Hello, all ye faithful readers. Due to various complications, I will be moving my blog. I'll still be on blogspot, but the blog title and URL will be different (see below). I will still write about movies, and it will still be my two cents. So, don't worry. Nothing changes but the name.
Here is the new info:
http://www.lastcinemastanding.blogspot.com/
See you there.
Congratulations to Marion Cotillard, Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova. I couldn't be happier about their wins. If you haven't seen Once or La Vie en Rose, do yourself a favor and check them out. Both are on DVD.
Thanks.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Monday, November 26, 2007
Grindhouse Movies: They Corrupted the Morality of an Entire Generation
So, back in April or thereabouts, Quinten Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez released their homage to the old grindhouse movies of the 70s, playfully called Grindhouse. Designed as a double bill, Tarantino's car chase flick Death Proof was preceeded by Rodriguez's apocalyptic zombie movie Planet Terror. As a whole, Grindhouse was well reviewed and did poor box office. But, here's the thing: Tarantino and Rodriguez are very talented filmmakers, whereas the makers of the real 70s grindhouse pictures were not.
So, when studios decided, in the wake of this year's Grindhouse, to release en masse the grindhouse pictures of the 70s on DVD, audiences had already received a poor introduction to the actual product. Obviously, these films are not well made- acting, directing, writing, it all goes out the window. The problem is that audiences who rent these movies have likely seen the modern Grindhouse and expect something similar.
I rented a grindhouse double feature yesterday. Very prominently displayed across the front of the box was a warning, taped on by employees at the video store: "NOT THE TARANTINO MOVIE". There is glitch number one. Number two: the movies (more accurately, the filmmakers) don't know they're supposed to be bad. So, there are a lot of people trying really hard and falling really flat. It's actually a bit depressing.
The features themselves are good for laughs, but they're not funny. They are, in point of fact, quite ludicrous. But, it's okay. We have a way in this country of looking back fondly at times that probably weren't that good. In the 40s, everyone came together and supported FDR and the war. In the 50s, families stayed together and no one got past second base without a ring. In the 60s, an entire generation stopped a war (never mind that the war ended in '73). So, it's okay. We can look back at these ridiculous B-movies from the 70s and say, "they were really only meant to be fun, not serious."
So, when studios decided, in the wake of this year's Grindhouse, to release en masse the grindhouse pictures of the 70s on DVD, audiences had already received a poor introduction to the actual product. Obviously, these films are not well made- acting, directing, writing, it all goes out the window. The problem is that audiences who rent these movies have likely seen the modern Grindhouse and expect something similar.
I rented a grindhouse double feature yesterday. Very prominently displayed across the front of the box was a warning, taped on by employees at the video store: "NOT THE TARANTINO MOVIE". There is glitch number one. Number two: the movies (more accurately, the filmmakers) don't know they're supposed to be bad. So, there are a lot of people trying really hard and falling really flat. It's actually a bit depressing.
The features themselves are good for laughs, but they're not funny. They are, in point of fact, quite ludicrous. But, it's okay. We have a way in this country of looking back fondly at times that probably weren't that good. In the 40s, everyone came together and supported FDR and the war. In the 50s, families stayed together and no one got past second base without a ring. In the 60s, an entire generation stopped a war (never mind that the war ended in '73). So, it's okay. We can look back at these ridiculous B-movies from the 70s and say, "they were really only meant to be fun, not serious."
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
New Movie Review: Before the Devil Knows You're Dead
Sidney Lumet has directed some of the finest films of all time, among them 12 Angry Men, Network, and Dog Day Afternoon. Before the Devil Knows You're Dead may not be of the same caliber as these other movies, but it is still a damn fine film. Tense and claustrophobic in all the right ways, Lumet's crime thriller hearkens back to the kind of non-linear heist movie that Tarantino popularized with Reservoir Dogs.
Kelly Masterson's script, her first, is a masterclass, intricately weaving the details of a heist, an affair, and a dysfunctional family all into one seamless plot that never seems to wander despite taking many detours. Beginning with the ending, Masterson gives us the story of two brothers, Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke, who plan to rob their parent's jewelery store, but things go terribly wrong when they discover their mother working there. Marissa Tomei plays Hoffman's wife and Hawke's girlfriend. As the film builds to its bloody climax, hidden motives are unearthed and old wounds are reopened.
Hoffman is as brilliant as ever playing the smarter, more successful, more confident of the brothers. Hawke is, at times, overmatched, but there are glimpses of the potential we've known about since Training Day. However, most impressive here is Albert Finney as the boys' father and the owner of the jewelery store in question. His relentless pursuit of the robbers is heartbreaking, made all the more sad because we know how it must end.
The plot moves back and forth with details of the robbery and its aftermath shown from every possible point of view. The lightning fast edits contrast nicely with the calm steady camerawork, both of which give the film an authentic documentary style feel. The devestation we experience as an audience is enhanced by this realism and by the fact that, perhaps save for all the blood, the story could be the story of any family, even our own, that must struggle with lost hopes and shattered dreams.
See it.
Yes.
Kelly Masterson's script, her first, is a masterclass, intricately weaving the details of a heist, an affair, and a dysfunctional family all into one seamless plot that never seems to wander despite taking many detours. Beginning with the ending, Masterson gives us the story of two brothers, Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke, who plan to rob their parent's jewelery store, but things go terribly wrong when they discover their mother working there. Marissa Tomei plays Hoffman's wife and Hawke's girlfriend. As the film builds to its bloody climax, hidden motives are unearthed and old wounds are reopened.
Hoffman is as brilliant as ever playing the smarter, more successful, more confident of the brothers. Hawke is, at times, overmatched, but there are glimpses of the potential we've known about since Training Day. However, most impressive here is Albert Finney as the boys' father and the owner of the jewelery store in question. His relentless pursuit of the robbers is heartbreaking, made all the more sad because we know how it must end.
The plot moves back and forth with details of the robbery and its aftermath shown from every possible point of view. The lightning fast edits contrast nicely with the calm steady camerawork, both of which give the film an authentic documentary style feel. The devestation we experience as an audience is enhanced by this realism and by the fact that, perhaps save for all the blood, the story could be the story of any family, even our own, that must struggle with lost hopes and shattered dreams.
See it.
Yes.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
New Movie Review: Lions for Lambs
Redacted. Rendition. In the Valley of Elah. The Kingdom. Lions for Lambs. Grace is Gone. This year seems determined to be the year of the Iraq War film, and Robert Redford's new political "thriller" is the perfect example of what separates a good film, such as Paul Haggis' Elah, from a mediocre film. And, make no mistake, Lions for Lambs is a fantastically mediocre film.
The triple story revolves mostly around Meryl Streep as a journalist interviewing a U.S. senator played by Tom Cruise. They discuss the senator's new plan of action in Afghanistan as we the audience watch the effects of that strategy on two young soldiers trapped on a mountain top. Redford shows up as a professor lecturing an intelligent but lazy student with misplaced values. It is all handled very matter-of-factly, which is a nice way of saying that it is boring beyond belief. What we have is a story of political intrigue that forgets to be intriguing or even entertaining. And, in the absence of the former, the absence of the latter is unforgivable.
Writer Matthew Michael Carnahan takes the easy way out at every opportunity, and instead of engaging the audience in an intelligent, important conversation, he gives us a one sided lecture on righteousness and morality. The complexity of the issue is completely sapped away, and we are left with good guys on white horses and bad guys so simply drawn that they may as well be wearing funny hats. The writing in this film is so terribly pointed that no one in the audience gets to have a thought. Every idea is hammered home so incessantly that any subtlety or intelligence that may have been there is bled completely dry.
This is the first film for the new Tom Cruise-helmed United Artists, and for his first feature, Cruise picked the kind of high-minded, liberal (not usually a dirty word but here a slur), prestige picture that seems meant only to win awards. That is not necessarily a bad thing, depending upon your perspective, and this film had every chance to prove itself worthy of winning those oh-so coveted awards. However, it seems like a lot of talented people brought their B-game to a C-movie.
Robert Redford does what he can with the little he is given, but there is a problem when the best thing about a movie is that it clocks in at under an hour and a half. This picture is truly cringe-worthy. It plays like a Berkeley film student's senior thesis: pseudo-radical ideology made blatantly obvious by a lack of interesting set pieces and a lot of people shouting without saying anything. Sadly, what the whole endeavor boils down to is ham-handed propagandizing that seeks not to understand and interpret but to proselytise and convert.
See it?
No.
The triple story revolves mostly around Meryl Streep as a journalist interviewing a U.S. senator played by Tom Cruise. They discuss the senator's new plan of action in Afghanistan as we the audience watch the effects of that strategy on two young soldiers trapped on a mountain top. Redford shows up as a professor lecturing an intelligent but lazy student with misplaced values. It is all handled very matter-of-factly, which is a nice way of saying that it is boring beyond belief. What we have is a story of political intrigue that forgets to be intriguing or even entertaining. And, in the absence of the former, the absence of the latter is unforgivable.
Writer Matthew Michael Carnahan takes the easy way out at every opportunity, and instead of engaging the audience in an intelligent, important conversation, he gives us a one sided lecture on righteousness and morality. The complexity of the issue is completely sapped away, and we are left with good guys on white horses and bad guys so simply drawn that they may as well be wearing funny hats. The writing in this film is so terribly pointed that no one in the audience gets to have a thought. Every idea is hammered home so incessantly that any subtlety or intelligence that may have been there is bled completely dry.
This is the first film for the new Tom Cruise-helmed United Artists, and for his first feature, Cruise picked the kind of high-minded, liberal (not usually a dirty word but here a slur), prestige picture that seems meant only to win awards. That is not necessarily a bad thing, depending upon your perspective, and this film had every chance to prove itself worthy of winning those oh-so coveted awards. However, it seems like a lot of talented people brought their B-game to a C-movie.
Robert Redford does what he can with the little he is given, but there is a problem when the best thing about a movie is that it clocks in at under an hour and a half. This picture is truly cringe-worthy. It plays like a Berkeley film student's senior thesis: pseudo-radical ideology made blatantly obvious by a lack of interesting set pieces and a lot of people shouting without saying anything. Sadly, what the whole endeavor boils down to is ham-handed propagandizing that seeks not to understand and interpret but to proselytise and convert.
See it?
No.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Happy Halloween
 |
| The horde approaches in Night of the Living Dead. |
I'll say it again, if only for just because: happy Halloween.
It may be cliched, but it is still a worthwhile venture to provide people with some scary movie ideas for Halloween. Is there really anything better than sitting in the dark and watching a scary movie on Halloween? And, isn't it amazing that this day makes movies infinitely scarier? But, without going on too long, here are some suggestions for fright night viewing tonight, in no particular order.
Halloween- John Carpenter's original scare fest is perfect if for no other reason that its title. And, also the fact than Michael Myers may be the most bone chilling of all horror film villains.
Night of the Living Dead- George Romero's zombie thriller is probably the finest B-movie ever made. On a shoestring budget, Romero recreated a sense of apocalyptic doom all in a little secluded cabin, and it could not have been scarier.
Scary Movie- For those of you looking more for fun than fright, look no further than this stellar comedy, lampooning everything from Scream to American Pie (and is there anything scarier than horny adolescent boys?). Though you should skip the increasingly bad sequels, this is well worth seeing.
Jesus Camp- The most frightening movie I have ever seen. A hundred children speaking in tongues and a monomaniacal camp leader. You'll forget all about Camp Crystal Lake after one viewing of this chilling documentary.
The Evil Dead series- Every one is a classic in its own right with memorable images from first to last. The cult status that these films enjoy is well earned. So if you're looking for a series that is good from start to finish, look no further.
Stir of Echoes- Unfairly overlooked, this film is downright chilling. Kevin Bacon is wonderfully psychotic as a hypnotized father haunted by visions of a dead woman.
There are others, but I am sure you all have a favorite scary movie to watch. So, have fun, happy movie watching, and happy Halloween.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
New Movie Review: Michael Clayton
Michael Clayton is the best movie of the year so far. Every element of this film succeeds on the highest level of the craft of film making. The writing is spot on, the direction is graceful, and the acting is top notch. This is one of those rare instances where the stars seem to have aligned to make the near impossible: a perfect film.
It is not without its flaws. It can tend to drag on in the middle, but the wait only makes the denouement that much greater. There are small things here and there. They are what Roger Ebert would refer to as the minor flaws in a masterpiece that make it human. And, writer-director Tony Gilroy's film is nothing if not brimming with humanity.
That is the greatest conflict here: the clash between those with a conscience and those without. George Clooney has never been better playing Michael Clayton, a law firm "fixer", mopping up his company's messes. He stumbles into a spider web of secrets and deceit when his friend, the magnificent Tom Wilkinson as Arthur Edens, has a crisis in wrestling with his own demons of morality.
It becomes the proverbial race against the clock as the walls begin to come crumbling down around Michael, and his options start to run dry. Clooney handles the role with suave and daring and just the right amount of paranoia. Pitted against him is the firm for which he supposed to be working, personified by a wonderful Sydney Pollack, and the company that has hired them, represented by Tilda Swinton. Like Faye Dunaway in Network, Swinton is remarkable, and sometimes frightening, as woman who has lost any sense of decency and will stop at nothing to come out ahead of the situation.
If the Academy does not recognize this film with at least a few Oscar nominations (Wilkinson should be a lock), then at least in this reviewer's opinion, they will have much for which to answer. This may be the best legal thriller ever made. The heart-pounding final act is the most exciting movie going experience of the year. Gilroy has much to say about morality and the conscience but never forgets to tell an intriguing, wonderfully nuanced story of truth, lies, and the people who control both.
See it?
Yes.
It is not without its flaws. It can tend to drag on in the middle, but the wait only makes the denouement that much greater. There are small things here and there. They are what Roger Ebert would refer to as the minor flaws in a masterpiece that make it human. And, writer-director Tony Gilroy's film is nothing if not brimming with humanity.
That is the greatest conflict here: the clash between those with a conscience and those without. George Clooney has never been better playing Michael Clayton, a law firm "fixer", mopping up his company's messes. He stumbles into a spider web of secrets and deceit when his friend, the magnificent Tom Wilkinson as Arthur Edens, has a crisis in wrestling with his own demons of morality.
It becomes the proverbial race against the clock as the walls begin to come crumbling down around Michael, and his options start to run dry. Clooney handles the role with suave and daring and just the right amount of paranoia. Pitted against him is the firm for which he supposed to be working, personified by a wonderful Sydney Pollack, and the company that has hired them, represented by Tilda Swinton. Like Faye Dunaway in Network, Swinton is remarkable, and sometimes frightening, as woman who has lost any sense of decency and will stop at nothing to come out ahead of the situation.
If the Academy does not recognize this film with at least a few Oscar nominations (Wilkinson should be a lock), then at least in this reviewer's opinion, they will have much for which to answer. This may be the best legal thriller ever made. The heart-pounding final act is the most exciting movie going experience of the year. Gilroy has much to say about morality and the conscience but never forgets to tell an intriguing, wonderfully nuanced story of truth, lies, and the people who control both.
See it?
Yes.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
New Movie Review: The 11th Hour
There are some movies, Casablanca and The Godfather come to mind, which you should see if you are a fan of movies at all. However, there are some movies, like Schindler's List and Nuit et Brouillard, that you should see because you are human being alive on this planet. The 11th Hour belongs in the latter category.
The Leonardo Dicaprio produced documentary takes a universal look at the problem of global warming, a topic brought into popular culture by Al Gore's Oscar winning documentary from last year, An Inconvenient Truth. The film has the talking head style of so many post-Errol Morris documentaries. In fact, it is a fairly conventional film; but for once, the film art is secondary to the subject matter.
It is not the most well made documentary, but it is effective in as much as it is scary as hell. Expert after expert is brought before the camera to explain what we should already know: our planet is dying, it is our fault, and time is running out. The first hour takes the sort of pessimistic doomsday stance that a documentary like No End in Sight does.
However, The 11th Hour succeeds where lesser documentaries, like No End in Sight, fail. It does not simply present a terrible problem and call it an insurmountable obstacle or refer to it as something that happened that can no longer be helped; The 11th Hour presents real, scientific, technologically based solutions to the problems it presents. The film does not leave us feeling helpless and lost. On the contrary, we are empowered.
Despite the frightening facts presented in the first half, the overall tone of the film is hopeful. The aforementioned experts not only give intelligent descriptions of what is happening, but they posit advice and steps on what we can do to correct it. Few films fall into this category, but this is essential viewing. As a human being alive on this planet, it is essential.
See it?
Yes.
The Leonardo Dicaprio produced documentary takes a universal look at the problem of global warming, a topic brought into popular culture by Al Gore's Oscar winning documentary from last year, An Inconvenient Truth. The film has the talking head style of so many post-Errol Morris documentaries. In fact, it is a fairly conventional film; but for once, the film art is secondary to the subject matter.
It is not the most well made documentary, but it is effective in as much as it is scary as hell. Expert after expert is brought before the camera to explain what we should already know: our planet is dying, it is our fault, and time is running out. The first hour takes the sort of pessimistic doomsday stance that a documentary like No End in Sight does.
However, The 11th Hour succeeds where lesser documentaries, like No End in Sight, fail. It does not simply present a terrible problem and call it an insurmountable obstacle or refer to it as something that happened that can no longer be helped; The 11th Hour presents real, scientific, technologically based solutions to the problems it presents. The film does not leave us feeling helpless and lost. On the contrary, we are empowered.
Despite the frightening facts presented in the first half, the overall tone of the film is hopeful. The aforementioned experts not only give intelligent descriptions of what is happening, but they posit advice and steps on what we can do to correct it. Few films fall into this category, but this is essential viewing. As a human being alive on this planet, it is essential.
See it?
Yes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)