I have seen all best picture nominees and couple of the others. Here are my picks. Enjoy!
BEST PICTURE-The Artist becomes the first silent film in 85 years to win this prize.
BEST ACTOR-I thought the best actor was George Clooney who acted his guts out in The Descendents. But his buddy Brad Pitt (Tree of Life, Moneyball) is siphoning votes leaving possible a win by Jean Dujardin who really excelled without saying a word. Isn’t it interesting there is no Ryan Gosling nominated since the vote was likely split among Crazy Stupid Love, Drive, and Ides of March.
BEST ACTRESS-One day Meryl Streep is going to get Oscar #3 but not in a mediocre film like The Iron Lady. My pick, Viola Davis, who should have won in Doubt, also registered briefly in Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Honorable mention to Michelle Williams, superb in My Week with Marilyn.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR-Christopher Plummer in Beginners.
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS-Octavia Spencer had the best scene in any movie this year.
BEST DIRECTOR-Michel Hazanavicius is an unknown but he put together a valentine to Hollywood.
BEST ORIGIAL SCREENPLAY-Midnight in Paris
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY-The Descendents although I loved Moneyball
BEST ANIMATED FILM-Rango
BEST FOREIGN FILM-A Separation
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY-The Tree of Life, a lock
BEST SOUND MIXING-Hugo
BEST SOUND EDITING-Hugo
BEST ORIGINAL SCORE-The Artist despite borrowing substantially from Vertigo.
BEST ORIGINAL SONG-Man or a Muppet just for the visuals of this song alone.
BEST COSTUME DESIGN-The Artist
BEST DOCUMENTARY-Pina
BEST ART DIRECTION-Hugo
BEST FILM EDITING-The Artist
BEST MAKEUP-The Iron Lady
BEST VISUAL EFFECTS-Hugo may sweep techie awards and upset Rise of the Planet of the Apes.
The Artist may end up with most awards at 5 technical followed closely by Hugo.
Vertigo
Vertigo
Friday, February 24, 2012
The ARTIST and the Golden Age of Tinseltown
The Artist is a little gem of a silent film that was shot in black and white. This clever throwback to old Hollywood was the work of a French production team with American support and headed by director Michel Hazanavicius. Not since Mel Brooks had the clout and audacity to make his Silent Movie in 1976 had a silent film been shot on a grand scale. Brooks had the advantage of blockbuster name recognition from his previous films and enlisting A list stars to do his film in color no less. The Artist has no superstars, and instead the film relies on telling a compassionate story that is surprisingly accessible to modern audiences.
In 1927 Hollywood, George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) is a matinee idol whose films are popular with the masses. At one Hollywood premier, he shows off his loyal dog (Uggie), and at the red carpet, he bumps into a fan, Peppy Miller (Bérénice Bejo), who has dreams of making it in movies. George’s home life is not so happy as his eccentric wife (Penelope Ann Miller) disapproves of his carefree antics. Meanwhile, Peppy auditions for and wins a bit part in a chorus line and by chance meets Valentin again who hires her for his film despite the grumblings of the studio boss (a wonderful John Goodman). During a dance club scene, the two have instant chemistry and a romance is blossoming even as Valentin has doubts and feeling guilty as a married man. When the studio begins to embrace the sound era, he refuses to change with the times and finds sinking box office grosses and waning popularity while Peppy is a fast rising star. When the stock market crashes, Valentin is ruined financially and, his career in a heap, all hope is seemingly lost until a shining beacon comes to his aid with a novel plan.
This is a silent film that caught everyone by surprise with its deceptively simple plot of romance, drama, comedy, and pathos. If that sounds like a Charlie Chaplin film, the kind of film they don’t make anymore, it’s because they haven’t for over eighty years! People who respond to this film owe it to themselves to rediscover the classic silent films like Chaplin’s City Lights and The General by Buster Keaton. The Artist is an ideal introduction to these and other masterworks.
The film borrows liberally from past cinema, and its main plot is right out of A Star Is Born. When Valentin is seated at the dinner table with his judgmental wife, it begs comparisons to the famous transitions at the dinner table in Citizen Kane. The scenes where the studio is switching to sound pictures is reminiscent of the same dilemma in Singin in the Rain. The dog, who steals the film, is terrific as comic relief and figures in a scene where he attempts to rescue his master from a burning building-Rin Tin Tin anyone?
Although the musical score by Ludovic Bource is quite good particularly in the playful main theme, it uses several minutes of a love theme from Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo for a climactic sequence. It works just fine, but purists who recognize Bernard Herrmann’s haunting score may find it a tad annoying. There are also a couple brief instances when actual sound is employed to great effect.
There are memorable moments including a loyal chauffeur (James Cromwell) who refuses to leave Valentin during his decline. There is a sentimental scene where Valentin has sold all his belongings and stands wistfully at a pawn shop, his refection superimposed with a tuxedo on display. And this may be one of the only times you see someone flip the bird in a silent film!
Sure, some of the scenes are filled with old fashioned movie clichés, but what is noticeable throughout the film is an energy and enthusiasm that becomes infectious even after the novelty of watching a soundless film wears off. And consider this-an engaging silent film with no nudity or violence that is riding a wave of sentiment and love all the way to the Oscars.
***1/2 of ****stars
In 1927 Hollywood, George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) is a matinee idol whose films are popular with the masses. At one Hollywood premier, he shows off his loyal dog (Uggie), and at the red carpet, he bumps into a fan, Peppy Miller (Bérénice Bejo), who has dreams of making it in movies. George’s home life is not so happy as his eccentric wife (Penelope Ann Miller) disapproves of his carefree antics. Meanwhile, Peppy auditions for and wins a bit part in a chorus line and by chance meets Valentin again who hires her for his film despite the grumblings of the studio boss (a wonderful John Goodman). During a dance club scene, the two have instant chemistry and a romance is blossoming even as Valentin has doubts and feeling guilty as a married man. When the studio begins to embrace the sound era, he refuses to change with the times and finds sinking box office grosses and waning popularity while Peppy is a fast rising star. When the stock market crashes, Valentin is ruined financially and, his career in a heap, all hope is seemingly lost until a shining beacon comes to his aid with a novel plan.
This is a silent film that caught everyone by surprise with its deceptively simple plot of romance, drama, comedy, and pathos. If that sounds like a Charlie Chaplin film, the kind of film they don’t make anymore, it’s because they haven’t for over eighty years! People who respond to this film owe it to themselves to rediscover the classic silent films like Chaplin’s City Lights and The General by Buster Keaton. The Artist is an ideal introduction to these and other masterworks.
The film borrows liberally from past cinema, and its main plot is right out of A Star Is Born. When Valentin is seated at the dinner table with his judgmental wife, it begs comparisons to the famous transitions at the dinner table in Citizen Kane. The scenes where the studio is switching to sound pictures is reminiscent of the same dilemma in Singin in the Rain. The dog, who steals the film, is terrific as comic relief and figures in a scene where he attempts to rescue his master from a burning building-Rin Tin Tin anyone?
Although the musical score by Ludovic Bource is quite good particularly in the playful main theme, it uses several minutes of a love theme from Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo for a climactic sequence. It works just fine, but purists who recognize Bernard Herrmann’s haunting score may find it a tad annoying. There are also a couple brief instances when actual sound is employed to great effect.
There are memorable moments including a loyal chauffeur (James Cromwell) who refuses to leave Valentin during his decline. There is a sentimental scene where Valentin has sold all his belongings and stands wistfully at a pawn shop, his refection superimposed with a tuxedo on display. And this may be one of the only times you see someone flip the bird in a silent film!
Sure, some of the scenes are filled with old fashioned movie clichés, but what is noticeable throughout the film is an energy and enthusiasm that becomes infectious even after the novelty of watching a soundless film wears off. And consider this-an engaging silent film with no nudity or violence that is riding a wave of sentiment and love all the way to the Oscars.
***1/2 of ****stars
A Life in Retrospect in The DESCENDENTS
Alexander Payne has written and directed films (Sideways, About Schmidt) about men at unique crossroads in life and coming to grim, sobering realizations that cause a reevaluation of the past and an uncertain future. In The Descendents, he focuses on a man’s family dealing with grief and the hidden truths that threaten to tear it apart. George Clooney is outstanding as a naïve husband and father who must confront life after a terrible series of events.
A water skiing accident in Hawaii has left a woman in a coma and her husband/lawyer, Matt (George Clooney), grief stricken and stunned by the news that she was having an affair with another man. It seems that everyone knew about the affair but Matt who was too busy with his work to even notice, and he must come to terms with it and rebuild his family. Matt’s daughters are a troubled ten year old Scottie (Amara Miller) and his older teen, Alexandra (Shailene Woodley) who has a spacy boyfriend, Sid. As the family realizes that their mom may never recover, they must make some major decisions, and Matt must find the truth even if it means confronting the man who stole her heart. Meanwhile, Matt, as the primary trustee for the extended family, has an impending major land sale he must decide upon that could be a financial windfall for his relatives. Determined to meet his wife’s lover, Matt does some detective work and, with some help from his daughters, finally arranges to meet the object of his obsession which causes him to reassess his own life and his relationship with his daughters.
This is Clooney’s film all the way, and he gives a thoroughly convincing portrait of a man betrayed and oblivious to his wife and his family. He is not the handsome, dashing Clooney of Oceans 11 or Ides of March but rather an unglamorous fellow who is vulnerable. The pain and realization he emotes is heartfelt. Woodley lends excellent support as the knowing daughter who helps her father’s quest.
Through much of the story you wonder if Matt will exact some kind of revenge on the creep or do something impulsive. That bit of tension only adds to an engaging plot. In the end, Matt does the right things and brings closure for his family. The final shot is great as Matt tries to become a dad again to his girls. A major subplot involving the land deal gets even more complicated as surprising information is revealed when Matt investigates his wife’s lover. There are occasional moments of hilarity as when Matt is at the end of his rope and resorts to asking Sid for advice. It is a riot of a moment.
There are good details which add to our understanding of Matt’s family including his cranky father-in-law (Robert Forster) and a mother-in-law who has Alzheimer’s disease. What is special about a film like this is that each major character evolves through events and changed to a degree by the end (including spacy Sid). That marks good character development. These are not cardboard caricature but fully etched individuals with weaknesses like anyone, and our initial impressions about each are dispelled by film’s end.
The Hawaiian scenery is gorgeous but never used as a travelogue. It merely sets the scene as did the wineries in Sideways and in some ways, the tropical paradise serves as counterpoint to the despair and angst that Matt must endure.
You could imagine a Broadway version of this story since it relies more on characters and situation. The film makes you care for and sustain interest in the main characters (brought to life by a strong cast) and what happens to them. In the end, there is sadness and regret but also hope, the kind of hope that strengthens and bonds a family.
***1/2 of **** stars
A water skiing accident in Hawaii has left a woman in a coma and her husband/lawyer, Matt (George Clooney), grief stricken and stunned by the news that she was having an affair with another man. It seems that everyone knew about the affair but Matt who was too busy with his work to even notice, and he must come to terms with it and rebuild his family. Matt’s daughters are a troubled ten year old Scottie (Amara Miller) and his older teen, Alexandra (Shailene Woodley) who has a spacy boyfriend, Sid. As the family realizes that their mom may never recover, they must make some major decisions, and Matt must find the truth even if it means confronting the man who stole her heart. Meanwhile, Matt, as the primary trustee for the extended family, has an impending major land sale he must decide upon that could be a financial windfall for his relatives. Determined to meet his wife’s lover, Matt does some detective work and, with some help from his daughters, finally arranges to meet the object of his obsession which causes him to reassess his own life and his relationship with his daughters.
This is Clooney’s film all the way, and he gives a thoroughly convincing portrait of a man betrayed and oblivious to his wife and his family. He is not the handsome, dashing Clooney of Oceans 11 or Ides of March but rather an unglamorous fellow who is vulnerable. The pain and realization he emotes is heartfelt. Woodley lends excellent support as the knowing daughter who helps her father’s quest.
Through much of the story you wonder if Matt will exact some kind of revenge on the creep or do something impulsive. That bit of tension only adds to an engaging plot. In the end, Matt does the right things and brings closure for his family. The final shot is great as Matt tries to become a dad again to his girls. A major subplot involving the land deal gets even more complicated as surprising information is revealed when Matt investigates his wife’s lover. There are occasional moments of hilarity as when Matt is at the end of his rope and resorts to asking Sid for advice. It is a riot of a moment.
There are good details which add to our understanding of Matt’s family including his cranky father-in-law (Robert Forster) and a mother-in-law who has Alzheimer’s disease. What is special about a film like this is that each major character evolves through events and changed to a degree by the end (including spacy Sid). That marks good character development. These are not cardboard caricature but fully etched individuals with weaknesses like anyone, and our initial impressions about each are dispelled by film’s end.
The Hawaiian scenery is gorgeous but never used as a travelogue. It merely sets the scene as did the wineries in Sideways and in some ways, the tropical paradise serves as counterpoint to the despair and angst that Matt must endure.
You could imagine a Broadway version of this story since it relies more on characters and situation. The film makes you care for and sustain interest in the main characters (brought to life by a strong cast) and what happens to them. In the end, there is sadness and regret but also hope, the kind of hope that strengthens and bonds a family.
***1/2 of **** stars
The HELP and the Women Behind the Scenes
Based on the best seller by Kathryn Stockett and adapted and directed by her childhood friend Tate Taylor, The Help is a personal film that is affecting in its depiction of social injustice in the treatment of black females who served as nannies and maids in the Old South during the turbulent 1960’s. As an ensemble piece, it features a host of memorable, Oscar caliber performances.
A black female, Aibileen (Viola Davis), in Jackson, Mississippi, during the 1960’s relates a story of life during that period where white families relied on black housekeepers to cook, clean and even raise their white children. These housekeepers in effect became second mothers to these children and did so for generations. Aibileen works in one such household, as does her combative friend, Minny (Octavia Spencer), who works for the stern Hilly (grandly played for nastiness by Bryce Dallas Howard). Fresh from college, Skeeter (Emma Stone) has a reunion of sorts with her old friends (including Hilly) from the community. Absent is the local outcast, Celia (Jessica Chastain), who is shunned by the group. Dreaming of being a writer, Skeeter has been curious about the life of these house servants and the injustices and humiliating treatment they must face that border on outright racism that has been passed down from family to family. Even as a child, Skeeter has fond memories of her own housekeeper Constantine (Cicely Tyson) who left one day under mysterious circumstances. Encouraged by her publisher, she decides to write a book based on the experiences of these servants. Under the fear of being discovered and fired (or worse), one by one these black women come forth to tell their stories. When civil rights activist, Medgar Evers, is murdered, it creates a firestorm of violence as these women risk everything to get the truth in print, and the results will forever alter their lives.
As a chronicle of a lesser known civil rights issue and injustice, this film offers some interesting insights into a modern form discrimination. While most of the white community is portrayed as villains and almost caricatures, perhaps that’s just the point: that such a backwards culture existed not that long ago. There are a number of subplots including the attempts to set up Skeeter on a blind date and Celia’s awkward attempts hide her domestic inadequacies from her husband by hiring a maid. Then there is the fate of Skeeter’s Constantine that is heartbreaking.
As much as the acting is superior across the board, the film does not quite work as a whole as well as one would hope. The narrative seems a bit uneven so things don’t flow smoothly from scene to scene. It’s the only thing that keeps the film from being even better than it is. In a way the parts or scenes are better than the whole, and many of those scenes are quite good and authentic. Despite its serious subject, the film does have its humorous moments especially in the infamous confrontation between Minny and Hilly where justice is served! It is the highlight of the film.
There are any number of performances that shine particularly Davis (a standout), Spencer, Howard, Chastain, and Stone. Even Sissy Spacek has a witty, offbeat role as an elderly mom at odds with her daughter Hilly. But it’s the film’s moments that will stay with you; they buoy The Help into our hearts.
***1/2 of **** stars
A black female, Aibileen (Viola Davis), in Jackson, Mississippi, during the 1960’s relates a story of life during that period where white families relied on black housekeepers to cook, clean and even raise their white children. These housekeepers in effect became second mothers to these children and did so for generations. Aibileen works in one such household, as does her combative friend, Minny (Octavia Spencer), who works for the stern Hilly (grandly played for nastiness by Bryce Dallas Howard). Fresh from college, Skeeter (Emma Stone) has a reunion of sorts with her old friends (including Hilly) from the community. Absent is the local outcast, Celia (Jessica Chastain), who is shunned by the group. Dreaming of being a writer, Skeeter has been curious about the life of these house servants and the injustices and humiliating treatment they must face that border on outright racism that has been passed down from family to family. Even as a child, Skeeter has fond memories of her own housekeeper Constantine (Cicely Tyson) who left one day under mysterious circumstances. Encouraged by her publisher, she decides to write a book based on the experiences of these servants. Under the fear of being discovered and fired (or worse), one by one these black women come forth to tell their stories. When civil rights activist, Medgar Evers, is murdered, it creates a firestorm of violence as these women risk everything to get the truth in print, and the results will forever alter their lives.
As a chronicle of a lesser known civil rights issue and injustice, this film offers some interesting insights into a modern form discrimination. While most of the white community is portrayed as villains and almost caricatures, perhaps that’s just the point: that such a backwards culture existed not that long ago. There are a number of subplots including the attempts to set up Skeeter on a blind date and Celia’s awkward attempts hide her domestic inadequacies from her husband by hiring a maid. Then there is the fate of Skeeter’s Constantine that is heartbreaking.
As much as the acting is superior across the board, the film does not quite work as a whole as well as one would hope. The narrative seems a bit uneven so things don’t flow smoothly from scene to scene. It’s the only thing that keeps the film from being even better than it is. In a way the parts or scenes are better than the whole, and many of those scenes are quite good and authentic. Despite its serious subject, the film does have its humorous moments especially in the infamous confrontation between Minny and Hilly where justice is served! It is the highlight of the film.
There are any number of performances that shine particularly Davis (a standout), Spencer, Howard, Chastain, and Stone. Even Sissy Spacek has a witty, offbeat role as an elderly mom at odds with her daughter Hilly. But it’s the film’s moments that will stay with you; they buoy The Help into our hearts.
***1/2 of **** stars
A Genius Is Rediscovered in HUGO
Martin Scorsese has a deep love for movie history and film preservation. Both passions are imbued in Hugo, a charming tale of a child’s personal search that leads to a treasure of memories and redemption.
At a Paris train station in 1931 a young boy, Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) lives a solitary existence. The train inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen) lurks about looking for stray children to send to the local orphanage. One day Hugo notices an elderly watchmaker (Ben Kingsley) who sits lonely and silent. Joined by a curious girl, Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moretz), the two join forces to investigate the old man and learn that there is much more to him than meets the eye. Add to this a mysterious mechanical man built by Hugo’s father and known as an automaton whose cryptic writings may provide clues to the past. But how to unlock these secrets? What the young couple finds will lead them back to the old man as there seem to be a surprising connection, and through the old man, a remarkable past is rejuvenated that will harken back to the birth of movies.
As the mysterious, old man, Ben Kingsley provides the gravitas to flesh out a character that at first seems dull and lonely, whose past catches up and reveals a lifetime of hope and genius heretofore forgotten by the public until Hugo and Isabelle rediscover it. The kids are well cast although Hugo comes across a bit of an oddball whereas Isabelle is a sweet girl who compliments him. Cohen, quite effective in a villainous role, is properly mean and threatening until he has a change of heart near the end, and you wish there had been more of him because his character evolves toward the end.
In fact the whole heart concept permeates Hugo. There is the budding love between Hugo and Isabelle, the old man’s romance in his past, and even the hint of love from a flower girl. There is the heart shaped key that unlocks the automaton’s mechanism. The automaton serves as a static character, a kind of Pinocchio in scenes where Hugo talks to it in the absence of his father. Above all, it’s all about a love for movies past and present.
It is clear how much Scorsese loves movies in smaller, intimate scenes as when Hugo and Isabelle sneak into a Harold Lloyd film or when he shows snippets from earlier moving images. The main thrust of Hugo’s plot provides Scorsese the excuse to restage classic kinescope and film clips. It’s like reliving history. Film buffs will love these moments as Scorsese lovingly and painstakingly recreates early silent film. We see history and magic being made simultaneously!
A minor problem with the film is that it feels a bit uneven at times, and you never feel fully engaged with the characters as much as you want to be. Hugo and his friend Isabelle should be the focus all the way, but the film seems to occasionally stray from their journey. As a couple, they are more tentative and reserved than Harry Potter and his friend Hermione in the Harry Potter series. It lacks a strong emotional center. One wonders how a director like Steven Spielberg or Tim Burton would have interpreted the story.
Technical and production quality are superb. This is a fully realized fantasy world especially with the overall design and art direction and costumes within the train station and immediate neighborhood. Even the visual effects work well within the story without being a distraction.
The film does works for both children and adults. Hugo in a way represents the painful and joyous past that people keep hidden until it is released by patience and love.
*** of **** stars
At a Paris train station in 1931 a young boy, Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) lives a solitary existence. The train inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen) lurks about looking for stray children to send to the local orphanage. One day Hugo notices an elderly watchmaker (Ben Kingsley) who sits lonely and silent. Joined by a curious girl, Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moretz), the two join forces to investigate the old man and learn that there is much more to him than meets the eye. Add to this a mysterious mechanical man built by Hugo’s father and known as an automaton whose cryptic writings may provide clues to the past. But how to unlock these secrets? What the young couple finds will lead them back to the old man as there seem to be a surprising connection, and through the old man, a remarkable past is rejuvenated that will harken back to the birth of movies.
As the mysterious, old man, Ben Kingsley provides the gravitas to flesh out a character that at first seems dull and lonely, whose past catches up and reveals a lifetime of hope and genius heretofore forgotten by the public until Hugo and Isabelle rediscover it. The kids are well cast although Hugo comes across a bit of an oddball whereas Isabelle is a sweet girl who compliments him. Cohen, quite effective in a villainous role, is properly mean and threatening until he has a change of heart near the end, and you wish there had been more of him because his character evolves toward the end.
In fact the whole heart concept permeates Hugo. There is the budding love between Hugo and Isabelle, the old man’s romance in his past, and even the hint of love from a flower girl. There is the heart shaped key that unlocks the automaton’s mechanism. The automaton serves as a static character, a kind of Pinocchio in scenes where Hugo talks to it in the absence of his father. Above all, it’s all about a love for movies past and present.
It is clear how much Scorsese loves movies in smaller, intimate scenes as when Hugo and Isabelle sneak into a Harold Lloyd film or when he shows snippets from earlier moving images. The main thrust of Hugo’s plot provides Scorsese the excuse to restage classic kinescope and film clips. It’s like reliving history. Film buffs will love these moments as Scorsese lovingly and painstakingly recreates early silent film. We see history and magic being made simultaneously!
A minor problem with the film is that it feels a bit uneven at times, and you never feel fully engaged with the characters as much as you want to be. Hugo and his friend Isabelle should be the focus all the way, but the film seems to occasionally stray from their journey. As a couple, they are more tentative and reserved than Harry Potter and his friend Hermione in the Harry Potter series. It lacks a strong emotional center. One wonders how a director like Steven Spielberg or Tim Burton would have interpreted the story.
Technical and production quality are superb. This is a fully realized fantasy world especially with the overall design and art direction and costumes within the train station and immediate neighborhood. Even the visual effects work well within the story without being a distraction.
The film does works for both children and adults. Hugo in a way represents the painful and joyous past that people keep hidden until it is released by patience and love.
*** of **** stars
A Boy’s Quest in EXTREMELY LOUD & INCREDIBLY CLOSE
Ambitious in concept, Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close is the love story of a troubled boy whose bond with his father transcends death and events beyond his understanding. Director Stephen Daldry (Billy Elliott, The Hours) has put together an interesting study in post trauma and rediscovery. It doesn’t always work, but it still registers on an emotional level.
A funeral signals the death of a family member and a boy’s alienation to the world. In flashbacks, Oskar (Thomas Horn), who has trouble communicating and may have Asperger Syndrome, adores his father (Tom Hanks) who challenges him with riddles and treasure hunts to meet people outside his apartment. Both father and mother (Sandra Bullock) are loving parents, and the world becomes an interesting laboratory for exploration and discovery. Life is idyllic until 9/11 when everything changes and Oskar is witness to his father’s last moments trapped in one of the Twin Towers. A year later, looking in his father’s closet, he discovers a key in an envelope with the letters ‘black’. Who or what does the key belong to? Oskar sets out to find out by systematically tracking down every ‘Black’ in the phone book and visiting each person for a clue. This big scavenger hunt is at best a daunting task.
His grandmother who lives across the street has a mysterious renter (Max Von Sydow) who does not speak and can only communicate by jotting on a note pad or displaying ‘yes’ and ‘no’ written on each hand. The renter takes a liking to Oskar and accompanies him on his quest. This is a search that proves overwhelming as each person they find has a story too. When all hope seems lost, the road leads back to that fateful September morning and opens Oskar to the truth about his parents and himself.
At first you wonder if this hunt will be meaningful and be rewarded or if it is a waste of time. Oskar’s obsession keeps him connected to his father; to fail is to lose whatever he has left of that relationship. In a way, it is about trying to make sense of his father’s death and coming to terms with it. It is also about the forgiveness of guilt that nearly consumes Oskar.
You kind of think that at some point a miracle may occur or that something profound may happen, but what does reveal itself does not quite answer all the questions, and maybe that’s just the point to the film, that life is part mystery and we never truly understand its riddle.
When you take stock of all the people that Oskar encounters, you realize that every one of them can sympathize or has suffered some kind of loss, and how they react to that in relation to Oskar shows how the trauma of loss can be a common bond. You wish you could learn more about some of these people.
Von Sydow gives a memorable performance without uttering a word as the renter who has a personal, family secret. Why does he remain mute? Was he a survivor of something so traumatic like the concentration camps of Europe that he does not speak? In a supporting role, Viola Davis is effective playing a character who figures prominently at the beginning and the end.
In the end, Oskar has learned something about himself and his family, and through his journeys, he has matured in a new post-9/11 world. Ultimately, the revelation at the end is bittersweet and that without the power of forgiveness, closure is incomplete. It also speaks to a part of humanity that we all share.
*** of **** stars
A funeral signals the death of a family member and a boy’s alienation to the world. In flashbacks, Oskar (Thomas Horn), who has trouble communicating and may have Asperger Syndrome, adores his father (Tom Hanks) who challenges him with riddles and treasure hunts to meet people outside his apartment. Both father and mother (Sandra Bullock) are loving parents, and the world becomes an interesting laboratory for exploration and discovery. Life is idyllic until 9/11 when everything changes and Oskar is witness to his father’s last moments trapped in one of the Twin Towers. A year later, looking in his father’s closet, he discovers a key in an envelope with the letters ‘black’. Who or what does the key belong to? Oskar sets out to find out by systematically tracking down every ‘Black’ in the phone book and visiting each person for a clue. This big scavenger hunt is at best a daunting task.
His grandmother who lives across the street has a mysterious renter (Max Von Sydow) who does not speak and can only communicate by jotting on a note pad or displaying ‘yes’ and ‘no’ written on each hand. The renter takes a liking to Oskar and accompanies him on his quest. This is a search that proves overwhelming as each person they find has a story too. When all hope seems lost, the road leads back to that fateful September morning and opens Oskar to the truth about his parents and himself.
At first you wonder if this hunt will be meaningful and be rewarded or if it is a waste of time. Oskar’s obsession keeps him connected to his father; to fail is to lose whatever he has left of that relationship. In a way, it is about trying to make sense of his father’s death and coming to terms with it. It is also about the forgiveness of guilt that nearly consumes Oskar.
You kind of think that at some point a miracle may occur or that something profound may happen, but what does reveal itself does not quite answer all the questions, and maybe that’s just the point to the film, that life is part mystery and we never truly understand its riddle.
When you take stock of all the people that Oskar encounters, you realize that every one of them can sympathize or has suffered some kind of loss, and how they react to that in relation to Oskar shows how the trauma of loss can be a common bond. You wish you could learn more about some of these people.
Von Sydow gives a memorable performance without uttering a word as the renter who has a personal, family secret. Why does he remain mute? Was he a survivor of something so traumatic like the concentration camps of Europe that he does not speak? In a supporting role, Viola Davis is effective playing a character who figures prominently at the beginning and the end.
In the end, Oskar has learned something about himself and his family, and through his journeys, he has matured in a new post-9/11 world. Ultimately, the revelation at the end is bittersweet and that without the power of forgiveness, closure is incomplete. It also speaks to a part of humanity that we all share.
*** of **** stars
The Remarkable Lessons of MONEYBALL
Truth may be stranger than fiction, but when the sports world is shaken by a methodology that will revolutionize the business of baseball, it becomes an amazing story born out of need. Adapted from the Michael Lewis’ bestseller by Aaron Sorkin (The Social Network) and Steven Zaillian (Schindler’s List) and directed by Bennett Miller (Capote), Moneyball is a fascinating look at how the sport of baseball was turned on its head and its implications that reverberate to this day. It’s also about the bond a father has with his daughter that is stronger than any contract.
In 2001, Oakland Athletics general manager and former player Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) is trying to keep his star players from being bought by financially wealthier teams like the New York Yankees. Desperate to field a winning team with a hopelessly limited budget, he happens upon an analyst for the Cleveland Indians named Peter Brand (a winning Jonah Hill) who has statistics to back up his theory that the best players are not necessarily the costliest ones. Rather than compete with the big teams, Beane realizes that the underrated players who are statistically on base the most will translate into runs scored and ultimately wins. The remarkable thing is that these players can be obtained at bargain basement salaries. The concept goes against conventional wisdom and immediately creates friction among the veteran scouts and even the A’s manager (played to perfection by Philip Seymour Hoffman). A former star recruit himself, Beane blew his chance for stardom at an early age and is now sharing custody of his teenage daughter with his ex-wife (Robin Wright). He loves his girl and fears that losing his job will force him to move farther away from her. As the team begins to show signs of becoming a winning organization, a remarkable string of wins begins that will make history and have far reaching consequences for the game of baseball.
This is one of the best roles Pitt has ever had. The dialogue is perfectly suited to him, and he delivers flawlessly. It’s the kind of role you could easily picture with a younger Robert Redford. When he says things that stun his personnel staff by deviating from common practice and status quo, it is a hoot. I mean he really shakes things up because he is willing to try just about anything to win games, and it also means changing a culture of losing into a winning attitude. Just watching the negotiations and deal making behind the scenes is fascinating. You also get a realistic perspective from the clubhouse as players come and go, but these are people too with families, and the film does not shortchange this point of view.
What elevates this film from its novel plotline is the genuine relationship between Billy and his daughter that influences his priorities. He isn’t just a general manager but a father, and the film never loses this perspective to its credit. When the team’s fortunes change dramatically by the end, an astonishing opportunity presents itself to Billy that puts him at a career crossroads, and the baseball world takes notice.
Even non-baseball enthusiasts may find this a fascinating story because it is character driven with strong performances by its cast. (Sports movies get made with semi-regularity, but when did a studio make a film about personnel management of a major sports team?) When you think about the recent championship success of teams like the Boston Red Sox and look at this film, the connections are mind boggling. And while this new age in personnel management is a story onto itself, the one constant through it all is a father’s love for his daughter. Top notch all the way.
**** of ****stars
In 2001, Oakland Athletics general manager and former player Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) is trying to keep his star players from being bought by financially wealthier teams like the New York Yankees. Desperate to field a winning team with a hopelessly limited budget, he happens upon an analyst for the Cleveland Indians named Peter Brand (a winning Jonah Hill) who has statistics to back up his theory that the best players are not necessarily the costliest ones. Rather than compete with the big teams, Beane realizes that the underrated players who are statistically on base the most will translate into runs scored and ultimately wins. The remarkable thing is that these players can be obtained at bargain basement salaries. The concept goes against conventional wisdom and immediately creates friction among the veteran scouts and even the A’s manager (played to perfection by Philip Seymour Hoffman). A former star recruit himself, Beane blew his chance for stardom at an early age and is now sharing custody of his teenage daughter with his ex-wife (Robin Wright). He loves his girl and fears that losing his job will force him to move farther away from her. As the team begins to show signs of becoming a winning organization, a remarkable string of wins begins that will make history and have far reaching consequences for the game of baseball.
This is one of the best roles Pitt has ever had. The dialogue is perfectly suited to him, and he delivers flawlessly. It’s the kind of role you could easily picture with a younger Robert Redford. When he says things that stun his personnel staff by deviating from common practice and status quo, it is a hoot. I mean he really shakes things up because he is willing to try just about anything to win games, and it also means changing a culture of losing into a winning attitude. Just watching the negotiations and deal making behind the scenes is fascinating. You also get a realistic perspective from the clubhouse as players come and go, but these are people too with families, and the film does not shortchange this point of view.
What elevates this film from its novel plotline is the genuine relationship between Billy and his daughter that influences his priorities. He isn’t just a general manager but a father, and the film never loses this perspective to its credit. When the team’s fortunes change dramatically by the end, an astonishing opportunity presents itself to Billy that puts him at a career crossroads, and the baseball world takes notice.
Even non-baseball enthusiasts may find this a fascinating story because it is character driven with strong performances by its cast. (Sports movies get made with semi-regularity, but when did a studio make a film about personnel management of a major sports team?) When you think about the recent championship success of teams like the Boston Red Sox and look at this film, the connections are mind boggling. And while this new age in personnel management is a story onto itself, the one constant through it all is a father’s love for his daughter. Top notch all the way.
**** of ****stars
MIDNIGHT IN PARIS -A Valentine to the City of Lights
One of the most productive and sought after directors (by actors), Woody Allen, has made dozens of films that deal with the often turbulent relationships between men and women. Almost exclusively a New Yorker by heart, Allen has begun a renaissance of sorts with his exploration of European settings in particular Paris, France, and although his films of the past decade have varied in quality, his latest, Midnight in Paris, is a standout and represents the writer/director at the top of his game.
Opening with a spectacular collage of vignettes, Paris never looked more enticing or romantic (Manhattan redux). At the fabled Giverny, Monet’s source of inspiration, an American couple, Gil (Owen Wilson) and Inez (Rachel McAdams) are engaged to be married and yet squabble constantly. An idealist, He is smitten by the culture and history of Paris, and one night while strolling the streets alone, a vintage car drives by and gives him a ride to a café. Gil realizes that he has been transported to 1920’s Paris and is mingling with the celebrities of its heyday including some famous American ex-patriots like Ernest Hemingway, Gertrude Stein, and F. Scott Fitzgerald. Gil is struggling with a novel and needs some advice, so who better than Gertrude Stein (amusingly played by Kathy Bates) to critique the manuscript? Upon his return to present day Paris, Gil wonders if it was all a dream but the scene repeats itself the next evening at midnight when he meets Pablo Picasso and the beautiful Adriana (Marion Cotillard), who captures Gil’s fancy. Thinking that Gil has lost his mind, Inez begins to show interest in another male friend. Meanwhile Gil is obsessed with Adriana, and as the couple visits the Moulin Rouge, they find themselves transported to an even earlier, romantic period in French history. Gil finds that Adriana has her own ideas about life, and he is about to find true love in the unlikeliest of places.
This is Allen in high gear and, though it does not necessarily rank among his best, it certainly is a throwback to his vintage period of Manhattan and the film that this will be most compared to The Purple Rose of Cairo, with its similar combination of wistful fantasy, storybook romance, and sophisticated comedy. You do wonder how Gil and Inez could ever become a couple considering how much they bicker about most everything. It’s also interesting how Allen uses a bit of sleight of hand by focusing our attention on Gil and Adriana that we miss an obvious connection. Such is love.
Gil is a surrogate for Allen’s inner voice. (One could even picture a younger Allen actually performing the role.) He is also a romantic in contrast to Inez’s friends who are intellectuals. As for Paris, it plays a supporting role as its landmarks are adoringly featured throughout the film without detracting from the characters or story. It is clear Allen is smitten with the City of Lights as he was with his home base of New York City.
There are some amusing scenes including the fate of a private investigator hired to follow Gil and ends up caught up in a different time running for his life. When Gil listens to old Cole Porter recordings or sees Picasso paintings in a museum, the joke is that he actually has met these men in real life! In another scene, Gil suggests to a young director, Luis Bunuel, a film idea which is the plot to The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie that he will make many years later (and win an Oscar). As Salvador Dali, Adrien Brody hams it up to great effect in a brief scene.
Sure Allen has made some good films recently like Match Point and Vicky Cristina Barcelona, but it’s been a long while since he made anything as imaginative, comedic, and romantic at the same time. Vive le Woody Allen!
***1/2 of ****stars
Opening with a spectacular collage of vignettes, Paris never looked more enticing or romantic (Manhattan redux). At the fabled Giverny, Monet’s source of inspiration, an American couple, Gil (Owen Wilson) and Inez (Rachel McAdams) are engaged to be married and yet squabble constantly. An idealist, He is smitten by the culture and history of Paris, and one night while strolling the streets alone, a vintage car drives by and gives him a ride to a café. Gil realizes that he has been transported to 1920’s Paris and is mingling with the celebrities of its heyday including some famous American ex-patriots like Ernest Hemingway, Gertrude Stein, and F. Scott Fitzgerald. Gil is struggling with a novel and needs some advice, so who better than Gertrude Stein (amusingly played by Kathy Bates) to critique the manuscript? Upon his return to present day Paris, Gil wonders if it was all a dream but the scene repeats itself the next evening at midnight when he meets Pablo Picasso and the beautiful Adriana (Marion Cotillard), who captures Gil’s fancy. Thinking that Gil has lost his mind, Inez begins to show interest in another male friend. Meanwhile Gil is obsessed with Adriana, and as the couple visits the Moulin Rouge, they find themselves transported to an even earlier, romantic period in French history. Gil finds that Adriana has her own ideas about life, and he is about to find true love in the unlikeliest of places.
This is Allen in high gear and, though it does not necessarily rank among his best, it certainly is a throwback to his vintage period of Manhattan and the film that this will be most compared to The Purple Rose of Cairo, with its similar combination of wistful fantasy, storybook romance, and sophisticated comedy. You do wonder how Gil and Inez could ever become a couple considering how much they bicker about most everything. It’s also interesting how Allen uses a bit of sleight of hand by focusing our attention on Gil and Adriana that we miss an obvious connection. Such is love.
Gil is a surrogate for Allen’s inner voice. (One could even picture a younger Allen actually performing the role.) He is also a romantic in contrast to Inez’s friends who are intellectuals. As for Paris, it plays a supporting role as its landmarks are adoringly featured throughout the film without detracting from the characters or story. It is clear Allen is smitten with the City of Lights as he was with his home base of New York City.
There are some amusing scenes including the fate of a private investigator hired to follow Gil and ends up caught up in a different time running for his life. When Gil listens to old Cole Porter recordings or sees Picasso paintings in a museum, the joke is that he actually has met these men in real life! In another scene, Gil suggests to a young director, Luis Bunuel, a film idea which is the plot to The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie that he will make many years later (and win an Oscar). As Salvador Dali, Adrien Brody hams it up to great effect in a brief scene.
Sure Allen has made some good films recently like Match Point and Vicky Cristina Barcelona, but it’s been a long while since he made anything as imaginative, comedic, and romantic at the same time. Vive le Woody Allen!
***1/2 of ****stars
The Moments of Existence in The TREE OF LIFE
The Tree of Life is the latest film by reclusive director Terrence Malick (Days of Heaven, The Thin Red Line) whose previous films displayed a simple narrative abetted by haunting imagery. This film takes a step further by telling its story in grand strokes of imagery. Though its technique may lead some to wonder the point of this exercise and dismiss it as confusing, others will hail it an ambitious masterwork. Let the viewer beware.
One family deals with a personal loss as it ponders the meaning of life through the point of view of its oldest son (Sean Penn), now an adult in the business world. Celestial forces of nature signal the very creation and existence of the universe and provide a majestic background to the birth and evolution of life on earth. We witness the beginnings of an American family from the Midwest in mid-twentieth century. Led by a stern, proud father (Brad Pitt), and a doting mother (Jessica Chastain), three sons experience the joys and pains of growing up. Through a rapid series of short scenes, this tapestry of sounds and images forms a mosaic of life’s precious moments. All the while a voice asks the great questions of life and God.
Certainly the most ambitious film in the enigmatic director’s career, it is also the most challenging. This is pure cinema, and it is remarkable how the film is able to communicate visually albeit without much in the way of lengthy dialogue. These fragments of life almost seem surreal as if from a Fellini film. In a way it is kind of an experimental film on a grand scale. It seems to ask, ‘what is the purpose of existence amid great loss’? (Despite being a very spiritual film, creationists might not like the premise of some of the scenes that strongly suggest an evolutionary development of life on earth.)
Those who are able to decipher the abstract nature of Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey will likely have a clue on how to access the style and meaning of this film. Indeed, some of the impressive visuals were created by Douglas Trumbull (Blade Runner) who did the 2001 special visual effects and helped to realize Spielberg’s Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki has captured some stunning visuals of landscapes and life that are at times overwhelming in their beauty. The musical score alternates between classical and operatic pieces although one almost expects a minimalist, Philip Glass-type score to pop up.
There are many unanswered questions. Which brother died and how? And what is the background of the oldest brother as adult? How has the father changed since the loss of his son and how does this affect the family? As much as the oldest son asks for answers, we want more information and must settle for pieces from a larger puzzle.
The film serves as a search for meaning and hope amid the vastness of existence. As we see the father teach his sons about manners, chores, music, fighting, and death, we may see something in our own common, shared experiences. Life is portrayed as a series of events that sometimes blur over time.
This exploration of the meaning of life may prove to be too abstract and a turn off for some, but to those who are open to a visual experience unlike any other, it may prove to be a fascinating exercise in pure cinema. Kubrick would be proud.
*** of **** stars (for those that are game for a sensory experience)
One family deals with a personal loss as it ponders the meaning of life through the point of view of its oldest son (Sean Penn), now an adult in the business world. Celestial forces of nature signal the very creation and existence of the universe and provide a majestic background to the birth and evolution of life on earth. We witness the beginnings of an American family from the Midwest in mid-twentieth century. Led by a stern, proud father (Brad Pitt), and a doting mother (Jessica Chastain), three sons experience the joys and pains of growing up. Through a rapid series of short scenes, this tapestry of sounds and images forms a mosaic of life’s precious moments. All the while a voice asks the great questions of life and God.
Certainly the most ambitious film in the enigmatic director’s career, it is also the most challenging. This is pure cinema, and it is remarkable how the film is able to communicate visually albeit without much in the way of lengthy dialogue. These fragments of life almost seem surreal as if from a Fellini film. In a way it is kind of an experimental film on a grand scale. It seems to ask, ‘what is the purpose of existence amid great loss’? (Despite being a very spiritual film, creationists might not like the premise of some of the scenes that strongly suggest an evolutionary development of life on earth.)
Those who are able to decipher the abstract nature of Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey will likely have a clue on how to access the style and meaning of this film. Indeed, some of the impressive visuals were created by Douglas Trumbull (Blade Runner) who did the 2001 special visual effects and helped to realize Spielberg’s Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki has captured some stunning visuals of landscapes and life that are at times overwhelming in their beauty. The musical score alternates between classical and operatic pieces although one almost expects a minimalist, Philip Glass-type score to pop up.
There are many unanswered questions. Which brother died and how? And what is the background of the oldest brother as adult? How has the father changed since the loss of his son and how does this affect the family? As much as the oldest son asks for answers, we want more information and must settle for pieces from a larger puzzle.
The film serves as a search for meaning and hope amid the vastness of existence. As we see the father teach his sons about manners, chores, music, fighting, and death, we may see something in our own common, shared experiences. Life is portrayed as a series of events that sometimes blur over time.
This exploration of the meaning of life may prove to be too abstract and a turn off for some, but to those who are open to a visual experience unlike any other, it may prove to be a fascinating exercise in pure cinema. Kubrick would be proud.
*** of **** stars (for those that are game for a sensory experience)
The Nobility of WARHORSE
The courage of a horse and its bond with a young man amid the horrors of war serves as the backdrop to a saga of loyalty and survival in Warhorse, Steven Spielberg’s take on World War I and its effect on a British family. Adapted from a novel and inspired by the stage play of the same name, this is old fashioned filmmaking that could have easily been made 50 years ago back when epic war dramas like Lawrence of Arabia and Dr. Zhivago ruled the screens.
A teenage boy, Albert (Jeremy Irvine), and a colt, Joey, form a bond amid the English countryside. Albert’s mother (Emily Watson) worries over the house being repossessed as his father (Peter Mullan), an alcoholic and war veteran, struggles to harvest crops from the harsh land. Threatened with eviction, Joey is sold to the army to assist in the fighting in Europe during World War I. Heartbroken, Albert vows to find Joey and be reunited. We can see early on that Joey is a special horse who is smart and brave whether he submits to being a plow horse, outracing a motor car, or lugging German war machines up a mountain. As the years pass from 1914-1918 and the war amasses its destructive toll on men and animals on both sides, Joey’s ownership changes hands, but through it all, he finds a succession of kind souls to watch over him. When Albert joins the battle, an unlikely series of events will bring him closer to Joey.
Joey is an allegory to slavery as he is being sold as a commodity to hard labor and taken as property by either side in the war. The story is primarily told through his eyes, and each set of people Joey encounters has a personal story: the British officer who makes a promise to bring Joey back to his rightful owner, a young German soldier who dotes protectively over his brother, or a German farm girl who is cared for by her grandfather. In wartime, making friends and losing them is a way of life, and Joey is no different whether it is a human or fellow mare. Some common themes emerge from all these people, namely their affection for Joey and the toll that war exacts on loved ones.
Production values are superior especially the vivid cinematography by Janusz Kaminski who employs color schemes especially at the end that emulate the palettes of Gone with the Wind. Irvine is ideally cast as the son who refuses to give up on his horse and friend.
There are not a lot of the trademark Spielberg moments that you expect; Clint Eastwood could have been the director without much difference. There are memorable scenes that resonate including a tragic charge by British cavalry on a German position and an auction with an army ‘band of brothers’ pitching in for a worthy cause. Then there is the harrowing, desperate escape by Joey that culminates in him getting tangled in barbed wire in No Man’s Land and help coming from an unlikely source which results in a most unusual standoff. Such scenes may seem clichéd but register nonetheless.
The ending does have an emotional payoff, but there are some missed opportunities along the way. There are relationships that could have been developed more like Albert’s father who is a one dimensional character but has suffered trauma from a previous war. The possibility of romance for Albert during a race between Joey and a car carrying a pretty girl never develops. Spielberg also meant this as an antiwar film as in the scenes of brutal trench warfare where Albert witnesses his own comrades die, but such scenes are relatively brief and do not linger like his World War II saga, Saving Private Ryan.
Warhorse is about the bringing together of a family torn apart by war. It’s about the common humanity that unites strangers. It’s also about a boy turned man and his love for his horse.
*** of **** stars
A teenage boy, Albert (Jeremy Irvine), and a colt, Joey, form a bond amid the English countryside. Albert’s mother (Emily Watson) worries over the house being repossessed as his father (Peter Mullan), an alcoholic and war veteran, struggles to harvest crops from the harsh land. Threatened with eviction, Joey is sold to the army to assist in the fighting in Europe during World War I. Heartbroken, Albert vows to find Joey and be reunited. We can see early on that Joey is a special horse who is smart and brave whether he submits to being a plow horse, outracing a motor car, or lugging German war machines up a mountain. As the years pass from 1914-1918 and the war amasses its destructive toll on men and animals on both sides, Joey’s ownership changes hands, but through it all, he finds a succession of kind souls to watch over him. When Albert joins the battle, an unlikely series of events will bring him closer to Joey.
Joey is an allegory to slavery as he is being sold as a commodity to hard labor and taken as property by either side in the war. The story is primarily told through his eyes, and each set of people Joey encounters has a personal story: the British officer who makes a promise to bring Joey back to his rightful owner, a young German soldier who dotes protectively over his brother, or a German farm girl who is cared for by her grandfather. In wartime, making friends and losing them is a way of life, and Joey is no different whether it is a human or fellow mare. Some common themes emerge from all these people, namely their affection for Joey and the toll that war exacts on loved ones.
Production values are superior especially the vivid cinematography by Janusz Kaminski who employs color schemes especially at the end that emulate the palettes of Gone with the Wind. Irvine is ideally cast as the son who refuses to give up on his horse and friend.
There are not a lot of the trademark Spielberg moments that you expect; Clint Eastwood could have been the director without much difference. There are memorable scenes that resonate including a tragic charge by British cavalry on a German position and an auction with an army ‘band of brothers’ pitching in for a worthy cause. Then there is the harrowing, desperate escape by Joey that culminates in him getting tangled in barbed wire in No Man’s Land and help coming from an unlikely source which results in a most unusual standoff. Such scenes may seem clichéd but register nonetheless.
The ending does have an emotional payoff, but there are some missed opportunities along the way. There are relationships that could have been developed more like Albert’s father who is a one dimensional character but has suffered trauma from a previous war. The possibility of romance for Albert during a race between Joey and a car carrying a pretty girl never develops. Spielberg also meant this as an antiwar film as in the scenes of brutal trench warfare where Albert witnesses his own comrades die, but such scenes are relatively brief and do not linger like his World War II saga, Saving Private Ryan.
Warhorse is about the bringing together of a family torn apart by war. It’s about the common humanity that unites strangers. It’s also about a boy turned man and his love for his horse.
*** of **** stars
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)