Friday, August 31, 2007

Finally!! Rescue Dawn and Sunshine!!!

















So I've been working on this for about a month now...and I think I have it just about right. I don't feel like working on it anymore, so if there are problems or inconsistencies....you can blow me. Enjoy!

Last week I got the pleasure of watching two of the best reviewed, and my own most anticipated, films of the summer. They are extremely different, so I have no way to tie them together other than the fact that they are independent dramas released in the summer (a rarity these days). But, the conversation to follow will be long, so I felt they deserved their own post.

First, Werner Herzog's Rescue Dawn. Starring Christian Bale, Steve Zahn, and Jeremy Davies, this is the true story of American POWs in Laos just prior to the Vietnam War. Bale stars as Dieter Dengler, a young Navy pilot whose first mission goes awry, leaving him stranded in the jungle, eventually to be captured. At the POW camp, he meets Zahn's Duane, who has been imprisoned for at least a year, and Davies' Gene, who has been there the longest around 2.5 years.

We meet their prison guards, whose nicknames, given to them by the prisoners, range from Lil' Hitler to Jumbo (who, as the only and ugliest Laotian midget I've ever seen, steals the movie). Dieter brings some hope to the prisoners, with talk of escape and possibly taking over the prison until the American planes and helicopters that fly overhead can be signaled. There is resistance at first, but eventually, due to a number of environmental, mental, and emotional factors, the necessity of escape becomes almost undeniable.

I won't go too much further into the plot, as from this point on, it really just comes down to escape and survival in the vicious jungles of Laos and Vietnam. The key to this film isn't the plot or the story, because in those regards, we've seen most of this before. The strength, as in almost all of Herzog's films, is the acting, and the director's almost criminally insane pursuit of realism.

First, we'll tackle the superb acting. By now, I think we all realize that Christian Bale is among, if not the, finest actor of his generation, and he continues that consistent level of talent here. Between his desire to inhabit a character and Herzog's desire to almost punish his actors with his methods, Dieter becomes real (he was real...just watch Herzog's 1997 documentary Little Dieter Needs to Fly), and his decisions and reactions are no longer scripted. His fear and his courage are almost tangible. Bale is the star of this film, and, without his talent, I think it would fall apart.

Steve Zahn...star of Saving Silverman and National Security...may deserve an Oscar. I've always liked Zahn, and always felt he was capable of so much more than he has done. Here, he finally proves that he has the dramatic chops I've always wanted him to have. He's still a sidekick here, but rather than being the stoned, dopey sidekick, he's the scared shitless, almost hopeless sidekick. It almost seems as if Dieter is there just to save this poor guy. His interactions with Dieter, and Gene in particular, show just how low this guy has fallen. He's barely hanging on. Not just physically, although that is a problem. His mind is almost gone. The year of being handcuffed, tortured, beaten, abused, starved, and constricted every night has worn him down until there's almost nothing left. Zahn uses facial tics and constantly darting eyes to express how his far his mind and humanity have been chiseled down. This isn't a flashy performance. Nothing in this film is. Zahn is at the brink of being completely pathetic. I can't help but feel that Herzog's insanity almost drove him to that stage, but you can see that Zahn gives everything he has, commits himself wholly to Herzog's madness. And the results are mesmerizing, eye-opening, and, above all, heartbreaking.

Finally, Jeremy Davies. Every review I read of the film just sort of tossed in a line or two basically saying, "Jeremy Davies plays the same role he has been mastering since the beginning of his career: the wimpy, whiny, weaselly wuss, and here he does it adequately." I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with the mass populace of critics. Davies is certainly most well-known for his turn as the wimpy, whiny, weaselly wuss of a translator in Saving Private Ryan. I've always stood up for that film, and for his role. He's a tragic pussy. He shouldn't be fighting. He's a translator. He's not meant to be out there trying to save one man amongst a few million. Yet, when he stands by and doesn't stop the German soldier from going up the stairs to brutally kill Adam Goldberg's character, you cannot help but hate how cowardly he is. He starred in that film, opposite some amazing actors, and held his own. Here, he does it again. His character was a pilot doing recon over Laos. He has been in the prison longer than anyone else, and it shows. He still has the wimpy factor that we'd expect, but he brings a fierce madness to the role that I didn't expect. He's cocky. He's been there longest, and knows how things are done. He knows that escape, or even thinking of escape is stupid. Their only hope, according to him, is that the war will never start, and they will be rescued or negotiated for. He fights with Duane and Dieter every step of the way. When the plans are finally set, he goes along, mostly because he knows he'll die if he stays. His following actions are never fully explained. There is no closure. I love the last scene he has. It really wraps up his character nicely, but never wraps up his fate, which will bother some.

Now to talk about the humanized form of insanity that is Werner Herzog. If you know anything about the man, you know what I am speaking of. He dragged a steamboat over a mountain. He ate his own boot. He almost shot his best friend and favorite actor, Klaus Kinski. He was accidentally shot in London last year, and, later that week, pulled Joaquin Phoenix out of his burning car after an accident. I know. It doesn't sound real, but it's true. But what makes him even more unreal, is the ways he tries to illicit realism from his actors. Here, he takes that to an extreme. Zahn lost 40 pounds for his role. God only knows what Bale lost (going from The Machinist to Batman Begins to Rescue Dawn the to The Dark Knight...his body's going to kill him). I'm convinced Herzog locked Jeremy Davies in his basement for 2 years, letting him only eat what he could find. He ties Bale's legs together, and drags him behind a bull (really). He covers Zahn and Bale in leeches (really). I think he made Zahn and Bale both shit their respective pants on film. I honestly can't recall everything that he put these actors through, but you can tell through their performances that he put them through hell. It shows, and it makes the film better. Their performances feel more authentic because of it, and that authenticity is what this film relies on.

Overall, if only for the performances and fine direction, I cannot recommend this film enough. But, I will warn you, the last five minutes of it, absolutely suck. They feel so out of place. They belong in another movie, and it left a very bad taste in my mouth, to the point where I had to wait a week before I could write this. Most won't find this in theaters (sadly), but I would say it is definitely worth the rental price.

Second, let's talk about Sunshine. If you thought that last review was long, you might want to go get a snack...some pudding would be nice...yes...go get a snack pack, then come back. Actually, eat one snack pack, and bring a second one with you...it's going to be a long trip.

I love Danny Boyle. He always makes fucking awesome movies. Rather he makes two-thirds of a fucking awesome movie, then kinda goes a bit crazy and sort of loses his focus. So, this review will have at least four distinct parts. I will discuss the first two-thirds of the film, a spoiler-free discussion of the last act, a spoiler filled discussion of the last act, and an overall look at the film.

First, let's talk about the first two acts. It's simple, and can be summed up thusly...absolutely wonderful. Granted...Boyle does borrow heavily from other Sci-fi films. Solaris and 2001: A Space Odyssey are combined to form the very base of this story. The sun is dying. We sent a space vessel with a huge fucking bomb attached to jump-start it. They failed. No one knows why. We took every last bit of the Earth that we could, and built another space vessel/bomb and sent it up. It's this crew that we follow. The Earth is in an Ice Age, and all will die if they are not successful. The failure of the first ship casts a giant shadow over the hope that this one will be successful. We first meet the crew just before they are to lose all communications with Earth.

The crew is truly an international affair. Almost every corner of the planet is represented, but very rarely do any cultural differences cause problems, or are even mentioned. You can look up the full cast yourself, but the three that stand out in my mind are Cliff Curtis, Chris Evans, and Cillian Murphy. Cliff Curtis has been acting since the beginning of time, or so it seems. He normally pops up a few times a year playing a cop or a military man in the background, has a few lines, then disappears. He's the first crew member we see here. We hear Murphy's voiceover narration, as we circle the ship. The first scenes inside the ship are in the gorgeous sun room, which is a room in which the crew can view the sun safely behind super-powerful filters. Curtis's Searle, who is the ship's psychologist, is bathing in the beauty of the sun from behind those filters. He wants to experience it as fully as he can, and asks the ship, named Icarus, to turn the filters down as low as is safe. As the film progresses, we watch as his addiction to the sun worsens. His justifications for his addictions are interesting, but, after the twist of the story has occurred, we see just how serious the implications of it could be. It's hard for me to discuss this character without mentioning the twist, and how the story progresses after it. I will discuss Searle more later on. Curtis brings an interesting psychosis to what could have been a very one-dimensional character. His addiction at first seems superficial, but ends up being so central to the story that its initial oddness and near innocence are, by the end, nearly removed from our consciousness.

Chris Evans. I know. He chooses shitty movies. But, I've always argued that he had a lot of charisma, and could be a damn good actor if he stayed away from things like Fantastic Four. Here, he finally fulfills that prediction. He's fierce. He's oddly likable. He knows what needs to be done, and does it. Not just his character...I mean Evans. He knows that the drama on the ship, whether it be between shipmates or just the whole humanity's last hope thing, has to be totally believable in order for the film to work. He wholly trusts Boyle, and allows him to tame his intensity and charisma to make his character believable. He's a dick, but the kind of dick that you know will save your ass one day. And because of this, he's not only invaluable, but he's likable. It's a great change of pace for Evans, and, hopefully, one that he takes to heart (and hopefully turns down Fantastic Four 3).

Cillian Murphy rocks hard almost all the time. He continues his tradition of awesomeness here with a performance that showcases his known strengths, but never really pushes him beyond what we've seen before. He's heady, but not irritatingly brainy. He's sarcastic, but not a prick. He's strong, but believably so. Murphy's strength has always been a quiet, reserved intensity, and here he's almost at his best. I would have liked to have seen some stretching on his part, but that certainly doesn't make any less of a great role for him.

The first two acts set up a great, claustrophobic, incredibly tense atmosphere that never lets up from the beginning on. It's similar to the aforementioned films, because, as the film progresses, the inevitable disasters begin to pile up. A human error leads to disaster, and, as the destruction and body count piles up, the near hopelessness of their cause becomes more and more apparent. That is until they find the first ship. I'm not going into the full details of they're encounter with the Icarus I, but Boyle does a fantastic job of building tension throughout the sequence. The set design within Icarus I is just great. What happens as a result of this run-in with Icarus I sets up the entire tone for the last act of the film, which I think I'll talk about now.

Spoiler-free first. As the crew that have survived thus far continue to work out how they can complete their mission, the Danny Boyle-patented third act mind-fuck begins to show its ugly mug. Before the film came out, I read a ton of reviews, most of which said the same thing: "It's great until the last act, which is so out-of-nowhere that it almost ruins the film." I think that's an exaggeration. The last act does come out of nowhere. It doesn't make much sense. The other thing I had read a lot was that it contained a spiritual/supernatural element that you would either go along with or just jump off it for good. This is perhaps where I was most disappointed. The thing that makes this act so out of place, while supernatural, doesn't really seem to have much to say. It's pointless. It's just another obstacle for the crew to overcome to reach their goal. It's a plot device, not a revelation.

I will discuss what I wish they would have done in the spoiler section to follow. Despite it's irrelevance, I stuck with the film after this event took place, and it was definitely worth it. There are very few directors that can use just an image, just visuals to evoke emotions so strong that it brings you to tears. Mulligan mentioned Terrence Malick a few posts back, and I think he is one of the few. I know that many weren't fans of The New World, but I happened to have loved it. The plot or story wasn't hinged so much on the dialoge as much as it was on the images Malick captures. The serenity of this "new world" and how it would soon be tainted by those who considered it new. Last year, Darren Aronofsky did this feat again in The Fountain. The closing scene of the cosmonaut flying into the dying star were among the most breath-taking images I've ever seen on film. Here, the finale, with Cillian Murphy attempting to set off the big-ass bomb in time, is almost as amazing looking as The Fountain, and, as much as I didn't care for that thing in the last act, it is truly cathartic.

Spoiler Alert!

So, what pissed me off, and how could they have done it better? After they debacle on the Icarus I, some strange stuff begins to happen on the Icarus II. People start dying, things start getting sabotaged, and the Icarus II computer is reading that there is 1 more life form on board than there should be. Turns out that the life form is the supposed to be dead, and definitely insane, captain of the Icarus I. During his crew's mission, he spent tons of time in the sun room, soaking himself in sunlight (much like Searle). There, he heard the voice of God tell him that mankind's time is up, so, he kills his crew and spends the next 6-7 years in the sunroom becoming a lovely shade of charred flesh. Now, he's on the Icarus II trying to sabotage their mission for his God.

My problem with this story line is the supernatural aspect. This guy lived in a sunroom for 7 years?!?! Just the look of him took me out of the story a bit. Worse is that his supernatural-ness and his spiritualness bring nothing to the film. They aren't presented in a manner that makes the film more intelligent or philosophical. They just don't make much sense really. I wish they would have done a similar story line with Searle. The two characters have the similar addiction to sunlight, so why couldn't Searle have been driven mad by it. We aren't forced to accept the stretch that is the Icarus I's captain, but we still get the drama of space-madness. And, if they had wanted to delve into the religious aspect still, they could have gone more in depth and given us a better idea of the philosophy they wanted to portray. There simply isn't enough time that late in the film for any of it to sink in and make sense. Perhaps a slow build through Searle would have given them a better opportunity to explain some of the more complex philosophical and religious thoughts they wanted to get across, but didn't.

Also, while in spoiler mode. The scene of immense beauty I was writing about a few paragraphs up was when Murphy detonates the bomb just as the radiation from the sun had reached that exact spot. The two forces opposing each other on either side of Murphy. Just breath-taking.

End Spoilers!

So...it's time to wrap this long ass post up. The film as a whole? Damn good, if slightly disappointing. Boyle is a visual master. His cinematography is spectacular. His use of color and shadow is wonderful. Unfortunately, he and screenwriter Alex Garland have a tendency to over-complicate or just totally jump off track towards the end of their films. The only other problem I had with the film was the soundtrack. As times, it felt very manipulative. At others, it was so loud and blaring that it was hard to hear the dialogue at the time. It's a minor complaint that may have just been the theater I saw it in, but it was bothersome a few times throughout. Despite these flaws, the first two acts, the fantastic acting, and amazing visuals make this a must see for sci-fi fans, Boyle fans, and just film lover's in general.

Monday, August 27, 2007

In the Screening Room - Joel Schumacher's
Falling Down


Session 005 - Falling Down

Who saw it and what are your thoughts on it?

Monday, August 20, 2007

Engagement Announcement

Because I can, I wanted to post a notice simply saying that Kelly and I got engaged over the weekend. I couldn't be happier and couldn't be looking forward to marrying her more.

But that's enough sentimental stuff. I also saw Superbad over the weekend and I can't help but be lovin' some McLovin. Chachi come back so we can discuss. I have to admit though that at this point in the year, I've totally turned around on my previous statements about how it was a lazy year. With summer additions to my Top 10 such as Superbad, Knocked Up, Ratatouille, The Lookout (caught up with it on DVD over the summer), Hot Fuzz (early summer) and Bourne Ultimatum... the year is shaping up quite nicely (and I never expected the summer movie season to be this year's saving grace, I sit here shocked).

Friday, August 10, 2007

Bourne: The Best Action Franchise Ever?


It’s been nearly a week now since I saw The Bourne Ultimatum and I’ve wavered between saying that the Bourne series is the Best Action Franchise Ever…

Or if it’s just the Best Franchise Ever.

I’ve decided to scale it back to my first classification, but that it even warrants mention in the second is something significant and kind of spectacular. In the end, I just couldn’t put it above some of the great film franchises of all-time such as The Godfather series (although III drags it down, something Bourne doesn’t have) or Lord of the Rings. I would, however, put it above Star Wars due to consistency (6 films, only 3 of which were good vs. Bourne’s 3-for-3). I know that's sacrilege, but I honestly don't care... I'm a Star Wars fan but not a Star Wars fanboy.

Anyways, turning to the Action Franchise aspect of the debate there isn't too much competition for the role as “Best Action Franchise Ever.” Although, compiling these franchises has made me interested in another Film Script Top 7 - Best Franchises (stay tuned for that soon and start compiling your own lists). Plus, it's also hard to classify some franchises (does The Terminator series fit in or is it strictly sci-fi? Alien was sci-fi, but Aliens was sci-fi/action, so where does it belong? Is Beverly Hills Cop primarily comedy? Should comic book series count? What would you consider The Man with No Name series?)

There are a handful of contenders, including Rambo, RoboCop, Mission Impossible, Dirty Harry, James Bond, Mad Max, Indiana Jones, Die Hard and Lethal Weapon.

I’m throwing out Rambo, RoboCop and Mission Impossible right from the start. While successful, I don’t think anyone regards these films as stellar, even in the genre. They’re fun (sometimes), but really nothing exceptional. And while I like the original Rambo, First Blood quite a bit… both sequels are just dreadful. And (as much as I hate to admit) I’ve never seen a RoboCop film, but the only one I expect to take slack for is the first one… which I will catch up with at some point, but one decent-to-good film does not make a franchise.

Then I’m going to get rid of Dirty Harry, James Bond and Mad Max. Mad Max because I honestly don’t like the series all that much – I don’t even think The Road Warrior is all that great. Bond and Harry are gone because they overextended themselves. Too many ups and downs in the series (much like Star Wars). Sure both might have three films in them (Dirty Harry, Magnum Force, Sudden Impact) (Goldfinger, Dr. No, Casino Royale) that stand up, but we’re taking the series as a whole… and when we do that they lose a lot of points for the lower rung sequels (The Dead Pool) (Any Pierce Brosnan Bond film).

That leaves the three big challengers, Die Hard, Lethal Weapon and Indiana Jones. I can lose Indiana Jones because it’s more adventure than action anyway (although the difference is very small) and though Bourne doesn’t have a single film to rival Raiders of the Lost Ark, I think Temple of Doom and The Last Crusade are fun but ultimately don’t hold up as well either. Bourne is more consistent. It’s good from minute one of film 1 until the final credits roll on film 3. Indiana Jones – if you classify it as action – might be the films that could most claim the Best Action Franchise crown… but by extending the genre limits to even include it, I have to add Terminator too and then I think I give Terminator the crown in that case anyway.

Finally, I don’t think either Die Hard or Lethal Weapon hold a candle to Bourne either. They’re a somewhat more respected series than RoboCop and Mission Impossible, mostly because the original films are considered classics of the genre whereas MI and RoboCop may not be, but taking in all 4 of each as 1 collective whole? You lose points. I don’t even remember Lethal Weapon 3 and I wish I could forget 4. And Die Hard I do remember each, but they’re ridiculous when you think about it. I think Kelly’s comparison of Die Hard to “24” is stunningly accurate, because after each film in Die Hard they seem to reboot with a new day, a new bad guy and the same lead character – much the same as Jack Bauer. Individually, they’re fine. The first one is great. The others are entertaining. But they’re not a continuous storyline like Bourne. I don’t think they’re as well acted either (come on, look at the string of brilliant actors in the Bourne series… even besides Damon, we get Franka Potente, Julia Stiles, Clive Owen, Chris Cooper, Brian Cox, Joan Allen, David Straithairn, Paddy Considine and Albert Finney).

Plus, there’s no mugging for the camera. There are no one-liners that need to be said each film. It’s all reliant on Jason Bourne being smarter and more clever than his would-be captors. Bourne’s character is on a mission with a clear ending to get to. The enemy is always the same, it’s Bourne vs. the Government. You’re not throwing him into a new ludicrous situation in each film just so you can make the movie. Most of all, they make sense.

Admittedly, the original storyline is not that interesting (amnesia victim, really?) but they toss that aside quickly in the original and get on with it. They embrace the idea and go with it and by the end of the film you’re not thinking about the amnesia gimmick anymore.

And that they’re brilliantly entertaining only seems to be a side effect. That's why it's my choice for Best Action Franchise.

Who dares disagree?

Sunday, August 5, 2007

Blaxploitation Marathon

One of Mulligan and I's favorite podcasts is Filmspotting. An on going tradition of the show is to catch up on a series of films, all related by genre, director, etc, they have not yet seen.

As you may have noticed in my previous posts, they just wrapped up their Film Noir marathon. Well up next is a genre that doesn't get enough respect yet demands it. Films with conventions that no other holds. A style that defined an era, yet holds relevance for today's audience. DeNiro himself, wished he could have been apart of this revolutionary era of poetry, harmony, and love. I of course refer to the genre that bitch slaps other genres...BLAXPLOITATION.

As we precede with our Screening Room sessions, I will also try to fit in these six films that many are deemed as Movies You Must See Before You Die. There are no set dates for discussion. I will post about them or at least mention them in our monthly Recent Watches. If you want to play, by all means join in the discussion, but if not, that is cool too,..just not nearly cool as Dolemite is.

1. Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song ('71)
2. Shaft ('71)
3. Superfly ('72)
4. Coffy ('73)
5. Foxy Brown ('74)
6. Dolemite ('75)

Saturday, August 4, 2007

In the Screening Room - Wong Kar-Wai's
Days of Being Wild



Session 004 - Days of Being Wild

Who saw it and what are your thoughts on it?

Friday, August 3, 2007

Recent Watches: August 2007

Caught up with a couple 2006 movies, a 2007 and one that was remade in 2007 - but I saw the original. I'll get right into it since I wrote practically a dissertation on every one of 'em.

Hairspray
Because of all the recent attention paid to Travolta-in-drag, I decided to go the other way and watch the John Waters' directed original. Now, normally John Waters is a director that I would go out of my way to avoid. Having caught even just five minutes of his horrific 1972 film Pink Flamingos, if I saw the man coming down the street I would probably run. The guy freaks me out. Apparently I saw another of his films previously without even realizing it too, Serial Mom, back when I was a kid. Now that I think about it, it makes sense. It's a wackjob film. It fits his emo. The only other film he's ever made that I have any remote interest in is Cry-Baby, but only because of Johnny Depp.

That said, Hairspray wasn't wholly terrible. It's definitely odd, but it's got an underdog charm and implausability that appealed to me. The whole Tracy Turnblad character succeeds in spite of any physical flaws she may have and that Waters seems to not even notice or embraces them (having Tracy bite into a snowball dessert while modeling plus-sized outfits?) adds to the naivete - and enjoyment, really - of the film.

I don't want to overpraise this film, because it really was pretty average, but there were things about it that were unusual and welcome. The acting, however, was not one of them. It's pretty dreadful, even considering they're supposed to be playing it over-the-top. But when you've got a crossdresser named Divine playing two roles in the film, what do you expect? Plus it had the good sense to keep it short (under 90 minutes)... something most films nowadays can't even come close to.

I don't know if I'm more interested or less interested in seeing the Adam Shankman version now. Waters' film is campy but has a racial undercurrent that I'd be surprised made it into the updated version (can anyone tell me if it did/didn't?). Like I said, I'm not really recommending nor dissuading anyone from seeing Hairspray. It's harmless enough to make it easily consumed, but I doubt if anyone's gonna really remember it as anything more than that.

(side note: If anyone has seen this film and played the classic Genesis video game "ToeJam & Earl" try to tell me that the 'crazy dentist' character from that game isn't just Waters' role as the 'crazy psychiatrist' in this film. Try to tell me differently).

Breach
My favorite of my recent watches. You can tell this was directed by the same guy (Billy Ray) who did Shattered Glass, which is a good thing. It's a tight movie. Sharp dialouge. Interesting characters. A fascinating storyline and some great performances (especially Chris Cooper, but Ryan Philippe is pretty solid as well). In those aspects, it's pretty much Shattered Glass all over again.

Billy Ray even goes so far as to take a much-maligned actor (Ryan Philippe this time instead of Hayden Christensen) and wrangle another good performance out of him. I'm not a Philippe hater though, I thought he was the best part of Flags of Our Fathers and one of the better parts of the much-overrated Crash. He shows ability. He's not flashy and I wouldn't categorize him as a great actor, but his being in a film is not going to dissuade me from seeing it. He'll never be a top-of-the-line talent, but he's good enough to warrant the roles he gets and he can be a nice addition to an ensemble cast.

And Cooper is great as always. It's basically his C.I.A. role from the original Bourne Identity if it was elaborated, he was a little more beaten down and he'd been pushed towards retirement but Cooper does great things in this role. He always seems to shine when given a chance. Lone Star, American Beauty, Adaptation... you give this guy a role and he'll work wonders with it. I'll agree with chachi from a while back, this one is a definite watch for anyone who hasn't seen it.

Bobby
Emilio Estevez's heart was in the right place. His script just wasn't all that good. It's okay. It's subject matter is interesting. The way he decided to do it, portraying the people at the hotel on the day of the assassination instead of focusing directly on Robert F. Kennedy, was an interesting twist. I think it takes away from the film truthfully, but it was an interesting decision nonetheless. Bobby Kennedy was what was the draw to this story though. That these people revered him and admired him isn't that compelling, it's his assassination and why it happened that is... but that's largely ignored.

Then the rest of the story is broken down into segments because we're told what amounts to a series of short stories about characters that really aren't very important. While Shia LeBeouf can act, seeing him strung out on LSD for an entire movie and then regretting not going door-to-door to promote Bobby isn't really a story. It's just something that happens, it doesn't amount to anything and then Bobby dies. Same goes for a lot of the things that happen in this movie. Demi Moore's Virginia Fallon is a drunk and a floundering singer, that's about all I learned about her. Except maybe she has a big wig and a sadsack husband (Estevez). Anthony Hopkins plays chess and greets Bobby at the door. But nothing is being said here. It's just what happened.

This film would have benefitted greatly from Paul Greengrass's cinema verite style. That way it would feel real. It would feel like Bloody Sunday or United 93. Instead, we get a dramatic rendering of the day that ultimately feels hollow. Greengrass never tried to explain the events of those two films, he just presents them as best as he can while making observations. Estevez tries something similar but can't hide his obvious regard for the man, nor can he help but amplify the dramatic elements (Macy cheating on his wife, Lohan trying to marry Wood out of his army service, etc.). Again, I don't think it's bad... it just doesn't work. It hides a lot of the intrigue of the event and doesn't even work as a real recollection of the day. A flawed, but valiant, attempt.

The Painted Veil
I probably could have included this as one of the Screening Room Sessions but instead I just went ahead and checked it out on my own. My family was around and we needed something we'd all watch... so a nice family film about cholera, infidelity and death seemed as good a choice as I had in my collection.

And you know what? It was pretty interesting and I liked it for the most part, especially the dynamic between Norton and Watts characters. I liked their storyline. I like how their relationship changed along the way, how these two people grew to respect one another and maybe to love one another. There were a couple of predictable points to the story, but nothing that stands out as too detrimental to the overall film.

I gotta say I'm a little surprised that it's IMDB rating is so high though (7.7) but it's a solid little film, much in keeping with John Curran's last film about relationships We Don't Live Here Anymore. And much like that film, Naomi Watts gives another very good performance. She's an interesting actress. Kind of muted - meaning that she's not real showy, she's not meant for your typical romantic comedy type of film. But in films like this, or 21 Grams or even King Kong she has a sincere, very human quality that I enjoy. She knows how to ground her characters so that they seem like everyday people. She's relatable. Anyways, another solid B film.

Alright. Those are my most recent watches, what are yours?

Thursday, August 2, 2007

Month of Movies: August 2007


Glancing through August there isn't a whole lot of films that I'm dying to see... not like September and October seem to be, where there are as many as three films per weekend I want to catch. There are some big budget comedies and sequels coming our way like Rush Hour 3 (a film at least two years later than it has any right to be for showing up in theaters) and the sequel no one was asking for - not even Eddie Murphy - with Daddy Day Camp. Underdog looks entirely unappealing in spite of the vocal talents of Jason Lee and The Invasion seems passable but surprisingly uncompelling for Daniel Craig's Bond follow-up. Never been a huge Mr. Bean fan, so Mr. Bean's Holiday is nothing to look forward to either. And War? With Jason Statham and Jet Li? Another I'll pass on. Meanwhile, I've heard next to nothing about Death Sentence with Kevin Bacon, The Nanny Diaries with Scarlett Johansson and the little from Hot Rod and Balls of Fury might have been more than enough for me.

So what is there?

Well, I'll finally get to gush all over The Bourne Ultimatum this weekend. I'm already convinced pre-watch that it concludes the best action series in film history (fight me with your Die Hard and Lethal Weapon arguments all you want, they don't hold up).

Unfortunately, that's the only film I'm dying for.

Other choices include Superbad, whose early reviews seem to indicate it's another piece of comedic gold that Seth Rogen was involved in. I'm there too.

Stardust and Resurrecting the Champ, ditto, are getting positive early reviews and becoming more appealing by the minute. I'm a tough sell on fantasy films though - I didn't even see The Fellowship of the Ring until it came out on DVD, so Matthew Vaughn has his work cut out for him if he expects to see me in theaters come opening night - despite that I loved his last film, Layer Cake. And Champ is getting big buzz for Samuel L. Jackson whose apparently acting again since Black Snake Moan, after taking a couple years off to make mostly cruddy sci-fi and action films.

And then there's Rob Zombie. Say what you will, but The Devil's Rejects was some kind of film. What kind, I don't know. And I don't know what in the world to think of a Zombie-fied Halloween (I like the Carpenter version just fine, thank you). But still... it intrigues me. Maybe not enough for a theater visit, but definitely enough to check out on DVD when it hits.

So, who's seeing what?

Sunday, July 29, 2007

In the Screening Room - Jean-Pierre Jeunet's
A Very Long Engagement


Session 003 - A Very Long Engagement

Who saw it and what are your thoughts on it?

Friday, July 20, 2007

First Glimpse: The Darjeeling Limited


How awesome is this one sheet?

The two films that I've been excited about for the longest time that are still coming out this year have been P.T. Anderson's There Will Be Blood and Wes Anderson's The Darjeeling Limited.

In the latter case, I've been just a little hesitant - I think mostly because I have to listen to people who criticize The Life Aquatic in spite of the fact that I love the little oddball film. But this one sheet came along and reinstilled my faith. Who's psyched?

Also, I'm gonna get back to posting more topics, even if they're just teaser topics like this. I was gonna post one relating to the worthiness or non-worthiness of one Adam Sandler, but then I saw this poster and that got kicked to the curb for now. Oh, and I'm watching A Very Long Engagement tonight, so thoughts and a post coming this weekend...

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

OMFBAGROFLCOPTERBFF4EVRBRB HOLY SHIT!


PLEASE.

PLEASE.

PLEASE.

We've all seen the trailer and want to watch it twenty thousand more times. I've never been more excited for a movie in my life, I may just have to slam my balls in a car door just to shock myself back into clarity.

Please, I implore you:

Help me figure out what this movie is about. Or I will die.

Die.


Dead.

Please.

Sunday, July 15, 2007

In the Screening Room - Oliver Stone's
The Doors

Session 002 - The Doors

Who saw it and what are your thoughts on it?

Friday, July 6, 2007

In the Screening Room - Martin Scorsese's
The Age of Innocence

Session 001 - The Age of Innocence

Who saw it and what are your thoughts on it?

Thursday, July 5, 2007

Recent Watches: July 2007

Kelly and I are still 2 episodes away from completing the "Freaks & Geeks" series, so again movie-watching has been scarce. Tonight will be the first in the "Film Script Watching Schedule (I really need to rename this)" though, as I sit down to watch The Age of Innocence. Still don't have a set schedule for the films though. Should I just list them for the rest of July as I see fit based on most glaring misses until we come up with a better system?

For now though, I will chime in with a couple recent watches...

Ratatouille. Pixar's latest great film and very reassuring after Cars signified a low point for their releases. Probably still ranks a notch or two below Finding Nemo and the first Toy Story but it's up there. Loved it absolutely. Maybe they go to the ghost of the dead chef one too many times for my taste, but other than that I can't think of anything that could have been done better. Pixar just proves time and time again, they ARE animation and everyone else is just faking it. The details, the story, the humor, the look, it's all great. I only hope Pixar can maintain this level after they really come under the influence of Disney (up to this point all these Pixar movies had been preplanned before the Disney buyout).

Live Free or Die Hard. I liked it okay, but I'd also be okay with never seeing it again... so that obviously shows it wasn't anything special. It did make me realize something about sequels and franchises though, you need to have character development. Seems like a pretty obvious point, but with a film like this is John McClane any different at the beginning of this film than he is at the end? I'd be hardpressed to point out one difference besides a bullet hole or two. On top of that, this is based on a short story that has absolutely nothing to do with the Die Hard series (Ocean's Twelve made the same mistake, trying to adapt material that wasn't intended for the characters). If it's not intended for John McClane, then obviously the stuff involving him is an afterthought... it's thrown in. The plotline about his troubles with his daughter seemed obvious, standard-issue stuff. And I got the feeling all they did was hire Willis, call him McClane and have him throw in a Yippie-Ki-Yay and suddenly this was supposed to be Die Hard. The reason that I felt Rocky Balboa succeeds where Live Free fails is the character, stupid. Rocky is a much different man at the end of his series than the beginning. He's beaten down by life. He's loved and lost. He's been hurt. Sure he has his moments, but the downs make the ups all that more enjoyable. He earns it and the crowd feels the euphoria of a victory. John McClane doesn't get down. His whole life is down. The one real interesting moment in Live Free was when McClane tries to explain to Justin Long's character that he doesn't want the life of a hero. It was the one moment of reflection in the whole movie. Other than that, it was McClane being McClane since Die Hard 2. He gets pissed off and kills a lotta people. At one point in the film, my girlfriend leaned over and whispered that if McClane teamed up with Jack Bauer, the U.S. would never have to worry about terrorists again. And she's right, because they both routinely slaughter about 30 guys in the course of a season/film. It's gotten ridiculous. The thing is though, I liked the movie okay. It was entertaining and kept my interest from beginning to end. I think Timothy Olyphant underplayed his part, but it was pretty good. But the whole concept of a "Fire Sale" attack on the U.S. in interesting on its own. This didn't have to be a Die Hard film (and might even have suffered because it was one). Plus, it needed a director who was gonna do more than point the camera at the action and it didn't get that. I would have liked to see John Woo do this film (where's he been anyway?). Len Wiseman relied on close-up shots of people firing guns wayyyy too often... and honestly it's just not that interesting. He found a couple ways of blowing people up that were new, but I felt he didn't hold his own or offer anything that any other director couldn't have done. I dunno. I know Chachi's got strong feelings on this and I can't wait to hear them, so let 'er rip.

And lastly, After Hours. After a huge paragraph of picking apart my faults with Die Hard, you'd expect a Scorsese film to be able to pull me out of it... but I think After Hours may be my least favorite Scorsese film to date, so no such luck. I just wasn't pulled in to this world. I could see interesting things happening, but for the most part I was thinking why would Scorsese waste his time depicting this takeoff of The Wizard of Oz in New York? What was the point? If someone knows, fill me in, but that this guy basically has a horrible night where everything goes wrong and he can't get home again isn't enough to keep me intrigued. Especially since it wasn't especially funny, it wasn't especially dark, and it wasn't especially good. And with Scorsese, I expect especially.

I dunno. 'Yay' for Ratatouille. 'Eh, they're okay' for the others. Nothing bad in the bunch, but a couple I expected more from.

So anyways, whose seen Transformers?

Tuesday, July 3, 2007

Month of Movies: July 2007

Considering it's the middle of the summer, I'm a bit perplexed at this list of films coming out that I'm looking forward to. Few, if any, big budgets. One franchise. And a load of independently financed or indepentedly minded films.

It isn't the July I was expecting either way.

I suppose the studios are banking on films like Transformers but even the 10-year-old inside of me can't get excited for a Michael Bay film. I'm sorry. It hurts to say, but at 24, I may be too old for the Transformers nostalgia and too smart to get hoodwinked into seeing a Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer production. Pass.

License to Wed looks like the latest in a series of disastrous Robin Williams films. At this point, I'm beyond defending him. I would rather he stop making films entirely. The good will days of Good Morning, Vietnam, Dead Poets Society, Awakenings and, well, Good Will Hunting are gone. Now are the days of RV, License to Wed and Man of the Year. Hell I even saw The Big White out of Williams-loyalty... but screw that. Every new film he makes is a slap in the face and License to Wed is where it ends. I'm done with you Robin Williams, you're dead to me. I'm sorry.

Then there are the somewhat more interesting Hairspray but directed by Adam Shankman? Uh, no thanks. And I Now Pronouce You Chuck and Larry at some point had Alexander Payne's imprint on it? But now it's starring Adam Sandler and Kevin James? Ugh. Might see these on DVD, but in theaters? It's looking like I'll be saving a lot of money on theater tickets in July.

The first film I can even point an interest in is #5 in the Harry Potter series? Since Chris Columbus bailed on the franchise, the series has improved dramatically, gaining a darker edge in the process. As long as David Yates rides the wave of Alfonso Cuaron and Mike Newell, he should be okay and the franchise should stay in solid hands. God forbid a return to Chris Columbus' hands down the road though.

And The Simpsons Movie. The movie at least 8 years overdue. I'm interested, but not nearly with the enthusiasm I would have had a decade ago. It's been done. There are now complete seasons of the Simpsons that I haven't seen, so if I want to see the new adventures of Bart & Lisa, I could go there. The only thing different about the movie is the ratio and the running time. We'll see. This is one I'll definitely see, but again, not rushing to see it.

As for me, the three most intriguing films of the season might be the overlooked kind. The counterprogramming. Werner Herzog's Rescue Dawn with Christian Bale, Talk to Me with Don Cheadle and Milos Forman's Goya's Ghosts. Three films with interesting performers, interesting subjects and interesting directors - but modest budgets. You could make all three for less than the price of any one of the big blockbusters of the season.

Either Hollywood math is all out of whack or to quote a former summer-standby in Lethal Weapon, "I'm just too old for this shit."

Monday, June 25, 2007

Film Script's Top 7 - Movies I Should Have Seen (1990s)

I thought long and hard about this list. Mostly how to twist it to somehow screw over Chachi again. By year? Only including films that have been nominated for awards? Skipping straight to the 80's? But in the end, I figured I couldn't take another of Chachi's whining comments about how I screwed him over and yada yada you suck Mulligan. So, here's the straight forward list of the movies I'm ashamed to admit to never having seen.

The 90s are even worse than the 2000s because, well, I had more time to catch up with these and these are really the films I should have grown up watching. But somehow, some way, I've avoided all these films to this date.

Here's the confession:

7. The Fisher King
I think we're going to run into a trend on this list that may possibly be enough to prove A.D.D. The movies I started, but, for some reason never got around to finishing. One such film is Terry Gilliam's The Fisher King. As I mentioned in the startling revelation that I think Masked & Anonymous counts as a must-see miss, I love Jeff Bridges. This makes two of his roles that I'm genuinely upset over having missed. Plus, you've got Robin Williams back in his heyday (when he actually made good films). But when I started this, probably 6-7 years ago, I don't remember being all that knocked out with it. It went back on the shelf (or returned to Blockbuster or whatever) and I've never gotten around to finishing the damned thing. Gilliam deserves better. Bridges deserves better. Williams deserves better. And I deserve better. My film history demands it.

6. Dark City
Alex Proyas, long before the step-backwards that was his half-stupid/half-enjoyable I, Robot, created what is still the quintessential comic book movie. It even headlined my "Film Script's Top 7 Comic Book Films" list a while back, The Crow. And Dark City seems to be just as beloved in the online community as well as, to be plainly obvious, just as dark. Filmgoers drool at the mention of Dark City. It's sci-fi. It's twisted. Besides the cast of Kiefer, William Hurt and Jennifer Connelly intrigues me. Gotta get around to it.

5. Mallrats
Largely considered to be the weakest of Kevin Smith's films, Mallrats has languished on my shelf as I awaited the proper incentive to get me interested. I think the below lukewarm reception to it has something to do with why it's the only Kevin Smith movie I've yet to see. I should see it just to satisfy the completist in me. But with the way Smith's recent films have been going with the decent-but-nothing-special Jersey Girl and Clerks II, I've actually become interested in getting back to Smith when he was starting out - to see if maybe he had more to offer back when his films were less polished?

4. Trainspotting
Danny Boyle's drug opus apparently. Every kid in high school has seen it. I have not. Truthfully Ewan McGregor and drugs aren't real selling points for me. Again though, this is another movie I started and never got back to. I still remember the climbing-into-the-toilet scene at the beginning of the film (it haunts my thoughts when I consider another attempt at watching it). But is there anything else to this movie besides warped perceptions? Does it matter if there isn't? Seeing that I've enjoyed Millions, 28 Days Later... and even The Beach to an extent, maybe I owe Boyle another shot.

3. Short Cuts
Robert Altman. Jack Lemmon. R0bert Downey, Jr. Julianne Moore. Chris Penn. Frances McDormand. Andie MacDowell. Based on the great Raymond Carver short stories, but interconnected like only Altman can do. Seems like the perfect match of material with director and it stood out as a comeback of sorts for Altman when it came out. The three hour long running time dissuades me just a bit, but the first chance I really get to sit down and take it in, I'll jump at the chance.

2. The English Patient
The only Best Picture winner since 1987's Bertolucci film that I haven't seen. Loved Anthony Minghella's The Talented Mr. Ripley and enjoyed Cold Mountain quite a bit as well. Unfortunately, my girlfriend considers it one of the most boring and tedious films she's had the displeasure of sitting through... but I tend to disagree with her a lot on films, so I'll take that with a grain of salt (or sand in this case). Seems like a lower profile choice for a Best Picture winner too, an unusual decision by the Academy's history. I need to hear some more opinions on this one that sway me towards a viewing.

1. The Age of Innocence
Any Scorsese that I haven't already seen is of the utmost embarrassment. The Age of Innocence just so happens to be a victim of my least favorite genre, the Edith Wharton-styled period piece. It's rare when a Pride & Prejudice comes along that I see, much less like. But this is Scorsese we're talking about, not some everyday hack. There's no excuse for it. Besides, as you can tell with my runners-up list I'm woefully behind on Daniel Day-Lewis's filmography as well. This just tops it off.

(my embarassingly long) runners-up: The Apostle, Crimes and Misdemeanors, Pi, Slacker, Clockers, Sense and Sensibility, Babe, The Crossing Guard, Gettysburg, In the Name of the Father, Last of the Mohicans, Husbands and Wives, Bad Lieutenant, One False Move, The Doors, Bugsy, El Mariachi, When We Were Kings, The Crucible, Sling Blade, Shine, Waiting for Guffman, Kundun, The Boxer, Buffalo '66, Hard-Boiled

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Film Script's Top 7 - Movies I Should Have Seen (2000s)

When I started compiling a list of all the movies I should have seen - but haven't yet - the list started small and grew enormous.

So I broke it down into decades and I'll work my way backwards over the course of who knows how long, but I'll start it off tonight with the most recent misses, the 2000s.

For this category, I have eliminated 2007 since we're still in it. And as much as I regret missing Bug, Black Snake Moan, Waitress, Breach and Once thus far... I have plenty of time before the end of the year to rectify that.

These are the films that I missed, and the months dragged over to years and that I desperately need to take time out to go and visit. Especially since so many of them are so highly regarded.

So without further hesitation, the Top 7 Movies I Should Have Seen (2000-06 edition):

7. The Motorcycle Diaries
Gotta love road movies, especially on a motorcycle. Seeing the country. Experiencing life. Everyone wants to do it one time or another in their life and after the letdown that I felt Easy Rider was, The Motorcycle Diaries is the next best thing, right? Gael Garcia Bernal (Amores Perros) stars. Plus it's about Che way before Soderbergh started to plan his own two films on the man. It's peeked my interest, but somehow never found it's way into my DVD player. I hope to change that soon.

6. Masked & Anonymous
It has some of my favorite bit actors in Jeff Bridges and John Goodman. It's stars a rock God in Bob Dylan. Dylan also wrote the damn thing. Larry Charles, who has directed a handful of "Curb Your Enthusiasm" episodes and absolutely the most hilarious movie of the decade in Borat also directed it. Plus, my favorite film critic of all-time, Philadelphia Weekly's Sean Burns gave it an A. This film has GOTTA be great, in spite of it's mixed reviews. I'm saving it for a special occasion. Nothing could make this film suck, I guarantee it.

5. The Fountain
Mostly for it's scope and ambition. I'm not the biggest Darren Aronofsky fan. He seems more interested with elliciting a sense of feeling over emotion if that makes sense to you. He wants you to feel exactly what his characters are going through, but doesn't necessarily get you to empathasize with any of them. Requiem was like that. From what I saw of Pi it was the same way. He's stylistic and a little out of control in his methods. Still, this is a passion project, one Aronofsky was trying to get off the ground for years and was even the film responsible for Brad Pitt's heinous homeless-man getup a few years back. For just those reasons, it should be enough for me to give it a watch.

4. Gosford Park
I have good reason for this one. One weekend I went to go visit my dad and when I walked into his house he was slumped down in his recliner snoring. He was in a deep sleep and Gosford Park was in the DVD player.... then I glanced up and noticed it hadn't even reached the 20-minute-mark yet! Now, it's a Robert Altman film (something I could have guessed my dad should stay far, far away from but that I enjoy quite a bit). But that being said, my dad rarely falls asleep in front of a movie. If he doesn't like it, he turns it off. This one seemed to pin him to the recliner and knock him unconscious. Plus, outside of a few faces, there aren't a whole lot of names I recognize in the cast list. It's one I need to see, but not one I'm dying to.

3. The Science of Sleep
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind would probably top my favorite films of the decade, but to show my appreciation for that film I still haven't even seen Michel Gondry's whimsical follow-up? When this film was announced it was one of my most anticipated films. It still is. Yet for some reason I never have made room for it in my schedule? What's wrong with me? Maybe it's the lack of star power - even though I am a Gael Garcia Bernal fan? And what's with two Bernal films being in my Top 7? No offense to Bernal, but really, how is that possible?

2. Oldboy
Not only Oldboy but the whole "Vengeance Trilogy" from Chan-wook Park. The movie sounds entirely kickass. It's widely considered one of the best action films of the last decade. Chachi even beats me up over it in the comments section. What it amounts to is... I need to see this film. The film was even highlighted (in a negative way) during the tragic Virginia Tech massacre. When a movie starts inspiring serial killers, it's obviously engrained itself into the culture for better or worse. I should really get on it.

1. City of God
I loved The Constant Gardner and I've only heard better things about City of God. It's currently listed at #17 on IMDB's Top 250 Films of All-Time. Yet, I haven't seen it. It's also the third foreign language film plaguing my Top 7, obviously a recurring theme - although I have seen all of Wong Kar Wai's recent films. I have no excuse, even owning a copy of the movie and being genuinely intrigued by the storyline of two boys in Rio de Janeiro growing up and becoming such starkly different people. By far, I'm the most ashamed for not having seen this than any other film on my Top 7. I may even watch it tomorrow night just to give it the rightful crossing out from this list that it deserves.

runners-up: Band of Brothers (Mini-Series), The Painted Veil, Bobby, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, The Machinist, Dogville, Manderlay, A Mighty Wind

Saturday, June 16, 2007

2007, The Year of the Middling Movie?

It's been far too long since I've posted a new topic and I've been dying to throw up "The Film Script - Top 7 Movies We Haven't Seen That We Should Have," but that's gonna take me a while to go through and find the precise 7 that I'm the most shamed for having not seen, so in the meantime I figured I'd post on the current shabby state of the cinemas (but keep the other topic in mind and start gathering your own lists).

Now, it's a known fact that the best movies of the year are usually withheld for the end of the year - for Oscar season - but this year seems especially slow to get started. Thus far, I've seen 23 movies released in 2007. Only 8 of the 23 have I given a rating of a B or better and I've still only given out a single, solitary A (for Zodiac). That's a pathetic 35% of movie I've considered to be "good films."

The ratio does get much better when I factor in a B- (my cutoff for a positive review), then the ratio jumps to 57%. Maybe I'm over-reacting, because at the end of the year if I've given a B- or better rating more than 50% of the time, I consider it a good year. But there's been so many blantantly average films recently that this is standing out in my mind.

Ocean's Thirteen. Lucky You. Alpha Dog. Spider-Man 3. Freedom Writers.

All B- films that I liked but felt they could have been better... especially with Raimi, Soderbergh and Hanson at the helms of 3 of them.

I watched Next the other day as well. C+.

300. C.

Plus, there's been an extrodinary amount of terrible films thrown in. I've already given out four D-'s or F's (and those are ratings I reserve for the real dregs of cinema). Thank you Pirates 3, The Ex, Catch and Release and Because I Said So.

I'm getting hopeful hearing positive things about Bug and Once and Waitress but haven't been able to track those films down yet. But honestly is anyone really holding out a lot of hope for films like Fantastic Four 2, Live Free or Die Hard (yes, I want to see it; no, I don't think it'll be anything special) and especially Transformers?!

C'mon people, it's a Michael Bay film for chrissake! When one of the most anticipated films of the season comes from the Jerry Bruckheimer/Michael Bay combo, we're facing some rough, rough times ahead.

I don't know guys, bring me around. Tell me I'm horribly mistaken. I've got hope for Breach which I just got on DVD, Black Snake Moan which I'm getting shortly and the upcoming Bourne film that I can't seem to stop talking about. And maybe those will help jumpstart the year for me.

But keep in mind, I also haven't seen Norbit, Hostel II, Hannibal Rising, In the Land of Women, etc. etc. Nor do I have any inclination to do so.

Monday, June 11, 2007

A Couple of Movies to See Before You Die











One book I love to read through is "1001 Movies to see before you die." I am slowly trying to see them all. In order to get you guys all started, I've posted links to the first two "films" you must see before you die.


The first is a 1902 french silent film about mans' trip to the moon. It is surreal. The animation is quite revolutionary, but the footage is in such terrible condition. The narration is in English, which I'm sure the original wouldn't be in. Not sure if it even would have had narration back than, but I guess if you can produce a score to these silent films, I don't see why you couldn't narrate. It only runs about 12 minutes.

"Le Voyage dans la Luna"

The second is much more familiar. It is a 1903 American silent film about a train robbery. The music is haunting and the direction is quite good for the time. I find this to be more the birth of film and it's conventions than "A Trip to the Moon." It runs about 11 minutes.

"The Great Train Robbery"

Number three on the list is DW Griffith's three hour epic "Birth of a Nation." I've seen it and man it is so damn racist, but that was a different time. Also very hard to sit through a three hour silent film. But you can clearly see what an impact this film had on cinema forever. But you will have to rent it and see it for yourself.

Friday, June 8, 2007

Lego My Prego!


Finally, the summer has bared its first great movie. After all the hype and utter disappointment of the big blockbusters that May offered,"Knocked Up" felt like such a breath of fresh air.

Judd Apatow cemented his status as a god amongst the disenfranchised and the belittled with his work on "Freaks and Geeks" and "Undeclared." He also was prominent in the Emmy Award winner "The Larry Sanders Show." But as we have seen before, what may work for TV (be it the actor, the writer, or the premise) certainly isn't always the case for film. However, Apatow is too good of a creator and writer to fall victim to any of those pitfalls.

Ironically, his TV shows only amounted to cult hit status. They were widely recognized as the best that TV had to offer when they were in rotation, but they never obtained the viewers needed to survive. His movies, however, have been moderately budgeted and yet make 500% in profit. Why are his films so successful when his TV shows weren't? I can't really say. He has maintained the same honesty and the same affection for his characters that he always had.

The key to his success though isn't simply his brilliant handling of raunchy humor and sincere emotion. Nor is it due to the fact that he has come up with a unique comedic plot ala Borat. In fact his two movies could easily fall prey to being deemed a gimmick (40 Yr Old Virgin) or unimaginative (Knocked Up). But what he brings to his films is his talent for picking the right actor for the right role, and bringing out the best in them.

Ben's friends in this movie, while don't serve the plot as well as Andy's friends in "Virgin," still have some of the funniest lines you will hear all year. Jason Siegel, Martin Starr, Jay Baruchel, and the great Jonah Hill (whom has lost alot of weight! I am saddened) all get their moment to shine. The lines said in reference to Starr's untamed beard are up there with "You know how I know you're gay?"

Katherine Heigl is annoying on Grey's Anatomy. She hasn't been particularly good in anything I've seen before. Yet here she is a gem. She can hold her own both comedically and emotionally with anyone in this movie. I 'm excited to see what she does next.

Leslie Mann may be the funniest unknown actress ever. She was so funny in her small role in "Virgin", but she gets to stretch her wings here and actually act. I will say she isn't the most convincing actress when she has to get all emotional, but she still sells it because she is so gifted in every other scene in the movie. An absolute riot.

Paul Rudd needs his own movie!!! Now!!! He once again just about steals the movie. Anchorman. Virgin. Knocked Up. He has proven himself to have both great timing and delivery for any occasion, be it comedy or drama. I hope he isn't relegated to supporting roles for the rest of his career.

And finally, the man of the year, Seth Rogen. I absolutely loved him in "Virgin." His lines were the best in my opinion. Here he has a tough task of creating a character that we both love, but expect more from. It really is quite a feat to portray this character where we root for him to make the right choices, but when he doesn't we are so disappointed in him. We react to him as if he were a long time friend of ours in real life. Some may think it wasn't so much acting as was just him being himself, but I still am astonished at just how much depth is actually there to witness. When he holds his daughter for the first time and tells her about his first encounter with Alison, I laughed and cried. I though it was a beautiful moment that Rogen earned all on his own.

Comparisons to "Virgin" are bound to happen. If I must make a statement on that notion, I will say "Virgin" is more quotable and "Knocked Up" is more poignant. But I find it really hard to definitively say which one is better. With only two movies under his belt, Apatow has perhaps started his own "dynasty." In twenty years, hopefully people will be talking about his movies in the same breath as Annie Hall, Blazing Saddles, or Animal House as the funniest films ever.

In a summer bursting with the best in effects, the best in explosions, the best in thrills, and so many damn sequels I can't count them all, it is great to see that what makes the best movie is something that a computer can't do. A great cast and a great script makes a great movie.

Thursday, June 7, 2007

Recent Watches: June 2007

Yeah, so I'm a total bum.

Really I haven't seen all that much recently to warrant putting this up, but this "Recent Watches" category should be up so that everyone can throw in their two cents, so here goes...

What I have seen so far is Snatch for a third time (the value of this film keeps diminishing on me as well) and Donnie Brasco for a second. I had recently watched Carlito's Way for a second time too and always tied the two together in my mind, so I wanted to pick which one I really appreciate more... only to watch both, enjoy both, and be stuck basically in the "damn these are both good movies" section again.

As for first time viewing, pickings are slim. Saw Pirates 3 and Knocked Up but everyone knows how I feel on those already. I'll elaborate on Knocked Up if Chachi does end up posting something of a review of it.

Other than that, there was the dreadful Sandra Bullock-starring Premonition. There were so many idiotic things that happened throughout the course of that movie, I just sat back slapping my own forehead over and over until it finally finished. On top of which, Bullock REFUSED to show anything resembling an emotion throughout the course of the film. It's hard to do, but that movie made her so unappealing that I couldn't even imagine being around her. Ugh.

And on TV... I finally caught up with "Heroes." Which, while good, is far from the level of "Lost." Whereas "Lost" has the same type of cross-cultural cast, it does a much better job of fleshing out personalities. In "Heroes" the actors (who themselves aren't exactly great) are pretty much defined by their superhero ability. Maybe this is a calculated decision by the creators, but it doesn't leave me all that interested in the characters. The one episode being the exception was the "5 Years in the Future" one, where we actually get to see what these characters had become. It was the one episode I loved in a season of solid-but-unspectacular ones. And people claiming it's the best show on TV are just insane.

Now, what are you guys watching?

Sunday, June 3, 2007

Month of Movies: June 2007


Sorry for the lack of posts guys, I've been sick all week long and just haven't been up to it.

But I'm back now, so for today, I have a place to post all you're most anticipated films of the month. Instead of dealing with this on a week-to-week basis, I figured we could just wrap it all into one month-long look forward.

Also, I'll be back tomorrow with a place to post your recent watches for June. From there we'll continue with more topics for the month.

And after a while I'll be back to praise the bejesus out of Knocked Up - also the only movie I've been able to get to or see in a week. Feel free to beat me to the punch though.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

WTF


Um...thoughts anyone?

Sunday, May 27, 2007

Reactions to Pirates


I'm sure everyone saw it. Here's the place to take your shots.

Personally, I hated it with a passion - and I liked the first one, and even found stuff to like (much like Spider-Man 3) in the second.

But this third entry was just awful from beginning to end. I couldn't pick out a single thing I enjoyed about the movie and I was squirming in my seat after 15 minutes. The painful knowledge that I still had two and a half hours left from that point only made it that much worse.

Depp tries his hardest to keep everyone entertained, but by this point he's playing a magician and he's just got too many balls in the air to keep them up. Geoffrey Rush was the only other part that I didn't loathe.

With as bad as Keira Knightley, Chow Yun-Fat, Orlando Bloom and the rest of the assortment were, worst of all is the story. The writers of this monstrosity had absolutely no idea what they were doing. It wanders all over the place, and for a pirate movie these guys stand around explaining shit to one another way too often. Say what you will about Dead Man's Chest but at least it felt like we were headed somewhere. During At World's End I felt like everyone's heads had been chopped off and they were just running around aimlessly with weapons in hand.

Oh, and I wanna thank the creators for treating us to the 30-or-so hangings we witness to kick the movie off. Nothing like the mass killings of people devoid of their rights to a trial. Really gets you in the mood for the brainless wonder you're about to behold.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Trailer Bulletin: John Rambo

Your thoughts?

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

On the Lot


As I'm sure some of you have been doing, I've been sitting here for the last half hour completely hating myself for watching the show "On the Lot." Being aspiring filmmakers and lovers of film, you guys have to have heard about this show, right? Produced by Steven Spielberg, they gather a group of 50-or-so filmmakers and put them through the ringer to see who's the best director.

First mistake the show makes... it's entirely a 'reality show.' I felt like I was watching "The Bachelor" or "Joe Millionaire" or some shit. It was terribly staged. I hated myself simply because it was totally, 100% reality crapola. I hate to watch people dance around for a camera and act like it's real life. The minute they add a camera to the mix, it's staged. I don't care what it is. "American Idol" or whatever, it's staged. I've been a big advocate of the fact that "American Idol" would be just as interesting as solely a radio show - still completely uninteresting - but besides that, it wouldn't lose anything but the 'Prom Queen' factor of voting... the voting for the prettiest, most appealing candidate. If there's anything that Peter Jackson, Alfred Hitchcock and Quentin Tarantino prove, it's that, "hey, ugly dudes can make pretty damn good films." They need to find a way past that, and they completely failed in every aspect of the show.

Second, the first episode is dedicated to 'The Pitch.' I'm sorry, but 'The Pitch' has absolutely nothing to do with who can make the best film. They're actually going to eliminate people because of this shit? I don't even want to address this. This is so asinine as to be laughable. Eliminating a director for something unrelated to what's a part of his footage is ludicrous. It's all about the film, people.

Third, they assign ideas. I mean, at this point you're losing brainpower.

And then lastly, besides all that (and even ignoring the annoying host of the show), we get... 'The Three Judges.' Garry Marshall. The world's most hit-or-miss (and mostly miss) director. He did Pretty Woman. He did Beaches. He did Overboard. Other than those three, mostly mediocre films, he's done shit. Hell, last week he released the roundly derided Georgia Rule. And the last film of his I saw? Raising Helen. Not a single thing worth remembering, I'm still trying to forget Kate Hudson was even in it.

And Carrie Fisher. Immortalized in Star Wars and forgotten in absolutely everything else.

And - of course - fuckin' Brett Ratner. Yes, Rush Hour/Red Dragon/X-Men 3 Brett Ratner. The guy has yet to make a SINGLE good film. Worse yet, he has this egotistical approach to his work like he's actually accomplished something - besides the astounding fact he actually got money to make a film. I blame Spielberg. Not only did he give Ratner the money to make his student film (thank you "Entourage" for that bit of info), but now he's producing a show that lets Ratner mug for the camera? Every time this guy winced at a pitch, I wanted to punch him in the face and say "hey, fuckhead, this is what it's like to sit through most all of your films."

I guess payback is hell. "On the Lot" is a squandered idea followed through with brutally terrible execution.

Now and Then


Mulligan brought this up in one of his comments, and I had been kicking around this idea for a post myself. Mulligan had recalled rewatching "Rookie of the Year" the other day and how it left a bad taste in his mouth. As a kid, he loved the movie, but now as an adult, it was just plain bad.

Obviously what makes you laugh as a kid doesn't necessarily carryover to maturity. I ask you to tell us of any nostalgia classics that you now wish you hadn't seen again. Ones that having seen a second time has now destroyed what fond memories you had for it.

Some examples I can think off the top of my head include nearly all Pauly Shore films. I caught "Encino Man" the other day. I had loved it as a kid and thought Link was the coolest cat. But now, my memory has been tainted. It really is a film of the '80s because it simply doesn't hold up. The friendships seemed fake. The jokes stale. Everyone was so oblivious to what was going on. The plot is so over the top, I cant believe I was ever able to suspend my disbelief for it. To be honest, I see the Wayans Bros. remaking it. They could even combine it with one of the their own flicks and make "Little Cave Man." In order to steal a dinosaur egg, Marlon must go undercover as a cave baby and infiltrate the wealthiest caveman in quarry. Oh dear god,..the suicide rate will be too much for our country to bare.

Also "Naked Gun 2 1/2." I loved all Leslie Nielsen films when I was younger. I since revisited all of the Naked Guns, and that second one is just bad. Not funny at all. Very disappointing because I thought I would still love it even today. At least the first is still terrific and the third is pretty good too.

So what films have you since rewatched and now you wish you had just hit the eject button. Oh and no "HOOK." That is just way too obvious.

Thursday, May 17, 2007

Inspiration



I got to reading about some of my favorite directors and not so favorite directors and despite my love or hate for them, I have something in common with them. A love for film and aspiration to create movies. And something that always interested me was what movies inspired them. What movies inspired everyone here to come to love and admire movies?

For me it was The 7th Voyage of Sinbad. I don't particularly love the movie though I do own it and let it play in the background on occasion just because, but I remember sitting on my dad's lap and watching it when I was at least four or five and thinking, "This is so awesome. How did they do this?" Soon after I remember seeing the Terminator 2 trailer and all of a sudden movies were important to me.

So that's the question, what movie made you love movies?

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Recent Watches: May 2007


I'm gonna get in the habit of posting a topic at the beginning of each month dealing solely with what we've recently watched. For me, one of the most interesting things is learning what other people are catching up with on DVD or which classics that they're seeing for the first time.

I'm gonna start that here. So feel free to kick in with whatever you've watched in theaters, on TV, on DVD, whatever. There are no restrictions.

Also, I'm just a little disappointed that it seems like the conversation on the site has come to a standstill. I have no problems being responsible for the main page, but I figured the comments section would be where the real heart of this site was as we could debate back-and-forth on topics. The last three posts have a grand total of 10 replies. The post before that had 11 all by itself. I dunno. C'mon guys, let's show that movie passion.

Wednesday, May 9, 2007

Film Script's Top 7 - Comic Book Movies


I know the topic comes entirely out of left field but with Rotten Tomatoes recently compiling the rankings of Comic Book films from 1-94, I figured our own Top 7 lists (feel free to throw in honorary mentions as well) were in order. And it's Top 7 because Top 5 is just too short and Top 10 is just too long.

So let's begin with my own - surprisingly one-sided - list:

6 & 7.) Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2
The reasons Spider-Man 3 was such a disappointment is plainly observable by rewatching the first two films. Director Sam Raimi has Peter Parker run the gamut of comic book hero storylines... origin, to underappreciated figure, to our finally recognized hero. Maybe that's why 3 felt like a lot of stalling - the movie equivalent of spinning your tires - because Raimi felt there was no place for the character to go. Besides, these films are trim, lean and iconic. There are images still burning in my mind from these two while 3 already begins to fade away.

5.) Batman Returns
The only movie that I remember my dad and I walking out on when I was a child... and a movie I avoided pretty much relentlessly until I finally gave in and gave it another chance a couple years ago. I'm glad I did. Maybe my 10-12 year old self wasn't ready for the darkness of the film and Burton's decision to focus the film around its villains instead of our hero, but nowadays - and maybe this says something about the older, more cynical me - but I revel in it. There's gotta be something to a film that so totally scares the hell out of its producers that they lose a Burger King sponsorship and bag the director. Unfortunately, it's also primarily responsible for the fiasco that became Schumacher's films, but you can't blame it on Burton.

4.) Sin City
Easily more entertaining and replayable than Frank Miller's 300, while still as much of a visual, jaw-dropping feast. Sin City establishes character in a way that 300 ignores, while also playing off the old noir pictures of Hollywood's yesteryear. Also, by crisscrossing from story to story, the film plays like a series of vignettes - each story interesting and unique enough to stand on its own. I'd actually love to see this film broken down and watch each story unfold in and of itself. While not perfect - like most Rodriguez' pictures the film is practically devoid of emotion outside of the 'wham, bam, thank ya ma'am' action school style of filmmaking - the film is by far his most roundly complete. Plus, with a cast list this deep you're drawn in for every second.

3.) Batman Begins
Christopher Nolan reboots the franchise after it nearly fizzled into extinction with Begins and, appropriately, tells the story of Bruce Wayne's origin over your typical Batman tale... a story that had thus far been largely ignored, even by Burton's twosome. It's fascinating and adds a depth to a character that had been fairly shallow to that point. With the exception of the casting of Katie Holmes (a mistake already addressed in a recasting for The Dark Knight), Begins is the best of the Batman films - giving him back a pulse, and an audience.

2.) Batman
Yes, the 3rd Batman film on my list - and still largely considered 'the' Batman film. Burton hit it out of the park on his first swing with the bewildering (at the time) casting of Michael Keaton as Batman and letting Jack dance in the pale moonlight. I don't even know what to say about it besides the fact it was the first pure comic driven movie that I'd so thoroughly enjoyed. Maybe it's something about the Wayne Mansion... or that Batman really has no superpowers so he's always wholly a human figure but he's definitely the best superhero and he generally shows the most emotion, teetering on the brink of vengeance over justice. Love it.

1.) The Crow
The ultimate hero figure. Part rock n' roller. Part supernatural. And intensely scary - even to evildoers. He has the ability to regenerate from gunshot wounds. And he's even a romantic at heart, with a backstory that kills... love destroyed, he's given the chance to set things right for one night on the eve of Halloween. Forget any of the sequels, but the original is pure comicbook genius. Dark and dynamic. It's still widely known for the tragic death of Brandon Lee, but what a way to go out. He was a God for a moment in this film. Always left me wanting more.

honorary mentions to: Hellboy, Superman: The Movie, X-Men, Blade, X2: X-Men United, Superman Returns and Blade 2: Bloodhunt

*note: I eliminated such films as A History of Violence and Ghost World because while technically deriving from a comic or graphic novel, they don't fit in with the whole aura of a pure comic book film (namely costumes and villains).

Blog Directory - Blogged