Hall Pass

Hall Pass

            The war between the Farrley Bros and Judd Apatow, two directors (I consider the Farrley  Bros one) that share a similar approach to comedies, is on.  They both develop their movies the same way; R-rated shock humor (mostly in bad taste), that is underlined with a certain wholesome sweetness to the characters as well as some insightful observations of the human condition.  The winner?  We are.  I love both these directors.  It appears Hall Pass is getting mixed reviews, but if you are a fan of the Farrelly Bros (Something about Mary and, Me, Myself, and Irene), then you know exactly what you are getting.  Personally, it’s my kind of humor.

            The concept is that after 20 years of marriage, 2 wives grant their delusional husbands a week off of marriage to prove that they aren’t missing out on anything.  In other words; a Hall Pass.  One of the great things about being married is that men can convince themselves that they are still studs, if only it weren’t for the wives cramping their style.  Little do they realize, the gradual neutering and domestication that has taken its’ toll on them as time marches on.  Their recollection of their youth becomes clouded as they remember being much more of ladies men than they actually were and the passage into middle age has made the reality even worse.

            Of course, like with most films of the ‘men vs women’ variety, the men come across as the buffoons and the women are portrayed as putting up with their insanity.  Rick (Owen Wilson) plays uncool so well it’s almost cool and Fred (SNL player Jason Sudeikis) plays the affable every man sidekick who can’t figure out why everyone considers him ‘portly’.  Maggie (Jenna Fischer) and Grace (Christina Applegate) play their roles as attractive yet still soccer mommish wives with great perturbed comedic timing.  Of course, they are pursued by impossibly attractive men during the Hall Pass despite their reluctance.

            The rest of the cast is populated by the Farrley Bros trademark use of Felliniesque style  cartoonish characters.  All freakish, yet somehow familiar in our everyday life.  We feel guilty at laughing at these character’s bizarre absurdities, but we can’t keep ourselves from laughing.  We think; ‘that is so wrong’ and then console ourselves that we will feel guilty later for laughing at these people.

The laughs come from seeing these men enter the world of freedom with no idea how square they are.  They are torn whether Applebee’s or the Olive Garden is the best place to meet available young women on a Friday night.  One friend, irritated by their naiveté, tells them that of course Chili’s is the only real place to meet women.  As 9:30pm rolls around they pack it up and vow to try again the next night. 

Again, the goal through-out this movie is shock humor and each gag becomes more outrageous than the last.  Some are so outrageous that I won’t even hint at what they are here. At some point, I wondered how this didn’t get the long defunct NC-17 rating.  Not to contradict myself, but the use of gratuitous nudity or sex gags is somehow not gratuitous in the Farrelly Bros films.  Gratuity is what they go for.

I will say, despite my previous comment about the lopsidedness of the ‘men vs women’ portrayal, each of the players deal with temptation in their own way and each trial, no matter what the outcome, draws us closer to the characters for their innate goodness.

It is hilarious and interesting where the Farrley Bros find so many incredibly attractive women.  Leigh (Nicky Whelan) the Aussie barista is like no barista I have ever seen.  I wondered if that is how she really looks or just how Rick perceives her to look given his tortured monogamous lifestyle.  His children’s babysitter (Alexandra Daddario) also meeting every cliché of a beguiling Lolita siren.

I walked out of this movie in no way thinking it will be a classic or even memorable, but I will say that I laughed continuously and thought that the feel good wholesomeness of the ending was my penance for all the ‘so wrong, but oh so right’ humor that I felt guilty enjoying

I rate this ***



Unknown

Unknown

           Unknown is a classic suspense thriller.  Unfortunately, what makes it classic is that it is filled with all those clichés that at one time were interesting, but after having seen them recycled innumerous times you can’t get past that necessary ‘suspension of disbelief’ that it takes to lose yourself in a film.

            I will say that I find Liam Neeson one of the most dependable and classic actors in films.  He can play all types of roles and always delivers.  And, despite my misgivings about this film, he delivers the solid performance he was hired for. He plays the traumatized Dr. Martin Harris, an American physician whose wife accompanies him on a bio-technology conference in Berlin.  Upon checking into a hotel, Dr Harris realizes he left a briefcase at the airport.  In the cab ride back to the airport, a horrible accident puts him into a coma from which he wakes up four days later.  He finds that despite imperfect recall of who he is and his life, no one else knows him…including his wife.  He finds that another man (Adian Quinn) has stepped into his life as Dr. Martin Harris.  No one, including his wife and friends, realize he is who he says.  He sets out to remember what happened and how his life was taken from him.

            This film is one of those twist and turn plot movies where as soon as we figure out what is happening another curve ball is thrown.  It was done in formulaic fashion.  I don’t think this next comment is a plot spoiler as I think you can derive this from the trailer, but this is a conspiracy movie.  I guess what kept going through my mind in every scene was how impossible the conspiracy was.  So many precise events had to happen in an exact Machiavellian sequence that it would be impossible for anyone or any agency to plot that exactly.  Any small variable or variance would cause the whole plan to collapse.  Then there were the DaVinci style trail of clues and secret codes he had to crack to lead himself to the truth.  The leaps he makes in logic were improbable at best.  Somehow, after a traumatic head injury, he figures out that a series of numbers in the back of a book he possessed really spelled out something in Latin which he deduced was a passcode to a computer file.  That is some Mensa level deduction. 

            Then of course the clichés:  Amnesia, something everyone who gets in an accident comes down with. The cab driver who rescues him is an impossibly beautiful illegal immigrant (Diane Kruger, remember her as the German starlet in ‘Inglorious Basterds?) named Gina.  Aren’t all illegal immigrant cab drivers runway models? They didn’t even try to frump her up.  She was stunning.  Then somehow Dr. Harris is a Daytona 500 level driver as he goes through lengthy car chases in a city he has never been in.  I have to tell you, that every time I go five miles over the speed limit in a construction zone, I get pulled over.  Apparently, in Germany, it’s possible to have extended car chases that destroys property, causes numerous car pile-ups, and demolishes infrastructure and public transportation and not a siren is heard.  The cliché that really caught my attention is when he was looking for a name in a phone book at a phone booth.  He finds the name and tears out the page.  This may not seem like a big deal to people my age or older, but when was the last time you saw a phone booth let alone a phone book in a phone booth?  The phone book page tear is so 1990’s and before. 

            Despite all my complaints, this was a good popcorn movie.  It’s like getting a favorite meal at a chain restaurant.  You enjoy it, but you’re not going to call anyone up and say; “You won’t believe the ‘Italian Pasta Trio’ I had at The Olive Garden tonight”.  Frank Langella, much like Liam Neeson, always brings a level of class and credibility to any movie.  January Jones, as Liam’s wife, delivers a solid, if uninspired, performance as his confused and conflicted wife. 

            Maybe I’m jaded because I’ve seen so many movies, but there was nothing that I haven’t seen before.  If you have an afternoon to kill and there is nothing else on, it will make a good matinee.  Otherwise, wait for the DVD.

I rate this: **

           



2011 Oscar Predictions and Results



The results are in and it wasn't my best year:  I was 4 for 6

Okay everyone,

It's Feb 13th and I am making my offical prediction for the 2011 Oscars.

In 2009 I was 4 for 5 (I still think Mickey Rourke was robbed)
In 2010 I was 5 for 5

I predict Best Picture, Actor, Actress, Supporting Actor, and Supporting Actress.  I always cop out and don't try to predict the Director.  Too hard for me. I've decided to step up like a big boy and add that to my list of predictions this year.  I am entitled to make modifictations up until the night before the Oscars, but I will notate any changes in a colored font.  I'm changing some on Friday 25 Feb at 8am.  Changes in Green

My Predictions:

Best Picture:     (Picked it) The King's Speech;  I thought it was going to be The Social Network, but the heat seems to be with this movie.

Best Actor:       (Picked it )Colin Firth for The King's Speech... it's about time Colin.  We can finally forget about Bridget Jone's Diary.

Best Actress:    (Picked it) Natalie Portman for Black Swan.  I would have liked to say Annette Benning, but I think it will be Natalie

Best Supporting Actor:  (Picked it) Christian Bale for the Fighter.  It could just as easily be Geoffery Rush for the King's Speech, but "Please, please, please let it be Christian Bale".  I know he is a hot headed overbearing actor, but he was so good in that movie.

Best Supporting Actress:  (Missed it, but Melissa Leo did a great job. I'm holding no grudges)  Hailee Stienfeld for True Grit is now my pick, don't ask me why, but that's my gut feeling.  Helena Bohnam Carter  for the King's Speech.  Please don't let it be Hailee Steinfeld.  I hate when kids get Oscars.

Best Director:  (Missed it, should have stuck with my first choice) David Arfonsky for Black Swan; if it were anyone other than the Acadenmy chosing I would pick Tom Hooper, but something tells me Black Swan.   Tom Hooper  for The King's Speech

Biutiful

         Biutiful

         Okay, before I get to the actual review, let me just say that I think Javier Bardem is one of the coolest actors today.  He was cool as a psychotic killer in ‘No Country for Old Men”, he was cool as a seducer in “Vicky, Cristina, Barcelona” and he’s just an all around cool guy.  The camera loves this guy.  Antonio Banderas (and Penelope Cruz of course) is the last Spaniard to make it big in the American cinema, but I think Javier has it all over Antonio.  He doesn’t have Antonio’s pretty boy good-looks, rather he has a rugged unique face.  He has a facial intensity that you just can’t turn away from…did I mention I think he’s cool? He radiates cool and hipness.

            Now the movie:  I’m going to alienate most people with this line… this is a sub-titled movie.  Any one left?

            I wish I could say you were wrong on this one.  “Biutiful” is a movie that fits every stereotype that Americans have about sub-titled movies.  Europeans chide Americans for their need to have feel good endings to their movies, but there is the other side of the coin.  European cinema is sometimes obsessed in creating the most tragic films they are able.  Each director measures his/her artistic ability by trying to “out tragedy” other films.  Well director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu wins.  He has created the most tragic film ever created.  Poverty? Check. Yelling, screaming, and crying? Check. depressed bi-polar wife? Check. Selling his soul for money job? Check. Tragic death? Check.  Mass tragic death? Check.  What more could make this possibly more depressing?  Oh yeah, the lead character is dying from cancer and has 3 months to live which will leave his two young children homeless!  Check.

            I tried to find some other reviews to get a sense what this movie was about.  I couldn’t find many and the ones I did find all seemed to have a different opinion on what the movie was about.  Here goes my version… This movie follows the life of a man named Uxbal.  He makes his meager living in the fringes of Spain’s underworld off of illegal immigrant labor.  Having discovered he has 3 months to live he seeks a path of redemption as his life collapse around him.  He fights to come to grips with the life he has led. The film is circular and ends where it starts. 

            Uxbal is not inherently evil.  He loves his two children, even if he has a bit of a temper with them.  Despite the fact that his ex-wife’s bi-polar promiscuous ways disgust him, he still loves her.  For all intents and purpose, his cut from selling illegal immigrant labor makes him a slave trader, but he still cares for the people he works with and tries to help where he can.  One Chinese immigrant even babysits his children.  Uxbal’s primary concern when he learns he is dying is to tie up all the loose ends of his life and leave his children provided for.  His parents died when he was young and he barely remembers them.  He is heartbroken that the same fate will befall his children.

            The movie follows Uxbal on this journey; however, tragedy starts to pile on his already collapsing life.  Instead of tying up loose ends, the entire fabric of his life starts to unravel.  Each tragedy is bigger than the previous one.  How much tragedy can a dying man take?  The answer?  Quite a lot apparently.  If his life story wasn’t tragic enough the movie explores the life of some of the Chinese and African illegal immigrants.  Their lives are tragic too.

            This was the longest 2 hours 18 minutes that I can remember.  The movie just wouldn’t end no matter how much I wanted it to.  Every year there is always that one foreign film that the Oscars nominate.  I think pretentious people say they like these types of films to try and make themselves seem sophisticated.  I know this is very judgmental of me, but I can think of no other reason this film would be nominated.  Sure taste is subjective, but I really don’t see how anyone can ‘enjoy’ this film.  I lose patience with cliché happy endings in movies as much as any hi-brow pretentious cinemaphile, but come on, Alejandro … Lighten up!

            I’ve known a few Spaniards in my travels and they’ve all seemed extremely cool.  Almost without exception.  Maybe it’s something in the water.  I just wish their films would follow suit.

I rate this:  zero stars 

I highly recommend you don’t see this film.

Cedar Rapids

Cedar Rapids

          After all the serious Oscar movies, it is nice just to see a fun movie.  That’s what Cedar Rapids is… fun and funny.  The Director, Miguel Arteta, has a love of small towns and the people who inhabit them.  Most of his films take place in small town America.  ‘Youth in Revolt’ and ‘The Good Girl’ were dark movies with just a slight comedic edge and explored the psyche of small town America.  Cedar Rapids is a full-fledged comedy, however; that doesn’t mean that there aren’t profound insights to be found.

            Miguel Artega pokes, prods, and makes fun of all the typical things we make fun of about small town America.  No joke or stereotype is too cliché, but you can tell he does it with love and affection.  Neither the Director nor the script looks down upon these characters.  They are fully fleshed out human beings.  You can tell Miguel loves the naiveté and genuineness displayed by these characters.  There’s something gratifying about their lack of worldliness.

            Tim Lippe (Ed Helms in his first starring role) is an insurance salesman who has never left his small town of Brown Valley, Wisconsin.  In fact, he is so sheltered that, at the age of 34, has just started to have sex and the woman just happens to be his newly divorced former 6^th grade teacher (played hilariously by Sigourney Weaver).  Life is going  great for Tim until the Agency’s star spokesman and Tim’s hero, Roger Lemke (Reno:911’s Thomas Lennon playing the slickster perfectly), dies in an embarrassing auto-erotic asphyxiation accident (is there any other kind).  The Agency’s boss, Bill Krogstad (played by the fantastic character actor, Stephen Root [I can’t wait until he’s a household name]) is in a panic.  Roger Lemke was always the Agency’s representative at the annual ASMI convention in Cedar Rapids and has brought home the prestigious ‘2 Star Diamond’ award for the last 4 years.  Krogstad has reservations about Lippe, but decides to send him anyway.  His send off speech to him; “Tim, when you where 16 yrs old, I thought that here was a kid who was going to go places and then somehow, you just didn’t… don’t let me down”. 

            Miguel Arteta takes much delight showing Lippe’s wide-eyed wonder as he leaves his town for the first time and goes to the most debaucherous sin city of the mid-west; Cedar Rapids, IA.  Lippe even finds the airport security line to be exciting.  He is giddy as he checks into his hotel that has an atrium and small triangle indoor pool.  Every step of the way he calls his girlfriend/teacher to extol the virtues of the big city.  He notes the chlorine-perfumed atrium, the crystal blue hotel pool and fake potted palm trees that are everywhere.  He excitedly exclaims; “I feel like I’m in Barbados’.  The smallest things that we all take for granted delight Lippe to no end.  He finds everything "Awesome".  When the flight attendant gives him a second bag of honey roasted peanuts..."Super Awesome"

            It is here we meet the rest of the cast.  His roommate is Ronald Wilkes (Isiah Whitlock, Jr) a black man who is probably the most straight-laced guy at the conference.  Lippe panics and calls his girlfriend/teacher; “Honey, there is an Afro-American in my room”.  Once he overcomes his shock, they become fast friends. Joan Ostrowski-Fox (played with world-weary beauty by Anne Heche) is a married insurance agent who looks forward to the annual convention to escape her dreary family life.  I’ve always thought of Anne Heche as a bit flaky, but she really pulls off her role.  You can really see the sadness behind her party exterior.  Her life didn’t turn out as she planned. “What happens in Cedar Rapids stays in Cedar Rapids” she confides at one point.  Finally there is Dean ‘Deanzie’ Ziegler, played by John C. Riley channeling the best Bill Murray performances.  He’s loud, smug, sleazy, and inappropriate.  He’s a self styled party machine who steals every scene he is in.  His strategy for winning debates: “Volume, proximity, and attitude”.  Even the short skirted prostitute Bree (Arrested Development’s Alia Shawcat) who stands outside the hotel has an innocent charm.  Lippe is so naïve that he doesn’t realize she is a prostitute.   He takes it at face value when she asks if he wants to party.  He replies that maybe he will run into her at the party in the hotel lounge.

            This movie is sweet, charming, raunchy, and dirty all at the same time.  The characters play in perfect ensemble and we laugh at things we recognize in our everyday life.  Everyone is funny, but Reilly is over the top hilarious with his raunchiness.  Every time he opens his mouth you can’t believe what comes out even though you are braced for it.  I didn’t realize how much I missed that Bill Murray style of slob comedy.

            Ultimately, this movie is an affectionate, comedic look at small town America and a lampoon of the insurance business.  Everything we see is familiar and relatable.  The more we recognize and relate, the harder we laugh.

            This is a funny insightful comedy with a perfect cast.

           

I rate this... wait for it "Super Awesome"  ****

           

Justin Bieber: Never Say Never

Psych!!!!! 

I can't believe you would think I would see this film.  Shame on you for even looking at this review.

Winter's Bone

Winter’s Bone

Winter’s Bone was another one of those films that debuted quietly last summer and did very little at the box office.  The critics loved it, but a combination of a dreary and ambiguous trailer (in the summer, people want to see blockbusters, not heavy movies) and an odd title (same thing that hampered Shawshank Redemption when it first came out) conspired to keep this movie obscure and forgotten.

            Still, the movie was powerful enough to catch the attention of the Oscars and it was nominated for both Best Picture and Best Actress.  I can say, with almost certainty, that it will win neither.  This is not to say it wasn’t a good film, but the mojo just isn’t there.

            Winter’s Bone is a story about a poverty stricken family in the Ozark’s.  I think critics love these extreme poverty tales as quintessentially American and tend to give more credit than is deserved, but don’t get me wrong this is a worthwhile film.  17 year old Ree Dolly (Jennifer Lawrence) is, for all intents and purposes, the head of her family.  The father is absent and the mother’s depression is so severe that she is incapacitated.  Ree dreams of joining the Army and providing a better life for her younger brother and sister.  The challenge comes when the Sheriff shows up on her doorstep looking for her father who has skipped bail.  Ree could care less about the whereabouts of her father, but unfortunately for them, the father put the house and property up as collateral.  Suddenly, Ree is faced with the possibility of facing eviction and having no way to care for the family.  She is already relying on the charity of the neighbors for food.

            Ree sets out to find her father.  She must  untangle the trail of lies and a code of silence from a community she is a part of.  While everyone has sympathy, the code of kin is even stronger and she risks her life pushing boundaries that no one wants crossed. 

            It’s a fascinating look at the state of mountain people in today’s world.  Where in previous generations, the illegal activity was moonshine, it is now trailer meth labs.  They need to hunt for their food which consists of squirrel and deer (do you want that stewed or fried they ask) all the while talking on cell phones.  They live in dilapidated log housing that have satellite dishes out front.  The banjo and the violin are still their main source of music and family entertainment.

            Jennifer Lawrence gives a quiet and powerful performance as a child who is forced to take on grown-up responsibility.  While it’s a fascinating performance for its’ unflinching look at hill life, I don’t think this is an Oscar level performance.  It’s just a movie to be immensely proud of. 

            An overlooked performance in this film is John Hawkes, who plays her meth-ridden, cocaine addicted Uncle Teardrop.  The man oozes redneck creepiness and danger, but as the story progresses ends up being her moral compass and protector.  Try pulling that off without being contrite, but the director Debra Granick somehow finds a way.  Teardrop is a reprehensible human being, but when all have abandoned Ree, he is there.  And that says something.

            I will say the movie is very slow and, even though it is an intriguing detective story, I wouldn’t call it riveting.  If nothing else it is an unflinching look at mountain life.  It’s hard, secretive, and brutal, but the redeeming, unwavering values of kin (I love using that word) and community is the balance.  Neighbors look out for each other.  Protecting the family is everything whether they are right or wrong.  They survive together and support each other.  It’s easy to look down upon this life, but they demonstrate valuable lessons that everyone should respect.

            Jennifer Lawrence is not an actress who displays a lot of charisma (which is perfect for this role).  Even though she is being nominated, I’m not sure she will go on to be a force to be reckoned with.  Of course, I thought the same thing about Jennifer Jason Leigh and, as she matured, her abilities grew and she has a resume to be respected (even if she isn’t a household name).  I think Jennifer Lawrence has a chance for that type of career.  Low-key, respectable, consistent.

I give this movie:  ***

A good and worthwhile movie, but can be slow and ponderous, especially if you watch it at home.

Blue Valentine

Blue Valentine:

I originally was going to see this movie the weekend it came out, but a certain lady friend of mine challenged my man credentials for wanting to see a ‘Chick Flick’, so I ended up not seeing it.  When Michelle Williams received the nomination for Best Supporting actress, I had to go see it for the sake of research.

Let me say that this was a conundrum for me as I can’t say this was a picture that I liked or would even recommend, but I was very impressed by the acting performances.  Let me correct that; I was extremely impressed by Ryan Gosling and was surprised that his co-star received the nomination as opposed to him.  Michelle Williams gave a good performance, but hardly Oscar worthy.  In fact, Ryan Gosling was nominated for the Golden Globe, but not the Oscar.  What’s up with that?

The Director, Derek Cianfrance, brings us a depressing and miring film about the failing of a marriage.  I will say the story telling is clever as he tells the story in the past and present simultaneously.  The past follows the courtship and the birth of the marriage and the present is 6 years into the marriage as it dissolves.  The courtship between Dean (Ryan Gosling) and Cindy (Michelle Williams) is very charming and even inspirational as ‘True Love’ wins out over all of their obstacles.  This feeling is crippled as it is overlaying the present where you see the crumbling of the marriage.  No matter what good feeling you have, it is muted by what you know is coming.

I will say the acting is top notch and Ryan Gosling takes it to the next level.  Ryan gained his moderate fame from the movie ‘The Notebook’.  He chooses roles that are not Hollywood mainstream.  If you ever want to see an impressive movie and performance that showcases his talent, I recommend “Lars and the Real Girl’.   He mirrors Johnny Depp’s choice of quirky roles in that way, but as good as he is, I don’t think he has Depp’s level of charisma that would ever take him to that level. Compare his performance to Michelle Williams who spends most of the film as just a teary eyed woman surviving the hardships of a low income life.  Whether past or present, she is more or less the same.  The true showcase is Ryan Gosling.  As Dean courts Cindy, he is poor but has an optimistic energy that he can conquer life.  He is a high school drop-out who works for a moving company, but knows that he will make something of himself someday.  After a chance encounter with Cindy, he falls hopelessly in love and pursues her, even though she is pregnant by another man.  Cindy realizes that the father of her child is not the right choice and she is eventually won over by Dean.  The ukulele serenade scene will charm even the most cynical anti-chick flick movie goer.

Again, whatever charm this movie does possess is taken away by the disintegration of the marriage that runs parallel to this story.  6 years later, Dean is a house painter who has trouble finding work.  He smokes and drinks non-stop and is haunted by a wife who feels unfulfilled by life and by him.  Despite all of Dean’s shortcomings, his love for his 6 year old ‘daughter’ (the girl doesn’t realize that Dean isn’t her father) is touching and she loves him back equally.  They have a playfulness between them that makes you smile.  As stated earlier, you really see no difference in Michelle’s appearance over the 6 years, which can sometimes be confusing when they jump between past and present, however the physical transformation of Dean over the 6 years is remarkably noticeable.  Ryan Gosling doesn’t play it over the top, but not only do you see a subtle physical difference, his whole persona is transformed.  The gravity and weight of the years wears down his youthful optimism and you can read the life weariness in his face and posture.  This is where true acting is required and delivered.

There are no good guys or bad guys here.  No one is right or wrong. No one is totally at fault or totally to blame.  This is just a depressing story of a low income couple trying to survive in an unfulfilling life.

Despite these impressive acting performances, I not sure what the purpose of this move was.  It felt like some Eastern European movie that was just a downer for the sake of being a downer.  I walked out feeling depressed without taking away anything substantial from the film.  It gives insight to nothing.  I would not recommend this movie to anyone

I will  rate it:  *

The only reason I won’t give it zero is due to the strong performances By Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams  (the nomination should have gone to Ryan).

Hereafter

 Hereafter

This is a movie that is not totally out of the mainstream but somewhat. Definitely not in the mold of a traditional Hollywood blockbuster.   Just saw the movie, "Hereafter' by Clint Eastwood and starring Matt Damon. I didn't have high expectations as, let's face it, Clint is in his 80's, I'm not a particular fan of Matt Damon, and most films about the afterlife tend to not have satisfying resolutions. This film was powerful to me on many levels. Most significant of which is that a low key, subtle movie could be so powerful in it's impact.
The story deals with three people who all have some connection with death experiences. Marie, a French journalist, almost dies during a tsunami in Thailand (frightingly realistic). Marcus, is a quiet troubled English boy who loses his more dominant twin brother in an accident, and Matt Damen, plays a former professional psychic, who unlike the majority of his colleagues worldwide, truly possess a gift to communicate with the dead. As I've stated, I'm not a big fan of Matt Damon, but he took a role which could have been played over the top and overacted, and played it with such subtlety and gravitas that you hung on every word and facial expression.
All three of them, worlds apart, all try to cope with understanding if there is life after death. Illustrating that no matter where you are from or what your background is,these are questions we all have in common. All seems totally separate until their life paths eventually come to intertwine. That's all I will say about the movie except that each of these 3 stories could have been a separate movie in and of themselves. Each had a different flavor and perspective and were equally captivating.
The call outs that were most memorable to me. Again, Clint Eastwood still proves to be highly relevant in his 80's. I will venture to say that this is one of his most artistic films to date. Matt Damon showing subtlety can be powerful, Bryce Dallas Howard (it's amazing how beautiful she is considering how homely her father is [sorry Richie Cunningham]) plays Matt Damon's potential girlfriend with an attractiveness and vulnerability rarely seen in Hollywood's bombshell actresses. Jay Moehr, who habitually plays wisecracking comedic roles, delivers a great performance as Matt Damon's brother who wishes to capitalize on his 'gift'. Marie (don't know the actress's name) is the epitome of European beauty. A woman whose life of celebrity and wealth is rendered meaningless to her by her near death experience. And then finally Marcus, the English boy. Played with such quiet conviction, yet you are still able to see the hurt in his eyes even when he smiles. I put him in the same league as Freddy Highmore.
I can see some people going to see this film and being bored by it's slow pace. For me, I was riveted to every word and walked out completely satisfied even though I had no more understanding of the afterlife than before I went in.

In my humble opinion, a truly fantastic film that I hope doesn't get overlooked at the Oscars. 

I rate this:  ***

True Grit

True Grit

Let me start off by saying that I am not a fan of the most famous True Grit starring John Wayne. I do not like Westerns in general and I do not care for John Wayne’s stature as an actor. In fact, I do not consider him an actor. He was more of an American icon who appeared in movies. Much like other American Icons, like Stallone, Eastwood or Schwarzenegger (who ironically is of Austrian origins, but hey, we are a land of immigrants), he merely portrayed personas of himself in movies as opposed to transforming himself into the characters he was supposed to play. That is what an ‘actor’ does; transform themselves into other personas.
What are my issues with most Westerns? Most of them portray the West as a sterile place where the good guys are clearly distinguishable from the bad guys. The good guys are of strong moral values and good hygiene. The bad guys snarl and do bad things just for the sake of being bad. Even though none of us were alive back then and don’t know for sure, it never rang true in the story telling.
The newest interpretation of True Grit does ring true. The good guys and the bad guys are not distinguishable by how clean shaven they are. No one is motivated by just doing good and frontier life is not romanticized. In fact, there are several scenes that I winced by things that were probably perceived as normal back then. The public hanging in the town square was frighteningly uncomfortable by how routine it seemed.
Introducing Hailee Steinfeld as Mattie Ross. A true fourteen year old playing the role of a fourteen year old. The John Wayne version starred Kim Darby who was over 20 at the time. I was skeptical going in as I am not fond of child actors and she was so hyped, I thought I would be too critical. Suffice it to say she completely won me over. The best child actor performance I have ever seen and I will be amazed if she doesn’t get an Oscar nod. She was sassy and precocious, things I hate in child actors, but it fit this role perfectly. I feel she even overshadowed Jeff Bridges probable Oscar performance.
Jeff Bridges as Rooster Cogburn. Where John Wayne portrayed the character while wearing a hair piece and man girdle (that is true), Jeff Bridges portrayed him as someone more akin to the town drunkard and a street person than some romanticized version of an old Western Marshall. Back in the 1800’s justice was not as black and white as we were led to believe. A man could be a drunkard and thief in one territory and yet become a drunkard and lawman in the next. Jeff Bridges effectively plays Rooster as a guy you would hold your nose upon meeting and he doesn’t play it over the top.
Matt Damon portrays Le Beouf (originally portrayed by Glenn Cambell). I have to give a begrudging admiration to an actor I don’t necessarily think as that good. This is the second time in as many months that I have had to give it up for Mr. Damon (the last time was in ‘Hereafter’). Matt is able to portray the Texas Ranger as someone who you both like and dislike simultaneously.
True Grit is supposed to be a tribute to the men of yesteryear who supposedly possessed a quality and toughness no longer seen in the modern world. While this may be true, the reason I liked this movie is because it shows that this quality does not always manifest itself in a clean and civilized package. In fact, those qualities often go hand in hand with qualities that we don’t necessarily find admirable.
This movie rang true to the way life was probably like back then, yet at the same time kept the romanticism that made American (and Italian) Westerns so memorable. I originally wondered why the Cohen Bros. wanted to remake this, but I’m glad they did. They remained faithful to the source material and kept their quirkiness which I love so much, in check.

I rate this:  ****

The King's Speech

The King’s Speech

Okay family and friends. You can tell the Oscars are approaching as I am more inspired to write these movie reviews.  I’m thinking about starting a blog, but that might require effort, so we’ll see.

            So this week it’s the King’s Speech.  A story based on the relationship of King George (Colin Firth) and his Speech therapist Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush).  I must confess that the idea of sitting through an English period piece was not my idea of an exciting afternoon (forgive me Carolyn).  They tend to be a bit dry and lacking excitement.  Usually I find them more visual feasts with unengaging stories (intellectual chick flicks if I may be so bold).

            The King’s Speech was a welcome surprise and a fully engaging story of a Royal stutterer.  As a foreigner, I had always heard the story of King Edward renouncing the throne for the woman he loved.  It always had a gallant or noble fairy tale sound to it.  If this movie is to be believed, it really was a tawdry affair that involved backroom politics and a King who put himself before his duties.  King Edward shirked his duties and handed the throne to someone who did not have the aptitude for it. Especially in a time of crisis with the approach of WWII

            Colin Firth plays the future King George.  A meek man whose nervousness causes a stutter so impeding that every public event is a source of humiliation which aggravates the condition even further.  Colin Firth is one of those actors that you see everywhere, but never really gets the credit he deserves.  This role really showcases his talent and I hope garnishes him the nomination he deserves.  As a Royal, public speaking is required and Colin Firth heavily captures the pain and anguish of a man forced to publicly demonstrate what he is woefully unable to do.  Every trip to the microphone feels like a walk to the hangman’s noose.  Despite his affable snobbery, you feel and sympathize every pain as he struggles through his speeches.

            This life would have not been such a concern as ‘Bertie’s (King George’s family name for him) merely was the disappointing second son.  The Kingdom was lined up to have the dashing, confident, and handsome  King Edward (Guy Pierce) to take the throne.  Unfortunately, Edward has had a glimpse of the wild life with an American commoner.  He becomes less concerned with his duties and obligations as he falls into the party life of a 3x divorced American socialite (quite a scandal for the time).  Making matters worse is that he carries on publically with the woman even though she is still married.  He shocks and causes scandal among the aristocracy of Britain, with public displays of affection and questionable parties with the foreign commoner.  Quite a different story from the one I grew up with.

            Helen Bonham Carter plays Queen Elizabeth (The future Queen Mother), with sympathy and heart.  You feel her love for King George as well as her pain as he humiliates himself in every public situation.  I know critics love her, but this is the first role (other than Fight Club), that I felt really showed her acting credentials.  She emotes great love and caring despite her English reserve.  Her tireless pursuit to find someone who can help her husband is heartbreaking.  Having exhausted all her options, she secretly approaches a lowly Australian (metaphorically holding her nose) whose unorthodox practices are her last hope.

            The final player is Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush).  An eccentric speech therapist who, despite his record of success, has a modest practice in the basement of an old London building.  Elizabeth arrives at his office under stealth.  Her physical discomfort for being in that part of London and in that building, matched only by her discomfort of having to ask an Australian for help.  The crux of the movie is the awkward friendship that forms between these two men from different classes.  George, whose station demand that he keeps formality and distance, and Lionel, whose entire method of speech therapy demands informality and ease.  George’s awkwardness and snobbery is not mean spirited, merely what is expected of him given his role in life.  When Lionel asks what he would like to be called, and he responds ‘Your Royal Highness’, his discomfort is as prominent as George’s when Lionel starts calling him by his family name ‘Bertie’.  You literally see George wince every time Lionel calls him that.

            This movie isn’t merely a one sided commoner teacher changing the life of a Royal.  As George reluctantly grows closer to Lionel, the hardships of his life affect Lionel profoundly. Lionel grows to respect George.  He respects the courage and determination he displays and his sense of duty to his country. Later as we learn that Lionel isn’t everything that he claims, the true test to the bond of their friendship becomes apparent.

            This is an inspiring movie of friendship between two men that were never supposed to be able to be friends.  It has inspired me to want to learn more about that period which is probably the highest compliment you can pay a period film.

.

I give this: ****

I hope the Oscars don’t overlook this.

Colin Firth: Best Actor

Geoffrey Rush: Best supporting Actor.

Not saying they will win, but they should be nominated.

127 Hours

127 Hours

The Oscars approach and I am in a frantic marathon to get in all the Oscar nominations so I can make an educated prediction.  127 hours is a movie I had to force myself to go see.  Nothing about this movie seemed appealing to me.  The story of Aron Ralston (played by James Franco) was a sensational news story back in 2003.   The recounting of a trapped hiker who had to cut off his own arm to survive was a riveting news story, but I didn’t think it would be a story that would be movie worthy.  I think it would be more of a Travel Channel special. 

            The problem with these types of movies is that first and foremost, being a news story, we already know how the movie is going to end.  How can there be any suspense. Secondly, the subject matter seemed a little morbid (not to mention gorey).  Lastly, I couldn’t imagine being engaged in a movie that is basically 2 ½ hours of a man with his arm trapped between a rock and a hard place…literally.

            This movie proves what a capable and competent director can do.  Danny Boyle, the visionary that gave us ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ 2 years ago gives us 127 hours.  This is a totally different genre of film, but equally impressive. Not only that, but Boyle takes a C-list actor (forgive me James Franco, but you will always be Spiderman’s buddy to me) and pulls an Oscar caliber performance out of him.  This was a low budget film that did little at the box office, but it has come on strong at Oscar time.  I will make a bold prediction and state that James Franco will not win the Oscar, but this is a case where it truly is an honor to be nominated.  This performance is the highlight of Franco’s undistinguished career (his last role was a recent stint on General Hospital).  This will at least upgrade him to B-list with an A-list performance.

            Now the movie; the title 127 hours, refers to the amount of time Aron Ralston spent with his arm trapped in behind a rock.  90% of the movie is the camera focused on him and the emotional rollercoaster and physical collapse he goes through while trapped.  I know you are probably thinking what I was thinking; “How can this hold my attention for 2 hours?”  Well, Boyle pulls it off.  He takes us on a cinematic journey that explores the depths of the human mind in crises.  Believe it or not, the movie becomes more interesting as it progresses.  After the 3^rd day, Aron starts to hallucinate and we go along for the ride.  Many times, like Aron, we can’t tell when he is in reality, dreaming, or hallucinating.  We journey with him as his mind goes to places that are important to him.  Some places that he didn’t even realize were important.  Family, lost love, light beer?????  Every day, when the sun shines directly into the crevice for 15 minutes, it is almost like a religious experience.  The whole time he is trying to chisel away at the rock with a dull climbing tool.  Deep down he knows it is a futile effort, but what else can he do?

            Danny Boyle as a unique style of shooting movies that worked well with this movie.  His choice of music is eccentric, but works beautifully.  The camera shots are tight on James Franco.  It turns out that Danny Boyle made an inspired choice with James Franco as Franco has arguably the most expressive eyes out in films today.  His eyes and facial expressions are able to communicate more than any of the dialogue (technically monologue) can.  This movie is akin to a one-man, one-act Broadway show where he is, for all intents and purpose, the only actor in the film.  I reiterate that 90% of this film is a camera trained on Franco and it works.  Danny Boyle should be saluted as he proves that a gifted story teller can make compelling art from anything.

            127 hours will not win any Oscars and I will probably not see it again, but I will say that I am happy that it was made and I have nothing but respect for the film.  James Franco shows what his potential can be and Danny Boyle shows you can do just fine (I’ll say excel) outside mainstream Hollywood.  A courageous, bold, and unique movie made during conservative cookie cutter movie making times in Hollywood.

           
I rate this: ***