Movie Mania

Mid Atlantic Nostalgia Convention with Overflowing Memories

2011-09-26T21:53:00.001-07:00

A star studded lineup of film and TV stars of yesteryear descended on Hunt Valley, MD,this past weekend as the 6th Annual Mid Atlantic Nostalgia Convention was held amid a sea of vendors with an overwhelming array of posters, books and assorted memorabilia toys and tidbits.

Headlining the celebrities was Oscar winner Patty Duke who is guesting on TVs new Hawaii Five O in October as an Alzheimer-stricken mother of a crime victim. I asked her about an early 1970's made for TV movie that won awards and acclaim, My Sweet Charlie, and she agreed that it needed release but that it was likely tied up over legal rights. I also told her how I enjoyed her son-Sean Astin's work (Lord of the Rings trilogy, 24). She was such a nice person as was her staff. You get a feeling about some people being genuinely sweet and giving, well that's what you get with her.

Among the other notables who attended and signed autographs and posed for pictures were Michael Constantine and Karen Valentine both from TV's Room 222, Tony Dow from Leave It To Beaver, Davy Jones of The Monkees, and several others.

The merchandise for sale ranged from inexpensive cards and toys to collectibles at several hundred dollars! In fact the variety and selection was downright overwhelming at times. Guess I'll have to come back next year for more as this relatively young convention is growing by leaps and bounds.

Monster Mania Con 20 with Celebs and Trinkets

2011-09-18T08:33:00.000-07:00

Director John Carpenter was the highlight of the 20th Monster Mania Convention held in Hunt Valley, MD, this weekend. His early films are cult classics including Assault on Precinct 13, Halloween, Escape from New York, and The Thing remake. When asked if he and frequent star Kurt Russell will reunite, he did not know except that Russell was still alive so who knows? Other stars included Anthony Michael Hall (TV's The Dead Zone and films 16 Candles and The Breakfast Club), P.J. Soles (Carrie, Halloween, and Rock n' Roll High School), veteran Joe Tukel (Paths of Glory, The Shining, and Blade Runner) ,Ernie Hudson (Ghostbusters, The Crow) and many more.

There were plenty of vendors selling movie and TV memorabilia and horror related makeup, props, and paraphenalia. The attendence was good and a good time was had by all it seems.

X MEN: FIRST CLASS Is a Grand Beginning

2011-07-02T15:58:00.000-07:00

The super hero genre in movies has been loading up with adaptations from DC and Marvel Comics primarily from the glorious Silver Age of Comics. In most cases, these incarnations have taken on a stunning visual realism with state of the art technology and pyrotechnics, but what separates the cream of the crop like Spiderman 2 and The Dark Knight from the rest is great acting and a superior script. Having scored less than impressive results with X Men: Wolverine and Last Stand, the reboot of the franchise, X Men: First Class, is a prequel that reinvigorates with a fresh cast, elaborate script (Ashley Miller and Jack Stentz) and solid direction by Matthew Vaughn (Kick Ass) who has proven himself in this genre.

During World War II, a young boy, Erik, is separated from his parents by ruthless Nazis and tormented by a sadistic doctor, Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon), who forces Erik to unleash his power of magnetism over metal. Meanwhile in a mansion in New York, a young, telepathic Charles Xavier befriends a fellow mutant named Raven who can morph into any person. Years later in 1962, an adult Erik (Michael Fassbinder) searches the world for Sebastian to exact revenge even as Charles is thriving at Oxford University. In Las Vegas, CIA agent Moira McTaggert (Rose Byrne) infiltrates a strip club and spies Sebastian Shaw planning to engineer a Cold War conflict with the Russians. Sebastian is aided by a roster of evil mutants including Emma Frost (January Jones). Moira and the CIA seek the help of Xavier who realizes that there are other mutants in the world, and he must seek them out. As Erik closes on Sebastian, he comes in contact with Charles, now realizing he, too is not alone as a mutant, and joins forces with Charles’ growing roster of young mutants including an increasingly restless Raven AKA Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence). Each discovered mutant has a distinctive power and a unique name or moniker (Charles becomes Professor X and Erik is Magneto). After a deadly attack by Sebastian and his mutants at a CIA compound, Charles and an ever vengeful Erik set about to train their raw recruits to face Sebastian as he steers the Russians on a collision course with the Americans in Cuba. With a global war imminent, Sebastian reveals a deeper, more insidious plan that could mean the end of humanity. The action filled climax is a visual feast that has a stunning display of military might versus the mutant super powers and sets the stage for betrayal and realigning allegiances.

This is a handsomely mounted production, with visual effects that serve the story and its super mutants in ways that could not be convincingly rendered a generation before. When a young Erik displays destructive power in front of his Nazi captors, it harkens back to Drew Barrymore’s burning apocalypse in Firestarter. Lending realism to otherwise unworldly characters, the dialogue frequently switches to German, Russian, French and Spanish as the setting dictates, and the fashion styles and news footage lend an air of period authenticity, although trying to integrate events like the Cuban Missile Crisis requires some suspension of disbelief.

The film succeeds in portraying the mutants as a metaphor for racial discrimination and being treated as commodities by each respective side of the impending war. There are moral dilemmas as these kids express feelings and doubts including the question of whether they should accept being different or conform to the human race. Witness the interesting parallels with the Nazi genocide of World War II, and how Erik ironically assumes some of the corrupt evil from Sebastian, the very individual he hates.

This is a very attractive, talented group of actors led by McAvoy (Atonement), sounding like a grown up Harry Potter with a commanding presence and a deliciously charming Fassbender (quite effective in Inglourious Basterds) who is destined to conquer heroic or villainous roles for years to come. Bacon is featured prominently and has a field day hamming it up as the scheming Sebastian who is clearly modeled after Nazi doctor Josef Mengele. The scenes as Charles and Erik search for mutants are quite fun, and there are a couple of clever cameos.

The film has echoes of traditional James Bond films with its iconic evil characters bent on world domination. That’s not a bad thing. Whether the box office will garner a direct sequel remains to be seen. Perhaps the one thing lacking is that it does not engage the audience the way films like Raiders of the Lost Ark and Spiderman did. The same sort of thing plagued the original Lara Croft: Tomb Raider film, only more so. What comic book enthusiasts will savor is a fairly entertaining recreation of what we know as the X Men, and while things don’t perfectly mesh with the original X Men canon, this is a slick, intelligent attempt to rejuvenate a franchise much as J. J. Abrams’ Star Trek relaunched that series.

*** of **** stars (add ½ * for Marvel fanatics)

A BRIDESMAIDS To Celebrate

2011-06-06T19:49:00.000-07:00

TV’s Saturday Night Live has long been a proving ground for some of the top comedians who have often gone on to greater fame. Witness John Belushi (Animal House), Eddie Murphy (Beverly Hills Cop, Trading Places), Bill Murray (Ghostbusters, Stripes), Will Ferrell (Anchorman), and Tina Fey (30 Rock) among many. Certainly a few have failed in films like Deuce Bigelow, The Ladies Man, and MacGruber. Current female SNL player, Kristen Wiig, joins the ranks of the former with Bridesmaids, an occasionally gross, yet heartfelt tale of self worth and ultimately love. After numerous supporting roles in popular films like Adventureland and Whip It, she has made the big leap into stardom, and she co-wrote the screenplay too!

Annie (Wiig) is an insecure, single woman working a miserable job at a jewelry store and whose love life consists of impersonal sexual romps with a narcissistic playboy (Jon Hamm). Her dreams of a bakery having failed recently, she has horrible roommates and a doting mother (Jill Clayburgh) nearby. When her best friend, Lillian (Maya Rudolph) announces her engagement and asks her to be her bridesmaid, Annie prepares the female bridal party for gowns, showers, and the reception. When Lillian’s wealthy, ‘perfect’ friend, Helen (Rose Byrne), elbows her way for attention and begins to take over the wedding preparations, Annie becomes jealous and overdoes things in a display of one-upsmanship (or rather womanship). In a series of confrontational events, Annie sinks further into verbal ineptitude and embarrassment in front of her best friend. Along the way she gets pulled over by an Irish cop, Rhodes (Chris O’Dowd), who takes a fancy to her; what puzzles her is why any man would be nice to her? It all culminates at a pre-wedding reception where Annie unleashes her anger and frustration. Things get worse for her at work and her apartment, and as her world comes crashing down and she becomes an outsider to her best friend’s wedding, Annie’s fate takes a dramatic turn amid friendship and love.

Audiences have been well aware of Wiig’s physical and whimsical skills as a skit comedienne. What this film does is show an entirely different spectrum of her abilities as an actress and writer (with Annie Mumolo directed by Paul Feig). By playing a sympathetic character with flaws and yearnings and surrounding herself with a roster of talented actresses, Wiig has positioned herself as an every woman who has had life’s ups and downs, but mostly downs and creating such pathos that the payoff at the end is more satisfying. The scenes between Wiig and O’Dowd, who make a terrific couple, are genuine and really hold the story on a firm emotional footing. As one of Lillian’s friends, Melissa McCarthy (Mike & Molly) steals every scene she is in and provides the film with some of its funniest moments in support. Even Byrne shines as the manipulative, scheming friend while Ellie Kemper and Wendi McLendon-Covey round out the wedding party. As Annie’s mom, Clayburgh performs a sweet, final career note; this was her last film. Jon Hamm is only in a few scenes but is quite effective as a chauvinist jerk.

There are numerous funny moments. A toast to Lillian and her fiancé by Annie and Helen develops into dueling testimonials that become silly and outrageous. When Annie gets stopped by a policeman, she displays her talent for physical comedy in conducting a drunk test. A scene where she sits at her mom’s home alone watching a video of Castaway’s scene of Tom Hanks losing his ‘best friend’ Wilson is a hoot. On the plane when Annie mixes prescription medication and alcohol, she becomes obnoxiously and amusingly uninhibited, and there is a running gag with McCarthy who thinks her seat companion is really an air marshal. Bridesmaids a film that is honest and direct about its subject matter and its consenting adults, and it has moments that are crude such as the food poisoning scene at the wedding boutique and some sexual gymnastics between Wiig and Hamm.

The film is a bit uneven in places but when it hits the right notes especially towards the end, when a major character like Annie undergoes a transformation, it feels genuine and at times heartfelt, and we are the beneficiaries of something more than a pedestrian comedy. When her relationship with Lillian is threatened, Annie reacts in exaggerated, desperate behavior. She even has trouble accepting true intimacy from a good man because she has never been treated so nice. It’s really about Annie being able to connect in a meaningful way with another human being. In fact, Annie’s plight and desperation shares its DNA with Bridget Jones’s Diary.

With its predominantly female cast, this Judd Apatow (40 Year Old Virgin, Knocked Up) co-produced film delivers the laughs with feeling. Don’t think of this as just a ‘chick flick’ but rather an entertaining, contemporary comedy that contains just a bit more estrogen. And do stay for the closing credits if you want a bit of raunchy fun.

*** of **** stars (Add ½* for Wiig fans)

2010 OSCAR PREDICTIONS by Clint

2011-02-25T09:30:00.000-08:00

Some of the top categories are pretty easy to predict but with the Oscars you never know for sure. I’ve seen all Best Picture nominees so the rest are guesses. (I am leaving the shorts categories alone.) Enjoy!

BEST PICTURE-The juggernaut among critics awards for The Social Network has given way to a film that tugs on one’s heart- The King’s Speech.
BEST DIRECTOR- David Fincher has paid his dues. Photo finish here with Tom Hooper hoping to ride the wave of The King’s Speech. And where the *%#! is Christopher Nolan’s name?
BEST ACTOR- Colin Firth’s time has come.
BEST ACTRESS-Natalie Portman gave a great performance in a physically demanding role of a lifetime. Sorry Annette.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR-Christian Bale thinned out and carried the heart of The Fighter. Geoffrey Rush has a chance.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS-Melissa Leo gets recognized for her body of work and a marvelous role-if only she hadn’t taken out those self ads. Hailee Steinfeld could pull an upset.
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY-The Kings Speech
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY-The Social Network
BEST ANIMATED FILM-Toy Story 3
BEST FOREIGN FILM- Biutiful
BEST FILM EDITING-The Social Network
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY-True Grit’s Deakins finally gets his due.
BEST ART DIRECTION-Inception with Alice in Wonderland coming strong
BEST SOUND-Inception
BEST SOUND EFECTS EDITING-Inception
BEST COSTUME DESIGN-Alice in Wonderland
BEST MUSICAL SCORE-Inception but this is wide open
BEST SONG-127 Hours (although I hold out hope a Toy Story will finally win one.)
BEST VISUAL EFFECTS-Inception
BEST DOCUMENTARY-Exit Through the Gift Shop
BEST MAKEUP-The Wolf Man
The biggest tally may go to Inception with as many as 5 Oscars.

Domestic Life in THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT

2011-02-25T08:31:00.000-08:00

The nuclear family takes on a different spin when both parents are same sex and the kids are the product of a male sperm donor in The Kids Are All Right. When traumatic upheaval and revelations strike such a family, the results can be amusing and also tragic. Annette Bening and Julianne Moore highlight an insightful script about domesticity turned on its head.

Nic (Bening) and Jules (Moore) are lesbian parents of two teens, Joni and Laser. One day the children research and contact their biological father, Paul (Mark Ruffalo), who agrees to meet his progeny. After an awkward first meeting, things actually go well as the new family connections are explored by the kids and their newly found father. The couple of Nic and Jules are a contrast; Nic is the physician who is totally controlling while Jules is still trying to find herself with a new business of landscaping. Laser hangs with the wrong crowd and begins to realize that he deserves better through his bond with Paul. Joni is trying to assert herself as an adult and prepares to go to college. The moms show a parental responsibility to watch over their children and want to meet the dad. When Paul hires Jules to do work on his restaurant landscape, the two connect. As Paul’s influence begins to overcome the family, Nic feels left out. But there is an attraction between Jules and Paul that leads to a torrid affair, and when Nic discovers the truth, the family is torn apart. Into this mix are two maturing children whose emotions will be tested throughout.

The roles are well acted especially by Benning as a betrayed spouse, and in particular, her scene of revelation about Jules is a marvel of expressiveness and devastating heartbreak. This culminates in a powerful moment with all the principals present at Paul’s dinner table. Moore gives solid support and shines in her heartfelt plea to her family near the end. The ensemble is well cast particularly Ruffalo whose almost bystander role is suddenly elevated to catalyst and disruptor of the family’s dynamic.

The story has a nice balance of serious tones and comedic elements born out of the situations. The themes work on several levels like ingredients of a zesty recipe: the family chemistry, the couple of Nic and Jules, the kids’ developing bond with Paul, Paul and Jules, and shake and mix well. Everyone has needs and wants, and the strongest is a need to belong to a family and the need to connect with another human being whether it be Laser and his friends, Paul and Jules, Paul and his children, and Nic and Jules. Amid the conflicts, no one escapes unscathed. There are no real heroes or villains here, only hard truths about life and relationships.

The fact that two lesbians are having the conflict over infidelity may seem novel on the surface, but it could easily have been a heterosexual couple. In fact the notion of two lesbians virtually disappears as we witness and understand this family unit with its warts and all. It could be any family when you think about it. The fact that both Benning and Moore play their respective spousal roles so convincingly is a testament to their acting skills playing off an excellent script by Stuart Blumberg and Lisa Cholodenko, who also directs. The ending rings true and shows not only how far the relationships have come, but how that foundation, despite some serious challenges, is strong enough to survive. Life moves on, and there is hope for the future.

There are not a lot of loose ends in this story although, toward the end, it would be nice to get a bit more resolution to Ruffalo’s character. The film does contains a couple of brief explicit sex scenes without which this would essentially be a PG rated film. There is little to quibble about, and the viewer gets to experience one of the more insightful domestic dramas in recent years.
*** or **** stars

A Girl’s Indomitable Spirit in WINTER’S BONE

2011-02-25T08:29:00.000-08:00

Winter’s Bone, adapted by independent director Debra Granik and Anne Rosellini from the novel by Daniel Woodrell, is a small, low budget film with a courageous lead character. This is one of those small films that features strong performances particularly by newcomer Jennifer Lawrence.

In a rural part of the country, a teenage girl, Ree (Jennifer Lawrence), raises her family which includes her younger brother and little sister. While most girls her age are attending high school, she has to assume the role of sister and parent. Life is grueling and tough for Ree who cares for her siblings even as her mother is depressed and dysfunctional and her father, who has had scrapes with the law, is missing from a bond hearing. Unfortunately the family’s house has been put up as collateral for his bail and is in danger to be taken by the bail bondsman. Ree has to rely on the kindness and donations of food and supplies from neighbors, and when her home is about to be repossessed, her whole family is in danger of having their fragile world destroyed. Threatened with her family’s survival and determined not to lose her home, she sets out to find her father by questioning friends and family. It seems that there is a little family blood everywhere, and people might know more than they let on. Her uncle, Teardrop (John Hawkes), is a menacing, uncooperative person. She follows leads that are dead ends and wild goose chases. She is at the end of her rope and desperate. What can she do? Is her father dead or on the run? Her search leads to some really bad people who are local crime lords, and her punishment at the hands of those she thought were friends is graphic and ruthless. Her situation is nearly an impossible one for anyone much less a teenager. Then help from an unlikely source begins to shed light on the fate of her father as her family’s future hangs in the balance.

Family is all important to Ree. She is put in what seems to be a hopeless situation with no options. Undeterred, she will not let her family be broken up. She has to not only act and think like an adult, but to grow up fast and also teach her brother and sister about the basics of life including hunting and cooking. She cherishes her siblings and despite her dad’s criminal background and what it has done to the family, she clings to his clothing and belongings especially his guitar which also serves as a symbolic bond with her uncle. You ask yourself just what would you do in this situation? How would you survive? You respond to her plight by watching how she reacts to her circumstances.

The lack of a budget does not hinder the film due to its subject matter and focusing on the individual characters. This is a very linear narrative with no parallel action. Some of the dialogue which reflects the local dialects is at times hard to understand. The unknown faces lend a very authentic feel as if these people really live this life. The rural countryside is filmed as a very foreboding presence and is itself a powerful character. The film employs frequent handheld camerawork that lends an immediacy and documentary feel which work in the film’s favor. Even the film’s colors are a darker hue which adds to the somber tone.

Lawrence really impresses in one of her first starring roles on film. The story rests on her shoulders, and she is more than up to the task. John Hawkes is believable as her uncle, and what’s fascinating is his character’s development and his dramatic changes over the course of the story.

It is a kind of downer of a film as the odds are stacked against Ree, and while Winter’s Bone is not for everyone with its solemn, serious themes, for those willing to immerse themselves in an intimate, realistic tale of loyalty and survival and a young girl who bravely carries on, it is an inspiration.

*** of **** stars

TRUE GRIT and a Girl’s Mission

2011-02-25T08:27:00.000-08:00

Joel and Ethan Coen (No Country for Old Men, Fargo) have extended their filmmaking prowess into new territory by adapting Charles Portis’ famous novel, True Grit, and their interpretation is a refreshing take on the western genre and compares favorably to the memorable John Wayne starring version of 1969. Purists who thought it would be sacrilege to remake a western classic have little to fear. Thanks to a smart script and strong acting, True Grit comes off as a very solid film with some similarities and noticeable differences from the original film.

Told in flashback by a woman’s voice, a 14 year old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) wants to avenge the murder of her father at the hands of Tom Chaney (a grizzled Josh Brolin), and she arrives in a small town to hire Marshal Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges), an aged, hard drinking veteran lawman who has done his share of killing and more. Mattie is not one to be trifled with and as another pursuer, Texas Ranger LaBoeuf (Matt Damon), realizes, not one to intimidate. Headstrong, she has grit herself. Together the trio search for Chaney and seek out a lead in another outlaw, Ned Pepper (an unrecognizable Barry Pepper). As friction mounts among the searchers, LeBoeuf strikes out on his own, and Cogburn and Mattie come upon a cabin. There, a couple of outlaws are smoked out, and this leads to Ned Pepper and his gang. Can Chaney be far behind? It all culminates in a final confrontation between Cogburn and Ned Pepper as Mattie comes face to face with her quarry and LeBoeuf reenters the scene with violent results.

Bridges (Crazy Hearts) is utterly convincing in making this version of Rooster Cogburn his own persona. He portrays him as a proud, grumpy curmudgeon who just may be a crack shot and smarter than he lets on. This takes nothing away from the over the top performance of John Wayne who won an Oscar for his rendition. You could almost see Tommy Lee Jones in this role. We gets bits and pieces of Cogburn’s past, and some of the tales make you wonder if they are utter fabrications or sheer exaggeration. Steinfeld is a marvel in her first movie role. She embodies Mattie as a take charge gal who will not be deterred and has enough smarts and spunk to strike a hard bargain with any man. Witness her amusing negotiations with a horse trader and wearing him down. Damon (Good Will Hunting) does well in a supporting role and adds more nuance than Glen Campbell’s version of LaBoeuf did in the older version. Brolin and Pepper have what amount to small but memorable screen time as the bad guys.

The dynamics of the trio are interestingly portrayed as LeBoeuf and Cogburn face off and trade barbs, while Mattie asserts herself every chance she gets. You even think there might be a hint of attraction between Mattie and LeBoeuf. The arc of LeBoeuf’s character deviates from the 1969 film significantly especially at the climax. The only negative is that his fate is left open ended and unresolved.

Much of the film is superior to the older version. There is really only one scene that would suffer in comparison to the original film, and that is the climactic charge by Cogburn against the bad guys. Bridges does well but he is not John Wayne. The scene lacks the heroic, mythic feel of Wayne. Also, when Bridges is shown in closeup carrying Mattie to safety, it seems a bit phony. But those are minor observations. A final sequence shows what happens many years afterward and serves as a melancholy postscript, and it has a final feel of a film like Unforgiven. The film could easily work without it though.

Thanks to the Coens, the authentic sounding dialogue, which is laced with humorous moments including a shooting contest between Cogburn and LeBoeuf, is peppy and sharp, a marked improvement from standard western fare. There are times when Bridges’ drawling and inflections are hard to understand but you get the gist anyway through context and body language. Technical crafts are standout especially a good musical score by Carter Burwell and beautiful cinematography by veteran Roger Deakins (A Beautiful Mind).
The Coen brothers must have been drawn to the quirky characters and the language of the novel, and while this is certainly not their best film, it is a very entertaining western with some standout performances.

*** or **** stars

The Majestic Roar of THE KING’S SPEECH

2011-02-25T08:26:00.000-08:00

As a document of a little known history of pre-World War II England, The King’s Speech is a fascinating, heart rending dramatization of King George VI, who assumed the throne despite a debilitating speech problem at a time when his country needed him the most. Well directed by TV veteran Tom Hooper (John Adams) from a lifelong project by screenwriter David Seidler, it boasts Colin Firth’s (Bridget Jones Diary, A Single Man) best performance as the beleaguered king and award caliber support by Geoffrey Rush (Shine, Elizabeth) and Helena Bonham Carter (Alice in Wonderland, Room With a View).

In 1925, Prince Albert (Colin Firth), who is second in line to the throne, gives a speech through BBC radio at Wembley Stadium in England, and it goes poorly as he hesitates and stumbles his words much to the astonishment of the crowd. He has a stuttering problem that is revealed in the most public and humiliating way. By the 1930’s in London, Albert is subjected to a multitude of therapies and remedies that range from speaking with a mouthful of marbles to smoking! His frustration grows until he abandons any hope of solving his affliction. His wife, Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter), seeks out an obscure, Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), who feels confident he can cure the prince. A struggling actor himself, Logue has a playful sense of humor that does not ingratiate himself with the future King of England. It is a humbling process, but he slowly brings the prince out of his timid and isolated shell. They work on a progression of methods which includes utilizing recordings and headphones and delves into Albert’s childhood. The therapy sessions are not without setbacks but a bond develops into a strong friendship. As 1936 approaches, King George V dies, and when The Prince of Wales (Guy Pierce) abdicates the throne to be with an American divorcee, the title and responsibility fall on Prince Albert who is desperate not to be placed in this position when England needs a leader. As the clouds of war approach Europe, Prince Albert is named King George VI on December 12, 1936. With England on the brink of declaring war on Germany, and a radio broadcast to all of England and the world, George summons Logue to coach him through the most important speech of his life. With Logue at his side to guide his every word, George speaks to the nation.

Hooper does a very straightforward job without having to resort to flashy camerawork but instead lets his actors do what they do best-act! This long gestating screenplay started with Seidler as a child stutterer listening to radio broadcasts of the king, and it was not until his widow, the Queen Mother, died that he had her conditional consent to tackle the story. It does play a bit with facts but never loses sight of the core relationship of the two disparate men and how a common actor taught a prince to be king. Technical production is excellent all around from the impressive period costumes and art direction to the dramatic score and dark hued cinematography.

It is the interplay and war of wills between Firth and Rush that is the delicious center of this relationship based story. Reunited after having costarred in Shakespeare in Love, both actors are at the top of their game, and part of the fun is that despite the seriousness of the therapy, there are humorous moments to savor. Carter plays ‘less is more’ in one of her more conventional roles, and she is quite convincing as royalty. Some nice turns are made by acting royalty, Michael Gambon, Guy Pierce, Derek Jacobi, and Claire Bloom among others.

The story adds texture in the family details by revealing George V as a domineering father. The troubles of George VI are shown in intimate scenes with his children as he tries to read a story but is handicapped by his impediment. The documentary footage of Hitler’s mastery of public speaking is studied with fascination and almost envy by George. It is an ironic yet telling scene. Logue adores his own family, and his down to earth persona is in sharp contrast to George VI’s more formal yet heartfelt affections for his family. There is a good contrast made of the King’s life from that of the common man. In the scene where George VI is crowned King, he must address his court and realizes that everyone, even his own family, will now treat him differently. Life will never be the same again. When George VI makes his speech at the end, we see that he is learning to be a king.

As a piece of history, The King’s Speech is thoroughly engaging, but what makes it affecting is one man’s triumph over adversity with the support of a loving wife and the friendship of a unique therapist.

**** of **** stars

Heart and Soul of THE FIGHTER

2011-02-25T08:23:00.000-08:00

OK, you may think, “another boxing film about a nobody who becomes somebody”, right? Don’t underestimate The Fighter as another boxing film. It has heart and good acting, but most of all, it is authentic. This film purposely avoids sentiment and going for easy, weepy moments. Rocky this is not. This pet project of producer and star Mark Wahlberg has been years in the making and the payoff here is a gallery of great performances by talented actors who do justice to their real life counterparts.

This true story centers on boxer Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg) who struggles to be a junior welterweight champion with training by his half-brother and former fighter, Dicky Ekland (an emaciated Christian Bale). Dicky lives his dashed dreams through Micky and has his own problems with drug addiction and other criminal activities. The extended family includes a supportive father and a controlling mother, Alice (Melissa Leo). Micky’s life changes when he meets a bartender, Charlene (Amy Adams), who believes in him. When the opportunity comes to take his career to the next level and work with professional trainers and management in Las Vegas, Micky’s relationship with Dicky is jeopardized and causes a mighty rift with his family especially his ‘manager’ Alice who feels betrayed. To make matters worse, Dicky gets in trouble with the law and must serve prison. He still lives in the past, clinging to memories of boxing Sugar Ray Leonard in 1978. Micky is so torn when a seemingly winnable fight switches his intended opponent to one who is much heavier at the last minute, that he contemplates quitting altogether. Riddled with guilt, he becomes reclusive until Charlene intercedes. He begins to fight again and amasses a series of wins until he is one step away from a championship if he can overcome a challenger, Sanchez, and Dicky offers tips on how to fight him. Faced with a chance to really make something of his career, Micky must choose between his new handlers and Dicky who taught him everything he knows about boxing. It could mean a championship in the end.

The film works on different levels of relationships: Micky and Charlene, Micky and his family, but most of all the film rests on the bond between the two brothers. There is a good sense of family life and local flavor. Micky and Dicky grew up local athletes and resident celebrities of sorts in a blue collar town where everybody knows each other. When Micky and Charlene challenge Alice, there is a tumultuous change of dynamics and a tense battle of wills. The best scene and also a turning point in the story happens when Dicky confronts Charlene about her own shortcomings, and everything in a way comes full circle as each person must look within to missed opportunities and not achieving their dreams. It is an honest, pivotal moment that validates Dicky’s character who, surprisingly, still knows a thing or two about boxing. Ironically Micky and Dicky’s scenes recall Marlon Brando and Rod Steiger as brothers in On the Waterfront also about a washed up fighter.

The fight scenes are quite convincing and well edited, and when you have a well chiseled actor like Wahlberg (The Departed), a kind of modern day John Garfield, you accept him as a boxer without question. Bale (The Dark Knight) really inhabits his portrayal of a proverbial loser, and he looks the part having shed substantial weight. Was this once the boy who enchanted us in Steven Spielberg’s Empire of the Sun? Come to think of it, Spielberg has another young alumnus in Adams (Catch Me If You Can) who makes the most of her role as a bright, headstrong woman who supports Micky and butts heads with Alice and her daughters literally. Leo (Frozen River) is quite good as the proud matriarch whose influence and authority is threatened.

The film tells its story as directed by David O. Russell (Three Kings) in workman like manner. It’s almost the kind of film Clint Eastwood makes these days. The story and relationships are strong enough to easily carry the film without resorting to sentimentality. Indeed, there is a thrilling moment ringside where a shot almost follows through with Alice and Charlene hugging, but Russell cuts away to another unglamorous shot. Bravo for not taking the easy way out although there are a couple of scenes could have been extended more. It’s also nice to see the real life brothers in the end credits, and you know that the film has done their lives justice. The original screenplay and story had a lot of writers involved, and the result is a heck of a remarkable comeback story and a family that would not quit.

***1/2 of **** stars

The Agony and Ecstasy of 127 HOURS

2011-02-25T08:21:00.000-08:00

Based on the harrowing tale of survival by Aron Ralston and adapted by Simon Beaufoy and director Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire, 28 Days Later), 127 Hours challenges the viewer to share in a difficult, life changing event that most people could never contemplate. It’s quite a feat to engage and emotionally move an audience focused solely on one person in one place. For an actor to pull this off is a great testament to James Franco’s acting skills and physical prowess as well as Boyle’s ingenuity behind the camera.

In April, 2003, Aron Ralston (Franco) escapes the rat race of the city to go hiking in a remote terrain. After parking his car, he goes mountain biking and then by foot deeper into isolation. There, he comes upon two hikers, Megan and Kristi, who are a bit lost. He tells them that the earth with its rocks and mountains is always moving. How prophetic! Aron guides the women and puts them on the right track after a brief adventure in a cave and a sparkling pool of water. Later, he proceeds on his trek of solitude and, while climbing between a narrow ravine, slips, and as he falls, a large bolder tumbles and pins his arm against the wall. Trying everything possible to dislodge the rock, he finds he is hopelessly trapped with limited supplies. No one knows where he is because he was didn’t care enough to mention it to family or friends. He is a confident, even cocky explorer whose cavalier attitude changes through this ordeal. He displays some amazing resourcefulness in such moments as when he erects a mini tent to protect his head from the elements. As he waits in vain for help that is not coming, he contemplates his survival skills and evaluates his life and relationships. Life is precious, and he must do whatever he can to survive even if it means the unthinkable.

The entire film works despite the fact it centers exclusively on one actor. (The Spirit of St. Louis is another that comes to mind.) Franco accomplishes the difficult task by making us care for an arrogant, free spirit who knows no fear. The film focuses on minute details that could easily be glossed over. The simplest of acts become a tortuous struggle as when his pocket knife falls and he must retrieve it while still pinned. A drink of water from his ever shrinking supply becomes an agonizing death watch. The flashback scenes give us some background into his family life and a former girlfriend. He even fantasizes a vision of a boy, a son that he will perhaps have someday? He regrets the things left undone or unsaid and resolves to make changes in his life if he makes it out alive. The fact that we know the outcome does not at all diminish the agony we feel for him in close quarters and his determination to survive. In a way the big rock is a kind of metaphor for his life. What should be a liberating journey becomes a test of survival, and as the hours go by and one day bleeds into the next, we become a part of his limited world complete with cracks of sunlight and an occasional bird or insect. After awhile you wonder if we really see images he is seeing, or if it is nothing more than a mirage or hallucination. During his ordeal he uses his mini video camera to document his plight and to report on his situation and feelings. The camera becomes a sort of confessor for him.

Yes, the scene where he must separate himself from the rock is excruciating but never exploitive. The subsequent scenes where he makes his way back to civilization and encounters other hikers are powerfully heart wrenching yet life affirming. It packs a punch and wrings you emotionally as Franco finds salvation when all hope is seemingly lost. By film’s end we breathe a collective sigh of relief. Yet it is the cumulative effect of emotions and our shared experience with him that are truly affecting.

Boyle utilizes handheld cameras and crisp editing to keep things moving along in a methodically paced narrative. It is ironic at how the beautiful landscape is in sharp contrast to the horror that Aron must experience. The film may set a record for having the longest running time before displaying its first title card. There is a nice epilogue which alludes to his prophetic visions from before. This is not a morbid exercise in claustrophobia or grossness but rather a realistic recreation of the triumph of the human spirit against impossible odds and the bleakest of settings.

*** of **** stars

Darkness at the Soul of BLACK SWAN

2011-02-25T08:19:00.000-08:00

Director Darren Aronofsky (The Wrestler, Requiem for a Dream) has done some offbeat films but has always elicited strong performances from his leads. Perhaps his greatest achievement is getting an Oscar worthy performance from Natalie Portman in Black Swan, a film that does an impressive job of depicting a psychological downward spiral of a competitive ballerina in the role of a lifetime.

Nina Sayers (Portman) works hard at her craft and gets the coveted starring role in Swan Lake. Doted on by her mother (Barbara Hershey in an unusual role) and pushed to extremes by her ballet director, Thomas Leroy (Vincent Cassel), she begins to feel threatened and becomes delusional and loses touch with reality. A new arrival, Lily (Mila Kunis), understudies her and becomes not only her friend and night scene companion, but also her main competitor and threat. Is she undermining her on purpose or is Nina just imagining it all? As opening night approached, the visions become even more disturbing to the point that Nina is at the brink of her sanity and the curtain opens on the most important moment of her life.

Portman projects a complex series of conflicting emotions including anxiety, jealousy, and even guilt as if she does not deserve the lead. Guided by Aronofsky, she soars as she has never done before. Not only does she perform a substantial amount of physically demanding ballet, but we see things through her eyes and feel her pains. Does she really commit the horrible acts she thinks she may have done or is it all in her warped mind? It’s not a pleasant journey. There is extremely disturbing use of mirror images that reflect Nina’s face and become Lily in the next instant in jarring and unexpected fashion. Is Nina seeing Lily or is it a reflection of her own self? A moment that shows the various pieces of wall art at her home coming alive in nightmarish figures is truly unnerving.

Kunis as Lily brings enough menace to her role. Winona Ryder has a supporting role of a retiring, vindictive ballerina, Beth MacIntyre, who ends up in the hospital. A scene where Nina worships Beth is reminiscent of Anne Baxter and Bette Davis in the dressing room scene of All About Eve. Beth is bitter and even self abusive which kind of foreshadows what awaits Nina. Cassell is effective as the ballet director whose sexism and unusual methods are suspect but never his quest for the absolute best for his production. Hershey registers as an overly concerned, controlling mom.

The film does a good job of showing the mental and physical toll that rehearsal and practice take on a performer, and to make matters worse, the angst exhibits itself seemingly on Nina’s body in distorted and grotesque manifestations. The physical mutations would probably amuse and please the likes of David Cronenberg and David Lynch. As Leroy demands more than what she shows in technique, she knows she has to give everything in her soul and more to satisfy the ballet’s demands. There is an interesting dichotomy showing two sides of a ballerina’s psyche with the repressed, uptight Nina whose frigidity is counterpointed by the free spirited and sensual Lily. Lily evens brings out her sexuality and inner yearning that seems all too real, or is it a dream? Something that is never mentioned or shown is if Nina is a virgin or ever had a real boyfriend. Then there is the duality within Nina of White and Black Swans in which the dark side must emerge if she is to fully inhabit the lead role.

Much of the film recalls other memorable films that bend reality like The Fight Club or Affliction, and Nina’s descent into madness has striking similarities to Roman Polanski’s classic Repulsion whose woman descends into psychological delusions and paranoia.

Aronofsky’s use of camera work is startling as it works in concert with Portman’s performance, and when you see the change in her eyes near the end, it is stunning. The film employs lots of handheld shots with cinematographer Matthew Libatique to visualize a subjective viewpoint for Nina. The score by Clint Mansell is well done with a touch of foreboding. Both of them are Aronofsky veterans. The final scene as Nina readies to perform the last act as she morphs into the Black Swan to complete her transformation is haunting. The final shot is unforgettable. Some viewers may be turned off by its repellent imagery but others will be astonished by a powerful depiction of madness at any price.

***1/2 of **** stars

The Phenom of THE SOCIAL NETWORK

2011-02-25T08:13:00.000-08:00

As a chronicle of events leading to the creation of the social networking site Facebook, touching nearly every computer user in the world, The Social Network is a fascinating take on Mark Zuckerberg, a maverick, whose brilliant mind is matched by his arrogance. Directed by David Fincher (Se7en, The Fight Club) from an excellent screenplay by Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men, The West Wing) and based on the book, The Accidental Billionaires by Ben Mezrich, this is a fascinating study of a success story complete with intrigue and subterfuge. In this case, the incidents play on a very human level. You would think this would make an excellent made for television HBO movie, but Sorkin and Fincher have created a remarkable, cinematic vision of an inventor, albeit a troubled one.

In the fall of 2003, Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) is portrayed as a computer genius at Harvard University with few social graces. What we know now as Facebook had its modest beginnings as a response to a failed relationship with a girl. Needing to vent some anger, Mark modifies a campus website and with the help of his buddy, Eduardo (Andrew Garfield), a concept is born for socializing on the internet. When web traffic to the site spikes to record numbers, people begin to take notice, and a phenomenon is born. A group of Harvard students enlist Mark to develop his site with their financial backing, but when they discover that he is working on his venture without them, they become incensed and contemplate legal action. Mark and Eduardo become popular ‘rock stars’ on campus as the new Facebook spreads like an epidemic to other college campuses like Yale, Columbia, and Stanford. Soon, the company approaches critical mass and the milestone of being able to monetize the site and turn a profit. Napster creator, Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake), reaches out to the growing network because he understands its vast potential. Mark becomes enamored and captivated by Sean’s leadership and vision and is drawn to Silicon Valley much to Eduardo’s consternation. But with Sean’s guidance comes his lavish, illicit lifestyle which has potential consequences for all. As the company expands to the whole country and becomes a global presence, it seeks more capital, and the ensuing growing pains will test friendships and lead to betrayals and litigation. By the end, everyone is suing to get a piece of the action. We’re not talking millions of dollars at stake but staggering numbers that far exceed normal comprehension.

Jesse Eisenberg (Adventureland, Zombieland) is perfectly cast as Mark Zuckerberg, a high energy geek running around a snowy campus in his shorts and flip flops and is quick to respond to his critics with venomous sarcasm. Making us fascinated with such an unsavory character is testament to his performance. Justin Timberlake is excellent as the charismatic entrepreneur Sean, who is portrayed as a narcissistic, lecherous Svengali and mentor to Mark. Andrew Garfield lends very strong support as Eduardo, Mark’s roommate.

The film’s pace is rapid and driven, not a slow spot at all. Its structure incorporates flashbacks and flash forwards in a masterful display of film editing. The story works as a kind of techie mystery especially from the point of view of a legal deposition that frames the events of the past. Every major player gets a scripted point of view Rashomon style. All through the narrative, you keep wondering if Mark knows more than he lets on. Is he naïve or is he a schemer or both? Was the betrayal of Eduardo orchestrated by Mark or was it the machinations of Sean? It is never truly clear as to Mark’s culpability. This is success, but at what price?

There’s very little to gripe about in this film. A short scene with Eduardo’s psychotic girlfriend is shocking but ultimately pointless. Were the filmmakers trying to show his poor judge of character? Also, I noticed a scene where the actors talk in the supposed cold with digital condensation coming from their mouths; so how come the extras don’t have any? A major subplot showing Eduardo’s initiation to the elite Phoenix Club never makes clear whether Mark had a hand in his acceptance.

With its fascinating subject matter, the script begs your attention and participation. Sorkin has done a marvelous job of bringing a book to life and complemented with Fincher’s acumen. The dialogue is stunning in its blatant display of Zuckerberg’s intelligence and rebellious streak. The result is a chronicle of a techie generation with not one false note and a thoroughly engrossing screenplay that has Oscar written all over it. Fincher is proving himself to be a great director when given superior material, and his branching out from thrillers to more mainstream fare has been remarkable (as in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button). One can only wonder the goodies that await movie audiences as he explores further.

**** of **** stars

Mid Atlantic Nostalgia Convention is Growing

2010-09-25T20:16:00.000-07:00

The 2010 installment of the Mid Atlantic Nostalgia Convention in Hunt Valley, MD, showed that this convention has come a long way and expanded from its modest beginnings in Aberdeen, MD. There were seemingly more attendees and vendors. The guests were intriguing as ever.

TV’s Green Hornet star Van Williams had to bow out beforehand due to a health consideration, but there were still well known stars of TV including Roy Thinnes (cult show The Invaders), Ed Nelson (one of the busiest actors in movies and TV in the 1950’s, 60’s, and 70’s), Dawn Wells, and Mark Goddard among others.

Dawn Wells played Mary Ann in Gilligan’s Island from 1964-1967. She looked terrific and was just as spunky and energetic as her character. She noted my Shirt with The Wild Wild West and mentioned that she was a guest on that show (as was co-star Alan Hale Jr.). She also noted how her cousin was also named Clint. No surprise that her autograph line was the longest all day.

Having been a big fan of Irwin Allen’s Lost in Space, Mark Goddard (Major West) looked incredibly youthful for his age of 74. His favorite episode was “The Anti Matter Man”. He said he would hang out with series star Guy Williams at the track with their wives. He never really saw much of producer Allen who had several projects going at the time, and he marvelled at how the special effects relied on live action models rather than today's computer generated effects.

Everyone seemed to be having fun and sharing memories of their favorite TV or movie moments. This Hunt Valley hotel location was spacious and ideal for this growing event; it looks like this convention has found a home for next year.

Duvall at the Height of His Power in GET LOW

2010-09-18T18:38:00.000-07:00

Robert Duvall is one of the best American actors of the past half century. Witness his roles in To Kill a Mockingbird, The Godfather I and II, The Great Santini, Apocalypse Now, Open Range, and a full TV resume including Lonesome Dove. In Get Low, he gives a measured, understated performance as a mysterious, old hermit who makes an unusual, life changing decision. This independent film is deceptively simple and honest. Yet it is done extremely well and leaves a deep feeling about life’s regrets.

After the brief image of a house burning down, we flash forward to a rural setting in the 1930’s to see an old home inhabited by a reclusive, elderly man, Felix Bush (Duvall), whose disheveled appearance and reputation are the stuff of rumor and legend. Are the stories about him true? Is he a killer? Haunted by visions of a woman, he decides to arrange his own funeral before his actual demise. The funeral home is run by Frank Quinn (Bill Murray) and his loyal assistant, Buddy Robinson (Lucas Black). Felix wants to invite everyone who has a story about him to tell. He sweetens the pot by offering to raffle off his vast acreage of property. He also runs into an old acquaintance, Mattie (Sissy Spacek), who has strong ties to him from way back. He later pays a visit to a preacher in another town in hopes of having him conduct the eulogy. As the plot thickens, we find that Felix is hiding a painful secret that will have the town reexamining its prejudices and assumptions about a tortured soul who is struggling for his own redemption before it’s too late.

Novice director Aaron Schneider, whose previous credits were as a cinematographer of various TV shows and movies, does a solid job with a modest budget and a lean story and script by Chris Provenzano and C. Gaby Mitchell.

It’s nice to see veteran actors like Duvall, Spacek, and Murray play older characters, wrinkles and all with enthusiasm and conviction. Duvall does a splendid job of presenting a cipher of a man whose words are sparse and direct and slowly, as the story develops, begins to open up to reveal a complex person replete with feelings of guilt. There are reasons perhaps for why he is the way he is. Duvall is destined for an Oscar nomination, and Spacek arguably deserves a nod for strong support. Bill Murray as the funeral director does a convincing job as a businessman who isn’t quite a villain or hero. He is carving a nice career niche as a dramatic character actor (aside from being a comedic superstar).

The film successfully evokes the period of depression era, small town USA. There are few items to quibble about; however, a violent break in at the funeral home doesn’t really forward the plot and is never fully explained.

There are similarities in Felix and the noble character in The Ballad of Cable Hogue. In both films, the protagonist is an aged, stubborn loner, and in the end, as his life is in its twilight, the truth sets him free. Perhaps the lesson here is that each person has a story, and some of the stories are not always evident. With Get Low, we get to see the bittersweet tale of a broken heart. Your heart will be moved too.

*** of **** stars (add ½ star for Duvall’s performance)

INCEPTION Is a Dream Come True

2010-07-23T05:45:00.000-07:00

Director/writer Christopher Nolan has explored dark, obsessive characters in exemplary films like The Dark Knight. In his most ambitious story yet (one that took ten years to develop), he designs a thoroughly complex story with concurrent narratives (think Godfather Part II or Intolerance) where (like his earliest film, Following, and his classic, Momento,) time and reality are bent and juxtaposed. This is not light, escapist fare but a deep, convoluted story that engages the mind and heart, and few movies in recent years can be so challenging yet rewarding to its audience.

A man named Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) washes ashore and is taken by armed guards to an old man. From there the film begins to jump in different settings or dream states. Cobb is an expert at the art of ‘inception’, the ability to enter people’s subconscious to steal an idea or plant one. A fugitive, he longs to be reunited with his two children and is constantly plagued by recurring visions of his wife, Mal (Marion Cotillard), who becomes increasingly dangerous. A wealthy Asian businessman, Saito (Ken Watanabe), makes a proposition to Cobb: extract a piece of information from a rival businessman (Cillian Murphy), and Cobb gets to return home to his kids. Vowing this to be his last job, Cobb assembles his team of experts, Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a newbie architect Ariadne (Ellen Page), a forger and impersonator, Earnes (Tom Hardy), and a drug chemist, Yusuf (Dileep Rao). To infiltrate Fischer’s mind, the team designs an elaborate set of dreams within dreams to effect a con game. This compounds the risks and, as Cobb finds himself being harassed by a more menacing Mal, the team encounters last minute crises that force Cobb to make a desperate choice. Can they get Fischer to reveal his secrets in time, and what of Cobb’s personal obsession?

The plot brings to mind the alternative realities of The Matrix, Dreamscape, and Altered States. Like the magicians in Nolan’s The Prestige, it is a slight of hand where much of the film’s narrative plays like stream of consciousness. It’s about a lifetime of love that’s experienced in mere flashes or an eternity, and despite the film’s intricate machinations, its simple themes are the search for validation and love. The film is also about the need of letting go and taking a leap of faith. At times you wonder if any given scene is real or a dream, and that is the conceit of the film; for some, the dream IS the reality.

The team concept is in keeping with Mission: Impossible and Oceans 11 (any version) as each member’s expertise comes into play, and the deeper the team goes into the dreams, the greater the risks. In one key sequence set in a snow mountain compound, there is an obvious homage to On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, and you wonder what wonders Nolan could work on the James Bond franchise!

This ‘dream’ cast works together very well and includes Nolan’s repertory actors, Murphy and Caine. DiCaprio (looking astonishingly like Nolan) does an excellent job as the tortured soul with a dark secret. Cotillard is hauntingly beautiful as Cobb’s wife while the younger Page is adorable as the bright architect who also serves as Cobb’s moral compass when he begins to falter and have self doubts.

The film’s technical accomplishments are outstanding, and although the special effects are terrific in depicting the mind bending scenery, the live action sets and stunt work (with Levitt doing some remarkable acrobatics) are even more impressive in depicting mixed gravity where people float or walk on walls and ceilings. In a masterful blend of film editing, the dream sequences shuttle back and forth, and time is slowed to a crawl in one instance, and given years in another. Hans Zimmer’s relentless, minimalist score is a particularly noteworthy achievement of mood and dramatic pacing.

This is not a perfect film, and (at two and one-half hours) there are moments where you think Nolan could have explored more of his subjects. A director like Steven Spielberg or Ron Howard might have emotionally milked certain scenes for all they are worth, and it is because of that, we expect a bit more connection and feelings. Like most of Nolan’s films, the brooding characters and situations are almost entirely devoid of humor or any lighthearted tone which brings to mind any number of Stanley Kubrick films. While some may find the ending a bit too neat or perhaps too open ended, it is left to the audience to decide how to interpret the meaning of the finale. Yet these are minor quibbles for grand, pure cinematic experience. Nolan has created something so special that it engages the mind. How dare he?

With Inception, Christopher Nolan is most certainly one of the best film directors. His previous masterpiece, The Dark Knight, should have been nominated for the Best Picture Oscar. Come to think of it, that very film helped change the Oscar rules to expand from five to ten nominees so that gems like Inception are not left out. It won’t be. Do take this wild ride, and you’ll find that you are obsessed with its mystery and beauty and repeating the journey again and again.

**** of **** stars

SHORE LEAVE 32 AND GALACTICA STARS

2010-07-11T19:41:00.000-07:00

Shore Leave 32, the annual sci-fi convention weekend, in Hunt Valley, Maryland, had its usual merchandise dealers and celebrity guests including Kevin Sorbo (Hercules), Torri Higginson (Stargate: Atlantis) , Catherine Hick (Star Trek IV), Dominic Keating (Star Trek: Enterprise), Katee Sackhoff (24), and Edward James Olmos (Miami Vice). The show was a great opportunity to get personal insight into an actor’s career. I had the chance to talk to both Olmos and Sackhoff and to attend their Q&A sessions. Both were very nice, forthcoming people.

With longer, gray hair, Olmos looked older from his days on Miami Vice but no less distinguished. He was lavish in his praise for the recent Battlestar Galactica series which took a simple 1970’s concept and expanded on its human elements and important themes and garnered Emmy nominations and the Peabody Award. His costar Katee Sackhoff was a mainstay on that show as well.

The Emmy winner was asked about other work in his career including Blade Runner and Stand and Deliver for which he received a Best Actor Oscar nomination. Stand and Deliver is based on a true story of an inner city math teacher whose class took the advanced placement test and excelled to the astonishment of the country. Triumph of the Spirit was also a true story about a boxer in Auschwitz concentration camp during World War II, the only non-documentary film allowed to film on location.

When asked about who influenced him as an actor and who he rated as an admired contemporary, he chose the legendary actor Paul Muni as the most important. Meryl Streep is the one current actress he acknowledges as being so good, that she stands alone in her abilities.

Katee Sackhoff was smaller in person than I thought, with auburn brown hair and not the blonde villain, Dana Walsh, as portrayed in the final season of TV’s 24. She told of how she did not know she was the traitorous mole until later that season and subsequently knew her character would die. Her death scene, which had her shot by Keifer Sutherland as Jack Bauer, involved explosive blanks and blood squibs at close range. She said she forgot to put earplugs in her ears and could not hear for days.

She had just heard that her pilot, Boston’s Finest, was not picked up for the upcoming TV season but that she had two guest spots in Big Bang Theory. Such is the life of a working actor. She auditions all the time for roles that often go to the likes of Katherine Heigl and Claire Danes and failed to win roles in It’s Complicated and Million Dollar Baby. She would love to be on the TV show Glee and just auditioned twice for a role in Mission Impossible 4. She owns a Harley Davidson Fatboy motorcycle and plans to ride to New Orleans and follow the Easy Rider route this fall.

There was a good turnout for this event, and many fans were dressed as favorite characters from sci-fi shows. Klingons, Star Fleet officers, Cylons, Stargate soldiers, and even R2D2 made appearances. After a search for collectible film memorabilia, I was ready to switch from groupie to civilian.

TOY STORY 3 Is a Winning Number

2010-07-05T21:05:00.000-07:00

Completing one of the greatest trilogies in movie history (joining Star Wars and Lord of the Rings), Toy Story 3 is everything one could wish for and more. These familiar toys that come alive with feelings and interplay became the cornerstone of Pixar Studios and a string of superlative animated gems. Disney should be thanking its lucky stars.

Picking up from the previous films, Andy has played with his beloved toys for years and explored imaginative adventures and thrills that are the stuff of a rich, wondrous childhood. The old gang is back with Woody (voiced by Tom Hanks), Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen), and the others. As Andy approaches college age, it is a time of change, and the toys lament at not being played with anymore. They are destined for the attic or the trash dump… or maybe a chance to entertain kids at a day school. Lest you think the field of toys gets too crowded (Little Bo Peep and Etch a Sketch have moved on), there are some nice additions (Barbie doll gets to romance Ken), and some not so nice ones.

Sunnyside Daycare seems to be an ideal situation with children who want toys, and toys needing to be needed (a kind of schoolyard version of ‘The Island of Misfit Toys’); it appears to be a match made in heaven. There’s even a connection between Andy and a daycare staffer whose daughter, Bonnie, is beginning to play with her first toys. But a mysterious leader emerges in the form of a stuffed bear, Lotso (a charming Ned Beatty), who has a rigid pecking order or hierarchy for the toys, and that leaves our newcomers at the mercy of the youngest, most violent kids who abuse them.

As Woody finds a temporary home with Bonnie and tries to make it back to his friends, Buzz attempts to find out the truth of the daycare and is captured. From there, the film becomes an escape story as the toys struggle to flee their daycare prison. Last minute rescues are trumped by surprises and betrayal, and salvation can come from the most surprising source. Will Woody and Buzz save the day, and what will become of their toy brethren? Will the toys find happiness somewhere perhaps?

What has never failed is that the filmmakers treat their audience with intelligence and respect. It also does not depend on one seeing the past films, but it does help in order to appreciate certain references. The Pixar team led by director Lee Unkrich and screenwriter Michael Arndt (Little Miss Sunshine) should be commended for never losing sight of the story. The cast of voices including Joan Cusack, Don Rickles (priceless as Mr. Potato Head), Estelle Harris, Wallace Shawn, John Ratzenberger (who has voiced in every Pixar film), and newcomer Michael Keaton (as Ken) are terrific. They do a better job of acting and emoting than many a live actor.

The film’s first hour or so is good but not great. It is in the final scenes that the themes of loyalty and sacrifice take on a deeper meaning, and the film blossoms with pathos. The notion of abandonment and wanting to belong resonate universally. As the toys learn that they can make other children happy and feel a purpose again, Andy also learns a lesson in life: passing the torch from one child’s happiness to another. It’s about growing up and letting go while finding closure amidst a time of uncertainty and change. Imagine that-a kid’s film that is affecting to adults!

If this is the end of the precious series (with record box office grosses, I find that hard to believe), it has ended on a very high note. Do stay for the end credits as you learn a bit more about the fate of our beloved toys. As much as I would hate to see these animated friends go, I should remember that these jewels are to be shared and cherished by future generations. How’s that for life imitating art?

**** of **** stars (preceded by another winning short, Day and Night))

IRON MAN 2 The Same Man

2010-05-17T08:47:00.000-07:00

After a spectacular start with Iron Man a couple summers ago, one would have hoped for an even better sequel, considering the fortunes of the Spiderman, X Men, and Batman franchises of late, whose sophomore efforts took their series to dizzying new heights. Not so here, although Iron Man 2 is definitely not a step down either. Consider it on par with the original film and as such, a pretty entertaining, well made Marvel Comics screen entry, and it boasts another strong performance by Robert Downey, Jr. as the hero.

Picking up where industrialist genius, Tony Stark, reveals himself to be Iron Man, the folks in Washington D.C., namely the military and Congress want the technology. He defies the Senate panel by declaring the armor as private property that has brought world peace. Stark’s competitor, Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) is desperate to claim the military’s approval for armored weaponry. Stark’s main girl, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) is trying to help him run Stark Enterprises despite Tony’s childish antics and thrill seeking. His buddy, Lt. Col. Jim Rhodes (Don Cheadle taking over for Terrence Howard), is under pressure by the military to get the Iron Man technology. A new assistant, Natalie Rushman (Scarlett Johansson), has a mysterious background. All this as Starks’ blood is beginning to get poisoned by his ebbing, artificial heart.

Enter the Russian, Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), whose father was snubbed by Stark’s dad. He has developed a body armor that has electric whips, while Hammer provides him the resources to exact revenge. Stark must come to terms with the distant relationship with his late father as he desperately searches for an answer to his failing heart. As Hammer presents his new military hardware to an audience, Ivan and Tony engage in a battle royal.

What the filmmakers needed to do (and could have done a bit more) was to let Downey carry the film on his shoulders; he’s certainly earned the right to flex his acting muscles after Iron Man. Here, he shows off his flair for being a bad boy whose arrogance is matched by his tech savvy, and he is a hero confronting his inner demons and pain which are directly related to the fallout with his father. It is interesting how poppa Stark is portrayed in newsreel footage as a kind of Industrial version of Walt Disney complete with a topographic industrial plan instead of a theme park.

Downey and Paltrow have good repartee and a smooth chemistry even when they argue. The dialogue is snappy and at times funny courtesy of screenwriter Justin Theroux (Tropic Thunder) and director Jon Favreau who still knows how to convey the fantasy world of super heroes, and there are enough twists and surprises to keep things humming along.

Rourke is sufficiently menacing as Ivan, spouting Russian and a dark, defiant persona. Samuel Jackson repeats as Nick Fury, the head of S.H.I.E.L.D., a secret organization that is attempting to assemble ‘The Avengers Initiative’. Johansson is on screen too briefly but there is a nice payoff where she comes through in fine form, or should I say fighting form. As a US Senator, comedian Garry Shandling is stunt casting but proves a bit of a distraction; you just can’t take his character seriously. Marvel co-creator Stan Lee makes another brief cameo, and Favreau is amusing in a larger supporting role of Happy Hogan.

Special effects are impressive and ably serve the story. That suit of armor still wows and functions in true comic book form. There is a familiar, circular prop that appears in a crucial scene that Marvel fans will want to note! Stunt work and the fight choreography that involves Johansson’s character is fun to watch but you wish there were more.

Favreau has shown a knack for comic heroes, but he has not made the big step to improve on his franchise. Perhaps in Iron Man 3 he can break the curse that has plagued super hero franchises that fell down in their third films. By the way, do stay after the credits for an interesting clip that hints at the ever growing Marvel Universe.

*** of **** stars (add ½* for Marvel fans)

CLINT’S OSCAR PREDICTIONS for 2009

2010-03-05T00:14:00.000-08:00

I have seen all ten Best Picture nominees and a few others. So based on what I have seen and hear, these are my predictions in this expanded best picture year. (I left short subjects alone but Wallace and Gromit are always a sure bet.) Enjoy!

BEST PICTURE-It was between Avatar and the Hurt Locker but Inglourious Basterds is strong with SAG. A new voting system could alter the results dramatically. In the end, THE HURT LOCKER has momentum.
BEST DIRECTOR-KATHRYN BIGELOW
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY-INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS unless Hurt Locker sweeps.
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY-UP IN THE AIR is so good that it’s no contest.
BEST ACTOR-JEFF BRIDGES by popular demand
BEST ACTRESS-SANDRA BULLOCK over Meryl Streep unless the voters really have a change of heart.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR-CHRISTOPH WALTZ -no contest
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS-MO’NIQUE -no contest
BEST ANIMATED FILM-UP
BEST FOREIGH FILM-EL SECRETO DE SUS OJOS
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY-THE HURT LOCKER
BEST EDITING-THE HURT LOCKER
BEST SOUND-AVATAR
BEST SOUND EDITING-AVATAR
BEST ART DIRECTION-AVATAR
BEST COSTUME-THE YOUNG VICTORIA
BEST VISUAL EFFECTS-AVATAR
BEST MAKEUP-STAR TREK
BEST SCORE-UP
BEST SONG-“THE WEARY KIND”-CRAZY HEART
BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE-THE COVE
Top Oscar tally –Hurt Locker and Avatar with 4 apiece

THE HURT LOCKER and the Human Essence of War

2010-03-05T00:06:00.000-08:00

Blessed with an insightful script by journalist Mark Boal, director Kathryn Bigelow (Point Break) has finally found superior material to apply her talents, and the result is a seminal war film set in Iraq. This is not the spectacle of war in broad strokes but rather an intimate point of view. As such, it provides a very personal, visceral experience.

In the middle of the Iraq War, Sgt. J T Sanborn (Anthony Mackie) welcomes a replacement for a fallen comrade. The new soldier, Sgt. William James (Jeremy Renner), is a quirky soul whose specialty is disarming bombs. 38 days are left for Bravo Company as the group sets out to diffuse a bomb. While an automated robot might be appropriate, James insists on doing the job himself and finds a booby trap in the city streets. After a tense period and an unexpected surprise, he is successful but not before spooking Sanborn and the other soldiers nearby. His boldness and gambling has serious consequences for his comrades.

James is a loose cannon, but does he have a death wish? He has the emotional and physical scars from war, and he lives and breathes bombs to the point of keeping bomb parts as souvenirs. He is addicted to the job, and war gives his life meaning. He is the perfect war junkie. It’s a high stress existence and the only person a soldier can rely on is his fellow soldier. These men bond amid difficult life and death situations while there is barely a shot fired. This is most definitely not Audie Murphy’s kind of war.

The risks escalate when a car loaded with explosives is set afire and as James tries to disarm the device, the soldiers attract a lot of attention from the locals who may or may not be innocent observers. It becomes a precarious situation by the minute as James’ expertise is tested to the limit. We witness the risks of guerilla warfare as threats come from around any street corner.

As days melt down to hours, the tension becomes almost unbearable, and you can feel the anxiety and fear in these men. There is an arduous sequence as the group gets pinned down by deadly sniper fire amid an oppressive sun. Later, a heartbreaking scene has James attempting to defuse a bomb strapped to an innocent civilian pleading for his life. It’s a desperate task as the seconds tick away. The emotions and the impossibility of the situation make for a compelling moment.

James has a wife and son back home where he discovers some truths about himself. Finding civilian life difficult to adjust to, he realizes the one thing makes him feel alive, and that is a tour of duty.

Some notable actors like Ralph Feinnes, Guy Pierce, and Evangeline Lilly appear in what are essentially throwaway cameos. Mackie is good as a soldier whose priorities in life change dramatically through his deployment, and Brian Geraghty registers as a young soldier who cannot wait to return safely to the states. But it is Renner who excels in the difficult role of a gifted, but troubled soldier.

Bigelow has always been adept at films (Point Break, Blue Steel) with lead characters under extreme duress, and she milks each bomb sequence with measured, tightly edited cuts to agonizingly prolong and heighten the suspense. She is schooling the public with pure cinematic technique. We feel a bit detached from these men not because they are not well drawn but because the film tries to show events in a semi-documentary way especially in its generous use of handheld cameras that give the feel of news footage.

This is not a perfect film. It feels episodic at times, and perhaps that is the point: that war can be a series of moments of danger and uncertainty. Also, we never fully realize or understand what makes James tick. We know he is drawn to his job and is very good at what he does. But we never see into his psyche’s attraction to this profession beyond the adrenaline rush.

While the film may not accurately portray military tactics or protocal, it does capture the human emotions of impossibly difficult tasks amid a hostile environment. Credit the filmmakers for exploring a fascinating aspect of warfare. In terms of driving home the fear and effects of war on the common soldier, few films have ever been better.
***1/2 of **** stars
Nominated for Best Picture 2009

AVATAR and Cameron’s Magnificent Obsession

2010-03-05T00:01:00.000-08:00

You would think that the man who redefined science fiction and action films over the past quarter century (Terminator, True Lies) and culminated with the best hat trick in movie history with Titanic garnering superlative reviews, earning the all-time box office, and winning a record 11 Oscars, would be satisfied and perhaps go on cruise control with a smaller film. But no, Cameron aims higher with a thrilling adventure that combines game changing special effects that have to be seen on the big screen in 3-D.

In the not too distant future, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), a physically challenged soldier, volunteers for an unusual mission on a far away planet, Pandora, a beautiful yet dangerous world where the blue skinned Na’vi are a primitive, enlightened race who are at one with nature and its balance of life as epitomized by the Tree of Souls, a kind of fiber optic tree that has a consciousness. Utilizing a unique technology that enables Sully to become sentient in a genetically engineered substitute Na’vi body or avatar, he is deposited on Pandora to assimilate himself into their culture. Led by a stern, no-nonsense scientist Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver), Jake learns the ways of the Na’vi people especially through Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), a proud warrior (much like the heroine in Heavy Metal) whose father is the tribal leader. You just know that Jake and Neytiri are going to become closer in their relationship.

Sully’s commanding officer, Col. Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang), expects him to gather intelligence on the Na’vi defense and capabilities in an effort to secure the valuable minerals beneath the Na’vi settlement. It seems that a mining company wants the minerals at any cost. As Sully bonds with these people and realizes that what the military plans to do, he has a change of heart and rallies all the villages to band together for a last stand and a simple battle between good and evil ensues with the Na’vi hopelessly outgunned and overly matched.

The story is simple with political overtones about preserving a green planet and the clash between science and the military. This military is an extension of the bad asses in Cameron’s Aliens. There are obvious parallels to the Iraq War with its natural oil resource. You can see elements of The Matrix with its out of body experience, and Star Wars: Return of the Jedi with its David versus Goliath setup. Any fan of old Tarzan films knows how nature is harnessed by the hero. You get the feeling that this planet’s life force is a collective much as the trees in The Lord of the Rings trilogy and that something extraordinary might happen. The avatar plot device bares loose similarities to the 1960’s TV show Outer Limits episode Chameleon. While Jake has damaged legs, he is able to revel in his new body and experiences what amounts to a rebirth. His initiation into Na’vi life is not dissimilar to the initiation rites in Dances with Wolves.

Apparently Cameron has been gestating this idea for many years, waiting for movie technology to catch up to his complicated visuals. It was worth the wait. He has always been at the forefront of state of the art effects (The Abyss, Terminator 2) so it comes as no surprise that he has single handedly elevated the creative possibilities of 3-D presentation to the mainstream. Cameron does not resort to using 3-D as a gimmick by simply throwing objects at the screen but rather organically and even shots of the planet’s jungles are fully realized settings with plant life and insects that jump out of the screen. The motion capture compliments and reflects real acting. What is remarkable is that this film is simultaneously demonstrating multiple visual effects in a seamlessly integrated presentation courtesy of Cameron’s fertile imagination.

Production values don’t get any better. James Horner composes an energetic yet tender score that evokes his own Titanic and Glory. Although the second half settles into a more conventional war film, that’s a minor complaint. There is a reference to Jake’s late brother (a subplot that does not add much to the story) who was originally slated for the mission.

Worthington and Saldana (Star Trek), in expressive motion capture, do a very solid job of emoting real feelings and making their love a tangible, believable union. Lang has an intimidating presence as the military commander and it’s nice to see his career resurgence (Public Enemies). Weaver lends strong support as the wise, impassioned scientist who will defend the Na’vis even with her life.

Make no mistake: this is a groundbreaking film in terms of technical achievement and theatrical presentation. It needs to be experienced in 3-D to get the complete experience. Do yourself a favor and immerse yourself in this landmark film.
**** of **** stars (especially the first half)
Nominated for Best Picture 2009

UP IN THE AIR Soars High

2010-03-04T23:54:00.000-08:00

Up in the Air is a timely story about the frontline, corporate downsizers who terminate workers across the country. It’s an unpleasant job with emotional backlash, and George Clooney’s performance as a top gun terminator is exemplary. Abetted by assured direction by Jason Reitman (Juno), this is a film for our times.

Ryan Bingham (Clooney) is very good at what he does, and he has the mileage to prove it. You see, corporations hire him to fly across the country to fire their employees. So good is Bingham that he has a perfect response for every possible reaction or objection. It is an art, and he has honed his skills over the years while living an insulated life of perks and frequent flier miles without any emotional attachments or long term plans for the future. He is even distant from his family. He has his routine down and lectures as a motivational speaker. Ah, what a life.

During a layover, he meets another frequent flyer, Alex (Vera Farmiga), who, like him, jets cross country and lives on her corporate credit cards and comps. So begins their jet setting affair and multi-city rendezvous. When Ryan’s employer decides to streamline expenses, a new hired gun, Natalie (Anna Kendrick), brings big changes including cutting down travel expenses and relying more on a telemarketer setup to conduct the corporate firings. This is a direct threat to Ryan’s lifestyle and he proposes to show her the ropes and what it is like to personally fire someone. It is a sobering, learning experience for Natalie as Ryan mentors her and espouses his words of wisdom and his hands on approach compared to her more empirical, scientific methods. It becomes apparent that they have differing values and philosophies on life. When Natalie tries to do a firing, it becomes a game changing event with severe ramifications for all. She is the young, wide eyed idealist, who learns about life the hard way.

At the same time, Ryan’s sister calls about a wedding that he is reluctant to attend. While most people go home for the holidays, he feels the opposite. He grudgingly takes pictures of cardboard replicas of his sister and fiancé in his travels since they can’t afford the trips. He even uses his powers of persuasion on his sister’s fiancé who has second thoughts about marriage. It is in this moment that Ryan has an epiphany and learns about himself and what’s important in life. As Ryan begins to have feelings for Alex and sets about to make his future, he discovers some startling, harsh truths that will alter his outlook on life forever.

Based on the novel by Walter Kirn, Reitman has created a smart, engaging film whose subject of corporate firings amid an economic downturn is quite timely. It is those scenes that are fascinating as they are heartbreaking, and Clooney’s Ryan is a master at finessing verbal interplay. This film puts faces and souls on the nameless whose lives are destroyed. A scene where a fired employee (J. K. Simmons is excellent) is inspired by Ryan to try something else is masterfully written.

Clooney’s Ryan is a distant cousin of sorts to his recent standout job in Michael Clayton. Rarely has he been more charming! His character lives in airport terminals and judges his success by his independence and frequent flyer miles. When Natalie, Alex and his own family converge on his life, we see him change, and that is what makes the film so special. To see someone whose outlook on life is changed forever is a rewarding, enriching feeling. When Ryan and Alex talk about life from their experiences, it is in stark contrast to the neophyte Natalie. What is refreshing is to see how Ryan becomes genuinely affected and how in the end he does the right things to correct an injustice.

Farmiga (The Departed) registers strongly as the mysterious lover, and Kendrick (Twilight) shines as the naïve Natalie. Jason Bateman (Juno) re-ups with Reitman and scores as a corporate manager. A note of interest is that many of the fired workers are played by actual, laid off employees so that their scenes do take on a sense of immediacy and realism.

This is one of those films that makes all the best lists of the year because it’s smartly written, well acted, and leaves you with that aftertaste of time well spent.
**** of **** stars
Nominated for Best Picture 2009

Coen Brothers’ Remembrances of A SERIOUS MAN

2010-03-04T23:52:00.000-08:00

Writers and directors, brothers Joel and Ethan Coen, have often made their mark in cinema (Blood Simple, Fargo) with their take on the human condition shot on an independent film budget. In A Serious Man they get self reflective on their own childhoods growing up in a Jewish family of the 1960’s. The result is their most personal, incisive film to date, and one that is told with sharp observation and honesty.

An opening scene tells the tale of a peasant couple visited by an elderly man who turns out to be a ghost. Are they cursed or blessed by this ominous apparition?

In a 1960’s Minnesota suburb, Larry Gopnik is a timid college professor with a wife, son, and daughter. His son is smoking pot, and his daughter steals his money for a nose job. One day his wife announces that she and his best friend Sy have become close and that she wants a divorce. Further, Sy wants to have a long talk with Larry to counsel and help him through his tough time. This happens at the same time Larry is up for tenure at his college, and a Korean student tries to bribe him for a passing grade. As if this weren’t enough, his brother, Arthur, who has all sorts of physical ailments and personal problems, is staying at his house. Meanwhile, Larry spies on and is tortured by his female neighbor who likes to sunbathe in the nude.

Things go from bad to frustratingly worse as Larry goes to see three rabbis for advice only to get inconclusive or non-answers. His bills with the attorneys are mounting, and he is told to move out of his own house. Now the Korean student’s dad threatens to sue him, and he is plagued by nightmares. The events don’t turn out as expected and the twists and turns culminate with his son completing his bar mitzvah. An ominous new set of events threatens to uproot his world even as Larry seeks to make sense and order of his plight and tries to do the right things and be a ‘serious man’.

The storyline will ring true for most audiences, especially baby boomers. Larry is a brilliant study in angst and suffering. By the film’s ending, the question remains: what is important in one’s life? What matters most? No commentary is made or judgment passed about Larry and his family, and the Coens offer no answers. What we get is a case study of one family trying to survive fractious events. Although told from their Jewish background and experiences, the Coens are able to strike the right emotional connection by showing Larry’s response to a difficult set of circumstances. His feelings and reactions are universal, and perhaps that is the point of the movie: The problems of the common man are eternal and life is a stream of situations that can be daunting and are constantly supplanted by new adversity. Much as Ordinary People revealed discord and a disconnect in a middle class family, A Serious Man shows this family slowly disintegrating. Larry’s situation bears striking similarities to the lead in Into the Night.

A mostly unknown cast actually helps the film by not having the distraction of well known faces. They are people like you and me. Michael Stuhlbarg is quite convincing as Larry, and folks might recognize Arthur portrayed by TV character actor Richard Kind.

It’s not the Coens’ best work but it is their most intimate one which they could afford to do after winning Best Picture with No Country for Old Men only a couple years before. It’s certainly one of the most original screenplays of the year.
*** of **** stars
Nominated for Best Picture 2009

PRECIOUS is a Gem

2010-03-04T23:50:00.000-08:00

In Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire, inner city life for a desperate teen is portrayed as a hopeless cycle of poverty, neglect, and despair. As envisioned by director Lee Daniels from the adaptation by Geoffrey Fletcher, life is hard and only redeemed by people who care and are willing to nurture the abused victim. This is a harrowing look at a dysfunctional family and one girl’s hope for a better life, and it benefits from towering performances by newcomer Gabourey Sidibe and Mo’Nique who bring home this heartfelt, slice of life.

The story opens with a pleasant, idyllic family setting with a teenager, Precious (Gabourey Sidibe), and the fantasy turns suddenly into a stark reality. It is 1987 Harlem where Precious lives as a cook, gofer, and almost as a slave to her domineering, abusive mother (Mo’Nique). Together, they are poor, always hungry and living on welfare. She hopes for a normal existence and is always beaten down verbally, physically and emotionally by her mom and the neighborhood gangs. She was pregnant at age 16 by her abusive, absentee father and already has a small, mentally challenged child by him. To escape her despair, she daydreams of a loving and supportive storybook world.

Switched to an alternative school that specializes in troubled youth, she meets a disparate group of girls and a disciplined teacher, Miss Rain (Paula Patton). Precious learns to read and understand a world beyond the confines of her existence. She begins to trust her teacher, and her support group is this motley group of classmates. This support comes into play when she gives birth to her second child and when her mother attacks her.

Her mother is so manipulative that she wants to stay on welfare, and she makes no secret of her distrust of white people. She even puts on a pretend act for a visiting social worker. At the welfare office, another social worker (Mariah Carey in no makeup) learns the horrible truth about Precious’ home life. Before long, Precious receives bad news that rocks her world and sets up a confrontation with her manipulative, con-artist of a mom and determines an uncertain future for herself and her children.

Daniels lends a very sure hand in directing this powerful story. Even as a novice director, he grabs his audience and keeps you involved in a very interesting tale based on truth. He offers a fresh perspective and after a success at producing (Monsters Ball, The Woodsman), is a talent to watch. The film is shot in almost a handheld semi-documentary manner. The budget must have been modest which suits the setting and story. Its technique and exposition belie an independent film (Tyler Perry and Oprah Winfrey are executive producers).

Sidibe and Mo’Nique carry the show, but Patton and Carey are quite good as supportive characters. Singer Lenny Kravitz has a small but effective part as a male nurse who befriends Precious.

The only real negative is that the film ends abruptly which may be just the point-that life does go on and it does so on Precious’ own terms. This is no Hollywood ending, that’s for sure. Also, repetitive use is made of Precious’ daydream fantasies of a happier life. It almost veers to self parody although there is an excellent moment where she dresses in front of a mirror and sees a well dressed white woman; so much for visual statements about self image.

So good are the portrayals of Precious and her mom that the other characters are given only marginal exposition. We want to learn more about her teacher and her classmates, but this is, after all, a story about Precious. For her first acting gig, Sidibe does a remarkable job, and Mo’Nique is so convincing as a maternal monster, that Oscar beckons. For a film based on real life experiences and truths, this one is hard to beat.
***1/2 of **** stars
Nominated for Best Picture 2009

AN EDUCATION Teaches Life Lessons

2010-03-04T23:48:00.000-08:00

Based on a memoir by Lynn Barber, supposedly this script, adapted by novelist Nick Hornby (About a Boy), was one of the great unproduced movies in Britain. Well no more. A winning performance by newcomer Carey Mulligan realizes a complex character in An Education, a fascinating study of growing up quickly in an adult world.

Following some dazzling opening credits, we see a teenage girl, Jenny (Mulligan), who is attending high school in the suburbs of London in 1961. Prodded by her parents to study hard and take cello, they dream of her acceptance to Oxford University and becoming financially secure. A top student, she desperately wants to break out of her routine and, instead, attend concerts, art galleries, and experience more of the world. Her parents feel otherwise. One rainy day, a handsome, older man named David (Peter Sarsgaard) drives up and offers her a lift home. David is a student of life. He attracts and fascinates her, and what starts innocently as an unlikely friendship develops into a deeper relationship. He is adept at charming her parents into letting her exceed her curfew and boundaries, and Jenny gets to go to an art auction, Oxford campus, and in time, even a romantic Paris getaway complete with a sunset by the River Seine.

Despite the overtures of a fellow student, Graham, he is no match for the sophisticated, mature, and apparently wealthy David. Jenny becomes self assured and even insubordinate to her teachers and principal despite their warnings and protestations. She revels in her new life with David and his carefree friends Danny and Helen, and the foursome venture into the night for partying and taking in the highlife. As romance deepens and her defiance of authority and protocol increases, can marriage be far behind, and how will Jenny’s parents react?

David is a mystery as are his motives. What does he do for a living, and is he for real? Perhaps his carefree life is not as glamorous as it seems. As Jenny finds out, life can be full of joy and surprises, and one moment she can be master of her own fate and the next instant everything could come shattering down around her. As much as her world has broadened and expanded, she also learns about humility and contrition. Such is the education of a girl learning about herself at a crucial moment in her life.

Director Lone Scherfig does a splendid job of telling a coming of age tale that hits the right notes. What this film does well is to put us inside the head of Jenny. We feel her yearnings and frustrations. We experience her highs and exhilaration at finding a life beyond her home. We also hurt when morality is twisted and she is disappointed and betrayed. That’s not just good writing (which it really is); it’s a well directed ensemble of talented actors starting with Mulligan. Production values are modest, but the period costumes and background music are infectious and authentic.

Sarsgaard (Kinsey, Jarhead) is quite magnetic as the manipulative David and inflects a convincing British accent. His scenes with Mulligan are affecting and sustain interest. Alfred Molina is good as Jenny’s stern father, while Emma Thompson is on too briefly as a proper school principal. Olivia Williams is effective as a teacher who will play a significant role in Jenny’s future.

Aside from its portrayal of a teenager, the film depicts the apparently limited options for a graduating female at the time. She either could excel academically and get a job, or she could find a husband who could take care of her. It is interesting how Jenny’s parents are motivated by this mode of thinking and how it guides their actions. There is an aspect to the story which borders on statutory laws regarding sex with a girl who is barely of adult age. The storytellers finesse their way around this and focus on the relationship and do a tasteful job in minimizing the lurid possibilities. Subtle hints of racism are folded into the narrative, this being the 1960’s.

In the end, it is Carey Mulligan in a star making turn as the idealistic teen who matures ahead of her own time and learns about life the hard way. Love that poster.
***1/2 of **** stars
Nominated for Best Picture 2009

Tarantino Reinvents War in INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS

2010-03-04T23:45:00.000-08:00

Quentin Tarantino has been working on this World War II script for many years, and what is ostensibly a revenge film with moments of terrific dialogue and parallel subplots is a bit undone with untidy displays of violence and a fantasy denouement. Nevertheless, the play is the thing and few writer/directors could fashion such an entertaining if mean spirited film like Inglourious Basterds with bravura performances particularly by Christoph Waltz as a most charming and lethal Nazi.

Once upon a time during World War II a French man is questioned about the whereabouts of local French Jews by a polite German SS officer, Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz) whose silky, sinister approach gets remarkable, deadly results from which one teenage French girl barely escapes.

Next we meet Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt giving a Chad Everett by way of Clark Gable impression) who has recruited Jewish soldiers to hunt down and terrorize the Nazis in an Apache Indian way. Any survivors do not escape unscathed but have a Swastika cross carved into their foreheads, their mark for life.

In 1944, a young French woman, Emmanuelle, owns a movie theater and is wooed by a German war hero, Fredrick, whose film, Nation’s Pride, is premiering in Paris. Fredrick gets Joseph Goebbels, head of German Propaganda to move the premiere to Emmanuelle’s smaller theater. She is in fact the young French girl (Shosanna) who escaped a massacre and is plotting to take revenge by killing all the Nazi attendees.

At the same time, British Lt. Archie Hicox is sent to meet a double agent in France and, with Raine’s men, attend the Nation’s Pride premiere to blowup the theater and kill high level Nazis including Hitler. Hicox meets the agent who is a famous German actress, Bridget von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger is glamorous) in a basement cafe. German soldiers and an SS officer complicate things, and a Mexican standoff ensues with explosive results. Having to alter plans, Raine substitutes himself and the surviving Basterds into the mission.

At the premiere, as head of security, Col. Landa discovers the Allied plot, and Raine is arrested and interrogated in another building. There, Landa makes a startling proposal even as Emmanuelle plots to ignite the film nitrate stored in her theater and the other ‘basterds’ in the audience execute their part of the plan. Seemingly spared the finale at the theater and having manipulated his own fate, Col. Landa and Lt. Raine have a day of reckoning.

The usual Tarantino touches are here including excruciating scenes with gunshots, scalpings, stabbings, and bat beatings. The film is structured in five chapters, and his love for movies is evident in references to German cinema icons, and, no doubt, major filmic influences from The Dirty Dozen (especially in the recruitment scene and the high octane finale), Where Eagles Dare, and any number of spaghetti westerns. Imaginative use is made of fluid camera movement and rapid edits.

While the cast is in fine form with Til Schweiger as a Charles Bronson-type, director Eli Roth as the Bear Jew, and Mélanie Laurent, radiant as the haunted Emmanuelle, the standout is Waltz. Pitt is a hoot as Raine (whose name is a play on actor Aldo Ray), and when he tries to spout Italian phrases, it is outrageous. Veteran Rod Taylor and comedian Mike Myers have fleeting cameos.

Some criticism of the film is warranted. Infamous figures get killed at the premiere; if you are going to rewrite history even in a fable, don’t take something that is so ingrained as to make an utter mockery of it. Also, any sympathetic characters pretty much go out the window, so don’t get too attached to anyone.

No Tarantino film would be complete without wonderfully written set pieces especially the one in the basement café that is very reminiscent of the final standoff in Reservoir Dogs. While his words are sublime and he is adept at setting up such scenes, he does not take full advantage of the possibilities of others which are given relatively short shrift like the arrest of Raine and the confrontation of Bridget by Col. Landa.

For fans of the talented director, this one is a must, but for the average moviegoer, the snappy screenplay may not be fully appreciated in the overall context of an entertaining story that drips a bit too much blood. Two things are for sure: A glass of milk will never seem the same again, and Brad Pitt looks fabulous in a white tuxedo.
*** of **** stars (add ½ star for Tarantino fans)
Nominated for Best Picture 2009

DISTRICT 9: Science Fiction as Allegory

2010-03-04T23:43:00.000-08:00

This film is an experiment in relatively low budget filmmaking based on an interesting concept. Peter Jackson (Lord of the Rings trilogy) acts as producer for newbie director Neill Blomkamp and a script by Blomkamp and Terri Tacthell to create an imaginative, powerful film whose DNA is civil strife in South Africa. Much as High Noon was about the Communist ‘witch hunts’ of the late 1940’s and The Sand Pebbles was a corollary to the Vietnam War, District 9 smacks of Apartheid commentary in its home setting of Johannesburg, South Africa. The results are a well made science fiction film that integrates an important message.

A government civil servant worker named Wikus Van De Merwe leads a relocation of an alien race dubbed ‘The Prawns’ from their current home in District 9 to a camp in a different part of South Africa. The military also wants to make use of the sophisticated alien weaponry that can only be operated by the aliens DNA.

Wikus leads a group of soldiers into an alien camp and during the confrontation, he finds a mysterious vile that explodes when opened and splashes his face with an unknown substance. And quicker than you can say, The Fly, he starts to notice some startling changes as his body becomes nauseous and altered. A reunion at home with his wife and friends becomes a tragic start of something ominous and, when the military realizes the unlimited value of Wikus’ genetic ability to operate the alien weaponry, he becomes a hunted fugitive.

Trying to find refuge in the alien camp, he locates one of the aliens who concocted the substance. And the two devise a plan to steal the liquid now in military custody. The alien needs the material for his ship and, in exchange, he will help Wikus. Can he be trusted? How fast before Wikus changes completely? Back in District 9, the alien attempts to liftoff in his ship with his son, and Wikus has similar plans to escape. Soon the military catches up to them for an explosive climax. At that moment, Wikus makes a momentous decision that will change his life and the fate of his alien companion.

The mostly unknown cast is uniformly excellent and capably led by Sharlto Copley as Wikus. Technical credits are superior particularly makeup and visual effects. Good use is made of a periodic timeline to show the passage of time and development of the events. Lots of handheld cameras and lack of a musical score lend a feeling of immediacy and reality. Told in a quasi-documentary style through flashbacks and interviews, the film takes on a realistic aura grounded in truth. Rarely has a science fiction film (Cloverfield) ever been presented in this convincing manner. This is narrative driven and doesn’t let up. Once it begins, you have to hang on for dear life.

A number of topics are ever present throughout the film including segregation and racism, military dominance, and ultimately love. Do aliens have rights? Do they have a soul? It’s a great premise for a film that the filmmakers take and expand upon. There is the use of private military contractors, and instead of oil, the resource the military seeks is superior technology in weaponry.

The film has elements of other films like Alien Nation, Black Hawk Down and Starship Troopers. It’s not for all tastes but for those who appreciate this genre with a moral twist, it is a rewarding experience. The action is graphic and unrelenting as the stakes get higher. As violent and startling as some of the scenes are-no punches pulled here, there is a noble theme that is never lost. What comes through in District 9 is its humanity amid the aliens and hardware, and the final shot cannot help but be affecting. Wow, an independent science fiction film with state of the art technical effects and a compelling, intimate story. Where do I sign up?
**** of **** stars (for science fiction purists)
Nominated for Best Picture 2009

THE BLIND SIDE Shines Brightly

2010-03-04T23:37:00.000-08:00

In the tradition of feel good sports movies like The Rookie and Hoosiers comes The Blind Side, and what sets this apart from the genre is a commanding performance by Sandra Bullock. In her best role to date, Bullock’s character lifts this story, one that is a perfect example of popular filmmaking and its themes of love, hope, and redemption.

Opening with the infamous injury of NFL quarterback Joe Theisman by Lawrence Taylor, the film centers on the importance of protecting the quarterback’s ‘blind side’, and hence the position of left tackle has become vital to a football team’s success. This true story recounts the beginnings of tackle Michael Oher who was eventually drafted by the Baltimore Ravens.

Coming from a broken family, Oher enters a predominantly white high school. Quiet and introverted, he does poorly in his classes and performs marginally in athletic sports. Befriended by a younger boy, S. J. Tuohy, Michael (Quinton Aaron), by circumstance, endears himself to the wealthy Tuohy family, led by strong-willed mom, Leigh Anne (Bullock). She offers the homeless boy a place to sleep for the night which turns out to be a mansion of a home, and in time, a trust and bond develops as he is adopted by this surrogate family. Leigh Anne makes the young man her project so to speak and grows to love him as her own despite his abusive childhood which includes his biological mother who can barely survive on her own and his friends from the ’hood who border on criminals.

Encouraged by his ‘family’ and the school faculty, Michael improves his grades and play on the football field. He opens up and is befriended by more schoolmates. Because his sense of family is so important to him, he takes his protective instincts to a new level, and it carries over to football with spectacular results. Before long, marquee college coaches descend on Memphis and attempt to recruit the gentle giant. To help get his grades get up to par, the family hires a tutor, Miss Sue (Kathy Bates in an all too brief role). When an official from the NCAA interviews Michael about any conflict of interest (since the Tuohys are avid Ole Miss Alumni) with the University of Mississippi, Michael is at a crossroads in his career and relationship with the Tuohy family.

There are moments to savor such as Thanksgiving in the Tuohy household and how the family rallies around Michael. And of course, the famous scene where Leigh Anne coaches Michael to protect his quarterback as if he were family is amusing. When she delves into his neighborhood, she gets a heavy dose of living on the other side of the tracks, and a scene where a local gang confronts her and gets more than they expected is a standout. It is a stark contrast to her comfortable lifestyle and her judgmental friends. The college recruitment scenes are amusing and lend an air of authenticity by showing real life coaching legends like Nick Saban and Lou Holtz. What is refreshing is how Michael is befriended by S. J. and later, his sister, Collins. Having children making positive, life affirming choices for the welfare of others is a rare depiction in film.

Director John Lee Hancock (The Rookie) deserves credit for weaving a good script based on Michael Lewis’ book into a pretty good film with a strong cast. The Tuohy kids are well played by Jae Head and Lily Collins, and singer Tim McGraw is quite good as Leigh Anne’s supportive husband Sean. But this is most definitely Bullock’s show, and her energy is infectious and carries the film through sheer will. It’s the kind of performance that gets awards. Think of Julia Roberts in Erin Brockovich.

This film is a real crowd pleaser and easily watchable for most family members, not an easy trick. (Do stay for the end credits to see snapshots of the real life Tuohy family.) Yes, the narrative is very straightforward and plays with facts in places, but the spirit of a family and its matriarch who would not let one of her own fail cannot help but touch and inspire.
***1/2 of **** stars (mostly for Bullock)
Nominated for Best Picture 2009

The Best Romantic Films of All Time

2010-02-14T22:38:00.000-08:00

The best love stories can stand the test of time. Such a theme permeates virtually every genre of film. Comedic examples like Woman of the Year and Bridget Jones’ Diary and silent classics City Lights and Broken Blossoms could easily be on this list. Tearjerkers Love Is a Many Splendored Thing, Random Harvest and Waterloo Bridge are every bit as good as Love Story. Dramas like A Place in the Sun, The Apartment and Now Voyager are in the running. Literary pieces like Romeo and Juliet (1968) and its musical version, West Side Story are legendary. Theatrical plays Picnic, Splendor in the Grass and some odd pairings in Wall-E and Harold and Maude are memorable. Even Hitchcock’s Vertigo and Penn’s Bonnie and Clyde are immersed in romance.

In chronological order:

SUNRISE-A simple tale of two lost souls and perhaps the greatest silent film ever.

GONE WITH THE WIND-Scarlett and Rhett tower over most screen couples even Dr. Zhivago’s Yuri and Lara and Wuthering Heights’ Heathcliff and Cathy.

CASABLANCA-Impossible love and sacrifice foreshadow Roman Holiday.

THE AFRICAN QUEEN-Two soon-to-be-lovers struggle to survive the elements. Sounds like Titanic.

AN AFFAIR TO REMEMBER-A remake of a classic Love Affair was, itself remade a couple times but most memorably in Sleepless in Seattle.

BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S-Vintage urban love in New York would presage Annie Hall and When Harry Met Sally.

LOVE STORY-“Love means never having to say you’re sorry.” Literary adaptations like The Bridges of Madison County followed this formula with “This certainty comes but once in a lifetime.”

THE WAY WE WERE- Popular love stories like An Officer and Gentleman don’t get much better than this.

GHOST-A spiritual bond that survives even in death as evidenced in The Ghost and Mrs. Muir and Destiny.

THE NOTEBOOK-The emotions transcend the mind as in A Beautiful Mind and other films with a twist.

CAPITALISM: A LOVE STORY and the Politics of Fear

2009-11-14T21:07:00.000-08:00

Controversial documentarian Michael Moore has taken on some important news topics over the past two decades but perhaps none has affected every American more than the financial meltdown of Wall Street in 2008 as depicted in Capitalism: A Love Story. Done in his customary style of news clips, interviews, and enactments, he has fashioned a convincing indictment of greedy bank executives while being engaging and at times enlightening.

He points out a startling fact: We used to be one income family, Wall Street and corporate profits were guided by sound principles, and our country had no business competition. It’s a kind of history lesson courtesy of Moore as he also notes parallels between the demise of Wall Street and that of the Roman Empire, a comparison not without merit.

His thesis is that since President Ronald Reagan came into office, the influence of Wall Street has increased to the point that, while Congress and the U.S. Treasury have promoted financial deregulation, many of them have direct links to financial giants such as Goldman Sachs. It would seem on surface to be a major conflict of interest, and that is the point. A handful of CEO’s have benefited from running the country as a corporation and costing millions of jobs and livelihoods.

Moore ties news stories to an increasing pattern of corporate greed. There is a juvenile facility in Pennsylvania financed by taxpayer money and corrupt public officials. There are college students beholden to banks with student loans, and we witness news reports of a recent plane crash in Buffalo, New York, for what appears to be the lack of funds for safety issues. Then there is the surprising practice of businesses like Wal-Mart that take out life insurance policies on its employees and collecting on the benefits. By contrast, he does show examples of companies owned by workers that operate efficiently and at a profit. His point is there can be win-win situations.

As Wall Street sold ‘derivatives’, a risky form of corporate gambling, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan suggested that Americans tap the equity in their homes, and thus came the refinance boom for banks and a new found wealth for the masses-or was it? Using a home like a bank was a formula for financial disaster as the housing industry collapsed with foreclosures and the banking industry fell too. Moore makes his point with footage of actual foreclosures as sheriffs evict homeowners, and the cruelty is not only losing a home but in the cottage industry that has taken advantage of this agonizing process. Added to this is the preferential treatment that CEO’s gave to each other and many lawmakers regarding mortgage approvals. The question that keeps being asked by Moore and others is ‘where were the regulators’ in all this?

As Congress debated on how to repair the economy with a bailout of as much as $700 billion of taxpayer money, Wall Street used media abetted fear to manipulate lawmakers. It was a politics of fear. But not everyone was buying into the fear. Some members of Congress were brave enough to tell a sobering tale of a lack of oversight versus corporate bonuses being fed by the bailout.

Moore shows that some people are fighting back. A new President (Obama) ushers in the potential for change. People are fighting foreclosures and forcing banks to prove chain of title. The laid off workers at Republic Doors refused to exit the factory, and with media coverage and a supportive President, Bank of America caves in and agrees to pay the workers what is owed to them. This event is not without precedent as Moore points out in 1936, workers at a GM Flint, Michigan plant also fought back. In an ironic, fascinating piece of history of what might have been, President Franklin Roosevelt proposed but never lived to see a second Bill of Rights which would address virtually every important concern for Americans including health care, education, and financial security.

Then Moore makes this observation based on a private corporate memo that says 1% of the population in this country has 95% of the wealth but that the other 99% have an equal vote and the power to make changes (yet still hope to be part of the rich). It is this equal vote that scares the corporate powers. His conclusion is that the only hope for this country is for democracy to work.

Some things don’t come off well in the film; Moore appears to be grandstanding when he rents an armored car to make a citizen’s arrest of the CEOs of Wall Street and get back the public’s money. He even takes crime scene tape to cordon off bank doors. Also, an interview with actor Wallace Shawn seems a bit out of place. Wouldn’t an interview with an industry insider have worked better? You may not agree with everything Moore espouses, but some of the information should cause anyone to research the facts and draw their own conclusions. If you are a fan of his previous films Sicko or Fahrenheit 9/11, then you will appreciate Capitalism: A Love Story.
*** of **** stars

The Ten Greatest War Films of All Time

2009-11-10T21:48:00.000-08:00

As Veterans Day approaches, here is a list of some memorable war themed films. You could assemble another list of ten quite easily. I left out biographies - Patton, Schindler’s List, and Sergeant York, and comedic takes like M*A*S*H, and straight wartime dramas - Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo, The Best Years of Our Lives, Twelve O’Clock High, and Coming Home, or silent masterpieces - The Big Parade, Wings, and the controversial Birth of a Nation, or foreign entrees - Grand Illusion and Das Boot, fictitious gems - The Guns of Navarone or The Dirty Dozen, and the frontline soldiers of Battleground, The Story of G.I. Joe, They Were Expendable, The Big Red One, and Platoon.

In chronological order-

All Quiet on the Western Front-Unflinching look at front line soldiers who must face the enemy as directed by the maestro war director of all time, Lewis Milestone (A Walk in the Sun, Pork Chop Hill).

From Here to Eternity-The first adult oriented depiction of the personal lives of the men and women whose fates are forever altered by Pearl Harbor.

Paths of Glory-The supreme, anti-war film based on fact and featuring knockout acting by Kirk Douglas and the directorial machinations of a young Stanley Kubrick who would match this effort with Full Metal Jacket.

The Bridge on the River Kwai-The madness of war and how its participants lose sight of what really matters is the core of a cinematic triumph featuring Alec Guinness’ Oscar laden performance and an exciting climax second to none.

The Longest Day-Epic recreation of D-Day which changed the world. Remarkable in its scope and clarity and a star studded roster of cameos.

The Great Escape-The true story of allied escape from a German Stalag has a marvelous cast, superbly edited, and a star turn by motorcycle riding Steve McQueen.

The Deer Hunter-The lives of a Pennsylvania steel town are depicted in loving detail and thrown into allegorical horror of the Vietnam War.

Apocalypse Now- Into the heart of darkness as a military officer is sent to find the mysterious Colonel Kurtz who has descended into war’s hell. The Ride of the Valkyries helicopter charge is stunning.

Glory-The real life exploits of a regiment of soldiers composed of former slaves during the Civil War culminates in the greatest, emotional charge in war filmdom.

Saving Private Ryan-Spielberg stages the most realistic battle scene of all time as D-Day is reenacted in all its horrifying detail. Not until Black Hawk Down did a film come close to matching its verisimilitude of orchestrated mayhem.

The Ten Greatest Horror Films of All Time

2009-10-31T23:14:00.000-07:00

Ok, I could have included any number of films like the classics, King Kong, The Wolfman, the Val Lewton classics (Cat People), and Island of Lost Souls, or some cool monsters in The Thing (1951) or Creature from the Black Lagoon, or some mind benders like The Innocents and Peeping Tom, while noting some slashers like Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Friday the 13th, and some well deserved sequels like Dawn of the Dead (1978) or thrillers like Silence of the Lambs or Carrie, and some recent gems like The Ring , Nightmare on Elm Street, and Evil Dead. This is only one person’s opinion but the goal was to focus on those films that have stood the test of time and have been the focal point of influence on not just one but many films. Indeed, these ten films vary from inexpensive cheapies to major studio A budgets and cover a wide period of filmmaking. Ultimately the criteria was if the film was unequivocally scary and stayed with you. These ten meet the test. Enjoy.

The Exorcist-the granddaddy of good vs. evil complete with gross moments, great acting, and told with complete conviction by William Friedkin at the height of his powers.

Halloween –John Carpenter set the standard for current slasher films but no one has done a better job at modulating events until its suspenseful climax which ushered in a multitude of sequels.

Psycho-Hitchcock influenced a generation with this innovative film that broke all the rules and foreshadowed Halloween and Carrie.

Night of the Living Dead- low budget indie that has stood the test of time and has inspired dozens of good zombie films (Resident Evil, 28 Days Later) and was a big influence on that Grand Guignol, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

Bride of Frankenstein-horror with pathos and over the top imagination as this sequel to Frankenstein surpasses it and establishes itself as an all time movie great among movies.

Nosferatu-a silent masterpiece courtesy of German visionary F.W. Murnau is the best Dracula film without being called Dracula (for legal reasons) and with the most horrifying shot of all time as Max Schreck’s vampire levitates out of his coffin and stalks the last survivor of a ship!

Invasion of the Body Snatchers-the notion of losing yourself to an unemotional, static form is that inhuman terror that infected The Stepford Wives but never as good as this original that puts all other remakes to shame.

Repulsion-the ultimate psychological descent into personal hell with Catherine Deneuve complete with a hallway scene to make you jump; director Roman Polanski was making ready for Rosemary’s Baby

Jaws-and its mostly unseen terror abetted by a masterful John Williams score and a new director named Spielberg would usher in the age of the blockbuster and later Jurassic Park.

Alien- ok any remake of a B-movie of the 50’s (It the Terror from Beyond Space) can’t be all bad if it delivers 100% and introduces us to one of the great movie monsters of all time and a new heroine in Sigourney Weaver.

HORRORFIND WEEKEND 2009

2009-09-26T13:01:00.001-07:00

This year's edition of the horror film convention in Hunt Valley, Horrorfind Weekend, featured a fewer number of vendors which was a disappointment for movie poster collectors like myself but not short on industry celebrities and faces. A rare appearance by Adrienne King, the heroine from the original Friday 13th movie, had a perpetual line of people. Old faces like Corbin Bernson (Major League , LA Law), Danny Trejo (Heat, Desperado), and Fred Williamson (M*A*S*H, Three the Hard Way) were there. I met with Margot Kidder who was Lois Lane in the Christopher Reeve Superman movies of the 1970's and 1980's. I also met William Katt who was Carrie's date to the prom! He was a pretty neat guy and spent time getting to know each fan. There were other folks like the great makeup effects artist Tom Savini who had a lifesized friend from Gremlins for me to snap a picture. It was a nice time to take your mind off from reality for a bit.

JULIE & JULIA Serves a Tasty Dish

2009-08-30T21:56:00.000-07:00

Take equal parts Meryl Streep and Amy Adams. Add a dash of Stanley Tucci and have chef/director Nora Ephron whip up a delicious patisserie of confectionary delight in the true tale, Julie & Julia. Combining two source books, Julie Powell’s Julie & Julia and Julia Child’s My Life in France, Ephron’s screen adaptation parallels the lives of up and coming master chef Child and aspiring writer Powell who uses Child’s cookbook as the inspiration for her ambitious blog. The results, while not a five star meal, is certainly an entertaining, well acted drama highlighted by some amusing situations.

Two married women from different times and places yearn to satisfy their inner desire for independence. In 1949, Julia Child and her US civil servant husband, Paul, are stationed in Paris, France. Wanting to do something besides sitting around like other wives of the period, she endeavors a variety of classes from hat making to bridge lessons until she and Paul hit upon the fact that she loves to eat. Thus she embarks on a mission to conquer cooking schools and the art of culinary cuisine. In 2002, with similar desires for a more fulfilling life as an author, Julie Powell is getting adjusted to Queens, New York, with her husband, Eric. Powell’s frustrations are channeled into a blog that documents her attempts to realize all 524 recipes in Julia Child’s famous cookbook in 365 days no less. The two lead characters depend on the publishing world for success-Child with her constantly delayed French cookbook manuscript that grows to 700 pages and the doubting responses of skeptical publishers, and Julie with her daily blogs as her way of garnering attention from a publisher. Both women’s lives are set on a journey of self discovery and validation as they find that their goals will be sprinkled with adversity and roadblocks. Ultimately it will be their sheer will, self reflection, and the love of their respective spouses that will see them through in their quests.

Streep is perhaps the best actress of the past thirty years and this role only serves to elevate her status. Although the role is not a tortured soul as in Sophie’s Choice or Kramer vs. Kramer, she embodies Child as a larger than life bon vivant while mimicking her voice and mannerisms with startling acumen and enthusiam. Child’s character gets more development than Powell. As she walks with Paul, her subtle reaction to a baby carriage and subsequent meltdown at the news of her sister’s pregnancy is an interesting revelation. Her love of French food becomes an avocation and her life’s calling. The cooking moments are convincing including a cute sequence involving chopped onions that will have audiences chuckling. She is a woman’s libber by default as she attends a more advanced, male dominated cooking class.

It’s a pity that any actor in a Streep film would suffer by comparison. Yet Adams throws herself in the more contemporary but less developed role with gusto. Her role is more of the everywoman who cooks as a form of therapy. Powell’s background can’t quite compete with the rich history of Child’s origins, but what she does get is a following and respect from fans and publishers. What Ephron should have done toward the end is to reemphasize how Powell’s inability to finish anything of merit has come full circle with this accomplishment and would have provided a more compelling character development.

Stanley Tucci is a standout who more than holds his own with Streep’s Child. It is an Oscar-worthy performance. Chris Messina is a star on the rise as Eric Powell; he performs well with an essentially one note role.

There are nice moments including an amusing scene when Julie and Eric watch Dan Aykroyd’s classic Saturday Night Live take on Julia Child. A subplot involving the House Un-American Activities Committee detracts from the overall spirit of Child’s story, and the film does slow a bit in the last half-hour but never loses interest completely. Ephron does well by linking similar themes and events that each woman experiences thus providing a bond and segue over time and space. One wishes that there was a more direct connection between the two women and even a chance meeting, but we have to settle for indirect links and the sharing of kindred spirits.

Don’t expect anything more than an interesting character study of two women bound by a love for food and search for purpose in their lives. Julie & Julia is light but satisfying fare highlighted by a sumptuous main course, Meryl Streep. Bon appetite!

*** of **** (add 1/2 * for Streep fans)

HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF- BLOOD PRINCE Sets the Finale

2009-08-30T21:53:00.000-07:00

This remarkably well balanced series of wildly successful films based on an equally popular series of novels by J. K. Rowling shows no signs of waning with Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. Potter veteran director David Yates and keeper of the flame scribe Steve Kloves have kept together a burgeoning franchise that is laying the foundation for a grand finale.

A new school year begins, and Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) is coming to terms with being the ‘chosen one’ to do battle against the ultimate in evil wizardry, Lord Voldemort and the evil Death Eaters surrounding Hogwart. Professor Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) enlists Harry to serve as bait to draw out the supremely evil Voldemort. An older Professor Slughorn (Jim Broadbent) returns to the school and brings with him a mysterious history of having taught the boy who became Lord Voldemort. Harry in the meantime discovers a manuscript by the ‘Half-Blood Prince’ and thinks that it is the key to learning the wizardry secret that will enable Harry and his comrades, Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) to defeat the man who killed his parents and godfather, Sirius Black. Harry’s school rival Draco harbors revenge against him for the death of his evil father. There is the aerial game Quidditch that challenges Ron’s mettle, and the blossoming of adolescent romance between Potter and Ron’s sister, Ginny and between Ron and Hermione. Then there is Professor Snape (Alan Rickman) and some mysterious behavior that questions his allegiance. As Dumbledore makes Harry promise to do whatever he instructs, the Death Eaters are unleashed within Hogwart with devastating consequences and a shocking betrayal that will forever change the destiny of the school and foreshadow the coming showdown with Voldemort.

This is a more grownup Potter as it explores relationships more thoroughly and some amusing situations arise such as a love triangle that plagues Ron. It is amusing to see how hormones are thriving amongst the teens and love is in the air. Growing up was never this hard. There are also surprises of a high order that will send the series on a new, ominous path while raising questions about the loyalty of a major player. The one constant is our beloved trio of maturing wizards who must face an uncertain future without an important character. The film reinforces the continuous themes of loyalty and friendship among our wizard heroes. That bond and natural chemistry among the three actors is partly what holds this remarkable series together.

Most of the characters are back from the previous film Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. It does feel like school has restarted when Professors Dumbledore, Snape, and McGonagall (venerable Maggie Smith) show up. Other familiar faces reappear, which greatly help in the continuity and progression of the story. The filmmakers are wise to introduce a couple new characters here and there without shaking up the status quo too much. All the Potter films have benefited from a strong focus on storyline in keeping with the novel sources.

Production values are topnotch again, and the dark, moody colored cinematography is an artistic triumph. It is impressive at how mainstream films have pushed the creative aspects of filmmaking without sacrificing popularity; witness the cinematography and art direction of The Dark Knight and the film editing in The Bourne Ultimatum. It has almost become passé to expect imaginative state of the art special effects in the Potter films, but they are always serving the plot and not merely to draw attention to the spectacle itself.

Since these are British performers, there is a bit of adjusting to their heavy British accents. This film, perhaps more than any other, assumes that the audience is already well versed on Potter lore, and so it may prove a bit confusing to the uninitiated. It starts out well and tries one’s patience just a tad as it builds a complex narrative that loses steam half-way through and picks up momentum toward the end and never lets up with a devastating payoff which in turn sets up the two part finale in grand fashion.

Though not the best film of the series, The Half-Blood Prince sets the table for the final battle of good versus evil. This must be a pretty good film because I can’t wait for the final installments.

*** of **** stars

PUBLIC ENEMIES Rekindles Gangster Era

2009-08-30T21:51:00.000-07:00

Johnny Depp is hitting his stride in recent years with his Pirates of the Caribbean films and character roles. Director/writer Michael Mann has been a respected stylist of the crime genre with such notables as Heat, Thief, and TV’s Miami Vice. The union of these two super talents results in a more than satisfactory retelling of the legendary bank robber, John Dillinger, in Public Enemies. This violent tale focuses on the free spirit of Dillinger and his infamous robberies in the Midwest at the height of the Great Depression.

In 1933, the country is in the midst of the Great Depression and bank robber John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) captures the public’s fascination and even folk hero worship. Having helped to break his friends out of prison, he continues his robberies in and around Chicago. As the crime wave sweeps the Midwest, the FBI’s J. Edgar Hoover enlists up and coming agent, Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale), (who has just nailed Pretty Boy Floyd,) to capture Dillinger, Public Enemy Number One. Purvis employs a variety of sophisticated listening devices and police work to track him. Dillinger thinks he is invincible and executes even more daring bank robberies. He dates hat check girl Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard) and travels with her to Florida for horse races and then to Arizona, where lawmen recognize and arrest him. Transported to Indiana State Penitentiary, an easier place to breakout than a federal prison thanks to his mob lawyer, he uses a fake gun to engineer an escape. He is joined by notorious hothead robber, Baby Faced Nelson, and they score more violent robberies. Purvis insists on recruiting a crack force of Texas lawmen who assist him in closing in on the Dillinger gang leading to a memorable shootout in Little Bohemia. As Dillinger crosses the state line, he violates federal laws and brings pressure on organized criminals, who turn on the fugitive. Billie’s fear that John will be caught or killed is tempered by her love for him, and when she is captured by local law enforcement, Purvis intercedes. When a call girl comes forward with information about Dillinger, Purvis sets up a fateful ambush at The Biograph Theater where the FBI will be waiting.

It is interesting that Dillinger’s relationship with organized crime syndicates helped him with a legal infrastructure that disappeared once the mob deemed him a risk to their lucrative business. Further, Hoover’s political agenda was desperate to make headlines and build the FBI into a future powerhouse of law. It is also fascinating how technically proficient the FBI was on its use of wire taps and eavesdropping devices while being relatively incompetent in conducting a simple arrest or taking part in a shootout.

What is refreshing is the core romance between Dillinger and Billie Frechette. Dillinger is presented as bold, charismatic and at times ruthless. It is his bravado that attracts fellow criminals and Billie to him. Cotillard gets a strong role that is considerably more than window dressing. Her performance is convincing, and her chemistry with Depp’s Dillinger makes this romance believable and heartbreaking thus lending an emotion subtext to the typical gangster movie. Bales’s Purvis is portrayed as an obsessed, determined lawman who is dry and dull in sharp contrast to the devil may care attitude of the freewheeling Dillinger. Billy Crudup registers effectively as the young Hoover. Mann favorite Stephen Lang, barely recognizable, registers a solid performance as a hardened Texas lawman who is critical to the end of the film.

Besides the usual set designs and costumes to mimic the depression era, heavy use is made of period music. The Little Bohemia shootout is a major set piece with heavy use of handheld cameras. Although a detailed montage of action, it still does not have the visceral impact of John Milius’ Dillinger or even the classic, G-Men. There is also an extended bank heist reminiscent of Mann’s Heat in its boldness and precision of execution. The climactic ambush at the Biograph Theater is depicted in excruciating detail and still carries a great deal of tension.

The last scene at a women’s prison may never actually have happened, and it is curious that Lang’s lawman and not Purvis serves as the catalyst for this key moment. The subsequent, final shot of Cotillard after getting a special message is quite memorable. It almost raises this film to another level.

Public Enemies is not the best of Michael Mann, but it is a solid entry in his canon of crime films. What is notable is another star turn by Depp, an actor at his creative peak.

*** of **** stars

UP Carries You Away

2009-08-30T21:48:00.000-07:00

Pixar has found a home with Disney and, with apologies to Dreamworks and other animation studios, no one has come close in recent years to their fresh, inventive, and importantly, timeless spirit in computer animation. In UP, a tale of loneliness and friendship is told in a simple, heartfelt way. This is one of the best films of the year and puts live action films to shame.

Carl begins as an adventure-loving boy whose childhood friendship with a girl, Ellie, grows into a marriage as adults and a dream to visit their ideal destination, Paradise Falls in South America. Later widowed, Carl becomes a crusty, elderly man who longs for escape. In time, his neighborhood is transformed into an urban development, and one fateful day with the threat of being committed to a retirement community, he takes his house on a bold, unlikely trip by balloons through the skies to South America. Unfortunately, he discovers an accidental passenger in the form of a Boy Scout named Russell who is looking to get his final merit badge by helping a senior citizen. Carl must make a momentous decision that changes his life and affects Russell. Their joint flight arrives somewhere in the vicinity of Paradise Falls. Along the way they encounter an unusual, giant bird dubbed Kevin and a dog named Dug whose thoughts are vocalized through his special electronic collar. This motley group encounters a mysterious, dangerous presence that threatens them and jeopardizes Carl’s journey to his final destination.

Pete Docter (Wall-E, Toy Story) and Bob Peterson (Finding Nemo) bring their story and screenplay talents to the fore as co-directors. It’s really a story about unfulfilled, broken dreams and things left undone, and the spirit and drive to recapture those feelings. The film begins with a subplot involving the friendship and growing romance of a young Carl and Ellie who share a passion for life and adventure. The imaginative vignettes tell a complete love story in an opening montage that ends as our film is only beginning-wow!

What makes this film head and shoulders above most animations is its poignant confrontation of life’s ups and downs. It’s about life and death told in terms that are not disingenuous. In the grand tradition of Disney classics as Bambi and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, movies about finding a safe place from danger are at the core of children’s animation, and this film plays on that tradition. The novelty here is that the lead character is elderly. There is a sense of The Wizard of Oz in its otherworldly journey of discovery and camaraderie, and even the climax smacks of Saturday morning cliffhangers. A nice change of pace is the lack of contemporary, inside jokes or puns based on pop culture that are staples of such Dreamworks hits as the Shrek films. The situations here are organically amusing from natural conflicts and plot.

Carl (voiced to perfection by Edward Asner) is a mean, bitter soul who rediscovers his innocence and humanity through Russell, who in turn discovers the safety of a nuclear family with Carl and some unlikely companions. Kevin is cute, emanating amusing sound effects and body movements without uttering a single line of dialogue. Dug is a riot as the misfit dog whose heart of gold is matched by his incessant habit of having his ‘talking’ interrupted at any moment by a sudden spasm of posturing and shouting, “point” or “squirrel”! It’s a hoot. Christopher Plummer is effectively sinister as a blast from the past. The only criticism of the movie is minor at the end when we are not quite sure about Russell’s parents and how much they are part of his life. John Ratzenberger’s (Cheers) streak of doing a voice in every major Pixar release is intact.
The computer animation is so good, that anything not human looks like a picturesque postcard. When Carl’s balloons sprout above his house, we admire their stunning, vibrant colors. Interesting uses of cinematography are employed as if this were a live action feature. The final image is ironic as it is iconic, a fitting end to a fairy tale.

This one ranks highly alongside Pixar favorites like Finding Nemo and Wall-E. Quite possibly, adults may find as much (if not more) to enjoy in this story. It’s amazing that a modest story featuring a kid and old man told with conviction and skill is one of the best films of 2009.

**** of **** stars (preceded by a winning short, Partly Cloudy)

ANGELS AND DEMONS-AN IMPROVEMENT

2009-05-25T20:59:00.000-07:00

Dan Brown’s phenomenal bestseller, The DaVinci Code was made into an equally successful film adaptation. Angels and Demons, while actually a prequel to that book, has been adapted into a movie sequel, and the results are certainly more promising. Director Ron Howard and actor Tom Hanks reteam for a better telling of intrigue, murder, and suspense amid a historic and religious setting. Essentially an almost real-time thriller which jumps from ancient landmark to landmark, this film actually works pretty well within its own confines and is thus a satisfying entertainment without getting sidetracked on the holy mission of revelatory discovery and truth that its predecessor got tangled in.

A scientific breakthrough in a Swiss laboratory generates powerful, anti-matter particles. When a mysterious group steals this deadly material, they threaten Vatican City with annihilation. The plot thickens when four Cardinals, in consideration to succeed the recently deceased Pope, are kidnapped and threatened with hourly execution at a holy site. Despite his purely scientific, empirical measure of the world, symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks with a normal hairdo this time) is whisked from Harvard campus to Vatican City where he is joined by Dr. Vittoria Vetra (Ayelet Zurer) whose lab created the stolen particles. Together, they attempt to locate the Cardinals and the anti-matter particles. We meet the Vatican Police guard and their protocols and protectiveness over not only the church and its members, but its archives which are at the heart of Langdon’s quest for clues. The Pope’s assistant, Camerlengo Patrick McKenna (Ewan McGregor), the Vatican Guard Commander Richter (Stellan Skarsgard), and elder Cardinal Strauss (Armin Mueller-Stahl) participate in the investigation. History (according to Dan Brown) has it that in 1668, four scientists or free-thinkers known as the Illuminati were kidnapped, branded and executed by the church. Now a darker version of the Illuminati is ready to exact an ‘eye-for-an-eye’ revenge on the church, and they intend to finish the job with one big bang of anti-matter. The clues lead to the four elements of fire, water, air and earth, and perhaps more. What do these have to with actual church locations? Complicating the proceedings is a mysterious assassin who carries out the lethal agenda with unerring accuracy even as Langdon, Dr. Vetra, and the police attempt to prevent further bloodshed. Should Vatican City be evacuated as thousands of people hold a vigil for the new Pope? Can everyone be trusted even in the most sensitive and elite of holy circles? These questions are raised as Langdon desperately searches for answers to save the Vatican.

Having not read the original novel, I feel the film does work on its own which is more than can be said of its predecessor which got lost in self importance and confusing exposition. Screenwriters David Koepp (Jurassic Park, Spiderman) and Akiva Goldsman (A Beautiful Mind) have tried to streamline and condense Brown’s immense, detailed novel into a serviceable story, which focuses on a race against time and is a pretty decent mystery without having the ‘holier than thou’ agenda. References are made to Langdon’s previous adventure with The DaVinci Code, but the film wisely stays on course almost in actual-time so that the suspense level is ratcheted up progressively until the potentially explosive climax.

There are some shortcomings to the film. There is alot of material covered here so it seems a bit episodic, and plot details that beg for a more patient explanation are raced over. The characters are not sufficiently fleshed out to give more meaning to what happens later. All we get are some brief notes of each person’s background to go forward; that is a missed opportunity. Perhaps Dan Brown’s book did not give much in the way of detailed history for his players, but that does not excuse the filmmakers from trying to make a stronger, more emotional connection. Further, elements of the plot strain credibility, and you need to make a leap of faith so to speak to accept some pretty amazing coincidences and key events. In particular, the climax is full of major surprises and a stunning turn of events that require a suspension of disbelief.

Production values are impressive particularly in the art direction and visual effects to recreate Vatican City (since permission for location shooting was denied). The camera work shows great fluidity, and seldom have visuals been more kinetic as in this film or for that matter any other recent adventure/mystery. This helps in the pacing and overall flow of the story.

It’s nice for a change to see male and female leads working together without resorting to the obligatory romance. Here, it’s strictly business. In fact the film plays almost like a chapter of TV’s 24 or The X Files which may determine whether the plot twists and turns are surprising or satisfyingly fresh to the uninitiated viewer. If you have seen The Godfather III, the storyline conspiracies may also seem a bit familiar. Still, you get the feeling that Howard and Hanks have gotten the hang of things this time around. What you get is a moderately interesting mystery in an elaborate, big budget setting. The visuals are impressive but the story itself is nothing special to write home about.

*** of **** stars
(**1/2 stars if you’re a 24 fan)

STAR TREK REDUX EXHILERATES

2009-05-13T21:15:00.000-07:00

Continuing the trend of reinventing sixties iconic figures such as Batman and James Bond, Star Trek was inevitably next in line. For those who fretted that the new incarnation of creator Gene Roddenberry’s beloved franchise of ‘Wagon Train to the Stars’ would be dishonored or ignored, they needn’t worry. This new version, intended to reboot the franchise that was so popular in TV reruns and subsequently in a series of big budget films, is a remarkably balanced take on the origins of the classic Enterprise crew. It is designed to appeal to the non-initiated audience while referencing the existing canon of Star Trek lore. Director J. J. Abrams (Fringe, Alias, Mission Impossible III) brings a fresh vision abetted by Trekkie fan/writers, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman.

James T. Kirk is born as his father rescues a starship crew during a Romulan attack led by the mysterious Nero (Eric Bana). A young rebel who grows into a brash, thrill seeking adventurer, young Kirk (Chris Pine) is recruited into Star Fleet Academy by Captain Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood). Meanwhile the half Vulcan / half human Mr. Spock (Zachary Quinto) has matured amid bullying kids and decides his destiny lies with The Federation as a cadet instead of his home planet Vulcan. Kirk strikes up a friendship with an ornery young Doctor Leonard McCoy (Karl Urban is a hoot) whose distrust of space and things not medical will become legendary. It is McCoy who devises a way for Kirk to become a crew member of the newly commissioned starship Enterprise. In fact, most of what will become the core crew is assembled including communications officer Uhura (Zoe Saldana), helmsmen Sulu (John Cho) and Chekov (Anton Yelchin), and later, engineer Scotty (Simon Pegg). Seeking vengeance against the Federation, Nero has traveled through time to exact pain and destruction with a planet killing device that will draw the Enterprise to Vulcan and ultimately Earth. With the Universe in the balance, Kirk and Spock must decide if they can work together (with the help of a certain mentor).

The parallel life paths of Kirk and Spock are marked contrasts of two men who will clash and reconcile their future relationship. Kirk smacks of hawkish, shoot-from-the-hip reactionary while Spock is the logical, think-inside-the-box good soldier. Nero reminds us a bit of Khan from Wrath of Khan. The character of Uhura is a major upgrade. She is a multi-talented officer who has romantic longings for a certain Vulcan. Greenwood shines as the veteran Pike. Leonard Nimoy makes a welcome, pivotal appearance as an elder Spock who figures prominently in the history that is to come. The cast makes the most of iconic roles and excels at recreating the personas of what we remember; each crew member gets an opportunity to shine. It is nice to see this group working and improvising together for the first time to solve a crisis. Further, this story takes it for granted as does its audience that this crew is not only multicultural, but multi-species, a far cry from the novelty of the integrated crew of classic Trek.

The screenplay has some well written dialogue and clever Trek references sprinkled throughout, and age old lines of the classic show are introduced for the first time. When McCoy utters, “I’m a doctor, not a physicist”, it’s a riot. Part of the fun is watching two heavyweights like Kirk and Spock faceoff and slowly bond and seeing how Kirk ascends to the captain’s chair. We finally get to learn what the ‘Kobayashi Maru’ wargame really is and how Kirk manages to defeat the test.

Sure, the plot has some gaping holes if you think about continuity and the fate of a certain venerable, classic character. Nero’s motives are explained in time, but they don’t make total sense. This film also does not have the gravitas of deep themes as previous films which is perhaps its only true failing, but instead, we get a strong character study that more than compensates.

Technical effects are quite impressive although Abrams seems to favor close-ups and tight camera setups that put the viewer in the middle of action scenes. Fortunately, there are no jarring Cloverfield handheld camera moves. There is a good fight sequence on a weapons platform and a surprise on an ice planet. You want phasers shooting back and forth in space battle? You’ve got them here. In fact the energy level keeps this voyage bouncing along.

The Enterprise is stunning-it has never looked quite this way ever, and it is cool how they depict the starship going into warp drive. There are imaginative points of view when showing off the ship’s exterior, and the interior is brimming with activity and sound, which is in stark contrast to the more antiseptic views from the earlier show. The costumes (complete with female miniskirts) harken back to that period and yet seem fresh. At credits’ end, there is a nice dedication to the Roddenberrys, Gene and Majel Barrett (who voices the Federation computer one last time).

Fans of the old show may tear up at how faithful and creative Abrams and his screenwriters are with Trek lore and how they set everything up nicely going forward. This is their alternate universe now, and we are game for the experience. This crew, baptized under fire, is ready for new missions, and they cannot come soon enough. Way to go, Mr. Abrams. This Trek rocks!

***1/2 of **** stars

OSCAR PREDICTIONS 2008 films

2009-02-22T10:59:00.000-08:00

OK, a last minute Oscar prediction for 2008 films…..
Because it is a level playing field in terms of quality, there could be a surprise in several categories except Best Supporting Actor. I have only seen some of the acting nominees but, as always, have seen all the Best Picture ones. Enjoy the telecast-the producers(Bill Condon did Dreamgirls) should have some cool faces and events that changes the traditional presentations. Here we go. –Clint
BEST PICTURE-All the films here are good but not one grabbed me deeply. However, Slumdog Millionaire is a gritty Cinderella story with universal appeal and should complete its magical journey.
BEST DIRECTOR-Danny Boyle makes good films (Trainspotting, 28 Days Later) and this is his coming out ceremony with Slumdog.
BEST ACTRESS-very close race between my favorite, Meryl Streep in Doubt and Kate Winslet in The Reader. Historically when an actress is overdue, she wins. When an actress has another strong film that year (revolutionary Road), she wins. Winslet wins.
BEST ACTOR-Sean Penn in Milk was transforming despite Mickey Rourke in the comeback film The Wrestler. Very very close…..I go with my heart-Sean Penn.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS-very tough here too but it is likely between Penelope Cruz in Vicky Cristina Barcelona and a short, memorable moment by Viola Davis in Doubt. If Streep loses, look for Davis to be the representative winner on Doubt. Cruz is heavily favored but I still remember Davis-so Davis.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR-Heath Ledger was so good in a memorable way in The Dark Knight (which should have been a best picture nominee-it was nominated in every major guild –Producers, Director etc)
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY-Milk was a very complete film and could have won Best Picture in another year. Here is its validation.
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY-Slumdog Millionaire, although this is where an upset could occur with strong competition from every film.
The rest…..
Benjamin Button should take SPECIAL EFFECTS (from Iron Man), possibly ART DIRECTION, and of course most definitely MAKEUP.
The Dark Knight in addition should take SOUND MIXING and SOUND EDITING,
Slumdog could scoop more awards like MUSICAL SCORE (think The Last Emperor), CINEMATOGRAPHY, and even COSTUME DESIGN. Probably EDITING although Benjamin Button is strong here.
Wall-E deserves BEST ANIMATION and could have been a Best Picture nominee. It could steak best song from Slumdog.
Waltz with Bashir should pickup FOREIGN FILM and Man on Wire for DOCUMENTARY FEATURE.
The tally-Slumdog-7 Oscars, Benjamin Button and Dark Knight could end up with 3 Oscars each. I give up on the short film categories.

The Masterpiece That Is THE DARK KNIGHT

2008-07-25T01:10:00.000-07:00

When Batman Begins (2005) reenergized the franchise with its dark, brooding vision and Zen beginnings, it looked like the followup could be primed for even better results. The higher expectations have not only been met, but are exceeded in The Dark Knight. Featuring a diabolical performance by the late Heath Ledger, this is a terrific film that takes the franchise to darker places, and it is a milestone in comic adaptations and certain to alter the course of such films in the future.

An elaborate bank heist is engineered by the ruthless Joker who is stealing from and toying with the mobsters of Gotham City. Batman (Christian Bale), the caped crusader, watches over the city aiding police Lt. James Gordon (Gary Oldman). Although Batman is an outcast in society, his true identity is billionaire Bruce Wayne, Gotham’s revered benefactor. A new ‘face’ in the form of District Attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), has arrived to clean up crime. Dent is a supremely confident, dynamic ‘white knight’ who means business, and he is dating Wayne’s former love, Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal). As Wayne Enterprise’s Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman) upgrades his armor and weaponry, Batman must confront the Joker, who consolidates his power and rule over Gotham’s mobs and begins to target city officials including Dent for assassination. When Dent sets himself as bait for The Joker, Batman must chase down and save the district attorney and Rachel from certain death. Meanwhile, a new villain emerges from an unlikely source. Racing against time, Batman is forced into a life and death choice, and he must decide if he should make a sacrifice that will forever change the course of Gotham’s heroic avenger.

Directed by Christopher Nolan (Batman Begins, Momento) in arguably his most accomplished work, this mature, psychological movie takes its themes seriously and weaves subplots upon subplots. For instance, how does a group of people respond when its morality and survival instincts are tested to the limit? You may be surprised and thrilled by the answers. The plot twists are so numerous, you wonder, ‘am I really watching an action picture?’ By the end, the franchise is launched into a new, uncertain direction. Bravo to the filmmakers for not playing it safe.

Whenever Ledger is onscreen, he is simply terrific. There is not one false note or boring moment as he lights up the screen. With his body language, every inflection and facial expression all working in concert to create a horrifying persona, he is so convincing, you cannot imagine that it is Heath Ledger. He is complemented, as are the other leads, with a well written script full of memorable lines. This Joker is a far cry from previous incarnations (Cesar Romero, Jack Nicholson) of the clown prince of crime. When Wayne tries to fathom The Joker’s motivations, Alfred counsels him and states, “Some men want to watch the world burn.” This Joker is grounded in real evil and is thus all the more menacing. We get bits and pieces of Joker’s sordid, traumatic past, which are totally credible in explaining his origins. Essentially an urban terrorist, he threatens the innocent and causes them to live in fear, and he kills with no remorse. There is no logic to his acts, and yet he is a brilliant, clever strategist. Batman follows his own set of rules, but must he sink to Joker’s level in order to combat him?

If The Joker is like the devil, then Batman is almost a Christ-like figure, one with self doubt and who is willing to protect the innocent even if it means taking on or absorbing the sins and pain of the world around him. Christian Bale continues to impress by portraying dual characters (Bruce Wayne/Batman) effectively and playing off the likes of Freeman and Caine, who make the most of their supporting roles. Eckhart is convincing as Dent, a role much more developed and utilized than in Batman Forever. Gyllenhaal (replacing Katie Holmes) does quite well as Wayne’s former flame. Oldman is very good as Gordon which is quite the change of pace from having previously played evil villains (JFK). In fact, Oldman, Freeman, and Caine form the moral compass of the film.

With a talented cast bringing well rounded characters to the screen, Nolan keeps things grounded and never loses track of his story. A Gotham car chase and Hong Kong escape are breathtaking sequences yet wholly believable. You don’t think of anything as computer generated or overdone, which is remarkable in this age of special effects. Are you listening Michael Bay (Armageddon, Con Air)? There are several well composed shots that are iconic and haunting. The hardware is eye-catchy including the Batmobile and a scooter like none you’ve ever seen. Pacing is methodical but it seems a bit choppy and jumpy by cramming in so much narrative material into a 2.5 hour running time. The camerawork is at times quite fluid and dazzling by enhancing the mood or (in The Joker’s case) madness.

There are a couple of moments that are a bit misleading or confusing such as an assassination attempt that may have claimed a key character’s life. And the villain’s fate is sort of, how shall I put this, left hanging? But these are tiny quibbles in a film vastly richer than any comic book adaptation (Spiderman 2 and Iron Man are in this elite company) to date. Rated PG-13, this is essentially an R rated film in spirit and not for younger children. It is creepy and sustains an overall dark, violent mood throughout. Go see The Dark Knight for a multi-layered story that challenges and surprises. Go see the wonderful acting and writing led by maestro Nolan. But most of all go see a burst of genius that was Ledger’s brilliant, last hurrah.

**** of **** stars

WALL-E Brings Pathos to Computer Animation

2008-07-05T08:03:00.000-07:00

Pixar has produced some of the best animation in the past decade with its computer-generated features (Toy Story, Monsters Inc., and Finding Nemo) that have been marked by strong storylines and vivid characters. The tradition continues in an impressive way with Wall-E. This deceptively simple tale is transformed by the emotional content told almost entirely through visuals.

A polluted Earth has become uninhabitable for 700 years, and one of its only residents is Wall-E, a small robot whose solitary mission is to be a mobile, trash compactor. In his work, he also finds and collects trivial, odd artifacts of mankind’s past such as a Rubik’s cube. He comforts himself with an old video, Hello Dolly, and as he learns about humans and his yearning for love, it becomes his idyllic vision of happiness amid an insulated, dull existence. Along his travels, he comes across a unique find, a live plant! One day a spaceship lands and deposits a robot probe. Fascinated by this kindred machine, Wall-E follows and eventually befriends this unit known as Eve. Eve has a directive that will hopefully return humans to Earth if only it can sustain life, and Wall-E’s plant figures immeasurably. Eve is returned to her mother ship with Wall-E frantically chasing after his newly found love. On a spaceship acting as a living city for its machine-dependent, overweight humans, little robots are not only the caregivers, but in control. Wall-E and Eve must figure a way to return the humans to earth and find happiness even if it means making the ultimate sacrifice.

Wall-E’s innocence and childlike wonder (think E.T.), as exemplified by how he introduces himself to everyone he meets, could almost have sprung from Steven Spielberg’s imagination. It’s in the small details that enrich Wall-E as a character. He brings to mind an amalgam of past robots like Star Wars’ R2-D2 and the little robots in Silent Running, and his fears and joys are expressed through body language and squeals. When he shuts down each night to sleep, he rocks himself as a child would. He is clumsy around Eve, and when he takes her to his makeshift home of robot parts and paraphernalia, he is like a little kid. Ironically, he is the catalyst to bring the humans back home.

Writer and director, Andrew Stanton (Finding Nemo), takes a huge risk by basing the film’s premise almost entirely on a song from Hello Dolly. I can’t think of an animated film that relied so much on visual storytelling. Even Fantasia and Allegro Non Troppo were collections of musical sequences not narrative features. In a way, this film is almost too sophisticated in its display and execution for little kids but is just right for adults. Remarkably, this is a tale with nary a spoken word by the principals. One has to think of silent films to approach this achievement. The operative word here is pathos like the best of Charlie Chaplin’s little tramp and, amazingly, this film earns its stripes by emoting body language, action, and sound effects. Yet most of the characters aren’t even human!

Fred Willard has an amusing small role as the corporate president. Sigourney Weaver, as the ship’s computer voice, is an inspired choice since, like Eve, she was a female hero (in the Alien movies) and had to deal with computer voices in those films. The animation is almost 3-D in its rich detail and simulated, fluid camerawork. The interior of the mother ship, the Axiom, is a futuristic view of a commercialized (think Blade Runner) city in space.

Yes, it is a thinly veiled message for all those ‘save the earth’ and ‘think green’ people, but that never detracts from the main theme of saving humanity amid a touching love story. There are moments when you think a scene could have played out a bit better, but that is minor. It is likely that Wall-E’s reputation will grow over time as a shining example of stretching the art form by challenging and trusting its audience. Bravo to the folks at Pixar for taking a chance and for entertaining and moving us.

***1/2 of **** stars (preceded by a winning short, Presto)

The Wisdom of KUNG FU PANDA

2008-06-23T20:52:00.001-07:00

Looking for an animated film that the whole family can watch and enjoy? Then the summer has a good selection in Kung Fu Panda, a magical tale of talking animals, martial arts, eastern philosophy, and good versus evil. It is also voiced by several well known stars not the least of which is the force of nature that is Jack Black.

Panda bear Po (Jack Black) works for his father’s noodle business in ancient China but yearns for something more. His interest in martial arts leads him to being an accidental selection as the ‘chosen one’ to defend the local town from a vengeful leopard Tai Lung (Ian McShane), a former student of the wise, martial arts teacher, Shifu (Dustin Hoffman). As the ‘chosen one’, Po is given the sacred Dragon Scrolls and is trained by Shifu in the ways and technique of Kung Fu much to the consternation of the Furious Five, the current crop of warriors. Po presents the ultimate challenge both physically and mentally to Shifu until the master hits on an unorthodox idea. As Tai Lung approaches and the Furious Five attempt to defend the town, Po must learn the ways of the true warrior. As he begins to mature and learn about himself, he becomes the last line of defense.

This story nicely blends serious themes with moments of comedic fun. What is refreshing in the humor is that it is organic and timeless without resorting to pop references (as in Shrek)-no small feat. It also depicts the ancient Chinese warriors with not only martial arts prowess, but abilities to defy gravity as in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. Children will find a wondrous, far away land populated by real people in the guise of animal characters. It is a believable world with real feelings of yearning, tradition, envy, and bravery.

A somewhat more subdued Jack Black does a fine job emoting and realizing the young Po. Dustin Hoffman is quite good as the wise sage, a sort of Asian Yoda (or the other way around). It’s rather hard to believe the star power behind the other voices including Angelina Jolie, Jackie Chan, and Seth Rogen. The movie could have worked just as well without them.

The movie actually gets better in the middle and toward the end, not that long a wait. Its basic themes of destiny and loyalty are universal. As Master Shifu says, “there are no accidents.” The animation and creative use of camera angles and zooms are breath taking at times. You kind of wish the script had just a bit more substance and this would have become a treasured classic. As it is, Kung Fu Panda is a delightful, inoffensive adventure with something for all ages.

*** of **** stars

Indiana Jones Rides Again in THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL

2008-05-27T00:22:00.000-07:00

The question that begs to be asked is if the latest installment of Indiana Jones is any good? The answer is yes, and one needn’t fret over another letdown like The Phantom Menace, which undermined the original Star Wars trilogy. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, far from perfect, gets the job done and carries on its tradition of high adventure in satisfying fashion.

In 1957 Nevada, mysterious soldiers persuade Dr. Henry ‘Indiana’ Jones Jr. (Harrison Ford) to locate an important crate amidst a large warehouse of X-Files type of treasures. A ruthless Russian, Irinia Spalko (Cate Blanchett), leads her troops in an obsessive search for a mythic, crystal skull of unknown origin that may have potential psychic powers if it is joined with other skulls hidden in a lost city in the South American jungle. Meanwhile at his college, Professor Jones meets young ‘Mutt’ Williams (Shia LaBeouf) who needs Indy’s help to rescue his mentor, Dr. Oxley, and his mom, Marion. It seems they, too, have been hunting for the skull. Pursued by Russian agents, Indiana and Mutt attempt to rescue their comrades while discovering clues about the crystal skull. During the journey, certain truths emerge, and Indy must confront his past and a former love. As Irina closes in, who will survive when the enigmatic skulls are reunited and unleash their hidden, unworldly power?

The screenplay by David Koepp cobbles previous stories and ideas from a battery of writers. While it has more heart than any Lara Croft film by far, one wishes that original writer, Lawrence Kasdan, had a final rewrite to punch up the emotional content to compliment the action. I do like, however, that they tease you with the possibility that Mutt may or may not be Indy’s son and if Indy will ‘get the girl’. Bravo to the filmmakers for confronting these issues head on by story’s end.

Harrison Ford may be 65 years of age, but he looks great and does most of his own stunts! (To put things in perspective, John Wayne was 62 in True Grit and Cary Grant was 59 in Charade.) Shia LaBeouf is more than able as his new sidekick with a greased comb and an attitude, and Karen Allen is most welcome as Marion, able to take charge and hold her own. Cate Blanchett is appropriately sinister and alluring as the deadly Irina. Unfortunately other talents are not well developed, leaving in its lurch, John Hurt as Oxley, Jim Broadbent as a college dean, and Ray Winstone as an older sidekick with his own agenda.

While Raiders of the Lost Ark had countless, memorable action scenes, this film has a few of its own. There are the usual barrage of bloodless shootouts, fistfights, and bits of customary nastiness with bugs, snakes and skeletons not to mention the exciting climax where you just know the greedy, evil commies will get theirs. Naturally, some of the scenes strain credibility in being quite implausible and unrealistic (as in plunging from a waterfall or two or three), but it is all in good fun. The hair raising escapes are like a well oiled machine particularly in an exhilarating but impossible chase in the jungle as major characters leap among three, count ‘em three moving vehicles! And if it feels like parts of the story seem familiar, keep in mind that the filmmakers are paying homage to the Saturday morning serials of their youth. Other referenced movies come to mind like Forbidden Planet and Journey to the Center of the Earth.

Production values are top notch. Veteran composer John Williams rekindles the musical cues, and Michael Kahn’s editing pushes the limits of nail biting suspense. A couple scenes look a little sloppy and don’t come off as well as they should, and although there are some slow spots with confusing dialogue and murky exposition, there is always a marvelously choreographed action scene waiting around the corner. For example, the opening sequence is vintage Indiana Jones as Spielberg builds up a grand entrance for his star and puts him in immediate peril. Later, there is an anxious moment when Jones is about to be caught in an atomic blast and must use his wits to survive. What has always made the character so likeable is that he is fallible. Even Indy’s mistakes and hiccups can be humorous and exciting, as evidenced in a sinking pit where he must come to grips with a childhood fear.

Lucas and Spielberg proved that lightning could strike three times in a row in the 1980’s (Raiders of the Lost Ark, Temple of Doom, and The Last Crusade), and now they have done it a fourth time. I put this film on par with the later chapters. Viewers who keep in mind how the 1950’s timeline lends itself to more science fiction elements, will understand that, while every Indy saga ends with a supernatural event, this one is grounded in the ‘watch the skies’ frame of mind. It is this conceit that may throw off a few fans of the older films.

The door is left open for more adventures, but the film does wrap things in a neat bow. You wish that they would just leave well enough alone and gracefully end on a high note. Indeed, the last, parting shots are terrific for fans. As with the previous chapters, this film is likely to improve with repeated viewings. I seem to recall liking the first one and then savoring it considerably more over time. Indiana Jones ages like fine wine. Drink up.

*** of **** stars

Downey Triumphant as the Invincible IRON MAN

2008-05-03T23:10:00.000-07:00

Although not as well known as other Marvel Comic icons as Spiderman or X Men, this film adaptation of Iron Man works due to the sure hand of director Jon Favreau (Swingers, Elf) who cleverly mixes action, drama, humor, and a totally winning performance by comeback actor, Robert Downey Jr. In terms of a first film showing a superhero’s origin, it is the one of the best to date.

Billionaire industrialist Tony Stark is a weapons manufacturer whose cavalier attitude and playboy appetite are matched only by his sheer genius in technology. On a tour of his weaponry in Afghanistan, he is wounded in the heart by shrapnel and captured by rebels who order him to build a super weapon of mass destruction. With the help of another civilian, Stark changes up and instead builds a powerful suit of high tech armor that sustains his weak heart and enables his escape but not without a price. Guilt ridden and traumatized by his experiences, Stark has a literal change of heart and alters the militaristic direction of his company much to the chagrin of his elder partner, Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges). A couple of friends, his assistant, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), and military liaison, Jim Rhodes (Terrence Howard), stick loyally by Stark’s side despite his earlier predilections. Intent on improving and perfecting his Iron Man suit, Stark experiments with its design and takes dangerous risks. His mission is to utilize his Iron Man technology to fight the evil in the world, starting first in Afghanistan. When the truth comes out about what Stark Industries is really doing with weapons sales, it leads to a deeper conspiracy and a battle of titans as Iron Man meets an old foe.

Buffed and in terrific physical condition, Downey is quite convincing as the prodigy whose initial devil-may-care attitude must undergo a transformation. (It is not without irony that the role and the person should merge in light of Downey’s real life, personal setbacks.) The movie rests on his shoulders, and he makes the most of his role. Bridges is great at playing a businessman with a sinister agenda. Paltrow strikes sparks with Downey and you yearn for more scenes with the two of them. The same goes for Howard as Stark’s best friend. What is a little hard to swallow is how Pepper and Rhodes could put up with such a pompous persona in the early goings.

Favreau has an amusing bit part as an assistant to Stark. Further, the robotic voice that assists Stark in his technological work is actor Paul Bettany! And yes, Stan (the man) Lee, one of the comic book creators, has a fleeting cameo.

The scenes, which show Stark developing his updated Iron Man suit and test-driving it, are realistic and at times amusing. The Iron Man suit 2.0 is a marvel of construction and is the coolest thing imaginable. There is no way that this concept of a hero could have been rendered as convincingly even a few years ago. My how movie magic has caught up with these stories finally and done them justice. It is clever how the film incorporates the original Iron Man design (which brings to mind a sort of poor man’s version of Robocop) and progresses through its more modernized version. Pure fans of the original comic (including myself) are thrilled at the reverence paid to the classic beginnings.

There is an aerial battle between American fighter jets and Iron Man that is a lot of fun. The special effects, while being among the most realistic and cleverly used in any action film, are well integrated with the strong narrative. Despite the eye candy, you get the feeling that the filmmakers never lose sight of what the story is about and how to stay focused on the characters. The pacing is excellent.

In terms of subplots, the Afghan conflict hits close to home with the current war in Iraq. Also, the secret government agency S.H.I.E.L.D. gets an introduction as support for Stark and figures to have a bigger role in future Marvel movies; don’t forget to stay until the credits are done for a bonus. The film has an edge about it in dialogue and theme, and is better for it especially in the final scene, which is surprising and has implications for future adventures.

I would put this film on par with Batman Begins and Spiderman, not bad company. While not as emotionally stirring as the best moments of X Men United or Spiderman 2, this is only the first of what likely will be a long running franchise. If the sequel can maintain the same quality as this effort, we could be in for the best superhero movie yet! And lest there be any doubt about Favreau’s ability to take on comic heroes, don’t worry; he understands what they mean and how to do them justice. He ‘get’s it’!

***1/2 of **** stars

Oscar Predictions for 2007

2008-02-24T02:04:00.002-08:00

OK, I admit to having limited viewings of the nominees for 2007 so I will base my picks on what I did see and also make an educated guess. I confess to having only seen the best picture nominees and few of the other nominated films.

PICTURE-Atonement might have won in the past, but this kind of film doesn’t win anymore. There Will Be Blood is hailed as a Citizen Kane of sorts but it worked for some and really turned off others. Juno is that little film that could but, like Little Miss Sunshine from year’s past, won’t make it here. Michael Clayton is wonderful but its nominations are award in itself for this kind of film. I can get past its abrupt ending and admire No Country for Old Men (think The Departed which had an unsatisfying end) which should win.

DIRECTOR-Coen brothers get their dues for No Country for Old Men.

ACTOR-Daniel Day-Lewis towers above them all.

ACTRESS-I will stick my neck out even though Julie Christie is the favorite; I will go with my heart and pick upset winner Marion Cotillard’s knockout job in La Vie en Rose.

SUPPORTING ACTOR-Javier Bardem period.

SUPPORTING ACTRESS-toughest, most unpredictable category….Tilda Swinton could get the consolation award for Michael Clayton

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY-Juno!

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY-No Country for Old Men

The rest of the tech categories should evenly split such films as Transformers, Sweeney Todd, Atonement, Bourne Ultimatum, and La Vie en Rose.

ANIMATED-Ratatouille
SONG-Once gets its just due
SCORE-Atonement
MAKEUP-La Vie en Rose
VISUAL EFFECTS-Transformers
EDITING-Bourne Ultimatum should win in the tradition of Bullitt and all great action films.
CINEMATOGRAPHY-Atonement
ART DIRECTION-Sweeney Todd
FOREIGN FILM-Counterfeiters
COSTUME-Sweeney Todd
SOUND MIXING-Bourne Ultimatum
SOUND EDITING-Bourne Ultimatum
DOCUMENTARY-Sicko

Have not seen any of the short subject so I won’t hazard a guess.
The totals award count should go to No Country for Old Men with at least 4 awards.

ENJOY!

MICHAEL CLAYTON and His Conscience

2008-02-24T02:04:00.001-08:00

Tony Gilroy, who has scripted all three Jason Bourne adaptations recently and helped revive the spy genre, has his directorial debut of his script in Michael Clayton, and the results are nothing short of spectacular with a story that harkens back to the conspiracy laden, morality plays of the 1970’s and passionate acting to boot by a strong cast.

Michael Clayton (George Clooney) is a fixer of problems for a leading law firm which experiences a crisis as its leading legal mind, Arthur Edens (Tom Wilkinson) has a breakdown as he defends an industrial giant, U-North, from a multi-billion dollar lawsuit. U-North’s corporate counsel Karen Crowder (Tilda Swinton) grows worried and later realizes that Edens may have some other agenda in mind, a trump card of sorts, that may threaten U-North, and she orders a couple of men to eliminate the problem. Add to this Clayton’s own woes as he owes loan sharks big money. As Clayton attempts to help Edens, a tragedy occurs which reverberates with Clayton’s own values and tests his resolve to delve deeper into an insidious world of corporate greed and murder. How far he is willing to go to save his own skin or find justice even if it risks his well being brings him to a defining point in his life.

You know this movie has a high minded agenda and stamp of quality when some of the producers include Steven Soderbergh (Erin Brockovich), Sydney Pollack (Absence of Malice), Anthony Minghella (The English Patient), and Clooney (Syriana) himself. Production values from camerawork to music are all topflight. Gilroy proves a sure-handed director and the film feels like the work of a veteran director of thrillers in the mode of The Insider or any John Grisham adaptation. like The Firm.

Clooney does a very good job as Clayton, a man who solves problems for a law firm. A smart, talented man who knows the legal business, he also is human with a mysterious past. He is far from perfect with shortcomings including a gambling problem and debt, which makes him more identifiable to the audience. Tom Wilkinson (In the Bedroom) is quite convincing with his American accent as the legal giant who has apparently lost his mind (like Bulworth or Network’s Howard Beale), and Tilda Swinton’s company woman, is so good, you wish there were more of her. Swinton’s talent is on the rise after such films as The Deep End. Sydney Pollack has been displaying his acting chops lately and proves to be equally adept at character roles (Tootsie, Eyes Wide Shut) as he is at directing.

The film is quite strong and when it reaches its bravura, concluding scene, it rises to the occasion and elevates the plot to lofty heights and rarefied air. It is a supremely crowd pleasing moment and cinches Michael Clayton as not only an interesting thriller and mystery, but an intelligent, literate morality play highlighting a talented writer now director and its ever shining star.

***1/2 of **** stars

A Bold NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN

2008-02-24T02:03:00.001-08:00

Starting with the film noir hit, Blood Simple, co-directors and screenwriters, Joel and Ethan Coen have had a productive output of auteur films that range from manic comedies (O Brother, Where Art Thou?, Raising Arizona) to thoughtful crime dramas (Fargo, Millers Crossing). With their latest, No Country for Old Men, they have excelled at personal filmmaking that just misses the mark by not delivering a more pronounced ending. Under the trappings of a mystery and then chase thriller, this film is an exercise in movie making at its best while taking chances with conventional characters and plot. It also features splendid performances by Josh Brolin and Javier Bardem.

Set in 1980 after the Vietnam War, an aged sheriff, Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones), talks of a long line of lawmen in his family. One day, in the desert a welder named Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) comes upon the remnants of a drug deal gone badly and a case of money and decides to take it. It turns out that some Mexicans are on his trail and mean business. So does a mysterious stranger, a clever, psychotic assassin, Anton (Javier Bardem). And the chase is on with Mexicans, the law, and worst of all, Anton, in pursuit. Moss sends his wife Carla to her mom’s, and he hightails it to an obscure motel. Apparently a syndicate has hired Anton to get the money and dispatch anyone who gets in the way, but Anton has other ideas and begins to eliminate not just the Mexican competition, but nearly everyone connected with him! Anton’s weapons of choice are a lethal air gun and the largest silencer rifle ever. He methodically hunts down Moss through detective work and a tracking device. You know that despite his resourcefulness, Moss is simply overmatched. Meanwhile, the syndicate hires another hitman, Carson Wells (Woody Harrelson) to recover the money and eliminate Anton. All the while, Bell is adding up the clues and the growing trail of bodies to form an ominous picture of what is happening and what is to become. As much as he tries to help Moss and his wife, he cannot compete with the likes of Anton. By the end, Bell contemplates retirement knowing a killer is on the loose.

Josh Brolin really makes a strong impression as the doomed Moss. His character reminds one of a younger Kris Kristofferson. Not since Michael Madsen in Reservoir Dogs has there been a hideously terrifying character as Bardem’s hitman, Anton. His calm, dispassionate killer is surely inspired by past movie villains as the ones in Point Blank and The Terminator. Yet, in his own strange way, Anton has his code and motivation. He even gives his potential victims a second chance based on random luck. And he is most unforgiving if he is crossed.

There are a number of well constructed scenes to enjoy including a marvelous one at a convenience store which illustrates Anton’s manic state, and a moment in a Mexican hotel that is unbearably tense as Moss is cornered in his room by someone who could be Anton.

The cinematography by Roger Deakins (The Shawshank Redemption) is quite effective as it illustrates a desolate, barren landscape in which this cat and mouse game is played out.

There are a couple problems with the films narrative, however. While it is good that the film attempts and mostly succeeds at being unique and offbeat, a few things are confusing like what really happens toward the end at a motel as Moss waits for his wife. What happens to the money? Some killings are off screen or suggested, and you have to make assumptions based on the context of a given scene.

The abrupt conclusion is a bit baffling; it won’t work for most audiences, and even the most ardent cinephile may need to digest the last several minutes to make sense of it. Pay attention to the film’s underlying theme. Reread the title of the film and understand that it is about the tradition of the lawmen being displaced by a new world order. Jones does a voice over at the beginning and he concludes it with a melancholy lament and recounting of a disturbing dream. If only the structure of the film could convey that more clearly, there would have been a better narrative flow to its finale. Some may call the device brilliant, but it does not work as it may have been intended. But don’t let this slip deny the pleasures of a marvelous ensemble of actors and some great camerawork. It could easily be the Coen brothers’ best work to date, and that is something to truly appreciate.

***1/2 of **** (mostly for Bardem and the terrific narrative until the unconventional, confusing ending)

Oil and Family in THERE WILL BE BLOOD

2008-02-20T22:39:00.000-08:00

Having been praised for his Altmanesque work on such multi-character and interweaving storyline films as Boogie Nights and Magnolia, Paul Thomas Anderson has set out for completely new territory, and the results, while not necessarily commercially palatable for mainstream audiences, is a unique tale of greed, power, and the loss of one’s soul in There Will Be Blood. Adapted loosely from Upton Sinclair’s novel, Oil, this is truly a labor of love by Anderson, who has elicited a stunning performance from Daniel Day-Lewis.

A struggling oil miner in 1898, Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis), slaves away on a dig until it begins to yield oil. Years later, he raises a child as his son amid the rural setting and buys oil fields while paying little or nothing for them. One day a stranger, Paul, offers to sell his family’s land knowing there is some oil. Plainview sets forth to this property in the guise of a hunter and makes an offer to the religious family. The elder son, Paul’s brother Eli (Paul Dano), is mistrustful. Eventually Plainview gets his land, begins to pump oil, and coddles the locals in a public relations sleight of hand. Although not a religious man, he subjugates his convictions to secure needed land rights. As Eli becomes a rising force of religious zeal, Daniel becomes a wealthy oil baron. Enter a mysterious man who has family ties to Plainview, and the quest for money and power takes on another aspect that complicates matters. Plainview’s thirst for oil will stop at nothing until he is eaten away to a vindictive, monstrous self, setting the stage for a macabre reunion with an old face.

This is a slice of the industrial revolution and the horrors of quality control in keeping with author Sinclair’s The Jungle. The period setting, with its raw, forbidding environment and dangerous existence, is vividly realized. This was a time where greedy men dealt with their own kind for personal gain, and women stood their place. Its antecedents are other similarly themed films like Giant, Greed, and The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, while it’s lack of warmth and stark visuals would have impressed director Stanley Kubrick. It was a time where future billionaire’s were in the making. As such it is a fascinating history and culture lesson all at once. Is this how the West was really won? Is this the darker side to Manifest Destiny?

Aside from watching Plainview’s amassing of wealth, the core relationship he has with his son, who witnesses much of his machinations, is an interesting one. Plainview at times shows paternal affection only to betray any semblance of loyalties and love for the prospect of oil. In fact, the film is filled with betrayals such as the way Plainview cheats families out of their potential wealth and a gut wrenching scene with his son on a train. It is a bleak film, but you’ve got to admire the singular vision with which Anderson and Lewis convey this character. We are fascinated by Plainview, but we don’t have to like him.

There is a scene that illustrates Plainview’s willingness to sacrifice his beliefs (or non-beliefs) in order to gain more oil fields. Set in a small church, this baptism scene is the highlight of the film and goes so over the top that it is a hoot. Further, when Plainview makes a play for land rights among sellers, his pitch becomes canned and rehearsed like a well ‘oiled’ commercial. He is a selfish con man, a liar, and a cheat. As much as you want to find something redeeming about him, it never fully emerges. He is also a most unforgiving and vengeful man in the worst way.

Former Oscar winner (My Left Foot) Lewis, like legendary actor Paul Muni, has limited his film output over the years. That he chose to do this based on Anderson’s script speaks highly of the attraction of other high profile stars (e.g. Tom Cruise in Magnolia or Adam Sandler in Punch Drunk Love). Paul Dano (Little Miss Sunshine) is pretty compelling as Eli, quite a weird, and ominous figure. The cinematography (Robert Elswit) recalls Days of Heaven. The minimalist score (Jonny Greenwood) is a bit unusual as it almost becomes an accompanying sound effect than theme.

The movie does have some impressive, opening minutes that are visual without talking. Some of the dialogue has a sadistic bite to it while the staging of scenes lends itself to a strong theatricality; despite its wide expanse of land setting, it has a claustrophobic feel. The pace of the film, which may test the audience’s patience, is quite deliberate and almost slows to a halt, but Lewis surprises and fascinates at every turn. Watch out for the bizarre ending which may perplex some viewers. Although some may not appreciate it, others will simply relish this informal history lesson in the making of a turn-of-the-century mogul as personified by an acting giant who is about to add another gold statuette to his collection.

*** of **** stars (**** for Lewis’ performance)

ATONEMENT and the Power of Love and Lies

2008-02-08T21:09:00.000-08:00

With the sweep of an epic and the intimacy of romance, Atonement comes across as a pretty good piece of period filmmaking until its devastating truths elevate the film to even greater heights. Joe Wright, who is becoming the torchbearer to period filmmakers, Ivory and Merchant (Room with a View), has been down this path before with his terrific Pride and Prejudice.

It is 1935 at a wealthy estate in England where two sisters contemplate life. The older sister, Cecilia (Keira Knightley), is at odds with the housekeeper’s grown son, Robbie (James McAvoy). The younger sister, Briony (Saoirse Ronan), is an impressionable teen and budding writer. Cecilia’s brother, Leon, arrives with a male friend, Paul, who takes keen interest in some children staying at the home. One evening, a passion erupts between Cecilia and Robbie that is interrupted by Briony. Later that night a girl is brutally assaulted by an unknown assailant. The subsequent allegations will have tragic consequences. The story shifts between London where Cecilia is a nurse and Dunkirk where Robbie fights to survive the early stages of World War II. The couple struggle to be reunited from afar even as a maturing Briony comes to terms with her past deeds. It is only later in life that she faces her guilt by paying tribute to the undying love of a tragic couple.

Atonement sets out to be an ambitious undertaking of love corrupted by outside forces and those from within as it spans the decades. It shows how mere words can hurt in ways that cannot be imagined. In this, the plot is not dissimilar to The Children’s Hour where a child’s words hurt deeply. The story focuses less about the horror and effects of war, and more on the purging and cleansing of sins. Briony chooses to deal with her misrepresentations and redeems herself with a final act of poetic justice (think Titanic), even if it takes a lifetime.

The film suffers a bit from confusing points of view as seen through the eyes of Briony by replaying the same scene to depict her point of view. What remains somewhat unclear are her motives. Is she jealous of the love between Cecilia and Robbie or is she making wild assumptions based on distortions?

The acting is quite good with teen Saoirse Ronan a standout as Briony. In fact, all three actresses who play Briony at various stages of life are a splendid tandem (much like the tandems in Shine or TV’s Life with Judy Garland).

Almost functioning as a Greek tragedy, the film most people will compare this to is The English Patient, which is ironic because there is a scene that has a television interviewer played by Patient’s director, Anthony Minghella! Atonement benefits from some good cinematography (Seamus McGarvey), which depicts some startling, surreal imagery especially in a tracking shot that says all that need be said of the horrifying evacuation of British troops at Dunkirk. The editing flashes back and forth to make a point or give background, and yet you wonder what is real or imagined. The musical score (Dano Marianelli) is in keeping with the dramatic mood quite nicely.

By the finale, we get to have an ending of sorts. Is it reality or the fabrication of an author’s guilt-ridden imagination? One thing is for sure: the feelings of longing and love are real. Atonement is like reading an epic romance novel with a bit of Jane Austen thrown in for good measure. As such, it’s pretty compelling.

***1/2 of **** stars (for romantics)

JUNO’S Touching, Growing Pains

2008-01-21T21:56:00.000-08:00

An interesting phenomenon is happening slowly in Hollywood. The offspring of some of the movie industry’s best directors have begun to assert themselves with their own, distinct voices. Sofia Coppola (Lost in Translation), whose father is Francis Coppola of The Godfather fame, Nick Cassavetes (The Notebook) whose father John Cassavetes pioneered independent films, and now Jason Reitman whose father is Ivan Reitman of Ghostbusters fame, have all proven that talent can be in the genes. Reitman has perfectly realized his vision of a coming-of-age drama, Juno, based on a fabulous script by newbie, Diablo Cody. This small, original film has enough intelligence and creative filmmaking to stand among bigger budgeted studio releases as among the best of 2007.

Juno MacGuff (Ellen Page) is a sixteen year old high schooler whose planned sexual encounter results in an unplanned pregnancy that causes a sensation among her classmates and at home with her dad and stepmom. A smart, sassy-mouthed loner, Juno, after deliberating on whether or not to abort the unborn, takes matters in her own hands and decides to donate her baby to an adopting, yuppie couple, Mark and Vanessa. Life is not so easy as situations change suddenly, and the dynamics of Mark and Vanessa throw everything into a tailspin as Juno’s life becomes much more complicated. Wondering if couples can ever really stay together and if true love can exist, Juno makes some hard, mature choices in her life.

The movie is presented in a unique format with actual, script lines subtitling the bottom of every shot. It’s almost as if the DVD extras are being used onscreen. This device, while interesting, can be a bit annoying too. A series of ballads punctuate and underscore the narrative much like Cat Stevens did in Harold and Maude. It does enhance the story and mood. The structure of the narrative is sectioned by the seasons beginning with autumn.

High school life is portrayed in a convincing manner with the behaviors and interplay dead on target. Some individual scenes like Juno’s parents first hearing and fearing what big announcement Juno has in store for them, or the confrontation with the ultrasound technician are pretty amusing. And there are quiet, introspective moments like between Juno and her dad or with her ‘boyfriend’ Bleeker that are quite touching.

Ellen Page already made her mark with the recent Hard Candy and showed her versatility in X Men-The Last Stand, but to exhibit that rare combination of drama and humor in a believable manner is quite a feat. There is not one false note in her impressive performance. You begin to place yourself in her position and empathize through her joy and pain. The rest of the cast is strong, and each has good portions of dialogue to capitalize upon. J .K. Simmons is quickly becoming a go-to character actor as Juno’s dad, and you wish Allison Janney had a bit juicier part to fly with as the stepmom. Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman are quite good as the prospective, adoptive parents. Michael Cera (Superbad) and Olivia Thirlby make convincing schoolmates.

We discover with Juno that life can be full of unexpected surprises and twists, and it is how we deal with those events that can have a profound and lasting effect on one’s future and happiness. (I can’t wait for writer Cody’s next story.) When you think about it, the screenplay rings true throughout without being preachy or awkward; it just sounds like it could really happen. That’s what makes Juno a terrific slice of life tale, a deceptively simple story with a rich core of acting and words. Oscars love this kind of independent jewel.

***1/2 of **** stars

War as Parable - IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH

2007-09-21T06:48:00.000-07:00

‘War is hell’ but perhaps it is the postwar that is most telling. At least that is the thesis of Paul Haggis’ latest film, In the Valley of Elah, a story of a father’s quest for his son that reveals some bitter truths about war. Not an easy film to swallow upfront, it is certainly one of the best films of the year.

A grizzled, former military policeman, Hank Deerfield (Tommy Lee Jones), is notified that his son, Mike, is AWOL after returning from the fighting in Iraq. What begins as a methodical search for his son’s whereabouts becomes more tragic and clashes with local police and military brass. Where is his son, and what do his soldier buddies know about one fateful night near their base? And what if anything did happen to him in Iraq? These questions are answered in small pieces and with alarming implications. Hank’s skills at police work help convince local Detective Emily Sanders (Charlize Theron) to take charge of the case despite the doubts of her own colleagues and the military, led by investigator Lt. Kirklander (Jason Patric). Mike’s PDA has garbled video that begins to paint a disturbing picture of the war front. Hank’s search takes an emotional toll on himself and his wife (Susan Sarandon). He and Emily form an uneasy alliance, and, amid theories and suspects, what emerges is an ominous portrait of war veterans on the homefront. Ultimately Hank comes face to face with a disarming truth about his son’s fate and the possible involvement of his military brethren.

The story is based on actual events in 2001 in Tennessee, and its title references the mythic tale of David and Goliath set at a time when the rules of engagement were different than the present. Its sparse, simplistic structure of a mystery peppered with flashback video and imagery may seem on surface like an independent film, but its message and execution is on a grander scale and not merely with dialogue. With effective visuals, much is conveyed by silence, expression, or simple body language.

As with other Haggis films, things that seem ordinary and insignificant at the beginning have implications later on. Though not as overtly obvious with connecting a myriad of dots as in his Oscar winner Crash, the threads are all there to gradually weave together. It is refreshing that the jurisdictional conflict between local police and the military does not take a stereotypic turn of heavy handed conspiracy and coverup even though the military investigators are not cast in the best light. It shares a similar feel with the recent Courage Under Fire where the truth is unearthed in small bits until a bigger picture emerges. A couple of minor plot points go nowhere such as Hank meeting an old comrade who may have connections with military intelligence.

As grandiose and flamboyant as was his Oscar–winning turn in The Fugitive, Tommy Lee Jones’ acting here is equally underplayed; he is magnificent. Through the pain and guilt that creep over his lined features, you also feel his suffering, his loss, and understand his bitterness. His Hank is a proud man, a patriot, who wants the truth. The truth ultimately changes him forever. Equally up to the challenge is Theron, in a strong performance, whose detective is a single mother who must battle her own squad and superiors while trying to solve a mystery. Even Sarandon’s brief moments are affecting as the long distance wife. The rest of the cast is very good; they become real people.

This is not simply the readjustment to the homefront done magnificently in The Best Years of Our Lives or the heavy use of dramatic love triangle to condemn the Vietnam War in Coming Home. Rather, it takes the concept of a given war and allows it to become the ultimate villain in an increasingly sordid mystery. Its ending calls to mind The Deer Hunter but with a more pessimistic bent. It most certainly vilifies the effects of war on its men.

It is significant that a passing quote, “We all do stupid things,” says something about not just the horror of warfare, but what such conflict does to its soldiers, and how they become soulless monsters capable of the most brutal of crimes. This is a brave, imperfect film that sets a somber tone and never lets up. The final image is a statement that makes this perhaps the subtlest of antiwar films ever. Oscar nominations can start here with picture, direction, screenplay, and the duo of Jones and Theron. While not everyone will be willing to let the story unfold with its nuanced direction and understated acting, those who are patient will find a moving tale of innocence lost and corrupted.

***1/2 of **** stars (give Tommy Lee ****)

HIGH NOON WITH 3:10 TO YUMA

2007-09-13T21:08:00.000-07:00

Although the western film recently experienced a brief resurgence with Unforgiven, the number of quality ones has been few like Open Range. With the remake of the 1956 cult western, 3:10 to Yuma, (itself adapted from a short story by Elmore Leonard), the genre is primed for another comeback with this tense, well acted film.

Set in the old west not long after the Civil War, a cattle rancher, Dan Evans (Christian Bale), and his family struggle to make a life for themselves as a local businessman threatens to foreclose on his property and make way for a railroad. His cattle are poached by outlaws led by Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) and his lieutenant, Charlie Prince (Ben Foster in a surly, effective performance). The criminals rob a money wagon (in a scene right out of Heat done western style) and stop at a local town. Wade is captured by local lawmen and is escorted to catch the Yuma prison train, which is hours away from arriving. Evans offers to join the group in return for some valuable reward money that will ultimately help his family’s plight. Thus begins a tortuous journey that has potential repercussions for Evans’ family and Wade’s bid for freedom even as his gang is in pursuit. Will Evans and his motley crew get Wade to the railroad station in time and who will survive?

Director James Mangold, fresh from his successful biopic, Walk the Line, again elicits strong performances from his two leads, Crowe and Bale. Crowe is everything we expect him to be, and his role is Oscar worthy. His outlaw is a cultured, Bible-quoting man who effuses an animal magnetism that is appealing to men and women. What is so satisfying here is that Bale is equally up to the task and really shines in a difficult, challenging role. The supporting cast is uniformly sharp with special nod to a grizzled, unrecognizable Peter Fonda as a tough bounty hunter. Logan Lerman is effective as Evans’ older son who is ashamed of and gradually realizes a growing respect for his father. Luke Wilson has an amusing bit role as a corrupt railroad hand.

The film has a plot similar to the 1950’s westerns High Noon and Last Train from Gun Hill, and encompasses elements of the classic western formula, namely the cattleman versus the railroad; only in this case, it is used as a jumping off point to a deeper, more psychological conflict. This is really a movie about what motivates people to do what they do. Most of the dialogue involves Wade’s hurling insults and quips at a stoic Evans. We can see that Wade has a respect and growing admiration for Evans’ seemingly hopeless quest, and the emerging facts have a strong bearing on what is to come. We learn about Wade’s childhood and about what truly guides Evans’ reasons for taking such a risky mission. His role in the Union Army during the Civil War comes to the fore. And how did he get his leg maimed? These shades of background and characterization enrich an already tense and interesting plot. The memorable ending, which pushes credibility just a tad, truly tests each man’s resolve and sense of justice.

Production values are strong with beautiful cinematography by Phedon Papamichael (Walk the Line, The Pursuit of Happyness). The film moves at a deliberate, methodical pace (editor Michael McCusker) and is never boring. It gets to the conflict fairly quickly and reaches its finale, an agonizing chase across town that is quite exciting and riveting right to the startling end.

Make no mistake, this is a film that western enthusiasts will love while those who appreciate a strong, tense character study will find much to savor. Although we expect gold performances from Crowe and the ever maturing Bale (hard to believe this was the boy in Spielberg’s Empire of the Sun), it is Mangold’s prowess in that delicate balance of critically acclaimed, popular filmmaking, that may become a major force in Hollywood for years to come.

***1/2* of **** (mostly for Crowe and Bale and of course western fans)

HORRORFIND’s FAMILIAR FACES

2007-08-13T21:07:00.000-07:00

The latest edition of the horror convention Horrorfind in Hunt Valley, MD, on August 11, 2007, was a bit smaller in vendor participation, but not lacking in star power as usual. Headlining the actors and authors was Malcolm McDowell (A Clockwork Orange, Time After Time, Star Trek: Generations) whose latest works include stints on TV’s Heroes and the upcoming Rob Zombie remake of Halloween. A gracious fellow who had the longest of autograph seeking lines, McDowell certainly has lost none of his appeal.

Also signing and mixing with the public were such notables as Udo Kier who gained fame through the early 1970s as Andy Warhol’s Dracula. There was Ernie Hudson from Ghostbusters and The Crow, and Michael Gross from TV’s Family Ties and the Tremors movies (featuring one of the greatest man versus monster face-offs in movie history). Other notables included Dee Wallace Stone from E.T., makeup effects guru now actor, Tom Savini, and many others. One notable absentee was actress Amanda Plummer.

Yes, there were the usual vendors selling posters and other horror-related items that seemed quite bizarre, but a ghoulish time was had by all.

SHORE LEAVE 29 BOASTS ORIGINAL SERIES STAR

2007-07-17T21:55:00.000-07:00

Actress Nichelle Nichols played Lt. Uhura in the original television series Star Trek. It was a supporting role that has, in decades since, catapulted her to royalty status at the recent Shore Leave event in Baltimore’s Hunt Valley. It was impressive to see how stunning she looked (at the age of 74) and very much on top of her game when fielding questions during a question-and-answer session. She contributed significantly to the progressive changes and perceptions of the civil rights movement through her portrayal of a star ship officer at a time when multiracial casts were unique to the small screen. She participated in the first interracial on air kiss with William Shatner in 1968 and was very influential in the recruitment process of astronauts in the U.S. space program which actively expanded its roster to include minorities and women. It was she who helped cultivate her character’s name, which started as the name of a book, Uhuru and softened to Uhura. Ever the professional, she stayed for hours into the evening to sign autographs for grateful fans.

Also on hand were cast members from other sci-fi shows past and present including Claudia Christian (from Babylon Five). Did you know that it was between her and Sandra Bullock for the starring role in Speed? She wondered out loud how that might have changed her life. In addition to her acting jobs, she has done singing and voiceover work. A playful, witty actress, she has been working nonstop for several years and currently resides in England.

Herb Jefferson, Jr has appeared in many television roles and was memorable as Nick Nolte’s friend in the landmark Rich Man Poor Man miniseries. Perhaps most people remember him as one of the pilots in the original Battlestar Galactica series of the 1970’s. He reminisced about the hurried, shooting schedule for that show, (which was adored for a brief time in the wake of the Star Wars fad) and how he forged a lasting, deep friendship with series star, Lorne Greene.

The usual group of dealers and vendors selling sci-fi related items was on hand, and the diverse attendees, some of whom were dressed as a favorite Star Trek character (a couple Harry Potter types were there too), all seemed to be enjoying the festive day.

2007 OSCAR PREDICTIONS

2007-02-23T14:18:00.000-08:00

Here are my 2007 OSCAR predictions and I can only say that while I saw all the Best Picture nominations and some other titles (Dreamgirls, Pan's Labyrinth, Notes on a Scandal, Devil Wears Prada, Cars), I was unable to catch other nominated ones, so an educated guess is all I can give.

PICTURE-Even though Letters from Iwo Jima was the best of these, and Dreamgirls should have been nominated, and The Departed is 3/4 a great movie, and Babel starts like a great film with great ambitions, and the Queen was too 'perfect' to garner votes, a small, 'a feel good film that could' and one that is neither remarkable or extraordinary except for the fact it humorously expouses the importance of family will win-Little Miss Sunshine.

ACTOR-Forest Whitaker has paid his dues and made the most of a role of a lifetime.easy pick.
ACTRESS-Helen Mirren has paid her dues and made the most of a role of a lifetime. easy pick. deja vu.
SUPPORTING ACTOR-Eddie Murphy's comeback role. He may never do work so good or display his total talent so well. I am wistful in wishing Peter O'Toole the best and Alan Arkin needed a bit more screentime.
SUPPORTING ACTRESS-Jennifer Hudson found the right part at the right time. Just watch her climactic song "AND I AM TELLING YOU I'M NOT GOING" and you could give her the Oscar for those few minutes alone.
DIRECTOR-MARTIN SCORSESE finally gets his dues with The Departed. It would be stunning upset otherwise. Inarritu for Babel and Eastwood for Letters from Iwo Jima would be justified in any other year.
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY-Little Miss Sunshine.
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY-The Departed one of the few times a film adapted from another film (Infernal Affairs)was honored.
CINEMATOGRAPHY-Pan's Labyrinth.
VISUAL EFFECTS-Pirates of the Caribbean-Dead Mans Chest
COSTUME-Dreamgirls
EDITING-Babel although United 93 stands a great chance.
ART DIRECTION-Pan's Labyrinth despite a possible surge in Dreamgirls
MAKEUP-Pan's Labyrinth
SOUND MIXING-Deamgirls
SONG-Listen/Dreamgirls
SOUND EDITING-Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Mans Chest
ORIGINAL SCORE-The Queen but possible competition from Babel
FOREIGN -Pan's Labyrinth
DOCUMENTARY-An Inconvenient Truth
ANIMATED-Cars
I think Dreamgirls and Pan's Labyrinth could win alot of the smaller awards between them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ROBERT ALTMAN-Beloved Maverick

2006-11-21T21:46:00.000-08:00

The death of famed director Robert Altman at age 81 is the loss of a true auteur of filmmaking whose prowess was undiminished right to the end.

A late bloomer who had done considerable television work in its golden era (his TV work was formidable in its own right-Combat, Alfred Hitchcock Presents, Bonanza, Peter Gunn), Altman had minor success in feature films in the sixties until he transformed M*A*S*H into a critical and popular success which would launch him throughout the seventies as a visionary artist who told stories in a candid, realistic manner. Of course, his style has been emulated by newer directors like Paul Thomas Anderson (Magnolia) and Paul Haggis (Crash) who have adopted aspects of Altman’s storyline structure of often seemingly unrelated characters in a vast tapestry of contemporary America that gradually coalesce into a unifying theme. Witness the recent Babel, which bears a striking similarity to the Altman way.

If you wanted ‘precise to the page’ scripted dialogue, then you wouldn’t look to an Altman film. He was notorious for improvising scenes and lines, and his fierce independence and respect for actors attracted the biggest and best of stars. How else could he get Bruce Willis and Julia Roberts do what amounted to superb cameos in The Player! It was fun to watch him match different actors together just to see how they would respond. One minute there was Lily Tomlin paired with Keith Carradine in Nashville and both get Oscar nominations, and next there was Lindsay Lohan paired with Meryl Streep in A Prairie Home Companion.

I had the good fortune of meeting Altman while I was working with the student union film committee at the University of Maryland in College Park, Maryland. He was featured to speak to the students at a showing of some of his films, and several of us had lunch at a nearby restaurant. Altman was always patient and informative in his responses to questions from the committee. What you saw on TV was what you got; he was just like that in real life. When asked what he thought of the hit television show M*A*S*H based on his movie, he wasn’t particularly fond of it since it sanitized and distorted the truth about what his film was trying to depict. When asked which of his films was his favorite, he answered that it was difficult to choose in the same way that his films were like his children, all special and beloved. I asked him what he had thought of Sam Peckinpah, another contemporary director, and his answer was “sick man…very sick….”, which was often an opinion shared by many. Altman’s individuality was evident when the waitress took our orders, and all of us went for the all-you-can-eat buffet. When it came time for Mr. Altman to order, he instead ordered a sandwich. Go figure.

A case could be made that as he got older, he became a better filmmaker. Sure, there were misfires like Popeye or the quirky Brewster McCloud, but you had to give him credit for being willing to take chances. Every few years or so, when you thought his career was foundering, he would return with The Player or Gosford Park and silence the critics and scholars. His is a body of work (Nashville, McCabe and Mrs. Miller, 3 Women, Short Cuts) that will be admired and imitated for a long time.

STRANGER THAN FICTION –Life as Narrative

2006-11-06T10:07:00.000-08:00

Marc Forster is making a name for himself with such major films as Monsters Ball and Finding Neverland. In Stranger Than Fiction, he takes a plot that could have been suggested by Charlie Kaufman (Being John Malkovich, Adaptation) and creates a world that suggests fantasy yet is grounded in what we call reality. It is an inventive plot made convincing by sensitive direction and fine performances by its stars, Will Ferrell and Maggie Gyllenhaal.

IRS civil servant Harold Crick (Ferrell) leads a regimented, mundane existence, which consists of an orderly routine guided by his punctual wristwatch. His solitary life becomes upset by the presence of a female voice that seems to be narrating his every move. His daily rituals are altered and, when he audits a baker, a free spirited activist named Ana Pascal (Gyllenhaal), he meets stiff resistance and hostility. Compelled to find the answers to the mysterious voice, he first consults the company shrink (Tom Hulce in a welcome, yet short performance), a therapist (Linda Hunt in too brief a role), and finally a literary professor, Dr. Jules Hilbert (Dustin Hoffman in bravura support). It is with Dr. Hilbert that Harold finds hope and a methodology to solve the puzzle of the narrative voice.

At the same time, famed author, Kay Eiffel, is trying to finish her latest novel about a taxman who is hearing voices. When she struggles to find a suitable end for her character (all her principal characters are killed off in her books), a publisher’s assistant arrives in the name of Penny Escher (Queen Latifah wasted in a pedestrian part). Harold visits Ana for a followup audit and becomes smitten and attracted by her perky charm. As he audits her maze of disorganized tax documents, Ana begins to feel bad for the poor soul and gives him a sort of peace offering of homemade cookies, and thus their relationship grows. His visits with Dr. Hilbert begin to narrow the possible sources of his affliction until one day he stumbles on the answer and in doing so, he realizes that his life is predestined. His life out of kilter, Harold begins to break out of his quiet shell and experience life’s interesting aspects. Kay’s mental block soon gives way and when she finishes her novel and is ready to type the manuscript, Harold tracks her down using some creative ingenuity. She too has realized some incredible connection between her story and his real life. When Dr. Hilbert reads the final manuscript, his conclusions are a stunner to Harold. How Harold and Kay respond to this is what winds the film to a tense conclusion.

The dialogue is funny at times and always interesting. There are traces of other films like Groundhog Day, Field of Dreams or an episode of The X Files that will come to mind. The movie touches on the concepts of fate and destiny without being too obvious-perhaps it should have been more obvious come to think of it. Do we control our lives or are we part of some other plan or manuscript (like The Matrix)? The concept of ‘cause and effect’ and of randomness figures heavily in the overall theme of the film.

Harold is a sort of distant cousin to Forrest Gump complete with an innocent perspective on life. His character works because his persona changes throughout the film and when he faces his fears and desires head on, his life begins to move forward in ways he never imagined. He is starting to live life. And when he finds out his fate, he makes a big decision that brings his character full circle.

Harold’s watch becomes a kind of supporting character, as it serves as a catalyst for him and Ana to bond, but it is used too sparingly at times. There is a slight feeling that the filmmakers did not have enough confidence in the fantasy part to match the reality which is well done. Too bad, as the film steadily progresses in its story and etches some interesting characters. It also gets a bit confusing as to why a couple of characters pop in and out briefly, and you know it’s for some reason that becomes more evident by the climax.

The movie is at its best when Harold warms up to Ana, and the two begin a courtship that is affecting and genuine. In this, Gyllenhaal and Ferrell shine. Will Ferrell has always been a dependable comic from his Saturday Night Live years, but here, he successfully portrays a shy, passive man complete with blank expressions and awkward body language. Hoffman has his most significant role in years since his brief but memorable turn in Foster’s previous Finding Neverland. And Gyllenhaal proves adept as a romantic lead.

Forster is becoming a modern day teller of fables. In Stranger Than Fiction he spins a simple tale (written by Zach Helm) of love, life, and fate with a moral that is redemptive and refreshing. Not everyone will connect with this film; I suspect that the romantics out there will.

*** of **** stars

BABEL’s Microcosm of the World

2006-11-03T06:58:00.000-08:00

With a plot structure not unlike his previous Amores Perros or 21 Grams, director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu and writer Guillermo Arriaga have created Babel, the final act of a trilogy about the human condition. With seemingly unrelated characters and storylines that gradually merge, it is as ambitious as a narrative can get, and the filmmakers pull it off with great aplomb.

Four parallel stories take place within days if not hours of each other. In Morocco, the father of a goat herding family buys a rifle from a neighbor. Set to guard the flock from predators, his two sons decide to do some target practice. As a tour bus happens by, a single shot rings out, and a careless act will create havoc and distress for innocent victims and have severe repercussions for others.

In the bus, an American couple, Richard (Brad Pitt) and Susan (Cate Blanchett), are having a marital crisis when all of a sudden their world is turned upside down. The tour bus stops at a remote village as the passengers begin to stir and fear for their own safety. As the Moroccan police investigate the incident, Richard is desperate to save the life of his wife amid primitive surroundings in a foreign land.

The couple’s two children in California are under the care of their nanny, Amelia (Adriana Barraza), who is anxious to go to her son’s impending wedding. After failing to find suitable caregivers to watch over the children, she takes them with her to Mexico. Escorted by her volatile nephew Santiago (Gael Garcia Bernal), they drive to a festive wedding ceremony and reception. Afterwards, they are stopped at a border checkpoint where events turn nightmarish.

In Japan, a lonely teenaged girl, Chieko (Rinko Kikuchi) who is deaf, hangs with her other deaf friends and dreams of flirting and connecting with a male even if it means compromising her dignity. Her father, Yasujiro (Koji Yakusho) is inadequate as a parent since his wife died under obscure circumstances. As detectives want to question Yasujiro, Cheiko is smitten by a younger detective and unleashes a torrent of passion and secrets.

The final moments of the film are memorable as each storyline becomes clearer and potent in their revelations and truths. Time slips back and forth and certain events catch up to the others (Christopher Nolan’s Momento comes to mind). The threads that connect the different stories are not as obvious as one might expect and when they do become apparent, they hold emotional meaning. What is so remarkable is how a seemingly innocent prank sets off a chain reaction of angst and responsibility.

The film does not sermonize but rather it presents the events as they happen albeit in an incongruent time frame. You experience life and its effects on other events and people. The director and writer try to depict people like you or me with the same needs or longings. With a setting that reaches the far-flung corners (Japan, Mexico or Morocco) of the world, Inarritu has forced his audience to go with him and face a myriad of characters that speak English, Japanese, Spanish, Arabic, Berber, or French! Yet when we get to know these disparate individuals and their situations, we begin to empathize and care for them despite their faults or shortcomings. Although the title has biblical references with its different languages, these stories share common emotional bonds that transcend mere dialects. This is a film that could easily play anywhere in the world and still be affecting.

The international cast melds amateurs with seasoned veterans and the honest performances are completely captivating and affecting. I dare anyone to pick out the professional actors from the non professionals (save Pitt and Blanchett). This use of unknowns adds to the believability of the whole storyline. (It is ironic that Michael Pena plays a border policeman; he was featured in last year’s similarly structured Crash-a coincidence perhaps?)

There are painful, agonizing moments where human suffering is brought with unflinching, explicit realism to an almost unbearable level. This film presents characters with all their strengths and weaknesses and it does so unsparingly. Sometimes the punishment or consequences unfairly outweigh the crime or the mistake. The brothers who watch over their father’s goats must face their own culpability and ugly family secrets that threaten to destroy their way of life. There are Richard and Susan who are at the center or eye of a growing hurricane of life’s cruel randomness and must depend on strangers for survival. A jaunt across a Mexican border turns ugly.

Things are not wrapped up nicely, and several plot threads are left hanging and open-ended on purpose. The marital problems of Richard and Susan are never clearly delineated and their relationship gets short shrift even as they go through a harrowing event. The music is somber and spare. The imagery is powerful despite the handheld documentary feel. The scenes of Japanese nightlife are vivid and disturbing in their portrayal of urban youth.

Babel is about how families are torn apart and come together. It is also about children. It could be your children or mine or the world’s children. There are some significant issues (racial tension, illegal immigrants, adolescent yearnings, perceptions of a foreign country, and the arrogance of the ‘ugly American’) the filmmakers touch upon and you wish they had gone even farther with the material, but you are glad they went as far as they did. Babel is a film that this reviewer has no desire to sit through again, but having gone through it once, it is a unique, remarkable experience. This is an imperfect, significant film and destined for major Oscar nominations.

*** ½ out of **** stars

THE DEPARTED - Scorsese’s Gangs of Boston

2006-10-07T09:03:00.000-07:00

No one has depicted the modern underworld better than film maestro Martin Scorsese who has melded cinematic acumen with his Italian-Catholic upbringing to form a trilogy of unparalleled morality plays: Mean Streets, Goodfellas, and Casino. The trilogy has become a quartet by default as the director tackles the Asian cult classic, Infernal Affairs, and has fashioned The Departed, a film so good up until its stunning conclusion, it almost can’t possibly live up to its steadily built, character driven narrative.

Set in Boston, mobster Frank Costello (Jack Nicholson) rises from small time hood to major crime boss. He befriends and mentors a boy, Colin Sullivan, who, as a grown man (Matt Damon) has studied his way to the State Police academy. Simultaneously, another young man, Billy Costigan (Leonardo DiCaprio), is about to graduate as a policeman. A task force is formed to build a case against Costello. Led by Captain Queenan (Martin Sheen) and Sergeant Dignam (Mark Wahlberg), Sullivan and Costigan are recruited for the team separately and unbeknownst to each other. Sullivan takes advantage of his status by tipping off Costello and keeping the kingpin one step ahead of the law. Costigan infiltrates Costello’s crew while Sullivan ironically leads an internal investigation into probable traitors/informants in the police department. Soon, Costello and Sullivan realize that there is a ‘mole’ in their own ranks too, but who can it be? It becomes a perverse game of cat and mouse as the policemen try to expose each other. Furthermore, Sullivan begins dating Madolyn (Vera Farmiga), a police shrink who also counsels and then forms a bond with Costigan. Realizing that he is about to be discovered, Costigan wants to be extracted by Queenan who senses that the situation is desperate. As the task force closes on Costello, Sullivan zeros in on Costigan’s identity by tailing Queenan, and thus good and evil are set on a collision course with startling, tragic finality.

Here we have a dichotomy or duality of two men, Sullivan and Costigan, both intelligent, well read, and streetwise, who happen to be on opposing sides and for a majority of the story, unaware of each other’s identity. Costigan is the noble undercover cop whose life is in ever increasing peril and Sullivan is the hotshot policeman who will do anything to protect Costello. Then there are the surrogate fathers as Nicholson’s Costello mentors Sullivan while Sheen’s Captain Queenan shepherds Costigan. It is amusing to see how Costello sort of adopts Costigan and Queenan is the elder to Sullivan at the police station. It is a parallel family nucleus turned inside out.

The acting is simply put-great. Jack Nicholson convincingly portrays a powerful mob boss with utter arrogance and ruthlessness. His dialogue is chilling and at times outrageously funny. Damon, in his old stomping grounds, sports a New England accent and does a very credible job as the heavy. DiCaprio demonstrates an ever-growing maturity in his roles; his recent partnership with Scorsese is proving fruitful (Gangs of New York, The Aviator). You have to hand it to Scorsese as one of the few directors who can attract the best actors who are dying to work with him. How else could such lead actors as Martin Sheen, Alec Baldwin (who is a riot as a profanity-laced FBI boss), and Mark Wahlberg accept what are essentially supporting roles!

The film does miss on a couple points. It would have meant more if the relationship of Madolyn and Sullivan had been explored with more depth, and the emergence of Costigan in this unlikely triangle would have had more poignancy. Likewise, at the end, those relationships are left unclear and never fully explored as much as we want after we get so involved in these characters good or bad as they might be. The film is a little long but never uninteresting, and when it reaches its astonishing ending, it is sudden and jarring in unexpected ways that reach Shakespearean proportions.

Scorsese is still very much in command of his medium, as he will throw in a cinematic device like an iris-in shot or freeze a frame here or there. (Editor Thelma Schoonmaker, his long time collaborator, is in fine form juggling a dozen characters and maintaining the tension at a very high level for a long time, no easy feat.) Though Scorsese’s early Mean Streets (1973) was a fictional tale of low level hoods, it was also semi-autobiographical in its depiction of the people he knew. Goodfellas (1990) and Casino (1995) took a semi-documentary approach that held a fascination of real life events amid a dramatic storyline. In terms of structure, The Departed, while similar in spirit and energy to his previous crime dramas, shows Scorsese fabricating essentially a purely fictitious story, and as always, he has a knack for depicting the inner workings of organized crime with realistic bravado.

There are echoes of the films, The Corruptor (featuring Wahlberg), Donnie Brasco and Reservoir Dogs (also a Hong Kong inspired plot) with their questions of loyalty and betrayal. While earlier police corruption stories were told primarily from the police/protagonist’s point of view like Serpico or the great Prince of the City, The Departed takes an equal time approach with its protagonists and antagonists.

The movie contains raw violence including a brief but action packed climax. The profanity is excessive but realistic, and at times there are amusing cussing matches between the various factions. It’s hard to wrap your arms around The Departed because there’s just so much to savor and admire while also wishing that the radical change in tone at the end weren’t so jarring to the rhythm of the plot. It’s basically a film about rats, and you know what happens to rats.

***1/2 of **** stars (almost as good as Goodfellas)

FIRST MID ATLANTIC NOSTALGIA CONVENTION SERVES UP IRWIN ALLEN ALUMNI

2006-09-18T22:38:00.000-07:00

Saturday September 16, 2006
The first Mid Atlantic Nostalgia Convention took place this past weekend in Aberdeen, MD. As usual, this event featured the usual dealer tables filled with books, comics, posters and stills from movies and tv shows past. As a bonus, there were several recognizable celebrities including Lana Wood (Natalie's sister and memorable as Plenty in Diamonds Are Forever), Marta Kristen (Judy in Lost in Space), and David Hedison (Capt. Lee Crane from tv's Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea). It was the latter who drew my attention having spent a childhood filled with imaginative adventure and science fiction, and what better than the submarine Seaview (get the screenname connection?) and its weekly adventures before Star Trek became the intellectual landmark in scifi tv. My family would have dinners out on many a Sunday and we would rush back home (before VCRs) in time to turn on the tv and see the opening tag for Voyage at 7pm EST. For its time, the show was impressive technically with its heavy special effects and in its early years, complex storylines (often courtesy of William Read Woodfield and Allan Balter who would then propell tv's Mission Impossible to glory). Although the later seasons would devolve into the monster of the week (as most Irwin Allen shows did), the show was an action filled good time. It is not a coincidence that Steven Spielberg remade the show as Seaquest DSV in the early 1990's.

During an hour long question and answer session, Hedison was quite animated, humorous, and very candid about his love for his craft of acting and his appreciation of his profession and the mentors he had known including the Playhouse where he studied with Sydney Pollack, Joanne Woodward, and Steve McQueen. Hedison related a story that during classes, McQueen told him that the two would be stars one day, and sure enough, a few years later, Haedison recalled seeing a movie marquee featuring Steve McQueen in The Blob and David Hedison as The Fly. And yes, Hedison says he gets asked all the time if he was under the fly mask (he was). And yes, he did most of his own stunts in Voyage which was crazy to attempt. And he only did Voyage at the advice of friend, Roger Moore and because of the casting of Richard Baseheart as Admiral Nelson. Later, Hedison would have the distinction of being the only actor to play CIA operative Felix Leiter twice in the long running James Bond series (Live and Let Die and License To Kill). What a thrill it was to finally meet Captain Crane in person and share great memories. Yes, for a moment I became a groupie.

Horror Weekend Thrives Despite Terrorism

2006-08-13T20:25:00.000-07:00

(George Romero and fan, Dee Wallace Stone, Priscilla Barnes)

A good time was had by fans of the macabre at the annual Horrorfind Convention at Hunt Valley Marriott Hotel this past weekend. Numerous vendors displayed posters, toys, books, and videos in the horror genre. Several celebrities were present including Dee Wallace Stone (the mother in E.T.), Priscilla Barnes (Three's Company, The Devils Rejects), and legendary director George Romero (The Night of the Living Dead trilogy, Creepshow). Despite the absence of others like Rutger Hauer (Blade Runner), Denise Crosby (Star Trek:The Next Generation), and Adrienne Barbeau (Maude, Escape from New York) due to issues including air flight disruption from the recent terrorist threat, this was a crowded event with something for every horror fan.

OSCAR PREDICTIONS 2006

2006-03-05T12:12:00.000-08:00

OK, I have been out of the loop for awhile (due to some major construction at the homestead) and there are several significant movie reviews forthcoming. However, I cannot miss out on the annual Oscar picks. I have seen most of the major films but I have not been able to catch up to the middle of the pack e.g. Syriana
Here we go and I went with my heart on the top awards even if it went against the popular consensus.
PICTURE-BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN was not the strongest movie of the year but its central theme struck a chord that should sweep it into history.
ACTOR-PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN’s role of a lifetime that he makes the most of.
ACTRESS-Reese Witherspoon seems to have the popular edge by a mile. I choose FELICITY HUFFMAN’s more challenging though under seen role in Transamerica, but what do I know?
SUPPORTING ACTOR-If there is justice in the world, PAUL GIAMATTI’s gutsy performance in Cinderella Man will win a split decision over popular juggernaut George Clooney.
SUPPORTING ACTRESS-RACHEL WEISZ was the soul of The Constant Gardener even though Amy Adams leaped out of Junebug
DIRECTOR–for a versatile career, the award goes to ANG LEE especially in a relatively weak field.
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY-CRASH works because some very fine actors brought a great screenplay to life.
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY-BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN emerged from a short story and with an assist from western expert Larry McMurtry
ANIMATED FEATURE-WALLACE & GROMIT IN THE CURSE OF THE WERE- RABBIT was in fact one of the best films of the year.
DOCUMENTARY FEATURE-MARCH OF THE PENGUINS will march down the aisle
ART DIRECTION-MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA
CINEMATOGRAPHY-MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA might be upset by Brokeback Mountain
COSTUME DESIGN-MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA
FILM EDITING-CRASH’s multiple storylines presented a great editing opportunity
SOUND EDITING and SOUND MIXING-KING KONG
VISUAL EFFECTS-KING KONG
MAKEUP-CHRONICLES OF NARNIA
FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM-TSOSTI
ORIGINAL SCORE-MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA
ORIGINAL SONG-“Travelin’ Thru”-TRANSAMERICA
I won’t get into the short films which I have not seen.
I think that Memoirs of a Geisha will take some technical awards and could actually win the most Oscars. ENJOY!

Johnny Cash is Humanized in WALK THE LINE

2005-12-14T16:16:00.000-08:00

It seems biographies of well known figures of the twentieth century have become an ever increasing source material for high drama (Ray, Beyond the Sea). Singer and songwriter Johnny Cash and his true love June Carter are realized by some honest, heartfelt performances and vivid period settings in Walk the Line. Directed by James Mangold (Girl Interrupted) from a screenplay by himself and Gill Dennis, the film draws material from autobiographies The Man in Black and Cash: An Autobiography.

An impending concert by Johnny Cash at Folsom State Prison is the point the story begins as it flashes back to 1944 in the South where the struggling Cash family works on a plantation. As a young boy, Johnny idolizes his older brother Jack and wishes for something special in life. Their mother gives Johnny the love for singing hymns while their father (Robert Patrick) is an alcoholic, stern figure. When tragedy strikes the family, an emotional, dark cloud hangs over Johnny (Joaquin Phoenix) through the years even as he serves military duty in Germany and begins to find solace in writing music. He marries his sweetheart, Vivian (Ginnifer Goodwin), and the two have a family and struggle to stay afloat financially while Johnny tinkers with gospel music and forms a trio. When a fateful audition starts badly, he reverts to his more personal, angry music, and the rest is history. Johnny begins cutting records, dressing in his fabled black outfits, and touring with the likes of Jerry Lee Lewis, Elvis Presley, and June Carter (Reese Witherspoon). Cash begins an infatuation and life long obsession for June who is also married at the time. Before long, Cash develops a dependency on drugs with unfortunate results. His career at a crossroads and his home life a shambles, he descends into a self-destructive path with only June Carter as his true love and salvation.

Let's face it, the reason for seeing this film is to see how good the performances are by Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon, and they deliver the goods. There is definitely chemistry between the two especially in their duets as both of them show vocal abilities by singing their own songs (as in films like Coal Miner's Daughter and The Buddy Holly Story). It would require a strong actor to play a legend, and Phoenix proves to be adept. He gets his vocals in a deep, low range to the point you are convinced that he is young Johnny Cash! Kudos should also go to Witherspoon who also shows a gift for warbling with a country twang and acting all at once, not a feat to be taken lightly. Goodwin shines in her moments as the first Mrs. Cash, and it's a shame we don't see more of her in the film.

The concert scenes are restaged with authenticity while simultaneously involving us with fluid close-ups and sharp cutting. It's nice to hear some famous songs recreated for today's audience. Even if you weren't a fan, the songs strike a memory chord regardless. Like Ray, Walk the Line shows how familial loss can have a lasting impact creatively and emotionally. The story manages to move ahead a few years at a time and important moments are rendered realistically. It is amusing in these pop music biographies to see a Who's Who of Rock n' Roll greats in their career infancies. Just seeing Cash pal around with the likes of Lewis, Presley, and others is fascinating. A lot of ground is covered in a little over two hours, but it doesn't feel too episodic.

What the film captures successfully is the affect that his music had on prison inmates and how an overwhelming amount of his fan mail was attributed to prisoners who felt that he spoke to them. (Watch for a cameo by co-producer James Keach as the prison warden.) Cash was a man of the people, and the film takes great pains to show that Cash was not perfect and in fact very human. He succumbs to the temptations of female groupies, gets addicted to drugs, goes to prison, and shows peculiar behavior as he obsesses with June. Although he was smitten with her, Cash was instrumental in getting June into the spotlight to do solos and to stand equal with him.

The film's momentum bogs down during Cash's downfall but redeems itself with scenes such as the Thanksgiving dinner in which Johnny confronts his father. Among the movie's few flaws is the failure to develop the strained relationship between Cash and his intimidating father (well played by Patrick), and the resolution of the film with its family reunion doesn't ring true as one would have liked. There is an amusing scene with June and her family scaring off a drug dealer who is trying to see Johnny. More scenes like that would have been welcome.

There will naturally be constant comparisons with Ray, but that shortchanges a film that would shine in any year. OK, Ray might be a tad better and Coal Miner's Daughter is the gold standard, but Walk the Line does just fine and Phoenix is terrific.

*** of **** stars (add ½* for Joaquin's performance)

KING KONG-Still the Champ

2005-12-14T16:15:00.000-08:00

Let's be clear about this epic retelling of 'beauty and the beast'. If you didn't care for the original 1933 horror classic, King Kong, it is doubtful you will warm to this mega version. That being said, this update is a marvelous, big production that entertains and excites without sacrificing any of its emotional substance. As escapist fare with heart, the new King Kong has blockbuster written all over it, and in this case that's a good thing, a very good thing indeed.

It is Depression era in New York City where Carl Denham (Jack Black), a frustrated movie director, gambles that he can make a hit film on a remote island. Denham happens upon Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts), an unemployed actress/comedienne, and casts her as his star. With some deception, he embarks on his filmic voyage with reluctant screenwriter, Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody). Arriving at uncharted Skull Island, the film crew ventures inland and is confronted by unfriendly natives who later kidnap Darrow as a human sacrifice. As Driscoll leads the ship's crew to rescue Ann, a gigantic, fierce gorilla called Kong approaches and seizes her. Driscoll and the others are in hot pursuit through a prehistoric land where they are attacked by gigantic creatures. Kong fights his way through carnivorous dinosaurs with his female captive in hand until they reach his mountain top lair. Kong is a vicious animal, but he also reveals a gentler side when tantalized by Ann's comedic and athletic talents. The two begin to form an unlikely bond. When Driscoll manages to rescue Ann, an enraged Kong chases them until Denham tranquilizes the beast. Now a major attraction on Broadway, Kong is a prisoner until he breaks free to wreak havoc while searching for Ann. When the two are reunited, it culminates atop the Empire State Building as Kong is attacked by warplanes in a heartrending finale.

Does the new Kong justify the hype and expectations? Yes, it is the complete moviegoing experience. There are thrills, spectacle, humor, and a sense of heroic adventure, which are rare even in the post-Indiana Jones era. It would take the superhuman effort of a director like Peter Jackson (and writers Phillipa Boyens and Fran Walsh), who had just completed the legendary Lord of the Rings trilogy, to tackle this project. This is an old fashioned film that stays closely to the original script. That Jackson takes his time in quieter moments to develop his characters and never stumbles when the action starts is truly amazing. Just when you think our heroes are safe, a new danger pops up to keep you at the edge of your seat. He is a master showman of creative, funhouse perils, and when he does things, bigger is better. He re-imagines legendary sequences from the original and takes them to new heights. When Kong fights a dinosaur, he battles not two but three dinosaurs in a clash of the titans! Kong’s rampage on Broadway reminds you of the Piccadilly Circus sequence in An American Werewolf in London. When he is reunited with Ann, the two communicate through unspoken language. It is a moment of truth that Jackson films with an eerie beauty. You just know Jackson is a romantic as he sets up his dawn raid at the Empire State Building and gives his biggest star a great sendoff that compares favorably to the original.

As for Kong himself, the (CG) computer-generated effects are phenomenal as the broadest of emotions and the tiniest of mannerisms and facial nuances (like blinking his eyes) are eloquently captured. Imagine that, pathos from a CG creation!

Literally a far cry from original star Fay Wray, Naomi Watts gives the best performance in emoting true feelings and playing off her giant ape convincingly. Adrien Brody displays the necessary heroics in a role that doesn't demand much more. Jack Black was bold casting, but his character doesn't always work. Although entertaining, his Denham is more calculating and morally ambiguous than actor Robert Armstrong's 1933 depiction.

Technically the film is a marvel, and the art direction and special effects meld seamlessly together so that it is impossible to tell one from the other. Rarely do the effects look artificial except in the dinosaur stampede. The stunning visuals and fluid camera work are like eye candy, and many scenes are shot with a fresh perspective or point of view. Some of the action scenes are almost too much overkill, but Jackson gets away with it because his other scenes are so impressive.

At three hours running time, it moves fairly well. It takes an hour to get to Kong, but when he does appear, the film becomes one big, nonstop chase. There are brief lulls, but credit Jackson with not rushing to an action scene and instead savoring the quiet moments that establish the most important relationship in the story. What's satisfying in the relationship between Kong and Ann is that it is one of companionship and love without the overt sexuality of the original.

There are a couple of unsettling moments when Denham confronts the natives and a spider pit sequence that could be nightmarish for children. This pit sequence pays homage to a scene that was cut from the original and expands on the possibilities in nasty ways. If you thought Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom's insects were creepy, watch out!

Jackson wows his audiences with his talent for managing enormous spectacles and imbuing them with humanity. This film verifies his prowess as one of the most gifted directors of his generation. Audiences looking for adventure of the highest order will find a lot to enjoy here. It’s been three-quarters of a century since the original Kong wowed ‘em, and it’s a safe bet that no one will wow ‘em like Peter Jackson for another 75 years!

**** of **** stars

HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE keeps the flame burning

2005-11-15T19:39:00.000-08:00

The phenomenal success of J. K. Rowling’s series of novels for children about a boy in a school of wizardry has been augmented by the enormous box office grosses of the film adaptations. Left with the daunting task of maintaining the standards and quality of the previous installments, Director Mike Newell has fashioned in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, a marvelous, visual treat that matches the series’ previous highs.

A new year at Hogwarts brings old faces and some new ones as the school for witchcraft and wizardry is primed for great change and a growing threat. Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is shaken by a recurring nightmare as the presence of Lord Voldemort looms ominously, and he summons Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) for advice. Soon a mysterious man, “Mad Eye’ Moody (Brendan Gleeson), arrives to help Harry against the dark forces. The school is preparing for a special gathering of two other schools to compete in a special Tri-Wizard Tournament, a fierce and dangerous competition in which only one older student from each respective school may enter via the Goblet of Fire. Harry becomes involved in the competition to the surprise of everyone including himself. As he and the other students find, the games are immensely formidable with dragons, underwater traps, and an endless maze of hedges. Meanwhile, Harry, Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) are experiencing the joys and pain of adolescence as the wonders of high school crushes and the anxiety of the school dance wreak havoc. Even Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane) catches the romantic bug. Mistrust and accusations complicate matters for Harry, and Professor Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) expresses his concerns about the future. Before long, Harry, Ron and Hermione bicker amongst themselves as their friendship is severely tested. When the tournament concludes, another set of tragic circumstances opens the way for new evil and betrayal. As the elder wizards (Gambon, Maggie Smith and Alan Rickman) close ranks to protect the students especially Harry, the future remains uncertain at best.

Ironically, Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral) is the first British director of the series, and, while he had the difficult challenge of continuing the series, he has added some nice wrinkles and touches by delving deeper into the emotional conflicts of these students. In fact, the maturation and changes these teens must encounter richly add to the already exciting story. We root for these heroes and feel their discomfort and pain because we have in a sense grown up with them. As with any Harry Potter storyline, not all the characters are good and, conversely, not all the suspicious ones are bad. Several plotlines are carried over from the previous films and new ones are primed for future sequels. Screenwriter Steven Kloves, the keeper of the flame, has done a herculean job of distilling the essence of Rowling’s novels into each film thus far.

As always, the trio of young actors, Radcliffe, Watson, and Grint, own these roles, and the thought of replacing any of them due to age concerns was unnecessary. All three look great as they are now a little older and wiser. Of course, Gambon, Smith, Rickman, and Coltrane are the old pros who are the constants at Hogwarts. Ralph Fiennes is perfectly suited for his villainous turn in the startling climax. Brendan Gleeson does a fine job as the menacing, yet benevolent ‘Mad Eye’ Moody who supposedly watches over Harry during the tournament. It also seems that the most recent Harry Potter film is becoming quite an international event as the cast of students is even more ethnically diverse than ever before.

As usual, the production values are outstanding with lavish sets and costumes imaginatively photographed by Roger Pratt. The special effects are quite impressive although nothing that you haven’t already seen in the Lord of the Rings trilogy or the Star Wars sextet. Just the generous details and little touches throughout the film like the animated paintings add to the overall care that still goes into these films. Make no mistake, this is a lengthy film, but the pacing is good as a large number of scenes are strung back to back to contain as much of the book as possible into roughly two and a half hours. It feels a bit episodic but never loses sight of the main story and the emotional state of the characters.

There are creepy images and a foreboding atmosphere through much of the film. This adaptation does contain more risqué scenes such as Harry’s bathtub scene or the terrifying menace of Voldemort, in which the tone gets downright mean-spirited. The students are not so innocent anymore as they curse, and in one climactic scene come face to face with the pain of loss. A PG13 rating signals that the Potter adventures are growing up fast.

It does require that the audience have a background in the series of books or films to fully appreciate the significance of critical events, although the film can stand on its own as pure entertainment and a coming of age. In some ways Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is a classic bridge episode similar to The Empire Strikes Back. Not only is it a strong entry in the series with the most open ended finale yet, it proves a good setup for some potentially exciting things to come. Harry’s next adventure can’t come soon enough!

***1/2 of **** stars

JARHEAD’s Dogs of War

2005-11-15T19:38:00.000-08:00

The first Gulf War in Iraq has been an occasional subject matter of films, but not until Jarhead has a bona fide story emerged which captures the experience and heartache as told by director Sam Mendes. Although Mendes has never been able to match the heights of American Beauty, he does an effective job of making the audience a participant in the rigors of desert warfare.

Raw recruits are thrust into rough, basic training (at times with tragic results) as they are prepared for duty in Iraq. Among them are Anthony Swofford (Jake Gyllenhaal) and Troy (Peter Sarsgaard). Drill Sgt. Siek (Jamie Foxx) whips the young men into soldiers as they are deployed in the Persian Gulf with the imminent threat of war. This is a rough life with constant humiliation and hazing. Then comes Operation Desert Shield with the endless training, waiting, monotony, and more time away from family and home where wives and girlfriends lose touch or stray. Such is the hapless life of the grunt. A hostile terrain such as dirty oil fields adds to the isolation and need for rebellious acts to mitigate frustration. Swofford and Troy are groomed to be snipers, and when their opportunity comes in Operation Desert Storm, they are more than ready until they are dealt an unexpected turn of events.

The recurring phrase or motif in the film is “Welcome to the suck.” That about sums up what these men are put through. Adapted by William Broyles Jr. from Swofford’s own real life experiences, it is an uncompromising recreation of ‘the suck’. Mendes is content to show you what it was like but never dwells on any one scene longer than needed to get his point across.

Told essentially from his point of view, the film opens and closes with a telling monologue by Swofford that sums up his experience. He and Troy form the nucleus of the film’s conscience and soul. Swofford made the mistake of signing up while Troy is the ironic soldier who wants to fight a war but is thwarted by bureaucracy. The film does ring true in its depiction of the preparation for warfare with the heavy toll it takes on the soldiers and their personal lives. Periodically, an onscreen tag will appear to list the number of days the surging numbers of troops were in Iraq (5000 troops increases to 575,000 troops in 175 days), which helps put the events in perspective. This film demythologizes war and instead presents war as a difficult and often life changing experience resulting not from actual combat, but from the tedium and loneliness.

It is important to note that although Swofford shows a dislike for this man’s army, he continues to do as he is told. This apolitical film does not really take a stance on the war. We really don’t get enough background on Swofford or Troy to understand what makes these men tick. Rather, we are left with what they experience and how they respond on a superficial level. Troy comes across as inconsistent and his motivations are questionable. While the evolution of their relationship doesn’t always make sense, the film still packs an emotional punch. About two-thirds through, the film’s momentum begins to lose some steam and direction. There is also a sad event toward the end that is never fully explained.

Gyllenhaal (Proof, Donnie Darko) is showing good maturity as an actor, and Sarsgaard (Kinsey) is effective as his closest buddy. Jamie Foxx (Ray) registers quite convincingly as the leader of this bunch. Dennis Haysbert and Chris Cooper have short but effective moments as commanding officers with axes to grind.

Although movies have been set in the Iraqi conflict like Three Kings, this film deals directly with the soldiers who must do the dirty work. In some ways this film shares a pedigree with an ensemble piece like Battleground. There are allusions to the Vietnam War particularly at the end involving a Vietnam veteran and also in clips from Vietnam movies like Apocalypse Now and The Deer Hunter. The early drills recall some of the most harrowing moments from Full Metal Jacket with the verbal insults and discipline. In fact, some of the vicious lines are hysterically funny. It’s certainly a far cry from An Officer and Gentlemen. Like the soldiers at the beginning of Born on the Fourth of July, they go in wide eyed, full of optimism, and ready for action. Instead, what they find is something that beats their spirits down. In a way, the structure of vignettes and random incidents is similar to The Big Red One without the periodic voiceover. Pop songs of the era are matched perfectly to scenes. Technical aspects are good including the camera work and editing. There are some memorable images including an eerie scene where the patrol comes upon a charred caravan of vehicles with burned, Iraqi people.

Jarhead is not a perfect film, but it is well acted and pulls no punches on what it must have been like in Iraq. Those looking for an action packed war film will be severely disappointed and let down. Except for some character inconsistencies, it is a realistic study in the psychological toll that military life takes on a human being.

*** of **** stars

Literary Classic Shines in PRIDE AND PREJUDICE

2005-11-15T19:36:00.000-08:00

Author Jane Austen has been a popular source of material for recent films and television miniseries. Her free spirited, individual women who search for happiness amid ignorance and old fashioned conduct are refreshing even by today’s standards. What’s pleasantly surprising is that Austen’s stories about manners, loyalty, honor, love, and betrayal have a universal appeal and a timeless quality amid a vivid period setting. A good example is Pride and Prejudice, which features thoughtful direction, a strong cast, and an impressive turn by its star, Keira Knightley.

In 18th century England, the Bennet family consists of a mother, (Brenda Blethyn), father (Donald Sutherland), and their many daughters including eldest Jane (Rosamund Pike) and the most independent-minded, Elizabeth (Keira Knightley). Desperate to marry her daughters to wealthy bachelors, mom will manipulate an event like the upcoming ball to play matchmaker. Enter the mysterious Mr. Darcy (Matthew MacFadyen) and his friend, Mr. Bingley, who are well-to-do and seeking a female date for the latter. Jane and Bingley seem to hit it off and another ball ensues at the Bingley estate. Meanwhile, the seemingly indifferent Darcy takes note of the free spirited Elizabeth. Gossip and rumors abound. When a soldier, Mr. Wickham, appears to woo Elizabeth and relays a tale of betrayal at the hands of Darcy, Elizabeth begins to despise Darcy. There later appears a cousin, Mr. Collins, who is heir to the Bennet fortunes and is searching for a bride to be. The problem is that Collins is hopelessly unappealing especially to the object of his affection, Elizabeth, much to the annoyance of Mrs. Bennet. Elizabeth finds herself still seemingly attracted again to Mr. Darcy when their paths cross by accident. Add to the complications the intentions of wealthy Lady Catherine de Bourg (Judi Dench), who has designs on Darcy for her younger girl, and you have a dramatic interweaving of a complex study of romance in which lovers fall from grace and reconnect.

Numerous versions of Austen’s novel have been filmed including the Laurence Olivier version from 1940 and a British television series with Colin Firth (ironically cast as a similarly named and etched character, Mark Darcy, from Bridget Jones’s Diary). TV veterans, director Joe Wright and screenwriter Deborah Moggach, do an impressive job of adapting the novel with good clarity of drama and moments of humor. It doesn’t feel like a book but rather an organic, filmic event, no small feat. This is not a ‘dumbed’ down version but a contemporary translation done with the right balance of reverence to the source material while making it accessible to modern day audiences.

Elizabeth is the kind of heroine who can think for herself at a time when women were not accorded many freedoms. She is cool as a proverbial cucumber as she makes a first impression on Darcy, and you feel an interest in how these two souls will come together despite some formidable obstacles along the way. It’s a delightful premise, and part of the fun is how this storyline and several other threads will develop. It is refreshing in any film to see how major characters will challenge an audience by evolving over the course of the story instead of remaining static.

Keira Knightley (Pirates of the Caribbean) at 20 is displaying the beginnings of a long, versatile career as a dependable actress who can tackle such prestigious material as this. In fact, her performance is not unlike the impressive turn of young Kate Winslet in Sense and Sensibility. MacFadyen is effective as Darcy, an aloof, cold fish when we first meet him. Blethyn (Secrets and Lies) is always good, and here she romps as the scheming mother. Sutherland, as the oblivious father, seems to fit period pieces quite well (Start the Revolution Without Me). Dench is always in command whenever she is on screen although it is a minor role. Rosamund Pike (Die Another Day) shows she can do more than action films.

Sure, there are minor plot holes and some inconsistencies in the characters, but the main themes work. The dialogue is proper, old English, and it takes a little time to get up to speed in deciphering the accents. The pace drags slightly toward the end, but it finishes with a nice flourish of resolution and optimism. Its dreamy ending will set hearts swooning and minds wandering to an elegant, romantic era.

The film has a natural, vivid sense of time and place. People bow and curtsey displaying all the proper mannerisms of the time. The cinematography is beautiful amid the English countryside and mansions. The extras are a realistic mixture of handsome faces and plain ones. Likewise, the interiors of the homes look worn and lived in. The balls are realistically choreographed in a manner reminiscent of TV’s Hill Street Blues where people come and go out of frame and others move throughout a fluid camera shot. Transitions that show a passage of time are cleverly done.

Pride and Prejudice is a worthy companion to 1995’s Sense and Sensibility. Don’t expect a boring film but rather a well paced drama with dashes of humor and heartfelt relationships. It not only proves that older, literary material can be brought to life cinematically without being stuffy, but that Knightley has emerged as a force to be reckoned with.

***1/2 of **** stars (especially for classic romance fans)

America on Trial in GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK

2005-10-12T21:10:00.000-07:00

Actor/Director George Clooney pays tribute to truth and decency amid distrust and uncertainty in the Communist witchhunts with his recreation of its greatest hero, the newsman of newsmen, Edward R. Murrow, in Good Night, and Good Luck.

In the early 1950’s, the Communist scare and the subsequent subversion of citizens’ rights was at its apex with blacklists and rampant accusations resulting in ruined lives and careers. Edward R. Murrow (David Strathairn) was the grand master of the news airwaves in the infantile medium of television. With his show’s director, Fred Friendly (George Clooney) and his production team, he picks one obscure news item regarding an Air Force serviceman who is dismissed due to unspecified charges. Murrow and CBS essentially take on the US Air Force amid this climate of suspicion and presumed guilt. Later, Murrow’s team takes on Senator Joseph McCarthy by making critical comments of the senator’s own words and contradictions. McCarthy retaliates with accusations of Murrow’s supposed association with un-American groups just as the parent network, CBS, reels under sponsorship pressure and the unpredictable whims of network president William Paley (Frank Langella). As Murrow and his own staff come under tense scrutiny by McCarthy and even CBS, public reaction and the response of the print media come to the forefront.

Nothing can compare to the words that were written and spoken with such conviction and honesty as those uttered by Murrow. The title of the movie is a direct quote that Murrow employed to sign off each week at the close of his interview shows. The filmmakers (including director Clooney and writers Clooney and Grant Heslov) were wise to let the text stand on its own. They also benefit from good performances from a cast headed by Strathairn (L.A. Confidential, A League of Their Own), a journeyman actor who has finally found a core role to call his own, and he makes the most of it. He gets the mannerisms and cadence down quite convincingly, and while Strathairn may not look exactly like Murrow, he has the persona nailed. Frank Langella (Dave) is excellent as the mercurial Paley whose support of Murrow was tenuous at best. Ray Wise (Twin Peaks) registers in what could have been a more defined role as a doomed newsman whose guilt by association triggers some life changing events. Patricia Clarkson (The Station Agent) and Robert Downey Jr. (Chaplin) as secretly married staffers, Joe and Shirley, round out the cast. Ironically, perhaps the best performance can be attributed to McCarthy himself as newsreels offer a fascinating, perverse glance at the infamous politician whose flamboyance and dogged theatrics doomed the careers of many government officials and film or television actors. The duel between Murrow and McCarthy seems like two heavyweights going at it verbally in the public arena.

The cinematography by Robert Elswit (Magnolia) is crisp and starkly lit in black and white to evoke the past. The production design and costumes are consistent with the period. Just the sight of newsmen typing on old style typewriters or production assistants carrying around film reels instead of videotape or discs is amusing. The editing by Stephen Mirrione (Traffic, 21 Grams) is tight and well paced. At times the studio broadcasts of a female blues singer bridges various sequences in theme and mood. The broadcast of a live network news program is staged with realism and with the frenzy and excitement that only live television could bring. One wonders what TV veterans like Sidney Lumet or Robert Altman could have brought to the table.

Murrow’s show was kind of a precursor to the current granddaddy of all prime time news shows, 60 Minutes. It was interesting to see that his was not a perfect career having to mix fluffy showbiz interviews with such personalities as Liberace on his Person-to-Person show with legitimate news reports. At 93 minutes, the film surprisingly seems a bit short. You almost feel like this is a big budget episode of the famous You Are There reenactment shows. The story ends almost abruptly as it begins being bookended by a formal event honoring Murrow in 1958.

A couple of things don’t quite work in the film. The characters of Joe and Shirley must come to terms with the network’s policy forbidding marriage among its coworkers, but this subplot doesn’t significantly serve to move the story forward. Clooney shows a workman-like approach to directing the film but it just doesn’t grab you as emotionally as you would like. You sit there entranced by the history but are never fully given to the pathos of its characters. Instead, the film becomes almost a quasi-documentary bereft of much feeling.

As previous films have dealt with the Red Scare and blacklists, this film compares favorably with The Front and the great television movie Fear on Trial. Although the Soviet Union was a major threat to the United States during the Cold War, the accusatory enemy from within was perhaps as great a menace. The implications and parallels to today’s political climate and the role television has in shaping perception are clearly the point Clooney and gang are trying to make. Murrow’s formal speech, which begins and ends the film’s story, is itself a prophetic and sobering commentary and indictment of the possibilities of television and foreshadows the future with amazing prescience. It shows that one man made a difference. Such is the testament to a heroic reporter whose integrity this film manages to capture, albeit in a brief history lesson.

*** of **** stars

Past Illuminates Present in EVERYTHING IS ILLUMINATED

2005-10-12T21:09:00.001-07:00

Actor turned director Liev Schreiber (The Sum of All Fears) does an above average screen version of the novel, Everything Is Illuminated, by author Jonathan Safran Foer. This tale of journey and self discovery is highlighted by strong ensemble performances and sharp direction with a storyline that enriches and enlightens the soul.

Jonathan Foer (Elijah Wood) is a young man who has seen his grandfather, Safran, pass away. Jonathan has a peculiar habit of taking small objects and life’s little memorabilia and sealing them in plastic ziplock bags to display them on his wall. Safran gives Jonathan an old picture showing a young Safran standing next to a beautiful girl who saved his life many years ago. Thus Jonathan commences on a long journey to locate this mystery woman in the Ukraine not knowing if she is still alive. He enlists the help of a brash, young tour guide named Alex (Eugene Hutz) and his grandfather (Boris Leskin) to drive him to his goal. At first the trip hits dead ends and false leads, but as the group nears its target, the men find themselves amid the ruins of a dark chapter in history with the memories of war and the past ghosts of a nonexistent town. There, they find their own respective destinies and will be forever changed by what they learn.

This film feels like it was directed by someone who knew how to get the most from his actors. At times, the film is spoken in Russian and seems like a foreign film. The title itself is a play on self discovery. This is a thoughtful trek of one man into his past, and his past ironically involves his companions; Jonathan’s obsessive journey becomes an emotional journey for Alex and his grandfather as well. It’s a tale of bonding over the long haul and the guilt one must carry for a lifetime. By the end of the film, these characters have all experienced life altering events that will permanently intertwine their lives. It proves that memories can be powerful in traumatizing and also cleansing the soul. It’s also about one’s legacy and how others view an event or a person in the past. Alex eventually sees his grandfather in a completely different light. Even our perception of these individuals will have changed by film’s end which is a tribute to a story that is well told.

The story is deceptively simple. It functions as a road trip movie (like The Straight Story) combined with an interesting mystery story. It really involves a great many layers of emotions and subplots that range from the past to the present. The ending is a bit surreal with its déjà vu feeling.

Elijah Wood (Sin City, The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind)) has chosen a wide range of roles ever since his splash in The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Here, he does a fine job with what is essentially a minimalist role with not much to show. Eugene Hutz and Boris Leskin fare better as Alex and his grandfather respectively. Even the grandfather’s dog named Sammy Davis Jr. Jr. (that’s right) is funny as a fiercely loyal companion.

The spare music score by Paul Cantelon is a moody compliment to the thoughtful nature of the film. The editing is effective as imagery from past and present are linked and transitioned effortlessly. The cinematography by Matthew Libatique (Gothika, Requiem for a Dream) is appropriately stark and lifeless with some impressive images of war and its aftermath.

The coincidences that emerge during the last half of the film make for good drama but are a little too coincidental. We never fully understand the whole background story of Alex’s grandfather and what his motivations are. Likewise, Jonathan’s blank stares and lack of apparent substance and depth do not give us much more than a sketch of a quirky man. At times, the film feels a little downbeat and depressing as more horrific revelations are exposed. But these are minor criticisms of what is a good, introspective story with good performances and interesting themes of remembrance and closure. That Schreiber not only directed but adapted the screenplay to this worthwhile slice of history is a tribute to his talents and promising potential in the future.

*** of **** stars

IN HER SHOES Stands Tall

2005-10-12T21:09:00.000-07:00

Having previously tackled a wide range of themes in his films, Director Curtis Hanson delves into the love/hate relationship of two disparate sisters in the film, In Her Shoes. The result is an enjoyably entertaining comedy/drama featuring a number of topflight performances and some hilarious dialogue.

Maggie Feller (Cameron Diaz) is an irresponsible, practically illiterate alcoholic who sleeps around and mooches or steals to get by in the world. Her sister, Rose Feller (Toni Collette) is a self conscious, workaholic lawyer who is dating her boss and indulges in her one passion, fashionable dress shoes. (Maggie’s obsession with Rose’s sexy heels recalls an ongoing theme of television’s Sex and the City.) Both sisters lost their psychologically impaired mother to a supposed car accident that affected their family over the years. One day Maggie is thrown out of her house by her step mother and dad. Finding refuge with her sister, Rose, she proceeds to make life miserable with her carefree attitude and interference that ends in embarrassment and anger for both. As Rose’s romantic and professional life is turned upside down, Maggie is sent packing and turns to one last hope, her maternal grandmother she never knew, namely Ella Hirsch (Shirley MacLaine). Ella works in a retirement community in Florida, and Maggie’s appearance causes quite a stir. When she lost her daughter, Ella lost touch with her granddaughters, and Maggie’s ‘visit’ serves as a catalyst for reconnection. Maggie’s visit becomes a reawakening of sorts for herself and a chance for Ella to rediscover her lost family. Meanwhile, Rose is at a crossroads in her life and decides to change course in her job and finds romance from an unlikely source. Anxious to reunite her granddaughters, Ella resorts to extreme measures to bridge an emotional gap as her two girls begin to discover their own identities in unique and unexpected ways.

This is a gem of a film. It says something when you realize early on that you are watching something special. Curtis Hanson (L.A.Confidential, Wonder Boys) has struck gold with Susannah Grant’s (Erin Brokovich) adaptation of the best seller by Jennifer Weiner. The film is really about the secrets and lies that cripple a family over time and how a strange course of events revisit the relationships or lack thereof. Hanson and the company do a marvelous job of balancing some very funny dialogue with more serious, dramatic scenes. There are some great, memorable lines, some of which are funny and smart without losing sight of the context of the story. A number of scenes are touching and affecting in their sensitive handling of real emotions without becoming clichéd. It’s nice to see real people who change over time and how seemingly inconsequential supporting characters gradually come to the forefront.

The acting by the entire cast is strong and you appreciate the little nuances in facial expression and inflection of dialogue that enrich each character. This may be Cameron Diaz’s best performance. That’s saying something as the glamorous model has been more star than actress in her most popular films (Charlie’s Angels, There’s Something About Mary) and she is given a juicy role with sharp direction. Toni Collette has always been a solid actress in any film (Sixth Sense, The Hours) but she has found a wonderful character in Rose and makes the most of it. Shirley MacLaine (Terms of Endearment, The Turning Point) is terrific in what is a change of pace role where she eschews makeup to look her age and shows a maternal wisdom that is the stuff of Supporting Oscars. You wish there were more of her in the film, but what’s there is delicious. It’s nice to see an old pro like Norman Lloyd still displaying his acting chops in what is a minor role of a bed-ridden patient who has a profound influence on Diaz’s character.

The performances are complemented by seamless editing which not only captures the right reactions, but effortlessly switches back and forth between the two sisters especially during key scenes that are thematically linked. Although the running time goes over two hours, the pacing is good, and everything seems integral to the storyline. The musical score by Mark Isham is quite effective in complimenting the emotional moments without ever being intrusive.

Despite its strong script, the film never fully explores Maggie’s transformation which, while uplifting and remarkable, is never totally convincing given her origins and tendencies. Things get wrapped up in a dreamy sendoff which is perhaps too good to be true, but those same qualities also make for a more upbeat film.

Hanson displays a very keen eye in relating what is essentially a woman’s film. Yes, this may be considered a woman’s film in its theme and target audience, but considering the fact it is also a well made, funny, and heart rending film about love and family, the women ought to bring along the men. In Her Shoes is not just about rival sisters but rather it is about a family yanked apart and slowly brought together again in ways that are not altogether apparent at the start. How these lost souls meld together is the stuff of high entertainment and substance.

***1/2 of **** stars

WALLACE AND GROMIT: THE CURSE OF THE WERE-RABBIT is superior family fun

2005-10-12T21:08:00.000-07:00

The Oscar winning shorts headlining inventor Wallace and his loyal dog Gromit are expanded to a feature film in Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit. The results are a splendidly entertaining 85 minutes of fun, excitement, comedy, and escapism that put most live-action films to shame.

Wallace and his canine pal, Gromit, have a thriving business as Anti-Pestos who hunt down and capture rabbits that are eating the vegetable yards of the neighborhood. Meanwhile, Wallace, who is constantly inventing new contraptions and devices, is experimenting with a mind altering machine that will brainwash a rabbit into not wanting veggies. But of course an accident occurs and later, under the full moon, a strange series of attacks by a large, mysterious creature ravages the vegetable gardens of many a neighbor. Meanwhile, Wallace is attracted to a woman, Lady Tottington, whose vegetables are part of the annual Great Vegetable Convention. At the same time, a lecherous man named Victor Quartermaine is on the make for her riches. As the vegetable competition is ready to begin, all the entrants are threatened by the giant veggie eating creature. Who is this strange creature and how can it be stopped? It falls on the loyal, resourceful Gromit to try to save the day even as danger threatens Wallace and the vegetable gathering.

Wallace and Gromit remind you of comedians Penn and Teller, where one is a straight man to the other’s silent pantomimes. Speaking of Gromit, his character clearly pays homage to the silent characters of Chaplin, Keaton, and even France’s Monsieur Hulot. Voice work by Ralph Fiennes (The Constant Gardener) and Helena Bonham Carter (The Corpse Bride) as Victor and Lady Tottington respectively is quite convincing. Although the characters are made from claymation, they take on a life of their own, and pretty soon you forget that you are watching clay and instead care about the characters as if they were real people.

Clever puns aside, and there are many of them that whiz by at a steady clip, the sight gags are delightfully amusing and inventive. The humorous situations are never stale or run out of steam but are consistently inspired. The title is a giveaway to the plot as it alludes to the werewolf mythology and the full moon. The transformation that serves as a major plot point is played for laughs and not horrific, Wolfman inspired though it may be. The identity of the creature is a playful parody of every werewolf movie ever made with a nod to such staples as King Kong and Frankenstein. The filmmakers even throw a couple of red herrings to keep you guessing until the big revelation. There are scary moments however, without needing to be graphic or terrifying. All this is from a G-rated film?

The pacing is very good and the mood goes from simple comedy to suspense to a hint of romance. Not only is the animation effective with its expressive characters emoting believably, but the overall production is strong even in areas one might not expect in an animated film, namely the cinematography and editing. Even the rousing musical score done by committee is heroically inventive and inspired.

Made by the creative team (Directors Steve Box and Nick Park) which scored big on the recent Chicken Run, ‘Wallace and Gromit’ soars even higher in terms of overall excellence. It works for kids to be sure as the screen is filled with a smorgasbord of colorful and imaginative sets, characters, and effects. What is special is how the film plays for adults in equal measure as the simple storyline is played straight and the jokes are rapid and clever. A great deal of care and time (five years) went into making every scene work, no small feat. This marks another high point this past year in animation as the art form has enjoyed a surge in popularity and creativity. Not only is Wallace and Gromit one of the best animated films of the year (surely giving The Corpse Bride a run for its money), it’s one of the best films of 2005. So when is the sequel coming out?

***1/2 of **** stars

Life as a Math PROOF

2005-10-12T21:07:00.000-07:00

Director John Madden and Gwyneth Paltrow reteam (Shakespeare in Love) in this film adaptation of the multi-award winning play, Proof. This tale of the bond between a mathematics student and her brilliant but mentally ill father is touching at times but can be a bit of a downer despite some strong performances by a terrific cast.

Catherine (Gwyneth Paltrow) lives with her father, Robert (Anthony Hopkins), a brilliant mathematician whose psychological bouts with mental illness undermine a genius of scholarly writings and formulas. The story begins as her father has died recently, and she sees herself talking to him and fantasizing about their past relationship. Pleasant memories give way to painful ones as her father begins to slip away from sanity. Catherine, herself, is a bright mathematics student who is befriended by one of her father’s pupils, Hal (Jake Gyllenhaal). Enter her sister, Claire, (Hope Davis) whose compulsively organized, sanitized lifestyle is counterpoint to the bohemian spirit of her troubled sister. As Claire attempts to convince Catherine to move back to New York and leave the house that their father occupied, strong bonds are tested and old wounds exposed. Meanwhile, Hal has been studying Robert’s journals and eventually stumbles onto a potentially significant discovery courtesy of Catherine. This revelation has serious scholarly implications and generates a potential controversy that intertwines Catherine’s self doubts about her own sanity with her father’s memory. The question remains, “Like father, like daughter?”

It doesn’t quite shed its stagy and talky origins but the basic material seems intact as adapted by Rebecca Miller and David Auburn from his Tony Award and Pulitzer Prize winning play. Cinematically, the film flashes back and forth over a period of a few years to depict Robert’s decline and its effect on the emotionally distraught Catherine. Time is periodically fragmented and memories are linked in an almost stream of consciousness. It is at times hard to distinguish what is reality or a memory or an illusion, and that is perhaps the point of the story to illustrate Catherine’s uncertainties and her own little madness. However, this also serves to confuse the audience.

The film tries to tackle the issue of ‘what is genius’ and ‘what is mental illness’ as if the two might be connected. On the former, we have to take it on faith, and on the latter, there is barely any clinical or medical exposition on Robert’s condition. Are the filmmakers saying that Robert’s genius led to his madness or that it may do the same to Catherine? As an audience, we begin to doubt her sanity and even her mathematic talents. The final flashback scenes with Hopkins as he loses his sanity are heartbreaking but not as powerful as they could have been. It is just not as poignant or powerful when compared to the inspired Shakespeare in Love, granted, a more romantic and comedic film story. Even Catherine’s mad dash at the very end should be emotionally resounding and even uplifting. Rather, it only gives the semblance of hope and an uncertain future for its protagonist.

For Paltrow, this part must have had resonance having just lost her father, producer-director Bruce Paltrow. She is the best thing about this film with her convincing depiction of an emotionally spent daughter who has a guilt ridden conscience. This performance confirms that her Oscar for Shakespeare in Love was no fluke. Hopkins is always fun to watch even though his screen time is rather limited in just flashbacks. Gyllenhaal is pretty good as her friend and confidant. (His career is coming full swing this year with two more high profile films, Brokeback Mountain and Jarhead). Hope Davis (American Splendor, About Schmidt) doesn’t have much to work with in her character, but she proves to be an always dependable supporting actress with each succeeding film.

There will be audiences who note the similarities between this story and A Beautiful Mind. The subject matter may be familiar, but that’s where the connection ends. A Beautiful Mind was adapted from a book and was done with great flamboyance and inspiration. In Proof, we have a more confined space to work from and an even more limited narrative that essentially cannot free itself of its claustrophobic setting. It’s a somewhat downbeat story with good performances especially by Paltrow. For audiences looking for thoughtful introspection on the correlation of genius and mental illness as it affects and perhaps perpetuates through a family, then this is worth your attention. Others will respect the talents involved but may wonder by the end what the fuss was about.

*** of **** stars (mainly for the acting)

Antique Show is a Pleasant Visit

2005-10-12T21:02:00.000-07:00

Recently, I attended the Antique Show in Gaithersburg, MD which features older furniture, jewelry, and countless collectibles from around the region. An added feature to these items for sale is the appearance of a few noteworthy film and television stars of the past. This time it was Anson Williams and Donnie Most who were prominent supporting players in the 1970’s sitcom Happy Days. Among the other guests was Marta Kristen who played Judy Robinson, the older daughter in the 1960’s scifi cult classic Lost in Space, a favorite from my childhood. Her striking features stood out and she was such a sweet person who exuded good vibes. I asked if she was doing any current acting and she said that she was pretty much taking a vacation and returning to take care of her family. She did say she had done numerous commercial spots in the past year. It was a pleasure to meet her.

THE 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN is Naughty Fun

2005-10-12T21:01:00.000-07:00

Steve Carell has been a fixture on Comedy Central for years and had scene stealing minor roles in feature films like Anchorman and Bruce Almighty, but with his first starring role as The 40 Year Old Virgin, he has struck pay dirt. Although crude in its humor and at times graphic in its display of sexual conduct, the film has a core story that elevates it above most gross out comedies and does keep the funny lines coming fast enough to amuse most.

Andy Stitzer, a painfully shy 40 year old, works as a service tech at an electronic entertainment showroom. He is friends with three salesmen who soon find during a poker game that Andy is a virgin, never having had sex with a woman before. It seems Andy never got around to that experience although his attempts are hilariously recalled. Because Andy is humiliated and embarrassed at the barbs and jokes at his expense, his buddies band together to help their fledgling. The aid comes in the forms of speed dating, roaming the singles bars, hitting on book store clerks, and propositioning the showroom’s customers where Andy meets an attractive woman, Trish (Catherine Keener), a single mother who has a small business. The two instantly hit it off, but when it comes time to consummate the relationship, things go awry and Andy becomes more despondent when he cannot bear to reveal his deep secret to the woman he loves. It’s time for a momentous decision in Andy’s life.

Carell co produced and stars in what is his pet project. Judd Apatow (The Larry Sanders Show) directs the script he cowrote with Carell. True, some of the jokes crash and burn badly or misfire and fizzle, but enough keeps coming to raise some good roaring fun. As Andy, Carell plays an everyman kind of role, and his friends who on surface seem like chauvinistic frat boys, do care and come to his aid in an endearing spirit. He is so adept at the nuances and exaggerated movements of physical comedy that he needs to exploit them further (as he will in the big screen remake of the TV spy show, Get Smart). Among the numerous scenes, the standout and most talked about one is the infamous hair removal at a waxing clinic where Andy attempts to make himself more physically appealing. The results are disastrous, and it is well known that Carell performed the scene for real and suffered for his ‘art’. Catherine Keener is a breath of fresh air and quite appealing in her realistic role of a single mother looking for love in the most unlikely of places. The relationship between Trish and Andy develops earnestly and serves to anchor the sillier aspects of the storyline. And there is silly aplenty with some outrageous lines of dialogue and vulgar asides. In some ways, this is about a man who finds his own sense of manhood and maturity after being a boy for a long time. There are subplots involving each of the guys that are amusing but don’t really add anything to the story. Also good is the developing relationship Andy has with Trish’s daughter. The final scene is pretty nutty and clever as the credits roll.

On the surface, this film would appear to have all the ingredients for an over-the-top comedy like Animal House or American Pie. Indeed, there are a couple of scenes that are quite sexually explicit. It takes its R rating seriously. Don’t be misled. This is not a one note comedy but rather a romantic tale. At its heart, it has a well intentioned theme of longing and frustration with some genuine compassion. If you go in knowing you may be grossed out at times but still induced to laughter, then that pretty much sums up the appeal of this energetic film. In a star making turn, Carell is one to watch for quite some time.

*** of **** stars

A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE Disturbs the Senses

2005-10-12T20:58:00.000-07:00

This is not a pleasant film. It is about the nature of violence and how humans are forced into violence and its consequences. Master of visceral angst, David Cronenberg, tackles the subject of the present haunted by the past in small town America in A History of Violence. Although its subject matter is disturbing and the visuals are unnerving, it boasts some of the best acting in any film this year and is the most accomplished of Cronenberg’s cinematic canon.

Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) is a family man who runs a quiet diner in a small town and has the idyllic life of husband to a beautiful, loving wife, Edie (Maria Bello), and father to an adolescent son, Jack (Ashton Holmes), and younger daughter, Sarah (Heidi Hayes). One fateful day a pair of serial criminals barges into the diner looking for trouble in the worst way, and Tom must protect his patrons and staff. What transpires is a remarkable display of self defense and marksmanship as Tom becomes a local hero for his bravery. Soon after, a mysterious, black car begins to stalk Tom and his family at his diner and home. A hardened looking man named Carl Fogarty (Ed Harris) approaches Tom. It seems Tom’s notoriety in the media has attracted Fogarty’s attention leading him to believe Tom is not who he appears to be but rather a man named Joey with a very dark, violent past. Years ago, this Joey had run from the mob after causing a lot of trouble and mutilating one of Fogarty’s eyes. The uneasy tension bubbles over when Fogarty and his men confront Tom at his home as his family watches in terror. What happens then and afterwards leads to traumatic discovery and the reevaluation of relationships that culminates full circle at a mobster’s mansion in Philadelphia.

Adapted by Josh Olson from the graphic novel by John Wagner and Vince Locke, director Cronenberg displays a sure hand in his scenes of conflict whether they are emotional or violent. How ironic that the Canadian born director comments on the violence in the U.S. He does a nice job of setting up the scenes and characters methodically as we first see a loving family amid an innocent town. Subsequently, an ominous atmosphere of foreboding hangs over the rest of the film. There are some terrific set pieces that culminate in startling violence, and the confrontation at Tom’s house is quite memorable and results in a moment of truth. Let it be said that the violence is organic. It grows out of necessity and is carried out brutally and swiftly. The scenes have a lingering trauma on the characters and the audience. The visuals are stark and powerful by cinematographer Peter Suschitzky with a brooding score by Howard Shore (ironically a veteran scorer of pervious Cronenberg films and Mortensen’s Lord of the Rings trilogy). In fact the film, with its small, peaceful town contrasted with an evil menace, feels like a David Lynch film, and is thematically very much akin to Blue Velvet or Twin Peaks.

Ed Harris makes a grand entrance early on and he grabs this juicy role and never lets go. It is certainly one of his finest performances. William Hurt makes you realize just how talented an actor he is in the relatively short but brilliant turn as a mobster from the past with an agenda. But it is lead actor Viggo Mortensen who shines as the reluctant hero. He balances just the right amount of paradoxical innocence and cunning. He is a man about to peer over the precipice and lose everything he has. His brooding, quiet but strong avenger is constantly riveting. Maria Bello is quite touching as the affected wife and mother who is confronted by fear and uncertainty. Even Stephen McHattie registers strongly as one of the baddies (very reminiscent of the scum in Natural Born Killers) at the beginning.

Some directors are accused of making movies of interminable length. Not so with Cronenberg as he may be accused of being too economic and concise. While the pacing is tightly edited for maximum impact, some relationships needed to be fleshed out more. During the course of the story, there are two graphic displays of sex between Tom and Edie (one playful and the other angry) which serve as emotional counterpoints to their relationship. We need to understand what is going on in Edie’s mind and how she faces the future with her family. While there is a promising development of the early bonding between Tom and his introverted son Jack, we want more exposition of Jack as he goes from harassed school kid to a coming of age. We just needed a bit more character development, but what we do have is pretty thought provoking and unforgettable. The final scene is memorable.

A far cry from his notorious horror films, this film delves into the true nature of self and identity. This is Cronenberg’s most accessible film since The Fly and The Dead Zone. While his early horror films like Scanners and Videodrome dealt with physical transformation, this film deals with metaphysical transformation. He comes dangerously close to his earlier, notorious cult film, Crash (not to be confused with Paul Haggis’ current film), another film about human behavior dealing with psychological change. His films often deal with ugly, sordid truths and secrets that lie beneath what is perceived superficially. A fascinating study and exploration of human behavior under the most extreme duress, A History of Violence is an intelligent, brutal gem of a film not for all tastes, but for those willing to peer on the other side of sanity and complacency, it’s a dark slice of unsavory life.

***1/2 of **** stars

Real Emotions Breathe Life in THE CORPSE BRIDE

2005-09-26T22:39:00.000-07:00

Don’t let the creepy title of this animated, musical tale throw you off. In the tradition of other excellent, animated features of recent years, The Corpse Bride will surely rank as one of the best. Granted, this kind of film may not be for all tastes, but if you can get past the title and are game for a wondrous, haunting world of fantasy and love, then this is your meal ticket.

Victor and his parents meet Victoria and her family to attend a wedding rehearsal. Unbeknownst to Victor’s family, it seems Victoria’s parents are broke and desperately need the marriage to secure their future. Yet, marriage is new to the nervous Victor, and when he gets jittery at the church, he runs off and into the woods to collect his thoughts. There, he jokingly recites his wedding vows and slips his wedding band on a finger shaped piece of what appears to be wood. The next thing he knows, the wooden finger is a real finger belonging to a former bride, and she has sprung ‘alive’ to his offer of marriage. As Victor reels in horror and confusion at his ‘corpse bride’, he is whisked away to another world of people who have died. While the corpse bride is partly decomposed, she retains much of her former beauty. Yet others in this strange land are mere skeletons and rotted flesh. It turns out that the corpse bride was to be married, but her groom had evil plans for her. She has been waiting for her true love ever since her demise. Meanwhile, Victoria’s parents are approached by a mysterious, handsome suitor who wants to marry Victoria. Victor must make a fateful decision and choose between the two brides even as the dead descend on the land of the living for a wedding ceremony like none other. One groom and two brides-what to do?

This is Tim Burton’s latest foray into stop motion animation, and he and Mike Johnson direct with economy from a relatively simple screenplay by John August, Pamela Pettler, and Caroline Thompson. The characters, especially Victor and the corpse bride, are well etched and create an emotional bond with the audience. Although we want Victor to marry his love Victoria, we grow to feel sympathy and attachment to the corpse bride as well. As for the images of the dead, Burton and company do a delightful job of making what, on the outset, could be grotesque and turning them into energized, playful souls. There is a terrific Peter Lorre homage with a worm who keeps popping in and out of the bride’s eye socket. After a short time, the skeletal limbs and discolored dead no longer seem frightening or gross. Ironically the most colorful sequences involve the world of the dead while the living are painted in austere, lifeless mutes of gray.

Much of the production team are veterans of other Burton films. Longtime collaborator Danny Elfman again provides an atmospheric score and a handful of nifty, little songs to move things along. Even the voices of the principals are Burton alumni, Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter (Burton’s significant other). Give Depp credit for voicing a British sounding character convincingly while others like Emily Watson, Albert Finney, Christopher Lee and Tracey Ullman, to name a few, are quite effective at bringing their figures to life. It’s a testament to Burton’s imaginative appeal that twice the usual number of major acting talents contributed to this work.

For all those who loved Burton’s earlier produced efforts, The Nightmare Before Christmas (whose ghoulish nature is quite similar) and James and the Giant Peach, this is a worthy followup. The animation itself is virtually seamless, and the characters and figures move as in real life. It is a far cry from the Rankin-Bass Christmas specials of the 1960’s. The set designs and costumes are very much gothic in style. It seems that Burton is drawing from his own films or is perpetuating his influences as evidenced in his previous films like Beetlejuice, Batman, and Edward Scissorhands particularly in his obsession with the good and evil in man. It also delves into the perception of life versus death. Who is really alive and who acts like the nonliving? It is evident that the true antecedent of The Corpse Bride is Burton’s own version of Washington Irving’s Sleepy Hollow with a nod toward Dickens (with its contrast in class distinction and its unsavory characters), especially the Miss Havisham character in Great Expectations.

The Corpse Bride marks a continuing peak in the current revival of animated feature films which was signaled by Toy Story a decade earlier and has been raised to new heights with such recent triumphs as Shrek and Finding Nemo. The final shot is a wondrous, memorable end that recalls the transformation scene in Disney’s classic, Beauty and the Beast. In fact, so good is its animation and technique that it is easy to forgive any shortcomings in what is basically a one act, one note story albeit told with sincerity. With just a bit more pathos and storyline, Burton’s team would have had an instant classic. It’s a near miss, but its status as the best animated film of the year is secure.

***1/2 of **** stars (**** for the animation and *** for the story)

Director Robert Wise-An Appreciation

2005-09-20T20:33:00.000-07:00

The passing of legendary film director Robert Wise last week marks the end of Hollywood’s golden age. Virtually all of the great directors who made their mark before 1950 are now gone. A few veterans like Stanley Donen (On the Town) remain, but with the passing of Wise, Hollywood has lost a true giant of movie history. From his horror classic, The Body Snatchers (1945), to the dream team boardroom of Executive Suite (1954), to a graphic depiction of capital punishment in I Want To Live (1958), to a politically charged indictment of war in The Sand Pebbles (1966), Wise has traversed the cinematic landscape with stunning achievement and success. His was that rare combination of critical acclaim, award recognition, and box office triumph. For years, his 1965 musical, The Sound of Music, was one of the most successful films of all time.

I met Robert Wise at the University of Maryland in College Park when I was still involved in the film program at the student union some 25 years ago. A guy named Mike and I picked up Wise and his wife from the airport and drove them to a hotel room near the campus. He had white hair, glasses, and spoke with a soft tone. En route, I had a chance to talk to him about his movies, and he was very open to answering questions and discussing his stellar career. It was amusing how his wife kept asking us to drive her to Monticello during their stay because she wanted to take a side trip to visit that historic landmark. We never did go but she was persistent and stubborn. When we arrived at their hotel and got them settled, I asked for Wise’s autograph and he obliged. I felt like such a groupie but I had to ask.

I was a fan of his films growing up having been raised on staples like The Sound of Music and West Side Story. I didn’t realize that I had already seen many of his other films and was impressed by what a versatile director he was by delving into a wide array of film genres. For example, his science fiction films like The Day the Earth Stood Still and The Andromeda Strain are now considered classics. It is astonishing how his career spanned a half century of film and that he had worked with some of the top talents in Hollywood whether it be Orson Welles on Citizen Kane (where Wise was a film editor), Val Lewton the king of B movie horror, Clark Gable in Run Silent Run Deep, George C Scott in The Hindenberg, or Steve McQueen in The Sand Pebbles. He won four Oscars as producer and director of West Side Story and The Sound of Music.

Whatever Wise did, he did well. Although he did not do any pure comedies, he had in all his films a gritty realism and authenticity which only served to enhance his subject matter. As a result, his films stand the test of time and seem relevant and watchable even today while other contemporaries seem very dated and phony. A good example of his attention to detail is the chase at the end of The Day the Earth Stood Still as the military read off actual street names in Washington D.C. Would anyone else have known the difference or even cared? Wise did, and his penchant for accuracy has paid handsomely over the years. I told him that I was thoroughly impressed by the meticulous sets in The Andromeda Strain, and he was flattered saying how he strove for great realism because it would enhance the credibility and believability of the movie. Watch the climactic countdown in the quarantine unit and see if any other film comes close to matching the intensity of suspense. The film holds up well to this day. He even told me how he was rushed to meet an impossible deadline for Star Trek: The Motion Picture, and while the film was decent enough, it seemed bloated and overlong. Wise said that he did not have time to trim the film down to a good pace and running time. He has since been able to rectify that shortcoming with the recent DVD release of his director’s cut.

Wise spoke to a crowd of students and general public at the student union theater, and many of his films were shown that week. My friend Murray and I drove him to the airport to catch a flight back to the west coast. Its funny how every time I would see an interview of him since then, he seemed exactly the same way he had been on campus-a distinguished, classy veteran of film who loved to talk celluloid and was receptive to the students. I was fortunate to have known a great director and good guy.

THE CONSTANT GARDENER Is a Well Tended Tale

2005-09-13T21:11:00.000-07:00

There have been nifty thrillers over the years with conspiracy attached, and many of them have been good like The Parallax View and JFK. Yet few of these have been able to rise above the visceral angst of suspense and intrigue to attain another level of human emotion. One good example is the recent adaptation of John Le Carre’s novel, The Constant Gardener. Adapted by Jeffrey Caine and directed by Fernando Meirelles, this is a superior cinematic rendition of a good, moral suspense yarn told with methodical precision and emotional resonance.

Tessa (Rachel Weisz) is a volunteer-activist who marries timid diplomat, Justin Qualye (Ralph Fiennes) and follows him to Kenya in Africa. When his wife goes missing, Justin decides to follow his wife’s trail and find out what really happened and why. The clues lead to a pharmaceutical drug corporation that is testing tuberculosis drugs on the lower class population. What Justin finds is a shocking conspiracy of secrets and lies reaching up to the British government and a corporate entity that will stop at nothing to release its money making windfall. As Justin discovers the truth, he begins to understand the ruthless nature of conspirators even as he begins to uncover the truth about his marriage.

This is a chilling mystery story that is at its heart a tale of romantic love between a man and a wife he really doesn’t know. Although not perfect, it does endeavor to be many things, and it integrates the love story that forms the soul of the film with an elaborate detective story that touches upon morality, fear, hope, and redemption and achieves them quite well. It’s like reading a long, complex novel. That a film could be filled with so many attributes is quite an achievement and a testament to the source material by Le Carre, a constant source of complex, filmic material ever since the breakout adaptation of his The Spy Who Came in From the Cold in the 1960’s. It is also a tribute to director Meirelles who has a sure hand in every scene and edit while never losing track of his many themes and maintaining strong performances from his talented cast.

At first Justin is oblivious to the insidious forces around him. The garden that he tends to is a metaphor of sorts to a basic, uncomplicated view of his world that is suddenly shaken. The backgrounds in many scenes show a rural countryside with poor people struggling to survive. Life is hard for the people in a harsh landscape. There are always incidental shots of children usually in the background as casual bystanders or observers; they are the innocent ones. This story and its people are distant cousins of the drug gangs in Meirelles’ previous, breakthrough film, City of God. It is in this setting that Justin retraces Tessa’s footsteps which lead to a dirty secret and a rediscovery of their love. Throughout it all, there is an almost inevitable, hopeless feeling, like a stacked deck against Justin. Then there is the question of trust. Who to trust? It seems everyone is either partly involved with the bad guys or reluctant to get involved. There are different levels of trust. There is the hint of marital infidelity and the questioning of loyalty. In this respect, The Constant Gardener reminds one of the underrated Under Fire.

The narrative fluidly flashes back and forth at will to show the beginnings of Justin and Tessa’s relationship amid the intrigue in Kenya. There’s also lots of handheld camera work (Cesar Charlone) that gives the film a semi documentary feel. While the look is raw and primitive, the editing (by Oliver Stone alumni Claire Simpson) is sophisticated and clever as various bits of associative imagery are connected to great emotional and informative effect. A great deal of thought and planning went into this story and its adaptation to connect the dots.

Fiennes is excellent as the beleaguered husband who seeks the truth about his wife. He has a knack for playing tragic characters (Quiz Show, The English Patient), and he has never been better than in this role. You feel his confusion and pain as he goes against difficult odds. Rachel Weisz is terrific as the brave crusader of the African people who risks harm and her marriage by digging for the truth. You feel her passion in Tessa’s character and the free spirit that dominates every scene she is in. You just know that Tessa’s own hard-headed agenda will get her in trouble. It is a far cry from Weisz’s days in action blockbusters like The Mummy, and it is her best role to date. The rest of the uniformly strong cast is excellent particularly Bill Nighy as the slimy Pellegrin.

If you are a conspiracy buff, then this is your kind of film. Although it is a bit of a downer, ultimately it is a haunting fable with memorable imagery, and it is a film that stays with you long after it is over. It should stay with Oscar voters for the long term as well.

***1/2 of **** stars

JUST LIKE HEAVEN Seems a Bit Familiar

2005-09-13T21:10:00.000-07:00

Ghost stories involving romance are a recurring subject matter in Hollywood. Case in point, one can look at The Ghost and Mrs. Muir, Heaven Can Wait, Somewhere in Time and the most recent entree, Just Like Heaven, a modest romantic comedy featuring attractive leads, Reese Witherspoon and Mark Ruffalo. While reasonably entertaining and diverting, it doesn’t quite deliver the goods.

Elizabeth (Reese Witherspoon) is a workaholic doctor in San Francisco who drives to meet a blind date on a rainy night and swerves into the path of a truck. Weeks later, we see David (Mark Ruffalo) who is searching for an apartment when a circular, advertising a vacancy, literally finds him. Upon moving in and settling down, David is surprised and spooked by the appearance of Elizabeth who claims she already lives in the newly rented space. She mysteriously vanishes and reappears, and David is convinced that she must be a ghost. Yet she refuses to believe she is really dead. As they figure out the truth, David and Elizabeth find they are attracted to one another. When the reality of what happened to her that rainy night is revealed, David must resort to desperate measures to save the girl he loves before it is too late.

Directed by Mark Waters, who showed promise with comedies like Mean Girls, this is a film that wants to be more than it is. It aspires to be a lighthearted, romantic love story with dramatic and comedic overtones. That’s pretty ambitious for a script (adapted by Peter Tolan and Leslie Dixon from Marc Levy’s novel, If Only It Were True) that would be better off on television. The themes are pretty familiar and have been done before and better. The filmmakers could have tightened the first hour and the pace would have been improved. At times, the plotline comes dangerously close to losing whatever momentum it has. It takes a long while for anything to happen, perhaps too long. However, the climax does pick up steam as the relationship between the two develops, and one just wishes there was more such life in the earlier stages. To be sure, there are nice touches in the story that allude to fate, coincidence, and true love, but the script doesn’t draw the connections as magically as one wishes.

Then there are the technical inconsistencies that even audiences with suspended disbelief may have a hard time to swallow. We see Elizabeth pass through walls and tables but why can we hear her footsteps on the floor or why can she sit in a truck without falling through? Granted, the special effects, while not earth shattering, are interesting and reasonably imaginative. It is also clever how the editing alternates between the ghostly Elizabeth and reality where no one sees or hears her except David. These point of view crosscuts when David is talking to Elizabeth even as the public sees him talking to no one are at times amusing.

The two stars do have nice screen chemistry together. Reese Witherspoon (Legally Blonde, Election) is watchable in almost anything she stars in, but she can only breathe so much life in a standard storyline. If Mark Ruffalo (Collateral, You Can Count on Me) gets hold of a great comedic script, then you’d definitely have something to utilize his versatility. After successful pairings with Witherspoon and Jennifer Garner in 13 Going on 30, how about teaming him with Rachel McAdams or even Drew Barrymore?

Here is an obvious case of star power being enough to overcome an average script. As comedies go, it really doesn’t climb to great heights, but the leads are so appealing, it really doesn’t matter. A sure video rental, it is a pleasant bit of fluff that will certainly appeal to those who believe in true love and fairy tales. To the rest of the audience, just sit still and smile with your date.

**1/2 of **** stars (*** for romantics)

THE GREATEST GAME EVER PLAYED Is Above Par

2005-09-13T21:07:00.000-07:00

For non-golfers, this true story of an ordinary youth who challenges a seasoned champ in the biggest golf match of all time is a stirring piece of history reenacted for the general audience. Seasoned actor turned director Bill Paxton has taken a simple tale and fashioned a mini pearl of a movie that will fit nicely with the other sports films like Remember the Titans and The Rookie.

As a boy, future English champion golfer, Harry Vardon is introduced to the world of golf while dark, mysterious figures begin to build a golf course nearby. Years later in America, another boy, Francis Ouimet, is a caddie at a golf course and is encouraged by adults to pursue his dream of playing competitively. It turns out Francis has a gift for the sport and he practices religiously. Although he is from a poor working class family, he enters an amateur tournament where he must face off seasoned golfers who are from well-to-do backgrounds. After a series of setbacks and the objections of his laborer father, Francis is given a chance opportunity to restart his dream as an amateur entree in the prestigious U.S. Open where he sees his childhood idol, Vardon, again but now as a competitor and rival. Harry is in the States to claim the U.S. golfing crown as he has (Tiger Woods fashion) done for consecutive years in the British Open. As the grueling course thins the ranks of professionals and to the amazement of swelling throngs of spectators and media, Francis and Harry are on a collision course in the most unlikely playoff matchup in the annals of golf.

This is essentially the story of two golfers with contrasting backgrounds. What is good about this film is that even though this story is about golf, it is easily accessible to mainstream audiences because they become involved in Francis’ dreams. The conflict at home between father (Elias Koteas) and Francis is an important plot point that is comparable to the father-son dynamic of The Rookie. There are nice examples of class struggle between the have-nots and the upper crust. The storylines never get too complex and while the plot is easy to follow, the simplicity can be a detriment in other ways.

There are a couple of unexplained subplots and relationships that are never fully explored. We don’t really understand what motivates or affects Vardon from his childhood. Also there seems to be a parallel being drawn between him and Ouimet which is never clearly explained. Likewise, there is a hint of romance in Ouimet’s life, but we never know where that goes.

This unknown cast works because there are no preconceived notions of stars or recognizable faces. For all intents and purposes, we believe Stephen Dillane is Harry Vardon. The performances deserve notice especially Shia LaBeouf (Holes) as Francis Ouimet and Josh Flitter as the diminutive child caddie, Eddie, whose enthusiasm and quips are disarming. Character actor Luke Askew does register in a change of pace role as an unnamed golfing mentor for Francis.

Director Paxton has a very clean sense of narrative, and it certainly didn’t hurt to be under the tutelage of his favorite director, James Cameron. There is a great shot of the audience watching Ouimet driving the ball and turning their collective heads to follow the ball’s path except for Vardon who stays on the young protégé as he knows it is a good shot. Paxton does save the best for last in the climactic playoff. He displays a sure hand in the final scene as he culminates various plot threads in one emotional finale. We never lose sight of our protagonist’s plight and everything is in service of a storyline adapted by Mark Frost (Twin Peaks) from his novel. If this is an example of Paxton’s capability as a director, then I welcome his next project.

Credit the production team for authentic period sets and costumes. The cinematography and special effects are imaginative and perhaps too clever as we witness the many new ways to simulate a ball in flight or rolling on the fairway.

This is the sort of film you would see as a made for television film like Brian’s Song in the 1970’s or as an HBO feature. Now Disney is mining the sports sagas in a consistently entertaining fashion. I would not put NASCAR past them. If you are looking for an inspiring family film, this is a good choice.

*** of **** stars

RED EYE Is Edge of Your Seat Thrills

2005-08-12T06:11:00.000-07:00

With the similarly set Flight Plan coming this fall, Red Eye shows that it can compete with the best of them in the thriller category. Director Wes Craven, best known for his popular horror films like Nightmare on Elm Street and Scream, has stretched his muscles into the suspense genre and has succeeded with a modest, effective gem.

Lisa Reisert (Rachel McAdams) is a hotel manager who is flying home from a funeral when she meets a charming stranger, Jackson Ripper (Cillian Murphy), who ends up threatening her on board the flight. He wants her to call the hotel and change a seemingly innocent reservation for a VIP or her father will be killed. With this premise, a terrified Lisa must contemplate a way to save her father and prevent an even larger plot to assassinate the VIP (who is an official of Homeland Security). Despite her every move, Jackson manages to stay one step ahead of her. As the plane arrives at the airport and the VIP arrives at the hotel, Lisa acts out of desperation to protect not only her father but attempt to thwart a convoluted conspiracy.

That’s it! That is the storyline, and Craven makes the most of a simple setup in character and plot. As an exercise in visceral excitement, the film succeeds admirably with a simple, almost TV plotline. There is a good sketch of characters as they are casually introduced at the beginning. Once the setup is established at takeoff, the plot likewise takes a sinister turn. The interplay between Murphy’s hunter and McAdams’ hunted works quite well as they parry and thrust verbally and then figuratively in front of a mostly oblivious compliment of bystanders. It is remarkable how much of the film’s running time takes place in such tight quarters, but that plays to the strengths of the script by Carl Ellsworth. It does not seem stagy, and yet the suspense quotient is heightened in this intriguing mousetrap. And Craven knows that a human monster like Ripper can be just as scary as any movie monster because it is part of a real world.

The screenplay has some interesting subplots like the assassination scenario which by itself is innovative and not far fetched. At times there is Hitchcock feel with its ‘every man’ or in this case ‘every woman’ lead whose actions and thoughts draw the audience into complicity with the nefarious plot. You think, ‘how is she ever going to warn her father and how the heck is she going to prevent this diabolical plan from being executed so to speak.’

There are minor disappointments overall. It could have been a more compelling story had it delved deeper into Lisa’s mysterious past and trauma and how she evolves as a person from her harrowing experience. But that’s what comes from being spoiled by a film that starts out so promisingly. It does come back to earth when the plane touches down leading to a more standard action ending. The pace, however, is well edited for maximum effect.

McAdams shows the appropriate terror and anxiety and is quite believable. After making her mark in films such as the romantic drama The Notebook and comedies like Mean Girls and Wedding Crashers, she is showing a good range of versatility, and by tackling this genre of suspense, she can move on to other subject matter worthy of her growing abilities. Murphy (quite good in Batman Returns) is talented enough to have other memorable roles. He mixes enough maniacal creepiness with cold, ruthless mercenary in guise of a handsome companion. He needs to avoid future psycho roles lest he becomes typecast.

Although it resorts to a conventional ending, the ride is worth it. It is truly refreshing to see a film that knows when not to overstay its welcome as it clocks in at less than 90 minutes. Once the story is over, it’s over. Maybe Mr. Craven might consider staying in this genre a bit longer. Red Eye is one nifty little thriller.

*** of **** stars

FOUR BROTHERS Returns to the 'Hood

2005-08-12T06:10:00.000-07:00

Boyz n the Hood was a landmark film in its realistic depiction of gang violence and its effect on families in urban America. Its novice director, John Singleton, has languished in relative obscurity since then and revisits a similar turf with his revenge drama, Four Brothers. While it reconfirms Singleton’s talents, it is an imperfect action drama that leans too heavily on its mean spirited revenge theme.

A middle aged woman, Evelyn Mercer (Fionnula Flanagan), is known for taking wayward boys off the streets and finding them foster homes. Yet, over time, only four boys could not be placed, and she adopted them herself. Years later, when a liquor store robbery goes awry, Evelyn is murdered. This reunites the four brothers who are now grown (Mark Wahlberg, Tyrese Gibson, Andre Benjamin, and Garrett Hedlund). What seems to be a simple crime gone wrong is only the beginning of a tale of conspiracy and betrayal. With police detectives (Terrence Howard and Josh Charles) seemingly a step behind the clues, the brothers decide to find the answers and punish all those involved even if it leads to corrupt officials, crooked cops, or the top crime boss in town. This causes violent confrontations and retribution until the brothers must attempt a daring plan to avenge their family and bring the murderers to their form of justice.

As portrayed by Singleton, this is a tough, violent neighborhood, a sort of distant cousin to the one in Boyz n the Hood. There are some similarities with New Jack City with its family of gangsters and a ruthless leader. The film does contain well directed scenes. The pool hall scene between Howard and Charles is quite good and the dialogue makes this a mini-gem. At times Singleton knows enough to reel back his characters from a pure revenge tale to one of family and connection. There is a good early scene during Thanksgiving at the dinner table where each brother looks upon the memory and visage of his deceased mother in an empty chair and remembers the lessons she instilled in them. It is a clever moment and speaks volumes on what she meant to each son. Perhaps a bit more of this would have balanced the film and kept it from turning into the overwhelmingly vengeful tale it ultimately becomes.

The film feels tough and gritty, and its characters are real people with real conflicts and emotions. The relationship of these brothers forms the backbone of the film no matter what they endure. They stick up for each other and watch each other’s back. These brothers in arms love each other and fight amongst themselves. We anguish when they suffer and cheer when they triumph. There are humorous moments sprinkled throughout the film and some funny lines spoken at the expense of each character. .

The story, written by David Elliot and Paul Lovett, works on a couple of levels. On one level, it is a detective story with twists and turns and some surprises. There are some clues and red herrings along the way, and you don’t quite know the whole story until the end. On another level it functions as a kind of urban western with its revenge tale. In fact the film is essentially structured similarly to fraternal, revenge westerns as The Sons of Katie Elder and Gunfight at the OK Corral. It’s also about the love given by a selfless mother who gave comfort and hope to four wayward rejects when no one wanted them.
The ending is a little like an urban Mission Impossible with its elaborate ruse. Some of it is implausible but on the whole the sequence works marginally. We don’t know much about Jeremiah Mercer’s family which would have added to our attachment to his character.

Mark Wahlberg is an imposing figure who will stop at nothing to find his mother’s killer.
In fact all four leads are quite strong and well cast. Terrence Howard (who has starred in a number of strong films this year and is a star on the rise for sure) has an effective role as a good cop although his character leaves too early as the conspiracy widens. Fionnula Flanagan is seen too briefly and should have been used more which would have grounded the film morally.

The soundtrack is a good mixture of oldies and serves as the pulse of the kinetic action scenes in the Motown setting. Technical credits for what is essentially a low budget film are solid especially in the cinematography and film editing.

It is entirely possible to be shell shocked by the hard hitting nature of this violent melodrama by film’s end. It’s certainly a crowd pleaser and almost manipulative in the way it generates deep feelings. The film succeeds in terms of sheer energy and force. It’s a little rough around the edges but still a welcome return to Singleton’s roots. While Four Brothers proves that his previous abilities were no fluke, he has yet to exceed let alone match the promise of his first film.

**1/2 of **** stars

DEUCE BIGALOW: EUROPEAN GIGOLO is a Loser

2005-08-12T06:07:00.000-07:00

Rob Schneider has been an amusing comic from his days as cast regular on TV’s Saturday Night Live. His only real success was a modest one, Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo, and now he returns to that character several years later. The results are disastrous. In the tradition of terrible comedies such as John Goldfarb Please Come Home and Which Way to the Front, this R-rated entree is trouble from start to finish.

Deuce Bigalow takes up where he left off as a jinxed widow who travels to Europe to join his pimp friend, T. J. Hicks (Eddie Griffin), who gets in hot water as a mistaken prime suspect in a series of murders of gigolos or ‘man whores’ as they call themselves. Deuce explores the European world of these men and even interviews the last women to see the murder victims alive. This sets up an amusing series of dates with women who have unusual physical attributes. At the same time the police are investigating the crimes, Deuce runs into and falls in love with a beautiful woman, Eva (Hanna Verboom), who is afflicted with a multitude of behavioral ticks due to obsessive compulsive disorder. She is also the niece of the lead detective on the case who has a grudge against these ‘man whores’. The story leads to the Man Whore Awards as Deuce races to save the day while the murderer has planned a final deadly act.

That sums up a simple, silly plot that is flawed in script and execution. The director (who is heck is Mike Bigelow, a pseudonym?) and a committee of writers don’t give the story or the lead actors a chance to succeed. What’s worse is that the skills of most of the people involved appear amateurish at best and may have been reedited and cut severely during post-production. Indeed, the transitions are at times jarring and sloppy. Billy Wilder, Preston Sturges, and Ernest Lubitsch are rolling in their graves.

If only the screenwriters had trusted their story more and sprinkled the jokes sparingly, the film would take on a more structured and involving comedic romance. Instead, what we get is literally toilet humor of the worst kind and repeated gags that are gross and intellectually void of brain matter. It’s one thing to have bawdy sight gags and vulgar humor which can actually spice up a comedic romp like Animal House or American Pie, but the jokes here are terrible to begin with and inserted at awkward times as if the filmmakers didn’t trust the material and threw in the kitchen sink, albeit a dirty one. It’s saying something when the Farrelly brothers (There’s Something About Mary) have more class in any given scene of their comedies than all these jokes put together. A missed opportunity is Schneider’s character falling in love with Eva. It is perhaps the only half-way decent thing the movie has going, and it is never fully developed. It does try to be good hearted and at times there is a glimmer of a decent scene only to be undermined by a sick punchline.

Schneider tries too hard at being funny and seems like he is forcing the jokes which makes it even worse. Griffin fares scarcely better in a cardboard role unworthy of his standup talent. Only Verboom fares adequately as Eva, and she is perhaps the only nice thing about the film. Not even the cameo/bit roles by Saturday Night Live alumni Norm MacDonald, Fred Armisen, and even Adam Sandler can bring life to the proceedings.

It is best to avoid Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo at all costs, and unless you have nothing better to do with your free time, it is still best to sit in a corner and stare at a blank wall; you will be far more entertained. Run for your lives!

* of **** stars mostly for Hanna Verboom

BROKEN FLOWERS Has Emotions in Full Bloom

2005-08-12T06:05:00.000-07:00

Flowers bloom and wilt just as people grow and age emotionally over time. How a character starts one way and is changed fundamentally in the end is at the heart of Jim Jarmusch’s latest character study, Broken Flowers. It features a pared down performance by comedian/actor Bill Murray, and it may well be his best role to date.

A successful computer entrepreneur and bachelor, Don Johnston (Murray), receives an anonymous letter from a former lover which reveals that he had a child out of wedlock and that the now nineteen year old son may try to contact him. When his current girlfriend, Sherry (Julie Delpy), breaks up with him, Johnston’s neighbor, Winston (Jeffrey Wright), encourages him to make a list of all his girlfriends from that period of time to figure out who the mother may be. As the list is reduced to four (Sharon Stone Frances Conroy, Jessica Lange, and Tilda Swinton), Winston sends a reluctant Johnston on a quest for the truth. Clues abound as Johnston attempts to query each woman to find the connection to the letter. Past and present feelings come welling to the surface, some them pleasant and some painful. Johnston must endure his lumps as he awkwardly tries to obtain any inkling of truth from his mysterious letter writer. There are red herrings too along the way as anticipated resolutions give way to disappointment and emptiness. Or does it? What is the truth and what is reality? These are the sort of questions that crop up during the trip to the end.

The film opens with the departing Sherry telling Johnston that “you’re never going to change.” That is the beginning of a kind of human experiment of travel and reconnecting with fond memories and old wounds. This special road trip film also works as one of Winston’s mystery novels. Only in this case, it’s one big mystery of life. When Murray’s Johnston begins his mission, he is an inert, emotionally spent, world-weary baby boomer. Director Jarmusch, who has marched to his own drummer, has always done personal, character driven pieces (Stranger than Paradise). He does a great job of inhabiting his world with disparate people who don’t always have happy endings. Jarmusch displays a clean, accessible eye for film composition, and his visuals can be striking and supportive of the emptiness Johnston must feel. Although the film appears plot driven, it is most certainly people driven as it explores relationships. His use of offbeat songs and musical score are good counterpoints to an intimate story.

The screenplay, also written by Jarmusch, is lean, yet poignantly effective, a kind of ‘less is more’ scenario. Such humorous lines as when Murray’s character complains, “I’m a stalker in a Taurus,” generate some fine moments. It is ironic that after all these years, Murray has developed into a bona fide dramatic actor whose comedic sensibilities only serve to accent rather than detract from the story. Perhaps he should have waited to the redo the somber material of The Razor’s Edge which he bravely tackled immediately following the successes of Caddyshack and Meatballs. It’s great to see him explore the subtle side of comedy and drama. He has mastered every nuance and economy of expression and is essentially toning his act down to a minimalist level even more so than in Lost in Translation. At times even his lack of reaction says more than words literally could ever say.

The actresses acquit themselves splendidly. We see too little of Delpy (Before Sunset) and Chloe Sevigny (who portrays a receptionist). Tilda Swinton is also too brief but extremely effective in a change of pace role. Frances Conroy (Six Feet Under) has a more substantive part as a repressed realtor. Sharon Stone looks fantastic and an aging Lange still has the acting chops that produced multiple Oscar nods in the past. (Trivia buffs will note this marks the second film featuring both Lange and Murray who previously excelled in Tootsie.) Speaking of Oscar, it would be a crime not to recognize Murray’s measured, controlled performance. Special mention should go to Wright in an amusing supporting role.

As for the ending, let’s just say that Murray’s character has seen all the former girlfriends with varying results and his suspicions that his son is closing in on him may be realized. These events place him at a crossroads of life. It is not an easy resolution to the film as it will not easily conform to standard plotlines. This is where the film deviates from the norm and this is where its theme potentially comes full circle. While it may be Jarmusch’s most accessible film thus far, it contains a cipher conclusion for the audience to interpret. So caught up are we in discovering the past, that we miss the point of the film-it’s all about self discovery. Despite the ending, which will separate the sophisticates from pop audiences, the film is nearly perfect up to that point for all. Those looking for happy, pat endings will be befuddled. The journey is the most important thing, and perceptive viewers will realize the ending tells more than meets the eye. I smell a sleeper here.

***1/2 of **** stars

BATMAN BEGINS Jumpstarts the Franchise

2005-07-27T21:07:00.000-07:00

Batman Begins is a reinventing of Bob Kane’s original comic book hero, and it is generally a successful transition into the 21st century with some nice wrinkles and updates. The comic book hero from D.C. Comics has captured the imagination of the public in print, television, and film. Director Christopher Nolan’s vision cleverly takes threads of the original story and merges them with unique twists and turns.

The wealthy Wayne family of Gotham City is well lauded, and young son, Bruce, lives an idyllic, pampered life with childhood friend Rachel. A chance accident lands him in a cave of bats which begins a cycle of trauma that will culminate in the murder of his parents in the city streets. A wayward, lost soul, Bruce (Christian Bale) grows into a young man who remains distant despite the support of family butler, Alfred (Michael Caine). Seeking meaning in his life, he travels the streets of the world to understand the criminal elements until a fateful meeting in Asia with a mentor, Ducard (Liam Neeson), who beckons Wayne to a temple/fortress in a remote mountain. There, he meets a group of avengers who have great fighting skills and unyielding, harsh justice. Bruce learns from Ducard to shed his inner fears of bats and harness the feelings of his parents’ death. As Wayne masters his physical and mental prowess, his sense of humanity ultimately collides with the shadow group’s ruthless sense of justice.

Wayne returns to and assimilates into Gotham City as a ‘millionaire playboy’ who secretly assumes the symbol of a bat to fight crime as Batman. In a city of increasing corruption and crime enters crime lord Carmine Falcone (Tom Wilkinson) and his cohort, Dr. Jonathan Crane (Cillian Murphy) whose alter ego, Scarecrow, will figure in an ever complicated plot. With support from Rachel (Katie Holmes), who works for the District Attorney, and Detective Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), Wayne also finds within his corporation an advanced weapons division overseen by Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman) who helps to arm Batman with state of the art body armor and sophisticated devices. As Batman commences his crime fighting, Scarecrow and ultimately a figure from Wayne’s past will threaten Gotham with ultimate doom.

This film stakes a claim to its own vision and resists previous, formulaic blueprints like Spiderman for depicting super heroes. With the most recent Batman films reducing the franchise to an uninspired shadow of its former self, someone had sense enough to let visionary director Nolan (Momento, Insomnia) have a crack at it. He has a great knack for incorporating his nightmarish imagery and integrated flashbacks into a brooding, dark exploration of human paranoia, memories and fear. Nolan cleverly traumatizes young Wayne with bats which ironically will be his salvation.

This is a different kind of narrative with more mood, psychological depth, and deliberate pacing. When Batman appears from above, it is an iconic vision of terror and swift justice, the perfect distillation of urban redemption in the guise of a bat facing down evil. Comic book aficionados will revel in a faithful rendering that stays true to the original’s roots and at the same time pays homage to recent updates like the critically acclaimed, Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight. Fans will also be amused at the new interpretations and somewhat poetic license taken on such established conventions as the bat cave, the bat signal, the coming to be of future Commissioner Gordon, and Alfred the butler. It is refreshing that the hero and villains are not really superhuman like Superman but rather ordinary people who are driven by a psychological bent.

The only real letdown is that while it starts out on a promising path, it degenerates into a conventional, by-the-numbers action formula in the last fifteen minutes. The story, which admittedly takes its good time to unfold, starts to run out of steam and momentum about three quarters of the way through and drags a bit until the revved up end. One could almost forgive the obvious teaser at the end which is a deliberate setup for a future sequel. It’s ironic that as much as the filmmakers tried to make Batman plausible and grounded in reality, there are credibility gaps especially towards the end. In one scene, Gordon attempts to operate the Bat vehicle, and it just doesn’t ring true. A fight aboard an elevated train (and earlier fight scenes) is at best standard fare.

Christian Bale (The Machinist) has been perceived as a rising talent whose persona is that of dark intensity; who better to portray the Dark Knight? He is surrounded by an exceptional supporting cast. Caine is effortlessly stoic. It is amusing in one scene to see both veteran pros like he and Freeman counsel Bale. Liam Neeson is good as a mentor but he is in danger of being typecast in these kinds of roles. Oldman is cast against type and quite effectively as a good cop. Ken Watanabe (The Last Samurai) as the leader of the temple is not given much to do unfortunately.

The luscious musical score by committee is appropriately strong and heroic without leaning on a catchy title theme as previous Batman scores have popularized e.g. Nelson Riddle on TV and Danny Elfman in film. The art direction and set design are impressive in their own interpretation of Gotham City compared to the earlier Tim Burton films which set a new standard.

By the climax, you root for the film to fulfill its promise but it doesn’t quite succeed. Although successes like X Men and Spiderman are good examples of mainstream, pop hero entertainment, the makers of Batman Begins for the most part have raised the super hero film to an art film, and that’s not a bad thing.

*** of **** stars (Add 1/2 * for comic book diehards)

2005-07-15T21:27:00.000-07:00

The Island is a fun, summer flick

Michael Bay has directed some big budget action adventures that have an over-the-top feel (like Pearl Harbor and Armageddon). He tones it down a bit and, despite borrowing from a myriad of past films, his latest effort, The Island, is an intelligent, entertaining adventure with science fiction as its source material.

In the not too distant future, there is a segregated world of men and women who function with a limited view and knowledge of their antiseptic world. Their only way of life is that they must work, follow the rules and dream of being selected in the lottery to go to The Island, the ultimate destination of happiness and fulfillment. One of the populace is a male, Lincoln Six Echo (Ewan McGregor), who begins to question his existence and role in the world even as he develops a friendship with a female, Jordan Two Delta (Scarlett Johansson). He also experiences nightmares about an outside world and expresses doubts about the validity of his surroundings including the lottery. He relates these concerns to a friendly doctor, Merrick (Sean Bean) and later to an outsider, McCord (Steve Buscemi), a computer geek. As he explores the floors above him, he stumbles onto another level where he discovers a terrible truth and lie. Realizing that their world is only part of something much more, Lincoln and Jordan make a break to the outside with McCord’s help and find themselves pursued by bounty hunters led by Albert Laurent (Djimon Hounsou). It seems that Merrick works for a cloning corporation dependent on enormous outside funds, and it is involved in secretly cloning humans for individual sponsors. The problem is that the corporation has gone too far in its experiments with tragic consequences. Searching for answers, Lincoln and Jordan eventually find themselves face to face with Lincoln’s sponsor whereupon they decide to stop Merrick’s evil plans and expose his horrifying activities to the world even as Laurent closes in.

This film is engaging from the very start with its interesting premise, and it does a good job of maintaining a steadily building mystery until the startling revelation which spins our protagonists in another direction. And if it seems the storyline is derivative of a multitude of other film plotlines, it’s because concepts such as duplicate humans, memory loss, corporate societies, and the pursuit of individual freedom and identity in a futuristic setting have been visited before. There are strong echoes of Coma, Logan’s Run, Minority Report, Total Recall, and especially George Lucas’ early THX 1138 and John Frankenheimer’s Seconds. And savvy viewers may recall an older made-for-television movie along the same lines called The Resurrection of Zachary Wheeler. Yet by liberally borrowing from these stories, The Island reinterprets familiar themes into a reasonably entertaining story unto its own with a nod to science fiction author Philip Dick.

Adapted from his own story by Caspian Tredwell-Owen and Alias alums Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman, the narrative takes a deliberate path, and its exciting action scenes, particularly the numerous chases on foot and by car, are in service of the plot. Michael Bay has been notorious for filming elaborate, ‘shoot ‘em up’ and ‘blow ‘em up’ set pieces that resemble a massive videogame. Here, he holds back a little and concentrates more on staying true to his storyline. ‘The play’s the thing’ and events move so rapidly, you don’t notice the credibility gaps that strain logic at times.

Sean Bean (who is making himself quite the first choice in movie villainy as in Goldeneye) is quite good as the sinister Merrick, and Djimon Hounsou (Gladiator) registers in a role that could have been one dimensional and without heart. Ethan Phillips (late of Star Trek: Voyager) lends able support as a resident of the clone world. And let us not forget the wonderful Steve Buscemi (Reservoir Dogs) who gets some of the best lines and exits much too soon. The leads, McGregor (Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith) and Johansson (Lost in Translation) are quite photogenic and work together quite well. One wishes they have future screen pairings.

The special effects are effective and especially impressive when Lincoln meets his dead on double. Those scenes are so good, they are seamless. The world of the near future is realistic in its depiction in much the way Blade Runner integrated futuristic vehicles and technology with older, existing buildings and settings. The pace is well edited, and the film never feels slow and boring.

Again, there are a couple of scenes which really strain credulity, but they come and go so
quickly that you are on to the next scene. One obvious complaint is the product placement that becomes a bit self conscious and annoying after the third or fourth product logo is conspicuously shown. You’ll see what I mean. It’s also hard not to have a slight feeling that the film’s main theme has controversial, political implications with the debate over cloning, stem cell research and the abortion fight in recent headlines.

Although it is ironically a clone of other film plots, The Island delivers legitimate action and thrills without sacrificing its linear storytelling. Let yourself go and don’t pay too much attention to the occasional plot lapses, and you’ll find this a reasonably diverting adventure.

*** of **** stars (mainly for sci-fi action fans)

Shore Leave 27 Convention

2005-07-11T19:32:00.000-07:00

The fan sponsored convention, Shore Leave at Marriott’s Hunt Valley Inn in Baltimore, Maryland, was a nice way to spend a weekend (July 8-10, 2005) immersed in science fiction movies, celebrity speakers, and related dealer items. Although Mark Goddard (Lost in Space) had departed early on the Sunday I attended, and Mary McDonnell (Independence Day) was tied up with last minute shoots on her Battlestar Galactica show, there were enough other celebrities to make it a fun show including last minute Galactica costar Tricia Helfer. There were actors and actresses from shows like TV’s Babylon 5 and Stargate SG1. I focused on Joanna Cassidy, the versatile actress from such films as Under Fire, Blade Runner, and Who Framed Roger Rabbit? She looked stunning and seemed quite proper and soft spoken. She spoke fondly of former costar Gene Hackman and his generosity as an actor. She expressed interest in writing screenplays and was deciding what life direction to take having just sold her house on the West Coast. Her current schedule is busy with movie roles including a comedy and her recurring role on cable TV’s Six Feet Under.

I also had a chance to speak with veteran character actors William Windom and Malachi Throne. What a treasure trove of history and anecdotes these actors had! They both guest starred in classic Star Trek episodes. It was interesting to hear these two old salts reminisce about their careers. Windom still has that boyish mischievous streak about him and was downright funny. His short lived classic based on James Thurber stories called My World and Welcome To It is fondly remembered, and he talked about the producer Danny Arnold who had autocratic authority without producing by committee. Arnold would later produce the classic Barney Miller. His reaction to the overwhelming popularity of his one shot guest role in Star Trek’s The Doomsday Machine baffles him as he considers acting no more than a craft and nothing special. He told me he wanted to return to acting as soon as he had his knees repaired.

Mr. Throne definitely has a theatrical acting pedigree and, like Windom, he has acted on stage, screen and television over half a century. He had a key supporting role in TV’s It Takes a Thief in the late 1960’s, and left after two seasons. I told him how I felt that show went downhill after he left, and he agreed wholeheartedly. I asked him to compare producers Gene Roddenberry and Irwin Allen (who ruled TV sci-fi in the 1960’s with Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea and Lost in Space). He said that Roddenberry was always thinking ahead and anticipated trends like cop shows before they were popular. While he was grateful for the work from Allen, it could be maddening. He related a story about being cast for a TV role and Allen wanted a larger beard than what he wore in reality. So Throne shaved off his beard and wore a larger fake one. The next day Allen hated the large beard and asked what happened to the smaller one he liked! Both Throne and Windom need to write books!

It was a pretty enthusiastic crowd and the dealer tables were buzzing all day with everything from dvds and books to posters and action figures for sale. Everyone seemed to be having fun and ready for the next convention.

Dark Water has Creepy Moments

2005-07-06T06:29:00.000-07:00

Koji Suzuki has enjoyed recent popularity through his minimalist horror stories told with more atmosphere, psychological brooding and menace than big budget effects. His first big hit, The Ring, has been serialized in multiple sequels in Japan and redone successfully in the U.S. In Dark Water, he has fabricated another tale involving restless souls and unexplained events that go bump in the night. The result, while reasonably spooky, is an adequate mood piece with a few effective scares and revelations.

Dahlia (Jennifer Connelly) is in an emotionally draining custody battle with ex husband Kyle (Dougray Scott) over their young daughter Ceci (Ariel Gade). Forced to find affordable housing, mother and daughter move into a low rent apartment presided over by the desk clerk/custodian, Veeck (Pete Postlethwaite) and an unreliable building manager, Mr. Murray (John C. Reilly). Upon moving in their drab, dreary unit, strange things begin to happen. Elevator doors close and open mysteriously on the wrong floors and black water seeps in from the floor above in increasingly grotesque amounts. Ceci attends school and begins to talk to an imaginary friend with alarming frequency. And whose backpack was left on the roof of the building? Add to this Dahlia’s constant battles with her ex-husband and her own dysfunctional childhood with a hateful mother and a father who abandoned the family. She becomes paranoid and frightened especially when she visits the tenant’s who lived above in room 10F. It seems the family that lived there had a father who abandoned them, and the mother was unable to take care of her daughter, Natasha, who is the same age as Ceci. As Dahlia fights her own sanity to discover the truth, the past will haunt her in a terrifying climax.

As an atmospheric, eerie, ghost story, Dark Water does succeed. The steady, methodical pacing works in the story’s favor. Think of horror master Val Lewton, whose gothic B-movies of the 1940’s are memorable e.g. the original Cat People. But for those looking for a shocking, intense payoff, there will be mild disappointment. Recent horror entries, The Ring and The Others have fared better in delivering the goods. There just isn’t a powerful, knockout scene or sufficiently startling surprises. The parallels between Dahlia’s life and the mysterious family above her apartment are not fully exploited or defined as they should be. The film tries to develop the psychologically tortuous journey of Dahlia as the happenings in room 10F are brewing, and somehow the two plotlines don’t quite mesh into an intelligent, coherent storyline. This is perhaps more a fault of the script adaptation by Rafael Yglesias and the source material from its Japanese authors including Suzuki, Takashige Ichise and Hideo Nakata. Director Walter Salles, fresh from a solid turn with The Motorcycle Diaries, does a decent job but takes the film’s story as far as his script will allow him. At times the film feels like a Hitchcock piece with its female protagonist going against difficult circumstances with little or no support from others. The visuals especially the water effects are unnerving at times and photographed starkly by Affonso Beato, and the somber score by Angelo Badalamenti reminds one of his previous collaborations (Blue Velvet, Twin Peaks) with David Lynch.

Jennifer Connelly is fairly convincing as the mother who struggles with her own demons while protecting her daughter from unknown forces. Visually, her ethereal beauty is ideally suited for the subject matter. Gade is quite good as Ceci, and we are mesmerized by her actions and reactions from beginning to end. She and Connelly work well together and do a good job of setting up their close relationship which drives the storyline. John C. Reilly is amusing as an irresponsible building manager. His early scenes trying to rent the apartment to Connelly’s character are downright funny. Tim Roth as her sympathetic lawyer is almost unrecognizable in a role reminiscent of Charles Durning’s in Sisters. While it is good support, it ultimately goes nowhere. Postlethwaite scores as a bizarre character whose background is insufficiently explored.

What hurts this film is also the knowledge of previous haunted films like The Other, Don’t Look Now, The Changeling, and Audrey Rose, all from the 1970’s. Some moviegoers, particularly fans of The Ring will have an easy time figuring out the hidden meanings in the plotline. When you think about it, Dark Water is a deceptively simple tale told with a minimum of characters in a confined setting. Like a mildly scary ghost story read at night, it comes and goes but does not stay very long.

**1/2 of **** stars