DUDE'S REVIEWS
I have been lax on my reviews and now I've got a list of 35 titles going back half a year. I'm going to purge the list of films I saw in 2008 by listing all of them here with a quick impression of each:
five stars (loved):
TITANIC (1997) - The greatest film of all time? Still a treat.
ROMAN HOLIDAY (1953) - One of my faves, shared with the family.
THE QUEEN (2006) - Among the most well-written films I've ever seen.
YOU CAN'T TAKE IT WITH YOU (1938) - Took me 70 years to discover this feel good film.
KING KONG (1933) - Dated effects but they're pretty good and the story is involving.
four stars (really liked):
JOHN ADAMS (2008) - Great period reconstruction with time to enjoy the intimate moments.
IN BRUGES (2008) - An overlooked gem with plot points you don't see coming.
THE PRINCESS AND THE WARRIOR (2000) - I was surprised how much I liked it.
INTO THE WILD (2007) - Penn crafts a pleasant journey towards preventable death.
THE DARK KNIGHT (2008) - Ledger wins an Oscar and joins the pantheon of great villains.
THE VISITOR (2007) - Involving tale about individual goodness vs the coldness of the state.
EL MARIACHI (1992) - Amazing film considering its $7k budget and definitely entertaining.
PICKPOCKET (1959) - The best part is the scholarly commentary explaining its importance.
THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE (1972) - A childhood favorite shared with my children.
IRON MAN (2008) - Favreau has a nice touch for tone with just the right amount of levity.
three stars (liked):
THE SEA HAWK (1940) - Unlike Tom, I prefer CAPTAIN BLOOD.
THE COURT JESTER (1956) - I liked the intricate plot, thinking it ripe for retelling.
THE COUNTERFEITERS (2007) - The protagonist isn't really the hero but it is interesting.
I AM LEGEND (2007) - Loved it for awhile but it wrapped up before I was ready.
BLOCK HEADS (1938) - Classic Laurel and Hardy buffoonery.
BOLT (2008) - Follows the formula and produces solid entertainment.
FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL (2008) - Overrated but funny and charming enough.
DEATHPROOF (2007) - Tarantino delivers style over substance for a good throwaway film.
VANISHING POINT (1971) - The reference point for DEATHPROOF has not aged well.
THE HOST (2006) - Atypical creature feature about a kooky family rising to the occasion.
SUNSHINE (1999) - Loved it until the third act which ramps up the bizarro level to eleven.
WAY OUT WEST (1937) - Laurel and Hardy on a mission to be funny in western garb.
THE APPLE DUMPLING GANG (1975) - Enough Disney charm and Don Knotts to satisfy.
SEEMS LIKE OLD TIMES (1980) - Several gags I've never forgotten since first viewing.
two stars (didn't like):
NODODY'S FOOL (1994) - Sure Newman's great, but the story heaps on the blandness.
AMERICAN GANGSTER (2007) - So long and boring, I can't believe it was a critical darling.
PARIS WHEN IT SIZZLES (1964) - Watchable only because its stars are easy to admire.
JAMAICA INN (1939) - Hitchcock's British swan song is a bit of a stinker.
BABES IN TOYLAND (1934) - Laurel and Hardy once again but not as good.
WORD WARS (2004) - Predictably engaging, but not an impressive film.
THE SHAGGY DOG (1959) - Even with a dopey story it manages to be thoroughly lame.
A Blog of Current Events and Ancient Issues.
Showing posts with label Film Reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Film Reviews. Show all posts
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Sunday, October 26, 2008
EASTWOOD LIVES
He won't live forever, but he's already been with us for longer than we could have expected. These last few years he's given us interesting and sometimes flawed movies, but this film coming out in December might be the last pure Eastwood pic. A film where we see Clint as we remember his legend, the equivalent of John Wayne in the Shootist.
(Via Dirty Harry)
He won't live forever, but he's already been with us for longer than we could have expected. These last few years he's given us interesting and sometimes flawed movies, but this film coming out in December might be the last pure Eastwood pic. A film where we see Clint as we remember his legend, the equivalent of John Wayne in the Shootist.
(Via Dirty Harry)
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
WHY WE FIGHT (2004) (A Documentary Film Review)
The basis of this film is Eisenhower’s speech on the military industrial complex (MIC) and that we haven’t heeded his warning as evidenced by our presence in Iraq. The argument here is a supply side one. If we build and make military equipment then we’ll naturally use it in war for economic reasons.
The problem is the MIC is really a chicken or the egg argument. Did we mobilize for war because of foreign powers like the Soviet Union or did we invent power likes the Soviet Union in order to mobilize for war? The current argument is whether the world is dangerous because we have weapons or whether we have weapons because the world is dangerous.
The other problem with the overall argument is that it doesn’t understand and explain enough about Eisenhower to put his warning into context. Eisenhower was a pre-WWII conservative and he was ideologically isolationist. FDR favored unconditional surrender for Germany and Ike favored a brokered peace to save lives. Ike avoided confrontation with the Soviets over their invasion of Hungary to the dismay of many Americans. Fair or unfair, Democrats got us into WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. The first Republican war of the 20th Century was the 1991 Gulf War that lasted 6 weeks. Progressives in the 20th Century used war to reshape the world while conservatives looked inward. Eisenhower’s speech was harkening back to the conservatism of his youth.
Isolationism is not a dead idea on the right, but it’s no longer the majority conservative idea. Pat Buchanan, Joe Sobran, Charley Reese, and others were against going into Iraq and Buchanan has even penned books saying that we shouldn’t have fought Germany in the 1940s. Any movie trying for mileage using Eisenhower’s speech should be interviewing Pat Buchanan to understand the ideology. Instead we get neoconservatives like Richard Pearle and William Kristol who favor the war and liberals who oppose it without any explanation of how Eisenhower fits in that picture.
There is some other mischief too. The movie shows Richard Pearle saying that there is no connection between Cheney and Haliburton when he clearly means no relationship since Cheney became VP, so they can immediately contradict Pearle by showing headlines with links out of context. Gore Vidal on the other hand can say that the Japanese were trying to surrender in the summer of 1945 but Truman ignored them so that he could drop the Atomic Bomb. And Vidal gets no one to refute him.
The major point of the film is that the arms industry is so big and so influential that the U.S. enters into war to please the munitions makers. But it ignores the fact that building up arms prevents attack. Why did rogue terrorists attack us in 2001? Because no country would risk getting turned to glass. Why did we go into Iraq, really? We wanted to show nations that supporting terrorists of any kind could be just as costly. The result has been no further attacks at home. A coincidence we should believe.
Like so many ideas on the Left, the world is controlled by money interests and we’re just unknowing pawns. But the problem with conspiracy theories isn’t that a conspiracy can't be true from time to time, but that once you believe any particular conspiracy you are apt to see conspiracy anywhere because all you have to do is find one is chase the money backwards to who profited from something. But life isn’t so easy. Sometimes things have unintended consequences and people or companies make money because of luck or intuition.
In short WHY WE FIGHT puts forward the premise is that we fight because people make money from it. And yet the Left disparages the Right for being simplistic.
The basis of this film is Eisenhower’s speech on the military industrial complex (MIC) and that we haven’t heeded his warning as evidenced by our presence in Iraq. The argument here is a supply side one. If we build and make military equipment then we’ll naturally use it in war for economic reasons.
The problem is the MIC is really a chicken or the egg argument. Did we mobilize for war because of foreign powers like the Soviet Union or did we invent power likes the Soviet Union in order to mobilize for war? The current argument is whether the world is dangerous because we have weapons or whether we have weapons because the world is dangerous.
The other problem with the overall argument is that it doesn’t understand and explain enough about Eisenhower to put his warning into context. Eisenhower was a pre-WWII conservative and he was ideologically isolationist. FDR favored unconditional surrender for Germany and Ike favored a brokered peace to save lives. Ike avoided confrontation with the Soviets over their invasion of Hungary to the dismay of many Americans. Fair or unfair, Democrats got us into WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. The first Republican war of the 20th Century was the 1991 Gulf War that lasted 6 weeks. Progressives in the 20th Century used war to reshape the world while conservatives looked inward. Eisenhower’s speech was harkening back to the conservatism of his youth.
Isolationism is not a dead idea on the right, but it’s no longer the majority conservative idea. Pat Buchanan, Joe Sobran, Charley Reese, and others were against going into Iraq and Buchanan has even penned books saying that we shouldn’t have fought Germany in the 1940s. Any movie trying for mileage using Eisenhower’s speech should be interviewing Pat Buchanan to understand the ideology. Instead we get neoconservatives like Richard Pearle and William Kristol who favor the war and liberals who oppose it without any explanation of how Eisenhower fits in that picture.
There is some other mischief too. The movie shows Richard Pearle saying that there is no connection between Cheney and Haliburton when he clearly means no relationship since Cheney became VP, so they can immediately contradict Pearle by showing headlines with links out of context. Gore Vidal on the other hand can say that the Japanese were trying to surrender in the summer of 1945 but Truman ignored them so that he could drop the Atomic Bomb. And Vidal gets no one to refute him.
The major point of the film is that the arms industry is so big and so influential that the U.S. enters into war to please the munitions makers. But it ignores the fact that building up arms prevents attack. Why did rogue terrorists attack us in 2001? Because no country would risk getting turned to glass. Why did we go into Iraq, really? We wanted to show nations that supporting terrorists of any kind could be just as costly. The result has been no further attacks at home. A coincidence we should believe.
Like so many ideas on the Left, the world is controlled by money interests and we’re just unknowing pawns. But the problem with conspiracy theories isn’t that a conspiracy can't be true from time to time, but that once you believe any particular conspiracy you are apt to see conspiracy anywhere because all you have to do is find one is chase the money backwards to who profited from something. But life isn’t so easy. Sometimes things have unintended consequences and people or companies make money because of luck or intuition.
In short WHY WE FIGHT puts forward the premise is that we fight because people make money from it. And yet the Left disparages the Right for being simplistic.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
PAUL NEWMAN (1925-2008)
It’s easy to talk about the films and I do that below, but it should also be mentioned that Newman used his star power to help people in a way that few celebrities do. I saw him interviewed on 60 Minutes a few years ago. They were at his HOLE IN THE WALL GANG camp for children with cancer. He proved to be a guy who really made a positive difference in this world. Many of his other causes weren’t mine, but when it counted his money went to something that really mattered. I hope to enjoy his salad dressing and spaghetti sauce for years to come.
SOMEBODY UP THERE LIKES ME (1956) – Newman’s breakout role as boxer Rocky Graziano was originally supposed to star James Dean, I once read. He was already 30 years when he made this, but he looks so young in comparison to the roles you remember that he seems much younger. Newman became quite a good actor over the years, but that Actor’s Studio style is evident and annoying here.
THE LEFTHANDED GUN (1958) – Newman is Billy the Kid. The film has a decent enough reputation helped by the direction of Arthur Penn, but it was not particularly memorable for me. I saw it the same week I saw Arthur Penn’s PENN AND TELLER GET KILLED, showing that the auteur theory is still somewhat debatable.
LONG HOT SUMMER (1958) The first film he made with Joanne Woodward also stars Orson Welles. While neither Welles nor Newman seem believable as a southerners to me, Woodward is believable in most anything. Newman is the hardheaded young man in conflict with Welles during most of the story although Welles comes to respect him more than his own weakling son. But can Welles match Newman with his daughter, Woodward? You guess.
CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF (1958) – Newman teams with Elizabeth Taylor in the Tennessee Williams play. Like most of Williams stuff “the love that dare not speak its name” is hovering around the periphery. The play begins with Newman’s unseen friend having killed himself and Newman feeling guilty because the friend had a crush on him. The central conflict of the play is that Newman has cut off the advances of wife, Elizabeth Taylor. But his dying father “Big Daddy” needs him to produce an heir so his tub-of-goo brother doesn’t inherit the plantation. Newman’s star power is evident and Taylor’s natural acting style is a pleasure to see. Burl Ives reprised his Broadway role as Big Daddy. I saw Ashley Judd, Jason Patric, and Ned Beatty do this on Broadway and critics weren’t kind. They weren’t as good as the movie cast, but it was still better than watching most of the Broadway musicals that I’ve seen. So much of good acting is good material and this was Newman’s best film up to this time, I think.
THE YOUNG PHILADELPHIANS (1959) Back when getting a Philadelphia lawyer was tantamount to getting the best, Newman is a young ambitious lawyer who will do anything to get ahead, stepping on those that love him along the way. The movie is melodramatic in that late 50s sort of way so it should be no surprise that Newman gets some redemption at the end. Brian Keith has a nice turn early in the film. I can’t think of a bad Brian Keith performance.
THE HUSTLER (1961) – The first out-and-out classic Newman movie and the first one I remember where he seemed relaxed enough to be the character instead of trying to play the character. Most everyone knows that Newman is pool hustler Fast Eddie Felson, a talented but egotistical young man who rises and falls. It’s great material helped along by Newman’s gritty determination. Had Newman died shortly after this film, I think we’d see HUSTLER posters in much the same way we see REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE now.
HUD (1963) – Newman gets to play the heel and a cowboy one at that. This is the most famous Newman film I have never seen, and the only one on this list haven't seen. I just didn’t think I could skip over it for all its importance.
COOL HAND LUKE (1967) – Another one of the all-time classics. My old hippie boss got me onto it and he loved to talk about the Christ symbolism. I found it interesting that he was a free spirit who wanted to be left alone and he inadvertently created a following that he wasn’t comfortable with. The fight with George Kennedy, and then the egg eating contest, and the rush to build the road all seem so fresh in my mind. I found it slow the first time I saw it. I was expecting another Butch Cassidy, I guess. But the second time I saw it much differently and I have admired and enjoyed it every time since.
BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID (1969) – The first Newman movie I ever saw. It was on television when I was twelve years old and I watched it all by myself and then quoted it in English class when the teacher asked about hero characters on the wrong side of the law. It was the most powerful ending I had seen up to that time and still one of the all-time great resolutions. I particularly like the train robberies early in the film and how nice Butch is robbing people. I have since recommended it to other friends with mixed results. One friend said that he couldn’t stand the music montages especially with the pop tune. That song does seem dated, but I think the montages in South America still work although he had no use for those either. Historically it's probably the first buddy film to be successful enough to create that subgenre.
SOMETIMES A GREAT NOTION (1971) – This is not considered a great movie, but there are a couple of reasons that it appealed to me. First, Henry Fonda as the father of Paul Newman has great possibilities. Second, it’s one of three movies where the main characters are named STAMPER. Can you name the other two? This film is based on the book by Ken “Cukoo’s Nest” Kesey about a family of loggers who are in the midst of a union fight. It’s been a while since I’ve seen it, but I remember thinking it had a conservative bent which seems impossible with this cast and author. I guess I wasn’t supposed to like the Stampers and what they do. That would explain it. The other thing I remember is a real poignant scene where Newman’s brother Richard Jaeckel is trapped under a log. Looking it up on ALLMOVIE, I realized I had totally forgotten about the other plot involving Lee Remick (Not easy to forget) and Michael Sarrazin.
THE LIFE AND TIMES OF JUDGE ROY BEAN (1972) My least favorite movie on the list. I saw it during the period I was watching all of the John Huston movies I could find. Newman is not sympathetic although the movie is funny at times. It just has too many weird characters for me. I suppose it could be someone’s cult favorite, but not mine.
THE STING (1973) – This is the Newman/Redford movie that won best picture although I prefer the other one. Still, this movie is a lot of fun and can be enjoyed multiple times. Robert Shaw always made a good heavy and there are plenty of other good supporting parts as well. Charles Durning and Harold Gould come to mind. The granddaddy of all confidence man films, I suppose.
THE TOWERING INFERNO (1974) – One of the weaker Best Picture winners with a great cast. Famous for the opening credit where McQueen’s name was first, but Newman’s was higher. The 70s loved disaster movies with high priced talent and this was just one of many.
THE DROWNING POOL (1975) – A sequel to the 1966 film HARPER where Newman plays PI Lew Harper once again based on the Ross McDonald’s Lew Archer series. The drowning pool is exactly how it sounds and a clever device to kill Newman in the movie. But maybe he escapes! Woodward shows up as does a young Melanie Griffith.
ABSENCE OF MALICE (1981) – Ironically, this movie is the counter-balance to the Redford film, ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN, where crusading reporters are admonished for printing stories based on hearsay information from anonymous sources. Both and Sally Field are quite good and the investigation into the truth works pretty well too.
THE VERDICT (1982) – If there was ever a time where you could say that Newman was not only a great movie star, but a great actor, the Verdict would be the example time I would pick. Everything about the performance says that it needs an actor and not a personality and the way Newman becomes this alcoholic lawyer is really impressive. It’s a shame that he didn’t take more character parts. He would have been a joy in those Robert Duvall type roles.
HARRY AND SON (1984) – Newman is Harry and Robbie Benson is the son and they have less than a harmonious relationship. It’s not a very good movie and it’s not all that memorable, except that Newman had lost his own son a few years earlier and that he chose to direct this picture says something about its meaning to him.
THE COLOR OF MONEY (1986) – Newman returns as Fast Eddie in this Hustler sequel directed by Scorsese and co-starring the up and coming Tom Cruise. There is a lot to like about the movie and I enjoyed it again last year sometime. The shame is that the Academy chose to finally reward Newman for his body of work and it should have been for something a little more interesting.
BLAZE (1989) Ron Shelton’s follow-up to Bull Durham is only nice for Newman’s performance as the corrupt Louisiana Governor and even that wears a bit thin at times.
FAT MAN AND LITTLE BOY (1989) – A dull telling of the atomic bomb creation with Newman wasted in a role anyone could have portrayed.
NOBODY”S FOOL (1994) – Newman really deserved to win an Oscar for this forgotten movie about a lovable loser who reconnects with his family. It’s a little quirky at times like the Richard Russo novel it’s based on, but if you can forgive that this movie is a gem and the last classic he made. Bruce Willis is great in a small role as Newman’s boss/friend./rival and Melanie Griffith is Willis’ wife and an object of Newman’s fancy. Jessica Tandy plays Newman’s land lady in her last screen role. I first saw it at the theatre with brother John and have seen it again several times over the years and it never gets old.
HUDSUCKER PROXY (1994) – One of the Coen Brothr’s lesser efforts and still not without its moments. Newman plays the CEO of a big company and Tim Robbins the lowly office boy who makes good. Jennifer Jason Leigh channels Katherine Hepburn’s screwball comedy accent.
TWILIGHT (1998) Newman re-teams with Russo and director Robert Benson as a Private Detective shot by Reese Witherspoon. A few years later he is living in the garage apartment of Reese’s parents (Gene Hackman and Susan Sarandon) and trying to solve as mystery. It’s a fine effort for all involved and worth the time if you see it on cable.
ROAD TO PERDITION (2002) Sam Mendes follow up to American Beauty starring Tom Hanks is a adaptation of a graphic novel filled with stars but also a kind of emptiness. Newman won a supporting Oscar nomination for his small but impactful role as a crime boss.
It’s easy to talk about the films and I do that below, but it should also be mentioned that Newman used his star power to help people in a way that few celebrities do. I saw him interviewed on 60 Minutes a few years ago. They were at his HOLE IN THE WALL GANG camp for children with cancer. He proved to be a guy who really made a positive difference in this world. Many of his other causes weren’t mine, but when it counted his money went to something that really mattered. I hope to enjoy his salad dressing and spaghetti sauce for years to come.
SOMEBODY UP THERE LIKES ME (1956) – Newman’s breakout role as boxer Rocky Graziano was originally supposed to star James Dean, I once read. He was already 30 years when he made this, but he looks so young in comparison to the roles you remember that he seems much younger. Newman became quite a good actor over the years, but that Actor’s Studio style is evident and annoying here.
THE LEFTHANDED GUN (1958) – Newman is Billy the Kid. The film has a decent enough reputation helped by the direction of Arthur Penn, but it was not particularly memorable for me. I saw it the same week I saw Arthur Penn’s PENN AND TELLER GET KILLED, showing that the auteur theory is still somewhat debatable.
LONG HOT SUMMER (1958) The first film he made with Joanne Woodward also stars Orson Welles. While neither Welles nor Newman seem believable as a southerners to me, Woodward is believable in most anything. Newman is the hardheaded young man in conflict with Welles during most of the story although Welles comes to respect him more than his own weakling son. But can Welles match Newman with his daughter, Woodward? You guess.
CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF (1958) – Newman teams with Elizabeth Taylor in the Tennessee Williams play. Like most of Williams stuff “the love that dare not speak its name” is hovering around the periphery. The play begins with Newman’s unseen friend having killed himself and Newman feeling guilty because the friend had a crush on him. The central conflict of the play is that Newman has cut off the advances of wife, Elizabeth Taylor. But his dying father “Big Daddy” needs him to produce an heir so his tub-of-goo brother doesn’t inherit the plantation. Newman’s star power is evident and Taylor’s natural acting style is a pleasure to see. Burl Ives reprised his Broadway role as Big Daddy. I saw Ashley Judd, Jason Patric, and Ned Beatty do this on Broadway and critics weren’t kind. They weren’t as good as the movie cast, but it was still better than watching most of the Broadway musicals that I’ve seen. So much of good acting is good material and this was Newman’s best film up to this time, I think.
THE YOUNG PHILADELPHIANS (1959) Back when getting a Philadelphia lawyer was tantamount to getting the best, Newman is a young ambitious lawyer who will do anything to get ahead, stepping on those that love him along the way. The movie is melodramatic in that late 50s sort of way so it should be no surprise that Newman gets some redemption at the end. Brian Keith has a nice turn early in the film. I can’t think of a bad Brian Keith performance.
THE HUSTLER (1961) – The first out-and-out classic Newman movie and the first one I remember where he seemed relaxed enough to be the character instead of trying to play the character. Most everyone knows that Newman is pool hustler Fast Eddie Felson, a talented but egotistical young man who rises and falls. It’s great material helped along by Newman’s gritty determination. Had Newman died shortly after this film, I think we’d see HUSTLER posters in much the same way we see REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE now.
HUD (1963) – Newman gets to play the heel and a cowboy one at that. This is the most famous Newman film I have never seen, and the only one on this list haven't seen. I just didn’t think I could skip over it for all its importance.
COOL HAND LUKE (1967) – Another one of the all-time classics. My old hippie boss got me onto it and he loved to talk about the Christ symbolism. I found it interesting that he was a free spirit who wanted to be left alone and he inadvertently created a following that he wasn’t comfortable with. The fight with George Kennedy, and then the egg eating contest, and the rush to build the road all seem so fresh in my mind. I found it slow the first time I saw it. I was expecting another Butch Cassidy, I guess. But the second time I saw it much differently and I have admired and enjoyed it every time since.
BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID (1969) – The first Newman movie I ever saw. It was on television when I was twelve years old and I watched it all by myself and then quoted it in English class when the teacher asked about hero characters on the wrong side of the law. It was the most powerful ending I had seen up to that time and still one of the all-time great resolutions. I particularly like the train robberies early in the film and how nice Butch is robbing people. I have since recommended it to other friends with mixed results. One friend said that he couldn’t stand the music montages especially with the pop tune. That song does seem dated, but I think the montages in South America still work although he had no use for those either. Historically it's probably the first buddy film to be successful enough to create that subgenre.
SOMETIMES A GREAT NOTION (1971) – This is not considered a great movie, but there are a couple of reasons that it appealed to me. First, Henry Fonda as the father of Paul Newman has great possibilities. Second, it’s one of three movies where the main characters are named STAMPER. Can you name the other two? This film is based on the book by Ken “Cukoo’s Nest” Kesey about a family of loggers who are in the midst of a union fight. It’s been a while since I’ve seen it, but I remember thinking it had a conservative bent which seems impossible with this cast and author. I guess I wasn’t supposed to like the Stampers and what they do. That would explain it. The other thing I remember is a real poignant scene where Newman’s brother Richard Jaeckel is trapped under a log. Looking it up on ALLMOVIE, I realized I had totally forgotten about the other plot involving Lee Remick (Not easy to forget) and Michael Sarrazin.
THE LIFE AND TIMES OF JUDGE ROY BEAN (1972) My least favorite movie on the list. I saw it during the period I was watching all of the John Huston movies I could find. Newman is not sympathetic although the movie is funny at times. It just has too many weird characters for me. I suppose it could be someone’s cult favorite, but not mine.
THE STING (1973) – This is the Newman/Redford movie that won best picture although I prefer the other one. Still, this movie is a lot of fun and can be enjoyed multiple times. Robert Shaw always made a good heavy and there are plenty of other good supporting parts as well. Charles Durning and Harold Gould come to mind. The granddaddy of all confidence man films, I suppose.
THE TOWERING INFERNO (1974) – One of the weaker Best Picture winners with a great cast. Famous for the opening credit where McQueen’s name was first, but Newman’s was higher. The 70s loved disaster movies with high priced talent and this was just one of many.
THE DROWNING POOL (1975) – A sequel to the 1966 film HARPER where Newman plays PI Lew Harper once again based on the Ross McDonald’s Lew Archer series. The drowning pool is exactly how it sounds and a clever device to kill Newman in the movie. But maybe he escapes! Woodward shows up as does a young Melanie Griffith.
ABSENCE OF MALICE (1981) – Ironically, this movie is the counter-balance to the Redford film, ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN, where crusading reporters are admonished for printing stories based on hearsay information from anonymous sources. Both and Sally Field are quite good and the investigation into the truth works pretty well too.
THE VERDICT (1982) – If there was ever a time where you could say that Newman was not only a great movie star, but a great actor, the Verdict would be the example time I would pick. Everything about the performance says that it needs an actor and not a personality and the way Newman becomes this alcoholic lawyer is really impressive. It’s a shame that he didn’t take more character parts. He would have been a joy in those Robert Duvall type roles.
HARRY AND SON (1984) – Newman is Harry and Robbie Benson is the son and they have less than a harmonious relationship. It’s not a very good movie and it’s not all that memorable, except that Newman had lost his own son a few years earlier and that he chose to direct this picture says something about its meaning to him.
THE COLOR OF MONEY (1986) – Newman returns as Fast Eddie in this Hustler sequel directed by Scorsese and co-starring the up and coming Tom Cruise. There is a lot to like about the movie and I enjoyed it again last year sometime. The shame is that the Academy chose to finally reward Newman for his body of work and it should have been for something a little more interesting.
BLAZE (1989) Ron Shelton’s follow-up to Bull Durham is only nice for Newman’s performance as the corrupt Louisiana Governor and even that wears a bit thin at times.
FAT MAN AND LITTLE BOY (1989) – A dull telling of the atomic bomb creation with Newman wasted in a role anyone could have portrayed.
NOBODY”S FOOL (1994) – Newman really deserved to win an Oscar for this forgotten movie about a lovable loser who reconnects with his family. It’s a little quirky at times like the Richard Russo novel it’s based on, but if you can forgive that this movie is a gem and the last classic he made. Bruce Willis is great in a small role as Newman’s boss/friend./rival and Melanie Griffith is Willis’ wife and an object of Newman’s fancy. Jessica Tandy plays Newman’s land lady in her last screen role. I first saw it at the theatre with brother John and have seen it again several times over the years and it never gets old.
HUDSUCKER PROXY (1994) – One of the Coen Brothr’s lesser efforts and still not without its moments. Newman plays the CEO of a big company and Tim Robbins the lowly office boy who makes good. Jennifer Jason Leigh channels Katherine Hepburn’s screwball comedy accent.
TWILIGHT (1998) Newman re-teams with Russo and director Robert Benson as a Private Detective shot by Reese Witherspoon. A few years later he is living in the garage apartment of Reese’s parents (Gene Hackman and Susan Sarandon) and trying to solve as mystery. It’s a fine effort for all involved and worth the time if you see it on cable.
ROAD TO PERDITION (2002) Sam Mendes follow up to American Beauty starring Tom Hanks is a adaptation of a graphic novel filled with stars but also a kind of emptiness. Newman won a supporting Oscar nomination for his small but impactful role as a crime boss.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
REVIEWS OF MOVIES FROM 2007
SHOOT ‘EM UP (2007) –The reliable Clive “no smile” Owen is just a schlub waiting for a bus when he notices a gunman trying to shoot down a pregnant lady. Although unarmed he tries to save her life and winds up with a baby for his efforts. From then on, a gang led by Paul Giamatti chases Owen and the bambino all over creation. It’s a funny movie that makes the villain a gun manufacturer and then entertains us with bullets flying everywhere and mostly into the guts of evil henchmen. The death toll is enormous and the stunts are inventive with early ones seeming a bit of a stretch and later ones downright impossible. It’s so over the top that you have to enjoy it on its own terms, and it helps if you aren’t sickened by the sight of blood.
AWAY FROM HER (2007) – Julie Christie seems to materialize once a decade for an Oscar nomination and here she is this time with Alzheimer’s. And it’s a fine performance all and all. It’s directed by Sarah Polley, the girl who played the cashier in GO and has been seen most recently as the daughter of JOHN ADAMS in the HBO miniseries. She does a fine job with good performances by Gordon Pinsent as her husband and Michael Murphy and Olympia Dukakis as another couple who figures big in the plot.
THE DIVING BELL AND THE BUTTERFLY (2007) Last year I saw Julian Schnabel’s film about the artist Basqaut who died of aids in the 1980s before people even knew what aids was. To find a more depressing subject, Schnabel chooses a guy completely paralyzed by a stroke who has to write a book with eye blinks. What’s funny is that Schnabel seems like a pretty up beat guy in real life. I saw him interviewed once about some paintings he was exhibiting and he was smiling and was not the least bit pretentious. I can understand Schnabel’s nomination for director, because this book is not easy material to turn into a film and he does a wonderful job of bringing the paralyzed world to life. Still, the main character is a narcissistic bore and recounting his life doesn’t redeem him.
DAN IN REAL LIFE (2007) – Steve Carell is the affable widower who meets cute with Juliette Binoche in a bookstore. It turns out that the French babe is dating his brother although she and Carell might turn out to be soul mates. Dane Cook is the brother, Diane Wiest as mother, and John Mahoney plays dad. If that sounds appealing you’re in for no further surprises.
INTO THE WILD (2007) – Sir Saunders summed this up a in a post a while back and I agree that it’s a fine movie that showed all of the adventure of such a pursuit and the danger at the same time. Sean Penn is a very thoughtful director, which is baffling after seeing him on Larry King back in 2003 where he couldn’t speak a coherent sentence in an hour of trying. Steve and I recently spoke about the adventure and how the environment has really been romanticized in the last 10-15 years. It’s like the Garden of Eden myth is back in the consciousness. Talk about coming full circle. But the movie shows how the environment will kill you without remorse. Civilization is little overrated until you’re out of rice and on the wrong side of the river. I think that’s why conservatives make the best outdoorsman. They have the most respect for the wild and they don’t mind turning hooves into steaks. Progressives are hoping that Puck and friends will sweep into the camp and with manna. Emile Hirsch is solid as Chris McCandless and Penn casts the supporting players ably too. Catherine Keener stands out as the aging hippy who takes on Chris as the son she lost. Nominated Hal Holbrook didn’t appear until the last 30 minutes, but he was a joy to watch. I liked the film enough that I might read the book.
MARGOT AT THE WEDDING (2007) – I consider Noah Baumbach’s 1995 debut KICKING AND SCREAMING to be a minor classic. 5 movies later I just can’t imagine he’s the same guy after watching the tiresome MARGOT. Is there anything really left to say about dysfunctional families? Some people just don’t love one another as they should and some have baggage. If the point of movies is to make you uncomfortable then they rang the bell, otherwise this is a yawn.
LA VIE EN ROSE (2007) – Another singer biopic and this time in French. Marion Cotillard’s Oscar for Best Actress is right out of the Charlize Theron book of “let’s ugly it up for the sake of art.” You can see her beautiful in awful film, A GOOD YEAR. I don’t see her winning that statue without the imagination of the voters thinking of her beauty. And isn’t it time we ban Oscar nominations for biopics about singers anyway? Edith Piaf was another interesting person that just didn’t have it easy. These scripts almost write themselves anymore. I can’t wait to see all the terrible things that happened to Pat Boone before he became famous.
WE OWN THE NIGHT (2007) – Duvall is a cop and the father of Marky Mark (cop) and Jaquin Phoenix (nightclub manager). Well the nightclub is mobbed up and Mary Mark takes a bullet and Phoenix quits his pals for family. Everything else about the plot is cat and mouse which is alright if you are in the mood, but not exceptional.
DARJEELING LIMITED (2007) – Wes Anderson has the style down pat and he loves unusual characters, but I’m convinced that he isn’t interested in story. I find that the majority of his movies aren’t really about anything. And although they are funny at times, they are mostly slow. I don’t think I have liked any of them since The Royal Tennenbaums, and that movie might not have worked at all without the brilliant Gene Hackman. Here three brothers Owen Wilson, Adrian Brody, and Jason Swartzmann are on a search in Asia to find their wandering mother Angelica Huston. Not as dysfunctional as MARGOT, but playing the same general idea for laughs.
KING OF KONG (2007) - Documentary on the guys who hold the all-time scores on classic video games, with a focus on two guys battling to be the best Donkey Kong player in the universe. Player one, Billy Mitchell, has been the Donkey Kong champion since he was a teenager in the 1980s. So famous was he during that time they included the guy in a Life Magazine spread about the best gamers. He’s now around 40 and the owner of a sports bar and wing sauce business in Hollywood, FL. He still enjoys in the glory of his teenage self, having never cut his long long hair. The challenger, Steve Weibe from Washington State is a normal looking guy with a nice family and an obsession to be the best Donkey Kong player anywhere. We watch him play the game for hours in his garage as his kids and wife yell for his help with various household things. The wife is both annoyed at the time this takes and proud when he achieves his goal. It’s not too unlike my own experiences with poker. The film maker builds up good drama between the two rivals especially the way the champion shows no respect for the budding challenger. It’s one of those stories where you really root for people.
2 DAYS IN PARIS (2007) –Writer, Director, Star, Julie Delpy doesn’t have the French characters look down at Americans, but she does have the American, Adam Goldberg do so. He is the typically holier than thou American who is better than where he came from, even going so far as to give American tourists the wrong directions. I’m supposed to love him for it because one of the ladies is wearing a Bush/Cheney T-shirt, an unlikely possibility. That’s not the problem with the movie, but the problem with what Delpy finds funny. The real trouble here is that she tries to channel Linklater with a talky boyfriend/girlfriend piece and it has none of the charm of the BEFORE movies and with time it gets annoying. By the end it’s not even realistic. But it never really was realistic, because I don’t see Julie Delpy anywhere near the geekish Adam Goldberg even on a bad day.
JUNO (2007) – The script is full of quirky dialogue that sometimes surprises you into laughter. Ellen Page seems a perfect fit for the role as a cute yet somewhat harsh teenager trying to find parents for her accidental baby. The couple she lands on, Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman, seem perfect at first like most couples, but underneath lies a struggle between the two. JK Simmons plays Juno’s father and is becoming quite a reliable character actor filling that unashamedly masculine authority figure device. My only real knock on the movie is that I don’t find Jennifer Garner all that sympathetic, she’s a bit of a pain really and seemingly phony at times, and yet she comes out better at the end than the story would have led me to believe.
EVAN ALMIGHTY (2007) – Steve Carell is winning enough, but this is the one-joke premise with few surprises. I didn’t see the Jim Carey version a few years ago and I don’t know why I thought this wouldn’t be mediocre. The God comedies are a little awkward, always having to stick with the Old Testament version and sidestepping the Jesus question. Remember how George Burns deflected the question as posed by John Denver. Here we get the humor of the prophet beard growing faster than he can shave, as if the beard were holy in itself.
THE BRAVE ONE (2007) – It’s more or less a remake of DEATH WISH with Jodie Foster in the Charles Bronson role. Like Death Wish, Foster loses a loved one to a violent attack and she fights back wild west style. Plenty of action, although the New York depicted here is really pre-Guiliani with a mugging on every corner. You’ll be surprised how many crimes Foster is the potential victim of and how quickly the perps become dog meat. It’s directed by Neil Jordan of all people. The original Death Wish has a few scenes that really test suspension of disbelief, and the Brave One is no different. Christopher Guest will never speak to Jodie Foster again.
GONE BABY GONE (2007) – I liked Mystic River for the most part. An hour into the film it had all the making of a classic, but I found the last ten minutes disappointing and the ending disjointed. I can see now that my problem was with the book author, Christopher Lehane, who also wrote GONE BABY GONE. This plot is just too busy with too much grey area for the character to reside in. Casey Affleck is quite good. I knew Amy Ryan from HBO’s THE WIRE, and she continues to be a solid actress, although her screen time didn’t really warrant a nomination. I think using heavyweights like Ed Harris and Morgan Freeman in smaller roles gives too much away and the resolution is quite contrived.
ACORSS THE UNIVERSE (2007) – This could have been an interesting 90 minute movie, but at 133 minutes its way too much for way too long. If you like Beatles music and know a little of their backstory then you can enjoy the first 30 minutes or so, but the movie drops off a cliff soon after that. The story of a bunch of kids exploring the possibilities of life with the Fab Four in the background is nothing but the millionth baby boomer romantic fantasy. Will that generation ever grow up? Julie Taymor is overrated, her one hit being the Lion King stage show that already had a built-in fan base. Did you see her last film, Frida? I did and I don’t remember anything but Geoffrey Rush showing up as Trotsky.
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (2007) – This was interesting material for the Coen Brothers. It really fits their crazy dark genre and yet fits into the realism universe at the same time. Javier bardem got all the ink and the Oscar, but it’s one of those performances that’s rewarded for the writing blended with the actor’s obscurity. I think Benicio Del Toro could have played the character just as menacing but we would have expected that. Tommy Lee Jones is so weather beaten that the guy has been playing an old man for ten years and he’s still not 65. I can’t complain about his performance though. They’re all good really. Even Woody Harrelson’s quirky personality seems to fit here. You could argue that it’s the Coen’s best film. I still prefer Miller’s Crossing. It may not have been the best film made last year, but it was better than the other films that were nominated for Best Picture.
CHARLIE WILSON’S WAR (2007) – No script can turn Tom Hanks into a whiskey- soaked womanizer. The first scene of the movie has him in a hot tub with naked strippers and you don’t believe it for a minute. WILSON does have a typically good performance by Phillip Seymour Hoffman and another icy performance by Julia Roberts. Is she no longer allowed to play fetching? Hoffman makes all of his scenes worth it and the scenes without him drag. The movie built a lot of good will with me by acknowledging the real bad guys. Enough time has passed that the Russians can be enemies even to Aaron Sorkin. But I guess it was all worth it to Sorkin so that he could have his little epilogue with Hoffman explaining to Hanks that without U.S. funding for Afghan schools, the whole place will fall apart, and he only needs $1 million. I don’t know what’s funnier about that comment, that a typical liberal solution of more education solves everything or that the whole country can be educated for $1 million. Orange County Florida can’t build a single high school for less than that. Good will or not, this is not a very memorable movie. I finished watching it 25 minutes ago and I’m having trouble remembering plot points.
SHOOT ‘EM UP (2007) –The reliable Clive “no smile” Owen is just a schlub waiting for a bus when he notices a gunman trying to shoot down a pregnant lady. Although unarmed he tries to save her life and winds up with a baby for his efforts. From then on, a gang led by Paul Giamatti chases Owen and the bambino all over creation. It’s a funny movie that makes the villain a gun manufacturer and then entertains us with bullets flying everywhere and mostly into the guts of evil henchmen. The death toll is enormous and the stunts are inventive with early ones seeming a bit of a stretch and later ones downright impossible. It’s so over the top that you have to enjoy it on its own terms, and it helps if you aren’t sickened by the sight of blood.
AWAY FROM HER (2007) – Julie Christie seems to materialize once a decade for an Oscar nomination and here she is this time with Alzheimer’s. And it’s a fine performance all and all. It’s directed by Sarah Polley, the girl who played the cashier in GO and has been seen most recently as the daughter of JOHN ADAMS in the HBO miniseries. She does a fine job with good performances by Gordon Pinsent as her husband and Michael Murphy and Olympia Dukakis as another couple who figures big in the plot.
THE DIVING BELL AND THE BUTTERFLY (2007) Last year I saw Julian Schnabel’s film about the artist Basqaut who died of aids in the 1980s before people even knew what aids was. To find a more depressing subject, Schnabel chooses a guy completely paralyzed by a stroke who has to write a book with eye blinks. What’s funny is that Schnabel seems like a pretty up beat guy in real life. I saw him interviewed once about some paintings he was exhibiting and he was smiling and was not the least bit pretentious. I can understand Schnabel’s nomination for director, because this book is not easy material to turn into a film and he does a wonderful job of bringing the paralyzed world to life. Still, the main character is a narcissistic bore and recounting his life doesn’t redeem him.
DAN IN REAL LIFE (2007) – Steve Carell is the affable widower who meets cute with Juliette Binoche in a bookstore. It turns out that the French babe is dating his brother although she and Carell might turn out to be soul mates. Dane Cook is the brother, Diane Wiest as mother, and John Mahoney plays dad. If that sounds appealing you’re in for no further surprises.
INTO THE WILD (2007) – Sir Saunders summed this up a in a post a while back and I agree that it’s a fine movie that showed all of the adventure of such a pursuit and the danger at the same time. Sean Penn is a very thoughtful director, which is baffling after seeing him on Larry King back in 2003 where he couldn’t speak a coherent sentence in an hour of trying. Steve and I recently spoke about the adventure and how the environment has really been romanticized in the last 10-15 years. It’s like the Garden of Eden myth is back in the consciousness. Talk about coming full circle. But the movie shows how the environment will kill you without remorse. Civilization is little overrated until you’re out of rice and on the wrong side of the river. I think that’s why conservatives make the best outdoorsman. They have the most respect for the wild and they don’t mind turning hooves into steaks. Progressives are hoping that Puck and friends will sweep into the camp and with manna. Emile Hirsch is solid as Chris McCandless and Penn casts the supporting players ably too. Catherine Keener stands out as the aging hippy who takes on Chris as the son she lost. Nominated Hal Holbrook didn’t appear until the last 30 minutes, but he was a joy to watch. I liked the film enough that I might read the book.
MARGOT AT THE WEDDING (2007) – I consider Noah Baumbach’s 1995 debut KICKING AND SCREAMING to be a minor classic. 5 movies later I just can’t imagine he’s the same guy after watching the tiresome MARGOT. Is there anything really left to say about dysfunctional families? Some people just don’t love one another as they should and some have baggage. If the point of movies is to make you uncomfortable then they rang the bell, otherwise this is a yawn.
LA VIE EN ROSE (2007) – Another singer biopic and this time in French. Marion Cotillard’s Oscar for Best Actress is right out of the Charlize Theron book of “let’s ugly it up for the sake of art.” You can see her beautiful in awful film, A GOOD YEAR. I don’t see her winning that statue without the imagination of the voters thinking of her beauty. And isn’t it time we ban Oscar nominations for biopics about singers anyway? Edith Piaf was another interesting person that just didn’t have it easy. These scripts almost write themselves anymore. I can’t wait to see all the terrible things that happened to Pat Boone before he became famous.
WE OWN THE NIGHT (2007) – Duvall is a cop and the father of Marky Mark (cop) and Jaquin Phoenix (nightclub manager). Well the nightclub is mobbed up and Mary Mark takes a bullet and Phoenix quits his pals for family. Everything else about the plot is cat and mouse which is alright if you are in the mood, but not exceptional.
DARJEELING LIMITED (2007) – Wes Anderson has the style down pat and he loves unusual characters, but I’m convinced that he isn’t interested in story. I find that the majority of his movies aren’t really about anything. And although they are funny at times, they are mostly slow. I don’t think I have liked any of them since The Royal Tennenbaums, and that movie might not have worked at all without the brilliant Gene Hackman. Here three brothers Owen Wilson, Adrian Brody, and Jason Swartzmann are on a search in Asia to find their wandering mother Angelica Huston. Not as dysfunctional as MARGOT, but playing the same general idea for laughs.
KING OF KONG (2007) - Documentary on the guys who hold the all-time scores on classic video games, with a focus on two guys battling to be the best Donkey Kong player in the universe. Player one, Billy Mitchell, has been the Donkey Kong champion since he was a teenager in the 1980s. So famous was he during that time they included the guy in a Life Magazine spread about the best gamers. He’s now around 40 and the owner of a sports bar and wing sauce business in Hollywood, FL. He still enjoys in the glory of his teenage self, having never cut his long long hair. The challenger, Steve Weibe from Washington State is a normal looking guy with a nice family and an obsession to be the best Donkey Kong player anywhere. We watch him play the game for hours in his garage as his kids and wife yell for his help with various household things. The wife is both annoyed at the time this takes and proud when he achieves his goal. It’s not too unlike my own experiences with poker. The film maker builds up good drama between the two rivals especially the way the champion shows no respect for the budding challenger. It’s one of those stories where you really root for people.
2 DAYS IN PARIS (2007) –Writer, Director, Star, Julie Delpy doesn’t have the French characters look down at Americans, but she does have the American, Adam Goldberg do so. He is the typically holier than thou American who is better than where he came from, even going so far as to give American tourists the wrong directions. I’m supposed to love him for it because one of the ladies is wearing a Bush/Cheney T-shirt, an unlikely possibility. That’s not the problem with the movie, but the problem with what Delpy finds funny. The real trouble here is that she tries to channel Linklater with a talky boyfriend/girlfriend piece and it has none of the charm of the BEFORE movies and with time it gets annoying. By the end it’s not even realistic. But it never really was realistic, because I don’t see Julie Delpy anywhere near the geekish Adam Goldberg even on a bad day.
JUNO (2007) – The script is full of quirky dialogue that sometimes surprises you into laughter. Ellen Page seems a perfect fit for the role as a cute yet somewhat harsh teenager trying to find parents for her accidental baby. The couple she lands on, Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman, seem perfect at first like most couples, but underneath lies a struggle between the two. JK Simmons plays Juno’s father and is becoming quite a reliable character actor filling that unashamedly masculine authority figure device. My only real knock on the movie is that I don’t find Jennifer Garner all that sympathetic, she’s a bit of a pain really and seemingly phony at times, and yet she comes out better at the end than the story would have led me to believe.
EVAN ALMIGHTY (2007) – Steve Carell is winning enough, but this is the one-joke premise with few surprises. I didn’t see the Jim Carey version a few years ago and I don’t know why I thought this wouldn’t be mediocre. The God comedies are a little awkward, always having to stick with the Old Testament version and sidestepping the Jesus question. Remember how George Burns deflected the question as posed by John Denver. Here we get the humor of the prophet beard growing faster than he can shave, as if the beard were holy in itself.
THE BRAVE ONE (2007) – It’s more or less a remake of DEATH WISH with Jodie Foster in the Charles Bronson role. Like Death Wish, Foster loses a loved one to a violent attack and she fights back wild west style. Plenty of action, although the New York depicted here is really pre-Guiliani with a mugging on every corner. You’ll be surprised how many crimes Foster is the potential victim of and how quickly the perps become dog meat. It’s directed by Neil Jordan of all people. The original Death Wish has a few scenes that really test suspension of disbelief, and the Brave One is no different. Christopher Guest will never speak to Jodie Foster again.
GONE BABY GONE (2007) – I liked Mystic River for the most part. An hour into the film it had all the making of a classic, but I found the last ten minutes disappointing and the ending disjointed. I can see now that my problem was with the book author, Christopher Lehane, who also wrote GONE BABY GONE. This plot is just too busy with too much grey area for the character to reside in. Casey Affleck is quite good. I knew Amy Ryan from HBO’s THE WIRE, and she continues to be a solid actress, although her screen time didn’t really warrant a nomination. I think using heavyweights like Ed Harris and Morgan Freeman in smaller roles gives too much away and the resolution is quite contrived.
ACORSS THE UNIVERSE (2007) – This could have been an interesting 90 minute movie, but at 133 minutes its way too much for way too long. If you like Beatles music and know a little of their backstory then you can enjoy the first 30 minutes or so, but the movie drops off a cliff soon after that. The story of a bunch of kids exploring the possibilities of life with the Fab Four in the background is nothing but the millionth baby boomer romantic fantasy. Will that generation ever grow up? Julie Taymor is overrated, her one hit being the Lion King stage show that already had a built-in fan base. Did you see her last film, Frida? I did and I don’t remember anything but Geoffrey Rush showing up as Trotsky.
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (2007) – This was interesting material for the Coen Brothers. It really fits their crazy dark genre and yet fits into the realism universe at the same time. Javier bardem got all the ink and the Oscar, but it’s one of those performances that’s rewarded for the writing blended with the actor’s obscurity. I think Benicio Del Toro could have played the character just as menacing but we would have expected that. Tommy Lee Jones is so weather beaten that the guy has been playing an old man for ten years and he’s still not 65. I can’t complain about his performance though. They’re all good really. Even Woody Harrelson’s quirky personality seems to fit here. You could argue that it’s the Coen’s best film. I still prefer Miller’s Crossing. It may not have been the best film made last year, but it was better than the other films that were nominated for Best Picture.
CHARLIE WILSON’S WAR (2007) – No script can turn Tom Hanks into a whiskey- soaked womanizer. The first scene of the movie has him in a hot tub with naked strippers and you don’t believe it for a minute. WILSON does have a typically good performance by Phillip Seymour Hoffman and another icy performance by Julia Roberts. Is she no longer allowed to play fetching? Hoffman makes all of his scenes worth it and the scenes without him drag. The movie built a lot of good will with me by acknowledging the real bad guys. Enough time has passed that the Russians can be enemies even to Aaron Sorkin. But I guess it was all worth it to Sorkin so that he could have his little epilogue with Hoffman explaining to Hanks that without U.S. funding for Afghan schools, the whole place will fall apart, and he only needs $1 million. I don’t know what’s funnier about that comment, that a typical liberal solution of more education solves everything or that the whole country can be educated for $1 million. Orange County Florida can’t build a single high school for less than that. Good will or not, this is not a very memorable movie. I finished watching it 25 minutes ago and I’m having trouble remembering plot points.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
DUDE'S REVIEWS
WALL-E (2008) - Some hate it (my in-laws) but most love it (film critics). I loved it as well, especially the cinematic first hour spent on Earth. I liked the character of Wall-E quite a bit and I loved the visuals and the humor throughout.
KUNG FU PANDA (2008) - I was convinced by the trailers that this was going to be stupid so I was pleasantly surprised by one of the most entertaining animated films I've ever seen. There were some great scenes and the script was true rather than aiming at toddlers. It wins an Oscar any year without WALL-E.
TIME BANDITS (1981) - It feels more dated now but still resonates as the touchstone arty picture of my youth. The visuals have stayed with me since I last saw it over twenty years ago. It's not a perfect film but it's one for the vault. I watched it as a kid and now I've shared it with my kids. It's just creepy enough that it should stick with them for awhile.
THE FABULOUS BAKER BOYS (1989) - I remember wanting to see this when it was released and here it is nearly twenty years later when I get my chance. I liked it quite a bit. Michelle Pfeiffer is timeless beauty with bonus acting skills and I am quite the fan also of the Bridges brothers. I appreciated the lingering quality to the simple story from the writer/director.
THE CIRCUS (1928) - Lesser Chaplin is still plenty good. Mason and I were cracking up over the high wire sequence.
FATTY ARBUCKLE SHORTS:
FATTY'S CHANCE ENCOUNTER/FATTY AND MABEL'S SIMPLE LIFE (1915)
CONEY ISLAND/THE ROUGH HOUSE/GOOD NIGHT, NURSE!/BACK STAGE/THE GARAGE (1917-1919) - My first taste of the legendarily tragic Arbuckle gave me a good overview of his brand of comedy. I got a DVD with four featurettes in which he broke Buster Keaton into the business, then I caught the two earlier shorts on TCM. Fun Arbuckle factoids: (1) Fatty was his stage persona, he preferred to be addressed as Roscoe; (2) Here is the man who literally invented the pie in the face gag; (3) His terse scripts would generally run only a single page and here again is the man who coined the phrase "cut to the chase". Something else that surprised me was his habit of looking into the lens which immediately called to mind both Benny Hill and the Skipper, both rotund students of the master.
61* (2001) - The storied 1961 season starring Mantle and Maris as told by Mr Saturday Night is a decent little film about a living legend and a modest man performing legendary feats. The actors do a first-rate job of characterizing these guys though the film fails to be memorable aside from the excellent dual leads.
MONKEY BUSINESS (1952) - With this much A-list talent involved (stars Cary Grant, Ginger Rogers, Marilyn Monroe; director Howard Hawks; scribes IAL Diamond and Ben Hecht) one might expect more than this silly nonsense. At least there are a few memorable scenes of inanity.
HELLBOY (2004) - I remember hearing at the time that this was good and I recently realized that it was helmed by the talent that brought me the excellent PAN'S LABYRINTH, so I gave it a watch and was vastly underwhelmed. Ron Perlman is excellent in the title role but his performance is the only thing I really enjoyed during our time together. The stabs at humor don't work at all - it doesn't work as camp and neither does the film quite deliver as straight action/adventure.
BEYOND THE SEA (2004) - I've enjoyed the soundtrack but the film is instantly forgettable except in its conceit to explain why Spacey is fifteen years older than was Bobby Darin when he died.
WALL-E (2008) - Some hate it (my in-laws) but most love it (film critics). I loved it as well, especially the cinematic first hour spent on Earth. I liked the character of Wall-E quite a bit and I loved the visuals and the humor throughout.
KUNG FU PANDA (2008) - I was convinced by the trailers that this was going to be stupid so I was pleasantly surprised by one of the most entertaining animated films I've ever seen. There were some great scenes and the script was true rather than aiming at toddlers. It wins an Oscar any year without WALL-E.
TIME BANDITS (1981) - It feels more dated now but still resonates as the touchstone arty picture of my youth. The visuals have stayed with me since I last saw it over twenty years ago. It's not a perfect film but it's one for the vault. I watched it as a kid and now I've shared it with my kids. It's just creepy enough that it should stick with them for awhile.
THE FABULOUS BAKER BOYS (1989) - I remember wanting to see this when it was released and here it is nearly twenty years later when I get my chance. I liked it quite a bit. Michelle Pfeiffer is timeless beauty with bonus acting skills and I am quite the fan also of the Bridges brothers. I appreciated the lingering quality to the simple story from the writer/director.
THE CIRCUS (1928) - Lesser Chaplin is still plenty good. Mason and I were cracking up over the high wire sequence.
FATTY ARBUCKLE SHORTS:
FATTY'S CHANCE ENCOUNTER/FATTY AND MABEL'S SIMPLE LIFE (1915)
CONEY ISLAND/THE ROUGH HOUSE/GOOD NIGHT, NURSE!/BACK STAGE/THE GARAGE (1917-1919) - My first taste of the legendarily tragic Arbuckle gave me a good overview of his brand of comedy. I got a DVD with four featurettes in which he broke Buster Keaton into the business, then I caught the two earlier shorts on TCM. Fun Arbuckle factoids: (1) Fatty was his stage persona, he preferred to be addressed as Roscoe; (2) Here is the man who literally invented the pie in the face gag; (3) His terse scripts would generally run only a single page and here again is the man who coined the phrase "cut to the chase". Something else that surprised me was his habit of looking into the lens which immediately called to mind both Benny Hill and the Skipper, both rotund students of the master.
61* (2001) - The storied 1961 season starring Mantle and Maris as told by Mr Saturday Night is a decent little film about a living legend and a modest man performing legendary feats. The actors do a first-rate job of characterizing these guys though the film fails to be memorable aside from the excellent dual leads.
MONKEY BUSINESS (1952) - With this much A-list talent involved (stars Cary Grant, Ginger Rogers, Marilyn Monroe; director Howard Hawks; scribes IAL Diamond and Ben Hecht) one might expect more than this silly nonsense. At least there are a few memorable scenes of inanity.
HELLBOY (2004) - I remember hearing at the time that this was good and I recently realized that it was helmed by the talent that brought me the excellent PAN'S LABYRINTH, so I gave it a watch and was vastly underwhelmed. Ron Perlman is excellent in the title role but his performance is the only thing I really enjoyed during our time together. The stabs at humor don't work at all - it doesn't work as camp and neither does the film quite deliver as straight action/adventure.
BEYOND THE SEA (2004) - I've enjoyed the soundtrack but the film is instantly forgettable except in its conceit to explain why Spacey is fifteen years older than was Bobby Darin when he died.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
DUDE'S REVIEWS
Here's a half-hearted review of ten films I saw so long ago, I'm worried I will forget them if I don't submit my report soon:
LARS AND THE REAL GIRL (2007) - This is one of the best films I've seen in years. I really enjoyed everything about it - the cast was perfect, the story was perfect, it was over when it needed to be and it made me feel good.
EASTERN PROMISES (2007) - I liked it a lot when I watched it though it has already mostly faded from my memory. I liked A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE better but this is a worthy follow-up from Cronenberg.
BREACH (2007) - This is a nifty little outing that kept my attention throughout with a good performance from Chris Cooper making up for perennial blank-slate, Ryan Phillippe. The blank routine actually works fairly well in this story so kudos to the casting department.
CLOVERFIELD (2008) - It is not terrifying but it is watchable. I like that it is more of a love story on the run than a routine monster thriller. I didn't really care for any of the characters enough to love the film but it's a fun little treat.
HORTON HEARS A WHO (2008) - Four hundred years ago, Gallileo built a telescope that enabled him to see things that could not possibly exist. Horton relives the social pressure that accompanies such a find. I enjoyed the film mostly but for the routine third act.
ENCHANTED (2007) - It started out great but by the end I was not sold. Amy Adams is incredibly winning in the lead role while Patrick Dempsey does just enough to coast as the romantic lead. I didn't love the bomabastic climax even though it probably makes sense that it ends that way, given what it was going for. I always prefer realism even in the fantasy realm.
CHARLOTTE'S WEB (2006) - This is harmless and forgettable. I nodded off a bit in the middle but still got the gist of it. It was more magical as a cartoon. This version just reminded me what a great film is BABE 2: PIG IN THE CITY.
THE GOOD SHEPHERD (2006) - It sounds interesting but fails to deliver. It is way way too long as it mostly is a drawn out character drama about a character whom we pretty much get after the first half hour. De Niro proved a much sharper director all those years ago with the great A BRONX TALE.
THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD (2007) - Another film that is too long by an hour. Have mercy on the audience already, even the title should have been trimmed by fifty percent. It did inspire me to research Jesse James as I hadn't been familiar with his backstory and circumstances surrounding his death. The backstory is absent here and the story suffers.
U.S. VS JOHN LENNON (2006) - Documentaries are always at least as interesting as the source material. This one works no magic as a film but enlightened me on 70's-era Lennon, who was really quite an intriguing character.
Here's a half-hearted review of ten films I saw so long ago, I'm worried I will forget them if I don't submit my report soon:
LARS AND THE REAL GIRL (2007) - This is one of the best films I've seen in years. I really enjoyed everything about it - the cast was perfect, the story was perfect, it was over when it needed to be and it made me feel good.
EASTERN PROMISES (2007) - I liked it a lot when I watched it though it has already mostly faded from my memory. I liked A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE better but this is a worthy follow-up from Cronenberg.
BREACH (2007) - This is a nifty little outing that kept my attention throughout with a good performance from Chris Cooper making up for perennial blank-slate, Ryan Phillippe. The blank routine actually works fairly well in this story so kudos to the casting department.
CLOVERFIELD (2008) - It is not terrifying but it is watchable. I like that it is more of a love story on the run than a routine monster thriller. I didn't really care for any of the characters enough to love the film but it's a fun little treat.
HORTON HEARS A WHO (2008) - Four hundred years ago, Gallileo built a telescope that enabled him to see things that could not possibly exist. Horton relives the social pressure that accompanies such a find. I enjoyed the film mostly but for the routine third act.
ENCHANTED (2007) - It started out great but by the end I was not sold. Amy Adams is incredibly winning in the lead role while Patrick Dempsey does just enough to coast as the romantic lead. I didn't love the bomabastic climax even though it probably makes sense that it ends that way, given what it was going for. I always prefer realism even in the fantasy realm.
CHARLOTTE'S WEB (2006) - This is harmless and forgettable. I nodded off a bit in the middle but still got the gist of it. It was more magical as a cartoon. This version just reminded me what a great film is BABE 2: PIG IN THE CITY.
THE GOOD SHEPHERD (2006) - It sounds interesting but fails to deliver. It is way way too long as it mostly is a drawn out character drama about a character whom we pretty much get after the first half hour. De Niro proved a much sharper director all those years ago with the great A BRONX TALE.
THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD (2007) - Another film that is too long by an hour. Have mercy on the audience already, even the title should have been trimmed by fifty percent. It did inspire me to research Jesse James as I hadn't been familiar with his backstory and circumstances surrounding his death. The backstory is absent here and the story suffers.
U.S. VS JOHN LENNON (2006) - Documentaries are always at least as interesting as the source material. This one works no magic as a film but enlightened me on 70's-era Lennon, who was really quite an intriguing character.
Monday, June 09, 2008
SOME BOOKS AND MOVIES
Sometimes I will be glancing at the bookshelf and see something that I forgot I owned. The other night I glanced at CADDIE FOR LIFE by John Feinstein. It’s the story of Tom Watson’s lifelong caddie, Bruce Edwards, and his demise from Lou Gehrig’s disease. The story is a great tribute to a regular guy who happened to be a pioneering touring caddie. I bought the book from the library’s used book store in a stack of so many that I had forgotten about it. Feinstein is a superb writer if you like golf. He’s also frequently on NPR talking with Robert Siegel about sports of the week.
I recently saw THERE WILL BE BLOOD, the PT Anderson movie starring Daniel Day Lewis. I find Lewis a very compelling actor and I was happy to see him win the Oscar. But now that I’ve seen the movie, I don’t think it was one of his better performances. It just seems too much like “acting” to me. He was eccentric in GANGS OF NEW YORK, but what an intense character opposite Leo. Here he’s the lead throughout and no one really matches him in tone and style. I guess the title is a play on “no blood for oil” since it’s based on Upton Sinclair’s novel OIL. Sinclair was an old radical, one of those turn of the century kind that hated capitalism and was always trying to “expose” its worst facets. The evils of capitalism are manifested in our hero’s greed and his eventual madness from wanting more. It’s typical of the genre really. Greed works well in so many movies, but it’s the tail that wags the dog here and I think the beloved recluse D.D. Lewis’ got this movie a lot more ink than it would have gotten had it starred Phillip Seymour Hoffman. That means I have seen 4 of the 5 Best Picture nominees now and I think the Academy picked the best of the four. I only have Atonement left. Soon.
I’m still reading NIXONLAND, a library book I started in Panama City when Trish and I spent the weekend with Sir Saunders and gang. It’s written by Rick Perlstein, the same guy who wrote an objective view of Goldwater’s campaign, although he is politically leftwing. He’s not so easy on Nixon though, or I should say he’s not as gracious to conservatives this time. I don’t know whether I will beat the library’s deadline or whether I want to.
What’s funny is his Goldwater book, universally praised, wound up out of print. Now with the new book out, you can only a buy his first book used and not for less than $100. Right now the cheapest paperback is $160. I suppose I should set up an Amazon account and sell my copy. I bought it at a used bookstore a year ago for $5. The same phenomenon happened in February when William F. Buckley died. Rush Limbaugh recommended his book “Let us Talk of Many Things” and that Out of Print book immediately sold out followed by used copies for $199. The book is still selling used for $60. It came down after a re-print was announced for October. Ebay has become an alternate form of renting. I have a couple of times bought items to rent for view and then sold them back. Before DVD, I bought a an old OOP VHS copy of the Walter Mathau movie HPSCOTCH for $32, watched it and then re-sold it for $46. I turned my LAST DAYS OF DISCO dvd into $80 when it went out of print.
Big businesses are really good at economies of scale and small businesses are good at customer service. Only a growing government with burdensome regulations can put small business out of business for all time.
Sometimes I will be glancing at the bookshelf and see something that I forgot I owned. The other night I glanced at CADDIE FOR LIFE by John Feinstein. It’s the story of Tom Watson’s lifelong caddie, Bruce Edwards, and his demise from Lou Gehrig’s disease. The story is a great tribute to a regular guy who happened to be a pioneering touring caddie. I bought the book from the library’s used book store in a stack of so many that I had forgotten about it. Feinstein is a superb writer if you like golf. He’s also frequently on NPR talking with Robert Siegel about sports of the week.
I recently saw THERE WILL BE BLOOD, the PT Anderson movie starring Daniel Day Lewis. I find Lewis a very compelling actor and I was happy to see him win the Oscar. But now that I’ve seen the movie, I don’t think it was one of his better performances. It just seems too much like “acting” to me. He was eccentric in GANGS OF NEW YORK, but what an intense character opposite Leo. Here he’s the lead throughout and no one really matches him in tone and style. I guess the title is a play on “no blood for oil” since it’s based on Upton Sinclair’s novel OIL. Sinclair was an old radical, one of those turn of the century kind that hated capitalism and was always trying to “expose” its worst facets. The evils of capitalism are manifested in our hero’s greed and his eventual madness from wanting more. It’s typical of the genre really. Greed works well in so many movies, but it’s the tail that wags the dog here and I think the beloved recluse D.D. Lewis’ got this movie a lot more ink than it would have gotten had it starred Phillip Seymour Hoffman. That means I have seen 4 of the 5 Best Picture nominees now and I think the Academy picked the best of the four. I only have Atonement left. Soon.
I’m still reading NIXONLAND, a library book I started in Panama City when Trish and I spent the weekend with Sir Saunders and gang. It’s written by Rick Perlstein, the same guy who wrote an objective view of Goldwater’s campaign, although he is politically leftwing. He’s not so easy on Nixon though, or I should say he’s not as gracious to conservatives this time. I don’t know whether I will beat the library’s deadline or whether I want to.
What’s funny is his Goldwater book, universally praised, wound up out of print. Now with the new book out, you can only a buy his first book used and not for less than $100. Right now the cheapest paperback is $160. I suppose I should set up an Amazon account and sell my copy. I bought it at a used bookstore a year ago for $5. The same phenomenon happened in February when William F. Buckley died. Rush Limbaugh recommended his book “Let us Talk of Many Things” and that Out of Print book immediately sold out followed by used copies for $199. The book is still selling used for $60. It came down after a re-print was announced for October. Ebay has become an alternate form of renting. I have a couple of times bought items to rent for view and then sold them back. Before DVD, I bought a an old OOP VHS copy of the Walter Mathau movie HPSCOTCH for $32, watched it and then re-sold it for $46. I turned my LAST DAYS OF DISCO dvd into $80 when it went out of print.
Big businesses are really good at economies of scale and small businesses are good at customer service. Only a growing government with burdensome regulations can put small business out of business for all time.
Thursday, June 05, 2008
RECOUNT A Movie Review
RECOUNT is an HBO movie about the 2000 election. Kevin Spacey stars as the Gore lawyer who becomes a key player in the recount fight. It’s a compelling movie in so many ways, but it’s too often dishonest about the actual events. If you didn’t know the history well you’d be certain that Gore had an idealist staff trying to do the right thing while Republicans had a ruthless machine set to fix it for Bush. That theme is summed up with a meeting between Warren Christopher (John Hurt) and James Baker (Tom Wilkinson). Hurt expects that they are going to negotiate the details of the recount. Baker says that there is no negotiation. If Bush wins the recount the election is over. Christopher says ok and the meeting ends. Christopher is treated as an idealist only interested in how America looks while Baker wants to win.
The Gore team decision to mine for votes in predominantly Democrat counties is not treated as the least bit opportunist and when a Republican on TV suggests it, the movie treats it as just another talking point and of no substance. Spacey and Leary sit in a bar late in the film and Spacey delivers the big line that sums of the theme. “I want to know who won this election, who won it?” But in the action of the film Spacey doesn’t want to know who won it, but how it can be won for Gore.
The trickiest part for the producers was how to blame the Supreme Court decision on Republicans when Democrats brought the matter to court in the first place. They do this by showing James Baker filing some sort of Federal lawsuit early in the film because he knows the Florida Supreme Court is full of lefties and he knows the case will find its way there. And though Baker’s suit goes nowhere and the U.S. court responds to the decision by the Florida court, we’re supposed to blame Baker for his earlier appraisal.
The Spacey people gasp when they read the verdict and they scratch their heads when the court says that this case is not to be used as a precedent that it counts for this election and this election only. In a piece of exposition, one staffer pipes up that it’s the first time in the history of the court this has ever happened. This is made out to be sinister when any constitutional lawyer knows that the U.S. Supreme Court doesn’t like to make rulings in overtly political cases, especially elections. This is strictly for self-preservation. Nothing in the constitution gives the court any particular power. Neither the legislative nor the executive branch even has to listen to the court. It’s become a tradition in this country that we do listen, but pushing too many boundaries is not a recipe for long term success. The one point barely remarked upon is the real quandary Democrats faced when it went to the high court. Liberals have counted on the court to give them most of the things voters do not want. Gore sends a message in the movie not to knock the court. It’s treated as statesmanlike instead of opportunistic. If Democrats stopped believing in the court then they would lose the only reliable leftward tilt this country has seen in the last 40 years. It’s pretty obvious to me that the Supremes weren’t happy with the Florida ruling and would have been happier to see this settled in the state legislature. They took the case to undo a bad ruling, but didn’t want the baggage of deciding future elections.
One of the most enjoyable parts of the film is Ed Begley Jr. as David Boise, the eccentric and brilliant lawyer for the Gore side. He’s a bit clumsy but lovable. One of the least enjoyable parts is the cartoon performance of Laura Dern as Katherine Harris. The case can be made that Harris was a political lightweight, but Dern plays her as a naïve fool easily led down the wrong path by a shrewd political operative. The tone is way too farcical for the rest of the film.
We only see the candidates from behind or hear them on the other end of the telephone. Removed is Gore’s odd vocal tone and kindergarten teacher way of talking to people. Bush, on the other hand, sounds like a cowboy character actor needing directions to Amarillo. Repeated in the film is the exchange between the two when Gore takes back his concession. The thing about the exchange that I remember from the time is Bush irritated that Gore takes the concession back and Gore saying, “You don’t have to get snippy.” I found that so appropriate from Gore, such a schoolmarm thing to say. I could even hear it in my head imagining the way he would say it all indignant. There isn’t a very masculine way to get that line out, but the producers tried their best here and it sounds like the wrong choice of words for the tone they use.
The movie doesn’t make someone like Jim Baker unlikable. Baker is talented and charming as a facade for his villainy. Talking to another Republican operative later in the film he admits that he was once a Democrat. Asked to tell the story he says his wife had died when he was 40 and a Republican friend asked him to help on his congressional campaign. Baker told the friend he was a Democrat, but the friend just didn’t want to see him so upset, so Baker joined up. When asked who that man was, Baker motions toward a picture of Bush 41. It’s a lot more subtle way of suggesting Baker is stealing the election for personal reasons and it makes him likable without making his side seem worthy of the office.
You do get the impression that the people fighting on both sides are doing so more to win the game than for the person or ideology that person represents. I think that’s a pretty honest portrayal of the way politics works on the inside. So even if the history here is selective, the process seems about right and it’s worth watching for that reason if nothing else.
RECOUNT is an HBO movie about the 2000 election. Kevin Spacey stars as the Gore lawyer who becomes a key player in the recount fight. It’s a compelling movie in so many ways, but it’s too often dishonest about the actual events. If you didn’t know the history well you’d be certain that Gore had an idealist staff trying to do the right thing while Republicans had a ruthless machine set to fix it for Bush. That theme is summed up with a meeting between Warren Christopher (John Hurt) and James Baker (Tom Wilkinson). Hurt expects that they are going to negotiate the details of the recount. Baker says that there is no negotiation. If Bush wins the recount the election is over. Christopher says ok and the meeting ends. Christopher is treated as an idealist only interested in how America looks while Baker wants to win.
The Gore team decision to mine for votes in predominantly Democrat counties is not treated as the least bit opportunist and when a Republican on TV suggests it, the movie treats it as just another talking point and of no substance. Spacey and Leary sit in a bar late in the film and Spacey delivers the big line that sums of the theme. “I want to know who won this election, who won it?” But in the action of the film Spacey doesn’t want to know who won it, but how it can be won for Gore.
The trickiest part for the producers was how to blame the Supreme Court decision on Republicans when Democrats brought the matter to court in the first place. They do this by showing James Baker filing some sort of Federal lawsuit early in the film because he knows the Florida Supreme Court is full of lefties and he knows the case will find its way there. And though Baker’s suit goes nowhere and the U.S. court responds to the decision by the Florida court, we’re supposed to blame Baker for his earlier appraisal.
The Spacey people gasp when they read the verdict and they scratch their heads when the court says that this case is not to be used as a precedent that it counts for this election and this election only. In a piece of exposition, one staffer pipes up that it’s the first time in the history of the court this has ever happened. This is made out to be sinister when any constitutional lawyer knows that the U.S. Supreme Court doesn’t like to make rulings in overtly political cases, especially elections. This is strictly for self-preservation. Nothing in the constitution gives the court any particular power. Neither the legislative nor the executive branch even has to listen to the court. It’s become a tradition in this country that we do listen, but pushing too many boundaries is not a recipe for long term success. The one point barely remarked upon is the real quandary Democrats faced when it went to the high court. Liberals have counted on the court to give them most of the things voters do not want. Gore sends a message in the movie not to knock the court. It’s treated as statesmanlike instead of opportunistic. If Democrats stopped believing in the court then they would lose the only reliable leftward tilt this country has seen in the last 40 years. It’s pretty obvious to me that the Supremes weren’t happy with the Florida ruling and would have been happier to see this settled in the state legislature. They took the case to undo a bad ruling, but didn’t want the baggage of deciding future elections.
One of the most enjoyable parts of the film is Ed Begley Jr. as David Boise, the eccentric and brilliant lawyer for the Gore side. He’s a bit clumsy but lovable. One of the least enjoyable parts is the cartoon performance of Laura Dern as Katherine Harris. The case can be made that Harris was a political lightweight, but Dern plays her as a naïve fool easily led down the wrong path by a shrewd political operative. The tone is way too farcical for the rest of the film.
We only see the candidates from behind or hear them on the other end of the telephone. Removed is Gore’s odd vocal tone and kindergarten teacher way of talking to people. Bush, on the other hand, sounds like a cowboy character actor needing directions to Amarillo. Repeated in the film is the exchange between the two when Gore takes back his concession. The thing about the exchange that I remember from the time is Bush irritated that Gore takes the concession back and Gore saying, “You don’t have to get snippy.” I found that so appropriate from Gore, such a schoolmarm thing to say. I could even hear it in my head imagining the way he would say it all indignant. There isn’t a very masculine way to get that line out, but the producers tried their best here and it sounds like the wrong choice of words for the tone they use.
The movie doesn’t make someone like Jim Baker unlikable. Baker is talented and charming as a facade for his villainy. Talking to another Republican operative later in the film he admits that he was once a Democrat. Asked to tell the story he says his wife had died when he was 40 and a Republican friend asked him to help on his congressional campaign. Baker told the friend he was a Democrat, but the friend just didn’t want to see him so upset, so Baker joined up. When asked who that man was, Baker motions toward a picture of Bush 41. It’s a lot more subtle way of suggesting Baker is stealing the election for personal reasons and it makes him likable without making his side seem worthy of the office.
You do get the impression that the people fighting on both sides are doing so more to win the game than for the person or ideology that person represents. I think that’s a pretty honest portrayal of the way politics works on the inside. So even if the history here is selective, the process seems about right and it’s worth watching for that reason if nothing else.
Monday, April 21, 2008
MOVIE REVIEWS LATE 2007 Part 2
I’m way behind. Dude's recent post got me going.
---------------------------------------------
BLACK SNAKE MOAN (2007) Christina Ricci is a nymphomaniac whose boyfriend is shipping out in the service. Not a good combination we can guess. The first plot point is nympho girl refusing her boyfriend’s best friend. He gets angry and beats her up and leaves her for dead on the side of the road. Along comes Sam Jackson who nurses her to health and then ties her up to heal her of her other affliction. And somehow it all has a happy ending. It’s recommended for those who like seeing Ricci scantily clad and like feeling guilty about it even more.
RED ROAD (2006) A Scottish film where the DVD gives you English subtitles by default and you’ll appreciate it about 1/3 of the time. Our hero Jackie monitors security cameras in a high crime area of Glasgow. She’s suffering from the death her husband and child and early on in the movie she discovers the dude who is responsible. Using her power with the cameras and some cleverness, she tries to get even. I can’t say much more without ruining it, but it’s a nice change of pace overall and worth the time.
V FOR VENDETTA (2006) –The basic plot has our masked hero blowing up things and creating general havoc in London set in the not too distant future. It takes a while for us to learn that he is a revolutionary fighting against a fascist English government. It seems that the current dictator and some pals took over Britain after a series of terrorist activities that they themselves orchestrated. That could have actually worked as satire, but this movie takes itself seriously. A little research revealed that the original story was written in the 1980s and it was a nuclear attack and not terrorism that brought about the events our hero fights against. So it was really a reaction to Thatcherism, they just updated the bugaboo post 2001. The big ending that I don’t mind spoiling is V blowing up Parliament, the oldest house of representative government on the planet. For a movie like this to work, it has to have a measure of plausibility. You have to imagine that a country could actually take such a turn. Fascism will never return in the form of militarism. That card was played and defeated by the very same England. Fascism can only return in the crisis of health care and the environment, things that are hard to oppose. In this form it’s no more viable than medieval serfdom. Now forget the politics and the film is stylish and Natalie Portman’s prison sequence was pretty inventive and quite effective. It really had a lot of things going for it except believability.
PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC (1928) Carl Dreyer’s Joan film was thought lost until the early 1980s where a copy turned up in a mental institution. This is not a life of Joan, but her trial and execution. If I had not acted in that Joan of Arc play back in college, I think I would have been lost on the background and characters, because none of that is explained. The politics behind Joan’s trial are not discussed either. I think the story works better in the context of her whole life because it’s more of a tragedy after you’ve seen her heroism. I have to suppose any Frenchman in the 1920s already knew the story and must have understood the tragedy without the prologue. As I have said before, I prefer silent comedies over silent dramas where the broad acting brings intentional laughs. This might be one of the few times where that level of intensity works in a silent drama. There is nothing entertaining here although you can appreciate technique and it will only cost you 80 minutes.
THE LEOPARD (1963) – This is my first Visconti movie and many consider it his masterpiece. I didn’t read anything going in and I was surprised that it’s a costume drama, sort of an Italian Gone with the Wind. Both GWTW and LEOPARD are set in the 1860s, both movies are about a way of life ending, and both movies are epic length. I guess I was expecting all Italian directors of this time period to be practicing neo-realism. What is weird about this movie is that it stars Burt Lancaster of all people and he’s dubbed in Italian. If I’m from Italy I probably don’t notice, but it’s Burt Lancaster and I know too well what his voice sounds like and when he opens up and I hear a husky Italian voice come out of his mouth it feels weird. There is an official release English language dubbed version and I would rent it and see the whole three hours again if I knew it was Burt Lancaster’s voice. I’m interested to see some other Visconti movies to know whether or not this is typical, because this one didn’t really rock me as I had expected, though any guy will appreciate Claudia Cardinale’s presence.
TALK TO ME (2007) – Don Cheadle plays an ex-con who lips his way into a job as a radio DJ in 1960s Washington D.C. The movie is based on the true story of Petey Greene, but rather than a pure biopic, the film tries to be a panorama of politics and race relations in the late 60s. Near the end it changes focus entirely and follows Petey’s manager played by Chiwetel Ejiofor. Cheadle proves capable again and Eijofor is every bit his equal. Like most biopics they have plenty to say up front about the rise of a person, but no easy resolution. Sometimes historical figures have not the decency to die a hero or martyr for the screenwriter. Watch it if you’re in the mood for the material or skip it with little regret.
SPIDERMAN 3 (2007) – The first movie in the series was alright. The second movie was an improvement focusing on the conflict between being a hero and leading a normal life. This third film comes out of nowhere as an “everything but the kitchen sink” fiasco with too many villains, too many love interests and too many subplots. They even re-write history a little by having someone else kill Uncle Ben. The Spiderman stories are interesting for their more complex villains, but after three films, that becomes a liability. All the back stories become redundant and you long for one guy to be pure evil just for variety. The character of Spiderman ends the trilogy as more of a psychologist than a super hero. And that could have been fine had they focused on Peter Parker’s complex relationship with the new Goblin. I suppose that was too cerebral for the producers who wanted action scenes that would play better overseas. So we’re introduced to the Sandman and Venom two more bad guys that don’t mean it. They really set themselves up for a great third movie and didn’t deliver.
I AM LEGEND (2007) I would usually skip this at the theatre, but Sir Saunders and the boys were going to see it so why not. I thought the trailer looked interesting and the reviews were decent too. It based on the same source material as THE OMEGA MAN, and this one has better production values. Just a character with the whole of Manhattan to himself gives the movie an intriguing pull. It also has Will Smith going for it, a real movie star in a time of few. The plot has Smith as last man on earth fighting a gang of vampires that only come out at night. The movie grabs you in many kinds of ways. I especially fell soft for the dog, having lost my own this past year. I AM LEGEND is a vehicle movie in the best possible way.
CHRISTMAS CAROL (1938) – Gene Lockhart seems a bit too old to play Bob Cratchet and the translation isn’t nearly as grim as later ones. I guess that a plus after seeing ignorance and want between the legs of that second spirit in so many films. Lionel Barrymore was supposed to star as Scrooge, but the arthritis that would later render him to a wheelchair prevented it. If you can find a copy you have to hear the Barrymore radio interpretation of this material. Reginald Owen steps in and does a decent enough job as Scrooge. The 1951 version outdid this.
CHRISTMAS CAROL (1999) Patrick Stewart as Scrooge this time. He’s got the accent down from birth. The rest of the film follows as expected. I kept thinking that this could be a signature take on the tale, but despite Alistair Sim’s 1951 version, I still think the best telling of this material is yet to come.
I’m way behind. Dude's recent post got me going.
---------------------------------------------
BLACK SNAKE MOAN (2007) Christina Ricci is a nymphomaniac whose boyfriend is shipping out in the service. Not a good combination we can guess. The first plot point is nympho girl refusing her boyfriend’s best friend. He gets angry and beats her up and leaves her for dead on the side of the road. Along comes Sam Jackson who nurses her to health and then ties her up to heal her of her other affliction. And somehow it all has a happy ending. It’s recommended for those who like seeing Ricci scantily clad and like feeling guilty about it even more.
RED ROAD (2006) A Scottish film where the DVD gives you English subtitles by default and you’ll appreciate it about 1/3 of the time. Our hero Jackie monitors security cameras in a high crime area of Glasgow. She’s suffering from the death her husband and child and early on in the movie she discovers the dude who is responsible. Using her power with the cameras and some cleverness, she tries to get even. I can’t say much more without ruining it, but it’s a nice change of pace overall and worth the time.
V FOR VENDETTA (2006) –The basic plot has our masked hero blowing up things and creating general havoc in London set in the not too distant future. It takes a while for us to learn that he is a revolutionary fighting against a fascist English government. It seems that the current dictator and some pals took over Britain after a series of terrorist activities that they themselves orchestrated. That could have actually worked as satire, but this movie takes itself seriously. A little research revealed that the original story was written in the 1980s and it was a nuclear attack and not terrorism that brought about the events our hero fights against. So it was really a reaction to Thatcherism, they just updated the bugaboo post 2001. The big ending that I don’t mind spoiling is V blowing up Parliament, the oldest house of representative government on the planet. For a movie like this to work, it has to have a measure of plausibility. You have to imagine that a country could actually take such a turn. Fascism will never return in the form of militarism. That card was played and defeated by the very same England. Fascism can only return in the crisis of health care and the environment, things that are hard to oppose. In this form it’s no more viable than medieval serfdom. Now forget the politics and the film is stylish and Natalie Portman’s prison sequence was pretty inventive and quite effective. It really had a lot of things going for it except believability.
PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC (1928) Carl Dreyer’s Joan film was thought lost until the early 1980s where a copy turned up in a mental institution. This is not a life of Joan, but her trial and execution. If I had not acted in that Joan of Arc play back in college, I think I would have been lost on the background and characters, because none of that is explained. The politics behind Joan’s trial are not discussed either. I think the story works better in the context of her whole life because it’s more of a tragedy after you’ve seen her heroism. I have to suppose any Frenchman in the 1920s already knew the story and must have understood the tragedy without the prologue. As I have said before, I prefer silent comedies over silent dramas where the broad acting brings intentional laughs. This might be one of the few times where that level of intensity works in a silent drama. There is nothing entertaining here although you can appreciate technique and it will only cost you 80 minutes.
THE LEOPARD (1963) – This is my first Visconti movie and many consider it his masterpiece. I didn’t read anything going in and I was surprised that it’s a costume drama, sort of an Italian Gone with the Wind. Both GWTW and LEOPARD are set in the 1860s, both movies are about a way of life ending, and both movies are epic length. I guess I was expecting all Italian directors of this time period to be practicing neo-realism. What is weird about this movie is that it stars Burt Lancaster of all people and he’s dubbed in Italian. If I’m from Italy I probably don’t notice, but it’s Burt Lancaster and I know too well what his voice sounds like and when he opens up and I hear a husky Italian voice come out of his mouth it feels weird. There is an official release English language dubbed version and I would rent it and see the whole three hours again if I knew it was Burt Lancaster’s voice. I’m interested to see some other Visconti movies to know whether or not this is typical, because this one didn’t really rock me as I had expected, though any guy will appreciate Claudia Cardinale’s presence.
TALK TO ME (2007) – Don Cheadle plays an ex-con who lips his way into a job as a radio DJ in 1960s Washington D.C. The movie is based on the true story of Petey Greene, but rather than a pure biopic, the film tries to be a panorama of politics and race relations in the late 60s. Near the end it changes focus entirely and follows Petey’s manager played by Chiwetel Ejiofor. Cheadle proves capable again and Eijofor is every bit his equal. Like most biopics they have plenty to say up front about the rise of a person, but no easy resolution. Sometimes historical figures have not the decency to die a hero or martyr for the screenwriter. Watch it if you’re in the mood for the material or skip it with little regret.
SPIDERMAN 3 (2007) – The first movie in the series was alright. The second movie was an improvement focusing on the conflict between being a hero and leading a normal life. This third film comes out of nowhere as an “everything but the kitchen sink” fiasco with too many villains, too many love interests and too many subplots. They even re-write history a little by having someone else kill Uncle Ben. The Spiderman stories are interesting for their more complex villains, but after three films, that becomes a liability. All the back stories become redundant and you long for one guy to be pure evil just for variety. The character of Spiderman ends the trilogy as more of a psychologist than a super hero. And that could have been fine had they focused on Peter Parker’s complex relationship with the new Goblin. I suppose that was too cerebral for the producers who wanted action scenes that would play better overseas. So we’re introduced to the Sandman and Venom two more bad guys that don’t mean it. They really set themselves up for a great third movie and didn’t deliver.
I AM LEGEND (2007) I would usually skip this at the theatre, but Sir Saunders and the boys were going to see it so why not. I thought the trailer looked interesting and the reviews were decent too. It based on the same source material as THE OMEGA MAN, and this one has better production values. Just a character with the whole of Manhattan to himself gives the movie an intriguing pull. It also has Will Smith going for it, a real movie star in a time of few. The plot has Smith as last man on earth fighting a gang of vampires that only come out at night. The movie grabs you in many kinds of ways. I especially fell soft for the dog, having lost my own this past year. I AM LEGEND is a vehicle movie in the best possible way.
CHRISTMAS CAROL (1938) – Gene Lockhart seems a bit too old to play Bob Cratchet and the translation isn’t nearly as grim as later ones. I guess that a plus after seeing ignorance and want between the legs of that second spirit in so many films. Lionel Barrymore was supposed to star as Scrooge, but the arthritis that would later render him to a wheelchair prevented it. If you can find a copy you have to hear the Barrymore radio interpretation of this material. Reginald Owen steps in and does a decent enough job as Scrooge. The 1951 version outdid this.
CHRISTMAS CAROL (1999) Patrick Stewart as Scrooge this time. He’s got the accent down from birth. The rest of the film follows as expected. I kept thinking that this could be a signature take on the tale, but despite Alistair Sim’s 1951 version, I still think the best telling of this material is yet to come.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
DUDE'S REVIEWS
ONLY ANGELS HAVE WINGS (1939) - Cary Grant never made a movie that wasn't worth watching and neither did Howard Hawks. This is the epitome of a four-star film, not quite a five-star classic, but so worthwhile, even 70 years on, that you'll be glad you lent it an evening. I really enjoyed the sense of place it gave me - I felt I knew the people, their way of life, and the relationships and motives of all the principles. I liked Jean Arthur's sense of independence yet her desire to tame the untamed Grant. I love Grant's way of being cavalier yet sincere in that fun way of his. It's a treat whenever I get to see a film like this for the first time.
GONE BABY GONE (2007) - I really liked the story. It's based on a novel from the writer of Mystic River which explored similar territory. Casey Affleck is great as the lead. He's a youthful PI whose specialty is getting information from people who don't talk to the police. He grew up in the toughest neighborhood of Boston and knows from high school all the thugs who run its underbelly. He's living and working with a woman who looks like Daphne Zuniga and we take it on faith that we know her type since their relationship is not properly set up. Writer/director Ben Affleck does a good job with the atmosphere, deliberate pacing and plot point curveballs, making for a fine film experience. One of the better films from last year.
THE TIN STAR (1957) - Hank Fonda as a retired sheriff turned bounty hunter comes to town to collect some cash and finds young Tony Perkins wearing a badge he hasn't earned. Perkins is gung-ho enough but the town seems to take orders from the burly bad guy who is always rustling up a lynching party. Perkins takes back the town, burly guy gets his comeuppance, and Fonda rides off with a lady in the end. All very enjoyable.
THE MACHINIST (2003) - Tom reviewed this film a few years ago and I don't disagree with his assessment that it is a hidden gem. Christian Bale plays a guy who is atrophying away and we're not sure what his issue is as we spend some crazy time with him as he attempts to piece it together. It's a bit of a contrived story, but parts of this film have managed to stay with me over the months since I've seen it. Werner Herzog says on the commentary of Rescue Dawn that he did not like this film though he loved Bale's performance. There are some storytelling tricks at work here but it is intriguing throughout with a clever wrap-up.
NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM (2006) - It's not god-awful but it's just not the type of film I enjoy. Cadence deemed it her all-time favorite film upon seeing it in the theatre a couple of years ago, and I finally got the chance to see it while I was at the in-laws' house on vacation. It's fun and it's not horrible. I thought Ben Stiller was good the way he played the character - he seemed to believe the goings-on without being too silly about it. He's a good everyman, not too much of a loser or a hero. There is some silliness in the script but it doesn't come across as amateurish so I can see how kids can like it.
ACROSS THE UNIVERSE (2007) - It seems about twice as long as its running time suggests even though it is mostly music I love. The singing voices are great but there are no wondrous re-imaginings of any of the songs. I did very much like what they did with I Wanna Hold Your Hand, turning it from a sing-song artifact to a plaintive call of feminine yearning. The story is just there to hang the songs on - you never really care for any of the participants, although you do get to see Evan Rachel Wood's boobies, which are perfect in the youthful suppleness. Director, Julie Taymor, is the female Tim Burton - all visuals with no sense of pacing.
THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED (2005) - A documentary about the MPAA rating committee which is veiled in secrecy even though it is purported to be comprised of ordinary parents like yourself, it is interesting enough but never rises above your standard televised documentary fare.
TOWN AND COUNTRY (2001) - It's in theory a comedy, starring Warren Beatty, Gary Shandling, and Goldie Hawn, all well past their prime, although all three are still enjoyable. It was written by Buck Henry, who also once did good work. Jenna Elfman shows up to ruin a few scenes and just about nothing works as they attempt to imitate a farcical thirties era comedic vibe. Beatty gets laid repeatedly and that's all that really matters. Dearly departed Chuck Heston shows up as a gun-toting protective daddy.
THE PARADINE CASE (1947) - It's a Hitchcock film I had never seen until recently. It didn't work at all for me and afterwards, I remembered that this is considered one of the clunkers in an otherwise legendary career. I didn't realize that Gregory Peck was supposed to be British until I saw him in the barrister's wig. He's not even attempting an accent. The woman who is supposed to be transfixing him is kind of a blank slate so I didn't buy that relationship for a minute. I liked the wife character, who had some good speeches, even though I never quite believed the notion that their marriage was threatened. The courtroom scenes are boring. When the film ended, I had question marks for pupils - it's just a bad film.
ELEPHANT (2003) - Hailed by some critics, this uber-realistic mood piece is one of the most boring films I have ever endured. In fact, I watched most of the first hour on fast forward since it was comprised mostly of tracking shots of high school kids walking the halls between classes. There was occasional dialogue but it was all ad-libbed and meaningless. The movie is basically a day in the life of normal kids at Columbine High School and how it is interrupted by surprise gunfire. I guess Gus Van Sant was going for the sort of film that was ultimately done much better by Paul Greengrass with United 93. It is difficult to watch and not for the reason intended.
ONLY ANGELS HAVE WINGS (1939) - Cary Grant never made a movie that wasn't worth watching and neither did Howard Hawks. This is the epitome of a four-star film, not quite a five-star classic, but so worthwhile, even 70 years on, that you'll be glad you lent it an evening. I really enjoyed the sense of place it gave me - I felt I knew the people, their way of life, and the relationships and motives of all the principles. I liked Jean Arthur's sense of independence yet her desire to tame the untamed Grant. I love Grant's way of being cavalier yet sincere in that fun way of his. It's a treat whenever I get to see a film like this for the first time.
GONE BABY GONE (2007) - I really liked the story. It's based on a novel from the writer of Mystic River which explored similar territory. Casey Affleck is great as the lead. He's a youthful PI whose specialty is getting information from people who don't talk to the police. He grew up in the toughest neighborhood of Boston and knows from high school all the thugs who run its underbelly. He's living and working with a woman who looks like Daphne Zuniga and we take it on faith that we know her type since their relationship is not properly set up. Writer/director Ben Affleck does a good job with the atmosphere, deliberate pacing and plot point curveballs, making for a fine film experience. One of the better films from last year.
THE TIN STAR (1957) - Hank Fonda as a retired sheriff turned bounty hunter comes to town to collect some cash and finds young Tony Perkins wearing a badge he hasn't earned. Perkins is gung-ho enough but the town seems to take orders from the burly bad guy who is always rustling up a lynching party. Perkins takes back the town, burly guy gets his comeuppance, and Fonda rides off with a lady in the end. All very enjoyable.
THE MACHINIST (2003) - Tom reviewed this film a few years ago and I don't disagree with his assessment that it is a hidden gem. Christian Bale plays a guy who is atrophying away and we're not sure what his issue is as we spend some crazy time with him as he attempts to piece it together. It's a bit of a contrived story, but parts of this film have managed to stay with me over the months since I've seen it. Werner Herzog says on the commentary of Rescue Dawn that he did not like this film though he loved Bale's performance. There are some storytelling tricks at work here but it is intriguing throughout with a clever wrap-up.
NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM (2006) - It's not god-awful but it's just not the type of film I enjoy. Cadence deemed it her all-time favorite film upon seeing it in the theatre a couple of years ago, and I finally got the chance to see it while I was at the in-laws' house on vacation. It's fun and it's not horrible. I thought Ben Stiller was good the way he played the character - he seemed to believe the goings-on without being too silly about it. He's a good everyman, not too much of a loser or a hero. There is some silliness in the script but it doesn't come across as amateurish so I can see how kids can like it.
ACROSS THE UNIVERSE (2007) - It seems about twice as long as its running time suggests even though it is mostly music I love. The singing voices are great but there are no wondrous re-imaginings of any of the songs. I did very much like what they did with I Wanna Hold Your Hand, turning it from a sing-song artifact to a plaintive call of feminine yearning. The story is just there to hang the songs on - you never really care for any of the participants, although you do get to see Evan Rachel Wood's boobies, which are perfect in the youthful suppleness. Director, Julie Taymor, is the female Tim Burton - all visuals with no sense of pacing.
THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED (2005) - A documentary about the MPAA rating committee which is veiled in secrecy even though it is purported to be comprised of ordinary parents like yourself, it is interesting enough but never rises above your standard televised documentary fare.
TOWN AND COUNTRY (2001) - It's in theory a comedy, starring Warren Beatty, Gary Shandling, and Goldie Hawn, all well past their prime, although all three are still enjoyable. It was written by Buck Henry, who also once did good work. Jenna Elfman shows up to ruin a few scenes and just about nothing works as they attempt to imitate a farcical thirties era comedic vibe. Beatty gets laid repeatedly and that's all that really matters. Dearly departed Chuck Heston shows up as a gun-toting protective daddy.
THE PARADINE CASE (1947) - It's a Hitchcock film I had never seen until recently. It didn't work at all for me and afterwards, I remembered that this is considered one of the clunkers in an otherwise legendary career. I didn't realize that Gregory Peck was supposed to be British until I saw him in the barrister's wig. He's not even attempting an accent. The woman who is supposed to be transfixing him is kind of a blank slate so I didn't buy that relationship for a minute. I liked the wife character, who had some good speeches, even though I never quite believed the notion that their marriage was threatened. The courtroom scenes are boring. When the film ended, I had question marks for pupils - it's just a bad film.
ELEPHANT (2003) - Hailed by some critics, this uber-realistic mood piece is one of the most boring films I have ever endured. In fact, I watched most of the first hour on fast forward since it was comprised mostly of tracking shots of high school kids walking the halls between classes. There was occasional dialogue but it was all ad-libbed and meaningless. The movie is basically a day in the life of normal kids at Columbine High School and how it is interrupted by surprise gunfire. I guess Gus Van Sant was going for the sort of film that was ultimately done much better by Paul Greengrass with United 93. It is difficult to watch and not for the reason intended.
Sunday, April 06, 2008
CHARLTON HESTON (1924-2008)
I saw Charlton Heston in person one time in Pensacola. He talked about his career and signed a few autographs. He had recently appeared in TRUE LIES and told us that James Cameron asked him to take the role as boss because he needed someone who could be intimidating to Arnold Swartzenegger. He marched with Dr. King against the establishment and then later in life he took on the liberal Hollywood establishment with his conservative viewpoint. In the movies he played heroes who did great things.
He had a great sense of humor guest hosting Saturday Night live twice and poking fun at his reputation and screen image. His interview with Michael Moore in Bowling for Columbine is quite illuminating. Heston is kind to Moore even as Moore goads him. He comes off as a decent guy. He will be missed.
DARK CITY (1950) – Interesting in that Harry Morgan and Jack Webb (later of Dragnet) co-star with Heston and Ed Begley as a group of con men that dupe Don Defore (Thorny from Ozzie and Harriet). Heston has the presence in even his first film.
THE TEN COMMANDMENT (1956) – The role he will forever be remembered for. I’m sure this was the first time I had ever seen him in a film. I remember being fascinated the way Moses throws his staff down and it turned into a snake. Think of Eddie Robinson saying, “Where’s your God now, Moses?” We somehow started saying that to each other during poker games.
THE BIG COUNTRY (1958) – Gregory Peck is the main star in this all-star cast. Heston is a great in the supporting role of ranch foreman. Heston tells a story in his book about Peck and Wyler getting into such an argument over a scene in this film that they didn’t speak to each other for years.
THE BUCCANEER (1958) – Cecil B Demille produced and Anthony Quinn directed. Quinn was married to Demille’s daughter. Heston is Andrew Jackson and Yul Brenner is the pirate Jean Lafitte. The background is New Orleans and the famous battle.
TOUCH OF EVIL (1958) – Orson Welles was signed to play the heavy when Heston was offered the lead. He suggested that Orson direct and he said the response was no different than if Heston had asked if his mother could direct. They did allow Welles to direct and it became one of his signature films. The movie takes place just across the Mexican border where Mexican Heston and his new wife American Janet Leigh get embroiled with crooked cop Welles. I had the fortune of seeing it on the big screen after the 1997 re-mastering using Welles notes. Great Henry Mancini soundtrack. Heston only wished he’d given his character a Mexican accent.
BEN-HUR (1959) – All those Oscars and that chariot race that can be watched again and again. I liked the way Wyler always obscures the presence of Christ. That he isn’t seen by the camera makes him seem more holy.
EL CID (1961) Heston said that this would have been an all-time classic had William Wyler directed it. I remember it being somewhat interesting but it doesn’t really stay with you as it should.
THE AGONY AND THE ECSTASY (1965) – Heston plays Michelangelo and Rex Harrison plays the Medici pope insisting that he paint the Sistine Chapel. The movie begins with a travelogue of the Chapel and the paintings in color. It now seems outdated since the restoration has brought out the colors more vividly. Still, Heston is great and the film is really compelling.
WILL PENNY (1967) – Subdued realistic western with Heston as a scraping by cowboy when he meets Joan Hacket and her son on a journey of their own. It’s much more about character and subtle attraction than plot which I can’t even remember. Heston said that Joan Hackett was perfect in the role.
PLANET OF THE APES (1968) – This is the second Heston film I watched as a boy. I stayed up late on Saturday night to be horrified by the statue at the end. No one to discuss it with was the hardest part. But it really stuck in my consciousness. Looking back, I was supposed to be anti-nuke. But the message I took was that America had to protect itself against all enemies. I wonder why we didn’t see chunks of anything else?
THE OMEGA MAN (1971) – From the same source material of the recent I AM legend. Heston as the last man on earth after germ warfare killed most humans and rendered the rest of them mutants. It’s a pleasure to see Heston machine gun those mutants every time.
SOYLENT GREEN (1973) – The third in Heston’s post-apocalyptic trilogy. Heston plays a New York City cop in the horrific 2022. Eddie Robsinson plays his sidekick and pal. Heston wrote a lot about his friendship with Robinson and how he died a week or so after shooting his last scene in this film. You either know the punchline to this or you don’t but it is an interesting film to see. What’s great about all the trilogy is that it shows how much those worries were unfounded and how America and world are much better off.
THE THREE MUSKETEERS + THE FOUR MUSKETEERS (1974) – Richard Lester shot these comedies together and released them back to back. Heston plays the infamous Cardinal Richelieu, a looming figure in both pictures but no the focus. I liked them a lot as a kid, but when I saw the first one a few months ago it didn’t retain the same magic, although I still enjoyed it.
HAMLET (1996) – Kennth Branaugh’s full length film of the famous play is full of stars. Heston plays the leader of the actor troupe in the play within the play. It was inspired for Brannaugh to think of Heston and his Shakespeare experience. The film itself is interesting although I don’t know why the director decided to set the production in the 1800s.
ANY GIVEN SUNDAY (1999) – Oliver Stone movie about the politics of the NFL. Al Pacino plays the coach of the Miami team. It’s probably full of too many stars to really take seriously. Cameron Diaz owns the football team. The quarterback controversy between Dennis Quaid and Jamie Foxx. Heston has a small part as the NFL Commissioner. I thought it was okay when I saw it but I don’t remember many details.
New York Times Obit
I saw Charlton Heston in person one time in Pensacola. He talked about his career and signed a few autographs. He had recently appeared in TRUE LIES and told us that James Cameron asked him to take the role as boss because he needed someone who could be intimidating to Arnold Swartzenegger. He marched with Dr. King against the establishment and then later in life he took on the liberal Hollywood establishment with his conservative viewpoint. In the movies he played heroes who did great things.
He had a great sense of humor guest hosting Saturday Night live twice and poking fun at his reputation and screen image. His interview with Michael Moore in Bowling for Columbine is quite illuminating. Heston is kind to Moore even as Moore goads him. He comes off as a decent guy. He will be missed.
DARK CITY (1950) – Interesting in that Harry Morgan and Jack Webb (later of Dragnet) co-star with Heston and Ed Begley as a group of con men that dupe Don Defore (Thorny from Ozzie and Harriet). Heston has the presence in even his first film.
THE TEN COMMANDMENT (1956) – The role he will forever be remembered for. I’m sure this was the first time I had ever seen him in a film. I remember being fascinated the way Moses throws his staff down and it turned into a snake. Think of Eddie Robinson saying, “Where’s your God now, Moses?” We somehow started saying that to each other during poker games.
THE BIG COUNTRY (1958) – Gregory Peck is the main star in this all-star cast. Heston is a great in the supporting role of ranch foreman. Heston tells a story in his book about Peck and Wyler getting into such an argument over a scene in this film that they didn’t speak to each other for years.
THE BUCCANEER (1958) – Cecil B Demille produced and Anthony Quinn directed. Quinn was married to Demille’s daughter. Heston is Andrew Jackson and Yul Brenner is the pirate Jean Lafitte. The background is New Orleans and the famous battle.
TOUCH OF EVIL (1958) – Orson Welles was signed to play the heavy when Heston was offered the lead. He suggested that Orson direct and he said the response was no different than if Heston had asked if his mother could direct. They did allow Welles to direct and it became one of his signature films. The movie takes place just across the Mexican border where Mexican Heston and his new wife American Janet Leigh get embroiled with crooked cop Welles. I had the fortune of seeing it on the big screen after the 1997 re-mastering using Welles notes. Great Henry Mancini soundtrack. Heston only wished he’d given his character a Mexican accent.
BEN-HUR (1959) – All those Oscars and that chariot race that can be watched again and again. I liked the way Wyler always obscures the presence of Christ. That he isn’t seen by the camera makes him seem more holy.
EL CID (1961) Heston said that this would have been an all-time classic had William Wyler directed it. I remember it being somewhat interesting but it doesn’t really stay with you as it should.
THE AGONY AND THE ECSTASY (1965) – Heston plays Michelangelo and Rex Harrison plays the Medici pope insisting that he paint the Sistine Chapel. The movie begins with a travelogue of the Chapel and the paintings in color. It now seems outdated since the restoration has brought out the colors more vividly. Still, Heston is great and the film is really compelling.
WILL PENNY (1967) – Subdued realistic western with Heston as a scraping by cowboy when he meets Joan Hacket and her son on a journey of their own. It’s much more about character and subtle attraction than plot which I can’t even remember. Heston said that Joan Hackett was perfect in the role.
PLANET OF THE APES (1968) – This is the second Heston film I watched as a boy. I stayed up late on Saturday night to be horrified by the statue at the end. No one to discuss it with was the hardest part. But it really stuck in my consciousness. Looking back, I was supposed to be anti-nuke. But the message I took was that America had to protect itself against all enemies. I wonder why we didn’t see chunks of anything else?
THE OMEGA MAN (1971) – From the same source material of the recent I AM legend. Heston as the last man on earth after germ warfare killed most humans and rendered the rest of them mutants. It’s a pleasure to see Heston machine gun those mutants every time.
SOYLENT GREEN (1973) – The third in Heston’s post-apocalyptic trilogy. Heston plays a New York City cop in the horrific 2022. Eddie Robsinson plays his sidekick and pal. Heston wrote a lot about his friendship with Robinson and how he died a week or so after shooting his last scene in this film. You either know the punchline to this or you don’t but it is an interesting film to see. What’s great about all the trilogy is that it shows how much those worries were unfounded and how America and world are much better off.
THE THREE MUSKETEERS + THE FOUR MUSKETEERS (1974) – Richard Lester shot these comedies together and released them back to back. Heston plays the infamous Cardinal Richelieu, a looming figure in both pictures but no the focus. I liked them a lot as a kid, but when I saw the first one a few months ago it didn’t retain the same magic, although I still enjoyed it.
HAMLET (1996) – Kennth Branaugh’s full length film of the famous play is full of stars. Heston plays the leader of the actor troupe in the play within the play. It was inspired for Brannaugh to think of Heston and his Shakespeare experience. The film itself is interesting although I don’t know why the director decided to set the production in the 1800s.
ANY GIVEN SUNDAY (1999) – Oliver Stone movie about the politics of the NFL. Al Pacino plays the coach of the Miami team. It’s probably full of too many stars to really take seriously. Cameron Diaz owns the football team. The quarterback controversy between Dennis Quaid and Jamie Foxx. Heston has a small part as the NFL Commissioner. I thought it was okay when I saw it but I don’t remember many details.
New York Times Obit
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
Richard Widmark (1914-2008)
He died over a week ago, but I just heard the news. Widmark seemed to be transitional figure between the classic actors of early talkies like Gable, Cooper, and Grant and the method actors like Brando and Clift. He had the approach of the former and the intensity of the latter. He didn’t make his film debut until he was 33 playing a psycho in the movie, KISS OF DEATH.
Looking over his filmography, I realize that I have seen far fewer of his films than I would have predicted. It’s a credit to his skills that I think of him highly with only a few examples.
KISS OF DEATH (1947) – A great debut and it impressed audiences enough that he was nominated for Best Supporting Actor. He lost to Edmnd Gwenn playing Santa Claus in Miracle on 34th Street.
PANIC IN THE STREETS (1950) – Elia Kazan film that pits health official, Widmark against a gang of outlaws on the lam and carrying a deadly plague. Like a number of early Kazan films, it doesn’t seem dated. Widmark is solid, but not as interesting as the villains led by Jack Palance.
NIGHT AND THE CITY (1950) – In my opinion, Widmark’s best performance and one of the great noir characters of all time. I first saw the early 1990s remake with Robert Deniro and I liked it enough, but I was really impressed with original. After seeing both I understood why the remake received such low marks. Widmark is a hustler trying to promote a boxing match and getting into all kinds of trouble along the way. It would be hard for me to rank the greatest noir films since so many great ones exist, but I can’t imagine this one not being in the top ten.
THE ALAMO (1960) – Like a lot of Widmark’s later ensemble work, The Alamo mixes him in with other big actors. Here John Wayne (who also directed) plays Davy Crockett and the consistently wooden Lawrence Harvey plays Colonel Travis against Widmark’s Jim Bowie. I remember Widmark being mostly wasted in the role and the film being a little too plodding at nearly 3 hours. Maybe I was ruined by seeing the Disney version first which plays more like a romp.
JUDGMENT AT NUREMBERG (1961) - Widmark plays the prosecutor to Spencer Tracy’s judge. His screen time is significant and his role is crucial to the storyline. The most interesting thing about the movie is it’s a liberal justification for doing the sort of thing that liberals now abhor, making evildoers pay for their crimes. Like all the late Stanley Kramer/Spencer Tracy collaborations, Spence gets a huge moralizing monologue rumored to be shot in one take.
HOW THE WEST WAS WON (1962) – Told as a long history lesson, none of the actors or storylines spend all that much time on screen, Widmark is overshadowed by John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart, Gregory Peck and Henry Fonda. I saw a pan and scan version on VHS as a kid and it kind of ruined it for me. Ron Howard used this film as an example of why Letterbox makes all the difference. It was shot in the wide wide format of 2:59 to 1. The widest modern movies are 2:35 to 1, with the common ratio being 1:85 to 1. That ratio was meant to be project on curved screens something like I-Max, but it never took off as a format.
MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS (1974) – Agatha Christie whodunit with a cast of stars big enough for three epics. Widmark’s role is crucial and yet it’s the surprise ending that I remember most.
ROLLERCOASTER (1977) – Timothy Bottoms plays a deranged guy who likes to blow up roller coasters and kill passengers. Widmark shows up in a smaller role so you can say, hey that’s Richard Widmark.
HANKY PANKY (1982) – I was 13 or so when this came out and like all things Gene Wilder I watched it again and again on HBO, proving that kids will watch anything. I seem to remember that Widmark was the villain and it was directed by Sidney Poitier, who starred with Widmark 30 years earlier.
TRUE COLORS (1991) John Cusack plays the scheming social climber while his pal, James Spader plays the moral guy. Widmark plays an aging Senator that Cusack tries to blackmail to get ahead in politics. It was Widmark’s last film role and he was so interesting it is a shame that he spent the last 15 years of his life with no further roles.
He died over a week ago, but I just heard the news. Widmark seemed to be transitional figure between the classic actors of early talkies like Gable, Cooper, and Grant and the method actors like Brando and Clift. He had the approach of the former and the intensity of the latter. He didn’t make his film debut until he was 33 playing a psycho in the movie, KISS OF DEATH.
Looking over his filmography, I realize that I have seen far fewer of his films than I would have predicted. It’s a credit to his skills that I think of him highly with only a few examples.
KISS OF DEATH (1947) – A great debut and it impressed audiences enough that he was nominated for Best Supporting Actor. He lost to Edmnd Gwenn playing Santa Claus in Miracle on 34th Street.
PANIC IN THE STREETS (1950) – Elia Kazan film that pits health official, Widmark against a gang of outlaws on the lam and carrying a deadly plague. Like a number of early Kazan films, it doesn’t seem dated. Widmark is solid, but not as interesting as the villains led by Jack Palance.
NIGHT AND THE CITY (1950) – In my opinion, Widmark’s best performance and one of the great noir characters of all time. I first saw the early 1990s remake with Robert Deniro and I liked it enough, but I was really impressed with original. After seeing both I understood why the remake received such low marks. Widmark is a hustler trying to promote a boxing match and getting into all kinds of trouble along the way. It would be hard for me to rank the greatest noir films since so many great ones exist, but I can’t imagine this one not being in the top ten.
THE ALAMO (1960) – Like a lot of Widmark’s later ensemble work, The Alamo mixes him in with other big actors. Here John Wayne (who also directed) plays Davy Crockett and the consistently wooden Lawrence Harvey plays Colonel Travis against Widmark’s Jim Bowie. I remember Widmark being mostly wasted in the role and the film being a little too plodding at nearly 3 hours. Maybe I was ruined by seeing the Disney version first which plays more like a romp.
JUDGMENT AT NUREMBERG (1961) - Widmark plays the prosecutor to Spencer Tracy’s judge. His screen time is significant and his role is crucial to the storyline. The most interesting thing about the movie is it’s a liberal justification for doing the sort of thing that liberals now abhor, making evildoers pay for their crimes. Like all the late Stanley Kramer/Spencer Tracy collaborations, Spence gets a huge moralizing monologue rumored to be shot in one take.
HOW THE WEST WAS WON (1962) – Told as a long history lesson, none of the actors or storylines spend all that much time on screen, Widmark is overshadowed by John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart, Gregory Peck and Henry Fonda. I saw a pan and scan version on VHS as a kid and it kind of ruined it for me. Ron Howard used this film as an example of why Letterbox makes all the difference. It was shot in the wide wide format of 2:59 to 1. The widest modern movies are 2:35 to 1, with the common ratio being 1:85 to 1. That ratio was meant to be project on curved screens something like I-Max, but it never took off as a format.
MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS (1974) – Agatha Christie whodunit with a cast of stars big enough for three epics. Widmark’s role is crucial and yet it’s the surprise ending that I remember most.
ROLLERCOASTER (1977) – Timothy Bottoms plays a deranged guy who likes to blow up roller coasters and kill passengers. Widmark shows up in a smaller role so you can say, hey that’s Richard Widmark.
HANKY PANKY (1982) – I was 13 or so when this came out and like all things Gene Wilder I watched it again and again on HBO, proving that kids will watch anything. I seem to remember that Widmark was the villain and it was directed by Sidney Poitier, who starred with Widmark 30 years earlier.
TRUE COLORS (1991) John Cusack plays the scheming social climber while his pal, James Spader plays the moral guy. Widmark plays an aging Senator that Cusack tries to blackmail to get ahead in politics. It was Widmark’s last film role and he was so interesting it is a shame that he spent the last 15 years of his life with no further roles.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
MICHAEL CLAYTON (A Movie Review)
There are only so many ways to tackle the evil corporate polluter on film and I’m getting convinced that they’ve all been utilized. Here George Clooney works as a “fixer” for a law firm and we learn through the course of the movie he was once a solid litigator, but the head of the firm, Sydney Pollack, saw his genius in another capacity and that’s his current role. A key deficiency is that we don’t really see him fix anything. And what we see him do doesn’t seem like any particular talent that would require a litigator when a paralegal or a PI could do the same job.
George Clooney is a charming actor, but it’s becoming clear he has two screen personas, the semi-rouge with a charming gleam in his eye and the same guy without the gleam. I can see how his oafish performance delighted the Academy in the ridiculous and boring SYRIANA, but in Michael Clayton he doesn’t even lose his finger nails. It’s just Clooney being Clooney. Tilda Swinton seems like a fine actress herself, but her nomination and win is just as equally baffling. Her role is pivotal to the plot, but her actual screen presence is minimal and not particularly dynamic. Further working against their nominations is the stellar work on the under-hyped Tom Wilkinson, that trudges along movie after movie bringing something unique and thoughtful nearly every time.
What seems to set Michael Clayton apart from other films of its kind is staging. This world has a sort of bleak tone where no one ever has much to smile about despite the fact that nearly every character on both sides of the big case is living well.
Without ruining the plot, I’ll say there are a couple of nefarious acts late in the picture and if you think about their plausibility it’s hard to take the total film seriously. I still enjoyed it enough. I would say that it succeeds in ways that other films of this sub-genre do not. But it’s hardly groundbreaking or worthy of a Best Picture nod.
There are only so many ways to tackle the evil corporate polluter on film and I’m getting convinced that they’ve all been utilized. Here George Clooney works as a “fixer” for a law firm and we learn through the course of the movie he was once a solid litigator, but the head of the firm, Sydney Pollack, saw his genius in another capacity and that’s his current role. A key deficiency is that we don’t really see him fix anything. And what we see him do doesn’t seem like any particular talent that would require a litigator when a paralegal or a PI could do the same job.
George Clooney is a charming actor, but it’s becoming clear he has two screen personas, the semi-rouge with a charming gleam in his eye and the same guy without the gleam. I can see how his oafish performance delighted the Academy in the ridiculous and boring SYRIANA, but in Michael Clayton he doesn’t even lose his finger nails. It’s just Clooney being Clooney. Tilda Swinton seems like a fine actress herself, but her nomination and win is just as equally baffling. Her role is pivotal to the plot, but her actual screen presence is minimal and not particularly dynamic. Further working against their nominations is the stellar work on the under-hyped Tom Wilkinson, that trudges along movie after movie bringing something unique and thoughtful nearly every time.
What seems to set Michael Clayton apart from other films of its kind is staging. This world has a sort of bleak tone where no one ever has much to smile about despite the fact that nearly every character on both sides of the big case is living well.
Without ruining the plot, I’ll say there are a couple of nefarious acts late in the picture and if you think about their plausibility it’s hard to take the total film seriously. I still enjoyed it enough. I would say that it succeeds in ways that other films of this sub-genre do not. But it’s hardly groundbreaking or worthy of a Best Picture nod.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
INTO THE WILD: A MOVIE REVIEW
Men's Journal does a wonderful Job of exploring the life and times of Chris McCandless in condensed form, so I will not bore you with the repeat of all that here. Rather, I wanted to speak a bit about the book and the movie (They are equally wonderful) and a little about my own experiences.
I bought the book a couple of years ago by mistake after purchasing several Jack London novels at a used book store. I scooped up Whitefang and what I thought was "Call of the Wild." When I got the book home I was disappointed at first until I read the back cover and the first few pages then was hooked. I immediately resonated with this story. It was so powerful and heartbreaking while at the same time, so familiar. I had no idea they had made a movie until I saw it on Tom's Netflix list and was happy to see it was about to release to DVD. I just saw the movie tonight with my son, Donovan.
In 1991, I had just completed my B.A. in Psych from UWF and was completely clueless as to what to do. I can remember that May sitting on a beach with Tom and asking him for advice. I wanted to go be a sailor (don't laugh), but felt the call of responsibility and could not bear to disappoint my family, particularly my grandfather. I had a comforting talk with Tom but could not make any real decision at that point. A few days later, on impulse, I enrolled in the "Chapman School of Seamanship" and moved down to the area with my crazy Uncle Dwight. He was in the middle of a major psychotic break, although I didn't know it at the time. I stayed for about 2 months, but never started the school. My Uncle would rant and rave every night about the various organizations and groups who were organizing against him (now I realize this was a bit of foreshadowing of things to come). I dreamed of a life on the sea, away from everyone and everything. After having enough of my Uncle (who at one point would not let me leave his house and held me there under the threat of a gun for a hour or two until he fell asleep thinking I had decided to stay) I left and returned to Bonifay. I drove all night and walked into my parents house that morning (October 1991) and the phone was ringing. I answered it and it was Prof. Rick Parr from Springfield College in Springfield, Massachusetts. He said he had gotten my application I had sent prior to graduation and wanted me to come up there to do my Masters in Counseling. Flattered and thankful (to have someone point me in a direction) I accepted, got married that December, then moved a week later. 17 years later, I am now a Professor and Psychologist myself, having fulfilled my own academic life and what I felt was duty to my family. I divorced and remarried during those years, had two sons, lived in 5 different cities and houses, and have about 8 years to go before my own sons are both grown.
When I read the book, Into the Wild (and later Jack London's novels) I was profoundly moved by what they each said. I was in awe of the fool-hearty courage of Chris McCandless. I have often thought about my own call of the wild and wondered what would have happened had my Uncle been a bit more stable and I had a bit more courage (or less sense). Perhaps, I wouldn't be here to write this blog. I've had many "wilderness" experiences before. Most recently was my Vision Quest experience of sleeping out in the deep Canadian wild for a week alone, which was among the top 3 most life altering experiences I've ever had. I think what moved me about Chris's story is the fact that he had the courage to live what I had/have so yearned to do and live myself. I think it is the quintessential story of men; perhaps of human beings. To run away from responsibility, to risk everything for a idea, to fore-go what society tells us is the correct or right thing to do, and simply exist in a moment to moment fashion without any rules or labels or "gotta do's" on our list.
I often think about Steven the sailor. Living in some alternate universe. I imagine him lonely and sad, feeling a failure for not having lived up to his families ideals. But sometimes I wish I could contact him and tell him how lucky and wonderful he is. I wonder if he made it, became a sea captain, and pilots a ship around the world. I wonder if he could find moments of happiness. In 8 years I'll be free of my final bit of responsibilities, having had my career, raised my kids, and had my marriages. I wonder if I will then, finally answer the call of the wild or will I be too old, too happy with my wife, too scared, too happy right where I am to do such a foolish thing----thinking that such adventures are for the young only. Or will I find some middle ground and simply go on sabbatical for a year or two, walking the Earth, and having a grand adventure but returning to what really matters. To what the movie and book and perhaps what Chris were trying to communicate all along----that what is truly of value is not just the adventure, but more importantly, that we have those around who are awake enough and love us enough to share the adventure.
"People say that what we're seeking is a meaning for life. I don't think that's what we're really seeking. What we seek is an experience of being alive, so that our life experiences on the purely physical plane have resonance within our innermost being and reality, so that we actually feel that rapture of being alive".
-Joseph Campbell
Men's Journal does a wonderful Job of exploring the life and times of Chris McCandless in condensed form, so I will not bore you with the repeat of all that here. Rather, I wanted to speak a bit about the book and the movie (They are equally wonderful) and a little about my own experiences.
I bought the book a couple of years ago by mistake after purchasing several Jack London novels at a used book store. I scooped up Whitefang and what I thought was "Call of the Wild." When I got the book home I was disappointed at first until I read the back cover and the first few pages then was hooked. I immediately resonated with this story. It was so powerful and heartbreaking while at the same time, so familiar. I had no idea they had made a movie until I saw it on Tom's Netflix list and was happy to see it was about to release to DVD. I just saw the movie tonight with my son, Donovan.
In 1991, I had just completed my B.A. in Psych from UWF and was completely clueless as to what to do. I can remember that May sitting on a beach with Tom and asking him for advice. I wanted to go be a sailor (don't laugh), but felt the call of responsibility and could not bear to disappoint my family, particularly my grandfather. I had a comforting talk with Tom but could not make any real decision at that point. A few days later, on impulse, I enrolled in the "Chapman School of Seamanship" and moved down to the area with my crazy Uncle Dwight. He was in the middle of a major psychotic break, although I didn't know it at the time. I stayed for about 2 months, but never started the school. My Uncle would rant and rave every night about the various organizations and groups who were organizing against him (now I realize this was a bit of foreshadowing of things to come). I dreamed of a life on the sea, away from everyone and everything. After having enough of my Uncle (who at one point would not let me leave his house and held me there under the threat of a gun for a hour or two until he fell asleep thinking I had decided to stay) I left and returned to Bonifay. I drove all night and walked into my parents house that morning (October 1991) and the phone was ringing. I answered it and it was Prof. Rick Parr from Springfield College in Springfield, Massachusetts. He said he had gotten my application I had sent prior to graduation and wanted me to come up there to do my Masters in Counseling. Flattered and thankful (to have someone point me in a direction) I accepted, got married that December, then moved a week later. 17 years later, I am now a Professor and Psychologist myself, having fulfilled my own academic life and what I felt was duty to my family. I divorced and remarried during those years, had two sons, lived in 5 different cities and houses, and have about 8 years to go before my own sons are both grown.
When I read the book, Into the Wild (and later Jack London's novels) I was profoundly moved by what they each said. I was in awe of the fool-hearty courage of Chris McCandless. I have often thought about my own call of the wild and wondered what would have happened had my Uncle been a bit more stable and I had a bit more courage (or less sense). Perhaps, I wouldn't be here to write this blog. I've had many "wilderness" experiences before. Most recently was my Vision Quest experience of sleeping out in the deep Canadian wild for a week alone, which was among the top 3 most life altering experiences I've ever had. I think what moved me about Chris's story is the fact that he had the courage to live what I had/have so yearned to do and live myself. I think it is the quintessential story of men; perhaps of human beings. To run away from responsibility, to risk everything for a idea, to fore-go what society tells us is the correct or right thing to do, and simply exist in a moment to moment fashion without any rules or labels or "gotta do's" on our list.
I often think about Steven the sailor. Living in some alternate universe. I imagine him lonely and sad, feeling a failure for not having lived up to his families ideals. But sometimes I wish I could contact him and tell him how lucky and wonderful he is. I wonder if he made it, became a sea captain, and pilots a ship around the world. I wonder if he could find moments of happiness. In 8 years I'll be free of my final bit of responsibilities, having had my career, raised my kids, and had my marriages. I wonder if I will then, finally answer the call of the wild or will I be too old, too happy with my wife, too scared, too happy right where I am to do such a foolish thing----thinking that such adventures are for the young only. Or will I find some middle ground and simply go on sabbatical for a year or two, walking the Earth, and having a grand adventure but returning to what really matters. To what the movie and book and perhaps what Chris were trying to communicate all along----that what is truly of value is not just the adventure, but more importantly, that we have those around who are awake enough and love us enough to share the adventure.
"People say that what we're seeking is a meaning for life. I don't think that's what we're really seeking. What we seek is an experience of being alive, so that our life experiences on the purely physical plane have resonance within our innermost being and reality, so that we actually feel that rapture of being alive".
-Joseph Campbell
Friday, March 07, 2008
DUDE REVIEWS
OPERATION PETTICOAT (1959) - My first taste of Blake Edwards was in the 1980s, and I could never figure out why producers kept giving him the keys to the movie-making machine. Those films were dreadful but this one is pure delight. It is ten years older than me but doesn't show its age at all - it has a thoroughly modern feel to it, is very funny, and has plenty of story, populated by characters with whom we are happy to spend time. You can't help but love Cary Grant doing his thing and as a bonus, you get Tony Curtis doing his thing alongside. This one stands the 50-years-later test.
IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON (2007) - This is one for the time capsule - a fine portrait of the dozen or so men who made history by walking on the moon in the twentieth century, telling their story nearly four decades later. Curiously, Neil Armstrong opted out, which is a real shame, but there is some priceless footage of his parents on "What's My Line" in the early 60s being asked how they would feel if their son became the first man to walk on the moon. The stories these guys tell must be heard and yet to a man they feel as if they were just the lucky ones to be the individuals actually experiencing what was truly a shared experience for all of mankind. The footage the filmmakers use is simply astounding. I was born the day we launched for the moon and as a kid, I was very interested in the space program. I am still fascinated by it to no end and I'm so glad this film was made before these men are laid to rest as footnotes to history.
THE PRESIDENT'S LADY (1953) - Another Tivo offering, not even available as yet on DVD. I was not familiar with the film but was intrigued by the subject matter, as I had a slight familiarity with the real-life predicament faced by President Andrew Jackson during his political heyday. Here, Chuck Heston is Jackson, a rough and tumble frontiersman/lawyer. Dawn Howell look-a-like, Susan Hayward is his lady, Rachel. It turns out that her divorce from Mr Prick is not quite formalized at the time she weds Jackson and this causes grievous scandal and torment for the couple as his political capital soars. His enemies use her against him at every opportunity until she dies just weeks before his inauguration. I really liked the film. I like depictions of strong marriages after seeing umpteen thousand variants of the marriage doomed to fail. Hayward is winning and ranks up there with June Allyson of THE GLENN MILLER STORY on my short list of all-time favorite movie wives. The third act is a bit rushed but it is a nice story up until his reluctant call to the presidency.
STARDUST (2007) - It's a bit cluttered and overlong but I was charmed nonetheless. There is a straightforward hero quest story at work with a smattering of interesting characters who pop in and out. The first scenes with DeNiro were great but he wears out his welcome soon after. There are some wonderful moments, including a fencing duel with a discombobulated corpse, and there is some great humor - it all adds up to a lot of fun.
THE PARENT TRAP (1961) - I saw this on the last day of school when I was in 2nd grade and fell madly in love with Hayley Mills. At the time, I didn't even question why she had a British accent as both the Boston girl and the Monterey tomboy. I think I even considered this my favorite film until it was superseded by STRIPES about five years later. It is still a worthy family classic even if I notice now that it drags a bit at times. They do a fine job of populating the screen with two girls using but one actress. Mason was fooled - when we saw another Hayley Mills film soon after, he asked if it was one of the sisters from this movie.
CORPSE BRIDE (2005) - Technically, this film is a masterpiece. Even though I knew it was stop-motion, about half an hour in, I had convinced myself that it is actually CG. But no, it truly is stop-motion, an art form that has no real necessity to exist any longer other than it is so magical when done well. I thought the first act was brilliant but once we leave the drab real world and enter the colorful underworld, it falls into that familiar Tim Burton pacing problem where everything looks really great but we stop caring much about what is actually transpiring. I love Danny Elfman to no end but after CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY and this film, I am ready for him to quit lyrics for awhile and just go back to underscoring. The ending didn't make sense to me because everybody seemed so happy in the underworld, but then the heroine gets to go to heaven, making me feel bad for all the dead people who are left behind. Will their world be so cheery the next day knowing that there is a greater reward than just being dead forever?
CUBE (1997) - I had not heard of this film until it recently came to my attention and sounded interesting. It is trying to be a psychological study with a high concept on a shoestring budget but it overshoots the target in my opinion. A group of disparate strangers awaken in a giant cube and are forced to find their way to freedom, knowing that one false move is instant death. They make a big point about how each of them was "chosen" for some individual talent and that they must all work together to survive, but then infighting brings them down as they seemingly prove that theory wrong by killing one another. There is a nugget of a great concept here and I believe this film will be much better the day it is remade by someone like Darren Aronofsky.
IN SEARCH OF THE CASTAWAYS (1962) - This film is both supremely silly and lots of fun. It is worth watching once but that will prove plenty. There are some laughably bad effects interspersed and you have never seen such bad process shots of people running in place in front of rear-projected images of apocalypse. The absolute best take-away from this movie is the song that Maurice Chevalier sings while stranded in a tree with a jaguar above and a flood below. He sings "Enjoy It" while cooking bird eggs for the gang - it has become a catch-phrase now for me and Cadence. Whenever one of us starts complaining about something, the other can instruct the sourpuss in a giddy French accent to basically stop bitching and enjoy it. The cat is gnawing on your toe? - Enjoy it! He's got nine of them to go - so enjoy it!
I MARRIED A WITCH (1942) - Tivo recorded it and Mason asked to watch it because he wonders if witches are real. He sat through the whole thing, which wasn't too tough at a brisk 77 minutes. There were a couple of laughs but not many. It seems like it should have been much funnier. There were some lame special effects, a shrewish Susan Hayward, and overall, not much to recommend.
ALVIN AND THE CHIPMUNKS (2007) - ENCHANTED was sold out so we wound up here. It was exactly as expected, maybe a bit more watchable even. Talking critters conquer pop culture but learn to despise the life of excess and crave the stability they left behind. It is the feature length examination of a minor subplot from PINOCCHIO.
OPERATION PETTICOAT (1959) - My first taste of Blake Edwards was in the 1980s, and I could never figure out why producers kept giving him the keys to the movie-making machine. Those films were dreadful but this one is pure delight. It is ten years older than me but doesn't show its age at all - it has a thoroughly modern feel to it, is very funny, and has plenty of story, populated by characters with whom we are happy to spend time. You can't help but love Cary Grant doing his thing and as a bonus, you get Tony Curtis doing his thing alongside. This one stands the 50-years-later test.
IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON (2007) - This is one for the time capsule - a fine portrait of the dozen or so men who made history by walking on the moon in the twentieth century, telling their story nearly four decades later. Curiously, Neil Armstrong opted out, which is a real shame, but there is some priceless footage of his parents on "What's My Line" in the early 60s being asked how they would feel if their son became the first man to walk on the moon. The stories these guys tell must be heard and yet to a man they feel as if they were just the lucky ones to be the individuals actually experiencing what was truly a shared experience for all of mankind. The footage the filmmakers use is simply astounding. I was born the day we launched for the moon and as a kid, I was very interested in the space program. I am still fascinated by it to no end and I'm so glad this film was made before these men are laid to rest as footnotes to history.
THE PRESIDENT'S LADY (1953) - Another Tivo offering, not even available as yet on DVD. I was not familiar with the film but was intrigued by the subject matter, as I had a slight familiarity with the real-life predicament faced by President Andrew Jackson during his political heyday. Here, Chuck Heston is Jackson, a rough and tumble frontiersman/lawyer. Dawn Howell look-a-like, Susan Hayward is his lady, Rachel. It turns out that her divorce from Mr Prick is not quite formalized at the time she weds Jackson and this causes grievous scandal and torment for the couple as his political capital soars. His enemies use her against him at every opportunity until she dies just weeks before his inauguration. I really liked the film. I like depictions of strong marriages after seeing umpteen thousand variants of the marriage doomed to fail. Hayward is winning and ranks up there with June Allyson of THE GLENN MILLER STORY on my short list of all-time favorite movie wives. The third act is a bit rushed but it is a nice story up until his reluctant call to the presidency.
STARDUST (2007) - It's a bit cluttered and overlong but I was charmed nonetheless. There is a straightforward hero quest story at work with a smattering of interesting characters who pop in and out. The first scenes with DeNiro were great but he wears out his welcome soon after. There are some wonderful moments, including a fencing duel with a discombobulated corpse, and there is some great humor - it all adds up to a lot of fun.
THE PARENT TRAP (1961) - I saw this on the last day of school when I was in 2nd grade and fell madly in love with Hayley Mills. At the time, I didn't even question why she had a British accent as both the Boston girl and the Monterey tomboy. I think I even considered this my favorite film until it was superseded by STRIPES about five years later. It is still a worthy family classic even if I notice now that it drags a bit at times. They do a fine job of populating the screen with two girls using but one actress. Mason was fooled - when we saw another Hayley Mills film soon after, he asked if it was one of the sisters from this movie.
CORPSE BRIDE (2005) - Technically, this film is a masterpiece. Even though I knew it was stop-motion, about half an hour in, I had convinced myself that it is actually CG. But no, it truly is stop-motion, an art form that has no real necessity to exist any longer other than it is so magical when done well. I thought the first act was brilliant but once we leave the drab real world and enter the colorful underworld, it falls into that familiar Tim Burton pacing problem where everything looks really great but we stop caring much about what is actually transpiring. I love Danny Elfman to no end but after CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY and this film, I am ready for him to quit lyrics for awhile and just go back to underscoring. The ending didn't make sense to me because everybody seemed so happy in the underworld, but then the heroine gets to go to heaven, making me feel bad for all the dead people who are left behind. Will their world be so cheery the next day knowing that there is a greater reward than just being dead forever?
CUBE (1997) - I had not heard of this film until it recently came to my attention and sounded interesting. It is trying to be a psychological study with a high concept on a shoestring budget but it overshoots the target in my opinion. A group of disparate strangers awaken in a giant cube and are forced to find their way to freedom, knowing that one false move is instant death. They make a big point about how each of them was "chosen" for some individual talent and that they must all work together to survive, but then infighting brings them down as they seemingly prove that theory wrong by killing one another. There is a nugget of a great concept here and I believe this film will be much better the day it is remade by someone like Darren Aronofsky.
IN SEARCH OF THE CASTAWAYS (1962) - This film is both supremely silly and lots of fun. It is worth watching once but that will prove plenty. There are some laughably bad effects interspersed and you have never seen such bad process shots of people running in place in front of rear-projected images of apocalypse. The absolute best take-away from this movie is the song that Maurice Chevalier sings while stranded in a tree with a jaguar above and a flood below. He sings "Enjoy It" while cooking bird eggs for the gang - it has become a catch-phrase now for me and Cadence. Whenever one of us starts complaining about something, the other can instruct the sourpuss in a giddy French accent to basically stop bitching and enjoy it. The cat is gnawing on your toe? - Enjoy it! He's got nine of them to go - so enjoy it!
I MARRIED A WITCH (1942) - Tivo recorded it and Mason asked to watch it because he wonders if witches are real. He sat through the whole thing, which wasn't too tough at a brisk 77 minutes. There were a couple of laughs but not many. It seems like it should have been much funnier. There were some lame special effects, a shrewish Susan Hayward, and overall, not much to recommend.
ALVIN AND THE CHIPMUNKS (2007) - ENCHANTED was sold out so we wound up here. It was exactly as expected, maybe a bit more watchable even. Talking critters conquer pop culture but learn to despise the life of excess and crave the stability they left behind. It is the feature length examination of a minor subplot from PINOCCHIO.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
DUDE REVIEWS
My last installment garnered no comments, not even a certificate of completion from Biff, so these are scaled down reviews of ten films I have seen, all from last year, ranked in order of enjoyment:
JUNO (2007) - the best and most original film of the year that I have seen. I know Ellen Page from HARD CANDY and now she is a few years older and funnier. She creates a character impossible to forget. The script is also unforgettable. I learned that you do not have a story without an antagonist but here it is achieved. There are no bad guys in this story. The dad and stepmom are real people and not caricatures as they would have been in any other teenage movie. The kids are real too with real thoughts and emotions. The situations are funny and true and it never takes the route you expect. Movies like this just feel good to watch.
SERAPHIM FALLS (2007) - FIRST BLOOD meets JOSEY WALES. I liked it a lot despite the peculiar third act in which delusions appear to affect reality. It is mostly Liam Neeson chasing Pierce Brosnan through treacherous terrain - they begin in the snowy mountains, nearly freezing to death, and wind up on the barren plateau with nary the strength to fight. A movie for guys who love movies.
THE LOOKOUT (2007) - interesting study of a one-time golden boy who got himself a little brain damage and now sweeps floors in a bank. He is preyed upon by a band of bank robbers who make him their inside man. The dude from 3rd Rock proves that he has the acting chops to stick around for awhile by creating a nifty character.
3:10 TO YUMA (2007) - it's a good mix of action and psychology that goes terribly haywire in the closing minutes. I know it was written that way long ago, but change it anyways if it sucks that bad. If Ben Wade simply gets on the train, knowing that he will escape later, then it is genius. Instead, we lose the guy we love and Wade kills all his buddies even though he still plans to escape later. I don't get it.
300 (2007) - the visual look of this film is simply astounding. There were a few scenes I played over and over just to look at again. Included in this ritual were the sexy scene with the babely wife and the slow-motion raptuous dance of the nymph. There were also some incredible battle sequences. It is truly a visual delight but I could have done with fewer beasts and mutants. It's basically BRAVEHEART for teenagers.
LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD (2007) - sure, it's ridiculous but all guys love a good action pic when handled with care. The plot is a decent shade of realistic armageddon and Justin Long is good as the sidekick. It is the height of silliness when McClain takes out a chopper with a squad car but there are some riveting action sequences to make up for that.
SUPERBAD (2007) - here is a movie made by teenagers for teenagers. It was written by Seth Rogen and his pal when they were thirteen and shelved until they had the power to get it made. It is ten times more crass than it needs to be and there has rarely been a more unlikeable lead character. This is somewhat made up for by the iconic McLovin character who is twice as funny as Napoleon Dynamite. I liked that it was a night-in-the-life tale, which was a SuperCrass version of DAZED AND CONFUSED.
THE SAVAGES (2007) - overrated by a mile but fun to watch two of everyone's favorite actors as siblings. The better film is YOU CAN COUNT ON ME in which Laura Linney plays the sane sibling. In this one, she's kind of nutty. It's a mildly interesting character study but not as good as you are being lead to believe.
1408 (2007) - it's fairly interesting until the way-over-the-top third act. I understand that the Stephen King short-story is mainly the conversation between John Cusack and Samuel Jackson. That is a great scene but it almost doesn't belong in this film since Jackson never reappears after that encounter. Cusack can carry a movie and he does here for long stretches.
THE BEE MOVIE (2007) - it had some good buzz but I was less than charmed. I actually nodded off for a few minutes in the middle. The Seinfeld humor works onstage and in sitcom format but drones on at feature length. If you are a critter that can talk, then just talk to one person, don't go on CNN - that is stretching credulity beyond repair.
My last installment garnered no comments, not even a certificate of completion from Biff, so these are scaled down reviews of ten films I have seen, all from last year, ranked in order of enjoyment:
JUNO (2007) - the best and most original film of the year that I have seen. I know Ellen Page from HARD CANDY and now she is a few years older and funnier. She creates a character impossible to forget. The script is also unforgettable. I learned that you do not have a story without an antagonist but here it is achieved. There are no bad guys in this story. The dad and stepmom are real people and not caricatures as they would have been in any other teenage movie. The kids are real too with real thoughts and emotions. The situations are funny and true and it never takes the route you expect. Movies like this just feel good to watch.
SERAPHIM FALLS (2007) - FIRST BLOOD meets JOSEY WALES. I liked it a lot despite the peculiar third act in which delusions appear to affect reality. It is mostly Liam Neeson chasing Pierce Brosnan through treacherous terrain - they begin in the snowy mountains, nearly freezing to death, and wind up on the barren plateau with nary the strength to fight. A movie for guys who love movies.
THE LOOKOUT (2007) - interesting study of a one-time golden boy who got himself a little brain damage and now sweeps floors in a bank. He is preyed upon by a band of bank robbers who make him their inside man. The dude from 3rd Rock proves that he has the acting chops to stick around for awhile by creating a nifty character.
3:10 TO YUMA (2007) - it's a good mix of action and psychology that goes terribly haywire in the closing minutes. I know it was written that way long ago, but change it anyways if it sucks that bad. If Ben Wade simply gets on the train, knowing that he will escape later, then it is genius. Instead, we lose the guy we love and Wade kills all his buddies even though he still plans to escape later. I don't get it.
300 (2007) - the visual look of this film is simply astounding. There were a few scenes I played over and over just to look at again. Included in this ritual were the sexy scene with the babely wife and the slow-motion raptuous dance of the nymph. There were also some incredible battle sequences. It is truly a visual delight but I could have done with fewer beasts and mutants. It's basically BRAVEHEART for teenagers.
LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD (2007) - sure, it's ridiculous but all guys love a good action pic when handled with care. The plot is a decent shade of realistic armageddon and Justin Long is good as the sidekick. It is the height of silliness when McClain takes out a chopper with a squad car but there are some riveting action sequences to make up for that.
SUPERBAD (2007) - here is a movie made by teenagers for teenagers. It was written by Seth Rogen and his pal when they were thirteen and shelved until they had the power to get it made. It is ten times more crass than it needs to be and there has rarely been a more unlikeable lead character. This is somewhat made up for by the iconic McLovin character who is twice as funny as Napoleon Dynamite. I liked that it was a night-in-the-life tale, which was a SuperCrass version of DAZED AND CONFUSED.
THE SAVAGES (2007) - overrated by a mile but fun to watch two of everyone's favorite actors as siblings. The better film is YOU CAN COUNT ON ME in which Laura Linney plays the sane sibling. In this one, she's kind of nutty. It's a mildly interesting character study but not as good as you are being lead to believe.
1408 (2007) - it's fairly interesting until the way-over-the-top third act. I understand that the Stephen King short-story is mainly the conversation between John Cusack and Samuel Jackson. That is a great scene but it almost doesn't belong in this film since Jackson never reappears after that encounter. Cusack can carry a movie and he does here for long stretches.
THE BEE MOVIE (2007) - it had some good buzz but I was less than charmed. I actually nodded off for a few minutes in the middle. The Seinfeld humor works onstage and in sitcom format but drones on at feature length. If you are a critter that can talk, then just talk to one person, don't go on CNN - that is stretching credulity beyond repair.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)