The Orphanage

The Orphanage is a Spanish language horror film directed by Juan Antonio Bayona and has been produced by Guillermo del Toro. Laura () spent formative years at an orphanage which she returns to as an adult with her husband and child in hopes of opening a home for special needs children. Her son Simon has a very active imagination which includes several imaginary friends. It is thus largely taken for granted when Simon begins talking of a new friend. When Simon goes missing, Laura becomes more and more desperate to discover what has happened to her son.

It is on this plot line that one becomes immersed in a fairly effective and at times incredibly creepy ghost story. One whose main concern is atmosphere not the degree to which it can turn your stomach with blood and torture. In this respect it is a far more effective horror film than wastes of film like those of the Saw franchise or worse still the Hostel movies. It is quite evidence early on that this is not a mystery of whether there are or are not ghosts but rather will Laura be able to reclaim her son.

A great deal is built on scenes being shot so that your expectation of the fright builds and an intrusive but effective soundtrack manipulates you into a moment of tension that half the time winds up being anticlimactic. But nevertheless the next scene is pulling you in the same way. One particularly effective aspect is the "game" which the ghost plays with people, wherein it takes something of value and hides clues to its location in various places. Each clue bringing Laura tantalizingly closer to finding Simon.

It isn't a great ghost story though. Much of the early character building is a little weak character motivation for all but Laura seems a little strained. And worst of its sins is that when it isn't in full on tension building manipulation mode its trudging along far to slowly. There are a few cheap scare tactics which always seem obligatory in horror films but I find tedious. These are the comes out of nowhere jolts you stuff not the generally creepy scares you to the bone type.

As for the ultimate reveal of the ghosts and of Simon's disappearance I must say I was pleasantly impressed but was disappointed by what although ostensibly is a dark ending is actually tamed by a certain sentimental streak. But in this one the whole is greater than its parts and it works in a satisfying way overall. And as I've suggested above, its ten times better than these hacker/slasher horror films that are so popular right now.

OSCARS!!

I've never failed to be disappointed every year while watching the Academy Awards. They are long, filled with mindless banter and often give awards to the wrong people in my opinion. But at the exact same time despite claims to the contrary I can't resist my excitement the day the nominees are announced or the day of the actual awards. And people, today is Oscar Nomination Day! (note: not actual holiday)

So what are the nominations you say? Can barely contain yourself from knowing who the venerable Academy selected for achievement in sound editing? Well you won't get that here because well frankly I couldn't tell good sound editing from great sound editing. But if you want to know who was nominated and don't want to bother going to another site, I'm happy to oblige and happy to comment on what I think as well. And of course the obligatory picking of the pony (so to speak) which I encourage you loyal reader to do as well. And we will see how well we do.

Supporting Actress:

Cate Blanchett - I’m Not There
Ruby Dee - American Gangster
Saoirse Ronan - Atonement
Amy Ryan - Gone Baby Gone
Tilda Swinton - Michael Clayton

I didn't see Ms. Swinton's performance and frankly it doesn't matter because Amy Ryan blows the other nominees out of the water. Can't we agree the academy should just give her the Oscar now? But I'd like to give note to Saoirse Ronan as runner-up in my opinion. I'm rooting for Ms. Ryan

Supporting Actor:

Casey Affleck - The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
Javier Bardem - No Country for Old Men
Philip Seymour Hoffman - Charlie Wilson’s War
Hal Holbrook - Into the Wild
Tom Wilkinson - Michael Clayton

I missed both Affleck's and Wilkinson's performances so I'm at a disadvantage on this one. Bardem and Hoffman were both phenomenal. But you know what, Holbrook had an emotional role that I responded to and helped catapult Into The Wild into one of my three favorite films of the year. I want him to win. I hope he wins. Go Hal Holbrook!

Directing:

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly - Julian Schnabel
Juno - Jason Reitman
Michael Clayton - Tony Gilroy
No Country for Old Men Joel Coen and Ethan Coen
There Will Be Blood - Paul Thomas Anderson

Didn't see Michael Clayton in the interest of disclosure. Wasn't that impressed with the direction in Juno. PT Anderson's film sort of fell apart for me. And now I'm torn. No Country for Old Men is pretty close to flawless but Schnabel does some amazing things with style (I appreciated that on my second viewing of his film). Still flawless people. The Coens should win.

Actor:

George Clooney - Michael Clayton
Daniel Day-Lewis - There Will Be Blood
Johnny Depp - Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
Tommy Lee Jones - In the Valley of Elah
Viggo Mortensen - Eastern Promises

This category could have had "Daniel Day-Lewis" - reading ingredients of a cereal box and I'd still think he deserved to win. But Mr. Jones was also memorable. Still Day-Lewis just overpowers the competition.

Actress:

Cate Blanchett - Elizabeth: The Golden Age
Julie Christie - Away from Her
Marion Cotillard - La Vie en Rose
Laura Linney - The Savages
Ellen Page - Juno

Blanchett for Elizabeth? That makes no sense. Ellen Page? Don't get me wrong she was good but best performance good? And I missed La Vie en Rose and I have plans to see Away From Her later this week so maybe I should hold off on this one. Nah, that's not my style. Laura Linney was wonderful in The Savages. Laura Linney for the win.

We've arrived people, the big one, best picture:

Atonement
Juno
Michael Clayton
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood

No Country for Old Men. I need say no more.

Cloverfield

On the eve of his move to Japan to start a new job, Rob is thrown a surprise party. At the request of his brother's girlfriend a video camera is present to record goodbyes. As it should happen this same night the party goers are witness to disaster. Something has begun to destroy downtown New York. We follow a group of survivors led by rob as they travel through the city in hopes of rescuing a trapped friend. All of this is faithfully recorded by the conscripted party camera man. There trials are documented by this camera which the film opens by claiming was recovered from an incident site formerly known as "Central Park".

This is about as much synopsis as one needs except to say one last thing. The entire movie is shot from the point of view of the camera wielding character. This means an entire film shot in pseudo-verite style. Those who get easily motion sick, beware, this is not the film for you. Even for those who aren't expect to have a headache by credit roll. Which is ultimately one of the problems of this film. Its built on a conceit (not even original since we previously witnessed the jerky camera in Blair Witch Project) which wears thin really quickly.

But beyond its very annoying style, the movie has more problems then that. Namely, the dumbest characters in an action film award goes to these geniuses. The cameraman Hud incessantly drones on with a diarrhea of the mouth. He narrates idiotically and keeps you up to date on the most inane of things and seems to reinforce a thousand times that this needs to be documented. Why? Why when your friends and loved ones are dying! would you feel the need to maintain the perspective of the non-interfering third party? At times he doesn't even put down the camera when he is selected to help drag wounded people from point A to point B.

Not that all my critical anger should be pointed at hapless Hud. The rational of the group willingly following idiotic Rob back into the thick of the monster attack all to save one person is lacking. And why is it that they are never halted by military or police except when its convenient for the purposes of moving the plot forward? There is a really embarrassing scene late in the film that offers up the key expositional plot points in the finale.

I choose to not waste another minute thinking or writing about this disaster of an attempt at reinvigorating the monster genre. I have to go take some aspirin for the headache that's arising just from thinking about this film.

The Savages

Leonard (Philip Bosco) is an irascible old man who lives with his girlfriend in Sun City, Arizona. He is also beginning to suffer from dementia and has a adversarial relationship with the caretaker whom his girlfriend's family hired to take care of her (notably not him). After the woman's death and the a prominent incident involving human feces, two siblings John (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and Wendy (Laura Linney) must go to Arizona and figure out what to do with their aging father.

Wendy lives a fairly miserable life in New York City, aspiring to be a playwright she furtively uses work to type up grant applications. The manner in which she barely hides what she is and isn't doing from her manager is a genuinely funny and by all accounts from friends in the cubicle shackled soul devouring corporate machine just about 100% accurate for those artistically inclined. But personal life isn't much better for Wendy who lives in a drab apartment and clings to two things, her cat and her ficus tree. Wendy is also in an extra-marital affair. Wendy cries out for success as a playwright and it probably isn't going to far to say her only escape is probably writing.

John's life seems a bit more satisfying. He is a professor in Buffalo and is trying to complete a book on Bertolt Brecht. His long term girlfriend's visa has expired but he is too commitment phobic to ask her to marry him. I say seems because of course upon analysis it isn't that much better at all. John seems almost bored teaching in class and his house is a mass of piled up books and clutter.

Despite their lives and their geographic distance, the first time the two communicate in the movie, you fall into a warm familiarity. These two are brother and sister. Wendy more neurotic is freaking out while John more methodical is attempting to calm her down. They have a necessary if complicated relationship seemingly necessitated by parental apathy towards them as children. They bicker like real siblings, they interact with third parties like real siblings and they have affection for one another like real siblings.

And this fact lies at the heart of this film. One can't help but remain fascinated by an extraordinarily complex family relationship as John and Wendy deal not only with the trials of their own lives but also with the very real tragedy of a dying parent. How they deal with this notion of mortality, their mixed feelings towards their distant father and the difficulty of pushing on when it seems like everything is beyond hope are all treated with abundant tenderness.

The trio of Bosco, Hoffman and Linney all deserve praise for their roles. Hoffman is having a stellar year that also included amazing performances in Charlie Wilson's War and Before The Devil Knows You're Dead. And what is amazing about that feat is that each role is so utterly different. His CIA agent from Charlie Wilson's War is a foul-mouthed spy who doesn't buy into the politics of spying with a pessimistic view of the world. Before the Devil Knows You're Dead he plays another brother but this one more self-serving and manipulative towards his sibling.

And so it is refreshing in so many ways to see the level-headed almost lovable academic lump in this movie. More so because Linney shines so brightly because of and beside him. You develop such empathy for her character that although I personally found the tail end of the film a bit tacky, I nevertheless was exhilarated by her triumph. Bosco also adds to many of the scenes most notably one where he turns off his hearing aid to avoid the loud bickering of his two children.

By no means is this an easy film to watch at times. It has humor but often at the expense of the absurdity of dysfunction. It has melancholy moments as well. These all add to its incredibly strong narrative and well crafted characters.

Whale Rider

Pai (Keisha Castle-Hughes) is born into tragedy. Her mother and twin brother die in childbirth. Her father rejecting his father's plans leaves New Zealand to be an artist. Pai is raised by her strict traditionalist grandfather and more reasonable grandmother. Although initially disappointed with Pai's birth, her grandfather does come to love her but in a way begrudgingly. When Koro's hopes for his son to take over as chief of his tribe are finally dashed, his disappointment regarding Pai resurfaces. Pai who loves her grandfather and feels she is destined in some way to be an aid to her tribe again and again attempts to show him she is capable of being a leader. Koro, is too much of a traditionalist to see what his granddaughter offers since she is just a girl. This all leads to a tragedy of nature. The solution to which provides the necessary moment of realization.

This story as it stands and reads is pretty basic. A disapproving father figure attempting to maintain his culture in the wake of modernity has to be enlightened that changes in custom do not have to be the end of culture but may help preserve it. Its partly an underdog story and certainly an inspirational one for young women. But the sign of a good film is one that can take a generic narrative and make it work on a new level or make you happy you saw it. And Whale Rider is able to do that. Both because it has a unique blend of a native culture and spiritualism and because its story is sold convincingly by its cast.

The first to note is the wonderful Keisha Castle-Hughes as Pai. She has an inspiring blend of youthful innocence and stolid determination. She's tough in certain ways but also watch her early and her slight unease when in the company of the boys her age (people she has been made to think are automatically better than her because they are male by her grandfather). But she knows she can do anything they can do and proves it again and again despite her grandfather's disapproval. Rawiri Paratene is also well cast as Koro. He blends his duel concerns of family and tribe in a way that to us may seem cruel but clearly has been instilled in him since childhood.

The two together have a great amount of screen chemistry. Pai has reverence and love for her grandfather. She knows deep down he loves her but clearly is pained by his inability to see her potential. Koro is torn between his care for his family and his obligation to his tribe. His hopes were so pinned to having a grandson that he is forever tainted by a certain spite towards his granddaughter. This struggle between them and the characterization of their relationship more than guides this film to its conclusion.

In the end you are likely to be quite pleased when the credits of this film roll. Its uplifting in the most satisfying of ways. It also has a few scenes that may have you tearing up and they never feel cheap or manipulative but like a reflection of what these characters would do. If the ending is a bit too tightly wrapped up, you quickly let it pass because you've just watched something that made you smile and sometimes a movie needs to do that.

Scenes that Go home with you

After a series of inspired posts from the New York Times, Nick and I decided to take a cue from them and each write about a scene that was particularly memorable or meaningful from a film released in 2007. We have both written as passionately about said scenes as we know how and they are now available for viewing on Cinematic Arena. Nick's thoughts can be found here (Moment of Clarity). My own incoherent rambling can be found here (Fathers and Sons).

Cinematic Arena

Nick and I have viewed yet another film this time, the much acclaimed There Will Be Blood. Check out our thoughts at Cinematic Arena.

Bests of the Year

What kind of critic would I be if I didn't feel the need to shove down your throats my opinion on what was the best of the year in a variety of categories? Although I'm absolutely sick of the trope this year of "I'm only doing this list because its tradition" which basically every major (read: real) critic has said. I like best of lists. Mainly because they give me chance to agree or disagree (something I enjoy doing) and because they at times call attention to films I didn't see but soon become intrigued by. Without Ebert's 2006 list I wouldn't have ever heard of Man Push Cart, now ultimately I was disappointed by that one but it was still worth watching.

Plus after seeing 87 movies at the theater you can bet I want to let you know which ones are worth seeing. I'm willing to convince myself that anyone cares. Now I haven't seen everything out there but I saw a great deal (most crap) a decent amount of memorable ones did make my initial gander. Plus I plan to throw in a few random awards (I admit stolen completely from my friend Nick).

Movie absolutely ruined by its ending award: The Brave One

This film was a pretty good take on the vigilante. A sort of modern day Charles Bronsan flick but way higher quality and Jodie Foster has the skill to pull of a really complex character who after a brutal attack at first recoils at the outside world but eventually takes it upon herself to make the world a better place in her eyes. Sure it missteps a few times early on and I didn't find everything convincing but once this film got going I was engrossed. And then whammo, easily one of my top five favorite scenes of the year. Foster and Terrence Howard together in a diner. Howard plays a cop investigating the vigilante murders and befriends Foster along the way. And the diner scene just excels. As the two of them talk frankly about the vigilante without ever mentioning the 800 pound gorilla in the room. And the promise of that scene just begs, nay demands an incredible finale. And the film totally punks out! I was never so disenheartened by an ending in my movie going experience. I wanted to scream I was so angry.

Escapist fantasy award: Stardust

Objectively I can understand all the criticism of this film. I understand the "poor man's Princess Bride analogy. I know it isn't a great film. Objectively I know that. And objectively I just don't care. This movie charmed me. I was smiling from minute one until the end. This movie had me smiling when I was stressed out. Sometimes you just go to a film and you enjoy it despite what anyone says and this was that film for me this year. I saw it four times (the only other movie I saw four times this year is in a different league). Favorite moments: A fight sequence choreographed to "Galop Infernal" from the opera Orpheus in the Underworld (often called Can-Can) and a scene in which we first realize that Clair Danes' Ivaine loves Tristan and its all done with a glow (you don't see her face).

Female performances:

Amy Ryan - Gone Baby Gone: I can't be so cavalier as to say it was the best performance of the year (there is too much I didn't see and too many great performances) but it was an amazingly powerful performance. Every scene she is in works and some of them set up the best parts of the film. Her tearful pleading to Casey Affleck to get her baby back leads to that amazing rollercoaster decision he makes. And her final acts leave us behind with a heartbreaking image. Certainly the best of the year in female performances that I saw (maybe the best overall performance, I'm too cautious to go out on a limb for it).

Kelly Macdonald - No Country For Old Men: When I saw Colin Farrell in Minority Report I had absolutely no clue he was Irish. When I saw Ms. MacDonald in this film I had absolutely no clue she was Scottish. In fact as far as this movie is concerned she is a West Texas trailer park wife and you believe it. She makes you believe it. And I'm tempted to say she has the single best scene in the whole movie. Her scene with Javier Bardem is flawless.

Katherine Keener - Into The Wild: A.O. Scott described a scene from this movie in a recent post and since I deeply admire him as a film critic and feel unequaled to the task I'll just link to his post for those who are interested (Into The Wild). It's the second most powerful scene in the whole movie behind Hal Holbrook and Emile Hirsch's hill top conversation (granted its just an opinion).

Male Performances:

Tommy Lee Jones - No Country For Old Men: I'm still bitter about Mr. Jones' Academy Award for The Fugitive but if ever he deserved one its for this year (he was also amazing in In the Valley of Elah and last year's Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada. From his poignant reflections on the evils of the world to his description of a strange dream, Mr. Jones holds your attention and I can't help but watch him again and again and again.

Hal Holbrook - Into the Wild: Its only a small part but Holbrook's character is McCandless' surrogate father in the same way that Katherine Keener's Jan is his surrogate mother. And his advice which comes from the experience of age is quite moving. Suffice to say I was crying a few times when Hal was on screen (although I fully admit I wiped those tears away quickly so my movie companion could not see them).

Frank Langella - Starting Out In The Evening: Langella pulls off his role in this film so well it reminded me of Peter O'Toole's performance in Venus from last year. Showing us with subtle performance that there is life and dignity in old age. He commands the space on screen even when he's acting opposite some fine actors in their own right.

Movies:

No Country For Old Men - Hands down the best film of the year (I refuse to accept a counter argument). Its picture perfect from moment one to the final shot. That it can elicit debate about who the protagonist really is or what the ultimately message is is all testament to how damn good it is. Its virtually complete lack of music, its tense moments of cat and mouse. Who knew a coin flip could have such emotional resonance? Who knew a quiet refusal could be the most daring and bold action of the movie? And finally who could have known that a unsure recitation of an almost random dream could so beautifully end a movie that I had nothing left to give if the film had continued on? I saw this film four times in theater and each time I was as emotionally invested as the first time. It didn't get old, talking about it now has me jonesing like a crack addict to see it again.

Gone Baby Gone - First time director Ben Affleck just knocks it out of the park. Sure it has a few missteps but its the kind of thing you might expect from a first time director. Here is another one that had me hooked from that first voice over (and I'm the guy who often rails against the use of voice over). Casey Affleck does wonders with his performance and is only outshone by Amy Ryan. And holy crap when it comes down to that final decision that his character has to make. Even when I absolutely knew what decision he had to make I was still on the edge of my seat wondering if they would have the stones to actually have him do it. And bam, it happens, I collapsed into my seat and thought I've got nothing left but then there is one final scene, that tears your heart right out of your chest and leaves you unable to move.

Into The Wild - Honestly I'm not sure I ever would have guessed that this would be in my top three after I saw it. I watched it. I knew it was good and I knew I liked it but I was critical of it on many points. But the more I think on it, the more I like it. It's the equivalent of a snowball rolling down hill. It just gets bigger and better in my mind as I reflect or discuss it with others. I only wish I could have seen it again in the theater. And since I've made special mention of both Mr. Holbrook and Ms. Keener, I want to reiterate how good they were (to say nothing of Emile Hirsch who was also amazing) and how I'm pretty sure neither Keener's best scene nor Holbrook's would have as much emotional resonance without the other. They just work so well on so many levels and are better for being in the same movie.

In The Name Of The King: A Dungeon Siege Tale

Uwe Boll may be the single worst director in film history. His films lack originality, are filled with bad dialog, bad acting and generally poor pacing and story telling. This is made more stark by his incessant whining that his films aren't successful because of a vast marketing conspiracy. I'm not kidding just read his own words (Uwe). Do you see how deluded this guy is? He is also incredibly fond of translating video games into movies. His amazingly incompetent resume includes House of the Dead, BloodRayne and now In the Name of the King.

You might be wondering why, if I have such clear disdain for him, why I would ever see a movie he directed. Well let's not forget the idiot part of my self-applied moniker. But truth be told its really a morbid fascination that I cannot resist. Despite the utterly irredemable nature of his films, he keeps going (who knows how he keeps getting money). He's an irresistable force that flies in the face of all traditional Hollywood wisdom. I think I watch out of genuine curiosity. How much worse can it get? What once major but now defunct Hollywood actor will he get to star in his next film?

Well this one offers a doozy of a list of b-movie relegated stars and once formerly glorious icons. I couldn't make up this cast: Ray Liotta, Burt Reynolds, Jason Statham, Matthew Lilard, John Rhys-Davies, Leelee Sobieski, Claire Forlani. Its really quite mind boggling. And sadly the one possibility that you could hope for is some real honest to goodness camp over acting to keep you entertained. But it fails to offer even that. Instead you can actually see the boredom on actors faces as they telephone in their lines. Nobody is having fun making this film.

I'm not even going to bother with a plot description. Its just a really crappy "Lord of the Rings" knock off anyway. But let me assure you the only time in the entire movie I was even mildly amused was when a group of ninjas showed up. Because all I could think was "who the hell thought ninjas was what this scene needed?" And in the end I know its my own fault that this film will indeliably be left in my conscience for years to come while much better movies that are deserving of memory will fall by the wayside.

Juno

Nothing is better than a light hearted comedy after an emotional, melancholy French film. I once watched Big Fish and 21 Grams back to back but made the mistake of watching Big Fish first. The result was I came out with a spring in my step from the first film before being utterly brought down by the grim message of 21 Grams. Lesson learned, watch the comedy second. Juno therefore became a quite pleasant follow-up to Diving Bell and the Butterfly.

Juno tells the story of Juno MacGuff (Ellen Page), a sarcastic, abrasive anti-high school establishment teenager who winds up after a sexual encounter with her best friend pregnant and unsure as to what to do. After a brief consideration of abortion she decides to have the baby and let a young couple adopt it. Along the way we meet several important people in Juno's life including her loving father (J.K. Simmons) and step-mother (Allison Janney), her best friends Leah (Olivia Thirlby) and Paulie Bleeker, the father of the baby (Michael Cera).

The yuppie adopting couple are played by Jennifer Garner and Jason Batemen and both reveal characters that are more complex and complicated than the first appear. All of these things and the general sincerity with which the movie deals with the subject matter is of course the point and the power of the film. And these are well developed characters. When you see Simmons as Juno's father utter sharp, sarcastic statements you know where Juno has picked up here wit from. There is a care and attention to detail of these characters that is genuinely enjoyable to watch.

Which serves the film well since at times its just a bit too tragically hip for its own good. The soundtrack is a bit too omnipresent and a final scene involving an acoustic guitar had me rolling my eyes. But despite that the charm is there and not to be forgotten. The film is actually funny. Perhaps its just my preference for stark sarcastic humor (I've been called sardonic at least once in my life) that made me laugh so much in the film. My hands down favorite scene involved Allison Janney telling off a ultrasound technician.

Ultimately I think it falls into a category of fun, charming and decent film but doesn't exactly wow me to a point of thinking its great film-making. It is also perhaps a bit too kids gloves with the discussion of teen pregnancy, abortion and the like. Still the experience is worth having and the sweetness of the comedy is never sweet to the point of nausea. I walked away smiling and thats pretty good.

Diving Bell And The Butterfly

After a night of emotionally draining films on New Year's Day, it was a tall order to keep up a streak of cinematic excellence in the films I planned to see the following day. This journey began with a more agreeable outdoor temperature and a train ride rather than a walk. It also involved a more commercial theater in a cleverly designed mall. Still as in the previous night, I wasn't going to pass up the opportunities that Chicago provided. And eagerness exuded from me as I sat on the "El" waiting for my stop that would lead me to my next cinematic treat.

Diving Bell And The Butterfly is based on the quite remarkable true story of Jean Dominique Bauby (Matthieu Almaric), a French editor of "Elle" who suffered a stroke which resulted in "locked in" syndrome. This is a rare condition in which the sufferer's mind is fully intact but they lose complete control of any motor skills. Bauby specifically could do little more than blink his left eye. Based on Bauby's memoir which was written by means of a Herculean effort of him blinking out ever letter of every word by means of a specially arranged alphabet, the story reflects on Bauby's life after his accident and the amazing power of the human imagination.

The Diving Bell of the title is how Bauby conceives of his new life trapped in his own body while the Butterfly represents his ability to escape via his imagination. The film has an incredible amount of artistic style. A large part of the film is represented through the lens of Bauby. The POV of Bauby through one eye and limited head motion is surprisingly powerful. One particular dreadful moment in which Bauby's right eye is sewn closed and he is unable to communicate is very emotional.

The movie tries to recreate the emotional power of the memoir (which I have read, shocking!). At times this does this very well and at times falls short of the power of words in the book. Notably the significance of his relationship with his wife and kids doesn't quite hold up as well in its representation on film. By contrast there are two quite brilliant scenes involving Bauby's father played by the ever brilliant but frequently misused Max von Sydow.

In point of fact those two scenes were my favorite part of the film. The earlier of the two scenes shows with surprising skill the memory of Bauby recalling the last time he saw his father. He shaves his ailing father in the morning as they talk. There is an amazing emotional tenderness to the scene that holds your attention and moved me. It reminded me of my own connections with my father (although we certainly wouldn't act the way they do, more likely we would be mocking each other). Still the essence of the bond is powerful and I responded to it.

This early scene makes the later scene a tour-de-force of emotion. Bauby's father arranges to call and converse with his now incapacitated son. Bauby unable to speak but able to hear must dictate his thoughts using the blinking code to a nurse who gives the response. Sydow realizing he will not be able to hear his son's voice is heartbroken. His own poor memory makes it difficult for him to remember what he wants to say between answers. I was in tears by the end of that scene. Heartbreaking and emotionally draining.

Sadly I cannot say that all the scenes were so powerful or memorable. Many I felt were much weaker. Equally the unique style of Bauby's POV also eventually got tedious and I was thankful anytime they went to flashback just to see more traditional filming. I also thought it could have been a bit more probing into Bauby as a person, especially dealing with his pre-stroke and post-stroke life. Something that seemed a bit more stark in the memoir and a bit more sanitized in the movie.

Still overall there were some powerful scenes and performances and a great deal of unique style which are generally worthy of praise, despite my overall disappointment with the film. And here's hoping Mr. Sydow is in more films like this in the coming years and less films like Rush Hour 3.

Control

The second movie I saw on the aforementioned New Year's Day trip through the cold was in the same theater and was fully intended as part of my double feature. Control is based on the true story of Ian Curtis who was the lead singer of a band called "Joy Division". The story follows Curtis from his teenage years when he first met his wife up until his death by suicide at the age of 24. In that time he joined the band "Joy Division" and they had remarkable success that culminated in an intended American tour that was to set to kick off on the eve of his death.

From his early influence from glam rockers like David Bowie to his surprisingly innocent and sweet romance with his wife (played by Samantha Morton), we as the viewers get a strong view of Curtis. We see him both in private life such as when he works at a government welfare office helping people get jobs. (Much critical comment has been made about how this subverts our expectation as we think he is going to the welfare office for dole money.) We also see his stage persona as he sings the band's songs in decently conceptualized performance scenes.

As the band's success grow, we see the increasing pressure on Curtis and the strain on him and his family. These include an extra-marital affair and the ever growing concern of his wife. The film takes its time developing these themes and characters. What immense detail it pays to Curtis is unfortunately not applied to the other band members who are essentially stock background. Still the focus on Curtis is complex and interesting.

The other refreshing aspect is that the film doesn't really seek to give answers to Curtis' suicide but rather just shows us the increasing depression. Perhaps it was the pressure of increasing performance or his disintegrating family life but equally there may have been an underlying depression as early as childhood. The film touches on all these and never tips its hand by suggesting one is more prevalent or the right answer.

Sam Riley as Curtis and Samantha Morton as Debbie (Curtis' wife) are both well cast. Morton especially in the later scenes when she is both heart broken by his actions and torn by her still persevering love for him. Riley on stage almost comatose as he sings before slowly gesturing around like crazy in the later scenes is also convincing. And his ever increasing depression is sad and poignant throughout the film.

This is a refreshing biopic which doesn't follow the formula (Ray, Walk The Line) of overcoming drugs and finding true love and the like. Not to say that either of those was a bad movie. But the fact that the story of Control requires different techniques and ends with an unanswerable poignant tragedy makes it effective in a unique way.

Starting Out In The Evening

I didn't know what I would think of the movies I intended to see on New Year's Day as I trekked out of my friend's apartment and down several blocks in the deepening cold of a January Chicago evening. I just knew I was in Chicago, I was going to take advantage of its status as a real city and therefore its ability to get smaller release films and that I thought I'd picked films that wouldn't disappoint for my first film of 2008. Still walking in the blistering cold and walking home just after midnight in the sub-zero temperatures was still better than my idiotic walk through a snowstorm to see dead on arrival National Treasure: Book of Secrets.

Starting Out In The Evening is based on a novel by Brian Morton, which of course I haven't read so I can say nothing about its adaptation but I'm guessing based on the content of this film was really well done. Our protagonist is Leonard Schiller (Frank Langella) an aging writer who wrote four books in his career and in his declining years is attempting to finish one more book. He is a meticulous man who dresses in suit and tie even while typing at his typewriter. He attends literary readings, and other artistic endeavors and seems completely part of the intellectual circle.

Into his life comes Heather Wolfe (Lauren Ambrose) a graduate student who was greatly influenced by Schiller's work and is in the process of writing a thesis on his literary contributions. She wants to interview him about his works and life in an attempt to get a better feel for her own work and also is hopeful that her work can inspire a resurgence in the popularity of Schiller's work. Initially, Schiller is standoffish and resistant to the idea but slowly allows Heather into his life.

Of almost equal interest to the story is the relationship of Schiller's daughter Ariel (Lili Taylor) and her lover Casey (Adrian Lester). Schiller sees their relationship as unhealthy and wants his daughter to be with someone who will treat her right and not take advantage of her. Ariel desires her love over any sort of rational accounting of it. And so the film revolves around these three basic relationships: Leonard and Heather, Leonard and Ariel, and Ariel and Casey.

And all three are handled with amazing grace. There is not a moment I didn't buy into all of these relationships. Leonard and Ariel have the beautifully complex relationship of a father and daughter who had a more problematic relationship in earlier times but have now found a new more healthy one. Ariel with Casey is a welcome addition to the dynamic especially with Leonard not caring for Casey. And finally Heather as the young grad student coming into the life of old and feeling old Schiller is done with amazing deftness. There are hints of a May-December romance that never quite gets off the ground but that results in stronger story telling.

And yet beyond a very well formulated story there are two other rather admirable things about this film. The first is obviously the acting. Taylor and Ambrose are in top form as their respective characters with all their toughness and vulnerability. Adrian Lester is great as Casey (see if nothing else his scenes with Langella when Taylor is off screen and they subtly needle each other over their respective selfishness). But hands down the film belongs to Langella.

There is not a scene he does not play with absolute class and agility. He can be passionate and rational as when he discusses his disapproval of his daughter's actions or harmful as when he dismisses Heather quite powerfully by movie's end. He is at his most affecting when he is discussing his art of writing. The idea of where character or story come from. There are two instantly memorable scenes in which he forcefully shows his opinion and that nothing can alter it.

The first takes place at a party of academics where a discussion of the union of commercialism and academic writing that has occurred in many literary review magazines. After stating his rather firm opinion, an equally compelling counter argument is merely dismissed by Langella with a polite nod of the head and an excuse to go elsewhere. The second involves a scene with Ambrose in which she questions his originality and the influence of his personal life on his books. Langella's response (part of which can be viewed in the trailer) is powerful and compelling.

The second admirable thing is that this movie is intelligent and academic and it isn't afraid to be so. Many of the really memorable scenes are discussions about academic writing, reading, writing and intellectual pursuit. And it was incredibly refreshing and delightful to witness. And the viewpoints expressed are at times contradictory and yet never does the film choose one viewpoint over the other. It merely gives both sides and lets you think about it as well.

Ambrose's Heather is absolutely in love with Schiller's first two books but thought his later work weaker. But by film's end we get an opinion about Schiller's last book by Casey which offers up the opposite opinion. The later book is the truly brilliant one. It was genuinely great to see two different characters who are well developed offer different opinions and all you can do is think that totally makes sense based on what I've seen about both.

But the intelligence is not limited to literary pursuit or debate. There are several conversations between Schiller and Ariel and Ariel and Casey that discuss more routine aspects of life such as love and family and the importance of being yourself. And the opinions in these scenes are no less well articulated and intelligent and again with no judgment as to which is right or wrong.

And it is all three of these things (story, acting and intelligence) that make this movie resound with me. And here is hoping that this first movie that I saw of 2008 (although technically a 2007 release) is evidence for a great year at the movies.

Worst of 2007

To be fair since I see a whole lot of really wretched film in a year, I'm limiting this list to the five films that I actually had hopes would be good, so you won't see anything like Hostel II or Saw IV on this list. I feel confident I can make this list because although I haven't seen every movie of 2007 that I intended, I don't plan to see any that will be as bad as these.

Knocked Up - Everyone seems to love this movie except me. It had very few laughs and most of its humor was derived from the fact that every single character is unlikable and an asshole. It misses the subtle sweetness of 40 Year Old Virgin.

Spiderman 3 - Although I didn't find Spiderman 2 as great as many critics, it was still a decent superhero film. The third attempt by the same director was just plain bad. Boring villains and an inane evil Peter Parker subplot that gave us what may be the worst scene of the year. Tobey Maguire doing a dance and piano routine.

Halloween - I think Rob Zombie has an interesting approach to film making and despite what others think, I kind of enjoyed The Devil's Rejects. So the idea that he would tackle hit or miss director John Carpenter's big horror hit was intriguing. Could he provide some substance to the classic slasher film? The answer is no. Complete waste of time.

28 Weeks Later - 28 Days Later was one of the great horror films. It practically single handedly rejuvenated the zombie film genre (some are saddened by that, I am happy). A sequel you say? With special forces snipers? and another break out of zombies? where do I sign up? It gave me almost nothing good and a persistent apparently prescient zombie who could find his kids anywhere!! Let's hope there is no third film.

The Host - The critical praise for this movie is incomprehensible to me. This was such a pretentious film. The monster wasn't that scary or impressive. The 'message' of this movie was heavy handed and the ending was down right atrocious.

Final Count

Another year has left us and it has left behind some memorable stinkers, some memorable instant classics and a whole lot of blah. I fell short of 100 films once again but I'm convinced that it is possible. So lets see if I can make this new year, the one where it happens. If you were wondering the final tally was 88 different films in a movie theater this year. But there are also the repeated viewings which would add 8 more viewings to the list (some might count those I choose not to). Although the goal may get increasingly difficult as I find it each year harder and harder to sit through the admitted swill just for the numbers game. Still I plan to start the new year off right by seeing some quality films tonight. Happy New Year and happy movie going.

The Kite Runner

Based on a book by Khaled Hosseini, The Kite Runner follows the life of Amir, a young Afghan who flees the country at the beginning of the Russian invasion in 1979. The story falls into two parts. The first shows Amir growing up as a young boy in Kabul in 1978. The second part shows Amir returning to the Mid East at the request of an old family friend. The first part focuses mainly on a unique game played by Afghan children which involves some form of kite fighting. Those who reclaim kites whose strings have been cut are the titular kite runners. It also deals with the friendship between Amir and his best friend Hassan.

There are some very beautiful shots of flying kites in the early part of the film. And the look of a pre-war/pre soviet Kabul is quite striking and beautiful. Amir witnesses a horrific act against his friend and their friendship becomes strained before being ended shortly before Amir and his father flee Afghanistan. As an adult Amir has become a writer and receives a phone call after his first book is published. A friend of his father requests his presence in Pakistan. Amir learns an important fact about his childhood that changes his outlook and seeks to find a way to atone for his actions as a child.

In general it makes for an interesting story. Although a bit is left unexplained regarding the kite fights which probably received more detailed treatment in the novel. The two young actors who play the young Amir and Hassan are very good playing two very different characters. One the son of a respected business man but with no fighting spirit as it were in his heart. The other the son of a discriminated against subclass who is utterly loyal to Amir and willing to fend off threats from him.

This relationship is so well established that it is quite painful to see it collapse. Amir's journey to make up for his early mistakes takes us into the heart of Taliban controlled Afghanistan prior to 9/11. There are horrendous depictions including the stoning of an adulterer and the contrast between the Kabul that Amir returns to and the Kabul he left 20 years earlier are striking.

In many ways I kept thinking of Atonement while watching this movie and when thinking about it afterwards. Both deal with acts of rape witnessed as children and responses that cause pain and tragedy for those involved. But this film worked better on that theme and didn't jump between several characters either. Amir's atonement may be a bit neater and in truer Hollywood fashion than Briony's in Atonement but it doesn't detract that much from the overall tone and interest of the story.

It isn't really a great film but it has some beautiful cinematography, a capable narrative and gives a picture into a culture and area of the world one rarely gets a glimpse of. I think its worth seeing for those reasons.

Alien Vs. Predator: Requiem

Signs you are in a monster apocalypse:

-Reformed bad boy suddenly returns to town
-Local sheriff appears to be borderline incompetent
-High school girl you had crush on suddenly loses interest in asshole boyfriend and gains interest in you
-Appearance of military/police character who provides both necessary exposition and weapons abilities.

Well let's face it this list could go on and on and AvP-R as it is known in adds and on the internet provides all this and more in the opening minutes. A blast of cliche character development served up as fast as the film can carry it. Not that you should care a lick about any character in this film. You know right now without reading anything I write whether you will see this film. And if you want to see it then you don't care about character or plot not that there is much of either in this movie.

The film picks up right where the last film (yes this is a sequel) left us. A Predator Alien hybrid has just come to life on a Predator ship and begins wrecking havoc which results in the ship crashing near a small Colorado town. Aliens escape and begin doing what Aliens do. A lone Predator apparently back on the home world observes all this and heads to Earth go clean up. One John Wayne-esque Predator coming to eliminate a hoard of Aliens.

If that last sentence doesn't put a smile on your face, then this is not the film for you. If it has you grinning in eager anticipation then why are you still reading, you should be headed to the theater, you won't be disappointed. Its quite an awful movie in almost any respect but it does provide unique fanboy type action sequences with Predators and Aliens killing in anyway you can think of. I'd do a checklist but Brad, the Wretched Genius (Wretched Genius) already beat me to the punch.

I laughed and smiled my way through this whole film and was never lacking in entertainment. But again you know if you'll like it or not and this review can only confirm for those who were interested but hesitant because of the wretchedness of the first Alien Vs. Predator film.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

I've repeatedly commented on my distaste for the movie musical (and I suspect the musical as well though I've never seen one). So it does constantly amaze me every time I get it in my head to go see one. I'm almost always disappointed though on rare occasions when it goes for more unconventional approaches I find myself pleasantly surprised. But as a rule the idea of people breaking out into spontaneous song and dance is just a bit too much for me to handle without laughing inappropriately at its absurdity.

Sweeney Todd is based on a musical by Stephen Sondheim. Sondheim's story is not a very traditional one as it deals with mass murder and cannibalism. Sweeney Todd (Johnny Depp) is newly arrived in London having been sent off to prison unjustly years before by a jealous judge (Alan Rickman) who coveted Todd's wife. Todd has only one desire: revenge. He concocts a plan with the aid of Mrs. Bennett (Helena Bonham Carter) that will benefit them both. Todd will be able to do his part to rid the world of the vermin, Bennet's business will boom because the quality of the "meat" in her pies will bring in the customers.

This is a bloody film. Oh my is this a bloody film. Now I found most of the blood to be comic in its absurdity (my poor mother for whom I feel bad for dragging along to the film didn't think it so fun). Still the blood and the plot are so deliciously absurd that I couldn't help but smile for most of the film. And oh yeah, there is some singing. But honestly I didn't really mind. I honestly got caught up in the story. Rickman, Depp and Carter are all delightful in their respective roles and Sacha Baron Cohen continues to impress with another great comic role as a rival barber.

Burton directs here and in its look it is classic Burton. Dark sets, dirty streets and a generally macabre world. This is the perfect look for this story. A dark dirty London that deserves everything it gets from its murderous duo of Todd and Bennett. The film begins and ends with Todd and his dark world and therefore we are left without a resolution to the innocents of the film and I think its fantastic for that.

The Great Debaters

The Great Debaters tells the story of a debate team at an all black college in the 1930s that made history by defeating white debate teams in a time when the Jim Crow south was oppressive as ever. Denzel Washington directed and stars as Melvin Tolson the famous poet. Don't feel bad if you don't know him but feel free to make me feel bad if you do. My first experience with Tolson was recently a piece he wrote on Gone With The Wind. It was actually quite a thought provoking writing. Suffice to say that Tolson is quite a fascinating figure in his own right.

The film follows his time at Wiley College where he taught and managed a debate team of young men and women who showed the world that black men and women were equals to whites in a time when that was not the majority opinion. As a story that is worth telling there is no doubt. It is quite pleasant to see a film about education and the power of education to effect change. I was pleased to hear real literary reference from Ghandi to Henry David Thoreau. I was happy to see a movie that wasn't afraid to give a etymology of denigrate.

Unfortunately a good story and a seemingly deep love of learning is muddled by a cookie cutter standard underdog story. You could replace debate here with any sport you can think of and you'd pretty much have the same movie. And that is really a shame because the film could be so much better if it ditched the cliches and went for a more interesting narrative. Despite that there are some powerfully moving scenes of racism that are horrible to watch and necessary because of course even if these specific things didn't happen to these characters, they certainly happened to countless others.

Washington in his second outing as a director does a fine job with the direction but the story seems torn between wanting to be inspirational and socially relevant. Not to say that it can't be both but it deserves better than the cliche underdog treatment it gets.

Charlie Wilson's War

Embarrassingly I don't know a whole lot about Russian involvement in Afghanistan in the 1980s. More embarrassing still I could tell you major plot points of Rambo III better than I could tell you about the history of Afghanistan during the cold war. Actually when I think about it, in a weird way Rambo III was meant as a social statement. I never thought I'd write that. Still if you have to choose between the fictional and ludicrous Rambo III and the based on a true story Charlie Wilson's War, I think the latter is the smart move.

Charlie Wilson's War tells the story of Texas congressman Charlie Wilson (Tom Hanks), a man known for liking to have fun, and how he helped fund a secret war in Afghanistan by supplying money and weapons to the mujahideen. He is joined in this task by Texas socialite and activist Joanne Herring (Julia Roberts) and CIA Agent Gust Avrakotos (Philip Seymour Hoffman). The film balances between the wild life that Wilson led and the slow awakening to fight for a cause.

Despite the ever present but never oppressive message that this film sends about the significance of this part of history on everything from the fall of the Soviet Union to the rise of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden, the story doesn't focus too much on it and we are better for it. It has just enough touchstones and hints of the future to remind you what happened in the ten years after the Soviet Union fell. But the heavy ramifications which may resound after you've left the theater are second to two things. First, the story is surprisingly good and interesting. Second, the story is pretty damn funny.

While on capitol hill, Wilson is schmoozing, drinking and ogling his staff of beautiful chesty secretarial staff (one of which he calls jail bait which made me laugh every time). While at social events, he is dropping sexual innuendos with Herring and drinking and schmoozing. While planning a secret funding of a war against the USSR, he is trading quips with Avrakotos and drinking and schmoozing. No doubt he's idolized but there is something kind of fun and refreshing about a politician who does all the wrong things in his personal life (booze, drugs, women) but does all the right things in his political life (does the right thing despite the red tape). He doesn't bend knee to focus groups and so on.

Hanks is just about pitch perfect as Wilson. Hanks has the charisma to pull off a role like this and enough talent to convince you he cares about his cause. Roberts is fun too in her role as the advocate socialite. But hands down this film belongs to Hoffman. His Gust is a wise ass, wise cracking no nonsense, no bullshit guy who is serious about what he does. From the opening when he tells off his boss (for the second time we learn), you can't help but smile at his brazen attitude. And when he flips off his idiot boss, you want to cheer (especially if you've ever had an idiot boss).

Hoffman claims every scene he is in and not even Hanks and Roberts can keep up (thought the try valiantly). In fact I want to see a follow up film that follows the career of Gust Avrakotos. I bet that would be damn entertaining. So although I had a number of reservations going into this film (not that reservations or downright no desire to see a film has ever stopped me) I was very pleasantly surprised by how fun and clever this one was. It isn't a perfect movie but it was worth my money.

Atonement

This has been quite a year for literary adaptations. No Country For Old Men, Love In The Time Of Cholera, There Will Be Blood, Starting Out In The Evening and others I'm sure I'm forgetting are all based on books. Atonement too is an adaptation of a novel. Of course I haven't read any of these books. A sad indictment of my life? Perhaps but to be fair I find myself reading a lot of non-fiction scholarship and barely found time in the studying and movie going to get through my annual reading of "Doctor Zhivago" by Boris Pasternak. And since I have never enjoyed one single adaptation of that my favorite book, maybe its better that I haven't read most of these books.

Atonement follows the lives of three key characters through the years surrounding World War 2. Robbie (James McAvoy) is a grounds keeper for the wealthy Tallis family of which two daughters, Cecilia (Keira Knightley and Briony (early on by Saoirse Ronan and later by Romala Garai). A case of misunderstanding by Briony leads to tragedy early in these three people's lives. As Briony ages and realizes her mistake she tries to make up for her sins. We follow Robbie as he spends time in France as a soldier attempting to escape to Dunkirk.

This film has a lot to speak for it. It is visually quite stunning. All the actors do a nice job with their roles. There is also a big reveal type ending that makes you rethink a bit of what you just saw. And yet despite all its technical achievement I just found myself not caring that much. There were just a few too many require leaps in narrative and I honestly kind of figured out what the reveal would probably be before the film reached that point because of course everyone including me has mentioned that there is one.

And although I said everyone does a nice job with their roles, no one does an amazing job (with one exception). Saoirse Ronan as young Briony with her bright eyed innocence and imagination are the most amazing part of the film to watch and made all the more interesting by the less interesting Romola Garai (less interesting but by no means uninteresting).

The one other thing that everyone has been talking about is a tracking shot of soldiers at Dunkirk. There are only two views on this shot that seem to let you know exactly what you will think of this film. If you watch the tracking shot and think "technically proficient but so what?" that pretty much sums up what you will probably think of the film. If you watch this shot and think wow this speaks to something (I don't know what I'm in the former group) then you probably like the film. Not that this fact helps you, because of course you have to see the movie to see the shot.

In the end although I think the Joe Wright has a lot of talent, this film just didn't end up working for me.

National Treasure: Book of Secrets

Most people don't even question when I see a movie like National Treasure: Book of Secrets. Familiar choruses of "why?" or "what were you thinking" have long fallen silent and have been replaced by quiet hanging of heads. The sad acceptance that I'm going to live up to my self applied epithet and see a lot of movies that you can pretty much guarantee aren't worth seeing once you see the trailer or at times hear the announcement of the film.

National Treasure was a disaster of an action film and sad to say a masterstroke of the Jerry Bruckheimer promotion/production machine. Why waste any time on plot or character development when you can just overload your audience with huge set pieces, absolutely ludicrous plot developments and general narrative chaos with horrible overacting? Why indeed. And yet there has been a sequel to that cinematic mess. But believe me, the fact that I saw the film, isn't even the saddest part of this story.

You see, I'm not in my normal haunt this holiday. I'm over a thousand miles away in my parent's house. I have no car and am currently in a town that has no real public transportation to speak of and a general layout that demands an automated vehicle of some sort. So imagine me essentially trapped in this house with literally nothing on tv to entertain me. So yeah I went out to a movie. Which meant I had to walk to the nearest theater to see it. It isn't a very long walk to be sure...but oh yeah it was during a snow storm. Yeah, I walked about half a mile through blowing winds, falling snow and freezing temperatures all so I could see a movie I was seeing out of shear boredom.

National Treasure: Book of Secrets is as ridiculous of a movie as you could expect from a sequel. We once again follow Ben Gates as he sets off on another treasure hunt that will lead us through major historical sites filling us in on trivial history that isn't even interesting enough for me to care if its actually true. Ben is joined by the whole gang from last time. The villain this time is an overacting Ed Harris.

Sad as all this is, I was most saddened by Helen Mirren apparently deciding to make a paycheck movie. Now I'm sure this film was made before Ms. Mirren won her Academy Award but there should be some escape clause in actor contracts that permit Academy Award members to prevent the release of embarrassing films or at least in this day of digital magic be removed digitally from the film. And watching the masterful actress utter ridiculous lines and crawl around in the dirt is just painful to watch. I'd also make comment for character actor Bruce Greenwood (fairing much better in I'm Not There).

So was this awful movie worth my snow filled journey? I think that's what we call a rhetorical question. Even as I set out that afternoon through the blowing snow, I knew I was doing something completely idiotic and that I would hate the movie. On the bright side, I've got a story that makes me look like an idiot and I'm on film closer to 100 in theater for the year. (This made 82, for the record).

I'm Not There

I'm only passingly familiar with Bob Dylan. I know a decent amount of his music and very little about his life. And yet Todd Haynes' film I'm Not There still intrigued me. Of course the film isn't a biopic. Instead it is "inspired" by the many lives and personalities of Bob Dylan. So instead of one traditional and likely boring single narrative, we are witness to six unconnected stories/vignettes that treat aspects of Bob Dylan's personality.

There is a young kid (Marcus Carl Franklin) who calls himself "Woody Guthrie" and travels the rails singing old folk songs. There is Robbie Clark (Heath Ledger) an actor whose break out role was playing a Dylan type folk star. Ben Whishaw plays Arthur Rimbaud who is being interviewed. Cate Blanchett plays Jude Quinn a folk singer who angers his fans when he starts using an electric guitar. Richard Gere becomes Billy the Kid who faces Pat Garrett years after their supposed fateful encounter. Finally Christian Bale plays Jack Rollins a gifted folk singer who gives it up for the life of a pastor.

The stories are inter-cut occasionally leaving one story to follow for a while another one. This leaves a very fractured film that mostly works and even when it isn't totally working, still leaves you pretty impressed. First and foremost is that the film is quite beautiful to look at and the performances are all very good. There is of course the much talked about and award whispers for Blanchett as Jude Quinn. And none of this talk is without warrant.

But Blanchett is not the only one who shines in this bizarre little film. Heath Ledger's Robbie Clark has a particularly compelling story. I confess in the end that the film didn't fully keep my interest. I found the Billy the Kid story a bit flat and wasn't sure what was going on half the time Ben Whishaw was on screen. But in the end the performances and visuals hold enough of a movie together to keep you interested. And you have to appreciate the attempt to tell a biopic without the standard boring old cliches.

I Am Legend

After an attempt to cure cancer backfires and kills off 90% of the Earth's population and turns all but 1% of the remaining into super strong/agile zombie like creatures, Robert Neville (Will Smith), a army scientist is left alone in New York City trying desperately to discover a cure. His only companion is his dog, Sam and a number of mannequins he has set up all over town. Neville spends his days foraging for food, keeping in shape, hunting, and experimenting in his lab for the cure. Night and dark places are off limits since the infected come out once the sun is down.

Based ever so loosely on a novella by Richard Matheson, I Am Legend starts off very well. We are shown a New York that has began to revert back to nature but still retains some of the clutter of human activity: abandoned cars, billboards and so forth. The film takes some time establishing the kind of routine that Neville has every day. It also takes its time establishing the relationship Neville has with his dog and to so extent his madness.

Once it has firmly shown you a world abandoned it begins to reveal that this is not entirely the case. This results in some very tense moments early on when we still aren't entirely sure what the infected are or why they are so dangerous. As the film escalates towards its finish, it loses quite a bit of what made it interesting. It quickly ramps up to a more traditional fight the monsters type film. There is one particularly powerful scene in the movie which I won't spoil but suffice to say not only does Smith play it perfectly but the camera work is just right as well.

By the third act the movie is getting increasingly cheap. It includes the introduction of two other humans who have survived although the movie is short on a satisfactory explanation as to how. There is also an inspirational Bob Marley speech that I could have done without as well as a salvation speech that falls kind of flat. Still the first half is well enough done that although in the end it isn't a completely satisfying movie, it definitely holds together despite the end.

Y Tu Mama Tambien

Alfonso Cuaron has most recently directed one of the great films of 2006 Children of Men. His skill in that movie was beyond a doubt as I can still vividly remember many of the truly great scenes in that movie. I had previously seen two other films by him. Neither exactly groundbreaking but I did enjoy both Great Expectations and Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. In fact the latter is in my opinion the best in what has become quite a tedious series of films.

So with great interest I sat down to watch Y Tu Mama Tambien. The story centers around the friendship of Tenoch (Diego Luna) and Julio (Gael Garcia Bernal). As their girlfriends leave for a summer in Italy, the two are left with their boredom and their own devices in their summer before college. There boredom amounts to swimming, smoking pot, general bs-ing and equally mindless pursuits. By chance at a wedding they meet Luisa, who is married to Tenoch's cousin. They in their pathetic attempts to pick her up tell a story of a wonderful beach they are planning to go to. Luisa eventually takes them up on their offer and the three being a road trip to a beach that doesn't quite exist.

The story is quite engaging. Tenoch and Julio's friendship seems genuine and they feel like real characters. Luisa as the interloper works surprisingly well as a catalyst for the two friends. There are countless surprises revealed on the trip that tear apart and then reforge the friendship the two have. It is a interesting take on what is essentially a road trip movie. There is also a rather lot of at times gratuitous sex in the film but not so much that one is taken out of the film.

There is also a frequent interruption through voice over to fill in back story about various points of life either of characters or locations. It gets quite annoying and I found myself quite tired of it really quickly. Still the actors and their characters keep one engaged through most of the film.

Man Push Cart

I confess I don't know much about the genre of Italian Neo-realism. I've seen only Vittorio de Sica's brilliant The Bicycle Thief. But when I recently read Ebert's much delayed but very enjoyable top ten of 2006: Ebert, I was intrigued by the inclusion of his number ten selection Man Push Cart. Ebert praised "as strong as or stronger than anything produced by Italian neorealism, and in the same spirit." Well I'll be honest my one experience with Neo-realism was the aforementioned Bicycle Thief so when Ebert was promising something better I immediately went to my dvd queue and added it as number one.

I like Ebert and generally I trust Ebert. I know just by reading a review whether I will agree with him or not. This time I was wrong. Not to say that Man Push Cart doesn't have a lot going for it. It certainly does. What it pulls off it pulls off amazingly and with heart. But when its not working its very painful to watch in the wrong way. What was so gripping in The Bicycle Thief was how the not so nice world of post war Italy unfolds for a poor man trying to get by. And the horror by which I realized despite my cinematic expectations that there would be no happy ending.

Man Push Cart is the story of a Pakistani immigrant named Ahmad. Ahmad wakes up every day in the early morning so that he can literally pull a portable bagel cart to a New York street corner and serve donuts and coffee. This is Ahmad's life. This is how he makes his living. Occasionally he sells bootleg porn on his walk home for a few extra bucks. Ahmad is trying to raise enough money to buy the cart he uses as well as get an apartment large enough that his son can come back to live with him. There are numerous repetitions of this routine which leave you with an overwhelming impression of the desperation and the sad life he leads.

Perhaps this wasn't thought enough or the filmmaker thought he had only half a movie (and maybe he did). So two very artificial subplots are introduced. Ahmad meets a wealthier Pakistani named Mohammad, who seemingly out of homeland solidarity helps out (but more often takes advantage) of his less well off friend. An equally dead on arrival story evolves from an encounter with Noemi. Noemi is a young woman who works at a news stand and the two have a mutual attraction and begin to hang out. Both as i say fall flat and are highly artificial.

Still praise should be given to this film when it is being more genuine. It is an extraordinary view into the lives that on a daily basis most people don't even think about. The former doctors and rock stars and professors and such who upon reaching the United States for whatever reason were considered no more qualified than to serve breakfast or mop the floor. Often times the camera is shown on real people completely unaware or caring about the man serving them their donut's story. When this was being portrayed I was riveted and interested.

A final very contrived event occurs at the end of the story (reminiscent of The Bicycle Thief) which causes Ahmad to run around for a while trying to instill in us a final sense of hopelessness but it fails because it feels contrived and like mimicry. Still the film did end on a final note of monotony of work that had me wishing the whole film could have been as memorable.

Latest From Cinematic Arena

Nick (Cinemaromantico) and I have reviewed The Golden Compass on Cinematic Arena.

The Year So Far

I have for the past three years attempted to see one hundred movies in the theater. I got about 82/3 the first year. Roughly 86/7 last year. This year with more pressing concerns I'm currently resting on a paltry 79. Unless you count rewatching the film in theater (I choose not to) in which case the number jumps to 86. If you were curious to know what films I saw (or are bored and looking for an excuse to procrastinate), here we go with a short blurb on what I can remember about each. Since I don't currently have a record of when i actually watched them (Yes I have done that in the past; yes I do save my ticket stubs; yes I am a big loser) the following is based on when they were released in theaters this year.

1. Codename: Cleaner - no justifaction, I just like Lucy Liu. Horrible unfunny movie

2. Freedom Writers - apparently Ms. Swank figures she can just star in crap now that she has 2 oscars. Inspirational teaching story that is actually more insulting than anything else. (circumstantial evidence for Ms. Swank's new attitude "The Reaping" (which I did not see and the upcoming "P.S. I love you")

3. Happily N'Ever After - Early last year I saw "Hoodwinked" and was pleasantly surprised by its subversive take on a fairy tale via animation. I thought maybe this could be a repeat. This reminded me why I see very few animated films. Aweful.

4. Catch & Release - Jennifer Garner can be quite charming and I admit sadly every now and then I like to watch a Romantic comedy. This wasn't great but it had its moments with Olyphant and Garner and Kevin Smith had a fun role.

5. Smokin' Aces - The trailer made me think this might be a fun/stylized action film. The trailer lied to me.

6. Lives of Others - Very well done study of an East German secret policeman who becomes fascinated and engrossed in the life of a man he is observing. Won best foreign film at the Oscars for 2006.

7. Ghost Rider - Might be less painful to actually go to hell.

8. Reno 911!: Miami - Felt like an overlong episode of the show and therefore too long. But Paul Rudd's bit part made me laugh every single time. Not sure why.

9. Black Snake Moan - Well done movie, just not sure how much I actually liked it.

10. Zodiac - Fincher does an amazing job with this film, probably worth rewatching as the year winds up to see how it holds up against some of the fall masterpieces.

11. 300 - Looks absolutely beautiful. Plays flat.

12. The Host - This movie was so bad I had a pained look on my face the whole time and shared looks with my friend that amounted to "is anyone actually enjoying this?"

13. The Namesake - I cared very little for Kal Penn, but the relationship between Tabu's character and Irfan Kahn's character was so unbelievably romantic and powerful that I ended up loving the movie.

14. Pride - Standard inspirational sports film, nothing new or exciting.

15. Reign Over Me - Adequate story about a man who lost his family in the 9/11 attacks and a friend's attempt to help him. Sandler is decent. Felt a little cheap at times.

16. Shooter - serviceable action film (I saw it twice but in my defense the second time was on a date and it was the only movie she wanted to see)

17. Lookout - just rewatched this one and its still good. Joseph Gordon Levitt is great as a man who has trouble remembering after a car accident. Its turn into a sort of thriller about mid film works well and it has a satisfying conclusion.

18. Grindhouse - One you have to see in theater with a good audience. I had a lot of fun and so was everyone else in the theater. "Planet Terror" was better than "Death Proof" in my opinion.

19. Disturbia - Decently done update on "Rear Window" with a surprisingly good performance by Shia LaBeouf.

20. Pathfinder - I can't fathom why I saw this. Really, really bad though.

21. Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie Film For Theaters - I enjoyed the first season of the show thought I'd give it a try. Better in a 10 minute dose, unfunny as a movie.

22. In The Land Of Women - Adam Brody I think has a certain charm that could make him a decent Romantic comedy lead. Sadly this was just crap.

23. Hot Fuzz - brilliant send up of action movies. Just brilliant.

24. Lucky You - again romantic comedy moment, plus poker. Turns out not as much fun as it might sound (or not sound)

25. Spiderman 3 - The Spiderman films just got worse with each consecutive one and this one is really really bad.

26. Waitress - Funny and charming, Keri Russell is a lot of fun to watch.

27. 28 Weeks Later - I love zombies, fast or slow (but I prefer slow) but this film which started off so well quickly degenerates into a ludicrous film.

28. Shrek The Third - Unfunny. Yet another reason I rarely watch animation.

29. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End - I watched this film solely for the cameo by Keith Richards. Seriously.

30. Knocked Up - I felt everyone in this film was an obnoxious jerk and I barely laughed.

31. Hostel: Part II - As unnecessary as "Hostel", someone might think about getting Mr. Roth some help.

32. Ocean's Thirteen - No film can survive that much expository dialogue and that little interesting plot.

33. Fantastic Four: Rise Of The Silver Surfer - I think it was a slow day and a friend wanted to go see this. Horrible.

34. 1408 - Started out pretty good and I had high hopes but it eventually degenerated into a prototypical horror film. Ending is so stupid.

35. Evan Almighty - all kinds of unfunny as was "Bruce Almighty" now that I think about it.

36. Live Free or Die Hard - It had its moments but the villain was pathetic and many of the action sequences were just way too unbelievable. Worst of the four films so far.

37. Sicko - Interesting and enjoyable for about two thirds of the film before Moore is unable to contain himself and starts in with the grandstanding antics.

38. License To Wed - Mandy Moore is purty. That's my only defense.

39. Transformers - If not for my fond childhood recollections I would not have enjoyed one moment of this film. Most of it is very bad but my inner child still leaps for joy when a transformer transforms.

40. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - I'm really tired of the Harry Potter series.

41. Sunshine - Decent but not perfect Sci-Fi Thriller. Some great effects at the end and some decent performances.

42. Bourne Ultimatum - Fantastic action film, the Bourne series knows how to do action.

43. Hot Rod - I think something in the trailer made me decide to see this, not sure why and it was awful so I've blanked out most of my memories of this one.

44. Becoming Jane - Apparently Jane Austen was not creative at all but merely relating auto-biographical accounts of her life. Just plain stupid.

45. Rush Hour 3 - Sometimes idiotically I am a completionist and felt like I should see this. Bad. Poor Max von Sydow.

46. Stardust - This movie made me smile so much I saw it three additional times.

47. Super Bad - I found this one completely unfunny.

48. The Nanny Diaries - I set a goal to see all Scarlett Johannson films once, it was a bad idea but a goal's a goal. Not good.

49. War - Jet Li, Jason Statham both in a really stupid action film.

50. Halloween - Completely unnecessary remake.

51. 3:10 To Yuma - decent remake with good performances by Christian Bale and Rusell Crowe but I still felt like it was blah.

52. Shoot 'Em Up - One giant mess of a movie with way over the top acting and outright laughable scenes which may or may not have been intentional. Unsatisfying in the end.

53. The Brave One - I loved Jodie Foster in this film and in particular a scene she has with Terrence Howard in a diner. Sadly the ending just ruined it.

54. Across The Universe - not a big fan of musicals but Jim Sturgess's Jude was a great and interesting character and the Beatles songs are all fun to hear. Some of the corresponding scenes were really great, some a bit too much.

55. Eastern Promises - Dark little tale with a great performance by Viggo Mortensen.

56. In The Valley Of Elah - When its focusing on Tommy Lee Jones and the mystery, its really well done. When its focusing on hitting you over the head with its subtlety (or lack of it) regarding the Iraq war, its painful.

57. Good Luck Chuck - There must have been a reason I saw it other than Jessica Alba but I can't recall so I guess I have to go with that. Stupid film.

58. Resident Evil: Extinction - zombies, completionist in me. Incoherent mess and the action wasn't even that entertaining.

59. Into The Wild - really well done version of the book "Into the Wild" with memorable performances by Catherine Keener, Emile Hirsch and especially Hal Holbrook.

60. The Kingdom - CSI: Saudi Arabia and about as entertaining (meaning not so much). Somewhat fun final battle sequence but utterly preposterous.

61. The Darjeeling Limited - Wes Anderson needs to try something new. It had its moments but too few.

62. Elizabeth: The Golden Age - So unbelievably ridiculous. Not worth watching.

63. Gone Baby Gone - Loved this one. Went for a beer afterwards to enjoy while thinking about it. Loved the end. (Rewatched it in theaters with some friends a week or so later).

64. Saw IV - A really sad tradition that I have with a friend that we see all the Saw movies. Really bad.

65. Before The Devil Knows You're Dead - Some great performances from some great actors. I actually think i need to rewatch this before establishing my opinion of it.

66. American Gangster - Highly unimpressed with this movie and everyone in it.

67. No Country For Old Men - oh how I ranted about this one (saw it twice more). So fantastic.

68. Hitman - Wanted an action movie, got this festering pile of crap.

69. The Mist - Decently done for most of the movie although the in store dynamic was a bit much and the ending was totally cheap.

70. The Golden Compass - Boring.

The following were released officially in 2006 but I didn't see until 2007.

71. Children of Men - fantastic.

72. The Queen - Helen Mirren is amazing as Queen Elizabeth and the film does a deft job of dealing with the historical event.

73. The Painted Veil - strong performances by Ed Norton and Naomi Watts, story a bit weak.

74. Letters From Iwo Jima - interesting to see a war movie from the other side but not as impressive as the buzz would lead you to believe.

75. Pan's Labyrinth - amazing blend of fantasy and reality, probably should have won the foreign film oscar.

76. Venus - I loved Peter O'Toole in this. He was so amazing as an aging man trying to live as though he wasn't.

I also saw the following revivals:

77. Aliens - A great action sci-fi film

78. Day of the Dead - classic Romero, over the top? yes. But great.

79. Monster Squad - Ahh, truly it doesn't get better than this for kid themed 80s horror action.

No Country For Old Men

What can I say about this movie that someone else hasn't already said and probably more eloquently than me? I saw this movie the day before Thanksgiving (and again on Thanksgiving) and only shear self restraint has limited me from seeing it again. So what can explain why a movie I loved so much has left me utterly without mediocre words to describe it? I did briefly right a half rate review that I had up for roughly one day before I removed it due to my own dissatisfaction with it. Why after three weeks have I been unable to commit to type something to say about this movie. Its not as if I haven't talked about it, extolled its brilliance and listened with apt eagerness to other viewers points of view. I know I loved this film. I know it falls into a list of "Great" cinematic viewing experiences.

I saw it on its wide release opening night, a Wednesday. It was at the Carolina Theater, a locally operated indie movie house with two real theaters and a third which is really a stage theater for concerts and plays but is used frequently for movie showings. The seats are a tad on the uncomfortable side. You can't really sink into them like you can a real good movie theater seat. The backs don't give much leeway. You can't prop your feat up on the backs of the seats in front of you (well I suppose you could but it would be unpleasant I think). To be fair, I like the Carolina and I like that they are indie and on occasion I have been allowed to see some old favorites reshown on the big screen, such as Monster Squad and Aliens. You can't imagine how great and happy I was to see Aliens on a full screen. And there other two theaters are much more suited to movie viewing.

And yet here I am still not talking about No Country For Old Men. Ultimately this is a cinematic experience. Yeah experience is about right. One you either need to see alone or with someone who respects enough not to start talking about the film the minute the screen goes black and the credits roll. Sit through those credits, all of them and just let what you saw wash over you. Then maybe a couple days later you talk about it. There are any number of avenues I could take when approaching a discussion of this movie from its use (or lack of use of music) to its cinematography to the minute details of character. I could rant about its beginning, its middle, its end (dear sweet maria, its end!). Although will be wholly inadequate I suspect especially since I will do my damnedest not to reveal anything that should not be revealed. Maybe its best in the end though to say "stop reading now, if you haven't seen it and only read on once you have"

I'm serious. Because try as I might, I fear something may slip out. So I'm going to blather on for one more paragraph before I start talking about the movie. I read a lot of the reviews after I saw this. Anthony Lane of the New Yorker was not as impressed in fact it was quite a brutal review at times. Ebert and A.O. Scott were both more positive. All interesting reviews and worth reading if you like numerous viewpoints. Rottentomatoes.com has a 96% fresh rating based on 160 reviews (impressive if you think statistics are meaningful.) Okay, enough stalling, I hope those appropriate have stopped reading for now.

"I was sheriff of this county when I was twenty-five. Hard to believe. Grandfather was a lawman. Father too. Me and him was sheriff at the same time, him in Plano and me here. I think he was pretty proud of that. I know I was.

Some of the old-time sheriffs never even wore a gun. A lot of folks find that hard to believe.... You can't help but compare yourself against the old timers. Can't help but wonder how they would've operated these times...."
-- Sheriff Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones)

This is how the film begins with a voice over from Jones as we see shots of the Texas countryside. Quite beautiful shots actually. I love good dialog but as a general rule I'm not so impressed with voice over. But this I buy and this I like. It speaks to character, it speaks to what the film is about. Jones' cadence and intonation are perfect with an sad nostalgia dropped in. The kind of scene that when the DVD comes out I will probably just pop it in the ol player and listen and watch this scene two or three times.

It has a resonance in me that some of the scenes in Thin Red Line have. There is another film I fully confess I am inadequate to the task of discussing. But one among many fantastic scenes in that film is one in which Sgt. Welsh (Sean Penn) is talking to Pvt. Witt (Jim Caviezel) on a grassy hillside after the combat has concluded.

Welsh: I feel sorry for you kid. Witt: Yeah? Welsh: Yeah a little. This army's going to kill you. If you were smart, you'd take care of yourself, there's nothing you can do for anyone else. Just running into a burning house where nobody can be saved.

Welsh: What difference do you think you can make? One single man in all this madness. If you die its going to be for nothing. There's not some other world out there where everything's going to be okay. There's just this one, just this rock.

Now me just quoting can't show you the way its played, the pauses, the reaction shots of Witt. The reaction shots from Caviezel are just perfect. He doesn't share the view point but he listens respectfully. Penn's ticks are perfect from starring over the horizon to spitting out loose tobacco from his rolled cigarette. And the score that creeps in mid-scene is an instrumentalized version of an early Polynesian song. Soft at times barely audible yet so beautiful. To me its a perfect scene.

Apologies for the digression but the opening of No Country For Old Men equally ranks in my mind as a perfectly conceived scene. In a way ultimately this is Tom Bell's story even if much of the narrative revolves around Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin). Brolin is brilliant by the way. I love early on when he says "I'm fixin' to do something dumber than hell, but I'm going anyways." And does he do something dumber than hell? You bet he does but whereas in another film I might be critical here I buy it. I buy that his conscience started to weigh on him and so he does go do something stupid and he acknowledges that.

I'm coming back to Tom Bell, how could I not but it is unjust to have a discussion of this movie and not mention Javier Bardem as Anton Chigurh. Variously his character has been described as death walking, a monster and equally unsatisfying limiting descriptors. He's been compared to Hannibal Lecter in Silence of the Lambs. Also a bit unsatisfying because I actually prefer Brian Cox's portrayl of Lecter in Manhunter to Hopkins' over the top performance in the more popular film.

Bardem is incredibly scary. He does everything so consciously. His intonations are so plain. The way he takes meticulous care of his boots, ensuring blood is not spilled on them. The way he casually murders or casually pardons. He is instantly memorable, immediate and makes you glad you have never come face to face with someone like him.

No really good movie can rely just on one or two performances and the supporting roles here are as memorable as the main characters. Kelly Macdonald, Barry Corbin and Woody Harrelson all have memorable rolls and scenes. Macdonald is amazing in her scene with Bardem. Just amazing. Corbin's scene at the end, like his scene with Jones in In The Valley of Elah is equally memorable as two old men discuss the hell that is the world and adds wonderful perspective and thought for Jones' character.

Which brings us back to Tom Bell. In a film that has so much and so many memorable performances, Jones's role just resonates with me most. I feel like I know this smart, wearied grandfatherly figure from scenes with his wife to the investigation of the botched drug deal. When he talks to Moss's wife and mid conversation gets caught up in verbal digression practically forgetting her, it was just so perfect.

And now I think I just need to end it. And I suspect it will be deeply unsatisfying. Its a bit odd because I love a good ending. I absolutely love a good ending. A good ending doesn't have to have resolution or anything. It just has to know this is it, this is how we end. The Long Good Friday has such an end. I have ranted extensively about it to friends and even on this site. Its another movie that I have been known to pop in the player and just watch that final 5 minutes with special emphasis for the last minute and a half. Easily one of the top ten, hell top five endings of all time.

So I am so delighted with the ending of No Country For Old Men. The more so because it involves Tom Bell. Tom newly retired sits at breakfast with his wife and mentions a dream he had.

"Both had my father. It's peculiar. I'm older now'n he ever was by twenty years. So in a sense he's the younger man. Anyway, first one I don't remember so well but it was about money and I think I lost it.

The second one, it was like we was both back in older times and I was on horseback goin through the mountains of a night, goin through this pass in the mountains. It was cold and snowin, hard ridin. Hard country. He rode past me and kept on goin. Never said nothin goin by. He just rode on past and he had his blanket wrapped around him and his head down, and when he rode past I seen he was carryin fire in a horn the way people used to do and I could see the horn from the light inside of it. About the color of the moon. And in the dream I knew that he was goin on ahead and that he was fixin to make a fire somewhere out there in all that dark and all that cold, and I knew that whenever I got there he would be there. Out there up ahead.

And then I woke up."

Bam. Black. Done. Yes. Yes. Yes. Opens with Bell sad, nostalgic, wearied and unsure and ends sad, nostalgic, wearied and unsure. I'm glad I had a few minutes in the dark as the credits rolled. I'm not sure I would have had the strength to get up with an end like that. Not right away. Made me want to go enjoy a beer and I did.