The Movie: Pan's Labyrinth, directed by Guillermo Del Toro
Recommendation: Me
Reason: Much as I'd like to say I don't need a reason, I do, and it's that I am in love with fairy stories.
I'm a longtime lover of stories of fae-kind. Snatched babies, spoiled milk, imps who sneak in to tweak the noses of rotten children, courts of sidhe and tuatha that mortals cannot look upon. From David Bowie as the Goblin King to the majesty of Fantasia to Michelle Pfeiffer's questionable depiction of Titania, I crave the presence of magic and faeries in my entertainment. Pan's Labyrinth has raised the bar.
The special effects were above and beyond what I expected. The faun and his host were so real I was less awestruck by him than I was by my own immediate acceptance of his existence. The small fae that attended him were present, not cloying or irritating but simply there. Background and foreground, so to speak. Doug Jones is amazing. His faun has captured my imagination (and his Pale Man will surely stalk my nightmares for some time).
The story was neatly parallel, the struggle for innocence, power and control criss crossing hither and yon from the fairytale landscape to the battlefield that surrounded it. It was an adventure and a horror tale at the same time. Reality was brutal, the fairy landscape less painful but no less frightening. I haven't changed my opinion of the film much-I'm as enthusiastic about it as I was before setting foot in the theater. Second best film of 2006 that I've seen.
-28/365 down, 337/365 to go
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Would someone please close that hatch?
The Movie: House on Haunted Hill, directed by William Castle
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: "Vincent Price is a god among men."
William Castle should be familiar to most horror fans as 'that guy that electrocuted his audiences'. He's the man responsible for The Tingler, in which little zappers prodded the audience into responding to the film. When House on Haunted Hill was screened, there were apparently skeletons that would go whipping past over the audience's heads. Oh, to have been around to see _that_. By today's standards, House on Haunted Hill is pretty tame. There's a bit of blood, a bit of hanging of people. Nothing too extreme.
The cast was alright. Very campy, very Vincent Price. Not a lot to be said about the special effects, though the jump scares were okay. They were sort of the variety of 'the camera can't see it, so obviously the characters can't'. There were some...severe logical problems. But if you just played along, it was not a bad way to kill some time.
Inevitably we have to address the question "soooo...was it better than the remake?" Sure. In some ways it was better, in some it wasn't as good. I'm a fan of cheese, as far as horror movies go, and 1999's remake had it in loads. In different flavors, even. I liked the way the house unleashed hell on the partygoers in the remake. I was a big fan of the opening sequence, and I still get shivers thinking of the herky-jerky motion of some of the ghosts. Jeebus...creepy. Anyway, back on track. I wish the remake had a little more to do with the original. It could have fixed a few things, polished the effects...but alas, it'll sit with Thir13en Ghosts as a nice little bit of 90's nostalgia for Mr. Castle's prime. (That's another guilty pleasure of mine. I refuse to apologize for getting a kick out of Matthew Lillard sometimes.)
-27/365 down, 338/365 to go
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: "Vincent Price is a god among men."
William Castle should be familiar to most horror fans as 'that guy that electrocuted his audiences'. He's the man responsible for The Tingler, in which little zappers prodded the audience into responding to the film. When House on Haunted Hill was screened, there were apparently skeletons that would go whipping past over the audience's heads. Oh, to have been around to see _that_. By today's standards, House on Haunted Hill is pretty tame. There's a bit of blood, a bit of hanging of people. Nothing too extreme.
The cast was alright. Very campy, very Vincent Price. Not a lot to be said about the special effects, though the jump scares were okay. They were sort of the variety of 'the camera can't see it, so obviously the characters can't'. There were some...severe logical problems. But if you just played along, it was not a bad way to kill some time.
Inevitably we have to address the question "soooo...was it better than the remake?" Sure. In some ways it was better, in some it wasn't as good. I'm a fan of cheese, as far as horror movies go, and 1999's remake had it in loads. In different flavors, even. I liked the way the house unleashed hell on the partygoers in the remake. I was a big fan of the opening sequence, and I still get shivers thinking of the herky-jerky motion of some of the ghosts. Jeebus...creepy. Anyway, back on track. I wish the remake had a little more to do with the original. It could have fixed a few things, polished the effects...but alas, it'll sit with Thir13en Ghosts as a nice little bit of 90's nostalgia for Mr. Castle's prime. (That's another guilty pleasure of mine. I refuse to apologize for getting a kick out of Matthew Lillard sometimes.)
-27/365 down, 338/365 to go
Style is King
The Movie: Down With Love, directed by Peyton Reed
Recommendation: Broomie
Reason: "Now you have to watch it!"
I really dislike romantic comedies, as a rule. I wish that most of them were direct-to-video releases, because generally speaking they're boringly shot, uninterestingly directed and acted in by people who are really only on-set to score a paycheck. Most of them are easy, in other words. They could be on TV, and you wouldn't notice the difference. Down With Love is different. It oozes 60's style. The screen is awash in color, and everything is so very, very mod. It's delicious to the eyes. The camerawork may not be legendary, but at least the sets are creative enough that they need a large screen to be appreciated.
They cast Renee Zellweger as the lead. Oh dear...except she's not bad. She's not great, not fantastic really, just there and performing adequately. I guess I enjoy her more in pieces where she sings, though she's not a really great singer. Something about that must up her performance level, like showing a dog a treat. Speaking of, actually, Ewan MacGregor was excellent. He's a great actor, and played off his part very well. At times he was hammy, but it was called for. David Hyde Pierce still has excellent comic timing.
The plot was...alright. Enjoyable, nicely zany for a movie that was trying very hard to be 60's rah rah rah. The ending left a little to be desired, quick as it came. Not a lot more to say about it. This was a nice movie, good for a fun bit of a laugh. Not very epic, but I'm not sorry I watched it.
-26/365 down, 339/365 to go.
Recommendation: Broomie
Reason: "Now you have to watch it!"
I really dislike romantic comedies, as a rule. I wish that most of them were direct-to-video releases, because generally speaking they're boringly shot, uninterestingly directed and acted in by people who are really only on-set to score a paycheck. Most of them are easy, in other words. They could be on TV, and you wouldn't notice the difference. Down With Love is different. It oozes 60's style. The screen is awash in color, and everything is so very, very mod. It's delicious to the eyes. The camerawork may not be legendary, but at least the sets are creative enough that they need a large screen to be appreciated.
They cast Renee Zellweger as the lead. Oh dear...except she's not bad. She's not great, not fantastic really, just there and performing adequately. I guess I enjoy her more in pieces where she sings, though she's not a really great singer. Something about that must up her performance level, like showing a dog a treat. Speaking of, actually, Ewan MacGregor was excellent. He's a great actor, and played off his part very well. At times he was hammy, but it was called for. David Hyde Pierce still has excellent comic timing.
The plot was...alright. Enjoyable, nicely zany for a movie that was trying very hard to be 60's rah rah rah. The ending left a little to be desired, quick as it came. Not a lot more to say about it. This was a nice movie, good for a fun bit of a laugh. Not very epic, but I'm not sorry I watched it.
-26/365 down, 339/365 to go.
Sunday, January 28, 2007
More fashion, less Andy
The Movie: The Devil Wears Prada, directed by David Frankel
Recommendation: A sort of anti-recommendation from Broomie and Dee
Reason: They hated the movie, or at least Broomie did. Dee didn't really see a lot of merit in it.
Movies based on books can be touchy subjects. The Devil Wears Prada was based on a book by the same title, though plotwise it shares about 50% with the book and veers off into the usual hollywood treacle for the rest. I don't insist on total faithfulness in the translation between novel and film, and The Devil Wears Prada doesn't exactly provide a feast of a story anyway. What it is high on is venom and viciousness, much of which somehow didn't make it to the screen.
First and foremost, forget about Anne Hathaway. Visually speaking, she's perfectly cast, with huge orphan eyes and a perpetual expression of 'ooooooooo'. Her character's a whiny little pushover who keeps wimping out and saying "I don't wanna" as she carries out the dirty work her ambition has wrought. It's Meryl Streep and Emily Blunt who bring together the most excellent onscreen pairing I've seen in some time. In a movie that's generally too nice to have the title of the book emblazoned over it, Streep is quietly vicious with the sort of precision that comes from being in the industry a long, long time. She has a gravity about her, a very real sense of 'upper echelon predator'. Meanwhile, Blunt buzzes through the film in a perpetual panic, the only character in the movie who feels true to the spirit of the novel. It's these two that sell it, in a strange tale of the sadomasochistic food chain of high fashion. The rest of the film has been populated with hypocritical backup players who cajole and mock Andy for her dedication to her job ("You did it for shoes, shirts, jewellery.") before babbling off on a tangent about their art, their cookery. Newsflash to everyone who's decided fashion is silly-every luxury is. Paying $100 for a purse is just as ludicrous as paying $20 for a pound of cheese (and I haven't even scraped the upper echelons of fashion or food with those price points). At least you can use the purse more than once.
If the movie had concentrated more on Miranda and how her very presence bowed and warped the world of everyone around her (not just whiny pathetic little Andy), if she was the real juggernaut of power and control she was portrayed as in the novel, I would have enjoyed it much more. As it was, with Anne Hathaway's simpering soppiness taking up most of the screen time, I'm just going to have to relegate myself to only half entertained.
(Oh, and a bit of trivia for those who didn't know? Anna Wintour showed up at the premiere in Prada.)
-25/365 down, 340/365 to go
Recommendation: A sort of anti-recommendation from Broomie and Dee
Reason: They hated the movie, or at least Broomie did. Dee didn't really see a lot of merit in it.
Movies based on books can be touchy subjects. The Devil Wears Prada was based on a book by the same title, though plotwise it shares about 50% with the book and veers off into the usual hollywood treacle for the rest. I don't insist on total faithfulness in the translation between novel and film, and The Devil Wears Prada doesn't exactly provide a feast of a story anyway. What it is high on is venom and viciousness, much of which somehow didn't make it to the screen.
First and foremost, forget about Anne Hathaway. Visually speaking, she's perfectly cast, with huge orphan eyes and a perpetual expression of 'ooooooooo'. Her character's a whiny little pushover who keeps wimping out and saying "I don't wanna" as she carries out the dirty work her ambition has wrought. It's Meryl Streep and Emily Blunt who bring together the most excellent onscreen pairing I've seen in some time. In a movie that's generally too nice to have the title of the book emblazoned over it, Streep is quietly vicious with the sort of precision that comes from being in the industry a long, long time. She has a gravity about her, a very real sense of 'upper echelon predator'. Meanwhile, Blunt buzzes through the film in a perpetual panic, the only character in the movie who feels true to the spirit of the novel. It's these two that sell it, in a strange tale of the sadomasochistic food chain of high fashion. The rest of the film has been populated with hypocritical backup players who cajole and mock Andy for her dedication to her job ("You did it for shoes, shirts, jewellery.") before babbling off on a tangent about their art, their cookery. Newsflash to everyone who's decided fashion is silly-every luxury is. Paying $100 for a purse is just as ludicrous as paying $20 for a pound of cheese (and I haven't even scraped the upper echelons of fashion or food with those price points). At least you can use the purse more than once.
If the movie had concentrated more on Miranda and how her very presence bowed and warped the world of everyone around her (not just whiny pathetic little Andy), if she was the real juggernaut of power and control she was portrayed as in the novel, I would have enjoyed it much more. As it was, with Anne Hathaway's simpering soppiness taking up most of the screen time, I'm just going to have to relegate myself to only half entertained.
(Oh, and a bit of trivia for those who didn't know? Anna Wintour showed up at the premiere in Prada.)
-25/365 down, 340/365 to go
They frickin' fly!
The Movie: The Cave, directed by Bruce Hunt
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: "It's this or Dukes of Hazzard."
Almost everything that's wrong with this movie can be summed up by the incessant lack of cursing on the part of the supposedly very experienced, very X-TREME!!! dive/cave exploration team. When a monster that seems to have come from hell itself is swooping towards you, intent on tearing you limb from limb, most people I know would be cursing their head ff. At least until the creature ripped their head off. It was one more black mark against this generically lame horror/action movie (which was problem #2: Horror movies should not be shot like action movies). It's a telling sign when I never learn character's names, and instead refer to them by their archetypical role throughout the movie ("What is Leader-Man doing now?" "Wow, Grrrl-Power-Girl is stupid." etc.).
This was supposed to be a creature movie, and when your creature is a bunch of wings, claws and fangs, it gets a little lame. It's also fairly lame to repeat the same 'fate' over and over again, as character after character gets dragged off through what appeared to be the same crack in the wall to an uncertain fate. I was cheered by the presence of the Shrieking Eels from The Princess Bride, even if it was unintentional. And I'm not sure if there's an answer to this, but what is up with the idiocy of horror movie characters lately? I mean it, seriously, these people should not be going anywhere with anyone, much less leading expeditions into caves or accompanying their families on strange shortcuts into radioactive mutant country. Yes, I am drawing a parallel between The Cave and The Hills Have Eyes. There is a scene in The Cave in which Leader-Man's Spirited Younger Brother chases after a cohort who has been abducted by the creatures. He finds his cohort IMPALED TO THE CEILING...and proceeds to sob about trying to save him. The man had multiple stalactites through his body cavity. He is dead. Either give him mercy or leave like a coward before you get et. It reminded me of the infuriating sequence in The Hills Have Eyes when the father is set on fire on what is obviously a HUGE pyre that there is no possible way he could have built and immolated himself on all by his lonesome, and the other two menfolk spend an extensive amount of time trying to put out the pyre that is taller than they are (without water, buckets or any sort of firefighting equipment). I love my father, but if I was lost in the freaking desert and all of a sudden he showed up burning to death on a pyre, I would be watching for mutants.
Anyway. Back to The Cave. The end of the movie is lame and predictable. As expected, it leaves room for a sequel, though why anyone would bother...oh wait, this is the same Hollywood that made a sequel to Anaconda. I'm sure it'll be in theaters soon, though the lack of listing on iMDB gives hope. Compared to last year's other 'people in a cave ohgod what was that' movie, The Descent, well...five women who seemed at least moderately intelligent and experienced win over an entire team of morons any day. Sorry Jin from LOST.
-24/365 down, 341/365 to go
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: "It's this or Dukes of Hazzard."
Almost everything that's wrong with this movie can be summed up by the incessant lack of cursing on the part of the supposedly very experienced, very X-TREME!!! dive/cave exploration team. When a monster that seems to have come from hell itself is swooping towards you, intent on tearing you limb from limb, most people I know would be cursing their head ff. At least until the creature ripped their head off. It was one more black mark against this generically lame horror/action movie (which was problem #2: Horror movies should not be shot like action movies). It's a telling sign when I never learn character's names, and instead refer to them by their archetypical role throughout the movie ("What is Leader-Man doing now?" "Wow, Grrrl-Power-Girl is stupid." etc.).
This was supposed to be a creature movie, and when your creature is a bunch of wings, claws and fangs, it gets a little lame. It's also fairly lame to repeat the same 'fate' over and over again, as character after character gets dragged off through what appeared to be the same crack in the wall to an uncertain fate. I was cheered by the presence of the Shrieking Eels from The Princess Bride, even if it was unintentional. And I'm not sure if there's an answer to this, but what is up with the idiocy of horror movie characters lately? I mean it, seriously, these people should not be going anywhere with anyone, much less leading expeditions into caves or accompanying their families on strange shortcuts into radioactive mutant country. Yes, I am drawing a parallel between The Cave and The Hills Have Eyes. There is a scene in The Cave in which Leader-Man's Spirited Younger Brother chases after a cohort who has been abducted by the creatures. He finds his cohort IMPALED TO THE CEILING...and proceeds to sob about trying to save him. The man had multiple stalactites through his body cavity. He is dead. Either give him mercy or leave like a coward before you get et. It reminded me of the infuriating sequence in The Hills Have Eyes when the father is set on fire on what is obviously a HUGE pyre that there is no possible way he could have built and immolated himself on all by his lonesome, and the other two menfolk spend an extensive amount of time trying to put out the pyre that is taller than they are (without water, buckets or any sort of firefighting equipment). I love my father, but if I was lost in the freaking desert and all of a sudden he showed up burning to death on a pyre, I would be watching for mutants.
Anyway. Back to The Cave. The end of the movie is lame and predictable. As expected, it leaves room for a sequel, though why anyone would bother...oh wait, this is the same Hollywood that made a sequel to Anaconda. I'm sure it'll be in theaters soon, though the lack of listing on iMDB gives hope. Compared to last year's other 'people in a cave ohgod what was that' movie, The Descent, well...five women who seemed at least moderately intelligent and experienced win over an entire team of morons any day. Sorry Jin from LOST.
-24/365 down, 341/365 to go
Saturday, January 27, 2007
Spinal Tarp?
The Movie: This is Spinal Tap, directed by Rob Reiner
Recommendation: H
Reason: "For so, so many reasons" Thanks H. Way to not be vague. :)
Christopher Guest might be my hero. He's certainly one of my favorite writer/directors, and I really like his style. He's got an excellent sense for finding funny in the most straightforward, mundane sorts of things. Until recently, I didn't even know Spinal Tap was a Guest film (and it sort of isn't, since he wrote and starred, instead of his usual gig of writing, directing and co-starring). It was missing a few things here and there-Eugene Levy and Catherine O'Hara, for instance, but that doesn't mean the movie lacked a single thing.
Spinal Tap, for the three people who didn't know, is a mockumentary in Guest's usual style, directed by Rob Reiner (may he be forever deified for The Princess Bride). It follows a truly awful rock band (Spinal Tap) through their ill-fated second tour of America. Along the way, interviews are done, songs are performed and hilarity is had by all as Spinal Tap pokes fun at rock bands, rock songs (Fat Bottomed Girls!), rockumentaries, Yoko Ono and everything it lays its hands on. The drummers explode. Fran Drescher cusses out the band's manager. The dials go up to eleven.
It was a fun time. I like Guest's movies for the subtle fun that they poke at their subjects. They're documentaries with a sort of an edge, looking for the funny below the surface rather than treating their subjects entirely seriously. This was a fun film from a fun perspective, as usual.
-23/365 down, 342/365 to go
Recommendation: H
Reason: "For so, so many reasons" Thanks H. Way to not be vague. :)
Christopher Guest might be my hero. He's certainly one of my favorite writer/directors, and I really like his style. He's got an excellent sense for finding funny in the most straightforward, mundane sorts of things. Until recently, I didn't even know Spinal Tap was a Guest film (and it sort of isn't, since he wrote and starred, instead of his usual gig of writing, directing and co-starring). It was missing a few things here and there-Eugene Levy and Catherine O'Hara, for instance, but that doesn't mean the movie lacked a single thing.
Spinal Tap, for the three people who didn't know, is a mockumentary in Guest's usual style, directed by Rob Reiner (may he be forever deified for The Princess Bride). It follows a truly awful rock band (Spinal Tap) through their ill-fated second tour of America. Along the way, interviews are done, songs are performed and hilarity is had by all as Spinal Tap pokes fun at rock bands, rock songs (Fat Bottomed Girls!), rockumentaries, Yoko Ono and everything it lays its hands on. The drummers explode. Fran Drescher cusses out the band's manager. The dials go up to eleven.
It was a fun time. I like Guest's movies for the subtle fun that they poke at their subjects. They're documentaries with a sort of an edge, looking for the funny below the surface rather than treating their subjects entirely seriously. This was a fun film from a fun perspective, as usual.
-23/365 down, 342/365 to go
Friday, January 26, 2007
Don't be like Joe.
The Movie: Say Anything, directed by Cameron Crowe
Recommendation: H (But only because no one else believed that I hadn't seen it.)
Reason: "Because I want to marry John Cusack." Please note that's a direct quote from her.
I sat down to write the review for Say Anything when "Mr. Wonderful", from Dance Dance Revolution cued up. And isn't that appropriate? Because Lloyd Dobler is Mr. Wonderful, so to speak. Cusack managed to craft a sweet, kind character that also managed to be a little bit human. As usual, he was quite enjoyable (though H can have him).
And as God's Gonna Cut You Down kicks in, I'd like to address Cameron Crowe. Not because the song reminds me of him, just because we're no longer listening to Mr. Wonderful. As a director, Crowe has made seven movies. I have seen two. If I had to choose between Jerry MacGuire or Say Anything, I would have to go with the sweet reality of his John-and-Joan-Cusack movie. That's what I felt, watching this. Reality. The dialogue, the setting, the acting and essentially everything else made the experience very real. I was actually surprised by the famous 'boombox' sequence, by its placement and relevance to the film.
This was a nice film. There were some neat little tricks, including a little Grecian chorus that opined on what was onscreen and some interesting tricks of composition. I liked it. It isn't one of my favorites forever and ever, but it was nice.
-22/365 down, 343/365 to go
Recommendation: H (But only because no one else believed that I hadn't seen it.)
Reason: "Because I want to marry John Cusack." Please note that's a direct quote from her.
I sat down to write the review for Say Anything when "Mr. Wonderful", from Dance Dance Revolution cued up. And isn't that appropriate? Because Lloyd Dobler is Mr. Wonderful, so to speak. Cusack managed to craft a sweet, kind character that also managed to be a little bit human. As usual, he was quite enjoyable (though H can have him).
And as God's Gonna Cut You Down kicks in, I'd like to address Cameron Crowe. Not because the song reminds me of him, just because we're no longer listening to Mr. Wonderful. As a director, Crowe has made seven movies. I have seen two. If I had to choose between Jerry MacGuire or Say Anything, I would have to go with the sweet reality of his John-and-Joan-Cusack movie. That's what I felt, watching this. Reality. The dialogue, the setting, the acting and essentially everything else made the experience very real. I was actually surprised by the famous 'boombox' sequence, by its placement and relevance to the film.
This was a nice film. There were some neat little tricks, including a little Grecian chorus that opined on what was onscreen and some interesting tricks of composition. I liked it. It isn't one of my favorites forever and ever, but it was nice.
-22/365 down, 343/365 to go
Best. Pirate. DJ. Ever
The Movie: Pump Up The Volume, directed by Allan Moyle
Recommendation: H
Reason: "It makes me want to fight the man, 1980's teen style" I edited your comment, H. Sorry. :)
I hate the FCC. Not in any way that means I'm going to do anything about it, because they don't regulate my TV, except in the way they regulate American television. I watch some American TV, so...they sort of do. I think I almost popped something during the Family Guy FCC song (which I've linked to). This poppy little shot of nihilism was a fun little rant with a similar message. Bite me, FCC, Love the 90's.
I've seen a few of the other 'school sucks, life sucks, Cobain rules my world, let's get stoned and do nothing cause it's the 90's and we're goddamn depressed' teen movies. In fact, I watched them as a teenager in the 90's. I hated them because they were bloody depressing and usually extremely bleak. This one was different, of course, since it was handled by Allan Moyle. Five years after Pump Up the Volume, he went on to direct a quirky little film I happen to love (because it makes me smile a lot and not hate Renee Zellweger as much) called Empire Records. I think I'll consider Pump Up the Volume to be Empire's spiritual big brother. It wasn't quite as solid as Empire, particularily in the acting and the writing departments, but it had the same careless teenaged attitude about it.
There were a few moments that almost elevated the movie from a nice bit of entertainment. In particular, I'll note the scene in which the utterly bored and jaded Mark/Harry stalks out of his studio to get a drink, swinging a golf club vaguely at his parents' heads. His parents don't even notice, too intent on their drinks, their 'everything else but their kid' thoughts, until he goes to the fridge and gets what is obviously a diet Pepsi. Though he was unconcerned a moment earlier, Mark/Harry's father asks if it's a beer. The movie somewhat scratched the surface of Generation Angst in that moment, but not so much in any other.
Also, I completely failed to identify Seth Green. *sigh* What's the world coming to?
-21/365 down, 344/365 to go
Recommendation: H
Reason: "It makes me want to fight the man, 1980's teen style" I edited your comment, H. Sorry. :)
I hate the FCC. Not in any way that means I'm going to do anything about it, because they don't regulate my TV, except in the way they regulate American television. I watch some American TV, so...they sort of do. I think I almost popped something during the Family Guy FCC song (which I've linked to). This poppy little shot of nihilism was a fun little rant with a similar message. Bite me, FCC, Love the 90's.
I've seen a few of the other 'school sucks, life sucks, Cobain rules my world, let's get stoned and do nothing cause it's the 90's and we're goddamn depressed' teen movies. In fact, I watched them as a teenager in the 90's. I hated them because they were bloody depressing and usually extremely bleak. This one was different, of course, since it was handled by Allan Moyle. Five years after Pump Up the Volume, he went on to direct a quirky little film I happen to love (because it makes me smile a lot and not hate Renee Zellweger as much) called Empire Records. I think I'll consider Pump Up the Volume to be Empire's spiritual big brother. It wasn't quite as solid as Empire, particularily in the acting and the writing departments, but it had the same careless teenaged attitude about it.
There were a few moments that almost elevated the movie from a nice bit of entertainment. In particular, I'll note the scene in which the utterly bored and jaded Mark/Harry stalks out of his studio to get a drink, swinging a golf club vaguely at his parents' heads. His parents don't even notice, too intent on their drinks, their 'everything else but their kid' thoughts, until he goes to the fridge and gets what is obviously a diet Pepsi. Though he was unconcerned a moment earlier, Mark/Harry's father asks if it's a beer. The movie somewhat scratched the surface of Generation Angst in that moment, but not so much in any other.
Also, I completely failed to identify Seth Green. *sigh* What's the world coming to?
-21/365 down, 344/365 to go
Thursday, January 25, 2007
If there is no world, there is no gold
The Movie: An Inconvenient Truth, directed by Davis Guggenheim
Recommendation: Broomie
Reason: "I really want to see this movie." Okay, so sometimes the reasons for the recs aren't really compelling. :)
I think some of the criticism this movie receives is a little unjust. Though most of the point and thrust of the film is Al Gore's concern with global warming, the film is actually also about how he came to be so concerned with this very real issue. The two parts are not equal, but understanding that the latter is an intentional addition to the movie is crucial to recognizing that the film is not, as one internet movie fan put it, 'partially about global warming, partially a commercial about Al Gore'. Only if you're not actually watching could you come to this conclusion.
To address the major section of the movie, the part relating to global warming, Gore's lecture held me rapt. It felt a little like a good lecture at university. Full of information, just entertaining enough to be memorable, and full of pictures that properly illustrate the points he was making. I might, just maybe, be a visual learner. His information wasn't too surprising to me. I've kept fairly informed on the status of global warming in recent years. Some things came as a surprise-the fate of the permafrost on the tundra in particular freaked me out a little. I suppose my concern for what is essentially frozen sod might be a little surprising to those who generally reserve their panic for cute fuzzy things, but I have a special fondness for crocus and ptarmigan.
I think, oddly, what really drew the film together were the segments in which Gore explained the journey that lead him to this point. There wasn't a lot of over-focus on the events one might expect (Florida, anyone?), a simple statement of fact and then he moved on. I think those parts were well cut and placed appropriately within the context of the film. I found them interesting.
Oh, and everyone? Cut your carbon emissions before we all die in a fiery hellhole.
-20/365 down, 345/365 to go
Recommendation: Broomie
Reason: "I really want to see this movie." Okay, so sometimes the reasons for the recs aren't really compelling. :)
I think some of the criticism this movie receives is a little unjust. Though most of the point and thrust of the film is Al Gore's concern with global warming, the film is actually also about how he came to be so concerned with this very real issue. The two parts are not equal, but understanding that the latter is an intentional addition to the movie is crucial to recognizing that the film is not, as one internet movie fan put it, 'partially about global warming, partially a commercial about Al Gore'. Only if you're not actually watching could you come to this conclusion.
To address the major section of the movie, the part relating to global warming, Gore's lecture held me rapt. It felt a little like a good lecture at university. Full of information, just entertaining enough to be memorable, and full of pictures that properly illustrate the points he was making. I might, just maybe, be a visual learner. His information wasn't too surprising to me. I've kept fairly informed on the status of global warming in recent years. Some things came as a surprise-the fate of the permafrost on the tundra in particular freaked me out a little. I suppose my concern for what is essentially frozen sod might be a little surprising to those who generally reserve their panic for cute fuzzy things, but I have a special fondness for crocus and ptarmigan.
I think, oddly, what really drew the film together were the segments in which Gore explained the journey that lead him to this point. There wasn't a lot of over-focus on the events one might expect (Florida, anyone?), a simple statement of fact and then he moved on. I think those parts were well cut and placed appropriately within the context of the film. I found them interesting.
Oh, and everyone? Cut your carbon emissions before we all die in a fiery hellhole.
-20/365 down, 345/365 to go
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
A brief divergence
To forestall a few questions about this years Oscars, this is a quick rundown of my thoughts:
-Screw Clint Eastwood. Greengrass in '07!
-Go Team The Queen. Helen Mirren all the way.
-Clive Owen was robbed. Utterly robbed. And Hugh Jackman was double-robbed, which I suppose includes a beating and being left by the side of the road. Looking forward to 2008, guys. Keep up the good work and maybe someone will notice. (Not that I'm bitter)
-Jennifer Hudson was one of my favorite American Idol competitors ever. You go girl.
-I hope Pan's Labyrinth completely annihilates all competition (and I haven't even seen it), unless it's up against Children of Men.
-Borat can die in a fire. Adapted script? Go Team Children of Men!
-Screw all y'all that had a part in picking best score. Not even a nomination to The Fountain? Were you drunk?
-Three songs from Dreamgirls. Three. Songs. From. Dreamgirls. That's three chances for Beyonce to get up on stage at an awards ceremony that has nothing to do with her. What were they thinking? I'm cheering for Melissa Etheridge on principle (because Randy Newman needs to take a break or something, Jesus, man...)
-And in the category of "We have to give Disney something this year...nominate them for special effects!"...well, yeah. Pirates 2. But given the competition, full speed ahead, Davy Jones.
-Monster House needs to win an award. I don't care who I have to set on fire (though I wouldn't mind roasting Clint Eastwood). Monster House for Animated Feature, if only for being so beautifully 80's.
-Deliver Us from Evil or Jesus Camp? Jesus Camp or Deliver us from Evil? Either way will make me happy.
-Who am I kidding? I heart United 93, but we need to give Scorsese his friggin' Oscar already.
So yeah. I don't think I need to elaborate, but...if you want to ask about anything, just ask. And no, I won't be watching the show this year. YouTube will provide me with the highlights.
-Screw Clint Eastwood. Greengrass in '07!
-Go Team The Queen. Helen Mirren all the way.
-Clive Owen was robbed. Utterly robbed. And Hugh Jackman was double-robbed, which I suppose includes a beating and being left by the side of the road. Looking forward to 2008, guys. Keep up the good work and maybe someone will notice. (Not that I'm bitter)
-Jennifer Hudson was one of my favorite American Idol competitors ever. You go girl.
-I hope Pan's Labyrinth completely annihilates all competition (and I haven't even seen it), unless it's up against Children of Men.
-Borat can die in a fire. Adapted script? Go Team Children of Men!
-Screw all y'all that had a part in picking best score. Not even a nomination to The Fountain? Were you drunk?
-Three songs from Dreamgirls. Three. Songs. From. Dreamgirls. That's three chances for Beyonce to get up on stage at an awards ceremony that has nothing to do with her. What were they thinking? I'm cheering for Melissa Etheridge on principle (because Randy Newman needs to take a break or something, Jesus, man...)
-And in the category of "We have to give Disney something this year...nominate them for special effects!"...well, yeah. Pirates 2. But given the competition, full speed ahead, Davy Jones.
-Monster House needs to win an award. I don't care who I have to set on fire (though I wouldn't mind roasting Clint Eastwood). Monster House for Animated Feature, if only for being so beautifully 80's.
-Deliver Us from Evil or Jesus Camp? Jesus Camp or Deliver us from Evil? Either way will make me happy.
-Who am I kidding? I heart United 93, but we need to give Scorsese his friggin' Oscar already.
So yeah. I don't think I need to elaborate, but...if you want to ask about anything, just ask. And no, I won't be watching the show this year. YouTube will provide me with the highlights.
Did you see what he did to that guy's nose?
The Movie: Raging Bull, directed by Martin Scorsese
Recommendation: AFI Top 100
Reason: Does anyone really need an excuse to watch Raging Bull? Yeah, didn't think so.
Scorsese has never won an Oscar for directing. The works he has created have won, but he himself has never been honored with a win. I have seen four of his movies and I cannot believe that at the very least, he didn't get the statue for Raging Bull. The composition, the writing and the performances he coaxed out of his actors certainly deserved it. It didn't have the emotional kick that other films I've seen recently did, but the poetry Scorsese set up on the screen, built from music, brutality, light and darkness was spectacular to behold.
It was easy to lose DeNiro in his character. His immersion in the part was incredible. Though there isn't a truly weak performance to pick apart in the movie, DeNiro really stands out above the others. He deserved the statue he won for his part in this semi-biography, for so many little touches. In particular, it was his physical acting that caught my attention. I talk about tone and inflection a lot, but it's nice to be able to comment on the way an actor moves. DeNiro's sense of motion shared a certain menace that I'd previously enjoyed in Russell Crowe's Bud White (L.A. Confidential).
I enjoyed the film. It was a visual spectacle as much as a wonderful work of acting. Not my favorite movie of all time, but I at least understand the accolades it's gathered. Goddamit, Academy of Motion Pictures, just give him the statue already!
-19/365 down, 346/365 to go
Recommendation: AFI Top 100
Reason: Does anyone really need an excuse to watch Raging Bull? Yeah, didn't think so.
Scorsese has never won an Oscar for directing. The works he has created have won, but he himself has never been honored with a win. I have seen four of his movies and I cannot believe that at the very least, he didn't get the statue for Raging Bull. The composition, the writing and the performances he coaxed out of his actors certainly deserved it. It didn't have the emotional kick that other films I've seen recently did, but the poetry Scorsese set up on the screen, built from music, brutality, light and darkness was spectacular to behold.
It was easy to lose DeNiro in his character. His immersion in the part was incredible. Though there isn't a truly weak performance to pick apart in the movie, DeNiro really stands out above the others. He deserved the statue he won for his part in this semi-biography, for so many little touches. In particular, it was his physical acting that caught my attention. I talk about tone and inflection a lot, but it's nice to be able to comment on the way an actor moves. DeNiro's sense of motion shared a certain menace that I'd previously enjoyed in Russell Crowe's Bud White (L.A. Confidential).
I enjoyed the film. It was a visual spectacle as much as a wonderful work of acting. Not my favorite movie of all time, but I at least understand the accolades it's gathered. Goddamit, Academy of Motion Pictures, just give him the statue already!
-19/365 down, 346/365 to go
Monday, January 22, 2007
A mesmerized innocent
The Movie: The Bridge On the River Kwai, directed by David Lean
Recommendation: AFI top 100.
Reason: Okay, so maybe I lied when I said I wasn't working my way through the AFI top 100. Not all of it, but a cross section. Some. Most.
Number thirteen on the AFI's top 100 list is a pretty prestigious spot to hold (especially with Strangelove sitting at 26, the charlatans). Did The Bridge on the River Kwai earn it? I'd say definitely. Best picture of its year, best actor of its year and a whole stack of other awards came its way, and I'd say they were definitely well deserved. The script, cinematography and score were excellent underpinnings to some wonderful performances.
This is the part where Sir Alec Guinness gets his apologies. I know I mentioned in an earlier review (of Last Holiday) the propensity of pretty much everyone to remember him entirely for Obi Wan Kenobi, the role he hated the most. Until fairly recently, I haven't had the opportunity to see many of his other works. His performance in Kwai was stunning. It was a case of the actor disappearing into the role. He elevated what could have been a schlocky Heart of Darkness-esque performance into a very real experience. He was truly one of the greatest of his generation, and I've unearthed a quote of his that I believe sums up his point of view on acting quite nicely. "An actor is an interpreter of other men's words, often a soul which wishes to reveal itself to the world but dare not, a craftsman, a bag of tricks, a vanity bag, a cool observer of mankind, a child, and at his best a kind of unfrocked priest who, for an hour or two, can call on heaven and hell to mesmerise a group of innocents."
It was an excellent movie, in short. Two hours and forty minutes long, and I don't think a minute was wasted. The performances were excellent. I'm certain I'll be re-viewing the ending for awhile to come.
-18/365 down, 347/365 to go.
Recommendation: AFI top 100.
Reason: Okay, so maybe I lied when I said I wasn't working my way through the AFI top 100. Not all of it, but a cross section. Some. Most.
Number thirteen on the AFI's top 100 list is a pretty prestigious spot to hold (especially with Strangelove sitting at 26, the charlatans). Did The Bridge on the River Kwai earn it? I'd say definitely. Best picture of its year, best actor of its year and a whole stack of other awards came its way, and I'd say they were definitely well deserved. The script, cinematography and score were excellent underpinnings to some wonderful performances.
This is the part where Sir Alec Guinness gets his apologies. I know I mentioned in an earlier review (of Last Holiday) the propensity of pretty much everyone to remember him entirely for Obi Wan Kenobi, the role he hated the most. Until fairly recently, I haven't had the opportunity to see many of his other works. His performance in Kwai was stunning. It was a case of the actor disappearing into the role. He elevated what could have been a schlocky Heart of Darkness-esque performance into a very real experience. He was truly one of the greatest of his generation, and I've unearthed a quote of his that I believe sums up his point of view on acting quite nicely. "An actor is an interpreter of other men's words, often a soul which wishes to reveal itself to the world but dare not, a craftsman, a bag of tricks, a vanity bag, a cool observer of mankind, a child, and at his best a kind of unfrocked priest who, for an hour or two, can call on heaven and hell to mesmerise a group of innocents."
It was an excellent movie, in short. Two hours and forty minutes long, and I don't think a minute was wasted. The performances were excellent. I'm certain I'll be re-viewing the ending for awhile to come.
-18/365 down, 347/365 to go.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Morris Day, P.I.M.P.
The Movie: Purple Rain, directed by Albert Magnoli
Recommendation: H
Reason: "Mostly for the Prince, but it's also a classic with amazing music"
H has a thing for Prince. She really likes him. A lot. I like Prince's music. I like rock and roll movies (I mean, generally speaking I do). I like classic movies and, surprisingly, I liked Purple Rain. Seriously, I did. It's certainly not a film on par with the creme de la creme, but it's a well-shot rock and roll movie. It was fun to watch Prince flounce around, and let myself enjoy the excellent camerawork on what looked like some pretty decent live performances.
Prince does his best acting on stage. He's a flippy, flouncy, scenery crunching ham when he's not performing, but when he's dancing and singing, it's easy to catch a sense of the character he's trying to portray. He's fun to watch, whether he's melodramatically staring off into middle distance, scampering around onstage or awkwardly attempting to kiss the (forgettable) female lead while touching as little of her face as he can. H was right, the music was great (does anyone not like at least one Prince song?). The acting was awful. The filming was alright. The script was...wretched. Morris Day was an absolute pimp.
I like that I'm starting to catch on to homages and sly little jokes that filmmakers are slipping into their movies. Purple Rain was a pretty neat revelation for little old me. Who'd have thought Jay would be a Prince fan, after all?
-17/365 down, 348/365 to go.
Recommendation: H
Reason: "Mostly for the Prince, but it's also a classic with amazing music"
H has a thing for Prince. She really likes him. A lot. I like Prince's music. I like rock and roll movies (I mean, generally speaking I do). I like classic movies and, surprisingly, I liked Purple Rain. Seriously, I did. It's certainly not a film on par with the creme de la creme, but it's a well-shot rock and roll movie. It was fun to watch Prince flounce around, and let myself enjoy the excellent camerawork on what looked like some pretty decent live performances.
Prince does his best acting on stage. He's a flippy, flouncy, scenery crunching ham when he's not performing, but when he's dancing and singing, it's easy to catch a sense of the character he's trying to portray. He's fun to watch, whether he's melodramatically staring off into middle distance, scampering around onstage or awkwardly attempting to kiss the (forgettable) female lead while touching as little of her face as he can. H was right, the music was great (does anyone not like at least one Prince song?). The acting was awful. The filming was alright. The script was...wretched. Morris Day was an absolute pimp.
I like that I'm starting to catch on to homages and sly little jokes that filmmakers are slipping into their movies. Purple Rain was a pretty neat revelation for little old me. Who'd have thought Jay would be a Prince fan, after all?
-17/365 down, 348/365 to go.
Friday, January 19, 2007
A Mutiny of Preverts
The Movie: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, directed by Stanley Kubrick
Recommendation: AFI top 100.
Reason: I'm not trying to tackle the AFI top 100, but it's easiest to list it as the recommendation. Strangelove is such a staple of pop culture that it essentially recommends itself.
I remember where I was when Gorbachev was overthrown and the countdown to the end of the Cold War really began. I was eleven, and I was at Girl Guide camp, being driven back to the campsite by one of the leaders. I heard about it on the radio. I guess I wanted to start by saying that so I could place myself at the end of the era of Strangelove. I didn't feel the fear others felt about the Russians or the Commies-I had a major problem with Nazis, but that was due to a lot of Indiana Jones as a kid. Nevertheless, I learned more as time passed by, and so I found myself appreciating Strangelove quite a bit.
I can't really analyze the movie. It would take too long. I understand the message, I see the subtle touches Kubrick placed on it. I got a lot of the jokes, blatant and not, and if there is a funnier man than Peter Sellers, he has yet to present himself. RIP, good sir, you were a credit to your profession. I don't know that I can really internalize this movie on just one watch-through. It was good, I can say that. I can even admit that it was great, in a pitch-black comedy sort of way. It was definitely absurd.
I think my appreciation of Kubrick has soared by viewing this piece, and I'm now tempted to track down an unedited version of Eyes Wide Shut (the first of his films that I saw, and I found it more incomprehensible than Mulholland Drive). Strangelove was hilarious, it was frightening, and I don't think I could possibly do it justice with any more words than I've already used. See it, think about it, and I hope you enjoy it.
-16/365 down, 349/365 to go
Recommendation: AFI top 100.
Reason: I'm not trying to tackle the AFI top 100, but it's easiest to list it as the recommendation. Strangelove is such a staple of pop culture that it essentially recommends itself.
I remember where I was when Gorbachev was overthrown and the countdown to the end of the Cold War really began. I was eleven, and I was at Girl Guide camp, being driven back to the campsite by one of the leaders. I heard about it on the radio. I guess I wanted to start by saying that so I could place myself at the end of the era of Strangelove. I didn't feel the fear others felt about the Russians or the Commies-I had a major problem with Nazis, but that was due to a lot of Indiana Jones as a kid. Nevertheless, I learned more as time passed by, and so I found myself appreciating Strangelove quite a bit.
I can't really analyze the movie. It would take too long. I understand the message, I see the subtle touches Kubrick placed on it. I got a lot of the jokes, blatant and not, and if there is a funnier man than Peter Sellers, he has yet to present himself. RIP, good sir, you were a credit to your profession. I don't know that I can really internalize this movie on just one watch-through. It was good, I can say that. I can even admit that it was great, in a pitch-black comedy sort of way. It was definitely absurd.
I think my appreciation of Kubrick has soared by viewing this piece, and I'm now tempted to track down an unedited version of Eyes Wide Shut (the first of his films that I saw, and I found it more incomprehensible than Mulholland Drive). Strangelove was hilarious, it was frightening, and I don't think I could possibly do it justice with any more words than I've already used. See it, think about it, and I hope you enjoy it.
-16/365 down, 349/365 to go
Czech Republic is a gorgeous country
The Movie: Last Holiday, directed by Wayne Wang
Recommendation: Dee's mom
Reason: She thought it was a very funny movie, and also very good.
I'm very fond of recent trends in filmmaking that involve going to Czech Republic. The architecture and scenery is wonderful to look at, whether the movie itself is any good (ahem, xXx, Van Helsing...you get the picture). Not to say that Last Holiday was a bad movie. It was sweet and easy to watch, with Queen Latifah putting forth her usual entertaining performance.
The original movie starred Alec Guinness, and I haven't any experience with it. The premise was interesting, and there were some intriguing subtexts to several scenes in the film. I was struck, in particular, by the church scene. As Georgia calls out to God, asking why she's been singled out for punishment, the parishoners begin to take up her call. She walks through the church, singing and praying, and the congregation builds to a crescendo...but none of them know why she's questioning God, and so none of them can really share in her emotion in that moment. They're parroting, following along, saying what they think they should. Kind of the way people tend to act around the sick and the dying. If that was the intent of the scene, I actually thought it was well done. If it wasn't...well, I'm obviously reading too much into what was otherwise a sweetly forgettable popcorn flick.
Liked the movie. It was a nice, light evening's entertainment. I'd like to see the original, being a fan of non-Kenobi Sir Alec Guinness (please don't come back from the dead and smite me, sir). Maybe I'll pop it onto my list.
-15/365 down, 350/365 to go
Recommendation: Dee's mom
Reason: She thought it was a very funny movie, and also very good.
I'm very fond of recent trends in filmmaking that involve going to Czech Republic. The architecture and scenery is wonderful to look at, whether the movie itself is any good (ahem, xXx, Van Helsing...you get the picture). Not to say that Last Holiday was a bad movie. It was sweet and easy to watch, with Queen Latifah putting forth her usual entertaining performance.
The original movie starred Alec Guinness, and I haven't any experience with it. The premise was interesting, and there were some intriguing subtexts to several scenes in the film. I was struck, in particular, by the church scene. As Georgia calls out to God, asking why she's been singled out for punishment, the parishoners begin to take up her call. She walks through the church, singing and praying, and the congregation builds to a crescendo...but none of them know why she's questioning God, and so none of them can really share in her emotion in that moment. They're parroting, following along, saying what they think they should. Kind of the way people tend to act around the sick and the dying. If that was the intent of the scene, I actually thought it was well done. If it wasn't...well, I'm obviously reading too much into what was otherwise a sweetly forgettable popcorn flick.
Liked the movie. It was a nice, light evening's entertainment. I'd like to see the original, being a fan of non-Kenobi Sir Alec Guinness (please don't come back from the dead and smite me, sir). Maybe I'll pop it onto my list.
-15/365 down, 350/365 to go
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Goddamn it was a shitty year for comedy/musicals
The Movie: Miss Potter, directed by Chris Noonan
Recommendation: Free preview tickets. That's right, no one's taking the blame on this one.
Reason: Free preview tickets.
I don't like awards shows. I have a fundamental disagreement with the Academy of Motion Pictures, the Golden Globes, the Emmies, the Grammys, the People's Choice Awards...year after year, I find less and less about their selections that jives with my own. This year in particular I'm finding myself astounded by the dissonance between what I've been watching and what's up for trophies. Miss Potter is a perfect example. I went in expecting a story about a writer, perhaps some intriguing performances from some decent actors, and what I got was a meandering biography with milquetoast acting and a crippled sense of purpose.
Of the persons on the screen, it was Ewan MacGregor who I felt put on the most inspired performance. His subtle touches of expression and tone were excellent, perfect little accents to the scenes he was in. The loss of the character midway through the movie really hurt it, as Renee Zellweger completely failed to be engaging or interesting in any way. Imagine my surprise to find her nominated for a Golden Globe for this very performance. I have generally enjoyed her work in the past, and I was surprised by how boring and repellent I found her performance. Whatever her grasp of character and era, she seemed to be playing her usual 'sassy rebel'. I felt she underperformed here, whether it was her fault or that of the scriptwriters.
The cinematography of the movie itself was quite nice. No really daring or spectacular shots, but wise decisions were made when shooting the countryside of the Isle of Man. The broad, sweeping views were wondrous, bringing forth the real beauty of the place and really demonstrating its role in Potter's work. I wish the rest of the movie had enough of a sense of purpose or point to justify such a wonderful location. If someone wants to have a run at J.K. Rowling or Stephen King (with some gorgeous Maine scenery, I hope): the Movie, I'm there, but Miss Potter was certainly not my cup of tea.
-14/365 down, 361/365 to go
Recommendation: Free preview tickets. That's right, no one's taking the blame on this one.
Reason: Free preview tickets.
I don't like awards shows. I have a fundamental disagreement with the Academy of Motion Pictures, the Golden Globes, the Emmies, the Grammys, the People's Choice Awards...year after year, I find less and less about their selections that jives with my own. This year in particular I'm finding myself astounded by the dissonance between what I've been watching and what's up for trophies. Miss Potter is a perfect example. I went in expecting a story about a writer, perhaps some intriguing performances from some decent actors, and what I got was a meandering biography with milquetoast acting and a crippled sense of purpose.
Of the persons on the screen, it was Ewan MacGregor who I felt put on the most inspired performance. His subtle touches of expression and tone were excellent, perfect little accents to the scenes he was in. The loss of the character midway through the movie really hurt it, as Renee Zellweger completely failed to be engaging or interesting in any way. Imagine my surprise to find her nominated for a Golden Globe for this very performance. I have generally enjoyed her work in the past, and I was surprised by how boring and repellent I found her performance. Whatever her grasp of character and era, she seemed to be playing her usual 'sassy rebel'. I felt she underperformed here, whether it was her fault or that of the scriptwriters.
The cinematography of the movie itself was quite nice. No really daring or spectacular shots, but wise decisions were made when shooting the countryside of the Isle of Man. The broad, sweeping views were wondrous, bringing forth the real beauty of the place and really demonstrating its role in Potter's work. I wish the rest of the movie had enough of a sense of purpose or point to justify such a wonderful location. If someone wants to have a run at J.K. Rowling or Stephen King (with some gorgeous Maine scenery, I hope): the Movie, I'm there, but Miss Potter was certainly not my cup of tea.
-14/365 down, 361/365 to go
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Crackhead? Crackhead. Crackhead!
The Movie: Crank, directed by Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor
Recommendation: Me
Reason: It looked like a cool little brains-off action movie. We're kind of Jason Statham fans.
With a tagline like "Poison in his veins. Vengeance in his heart." you pretty much know what you're in for. I first heard of Crank due to a SpikeTV preview clip, and due to my devotion to Statham's acting career I knew I had to see it. The storyline's convoluted in a simple sort of way. The bad guys injected Jason Statham's character with a poison. If the bus...er...Statham goes below a certain adrenaline level, he starts to die. It's Speed, only it's a guy, not a bus. That's about as wrong a definition of Crank as you're going to get, but it's the easiest way to explain it.
There's no way you can say that a movie in which Dwight Yoakam is cast (in all seriousness) as a doctor is going to be factually accurate, but Crank makes its intentions clear from the opening frames. This is not a movie about realism. This isn't even a movie that gives a damn about plot or anything much beyond pushing the action-movie envelope as far as it can go. It's almost a parody of the action genre, cutting close to a sort of Scream trilogy satire. It's so over-the-top that it can't be taken seriously, but it's a heck of a ride. Statham completely dominates the rest of the cast with his usual sardonic persona (this could practically be The Transporter 3: On Foot and Angry). He's funny and physical, managing the standard Stathamisms of creative action sequences and growly English.
The style of the movie is wonderful. It blatantly rips off the GTA series of games, and in fact it feels like you're watching a video game's cutscenes most of the way through. Even the placement of little mini-movies inside of the scenes add to the Playstation feel of the whole thing (and of course, the map-view that moves the story from location to location). Those little touches really pulled Crank from 'decent action movie' to 'rewatchable scenery-chewing'. It was a fun thing to watch.
-13/365 down, 352/365 to go
Recommendation: Me
Reason: It looked like a cool little brains-off action movie. We're kind of Jason Statham fans.
With a tagline like "Poison in his veins. Vengeance in his heart." you pretty much know what you're in for. I first heard of Crank due to a SpikeTV preview clip, and due to my devotion to Statham's acting career I knew I had to see it. The storyline's convoluted in a simple sort of way. The bad guys injected Jason Statham's character with a poison. If the bus...er...Statham goes below a certain adrenaline level, he starts to die. It's Speed, only it's a guy, not a bus. That's about as wrong a definition of Crank as you're going to get, but it's the easiest way to explain it.
There's no way you can say that a movie in which Dwight Yoakam is cast (in all seriousness) as a doctor is going to be factually accurate, but Crank makes its intentions clear from the opening frames. This is not a movie about realism. This isn't even a movie that gives a damn about plot or anything much beyond pushing the action-movie envelope as far as it can go. It's almost a parody of the action genre, cutting close to a sort of Scream trilogy satire. It's so over-the-top that it can't be taken seriously, but it's a heck of a ride. Statham completely dominates the rest of the cast with his usual sardonic persona (this could practically be The Transporter 3: On Foot and Angry). He's funny and physical, managing the standard Stathamisms of creative action sequences and growly English.
The style of the movie is wonderful. It blatantly rips off the GTA series of games, and in fact it feels like you're watching a video game's cutscenes most of the way through. Even the placement of little mini-movies inside of the scenes add to the Playstation feel of the whole thing (and of course, the map-view that moves the story from location to location). Those little touches really pulled Crank from 'decent action movie' to 'rewatchable scenery-chewing'. It was a fun thing to watch.
-13/365 down, 352/365 to go
Monday, January 15, 2007
Is there anything Bill Nighy can't do?
The Movie: Love Actually, directed by Richard Curtis
Recommendation: Me.
Reason: I wanted to see if Chiwetel Ejiofor could play a character I don't hate. Also, everyone I talked to said it was really good.
The good news is that yes, Chiwetel Ejiofor pulled it off. I did not hate his character in Love Actually. He didn't seem at all villainous, didn't wield any sort of weapon against anyone, and if his philosophy was in any way disagreeable, I didn't notice. Hurray! The great news is that Love Actually is a sweetly sensational rom-com that manages to be funny and romantic while not being overly sappy. There are sugary moments, but the movie as a whole manages to dodge the 'overly cute' bandwagon quite nicely.
It's a quirky, interesting bunch of plots, some large, some small, all of them overlapping in tiny ways. The movie explores not only romantic love, but also familial love, lust, the love of children and unrequited love. It places equal importance on the love between siblings, parents and children, perfect strangers and long-dating couples. The relationships are explored in short segments, snippets rather than extended examinations of the whys, whos and hows. The performances the cast pulled off shone-not a one of them was bad, and most were note-perfect. Bill Nighy in particular did an excellent job. He's starting to become a secondary Christopher Walken-his presence improves every movie I've seen him in.
It was a fun, interesting movie that made me laugh, cry and cheer here and there. I have a feeling I'll be cheerily watching it for years to come. I'd heartily recommend it for anyone who doesn't like the usual sort of rom-com.
-12/365 down, 353/365 to go
Recommendation: Me.
Reason: I wanted to see if Chiwetel Ejiofor could play a character I don't hate. Also, everyone I talked to said it was really good.
The good news is that yes, Chiwetel Ejiofor pulled it off. I did not hate his character in Love Actually. He didn't seem at all villainous, didn't wield any sort of weapon against anyone, and if his philosophy was in any way disagreeable, I didn't notice. Hurray! The great news is that Love Actually is a sweetly sensational rom-com that manages to be funny and romantic while not being overly sappy. There are sugary moments, but the movie as a whole manages to dodge the 'overly cute' bandwagon quite nicely.
It's a quirky, interesting bunch of plots, some large, some small, all of them overlapping in tiny ways. The movie explores not only romantic love, but also familial love, lust, the love of children and unrequited love. It places equal importance on the love between siblings, parents and children, perfect strangers and long-dating couples. The relationships are explored in short segments, snippets rather than extended examinations of the whys, whos and hows. The performances the cast pulled off shone-not a one of them was bad, and most were note-perfect. Bill Nighy in particular did an excellent job. He's starting to become a secondary Christopher Walken-his presence improves every movie I've seen him in.
It was a fun, interesting movie that made me laugh, cry and cheer here and there. I have a feeling I'll be cheerily watching it for years to come. I'd heartily recommend it for anyone who doesn't like the usual sort of rom-com.
-12/365 down, 353/365 to go
May-December couples are bad at mortality
Movie: Autumn in New York, directed by Joan Chen
Reccomendation: B-Dawg
Reason: "It's a very sad movie, but it's also beautiful."
I'm not sure what B-Dawg has going on with Twin Peaks, but there's a definite connection here. Joan Chen was apparently a series regular, and Moira Kelly (from The Cutting Edge, one review back) was in Fire Walk With Me. Now that I have that observation out of the way, on with the show.
Autumn in New York was nominated for a Razzie the year it came out for worst onscreen couple. Given what else came out that year (especially in that category, Blair Witch 2 I'm looking at you), Autumn in New York was certainly an underdog. I think that this movie sort of died on the lack of connection between the leads. Fond as I am of Richard Gere and some of Winona Ryder's work, Will and Charlotte can't compare to Izzy and Tom, Theo and Julian or even Julien and Sophie. The performers didn't sell me enough on the characters' relationship to make such a straightforward story spectacular.
To contrast with the story and the acting, this is a very visually nice movie. The use of color and framing really brought Autumn in New York out of the realm of 'forgettable' and into the realm of 'watchable'. Nothing too daring or incredible, but attractive enough. Better than Blood Creature, but still lagging behind The Cutting Edge.
-11/365 down, 354/365 to go
Reccomendation: B-Dawg
Reason: "It's a very sad movie, but it's also beautiful."
I'm not sure what B-Dawg has going on with Twin Peaks, but there's a definite connection here. Joan Chen was apparently a series regular, and Moira Kelly (from The Cutting Edge, one review back) was in Fire Walk With Me. Now that I have that observation out of the way, on with the show.
Autumn in New York was nominated for a Razzie the year it came out for worst onscreen couple. Given what else came out that year (especially in that category, Blair Witch 2 I'm looking at you), Autumn in New York was certainly an underdog. I think that this movie sort of died on the lack of connection between the leads. Fond as I am of Richard Gere and some of Winona Ryder's work, Will and Charlotte can't compare to Izzy and Tom, Theo and Julian or even Julien and Sophie. The performers didn't sell me enough on the characters' relationship to make such a straightforward story spectacular.
To contrast with the story and the acting, this is a very visually nice movie. The use of color and framing really brought Autumn in New York out of the realm of 'forgettable' and into the realm of 'watchable'. Nothing too daring or incredible, but attractive enough. Better than Blood Creature, but still lagging behind The Cutting Edge.
-11/365 down, 354/365 to go
Toepick!
Movie: The Cutting Edge, directed by Paul Michael Glaser
Recommendation: B-Dawg
Reason: "It's just a good romantic comedy."
Confession time: Until my cousin handed me this DVD and confided that it was one of her favorite movies ever, I had never heard of The Cutting Edge. Based on the reaction that revelation has gotten from some of my other friends and associates, I should apparently be considering revoking my Canadian citizenship, or at least my claim to be a Canadian girl. This was evidently a staple film of YTV and Fox Rochester while I was growing up. I can honestly say this is the first movie I've been handed that I wouldn't have picked up on my own, and just as honestly I can thank B-Dawg for the recommendation.
I'm not a romantic comedy buff. As I mentioned in my review of Love Me If You Dare, I like my rom-coms quirky and weird, as well as more than a little twisted. The sort of straight-up saccharine that The Cutting Edge and its ilk are made of usually repels me. The sheer chemistry of this movie is what made it work. Moira Kelly and D.B. Sweeney are certainly capable actors, and they put on a decent show when they're not sharing a scene, but the easy build of romance and chemistry was the true shining moment of this piece.
The story was stable, but simple enough-ice princess backstabs one partner after another (one actually gets a literal backstab, though it's with a toepick), meets hockey player, they skate, fall in love, maybe win an Olympic medal. Bog standard opposites attract rom-com meets sports movie. It worked, though. The usual props go out to Terry O'Quinn for remaining one of the best TV actors working today (and I got an extra big chuckle out of Moira Kelly's late-in-the-film line "No one tells me what I can and can't do." LOST fans ahoy!). I'm glad I saw this movie. Totally aces.
-10/365 down, 355/365 to go
Recommendation: B-Dawg
Reason: "It's just a good romantic comedy."
Confession time: Until my cousin handed me this DVD and confided that it was one of her favorite movies ever, I had never heard of The Cutting Edge. Based on the reaction that revelation has gotten from some of my other friends and associates, I should apparently be considering revoking my Canadian citizenship, or at least my claim to be a Canadian girl. This was evidently a staple film of YTV and Fox Rochester while I was growing up. I can honestly say this is the first movie I've been handed that I wouldn't have picked up on my own, and just as honestly I can thank B-Dawg for the recommendation.
I'm not a romantic comedy buff. As I mentioned in my review of Love Me If You Dare, I like my rom-coms quirky and weird, as well as more than a little twisted. The sort of straight-up saccharine that The Cutting Edge and its ilk are made of usually repels me. The sheer chemistry of this movie is what made it work. Moira Kelly and D.B. Sweeney are certainly capable actors, and they put on a decent show when they're not sharing a scene, but the easy build of romance and chemistry was the true shining moment of this piece.
The story was stable, but simple enough-ice princess backstabs one partner after another (one actually gets a literal backstab, though it's with a toepick), meets hockey player, they skate, fall in love, maybe win an Olympic medal. Bog standard opposites attract rom-com meets sports movie. It worked, though. The usual props go out to Terry O'Quinn for remaining one of the best TV actors working today (and I got an extra big chuckle out of Moira Kelly's late-in-the-film line "No one tells me what I can and can't do." LOST fans ahoy!). I'm glad I saw this movie. Totally aces.
-10/365 down, 355/365 to go
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Why do the British set fire to the livestock every time there's an apocalypse?
The Movie: Children of Men, directed by Alfonso Cuarón
Reccomendation: Me
Reason: I'm wild about Clive Owen. That's essentially the reason I saw this movie.
There was no way this movie could have lived up to all the hype. That's what I'd have said a few hours ago, anyway. No way in hell. Sure, Clive Owen's in it. Michael Caine. Julianne Moore. Chiwetel Ejiofor. Sure it's a dystopian future England (I heart dystopian future England). Sure, it's directed by Alfonso Cuarón. But there wasn't a chance it could live up to everything I've heard.
It exceeded my expectations enormously. The camerawork was intimate, the world Alfonso Cuarón sought to create was wholly realized. Clive Owen and Claire-Hope Ashitey were utterly human in a way few movie characters manage to be. The plot was intricate but understandable, and even the slightest throwaway shots were laden with emotion and meaning. The desperation and hope of every character was palpable, even those with only one or two lines. From the explosive beginning to the heart-thumping end, it was a real epic.
There's not much I can say here aside from this: See this movie. I don't really care if you like it as much as I did. I just want more people to see it. It's beautiful and horrible and terrifying. It's wonderful. Make up a reason. Just go watch it. Please. Just to be glib for a moment, Chiwetel Ejiofor needs to play a character that isn't misguidedly evil. Just once. I'd like to like his characters because he's truly an underrated actor.
-9/365 down, 356/365 to go
Reccomendation: Me
Reason: I'm wild about Clive Owen. That's essentially the reason I saw this movie.
There was no way this movie could have lived up to all the hype. That's what I'd have said a few hours ago, anyway. No way in hell. Sure, Clive Owen's in it. Michael Caine. Julianne Moore. Chiwetel Ejiofor. Sure it's a dystopian future England (I heart dystopian future England). Sure, it's directed by Alfonso Cuarón. But there wasn't a chance it could live up to everything I've heard.
It exceeded my expectations enormously. The camerawork was intimate, the world Alfonso Cuarón sought to create was wholly realized. Clive Owen and Claire-Hope Ashitey were utterly human in a way few movie characters manage to be. The plot was intricate but understandable, and even the slightest throwaway shots were laden with emotion and meaning. The desperation and hope of every character was palpable, even those with only one or two lines. From the explosive beginning to the heart-thumping end, it was a real epic.
There's not much I can say here aside from this: See this movie. I don't really care if you like it as much as I did. I just want more people to see it. It's beautiful and horrible and terrifying. It's wonderful. Make up a reason. Just go watch it. Please. Just to be glib for a moment, Chiwetel Ejiofor needs to play a character that isn't misguidedly evil. Just once. I'd like to like his characters because he's truly an underrated actor.
-9/365 down, 356/365 to go
Saturday, January 13, 2007
It's like The Craft, only with boys
The Movie: The Covenant, directed by Renny Harlin
Reccomendation: Broomie
Reason: See the review title.
Picture this. It's 1998. They're making The Craft 2. They cast Joshua Jackson, Shane West, Devon Sawa and Seth Green as boy witches. As a villian, they've chosen...I dunno, Barry Watson. They rip the plot from The Craft, but make it with boys this time. Things explode. Fairuza Balk and Neve Campbell make a cameo appearance, possibly playing wise mentors or older sisters to the young warlocks. A good time is had by all. That's the movie I was imagining in my head when I first heard word of The Covenant. That is not the movie I saw tonight.
There are a lot of things wrong with The Covenant. The leads are uncharismatic and cannot act. The lead girl was a shining example of how to take the audience entirely out of the movie with a poor performance. None of the characters were distinct enough to care about-even the villain managed to be both unsympathetic and completely moronic. The plot was muddled and pointless. The camera work was distracting and the special effects were awful. While I was imagining Joshua Jackson snarling the lead's lines, putting up his dukes and maybe throwing around some fireballs, the lead was actually whipping around bad liquid effects. Also, the whole 'jumping off a really high thing and landing in a crouch, then walking off like a total badass' was badass when Kate Beckinsdale did it in Underworld, in 2003. It is no longer badass, even when you do it three times in one movie.
As you can tell, I didn't like the flick. It was pretty subpar, so I'll stick with my imagined movie full of 90's Teenbeat coverboys who could actually occasionally act, instead of 2000's crop of whiny emoboys. And I would've totally cast Claire Danes as the lead girl. That's just how I roll.
-8/365 down, 357/365 to go
Reccomendation: Broomie
Reason: See the review title.
Picture this. It's 1998. They're making The Craft 2. They cast Joshua Jackson, Shane West, Devon Sawa and Seth Green as boy witches. As a villian, they've chosen...I dunno, Barry Watson. They rip the plot from The Craft, but make it with boys this time. Things explode. Fairuza Balk and Neve Campbell make a cameo appearance, possibly playing wise mentors or older sisters to the young warlocks. A good time is had by all. That's the movie I was imagining in my head when I first heard word of The Covenant. That is not the movie I saw tonight.
There are a lot of things wrong with The Covenant. The leads are uncharismatic and cannot act. The lead girl was a shining example of how to take the audience entirely out of the movie with a poor performance. None of the characters were distinct enough to care about-even the villain managed to be both unsympathetic and completely moronic. The plot was muddled and pointless. The camera work was distracting and the special effects were awful. While I was imagining Joshua Jackson snarling the lead's lines, putting up his dukes and maybe throwing around some fireballs, the lead was actually whipping around bad liquid effects. Also, the whole 'jumping off a really high thing and landing in a crouch, then walking off like a total badass' was badass when Kate Beckinsdale did it in Underworld, in 2003. It is no longer badass, even when you do it three times in one movie.
As you can tell, I didn't like the flick. It was pretty subpar, so I'll stick with my imagined movie full of 90's Teenbeat coverboys who could actually occasionally act, instead of 2000's crop of whiny emoboys. And I would've totally cast Claire Danes as the lead girl. That's just how I roll.
-8/365 down, 357/365 to go
Friday, January 12, 2007
How do you get ambushed by a planet?
Movie: Transformers: the Movie, directed by Nelson Shin
Reccomendation: Broomie
Reason: We're children of the 80's, and he just really wanted to watch the movie.
When I was a kid in the 80's, I was a pretty big fan of cartoons. Jem and the Holograms, Thundercats, Smurfs, those were my favorites. Transformers was more my brother's thing, though we did play with the toys together a lot. Ever since it was announced that Michael Bay was making a live action Transformers movie, I've been watching all the fuss with a bit of amusement. I didn't really have all of the same fond memories my fellow 80's children did. Watching this movie didn't bring back the sort of nostalgia I really expected.
The first time we tried watching this movie I missed a few important plot points, but the second time through (complete with two huge fans who did have that nostalgia I didn't) was much easier on my head. I mostly switched off my brain and enjoyed the happenings onscreen. I can understand now how the Transformers movie was so significant for fans of the show-a good quantity of the main cast gets completely annihilated in the opening acts.
There isn't a lot I can say about Transformers. It was alright, and the experience was definitely enhanced by watching with people who really love and miss the series. The animation was solid 80's Bakshi, the voice talent surprisingly well picked.
-7/365 done, 358/265 to go
Reccomendation: Broomie
Reason: We're children of the 80's, and he just really wanted to watch the movie.
When I was a kid in the 80's, I was a pretty big fan of cartoons. Jem and the Holograms, Thundercats, Smurfs, those were my favorites. Transformers was more my brother's thing, though we did play with the toys together a lot. Ever since it was announced that Michael Bay was making a live action Transformers movie, I've been watching all the fuss with a bit of amusement. I didn't really have all of the same fond memories my fellow 80's children did. Watching this movie didn't bring back the sort of nostalgia I really expected.
The first time we tried watching this movie I missed a few important plot points, but the second time through (complete with two huge fans who did have that nostalgia I didn't) was much easier on my head. I mostly switched off my brain and enjoyed the happenings onscreen. I can understand now how the Transformers movie was so significant for fans of the show-a good quantity of the main cast gets completely annihilated in the opening acts.
There isn't a lot I can say about Transformers. It was alright, and the experience was definitely enhanced by watching with people who really love and miss the series. The animation was solid 80's Bakshi, the voice talent surprisingly well picked.
-7/365 done, 358/265 to go
Tuesday, January 9, 2007
Nicole Kidman's Voice Is Creepy
Movie: Happy Feet, directed by George Miller
Reccomendation: Dee
Reason: Stomp stomp clap, stomp stomp clap, stomp clap stomp clap stomp stomp clap. In other words, she wanted to see dancing penguins.
Happy Feet is a strange sort of movie. It's wonderfully animated, with a great deal of attention to detail. It's got an interesting set of plots running. The voice talent is decent. It's just...weird. To get the usual questions out of the way, yes, I did enjoy the movie, no it wasn't the best movie ever. Yes, it was really weird.
I think Hugh Jackman is my new hero this year. His performance in The Fountain was enough to send me into bliss, and he managed to sing his way into my head again in Happy Feet. Elijah Wood was fairly nondescript, vocally speaking. Brittany Murphy was her usual distinctive self, and managed to pull off a bit of a surprise by being a reasonably capable singer. Robin Williams bounced off the walls as he always does. Steve Irwin's voice came as a bit of a surprise though given the content of the film, his contribution makes plenty of sense. Nicole Kidman seemed midway between Norma Jean/Marilyn Monroe and leaving-a-pretty-corpse Satine, which I found oddly jarring. In fact, I was picking up a bit of a 'Baz Luhrmann' vibe from the entire proceeding (which isn't a bad thing, I love me some Baz).
The weirdness of the movie comes from the plot, which suffers from an awkward shifting of focus and momentum here and there throughout the film. None of it felt tacked on or added 'just cause', but the directions the story took were certainly unexpected at several points. Many critics seem to be lambasting Happy Feet due to the messages the movie seems to be passing along to the audience. I can certainly see their point-the movie is not subtle on its environmental message or its 'be yourself' attitude, but the latter isn't rare in today's movies. It's the rather stark portrayal of zoos and the implied casual attitude of humans towards the environment that seems to have people up in arms. I think the movie went a little heavy on those points-they're harsh, compared to the otherwise upbeat tone of the show.
-6/365 done, 359/365 to go
Reccomendation: Dee
Reason: Stomp stomp clap, stomp stomp clap, stomp clap stomp clap stomp stomp clap. In other words, she wanted to see dancing penguins.
Happy Feet is a strange sort of movie. It's wonderfully animated, with a great deal of attention to detail. It's got an interesting set of plots running. The voice talent is decent. It's just...weird. To get the usual questions out of the way, yes, I did enjoy the movie, no it wasn't the best movie ever. Yes, it was really weird.
I think Hugh Jackman is my new hero this year. His performance in The Fountain was enough to send me into bliss, and he managed to sing his way into my head again in Happy Feet. Elijah Wood was fairly nondescript, vocally speaking. Brittany Murphy was her usual distinctive self, and managed to pull off a bit of a surprise by being a reasonably capable singer. Robin Williams bounced off the walls as he always does. Steve Irwin's voice came as a bit of a surprise though given the content of the film, his contribution makes plenty of sense. Nicole Kidman seemed midway between Norma Jean/Marilyn Monroe and leaving-a-pretty-corpse Satine, which I found oddly jarring. In fact, I was picking up a bit of a 'Baz Luhrmann' vibe from the entire proceeding (which isn't a bad thing, I love me some Baz).
The weirdness of the movie comes from the plot, which suffers from an awkward shifting of focus and momentum here and there throughout the film. None of it felt tacked on or added 'just cause', but the directions the story took were certainly unexpected at several points. Many critics seem to be lambasting Happy Feet due to the messages the movie seems to be passing along to the audience. I can certainly see their point-the movie is not subtle on its environmental message or its 'be yourself' attitude, but the latter isn't rare in today's movies. It's the rather stark portrayal of zoos and the implied casual attitude of humans towards the environment that seems to have people up in arms. I think the movie went a little heavy on those points-they're harsh, compared to the otherwise upbeat tone of the show.
-6/365 done, 359/365 to go
A Children's Game - Or Not
Movie: Love Me If You Dare, directed by Yann Samuell
Reccomendation: Me.
Reason: It's my kind of romantic comedy. It's foreign, it's a little off-kilter, and it has a neat story hook.
I wandered into this movie a little blind. I remembered reading somewhere something about it, but I couldn't remember what or where, then I saw a preview for it attached to the DVD of Mean Creek. The look and feel of the trailer is what sold the movie to me, which was unusual. I came away from it without feeling as though I'd seen the whole movie, and so...tonight. I have to admit I was enraptured, gleeful at the sweet, playful tone the movie took from the very start. The title (which translates a little more directly as Children's Game) was quite apt, the metaphor of games and play giving the movie a bit of a lighter feel. It was an interesting contrast from the difficult, even dark territory the characters tread.
Within the context of the movie, the dare game swings from sweet and amusing to strangely warped and macabre. It is childish fun, but it is also the way the two main characters have found to best express themselves to one another. To me, it seemed like the 'twin language' that twins seem to develop. Not only do they express affection through the game, but jealousy, anger, love and pain as well. It's the most literal metaphor for love I've ever seen put to screen-"Stand on the train tracks until I say you can stop" is pretty close to "Tell me how you really feel, I can handle it". The relationship in the movie vaguely reminded me of Secretary, only with a slightly subtler sado-masochistic chemistry than the one Maggie Gyllenhal and James Spader developed.
I have to say I liked the movie. It was my kind of romantic comedy, after all. There was a certain bittersweet quality to the entire affair, the conclusion forgone, the entire story revolving around the journey. It was fun and adorable, and it didn't hurt that La Vie en Rose is one of my favorite love songs of all time.
-5/365 done, 360/365 to go.
Reccomendation: Me.
Reason: It's my kind of romantic comedy. It's foreign, it's a little off-kilter, and it has a neat story hook.
I wandered into this movie a little blind. I remembered reading somewhere something about it, but I couldn't remember what or where, then I saw a preview for it attached to the DVD of Mean Creek. The look and feel of the trailer is what sold the movie to me, which was unusual. I came away from it without feeling as though I'd seen the whole movie, and so...tonight. I have to admit I was enraptured, gleeful at the sweet, playful tone the movie took from the very start. The title (which translates a little more directly as Children's Game) was quite apt, the metaphor of games and play giving the movie a bit of a lighter feel. It was an interesting contrast from the difficult, even dark territory the characters tread.
Within the context of the movie, the dare game swings from sweet and amusing to strangely warped and macabre. It is childish fun, but it is also the way the two main characters have found to best express themselves to one another. To me, it seemed like the 'twin language' that twins seem to develop. Not only do they express affection through the game, but jealousy, anger, love and pain as well. It's the most literal metaphor for love I've ever seen put to screen-"Stand on the train tracks until I say you can stop" is pretty close to "Tell me how you really feel, I can handle it". The relationship in the movie vaguely reminded me of Secretary, only with a slightly subtler sado-masochistic chemistry than the one Maggie Gyllenhal and James Spader developed.
I have to say I liked the movie. It was my kind of romantic comedy, after all. There was a certain bittersweet quality to the entire affair, the conclusion forgone, the entire story revolving around the journey. It was fun and adorable, and it didn't hurt that La Vie en Rose is one of my favorite love songs of all time.
-5/365 done, 360/365 to go.
Monday, January 8, 2007
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the rain
Movie: Blood Creature, aka Terror is a Man, aka Creature from Blood Island, aka Island of Terror, aka The Gory Creatures, directed by Gerardo de Leon
Reccomendation: Dee
Reason: "Hahahahahahahaha!" -direct quote.
Sometimes I'm glad I've seen certain bad movies. I'm gleeful that I've seen Forrest Gump recently-it won't be part of this experiment, as I finally saw the entire movie last year. I'm even happier tonight to report that in 1997 I was a rather huge fan of Val Kilmer and Fairuza Balk. In my youthful innocence, I subjected myself to The Island of Dr. Moreau. Blood Creature is The Island of Dr. Moreau's hideous Girl Friday. From the horrible editing to the hideous pacing, Blood Creature was hilariously awful.
Special mention needs to be given to the individual responsible for the foley on this picture. I have never before (and never again hope to) heard the ocean represented by what sounded like a soup bowl of water, and the evocative use of potato chips instead of leaves managed to block out almost every other sound in several scenes. Even the rain proved deafening-in some movies this can be beneficial. In Blood Creature, it definitely wasn't.
The message of the movie is the same as that of Dr. Moreau-do not mess in the affairs of human-animal hybrids, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup. At least that's what I think it was-the editing was so choppy and rough that it was hard to understand what was happening from scene to scene. Not that it really mattered, of course. It was funny either way. Though we were going to make an attempt at the second movie on the disc, after Blood Creature, we've decided not to risk our sanity further. Werewolf in the Girls Dormitory, you'll have to wait for another day.
-4/365 down, 361/365 to go
Reccomendation: Dee
Reason: "Hahahahahahahaha!" -direct quote.
Sometimes I'm glad I've seen certain bad movies. I'm gleeful that I've seen Forrest Gump recently-it won't be part of this experiment, as I finally saw the entire movie last year. I'm even happier tonight to report that in 1997 I was a rather huge fan of Val Kilmer and Fairuza Balk. In my youthful innocence, I subjected myself to The Island of Dr. Moreau. Blood Creature is The Island of Dr. Moreau's hideous Girl Friday. From the horrible editing to the hideous pacing, Blood Creature was hilariously awful.
Special mention needs to be given to the individual responsible for the foley on this picture. I have never before (and never again hope to) heard the ocean represented by what sounded like a soup bowl of water, and the evocative use of potato chips instead of leaves managed to block out almost every other sound in several scenes. Even the rain proved deafening-in some movies this can be beneficial. In Blood Creature, it definitely wasn't.
The message of the movie is the same as that of Dr. Moreau-do not mess in the affairs of human-animal hybrids, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup. At least that's what I think it was-the editing was so choppy and rough that it was hard to understand what was happening from scene to scene. Not that it really mattered, of course. It was funny either way. Though we were going to make an attempt at the second movie on the disc, after Blood Creature, we've decided not to risk our sanity further. Werewolf in the Girls Dormitory, you'll have to wait for another day.
-4/365 down, 361/365 to go
Sunday, January 7, 2007
Nrh? Mrh? Erh? Mrr?
The Movie: A Scanner Darkly, directed by Richard Linklater
Reccomendation: Me.
Reason: The animation style was very intriguing, as was the casting.
I can't quite decide whether or not to like Keanu Reeves. On one hand, I'm grateful for the existence of Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, and The Matrix trilogy. On the other, I'm not entirely sure he's the actor people think he is. In A Scanner Darkly, he played Bob, a drug enforcement double agent, an addict and a cop at the same time. With rotoscope animation and a decent cast backing him up, I thought he may be able to pull through a decent performance, but something about it fell flat. It felt like he had defaulted back on 'Neo' as a sort of default starting point and didn't get any farther. I'm not sure he's actor enough to carry such an important performance, especially in a movie like this.
I did enjoy the film, particularly Rory Cochrane's presence. I really connect with his sort of humor-it's even made watching CSI: Miami bearable (until he failed to learn from David Caruso's example and struck out on his own). He and Robert Downey Jr. managed to pull off a lot of the movie's dry wit and humor quite capably. The cool brain-bending sequences of Keanu-Bob going to the office were quite neat. I'm not familiar with the source material, but I thought that either Winona Ryder's character or her portrayal was a little limp. The music had its moments, though it did overwhelm a few times.
This was a good movie, a little convoluted, a little weak in spots. The animation was very well done, the style was admirably consistent and most importantly it didn't look as horrible as some previous experiments have been. I think the style lent itself nicely to the story as it was told, particularily the trippy nature of the drug being dealt with in the movie. Not a bad third movie.
-3/365 done, 362/365 to go
Reccomendation: Me.
Reason: The animation style was very intriguing, as was the casting.
I can't quite decide whether or not to like Keanu Reeves. On one hand, I'm grateful for the existence of Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, and The Matrix trilogy. On the other, I'm not entirely sure he's the actor people think he is. In A Scanner Darkly, he played Bob, a drug enforcement double agent, an addict and a cop at the same time. With rotoscope animation and a decent cast backing him up, I thought he may be able to pull through a decent performance, but something about it fell flat. It felt like he had defaulted back on 'Neo' as a sort of default starting point and didn't get any farther. I'm not sure he's actor enough to carry such an important performance, especially in a movie like this.
I did enjoy the film, particularly Rory Cochrane's presence. I really connect with his sort of humor-it's even made watching CSI: Miami bearable (until he failed to learn from David Caruso's example and struck out on his own). He and Robert Downey Jr. managed to pull off a lot of the movie's dry wit and humor quite capably. The cool brain-bending sequences of Keanu-Bob going to the office were quite neat. I'm not familiar with the source material, but I thought that either Winona Ryder's character or her portrayal was a little limp. The music had its moments, though it did overwhelm a few times.
This was a good movie, a little convoluted, a little weak in spots. The animation was very well done, the style was admirably consistent and most importantly it didn't look as horrible as some previous experiments have been. I think the style lent itself nicely to the story as it was told, particularily the trippy nature of the drug being dealt with in the movie. Not a bad third movie.
-3/365 done, 362/365 to go
Saturday, January 6, 2007
My Immortals
The movie: The Fountain, directed by Darren Aronofsky
Reccomendation: Me.
Reason: I like Rachel Weisz and Hugh Jackman quite a bit, both as actors and as pretty faces. I am also a fan of science fiction.
I left The Fountain twenty minutes ago and I'm still not quite certain what to say about it. It was not a movie to be watched with the brain turned off-I found it quite profound in both the statements it made about immortality and the quest for such, and the delicate nature of life and death. I've already decided to see it again, and I'm positive it will hold up on the second time around. The movie centers around three plots that run parallel to one another, taking place in different times and different places, with the same goals and even the same relationships flowing throughout. It's hard to say more about The Fountain than that, however, without meandering off into ramblings.
A huge part of the stroke of genius this movie is stems from the visual poetry created by the effects and the camerawork. The rich landscapes the movie settles its characters into magnify the emotional resonance of each scene. Again, it's difficult to capture in words an experience that was so wonderfully visual. The look of the movie was designed to provoke thought, to stimulate the viewer into further contemplation of the message.
As I had hoped, Rachel Weisz and Hugh Jackman really delivered in this movie. I'm a fan of each actor for different reasons, but I felt that both truly disappeared into their characters. I never believed I'd be able to say that about Hugh Jackman in particular, but he was more than up to the challenge of the roles he was called on to play in this piece. He managed some unexpected subtlety, and I'm looking forward to more such work in the future from him. Rachel Weisz was her usual shining best, gorgeous to look at and expert in her portrayals. I think I could gush about her forever, and I probably will. The second movie of 2007 was truly a phenomenal experience.
-2/365 done, 363/365 to go
Reccomendation: Me.
Reason: I like Rachel Weisz and Hugh Jackman quite a bit, both as actors and as pretty faces. I am also a fan of science fiction.
I left The Fountain twenty minutes ago and I'm still not quite certain what to say about it. It was not a movie to be watched with the brain turned off-I found it quite profound in both the statements it made about immortality and the quest for such, and the delicate nature of life and death. I've already decided to see it again, and I'm positive it will hold up on the second time around. The movie centers around three plots that run parallel to one another, taking place in different times and different places, with the same goals and even the same relationships flowing throughout. It's hard to say more about The Fountain than that, however, without meandering off into ramblings.
A huge part of the stroke of genius this movie is stems from the visual poetry created by the effects and the camerawork. The rich landscapes the movie settles its characters into magnify the emotional resonance of each scene. Again, it's difficult to capture in words an experience that was so wonderfully visual. The look of the movie was designed to provoke thought, to stimulate the viewer into further contemplation of the message.
As I had hoped, Rachel Weisz and Hugh Jackman really delivered in this movie. I'm a fan of each actor for different reasons, but I felt that both truly disappeared into their characters. I never believed I'd be able to say that about Hugh Jackman in particular, but he was more than up to the challenge of the roles he was called on to play in this piece. He managed some unexpected subtlety, and I'm looking forward to more such work in the future from him. Rachel Weisz was her usual shining best, gorgeous to look at and expert in her portrayals. I think I could gush about her forever, and I probably will. The second movie of 2007 was truly a phenomenal experience.
-2/365 done, 363/365 to go
Tuesday, January 2, 2007
Glitches and Ghoulies and Ghosts, Oh My!
The movie: Pulse, based on the Japanese horror movie Kairo, directed by Jim Sonzero.
Reccomendation: Me.
Reason: I have a special fondness for horror movies that are remakes of Asian horror movies. They're either awesome (The Ring) or they're terrible (Dark Water) but they never fail to be entertaining.
The first movie of the year is Pulse, though there were several attempts at other selections. However, my roommate got bored and picked it up at the video store. Bless his little heart. Pulse was an interesting case of misleading advertising. I approached the movie from the angle of 'another Asian Horror movie with freaky ghosts and technology'. That's how it was marketed, at least in all the promos I saw. Instead, it became a spectral apocalypse, brought about by the technology we rely on every day. (This is not a spoiler of any real magnitude-the apocalypse happens round about the second act.)
Kristen Bell carried the movie fairly capably. She was a little bland, but more than made up for many of the supporting cast. In particular, she played several key scenes very well, with a sort of subtle sense of realism in her portrayal. She was slightly more vulnerable than most Final Girls, a little less sure of herself. It was refreshing. Male lead Ian Somerhalder was very pretty. He played the part he was supposed to play. It wasn't a performance that will lead to any accolades, but he was solid. The supporting cast was so-so, each of them having a few brief shining moments, but overall they were forgettable.
The effects were fairly standard for a movie that follows this vein. Jittery camerawork, psuedo-electronic interference and a lot of heavy makeup made the ghosts both like and unlike anything most western audiences have seen before. I was quite intrigued by the background sound, however, and particularily impressed by the frequent subtle use of modem and computer noises instead of music. The story was interesting, taking the idea of 'ghost in the machine' and playing about with it.
Overall, due to an interesting plot, decent acting, interesting effects and a few very cool little touches, I'd definitely rewatch Pulse and I wouldn't mind having it on my shelves. File it under Spooky.
-1/365 done, 364/365 to go.
Reccomendation: Me.
Reason: I have a special fondness for horror movies that are remakes of Asian horror movies. They're either awesome (The Ring) or they're terrible (Dark Water) but they never fail to be entertaining.
The first movie of the year is Pulse, though there were several attempts at other selections. However, my roommate got bored and picked it up at the video store. Bless his little heart. Pulse was an interesting case of misleading advertising. I approached the movie from the angle of 'another Asian Horror movie with freaky ghosts and technology'. That's how it was marketed, at least in all the promos I saw. Instead, it became a spectral apocalypse, brought about by the technology we rely on every day. (This is not a spoiler of any real magnitude-the apocalypse happens round about the second act.)
Kristen Bell carried the movie fairly capably. She was a little bland, but more than made up for many of the supporting cast. In particular, she played several key scenes very well, with a sort of subtle sense of realism in her portrayal. She was slightly more vulnerable than most Final Girls, a little less sure of herself. It was refreshing. Male lead Ian Somerhalder was very pretty. He played the part he was supposed to play. It wasn't a performance that will lead to any accolades, but he was solid. The supporting cast was so-so, each of them having a few brief shining moments, but overall they were forgettable.
The effects were fairly standard for a movie that follows this vein. Jittery camerawork, psuedo-electronic interference and a lot of heavy makeup made the ghosts both like and unlike anything most western audiences have seen before. I was quite intrigued by the background sound, however, and particularily impressed by the frequent subtle use of modem and computer noises instead of music. The story was interesting, taking the idea of 'ghost in the machine' and playing about with it.
Overall, due to an interesting plot, decent acting, interesting effects and a few very cool little touches, I'd definitely rewatch Pulse and I wouldn't mind having it on my shelves. File it under Spooky.
-1/365 done, 364/365 to go.
Monday, January 1, 2007
As the red curtain rises, a hush falls.
Hi. You may or may not know me personally, but I'm engaging in a little odyssey. I love movies, and as my New Years resolution, I've decided that I want to know a little more about them. I am going to watch 365 movies in 365 days, and I am going to write a short, three paragraph review for each one. The rules I've set for myself are as follows:
1.) I can't have seen the movie in the last ten years.
2.) When I ask for recommendations, I must watch the recommended movie.
3.) I have to watch the entire movie in order for it to count towards the total.
Simple and easy.
As I begin this experiment, I am a dedicated fan of movies in general with a particular focus on horror. The last movie I saw in its entirety was L.A. Confidential. My current favorite movies are Fargo, Rules of Attraction, American Psycho, L.A. Confidential, Sin City, The Queen, Josie and the Pussycats, Unspeakable Cruelty, Silence of the Lambs and Clerks II. The movies I'm most looking forward to in the coming year are Children of Men, 300 and Pan's Labyrinth. I loathe Tom Hanks with a burning passion, due to being made to watch Big too many times as a child.
As you can see, I have a particular taste. I don't really trust myself to choose a wide enough range of 'out of my ordinary' movies, so I'm doing something a little different. I've asked friends and family to start developing 7-movie lists. They're going to give me a short justification for each of their selections, and then I'm going to watch the movies they've suggested. Some of them have sworn to be cruel (I've heard rumblings about Catwoman), some of them are going to be kind (Gods and Monsters has definitely been mentioned, as has the original 80's version of Transformers, The Quick and the Dead, and several others). I have a feeling I'm going to learn a lot about my panel of advisers as I view their choices. I'm very excited about all of this, and I'm looking forward to my first film, whatever it might be. Lots to pick from.
At any rate, it's time to start. Have a happy new year, and I thank you for reading.
-0/365 down, 365/365 to go.
1.) I can't have seen the movie in the last ten years.
2.) When I ask for recommendations, I must watch the recommended movie.
3.) I have to watch the entire movie in order for it to count towards the total.
Simple and easy.
As I begin this experiment, I am a dedicated fan of movies in general with a particular focus on horror. The last movie I saw in its entirety was L.A. Confidential. My current favorite movies are Fargo, Rules of Attraction, American Psycho, L.A. Confidential, Sin City, The Queen, Josie and the Pussycats, Unspeakable Cruelty, Silence of the Lambs and Clerks II. The movies I'm most looking forward to in the coming year are Children of Men, 300 and Pan's Labyrinth. I loathe Tom Hanks with a burning passion, due to being made to watch Big too many times as a child.
As you can see, I have a particular taste. I don't really trust myself to choose a wide enough range of 'out of my ordinary' movies, so I'm doing something a little different. I've asked friends and family to start developing 7-movie lists. They're going to give me a short justification for each of their selections, and then I'm going to watch the movies they've suggested. Some of them have sworn to be cruel (I've heard rumblings about Catwoman), some of them are going to be kind (Gods and Monsters has definitely been mentioned, as has the original 80's version of Transformers, The Quick and the Dead, and several others). I have a feeling I'm going to learn a lot about my panel of advisers as I view their choices. I'm very excited about all of this, and I'm looking forward to my first film, whatever it might be. Lots to pick from.
At any rate, it's time to start. Have a happy new year, and I thank you for reading.
-0/365 down, 365/365 to go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
