Just wanted to try and catch up on things.
Movies seen:
Out of Sight (1998)
Jane Austin book Club
My Own Private Idaho
Sexy Beast
Anvil: The Story of Anvil
Yojimbo
Lars and the Real Girl
Jacob's Ladder
The Damned United (2009)
A Serious Man (2009)
The Men Who Stare At Goats (2009)
The Road (2009)
Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009)
Antichrist (2009)
Monday, December 7, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
MRBB Pt. 5: Fantastic Five Star Spectacular!!!
Part five of the Mega Rating Blowout Bonanza reviews. For links to the previous posts in this series, and for a primer on how I apply my ratings, click on the links below:
Part 1: Introduction and Three Star Reviews
Part 2: Two Star Reviews
Part 3: One and Zero Star Reviews
Part 4: Four Star Reviews
Star Review Primer
So here they are, the movies that absolutely blew my brain. Also, unlike the previous four posts, I listed these in chronological order rather than reverse chronological order - it just made more sense to me on this post whereas it didn't seem to matter for the others.
06-12-09: Chungking Express (1995) 5 stars
I had seen In the Mood for Love in college, but I don't think I appreciated it. So, despite knowing about Chungking Express for years, I never had the desire to watch it. Stupid me! The first half of this film is a fine, fine movie, but the second story is sublime. I won't wax poetic about Wong Kar-Wai, but I think the second half of Chungking Express is about the closest cinema can come to imitating Miles Davis' Some Kind of Blue - it's pure cinema, and it's just reveling in its own fun and happiness.
I will never hear The Mamas & The Papas' "California Dreaming" or The Cranberries' "Dreams" again without thinking of Chungking Express, Wong Kar-Wai, Tony Leung, or Faye Wong. Chungking Express isn't for everyone, but I don't think cinema lovers can watch this film without smiling.
06-16-09: 24 Hour Party People (2002) 5 stars
I blame it all on the idiots I went to film school with. In 2002 and 2003, I was completely burnt out on movies - if I remember correctly, I hadn't seen any of the 2002 Best Picture Nominees when the Oscars came around, and I hadn't seen any of the smaller, critical darlings everyone was talking about either. I was fed up, and it took a while before I was truly back in love with the movies. Which is the only reason I can possibly think of for never seeing, or even knowing, about 24 Hour Party People until this year.
I love movies about music, especially funny movies that are totally in love with music, and this might be the best postmodern, quasi-mockumentary, semi-historical, funny as hell portrait of a musical scene ever filmed. It's hilarious, has great performances, has great energy, has great music, and has won my eternal love. I do not think I will ever understand how 24 Hour Party People escaped my attention, and I would feel rightfully shamed right now if it was possible to feel anything but giddy love when thinking about 24 Hour Party People. Please, go see it now!
06-17-09: Badlands (1973) 5 stars
I get it now, why filmlovers were so distraught after Terrence Malik disappeared for twenty years. Having now seen Badlands and Days of Heaven, even though Malik has since returned, I'm pissed at him for not making movies for those twenty years. I love Days of Heaven, I think The Thin Red Line is a masterful movie, and for some dumb reason I still haven't seen The New World. However, minutes after Badlands finished I knew I had just seen a masterpiece. It took maybe an hour more to realize that, not only was Badlands now my favorite Malick film, it was also almost certainly his best.
Badlands came out merely six years after Bonnie and Clyde, but the two are like night and day. Bonnie and Clyde is a wonderful film, but Badlands is a beautiful, haunting, dreamlike masterpiece of two young lovers on the run, one that has neither sympathy nor distaste for the characters or their actions. Malick beautifully presents the what, when, where, and how, leaving the why all to the audience. Badlands is also a showcase of acting, cinematography, editing and sound, all of which go to his credit as a director. Easily one of the most impressive debut films ever made, I am in awe of Badlands.
06-25-09: In the Mood for Love (2000) 5 stars
I obviously didn't give In the Mood for Love its due when I saw it the first time. I can't say much about it. The movie is beautiful, the people are beautiful, the costumes are amazingly beautiful, the music is beautiful, the story is beautifully told, the characters are beautifully tragic.
I can't think of anyone who would not enjoy watching In the Mood for Love, and I guess that is my highest praise. I urge people to see it, I think it's probably a great introduction to Wong Kar-Wai, Tony Leung, and Maggie Cheung. There is a scene where each character gets to confront his and her spouse, and I think it might be one of the best, most original takes on such a scene I have ever had the pleasure to watch . . . and that might not even be the best scene in the movie.
07-13-09: Gosford Park (2001) 5 stars
Gosford Park was my first Altman film, before I really understood what Altman was about (I had heard of him, and of his films, but that was about it). I enjoyed it, but then didn't think much more of it. Later, as I was introduced to Altman, I was able to look back on Gosford Park and appreciate it more, able to see how Altman played with Rules of the Game and Agatha Christie murder mystery stereotypes. I thought it was a very good movie, and understood why people considered it perhaps Altman's last great film.
I've seen a lot more Altman films now, including a nice run of them recently. I think I have grown a lot more as a student of film, and am better prepared to understand everything Altman is doing. When I choose to rewatch this, I was expecting to find it fulfilling on a cerebral level, but not to hold up to some of his other films I considered, until now, more important Altman works (such as Short Cuts).
Oh, how I was wrong. Gosford Park is my favorite Altman film, the one I most enjoy watching, and most certainly one of his masterpieces. I was definitely not dissapointed with the intellectual side of Gosford Park. I saw the references and enjoyed how he played with our expectations of the genre and characters. What I had forgotten, though, was how much fun everyone, especially Altman, was having on this film. Yes, it plays with the genre, but it plays with it in a decidedly wicked way. The knives, the poison, the acidic characters with their many twisted motives; Altman was smiling at us with every single frame of Gosford Park, and I love him for it. This is the work of a master at the absolute top of his game, and everyone else falls in line. It might not be his most groundbreaking film, but Gosford Park is pitch perfect, self assured, and brilliantly fiendish.
08-06-09: Bloody Sunday (2002) 5 stars
The Academy is stupid. Bloody Sunday was the best film of 2002, and an important work in trying to understand a horrible catastrophe. I applaud the UK's Independent Television Authority for producing this film - and I can't imagine why the Academy would then disqualify Bloody Sunday because it was shown on British public access four days after its premier at Sundance. Greengrass learned, obviously, because I remember United 93 being broadcast on network television over here, but it must have been after whatever period of time necessary to stay Academy eligible.
Had I seen Bloody Sunday before hearing about United 93, I would have had zero apprehension about United 93's production. I think United 93 was one of the best films of 2006, and will stand the test of time as the first important film about September 11th. As great as United 93 is, though, it was a step backwards from Bloody Sunday. For instance, United 93's relies on a score, which I found overly dramatic upon a recent rewatch, especially for a film that otherwise takes such great care to stay confined to the reality of its environment. Bloody Sunday, on the other hand, won't give you that comfort; it's soundtrack is made up of protesting voices, military orders, echoing gunshots, screaming, and unsettling silence.
Bloody Sunday is a near perfect film, and simply the best cinema verite style historical movie since Battle of Algiers. Even knowing Greengrass' skill with a handheld camera, I was blown away by what was captured on screen, and how it was presented to us. Bloody Sunday is brutally honest, sophisticatedly restrained, and unapologetically enraged at the atrocity that occurred in Derry on the Thirtieth of January, 1972. This is a film that needs to be seen, about an event that should never be forgotten.
In February 2003, seventeen months after September 11th, 2001, when our country was at war with Afghanistan and knocking on Iraq's door, I'm sure glad the Academy wisely thought to exclude Bloody Sunday on a stupid technicality so that Chicago, a satisfactory adaptation of a well-known Fosse Broadway production, could be recognized as the Best Picture of 2002.
And on that last dig, and over two weeks in the making, I hereby conclude the Mega Review Blowout Bonanza. I hope you enjoyed it, but even more, I hope one person was encouraged to check out a new movie on one of these lists (hopefully from this five star bunch). It was a great run of movies, I the next forty or so are just as good.
Friday, August 28, 2009
MRBB Pt. 4: Very Fine Four Star Films!
Part four of the Mega Rating Blowout Bonanza reviews. For links to the previous posts in this series, and for a primer on how I apply my ratings, click on the links below:
Part 1: Introduction and Three Star Reviews
Part 2: Two Star Reviews
Part 3: One and Zero Star Reviews
Star Review Primer
In this post, I present you the gems, those films that just have a little something extra that really sets them apart from what are otherwise perfectly enjoyable three star experience. Here are the four (and four point five) star movies!
08-16-09: Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (2003) 4.5 stars:
I love this movie. It drags a tiny bit, which is why its not a five star film, but then again, I don't know what I would cut out. The attention to detail is amazing - few historical films feel this real, and a masterpiece in sound. Not for everyone, but how I wish they would make more of the series.
08-15-09: Before Sunset (2004) 4 stars:
Having watched them both again this year, Before Sunset is the better film. I'm still amazed Linklater was able to make this sequel without destroying the story, but he did. When he is on, nobody can make a conversation as interesting as Linklater. Also, Ethan Hawke's character isn't good enough for Julie Delpy.
08-04-09: Feeling My Way (1997) 4 stars:
Watching this short doc in film school, I was blown away. Its completely subjective, half animated, and simply about the thoughts of a man as he walks home from work. Its also one of my favorite documentary films ever, absolutely captivating, and helped me realize that these films should simply be called "non-fiction" or "essay films." Its on youtube, check it out.
08-03-09: The Lives of Others (2006) 4 stars:
I think I told someone that, ten years from now, I might list this as the best film of 2006. Ulrich Muhe's performance is perfect - he completely sells his character's transformation without ever breaking his character's stoic, subdued nature. An impressive debut by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, here is hoping his films just keep getting better with experience. Finally, with this film and Mostly Martha, I officially have a screen crush for Martina Gedeck.
07-25-09: The Hit (1984) 4 stars:
This early Stephen Frears film has all of the following going for it: (1) Tim Roth's debut as a cocky young hitman, (2) John Hurt as a stoic, experienced hitman, (3) Terrence Stamp being the coolest man alive, (4) the absolutely stunning Laura del Sol, in a magnificent dress, (5) a beautiful flamenco guitar score, and (6) gorgeous shots of the Spanish countryside. Sexy Beast (another great movie), and so many other English crime films, are forever in debt to The Hit. Its a blast.
07-21-09: McCabe & Mrs. Miller (1971) 4 stars:
This is a great movie, and I know that. Its also a perfect example of a great movie not being a five star film for me, because as much as I respect and enjoyed this film, it wasn't the most entertaining movie to watch, and could be a tad slow in places. However, the final shootout is one of the most surreal, beautiful scenes I have ever seen.
07-14-09: MASH (1970) 4.5 stars:
McCabe is better than MASH, but I enjoyed MASH more. Without the final football scene (which drags a little), this is a five star film. Elliot Gould is one of the coolest men alive - I'm so glad he came forward to Altman after this film about Gould and Sutherland's attempts to get Altman fired early in the shooting, because Altman never forgave Sutherland for staying quiet (and never worked with him again), and it would have been such a waste if this was the only Gould-Altman collaboration. After growing up with the TV show, and after hearing all the praise for it, MASH still managed to blow right past my expectations.
06-30-09: Le Cercle Rouge (1970) 4 stars:
If it was a little tighter, a little brighter, or made a little earlier, this would be five stars. Its still an amazing heist film, and Alain Delon is always the man, but Le Samourai and Rififi set an obscenely high bar for a heist film with a cool Alain Delon character, a bar which, quite possibly, no film could meet. I still really loved Le Cercle Rouge, but it will never be the first film I think of for Melville, Delon, or heist films in general.
06-28-09: Major League (1989) 4 stars:
It makes me laugh. If I hadn't seen Sugar earlier this year, I might say Major League is my favorite baseball movie, and even now I think they are tied for me. I still want to know where they found a life-size picture of the team owner in pasties and a g-string.
06-27-09: Dan in Real Life (2007) 4 stars:
This was one of those awesome, surprise gems for me when it came out in 2007. I'm a sucker for the "get the family together for a weekend" plots, and I really enjoy watching the characters interact in this movie. Plus, Steve Carell and Juliette Binoche have great chemistry, and its Juliette Binoche, who becomes more attractive every single year. This has pretty much become my go-to pick for a romantic comedy.
06-27-09: Traffic (2000) 4.5 stars:
I am ready to admit that I was wrong about Traffic. I think the last couple years I have finally accepted Soderbergh on Soderbergh's terms. I used to think Traffic was shallow as all it was telling us was stuff I already knew, but I realize now that is pretty much the point. Soderbergh isn't trying to give answers to the drug problem, he just wants to show how it affects multiple people in many different ways. I still am not the biggest fan of the Michael Douglass and daughter scenes, but everyone else is top notch. On a final note, I think Benecio del Toro's character, and performance, might be the best of the decade - it is masterful that, until the final shot, you don't know what to expect from him, yet his actions and reactions throughout the film are one hundred percent realistic and natural.
06-23-09: Happy-Go-Lucky (2008) 4 stars:
Who would have thought Mike Leigh would make such a warm, loving movie? It still has some darker, Mike Leigh elements, but there isn't a movie this decade with a more apropos title. Sally Hawkins was absolutely snubbed by not receiving an nomination, and she isn't even the best performance in the film; Eddie Marsan gives a clinic in what I think is the best performance of 2008, and a masterfully realized character.
06-23-09: Paranoid Park (2007) 4.5 stars:
This movie is hard to explain in words, partly because this movie is about as close to pure cinema as you are going to get. As much as I like Milk, and Good Will Hunting, I hope someone just writes Gus van Sant a blank check so he can continue to make his little arthouse films for all eternity. Might be my favorite van Sant film ever, and if not, its right up there with My Own Private Idaho. The only reason this isn't a five star film is that I don't think it was meant to be a film that just smacked you senseless as you watch it - it haunts you and grows upon reflection, all by design. Criminally overlooked.
06-15-09: Moon (2009) 4 stars:
My favorite movie of 2009 so far? Not sure, but its right up there. Without saying too much, Sam Rockwell carries this movie and deserves a lot of recognition for his performance, as he is basically the only human on screen. I love the use of practical effects and miniatures, and the score is another haunting Clint Mansell score. This film knows its roots and pays homage while remaining its own work - Bravo Duncan Zowie Bowie Jones!
06-02-09: In America (2002) 4.5 stars:
Powerhouse performances, especially from Paddy Considine and Samantha Morton (two of the best working actors today). It would come off as overly melodramatic if everyone involved wasn't selling their characters at one hundred percent. Its not a perfect film, but I think Jim Sheridan pushes his very personal story to the absolute limits, which is about all you can ask for, isn't it?
That does it for part 4 of the Mega Rating Blowout Bonanza, and I hope you are looking forward to the final installment, because I saved the best for last.
Part 1: Introduction and Three Star Reviews
Part 2: Two Star Reviews
Part 3: One and Zero Star Reviews
Star Review Primer
In this post, I present you the gems, those films that just have a little something extra that really sets them apart from what are otherwise perfectly enjoyable three star experience. Here are the four (and four point five) star movies!
08-16-09: Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (2003) 4.5 stars:
I love this movie. It drags a tiny bit, which is why its not a five star film, but then again, I don't know what I would cut out. The attention to detail is amazing - few historical films feel this real, and a masterpiece in sound. Not for everyone, but how I wish they would make more of the series.
08-15-09: Before Sunset (2004) 4 stars:
Having watched them both again this year, Before Sunset is the better film. I'm still amazed Linklater was able to make this sequel without destroying the story, but he did. When he is on, nobody can make a conversation as interesting as Linklater. Also, Ethan Hawke's character isn't good enough for Julie Delpy.
08-04-09: Feeling My Way (1997) 4 stars:
Watching this short doc in film school, I was blown away. Its completely subjective, half animated, and simply about the thoughts of a man as he walks home from work. Its also one of my favorite documentary films ever, absolutely captivating, and helped me realize that these films should simply be called "non-fiction" or "essay films." Its on youtube, check it out.
08-03-09: The Lives of Others (2006) 4 stars:
I think I told someone that, ten years from now, I might list this as the best film of 2006. Ulrich Muhe's performance is perfect - he completely sells his character's transformation without ever breaking his character's stoic, subdued nature. An impressive debut by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, here is hoping his films just keep getting better with experience. Finally, with this film and Mostly Martha, I officially have a screen crush for Martina Gedeck.
07-25-09: The Hit (1984) 4 stars:
This early Stephen Frears film has all of the following going for it: (1) Tim Roth's debut as a cocky young hitman, (2) John Hurt as a stoic, experienced hitman, (3) Terrence Stamp being the coolest man alive, (4) the absolutely stunning Laura del Sol, in a magnificent dress, (5) a beautiful flamenco guitar score, and (6) gorgeous shots of the Spanish countryside. Sexy Beast (another great movie), and so many other English crime films, are forever in debt to The Hit. Its a blast.
07-21-09: McCabe & Mrs. Miller (1971) 4 stars:
This is a great movie, and I know that. Its also a perfect example of a great movie not being a five star film for me, because as much as I respect and enjoyed this film, it wasn't the most entertaining movie to watch, and could be a tad slow in places. However, the final shootout is one of the most surreal, beautiful scenes I have ever seen.
07-14-09: MASH (1970) 4.5 stars:
McCabe is better than MASH, but I enjoyed MASH more. Without the final football scene (which drags a little), this is a five star film. Elliot Gould is one of the coolest men alive - I'm so glad he came forward to Altman after this film about Gould and Sutherland's attempts to get Altman fired early in the shooting, because Altman never forgave Sutherland for staying quiet (and never worked with him again), and it would have been such a waste if this was the only Gould-Altman collaboration. After growing up with the TV show, and after hearing all the praise for it, MASH still managed to blow right past my expectations.
06-30-09: Le Cercle Rouge (1970) 4 stars:
If it was a little tighter, a little brighter, or made a little earlier, this would be five stars. Its still an amazing heist film, and Alain Delon is always the man, but Le Samourai and Rififi set an obscenely high bar for a heist film with a cool Alain Delon character, a bar which, quite possibly, no film could meet. I still really loved Le Cercle Rouge, but it will never be the first film I think of for Melville, Delon, or heist films in general.
06-28-09: Major League (1989) 4 stars:
It makes me laugh. If I hadn't seen Sugar earlier this year, I might say Major League is my favorite baseball movie, and even now I think they are tied for me. I still want to know where they found a life-size picture of the team owner in pasties and a g-string.
06-27-09: Dan in Real Life (2007) 4 stars:
This was one of those awesome, surprise gems for me when it came out in 2007. I'm a sucker for the "get the family together for a weekend" plots, and I really enjoy watching the characters interact in this movie. Plus, Steve Carell and Juliette Binoche have great chemistry, and its Juliette Binoche, who becomes more attractive every single year. This has pretty much become my go-to pick for a romantic comedy.
06-27-09: Traffic (2000) 4.5 stars:
I am ready to admit that I was wrong about Traffic. I think the last couple years I have finally accepted Soderbergh on Soderbergh's terms. I used to think Traffic was shallow as all it was telling us was stuff I already knew, but I realize now that is pretty much the point. Soderbergh isn't trying to give answers to the drug problem, he just wants to show how it affects multiple people in many different ways. I still am not the biggest fan of the Michael Douglass and daughter scenes, but everyone else is top notch. On a final note, I think Benecio del Toro's character, and performance, might be the best of the decade - it is masterful that, until the final shot, you don't know what to expect from him, yet his actions and reactions throughout the film are one hundred percent realistic and natural.
06-23-09: Happy-Go-Lucky (2008) 4 stars:
Who would have thought Mike Leigh would make such a warm, loving movie? It still has some darker, Mike Leigh elements, but there isn't a movie this decade with a more apropos title. Sally Hawkins was absolutely snubbed by not receiving an nomination, and she isn't even the best performance in the film; Eddie Marsan gives a clinic in what I think is the best performance of 2008, and a masterfully realized character.
06-23-09: Paranoid Park (2007) 4.5 stars:
This movie is hard to explain in words, partly because this movie is about as close to pure cinema as you are going to get. As much as I like Milk, and Good Will Hunting, I hope someone just writes Gus van Sant a blank check so he can continue to make his little arthouse films for all eternity. Might be my favorite van Sant film ever, and if not, its right up there with My Own Private Idaho. The only reason this isn't a five star film is that I don't think it was meant to be a film that just smacked you senseless as you watch it - it haunts you and grows upon reflection, all by design. Criminally overlooked.
06-15-09: Moon (2009) 4 stars:
My favorite movie of 2009 so far? Not sure, but its right up there. Without saying too much, Sam Rockwell carries this movie and deserves a lot of recognition for his performance, as he is basically the only human on screen. I love the use of practical effects and miniatures, and the score is another haunting Clint Mansell score. This film knows its roots and pays homage while remaining its own work - Bravo Duncan Zowie Bowie Jones!
06-02-09: In America (2002) 4.5 stars:
Powerhouse performances, especially from Paddy Considine and Samantha Morton (two of the best working actors today). It would come off as overly melodramatic if everyone involved wasn't selling their characters at one hundred percent. Its not a perfect film, but I think Jim Sheridan pushes his very personal story to the absolute limits, which is about all you can ask for, isn't it?
That does it for part 4 of the Mega Rating Blowout Bonanza, and I hope you are looking forward to the final installment, because I saved the best for last.
MRBB Pt. 3: Woeful One Star Reviews, and Worse
Part three of the Mega Rating Blowout Bonanza reviews. For links to the previous posts in this series, and for a primer on how I apply my ratings, click on the links below:
Part 1: Introduction and Three Star Reviews
Part 2: Two Star Reviews
Star Review Primer
This is going to be the fun post. There are only two movies to list here, but I couldn't wait to talk about them, especially the latest Mr. Mann Masterpiece.
07-09-09: Choke (2008) 1 star:
This movie feels like it came out about ten years too late and about six months before it was ready. I love Sam Rockwell, he is fine in this movie, as is Angelina Jolie. Brad William Henke was a revelation, and I can't wait to see more of his work. My problem, though, is that this film doesn't go anywhere, or say anything. Its just there. I don't know if this is the fault of Palahnuik's book or Gregg's writing and direction, but after this film ended, all I could think was "so what?" On top of that, the film is disjointed and feels like it was rushed. Part of me wonders if half the movie was left on the cutting table, and if those scenes would have given the film more resonance, but I think the biggest problem with this film is that the film thinks it is meaningful and deep, rather than just a collection of sex jokes, quirky characters and awkward moments.
I didn't want to, but I have to compare it to Fight Club. I know a lot of people were seduced by the ideology of Tyler Durden, but I honestly think that, at least the movie, is a satire of that ideology - I have never believed Fincher for once thought that the characters were anything but idiot losers stuck in arrested development. On the other hand, Fight Club is a technical masterpiece and moves with an energy that I wish all films had.
Choke, on the other hand, is the exact opposite. It has no energy or drive, and shifts between laid back and lethargic. Choke also worships its characters and wants us to sympathize with them. For what reason, I don't know; they are outsiders who don't fit into normal society, work at a historical reenactment camp, and have cool, quirky addictions to sex. Maybe I'm too old, or maybe I'm too dull, but I can't find these characters as anything but laughable and pathetic. Choke is the thirty-five year who had one philosophy class in college and is convinced he knows the truth of the world. He also has a fondness for calling people sheep. For five minutes he is amusing, for ten minutes he is a bore, and after an hour or so, you have already tuned him out.
07-11-09: Public Enemies (2009) 0 stars:
Damn you Michael Mann, you did it again! After swearing you off repeated times, somehow you pulled the sheet over my eyes once more and made me think, "this time will be different, this time it will be a great movie." He was back in his hometown of Chicago, where they had to shut down the city during filming. He was working with an awesome collection of interesting historical characters in a great time period. Look at that cast!!! Most movies would kill to have a supporting roster that deep.
So what does he do with it? He spends an obscene amount of money making a hybrid between an old studio gangster and a $10,000 exploitation film. In no particular order, this film is:
1. Ugly as sin! Yes, you love digital, and you like putting cameras in the corner of a floor so it looks worse than a student horror film. You also seem to hate lighting. I don't care if this is your style, its completely ridiculous for this film. If Scorsese can use a completely static camera in The King Of Comedy because a fluid camera, despite being his trademark, would feel completely foreign in an environment of stilted, arrested characters, then you could learn how to light a shot or hire a cameraman who has legs, a dolly, or at least a tripod. Zodiac was a digitally shot period film, and its beautiful. That shootout in the house in the woods, you know, the big climactic scene, was one of the ugliest, most amateurish, laughably bad looking scenes I have seen in a movie this decade. What the hell did you spend all that money on?
2. Long and boring. Michael Mann, I have finally realized there is no story you can't make unexciting. Hell, you made Ali dull. Ali, arguably one of the most interesting, controversial, energetic, provocative, charismatic people of the Twentieth Century, you found a way to make a movie about this man as entertaining as C-Span. I didn't care a damn thing about any of the characters in this movie. How can John Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd, Baby Face Nelson, or J. Edgar Hoover ever bore you? They can all meet in a Michael Mann film, and then go about their motions as if on rails, with zero character development, motive, insight, or even common sense. Mann is more interested in getting from point A to point B than to explain why, how, what, where, or who the hell gives a damn about point B. Its all trip no destination, and sadly, he doesn't even navigate the trip well.
3. Seriously, you shut down Chicago for this???? Name one shot that you go "Oh Wow, way to use the location." It could have been shot on a soundstage, it probably should have - at least then you would have proper lighting.
4. The music and tone suck. I liked the bluegrass guitar, but whenever the love story came on screen, the dialogue got cheesy and the orchestra swelled to MGM proportions. The only saving grace of this, of course, is it helped wake me up a couple times when I caught myself dozing off for a minute or two. This film is completely schizophrenic: it wants to look like a Lars von Trier experiment and ignore classic story conventions, but also wants to be a studio era gangster film with snappy dialogue, over the top glamour shots, and musical queues on every single closeup of the lovebirds. Its a mess.
5. Be accurate, or be fun! I don't expect or demand historical accuracy. Mann, though, obviously feels that is the reason to watch his film: the only answer to most of my complaints about the story structure is that Mann just wants to show us how it was, not explain it. That would be alright, or at least forgivable, if he was historically accurate. He isn't - despite adapting the film from a very good, non-fiction source, this film is very fast and loose with the facts, having people die out of order to provide motivation, or inventing scenarios to show how characters ascended their own career ladders. Hell, Dillinger had like 50 girls, but not in this movie. This would be fine if Mann actually backed up this fantasy by fleshing out the characters or the plot and let us believe the characters would act this way. Instead, he just cuts and dices history to fit some fantasy story and expects the audience to just buy it because "its history." Basically, Mann's story is lazy and insults our intelligence, hiding behind the authenticity of "inspired by a true story." Someday Mann is going to film the Civil War where Lincoln kills Robert E Lee in 1958, which is how he is elected president, only to have Grant kill Lincoln because Lincoln fell in love with General Sherman, with no explanation, and expect the audience to buy it all because its "inspired by a fifth grade history book."
There is more, a lot more, wrong with this movie, but I don't care. I'm done with Michael Mann, you can have him. I want to make it clear that I blame 100% of this movie on Mann. For what they had to work with, the actors were all fine. The sets and costumes appear to be great. Then Mann gets to shoot and edit, and it all goes to waste.
In parting words, I'm not the only one who seems to be done with Mann: he has a history of bringing in films over budget that never make their money back, and there are rumors that Public Enemies was the last straw. I'm actually happy - I think Mann has some talent, and a true arthouse budget might be just what he needs to make a good movie again. At least he won't be able to hire a full orchestra anymore!
There are the dogs. Stay tuned for Part 4 of this series where we get into some true gems!
Part 1: Introduction and Three Star Reviews
Part 2: Two Star Reviews
Star Review Primer
This is going to be the fun post. There are only two movies to list here, but I couldn't wait to talk about them, especially the latest Mr. Mann Masterpiece.
07-09-09: Choke (2008) 1 star:
This movie feels like it came out about ten years too late and about six months before it was ready. I love Sam Rockwell, he is fine in this movie, as is Angelina Jolie. Brad William Henke was a revelation, and I can't wait to see more of his work. My problem, though, is that this film doesn't go anywhere, or say anything. Its just there. I don't know if this is the fault of Palahnuik's book or Gregg's writing and direction, but after this film ended, all I could think was "so what?" On top of that, the film is disjointed and feels like it was rushed. Part of me wonders if half the movie was left on the cutting table, and if those scenes would have given the film more resonance, but I think the biggest problem with this film is that the film thinks it is meaningful and deep, rather than just a collection of sex jokes, quirky characters and awkward moments.
I didn't want to, but I have to compare it to Fight Club. I know a lot of people were seduced by the ideology of Tyler Durden, but I honestly think that, at least the movie, is a satire of that ideology - I have never believed Fincher for once thought that the characters were anything but idiot losers stuck in arrested development. On the other hand, Fight Club is a technical masterpiece and moves with an energy that I wish all films had.
Choke, on the other hand, is the exact opposite. It has no energy or drive, and shifts between laid back and lethargic. Choke also worships its characters and wants us to sympathize with them. For what reason, I don't know; they are outsiders who don't fit into normal society, work at a historical reenactment camp, and have cool, quirky addictions to sex. Maybe I'm too old, or maybe I'm too dull, but I can't find these characters as anything but laughable and pathetic. Choke is the thirty-five year who had one philosophy class in college and is convinced he knows the truth of the world. He also has a fondness for calling people sheep. For five minutes he is amusing, for ten minutes he is a bore, and after an hour or so, you have already tuned him out.
07-11-09: Public Enemies (2009) 0 stars:
Damn you Michael Mann, you did it again! After swearing you off repeated times, somehow you pulled the sheet over my eyes once more and made me think, "this time will be different, this time it will be a great movie." He was back in his hometown of Chicago, where they had to shut down the city during filming. He was working with an awesome collection of interesting historical characters in a great time period. Look at that cast!!! Most movies would kill to have a supporting roster that deep.
So what does he do with it? He spends an obscene amount of money making a hybrid between an old studio gangster and a $10,000 exploitation film. In no particular order, this film is:
1. Ugly as sin! Yes, you love digital, and you like putting cameras in the corner of a floor so it looks worse than a student horror film. You also seem to hate lighting. I don't care if this is your style, its completely ridiculous for this film. If Scorsese can use a completely static camera in The King Of Comedy because a fluid camera, despite being his trademark, would feel completely foreign in an environment of stilted, arrested characters, then you could learn how to light a shot or hire a cameraman who has legs, a dolly, or at least a tripod. Zodiac was a digitally shot period film, and its beautiful. That shootout in the house in the woods, you know, the big climactic scene, was one of the ugliest, most amateurish, laughably bad looking scenes I have seen in a movie this decade. What the hell did you spend all that money on?
2. Long and boring. Michael Mann, I have finally realized there is no story you can't make unexciting. Hell, you made Ali dull. Ali, arguably one of the most interesting, controversial, energetic, provocative, charismatic people of the Twentieth Century, you found a way to make a movie about this man as entertaining as C-Span. I didn't care a damn thing about any of the characters in this movie. How can John Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd, Baby Face Nelson, or J. Edgar Hoover ever bore you? They can all meet in a Michael Mann film, and then go about their motions as if on rails, with zero character development, motive, insight, or even common sense. Mann is more interested in getting from point A to point B than to explain why, how, what, where, or who the hell gives a damn about point B. Its all trip no destination, and sadly, he doesn't even navigate the trip well.
3. Seriously, you shut down Chicago for this???? Name one shot that you go "Oh Wow, way to use the location." It could have been shot on a soundstage, it probably should have - at least then you would have proper lighting.
4. The music and tone suck. I liked the bluegrass guitar, but whenever the love story came on screen, the dialogue got cheesy and the orchestra swelled to MGM proportions. The only saving grace of this, of course, is it helped wake me up a couple times when I caught myself dozing off for a minute or two. This film is completely schizophrenic: it wants to look like a Lars von Trier experiment and ignore classic story conventions, but also wants to be a studio era gangster film with snappy dialogue, over the top glamour shots, and musical queues on every single closeup of the lovebirds. Its a mess.
5. Be accurate, or be fun! I don't expect or demand historical accuracy. Mann, though, obviously feels that is the reason to watch his film: the only answer to most of my complaints about the story structure is that Mann just wants to show us how it was, not explain it. That would be alright, or at least forgivable, if he was historically accurate. He isn't - despite adapting the film from a very good, non-fiction source, this film is very fast and loose with the facts, having people die out of order to provide motivation, or inventing scenarios to show how characters ascended their own career ladders. Hell, Dillinger had like 50 girls, but not in this movie. This would be fine if Mann actually backed up this fantasy by fleshing out the characters or the plot and let us believe the characters would act this way. Instead, he just cuts and dices history to fit some fantasy story and expects the audience to just buy it because "its history." Basically, Mann's story is lazy and insults our intelligence, hiding behind the authenticity of "inspired by a true story." Someday Mann is going to film the Civil War where Lincoln kills Robert E Lee in 1958, which is how he is elected president, only to have Grant kill Lincoln because Lincoln fell in love with General Sherman, with no explanation, and expect the audience to buy it all because its "inspired by a fifth grade history book."
There is more, a lot more, wrong with this movie, but I don't care. I'm done with Michael Mann, you can have him. I want to make it clear that I blame 100% of this movie on Mann. For what they had to work with, the actors were all fine. The sets and costumes appear to be great. Then Mann gets to shoot and edit, and it all goes to waste.
In parting words, I'm not the only one who seems to be done with Mann: he has a history of bringing in films over budget that never make their money back, and there are rumors that Public Enemies was the last straw. I'm actually happy - I think Mann has some talent, and a true arthouse budget might be just what he needs to make a good movie again. At least he won't be able to hire a full orchestra anymore!
There are the dogs. Stay tuned for Part 4 of this series where we get into some true gems!
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
MRBB Pt. 2: Not Too Shabby Two Star Movies!
Part two of the Mega Rating Blowout Bonanza reviews. For links to the previous posts in this series, and for a primer on how I apply my ratings, click on the links below:
Part 1: Introduction and Three Star Reviews
Star Review Primer
Now, lets get onto the show with the two star films:
08-22-09: Wet Hot American Summer (2001) 2 stars:
I don't have much to say about this film. It has some funny moments and a great cast. I like some of the old summer camp comedies from the 70s and 80s, but I don't have enough fond nostalgia for those films, which I think is necessary to really enjoy Wet Hot American Summer. A forgettable, decent comedy.
08-19-09: Do You Remember Dolly Bell (1981) 2.5 stars:
I see enough in this movie to get excited about Kusturica's later films. There are great scenes that show a true gift with the camera. There is also a lot of filler and Marxist propaganda scenes that run completely against the mood of the film - I'm assuming they were necessary to get the film made. Not bad, but there are enough low points that it just misses three stars.
08-18-09: The Band's Visit (2007) 2 stars:
Cool little movie with great performances but, overall, a little lacking in the story. It might resonate more if I lived in the area, but for being billed as a heartwarming comedy, it wasn't that funny or heartwarming.
08-13-09: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (2009) 2 stars:
I think most of the problems I have with this film are from the book itself. That said, I would have liked a much more streamlined plot, excluding everything that wasn't Harry, Draco, Dumbledore and Snape. I wonder if there were scheduling constraints that kept Alan Rickman out of more scenes, but he was way too underused in the film. The kids are becoming better actors (especially Draco), but Ginny is stiff as a board in this film. I'm still looking forward to the final two.
08-09-09: Wanted (2008) 2.5 stars:
This movie is much more fun than it has any right to be. I'm going to ignore everything else about it - the car chases are well done, some of the action shots are cool, and it has Terrence Stamp. Good enough for me.
07-25-09: (500) Days of Summer (2009) 2 stars:
Too cutsey for me - its trying so hard to be a precocious hipster film. I love all the shots of downtown LA, I liked the Hall and Oates scene, but overall I think the film is just trying way to hard to be quirky. Still fun, but completely forgettable.
07-23-09: Zack and Miri Make a Porno (2008) 2.5 stars:
It has some good moments, and it was enjoyable to watch, but a lot of it fell dead, and end the end, its a pretty predictable love story. If it was a tighter film, I would probably give it a three. On a positive note, there were a couple scenes that are easily the best cinematic shots Kevin Smith has ever used - I love his dialogue, but it was refreshing to see him learning how to tell the story without words.
06-25-09: White Dog (1982) 2.5 stars:
I see what its trying to do, I applaud the courage to make it, I even sort of enjoy the complete cheesy, low budget aesthetic. However, Kristy McNichol is awful, and not even campy awful, and in the end, I think I respect Sam Fuller's approach more than I enjoy it. Also, how this film was so controversial to basically be shelved for a decade will always escape me. On the other hand, the church scene alone is enough to earn its half-star.
06-24-09: The Deal (2003) 2 stars:
Interesting, well made, economical. As a made for TV movie, its pretty damn good. As a precursor to The Queen, it just shows all the things that made The Queen that much more special. Great acting though!
06-12-09: Angels and Demons (2009) 2 stars:
Fun and completely ridiculous, with a great, over-the-top performance by Ewan McGregor. Plus, Stellan Skarsdard is always fun, even in a role like this. I'm not going to even get into how much this film relies on coincidences that are completely unbelievable even in this film's own fantasy world - I assume those are all faults of Dan Brown's story. Basically, this film was a fun distraction with great actors chewing the scenery. Plus, Tom Hanks has a glamour shot in the pool - good for him!
That wraps up Part 2 of the Mega Rating Blowout Bonanza. Stay tuned for Part 3, where we tackle the duds and the stinkers!
Part 1: Introduction and Three Star Reviews
Star Review Primer
Now, lets get onto the show with the two star films:
08-22-09: Wet Hot American Summer (2001) 2 stars:
I don't have much to say about this film. It has some funny moments and a great cast. I like some of the old summer camp comedies from the 70s and 80s, but I don't have enough fond nostalgia for those films, which I think is necessary to really enjoy Wet Hot American Summer. A forgettable, decent comedy.
08-19-09: Do You Remember Dolly Bell (1981) 2.5 stars:
I see enough in this movie to get excited about Kusturica's later films. There are great scenes that show a true gift with the camera. There is also a lot of filler and Marxist propaganda scenes that run completely against the mood of the film - I'm assuming they were necessary to get the film made. Not bad, but there are enough low points that it just misses three stars.
08-18-09: The Band's Visit (2007) 2 stars:
Cool little movie with great performances but, overall, a little lacking in the story. It might resonate more if I lived in the area, but for being billed as a heartwarming comedy, it wasn't that funny or heartwarming.
08-13-09: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (2009) 2 stars:
I think most of the problems I have with this film are from the book itself. That said, I would have liked a much more streamlined plot, excluding everything that wasn't Harry, Draco, Dumbledore and Snape. I wonder if there were scheduling constraints that kept Alan Rickman out of more scenes, but he was way too underused in the film. The kids are becoming better actors (especially Draco), but Ginny is stiff as a board in this film. I'm still looking forward to the final two.
08-09-09: Wanted (2008) 2.5 stars:
This movie is much more fun than it has any right to be. I'm going to ignore everything else about it - the car chases are well done, some of the action shots are cool, and it has Terrence Stamp. Good enough for me.
07-25-09: (500) Days of Summer (2009) 2 stars:
Too cutsey for me - its trying so hard to be a precocious hipster film. I love all the shots of downtown LA, I liked the Hall and Oates scene, but overall I think the film is just trying way to hard to be quirky. Still fun, but completely forgettable.
07-23-09: Zack and Miri Make a Porno (2008) 2.5 stars:
It has some good moments, and it was enjoyable to watch, but a lot of it fell dead, and end the end, its a pretty predictable love story. If it was a tighter film, I would probably give it a three. On a positive note, there were a couple scenes that are easily the best cinematic shots Kevin Smith has ever used - I love his dialogue, but it was refreshing to see him learning how to tell the story without words.
06-25-09: White Dog (1982) 2.5 stars:
I see what its trying to do, I applaud the courage to make it, I even sort of enjoy the complete cheesy, low budget aesthetic. However, Kristy McNichol is awful, and not even campy awful, and in the end, I think I respect Sam Fuller's approach more than I enjoy it. Also, how this film was so controversial to basically be shelved for a decade will always escape me. On the other hand, the church scene alone is enough to earn its half-star.
06-24-09: The Deal (2003) 2 stars:
Interesting, well made, economical. As a made for TV movie, its pretty damn good. As a precursor to The Queen, it just shows all the things that made The Queen that much more special. Great acting though!
06-12-09: Angels and Demons (2009) 2 stars:
Fun and completely ridiculous, with a great, over-the-top performance by Ewan McGregor. Plus, Stellan Skarsdard is always fun, even in a role like this. I'm not going to even get into how much this film relies on coincidences that are completely unbelievable even in this film's own fantasy world - I assume those are all faults of Dan Brown's story. Basically, this film was a fun distraction with great actors chewing the scenery. Plus, Tom Hanks has a glamour shot in the pool - good for him!
That wraps up Part 2 of the Mega Rating Blowout Bonanza. Stay tuned for Part 3, where we tackle the duds and the stinkers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
