GREAT FILMS: Within Our Gates (1919)

GREAT FILMS: WITHIN OUR GATES (1919)
Written and Directed by Oscar Micheaux

In the absence of any interesting new releases, I will instead add another piece to my 'Great Films' series.

1919 was a precocious time in cinema. For a decade, filmmakers had realized the art that could be made with this medium, but it wouldn't be for another few decades that film's true golden age would arrive. Films were still silent, and dominated by giants the like of D.W. Griffith and Charlie Chaplin. Amidst it all, a young African American filmmaker named Oscar Micheaux was whittling away on independent features that would go on to have huge audiences, despite little to no distribution. The most cherished and preserved of all the films he made is Within Our Gates.

Thought for decades to have completely disappeared, the original film prints of Within Our Gates were found in remarkable condition in Madrid around the early 1990's. The film has survived through decades of edits and censors (in fact, in the only version we have today, there is a scene still missing, which is explained on an intertitle), and stands today as one of the first American movies to directly deal with the issues that challenged African Americans in the early Twentieth Century.

Starring an all black cast (the fashion those days was to cast whites in blackface), the film's main character is Sylvia. A mulatto, Sylvia (famous performer Evelyn Preer) was raised by her adoptive black parents, and educated thoroughly. As an adult, she lives in the North where she tries to help other negroes get educated as well. She's engaged to the proud Conrad (James Ruffin), and lives with her jealous cousin Alma (Flo Clements). Alma, in love with Conrad, poisons him against Sylvia by showing him Sylvia's encounter with a white man. This encounter is never fully explained till the end of the film, but it sends Conrad into a rage, and he leaves Sylvia.

Another sub-plot within the film deals with Sylvia attempting to raise money to help keep the negroe school she works at open. She asks a kindly older white woman, who plans to give her the money, until a friend of hers try to convince her not to. Planning to donate a thousand dollars, the ignorance and blatant racism of her friend convinces her that she should in fact donate $50,000, to make up for her friend's impertinance. Also, we have the story of Jasper (William Stark), a gambling gangster, who has a romantic interest in Sylvia. When Sylvia falls for Dr. V. Vivian (Charles Lucas), Jasper warns her that he'll expose her past if she doesn't choose to be with him.

Of coarse, a lot of the plot revolves around Sylvia's past and her strange encounters, that are never fully explained until the film's third act. In an act of surprising humanity, Alma takes Dr. Vivian aside, to explain Sylvia's story. Sylvia was raised two sweet parents, but when the father is mistakenly charged with the murder of a white man, both he and Sylvia's mother are arrested and lynched. Sylvia, trying to escape, is encountered by an older white man who intends to rape her. His intentions are ceased when he sees a birthmark over Sylvia's breast. This is the same birthmark that belongs to his daughter, whom he had with a black girl he'd raped. This distinguished white man had provided for Sylvia's education and life.

The film was never widely seen across America, mostly because of its provocative material which was coinciding with the 1919 Race Riots in Chicago. But still, the film had a popular following in the African American community, particularly out West, where many blacks traveled to escape the prejudices of the East. From the beginning, the film faced heavy censorship. Before its premiere, two reels were cut from the film, and both the rape and lynching scenes were both increasingly cut. Even the surviving version we see now is said to be only a partial treatment to Micheaux's original vision.

Many parallels between the attempted rape scene in this film, and the attempted rape scene in D.W. Griffith's immortal epic The Birth of a Nation (1915). That film, probably the most popular film ever made up to that point, had a young white girl being chased by the sexual misgivings of a mongoloid black man until she is forced to throw herself off a cliff, to avoid (as Griffith put it, "a fate worse than death"). Griffith spent a lot of his career trying to apologize for racism of Nation, despite the fact that it was a huge hit. But with Within Our Gates, Micheaux stated that he wanted to make it clear "who raped who".

In the end, their is more to Within Our Gates than challenging the principles of Griffith (just as there is more to Nation than unadulterated prejudice), but its unflinching stance on the state of African Americans in 1919 America makes it a true classic in cinema. It's nearly 70-year hiatus from relevancy has made it forgotten in many minds, but it (along with others of Micheaux's work) has been brought back into the social consciousness. The films final scene, between Dr. Vivien and Sylvia, is probably its most powerful. Vivien, coming back to her despite knowing her tortured past, exclaims to her "You must be proud of your country. We were not immigrants." This blatant patriotism is both powerful and enrapturing, as we see a man who refuses to think of himself as anything other than a human being.

Zack and Miri Poster

Well, that Kevin Smith sure knows how to take his lemons and make lemonade, eh? Oh, and you can go ahead and add this film to the others that I was anticipating this Fall.

GREAT FILMS: The Conversation (1974)

GREAT FILMS: THE CONVERSATION (1974)
Written, Produced, and Directed by Francis Ford Coppola

Francis Ford Coppola made four films in the 1970's. Three of those films are The Godfather, The Godfather Part II, and Apocalypse Now. All three of those films are considered cinema classics, all showcased Coppola's talent for grand visual mastery, and all three made it on 2007's AFI 100 Greatest American Films list--and well-deserved. But that fourth film he made, between the two Godfather pictures, was also nominated for a Best Picture Academy Award, but it sometimes get lost in the cracks. That film is The Conversation; a film on the same level of all of Coppola's classics, but not nearly as admired.

Coppola has said many times that the film is in a way, a feature-length homage to Michelangelo Antonioni's Blow-Up. Both films are languid, intentionally-paced, and center around a character that finds more than meets the eye in his work. But where Blow-Up settles in its criticism of 1960's youth culture, The Conversation weaves a web of complex characterization and paranoia. Probably the most personal and subtle of all of Coppola's work, the film slowly uncoils its complex story piece by piece, until things are finally released that realize the worst nightmares of the main character.

That character is Harry Caul, played marvelously by Gene Hackman. Caul is known through various circles as the very best wire-tapper in the business. But he goes beyond that. He can record anything or anyone that he's asked, even if that person is in some of the most secure locations. The film opens with Caul recording a young couple that walks conspicuously around a park square, where they're sure the noise and the constant movement will make their conversation unheard. Using a complex arrangements of mics, and with the help of an arrangement of associates--including his partner, Stan, played by the late, great John Cazale--Caul is able to get every word they say nearly perfectly.

Harry works independently, for people who willing to pay the right price. He is the best in the business because he practices what he preaches. He is always the man in the shadows, even when he's off the clock. His pressing secrecy and insecurity cripple him in all aspects of life except for his work. He leaves a woman that he'd been seeing for a while after she begins "asking too many questions". He refuses to allow anybody, even Stan, access to his secrets in espianogue. He has built himself a force-field which pushes everyone out, leaving his only dedication to that of his complicated work.

The main plot point of the film begins when Harry attempts to give the tapes of the young couple's conversation to the man who was paying him to record them. The man is out of town, but his business associate named Martin (played by a young Harrison Ford), states that he can pick them up and give them to his boss first thing. Harry refuses to give away the tapes, unless it's to the man who paid for them, and leaves, smelling something fishy. He gives the tapes a closer listen, notices how desperate and concerned the young voices sound. He hears statements that draw red flags, and is plagued with worry that these tapes can be used to hurt someone.

Truth is, the film's greatness doesn't breed itself from its suspence story, though it is a competent, and effective one. This film, unlike Blow-Up, is brilliant because of the complex psychology of its main character. Hackman playing Harry Caul is one of the great performances of the 1970's. Hackman is an actor just as talented as Pacino, De Niro, or Hoffman, but other than winning two Oscars, he doesn't get the kind of respect those performers do in film society. Caul is quiet and contemplative, but always worried. He is pious, goes to Church and confesses regularly, but his faith seems to contradict his line of work, which is one of deceit and ominous voyeurism.

Two scenes in particular stand out in this film, when explaining Harry's character make-up. One being a scene directly after he refuses to give the tapes to Martin. He sits with his advanced audio equipment, listening to portions of this conversation over and over again, completely immersed. Meanwhile, Stan tries to intervene, asks him to grab lunch, and asking him details of the young couple. Harry yelps at him, explaining he does not want to be disturbed in his work. Another scene is later in the film, where Harry, slightly inebriated, talks to a beautiful woman, and attempts to explain his personality to her. He speaks in the third person, as if to distance himself from the truth of the matter, but its the closest this film goes in terms of having Harry open up his soul.

By the end of the film, Harry's life has been demolished--both figuratively and literally--by his unwavering paranoia. He failed at attempting to find the sketchy goings-on behind the tapes, and he sits alone. The film works on so many levels, both stylistically and thematically. Coppola, using long takes, and a smooth jazz piano score creates a brewing atmosphere. The film doesn't really build to its climax as much as it does wash over it like a wave on the rocks. It is the least known of Coppola's 1970's movies, but it can easily be called better than any film he made outside that decade. As a character study, it is equal to Taxi Driver, but the punch is a lot softer. Does Coppola borrow style points from Antonioni? He does indeed, but in the process accomplishes in making a film as beautiful as it is haunting.

Righteous Kill (*)

RIGHTEOUS KILL
Directed by Jon Avnet



*

The other day I watched the film Heat for the first time in a long time. It was famous when it came out for being the first film ever to have all-star actors Al Pacino and Robert De Niro converse together. Many audience members had beef when they went to see the film, and the two method geniuses only had one-and-a-half scenes together. But all that aside, Heat is one of the best crime films of the last twenty-five years. In Righteous Kill, Pacino and De Niro pair up again, but this time as partner detectives--guaranteeing significant screen time together. The audience got what they wished for, and were left with a film so devoid crativity and intelligence, we hope the two never make a movie together again.

The story involves Turk (De Niro) and Rooster (Pacino), two officers who have decades upon decades of experience in the NYPD. One thing they hate more than anything is watching criminals walk on a technacality, after they worked so hard to put them away. They run a good cop-bad cop routine, with Rooster as the witty charmer, and Turk as the strong-arm bulldog. They both believe that violence is just part of the job. "Most people respect the badge, but everybody respects the gun," says Turk--so you see the kind of dialogue we're dealing with here.

The big secret between Turk and Rooster is that they once planted evidence on a man they knew to be a child murderer and rapist. They knew him to be guilty, but with no evidence, and someone to back his story, there was nothing they could do, but cross the line of justice. Then, suddenly, all of the scumbags that were walking away clean are turning up with bullet wounds in their brains. One after the other, these free criminals are being gunned-down, each left with a poem resting on their corpses--so this criminal obviously took some tips from The Riddler.

Turk, despite being a menacing, violent man well over sixty, attracts the sexual escapades of Det. Karen Corelli (Carla Cugino), a forensic specialist. She, along with the much-younger officers Perez (John Leguizamo) and Riley (Donnie Wahlberg), notice a change in Turk as soon as the poetry-laden bodies begin to stack up. The person who is commiting all of these crimes seems likely to be a cop, and with Turk being as demonstrative and justice-searching as he is, he seems a likely candidate. Even Rooster, to a point, begins seeing the emotional change in his partner. So, is Turk a vigilante police officer or not? The audience, unfortunately, is left to figure it out.

Let's forget for a second that this film forces you to watch a 64-year-old De Niro attempt to sexually pleasure a woman nearly thirty years younger than him. And while we're at it, let's forget that the film has Pacino drenched in a tan bronzer than Alicia Keyes. Both of these, unfortunately, are already norms in Hollywood, so it would be hackneyed to poke fun at that. Instead, let's focus on the deplorably inate screenplay, which seems to know close to nothing about police work or crime in general, other than what you can pick up watching your sepcial edition DVD of Scarface.

This is the kind of film that inspires lines of dialogue such as "This is the clusterfuck to end all clusterfucks". Yeah, cause respectable people actually walk around saying that. In the film I saw directly before this, Burn After Reading, there was also a line of dialogue that used the ominous word "clusterfuck", but that film used the word to its creative advantage. It is an obscenity, sure, but it is a unique obscenity that can be used toward great humor, or can be manipulated many ways in dialogue. For Righteous Kill, the character spits it out like a potato, and its used only for its provocative draw, and nothing more.

Not that anybody should expect much out of a film that has Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson billed directly below the two legends. He plays a drug dealer named Spider (does anybody have a real name in this movie?). It's hard to be disappointed in a film that should've never been made in the first place. The star power of De Niro and Pacino alone is what got this film off the ground, and well it should. When you look at the two actors, you see two of the most talented actors in cinematic history. They were some of the biggest stars of the 1970's film renaissance, and are both Oscar winners. These guys are class acts, but they take part in a film that takes them at the basest value.

To his credit, Pacino seems to have a little fun with his role, almost poking fun at how vapid the storyline becomes. But De Niro, always the face of intensity, seems lazy by comparison. If these two ever line up together for another film, I don't doubt that I would go see it. I mean, there is still so much potential for magic between these two megastars. I have to believe that there's a better vehicle out there for them than this. Director Jon Avnet was also behind the helm for the equally hapless 88 Minutes, released earlier this year. He seems on a goal to be the worst filmmaker of the year. If your looking for a true taste of the potential between Pacino and De Niro, check out the diner scene between the two in Heat. That ten minute segment alone is better than one reel of this film.

Burn After Reading (***)

BURN AFTER READING
Produced, Written, and Directed by Joel Coen and Ethan Coen



***

Less than eight months ago, the Coen brothers were being hailed as cinematic geniuses while they're harrowing film No Country For Old Men won four Academy Awards, including those for Best Picture and Best Director(s). So, how do you follow that up? Well, the last time they produced a masterpiece--Fargo--they followed it up two years later with the hilarious cult classic The Big Lebowski. So, what do those pesky Coens have up their sleeves this time? How about a zany comedy with more plot lines than a Victorian romance novel, and more brain-dead characters than the audience at the last screening of Disaster Movie?

The plot (if you want to call it that) starts with Osbourne Cox (John Malkovich), a CIA man who is fired after being deciphered as an alcoholic. Cox is rather unpleasant sort of fellow, and is married to the equally unpleasant Katie (Tilda Swinton), a pediatrition who sometimes feels the need to strong-arm her young patients. Katie is having an affair with Harry Pfarrer (George Clooney), an officer for the Treasury (though we never see him actually working), who is also married himself to a successful author of children's books.

The last three pieces of the puzzle are two gym employees: one a middle-aged woman who is desperate to take part in several plastic surgery procedures, named Linda Litzke (Frances McDormand) and Chad Feldheimer (Brad Pitt), a spunky trainer who acts like a four-year old, but is good friends with Linda. Chad is like the last person you'd want to meet at a gym, because he'll give you useless information about the best energy bar or the best music to listen to during cycling class. They work at Hardbodies Gym, a modest business run by the sincere Ted (Richard Jenkins), who secretly loves Linda.

When Linda and Chad find a disk lying around the woman's locker room, they believe that inside it holds secret, important CIA information. They hope that the true owner of the disk, Cox, will give them a reward. Linda could use the cash to pay for her plastic surgery, and Chad could use it for whatever it is that Chad does. Among others, there are sub-plots involving: a) Harry and Linda meeting via an online dating service; b) Katie and Harry's attempts at divorce from their significant others (which has more relevancy than is initially percieved); and c) Harry's invention of an unorthodox sex toy, which he has built in his basement.

Of coarse, being the Coens, they attempt to cram all of this into a 96-minute running time, and they nearly pull it off. This is the kind of film where details and storylines are being thrown at the audience left and right, and if you happen to miss them, well, you may not know exactly what's going on. Not that its easy to follow even if you do catch them. The film ties the stories together so tightly, what we're previewed to is a rapid-quick labyrinth of idiotic behavior and unfortunate events that snowball into disaster. This is the common theme for Coen films: normal everyday people get mixed into criminal behavior; but never before have these everyday people experienced such horrfying, unexpected consequence (okay, maybe Fargo's woodchipper was the worst).

No doubt, the success of this film will judged by its cast. Clooney is devilishly fun as Harry, completeing what the Coen's call their "idiot trilogy" after starring in both Coen films O Brother, Where Art Thou? and Intolerable Cruelty. Swinton, Jenkins, and Malkovich do a wonderful job in limited screen time, if not necessasarily moving the plot forward, but giving the film more life and more humor. The best aspects of the film come from the performances of Pitt and McDormand. They're both mannered, over-emotional, and completely over their heads. In a world of imbesciles, Chad and Linda are the only imbeciles we find ourselves rooting for, even when one of them meets a pretty devastating state.

The film is incredibly shrewd, and does its fair share of winking with the audience. Not everything within this story works, and the Coens definitely let the film loose into whimsical territory. But what's fun about a film like this is not the story, per se, but the characters, and nobody creates interesting, quirky characters they way those pesky brothers do. I don't mind the off screen wrap-ups and conclusions like most people do. I believe the way the Coens make films is almost guaranteed quality work, and since nobody has been able to make such good films and be so prolific since Woody Allen, it's safe to say they are now within the same scope of filmmakers like Scorsese and Altman.

One thing I almost forgot to mention is wonderful two-scene cameo by J.K. Simmons as a CIA Superior trying to make sense of the crazy actions these characters take part in. He is a man of few words but every line is a punch line. His performance is a summation of what is great within this film, outstanding humor, wonderful performances, and plot that is so deliciously convoluted, we can forgive it easily because we love every image on the screen. In the Pantheon of great Coen comedies, it's not quite Lebowski or Raising Arizona, but it definitely has an edge over Cruelty or The Ladykillers.

A Word About.....

2 Days In Paris

A combination of lousy distribution and personal laziness prevented me from seeing Julie Delpy's 2 Days In Paris. Luckily, these days we have DVD, where essentially any film, no matter how small, can be seen long after it has perished in the theaters. Much like my discovery of In Bruges earlier this year, what I uncovered when watching this incredibly well-written comedy was a much more layered tale than I expected. The story of a couple who are constantly on and off the rocks, Delpy's first feature film is one of mastery.

We all know Delpy (and if you don't, you most definitely should) from her incredible work with Ethan Hawke in the Richard Linklater Before Sunrise/Before Sunset films. Delpy actually co-wrote the latter film with Hawke and Linklater, which adds no surprise to the fact that she wrote 2 Days as well. In one film, Delpy has been able to establish a style, likened that to Woody Allen with a much more provocative edge (remember how sexy Allen tried to be with Vicky Cristina Barcelona? Yeah, can't seem to forget it either). The dialogue is rabid, and brilliantly delivered, but most of all, just mannered enough to hold the sting of realism.

Delpy is the lead, and the film's narrator, and she plays Marion, who is--wouldn't you guess--a terribly insecure French woman, who is creeping up on middle age and doesn't seem to be able to find structure in her life or in love. Sure, she's been with Jack (Adam Goldberg) for two years now--a time she calls "forever, by today's standards"--but the two have just spent a disastrous trip in Vienna, where they hoped to rekindle their romance. Before heading back home to New York, the couple decided to take a two-day detour in Marion's hometown of Paris, where they live in her parents' apartment and run into a number of Marion's ex-boyfriends.

Goldberg plays Jack with a rather bothered, nebbish annoyance, and his sarcasm provides most of the film's comedic punch. It is Jack who has to deal with most of the film's roadblocks; the discovery of more and more ex-boyfriends, the rudeness of numerous Frenchmen, Marion's parents and their twisted sense of humor, and most importantly, Marion's growing impatience with life. Sure, the film has its moments of uneveness, and it can't seem to decide whether it wants to be from the point-of-view of Marion or Jack, but despite it all, Delpy creates a film that is hysterical, poigniant, and sincere. Showcasing a couple on the edge of a nervous breakdown, this film scores as one of the funniest comedies of 2007.

***1/2

GREAT FILMS: Heat (1995)

GREAT FILMS : HEAT (1995)
Produced, Written, and Directed by Michael Mann

A group of actors in the 60's and 70's revolutionized acting in the movies. They changed the ideas most people had of movie stars, that they don't always have to be tall, dark, and handsome. They can become characters and still get top-billing. Many say they were directly influenced by the manic acting of Marlon Brando in the 50's, but I like to give them all of the credit. Among others, there was Jack Nicholson, Dustin Hoffman, and Gene Hackman. But the two that were probably most burnt into the social consciousness were Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino. Connected by the Godfather films, it wasn't until 1995 that they graced the screen together in one of the most anticipated films of the 90's... and one of the best.

It was like a gift from God, arguably two of the greatest actors in film history in one movie. But what some people didn't realize (and what they still don't realize) is that the film is by-and-large an epic ensemble performance. But it can't be denied that the film's story is headlined by the characters of Vincent Hanna (Pacino) and Neil McCauley (DeNiro). Hanna is obsessive homicide detective in Los Angeles, and Neil McCauley is one of the world's most skilled thieves. With McCauley planning his last big score, Hanna is already on his tail, even at times admiring McCauley's masterwork. The cat-and-mouse game played between them is the basis of the greatest crime drama of the 1990's.

The film is helmed by Michael Mann, known now for his films The Insider and Collateral, but known back then for his immensely popular Miami Vice television series. By now, we know Mann is a master of slick, L.A. crime capers, but what many didn't expect with his work on Heat is his ability to weave such a complex character-driven film filled with such disturbed and interesting personalities. The film established Mann as a filmmaker, and still stands as his most harrowing, brilliant film to date. The story, written by Mann as well, goes beyond cops-n-robbers and delves deep into the psychology of the stock characters many films tend to take for granted, and in the end, we're left with a film that blurs the line of good and evil brilliantly.

First, let's talk about the enormous list of characters. For Neil, there's his rough-around-the-edges protege Chris Shiherlis (Val Kilmer) and his strong-willed, trustworthy wife Charlene (Ashley Judd). There's also Neil's hothead associate Michael (Tom Sizemore), and the new guy they bring in on the job, Waingro (Kevin Gage), who is a little too sporadic even for this crew. In the film, Neil also meets Eady (Amy Brenneman), a Southern graphic designer. Eady catches Neil's eye, and very soon grabs hold of his heart, even to the point that he is willing to give up his life in crime. One more job, and he can use the money to build a life for the two of them. The work Neil does throughout the film concealing his criminal life from Eady is work of Chaplin-esque tightrope-walking.

Then, we have Vincent's group of friends. There is his wife Justine (Diane Venora), his third, who can't seem to break through Vincent's obsessive work ethic. She struggles to get close to Vincent, but also struggles to manage her disturbed teenage daughter Lauren (Natalie Portman). There's Vincent's main crew in crime-busting: including Drucker (Mykelti Williamson), Bosco (Ted Levine), and Casals (Wes Studi). Other characters weave in and out of the story, such as Neil's somewhat consigliari Nate (Jon Voight), a bad-luck former criminal at the wrong place at the wrong time named Donald (Dennis Haysbert), and a egotistical business head with an eye for corrupt crime named Van Zant (William Fichtner).

The main plot point of the film is a major bank robbery that Neil plans worth upwards of $12 million, and Hanna's preemptive attempts to stop it. But what the story is really about is how these characters, seemingly on two different sides of the law, almost depend on each other for their own existence. The film's peak comes in a scene where Vincent invites Neil to have some coffee. The two know each other to a point, they know that they're on different sides of the same fight, but instead of a showdown between the angel and the devil, we are previewed to a conversation. The conversation is a meeting between two men who are the best at what they do. They respect each other, and each other's ability, but they know in the end, one of them has to go down.

In a decade filled with exciting crime films like Speed and True Lies, Heat stands alone, not only because of its epic-stature, but because of the brilliant performances of its lead stars. Pacino, a master of intensity and street-wise wisdom, plays Vincent with the energy of the 1970's Pacino. He runs, he shoots, but more than anything, he obsesses, allowing every other aspect of his life take a backseat to his work. DeNiro had already played numerous criminals in his partnership with Martin Scorsese, but takes a different approach to Neil. Known mostly for his ferocity, DeNiro plays to McCauley's insecurities; he's stripped-down, questioning his lifestyle for the first time, and hopelessly connected to Eady, whom he knows his life won't allow.

Heat is a magnum opus. A masterpiece of stylized filmmaking, and a labyrinth of complicated personas, the film takes its time with its 172-minute running time and pays off. With this film, you don't get a run-of-the-mill bank heist film, but a tale that makes the all-too-forgotten statement that there really is no big difference between good and evil, becuase there is no good without evil. There is never a dull moment, or a moment where a character plays to some cliche of the crime film genre. The movie solidified Michael Mann as a legit filmmaker (perhaps the best pure movie director, if the criteria is style), and brought together a dream pairing of two of history's finest screen actors. Nearly thirteen years later, the film still stands as a classic in modern cinema.

Frozen River (***1/2)

FROZEN RIVER
Written and Directed by Courtney Hunt



***1/2

Ninety-nine percent of all movies have a pretty clear distinction between who is good and who is bad. Within the first fifteen minutes, usually, we know who we want to root for, and who we despise. Not that there is anything particularly wrong with this model of storytelling (it's strictly taught this way in most screenwriting classes), but the standard can become quite monotonous. That is what makes films like Frozen River so special. In this film, there is no black and white; there is no good guy or bad guy, just people doing what they have to do, and this results in a film of stunning realism and powerful performances.

The film is about Ray Eddy (Melissa Leo), a woman with two children, one a toddler and the other a bitter teenager. Her husband, a gambling addict, has taken the money they needed to pay for their new home, and has abandoned them. In her search to find him, she finds his car in the possession of a Mohawk Indian woman named Lila (Misty Upham). She wants her car back, but Lila convinces her to let her friend look at it because he is willing to pay more for it than it's worth. On the way there, though, Lila holds Ray hostage as they use her car to transport illegal aliens across the Canadian border.

Ray is able to get out of the situation without getting hurt or losing her car, but Lila takes all of the money. With the pressures of bills, feeding her children, and the down payment on the home she dreams to have (they currently live in a poorly insulated trailer), she returns to Lila to propose becoming partners in transporting illegals. You see, since the border lies on a Mohawk reservation, they're able to pass freely, but must be careful not to get caught with the illegals in their car.

To get to Canada and back, the two frequently cross a frozen river. It's said to be frozen so solid that semi-trucks can cross over it. As Ray and Lila continue to run their operation, the jobs start to become more and more dangerous both for their transports and for them. As Lila strives to retrieve her infant daughter in the possession of her meddling mother-in-law, and Ray dreams to get her children a proper home and life, they risk their freedom, and in some cases their lives, trying to allow many foreigners their ticket to America.

The film is the debut for filmmaker Courtney Hunt who also wrote the screenplay. The film may seem to drown in subtleties in moments, but that is only a further attempt to immerse the audience into the film's ice tundra setting. The film is about two women who do what they can to make sure they can live their lives civilly, and it neither criticizes nor canonizes them. The film simply documents their reactions and allows us to pass our own judgment. Using the prickly locations and wonderful performances, Hunt creates a world of disappointment, but also of hope. She does this without an ounce of sentiment or melodrama, and shows a maturity as a filmmaker far beyond that of a rookie.

One of my favorite aspects of the film is all the minor characters that weave themselves in and out of the movie. For instance, the character of T.J. (Charlie McDermott), Ray's oldest son. He is angry, angry that his mother won't allow him to work to help support them, angry that she doesn't allow him to have responsibilities, but most of all angry that his father has taken off without a word. McDermott doesn't play the role as a pithy, wordy adolescent, but a deeply disppointed youth, who truly loves his mother. Same could be said for the officer played by Michael O'Keefe. The officer does not come on to bring nonchalant authority like most films, but acts as a responsible police trooper. It's always fun to watch someone break up the supposed hackneyed stock characters.

But let's get down to what really makes this film great, and that is the lead performance from Melissa Leo. Leo turned a lot of heads at the Sundance Film Festival earlier with her portrayal of Ray, depicting perfectly the haggard strength and the broken heart. Leo is not a household name, and in fact, didn't really get notorization until her great turn as Benecio Del Toro's emotional wife in 21 Grams. Much like that film, Leo's Ray is a woman stuck in dire straits, depending on a completely undependable man, and finding herself to be her family's ultimate strength. It's not a stretch for her to play so weathered, but it's the warmth and the sincerity, along with the ruined image, that makes her so memorable.

Frozen River was about the only film that had anybody talking at Sundance (though Hamlet 2 and Choke got the biggest paydays), but it struggled to get distribution before being picked up by Sony Classics. With Rachel Getting Married and Synecdoche, New York to come out later this year, Sony Classics looks to have an interesting Fall season. People may generalize River's handheld style as 'indie' (a phrase most people are beginning to despise more than 'formulaic'), but there is a reason why it rose above all of those other 'indies' at Sundance and is now getting a proper distribution: wonderful acting and an overacheiving piece of work from a first-time filmmaker.

Hamlet 2 (**1/2)

HAMLET 2
Directed by Andrew Flemming



**1/2

It's not that far out of the realm of reality that something along the lines as a sequel to William Shakespeare's Hamlet could actually be created, but we must ask that question that we do with any kind of sequel--is it really necessary? Well, for Dana Marschz (Steve Coogan), a high school drama teacher, the answer is an enthusiastic 'definitely'. Hence forth, Hamlet 2 is born. A play such a stretch both creatively and morally from the original piece that it sends the entire nation into a First Amendment crisis.

The story involves the aforementioned Marschz (I won't even try to explain how it's pronounced), who has failed miserably as a struggling actor, wasting time in infomercials about herpes and brainless episodes of Xena: Warrior Princess. Low on cash, Dana drags his abrasive wife Brie (Catherine Keener) to Tuscon where he decides to try his hand at high school drama. He only has two devoted students, who play out his own ramshackled recreations of films on the stage, such as Erin Brokovich or Mr. Holland's Opus.

Needless to say, his theater remakes of cinema are disregarded in the school, and panned by the school paper's harshest critic: a 13-year-old adolescent with a very advanced sense of art. When the school threatens to cancel drama forever, it's up to Dana and a new crop of rough-and-tumble students to try and bring the program back into the school's good graces. How do you do that? Dana ponders, and decides that he will write his own play, a completely unrelated sequel to the Bard's classic that involves Jesus, a time machine, and Satan french-kissing the United States president.

Little time is spared before the school, the town of Tuscon, and--most importantly--the students' parents display their disdain for this offensive play, and the clueless Dana is swept up into a controversy that only a man of his limited brain function could create. Marschz attempts to put out the flames with the help of a fiesty amendment lawyer (Amy Poeler) and Elizabeth Shue (yes, the Elizabeth Shue, who--in this film--has given up acting to become a nurse in Tuscon). It is only up to the show itself to prove the nay-sayers wrong, but will the show even go on?

Hamlet 2 is quite paradoxical as a film, mostly because of its uneven humor. There are moments of great guffaws, but they are mostly few and far between other costly moments of adolescent humor, and plot points which slightly come off as serious or dramatic (though, I may have just not gotten the joke). So, what is the great equalizer? Are those few hysterical appearances enough to bouy a mediocre comedy? Well, in the case of this reviewer, it's the enthusiasm and energy of the film's main star Steve Coogan that makes this film bright, funny, and quite an enjoyable experience.

It may be my sense of nostalgia, because I was once sitting inside a high school drama class headed by a talentless bafoon. But that is not what is important. What is important in high school drama--and this film makes a point to say this--is enthusiasm, and boy did that teacher that "taught" me have plenty of that. Anyone who has ever taken any form of theater, whether it be in Juliard or elementary school, can see a resemblance in Marschz to that one crazy instructor who thought everything you needed to learn in life could be found within the pages of his favorite play (or in Marschz's case, movie).

The young actors who play Hamlet 2's cast are all competent if not carbon-copies of the way most teenagers are presented in Hollywood films. Thr truth is the film saves itself from medocrity about an hour and ten minutes in, when the actual play begins. Watching it, I felt exhilarated, thinking that if someone had ever had the moxy to actually put this show on, it could work as a satire in the form of Rosencratz and Guildenstern Are Dead. But soon, I came to my senses and noticed that the show's briliance was in part due to it's congested state within the movie.

In a fair world, the song "Rock Me, Sexy Jesus" would be in serious consideration for a Best Original Song Academy Award, but I wouldn't give it more than a puncher's chance just to score a nomination. The film squanders many moments for great humor in exchange for the kind an adolescent might enjoy, and actually puts Catherine Keener in a position that I've never seen her: stuck in a character that even she can't make sense out of. That all said, I can't say I didn't leave the theater glad I'd seen it, and glad to see a talented performer like Coogan display his brand of humor on the big stage.

Inexplicably Early Oscar Predictions

INEXPLICABLY EARLY OSCAR PREDICTIONS

Why? Because I have no reason not to, and it's early enough to do them without looking like a lunatic. Still, though, the official nominations do not come out until January 22 of 2008, and there is truly no official buzz or apparent front-runners yet, which makes predicting at this point much more fun--but because of all the unknown intangibles that could occur between now and January, I will refrain and only do major awards...

BEST PICTURE

Changeling
The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
Doubt
*Milk
Revolutionary Road

BEST DIRECTOR

*David Fincher, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON
Ron Howard, FROST/NIXON
Christopher Nolan, THE DARK KNIGHT
John Patrick Shanley, DOUBT
Gus Van Sant, MILK

BEST ACTOR

Richard Jenkins, THE VISITOR
Frank Langella, FROST/NIXON
Viggo Mortenson, THE ROAD
Sean Penn, MILK
*Brad Pitt, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON

BEST ACTRESS

Angelina Jolie, CHANGELING
Anne Hathaway, RACHEL GETTING MARRIED
Sally Hawkins, HAPPY-GO-LUCKY
Melissa Leo, FROZEN RIVER
*Kate Winslet, REVOLUTIONARY ROAD

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

*Josh Brolin, MILK
Heath Ledger, THE DARK KNIGHT
John Malkovich, BURN AFTER READING
Michael Sheen, FROST/NIXON
Kodi Smit-McPhee, THE ROAD

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Kathy Bates, REVOLUTIONARY ROAD
Penelope Cruz, VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA
*Viola Davis, DOUBT
Samantha Morton, SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK
Debra Winger, RACHEL GETTING MARRIED

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

*Dustin Lance Black, MILK
Joel Coen & Ethan Coen, BURN AFTER READING
Charlie Kaufman, SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK
Jenny Lumet, RACHEL GETTING MARRIED
Andrew Stanton, WALL-E

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Justin Haythe, REVOLUTIONARY ROAD
Peter Morgan, FROST/NIXON
Joe Penhall, THE ROAD
Eric Roth, THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON
*John Patrick Shanley, DOUBT

Elegy (***)

ELEGY
Directed by Isabel Coixet



***

Both Penelope Cruz and Sir Ben Kingsley had films released earlier this summer which had me somewhat intrigued (Kingsley with The Wackness; Cruz with Woody Allen's Vicky Cristina Barcelona). Both films were more than underwhelming experiences, though the two actors both performed as the formidable actors we all know they are. In Elegy, not only do we have both of them in great form once again, but they're also paired in a film that is eloquently made, with a story so masterfully told, that it makes up for both of the earlier disappointments.

The film is about accomplished college professor David Kepesh (Kingsley), who hosts a radio show in which he discusses literature, and appears on television numerous times to talk about other high-brow topics. But his favorite thing to do? Seduce young women. After every semester, Kepesh holds a cocktail party in which he invites all of his students. At that party, like routine, he finds one particular young woman to track down and lure into bed with him. His target in this particular film? The beautiful, elegant Consuela (Cruz).

Consuela is a Cuban-American student who, like many others, is astonished by Kepesh's seemingly infinite knowledge of all types of culture. She allows Kepesh to guide her quite easily into his bedroom, and they quickly begin a passionate love affair that--shockingly to Kepesh--becomes much more than just physical. For the first time in his entire life, Kepesh feels emotionally attached to this woman. She's all he thinks about when he's alone, and he obsesses about her when she tells him she's made plans. His jealousy turns to paranoia. All of this emotional jostling coming as a consequence of love--something which is very foreign to him.

Despite his near-stalking obsession, Consuela sees something wonderful in Kepesh. He does not know how to handle this love that he feels, and she uses that to make him putty in her hands. Kepesh, though, still cannot grasp his own strong emotions, and attempts at numerous moments to sabotage the relationship. He isolates her, breaks promises, convinced that sooner than later she would find a man more suitable to her age (Kepesh, as they explain, is more than thirty years older than her). Finally, Kepesh succeeds in his journey to end the affair, but he is faced with something even harder: loneliness and a broken heart.

The film is based on a novel by Philip Roth, an author who is frequently attempted on the big screen, but seldom told in any competent fashion (remember The Human Stain?). Much to Roth's MO, the story is filled with sexual paranoia, particularly dealing with an older gentleman's affinity for a much younger woman. Of the few films I've seen based on his works, Elegy is the only one that I've seen that truly works all of the way through. I wonder if it is poetic justice that it is Isabel Coixet, a woman, who finally makes sense of his words on the screen. She handles the material with restraint--well, as much as you can with such graphic material--and lets the story unfold through the characters rather than plot contrivances.

In truth, the film is in the hands of its two stars. Kingsley has much to do throughout this film, as its main character and narrator. I don't know if we ever believe he is the Lethario that he is suggested to be, but his portrait of sexual awakening and lovelorn is both captivating and painful. The biggest star is Cruz, as the mild-mannered Consuela. At first glance (and definitely when we first glance at her in the film), she may be seem to old to play the strong-willed but naive college student, but we're proven wrong rather quickly. For starters, certain moments in the film display Cruz's amazing grace within Consuela's skin that could only be achieved through life experience. Cruz, it seems, has found her niche in American films (another one saved by jumping that sinking Tom Cruise ship).

The film has several astounding supporting turns. One coming from the always wonderful Patricia Clarkson as Carolyn, Kepesh's consistent and unattached mistress, who is much more upset about his affair than she thought she would be. Peter Sarsgaard plays Kepesh's son Kenny, who has never gotten over the bitterness born from Kepesh's abandonment of him and his mother at such a young age. Best of all, though, is Dennis Hopper as Kepesh's Pulitzer Prize-winning friend George O'Hearn. It's much to Hopper's credit that he was able to pull off the role as a much-acclaimed poet and still hold that fire that has lit his entire eccentric career.

The film drags in more than one part of the movie, and the film never addresses anything that hasn't been said in numerous other films before it. But it makes that always amazing point that is much more true than we realize: that some of the most brilliant men who are geniuses of the brain, can be the most incompetent when dealing with the issues of the heart. I will gladly look into more of Isabel Coixet's more obscure work (I confess I haven't seen any of it), and though this film is nothing close to perfect, it holds a great sincerity for its characters that carries through to the audience.

P.S.: With The Wackness Kingsley was with both Famke Janssen and Mary-Kate Olson, and now he in Elegy, he has the arm candy of both Clarkson and Cruz. I can't think of a time in the past or can I think of a time in the future where numerous beautiful women will be throwing themselves so fervently at the knighted actor. That Gandhi is one lucky bastard.

Tropic Thunder (****)

TROPIC THUNDER
Directed by Ben Stiller



****

With his massive success as a movie star, it's easy to overlook Ben Stiller's incredible talent as a filmmaker. He made the Gen-X classic Reality Bites in 1994, the overwhelmingly underrated The Cable Guy, a 1996 dark comedy that truly took advantage of Jim Carrey, and then in 2000, he helmed the brain-dead guilty pleasure Zoolander. All three incredibly well-made and entertaining films, but with Tropic Thunder he takes the responsibility of trying to create a blistering comedy combined with an action picture combined with a Hollywood satire. Wouldn't you know it, Stiller manages to balance all these genres, and creates one of the best films of the year in the process.

The film involves the production of another film based on a novel about Vietnam soldiers that may or may not be true (don't worry, it's supposed to be this convoluted). The big-time producers call on rookie director Damien Cockburn (Steven Coogan) to control the biggest, highest budgeted war film in Hollywood history. The movie stars brought along for the ride are action star Tugg Speedman (Stiller), the comedian with a staple in fart humor Jeff Portnoy (Jack Black), and Australian, five-time Oscar winner Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr.). Getting these high-profile personalities spells disaster for Cockburn, as the film production spirals out of control.

After feeling the pressure from both Speedman's pesky agent Pecker (Matthew McConaughey), and the film's verbally abusive executive producer Les Grossman (it ruins the fun to know who plays this memorable character), Cockburn takes the advice from Four Leaf Tayback (Nick Nolte), the author of the original story's novel, and puts his actors into the real hell of Vietnam. Placing cameras all around the jungle trees, Cockburn hopes he can catch the natural, gritty energy of the actors, and hopes to keep the film in check with the help of his gung-ho pyrotechnics man Cody (Danny McBride), rigging all kinds of bombs and gadgets to go off.

If it doesn't seem like another characters already, I should probably tell you that Speedman, Lazarus, and Portnoy are joined by two other cast members. One, a rapper named Alpa Chino (Brandon T. Jackson), who is in constant promotion of his soft drink "booty sweat", and the other a soldier specialist named Kevin Sandusky (Jay Baruchel)--essentially the only man in the jungle who knows what he's doing. Speedman tries to convince the other actors to stay in character and revive the sinking film, but the plan goes awry when Tugg is captured by Vietnamese heroin manufacturers and held for ransom. It is up to the other four to go back for Speedman to try and save him, though Speedman himself doesn't even realize he's no longer being filmed.

I can go back and go over other plot details like Portnoy's serious heroin withdrawal in the jungle, or Lazarus' attempt to play a character in blackface, but I didn't want to spend all of this review trying to explain the plot. All that matters is that this film is simply hilarious. It's hard to explain what makes this film so amazing, but I'll try to focus on it's balance of hysterical humor, biting satire, and exciting action. I give Stiller all of the credit that this film works so well despite all these aspects, and his incredible puppeteering of all the jokes and stunt work gives him the best comedy of 2008.

The film only scratches the surface of self-important actors, ego-centric studio heads, and money-grubbing agents, but it's the development of the characters that makes the film so engrossing. Watching Downey Jr. play an Australian trying to play an African-American is something of extraordinary acting (with Iron Man already huge and The Soloist still to come, this could be the biggest year of his career). Still, though, there is no one actor that stands above the rest, each one having there moment of stabbing glory. And with such a long, star-studded cast, the audience gets to experience a lot of glorious moments.

Danny McBride (Red in Pineapple Express) continues to show his skill as a hilarious supporting player, and both Baruchel and Jackson hold their own with Stiller and Downey Jr. As for Jack Black, it has never been so funny watching a man struggle with his own substance abuse. It's foolish to say Downey Jr. is great in his incarnation of Daniel Day-Lewis slash Russell Crowe--it is too obvious; and Stiller does a good job of playing a slightly more intelligent man than Derek Zoolander (though that's not saying much). The true star of the movie is the script written by Stiller and also Justin Theroix and Etan Coen, which is filled with such brilliant dialogue and such industry know-how.

This film is so great, even the closing credits provide entertainment and surprises. It's The Player meets Platoon, only it's hell of a lot funnier than both of those movies. Okay, okay, I sound like I'm dwelling on hyperbole a little bit, but I can't hold my love for this movie. It's been rare the last couple of years that I've truly enjoyed a comedy that didn't have anything to do Judd Apatow. It seems Hollywood comedies are finally coming around (though Step Brothers was a bitter disappointment). They're starting to realize their potential to affect the audience rather than make them cringe or scratch their heads. I say this knowing knock-offs like Disaster Movie are hitting theaters in a few weeks. When I see things like that, I can always think of this film to make me feel better.

The 12 Films I'm Most Anticipating For The Rest of 2008

THE 12 FILMS I'M MOST ANTICIPATING FOR THE REST OF 2008

I hate to say it, but 2008 has been a pretty droll year in search of great films. I can name four films--WALL-E, Pineapple Express, The Dark Knight, and In Bruges--that I believe were truly great. The rest that I've seen have been sincere but mediocre (The Wackness or Smart People), or just plain awful (The Happening or Drillbit Taylor). All that being said, there are still plenty of films being released in the remainder of the year that have me truly excited, but these ten are the ones that I'm looking forward to the most.

BURN AFTER READING
Sept. 12

The Coen Brothers are kidding themselves if they think that they can match the industry success they had with their first Oscar darling No Country For Old Men. This film is a throwback to the glory days of zany comedies. Their dramas win them accolades, but it's those wonderful comedies (Raising Arizona, The Big Lebowski) that has made the Coens household names. Burn After Reading seems like prototype Coen Brothers, a group of inept peoples caught up in a truly dangerous situation that they'll never be able to understand. The film includes a wonderful cast that includes George Clooney, Frances McDormand, John Malkovich, Tilda Swinton, and Brad Pitt, and they all look like they're having fun. I think the audience will be having tons of fun as well.

BLINDNESS
Sept. 26

Jose Saramago's Nobel Prize-winning novel about the world's destructive response to a blindness epidemic seems like a difficult translation to the screen. Few filmmakers are mentally tough enough to take on such a burden, but this film is in the hands of Federico Merielles, who has also handled complex novels in the two masterful films City of God and The Constant Gardener. Merielles knows how to take on these kinds of tales, and he knows how to make them into meaningful films, and with a cast equipped with Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo, Gael Garcia Bernal, and Danny Glover, I have complete trust that this film will do justice to Saramago's masterpiece, even if the early word from Cannes wasn't favorable.

HAPPY-GO-LUCKY
Oct. 10

Oh, that Mike Leigh and his little indie films. His unorthodox style--relying mostly on improv, and not even writing a script most of the time--has made him one of the most interesting filmmakers of the last two decades. Most of his films fall by the wayside, but he also was behind the much-lauded Secrets and Lies, the cult favorite Topsy-Turvy, and the surprise Oscar success Vera Drake. Of coarse, the adjective usually associated with Leigh is "natural", and with a glimpse of the trailer for Happy-Go-Lucky, his technique still seems intact. The plot involves Poppy (Sally Hawkins), a forever light-hearted young woman, whose constant cheerful demeanor frequently clashes with the depression of others. Hawkins won the Best Actress at the Berlin Film Festival and is getting serious Oscar buzz. A must-see for me.

RACHEL GETTING MARRIED
Oct. 17

I'm sure everyone is tired of the dysfunctional family dramedy, and even I have to say that this film looks like a carbon-copy of last year's Margot at the Wedding. But I must say I trust this film's director, the brilliant Jonathon Demme, more than I trust Margot's Noah Baumbach. And with a fiery lead performance from Anne Hathaway this film could sneak in and become the indie surprise of the year. The film co-stars Rosemary DeWitt, Deborah Winger, and Bill "Mr. Noodle" Irwin. Sure, this premise has been beaten to death ever since The Royal Tenenbaums perfected it in 2001, but there is a reason that this theme keeps on getting revisited, and that's because everyone knows the tortures and the virtues of family, and when done well in film, it could create wonders.

CHANGELING
Oct. 24

I've never seen a 78-year-old who works as hard and as frequently and with as much skill as Clint Eastwood. His newest film, Changeling, was the biggest American darling at the Cannes Film Festival. The film stars Angelina Jolie as a mother who finds her missing son, only to suspect that the boy may not be who she thinks he is. The film takes place 20's or 30's (don't know for sure), but it strikes modern issues of espionage and strange intervention. Clint is red-hot if we're thinking in terms of Oscar attention (woah, Space Cowboys seems like such a long time ago), and this film seems to hold the same balance of intensity and romanticism that he's had during this "Golden Years" stretch of his career since 2003's Mystic River and up to 2007's Letters From Iwo Jima.

THE ROAD
Nov. 28

Much like Blindness, The Road is an adaptation of a superb, heavily awarded novel from a seemingly unadaptable author. The author in this case, Cormac McCarthy, had already scared off spooked screenwriters when the Coen Brothers won an Oscar for adapting No Country For Old Men, so in a way, this is actually much different than the situation with Blindness. Still, this story of a strong-willed father trying to guide his introspective young son through the wasteland that is now the world may seem like a dull movie preposition if not done perfectly. The film is helmed by rookie John Hilcoat and has Viggo Mortenson as Father, and those seem like wise choices. Truth is, The Road may be the best book of the last ten years, and I find it extremely exciting to see how it holds up as a film.

MILK
Dec. 5

Gus Van Sant has talent as a filmmaker, proven by his Oscar nomination for the earnest Good Will Hunting and the Palme D'Or-winning Elephant. He's also shown the talent to make awful movies like the horribly misguided Gerry and the completely unnecessary, almost avant-garde remake of Psycho. But in 2008, Van Sant takes on the story of Harvey Milk, California's first openly gay elected official, and his subsequent murder by San Francisco Supervisor Dan White. Being a homosexual, some have sighted this picture as a personal project for Van Sant, though he has never been a major player in gay cinema. What the film does have is a cast that includes Sean Penn as Harvey Milk, Josh Brolin as Dan White, and also includes Emile Hirsch and James Franco as Milk's numerous lovers. So, whether or not it's personal, it has a swell chance of being very good.

DOUBT
Dec. 5

This is yet another film based on award winning literature. John Patrick Shanley's play both won the Pulitzer Prize and completely devastated the Tony competition, so where else to go but to the big screen. Shanley wrote the screenplay and has even directed the film using a cast including Philip Seymour Hoffman, Meryl Streep, and Amy Adams. The play involved a young nun in the 60's who suspects a priest is abusing a young, black student, and attacks many taboo themes throughout which usually gain a lot of attention around Oscar consideration time. All that being said, one of the hardest things to do is sufficiently adapt a very talky play to a truly entertaining movie, but Doubt seems like a good enough play to give it a shot.

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON
Dec. 19

David Fincher is truly one of the most talented young filmmakers right now, but his films usually mire in obscurity. Last year's Zodiac was lauded by critics, but forgotten. Fight Club is a cult classic amongst many angst-y high school boys. Even Se7en, his biggest hit, is usually watered down as a horror film, even though it's a truly horrifying suspense tale. So, it seems, Fincher refuses to take any kind of Hollywood approach, but instead delves even deeper into strangeness. Based on the mildly amusing short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald, Bejamin Button is about a man who is born over a hundred years old and grows backwards, getting younger and younger. Brad Pitt stars as the title character at what might be the peak of his career (watch Assassination of Jesse James if you don't think so), and him and Fincher seem bound to make this film a magical journey.

REVOLUTIONARY ROAD
Dec. 26

The last time Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio starred together in a film, it was the biggest box office hit of all time. Now, eleven years later, the two star as a troubled couple in a film helmed by Winslet's husband Sam Mendes. Based on the novel of Richard Yates, the two star as a couple struggling to stay faithful and struggling to keep their family together in the 1950's. There is something very baity about that plot, but with DiCaprio, Winslet, and Mendes all on board, it seems nearly impossible that this film will be less than superior work. Like I mentioned before, the dysfunctional family seems to be growing tired as a popular movie staple, but it is the responsibility of these three artists to make it work, and I feel confident in their ability.

SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK
T.B.A.

I don't think I'm the only film nut who adores Charlie Kaufman. Every story he creates is beautiful, strange, and best of all, perfect in its imperfection. With Synecdoche, New York, Charlie Kaufman gets his first chance as a director with yet another tale of nervous love and neurotic personalities. The story involves a man attempting to build a life-size stage of New York in a warehouse for his new play, while also trying to juggle the numerous women in his life. The film stars Philip Seymour Hoffman in the lead role, and stars Samantha Morton, Catherine Keener, Emily Watson, Michelle Williams, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Diane Weist, and Hope Davis as the women. If we're going based on names, this film should be a knockout. The release is still a mystery, though the Weinsteins promise it'll be before the end of 2008. I don't know how much longer I can wait.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona (**)

VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA
Written and Directed by Woody Allen



**

You can make the case that Woody Allen was the greatest filmmaker of the seventies or the eighties if the criteria was consistently great work, but since then it's been mostly hit or miss. Basically for the last 18 years it's been feast (Bullets Over Broadway, Sweet and Lowdown) or famine (Everyone Says I Love You, Hollywood Ending). People all proclaimed Woody was back in business when he was once again Oscar nominated for Match Point, and then cringed again when they saw the lazy Scoop. With Vicky Cristina Barcelona, we see Woody continuing to probe his late fascination with European cities, resulting in a dull film which glosses over the same few themes he has addressed numerous times over the last thirty-five years.

The story involves Vicky (Rebecca Hall) and Cristina (Scarlett Johansson) as they take a two month vacation in Barcelona, offered to them by Vicky's relative Judy (Patricia Clarkson). Vicky is securely engaged to Doug (Chris Messina), who is rich and ready to commit his fortune to Vicky who has been studying Catalin culture--for what, nobody is sure. Cristina is an actress, trying to be an artist, practicing as a photographer--basically trying to find the perfect resource to outlay her yearning for artistic creativity. Cristina's lack of talent in any of the things she tries makes her bitter, but she is still a hopeless romantic.

The two run into exotic painter Juan Antonio (Javier Bardem), and he offers them both the opportunity to spend the weekend with him drinking wine, seeing sights, and making love. Vicky is vocally appalled by the abrupt nature of Juan Antonio, but Cristina is excited by his aggression. Against Vicky's pleading, Cristina drags them both along to Oviedo where the story finally begins to roll along. Cristina is readily willing to fall under Juan Antonio's seduction, but Vicky takes a little work, after all she doesn't want to risk the comfortable relationship she has with Doug, even if it isn't totally sincere.

The wrench thrown into this machine is Juan Antonio's ex-wife Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz). Depending on who tells the story, Maria Elena tried to kill Juan Antonio, or he tried to kill her--at this point, it doesn't really matter. The point is that the two are never able to get over each other, yet never able to function together without a chance of violence. Maria Elena is suspicious of Cristina, and paranoid that Juan Antonio might actually be in love with someone else. Soon though, the triangle of Maria Elena, Juan Antonio, and Cristina becomes a steamy love affair between the three of them. Meanwhile, Vicky debates with herself over the seemingly uneventful and unloving life she seems to be headed for.

I guess the problem I have with this film is that it is a showcase for how lazy Woody Allen has become as a filmmaker lately. He's making puzzling decisions throughout this film, for instance deciding to have a third-person omniscient narrator detail all the subtleties while the story unfolds. This is a technique that also vexed me in Little Children two years ago, so perhaps I have a bit of a prejudice where narrating stands, but it's hard not to see that where Woody used to be flawless, he now seems tired and obtuse. How else do you explain this film's long, dull passages and some of the characters' weaving in and out of some subplots for what seems like no point?

The saving grace of this film is something that has always been there for Woody no matter what: the intrigue of the characters. Both Vicky and Cristina--even Maria Elena to a point--are Woody Allen female prototypes: one a conservative, intelligent woman who must choose whether or not her life is truly living; and the other being the wild child who is almost suicidal in her ignorant romanticism. Though we've seen these women before, it's always fun to see them tossing around Woody's extended vocabulary through scenes of their extreme neuroticism. Sure, it's a male fantasy to see the three of them in all forms of undress with a single man, but Woody movies are all about the everyman getting the beautiful girl.

Scarlett Johansson is now on her third film with Woody, and this is the closest I've seen her to being comfortable in his system (I didn't buy anything she did in the overrated Match Point), but she and Javier Bardem seem to sleepwalk through their roles. Penelop Cruz is the film's fire, bringing the story's only energy as the jealous, volatile Maria Elena. An Oscar nomination could be in her future for being such a bright spot in such a droll movie. The best performance though, probably comes from one who didn't even make it onto the poster, and that's Rebecca Hall. Hall is the closest thing in the film to the natural Woody-esque actress in the form of Diane Keaton or Mia Farrow, and she deals with her complex issues with such wonderful subtlety that her performance becomes the glue that holds this tale together.

In the end, I find this latest picture just as underwhelming as most of the films Woody has made in the last decade. There was a time when he could do no wrong, but now he has a film which totally jumbles its themes and even pulls off the impossible by not knowing how to use the brilliant Patricia Clarkson. Many say that Woody has gotten a tough wrap, because most of his films that are considered mediocre would be called masterpieces if made by a no-name filmmaker. As a huge Woody fan, I think even he'd agree that there is a whole lot more to making a great film than making a 96-minute video postcard for one of his favorite Spanish cities.

Pineapple Express (***1/2)

PINEAPPLE EXPRESS
Directed by David Gordon Green



***1/2

The stoner flick is a funny genre. Technically, the original Harold & Kumar film was a film about two young men and an adventurous night, but it's considered a stoner film. The Big Lebowski is a hilarious take on modern film noir, but since Jeff Bridges smokes weed, it's considered a stoner film. No other movie prop can overtake an entire movie's genre the way marijuana does, even if it's not a focal point to the plot. Pineapple Express, the newest Judd Apatow brainchild, takes a different approach. This hilarious film tries to infuse marijuana into every aspect of the story, almost empowering all other plot points.

So I guess it's safe to say that those audience members who aren't a fan of the inebriating plant may find Express a bit vexing, but for those who watch objectively get to experience one of the funniest films of 2008. The film is about Dale (Seth Rogan), a pudgy pothead who works as a process server, constantly disguising himself so he can hand out subpoenas to those who least expect it. Well, to be honest, he spends most of his day listening to talk radio and blatantly smoking his favorite herb. He's in a puzzling relationship with a high school senior named Angie (Amber Heard) which would be a much more disturbing sub-plot if it wasn't a perfect example of his underachieving lifestyle.

The other half of this film's dynamic duo is Saul (James Franco), Dale's main source of weed. Saul spends his entire life baked out of his mind in an apartment filled with so many gadgets that go to waste on his simple mind. When Dale comes to Saul to make a purchase, Saul reveals his new stuff: Pineapple Express. A new weed so amazing smoking it almost feels like--as Saul puts it--"killing a unicorn". The two fill up on the high-level marijuana, and Dale walks away buying a quarter-bag of his own.

Later in the day, Dale sits outside the house of Ted Jones (an interestingly dark Gary Cole), and once again smokes before preparing to deliver yet another subpoena. This time, though, Dale witnesses Jones and another lady officer (Rosie Perez) murder a man. In attempts to flee the scene, Dale makes quite a racket and drops his joint. Dale escapes but Jones knows that the weed is Pineapple Express, and he knows that the only person in the city who has this rare supplement is Saul. So, Dale and Saul are forced to go on the run from these crooked cops in a chase film that is as hysterical and violent as it is impromptu.

All Apatow films have the loveable supporting character. 40-Year-Old Virgin had Rogen, Paul Rudd, and Romany Malco as a tag-team comedy force. Superbad had the unforgettable McLovin. What we get in Pineapple Express is Red (Danny McBride). Red is the middle-man who gives Ted's weed to Saul. Equipped with a 90's Will Smith flat-top and gangster lingo, Red bursts in and out of the film as loudly as possible bringing constant hilarity and unpredictability. McBride has hopped around through bad comedies like Drillbit Taylor and The Heartbreak Kid, but in Express he's a revelation of comedic ability.

The film is directed by proven autuer David Gordon Green--perhaps the last person on Earth that anyone would consider to be the director of an Apatow production. The man behind such tranquil, lovely films as George Washington and All The Real Girls has a lot of fun with his first major Hollywood film, but there still are glimpses of the master behind the camera. Bringing along his usual cinematographer, Tim Orr, Express is easily the most visually stylized of all of the Apatow productions, particularly the scenes that are driven by the dialogue and not the action.

Speaking of the action, I should take the time to say how surprised I was with the violence is in this film. Not that I minded, nor do I believe that the violence is as bad as films like Wanted or even Untraceable from earlier in the year, but I don't think I'm the only one who expected more punchy one-liners and sight gags than bullet-grazed bodies and horrific assassinations. The film, I believe can stand alone as a pretty competent action film, using the always dependable Hitchcock formula of a regular Joe who gets caught up in trouble he can't even begin to understand, but only a fool watches this film not to come out appreciating the comedy first.

I think the reason why so many love Apatow films is because of their "everyman" leads. How else could you explain someone like Seth Rogan becoming a movie star in such image-conscious times? Rogan has performances like this on lock-down: loveable loser who's put in unusual place of responsibility. It's to his credit that he's able to make this same character funny every time. The real energy in this film comes from James Franco. Franco, an actor I've always found wooden and disingenuous seems freed by the character of Saul, never relenting on his constant state of euphoric highness.

The film contains great supporting performances from The Office's Craig Robinson and a wonderful Ed Begley Jr. as Angie's impatient and gun-toting father. This film is probably the funniest movie I've seen this year (I'd have to re-watch Forgetting Sarah Marshall before I can say this definitively) and never lets go of its adrenaline. Sometimes the film falls in love with its action sequences a little too much, and the film has a black-and-white prologue that seems to be a scene from an entirely different film, but it is in no way a film experience that you will want to forget.