[* another post suggested by my brother!]
The recent release of the holiday family feature with the unfortunate title of "Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium," prompted a critic at msn.com to come up with his ten worst movie titles. It's a good list, and I tried not to repeat too many of them in my list below. But he left out some glaring examples -- I've tried to stick to more recent movies (who would guess that the British would have a penchant for bad movie titles?)
10. "Finnegan Begin Again" (1985) -- I know, I know, this lame TV movie starring Robert Preston and Mary Tyler Moore doesn't even qualify -- and it would be completely forgotten by now except for its stupid title -- but I hate, hate, HATE the title so much, I am making an exception.
9. Boys on the Side (1995) -- a movie with a lot going for it, like a respected director (Herbert Ross) and an engaging cast (Mary Louise Parker, Whoopi Goldberg, Drew Barrymore and a very young Matthew McConnaughey!) But obviously the studio suits were so freaked-out by the lesbian storyline -- the Indigo Girls cameo must've given it away! -- that they did everything in their power to label it with as innocuous-sounding a title as possible. Job well done.
8. I Want Someone to Eat Cheese With (2007) -- I'm not upset that the title ends with a preposition as much as I am with the fact that a comedian with an obvious obesity problem (Jeff Garlin of "Curb Your Enthusiasm") enforces the stereotype by referencing eating in the title of his first movie! It encourages comments like "You've obviously found plenty of people to eat cheese with... and fries... and ice cream...."
7. Don't Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking your Juice in the Hood (1996) -- I was going to give this movie a pass (it is a send-up, after all) but the phrase "while drinking your juice" is so tortured and unimaginative -- not to mention out-of-touch with the culture it parodies (WHO remembers the movie "Juice" anymore?) -- that it demands inclusion.
6. Divine Secrets of the Sweet Potato Queen's Ya-Ya Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants -- okay I made this up, but it's more clever than the Wayans' Brothers! (see #7). Think of this entry as a tie among all those lame-assed, 'chick lit' books that always seem to find an audience of book-club-loving women experiencing mid-life-crises (you get 'em, too, you know you do!). And the 'Sweet Potato Queen' isn't even a movie ... YET (no doubt someone is waiting for an opening in Sandra Bullock's schedule).
5. Hideous Kinky (UK 1998) -- Kate Winslet's first movie after her blockbuster break-out in "Titanic," this British indie is set in North Africa in 1972, but contrary to its title, it is neither hideous nor kinky! These two random adjectives, in fact, are the two favorite words her little girls use to mimic their fellow British travelers. What does it tell you about the movie? Nothing.
4. Nil by Mouth (UK 1997) -- Actor Gary Oldman makes his directing debut with a title that is incomprehensible to anyone outside of Britain. Apparently, the title refers to the instructions on prescription pills, translated as 'don't eat anything with this medicine.' Good to know for future reference, Gary, but what purpose does it serve as a movie title???
3. Wah-Wah (UK 2005) -- Another British import, again about more unwelcomed British ex-pats in Africa (which begs the question "where are they welcomed?") and their wacky customs. Coincidentally, the title is the phrase the one American character uses to disparage the Brits silly slang.
2. Freddy Got Fingered (2001) -- the less said about this monstrosity, the better.
And the Number 1 Worst Movie Title of All Time ......
1. OCTOPUSSY (1983) -- this choice needs no explanation. It is as big an embarrassment today as it was 24 years ago (I was in college, and it still made me cringe!)
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Sunday, December 02, 2007
"I'm not here"
The above message flashes on the screen during the opening credits of 'I'm Not There," Todd Haynes' pseudo biography of the enigmatic Bob Dylan. I remember that line because for long stretches of this movie I felt:
a) I wish I wasn't here, stuck in this frustrating mess if a movie; and b) Bob Dylan himself is largely absent from what is billed as his life story.
The filmmaker's well-documented gimmick of using six different actors to portray the many sides of Dylan is just that -- a gimmick. [And not even an original one: Todd Solondz thought of it first for his "Palindromes."] From the beginning it alienates the audience from ever engaging in the story, and by the end, you are left thinking you are watching random clips from several different movies.
That is a shame, because at least three of these snippets from the life of someone who sounds alot like Dylan could have turned into a watchable film. I'd love to see more of both Christian Bale and unknown Ben Whishaw; unfortunatley, Haynes wastes these two performances by relegating them to bit parts in their own movie. Bale's scenes are in the context of a faux documentary of the early, folkie Dylan-- never was there a lazier way for a screenwriter to tell a story. Julianne Moore is even more misused as a stand-in for Joan Baez in this lame and uninteresting device. Whishaw has a more difficult task: pretend you are testifying before some sort of Congressional committee as Arthur Rimbaud. (I couldn't make this stuff up if I wanted to!)
The third story that works is, of course, Cate Blanchett's brilliant star turn. But, in fairness, she is given the most screen time, the most-coherent storyline, and the best lines! Heath Ledger, playing an actor who played Christian Bale's character in a movie version of his life, gets the next most screen time--but who is he and what is his problem, exactly? We never find out. Annoyingly, each of these facets of Dylan is given a different character name, adding needless confusion to an already confusing conceit.
At its best, the movie attempts to delve into the obscure lyrics and contradictory personalities that defined Dylan at various points in his life. One of the best scenes plays like a glorified music video for "Ballad of a Thin Man" (pulling that off in the context of a film is no mean feat, as Julie Taymor recently found out the hard way). Charlotte Gainsbourg and Michelle Williams, as Dylan's wife and one of his unlikely flings, Edie Sedgwick, respectively, make striking impressions. But why bother investing in these characters, when you know the rug is about to be pulled out from under them (and you) soon enough?
The most-tiring episode (for me) was a sentimentalized depiction of Dylan's own myth-making: the one that has him starting out as a travelling folk musician in the tradition of Woody Guthrie. Haynes uses the character of a precocious black kid to personify the formative influences of the artist. Give me a break! Robert Zimmerman was from 'b.f.' Minnesota ... Deal with THAT reality, Haynes! Don't buy into his mythologizing of a childhood that was uniquely, normally -- even boringly --American. A critical look at that reality would make for a compelling sequence, not some too-cute homage to both the folk and blues music that Dylan somehow drew on and assimilated from his most ordinary of upbringings.
The entire enterprise reminds me of another 'ambitious failure' -- an end-of-year movie category I created especially for such a movie -- Steven Shainberg's "Fur: an Imaginary Portrait" (of Diane Arbus). It takes quite a bit of hubris to use the life of a gifted artist as a jumping off point for your own flights of self-important, often delusional, artistry. I don't know the details of Dylan's life and career; what's more, I resent having to research that life to figure out what the hell was going on in this movie! Sure, D.A. Pennebaker filmed a documentary called "Don't Look Back." And Dylan himself had a bit part in a movie called "Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid." I didn't see either of them; if you saw them both, then you might appreciate this movie more than I did. Maybe.
As for the sixth actor to portray Dylan, I have nothing bad to say about Richard Gere. He does a nice job with his material. My problem? What the f**k is his material doing in this movie??
[The above review brought to you as a public service, so you won't have to sit through this movie and wonder why I didn't warn you away from it. Consider yourself warned.]
a) I wish I wasn't here, stuck in this frustrating mess if a movie; and b) Bob Dylan himself is largely absent from what is billed as his life story.
The filmmaker's well-documented gimmick of using six different actors to portray the many sides of Dylan is just that -- a gimmick. [And not even an original one: Todd Solondz thought of it first for his "Palindromes."] From the beginning it alienates the audience from ever engaging in the story, and by the end, you are left thinking you are watching random clips from several different movies.
That is a shame, because at least three of these snippets from the life of someone who sounds alot like Dylan could have turned into a watchable film. I'd love to see more of both Christian Bale and unknown Ben Whishaw; unfortunatley, Haynes wastes these two performances by relegating them to bit parts in their own movie. Bale's scenes are in the context of a faux documentary of the early, folkie Dylan-- never was there a lazier way for a screenwriter to tell a story. Julianne Moore is even more misused as a stand-in for Joan Baez in this lame and uninteresting device. Whishaw has a more difficult task: pretend you are testifying before some sort of Congressional committee as Arthur Rimbaud. (I couldn't make this stuff up if I wanted to!)
The third story that works is, of course, Cate Blanchett's brilliant star turn. But, in fairness, she is given the most screen time, the most-coherent storyline, and the best lines! Heath Ledger, playing an actor who played Christian Bale's character in a movie version of his life, gets the next most screen time--but who is he and what is his problem, exactly? We never find out. Annoyingly, each of these facets of Dylan is given a different character name, adding needless confusion to an already confusing conceit.
At its best, the movie attempts to delve into the obscure lyrics and contradictory personalities that defined Dylan at various points in his life. One of the best scenes plays like a glorified music video for "Ballad of a Thin Man" (pulling that off in the context of a film is no mean feat, as Julie Taymor recently found out the hard way). Charlotte Gainsbourg and Michelle Williams, as Dylan's wife and one of his unlikely flings, Edie Sedgwick, respectively, make striking impressions. But why bother investing in these characters, when you know the rug is about to be pulled out from under them (and you) soon enough?
The most-tiring episode (for me) was a sentimentalized depiction of Dylan's own myth-making: the one that has him starting out as a travelling folk musician in the tradition of Woody Guthrie. Haynes uses the character of a precocious black kid to personify the formative influences of the artist. Give me a break! Robert Zimmerman was from 'b.f.' Minnesota ... Deal with THAT reality, Haynes! Don't buy into his mythologizing of a childhood that was uniquely, normally -- even boringly --American. A critical look at that reality would make for a compelling sequence, not some too-cute homage to both the folk and blues music that Dylan somehow drew on and assimilated from his most ordinary of upbringings.
The entire enterprise reminds me of another 'ambitious failure' -- an end-of-year movie category I created especially for such a movie -- Steven Shainberg's "Fur: an Imaginary Portrait" (of Diane Arbus). It takes quite a bit of hubris to use the life of a gifted artist as a jumping off point for your own flights of self-important, often delusional, artistry. I don't know the details of Dylan's life and career; what's more, I resent having to research that life to figure out what the hell was going on in this movie! Sure, D.A. Pennebaker filmed a documentary called "Don't Look Back." And Dylan himself had a bit part in a movie called "Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid." I didn't see either of them; if you saw them both, then you might appreciate this movie more than I did. Maybe.
As for the sixth actor to portray Dylan, I have nothing bad to say about Richard Gere. He does a nice job with his material. My problem? What the f**k is his material doing in this movie??
[The above review brought to you as a public service, so you won't have to sit through this movie and wonder why I didn't warn you away from it. Consider yourself warned.]
Monday, November 26, 2007
Top Ten Films about Children
This post was inspired by a recent screening of an obscure (to me) Spanish film from 1973: Victor Erice's surreal debut, "The Spirit of the Beehive" -- an atmospheric post-Civil War period piece (think of it like "Pan's Labyrinth" without the scary monsters). The plot centers on two young sisters with active imaginations who, after watching a screening of "Frankenstein" at their local theater (a Spanish 'Cinema Paradiso'), create their own fantasy involving an abandoned farmhouse and its supposed inhabitant. Like all good movies from the 1970s, it is deliberate, obtuse, and challenging -- and very perceptive about the complexities of childhood: the innocence, the loss of it, the sibling manipulation and cruelty ... all that good stuff. Much like the following movies (all foreign films, interestingly -- because 'Stand By Me' never really did it for me, Rob Reiner and 'the fat kid'!)
10. The Spirit of the Beehive
9. The River (Jean Renoir)
8. tie: Wild Reeds & Au Revoir, Les Enfants (both about French adolescence)
7. Pather Panchali (India: 1955) -- I can't leave out Apu!
6. I'm Not Scared (one of many Italian films I could have included)
5. The Traveler (Iran: 1974) -- that is how Abbas Kiarostami's black and white masterpiece is listed in IMDB (but I swear I saw it at the National Gallery of Art under a different title). It is about a little boy's efforts to get to Tehran to see the national soccer team play. Brilliant.
4. Chocolat (France: 1988)
3. Ponette (France: 1996)
2. My Life as a Dog (Sweden: 1985)
... and the #1 movie about childhood --
1. To Be and to Have (France) -- nothing is more authentic than a documentary about real French kids!
I know I'm forgetting some, so submit your own nominees.
10. The Spirit of the Beehive
9. The River (Jean Renoir)
8. tie: Wild Reeds & Au Revoir, Les Enfants (both about French adolescence)
7. Pather Panchali (India: 1955) -- I can't leave out Apu!
6. I'm Not Scared (one of many Italian films I could have included)
5. The Traveler (Iran: 1974) -- that is how Abbas Kiarostami's black and white masterpiece is listed in IMDB (but I swear I saw it at the National Gallery of Art under a different title). It is about a little boy's efforts to get to Tehran to see the national soccer team play. Brilliant.
4. Chocolat (France: 1988)
3. Ponette (France: 1996)
2. My Life as a Dog (Sweden: 1985)
... and the #1 movie about childhood --
1. To Be and to Have (France) -- nothing is more authentic than a documentary about real French kids!
I know I'm forgetting some, so submit your own nominees.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
"ONCE" Set List
Dateline -- AUSTIN (November 15, 2007):
I am an admittedly biased reviewer, so I will only say that it was a magical night of music at the outdoor stage of Stubb's Barbecue last Thursday night. As anyone who has SEEN the movie knows (and only four people I know have, as far as I can tell), Glen Hansard is a dynamic performer, and he carried the show. Marketa Irglova was, by contrast, very much a supporting player, which also fits her personality (she is not a professional, and this is her first tour ever!)
Hansard came out solo (with that same old, beat-up guitar he used in the film--holes and all) and performed "Say it to Me Now." Next, he introduced Marketa and they did a duet of "All the Way Down." Then, he introduced the rest of The Frames, who came out for "Lies." At one point, she took his old guitar for a solo while he sat down on her piano bench.
The rest of the set (as best I can remember) went like this:
-- two new songs: one with a working title about 'Heartstrings;' the other was called 'Drown Out'
-- "When Your Mind's Made Up"
-- two more new songs: Edges of the Night (?) and "This Low"
--an impromptu audience request of 'Cry Me a River' (a Frames hit?)
-- Falling Slowly
-- Hoover Fixer Sucker Guy (another audience request)
-- Leave
-- ?? lay me down ??
-- a Pixies cover ('I want my life to make more sense'?)
ENCORE #1:
"Once"
"Star-Star ... " ??
"If You Want Me" -- finally, marketa!!
ENCORE #2:
"Fitzcarraldo" (a Frames song)
"Deviltown" (a Daniel Johnston song) -- where he lead the audience in a sing-along, asking the obliging crowd to snap their fingers, repeat the chorus, and file out quietly (which they started to do!). That lead him to shout "Austin, you Fuckin' Rule!!"
And the concert was over.
I am an admittedly biased reviewer, so I will only say that it was a magical night of music at the outdoor stage of Stubb's Barbecue last Thursday night. As anyone who has SEEN the movie knows (and only four people I know have, as far as I can tell), Glen Hansard is a dynamic performer, and he carried the show. Marketa Irglova was, by contrast, very much a supporting player, which also fits her personality (she is not a professional, and this is her first tour ever!)
Hansard came out solo (with that same old, beat-up guitar he used in the film--holes and all) and performed "Say it to Me Now." Next, he introduced Marketa and they did a duet of "All the Way Down." Then, he introduced the rest of The Frames, who came out for "Lies." At one point, she took his old guitar for a solo while he sat down on her piano bench.
The rest of the set (as best I can remember) went like this:
-- two new songs: one with a working title about 'Heartstrings;' the other was called 'Drown Out'
-- "When Your Mind's Made Up"
-- two more new songs: Edges of the Night (?) and "This Low"
--an impromptu audience request of 'Cry Me a River' (a Frames hit?)
-- Falling Slowly
-- Hoover Fixer Sucker Guy (another audience request)
-- Leave
-- ?? lay me down ??
-- a Pixies cover ('I want my life to make more sense'?)
ENCORE #1:
"Once"
"Star-Star ... " ??
"If You Want Me" -- finally, marketa!!
ENCORE #2:
"Fitzcarraldo" (a Frames song)
"Deviltown" (a Daniel Johnston song) -- where he lead the audience in a sing-along, asking the obliging crowd to snap their fingers, repeat the chorus, and file out quietly (which they started to do!). That lead him to shout "Austin, you Fuckin' Rule!!"
And the concert was over.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Wes Anderson does it again
[A special 'travelling post' coming to you from the Halcyon coffee shop on 4th St. in lovely downtown Austin, Texas!! (Site of Wes Anderson/Owen Wilson's first collaboration, "Bottle Rocket"). I'm here to see the stars of "Once" -- in concert!]
"The Darjeeling Limited" -- I always enjoy a Wes Anderson movie, no matter what anyone else says: from "Rushmore" (filmed in Houston), to "The Royal Tenenbaums" to "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou." And this movie proudly joins that list. Stylistically inventive like his previous films, it is also engaging, funny, clever and cheeky. Shot in vivid colors, it is a sumptuous travelogue of India. It's the kind of film critics love to describe by trotting out useless descriptors like 'precious' and 'twee' -- both of those courtesy of the New York Times -- to denigrate Anderson's unique, quirky style. My retort: "It's his style -- get used to it!"
Also, I have a soft spot for any movie that takes place on a train. (Movie truism #1: train movies work; plane movies do not. Latest example: that Jodie Foster vehicle I refer to as "Panic Room on a Plane" because I can never remember the name of it. Another sexless starring role for Jodie Foster (in addition to the two previously mentioned, look at 'The Brave One' and 'Inside Man') which is a shame from such a fine actress. Why is she afraid to play a character with a sex life??? I do not care what sexual orientation she portrays (or lives) just show us something! Hell, she was asexual in "Anna and the King" and that was a romance!!) [How can you be sexless when you're playing opposite Chow Yun Fat, girlfriend!?!!]
I digress. The performances by the three leads are all on-pitch (Wilson, Schwartzman, and Adrien Brody; even though they share zero sibling resemblance). They are petty and selfish and needy ... just like real brothers! =) The movie does take a too-serious detour that is out-of-step with the mood of the piece (consequently, the emotions it evokes do not feel earned). But it does lead to a necessary flashback sequence that fleshes-out the characters of the three brothers.
I cannot imagine enjoying it as much if I hadn't seen the essential short film that now precedes the feature, "Hotel Chevalier," filmed in the chic Hotel Rafael in Paris. It sets the tone for the feature and informs the Jason Schwartzman character and two key scenes. I wonder why it was not included with the main film in the first place.
Look for great cameos by Anjelica Huston, Bill Murray (redeeming himself for appearing in the execrable "The Lost City" last year), and director Barbet Schroeder (redeeming himself after appearing in an execrable sequence in "Paris, Je t'aime" this year). I suppose I have a favorite adjective, too.
"The Darjeeling Limited" -- I always enjoy a Wes Anderson movie, no matter what anyone else says: from "Rushmore" (filmed in Houston), to "The Royal Tenenbaums" to "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou." And this movie proudly joins that list. Stylistically inventive like his previous films, it is also engaging, funny, clever and cheeky. Shot in vivid colors, it is a sumptuous travelogue of India. It's the kind of film critics love to describe by trotting out useless descriptors like 'precious' and 'twee' -- both of those courtesy of the New York Times -- to denigrate Anderson's unique, quirky style. My retort: "It's his style -- get used to it!"
Also, I have a soft spot for any movie that takes place on a train. (Movie truism #1: train movies work; plane movies do not. Latest example: that Jodie Foster vehicle I refer to as "Panic Room on a Plane" because I can never remember the name of it. Another sexless starring role for Jodie Foster (in addition to the two previously mentioned, look at 'The Brave One' and 'Inside Man') which is a shame from such a fine actress. Why is she afraid to play a character with a sex life??? I do not care what sexual orientation she portrays (or lives) just show us something! Hell, she was asexual in "Anna and the King" and that was a romance!!) [How can you be sexless when you're playing opposite Chow Yun Fat, girlfriend!?!!]
I digress. The performances by the three leads are all on-pitch (Wilson, Schwartzman, and Adrien Brody; even though they share zero sibling resemblance). They are petty and selfish and needy ... just like real brothers! =) The movie does take a too-serious detour that is out-of-step with the mood of the piece (consequently, the emotions it evokes do not feel earned). But it does lead to a necessary flashback sequence that fleshes-out the characters of the three brothers.
I cannot imagine enjoying it as much if I hadn't seen the essential short film that now precedes the feature, "Hotel Chevalier," filmed in the chic Hotel Rafael in Paris. It sets the tone for the feature and informs the Jason Schwartzman character and two key scenes. I wonder why it was not included with the main film in the first place.
Look for great cameos by Anjelica Huston, Bill Murray (redeeming himself for appearing in the execrable "The Lost City" last year), and director Barbet Schroeder (redeeming himself after appearing in an execrable sequence in "Paris, Je t'aime" this year). I suppose I have a favorite adjective, too.
Monday, November 05, 2007
Quick takes (part 2)
"Becoming Jane" -- Any movie with a fan blog as good as this one has to have something going for it: sure, Jane Austen brings her own fan club with her wherever she goes, but I think this movie's success is due more to the charming, assured performance by the Prada Princess herself, Anne Hathaway (if "Brokeback Mountain" had a 'P' in it, I would have referenced that, too). She silences all doubters that a lowly American can play a Brit convincingly (didn't Katy, Texas-native Renee Zellweger silence those haters once and for all?). The historical jumping-off point for the story is purely fictional, but I jumped anyway, and enjoyed the trip!
"The Jane Austen Book Club" -- Speaking of Jane Austen fan clubs, this movie is a tailor-made chick-flick: it's all about relationships, talking about relationships, book clubs, more talking ... and I loved every minute of it! Interesting characters, clever plotting, appealing performances (especially by Emily Blunt, and my fave, Maria Bello), all make you overlook the unconvincing, politically-correct lesbian subplot (all the lesbians are 'hot': how unbelievable is that!?) and the predictability of it all.
"Gone Baby Gone" -- major props to Ben Affleck in his directing debut. The guy was obviously paying attention on the set. He smartly stays in the milieu he is most comfortable: the mean streets of Dorchester, South Boston. And boy are they mean! He brings an obvious affection for the neighborhood and its denizens, while not shying away from the ugly side (and boy does it get ugly!). Amy Ryan is awesome in bringing both sides to life. An effective crime thriller that doesn't shy away from hard-to-answer questions (impressively, it tackles them head-on), this Dennis Lehane story is just a notch below the previous film adaptation of his work, "Mystic River." And a notch below Clint Eastwood is a good place to start.
"Lars & the Real Girl" -- this movie is the cream of the crop, even though it is getting panned as cloying and unbelievable. The guy falls in love with a blow-up doll: what part do you not believe? In a more convincing portrayal than his excellent performance in "Half Nelson", the great Ryan Gosling makes you believe! I bought in to the sadness behind this slapstick premise, precisely because of Gosling's totally committed performance. The supporting cast all bought into it, too, which makes it a more heart-wrenching than laugh-out-loud comedy.
--Hey, I liked all four movies: how unbelievable is that!?! -- ffg
"The Jane Austen Book Club" -- Speaking of Jane Austen fan clubs, this movie is a tailor-made chick-flick: it's all about relationships, talking about relationships, book clubs, more talking ... and I loved every minute of it! Interesting characters, clever plotting, appealing performances (especially by Emily Blunt, and my fave, Maria Bello), all make you overlook the unconvincing, politically-correct lesbian subplot (all the lesbians are 'hot': how unbelievable is that!?) and the predictability of it all.
"Gone Baby Gone" -- major props to Ben Affleck in his directing debut. The guy was obviously paying attention on the set. He smartly stays in the milieu he is most comfortable: the mean streets of Dorchester, South Boston. And boy are they mean! He brings an obvious affection for the neighborhood and its denizens, while not shying away from the ugly side (and boy does it get ugly!). Amy Ryan is awesome in bringing both sides to life. An effective crime thriller that doesn't shy away from hard-to-answer questions (impressively, it tackles them head-on), this Dennis Lehane story is just a notch below the previous film adaptation of his work, "Mystic River." And a notch below Clint Eastwood is a good place to start.
"Lars & the Real Girl" -- this movie is the cream of the crop, even though it is getting panned as cloying and unbelievable. The guy falls in love with a blow-up doll: what part do you not believe? In a more convincing portrayal than his excellent performance in "Half Nelson", the great Ryan Gosling makes you believe! I bought in to the sadness behind this slapstick premise, precisely because of Gosling's totally committed performance. The supporting cast all bought into it, too, which makes it a more heart-wrenching than laugh-out-loud comedy.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
"Across the Universe"
Julie Taymor is a gifted artist and director. Not just for "The Lion King" either: her feature film debut, an adaptation of Shakespeare's "Titus" starring Anthony Hopkins and Kate Beckinsale, was shocking and inspired. So imagine my disappointment after sitting through 140-minutes of "Across the Universe." I won't sugarcoat it: the movie is a complete and total misfire.
It is a great concept: fashioning a story out of the music of the Beatles, set during the time the songs were created, and interpreted by a cast who were not even born when the songs were hits. The cast of young, energetic, relative unknowns acquits itself well. (Except for one female cast member, who goes by the unfortunate name of 'T.V. Carpio' -- with a name like that, I hope she stays unknown!)
But this mess of a story with an oh-so multi-cultural cast often feels like a warmed-over "Rent" (with a better soundtrack). Before that, it comes across as a spin-off of NBC's short-lived "American Dreams." And worst of all, its depiction of the Sixties is so cliche-ridden it has all the complexity of "Forrest Gump" (again with a better soundtrack). [Note: I put that last movie in quotes, to point out that the politics in that overrated movie is even more simplistic than the intelligence of its title character!]
'ATU' never even attempts to create real characters or wring true emotions out of its protagonists. Think of it as the anti-'Once.' Without these elements, it amounts to nothing more than a collection of music videos--and not very cutting-edge videos at that. The dancing, the editing, the camera angles are all so 'been there, seen that on MTV when they used to show videos!' Only one set piece resonated with me: 'Strawberry Fields Forever,' an artistic expression of both the violence in Vietnam and the inability to stop it at home.
The rest of the interpretations are too damn literal! The beauty of a classic Lennon-McCartney song is that it defies literal interpretation. How can you make sense of a song like "I Am the Walrus" ... and why would you want to? In case you think I am exagerrating, note the ludricous heights (or depths) Taymor reaches when she acts out the lyrics "She's so heavy" (from 'I Want You') and "Mother Superior jumped the gun" (from 'Happiness is a Warm Gun'). Cringe-inducing.
Sure, the screenwriters make maximum use of Beatles lore with inside references and verbal and visual puns: the character names of Jude and Prudence lead to the inevitable (but well done) songs; the main character cuts a Granny Smith apple in half; and the movie's climax comes at an impromptu rooftop concert -- all are nice touches. Some of the best moments are provided by the cameos from real stars: Joe Cocker singing "Come Together"; Bono doing his best non-Irish accented acting before breaking into "I am the Walrus" in full U2 brogue. (This is the second movie in two years where Bono elevates an otherwise weak movie: remember last year's Leonard Cohen doc "I'm Your Man"?)
But this overlong film simply becomes a contest to see how many disparate Fab Four songs it can cram into one movie, without regard to coherence or flow. If Taymor had begun her movie with the end credits (a trippy "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" sung by the incomparable Bono--again!) it would have set the bar at a point where her creativity could have taken off. Instead, we get a brief appearance by her giant puppets (at a protest march, naturally) and not one, but five Salma Hayeks, dressed for Halloween as a 'naughty nurse.' Sometimes you gotta give the people what they want. What I wanted was something a little more daring from the creator of the Lion King and Titus.
It is a great concept: fashioning a story out of the music of the Beatles, set during the time the songs were created, and interpreted by a cast who were not even born when the songs were hits. The cast of young, energetic, relative unknowns acquits itself well. (Except for one female cast member, who goes by the unfortunate name of 'T.V. Carpio' -- with a name like that, I hope she stays unknown!)
But this mess of a story with an oh-so multi-cultural cast often feels like a warmed-over "Rent" (with a better soundtrack). Before that, it comes across as a spin-off of NBC's short-lived "American Dreams." And worst of all, its depiction of the Sixties is so cliche-ridden it has all the complexity of "Forrest Gump" (again with a better soundtrack). [Note: I put that last movie in quotes, to point out that the politics in that overrated movie is even more simplistic than the intelligence of its title character!]
'ATU' never even attempts to create real characters or wring true emotions out of its protagonists. Think of it as the anti-'Once.' Without these elements, it amounts to nothing more than a collection of music videos--and not very cutting-edge videos at that. The dancing, the editing, the camera angles are all so 'been there, seen that on MTV when they used to show videos!' Only one set piece resonated with me: 'Strawberry Fields Forever,' an artistic expression of both the violence in Vietnam and the inability to stop it at home.
The rest of the interpretations are too damn literal! The beauty of a classic Lennon-McCartney song is that it defies literal interpretation. How can you make sense of a song like "I Am the Walrus" ... and why would you want to? In case you think I am exagerrating, note the ludricous heights (or depths) Taymor reaches when she acts out the lyrics "She's so heavy" (from 'I Want You') and "Mother Superior jumped the gun" (from 'Happiness is a Warm Gun'). Cringe-inducing.
Sure, the screenwriters make maximum use of Beatles lore with inside references and verbal and visual puns: the character names of Jude and Prudence lead to the inevitable (but well done) songs; the main character cuts a Granny Smith apple in half; and the movie's climax comes at an impromptu rooftop concert -- all are nice touches. Some of the best moments are provided by the cameos from real stars: Joe Cocker singing "Come Together"; Bono doing his best non-Irish accented acting before breaking into "I am the Walrus" in full U2 brogue. (This is the second movie in two years where Bono elevates an otherwise weak movie: remember last year's Leonard Cohen doc "I'm Your Man"?)
But this overlong film simply becomes a contest to see how many disparate Fab Four songs it can cram into one movie, without regard to coherence or flow. If Taymor had begun her movie with the end credits (a trippy "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" sung by the incomparable Bono--again!) it would have set the bar at a point where her creativity could have taken off. Instead, we get a brief appearance by her giant puppets (at a protest march, naturally) and not one, but five Salma Hayeks, dressed for Halloween as a 'naughty nurse.' Sometimes you gotta give the people what they want. What I wanted was something a little more daring from the creator of the Lion King and Titus.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Quick takes (part one)
Brief reviews of current movies:
"The Hottest State" -- Ethan Hawke takes a turn behind the camera, and it's not even the best directing job by a star of "Before Sunrise" THIS YEAR (that honor belongs to Julie Delpy (see below). He's not bad, he just needs better source material. Did I mention he's directing his adaptation of his own novel?? The pace is brisk, the young actors engaging (to a point), but the whole thing is so much twentysomething navel-gazing. Sheesh!
"2 Days in Paris" -- now THIS is a self-assured directing debut! Julie Delpy wrote the script and stars, too (Richard Linklater should be proud of his proteges). She owes a great debt to Woody Allen, but she brings her own irreverent, opinionated, and sexually frank perspective to relationships and modern life. And she's not afraid to take on the French people's own prejudices and hang-ups, which strikes me as courageous. Oh, and it is very, very funny!
"The Kingdom" -- I was uncomfortable throughout this movie, and for a self-proclaimed piece of action-entertainment, that is not a good thing. It may be a question of timing, but I hope I can say it will never be appropriate to take such brutal incidents as suicide bombings and videotaped beheadings, and use them for nail-biting action sequences in big-budget Hollywood movies. I continue to have a great deal of respect for director Peter Berg (who created the marvelous "Friday Night Lights") but his skills should be put to better use than in this bit of terrorist revenge fantasy.
SPOILER ALERT: The ultimate insult, however, comes when after all this feel-good, blow away the bad guys, he tries to make a 'statement' about how all this tit-for-tat violence just leads to another generation of hatred and death.
GIVE ME A BREAK! You have no right to lecture us about that, after using that same violence as a back-drop to your movie, Mr. Berg!
COMING ATTRACTIONS:
"Becoming Jane"
"The Jane Austen Book Club"
"Gone Baby Gone"
"Lars & the Real Girl"
"The Hottest State" -- Ethan Hawke takes a turn behind the camera, and it's not even the best directing job by a star of "Before Sunrise" THIS YEAR (that honor belongs to Julie Delpy (see below). He's not bad, he just needs better source material. Did I mention he's directing his adaptation of his own novel?? The pace is brisk, the young actors engaging (to a point), but the whole thing is so much twentysomething navel-gazing. Sheesh!
"2 Days in Paris" -- now THIS is a self-assured directing debut! Julie Delpy wrote the script and stars, too (Richard Linklater should be proud of his proteges). She owes a great debt to Woody Allen, but she brings her own irreverent, opinionated, and sexually frank perspective to relationships and modern life. And she's not afraid to take on the French people's own prejudices and hang-ups, which strikes me as courageous. Oh, and it is very, very funny!
"The Kingdom" -- I was uncomfortable throughout this movie, and for a self-proclaimed piece of action-entertainment, that is not a good thing. It may be a question of timing, but I hope I can say it will never be appropriate to take such brutal incidents as suicide bombings and videotaped beheadings, and use them for nail-biting action sequences in big-budget Hollywood movies. I continue to have a great deal of respect for director Peter Berg (who created the marvelous "Friday Night Lights") but his skills should be put to better use than in this bit of terrorist revenge fantasy.
SPOILER ALERT: The ultimate insult, however, comes when after all this feel-good, blow away the bad guys, he tries to make a 'statement' about how all this tit-for-tat violence just leads to another generation of hatred and death.
GIVE ME A BREAK! You have no right to lecture us about that, after using that same violence as a back-drop to your movie, Mr. Berg!
COMING ATTRACTIONS:
"Becoming Jane"
"The Jane Austen Book Club"
"Gone Baby Gone"
"Lars & the Real Girl"
Monday, October 15, 2007
The Moon rocks! ("The Moon"? ... not so much)
I normally do not take requests on this blog, but I submit this review at the behest of the number one Space Program fan (and defender) that I know--George Bradford-- who claims the documentary "In the Shadow of the Moon" to be "the ultimate foreign film, because it was filmed on the moon!" I even had the pleasure of walking through downtown Houston's own Tranquility Park on my way to the theater -- a fitting tribute to the 1969 event.
Well, the subject matter may be foreign to us Earthlings, but the movie's downfall is that it spends too much time with its feet firmly planted on terra firma. For much of the first hour, the movie remains tediously Earth-bound: both in subject matter and in its too-traditional execution, not helped by a truly lame soundtrack (a stupid Byrds song was the best they could come up with??). I'm not saying every documentary has to follow the Ken Burns template, but a little originality in presentation is de rigueur in this post-Michael Moore era, or I might as well stay home and watch the Discovery Channel (or Meerkat Manor on Animal Planet <<"My favorite animal's the meerkat." -- from what movie??>>).
Compare this with another recent release, Peter Berg's uncomfortable bit of post-9/11 escapism, "The Kingdom," where the opening credit sequence depicts the entire history of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia -- from 1933 to 9/11 -- in a two-minute animation! Incredible (and the best thing in the movie).
True, the movie is educational and informative about a watershed moment in human history (even for us old-timers ... who remember "The Right Stuff"-- I kid, I remember back in 1969), but the narrative and interviews just never reach the heights this monumental achievement deserves. By the time the first astronauts land on the moon, you are hoping for more insight than learning which astronaut was the first to take a whiz on the lunar landscape.
-- SPOILER ALERT!! --
- It was Buzz Aldrin!!
I cannot blame the interview subjects for the less than inspiring narration; in fact, some are able to break-through the unimaginative, studio-bound interviews to reveal glimpses of their personality, which only makes you wish for a looser format (and better interviewer) to free them from the talking-head treatment they all received in equal measure. I have no complaints about spending an hour and a half listening to anecdotes from this league of extraordinary gentlemen, illustrated by NASA's own film of the missions; I simply wish this documentary did a better job capturing the mystery and awesomeness of space travel -- like a Ron Howard movie, for example (he had a hand in producing, alas not directing, this film).
Well, the subject matter may be foreign to us Earthlings, but the movie's downfall is that it spends too much time with its feet firmly planted on terra firma. For much of the first hour, the movie remains tediously Earth-bound: both in subject matter and in its too-traditional execution, not helped by a truly lame soundtrack (a stupid Byrds song was the best they could come up with??). I'm not saying every documentary has to follow the Ken Burns template, but a little originality in presentation is de rigueur in this post-Michael Moore era, or I might as well stay home and watch the Discovery Channel (or Meerkat Manor on Animal Planet <<"My favorite animal's the meerkat." -- from what movie??>>).
Compare this with another recent release, Peter Berg's uncomfortable bit of post-9/11 escapism, "The Kingdom," where the opening credit sequence depicts the entire history of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia -- from 1933 to 9/11 -- in a two-minute animation! Incredible (and the best thing in the movie).
True, the movie is educational and informative about a watershed moment in human history (even for us old-timers ... who remember "The Right Stuff"-- I kid, I remember back in 1969), but the narrative and interviews just never reach the heights this monumental achievement deserves. By the time the first astronauts land on the moon, you are hoping for more insight than learning which astronaut was the first to take a whiz on the lunar landscape.
-- SPOILER ALERT!! --
- It was Buzz Aldrin!!
I cannot blame the interview subjects for the less than inspiring narration; in fact, some are able to break-through the unimaginative, studio-bound interviews to reveal glimpses of their personality, which only makes you wish for a looser format (and better interviewer) to free them from the talking-head treatment they all received in equal measure. I have no complaints about spending an hour and a half listening to anecdotes from this league of extraordinary gentlemen, illustrated by NASA's own film of the missions; I simply wish this documentary did a better job capturing the mystery and awesomeness of space travel -- like a Ron Howard movie, for example (he had a hand in producing, alas not directing, this film).
Friday, September 28, 2007
EASTERN PROMISES
I was lucky enough to be in one of those 'select theaters' recently to see the Toronto Film Festival award-winning feature by David Cronenberg, "Eastern Promises." This movie has it all: blood, death, dismemberment ... and Naomi Watts!
Now, you are able to experience it for yourself at theaters nationwide. Imagine a movie combining the unease and foreboding of A History of Violence with the dark societal underbelly of Dirty, Pretty Things -- the director and screenwriter, respectively, of two of my favorite recent movies have teamed up for this one -- and you have a sense of what awaits you: another great time at the movies!
The revelation in this movie is the lead perfomance by Viggo Mortensen: the dude can act! He plays a sympathetic Russian underworld underling, to Naomi Watts' sympathetic British nurse (reviews insist on calling her a 'midwife', which I don't understand at all). This will be my last mention of Ms. Watts, not because she isn't her usual captivating self, but her part doesn't utilize the full range of her immense talent (compared to her lead role in last year's shamefully overlooked The Painted Veil). She does get to ride around London on a cool motorcycle, though, wearing an even cooler designer black leather motorcycle jacket (the name -- Belstaff -- went straight from the closing credits to my Christmas list: another reason to stay and watch the end credits!).
The story might seem familiar: a Russian version of Goodfellas, if you will. But because the milieu is different, and the directing so assured, you don't mind spending another two hours of your life with mobsters. The piece-de-resistance of the movie is a four-minute fight scene in a public steam room. The bathhouse fight is already being hailed as a classic, and rightly so. It will take your breath away, not least because it involves two fully-clothed Chechen assassins with ornate, long knives attempting to kill a completely nude Viggo Mortensen. Completely!
While critics have equated the sequence to the car chase in French Connection (1971), a more apt comparison is the homoerotic nude wrestling match between Alan Bates and Oliver Reed in Ken Russell's Women in Love (1970). Let's face it: full frontal male nudity still has the power to shock a mainstream audience, even those with HBO subscriptions. Regardless of sexual orientation, a viewer's mind is in a whirl: you cannot believe the audacity of the filmmaking while you wonder: "What should I be looking at?" and "How long is the director going to put his actors (and us) through this?" It leaves you unsettled, off-balance, and exhausted in a way that makes all other choreographed fights in action movies, no matter how well-done, look and feel 'staged.' Of course they are staged -- It's a movie, after all -- but the director's goal is to make a viewer forget that, to take him out of his reality and into the film's reality. Proof enough of Cronenberg's success in bringing that reality to his audience are the critic's giddy comparisons to classics from the Seventies.
No one who is serious about making an annual Top Ten Movie list should miss "Eastern Promises."
Now, you are able to experience it for yourself at theaters nationwide. Imagine a movie combining the unease and foreboding of A History of Violence with the dark societal underbelly of Dirty, Pretty Things -- the director and screenwriter, respectively, of two of my favorite recent movies have teamed up for this one -- and you have a sense of what awaits you: another great time at the movies!
The revelation in this movie is the lead perfomance by Viggo Mortensen: the dude can act! He plays a sympathetic Russian underworld underling, to Naomi Watts' sympathetic British nurse (reviews insist on calling her a 'midwife', which I don't understand at all). This will be my last mention of Ms. Watts, not because she isn't her usual captivating self, but her part doesn't utilize the full range of her immense talent (compared to her lead role in last year's shamefully overlooked The Painted Veil). She does get to ride around London on a cool motorcycle, though, wearing an even cooler designer black leather motorcycle jacket (the name -- Belstaff -- went straight from the closing credits to my Christmas list: another reason to stay and watch the end credits!).
The story might seem familiar: a Russian version of Goodfellas, if you will. But because the milieu is different, and the directing so assured, you don't mind spending another two hours of your life with mobsters. The piece-de-resistance of the movie is a four-minute fight scene in a public steam room. The bathhouse fight is already being hailed as a classic, and rightly so. It will take your breath away, not least because it involves two fully-clothed Chechen assassins with ornate, long knives attempting to kill a completely nude Viggo Mortensen. Completely!
While critics have equated the sequence to the car chase in French Connection (1971), a more apt comparison is the homoerotic nude wrestling match between Alan Bates and Oliver Reed in Ken Russell's Women in Love (1970). Let's face it: full frontal male nudity still has the power to shock a mainstream audience, even those with HBO subscriptions. Regardless of sexual orientation, a viewer's mind is in a whirl: you cannot believe the audacity of the filmmaking while you wonder: "What should I be looking at?" and "How long is the director going to put his actors (and us) through this?" It leaves you unsettled, off-balance, and exhausted in a way that makes all other choreographed fights in action movies, no matter how well-done, look and feel 'staged.' Of course they are staged -- It's a movie, after all -- but the director's goal is to make a viewer forget that, to take him out of his reality and into the film's reality. Proof enough of Cronenberg's success in bringing that reality to his audience are the critic's giddy comparisons to classics from the Seventies.
No one who is serious about making an annual Top Ten Movie list should miss "Eastern Promises."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)