The Movie: Curse of the Golden Flower, directed by Yimou Zhang
Recommendation: The Oscars. That'll show me...
Reason: Nominated for Best Foreign Film. Why, I'll never know.
Look. Yimou Zhang makes visually gorgeous, color-driven movies, usually starring Chow Yun Fat. I don't know why I keep watching them. Ever since Ang Lee's Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon I've been interested in wuxia films, but I know I'm going about it ass backwards. I've seen Hero, House of Flying Daggers, Curse of the Golden Flower, etc., basically every overhyped semi-interesting pallet-melodrama that's hit the West. What I haven't seen (and I might enjoy a little more than the just-average offerings I've been watching) are movies like The Bride with White Hair and Chinese Ghost Story. This movie at least had a bit of novelty, what with all the incest. There was a lot of that.
I'm getting pretty bored with Chow Yun Fat, actually, and I thank god that no one thought it was a good idea to cast Zhang Ziyi in this one. Yun Fat is a good actor. I know he is. Gong Li might be, if she could emote past her chest. I guess I just really couldn't get into this movie. Children of Men, another movie whose appeal lay largely in its direction and set design, at least told a story with that lush background. This movie was just very, very pretty.
The metaphor and tales told here have been compared to a Greek tragedy. It's like Hamlet on a huge scale, with swaths of vaguely relevant ninja/soldiers duking it out in line with the battling royals that are above them. But the symbolism and the rotted core that the movie plays with exposing were not enough. Maybe with some good acting and some real reasons behind the silly fight scenes it might have been a more compelling film. Dammit Hollywood, stop nominating wuxia movies for awards just because they're wuxia!
-80/365 down, 285/365 to go
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Can a country be broken?
The Movie: Earth, directed by Deepa Mehta
Recommendation: Me.
Reason: I've been interested in Deepa Mehta's work after seeing a few interviews with her.
I watched Earth over the course of days. It's a heavy movie, though the reason I watched it over a long period had less to do with that and more to do with time constraints. Deepa Mehta's work about the end of British rule in India and the trouble it caused was impactful as well as educational. I don't think we covered much Indian history.
Deepa Mehta wove mutiple levels of metaphor and perspective into this film. Shanta, the woman at the center of a religiously divided group of friends, is both a metaphor for the soon-to-be divided India and the representative of the voices of moderation that surely sounded during the division. Likewise, her friends represent the Sikh, Muslim and Hindu perspectives. Mehta adds another dimension, however, with Lenny-baby to present the perspective of the young, and the older Sethna's to represent the perspectives of the older generation. She gives all of these voices time to speak their piece, in amidst the rapidly devolving situation.
It is an interesting piece of history that Deepa Mehta has presented in her film. I find I appreciate her writing and directing very much-not many can actually pull it off with such candor and honesty (Shyamalan, goddammit, take note!). If you're a completist, by all means watch this film. It's a good, understated historical fiction.
-79/365 down, 286/365 to go
Recommendation: Me.
Reason: I've been interested in Deepa Mehta's work after seeing a few interviews with her.
I watched Earth over the course of days. It's a heavy movie, though the reason I watched it over a long period had less to do with that and more to do with time constraints. Deepa Mehta's work about the end of British rule in India and the trouble it caused was impactful as well as educational. I don't think we covered much Indian history.
Deepa Mehta wove mutiple levels of metaphor and perspective into this film. Shanta, the woman at the center of a religiously divided group of friends, is both a metaphor for the soon-to-be divided India and the representative of the voices of moderation that surely sounded during the division. Likewise, her friends represent the Sikh, Muslim and Hindu perspectives. Mehta adds another dimension, however, with Lenny-baby to present the perspective of the young, and the older Sethna's to represent the perspectives of the older generation. She gives all of these voices time to speak their piece, in amidst the rapidly devolving situation.
It is an interesting piece of history that Deepa Mehta has presented in her film. I find I appreciate her writing and directing very much-not many can actually pull it off with such candor and honesty (Shyamalan, goddammit, take note!). If you're a completist, by all means watch this film. It's a good, understated historical fiction.
-79/365 down, 286/365 to go
# Ironic. A French movie about running away.
The Movie: District 13, directed by Pierre Morel
Recommendation: Me.
Reason: A three minute clip from the opening of the film was posted to a message board I frequented some time ago. As you can see, I've included it in my post so everyone can experience the awesome.
I love action movies. Something about musclebound guys running amok and punching each other in the face is just so wholesome. From my early memories of Indiana Jones punching Nazis to John McLane duking it out with terrorists, how could the simple classic moments of action cinema not become my most beloved cliches. District 13 feeds them all, and adds in the gleeful free-running excitement of parkour.
The plot isn't anything to get excited about. I'm starting to see a trend in European movies-a certain fear of fascists. American films concentrate more on an outside threat, a foreign creature or group assaulting one that is 'local'. European movies seem more concerned about the threat that arises from within. I can't really comment on any other area of the world-not enough experience, though after finishing Curse of the Golden Flower I may have some more insight into Chinese cinema (or at least wuxia).
Anyway. It's a movie about two guys, a bomb and a kid sister in trouble. They run up walls and take on some inspired fight scenes to create a pretty good rumble in the barrios. This isn't a heavy movie. Not something difficult to digest at all, just a light bit of entertainment for action fans looking for something different.
-78/365 down, 287/365 to go
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Heroes in a half shell...TURTLE POWER!
The Movie: TMNT, directed by Kevin Munroe
Recommendation: My childhood.
Reason: "The ninja turtles are totally awesome! TOTALLY AWESOME!"
The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are still totally awesome. I'm so happy to report that, as I was scared this movie would suck. Instead, a simple, but well-structured plot provides the background for a classic-Turtles story. The Shredder might be gone, but there are still things for the ninja turtles to kick in the head. So the good old days of tying rags around your head and running around hitting each other with sticks are really back. TMNT picked up after the Shredder's death. The authors of this particular adventure did well in that respect-there's no dancing around it, it's handled quickly and to the point and the story proceeds.
The animation had some truly great moments. In a real wonderful love note to the fans, Leonard and Raphael duel on a New York rooftop. It really proves how far animation has come-I could have watched rain fall on the pair of them for hours, never mind the smooth, fluid motion of each character. The human characters were...unusual in their dimensions, but they were more than made up for by the turtles individuality and personality. Raphael looked like a goon, Leonardo like a balanced individual. Mikey and Don were a little less involved than I would have liked, but eh. It was still everything a ninja turtle movie needed to be and more.
I have a lone criticism, and that's the voice acting. The turtles were excellent. Totally awesome. Perhaps, however, a mistake may have been made in casting Ziyi Zhang as a presumably Japanese character (I may be wrong, but I don't think the Foot Clan was ever Chinese, or ever had a Chinese branch). Her accent and manner of speaking really just...grated for some reason. She's a minor character anyway, so don't worry too much over her. See TMNT. It's worth it, dudes.
-77/365 down, 298/365 to go
Recommendation: My childhood.
Reason: "The ninja turtles are totally awesome! TOTALLY AWESOME!"
The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are still totally awesome. I'm so happy to report that, as I was scared this movie would suck. Instead, a simple, but well-structured plot provides the background for a classic-Turtles story. The Shredder might be gone, but there are still things for the ninja turtles to kick in the head. So the good old days of tying rags around your head and running around hitting each other with sticks are really back. TMNT picked up after the Shredder's death. The authors of this particular adventure did well in that respect-there's no dancing around it, it's handled quickly and to the point and the story proceeds.
The animation had some truly great moments. In a real wonderful love note to the fans, Leonard and Raphael duel on a New York rooftop. It really proves how far animation has come-I could have watched rain fall on the pair of them for hours, never mind the smooth, fluid motion of each character. The human characters were...unusual in their dimensions, but they were more than made up for by the turtles individuality and personality. Raphael looked like a goon, Leonardo like a balanced individual. Mikey and Don were a little less involved than I would have liked, but eh. It was still everything a ninja turtle movie needed to be and more.
I have a lone criticism, and that's the voice acting. The turtles were excellent. Totally awesome. Perhaps, however, a mistake may have been made in casting Ziyi Zhang as a presumably Japanese character (I may be wrong, but I don't think the Foot Clan was ever Chinese, or ever had a Chinese branch). Her accent and manner of speaking really just...grated for some reason. She's a minor character anyway, so don't worry too much over her. See TMNT. It's worth it, dudes.
-77/365 down, 298/365 to go
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
My worst nightmare lives!
The Movie: Stranger than Fiction, directed by Marc Forster
Recommendation: H
Reason: "It was wierd."
I am a writer, or at least I pretend to be every time my fingers hit the keyboard. I understand writing, to some extent. I suppose I don't understand it incredibly well, or else I'd probably be a famous author by now. But there is one scene in Stranger than Fiction that really struck an empathic chord with me. Emma Thompson, sitting in her office, unaware of what exactly to expect, is confronted by her protagonist. She doesn't bluster, she doesn't even really apologize, she only crumples under the sudden emotional weight of all she's done to him.
What began as a funny movie (not FUNNAY, like Anchorman) quickly became a headtrip on par with parts of I Heart Huckabees. Emma Thompson's collapse was the climax of some excellently constructed anticipation. I knew exactly how she felt in that moment, and in many of the ones leading up to it. Trying to plan the death of a character is difficult in any medium. Being confronted with evidence of their actuality is another realm of messed up.
I think this was a thoughtful movie. Do not see it if you're a WACKAY WILL FERRELL DOES WACKY THINGS OMG fan. If you want that, here. I also love lamp, but if you don't let Ferrell's reputation as a slapstick, over the top comedian get in the way, he pulls off a decent performance here. Not as powerful perhaps as Jim Carrey's turn in The Truman Show, but he did a decent job.
-76/365 down, 289/365 to go
Recommendation: H
Reason: "It was wierd."
I am a writer, or at least I pretend to be every time my fingers hit the keyboard. I understand writing, to some extent. I suppose I don't understand it incredibly well, or else I'd probably be a famous author by now. But there is one scene in Stranger than Fiction that really struck an empathic chord with me. Emma Thompson, sitting in her office, unaware of what exactly to expect, is confronted by her protagonist. She doesn't bluster, she doesn't even really apologize, she only crumples under the sudden emotional weight of all she's done to him.
What began as a funny movie (not FUNNAY, like Anchorman) quickly became a headtrip on par with parts of I Heart Huckabees. Emma Thompson's collapse was the climax of some excellently constructed anticipation. I knew exactly how she felt in that moment, and in many of the ones leading up to it. Trying to plan the death of a character is difficult in any medium. Being confronted with evidence of their actuality is another realm of messed up.
I think this was a thoughtful movie. Do not see it if you're a WACKAY WILL FERRELL DOES WACKY THINGS OMG fan. If you want that, here. I also love lamp, but if you don't let Ferrell's reputation as a slapstick, over the top comedian get in the way, he pulls off a decent performance here. Not as powerful perhaps as Jim Carrey's turn in The Truman Show, but he did a decent job.
-76/365 down, 289/365 to go
Sunday, March 25, 2007
When good men do nothing.
The Movie: High Noon, directed by Fred Zinneman
Recommendation: Me
Reason: I don't watch Westerns at all, despite how much I enjoy the idea of them.
75 movies. From Pulse to The Devil Wears Prada to Fun With Dick and Jane to High Noon. I just took a moment to reflect on this while I was paging through the IMDB listing for this film. I'm a little embarrassed to admit this, but I'd never heard of High Noon before I popped it onto my Ziplist. As I said in my reason for picking this out, I've never watched very many westerns. In fact, I don't think I've ever sat through a single one. I have been missing out in a big way. Made during the McCarthy witchhunt in Hollywood, High Noon was intended as a criticism of the people who wouldn't stand against the persecution of their fellow artists. (I know that sounds like I know what I'm talking about, but I read it on IMDB.)
Regardless of intent, High Noon is surprisingly forward-thinking and liberal for a western film shot in the fifties. Viewing movies from that era has really struck home that people haven't changed so much as I'd thought. Here in High Noon we have a hispanic woman in a position of power, cowardly clergy and townsfolk, and a barrage of excuses that are used even today to excuse individual involvement in a potentially uncomfortable situation. Grace Kelly (in her first movie role ever, seriously!) actually shot a guy. Consider my illusions about westerns shattered.
Allegories aside, High Noon really was a great film. The plot was interesting, the performances just right, and the tension developed wonderfully. I was especially impressed by the editing necessary to make the movie seem to be moving in real time. Knowing that the time limit was very real, very finite, really added to an already great plot. The filming techniques employed did the same, emphasizing the abandonment of Marshall Kane in some really excellent shots. Really great film.
-75/365 down, 290/365 to go
Recommendation: Me
Reason: I don't watch Westerns at all, despite how much I enjoy the idea of them.
75 movies. From Pulse to The Devil Wears Prada to Fun With Dick and Jane to High Noon. I just took a moment to reflect on this while I was paging through the IMDB listing for this film. I'm a little embarrassed to admit this, but I'd never heard of High Noon before I popped it onto my Ziplist. As I said in my reason for picking this out, I've never watched very many westerns. In fact, I don't think I've ever sat through a single one. I have been missing out in a big way. Made during the McCarthy witchhunt in Hollywood, High Noon was intended as a criticism of the people who wouldn't stand against the persecution of their fellow artists. (I know that sounds like I know what I'm talking about, but I read it on IMDB.)
Regardless of intent, High Noon is surprisingly forward-thinking and liberal for a western film shot in the fifties. Viewing movies from that era has really struck home that people haven't changed so much as I'd thought. Here in High Noon we have a hispanic woman in a position of power, cowardly clergy and townsfolk, and a barrage of excuses that are used even today to excuse individual involvement in a potentially uncomfortable situation. Grace Kelly (in her first movie role ever, seriously!) actually shot a guy. Consider my illusions about westerns shattered.
Allegories aside, High Noon really was a great film. The plot was interesting, the performances just right, and the tension developed wonderfully. I was especially impressed by the editing necessary to make the movie seem to be moving in real time. Knowing that the time limit was very real, very finite, really added to an already great plot. The filming techniques employed did the same, emphasizing the abandonment of Marshall Kane in some really excellent shots. Really great film.
-75/365 down, 290/365 to go
Thursday, March 22, 2007
I am not Paul Avery
The Movie: Zodiac, directed by David Fincher
Recommendation: Dee and The Boy
Reason: From Dee: "The book was really, really good." From The Boy: "The editing and the lighting was really well done."
People, I beg of you, stop bringing your small children to the theater. Please. Not because movies like Zodiac will warp them for life (for a movie that's being hyped as being about a serial killer, it's not very gory), but because they will get bored, and every time the screen goes black, they will yell "MOMMY THE MOVIE'S OVER!" Get a sitter. Please. The moviegoing public will appreciate it. Small children shouldn't be put through the excruciating boredom of sitting in a dark theater watching a story they don't care about, without anything that would interest them happening on the screen at all. It annoys adults who are really enjoying the film.
Anyway. My mother once told me that when she was a teenager, she was afraid of David Berkowitz, the Son of Sam. She didn't live in New York at the time, had never been there to my knowledge, but she somewhat fit his profile. She recalled that when the Son of Sam was prowling the streets of Queens, a lot of young women started cutting their hair short, whether they were near New York or not. Serial killers like Zodiac and the Son of Sam do some strange things to people. They're the supervillains of our age, and the police who try to outmatch them are our heroes, to put a four-color spin on it. I was therefore quite impressed by the thought put into this film. From a story perspective, Zodiac is not fast moving. It stops and starts. It jumps. In a way, I imagine it's what real casework would be like. From the early stages, when leads were hot and the killer seemed just inches away, the film flows fast and clean, the rough patches in the story palpably frustrating. In the later stages it seems halting, difficult to watch, much as an investigation must become when reality sets in and the 'outwitting' takes longer than expected. The pace, I think, stuck with the story Graysmith wanted to tell. He did more than make a case for one suspect or another-his book and this film discuss the impact of the case on the investigators and those around them.
Theories and accusations aside, I liked the story the film told. Zodiac is a strange figure, morphing according to eyewitness accounts (and played by different actors, who matched the descriptions the victims and witnesses provided at the time). Graysmith is a weedy little nerd, Avery's a wannabe gonzo journalist, Toschi's eternally frustrated, and as they each take their own shot at IDing the knife-hand who's been tormenting their careers, a little more of the whys and the hows of the case's handling are brought to light. It's difficult to watch the interactions between the agencies that handled the case-so many things were dropped or missed. Jake Gyllenhaal struck a perfect chord of desperation and logic. Toschi's frustration was greatly played by Mark Ruffalo. This movie isn't for the easily distracted, weighing in at around two and a half hours, but it's worthwhile if you're interested in the case and the way the book came to be.
-74/365 down, 291/365 to go
Recommendation: Dee and The Boy
Reason: From Dee: "The book was really, really good." From The Boy: "The editing and the lighting was really well done."
People, I beg of you, stop bringing your small children to the theater. Please. Not because movies like Zodiac will warp them for life (for a movie that's being hyped as being about a serial killer, it's not very gory), but because they will get bored, and every time the screen goes black, they will yell "MOMMY THE MOVIE'S OVER!" Get a sitter. Please. The moviegoing public will appreciate it. Small children shouldn't be put through the excruciating boredom of sitting in a dark theater watching a story they don't care about, without anything that would interest them happening on the screen at all. It annoys adults who are really enjoying the film.
Anyway. My mother once told me that when she was a teenager, she was afraid of David Berkowitz, the Son of Sam. She didn't live in New York at the time, had never been there to my knowledge, but she somewhat fit his profile. She recalled that when the Son of Sam was prowling the streets of Queens, a lot of young women started cutting their hair short, whether they were near New York or not. Serial killers like Zodiac and the Son of Sam do some strange things to people. They're the supervillains of our age, and the police who try to outmatch them are our heroes, to put a four-color spin on it. I was therefore quite impressed by the thought put into this film. From a story perspective, Zodiac is not fast moving. It stops and starts. It jumps. In a way, I imagine it's what real casework would be like. From the early stages, when leads were hot and the killer seemed just inches away, the film flows fast and clean, the rough patches in the story palpably frustrating. In the later stages it seems halting, difficult to watch, much as an investigation must become when reality sets in and the 'outwitting' takes longer than expected. The pace, I think, stuck with the story Graysmith wanted to tell. He did more than make a case for one suspect or another-his book and this film discuss the impact of the case on the investigators and those around them.
Theories and accusations aside, I liked the story the film told. Zodiac is a strange figure, morphing according to eyewitness accounts (and played by different actors, who matched the descriptions the victims and witnesses provided at the time). Graysmith is a weedy little nerd, Avery's a wannabe gonzo journalist, Toschi's eternally frustrated, and as they each take their own shot at IDing the knife-hand who's been tormenting their careers, a little more of the whys and the hows of the case's handling are brought to light. It's difficult to watch the interactions between the agencies that handled the case-so many things were dropped or missed. Jake Gyllenhaal struck a perfect chord of desperation and logic. Toschi's frustration was greatly played by Mark Ruffalo. This movie isn't for the easily distracted, weighing in at around two and a half hours, but it's worthwhile if you're interested in the case and the way the book came to be.
-74/365 down, 291/365 to go
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Bella Amore!
The Movie: Moonstruck, directed by Norman Jewison
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: "Cher won an Oscar for this!"
Moonstruck is predictable. That's the biggest problem it has. The story's spelled out from beginning to end, the characters aren't unexpected. But there's a level of genuine...something that really elevates the film above its merely blah trappings. Cher really did earn her award-her character is quite unlike the mega-diva-from-beyond-time that everyone's so familiar with. She has a rhythm, a patter about her speech and her movement that's very fresh.
The rest of the cast has a similar sort of power. They're charming without being saccharine, and there's that same very real quality about them. It's hard to believe they aren't really a big, loving, brawling, shouting family. They were a perfect setting for a decent romantic comedy. Seriously, Nia Vardalos has nothing on these guys. They were legitimately funny. I laughed more often during Moonstruck than I did during My Big Fat Greek Wedding.
My Italian sucks, as you can see above. I'm primarily from the Isles of the United Kingdom, and then filtered through a few generations in Canada. But I can really appreciate the family unit that was created in this film, as foreign as the root of it may be. Pretty good work here.
-73/365 down, 292/365 to go
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: "Cher won an Oscar for this!"
Moonstruck is predictable. That's the biggest problem it has. The story's spelled out from beginning to end, the characters aren't unexpected. But there's a level of genuine...something that really elevates the film above its merely blah trappings. Cher really did earn her award-her character is quite unlike the mega-diva-from-beyond-time that everyone's so familiar with. She has a rhythm, a patter about her speech and her movement that's very fresh.
The rest of the cast has a similar sort of power. They're charming without being saccharine, and there's that same very real quality about them. It's hard to believe they aren't really a big, loving, brawling, shouting family. They were a perfect setting for a decent romantic comedy. Seriously, Nia Vardalos has nothing on these guys. They were legitimately funny. I laughed more often during Moonstruck than I did during My Big Fat Greek Wedding.
My Italian sucks, as you can see above. I'm primarily from the Isles of the United Kingdom, and then filtered through a few generations in Canada. But I can really appreciate the family unit that was created in this film, as foreign as the root of it may be. Pretty good work here.
-73/365 down, 292/365 to go
Monday, March 19, 2007
If coincidences are just coincidences, why do they feel so contrived?
The Movie: In the Mouth of Madness, directed by John Carpenter
Recommendation: Len
Reason: "Freaky."
It's rare to find a movie that's truly immersive. I've heard good things about watching Babel without subtitles, allowing for a normally unavailable empathy with the main character. I didn't expect a horror movie to get so very under my skin. I suppose part of that is John Carpenter's fault. Village of the Damned and The Fog were both very unsettling for me and with the proviso that I haven't seen The Thing or Halloween, In the Mouth of Madness is the most disturbing film of his that I've seen so far.
It isn't the violence or the special effects (God, it's definitely not the special effects). It's the backbrain 'I know that from somewhere' bits that Carpenter's thrown into the film, from the music (stealing the riff from Enter Sandman) to the story (which borrows heavily, but often subtly from both Stephen King and H. P. Lovecraft). He's got a strange sort of style that slips the references in, allowing the viewer to catch them in their own time. I was riveted, alternately twitching and going wide-eyed as one piece after another fell into place.
Was it a good movie? Yeah. The cinematography, the casting, those worked nicely. By 1995, Carpenter was a pretty capable director. The special effects...you do what you can with what you have. They were alright, not spectacular. Not as amazing as the technical work on The Fog (or, as I've heard, The Thing). Hurray for Sam Neill for being a pretty good protagonist and managing not to sound too over-the-top in his insanity scenes. I recommend this movie for anyone with a decent familiarity with Stephen King or Lovecraft. Twitch away, horror lovers.
-72/365 down, 293/265 to go
Recommendation: Len
Reason: "Freaky."
It's rare to find a movie that's truly immersive. I've heard good things about watching Babel without subtitles, allowing for a normally unavailable empathy with the main character. I didn't expect a horror movie to get so very under my skin. I suppose part of that is John Carpenter's fault. Village of the Damned and The Fog were both very unsettling for me and with the proviso that I haven't seen The Thing or Halloween, In the Mouth of Madness is the most disturbing film of his that I've seen so far.
It isn't the violence or the special effects (God, it's definitely not the special effects). It's the backbrain 'I know that from somewhere' bits that Carpenter's thrown into the film, from the music (stealing the riff from Enter Sandman) to the story (which borrows heavily, but often subtly from both Stephen King and H. P. Lovecraft). He's got a strange sort of style that slips the references in, allowing the viewer to catch them in their own time. I was riveted, alternately twitching and going wide-eyed as one piece after another fell into place.
Was it a good movie? Yeah. The cinematography, the casting, those worked nicely. By 1995, Carpenter was a pretty capable director. The special effects...you do what you can with what you have. They were alright, not spectacular. Not as amazing as the technical work on The Fog (or, as I've heard, The Thing). Hurray for Sam Neill for being a pretty good protagonist and managing not to sound too over-the-top in his insanity scenes. I recommend this movie for anyone with a decent familiarity with Stephen King or Lovecraft. Twitch away, horror lovers.
-72/365 down, 293/265 to go
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Grissom vs. Lecter
The Movie: Manhunter, directed by Michael Mann
Recommendation: Len
Reason: Red Dragon before there was a Silence of the Lambs.
This movie sort of played like a prequel to CSI, more than a prequel to the wonderful Silence of the Lambs. William Peterson was playing Grissom, apparently, fourteen years before Grissom stepped onto our TV screens. I hate to reduce a decent serial killer movie into a two hour prequel for a TV series and its spinoffs, but that's simply how it felt. It seems like Michael Mann has a sort of television-vibe to his directing.
Whoever wrote the script, incidentally, was apparently envisioning a very different Bill Graham. The lines that Peterson delivered wouldn't have been out of place coming from an older man, but he sounded and looked too young to be calling the killer 'buddy' like some condescending older dude. Still, the actors did what they could with what was given to them.
For a film that technically speaking began the cinematic legacy of Hannibal Lecter, the Lecter (or Lecktor, as his name was spelled in the film) wasn't all that interesting. There was none of the menace that Anthony Hopkins oozed up on the screen, none of the unpredictable 'ohgodhe'sgoingtomaulmybrain' in Brian Cox's eyes. He was good, but he wasn't Lecter as we've come to understand him. In fact, I don't think Hannibal Lecter has existed since Silence of the Lambs-Red Dragon, Hannibal and Hannibal Rising can just suck it and realize they can never be as good.
-71/365 down, 294/365 to go
Recommendation: Len
Reason: Red Dragon before there was a Silence of the Lambs.
This movie sort of played like a prequel to CSI, more than a prequel to the wonderful Silence of the Lambs. William Peterson was playing Grissom, apparently, fourteen years before Grissom stepped onto our TV screens. I hate to reduce a decent serial killer movie into a two hour prequel for a TV series and its spinoffs, but that's simply how it felt. It seems like Michael Mann has a sort of television-vibe to his directing.
Whoever wrote the script, incidentally, was apparently envisioning a very different Bill Graham. The lines that Peterson delivered wouldn't have been out of place coming from an older man, but he sounded and looked too young to be calling the killer 'buddy' like some condescending older dude. Still, the actors did what they could with what was given to them.
For a film that technically speaking began the cinematic legacy of Hannibal Lecter, the Lecter (or Lecktor, as his name was spelled in the film) wasn't all that interesting. There was none of the menace that Anthony Hopkins oozed up on the screen, none of the unpredictable 'ohgodhe'sgoingtomaulmybrain' in Brian Cox's eyes. He was good, but he wasn't Lecter as we've come to understand him. In fact, I don't think Hannibal Lecter has existed since Silence of the Lambs-Red Dragon, Hannibal and Hannibal Rising can just suck it and realize they can never be as good.
-71/365 down, 294/365 to go
Bond is back
The Movie: Casino Royale, directed by Martin Campbell
Recommendation: A lot of people.
Reason: Best Bond in awhile.
In awhile? Try best Bond movie ever. Fanboys beware, I'm declaring this race over. Daniel Craig is an excellent new Bond, possibly the equal of Sean Connery. From the parkour riddled opening sequence to the high-tension poker game, from the first Bond girl to the last, Casino Royale was excellent. I'm sure when I see the movie entirely uninterrupted, it'll be even more awesome. It was Bond concentrated, with a dash of Bourne thrown in to make it even more believeable. And for once, the gadgets weren't stupid.
I saw the film at the local cheap movie theater, and it's very good of them to provide that service. However, it'd be pretty awesome if they could run the entire movie without it stopping three times, and the lights coming up. I know that the 'projectionists' in this city suck some serious ass (about a quarter of the movies I've seen recently have started out of focus), but really people.
As usual, I'm mourning the cars that were destroyed in the film. Drooling over the Aston Martin, weeping for the sporty number Bond destroys trying to save the girl. The filming wasn't anything to write home about, but Bond movies have always been character pieces. And lest we forget, the divine Mrs. M. Judi Dench was a pleasure as always, cutting and sarcastic when necessary. Her dialogue was a real high point in the movie.
-70/365 down, 295/365 to go
Recommendation: A lot of people.
Reason: Best Bond in awhile.
In awhile? Try best Bond movie ever. Fanboys beware, I'm declaring this race over. Daniel Craig is an excellent new Bond, possibly the equal of Sean Connery. From the parkour riddled opening sequence to the high-tension poker game, from the first Bond girl to the last, Casino Royale was excellent. I'm sure when I see the movie entirely uninterrupted, it'll be even more awesome. It was Bond concentrated, with a dash of Bourne thrown in to make it even more believeable. And for once, the gadgets weren't stupid.
I saw the film at the local cheap movie theater, and it's very good of them to provide that service. However, it'd be pretty awesome if they could run the entire movie without it stopping three times, and the lights coming up. I know that the 'projectionists' in this city suck some serious ass (about a quarter of the movies I've seen recently have started out of focus), but really people.
As usual, I'm mourning the cars that were destroyed in the film. Drooling over the Aston Martin, weeping for the sporty number Bond destroys trying to save the girl. The filming wasn't anything to write home about, but Bond movies have always been character pieces. And lest we forget, the divine Mrs. M. Judi Dench was a pleasure as always, cutting and sarcastic when necessary. Her dialogue was a real high point in the movie.
-70/365 down, 295/365 to go
Yo-har! Board the garage, men!
The Movie: Pirates of Silicon Valley, directed by Martyn Burke
Recommendation: H
Reason: She's a fan of Noah Wyle and Anthony Michael Hall.
I am a computer geek-person. I like computers, I like playing with my computer, I really like taking it apart sometimes. I highly anticipate working on my fixer-upper computers. Pirates of Silicon Valley is the history of how the two major influences on personal computing rose to power. It's the story of two men driven by a similar dream to achieve great things.
I think that Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, as portrayed in the movie by Noah Wyle and Anthony Michael Hall, were played as broad-strokes depictions. I know the reputations of both men, Jobs-as-a-hippie and Gates-as-a-geek, but I don't think that either of them are quite as...'extreme' as they were depicted in the film. I was impressed that the movie didn't really seem to take sides, really attempting to portray an even look at a fairly important bit of history. The film gave a fairly simplistic explanation of the differences in approach of both Jobs and Gates, and how their companies were molded. Jobs wanted personal computers to be accessible to the user. Gates wanted to push the envelope of technology and create something great. I like to think both achieved their vision. In the Apple vs. Microsoft debate, I don't really take a side. I like both Macs and generics for different reasons. I wish I had a Mac for a home computer, but I can't deny I like fiddling with my desktop (currently running XP). I think the world of computing would be very different without both companies.
Liked the film. It wasn't action-packed or very thrilling, but it told an interesting story about two very interesting and different men. I'm interested to see how future generations will learn about this particular bit of history, because the conflict between Gates and Jobs is really one of the cornerstones of the home computer revolution.
-69/365 down, 296/365 to go
Recommendation: H
Reason: She's a fan of Noah Wyle and Anthony Michael Hall.
I am a computer geek-person. I like computers, I like playing with my computer, I really like taking it apart sometimes. I highly anticipate working on my fixer-upper computers. Pirates of Silicon Valley is the history of how the two major influences on personal computing rose to power. It's the story of two men driven by a similar dream to achieve great things.
I think that Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, as portrayed in the movie by Noah Wyle and Anthony Michael Hall, were played as broad-strokes depictions. I know the reputations of both men, Jobs-as-a-hippie and Gates-as-a-geek, but I don't think that either of them are quite as...'extreme' as they were depicted in the film. I was impressed that the movie didn't really seem to take sides, really attempting to portray an even look at a fairly important bit of history. The film gave a fairly simplistic explanation of the differences in approach of both Jobs and Gates, and how their companies were molded. Jobs wanted personal computers to be accessible to the user. Gates wanted to push the envelope of technology and create something great. I like to think both achieved their vision. In the Apple vs. Microsoft debate, I don't really take a side. I like both Macs and generics for different reasons. I wish I had a Mac for a home computer, but I can't deny I like fiddling with my desktop (currently running XP). I think the world of computing would be very different without both companies.
Liked the film. It wasn't action-packed or very thrilling, but it told an interesting story about two very interesting and different men. I'm interested to see how future generations will learn about this particular bit of history, because the conflict between Gates and Jobs is really one of the cornerstones of the home computer revolution.
-69/365 down, 296/365 to go
Friday, March 16, 2007
Taping a badass to another badass
The Movie: 300, directed by Zack Snyder
Recommendation: Me
Reason: Frank Miller comic book movie? Get me my ticket!
I've been looking forward to this movie for months. Possibly nearly a year, since I first heard that another of Frank Miller's visually striking works was being adapted to film. I'm still eagerly anticipating Sin City 2, but 300 worked nicely to tide me over. The visuals that I'd slavered over in every trailer I could track down were wonderful on the large screen. The colors jumped, the choice of digital photography was an excellent one. The drama was heightened by the incredibly sharp contrast the film was shot in.
Acting was admittedly a little shaky in this movie, but it's a popcorn action movie. I wasn't expecting gold, only enough shine to keep the story moving. I'm trying not to entirely blame Rodrigo Santoro, because it isn't all his fault, and I know I'm just being blinded by my hatred of Nikki and Paolo on Lost. He wasn't spectacular, he was alright as Xerxes the eight foot tall drag-god. Gerard Butler was the height of bellowing awesomeness, of course. Admittedly, there was a lot of cheering from our seats for the queen of the Spartans, especially in her moment of glory. (No spoilers here, sorry.)
Was a pretty cool experience overall. The pageant of badassosity was spectacular, as it should have been. I can forgive its weak points, because it delivered the one thing I expected-two hours of sweaty, glistening men in very little clothing, stabbing each other and being awesome. I have low standards, I really do sometimes.
-68/365 down, 297/365 to go
Recommendation: Me
Reason: Frank Miller comic book movie? Get me my ticket!
I've been looking forward to this movie for months. Possibly nearly a year, since I first heard that another of Frank Miller's visually striking works was being adapted to film. I'm still eagerly anticipating Sin City 2, but 300 worked nicely to tide me over. The visuals that I'd slavered over in every trailer I could track down were wonderful on the large screen. The colors jumped, the choice of digital photography was an excellent one. The drama was heightened by the incredibly sharp contrast the film was shot in.
Acting was admittedly a little shaky in this movie, but it's a popcorn action movie. I wasn't expecting gold, only enough shine to keep the story moving. I'm trying not to entirely blame Rodrigo Santoro, because it isn't all his fault, and I know I'm just being blinded by my hatred of Nikki and Paolo on Lost. He wasn't spectacular, he was alright as Xerxes the eight foot tall drag-god. Gerard Butler was the height of bellowing awesomeness, of course. Admittedly, there was a lot of cheering from our seats for the queen of the Spartans, especially in her moment of glory. (No spoilers here, sorry.)
Was a pretty cool experience overall. The pageant of badassosity was spectacular, as it should have been. I can forgive its weak points, because it delivered the one thing I expected-two hours of sweaty, glistening men in very little clothing, stabbing each other and being awesome. I have low standards, I really do sometimes.
-68/365 down, 297/365 to go
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Grandma, put down the jewellery.
The Movie: Tempo, directed by Eric Styles
Recommendation: No one.
Reason: No one should ever see this movie. Ever.
Seriously. Never. I've seen some pretty awful movies. I've seen Cabin Fever, I've seen Texas Chainsaw Massacre: the Next Generation. I've seen every Uwe Boll movie to date (for free). I even sat through the anatomically impossible sex scene in Bloodrayne without puking. No one should be made to watch Tempo. Never in a million years did I think a movie could be so awful, and yet here we are.
Broomie bought this movie for me due to a certain...enthusiasm on my part for Rachel Leigh Cook. Specifically, she's adorable and I love Josie and the Pussycats. So naturally, no Rachel Leigh Cook movie could be a bad choice. Noooo. I was so very wrong. The script was wretched, packed with unbelievably stupid lines that sounded as though they were written by a high school kid. It was like a tenth-grader trying to rewrite Closer (everyone must see Closer). Follow that with Rachel Leigh Cook in the role of Not-Alice, who acts passably in roles she's familiar with (ie. not this) and Hugh Dancy in the role of Not-Dan, who as far as I can tell is made of animated wood. That leaves us with Melanie Griffith in the role of Not-Anna, and not a Clive Owen-inspired role in sight. (Let's also ignore that Tempo was released before Closer, just for the sake of the metaphor here.)
Melanie Griffith is what drags this film from mediocre-bad to absolutely-wretched-bad. She emotes like a brick wall, barely able to slur out her lines between lips so stuffed with collagen they look like overinflated party balloons. She sounds, acts and moves like a grandma, making her escape from anything more violent than a fire hydrant seem less and less likely with each passing second. When she tries to sound tough and use curse words, she sounds like she's never even heard them before in her life. Four-letter words have to be hurled with confidence, not hissed as though your mom's listening. Thanks for hauling a bad movie into the realms of hell, Melanie.
-67/365 down, 298/365 to go
Recommendation: No one.
Reason: No one should ever see this movie. Ever.
Seriously. Never. I've seen some pretty awful movies. I've seen Cabin Fever, I've seen Texas Chainsaw Massacre: the Next Generation. I've seen every Uwe Boll movie to date (for free). I even sat through the anatomically impossible sex scene in Bloodrayne without puking. No one should be made to watch Tempo. Never in a million years did I think a movie could be so awful, and yet here we are.
Broomie bought this movie for me due to a certain...enthusiasm on my part for Rachel Leigh Cook. Specifically, she's adorable and I love Josie and the Pussycats. So naturally, no Rachel Leigh Cook movie could be a bad choice. Noooo. I was so very wrong. The script was wretched, packed with unbelievably stupid lines that sounded as though they were written by a high school kid. It was like a tenth-grader trying to rewrite Closer (everyone must see Closer). Follow that with Rachel Leigh Cook in the role of Not-Alice, who acts passably in roles she's familiar with (ie. not this) and Hugh Dancy in the role of Not-Dan, who as far as I can tell is made of animated wood. That leaves us with Melanie Griffith in the role of Not-Anna, and not a Clive Owen-inspired role in sight. (Let's also ignore that Tempo was released before Closer, just for the sake of the metaphor here.)
Melanie Griffith is what drags this film from mediocre-bad to absolutely-wretched-bad. She emotes like a brick wall, barely able to slur out her lines between lips so stuffed with collagen they look like overinflated party balloons. She sounds, acts and moves like a grandma, making her escape from anything more violent than a fire hydrant seem less and less likely with each passing second. When she tries to sound tough and use curse words, she sounds like she's never even heard them before in her life. Four-letter words have to be hurled with confidence, not hissed as though your mom's listening. Thanks for hauling a bad movie into the realms of hell, Melanie.
-67/365 down, 298/365 to go
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Iconic
The Movie: Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, directed by Howard Hawks
Recommendation: Me.
Reason: I have never seen a Marilyn Monroe movie.
I think your first Marilyn Monroe movie's some sort of landmark. I've seen parodies, I've seen homages, I've seen (for all intents and purposes) remakes, but next to the real thing, they pale in comparison. Nicole Kidman and Madonna (the first who spring to mind) can't quite compare to the screen presence of Monroe. Hype aside, I couldn't take my eyes off of her. Something about her dippy delivery, her wide blue eyes, that cute blonde hair was so magnetic it was hard to even acknowledge her costars.
I think hype definitely has influenced my watching decisions. At the moment, I'm clicking through my Ziplist to try to pick out a few more of Marilyn Monroe's classics. Nothing wrong with seeing those, of course. She was a talented actress and definitely not hard to look at. A real treat to watch and hear.
Diefied bombshells aside, the movie was sweet and funny. It was simple, it did what it had to do, there was singing, there was dancing, there were iconic moments that have sunk into pop culture. I laughed out loud at jokes that were corny as hell, and I had fun doing it. It's hard to say a bad thing about that.
-66/365 down, 299/365 to go
Recommendation: Me.
Reason: I have never seen a Marilyn Monroe movie.
I think your first Marilyn Monroe movie's some sort of landmark. I've seen parodies, I've seen homages, I've seen (for all intents and purposes) remakes, but next to the real thing, they pale in comparison. Nicole Kidman and Madonna (the first who spring to mind) can't quite compare to the screen presence of Monroe. Hype aside, I couldn't take my eyes off of her. Something about her dippy delivery, her wide blue eyes, that cute blonde hair was so magnetic it was hard to even acknowledge her costars.
I think hype definitely has influenced my watching decisions. At the moment, I'm clicking through my Ziplist to try to pick out a few more of Marilyn Monroe's classics. Nothing wrong with seeing those, of course. She was a talented actress and definitely not hard to look at. A real treat to watch and hear.
Diefied bombshells aside, the movie was sweet and funny. It was simple, it did what it had to do, there was singing, there was dancing, there were iconic moments that have sunk into pop culture. I laughed out loud at jokes that were corny as hell, and I had fun doing it. It's hard to say a bad thing about that.
-66/365 down, 299/365 to go
Monday, March 12, 2007
Dude. Just...dude...
The Movie: Point Break, directed by Katheryn Bigelow
Recommendation: H
Reason: No reason given. I'll assume it's because of Keanu plus Patrick plus Gary Busey
Alright. So Point Break is a pretty formulaic action movie with some really neat little twists and turns in it. There are some genuine 'adrenaline' moments, in an otherwise pedestrian flick. All of them are provided by Patrick Swayze, in a surprisingly decent turn as Bodhi, leader of the Ex-Presidents. In fact, all of the best images in the film, as well as the awesome action sequences, involve Swayze.
Keanu Reeves was up to his usual Keanuey tricks, his FBI agent act completely unconvincing. If you've gotta watch Point Break, watch Lori Petty and the aforementioned Swayze. Lori Petty brings the hotness, and Swayze brings the awesome. His "Bohdi" character was like a surfing, gun wielding, skydiving hedonist viking with all the trappings. A real treat to watch.
As with most action movies, this is one where you need to turn off your brain. The plot's got a million holes, but some of the action sequences are gold. And it's an inspiration for Hot Fuzz. Everyone go see Hot Fuzz as soon as you can.
-65/365 down, 300/365 to go
Recommendation: H
Reason: No reason given. I'll assume it's because of Keanu plus Patrick plus Gary Busey
Alright. So Point Break is a pretty formulaic action movie with some really neat little twists and turns in it. There are some genuine 'adrenaline' moments, in an otherwise pedestrian flick. All of them are provided by Patrick Swayze, in a surprisingly decent turn as Bodhi, leader of the Ex-Presidents. In fact, all of the best images in the film, as well as the awesome action sequences, involve Swayze.
Keanu Reeves was up to his usual Keanuey tricks, his FBI agent act completely unconvincing. If you've gotta watch Point Break, watch Lori Petty and the aforementioned Swayze. Lori Petty brings the hotness, and Swayze brings the awesome. His "Bohdi" character was like a surfing, gun wielding, skydiving hedonist viking with all the trappings. A real treat to watch.
As with most action movies, this is one where you need to turn off your brain. The plot's got a million holes, but some of the action sequences are gold. And it's an inspiration for Hot Fuzz. Everyone go see Hot Fuzz as soon as you can.
-65/365 down, 300/365 to go
Sunday, March 11, 2007
That was a lot of naked people.
The Movie: Stealing Beauty, directed by Bernardo Bertolucci
Recommendation: H
Reason: "it is beautiful and there is some full-frontal rachel weisz"
There is indeed some full-frontal Rachel Weisz. There's also a lot of full frontal other people, but let's face it, we came for the Rachel, we stayed for the utterly gorgeous Italian landscape. No, really. The Italian landscape was beautiful, and the Matthew Spender sculptures that dotted the villa that served as the setting for the film were captivating. (Google him. You won't be disappointed) They kept me watching when the mildly confusing story and occasionally underwhelming acting distracted me.
For a coming of age tale, the movie was handled quite well. Bertolucci's visual sensibility (which I will continue to bring up at any opportunity, of course) is spectacular. I'm not normally a fan of the genre, but how can you possibly deny such a gorgeous film with such an honest vision at least the credit it's due. I've already mentioned that the acting was a little uneven-that failing can mostly be attributed to Liv Tyler, who was decent, but still very, very new and D.W. Moffett. The latter seemed to lose his character here and there, and I didn't really get a feeling of consistency from his performance.
I don't know how rewatchable the movie was-I suppose I could get through another viewing, just to catch a few more glimpses of the artwork and perhaps to get a better idea of Jeremy Irons' character. This does make me want to catch a few other Bertolucci movies, though. Last Tango in Paris, anyone?
-64/365 down, 301/365 to go
Recommendation: H
Reason: "it is beautiful and there is some full-frontal rachel weisz"
There is indeed some full-frontal Rachel Weisz. There's also a lot of full frontal other people, but let's face it, we came for the Rachel, we stayed for the utterly gorgeous Italian landscape. No, really. The Italian landscape was beautiful, and the Matthew Spender sculptures that dotted the villa that served as the setting for the film were captivating. (Google him. You won't be disappointed) They kept me watching when the mildly confusing story and occasionally underwhelming acting distracted me.
For a coming of age tale, the movie was handled quite well. Bertolucci's visual sensibility (which I will continue to bring up at any opportunity, of course) is spectacular. I'm not normally a fan of the genre, but how can you possibly deny such a gorgeous film with such an honest vision at least the credit it's due. I've already mentioned that the acting was a little uneven-that failing can mostly be attributed to Liv Tyler, who was decent, but still very, very new and D.W. Moffett. The latter seemed to lose his character here and there, and I didn't really get a feeling of consistency from his performance.
I don't know how rewatchable the movie was-I suppose I could get through another viewing, just to catch a few more glimpses of the artwork and perhaps to get a better idea of Jeremy Irons' character. This does make me want to catch a few other Bertolucci movies, though. Last Tango in Paris, anyone?
-64/365 down, 301/365 to go
You are from Texas, not England.
The Movie: Bridget Jones's Diary, directed by Sharon Maguire
Recommendation: H
Reason: Hugh Grant is funny.
Renee Zellweger's really starting to bug me lately (I love Empire Records, I love Chicago...I love Empire Records, I love Chicago...). I keep seeing movies with her in them that bite. Bridget Jones's Diary wasn't awful, but it wasn't spectacular, and I'm really starting to get pissed at the Academy for equating 'physical alteration' with 'great acting'. I mean, goddammit! Renee Zellweger was nominated for an academy award for this movie, playing the same half-crazy, supposedly cute, slightly rebellious character she plays in everything (even Chicago, but her performance was more nuanced there, and she wasn't speaking in an English accent) after putting on 25 pounds. Christian Bale dropped 80 pounds for The Machinist, and he didn't get nominated for squat, despite an excellent performance in an alright suspense film. At least she didn't win. We got Halle Berry instead, who I'm still not quite sure about.
Taking a peek into the trivia I could find about this movie, it looks like it was a bit of a circlejerk, since the director's a friend of the author of the book and the two leading men are mentioned in the book (as themselves, not as the characters they played). I wasn't that much enamored of the story. I think the pinnacles of the British romantic comedy ala Working Title Pictures are still (and probably always will be) Love Actually and Four Weddings and a Funeral. They've got a few good films on the way that I'm looking forward to, so huzzah for the upcoming Hot Fuzz!
To continue this scattered rambling, I spent half of the movie peering intently at the screen, trying to figure out who the hell that squeaky-voiced chick was, and why she sounded so familiar. Shock and awe! It's Moaning Myrtle, from Harry Potter! So imagine my chagrin at learning that Moaning Myrtle's fortysomething. That just adds a whole new level of goddamn creepy to the bath scene in Goblet of Fire, seeing as she was forty and Daniel Radcliffe was fifteen. Ewwwwwwww.
-63/365 down, 302/365 to go
Recommendation: H
Reason: Hugh Grant is funny.
Renee Zellweger's really starting to bug me lately (I love Empire Records, I love Chicago...I love Empire Records, I love Chicago...). I keep seeing movies with her in them that bite. Bridget Jones's Diary wasn't awful, but it wasn't spectacular, and I'm really starting to get pissed at the Academy for equating 'physical alteration' with 'great acting'. I mean, goddammit! Renee Zellweger was nominated for an academy award for this movie, playing the same half-crazy, supposedly cute, slightly rebellious character she plays in everything (even Chicago, but her performance was more nuanced there, and she wasn't speaking in an English accent) after putting on 25 pounds. Christian Bale dropped 80 pounds for The Machinist, and he didn't get nominated for squat, despite an excellent performance in an alright suspense film. At least she didn't win. We got Halle Berry instead, who I'm still not quite sure about.
Taking a peek into the trivia I could find about this movie, it looks like it was a bit of a circlejerk, since the director's a friend of the author of the book and the two leading men are mentioned in the book (as themselves, not as the characters they played). I wasn't that much enamored of the story. I think the pinnacles of the British romantic comedy ala Working Title Pictures are still (and probably always will be) Love Actually and Four Weddings and a Funeral. They've got a few good films on the way that I'm looking forward to, so huzzah for the upcoming Hot Fuzz!
To continue this scattered rambling, I spent half of the movie peering intently at the screen, trying to figure out who the hell that squeaky-voiced chick was, and why she sounded so familiar. Shock and awe! It's Moaning Myrtle, from Harry Potter! So imagine my chagrin at learning that Moaning Myrtle's fortysomething. That just adds a whole new level of goddamn creepy to the bath scene in Goblet of Fire, seeing as she was forty and Daniel Radcliffe was fifteen. Ewwwwwwww.
-63/365 down, 302/365 to go
Thursday, March 8, 2007
They have Harrison Ford's family, and he's going to get them back.
The Movie: Firewall, directed by Richard Loncraine
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: See title.
There is one good thing about this movie, and it's that Carly Schroeder continues to get work. A young actress of her caliber deserves to get as much screen time as possible, work up a thorough resume and when she becomes the next Jodie Foster, we can all look back and say "Remember Mean Creek? That sure was an awesome movie." Because it was an awesome movie, and you should all go out, rent or buy it and enjoy how subtle and nuanced her performance in that film was. Do me the honor of _not_ picking up a copy of Firewall.
I can't really address the technical aspects of this film. It'd be great if, just once, some techy guy being held hostage to force him to be a 1337 H4XX0RZ would lie, and the stupid bastards who'd taken him hostage believed him. We get Harrison Ford, hacking the Gibson with an iPod and half of a fax machine instead. Apple's cool and all, but c'mon, not even an iPod is more AWESOME than Acid Burn and Zero Cool. At least in 1995 they had an excuse-not a lot of people were 'net savvy enough to know that Hackers was completely off-the-charts impossible.
Firewall fails on a lot of levels, from technical impossibilities to the stupidest damn seven year old in the history of film (0 to Stockholm Syndrome in twenty minutes). I'd love to see someone flip this whole idea on its head, and have some sort of older woman-action-hero-Frances McDormand-type having to save her family from the bad guys. That'd be pretty cool.
-62/365 down, 303/365 to go
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: See title.
There is one good thing about this movie, and it's that Carly Schroeder continues to get work. A young actress of her caliber deserves to get as much screen time as possible, work up a thorough resume and when she becomes the next Jodie Foster, we can all look back and say "Remember Mean Creek? That sure was an awesome movie." Because it was an awesome movie, and you should all go out, rent or buy it and enjoy how subtle and nuanced her performance in that film was. Do me the honor of _not_ picking up a copy of Firewall.
I can't really address the technical aspects of this film. It'd be great if, just once, some techy guy being held hostage to force him to be a 1337 H4XX0RZ would lie, and the stupid bastards who'd taken him hostage believed him. We get Harrison Ford, hacking the Gibson with an iPod and half of a fax machine instead. Apple's cool and all, but c'mon, not even an iPod is more AWESOME than Acid Burn and Zero Cool. At least in 1995 they had an excuse-not a lot of people were 'net savvy enough to know that Hackers was completely off-the-charts impossible.
Firewall fails on a lot of levels, from technical impossibilities to the stupidest damn seven year old in the history of film (0 to Stockholm Syndrome in twenty minutes). I'd love to see someone flip this whole idea on its head, and have some sort of older woman-action-hero-Frances McDormand-type having to save her family from the bad guys. That'd be pretty cool.
-62/365 down, 303/365 to go
Monday, March 5, 2007
Never trust a hippie with your wife.
The Movie: Down and Out in Beverly Hills, directed by Paul Mazursky
Recommendation: AMC
Reason: Hey look, a movie! On TV! What a novelty!
It's very difficult to believe that Down and Out in Beverly Hills was made over twenty years ago. The cinematography's excellent, likely pretty innovative for the late eighties. It was the first thing I noticed about the film, though there were a lot of other points that caught my attention. The plot is similar to American Beauty, but the execution and tone is different. Down and Out focuses on the same sort of journey, an awakening brought to the suburbs, but this awakening is gentle.
Lester (from American Beauty) somehow felt a little more real, a little more desperate than Dave, Richard Dreyfuss' suburban dad in Down and Out. Though the catalyst for the change they experience is desire, Dave's envy seems more pure than Lester's lust. When both of them see the object of their desire exposed for what it is, the result is strikingly similar-retreat, relief. It could be a quirk of the actors, but I feel it's more a reflection of the material and mood of the respective films.
Overall, this was an interesting light to American Beauty's dark. There were a few moments of really solid brilliance in the film, though there were definitely some low points (AhemLittleRichardAhem). It had several subtle points that were made, once more about the society that the suburbs seem to create within and without. Very interesting.
-61/365 down, 304/365 to go
Recommendation: AMC
Reason: Hey look, a movie! On TV! What a novelty!
It's very difficult to believe that Down and Out in Beverly Hills was made over twenty years ago. The cinematography's excellent, likely pretty innovative for the late eighties. It was the first thing I noticed about the film, though there were a lot of other points that caught my attention. The plot is similar to American Beauty, but the execution and tone is different. Down and Out focuses on the same sort of journey, an awakening brought to the suburbs, but this awakening is gentle.
Lester (from American Beauty) somehow felt a little more real, a little more desperate than Dave, Richard Dreyfuss' suburban dad in Down and Out. Though the catalyst for the change they experience is desire, Dave's envy seems more pure than Lester's lust. When both of them see the object of their desire exposed for what it is, the result is strikingly similar-retreat, relief. It could be a quirk of the actors, but I feel it's more a reflection of the material and mood of the respective films.
Overall, this was an interesting light to American Beauty's dark. There were a few moments of really solid brilliance in the film, though there were definitely some low points (AhemLittleRichardAhem). It had several subtle points that were made, once more about the society that the suburbs seem to create within and without. Very interesting.
-61/365 down, 304/365 to go
Saturday, March 3, 2007
My love is conditional
The Movie: Zombi 2, directed by Lucio Fulci
Recommendation: Me
Reason: Shark vs. Zombie vs. mostly naked diver.
I like zombie movies, really I do. When I watch things like Zombi 2 and House of the Dead, it's really hard to remember that. I tried to like this one based on its charming bad acting and hideous special effects. I managed to make it through the entire eye-gouging and the whole aforementioned fight scene pretty well, but the rest of the film was a trial in stupidity. There's something to be said for heroes and heroines who don't just stand around waiting to be eaten. Shambling zombies should win through superior numbers, not through apparent idiocy.
So that's the deal. It was like House of the Dead, without the video game clips and with added gore. I'm starting to get desensitized to the sight of exposed intestines, which I'm not sure is entirely normal. Then again, it's not like I'm giggling as loops of guts fly at the camera. I think I'm still fine. Oh wait, no, I do laugh when that happens in Shaun of the Dead. I'm going to hell.
I think we need to see more revolutionary zombie flicks like Night of..., Shaun of...
and 28 Days Later. I supposed for completeness' sake I should also pick up copies of that atypical Z-movie classic Assault on Precinct 13, just for Carpenter's shot at the genre. And I don't know about any more mondo flicks. I think I only need one eye-gouging in my life, thanks.
-60/365 down, 305/365 to go
Recommendation: Me
Reason: Shark vs. Zombie vs. mostly naked diver.
I like zombie movies, really I do. When I watch things like Zombi 2 and House of the Dead, it's really hard to remember that. I tried to like this one based on its charming bad acting and hideous special effects. I managed to make it through the entire eye-gouging and the whole aforementioned fight scene pretty well, but the rest of the film was a trial in stupidity. There's something to be said for heroes and heroines who don't just stand around waiting to be eaten. Shambling zombies should win through superior numbers, not through apparent idiocy.
So that's the deal. It was like House of the Dead, without the video game clips and with added gore. I'm starting to get desensitized to the sight of exposed intestines, which I'm not sure is entirely normal. Then again, it's not like I'm giggling as loops of guts fly at the camera. I think I'm still fine. Oh wait, no, I do laugh when that happens in Shaun of the Dead. I'm going to hell.
I think we need to see more revolutionary zombie flicks like Night of..., Shaun of...
and 28 Days Later. I supposed for completeness' sake I should also pick up copies of that atypical Z-movie classic Assault on Precinct 13, just for Carpenter's shot at the genre. And I don't know about any more mondo flicks. I think I only need one eye-gouging in my life, thanks.
-60/365 down, 305/365 to go
Friday, March 2, 2007
Can someone please un-pussify Guy Ritchie?
The Movie: Layer Cake, directed by Matthew Vaughn
Recommendation: Me
Reason: I wanted to see how the new James Bond shaped up in his earlier roles.
Guy Ritchie needs to shape the hell up. I'm a huge fan of Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. Hey, everyone loves a caper movie, right? Ocean's Eleven through Thirteen (just speculating on that one), O Brother Where Art Thou?, they've been decent hits, good movies to watch just to have something to watch. Heist movies live and die on style, and Ritchie had a whole hell of a lot of it. There was just something so perfect about the fast cuts, the writing, the casting, and the directing that Ritchie did on his better known pictures. He was supposed to direct this little number, but he didn't. Passed on the torch to Matthew Vaughn, on a movie that could have been a triumphant return to the genre he'd helped revive.
Vaughn was involved in Lock, Stock... and Snatch as a producer, so it's no surprise he handled Layer Cake so nicely. It has a similar feel to Ritchie's originals. Unfortunately, it's not so engaging as either. The plot twists and turns in some really great (though predictable) ways, but aside from Daniel Craig's stone cold XXXX and a very good ending, it doesn't stand as an equal to the movies it's succeeded.
Daniel Craig is definitely comment-worthy. He's a unique, understated actor with a great unruffled feel about him. His bearing and his tone just fit. I had to give myself a little giggle when XXXX picks up his first gun and immediately strikes a Bond pose-at the time Layer Cake was shot, Craig was probably unaware that he was soon going to become that legendary character. At any rate, Craig alone commends this flick. If you liked Lock, Stock... or Snatch, you might get something out of Layer Cake. It'd also be a pretty decent introduction to the other two, should you be looking to get someone else interested.
-59/365 down, 306/365 to go
Recommendation: Me
Reason: I wanted to see how the new James Bond shaped up in his earlier roles.
Guy Ritchie needs to shape the hell up. I'm a huge fan of Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. Hey, everyone loves a caper movie, right? Ocean's Eleven through Thirteen (just speculating on that one), O Brother Where Art Thou?, they've been decent hits, good movies to watch just to have something to watch. Heist movies live and die on style, and Ritchie had a whole hell of a lot of it. There was just something so perfect about the fast cuts, the writing, the casting, and the directing that Ritchie did on his better known pictures. He was supposed to direct this little number, but he didn't. Passed on the torch to Matthew Vaughn, on a movie that could have been a triumphant return to the genre he'd helped revive.
Vaughn was involved in Lock, Stock... and Snatch as a producer, so it's no surprise he handled Layer Cake so nicely. It has a similar feel to Ritchie's originals. Unfortunately, it's not so engaging as either. The plot twists and turns in some really great (though predictable) ways, but aside from Daniel Craig's stone cold XXXX and a very good ending, it doesn't stand as an equal to the movies it's succeeded.
Daniel Craig is definitely comment-worthy. He's a unique, understated actor with a great unruffled feel about him. His bearing and his tone just fit. I had to give myself a little giggle when XXXX picks up his first gun and immediately strikes a Bond pose-at the time Layer Cake was shot, Craig was probably unaware that he was soon going to become that legendary character. At any rate, Craig alone commends this flick. If you liked Lock, Stock... or Snatch, you might get something out of Layer Cake. It'd also be a pretty decent introduction to the other two, should you be looking to get someone else interested.
-59/365 down, 306/365 to go
Thursday, March 1, 2007
He's not gone. He's never gone!
The Movie: What About Bob?, directed by Frank Oz
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: "Bill Murray is so funny!"
I really needed a break. As you can see , there've been some really psychologically gruelling films over the last week. Man Bites Dog just won't leave my head, and so the double bill of "Trisha Takinawa is Dead" on Lost and What About Bob? was the perfect thing to wash the dirt out of my psyche. Though Hurley's tale of woe and heartache was fun, What About Bob? was just really nice.
I appreciate Bill Murray's acting more and more every time I see one of his early films. Oddly, I don't have as much experience with his more recent work, though I'm looking to change that. He's a funny man, always has been, and I'm interested to see his dramatic turns. Tears of a clown. In What About Bob? he's his usual wacky force of nature, quirky and odd as he wanders through the story. His counterpoint in this odd couple comedy is Richard Dreyfuss. Dreyfuss's character is a good foil. He doesn't do much beyond explode at Murray's offbeat antics, but that's all he needs to do.
The film is funny, quirky and a little dark, but it's not black as pitch. It's what I needed to see, basically. Go Bill Murray.
-58/365 down, 307/365 to go
Recommendation: Dee
Reason: "Bill Murray is so funny!"
I really needed a break. As you can see , there've been some really psychologically gruelling films over the last week. Man Bites Dog just won't leave my head, and so the double bill of "Trisha Takinawa is Dead" on Lost and What About Bob? was the perfect thing to wash the dirt out of my psyche. Though Hurley's tale of woe and heartache was fun, What About Bob? was just really nice.
I appreciate Bill Murray's acting more and more every time I see one of his early films. Oddly, I don't have as much experience with his more recent work, though I'm looking to change that. He's a funny man, always has been, and I'm interested to see his dramatic turns. Tears of a clown. In What About Bob? he's his usual wacky force of nature, quirky and odd as he wanders through the story. His counterpoint in this odd couple comedy is Richard Dreyfuss. Dreyfuss's character is a good foil. He doesn't do much beyond explode at Murray's offbeat antics, but that's all he needs to do.
The film is funny, quirky and a little dark, but it's not black as pitch. It's what I needed to see, basically. Go Bill Murray.
-58/365 down, 307/365 to go
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
