Well this month has been very productive for movie viewing if for nothing else. Granted there were a few really awful movies endured in the course of things but there were also some really refreshing ones as well. And from a disappointing showing of only 7 films last month, I managed a whopping 15 this month. Some were even free. And as the summer movie season ends and the cinematic hope of Fall movies dawns us, I'll maintain my cinematic idealism that there will be films as good this year as last. Though my personal cynicism suspects it won't happen. But fingers crossed. Plus this was the month for documentaries
Month Recap:
The Wackness - largely forgettable
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor - the Yetis putting their arms up like American football goal post judges still infuriates me about this awful movie.
Swing Vote - Very weak political satire
Pineapple Express - I laughed a few times, the action sequences were poorly done, and the last act is just terrible and unconvincing.
Gonzo: The Life and Works of Hunter S Thompson - I thoroughly enjoyed this doc on the late Hunter S Thomspon. It was entertaining, educational and heartfelt.
Tell No One - well done and entertaining thriller with its sole big action piece being very well done.
Encounters at the End of the World - Soulful, beautifully shot and asking those deep, difficult, unanswerable questions that I love so much. Fantastic, best film I've seen so far this year.
Tropic Thunder - Not for me. Felt like a parody of a parody of Hollywood. Downey, Jr. was good. Tom Cruise did not impress me.
Vicky Christina Barcelona - if I could afford it right now I'd probably see this one. Allen directs wonderfully and the leads are great. Again it has all that great questioning that I enjoy.
Bottle Shock - Terrible, just terrible.
Death Race - If you can on occasion just sit and watch a mindless action flick this one does well. It doesn't even try to develop its characters and just brings on the gore and explosions.
Man on Wire (review forthcoming) - A fantastic story that feels like a crime caper and is helped along by the sheer vivacity of Phillipe Petit.
Elegy (review forthcoming) - There have been way better tales about people dealing with old age, one of my favorites from last year "Starting Out in the Evening" being notable.
Frozen River (review forthcoming) - Very well done film about a desperate working poor mother.
Babylon A.D. (review forthcoming) - I suppose it was right to leave the summer season with a really terrible summer action film.
And now what you've all come to see, meaningless statistics.
Films Remaining: 28
Days Remaining (As of September 1): 122
Average Number of Films per Day to achieve goal: 0.23
Average Number of Films per Week to Achieve Goal: 1.56
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Cabiria
A dear friend decided to watch films in chronological order to educate herself on early film and to watch the progression of film from its origins to the present day. She compiled a list of films from numerous sources stretching from the silent age to the present. I admit I am jealous that I never thought of this and I am amazed at her thoroughness in compiling the list. She was kind enough to share it with me and I have myself began to explore films from this list.
Cabiria was released in 1914 and directed by Giovanni Pastrone. It tells the story of Cabiria a young Roman girl who is lost by her family during an eruption of Vesuvius. She winds up in Carthage to be sacrificed to one of their gods. A Roman spy named Fulvius Axilla in Carthage entwines his fate to her's and rescues Cabiria. Thus we see partially through the eyes of a Roman commander the great Punic War waged between Carthage and Rome from 218 to 201 BCE.
The story if solid if a bit jingoistic and the national fervor of Romans defeating Carthaginians is easy to read as referencing the Italo-Turkish war that occurred a couple years before. But it is entertaining nonetheless for its side stepping history and telling a story within the time frame. The sets are fantastic and I was particularly pleased with the Temple of Moloch sequence. In fact as far as early cinema is concerned it is impressive that such long narrative is maintainable with no dialog and sparse inter-titles.
I've already mentioned the temple of Moloch sequence which is worth repeating. The sets for the temple itself are wonderful, the sacrifice room is so well decorated. Then the escape sequence which is at times a bit slapstick but nevertheless riveting. Later in the film Roman soldiers make a human stair to let Fulvius gain access to a town and it is wonderful to watch and a marvel to think of accomplishing. It is these little moments and the realization that no one had done these things much before that really stay with you.
Cabiria was released in 1914 and directed by Giovanni Pastrone. It tells the story of Cabiria a young Roman girl who is lost by her family during an eruption of Vesuvius. She winds up in Carthage to be sacrificed to one of their gods. A Roman spy named Fulvius Axilla in Carthage entwines his fate to her's and rescues Cabiria. Thus we see partially through the eyes of a Roman commander the great Punic War waged between Carthage and Rome from 218 to 201 BCE.
The story if solid if a bit jingoistic and the national fervor of Romans defeating Carthaginians is easy to read as referencing the Italo-Turkish war that occurred a couple years before. But it is entertaining nonetheless for its side stepping history and telling a story within the time frame. The sets are fantastic and I was particularly pleased with the Temple of Moloch sequence. In fact as far as early cinema is concerned it is impressive that such long narrative is maintainable with no dialog and sparse inter-titles.
I've already mentioned the temple of Moloch sequence which is worth repeating. The sets for the temple itself are wonderful, the sacrifice room is so well decorated. Then the escape sequence which is at times a bit slapstick but nevertheless riveting. Later in the film Roman soldiers make a human stair to let Fulvius gain access to a town and it is wonderful to watch and a marvel to think of accomplishing. It is these little moments and the realization that no one had done these things much before that really stay with you.
Andrei Rublev
Nine months ago I discovered the wonderful world of Andrei Tarkovsky. I found his first feature film Ivan's Childhood so starkly beautiful that I proclaimed it one of the most beautiful film I had ever seen. (http://movieidiot.blogspot.com/2007/11/ivans-childhood.html). And I can still recall what I found to be the most beautiful shot in the film vividly. But not only was the film so wonderful to view for its cinematography but it also had a dark and wonderful story of a boy of lost innocence in war. Unfortunately Tarkovsky's second film Andrei Rublev was far more difficult for me to get through. It was long and I only got about half way through before giving up and returning it. And so now nine months later I re-rented it and attempted round two.
The titular character was an icon painter in 15th century Russia and the story follows him as he goes through his life. But at times he is not the central character but rather an observer and practically invisible for sections of the film. It is an impressive manipulation of narrative. Admittedly I found the story less interesting than his first but one must respect that same attention to detail. The fact that he really wants to push the boundaries of what story telling can do. Tarkovsky is a film maker like we don't really see anymore. One who is constantly pushing at the edges shwoing what can be done with images, symbolism, narrative.
The fact that the titular character disappears at times reveals that the real protagonist is Russia itself. From the grandeur of painting cathedrals to the horror of Tartar hoards destroying and pillaging a town one cannot help but be intrigued. And the film concludes with a long narrative about a boy who is set on making a bell despite knowing nothing about how to do so. The climax of that sequence is poignant and amazing. I admit that this one didn't enthrall me that much but I could never deny that I was watching a genius work and that in all likelihood I was missing something. But enduring it is worth the effort.
The titular character was an icon painter in 15th century Russia and the story follows him as he goes through his life. But at times he is not the central character but rather an observer and practically invisible for sections of the film. It is an impressive manipulation of narrative. Admittedly I found the story less interesting than his first but one must respect that same attention to detail. The fact that he really wants to push the boundaries of what story telling can do. Tarkovsky is a film maker like we don't really see anymore. One who is constantly pushing at the edges shwoing what can be done with images, symbolism, narrative.
The fact that the titular character disappears at times reveals that the real protagonist is Russia itself. From the grandeur of painting cathedrals to the horror of Tartar hoards destroying and pillaging a town one cannot help but be intrigued. And the film concludes with a long narrative about a boy who is set on making a bell despite knowing nothing about how to do so. The climax of that sequence is poignant and amazing. I admit that this one didn't enthrall me that much but I could never deny that I was watching a genius work and that in all likelihood I was missing something. But enduring it is worth the effort.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Death Race
Well what can one really say about Death Race. Ever so loosely based on the 1975 Roger Corman produced classic Death Race 2000, the film proudly displays Corman's name at the opening titles. Jensen Ames (Jason Statham) is a former professional race car driver who has just been laid off in the ever increasingly bad US economy. He's framed for his wife's murder and sent to Terminal Prison, a modern day Alcatraz run by a greedy corporation and supervised by Hennessey (Joan Allen). The pride and joy of Terminal Prison is "Death Race" a grueling, kill or be killed race over three days. The winner of five races gets released from prison.
The star of Death Race "Frankenstein" has been killed and Hennessey needs a replacement driver. The racers are characters themselves, notable Tyrese Gibson as Machine Gun Joe a driver with a grudge against Frankenstein. Then there is the pit crew with notable Ian McShane as "Coach". And blah, blah, blah. Honestly do you even care? I saw the movie and I can't say I cared. What do you need to know? Directed by Paul W.S. Anderson you should probably know that. He's direct a fair amount of horrible films and a fair share of watchable if not in any way great films. Hot busy women? check. Fast cars and race sequences? check. Gratuitous violence and gore? check.
In the end the film was mindless but at times mindless can be good. I can barely recall any major plot developments. There were a fair amount of silly scenes that aren't worth repeating. But you get the races and the blood and it doesn't take itself that seriously. You can easily scarf down a bag full of popcorn and not feel like you've lost that much of your life. I do want to stress it is not a "good" action film. It just happened to make me chuckle a few times and I didn't walk out filled with a desire to set fire to something (not that any movie has ever done that).
The star of Death Race "Frankenstein" has been killed and Hennessey needs a replacement driver. The racers are characters themselves, notable Tyrese Gibson as Machine Gun Joe a driver with a grudge against Frankenstein. Then there is the pit crew with notable Ian McShane as "Coach". And blah, blah, blah. Honestly do you even care? I saw the movie and I can't say I cared. What do you need to know? Directed by Paul W.S. Anderson you should probably know that. He's direct a fair amount of horrible films and a fair share of watchable if not in any way great films. Hot busy women? check. Fast cars and race sequences? check. Gratuitous violence and gore? check.
In the end the film was mindless but at times mindless can be good. I can barely recall any major plot developments. There were a fair amount of silly scenes that aren't worth repeating. But you get the races and the blood and it doesn't take itself that seriously. You can easily scarf down a bag full of popcorn and not feel like you've lost that much of your life. I do want to stress it is not a "good" action film. It just happened to make me chuckle a few times and I didn't walk out filled with a desire to set fire to something (not that any movie has ever done that).
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Fall Movies
As the summer winds down and the blatant blockbusters are replaced by the blatant Oscar seeking films a warm feeling comes over me. Because even if the year isn't as great as last year, I have confidence that at least one or two gems will surface and its films like that which keep me driving on and hoping to find that great classic. EW just released its Fall Preview issue and having read through it I am interested in the following upcoming films.
Miracle at St. Anna - Spike Lee can make a really good movie and I'm interested to see how he tackles the WW2 genre.
Burn After Reading - I'm a bit wary of Cohen Brothers comedies but I'm giving them a chance to wow me in comedy they way the wowed me in drama last year. (Interesting side note: while viewing a trailer last night of this film in a crowded theater, everyone seemed unsure and uneasy about it until they saw the Cohens named and then they thought it looked really good and funny. Power of a name for you)
Appaloosa - Ed Harris and Viggo Mortensen as strong silent type cowboys in the old school style. Sounds similar to Open Range a few years back and I always love a good traditional western.
Righteous Kill - Mainly its the fanboy in me, hoping for great things from the pairing of DeNiro and Pacino.
The Duchess - Kiera Knightly is pretty and she's actually been fairly impressive as an actress in her last few dramatic roles plus Ralph Fiennes.
Elite Squad - reference was made to City of God which was an excellent film although from all I can tell the only connection is that both films are Brazilian.
Body of Lies - Ridley Scott directing DiCaprio and Russell Crowe in a thriller (yeah expectations are high but these guys have earned it)
RocknRolla - I've never seen the disaster that was Swept Away or the recent critical bomb Revolver but Guy Ritchie still has a place in my cinematic heart thanks to Snatch and especially Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels.
W. - I'm just intrigued by what Oliver Stone will do with it.
Synechdoche, New York - Philip Seymour Hoffman, Katherine Keener and Charlie Kaufman (again just a hope I'm not let down by that promise)
Brothers Bloom - from the director of Brick (which was excellent) plus Mark Ruffalo
The Road - I just started reading this and in one day I'm halfway through. Its surprisingly compelling as a story. Viggo Mortensen feels like pretty good casting from what I can tell.
The Soloist - Joe Wright impressed me with Pride and Prejudice, underwhelmed me with Atonement (though he floored my friend Nick) and I'm eager to see what he has up his sleeve next. Throw Jamie Foxx and Robert Downey, Jr into the mix and my interest is peeked.
Quantum of Solace - I enjoyed Casino Royale quite a bit and am interested in returning to the new Bond.
Revolutionary Road - I'd probably see it just to see DiCaprio and Winslett act circles around everyone but it actually sounds really intriguing as well.
The Curious Case of Benjamen Button - David Fincher really impressed me with Zodiac
And of course I'm hopeful of a rare gem of a foreign film along the way as well.
Miracle at St. Anna - Spike Lee can make a really good movie and I'm interested to see how he tackles the WW2 genre.
Burn After Reading - I'm a bit wary of Cohen Brothers comedies but I'm giving them a chance to wow me in comedy they way the wowed me in drama last year. (Interesting side note: while viewing a trailer last night of this film in a crowded theater, everyone seemed unsure and uneasy about it until they saw the Cohens named and then they thought it looked really good and funny. Power of a name for you)
Appaloosa - Ed Harris and Viggo Mortensen as strong silent type cowboys in the old school style. Sounds similar to Open Range a few years back and I always love a good traditional western.
Righteous Kill - Mainly its the fanboy in me, hoping for great things from the pairing of DeNiro and Pacino.
The Duchess - Kiera Knightly is pretty and she's actually been fairly impressive as an actress in her last few dramatic roles plus Ralph Fiennes.
Elite Squad - reference was made to City of God which was an excellent film although from all I can tell the only connection is that both films are Brazilian.
Body of Lies - Ridley Scott directing DiCaprio and Russell Crowe in a thriller (yeah expectations are high but these guys have earned it)
RocknRolla - I've never seen the disaster that was Swept Away or the recent critical bomb Revolver but Guy Ritchie still has a place in my cinematic heart thanks to Snatch and especially Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels.
W. - I'm just intrigued by what Oliver Stone will do with it.
Synechdoche, New York - Philip Seymour Hoffman, Katherine Keener and Charlie Kaufman (again just a hope I'm not let down by that promise)
Brothers Bloom - from the director of Brick (which was excellent) plus Mark Ruffalo
The Road - I just started reading this and in one day I'm halfway through. Its surprisingly compelling as a story. Viggo Mortensen feels like pretty good casting from what I can tell.
The Soloist - Joe Wright impressed me with Pride and Prejudice, underwhelmed me with Atonement (though he floored my friend Nick) and I'm eager to see what he has up his sleeve next. Throw Jamie Foxx and Robert Downey, Jr into the mix and my interest is peeked.
Quantum of Solace - I enjoyed Casino Royale quite a bit and am interested in returning to the new Bond.
Revolutionary Road - I'd probably see it just to see DiCaprio and Winslett act circles around everyone but it actually sounds really intriguing as well.
The Curious Case of Benjamen Button - David Fincher really impressed me with Zodiac
And of course I'm hopeful of a rare gem of a foreign film along the way as well.
Bottle Shock
In 1976, the year of the US Bicentennial, a British oenophile staged a contest between French wines and California wines as a stunt. It was like a shot heard round the world when the winners of the tasting by French professionals was not French wine but Napa Valley wine. The film based on a true story attempts to tell this tale. Attempts I say because although it is certainly a important point in history and does seem worthy of a tale, I'm not convinced this was it.
People will think of Sideways when they hear or see this, not because it is anything like that film but because its about wine and has lots of wine lingo interspersed in its dialog. Whereas that film had interesting characters and nice driving plot, Bottle Shock flounders in mediocrity and one dimensional characters. It feels unnuanced, seems more interested in building a boring subplot of a love triangle than anything else and has inexplicable leaps in sense.
Bill Pullman plays a perfectionist asshole wine maker, Chris Pine plays his lazy, hippie son and so on and so on. It doesn't have any real laughs, the agonizingly forced love triangle which gets no interesting resolution and a climax that is already a known and forgone conclusion and thus totally uninteresting. It basically feels like a mess of lazy film making and writing in hopes of making a few dollars off other people's success.
People will think of Sideways when they hear or see this, not because it is anything like that film but because its about wine and has lots of wine lingo interspersed in its dialog. Whereas that film had interesting characters and nice driving plot, Bottle Shock flounders in mediocrity and one dimensional characters. It feels unnuanced, seems more interested in building a boring subplot of a love triangle than anything else and has inexplicable leaps in sense.
Bill Pullman plays a perfectionist asshole wine maker, Chris Pine plays his lazy, hippie son and so on and so on. It doesn't have any real laughs, the agonizingly forced love triangle which gets no interesting resolution and a climax that is already a known and forgone conclusion and thus totally uninteresting. It basically feels like a mess of lazy film making and writing in hopes of making a few dollars off other people's success.
Vicky Christina Barcelona
When Woody Allen is on his game, he can make a deeply satisfying movie. When he isn't on his game, watching his work is excruciatingly painful. It was deeply satisfying to watch Vicky Christina Barcelona. It is perhaps not a complete masterpiece but it is one of his better films in some time. Its well acted, well constructed and searches deeply to the answer of some interesting questions about love and companionship.
Vicky (Rebecca Hall) is logical, reserved, happily engaged and seeking to finish a thesis on Catalan Identity in Barcelona. Christina (Scarlett Johansson) is irrational, free spirited, single and seeking art and semi hedonism as she accompanies Vicky. As the two explore Barcelona they meet Juan Antonio (Javier Bardem) a passionate painter who speaks directly and has a good share of emotional issues relating to his life and ex-wife. The three have a complicated relationship throughout the film. Vicky is torn between the comfort of her boring fiance and the excitement of the wild Juan Antonio. Christina sense a similarity of spirit in Juan Antonio. He sees compatibility in Christina but something intriguing in Vicky.
In the mix is Juan Antonio's ex Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz). Maria Elena is a fireball of emotion with a love and conflict with Juan Antonio. The film revolves around these people as it tries to find a particular form of love and companionship. Their actions feel real and unforced. There are moments of pain and joy and it all is very effective. It is all set to the backdrop of the beautiful Barcelona. Allen uses a narrator for much of the film and I am typically angered by voice over but here it has purpose. He advances the story through the mundane details and we therefore experience a summer and life in interesting vignettes.
There are excellent performances by the leads here. Bardem's Spanish lover is nuanced enough that he is not just a stereotype and while you will get no overtones of his rule following sociopath of last year's No Country For Old Men you can see he is in fact an excellent actor. Penelope Cruz is wonderful doing well in both Spanish and English as the fiery passion and art inspiring whirlwind. Woody Allen has a talent for finding roles that are perfect for the somewhat limited ability of Scarlett Johansson. Rebecca Hall just is utterly charming to watch. Her uncertainty mixed with her unrestrained moments are just so much fun. She's beautiful and smart and I confess to having a crush on her very early in the film as she tries to rationalize away her own feelings.
And kudos to Allen for doing what so few in film are willing to do. Sometimes things don't turn out well in the end. Sometimes we don't learn from our mistakes or we don't reach a new understanding. Sometimes we end up right back where we started and we have to start all over in hopes of finding the answer. The end of this film was so great for me. It felt right and natural and yes a little depressing but perfect.
Vicky (Rebecca Hall) is logical, reserved, happily engaged and seeking to finish a thesis on Catalan Identity in Barcelona. Christina (Scarlett Johansson) is irrational, free spirited, single and seeking art and semi hedonism as she accompanies Vicky. As the two explore Barcelona they meet Juan Antonio (Javier Bardem) a passionate painter who speaks directly and has a good share of emotional issues relating to his life and ex-wife. The three have a complicated relationship throughout the film. Vicky is torn between the comfort of her boring fiance and the excitement of the wild Juan Antonio. Christina sense a similarity of spirit in Juan Antonio. He sees compatibility in Christina but something intriguing in Vicky.
In the mix is Juan Antonio's ex Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz). Maria Elena is a fireball of emotion with a love and conflict with Juan Antonio. The film revolves around these people as it tries to find a particular form of love and companionship. Their actions feel real and unforced. There are moments of pain and joy and it all is very effective. It is all set to the backdrop of the beautiful Barcelona. Allen uses a narrator for much of the film and I am typically angered by voice over but here it has purpose. He advances the story through the mundane details and we therefore experience a summer and life in interesting vignettes.
There are excellent performances by the leads here. Bardem's Spanish lover is nuanced enough that he is not just a stereotype and while you will get no overtones of his rule following sociopath of last year's No Country For Old Men you can see he is in fact an excellent actor. Penelope Cruz is wonderful doing well in both Spanish and English as the fiery passion and art inspiring whirlwind. Woody Allen has a talent for finding roles that are perfect for the somewhat limited ability of Scarlett Johansson. Rebecca Hall just is utterly charming to watch. Her uncertainty mixed with her unrestrained moments are just so much fun. She's beautiful and smart and I confess to having a crush on her very early in the film as she tries to rationalize away her own feelings.
And kudos to Allen for doing what so few in film are willing to do. Sometimes things don't turn out well in the end. Sometimes we don't learn from our mistakes or we don't reach a new understanding. Sometimes we end up right back where we started and we have to start all over in hopes of finding the answer. The end of this film was so great for me. It felt right and natural and yes a little depressing but perfect.
Tropic Thunder
Tropic Thunder presents four actors trying to film a war movie. These actors run the gamut of Hollywood: aging action stars, funny men desperately trying to earn respect as actors, method actors who go overboard for a role and so on. When problems have the production in trouble, the director decides to direct a guerrilla movie in which his actors don't know what is coming. When something goes wrong and the actors are actually in danger, most of them are so self involved that they don't even realize they are no longer playing at games. The group of actors has its run in with local drug lords in the jungle and try to survive.
Beyond its send up of the action flick, the movie is also heavily focused on sending up Hollywood itself. The actors are all as initially conceived one dimensional. They have ridiculous agents and there is the studio head who is a gruff s.o.b. who swears and yells and threatens to succeed. There is Tugg Speedman (Ben Stiller) whose action films are not grossing as much any more and whose attempt at critical praise was panned. There is Jeff Portnoy (Jack Black) who made a career on fat suits and fart jokes and has a massive drug habit. He too is looking for some critical praise. And then there is the multiple award winning method actor in extreme Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey, Jr.) who has undergone a medical form of black face to play an African American soldier.
Each of these portrayals has the makings of humor and certainly the trailers that represent their careers at the opening of the film are over the top but quite humorous. Sadly the promise fizzles out quickly. Much praise has been thrown out for Tom Cruise (called unrecognizable in his makeup) as the obstinate head of the studio. I was at best uncomfortable in most of his scenes (too be sure it could have been the point) and after seeing Cruise's interview with Matt Lauer, imagining him as an asshole isn't much of stretch and so I'm not terrible impressed with his ability to play one.
In fact the whole attempt to satirize the movie industry seems to have been done better by others. Bowfinger was loads of fun. Wag the Dog even had a fair amount of Hollywood satirizing going on. This film doesn't feel like its satirizing Hollywood but rather a hollow image of what the filmmaker thinks we the viewers think Hollywood is. (Got that?) Most of what had potential for humor is sucked out by crude jokes, stupid humor or at its worst focusing the scene on the wrong thing. Notably is the discussion between Downey, Jr and Stiller about playing mentally handicapped people in movies that is interesting but ruined by the repeated and unfunny use of the word "retard."
The movie degenerates pretty quickly especially in the final act as explosions and action set pieces are played up and the actor dilemmas get increasingly ridiculous and uninspiring. Attempts to ground the potential mindfield of the Downey, Jr's character is a real African American constantly pointing out the absurdity of Downey, Jr's portrayal. At times this works and at times it falls as flat as most of the movie. I can scarcely recall laughing at all in this "comedy". Mainly I was just bored and felt it insulted my and the movie goer's intelligence.
Beyond its send up of the action flick, the movie is also heavily focused on sending up Hollywood itself. The actors are all as initially conceived one dimensional. They have ridiculous agents and there is the studio head who is a gruff s.o.b. who swears and yells and threatens to succeed. There is Tugg Speedman (Ben Stiller) whose action films are not grossing as much any more and whose attempt at critical praise was panned. There is Jeff Portnoy (Jack Black) who made a career on fat suits and fart jokes and has a massive drug habit. He too is looking for some critical praise. And then there is the multiple award winning method actor in extreme Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey, Jr.) who has undergone a medical form of black face to play an African American soldier.
Each of these portrayals has the makings of humor and certainly the trailers that represent their careers at the opening of the film are over the top but quite humorous. Sadly the promise fizzles out quickly. Much praise has been thrown out for Tom Cruise (called unrecognizable in his makeup) as the obstinate head of the studio. I was at best uncomfortable in most of his scenes (too be sure it could have been the point) and after seeing Cruise's interview with Matt Lauer, imagining him as an asshole isn't much of stretch and so I'm not terrible impressed with his ability to play one.
In fact the whole attempt to satirize the movie industry seems to have been done better by others. Bowfinger was loads of fun. Wag the Dog even had a fair amount of Hollywood satirizing going on. This film doesn't feel like its satirizing Hollywood but rather a hollow image of what the filmmaker thinks we the viewers think Hollywood is. (Got that?) Most of what had potential for humor is sucked out by crude jokes, stupid humor or at its worst focusing the scene on the wrong thing. Notably is the discussion between Downey, Jr and Stiller about playing mentally handicapped people in movies that is interesting but ruined by the repeated and unfunny use of the word "retard."
The movie degenerates pretty quickly especially in the final act as explosions and action set pieces are played up and the actor dilemmas get increasingly ridiculous and uninspiring. Attempts to ground the potential mindfield of the Downey, Jr's character is a real African American constantly pointing out the absurdity of Downey, Jr's portrayal. At times this works and at times it falls as flat as most of the movie. I can scarcely recall laughing at all in this "comedy". Mainly I was just bored and felt it insulted my and the movie goer's intelligence.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Forthcoming
Recently I've been thinking of trying to write essays on films and why they are so magical to me. So along with my reviews I will try to write said essays much as my cinematic arena essay on The Diving Bell and the Butterfly:Fathers and Sons.
Monday, August 11, 2008
Encounters At The End Of The World
The greatest thing about writing a review about a documentary? No plot synopsis. Encounters at the End of the World is the newest documentary from Werner Herzog. Simply put its about Antarctica. But nothing with Herzog is every simply put. Herzog journeys to the continent of ice inspired by underwater photography but it is not simply a documentary about sea creatures under the glacier. In fact the film touches on several researches going on there including volcanology, seal and penguin studies.
Herzog is not just interested in nature, he is interested in mankind as well. What drives man to do what he does. And Antarctica provides a unique possibility for finding some of those answers. What drives men and women from all walks of life to arguably the most inhospitable place on Earth? The film is filled with absolutely gorgeous photography of icy landscapes, exotic alien undersea life and enduring colonies of penguins and volcanoes and anything else you can imagine. By contrast there is the particularly jarring return regularly to McMurdo station a sprawling eye sore of industrial human presence in a virtually unspoiled landscape.
Inside the industrial nightmare are a menagerie of adventurers and scientists. Herzog takes time to put some of these men and women before his camera and to investigate what drove them to come to this land. They are ultimate dreamers. It is a sad realization that most of us will never go to places like Antarctica, many of us will never leave our home countries and some will never leave their home states. But here at the end of the world are people who escaped despotic oppression or threw off societal collars and came to live in a wonderland of fantasy.
Herzog is so good at contrasting man and nature and the drive of human beings. His film feels like a philosophic dissertation on man. To be sure it is scattered. It does not focus on one thing. It seems clear that you could make a documentary about almost any one of the many things going on at the strange southern continent. But the scattering gives both a broad view of the many marvels of an exotic land and feels fitting as one searches for the answer to a question that is by its nature perhaps unanswerable.
There is even a since of regret that such great natural places were not left untarnished. A short discourse on man's need to claim and conquer the final frontier brings on a melancholy to Herzog, emphasized by an interview with a glory seeker who wishes to hop on a pogo stick to the South Pole. It is enormously satisfying to watch a film whose concern is the human condition without the wider worries of our everyday world. There is little mention of global warming in this picture not because it isn't a serious threat but rather because the foregone conclusion of the film is that humans life will end in one way or another.
This film may well inspire some to throw off constraints of their lives and seek out Antarctica themselves. But even if it doesn't you should at least see it and for two hours explore a world you can't quite imagine and ask questions you can't easily answer. It is an experience you won't regret.
Herzog is not just interested in nature, he is interested in mankind as well. What drives man to do what he does. And Antarctica provides a unique possibility for finding some of those answers. What drives men and women from all walks of life to arguably the most inhospitable place on Earth? The film is filled with absolutely gorgeous photography of icy landscapes, exotic alien undersea life and enduring colonies of penguins and volcanoes and anything else you can imagine. By contrast there is the particularly jarring return regularly to McMurdo station a sprawling eye sore of industrial human presence in a virtually unspoiled landscape.
Inside the industrial nightmare are a menagerie of adventurers and scientists. Herzog takes time to put some of these men and women before his camera and to investigate what drove them to come to this land. They are ultimate dreamers. It is a sad realization that most of us will never go to places like Antarctica, many of us will never leave our home countries and some will never leave their home states. But here at the end of the world are people who escaped despotic oppression or threw off societal collars and came to live in a wonderland of fantasy.
Herzog is so good at contrasting man and nature and the drive of human beings. His film feels like a philosophic dissertation on man. To be sure it is scattered. It does not focus on one thing. It seems clear that you could make a documentary about almost any one of the many things going on at the strange southern continent. But the scattering gives both a broad view of the many marvels of an exotic land and feels fitting as one searches for the answer to a question that is by its nature perhaps unanswerable.
There is even a since of regret that such great natural places were not left untarnished. A short discourse on man's need to claim and conquer the final frontier brings on a melancholy to Herzog, emphasized by an interview with a glory seeker who wishes to hop on a pogo stick to the South Pole. It is enormously satisfying to watch a film whose concern is the human condition without the wider worries of our everyday world. There is little mention of global warming in this picture not because it isn't a serious threat but rather because the foregone conclusion of the film is that humans life will end in one way or another.
This film may well inspire some to throw off constraints of their lives and seek out Antarctica themselves. But even if it doesn't you should at least see it and for two hours explore a world you can't quite imagine and ask questions you can't easily answer. It is an experience you won't regret.
Tell No One
Alex was happily married to Margot. But eight years prior she was brutally murdered while they were at a lake celebrating their anniversary. Alex was not without suspicion as the possible murderer. As Alex tries to carry on his life, never truly over the death of his wife, he receives a bizarre anonymous email. The email contains a link to a real time video feed showing his wife very much alive (or so he thinks). New evidence is uncovered at the crime scene which increases interest in the murder and especially the police interest in Alex as the suspect. Alex must discover as fast as he can what is going on.
The film directed by Guillaume Canet is a French language thriller. As Alex investigates the circumstances of his wife's death and continues to receive emails from this anonymous person he discovers a complex series of events that begin to complicate his life. Is his wife alive? Why has someone murdered a close friend and planted evidence on Alex? The film is a solid entertaining thriller. Its story is good and its acting is as well. It may get a bit convoluted and confusing as the film nears its end but that tends to be the nature of such thrillers.
What is blissfully good about it is that it eschews what we might consider the typical Hollywood thriller format. There are no explosions or an action sequence ever eleven point two minutes. In fact there is really only one action set piece. It is well performed, authentically motivated and tense. Canet no doubt could have put other sequences in and handled them with skill. But he doesn't need to conceal a thin premise with flashy action. The mystery carries itself just fine.
It is a movie like Tell No One that makes me happy. It is not without its flaws but it is by no means a terrible film. It is just a good story that was fun to watch and doesn't make pretensions to being overly artistic or reach for the lowest common denominator.
The film directed by Guillaume Canet is a French language thriller. As Alex investigates the circumstances of his wife's death and continues to receive emails from this anonymous person he discovers a complex series of events that begin to complicate his life. Is his wife alive? Why has someone murdered a close friend and planted evidence on Alex? The film is a solid entertaining thriller. Its story is good and its acting is as well. It may get a bit convoluted and confusing as the film nears its end but that tends to be the nature of such thrillers.
What is blissfully good about it is that it eschews what we might consider the typical Hollywood thriller format. There are no explosions or an action sequence ever eleven point two minutes. In fact there is really only one action set piece. It is well performed, authentically motivated and tense. Canet no doubt could have put other sequences in and handled them with skill. But he doesn't need to conceal a thin premise with flashy action. The mystery carries itself just fine.
It is a movie like Tell No One that makes me happy. It is not without its flaws but it is by no means a terrible film. It is just a good story that was fun to watch and doesn't make pretensions to being overly artistic or reach for the lowest common denominator.
Friday, August 08, 2008
Gonzo
In terms of cinema, it hasn't been a great year for me. Although I was want to argue and play devil's advocate with friends, last year was truly a magical time for great films. A good deal of my viewings from early this year was actually catch up for that which I missed due to time constraints or my abyssmal location when it comes to indie films (the good stuff comes late or not at all to North Carolina). Granted I am prone to gripe, be over critical and have been generally tagged by friends and foes alike as a curmudgeon. So although I've seen a few films I enjoyed (Reprise, The Dark Knight even they could not escape my criticism. Thankfully I am not going to do that with this review.
Gonzo is a documentary of the life of Hunter S. Thompson. An iconic cultural figure who has influenced a lot of people and has written several very acclaimed literary works. He was a refreshing voice in America who told you how he saw it. Now I've never actually read any of his work. I can't be entirely sure I would enjoy it. In fact most of what I know of the man relates to the Terry Gilliam film Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas based on Thompson's book. But my ignorance actually made the film enjoyable. I learned things, got insight and in some way was comforted (or perhaps horrified) that the problems of the past are still around.
The film is narrated largely by Johnny Depp and is filled with interviews of those who were his friends, as well as political figures such as Pat Buchanan, Jimmy Carter and George McGovern. All this is interspersed with selected passages from Thompson's work that show his fluidity and grace with words as well as his outrage. Obviously I'm a fan of history and have studied it enough to know the notion of unbiased history is a joke as old as written historical narrative. So to experience the history of the 1960s (the Vietnam War, loss of the American Dream, Civil Rights) and the 1970s (still the war, political disillusionment) through the lens of an admitted "freak" and malcontent who would even lampoon his heroes if he felt betrayed, is quite refreshing.
His personal takes on sub culture, politics and America is refreshing. I don't always agree with his conclusions but I have respect for them. I admittedly am more sympathetic to his outrage than perhaps conservative America would be but I still naively believe that Hegelian dialectic and its focus on synthesis is in desperate need in all aspects of life and calls for extreme radical views on both sides to be tempered by moderate moderators.
So I applaud the director in giving us a fresh, largely positive look at a radical figure of our past. It is blatantly provocative about our current political and cultural crises but not overly so and is mainly contemplative. The sad confession that Thompson's first wife utters at film's end that the problems of today need an on top of his game Thompson to help us through is as tragic as it is true.
Gonzo is a documentary of the life of Hunter S. Thompson. An iconic cultural figure who has influenced a lot of people and has written several very acclaimed literary works. He was a refreshing voice in America who told you how he saw it. Now I've never actually read any of his work. I can't be entirely sure I would enjoy it. In fact most of what I know of the man relates to the Terry Gilliam film Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas based on Thompson's book. But my ignorance actually made the film enjoyable. I learned things, got insight and in some way was comforted (or perhaps horrified) that the problems of the past are still around.
The film is narrated largely by Johnny Depp and is filled with interviews of those who were his friends, as well as political figures such as Pat Buchanan, Jimmy Carter and George McGovern. All this is interspersed with selected passages from Thompson's work that show his fluidity and grace with words as well as his outrage. Obviously I'm a fan of history and have studied it enough to know the notion of unbiased history is a joke as old as written historical narrative. So to experience the history of the 1960s (the Vietnam War, loss of the American Dream, Civil Rights) and the 1970s (still the war, political disillusionment) through the lens of an admitted "freak" and malcontent who would even lampoon his heroes if he felt betrayed, is quite refreshing.
His personal takes on sub culture, politics and America is refreshing. I don't always agree with his conclusions but I have respect for them. I admittedly am more sympathetic to his outrage than perhaps conservative America would be but I still naively believe that Hegelian dialectic and its focus on synthesis is in desperate need in all aspects of life and calls for extreme radical views on both sides to be tempered by moderate moderators.
So I applaud the director in giving us a fresh, largely positive look at a radical figure of our past. It is blatantly provocative about our current political and cultural crises but not overly so and is mainly contemplative. The sad confession that Thompson's first wife utters at film's end that the problems of today need an on top of his game Thompson to help us through is as tragic as it is true.
Pineapple Express
The good news: I can actually find things funny. I laughed several times and genuinely so during this movie.
The bad news: third act what the fu...
Meet alliteratively named Dale Denton (Seth Rogan), a process server, who spends his days serving subpoenas, calling talk radio shows and smoking a seemingly excessive amount of pot (seemingly because really I don't have any clue what an excessive amount is - one? five? its not really my thing). Dale gets his pot from equally alliteratively named Saul Silver (James Franco). Saul a lovable loser likes Dale and offers him up some new extremely good marijuana called Pineapple Express. Fast friendship has been made. Dale continues with his job duties and winds up at the house of a drug lord at the inopportune time when he happens to be killing a rival.
Dale runs and brings Saul along, the dealer discovers who Dale and Saul are and chases them. Dale and Saul bond over pot and their fear as they run. Granted they don't run very effectively since they are constantly making stops to smoke up, feast on munchies and be distracted by anything. The movie really gets into its grove about midway through the film. Yes its buddy/stoner comedy but it eschews the typical format of an epic quest for burgers or whatever and goes more surreal. It is certainly kindred with The Big Lebowski though not near as good and while in that film the the smoking was a character trait, here it is front and center and the driving force.
Above it all is that the two characters are likable. Rogen is as always the chubby, lovable loser espousing dreams he will not likely ever accomplish but he thinks he will. Franco is splendid as the absentminded Saul. Just listen to him mention his "second favorite civil engineer" (That line might be genuinely funnier than anything else he says). The two together have great chemistry and you drive whole hearted into the surreal plot because they are leading you with their charm. Danny McBride is the other bright spot of the film. He plays Saul's supplier Red. He's just about the funniest thing in the whole movie. Whether he's beating up someone with household appliances or ruing the fact that he's been shot repeatedly.
Not that all the casting is great. Gary Cole plays the drug lord and well he doesn't ever really rise above my recollection of him as Mr. Brady in the feature films of the 1990s. He doesn't even act like that much of an effective drug lord. Rosie Perez plays a dirty cop on his payroll and she acts pretty much batshit insane (again without any coherent reason). The film was directed by David Gordon Green the man behind the very interesting George Washington and the nice All the Real Girls and the unseen by me Snow Angels. Manhola Dargis of the New York Times recently wrote of him "a regional filmmaker who’s been making a beeline for the mainstream." I don't read this as a compliment.
Green is decent with the comedic stoner motif narrative and you can see his artistic flare (heavily influenced by Terrence Malick) at small moments (the doped up twits leap frogging through a forest for example). There are some profoundly nice shots that sort of leap out because they don't really mix with the frentic stoner driven plot. The plot unfortunately ends up calling for numerous action sequences which frankly seem to baffle Mr. Green. They aren't exciting or tense and I was at times turning to my watch in impatience.
This is of course really tragic given the third act. Abandoning its tone and humor for largely a conventional action set piece. The heroes new found prowess with guns is far too much. The action continues to boor and the narrative devolves into a more and more ridiculous uninteresting mess. Asian ninjas, guns, bombs and elaborate fight sequences carry us to the end with occasional jokes thrown in that do very little. It took me some time to get into the film but once I did I was fully enjoying it until the disaster of the final act. Still overall its better than most comedies out there and undoubtedly is another win in the Judd Apatow column.
The bad news: third act what the fu...
Meet alliteratively named Dale Denton (Seth Rogan), a process server, who spends his days serving subpoenas, calling talk radio shows and smoking a seemingly excessive amount of pot (seemingly because really I don't have any clue what an excessive amount is - one? five? its not really my thing). Dale gets his pot from equally alliteratively named Saul Silver (James Franco). Saul a lovable loser likes Dale and offers him up some new extremely good marijuana called Pineapple Express. Fast friendship has been made. Dale continues with his job duties and winds up at the house of a drug lord at the inopportune time when he happens to be killing a rival.
Dale runs and brings Saul along, the dealer discovers who Dale and Saul are and chases them. Dale and Saul bond over pot and their fear as they run. Granted they don't run very effectively since they are constantly making stops to smoke up, feast on munchies and be distracted by anything. The movie really gets into its grove about midway through the film. Yes its buddy/stoner comedy but it eschews the typical format of an epic quest for burgers or whatever and goes more surreal. It is certainly kindred with The Big Lebowski though not near as good and while in that film the the smoking was a character trait, here it is front and center and the driving force.
Above it all is that the two characters are likable. Rogen is as always the chubby, lovable loser espousing dreams he will not likely ever accomplish but he thinks he will. Franco is splendid as the absentminded Saul. Just listen to him mention his "second favorite civil engineer" (That line might be genuinely funnier than anything else he says). The two together have great chemistry and you drive whole hearted into the surreal plot because they are leading you with their charm. Danny McBride is the other bright spot of the film. He plays Saul's supplier Red. He's just about the funniest thing in the whole movie. Whether he's beating up someone with household appliances or ruing the fact that he's been shot repeatedly.
Not that all the casting is great. Gary Cole plays the drug lord and well he doesn't ever really rise above my recollection of him as Mr. Brady in the feature films of the 1990s. He doesn't even act like that much of an effective drug lord. Rosie Perez plays a dirty cop on his payroll and she acts pretty much batshit insane (again without any coherent reason). The film was directed by David Gordon Green the man behind the very interesting George Washington and the nice All the Real Girls and the unseen by me Snow Angels. Manhola Dargis of the New York Times recently wrote of him "a regional filmmaker who’s been making a beeline for the mainstream." I don't read this as a compliment.
Green is decent with the comedic stoner motif narrative and you can see his artistic flare (heavily influenced by Terrence Malick) at small moments (the doped up twits leap frogging through a forest for example). There are some profoundly nice shots that sort of leap out because they don't really mix with the frentic stoner driven plot. The plot unfortunately ends up calling for numerous action sequences which frankly seem to baffle Mr. Green. They aren't exciting or tense and I was at times turning to my watch in impatience.
This is of course really tragic given the third act. Abandoning its tone and humor for largely a conventional action set piece. The heroes new found prowess with guns is far too much. The action continues to boor and the narrative devolves into a more and more ridiculous uninteresting mess. Asian ninjas, guns, bombs and elaborate fight sequences carry us to the end with occasional jokes thrown in that do very little. It took me some time to get into the film but once I did I was fully enjoying it until the disaster of the final act. Still overall its better than most comedies out there and undoubtedly is another win in the Judd Apatow column.
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
Swing Vote
Bud (Kevin Costner) is a drunk, not a very good father and is too self absorbed to even think about civic responsibility. His daughter Molly (newcomer Madeline Carroll) is young, was forced by circumstance to grow up faster than she should have and inspired by the civic lessons of her teacher. Molly wants Bud to vote, Bud wants to drink. An act of voter fraud that is barely acknowledged and in fact swept quickly under the rug sets up the premise. Bud's vote for president didn't count and the closeness of the presidential race means his vote will put one candidate over the top and become the next president. Along the way Bud will be courted and enjoy celebrity and ultimate do the right thing.
Swing Vote is supposed to be political satire. But like much recent satire it pulls its punches when it should be cutting deep. It wants to be universal rather than partisan and so never digs deep into political issues. Its presidential candidates are both basically variations on a George W Bush theme of likable guys without a whole lot of ideas. They are both sort of boringly charismatic. The whole narrative seems to exist in a world parallel to our own in which the most significant factor in American politics in the last ten years doesn't exist. There is no war on terror in this film. There is only a passing mention of North Korea.
It treats with kid gloves poverty in America but this is not a reflection so much of current economic realities but rather general poverty. There was only the barest reference to health care. Abortion and immigration get token appearances as does gay marriage. The film doesn't have the guts to tackle any issue head on and make it interesting. It has a bit of a too little too late moment mid film in which traditional cliched political views are flip flopped like never before. A pro environment Republican and a pro-life/anti-immigration Democrat are attempts at mocking the votes at any cost ideology that seems to at times dominate political debate.
In addition to never digging deep into any issue I have serious objection to the hero of the narrative. Bud is a selfish, drunken asshole. Why is it that the everyman in this film has to be such a worthless part of society? Voter apathy is not strictly the domain of redneck alcoholic pricks. Costner is a charismatic enough actor that his big moment speech at the film's finale is well done and emotionally convincing but the ten day turn around of such a jerk is less believable. In our current state of politics a truly damning satire of the political system would be refreshing whether it was pro conservative or pro liberal. Sadly this film takes a strange path through attempting to be a feel good movie. It fails.
Swing Vote is supposed to be political satire. But like much recent satire it pulls its punches when it should be cutting deep. It wants to be universal rather than partisan and so never digs deep into political issues. Its presidential candidates are both basically variations on a George W Bush theme of likable guys without a whole lot of ideas. They are both sort of boringly charismatic. The whole narrative seems to exist in a world parallel to our own in which the most significant factor in American politics in the last ten years doesn't exist. There is no war on terror in this film. There is only a passing mention of North Korea.
It treats with kid gloves poverty in America but this is not a reflection so much of current economic realities but rather general poverty. There was only the barest reference to health care. Abortion and immigration get token appearances as does gay marriage. The film doesn't have the guts to tackle any issue head on and make it interesting. It has a bit of a too little too late moment mid film in which traditional cliched political views are flip flopped like never before. A pro environment Republican and a pro-life/anti-immigration Democrat are attempts at mocking the votes at any cost ideology that seems to at times dominate political debate.
In addition to never digging deep into any issue I have serious objection to the hero of the narrative. Bud is a selfish, drunken asshole. Why is it that the everyman in this film has to be such a worthless part of society? Voter apathy is not strictly the domain of redneck alcoholic pricks. Costner is a charismatic enough actor that his big moment speech at the film's finale is well done and emotionally convincing but the ten day turn around of such a jerk is less believable. In our current state of politics a truly damning satire of the political system would be refreshing whether it was pro conservative or pro liberal. Sadly this film takes a strange path through attempting to be a feel good movie. It fails.
Sunday, August 03, 2008
Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor
Nothing quite like perspective to make you realize just how terrible something is. I'm a bit of a fan of Superman and strangely teen melodrama and so really the show Smallville is just win win as a guilty pleasure for me. Which isn't to say that I can't recognize its a pretty awful show but I still enjoy it. If this seems like a bit of a digression well it does have a point. Alfred Gough and Miles Millar were the creative show producers behind the tv show and are the writers of this film.
I honestly thought the Mummy had a chance way back in 1999 to be the heir to Indiana Jones. There were enough nice moments in the first half of that film to make one recall fondly those journeys of Dr. Jones. Then just a bit after half way point the film degenerated into a full blown Bruckenheimer inspired summer spectacle and lost any charm value it had built up. The Mummy 2 just sort of upped the ante on absurdness including if I recall correctly a character out running the sun. Now with such a stellar recommendation one might wonder why on Earth I would see a third mummy film. Well at my weakest I'm a completionist. I can't tell you how sad my life will be when I have no doubt I will travel to the cinema to see Saw V simply for the fact that I saw the first four films.
The film picks up with our key characters Rick (Brendan Frasier) and Evelyn (formerly Rachel Weisz, now Maria Bello doing the most appalling English accent) just after world war 2. Their son Alex (Luke Ford) is all grown up and a tomb hunter (at least he isn't calling himself an archaeologist). Alex uncovers the tomb of a cursed Chinese emperor. A particularly preposterous line of events leads to the awakening of said emperor. This leads to another series of fairly ridiculous events all concluding with a big elaborate action set piece, including two cgi undead armies and everyman Frasier beating up Jet Li.
Now, granted a film about supernatural mummies doesn't need to be grounded in reality but then again it doesn't need to have yeti who seem far to familiar with American football. There are so many tongue in cheek, wink at the camera moments in the film that one actually just sighs in defeat after a while. They never acknowledge Rick's age which I may be great full for after the repetition of said joke in the newest Indiana Jones film. There were just enough things in the movie making me hate it with a barely constrained rage that I couldn't even enjoy some of the better done action sequences.
I honestly thought the Mummy had a chance way back in 1999 to be the heir to Indiana Jones. There were enough nice moments in the first half of that film to make one recall fondly those journeys of Dr. Jones. Then just a bit after half way point the film degenerated into a full blown Bruckenheimer inspired summer spectacle and lost any charm value it had built up. The Mummy 2 just sort of upped the ante on absurdness including if I recall correctly a character out running the sun. Now with such a stellar recommendation one might wonder why on Earth I would see a third mummy film. Well at my weakest I'm a completionist. I can't tell you how sad my life will be when I have no doubt I will travel to the cinema to see Saw V simply for the fact that I saw the first four films.
The film picks up with our key characters Rick (Brendan Frasier) and Evelyn (formerly Rachel Weisz, now Maria Bello doing the most appalling English accent) just after world war 2. Their son Alex (Luke Ford) is all grown up and a tomb hunter (at least he isn't calling himself an archaeologist). Alex uncovers the tomb of a cursed Chinese emperor. A particularly preposterous line of events leads to the awakening of said emperor. This leads to another series of fairly ridiculous events all concluding with a big elaborate action set piece, including two cgi undead armies and everyman Frasier beating up Jet Li.
Now, granted a film about supernatural mummies doesn't need to be grounded in reality but then again it doesn't need to have yeti who seem far to familiar with American football. There are so many tongue in cheek, wink at the camera moments in the film that one actually just sighs in defeat after a while. They never acknowledge Rick's age which I may be great full for after the repetition of said joke in the newest Indiana Jones film. There were just enough things in the movie making me hate it with a barely constrained rage that I couldn't even enjoy some of the better done action sequences.
The Wackness
Ahh there is nothing quite like a coming of age story dealing with love, drugs, rap music and a bizarre friendship all in the year...hmm...now what year was it again? Oh that's right I remember since its jammed into your head incessantly again and again. This is that ancient past that was 1994. Kurt Cobain is dead, Notorious B.I.G. is getting hip. Blah, blah, blah. I was 13 in 1994 and in 8th grade I think nor did I live in New York and so all the nostalgia that this film elicits is all one big who gives a crap.
Josh Peck plays Luke, a recently graduated drug dealer who is going to his safety school in the fall. He's always been a bit of a loser and has developed a codependent relationship with a psychiatrist named Squires (Ben Kingsley) in which he exchanges drugs for therapy sessions. Luke falls for Squires' daughter Stephanie (Olivia Thirlby) and we follow Luke through his trials of his last summer before college. Everyone in this film has family troubles of some sort and Luke's magically lie just off screen save for a few character building moments of his home life.
I suppose we are supposed to see in Luke a lovable loser. Someone who once he's away from the singular clique mind of high school will flourish. The problem is that somewhere along the line the lovable part seems to have been missed. I'm not sure its because of Josh Peck's banal performance or poor writing. The fact that he has a closer relationship with his crush's step father than the crush should bode well for him. There isn't any point in the film where I care what happens to Luke or any of these people.
Kingsley is playing a bit of a bizarre character which I'm sure he relishes but he's far better than this film and its unfortunate that he has to be in it. Olivia Thirlby who was Juno's best friend in hit from last year does pretty well but again like all the characters here they don't feel that interesting. If you have some strange nostalgia for a very specific vision of 1994 well then I encourage you to go listen to an old album and take a gander at some photos and not bother with this film.
Josh Peck plays Luke, a recently graduated drug dealer who is going to his safety school in the fall. He's always been a bit of a loser and has developed a codependent relationship with a psychiatrist named Squires (Ben Kingsley) in which he exchanges drugs for therapy sessions. Luke falls for Squires' daughter Stephanie (Olivia Thirlby) and we follow Luke through his trials of his last summer before college. Everyone in this film has family troubles of some sort and Luke's magically lie just off screen save for a few character building moments of his home life.
I suppose we are supposed to see in Luke a lovable loser. Someone who once he's away from the singular clique mind of high school will flourish. The problem is that somewhere along the line the lovable part seems to have been missed. I'm not sure its because of Josh Peck's banal performance or poor writing. The fact that he has a closer relationship with his crush's step father than the crush should bode well for him. There isn't any point in the film where I care what happens to Luke or any of these people.
Kingsley is playing a bit of a bizarre character which I'm sure he relishes but he's far better than this film and its unfortunate that he has to be in it. Olivia Thirlby who was Juno's best friend in hit from last year does pretty well but again like all the characters here they don't feel that interesting. If you have some strange nostalgia for a very specific vision of 1994 well then I encourage you to go listen to an old album and take a gander at some photos and not bother with this film.
Friday, August 01, 2008
Running Tally - Part 7
With just five months to go, July really slowed down. Despite seeing a few of the blockbusters there just wasn't a whole lot being offered out there. Shockingly I resisted the morbid curiosity that was telling me to see Mama Mia!. I also veered off at the last minute several times from Journey to the Center of the Earth. Best to leave that story to Verne which I read as a kid. And despite the blockbuster season, I actually managed to see a film or two that wasn't a blockbuster at all. Seven was my total which has me a bit wary since if this keeps up I'll fall 8 short of my goal by year's end. But I suspect when the juicy cinematic goodness of fall comes there will be plenty to choose from.
Hancock - Its premise is great, its follow through was very disappointing.
Bigger, Stronger, Faster - Took a bit to get used to but at its most sincere moments this is a very well done documentary.
Reprise - Its trying a lot of things, some work, some don't but at its heart is characterization of its two main characters. Ultimately I enjoyed it a lot.
Hell Boy 2 - Visually great, story a little incoherent and uninteresting.
Dark Knight - It had problems but nothing that take away too much from the fact that it is a really well done action film and worth seeing.
X-Files:I Want To Believe - Like a two part mediocre arc from the show.
The Last Mistress - French films usually aren't my cup of tea, especially period dramas. Truthfully this one wasn't very interesting either save for the bizarre presence of Asia Argento that made me guiltily enjoy it.
And now time for another installment of meaningless statistics.
Films Remaining: 43
Days Remaining (As of August 1): 153
Average Number of Films per Day to achieve goal: 0.28
Average Number of Films per Week to Achieve Goal: 1.95
Hancock - Its premise is great, its follow through was very disappointing.
Bigger, Stronger, Faster - Took a bit to get used to but at its most sincere moments this is a very well done documentary.
Reprise - Its trying a lot of things, some work, some don't but at its heart is characterization of its two main characters. Ultimately I enjoyed it a lot.
Hell Boy 2 - Visually great, story a little incoherent and uninteresting.
Dark Knight - It had problems but nothing that take away too much from the fact that it is a really well done action film and worth seeing.
X-Files:I Want To Believe - Like a two part mediocre arc from the show.
The Last Mistress - French films usually aren't my cup of tea, especially period dramas. Truthfully this one wasn't very interesting either save for the bizarre presence of Asia Argento that made me guiltily enjoy it.
And now time for another installment of meaningless statistics.
Films Remaining: 43
Days Remaining (As of August 1): 153
Average Number of Films per Day to achieve goal: 0.28
Average Number of Films per Week to Achieve Goal: 1.95
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)