I'VE LOVED YOU SO LONG
Ill y a longtemps que je t'aime
Written and Directed by Phillipe Claudel
***1/2
When we think of the great premiere films from directors, our minds automatically go to Citizen Kane for Orson Welles, Blood Simple for the Coen Brothers, and most recently Michael Clayton for Tony Gilroy. You can add I've Loved You So Long to that list, for the budding new French filmmaker Phillipe Claudel. Not only does the film boast exceptional cinematic skill unseen in most rookies, but it also holds a handful of iconic performances in the most emotionally bare film released so far this year.
We are introduced to Juliette (Kristen Scott-Thomas) as she sits at the airport, a cigarette is glued between her fingers. Her expression is automatically one of a woman who is carrying the weight of the world on her shoulders. Her sister Lea (Elsa Zylberstein) races into the terminal, and spots her. They have not seen each other in over fifteen years, but now, Lea is forced to give Juliette a place to stay. Lea is overjoyed to be with her sister after so long, but is still a bit timid, and fears the unknown. The truth is, she barely knows this Juliette; the one that had vanished for so long.
Lea's two adopted daughters are excited to live with their new aunt, ready to indulge Juliette in playing piano and tours of their rooms. But Juliette is reserved, finding life reinstated to the family harder to adjust to, after being away from it for so long. Lea's husband Luc (Serge Hazanavicius) is bothered by Juliette's presence--why should his home have to house this mysterious, and introverted woman? Through various meetings and off-hand comments, we learn where Juliette has been this whole time: in prison--for murder.
Slowly, but surely, Juliette begins to adjust to living with her sister's family. She gets along with her parole officer (Frederic Pierrot), who introduces his own personal problems in their in-depth conversations. She meets Michel (Laurent Grevill), one of Lea's co-workers, and is sucked in by his sense of humor, and romantic intellect. Life is starting to come back to normal, but as more and more details are revealed about her heinous crime, the more and more she is faced with her own life decisions. With Lea trying to help her sister come to grips with her tormented soul, Juliette debates whether or not she is willing to go through the pain true closure can bring.
I absolutely love the way this film unveils its intentions piece by piece. We are never told a piece of information at the wrong time, and there is never a moment when a character reveals something that seems insincere. The film moves at an intentional novel-like pace, which may put some on edge, but is the perfect way to tell this story. Few filmmakers would trust this technique (it's one of the most unpopular among audiences), but what is probably more surprising is that this bold decision was made by a filmmaker on his first film. Few would have been as brave as Claudel, in sacrificing audience convenience for austere narrative structure.
But lets not forget those wonderful performances. Scott-Thomas gives what is probably the greatest performance of her uneven career. Her Juliette is a character filled to the brim with caged demons, its amazing she was able to pull this off with such delicacy. She's a straight powder-keg of emotion, with the pain of the whole world sitting in her strained eyes--even her smiles seem fractured. Scott-Thomas has seemed to me, to always be an actress who depended on her radiance, but that is certainly not the case here, where she wears nothing but muted colors and allows the character to be completely de-glammed.
Popular in French cinema, but nearly unheard of in America, Zylberstein gives a wonderful supporting turn as Lea, the supportive, but persistant sister. She has to hold back a lot of frustration and a lot of dismay in order to retain her status as the cornerstone of that family. Both Pierrot and Grevill are pleasant in their smaller, more light-hearted roles, but most importantly, they add even more depth to Juliette, who uses them both to figure out how she will succeed in her reconstructed life. It's a successful ensemble, which I also credit to Claudel, who in addition to his superior use of visual motif, shows that he has talent handling actors as well.
I've Loved You So Long is a movie that is equally devastating and gratifying. The brilliance of Juliette's character arc is what guides the film, and the combination of Claudel's intelligent, self-disciplined directing, and Scott-Thomas's ethereal, understated portrayal brings it to its full fruition. I know that I'm biased toward small, personal films which depend more on character than plot, so this is the kind of movie that is tailor-made for someone like me. It is not a film that is well-defined by genre, because the power behind storytelling as exceptional as this is universal.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Just Like You, But Sweeter
The most scathing scene in one of the most scathing films in recent memory. Has Clive Owen ever been better? Has Julia Roberts ever been braver? Closer is an example of how to make an excellent film out of an excellent play. Later this year, I hope Doubt and Frost/Nixon can pull off the same feat.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
The Emergence of 'The Wrestler'
I wasn't too excited about this film until I saw this trailer. Mickey Rourke seems to be on a streamline toward his first Oscar nomination, if this is any indication. This is probably the last trailer of any of the major fall films, so I guess we are finally at the point where intangible buzz gives way to actual opinions of the films as they're seen. Part of me still feels that this small gem will sneak into the Best Picture shortlist, but as all of the films are being dumped into theaters in December, we (well, I) have a lot of watching to do.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Synecdoche, New York (**1/2)
SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK
Written and Directed by Charlie Kaufman
**1/2
Everything that I've admired about films penned by Charlie Kaufman is the limitless creativity and fearlessness in which the strangeness is unleashed. After Being John Malkovich, Adaptation., and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, I figured that there wasn't really any way Kaufman could surprise me with anything on the screen. That is, until Synecdoche, New York, in which not only does he write the screenplay, but is also given the reigns as director. The result is a film which purposely goes out of its way to make sure that its audience is off-balance.
The entire film is essentially one, huge ambitious metaphor for life. The phrase "synecdoche" means "a figure of speech in which a part is made to represent a whole, or vice versa", and essentially the story of Caden Cotard (played brilliantly by Philip Seymour Hoffman), is something that stands in place for everybody's lives. Obsession with death, romantic anxiety, eccentric characters (all Kaufman specialties), are displayed ad nauseum throughout this picture, but its supposed to stand for the pain and romance we all experience.
There's no way to truly explain the plot competently, because the plot is not necessarily adequately told. Essentially, we follow Caden throughout his life. It begins with Caden directing a re-enactment of Death of a Salesman, in which Claire (Michelle Williams) is his sexy lead actress, and Hazel (Samantha Morton) is his sincere, sweet box office attendant. His marriage to an artist named Adele (Catherine Keener), is on incredibly shaky ground, and she swiftly decides to take their young daughter, Olive, to Belgium with her lover Maria (Jennifer Jason Leigh).
Depressed without his wife and daughter, and disappointed with his lack of romantic success with Hazel, Caden uses a "genius grant" he receives, and decides to begin working on his own play. This is not just another run-of-the-mill play, he wants it to be large, and personal. He wants it to thematically scorch the Earth, and change theater, representing life as it is. Becoming more and more ambitious, and wanting to display realism, his own life spills into the play. His impulsive marriage to Claire is even sabotaged by Caden's inability to separate the play and reality.
As Caden's life becomes more and more convoluted between reality and fantasy, so does his play--and so does, quite frankly, the film itself. Minor characters, such as Caden's stand-in Sammy (Tom Noonan), and Caden's narcissistic therapist Madeleine (Hope Davis) weave themselves in and out of the movie, with little to no purpose. We are previewed to truly unpleasant images, such as poop on numerous occasions. As soon as you think, as the viewer, you have any kind of grasp on this film, it wrangles its way out of your hands violently and disappears.
Every character, even the reasonably normal ones, have eccentricities. Adele is a famous artist, but paints portraits so small that people have to wear binoculars to the exhibitions. Hazel lives in a house which is constantly on fire, though never burns down. Maria switches on and off between having a German accent and not having one. The biggest quirk in character, though, has to be in the daughter Olive, who starts off as a sweet, precocious young girl, and in no time is transformed in to a German stripper with a pretty exotic body tattoo. I don't doubt that these quirks have meaning and sub-text, but why make it so frustrating on the audience that has paid good money?
Truth be told, the film is a giant mess throughout, though it may be the most breathtaking giant mess in cinematic history. Kaufman, though taking his oddness and nearly spilling into pretension, does still keep his knack for creating compelling characters. The performances from Hoffman and Morton (the two most centralized characters) are very strong here, and small, supporting turns from Emily Watson and Dianne Wiest (as actresses in the play, respectively) are strong, sometimes funny highlights. No other screenwriter today is better at expressing emotional degradation.
The movie does take advantage of its 124-minute running time, and stretch it out as far as it can go. For a film that purposely makes no sense 75% of the time, this makes it feel particularly longer. Not that there is ever a boring moment, because there is always something alarming or bizarre awaiting in the next scene. You do find yourself curiously connected to Caden throughout his journey, and perhaps you can even buy into Kaufman's metaphor of Caden's life being everybody's life. But it's obvious that in his directorial debut, Kaufman has no idea how to use restraint. This is the type of film that would make David Lynch fans scratch their heads, and though I feel it is a film that should be watched by everyone, its almost certain that it will not be enjoyed by everyone.
Written and Directed by Charlie Kaufman
**1/2
Everything that I've admired about films penned by Charlie Kaufman is the limitless creativity and fearlessness in which the strangeness is unleashed. After Being John Malkovich, Adaptation., and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, I figured that there wasn't really any way Kaufman could surprise me with anything on the screen. That is, until Synecdoche, New York, in which not only does he write the screenplay, but is also given the reigns as director. The result is a film which purposely goes out of its way to make sure that its audience is off-balance.
The entire film is essentially one, huge ambitious metaphor for life. The phrase "synecdoche" means "a figure of speech in which a part is made to represent a whole, or vice versa", and essentially the story of Caden Cotard (played brilliantly by Philip Seymour Hoffman), is something that stands in place for everybody's lives. Obsession with death, romantic anxiety, eccentric characters (all Kaufman specialties), are displayed ad nauseum throughout this picture, but its supposed to stand for the pain and romance we all experience.
There's no way to truly explain the plot competently, because the plot is not necessarily adequately told. Essentially, we follow Caden throughout his life. It begins with Caden directing a re-enactment of Death of a Salesman, in which Claire (Michelle Williams) is his sexy lead actress, and Hazel (Samantha Morton) is his sincere, sweet box office attendant. His marriage to an artist named Adele (Catherine Keener), is on incredibly shaky ground, and she swiftly decides to take their young daughter, Olive, to Belgium with her lover Maria (Jennifer Jason Leigh).
Depressed without his wife and daughter, and disappointed with his lack of romantic success with Hazel, Caden uses a "genius grant" he receives, and decides to begin working on his own play. This is not just another run-of-the-mill play, he wants it to be large, and personal. He wants it to thematically scorch the Earth, and change theater, representing life as it is. Becoming more and more ambitious, and wanting to display realism, his own life spills into the play. His impulsive marriage to Claire is even sabotaged by Caden's inability to separate the play and reality.
As Caden's life becomes more and more convoluted between reality and fantasy, so does his play--and so does, quite frankly, the film itself. Minor characters, such as Caden's stand-in Sammy (Tom Noonan), and Caden's narcissistic therapist Madeleine (Hope Davis) weave themselves in and out of the movie, with little to no purpose. We are previewed to truly unpleasant images, such as poop on numerous occasions. As soon as you think, as the viewer, you have any kind of grasp on this film, it wrangles its way out of your hands violently and disappears.
Every character, even the reasonably normal ones, have eccentricities. Adele is a famous artist, but paints portraits so small that people have to wear binoculars to the exhibitions. Hazel lives in a house which is constantly on fire, though never burns down. Maria switches on and off between having a German accent and not having one. The biggest quirk in character, though, has to be in the daughter Olive, who starts off as a sweet, precocious young girl, and in no time is transformed in to a German stripper with a pretty exotic body tattoo. I don't doubt that these quirks have meaning and sub-text, but why make it so frustrating on the audience that has paid good money?
Truth be told, the film is a giant mess throughout, though it may be the most breathtaking giant mess in cinematic history. Kaufman, though taking his oddness and nearly spilling into pretension, does still keep his knack for creating compelling characters. The performances from Hoffman and Morton (the two most centralized characters) are very strong here, and small, supporting turns from Emily Watson and Dianne Wiest (as actresses in the play, respectively) are strong, sometimes funny highlights. No other screenwriter today is better at expressing emotional degradation.
The movie does take advantage of its 124-minute running time, and stretch it out as far as it can go. For a film that purposely makes no sense 75% of the time, this makes it feel particularly longer. Not that there is ever a boring moment, because there is always something alarming or bizarre awaiting in the next scene. You do find yourself curiously connected to Caden throughout his journey, and perhaps you can even buy into Kaufman's metaphor of Caden's life being everybody's life. But it's obvious that in his directorial debut, Kaufman has no idea how to use restraint. This is the type of film that would make David Lynch fans scratch their heads, and though I feel it is a film that should be watched by everyone, its almost certain that it will not be enjoyed by everyone.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Happy-Go-Lucky (***1/2)
HAPPY-GO-LUCKY
Written and Directed by Mike Leigh
***1/2
Certain actors would have to spend years to pull off the balancing act that Sally Hawkins performs in Mike Leigh's new film, Happy-Go-Lucky. It is a work of delight, charisma, and poignancy all wrapped up into a pleasant little film. Leigh, whose films Secrets & Lies and Vera Drake are usually gloomy and emotionally heavy, goes into unfamiliar territory here, with a film so upbeat, that it's to the point of unnerving. Of coarse, I mean that in the very best way possible.
Much has been said about Leigh's "method", where he essentially goes without a script, and allows the actors to create scene by scene with improvisation. I don't know what it is about his system which brings about the best in actors, but it always prevails. His "slice-of-life" filmmaking technique creates such a permeating atmospheric tone that we are sucked into the lives of the eccentric characters that pass across the screen. Happy-Go-Lucky is a film taylor-made for this production theory, because the ad-libbing adds to the film's comedic flow.
The film is solely about Poppy (Hawkins). She is a thirty-year-old elementary school teacher who sees her life through rose-colored glasses. She lives in bohemian England in a flat with her flatmate Zoe (Alexis Zegerman). Her spontaneity leads her into things such as flamenco dancing lessons, and wearing clothes that look like they were made by her young students. Her happiness is infectious to most, but pestering to some, as her glowing world view is mistaken for immaturity and indifference by some of the people who love her most.
There is no particular focus to the plot, other than to follow the days of Poppy. She decides to take driving lessons with an instructor that has an incendiary attitude, named Stan (a hilarious Eddie Marsan), where they constantly bicker. She has to deal with one student in her class that has violent tendencies. She has to juggle the insecurities of two younger sisters on opposite sides of the social line. Finally, she is able to meet Tim (Samuel Roukin), a social worker who helps children, and may be the one person who can handle her constant bubbly-ness.
No other film this year embodies it's central character the way Happy-Go-Lucky does. This story's structure does not move scene to scene, because Poppy is not the kind of character that moves from scene to scene. She takes time to notice certain books within a bookstore, and we stop to notice them with her. She wanders off into a back alley to spend quality time with a lonely homeless man, and we sit there with them, and we feel their closeness. It takes the time to see the world through Poppy's eyes, and though we may not agree with her purposeful lifestyle, we never doubt that she has the right state of mind.
The film is primed with a wondrous supporting cast, including an over-enthusiastic flamenco dance instructor (Karina Fernandez), who is haunted by the infidelity of her ex-lover from years ago. Also, Roukin's Tim is a fresh slice of warmth in the film. Eddie Marsden, as the manic Stan, is hysterical and haunting. Stan is the complete antithesis of what Poppy is and stands for. He approaches every scene foaming at the mouth, ready to catch Poppy by surprise, but the fact that she's always two steps ahead of him makes him that much more furious. His surprising disclosure toward the end is one of the film's high points.
Of coarse, though, the biggest star of this film is Hawkins. She is an actress of little popularity, but she has made her way in and out of various films since 2000. Much like Melissa Leo in Frozen River, this brilliant performance is an example of what can happen when a certain actor is simply given an oppurtunity. On paper, Poppy is nothing more than a stock character; the giggling, incompetent friend whose naievity is at some times endearing, but at most times annoying. Through Hawkins, she is a woman of immense depth, charm, and captivating personality. If she is not considered for an Oscar nomination in the coming months, there is no justice.
It only took 35 days for me to be able to see this film after its original Oct. 10th release, and under such long-waiting anticipation, a film can wither within my own overinflated expectation. Luckily for me, there was nothing disappointing within this darling picture. Hawkins holds the entire movie together with her enchanting performance, but is perfectly buoyed by Marsan's supporting turn. Though unlike most of Leigh's films in tone, it is not lacking in quality, as it is one of the best films so far this year.
Written and Directed by Mike Leigh
***1/2
Certain actors would have to spend years to pull off the balancing act that Sally Hawkins performs in Mike Leigh's new film, Happy-Go-Lucky. It is a work of delight, charisma, and poignancy all wrapped up into a pleasant little film. Leigh, whose films Secrets & Lies and Vera Drake are usually gloomy and emotionally heavy, goes into unfamiliar territory here, with a film so upbeat, that it's to the point of unnerving. Of coarse, I mean that in the very best way possible.
Much has been said about Leigh's "method", where he essentially goes without a script, and allows the actors to create scene by scene with improvisation. I don't know what it is about his system which brings about the best in actors, but it always prevails. His "slice-of-life" filmmaking technique creates such a permeating atmospheric tone that we are sucked into the lives of the eccentric characters that pass across the screen. Happy-Go-Lucky is a film taylor-made for this production theory, because the ad-libbing adds to the film's comedic flow.
The film is solely about Poppy (Hawkins). She is a thirty-year-old elementary school teacher who sees her life through rose-colored glasses. She lives in bohemian England in a flat with her flatmate Zoe (Alexis Zegerman). Her spontaneity leads her into things such as flamenco dancing lessons, and wearing clothes that look like they were made by her young students. Her happiness is infectious to most, but pestering to some, as her glowing world view is mistaken for immaturity and indifference by some of the people who love her most.
There is no particular focus to the plot, other than to follow the days of Poppy. She decides to take driving lessons with an instructor that has an incendiary attitude, named Stan (a hilarious Eddie Marsan), where they constantly bicker. She has to deal with one student in her class that has violent tendencies. She has to juggle the insecurities of two younger sisters on opposite sides of the social line. Finally, she is able to meet Tim (Samuel Roukin), a social worker who helps children, and may be the one person who can handle her constant bubbly-ness.
No other film this year embodies it's central character the way Happy-Go-Lucky does. This story's structure does not move scene to scene, because Poppy is not the kind of character that moves from scene to scene. She takes time to notice certain books within a bookstore, and we stop to notice them with her. She wanders off into a back alley to spend quality time with a lonely homeless man, and we sit there with them, and we feel their closeness. It takes the time to see the world through Poppy's eyes, and though we may not agree with her purposeful lifestyle, we never doubt that she has the right state of mind.
The film is primed with a wondrous supporting cast, including an over-enthusiastic flamenco dance instructor (Karina Fernandez), who is haunted by the infidelity of her ex-lover from years ago. Also, Roukin's Tim is a fresh slice of warmth in the film. Eddie Marsden, as the manic Stan, is hysterical and haunting. Stan is the complete antithesis of what Poppy is and stands for. He approaches every scene foaming at the mouth, ready to catch Poppy by surprise, but the fact that she's always two steps ahead of him makes him that much more furious. His surprising disclosure toward the end is one of the film's high points.
Of coarse, though, the biggest star of this film is Hawkins. She is an actress of little popularity, but she has made her way in and out of various films since 2000. Much like Melissa Leo in Frozen River, this brilliant performance is an example of what can happen when a certain actor is simply given an oppurtunity. On paper, Poppy is nothing more than a stock character; the giggling, incompetent friend whose naievity is at some times endearing, but at most times annoying. Through Hawkins, she is a woman of immense depth, charm, and captivating personality. If she is not considered for an Oscar nomination in the coming months, there is no justice.
It only took 35 days for me to be able to see this film after its original Oct. 10th release, and under such long-waiting anticipation, a film can wither within my own overinflated expectation. Luckily for me, there was nothing disappointing within this darling picture. Hawkins holds the entire movie together with her enchanting performance, but is perfectly buoyed by Marsan's supporting turn. Though unlike most of Leigh's films in tone, it is not lacking in quality, as it is one of the best films so far this year.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Backlogging
What is backlogging? Well, if being used in the literary form, it's a term that refers to a work that is unfinished and has no relevant plans to be finished. But for the purposes of this article, we'll talk about what "backlogging" means in terms of the movie release schedule. Backlogging is a strategy used by movie executives, in which highly anticipated and prestigious films are held until December or later in hopes of winning Academy Awards. This system, occupied by most if not all film studios gives off the impression that there is no sense in going to the theaters in January through November, because nothing of quality comes out until Christmas.
Happy-Go-Lucky
"Official" Release Date:
Oct. 10th
# of theaters:
4
Actual nat'l release:
??????
This theory, though successful, truly stretches the boundaries of what it means to be a great film of a particular year. If a film is "released" in 2008, but a majority of people don't see the film until 2009, where's the merit? Why not just release it in 2009? Because in the hopes of slipping into the Oscar race, more and more times we are seeing films being released on December 31st, in a coup to be relevant by the time Oscar season is in full swing.
This has completely affected the way we watch movies. Despite the fact that In Bruges and WALL-E are two of the most brilliant, imaginative, and wonderfully-made films of 2008, neither film is receiving award traction, because both were thrown into theaters way before fall season, where films like Doubt or The Curious Case of Benjamin Button seem to be in a battle royale over which can meet the hype.
Great films need weeks, sometimes months to process properly. If a film wins Best Picture at the Oscars and it was released just a month prior to it, then where is the true worth of the award? All it shows is that people have liked your film for a month, but there is absolutely no way to see how this film's staying power will be years from now.
I speak about backlogging, because this year, essentially every hyped film has come off disappointing. In a set-up to collect gold statues, studios feel like they can wait longer and longer as if the wait will make the experience that much more delectable. Same goes for films with an expanding schedule as forth-moving as the DMV. The truth is, every month of the year deserves its own great movie. We should not have to wait till the holiday season to watch anything of quality. That way, we have more time to savor it before we hand out the awards.
Happy-Go-Lucky
"Official" Release Date:
Oct. 10th
# of theaters:
4
Actual nat'l release:
??????
This theory, though successful, truly stretches the boundaries of what it means to be a great film of a particular year. If a film is "released" in 2008, but a majority of people don't see the film until 2009, where's the merit? Why not just release it in 2009? Because in the hopes of slipping into the Oscar race, more and more times we are seeing films being released on December 31st, in a coup to be relevant by the time Oscar season is in full swing.
This has completely affected the way we watch movies. Despite the fact that In Bruges and WALL-E are two of the most brilliant, imaginative, and wonderfully-made films of 2008, neither film is receiving award traction, because both were thrown into theaters way before fall season, where films like Doubt or The Curious Case of Benjamin Button seem to be in a battle royale over which can meet the hype.
Great films need weeks, sometimes months to process properly. If a film wins Best Picture at the Oscars and it was released just a month prior to it, then where is the true worth of the award? All it shows is that people have liked your film for a month, but there is absolutely no way to see how this film's staying power will be years from now.
I speak about backlogging, because this year, essentially every hyped film has come off disappointing. In a set-up to collect gold statues, studios feel like they can wait longer and longer as if the wait will make the experience that much more delectable. Same goes for films with an expanding schedule as forth-moving as the DMV. The truth is, every month of the year deserves its own great movie. We should not have to wait till the holiday season to watch anything of quality. That way, we have more time to savor it before we hand out the awards.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Role Models (***)
ROLE MODELS
Directed by David Wain
***
Role Models is a nifty little comedy. It holds a formulaic plot, but not the kind that makes you gag, but the kind that draws attention to the plot and not the formula. Despite popular belief, this is not one of the many films micromanaged by the sleepless Judd Apatow, but a film done by Wet Hot American Summer director David Wain. Like American Summer, Role Models has a hilarious side and a sweet side, and neither side ever has to be sacrificed for the other.
The plot focuses on Danny (Paul Rudd) and Wheeler (Sean William Scott), a pair of underachieving young men who work for a company that processes the powerful energy drink Minotaur. Their job entitles them to travel from school to school, and while Danny preaches to the students how drinking a Minotaur can help them stay off drugs, Wheeler participates by dressing in a minotaur costume and prancing around, shouting "Minotaur! Taste the beast!". Wheeler is perfectly fine with his station in life, but Danny is essentially depressed with his job and life.
To make matters worse for Danny, he is dumped by his girlfriend Beth (Elizabeth Banks--holy christ, this girl is in everything lately), because she no longer wants to deal with his constant crankiness (a conversation about the dubious size names at Starbucks is particularly hilarious). Danny's anger boils over when he and Wheeler drive their Minotaur truck onto a statue, and they are both arrested. Since Beth is a lawyer, she is able to negotiate with the judge so they don't have to serve jail time, but commit to community service at Sturdy Wings, where they have to look after lonely, troubled young boys.
Sturdy Wings is run by the startling open Gayle (the hilarious Jane Lynch), who works there after recovering from a nasty drug addiction. Gayle assigns Danny to Augie (Christopher Mintz-Plasse aka "McLovin"), a teenage nerd who lives only to play LAIRE, a sort of live-action cross of World of Warcraft and Dungeons and Dragons. Wheeler is assigned to Ronnie (Bobb'E J. Thompson), a prebuscent boy with a flair for four-letter words, and a constant thirst for mischief. The two debate about what is more torturous, dealing with these two phishers or going to jail, but over time, they find their times with the boys to be a virtuous one.
The reason why this movie is such a pleasure, is because (unlike say, Zack and Miri) it presents its comedy on a visceral level. There are no sight gags, and it felt so good to watch a modern comedy that didn't have a major character get kicked in the nuts. Instead, the comedy comes out of the depths of characters' psyche, and with two comedic actors the likes of Rudd and Scott, the story is allowed to run wild, while all the time running right on time. There is never a debate about where the story is going, or who will get the girl, because it takes solace in its comedic givings, not in its plot contrivances.
Not that there aren't contrivances, but it's something we're able to get over pretty quickly. This is a super-light film, and though its profanity and minor sexual content may state otherwise, it's just as cuddly as any Sandra Bullock romantic comedy. The best, most funny, moments within the film come from scenes involving Augie and Danny's involvement in LAIRE, where all the participants partake in medieval warfare, and play it with the utmost seriousness. When you're stabbed with the rubber sword, you're dead, and no one dare break that rule.
This is probably the first film that I've ever seen in which I saw Sean William Scott in a major role that was actually funny (though his minor cameo within Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back is still one of the funniest things I've ever seen). Watching him school the foul-mouthed Ronnie in the arts of watching female breasts and listening to KISS is hilarious. Rudd also does a good job playing the kind of character that has become his bread-and-butter over the last few years. His career has always been based on the contrast between his boyish good lucks, and the words that fall out of his mouth.
Role Models is an adult film striving to be children's comedy. To be sure, with a few edits here and there, I don't think this film would be so off limits for young children to see. Part of its charm lies within its precociousness. Steady performances by Rudd and Scott, enhanced by brilliant comedic turns by Lynch and Thompson is a perfect equation for a successful comedy. You leave the theater with nothing, really, but satisfaction.
Directed by David Wain
***
Role Models is a nifty little comedy. It holds a formulaic plot, but not the kind that makes you gag, but the kind that draws attention to the plot and not the formula. Despite popular belief, this is not one of the many films micromanaged by the sleepless Judd Apatow, but a film done by Wet Hot American Summer director David Wain. Like American Summer, Role Models has a hilarious side and a sweet side, and neither side ever has to be sacrificed for the other.
The plot focuses on Danny (Paul Rudd) and Wheeler (Sean William Scott), a pair of underachieving young men who work for a company that processes the powerful energy drink Minotaur. Their job entitles them to travel from school to school, and while Danny preaches to the students how drinking a Minotaur can help them stay off drugs, Wheeler participates by dressing in a minotaur costume and prancing around, shouting "Minotaur! Taste the beast!". Wheeler is perfectly fine with his station in life, but Danny is essentially depressed with his job and life.
To make matters worse for Danny, he is dumped by his girlfriend Beth (Elizabeth Banks--holy christ, this girl is in everything lately), because she no longer wants to deal with his constant crankiness (a conversation about the dubious size names at Starbucks is particularly hilarious). Danny's anger boils over when he and Wheeler drive their Minotaur truck onto a statue, and they are both arrested. Since Beth is a lawyer, she is able to negotiate with the judge so they don't have to serve jail time, but commit to community service at Sturdy Wings, where they have to look after lonely, troubled young boys.
Sturdy Wings is run by the startling open Gayle (the hilarious Jane Lynch), who works there after recovering from a nasty drug addiction. Gayle assigns Danny to Augie (Christopher Mintz-Plasse aka "McLovin"), a teenage nerd who lives only to play LAIRE, a sort of live-action cross of World of Warcraft and Dungeons and Dragons. Wheeler is assigned to Ronnie (Bobb'E J. Thompson), a prebuscent boy with a flair for four-letter words, and a constant thirst for mischief. The two debate about what is more torturous, dealing with these two phishers or going to jail, but over time, they find their times with the boys to be a virtuous one.
The reason why this movie is such a pleasure, is because (unlike say, Zack and Miri) it presents its comedy on a visceral level. There are no sight gags, and it felt so good to watch a modern comedy that didn't have a major character get kicked in the nuts. Instead, the comedy comes out of the depths of characters' psyche, and with two comedic actors the likes of Rudd and Scott, the story is allowed to run wild, while all the time running right on time. There is never a debate about where the story is going, or who will get the girl, because it takes solace in its comedic givings, not in its plot contrivances.
Not that there aren't contrivances, but it's something we're able to get over pretty quickly. This is a super-light film, and though its profanity and minor sexual content may state otherwise, it's just as cuddly as any Sandra Bullock romantic comedy. The best, most funny, moments within the film come from scenes involving Augie and Danny's involvement in LAIRE, where all the participants partake in medieval warfare, and play it with the utmost seriousness. When you're stabbed with the rubber sword, you're dead, and no one dare break that rule.
This is probably the first film that I've ever seen in which I saw Sean William Scott in a major role that was actually funny (though his minor cameo within Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back is still one of the funniest things I've ever seen). Watching him school the foul-mouthed Ronnie in the arts of watching female breasts and listening to KISS is hilarious. Rudd also does a good job playing the kind of character that has become his bread-and-butter over the last few years. His career has always been based on the contrast between his boyish good lucks, and the words that fall out of his mouth.
Role Models is an adult film striving to be children's comedy. To be sure, with a few edits here and there, I don't think this film would be so off limits for young children to see. Part of its charm lies within its precociousness. Steady performances by Rudd and Scott, enhanced by brilliant comedic turns by Lynch and Thompson is a perfect equation for a successful comedy. You leave the theater with nothing, really, but satisfaction.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
...but you didn't say 'God bless you' when I sneezed.
Yeah, Zack and Miri Make a Porno was a serious dud, but let's not forget the charming pieces within Kevin Smith's filmography, like this wonderful sequence within his religious satire Dogma.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Changeling (***)
CHANGELING
Directed by Clint Eastwood
***
The story of Christine Collins is the kind that is tailor-made for a filmmaker for Clint Eastwood. Powerful, long-winded, and profound, Changeling is not a huge stretch, thematically or stylistically, from the last couple of films Eastwood has made during his glorious emeritus years. His late-life boost as a director has produced Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby, and several Oscars. Both of those films were grand in the size of their drama, and Changeling is much of the same model. It may not be as memorable as those other two films, but with a wonderful lead performance, Eastwood is able to create another masterful motion picture that punctures bare human emotion.
Collins (Angelina Jolie) is a skilled worker at the Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Comp., working as supervisor of the telephone operators during the late 1920s. Her work ethic and dedication gets her many a compliment within her workspace. She is also a responsible single mother. Her son Walter is her main source of happiness, and other than work, her life is focused solely on his well-being. When she is unexpectedly called into work on the weekend, she is forced to leave him at home until she gets back, but when she finally returns that afternoon, Walter has disappeared.
Christine calls the police, but they refuse to handle any missing children cases unless they are missing for more than twenty-four hours, so she scours the town, finding nothing. When the police finally do contact her, they tell her that her son has been found after five months of investigation. Police Capt. J.J. Jones (Jeffrey Donovan) takes her to the train station to see her son, but who Christine meets is not her son. In fact, this boy is three inches shorter. Upset, Christine pleads with Capt. Jones to keep looking for her son, but he refuses, stating that a traumatic experience has probably effected the boy's physical features.
Christine is approached by an Episcopalian preacher named Gustav Briegleb (John Malkovich), who is a progressive reformer, who feels it is his mission to bring out the corruption and ineptitude of the Los Angeles Police Department. He advises Christine to fight the police, and fight for her son, but his advice leads Christine straight into the claws of the police. She is lead under false pretenses into the police station, and commited to a psychopathic hospital, where she meets many other women who weren't in fact crazy, but just a pest to the police. After suffering the greatest injustice, Christine continues on, striving to find justice and hoping to find Walter through all of the corruption in the L.A.P.D.
Sure, this film outstays its welcome, and is perhaps thirty minutes too long. Sure, it is pretensiously aware of its own pretigious pedigree (a sequence which actually showcases an Academy Awards ceremony seems steemingly baity). All of that would probably be crippling to a film, if it wasn't be handled by the delicate hands of Clint Eastwood. Its hard to use Clint and the word "delicate" in the same sentence, but its that delicacy that is the reason he has succeeded so recently behind the camera. He has an eye for human emotion, and knows how to push his actors without allowing them to become preachy or melodramatic.
The L.A.P.D. has probably been the most skewered and criticized organization in film history, particularly in films from the 1990's on. The Christine Collins story is supposed to be based on a true story, but the actual famous event that the film is based upon cannot be concealed here, for fear of a spoiler. The reason I bring it up, is because I can't help but wonder how much more interesting the film could have been if the story was singularly focused on Christine Collins, and didn't take long meanderings focused on characters that are important, but not particularly gravitating.
The power of this movie does come solely from the performance of Angelina Jolie. Her performance in Hollywood commercial films has caused her to be somewhat underestimated. She is known for gaudy action films, where subtlety is left in the wind. Even her Oscar-winning performance for Girl, Interrupted was one of a large dramatic scope, where she is scene-stealing simply because she is the loudest force on the screen. In Changeling--much like her performance within last year's A Mighty Heart--she shows her talent for nuance and understatedness. Because it comes so unbelievably natural to her, it some times seems absent, but this film is certainly a soft performance of notice.
This film has nearly the same amount of endings as the final Lord of the Rings film, and that is the sole source of frustration when you watch this movie, but it is certainly crowd-pleasing. The twists do not unfold as smoothly to make them as shocking or surprising as they need to be, but Eastwood still allows them to feel profound. Much like his other films, Eastwood directed, produced, and wrote the musical score. He's a renaissance man of cinema, and with December's Gran Torino, he is becoming as prolific as Woody Allen. Changeling is certainly not the best of Eastwood's recent films, but it is satisfying either way.
Directed by Clint Eastwood
***
The story of Christine Collins is the kind that is tailor-made for a filmmaker for Clint Eastwood. Powerful, long-winded, and profound, Changeling is not a huge stretch, thematically or stylistically, from the last couple of films Eastwood has made during his glorious emeritus years. His late-life boost as a director has produced Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby, and several Oscars. Both of those films were grand in the size of their drama, and Changeling is much of the same model. It may not be as memorable as those other two films, but with a wonderful lead performance, Eastwood is able to create another masterful motion picture that punctures bare human emotion.
Collins (Angelina Jolie) is a skilled worker at the Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Comp., working as supervisor of the telephone operators during the late 1920s. Her work ethic and dedication gets her many a compliment within her workspace. She is also a responsible single mother. Her son Walter is her main source of happiness, and other than work, her life is focused solely on his well-being. When she is unexpectedly called into work on the weekend, she is forced to leave him at home until she gets back, but when she finally returns that afternoon, Walter has disappeared.
Christine calls the police, but they refuse to handle any missing children cases unless they are missing for more than twenty-four hours, so she scours the town, finding nothing. When the police finally do contact her, they tell her that her son has been found after five months of investigation. Police Capt. J.J. Jones (Jeffrey Donovan) takes her to the train station to see her son, but who Christine meets is not her son. In fact, this boy is three inches shorter. Upset, Christine pleads with Capt. Jones to keep looking for her son, but he refuses, stating that a traumatic experience has probably effected the boy's physical features.
Christine is approached by an Episcopalian preacher named Gustav Briegleb (John Malkovich), who is a progressive reformer, who feels it is his mission to bring out the corruption and ineptitude of the Los Angeles Police Department. He advises Christine to fight the police, and fight for her son, but his advice leads Christine straight into the claws of the police. She is lead under false pretenses into the police station, and commited to a psychopathic hospital, where she meets many other women who weren't in fact crazy, but just a pest to the police. After suffering the greatest injustice, Christine continues on, striving to find justice and hoping to find Walter through all of the corruption in the L.A.P.D.
Sure, this film outstays its welcome, and is perhaps thirty minutes too long. Sure, it is pretensiously aware of its own pretigious pedigree (a sequence which actually showcases an Academy Awards ceremony seems steemingly baity). All of that would probably be crippling to a film, if it wasn't be handled by the delicate hands of Clint Eastwood. Its hard to use Clint and the word "delicate" in the same sentence, but its that delicacy that is the reason he has succeeded so recently behind the camera. He has an eye for human emotion, and knows how to push his actors without allowing them to become preachy or melodramatic.
The L.A.P.D. has probably been the most skewered and criticized organization in film history, particularly in films from the 1990's on. The Christine Collins story is supposed to be based on a true story, but the actual famous event that the film is based upon cannot be concealed here, for fear of a spoiler. The reason I bring it up, is because I can't help but wonder how much more interesting the film could have been if the story was singularly focused on Christine Collins, and didn't take long meanderings focused on characters that are important, but not particularly gravitating.
The power of this movie does come solely from the performance of Angelina Jolie. Her performance in Hollywood commercial films has caused her to be somewhat underestimated. She is known for gaudy action films, where subtlety is left in the wind. Even her Oscar-winning performance for Girl, Interrupted was one of a large dramatic scope, where she is scene-stealing simply because she is the loudest force on the screen. In Changeling--much like her performance within last year's A Mighty Heart--she shows her talent for nuance and understatedness. Because it comes so unbelievably natural to her, it some times seems absent, but this film is certainly a soft performance of notice.
This film has nearly the same amount of endings as the final Lord of the Rings film, and that is the sole source of frustration when you watch this movie, but it is certainly crowd-pleasing. The twists do not unfold as smoothly to make them as shocking or surprising as they need to be, but Eastwood still allows them to feel profound. Much like his other films, Eastwood directed, produced, and wrote the musical score. He's a renaissance man of cinema, and with December's Gran Torino, he is becoming as prolific as Woody Allen. Changeling is certainly not the best of Eastwood's recent films, but it is satisfying either way.
Zack and Miri Make a Porno (*1/2)
ZACK AND MIRI MAKE A PORNO
Written and Directed by Kevin Smith
*1/2
Kevin Smith is a genius when it comes to writing smart, irreverent, and most of all hilarious dialogue. His films Dogma, Chasing Amy, and Clerks are brilliant exercises in the extremity of what "dirty words" are. Not only that, but he's also somebody who has challenged taboo themes, such as religion in Dogma and homosexual confusion in Chasing Amy. The weight of his material has never been said to be too heavy, but when you look at his latest film, Zack and Miri Make a Porno, it is so light that it gets picked up by the wind and is blown away quickly after it starts.
The story follows Zack (Seth Rogen) and Miri (Elizabeth Banks), who are best friends and roommates. They've known each other since the first grade, and have never crossed the romance barrier with each other, because that would just make everything weird between them, wouldn't it? Miri has a job (but it is never seen or mentioned), but that along with Zack's measley salary at his coffee shop is not enough to keep the electricity on. After the embarassment of realizing their own mediocrity at their 10-year high school reunion, along with their dire financial straits, they decide that the thing to do is to shoot a porno.
Neither of them lose their jobs, but useless expenses have put them in this comprimising situation, so they decide to put a crew together for their super low-budget dirty movie. They recruit Zack's co-worker Delaney (Craig Robinson) to be the producer, despite having no idea what the job requires. For actors, they get Lester (Smith regular Jason Mewes) to be the meaty male cast member, Stacey (Katie Morgan) to be the bubbly blonde, and the aptly-named Bubbles (Traci Lords) to be the mature, dominant woman character. Along with them, Zack and Miri themselves decide that they will hook up on screen as well.
They go to work, making the film with mics tied to hockey sticks and using the coffee shop as the shooting location. Production is going along swimmingly, until the dreaded Zack-Miri sex scene, where the two friends are brought face-to-face with their brewing sexual tension. The surprisingly tame sex scene is followed by a sloven third act that is both unfunny, as well as sappy. The film dwindles almost immediately from the beginning, and by the time we've reached the stretching end, it has completely bottomed-out on its sense of humor.
Kevin Smith is a filmmaker that has been dear to my heart, because I think he has a way to present deviant language and behavior in a very funny and appealing way. That being said, as a writer, he has always had one major weakness: the outside perception of his films--that are usually brazen with obscene and liberal images--are usually just coating for stories that can't withhold its own conservative sentimentality. Even in his best film, Chasing Amy, the cleverness spills over into melodrama, and nearly sabotages the film's entire structure. The same can be said for Zack and Miri, except that it is like that the entire time.
On top of that, Smith has never been a sharp director. His idea of visual comprehension is that of static shots and awkward angles. His focus is on dialogue, fair enough, but even Woody Allen knows how to make conservative camerawork look progressive. Smith has never shied away from his ineptitude behind the camera, but it's his paranoia that someone may harm his words that keeps him back there. What we're left with is a visual eye-sore which would be fine and dandy if the film's story and dialogue were enough to distract us, but instead it just helps to magnify all of the mistakes within its sparse 101 minutes.
The cast is a mish-mash of Kevin Smith regulars (Mewes and Jeff Anderson), former porn stars (Lords and Morgan), and a new crop of unfamiliar talent (Robertson, Rogen, Banks). One of the few bright spots within the movie is a cameo from Justin Long, who plays Brandon, someone who meets up with Zack at the reunion, and discloses his employment as a gay porn star. His confession helps influence Zack and Miri's decisions later in the film, but nothing else is as funny as his sparse screen time.
I will not say that there weren't parts where I did laugh, but they were few and far between. Like another unfunny comedy this year, Step Brothers, there is a lack of actual jokes. The movie depends on gross-out sight gags, where the level of humor reaches the lowest common denominator. I'd been tipped off that Zack and Miri was truly a warm romance, but I didn't expect the film to veer so close to overemotional scenes that are so far out compared to the rest of the movie's content. This film is not Kevin Smith's best day, and out of all his films, this is probably his least satisfying.
Written and Directed by Kevin Smith
*1/2
Kevin Smith is a genius when it comes to writing smart, irreverent, and most of all hilarious dialogue. His films Dogma, Chasing Amy, and Clerks are brilliant exercises in the extremity of what "dirty words" are. Not only that, but he's also somebody who has challenged taboo themes, such as religion in Dogma and homosexual confusion in Chasing Amy. The weight of his material has never been said to be too heavy, but when you look at his latest film, Zack and Miri Make a Porno, it is so light that it gets picked up by the wind and is blown away quickly after it starts.
The story follows Zack (Seth Rogen) and Miri (Elizabeth Banks), who are best friends and roommates. They've known each other since the first grade, and have never crossed the romance barrier with each other, because that would just make everything weird between them, wouldn't it? Miri has a job (but it is never seen or mentioned), but that along with Zack's measley salary at his coffee shop is not enough to keep the electricity on. After the embarassment of realizing their own mediocrity at their 10-year high school reunion, along with their dire financial straits, they decide that the thing to do is to shoot a porno.
Neither of them lose their jobs, but useless expenses have put them in this comprimising situation, so they decide to put a crew together for their super low-budget dirty movie. They recruit Zack's co-worker Delaney (Craig Robinson) to be the producer, despite having no idea what the job requires. For actors, they get Lester (Smith regular Jason Mewes) to be the meaty male cast member, Stacey (Katie Morgan) to be the bubbly blonde, and the aptly-named Bubbles (Traci Lords) to be the mature, dominant woman character. Along with them, Zack and Miri themselves decide that they will hook up on screen as well.
They go to work, making the film with mics tied to hockey sticks and using the coffee shop as the shooting location. Production is going along swimmingly, until the dreaded Zack-Miri sex scene, where the two friends are brought face-to-face with their brewing sexual tension. The surprisingly tame sex scene is followed by a sloven third act that is both unfunny, as well as sappy. The film dwindles almost immediately from the beginning, and by the time we've reached the stretching end, it has completely bottomed-out on its sense of humor.
Kevin Smith is a filmmaker that has been dear to my heart, because I think he has a way to present deviant language and behavior in a very funny and appealing way. That being said, as a writer, he has always had one major weakness: the outside perception of his films--that are usually brazen with obscene and liberal images--are usually just coating for stories that can't withhold its own conservative sentimentality. Even in his best film, Chasing Amy, the cleverness spills over into melodrama, and nearly sabotages the film's entire structure. The same can be said for Zack and Miri, except that it is like that the entire time.
On top of that, Smith has never been a sharp director. His idea of visual comprehension is that of static shots and awkward angles. His focus is on dialogue, fair enough, but even Woody Allen knows how to make conservative camerawork look progressive. Smith has never shied away from his ineptitude behind the camera, but it's his paranoia that someone may harm his words that keeps him back there. What we're left with is a visual eye-sore which would be fine and dandy if the film's story and dialogue were enough to distract us, but instead it just helps to magnify all of the mistakes within its sparse 101 minutes.
The cast is a mish-mash of Kevin Smith regulars (Mewes and Jeff Anderson), former porn stars (Lords and Morgan), and a new crop of unfamiliar talent (Robertson, Rogen, Banks). One of the few bright spots within the movie is a cameo from Justin Long, who plays Brandon, someone who meets up with Zack at the reunion, and discloses his employment as a gay porn star. His confession helps influence Zack and Miri's decisions later in the film, but nothing else is as funny as his sparse screen time.
I will not say that there weren't parts where I did laugh, but they were few and far between. Like another unfunny comedy this year, Step Brothers, there is a lack of actual jokes. The movie depends on gross-out sight gags, where the level of humor reaches the lowest common denominator. I'd been tipped off that Zack and Miri was truly a warm romance, but I didn't expect the film to veer so close to overemotional scenes that are so far out compared to the rest of the movie's content. This film is not Kevin Smith's best day, and out of all his films, this is probably his least satisfying.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
An Open Letter To Larry Miller
Dear Larry Miller,
Not to be confused with the brilliant comedian, the Larry Miller who I wish to address is a noted philanthropist from Utah who is the owner the state's basketball team, the Utah Jazz, but most importantly (for the sake of this letter) owner of Megaplex Theaters which has a large string of movie theaters across the Salt Lake City area.
In 2005, you came under heat when you refused to show the film Brokeback Mountain in your theaters because you felt that it "crossed the line". This was a regrettable event, to be sure, but a reminder of just how blind many Americans are toward homosexuals. Now, in 2008, your theater chain is in the news again, because they refuse to show Kevin Smith's new film Zack and Miri Make a Porno because "it's very close to an NC-17 with its graphic nudity and graphic sex." That was a statement from the theater manager, Cal Gunderson, since I assume you, Mr. Miller, wished to ignore the limelight of being a complete ass.
Now, I'm almost certain that you have never taken the time to watch either film yourself--radicals of your nature never take the time to criticize something that you know anything about. I'm coming at you strictly from a cinematic point-of-view. Your same theater chain, Megaplex Theaters, that refuses to show Zack and Miri is probably making thousands of dollars in profits off of the recently released, and exceedingly violent Saw V. It's strange since the Saw films are essentially porno themselves--with hacked limbs and psychopaths. Let's flash back to 2005, when you refused to show Brokeback, but that same time, were totally fine with showing the revolting cesspool of deviant behavior that was Hostel. Exactly what message are we supposed to get from this, Mr. Miller? Homosexual relationships, stories satirizing pornography: bad. Someone hacking off their own leg with a saw, naked corpses and rape: totally cool and appropriate.
I hope I'm not the first, nor the last to say that your blatent hypocrisy and dogmatic behavior ruins cinema. Nobody like you deserves to own a theater chain. Provocative films are what makes the film industry beautiful, and if people like you continue to substitute them with "torture porn", then you are fundamentally adding to the systematic "dumbing down" of this nation. Not only that, but you are making a profit off of it. Shame on you, Mr. Miller. Turn your attention toward things that you are reportedly good at, like cutting checks for charities or running an annually underachieving basketball franchise. There is no room in the movies for bigots who refuse to accept the sexuality of others, and certainly no room for those who refuse to see the sense of humor behind a good-natured comedy. Open your eyes and your mind, and maybe you will see what a giant idiot you have been these last couple of years.
Yours Truly,
James C.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Rachel Getting Married (****)
RACHEL GETTING MARRIED
Directed by Jonathan Demme
****
Jonathan Demme is an Oscar-winning filmmaker who has made such seminal films as Melvin and Howard and The Silence of the Lambs. The last few years of his career have been plagued by unneeded remakes (The Manchurian Candidate, The Truth About Charlie) and indifferent documentaries (Jimmy Carter Man From Plains). So, it suits his erratic nature that he would come out of left field and create one of the best, most beautiful films so far this year. A movie so tender and powerful that it brings out emotions from the deepest, purest parts of our souls.
The film centers on Kym (Anne Hathaway), a recovering drug addict who is allowed out of rehab for the weekend in order to attend the wedding of her sister Rachel (Rosemarie Dewitt). She arrives and is immediately overwhelmed by her caring, but overbearing father Paul (Bill Irwin), and getting perturbed by the constant judgement she feels from friends and family members who know so much about her troubled past. The two daughters get sparse visits from their estranged mother Abby (Debra Winger), who has remarried after her divorce from Paul and is nearly invisible.
The plot builds slowly on the concept of Kym's recovering neediness versus Rachel's wedding-infused self-involvement. Kym is the troubled one, she is the one who everybody's eye is on, and all Rachel wants on the weekend of her wedding is that people will give her a little attention as well. She is getting married to Sidney (Tunde Adebimpe), a gentle but towering man and former musician. He has numerous friends who are also musicians who play music seemingly non-stop throughout the entire film.
The main pawn who is shuffled around by the sister's struggles is Paul, whose need to make sure everybody feels comfortable is appeasing to most, but infuriating to those who know him best. The fact that he receives little to no support from Abby is not addressed much, and treated as a simple fact of life. The dysfunction doesn't necessasarily build to a stunning climax, because the point of this film is not the payoff, but the journey. Using mostly handheld camerawork and by extending scenes past the point that seems necessary, Demme infuses the audience into this bothered but loving family. By the time we actually reach the wedding, its such an emotional moment, because you feel like you know these people so well.
One of those extended scenes, in particular, is fascinating. Toward the beginning of the film, all of the film's characters pow-wow around the dinner table, some of them already introduced, but all of them at least seen in a glance. Every important character that we will know so well by the end of the film, has their chance to speak and congradulate Rachel and Sidney in their future ceremony. The fathers stand up and speak, then the mothers, the sisters, the friends, and the dedications are so pure and sincere, that it creates the aura which drives the entire story. Kym, of coarse, uses the oppurtunity to her advantage, and indulges in the fourth step of her "12-Step Program", by making "amends".
I feel like I've gone through this film's story and completely glossed over Kym, the rock on which this great film is built on. Truth is, Kym is the best and most compelling character of all, but the most endearing plot point within the story is this wedding. In a way, the wedding itself can be called the main character, as it drives the motivations of essentially all of the people on the screen. Demme's success in making a film that is so organic as well as tight, comes from the near-perfect screenplay by Jenny Lumet (yeah, Sidney's daughter), who presents characters and makes them unravel so successfully, its a surprise that this is her first script.
But to be sure, this is Demme's show. He takes this ball of putty handed to him by Lumet, and he, along with his cast, molds it into a work of art that exposes the demons of so many unsettled families and struggling recovering addicts. He does not shy away from the pain and guilt felt by his characters, and instead holds on it. He forces them to bare their souls, and come to grips with issues that have been ignored for years. A distressing showcase, sure, but it needs to be in order for Demme to tell the story he wants to tell, the way he wants to tell it.
Much has been said about Anne Hathaway's de-glam transformation into Kym, many predicting an Oscar nomination. There is little resemblance of the starlet from this year's Get Smart, as she chops of her long locks, and becomes as unnattractive as someone as beautiful as her can be. It's such a difficult performance because it works on two seperate levels. There is the Kym that is the center of attention, who is loud, feisty, accusing all of her family members of paranoia, and taking advantage of all of the kindness people present to her. Then there is the Kym that is ignored, the one who watches the current attention-getter. This Kym is quiet, pouty, crippled by insecurity and fear of falling off the wagon. To pull off this balance and still be the one who carries the majority of the story is a load most young actresses with less talent probably could not handle.
To be sure, though, the film's performances work in an ensemble. Rosemarie Dewitt, known mostly for her work on television's Mad Men is terrific as Rachel, wanting to be supportive of her problem-sibling, but wanting the spotlight as well. Bill Irwin, an accomplished theater actor, is fantastic as the worry-wort father Paul, always looking over his shoulder to make sure Kym is okay, and constantly refereeing the infighting and arguments between the people he loves. Debra Winger returns from a four-year, big-screen hiatus with a powerhouse of a performance. In only a handful of scenes, she plays a character that is a subdued powder-keg, with a breakdown scene so electric and tragic, that it brings down the house.
The perfect adjective to describe this film is beautiful. It is certainly the best film Jonathan Demme has done since his masterpiece in Silence of the Lambs. This is an entirely different film, in terms of themes and plot, but both contain Demme's ability to deconstruct the psychology of incredibly nuanced and disturbing characters. Rachel Getting Married is seminal film in a lot of ways, for Anne Hathaway's film career, and hopefully a Jonathan Demme resurgence. It's a bone-bare film, much like last year's Away From Her. It has such faith in its characters to survive its meandering story structure, and pulls it off. No other film so far in 2008 is as striking and pragmatic.
Directed by Jonathan Demme
****
Jonathan Demme is an Oscar-winning filmmaker who has made such seminal films as Melvin and Howard and The Silence of the Lambs. The last few years of his career have been plagued by unneeded remakes (The Manchurian Candidate, The Truth About Charlie) and indifferent documentaries (Jimmy Carter Man From Plains). So, it suits his erratic nature that he would come out of left field and create one of the best, most beautiful films so far this year. A movie so tender and powerful that it brings out emotions from the deepest, purest parts of our souls.
The film centers on Kym (Anne Hathaway), a recovering drug addict who is allowed out of rehab for the weekend in order to attend the wedding of her sister Rachel (Rosemarie Dewitt). She arrives and is immediately overwhelmed by her caring, but overbearing father Paul (Bill Irwin), and getting perturbed by the constant judgement she feels from friends and family members who know so much about her troubled past. The two daughters get sparse visits from their estranged mother Abby (Debra Winger), who has remarried after her divorce from Paul and is nearly invisible.
The plot builds slowly on the concept of Kym's recovering neediness versus Rachel's wedding-infused self-involvement. Kym is the troubled one, she is the one who everybody's eye is on, and all Rachel wants on the weekend of her wedding is that people will give her a little attention as well. She is getting married to Sidney (Tunde Adebimpe), a gentle but towering man and former musician. He has numerous friends who are also musicians who play music seemingly non-stop throughout the entire film.
The main pawn who is shuffled around by the sister's struggles is Paul, whose need to make sure everybody feels comfortable is appeasing to most, but infuriating to those who know him best. The fact that he receives little to no support from Abby is not addressed much, and treated as a simple fact of life. The dysfunction doesn't necessasarily build to a stunning climax, because the point of this film is not the payoff, but the journey. Using mostly handheld camerawork and by extending scenes past the point that seems necessary, Demme infuses the audience into this bothered but loving family. By the time we actually reach the wedding, its such an emotional moment, because you feel like you know these people so well.
One of those extended scenes, in particular, is fascinating. Toward the beginning of the film, all of the film's characters pow-wow around the dinner table, some of them already introduced, but all of them at least seen in a glance. Every important character that we will know so well by the end of the film, has their chance to speak and congradulate Rachel and Sidney in their future ceremony. The fathers stand up and speak, then the mothers, the sisters, the friends, and the dedications are so pure and sincere, that it creates the aura which drives the entire story. Kym, of coarse, uses the oppurtunity to her advantage, and indulges in the fourth step of her "12-Step Program", by making "amends".
I feel like I've gone through this film's story and completely glossed over Kym, the rock on which this great film is built on. Truth is, Kym is the best and most compelling character of all, but the most endearing plot point within the story is this wedding. In a way, the wedding itself can be called the main character, as it drives the motivations of essentially all of the people on the screen. Demme's success in making a film that is so organic as well as tight, comes from the near-perfect screenplay by Jenny Lumet (yeah, Sidney's daughter), who presents characters and makes them unravel so successfully, its a surprise that this is her first script.
But to be sure, this is Demme's show. He takes this ball of putty handed to him by Lumet, and he, along with his cast, molds it into a work of art that exposes the demons of so many unsettled families and struggling recovering addicts. He does not shy away from the pain and guilt felt by his characters, and instead holds on it. He forces them to bare their souls, and come to grips with issues that have been ignored for years. A distressing showcase, sure, but it needs to be in order for Demme to tell the story he wants to tell, the way he wants to tell it.
Much has been said about Anne Hathaway's de-glam transformation into Kym, many predicting an Oscar nomination. There is little resemblance of the starlet from this year's Get Smart, as she chops of her long locks, and becomes as unnattractive as someone as beautiful as her can be. It's such a difficult performance because it works on two seperate levels. There is the Kym that is the center of attention, who is loud, feisty, accusing all of her family members of paranoia, and taking advantage of all of the kindness people present to her. Then there is the Kym that is ignored, the one who watches the current attention-getter. This Kym is quiet, pouty, crippled by insecurity and fear of falling off the wagon. To pull off this balance and still be the one who carries the majority of the story is a load most young actresses with less talent probably could not handle.
To be sure, though, the film's performances work in an ensemble. Rosemarie Dewitt, known mostly for her work on television's Mad Men is terrific as Rachel, wanting to be supportive of her problem-sibling, but wanting the spotlight as well. Bill Irwin, an accomplished theater actor, is fantastic as the worry-wort father Paul, always looking over his shoulder to make sure Kym is okay, and constantly refereeing the infighting and arguments between the people he loves. Debra Winger returns from a four-year, big-screen hiatus with a powerhouse of a performance. In only a handful of scenes, she plays a character that is a subdued powder-keg, with a breakdown scene so electric and tragic, that it brings down the house.
The perfect adjective to describe this film is beautiful. It is certainly the best film Jonathan Demme has done since his masterpiece in Silence of the Lambs. This is an entirely different film, in terms of themes and plot, but both contain Demme's ability to deconstruct the psychology of incredibly nuanced and disturbing characters. Rachel Getting Married is seminal film in a lot of ways, for Anne Hathaway's film career, and hopefully a Jonathan Demme resurgence. It's a bone-bare film, much like last year's Away From Her. It has such faith in its characters to survive its meandering story structure, and pulls it off. No other film so far in 2008 is as striking and pragmatic.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Orlando Slumming and Films being pushed
So yeah, both Rachel Getting Married and Happy-Go-Lucky are in the process of an ultra-conservative release schedule, obviously created to make people like me (in Orlando) suffer. I have confidence that I will be able to see these films eventually, but why must I have to wait so long? All Oscar marketing babble, I'm sure. I notice films like Sex Drive and Max Payne have no problem being slotted in thousands of theaters across the country. [scratches head]
In other news, The Road seems destined for a 2009 release, unfortunately. There's no official word from The Weinstein Company about it just yet, but seeing as its aimed at a Nov. 14 release and there has been no promotion whatsoever, it doesn't look good. Early test screenings and leaked studio information spell doom for the John Hilcoat picture. Another film, though, The Soloist is officially being lifted from Oscar contention, being pushed from its original Nov. 21 release to Mar. 13 of '09. Kind of shocking considering that the film had already started promoting itself on TV spots, but hey, Fall movies can do that occasionally.
One more thing, goldderby.com wrote this great article about how the Oscars are not the true measure of greatness in cinema, but a celebration of the film industry itself. The list of Oscar-snubbed films, actors, and directors may flat-out shock a few of you.
W. (**)
W.
Directed by Oliver Stone
**
The administration of George W. Bush has been one of the most shameful in American history. It has everything: deceit, violence, religious fanaticism, essentially anything except for infidelity (And the Republicans call Democrats heathens just because they get BJs in the oval office, and sleep with Marilyn Monroe). It's plain to see why Bush has gone into complete isolation over the last few months of his infamous presidency, only popping his head out to convince Americans to approve a bailout plan that's only needed because of his failed economic policies. [sighs] I'm off on a tangent, I'll try and stick to the movie.
So, who else, Oliver Stone decides to put together a film about the life and times of Mr. President while he's still in office. It seems like just yesterday I first heard about this film being made, and in less than a year, it's already being tossed into theaters. Stone put this film together with an almost Spielbergian speed. Rarely does anything in cinema turn out well when it's rushed, and W. is no exception. The main flaw in this film, though, is not necessarily its sloppiness, but its indifference. Any film about Bush, especially one made by the liberal conscious of Stone, should have ten times the bite that this film has. Instead, we are left with two hours reliving the eight years of Hell this country has gone through with Bush at the helm.
The film moves in a non-chronilogical form, splicing his presidency with what led to it. We watch George (Josh Brolin) as he take part in a rather debaucherous hazing routine while at Yale, being forced to sit in a tub of ice, while force-fed whiskey through a funnel. His adolesense and young adulthood are plagued by constant boozing and womanizing, which does little to humor his father, then Congressman George Bush (James Cromwell). George is frequently living in the shadow of his more level-headed younger brother Jeb (Jason Ritter), and seems primed to become the son his parents would like to forget.
George Jr.'s life begins to change when he meets Laura (Elizabeth Banks), his future wife. With her, he begins a sincere relationship, and by the age of 40, George finds God and rids himself of alcohol. In an attempt to gain the respect of his father, he helps him in his 1988 presidential campaign, which leads to victory. With the confidence he finds in this (and the bitterness of his father's defeat to Clinton in 1992), he campaigns for the governship of Texas, his homestate. Lo and behold, George Jr. wins, and also works his way to becoming the owner of Texas Rangers Major League baseball team (the film seems to think that the team may be the biggest accomplisment in his life--though he traded Sammy Sosa).
As for the actual presidency of George W. Bush, Stone deals with it in an incredibly strange way. The notorious 2000 Election and the circus it became is only mentioned in half-quip, yet small details like Bush's reputation as a compulsive eater is exploited in great detail. The single most important event in his administration: September 11th, is only passed around in conversation well after the fact. Yet, we are previewed to graphic scene which dramatizes the well-publicized event of how Bush nearly choked to death on a pretzel. It's puzzling the way in which Stone distributes screen time to certain events.
I don't think I ever thought there would be a day where I would be calling an Oliver Stone film soft, but here it is. He seems to make the case that Bush is no more than an incompetent who was pushed on by outside sources (smarter, more conniving friends; his family; God) toward the presidency. By the last third of the movie, the film just regurgitates aspects of Michael Moore's incendiary documentary Fahrenheit 9/11. Moore's film, though, is a masterpiece because it doesn't buy into Bush's "aw, shucks", country bumpkin persona, and holds him accountable for the decisions that he made. All presidents have advisers, but in the end, their administration is decided by what they do.
The film's one bright star is its performances, which are a hoot. The film is stocked with the usual suspects such as Donald Rumsfeld (Scott Glenn), Condoleeza Rice (Thandie Newton), and Bush's main 'genius boy' adviser Karl Rove (Toby Jones). All the supporters are almost eerie in their precision, and the ones that are the most fun are Richard Dreyfuss' scathing reproduction of Vice Pres. Dick Cheney, who's obsession with becoming an American empire wholly represents the problems with imperialism. Jeffrey Wright is also good as the soft-spoken, but intense Colin Powell, who is merely brushed off when he speaks against the War in Iraq at a meeting of the heads. Also, Ellen Burstyn's performance as the explosive Barbara Bush is funny, sweet, and appropriately maternal.
Which brings us to Josh Brolin, who seems to be left on an island to play the titular character. His performance could have easily just have taken cues from so many SNL impersonations. Instead, Brolin manages to find the heart of Bush. Constantly stuffing food down his throat and minutes away from his temper flying off the handle, Brolin is a revelation. They say impression is the biggest form of flattery, and Brolin pulls off the impossible of making George W. Bush a funny, sympathetic character, who is a victim of the influences around him. Brolin, hot off the success of last year's No Country For Old Men and the anticipation of November's Milk is quickly reaching the pinnacle of a steady acting career.
In the end, the film that Stone created is little more than a fantasy. It's not that I'd have been more pleased with a 'meaner' picture, but something with a little more cojones. To pass Bush off as just a dim-witted good ol' boy is to underestimate the harm he has down to the prestine stature of America. He made the mistake of bringing personal problems into the White House, and let it influence him into a preemptive war that's still being fought today. I know the significance behind this film being released so soon: to put people's perspective in check about the last eight years, before they cast their ballot on November 4th. What this movie achieves, however, is creating a restlessness in an audience who thinks November 4th can't come fast enough.
Directed by Oliver Stone
**
The administration of George W. Bush has been one of the most shameful in American history. It has everything: deceit, violence, religious fanaticism, essentially anything except for infidelity (And the Republicans call Democrats heathens just because they get BJs in the oval office, and sleep with Marilyn Monroe). It's plain to see why Bush has gone into complete isolation over the last few months of his infamous presidency, only popping his head out to convince Americans to approve a bailout plan that's only needed because of his failed economic policies. [sighs] I'm off on a tangent, I'll try and stick to the movie.
So, who else, Oliver Stone decides to put together a film about the life and times of Mr. President while he's still in office. It seems like just yesterday I first heard about this film being made, and in less than a year, it's already being tossed into theaters. Stone put this film together with an almost Spielbergian speed. Rarely does anything in cinema turn out well when it's rushed, and W. is no exception. The main flaw in this film, though, is not necessarily its sloppiness, but its indifference. Any film about Bush, especially one made by the liberal conscious of Stone, should have ten times the bite that this film has. Instead, we are left with two hours reliving the eight years of Hell this country has gone through with Bush at the helm.
The film moves in a non-chronilogical form, splicing his presidency with what led to it. We watch George (Josh Brolin) as he take part in a rather debaucherous hazing routine while at Yale, being forced to sit in a tub of ice, while force-fed whiskey through a funnel. His adolesense and young adulthood are plagued by constant boozing and womanizing, which does little to humor his father, then Congressman George Bush (James Cromwell). George is frequently living in the shadow of his more level-headed younger brother Jeb (Jason Ritter), and seems primed to become the son his parents would like to forget.
George Jr.'s life begins to change when he meets Laura (Elizabeth Banks), his future wife. With her, he begins a sincere relationship, and by the age of 40, George finds God and rids himself of alcohol. In an attempt to gain the respect of his father, he helps him in his 1988 presidential campaign, which leads to victory. With the confidence he finds in this (and the bitterness of his father's defeat to Clinton in 1992), he campaigns for the governship of Texas, his homestate. Lo and behold, George Jr. wins, and also works his way to becoming the owner of Texas Rangers Major League baseball team (the film seems to think that the team may be the biggest accomplisment in his life--though he traded Sammy Sosa).
As for the actual presidency of George W. Bush, Stone deals with it in an incredibly strange way. The notorious 2000 Election and the circus it became is only mentioned in half-quip, yet small details like Bush's reputation as a compulsive eater is exploited in great detail. The single most important event in his administration: September 11th, is only passed around in conversation well after the fact. Yet, we are previewed to graphic scene which dramatizes the well-publicized event of how Bush nearly choked to death on a pretzel. It's puzzling the way in which Stone distributes screen time to certain events.
I don't think I ever thought there would be a day where I would be calling an Oliver Stone film soft, but here it is. He seems to make the case that Bush is no more than an incompetent who was pushed on by outside sources (smarter, more conniving friends; his family; God) toward the presidency. By the last third of the movie, the film just regurgitates aspects of Michael Moore's incendiary documentary Fahrenheit 9/11. Moore's film, though, is a masterpiece because it doesn't buy into Bush's "aw, shucks", country bumpkin persona, and holds him accountable for the decisions that he made. All presidents have advisers, but in the end, their administration is decided by what they do.
The film's one bright star is its performances, which are a hoot. The film is stocked with the usual suspects such as Donald Rumsfeld (Scott Glenn), Condoleeza Rice (Thandie Newton), and Bush's main 'genius boy' adviser Karl Rove (Toby Jones). All the supporters are almost eerie in their precision, and the ones that are the most fun are Richard Dreyfuss' scathing reproduction of Vice Pres. Dick Cheney, who's obsession with becoming an American empire wholly represents the problems with imperialism. Jeffrey Wright is also good as the soft-spoken, but intense Colin Powell, who is merely brushed off when he speaks against the War in Iraq at a meeting of the heads. Also, Ellen Burstyn's performance as the explosive Barbara Bush is funny, sweet, and appropriately maternal.
Which brings us to Josh Brolin, who seems to be left on an island to play the titular character. His performance could have easily just have taken cues from so many SNL impersonations. Instead, Brolin manages to find the heart of Bush. Constantly stuffing food down his throat and minutes away from his temper flying off the handle, Brolin is a revelation. They say impression is the biggest form of flattery, and Brolin pulls off the impossible of making George W. Bush a funny, sympathetic character, who is a victim of the influences around him. Brolin, hot off the success of last year's No Country For Old Men and the anticipation of November's Milk is quickly reaching the pinnacle of a steady acting career.
In the end, the film that Stone created is little more than a fantasy. It's not that I'd have been more pleased with a 'meaner' picture, but something with a little more cojones. To pass Bush off as just a dim-witted good ol' boy is to underestimate the harm he has down to the prestine stature of America. He made the mistake of bringing personal problems into the White House, and let it influence him into a preemptive war that's still being fought today. I know the significance behind this film being released so soon: to put people's perspective in check about the last eight years, before they cast their ballot on November 4th. What this movie achieves, however, is creating a restlessness in an audience who thinks November 4th can't come fast enough.
Monday, October 13, 2008
100th POST!
This is my 100th post on this blog. This calls for some indulgence....
Greatest Movie Character Entrance ever? I'd agree with that statement...
Greatest Movie Character Entrance ever? I'd agree with that statement...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
