Review: X-Men: First Class

Review: X-Men: First Class

My summer blockbuster viewing began this weekend by taking in X-Men: First Class, a star studded cast of a movie that promised to explain the origin of these mutant superheroes/villains.  I had no expectation for this movie, I barely remember seeing any trailer for it, and this usually helps, as I do not build up or shoot down a film before the first image reaches my retina (I could pretend like I go into all movies with a clean slate, but that would be a lie.  We all have baggage we bring to a movie and to pretend otherwise is rather ridiculous.).

X-Men: First Class follows the rise of our beloved mutant characters and begins the process of explaining how they came to be; and how they came to be is actually quite boring and involves some questionable special effects.  Ever wonder where the names came from?  Well some mutant kids were sitting around and thought it would be fun to have names.  They even nailed the names on the first try, save one, which is pretty good considering the number of nicknames each of us are bestowed upon us by friends.  So, but, anyway, naming was answered.

Ever wonder how many references they could make to the first, and far superior, X-Men movie, and not in an origin explaining way?  Well they can make a few more than I would deem reasonable.  Having Hugh Jackman cameo just reminded me he has much better things to do than attach his name to a sub-par film (errrr … Real Steel?).  Superimposing Rebecca Romijn face into the film, also brought up the idea that she didn’t even want to show up for a cameo, she only agreed to digitally be there.

And while we are on the topic of digital alterations, let us discuss special effects.  A film like this relies heavily on the quality execution of CGI.  If this isn’t well done, the house of cards tumbles and all we are left with is a mediocre script that was supposed to be hidden behind the curtain of wowing effects.  And that is what we got: less than impressive effects.  Scenes of characters flying were so egregiously fake that, I can’t believe I am going to say this, I actually wished Michael Bay were available to have correctly directed those sequences.  The not-so-special effects were amazingly distracting and constantly pulled me out of the film.

There was overuse of images overlaying images during flashback sequences/Dr. Xavier going into minds of people, split screen montages, terrible voice-overs, weird facial strains as the characters implimented their mutation (i.e. look constipated and that will let the audience know that a super power is being used), and the list goes on, but I will spare you.

It is rare that I see such a talented group of actors/actresses so misused.  I don’t blame them necesarily (well, I do blame January Jones for thinking we just want to see Betty Draper, which we kind of do, but only when she is in Mad Men, not necessarily in X-Men … and Kevin Bacon for, well, bad accents and acting like someone trying to act evil), the direction of Michael Vaughn was just not strong.  I never felt like the story meant anything to him.  Maybe he was too busy making babies (allegedly) with January Jones to really concentrate on the film, or maybe the X-Men story just didn’t hold his interest.  After seeing X-Men: First Class, it didn’t hold my interest either.

IFFBoston ’11 Review: Heaven + Earth + Joe Davis

IFFBoston ’11 Review: Heaven + Earth + Joe Davis

Joe Davis is a genius (most likely to the hindrance and detriment to what a lot of us would considered a quality life [though the whole eye-of-the-beholder thing probably applies, so I will concede that he may enjoy his life a lot more fully than I  ever will, though I am a fairly happy guy]; i.e. stable housing and job).  There is no denying he will wrap his head around concepts that I have a snowballs-chance even reading without getting heavy eyes, let alone understand.  Knowing this, the director contrasts our preconceived notions of an MIT level genius/artist/inventor by are introducing Joe to us as he washes dishes, picks through trash and speaks a language to his comrades that only he understands.  Joe Davis is self described as an artistic genius (and regular genius) that, if we don’t  appreciate him, it’s because we just don’t get him yet.  A bit insulting, but maybe that’s because I just  don’t get him yet(?).

The “story” (term used loosely as a documentary narrative never truly forms) meanders as we tag along with Joe in his many adventures in creating his art, various employment follies  and various rants that come off as a stoner riffing at a party, stringing lines together that sound deep, but have no real context.  He  struggles in his day to day to find who he is and seems to take no real accountability for himself.  This unwillingness to grapple with the consequences  of his actions may in fact be the reason the film is never really allowed to give us any kind of arc we are itching for. (The film does display this lack of accountability, beautifully and  in what COULD have been a powerful moment, if Joe, for a second, took the question seriously.  In this moment Joe was looking for a way to, essentially, render severe storms,  such as hurricanes, impotent [and having had his childhood home devastated by Katrina, this is more than understandable].  As he is explaining to a companion his idea, a question is brought up that boils down to: even if you could, should you?  Joe brushes this aside as though the moral issue is unimportant.  His lack of interest in exploring this area does speak volumes to his personality, but it was clearly difficult for the director to bend that void into an arc.)

Throughout the film I found myself getting more annoyed with the character of Joe.   I use the word “character” because I am fairly certain Joe used this platform as a way to write his own story.  An example of this: In the film Joe provided an explanation of how he lost his leg.  He mentioned and alligator snapping it off, and we were treated to a shot of a fairly tame gator wading in the water (thankfully no re-enactment). However, later in the film, and not soon enough after to want to point out this discrepancy as a point of interest and insight into the psyche of Joe Davis, a friend of Joe’s said the leg was lost in a motorcycle accident.  (In the Q&A after the film we were told we could not get into the why’s of this splintering of the story, but that the contradicting footage was left in there on purpose.  It came off more as a justification of  something unintended rather than an explanation of why the fork in the story. As another aside, I am not sure why getting your leg eaten by an alligator is cooler than a motorcycle accident, but maybe he has a Captain Hook fantasy and wants to have a story like his [with the obvious substitution of hand/hook for foot/peg leg].)   The director seemed to rely on the eccentricity of Joe to carry the film, but his shtick worn thin 20 minutes in, and I spent a majority of the films’ remaining run-time trying to figure out ways in which he annoyed me and why it annoyed me.

Overall I felt that the story lacked any vision.  It is most likely a good thing for a documentarian to not go in with a story in mind as it could tempt the filmmaker to want to lead the characters to reflect this desired outcome.  However, as the filming process migrated towards the end, a story should have formed, and to my disappointment, it didn’t.  Joe Davis is an eccentric artist and a genius. Nothing to write home about, and certainly nothing to film.

Brandin’s 2011 Oscar Picks

Brandin’s 2011 Oscar Picks

Hollywood has returned once again to celebrate their overwhelming achievements of 2010.  As always there are plenty of notable omissions from the nominee list, but we can discuss why The Last Airbender missed out on Best Original Screenplay (besides its obvious flaw off being an armpit of of movie and further evidence that M. Night has never actually watched his own movies, or else he would stop making them) at a later time.  Right now we need to focus on those that earned nominations … well at least the nominations we care about.  I mean Best Foreign Language Film? What am I?  Some sort of reading scientist?

Anyway, these are my picks for who I think will win.  I may hedge a bet and say who I want to win at some point, but I will decide when I get there.

Best Director
David Fincher

Best Actor
Colin Firth

Best Actress
Natalie Portman

Best Supporting Actor
Christian Bale

Best Supporting Actress
Melissa Leo

And the Best Picture goes to …

The King’s Speech

I think this film is tailor made for BP.  It has an outstanding performance by Colin Firth, historical context, elegance of costume design, the sets were amazing, the cinematography, while not mind blowing, was beautifully structured in its commitment to geometric integrity.  While my preference would be to see a Black Swan/Aronofsky combination win (I believe the journalistic term to what I have just done is I have given myself “wiggle room”), I think The King’s Speech will take home the night’s top prize.  And while I would be more than joyous if Black Swan took the gold man home, that does not make Tom Hooper’s effort any less deserving in my eyes.  It was a great film and a worthy winner.

My Netflix Queue Review 8

My Netflix Queue Review 8

Over the course of a week I watch a lot movies and neglect my responsibilities and personal hygiene, all for your benefit.  Here is the list of movies I have seen this past week.  Try to keep up:

Breathless

I didn't even say anything. Why is she laughing?

Breathless – In the 50 years since its release, what more can be said about this beautiful film?  Hundreds of critics have critiqued.  Hundreds of reviewers have reviewed.  If I threw in my two I would quickly realize what these people have already discovered: there have been millions of words used to describe Breathless and none of them can quiet adequately achieve what the film itself so eloquently states on its own behalf.

Rarely does a film start a movement.  This movie not only started a movement, it defined it so well that even today we are still feeling its impact.  Its jarring jump cuts confused me in an intriguing way.  The editing in the car scene startled me with discontinuity that, if used incorrectly, could have cause a train wreck, but instead brought me further into the world of Michel (Jean-Paul Belmondo).  The handheld, live action feel made the film more real.  Studio’s try to recreate this environment, Godard went out into the environment and just started rolling.

Breathless is a guide on how to be cool.  This movie teaches us to act as if someone is always watching, but at the same time be aloof.  It tells us what kind of music to listen to, how to walk, how to talk, what kind of glasses to wear, how to smoke a cigarette, how to flirt with woman, what drink to order and how to wait for it.  In a sense it shows us how to be in.  We love Michel so much for his debonair and easy style that we forgive him his serious flaws and indiscretions.  We are quick to ignore a murder he commits in order to get closer to him and feed off his cool persona.  We, like Patricia (Jean Seberg), want to be his friend.  And while she may eventually turn on him, we have resolved ourselves to never do so.  He mean too much to us and we feel we have so much to learn from him.

And then there is Jean Seberg.  How can we not fall in love with her and her cute French with the American accent?  She walks around selling the New York Herald Tribune in a tee-shirt stating that fact, with a naive, wide-eyed free spirit that is just soaking in the world around her.  And what a carefree and fun world it is for her.  A world of fast cars, exciting people, and laissez-fare attitudes.  We all want what she has.

The images on the screen are iconic.  The feeling we get from viewing this film is lasting.  The Herald Tribune Patricia is peddling would fall short even if the efforts of those thousands of printed words were all directed at describing this film.  So I will stop trying to do what better writer than I could not.  I will just let Breathless do what it does best for itself.

Art & Copy

Radio? Who needs a radio?

Art & Copy – In a time when it is en vogue to bash advertisements and advertisers for being an ugly distracting force in our lives created by low rung sell outs, Art & Copy presents to us an opposing view: advertisers are artists.  The film investigates what it is that makes an advertisement good.  It is too easy to look at advertising and call it a lowest common denominator.  This is a mistake that a lot of films and books make.  They make a sweeping generalization about the pervasiveness of advertising, and then point out its near ubiquity in our daily lives and then erroneously concluded that this makes the industry a devils playground.  Art & Copy shows you the artistry of an ad (although there are several points in the film where the ad men and women highlight that there are trashy ads out there, but it is also stated that, “you can do so much more” and extrapolating out, I would contend these elite creatives feel advertisements should do so much more); the creative genius of the rare few that understand what a good ad does and how to create it.

We are introduced to several people that embody what a good ad person does: they tap into a feeling that resonates with an audience.  We meet several artists that took their creative talents and found an outlet for them.  Lee Clow implores halfway through the film: creative people rise up!  And they did.  A good ad is more than just a mechanism to sell a product.  A good ad can inspire.  It can make a person strive to achieve something they otherwise would not have thought possible.  A good ad is, at its core, art.  Art is a tool through which a message is delivered.  Advertising art just does it a little more directly.  In the words of Oscar Wilde: It is through art, and through art only, that we can realize our perfection.  A good ad uses art to inspire us to achieve better.  And if you want to drink a Coke while you are out there achieving, why not?

Delicatessen

... and this is how I look when I'm about to eat a hamburger.

Delicatessen – With this being Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s debut film it is easy to see why he has since been regarded as one of the finest and most innovative directors working today.  His style is distinctive.  His stories are unique.  The execution is flawless.  Delicatessen is a mad house of creative genius and dark beauty.  A nightmare we enjoy being in and are sad when we must finally wake up.

We are released into a tenement where people are brought in by the landlord, a butcher, to be butchered and eaten.  An obvious plot for a comedy, right?  Louison is played by Dominique Pinon who appears as though he was plucked right out of a vaudeville act and dropped on Jeunet’s set.  He creates a character that is good hearted, oblivious at times, and never dull.  There are scenes in the film that could have been silent, and the impact would not have been lost.  A tea time scene with his love interest Julie (Marie-Laure Dougnac) unfolds with a beautifully choreographed awkward interaction.  In this scene Julie removes her glasses and cannot see Louison.  Louison is confused and just trying to catch on to what Julie is doing and why she is acting the way she is.  He is always one step behind.  The whole movie is in that scene.  Louison is as blind to his surrounds as Julie is without her glasses.  Beautiful, simple and brilliant.

Delicatessen invites us to laugh and feel a delightful guilt at the topics we are being allowed to smile at.  Cannibalism rarely ever gets to be this funny.  Let’s enjoy the opportunity we have to laugh at it.

Lightening Round:

Clash of the Titans (1981) – It was nice reminder of a time when Harry Hamlin got movie roles and why we stopped giving them to him.  It is difficult to pick exactly why the movie didn’t work, but I am sure it has to do with Bubo the mechanical owl.

A Scanner Darkly – The lives of paranoid drug addicts should have been more interesting.  Drugs ruined the lives of the characters.  The irony being you would have had to have been high as a kite in order to find this movie entertaining.

Cloudy  with a Chance of Meatballs – Has a chimp in the story.  What more do you need?  Cloudy  with a Chance of Meatballs contains all the “ingredients” for a good family movie.  A “deliciously” entertaining story “with a side” of comedy.  You will be “asking for seconds.”  “Meateor” sized fun.  OK, I’m done.  “Well done.”

My Netflix Queue Review 7

My Netflix Queue Review 7

Over the course of a week I watch a lot movies and neglect my responsibilities and personal hygiene, all for your benefit.  Here is the list of movies I have seen this past week.  Try to keep up:

Gerry

Look, I'm sorry I used the last of our water to clean my shoes. Please come back.

Gerry & Elephant – I am going with a two for one deal here.  In the aughts Gus Van Sant went on a bit of a tear, ending with his 2008 best picture nominee Milk.  To date my only exposure  to him had been his mainstream films such as the previously mentioned film Milk and Good Will Hunting.  Now not to take anything away from these movies, because I enjoyed them both very much, but the direction seemed a bit standard. This could be an impressive feat by Mr. Van Sant of knowing when to step back and let the story be the main driving force of the movie, to which I would applaud, but now having been exposed to other Van Sant creations, I must say, I am far more impressed with his ability.  Both Gerry and Elephant are masterfully choreographed and executed.  Elephant in particular has a beautiful scene where we follow three characters through a cafeteria, listening to their mundane dialogue, then we pickup a cafeteria worker and follow them through the kitchen until we arrive back in the cafeteria, seamlessly reuniting with our original group.  It was breath taking.  We float along within the story, seeing things unfold.  A methodical surgeon with the camera, Gus Van Sant plays with time through each of these films.  In Gerry we are painfully made aware of how long a minute actually is.  Each moment that passes only heightens this awareness.  This could be seen as a risk, but it is a risk that pays off.  In Elephant his teasing of time creates an anxiousness in the viewer as he prolongs the inevitable end we all know is coming.  And even though we know it is coming, we see how the film must end, we cannot turn away.  The camera lingers long enough for us to absorb the scene as it glides by on the screen.  Van Sant shows us reality, every excruciating minute of it.

Brief Interviews with Hideous Men

I have been serving empty glasses for the past hour. How crazy is that?

Brief Interviews with Hideous Men – I am not one of those “The book was better than the movie” kind of guys.  I usually want to punch that guy.  We get it: you’re smart, you read books and can’t even stoop to the level of being entertained by such a pedestrian medium as film, but … Some works of literature are sacred to people, and the collection of novels and short stories produced by David Foster Wallace in his brilliant and devastatingly short career, would fall under that category for me.  It could be that no film reproduction of his books will ever be good enough, but even if that were the case, that would not excuse the poor execution by John Krasinski.  There are some things that work on paper, but not on screen.  DFW’s vernacular would be one of those things.  To see it written out on paper, woven together by someone who really understood his own voice and what he meant it to say, is completely different than a person who admires that work and wants to sound cool and smart using it.  In the book we get a dissection of the male psyche that is devastating, funny, and clearly thought out in painful detail.  Foster Wallace is accused of being verbose, but it was more from his perception of his own work where he felt he could never clearly communicate what was inside of him.  Through this struggle, though, we began to understand both the character and the author.  Krasinski’s attempt fall short of the genius on which his movie is based.  There were a few pieces in the film that stand out as well done, most notably Julianne Nicholson’s subtle and nuanced performance as Sara Quinn, the interviewer, but overall the short vignettes are choppy (as was the editing choice of jump cutting every 3.4 seconds) and never found a rhythm.  I was unsure at one point if the characters were breaking the 4th wall and talking to me or if they were glancing at the camera accidentally (turns out they were talking to us, but I shouldn’t be wondering that, it should be clear).  And most tasteless of all was the decision of John Krasinski to leave for himself what he clearly felt was the most important and powerful story of the film.  He is confident that only he could execute such a bold and intellectually overpowering scene.  I, however, am less sure of it.  I hate to say it, but: read the book.

Antichrist

You never want to snuggle anymore.

Antichrist –  I am not sure I am ready to discuss this movie.  To discuss it is to relive it and I know I am not ready to relive it.  Do not however, take this as a declaration that the film was not good.  I want to state quite the opposite.  Lars Von Trier did exactly what he set out to do.  The discomfort I felt during the film (and several hours after) was the desired effect.  You cannot view this film and not be affected by it.  Lars takes us on a journey into the depths of darkness and does not allow us to come up for air.  Not even for a moment.  We enter a fantasy world where chaos reigns (so says the fox), seeds of life fall and die around us, Man and Woman struggle, fear consumes, depression overwhelms, sex is violent and sinful.  The entire film is a nightmarish hallucination, but within this nightmare we begin to learn about ourselves.  To dismiss Antichrist as another shock film filled with the misogyny Lars is often credited with, would be disingenuous to the true topics it is discussing.  Symbolism oozes from the screen, and it is up to us to stomach the film as best we can so that we may peel the rotten onion of humanity that Lars has masterfully placed before us.  A technically and visually stunning film, it is hard not to be both uncomfortable with the subject, but in awe of the beauty of the images.  Charlotte Gainsbourg’s performance was stunning.  She became the subject of our interest much the same way as She was for He (Willem Dafoe).  We wanted to look away, we wanted to run, we wanted He to run, but as He could not, for He must understand how far She was spiraling into the depths of depression, we too stuck around for the same reason.  This was a film that was rewarding to watch, but I recommend it with caution.  Watch alone, and be prepared to think about it.

Since it had been a couple of weeks since my last post, I have watched a lot of movies.  This is more of a lightening round to get us all up to speed.

Couples Retreat – If you heard bad things about this movie and are thinking, “it can’t be as bad as they say, can it?”  The answer is a resounding, “yes.”  If you have a choice to either watch this movie or be kicked in the groin by a donkey: go with the donkey.

Before Sunrise – I watched this the same day as Antichrist.  The perfect follow up movie.  It was wordy, and at times I felt like the writer just wanted to tell us their views on topics, but I was in a place where I needed a film like this.  It was a great chaser.

My Netflix Queue Review 6

My Netflix Queue Review 6

I wasn’t able to get to as many movies as I would have liked to this week.  The reason?  My job.  Now, I can’t tell you what my I do (CIA agent), but I was called away on important business (following hot women from a safe and legal distance) and so I was only able to squeeze in a few movies.  So without further ado…

Over the course of a week I watch a lot movies and neglect my responsibilities and personal hygiene, all for your benefit.  Here is the list of movies I have seen this past week.  Try to keep up:

Terror has a new name: Huw.

How Green Was My Valley – I would liken watching this to doing homework while at the dentist office and being forced to eat vegetables in the waiting room, but at least you get some benefits from those three things.  A more accurate analogy would be this was like eating black licorice.  You would think that eating candy would be fun, but then you bite in and the black licorice taste coats your tongue and you sit there disappointed, with a bad taste in your mouth.  That is exactly what this movie was.  I went into it expecting a lot because, well, in 1941 it beat out Citizen Kane (the perennial number one in AFI’s top movie list) for Best Picture.  What I got was far less.  I was thinking of ways to possibly ruin this movie for you by telling you how different story lines play out, but the thing is, the movie never goes into any sort of depth.  Every time an interesting story is brought up, that is it, it is just brought up.  There is a moment where the possibility of unionizing labor is brought up.  A family dispute happens, the sons leave for America.  End.  No more union talk.  The youngest son, Huw Morgan (played by the creepiest kid with eyes so vacant and black you can feel them sucking your soul through the TV screen), falls in love with his brothers wife, the brother dies, she was apparently pregnant (although never seen as pregnant in the film, it was just all of a sudden: hey, I’m giving birth to a baby!  But really, who has time to explain plot points like that when there is so much singing to be done for no reason?), so Huw decides to move in with her and take care of her.  He’s 10, right?  She’s in her 20?  This isn’t creeping anyone else out?  The father has the sniffles, I assume we are going to get back to the union stuff and abuse of labor and dig into this story, nope.  He just has a cold.  It goes away.  At the end of the day the movie was about this mining town and the people being taken advantage of by the mine owners who create a troublesome and unsafe working environment.  The problem for me was that this was all surface level and just stated.  I did not care for any of the characters and was annoyed by the lack of story development.  It was too broad and unfocused.  John Ford has put together good movies, this just wasn’t one of them.  I am at a loss for how this beat out Citizen Kane for Best Picture.  Unfortunately for Orson Welles, the 1941 Academy really likes black licorice.  I, however, do not.

Tell me what to do one more time, Dad, and I will go Republican so fast it will make your head spin.

Tell Them Who You Are – This documentary centers on Haskell Wexler, one of Hollywood’s greatest cinematographers, and was directed/written by his son, Mark.  What easily could have been a fluff piece about Haskel’s amazing career or the drama surrounding the sets he worked on, was quickly ushered out the door.  We even see it being ushered out in a moment where the film stops and all of the footage of Mark talking to actors about his father is shoved aside.  That film would have been too easy.  It would have been a good tribute to him for an award show, but it would not have been an interesting documentary.  What replaces this is far more interesting and far more important.  We get a scrutinizing and sometimes uncomfortable look at the hidden side of Haskel, the side he kept hidden behind the camera, and his complex relationship with his son.  Both struggle to understand the other, both have set hard lines on who they are, both have created themselves even further as a reaction to one another, but both still seek the others love and approval.  And it is this dynamic that is being battled out before us.  We see a hard and mean Haskel, critique Mark throughout the piece.  We see Mark fight back by not wanting to take his advice, a defiant, “I know what I am doing, don’t tell me what to do,” reminiscent of so many scenes played out in households across America.  We see Mark defined by his father (though in the complete opposite image his father would have liked), by rejecting almost everything his father stood for.  Even their fondness for filmmaking puts them at odds and is a battle.  The one moment we see them hold together is in their love for Mark’s mother.  She restores balance to them and brings them together.  They realize their common ground and for the first moments in this movie, see each other through something other than the camera lens.

My Netflix Queue Review 5

My Netflix Queue Review 5

Over the course of a week I watch a lot movies and neglect my responsibilities and personal hygiene, all for your benefit.  Here is the list of movies I have seen this past week.  Try to keep up:

The Headless Woman

Smokey saw what you did, and he is pissed.

The Headless Woman - This movie by Lucrecia Martel poses questions, makes suggestions, eludes to answers, but at the end of the day it is up to us to decide what has and what will happen.  We are witnesses to an event.  How big or little that even all depends on what you believe.  What Veronica believes is worst case, what really happened could be much less damaging.  Regardless of what really happened we begin to see a woman unravel at the potential of her actions.  Her mind begins to either fail her or block things out as a defense.  (I would like to see the analysis on her mind blocking out this one traumatic event, but still let her bump all kinds of uglies with her cousin.  The mind works in mysterious ways.)  I loved the pacing of this movie.  It was shot well, and only showed us what we needed.  We know only as much as our protagonist, and that isn’t a whole heck of a lot.  We are kept at an arms length to the facts and we have to believe what we want to believe.  The Headless Woman requires an engaged and proactive viewer.  It starts as quickly as Veronica’s psyche unravels.

Cache

I have been watching, and you sir, should be ashamed of yourself, or at least be closing the blinds

Cache – Making my way through Michael Haneke’s movies I picked up Cache.  I am going to say that so far he may be one of the most methodical director in recent memory.  He allows each image on the screen to wash over you and creep the bajesus out of you.  We start and end in the same spot, outside a house.  Each moment that passes outside of this house we begin to feel worse and worse as we watch.  There were moments where I felt like I shouldn’t be seeing what was on screen. I felt like I was part of the problem, peering into the life of this man, Georges.   And that was the brilliance of the film.  Haneke made you privy to a facets of lives we should have never known.  His methodical camera work built up tension by lingering in a room where we shouldn’t have been.  It slides along and pauses where it probably should keep moving.  What we learn by doing this is that we are all voyeurs, observing clips of other peoples lives by watching television, movies, reading the details of privates lives of celebrities in $2 checkout counter magazines at the grocery store, Haneke also lets us know how creepy it is.  He answers nothing, just points to possibilities.  At the exact moment you want to pry a little further to get an answer, learn why these events unfolded they way the did and how they unfolded, Haneke pulls back.  We are voyeurs no longer.  He does not give us the satisfaction.  And that’s what makes it so satisfying.

Fletch

I'll have a bloody mary, a steak sandwich and a steak sandwich.

Fletch - Reminiscent of Groucho Marx’s style of linguistic Tom Foolery, Chevy Chase unleashes a barrage of one liners and verbal two steps that beg to be repeated.  I am bursting at the seams to go to an interview so I can say, “Hey, don’t talk to me that way, assface. I don’t work for you yet.”  (Career Tip:  Saying stuff like that gets you raises and corner offices.  Also, if you call someone a “shit-tard” within the first five minutes of your first day that will make you the winner of work and you can retire.  Fact.)  Unfortunately for Fletch, the story was not strong enough.  I felt my attention starting to wane towards the end.  The one liners were still funny, and I overall enjoyed the movie, but I don’t think I should thought that the movie could have been 20 minutes shorter when the runtime is only 90 minutes.  Can Chevy carry a movie?  Yes.  He was at his peak here.  A comic Goliath that is currently trying to recapture this Fletch magic.  Unfortunately the movie could not carry Chevy Chase.  It hit a lull and didn’t recover.  When the story didn’t get in the way the jokes popped.  Its comedy was random and confusing and Chase’s brilliance will make you a bit envious.  I would definitely recommend seeing this film, in spite of the story slip.  It is one that I think could be watched over and over, but these repeated viewings must be accompanied by the scene select menu.

In the Loop

I do not unforsee nor do I forsee climbing or not climbing any mountain of conflict in the near or far future. Possibly.

In the Loop - Two things the British do well: accents and comedy.  Both were in full force for this film.  This movie isn’t just about a lack of communication, sometimes it is about too much communication and knowing when to shut up (especially when you are talking about something you really don’t know too much about).  Tom Hollander was my star of the film.  His ability to bring together a character that was self aware of his idiocy, his relative unimportance, except as a pawn, and his uncanny knack for royally messing up even simple situations by not keeping his mouth shut (unfortunately for him, he was aware of his verbal mistakes about 30 seconds after he should have been), was beautifully blended with a character that was also a well meaning servant of the people who was actually full of integrity and wanted, very much so, to be relevant, was amazing. This movie was brilliantly acted and the pace, well, the pace was fast.  Trying to keep up was tough, knowing who to keep up with was even tougher.  Everyone had an agenda, everyone was looking out for themselves and their career,  the only problem was nobody really knew what was going on, they just knew they had to act, and fast.  Good thing that the only thing at stake was a war.  This satire brought to light the insanity of politics and the power of controlling your image in the media.  I would put this on par with a Dr. Strangelove for its ability to comically put its thumb on the ridiculousness of politics and how things can get out of hand even when concerned with something as serious as war.

My Netflix Queue Review 4

My Netflix Queue Review 4

Over the course of a week I watch a lot movies and neglect my responsibilities and personal hygiene, all for your benefit.  Here is the list of movies I have seen this past week.  Try to keep up:

Gilliam: The face of a man who has it all under control.

Lost in La Mancha – There is bad luck, there is Murphy’s Law, then there is Terry Gilliam on a shoot.  Ironically, by not making the actual movie, Terry Gilliam may have nailed the essence of Don Quixote.  It was almost like the filmmakers were making a fake documentary about the making of a movie about Don Quixote, a man that was a dreamer, chasing and trying to conquer the impossible, and by not being able to actually make the movie, the documentary was actually capturing the story more honestly than any narrative film could have.  I was getting very meta about this movie.  I had layers about how each thing that happened was in a way just being exploited to feed the true movie (Lost in La Mancha) and the fake movie (The Man Who Killed Don Quixote) was merely a vessel for this.  I was thinking how brilliant it would be if the documentary were truly the scripted story.  Oh, doesn’t Terry Gilliam wish that were  true.  Unfortunately for him, this all actually happened.  A rain storm to end all rain storms, Jean Rochefort really had a prostate problem, insurance for the movies is a bad as it is for the rest of us, etc. etc..  Terry Gilliam is cursed.  Some of  the bad luck he brings on himself, some of it is out of his hands.  Either way though I will watch any movie he does or does not make.  Even a failed Gilliam movie sure is fun.

Ryan Reynolds portrayal of fat people more damaging than trans-fats.

Just Friends –  I know what you are thinking: Brandin, what the carrot cake are you doing watching that?  I have no good answer for you.  Amy Smart?  Maybe?  I got nothing.  Am I proud that I watched it?  No … yes … both, kind of.  As a film lover and a human being, I am a little embarrassed.  BUT it is a testament to my ability to watch any movie.  I am kind of a modern day hero actually, but instead of being able to leap over tall building in a single bound, I can sit through a movie that won Best Hissy Fit at the Teen Choice Awards.  Just Friends is a stirring tale of Ryan Reynolds in a fat suit wants girl, girl just wants to be friends,  Ryan Reynolds takes off fat suit and still can’t get girl … or can he?  (Spoiler: he can.)  As with most movies though, it had a few moments. (Ryan interpreting the character as “fat” to mean that the character must also be fairly dumb, was not a big highlight.)  Most of the comedy stemmed from scenes involving Anna Faris being Anna Faris.  Would I recommend the movie just for her?  No.  Would I say sit through it if it is on TV?  Not the whole thing.  Maybe, if it is on TV, stay watching it until a commercial break, then go find a mirror, look into it and spend the next 10 minutes doing some serious soul searching.

Bonus Movie!

Killer boots, man.

Crazy Heart – Vatche wrote up a nice review on this movie that you can read on LR, so I will be brief.  I had heard great things about Jeff Bridges and I was not disappointed.  It was a little like The Wrestler, and like The Wrestler, it was driven by a performance.  Mr. Bridges delivered big time, the story just had to simply be there for him to navigate through.  I do not hold cliches against a film as long as something else is given to me.  I need great direction, or an innovative way to tell an old story, an in depth character study, great performances.  With regards to this last point the entire cast (most notably Jeff Bridges, but not limited to) definitely came with their A game.  I would definitely recommend seeing this movie.  The story is a little predictable (not all points, but at times), but you will forgive this film for that.

My Netflix Queue Review 3

My Netflix Queue Review 3

Over the course of a week I watch a lot movies and neglect my responsibilities and personal hygiene, all for your benefit.  Here is the list of movies I have seen this past week.  Try to keep up:

We were all reaching a bit in this movie.

Sunshine - This syfy was was definitely more fy than sy.  I am not a billion percent sure what I was expecting when I sat down to watch a movie about a trip to bomb the Sun, but looking back, I probably got what I should have expected.  In a movie like this, you have to establish a reality where certain things are possible.  If you create a world where humans can fly, and then I see a human fly, then I am OK.  Sunshine never did this for me.  They had a situation where I was on board with going to the Sun (I stretched a lot to get there, but I got there) because they seemed to set up that we had the technology to do this.  The ship was based on the science of the movie.  Fine.  Then they started just doing stuff.  Not cool, and a sure way to take me out of the movie (i.e. I don’t care how much tin foil you wrap yourself in, you will never be able to line up two spaceships and propel someone 50 meters through the vacuum of space with its 2.7 Kelvin temperature [molecular friggin motion stops at 0 Kelvin!], let alone the pressure difference, without a spacesuit, from one ship to the other [and even if I grant you that you could, the success rate of this maneuver would be nowhere near 67%].  Yes it’s a movie.  I don’t care.  You still can’t do it.  You can’t.)  I just wasn’t able to get into it.  Danny Boyle did a very nice job on the visuals and the style of the movie was nice, but overall I never got into the film.  It was just too unbelievable for me, and that’s before I even get into the lack of story and character development…

Dolphins: the crying clowns of Sea World.

The Cove - OK, if after watching this documentary you don’t want to fly to Taiji, Japan and yell, “hey, you, with the dolphin axe, what the crap are you doing?!”  (Except you’d probably have to do it in Japanese because I am like 90% sure English is not their native language.  But I guess if you speak loudly enough English is understood everywhere.  It’s like a universal language, like math, except it won’t get you beat up in high school for knowing it.) then you are a robot that doesn’t have enough RAM to feel emotions.  The film calls into serious question the morality of a person that can treat another living thing with such disregard.  The film centers on Ric O’Barry, the man responsible for the training the dolphins for the hit show Flipper.  But now he is a changed man and he is hell bent on changing us. (At one point Ric says, he spent 10 years building up the dolphin industry and has spent the next 30 trying to bring it down.)  A powerful movie, a suspenseful movie, a movie that will make you reflect, not just on the treatment of these majestic beings, but on how you value life as a whole and the power we each possess to make a change when we see an injustice.  Please see this movie.  It may be tough to stomach at times, but it should to be seen.

Don't worry, Ben, I was bored too.

Hollywoodland – It is like you are walking down the street and someone comes up to you and says, “hey you look like Brad Pitt,” so you are thinking, nice, he is a good looking guy, I’ll take it.  But then that person continues on and says, “like an overweight, balding Brad Pitt with bad teeth and the smell of swiss cheese faintly emanating from them.”  Renders your sails windless a bit doesn’t it?  That is what I am going to mean when I say this movie reminded me of L.A. Confidential.  Hollywoodland was like a bad L.A. Confidential.  The story was there, it had a good cast that each contributed nice performances, but in the end, I was left very unsatisfied and mostly wondering what the old man in the cut off jeans was doing lifting barbells by the pool.  Not a good sign.  The movie had its moments, but it was predictable (which is weird because the true life story isn’t) a little cliche (I will be honest, I can get over cliche scripts if the film is giving me something else: a powerful character study, inventive storytelling, something interesting that I can grab ahold of, but Allen Coulter didn’t give me much to hold onto.) and overall a miss for me.  At the end of the day, if you are looking for a good Hollywood crime noir, pick up L.A. Confidential.

If you're finished using them as shoulder pads, Boeing would like their wings back.

Heathers – It was initially a tickle hard to get into this movie.  You had a classic 80′s score, shoulder pads you could launch missiles off of and Christian Slater doing his best Jack Nicholson impression.  That sounds like a recipe for disaster.  Throw in a director who, it seems, wasn’t able to decide if he wanted to go whole hog 80′s teen or dark comedy (maybe, more accurately, he was pitting his desire to do an all out dark comedy, with the studios idea that a teen movie would be more profitable), so he attempted to merge the two and you have a bad movie, right?  Hold your horses buddy.  Not quite.  While there were distracting portions of the movie, the good parts were real(ly) good.  When it hit its stride, it was a great movie.  Sufficiently dark for a comedic movie about the struggles of high school and death/suicide, I found myself getting into it.  Laughing at images that, in other contexts might make you cringe.  Overall it was too inconsistent to be great, but it was a good film.  A step in the right direction for a pop 80′s movie.  I kept getting a Lynchian vibe in some scenes and wondered to myself what he would have done with a script like this (or Kubrick, who the film was originally written for).  I would see this movie, if, for nothing else, the last image of the film.  That was definitely worth it.

Bonus Review!

Oh the jokes that must pass over that table. Laugh ... riot.

The White Ribbon – OK, technically not a movie from my queue, but that’s why it is a bonus.  This was my first Michael Haneke movie and it won’t be my last.  Placing you square into a town where, if you we just to hear someone describe it, it would sound Leave It to Beaver, but 5 minutes in, you realize something is not just off, it’s possible it was never screwed  on to begin with.  Posing more question and motives than actual answers, Haneke delivers an unsettling tale of a town where the adults are  entrenched in an old world patriarchal abusive society, but look like dandy lions next to the children that are running amok.  Toss in some good old distrust and skepticism of those around you, and you have movie where the only thing protecting you from the ugly truth of these nefarious deed is a thin closed door Haneke masterfully hides his camera behind.  See it, absorb it, let it wash over you in an unsettling and powerful way.

My Netflix Queue Review: 2

My Netflix Queue Review: 2

Another week has passed.  It was a struggle to get some movie time in.  Do you think that stopped me?  No.  I am a professional.  So here we go again:

Over the course of a week I watch a lot movies and neglect my responsibilities and personal hygiene, all for your benefit.  Here is the list of movies I have seen this past week.  Try to keep up:

Killer of Sheep

Just hanging out in my dog mask, what are you doing?

Killer of Sheep – Production value was nonexistence.  Edits were occasionally cumbersome.  Dialogue was, at times, difficult to hear.  This all added up to an amazing movie about a man’s life and struggle in a Watts ghetto.  Charles Burnett crafts a beautiful film centered on Stan, a slaughterhouse worker becoming more and more cold and distant to the life surrounding him.  We never see anything amazing happen to Stan, just life and all of  the trials it presents on a daily basis.  He tries to be good (Stan turns down, in a nondescript way, the opportunity to commit a crime and make a quick buck.  And when was the last time a film had the brass-danglers to say no to an action scene?  A very powerful scene that spoke volumes for what it brilliantly didn’t do.), he tries to provide, but the struggle continues.  And after all of this, with the strength of his wife, a strong woman to lean on, at the end film, he smiles.  And so do we.  A must see.

Pickpocket

I'd be looking too. Maybe not so creepily, but I'd be looking.

Pickpocket - This film, with its cool French lack of reaction, where it is more like they are telling you lines than delivering them, takes you on a journey into morality.  It reminded me a bit of Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment with its views on laws versus conscience, are there people that possess the intellect and ability to be above the law, a woman in their lives that is used as a guiding force, a friend that tries to help them achieve what they want in a more honest way, etc. etc..  Dostoevsky’s discussion is far more dark and disturbing than Bresson’s, and does get into the characters mind a lot better, but Pickpocket does create an interesting world for our protagonist Michel to mosey through. (Advantage 1 Pickpocket: the main character has one name to keep track of, whereas there are apparently 45 ways to say ‘Raskolnikov’ in Russia. Advantage 2: Marika Green looks exactly like Natalie Portman.)  Pickpocket was a good film, not a great film, and even though there are better examples of the French New Wave to choose from, I would still recommend seeing it.

Thirst

In a world of white, a blue couch can really make a difference.

Thirst - I will be honest, I went into this with a lot of concerns.  The vampire thing is very played out for me.  I have made my choice, it is Edward.  I’ve moved on.  So this movie started off playing behind the chains.  Way behind.  Halfway through, though, I was sold.  This was a good movie.  Some of the CGI was a tickle lame, but it was something I could get over.  One of the most impressive things about the movie, and this is consistent with all of Park Chan-wook’s work, is the great composition of color on screen.  It is visually arresting.  This film also, amazingly and refreshingly, stays true to the original lore of the vampire with its strong sexual content and insanely more dangerous female vampire.   I would recommend this movie for its visually stunning look and intricate story that calls into serious question morality, the afterlife, and what we decide to do with power.