December 30, 2008

Worst of 2008.

I don't see very many bad movies in the theater each year because I avidly avoid them. However, I usually do end up seeing a handful of terrible films. Last year I suffered through Transformers and the abysmal Waitress. I can't hand out the title, "Worst Movie of the Year", I can only say "Worst Movie I Saw This Year", and the flick that deserves this is Repo! The Genetic Opera. A movie worse than anything I've seen in at least a couple years, and that includes watching Wes Craven's Shocker on TV. Anyways, I wholeheartedly insist that everyone should avoid Repo! at all costs.

In other news, my top ten list of the year's movies is likely to come a little late thanks to The Wrestler not being in theaters here until January 9th. As soon as I see that movie I can finalize the list and post it, so expect it on January 10th.

Until then, happy new year.

December 26, 2008

Best of 2008. Music

Last year, there was an obvious choice for best album. Radiohead's In Rainbows stood far above the rest, and it still does. It was again the album I listened to the most this year. Nothing stood alone as the definitive masterpiece of the year, so, I will not be picking a best album this year but instead listing the albums I enjoyed the most. Here they are:

EDIT: if I had a gun to my head I would go with TV on the Radio's Dear Science as the #1

Conor Oberst by Conor Oberst

Dear Science, by TV on the Radio


Death Magnetic by Metallica


Evil Urges by My Morning Jacket


Fleet Foxes by Fleet Foxes


A Mad & Faithful Telling by Devotchka


Með suð í eyrum við spilum endalaust by Sigur Ros


Modern Guilt by Beck


Narrow Stairs by Death Cab for Cutie

All of these albums have great covers, which is far too rare.


More "Best of 2008" on the way in the coming weeks.

December 24, 2008

December 23, 2008

The Masterpieces Vol II. The Royal Tenenbaums

mas⋅ter⋅piece
–noun
1. a person's greatest piece of work, as in an art.
2. anything done with masterly skill: a masterpiece of improvisation.
3. a consummate example of skill or excellence of any kind: The chef's cake was a masterpiece.

The Masterpieces is an ongoing list of the greatest achievements in cinema from around the world. The only requirement is that no movie released in the last year can be added. These are the films that set the highest standards for their art form and respective genres. They can be important socially and universally or they can resonate on a deeply personal level or they can simply be incredibly entertaining.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Royal Tenenbaums


Written by Wes Anderson & Owen Wilson
Directed by Wes Anderson

The Royal Tenenbaums is a profoundly special work of cinema. Like all of Wes Anderson's films, its value can only be appreciated with multiple viewings. In fact, to be honest, I barely liked it upon it's release in 2001. I think this is because of Anderson's overwhelmingly dominant and unique style. The most common criticism associated with his body of work is "style over substance". Initially, for me, such an accusation seems preposterous. However, after reflection I realize after one viewing of The Royal Tenenbaums, it is the style that makes the first impression. I have seen the film quite a few times now, and with each viewing, it becomes considerably more substantial. Further examination reveals a remarkable complexity and intricacy, like a truly great work of fiction.

Each character is treated with such love and care by Anderson, it can be a wonder to behold. Many of his characters disagree with each other, hate each other and hurt each other. Yet, it is clear that Wes Anderson loves them all fervently and equally. Is this not powerful in itself? Perhaps even important? The Royal Tenenbaums is the best example of this because there are so many key characters, so many unique profiles with an astounding depth.

I'm realizing it doesn't sound like I'm writing about a comedy, but I am. This movie is very funny. The humour found here is so far removed from the typical American comedy that it's off putting. There is a rare level of class wherein the jokes all serve the story or the characters. Anderson himself stated that nearly everything he does in his films serves the purpose of "bringing the characters forward". One might synopsize that the film is about the character Royal Tenenbaum, a deranged father, trying to earn his family back. Yes, it is about that but it is about every single relationship between every single person in the movie. While all aren't given equal screen time, I still see them as important. How heartbreaking is Margot's neglecting of her seemingly infatuated husband? How interesting is the rivalry between Royal and Henry, even if there only a few brief instances that contribute to it? An entire movie could have been devoted to any of the sole relationships and conflicts.

The difficult to penetrate surface contains a uniquely cinematic soul and a heart of gold, with layers of richness, humour and sadness that add up to one of the best films of the current decade. For newcomers to Anderson's work, I find it's best to watch his films chronologically, or at least with his debut film Bottle Rocket, followed by his sophomore piece, Rushmore. With Bottle Rocket, he had a far more constrained budget and was not yet able to fine tune every detail of each frame as he does now. In the case of Rushmore, he displays a much stronger level of attention to detail but it is still not at the profound level of Tenenbaums and later films. I think if you start out in this manner, you can ease into his work, and the initial viewings are all the more rewarding. I don't mean to point out the meticulously crafted production design and costumes and all other aspects of the visuals as flaws. I only mean that at first the flashiness can distract one from the inner workings of this auteur's brilliant works.

It's a shame that some may be turned off, or at least led astray by the balanced and vibrant visual quirks, because Wes Anderson is one of the finer film makers alive today. He is one of America's strongest voices in movies and this is one of his strongest films. And it's not even his only masterpiece.

December 21, 2008

List Logic

It's that time of year again and top ten lists of the year's best movies are showing up everywhere. Everybody loves lists. They're simple, they rarely offer any thoughtful writing, and they rank the 10 best movies so that people know what to see, that they haven't already. Some years, there are far more than 10 movies worth mentioning, but too bad for them. It sounds like I might be against such lists, but that is not the case.

http://www.foxnews.com/images/305852/0_61_082407_RogerEbert.jpg

I bring this up because critic Roger Ebert has rebelled against the system this year. Instead of posting the normal list, he refused to rank films. His list is a top 20 in alphabetical order. Good for him, right? Ranking films isn't the best way to celebrate cinema, but I believe he has made a mistake. I agree it's silly to rank films but it is necessary to draw people's attention. By making an alphabetical top 20 he has removed the emphasis from any of the movies. Now, it's just a list of movies he really likes, and no one will be as compelled to check out his number one, two or even ten (even though ten is the lowest, simply by being numbered it draws more attention). His list will still have an influence because of his deserved popularity, but if this became a trend amongst all critics, I fear many people would lose some interest.

The top ten list is a means to get anyone, even the most casual of moviegoers to see what deserves to be seen. Even if a hypothetical #11 is just as great as 10, 9 and 8, the top ten list is still important. It is unfair to number 11, yes, but that's the price of grabbing the attention of a reader skimming through a newspaper. Many critics have a method of getting around this. I, like many, have an "honourable mentions" portion that alphabetically lists other great movies. I know it's not as influential, but at least the worthy get mentioned. So I do believe in the top ten list, but one of it's biggest flaws is that for most critics, it loses some relevance. Opinions change, two years later one realizes their number 9 should have been number 3. This is a bit silly. Really, ranking is the method with the greatest impact, but it shouldn't be read into too deeply.

For example, I will post my top ten list from last year, followed by a revised list to see how much has changed in a year.

My top ten list from 2007:

1. Juno
2. Ratatouille
3. There Will Be Blood
4. Superbad
5. Once
6. Hot Fuzz
7. Knocked Up
8. No Country For Old Men
9. Into The Wild
10. Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead/The Savages (Tie)

Honorable mentions…
4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days, Away From Her, The Darjeeling Limited, Eastern Promises, Rescue Dawn, Zodiac

Now, here is a revised list of how I feel now:

1. Juno
2. Ratatouille
3. Once
4. There Will Be Blood
5. No Country For Old Men
6. The Darjeeling Limited
7. Rescue Dawn
8. 4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days
9. Into The Wild
10. Knocked Up

Honourable Mentions…
Away From Her, Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead, Hot Fuzz, The Savages, Superbad, Zodiac

Now, there have been some changes of course, but there isn't a single movie in the top ten or honourable mentions list that wasn't there before. Only the order has changed. This wont always be the case. Ten years from now I might discover a brilliant obscure 2007 picture that makes Juno look like What Happens In Vegas. Whatever. It doesn't matter. My goal, which was to put emphasis on the year's best movies was accomplished. The order has since changed but it's the same movies I wanted to honour in the first place. Top ten lists are important, and should continue to be an end of year event. As long as people take them as a semi-serious guide of what to see, but not a serious guide to which 2007 great movie was better than another 2007 great movie. Just see them both. Please.


All lists published on the Bronze can be found here

December 13, 2008

Frost/Nixon

New Movie Review.

Frost/Nixon

Written by Peter Morgan, based on his play
Directed by Ron Howard
Starring Michael Sheen, Frank Langella, Sam Rockwell, Oliver Platt, Kevin Bacon, Matthew McFayden


Frost/Nixon is the mostly factual account of when Playboy talk show host David Frost (Michael Sheen) ambitiously decided to interview the most controversial man in America, perhaps even the world at the time, Richard Nixon. Nixon (Frank Langella) had surrendered his place in the White House but had not yet confessed any involvement in illegal activity. The world wanted an admission of guilt and Frost was the least likely candidate to get it. Nixon's people considered David Frost such a lightweight interviewer that they actually took the offer. Better to go with Frost than someone serious, that proposes a threat to Nixon's reputation. Frost, however, was determined. He hired a crack team to help his cause, including friend/producer John Birt (Matthew McFayden), and two experienced journalists James Reston Jr. (Sam Rockwell) and Bob Zelnick (Oliver Platt). Together, they frantically research, strategize and fight over the best ways to nail the former president. This process is entertaining in it's own right, mostly due to the anticipation of getting to the actual interviews. When the film arrives to the point where Frost and Nixon are seated across from each other, with cameras rolling, it's the most exciting thing in film this year other than a slightly more theatrical match up between the Batman and the Joker.

This story is about the men and where they were in life and what the interviews meant to them. Peter Morgan, who wrote the play and the film's screenplay is more interested in Frost as an unlikely hero and Nixon as a tragic figure than he is in exploring the politics surrounding the situation. The interviews truly play out like a boxing match. They first meet at Nixon's California residence, and it seems they assess each other, or keeping with the boxing analogy, they "weigh" each other. It is abundantly clear that Nixon is a heavyweight and Frost barely registers on the scale. Both sides practice and learn their opponent's weaknesses. When the first of four interviews begins, Nixon is calm, prepared and confident while Frost is alarmingly timid. Frost's "trainers" call for a break, pretending that the tapes need to be switched. Both fighters retreat to their corners. I half expected Frost to be offered a water bottle and stitches. These scenes are masterful and command an impressive level of suspense and fascination.

Ron Howard is certainly no more than a technician, when it comes to the craft of film, but he is an apt one. His career isn't spotless but he has had success with films such as Apollo 13 and A Beautiful Mind. However he is also responsible for ED TV and The Da Vinci Code. Nonetheless, his best work is in this movie, which feels much less Hollywood than anything else he has done. A lot of the credit should go to Peter Morgan who is also responsible for recent movies The Queen and The Last King of Scotland. His writing is intelligent and sophisticated but also accessible and clever. Morgan offers us an insightful look at two men at a crossroads in life. Frost was in the middle of a successful career, but it began to unravel as he poured all of his attention and money into the Nixon project. His career, and reputation depended on the success of the interviews. On the surface, Nixon and his people wanted to deter the public from suspecting him of illegal activity and also gain some of the respect he had lost. However, as Frank Langella's performance suggests, it seems Nixon secretly needed to confess. He seems lonely, lost, damaged by guilt and regret. Ultimately, the interviews might be good for both men. For Frost it serves as a incredible achievement, for Nixon a vital catharsis.

Obviously, this is a film that relies on the portrayals of it's leads. Both Langella and Sheen give equally deep and committed turns. Langella's Nixon strikes a perfect balance between being an unlikable man who could not get along with those around him and a sympathetic character who desperately wanted to seve his country. Sheen is charismatic and arrogant, but he also has a subtle vulnerability that connects him to the audience. If Frost was played at a more impersonal and greater distance, he would have just seemed like an egotistical womanizer. Thankfully, Sheen hints at so much more. Rockwell and Platt give inspired supporting performances as the two men helping Frost. Rockwell still remains an under appreciated actor who had two other great roles this year in Snow Angels and Choke. Platt has always had a hit or miss career but he is delightful here. An odd thought crossed my mind while watching him act. Oliver Platt could play Roger Ebert if a movie was ever made requiring one to do so. They don't look alike but there is a similar intangible quality. Kevin Bacon has a key role as Nixon's right hand man. Through his perception we are able to see Nixon in a different light.

The film was different than what I had expected. I thought it to be a serious and politically minded drama. It feels more like a character study crossed with a thriller. There is a welcomed, natural humour in each character that lightens the mood but subtly strengthens the bond between the viewer and the film. Frost/Nixon is a remarkable entertainment that shouldn't be missed.


December 07, 2008

The Masterpieces. Vol I. 2001: A Space Odyssey

mas⋅ter⋅piece
–noun
1. a person's greatest piece of work, as in an art.
2. anything done with masterly skill: a masterpiece of improvisation.
3. a consummate example of skill or excellence of any kind: The chef's cake was a masterpiece.

The Masterpieces is an ongoing list of the greatest achievements in cinema from around the world. The only requirement is that no movie released in the last year can be added. These are the films that set the highest standards for their art form and respective genres. They can be important socially and universally or they can resonate on a deeply personal level or they can simply be incredibly entertaining.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2001: A Space Odyssey

http://www.ohgizmo.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/monolith.jpg

Directed by Stanley Kubrick
Written by Stanley Kubrick & Arthur C. Clarke

2001: A Space Odyssey is an undeniable masterpiece. It remains the most visually stunning film ever made. It's soundtrack is perfect and compliments the goings-on in the film better than anything before or after it. The character of "HAL", the corrupt computer that turns on a spaceship crew, has remained in pop culture with countless references in TV & film. Anthony Hopkins even claims to have used "HAL" to help find the voice of Hannibal Lecter, which he won an Oscar for portraying in Silence of the Lambs. I've always found it odd that "HAL" is the most popular part of the movie.

I savour every moment from beginning to end, but I do have a stronger affection for the opening and closing of the film. It begins with a pitch black screen, which holds for quite a while. Then we follow a group of apes at the dawn of time, fascinated by a black column sticking out of the ground. There are many great discussions to be had regarding this mysterious monolith. It has been suggested that they are some form of marker left by an alien race. What does it mark? Perhaps human progress. We see two more monoliths throughout 2001, and that theory seems concrete. Do the monoliths cause our progress? This is something Kubrick himself allegedly said. Whether that's true or not, it is clear that the film is a philosophical one. It is, as art always is, open to interpretation. Different people can see the movie and take away their own philosophical musings. Some see it as completely religious. Others see it as a story devoid of any evidence of a god. The film is a conversationalist's dream. Moreover, it is a movie lover's dream.

Kubrick and Clarke dreamed up a work of science fiction yet to be matched. Rich story aside, just watching the film and listening to it's euphonious soundtrack is an experience to behold. 2001 is filled to the brim with overwhelmingly incredible imagery. Consider the fact that film was released in 1968, 9 years before Star Wars. I still don't think any movie has portrayed space as successfully. It was apparently a requirement for astronauts in training to watch the movie. 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the most profound and rewarding movies I have ever seen. Much like the monoliths left, perhaps by more advanced life, Kubrick's film provokes us to explore our intellect, and to progress.

December 05, 2008

upcoming goodness + the best site(s) on the internet

http://images.easyart.com/i/prints/rw/lg/1/3/Roy-Lichtenstein-Masterpiece--1962---Silkscreen-Print--133899.jpg
OK, so I haven't posted anything new in a while, but there are exciting things on the way. My annual top ten list and other best of 2008 stuff will be posted soon. I'm going to launch a new column on the site. "The Masterpieces". Essentially, it is a rip off of Roger Ebert's ongoing "Great Movies", which you can find here. Basically, I will, from time to time, add a movie (any movie, as long as it's worthy) to a growing list of what I consider to be true masterpieces. I'm not sure if I'll write full reviews or try something new...We'll see. Hopefully, I'll see some new movies soon so I can post some reviews as well. I plan to see Doubt upon release, as well as The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, but the truth is that I've seen most everything I plan to in the near future. I'm going to do some thinking and try to come up with some more neat stuff. Wish me luck.
http://blog.pentagram.com/archives/Criterion_Signature_Small.jpg
In the meantime, I highly recommend a trip to criterion.com and their partners theauteurs.com. Since Criterion redesigned their site last month (click here for a sick intro video to their site), this has been my favourite place on the Internet. The Auteur's forums have a great community of film lovers discussing anything to do with movies. I myself tend to post everyday under my creative online handle, "Adam Cook".

The best thing to come of the Criterion/Auteurs partnership is a monthly online film festival. Each month on The Auteurs, there will be a themed festival featuring Criterion films. Right now it is "Cruel Stories of Youth". The best part of the festival? All the movies are available to watch, in considerably high quality...for free. So head on over and start watching here. I watched the film, Fat Girl. I recommend it. I'll try to check out as many films in the festival each month as I can and I'll post my thoughts here.

November 15, 2008

Synecdoche, New York

New Movie Review.

Synecdoche, New York


Written & directed by Charlie Kaufman

Starring Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Samantha Morton, Michelle Williams, Catherine Keener, Diane Weist, Emily Watson, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Hope Davis and Tom Noonan


Synecdoche, New York is the latest film written by genius screenwriter, Charlie Kaufman. However, thanks to Spike Jonze (who collaborated with Kaufman on Adaptation and Being John Malkovich) being busy with his next film, Kaufman slips into the director's chair for the very first time. He has stated in the past that he was interested in directing, but it's no surprise that the neurotic Kaufman had to be kinda forced into making the decision to do so. It's understandably nerve wracking going into this film, worrying if the talented writer can bring his words to life as well as Jonze and Gondry did. Oh, he can, and he does.

The film is difficult to describe so I'll just give a very general synopsis. Synecdoche follows a new york theater director named Caden Cotard, played by master thespian Phillip Seymour Hoffman, from roughly age 40-90 as he tries to create his masterpiece in a giant warehouse in New York. His central aim is to tackle mortality, but he wants his work to encompass everything it can. As the years pass, his production gets more and more out of hand, with hundreds of hired actors and incredibly elaborate sets. Eventually he builds a scale model of New York. Of course, for the scale New York to be accurate it must incorporate the warehouse, and inside that warehouse needs to be another scaled version of the city. So we get somewhat of a Russian doll effect except, oddly enough, each New York seems to be the same size. This is the type of "dream logic" you'll need to be prepared for in Synecdoche, New York.

A common complaint I'm hearing is confusion over unrealistic things in the movie. For example the scaled New Yorks which all are the same size or the more infamously mentioned burning house. Hazel, played by Samantha Morton, purchases a house while it's on fire. She mentions her concern of the fire once to her realtor, but that's all. For the remainder of the film, which works out to about 40 years within it, the fire remains, constant, but the house never burns down. That this is something people are whining about irritates me. It seems that most moviegoers are unwilling to think in any other way than literally. Some may argue that they don't like being slapped in the face with a metaphor, which is fine, but most are completely turned off by thinking outside the box at all. Those people shouldn't see Kaufman movies. Too bad, because he is the most important screenwriter (and, now, perhaps film maker) alive. Kaufman would be the first to tell you that everything in the movie is open to interpretation, but regarding the burning house, I was reminded of lyrics written by Issac Brock of the band Modest Mouse; "Every one's a building burning with no one to put the fire out/Staring at the window, looking out/Waiting for time to burn us down". How appropriate considering the most obvious theme of the film is death and how we ignore it's inevitability.

There are several pieces of evidence throughout the film of people ignoring something. There's the burning house, of course, and Cotard's therapist, played by Hope Davis in another terrific bit part, has terrible blisters from her tight fitting shoes which go unmentioned and she smiles through her teeth. There are more than a couple brilliant monologues regarding our mortality and thankfully they are laced with necessary, albeit dark, humour. Kaufman also tackles a familiar subject which is false expectations.

His disbelief in romantic love lead to Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and it's no surprise he explores such disappointment even further. Caden Cotard goes through heartbreak, yes, but really he never experiences love in the first place. At least not in it's commerical form. He is lonely when he is alone and when he's with someone. He cries when he becomes intimate with a woman. He tries only to use everyone in the way he wants them. Cotard wants no one to be themselves. This is something we may all be guilty of, wanting everyone to be a version of themselves that pleases us best. In life we direct and manipulate those around us like Cotard directs his actors. What he expects and wants is not possible. In the end he is left with the approximation of an ideal, a flawed microcosm, or an illusive synecdoche.

Kaufman delivers plenty of devastating insights such as that no one ever really knows us, not truly. Depressing but truthful, this film is more than a common movie, it is a work of great fiction worthy of being studied for years to come. I know I will. Synecdoche strikes me as a film I will receive endless value from. I believe that every time I watch it, I will interact with it differently and sometimes find something new. Something that made me sad may make me laugh years down the line, and vice versa. It will remain thought-provoking but new and different thoughts will be conjured each time. This is living, breathing art that one could appreciate forever.

I could mention that Phillip Seymour Hoffman is yet again Oscar-worthy (surprise!). That each supporting actress is so perfect I can't single any of them out and that all of them should receive the award for best supporting actress. I could mention how special the sets are, that there's some of the best make up work I've ever seen. I could mention that the score is wonderful and that the song, "Little Person" is now a favourite of mine thanks to how it's used. I could mention a great many other immense successes, but I'll get to that a little further down the line. Maybe after I've seen the movie a few more times. Initially, the aspect of Synecdoche, New York that I'm focused on is that it's one of the most rich, fulfilling, satisfying, cathartic and significant movie experiences of my life.

November 04, 2008

My Take on the Election...

So, alas, election day is upon us. Time for me to shamelessly force my opinion onto the Internet, which is really what I always do here anyhow. Now I don't know if Obama is gonna be super awesome fixer president guy, but I do know it will truly suck if McCain wins. If the American public decides to go with him, I will have totally lost faith in them. I will deem them so morally defective that I could no longer share the continent with them. Therefore, I will pimp away to Australia spending long days on my Outback porch rocking the didgeridoo. Of course, I will also be on acid at the time and using only this notorious Australian instrument, I will create a retooled version of the song "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" that is completely unrecognizable in music or lyric. I will be enthusiastically accompanied on vocals with the ghost of Steve Irwin, not a mean ghost but more of a Casper + Christina Ricci dynamic. When he's not spending his time pissing off ghost animals to boost his ratings (spooooky ratings) we will help out those in need and solve small time crimes. Such adventures will be published as fictional pulp novels with titles such as "The Kangaroo Caper". We will still maintain our musical duo and create top 40 hits, such as "You Say G'Day, I Say G'night". All of this will occur on my aforementioned outback porch whilst tripping on the also aforementioned acid.
http://missbakersbiologyclass.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/irwin.jpg
Steve says "Happy Voting!"

*oh, and for those who find that my usage of Steve Irwin is in poor taste, keep in mind I could have easily gone down the "too soon" path and referenced a more recently deceased Australian. Damn, I should have done that instead. Seriously imagine me and the Joker pimping around the outback causing trouble in all the wrong places. Wacky fun.

October 31, 2008

Zack and Miri Make a Porno

New Movie Review.


Written by Kevin Smith
Directed by Kevin Smith
Starring Seth Rogen, Elizabeth Banks, Craig Robinson, Jason Mewes, Jeff Anderson


The main goal of a movie like Zack and Miri Make A Porno is to make you laugh. In that regard, the film is a wonderful success. If the second goal is to contain some heart and make you feel it is also a success. So, yes, this is a successful movie, but as far as Kevin Smith's movies go, this is a bit of a disappointment.

I don't want to sound too negative throughout this review, as this is a nearly great comedy that I highly recommend, but I must declare I am a big fan of Kevin Smith. My favourite film ever is Chasing Amy, with many others of his high up on my list. Out of his filmography, Make A Porno ranks above only Jersey Girl, a movie most Smith fans have tried to forget. It has some great dialogue but it lacks some of the quotables of his other films. More importantly, there is no attempt at raising the bar substance wise, making this the third lateral movement in a row after the surprisingly meaningful, insightful and affecting Chasing Amy and the almost equally great but far more ambitious following film Dogma. Both those movies had the great dialogue, the great heart but they also had something to say.

Kevin Smith is at the top of his game, however, in one very touching sequence. Eventually, longtime best friends Zack (Seth Rogen) and Miri (Elizabeth Banks) have to "perform" on screen together. The ensuing result is of considerable emotional weight. As Zack later puts it, "we were supposed to f**k, but ended up making love". The story of two friends discovering what was under their noses all along is told very well here.

In comparison to Smith's other work this is most like Clerks II. They follow somewhat similar formulas, but Clerks II worked much better for a few reasons. First off we already knew and loved the characters from Clerks and the story of two male best friends was much closer to Smith's heart giving it a stronger sense of sincerity and resonance. Also, telling a story about two dudes digging each other as buds is way less common than boy loves girl.

Like I said, the movie is hilarious and is quite sweet but it has the added bonus of being about making a porno. This adds freshness and fun to an otherwise formulaic film. The highlight of the movie has to be the scenes where longtime best friends, Zack and Miri are, along with some new found pals, shooting their flick. It captures the fun of doing something creative and collaborating with other people to make it happen. Quite simply, it may inspire you to do a little filming of your own. Perhaps not pornography, but I'm sure you get the point nonetheless. It accomplishes what Michel Gondry's Be Kind Rewind tried to do, and it tried really really hard whereas Make A Porno makes it look effortless. The ragtag group of people Zack and Miri scrounge together are a mixed bag. Each character seems interesting enough, and each actor portraying them seems on their game, but Smith seems only interested in exploring the title characters and Deleany, played by a never better Craig Robinson (Knocked Up, Pineapple Express). This is a shame and gives the move a much narrower feel than what may have been best. You'll certainly notice this after a "three months later..." cut that just doesn't feel right and doesn't convey the scope that was seemingly intended.

One worry I had going in was that Seth Rogen's overbearing personality would overshadow Kevin Smith's as a director. Instead both their personalities intertwine in comedic harmony. This is a great pair. However, The show stealer is star on the rise Elizabeth Banks who plays funny well and plays real even better. She has a similar effect on the movie that Rosario Dawson did on Clerks II; and that's no small compliment. As far as 2008 goes, Zack and Miri Make a Porno falls short of Forgetting Sarah Marshall but ranks ahead of Pineapple Express or Tropic Thunder.
So overall, this isn't a Kevin Smith classic, but it is a more than worthwhile comedy.




October 16, 2008

Rachel Getting Married

VIFF 08 Movie Review.


Written by Jenny Lumet
Directed by Jonathan Demme
Starring Anne Hathaway, Rosemarie DeWitt, Bill Irwin, Debra Winger, Tunde Adebimpe and Mather Zickel

Rachel Getting Married is one of my favourite films of the year. It's a completely original, unique experience I'll never forget and one that I'll always treasure. First off there's the plot which follows Kym, played by an Oscar worthy Anne Hathaway, just out of rehab to join her family for the weekend as her sister, Rachel, is getting married. Family drama ensues. Don't get me wrong, the story is interesting on it's own, but deserving more attention is the actual wedding. This is the best fictional wedding in film. When the credits roll, it feels as if you did indeed attend Rachel and Sidney's ceremony, and it's a shame to have to leave. This is one of the most remarkable accomplishments in cinema this decade.

Rachel (Rosemarie DeWitt) is marrying Sidney (Tunde Adebimpe) at a backyard wedding with both families coming together for the very first time. Rachel, and her family, are white. Sidney, and his family, are black. This is never an issue. This is never brought up. The wedding displays their cultural diversity with various celebrations, dances and music. A testament to our (slowly) evolving society. The two families get along, ecstatic that bride and groom are happy. Many give colourful toasts, that are either sweet, funny, touching or all that at once. All of these speeches are completely authentic and help achieve a realistic, emotionally involving setting.

None of this would work without a superb cast. Anne Hathaway is absolute perfection as Kym, she plays a very troubled young woman who has occasional emotional outbursts but her performance is somewhat reserved. Hathaway doesn't look to exaggerate any particular aspect of her character. She gives as human a rendering as one can. It's a bit early, but Anne Hathaway is my pick for best actress so far this year. All the supporting players make up one of the most memorable casts of the year, at least up there with The Dark Knight and In Bruges, perhaps more so due to the size of the ensemble. Rosemarie DeWitt is great as Rachel. She and Tunde Adebimpe make for a very convincing engaged couple. The supporting actor that stands out the most for me is Bill Irwin. He plays the father with such convincing love, that it's overwhelming. He brings happiness to his character complimented by a hidden reservoir of sadness we catch a couple devastating glimpses of. Irwin does not get prominent roles in film but he has won a Tony award. If it weren't for Heath Ledger's Joker, this would be my favourite supporting performance of the year.

Jonathan Demme has crafted a wonderful film from Jenny Lumet's one of a kind screenplay. With the help of his cinematographer Declan Quinn, Demme has made a visually unprecedented film. It feels as if we are attending the wedding, moving from room to room, observing. I highly recommend this special movie to everyone, especially if you feel like going to a wedding.

Sugar

VIFF 08 Movie Review.

Written by Anna Boden & Ryan Fleck
Directed by Anna Boden & Ryan Fleck
Starring Algenis Perez Soto

Sugar is the story of a Dominican teenager working towards his goal of becoming a professional pitcher in Major League Baseball. Miguel Santos, or "Sugar", is eventually recruited to the US minor leagues, and we get to follow his journey to the MLB. This is the next film from writing/directing duo Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck, the pair who brought us the masterful Half Nelson. While this film isn't as powerful and doesn't feature a performance of the same magnitude that Ryan Gosling had, it's a worthy follow up and the best sports film of the year.

Great sports films are about as hard to come by as great horror movies. These genres, in my opinion, have very similar history and patterns. Both usually follow a very simple formula, with sports movies we follow an underdog team to an unlikely victory or a a players personal journey to fame and fortune. It's no less than ridiculous, that almost every sports movie made, even ones being released this year, fall into those descriptions. So, when something comes along that doesn't follow a formula, I give it full attention. Sugar is different because it barely follows any of the actual baseball games. It only shows what Santos does, how his pitching performance goes. It only shows what's important for the character as this movie is somewhat of a character study. We really get in the mindset of a foreigner struggling to understand America and struggling to improve his game. Another breath of fresh air is that Santos isn't a star. He is an average pro who may never really be a starting pitcher. For once we get insight into the journey of someone normal, not someone destined to make it.

One of the most interesting insights we are afforded is that of seeing the process of how a player in the Dominican Republic is scouted and signed. It's fascinating, and very different than one might expect. I attended a Q & A with both Boden and Fleck, and Fleck said what inspired him to make this movie, besides loving baseball, was his curiosity in how this process works and also wanting to tell the story of an average player. They succeeding in doing so, as the story is very engrossing and it goes to surprising places, including a terrific ending.

One of the more interesting things I found out at the Q & A was that Algenis Perez Soto was a non-professional actor who could not speak english. Throughout the film, Soto's character learns more and more english as he arrives in the US. The actor actually went through the very same learning experience. This really helps the movie feel authentic. Soto is very believable and likable as the title character. He brings a soft sincerity lost in most Hollywood pictures.

The movie never shows the scoreboard when a game ends. This film is not interested in such things, it only wants to tell this one man's story. As a result, Sugar might not please all sports movie enthusiasts. However, I savoured every minute of this rare gem. This is simply one of the best, freshest sports movies of the decade.

October 08, 2008

Religulous

VIFF 08 Movie Review.


Written by Bill Maher
Directed by Larry Charles
Starring Bill Maher

“Religion is detrimental to the progress of mankind”.

This is the thesis Bill Maher uses to introduce his film, Religulous, directed by Larry Charles (Borat). I wish it wasn’t so simple, but if you agree with his statement, this is your movie, if you don’t, it probably isn’t. However, I urge everyone to see it. While it likely wont be changing all people’s views on faith, it is thought provoking. This is probably the best conversation starter in theaters this year.

The director, Larry Charles is no newcomer to controversy. Two years ago he brought us the brilliant Borat, which immediately divided audiences with it’s offensive content. While Borat was accused of racism, it was actually meant to expose the prejudice of the “Land of the Free”. This time around, Charles is taking on religion which should spark even stronger controversy. Also, audiences will be divided within the first 30 seconds of the trailer. A shame, really, as this is one of the most thoughtful and powerful films of the year.

We follow famous stand-up comedian Bill Maher on his quest to prove not that there’s no God, but that it’s impossible to know if one exists. As he puts it, he preaches the church of “I don’t know”. He interviews people of various faiths, but Catholicism is his primary target. He pretty much only goes for the easy victims. For example, an actor performing as Jesus, a holocaust denying Rabbi and the people inside a truck stop chapel. While his choice in interviewees seems like cheating, Bill Maher actually gives them all a chance to have their say. He is surprisingly fair to everyone he interviews. OK, maybe not the Holocaust denier. Maher listens to everyone carefully. In each conversation he goes on to debunk everything they say, and he does so respectfully. It’s clear that Maher is very well read and informed. Of course, none of his subjects give in, but they do manage to make fools of themselves again and again, and make no mistake about it, Maher and Charles never cease to capitalize on their ignorance and they do it in hilarious fashion.

Religulous actually harbours some very sweet moments. One display of kindness and sincerity from a Christian found in the truck stop chapel is very powerful. Bill Maher asks the man to pray and the ensuing prayer is sincere and heartwarming. Maher isn’t looking to insult everyone with faith. What he wants is to point out the flaws of organized religion and have people reason with him, instead of having blind faith. He mentions being terrified by having a religious government. Again and again he points out how religion contributes to many of the world’s problems. Maher’s argument is a convincing one.

At the end of the film, he nearly pleads for the world to wake up and change. This is something I feared he would do. However, by the end of the movie he has done such a good job of supporting his ideas, that it comes off extremely well. The last few minutes are deathly serious and astoundingly powerful. I was moved and enraged. This is one of those rare movies that makes you want to do something about what it’s saying.

Unfortunately, I fear that Religulous will suffer from the “Fahrenheit 9/11” effect. By this I mean that only the supporters of the film’s cause will go see the movie, thus completely ruining the possible effect Bill Maher hopes it to have. Once again I urge everyone to see it, as it is one of the funniest movies of the year, It’s one of the most powerful, but moreover, it’s the most important.

October 02, 2008

Blindness

VIFF 08 Movie Review.


Written by Don McKellar
Directed by Fernando Meirelles
Starring Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo, Gael Garcia Bernal, Alice Braga & Danny Glover

In Fernando Meirelles's latest film, a city is struck by an epidemic of blindness. Those afflicted with the "white sickness", named such because it is a white blindness as opposed to the traditional darkness, are placed in quarantine in an abandoned mental hospital. Once you're put in the quarantine, you can not leave. Military personnel have the exits surrounded, and are willing to kill those who try to escape. When a husband and wife arrive early on, played by Julianne Moore and Mark Ruffalo (no characters are given names), they step up as leaders and try to bring kindness and order inside the quarantine. Julianne Moore's character has a secret, she can see. She followed her husband, not wanting to be separated. Soon the building is overflowing with too many people, and the mini-society they had formed begins to crumble.

I have not read the book, so I can not compare the two. I have noticed many critics are attacking the film and claiming it to be an insult to the Nobel Peace Prize winning novel by Jose Saramago. I'm sure most would agree the go-to opinion would be the original author's. When Saramago saw Blindness, he told the director, "Fernando... I'm as happy with the movie... as I was when finished the book". You can even see his initial, very emotional reaction, while in the theater, on
YouTube. It's not often an author praises a film adapated from his work, I can only think of when Phillip K. Dick said he loved Blade Runner. The only example where the author was wrong I can think of is Stephen King hating Kubrick's The Shining.

Fernando Meirelles is a world-class film maker. His last three films are all attempts at masterpieces. It seems he is only interested in setting the bar as high as it can go, and never compromising. I have all the respect in the world for him and if he doesn't always reach the bar, he comes close. City of God was a masterpiece, and The Constant Gardener, like Blindness, had it's flaws. Also like Blindness, those flaws are forgivable and fade away from memory, while the important points of each film linger on and on.

This film is shot like no other before it. It is somewhat experimental, but I was never distracted, at least not in a bad way. Cesar Charlone, the film's cinematographer deserves to mentioned come Oscar time early next year. There is frequent over exposure and brilliant use of shadow and reflection. One particular shot when Julianne Moore first arrives at the quarantine is astonishing. The camera sits in one spot, while she walks around and in several rooms off camera, but we can always see her in a reflection in the windows and clear glass walls.

People will be divided by the film's brutality in certain scenes. There is a specific sequence receiving much criticism. A cruel, group rape scene, in which the women are humiliated and used. Does this scene make you angry? Uncomfortable? Miserable? Don't let that stop you from thinking about what it may mean or represent. In an allegorical sense it could mean the raping of women's rights. Anyways, it's supposed to make you feel that way, it is the director's intention to go to these dark places. Film can not always be entertaining and enjoyable. We must be honest about the depths of human indecency, to earn the right to tell the stories of unwavering kindness. And if you look close enough, you will find that that unwavering kindness is in Blindness.

The acting is solid, but Julianne Moore steals the show. She conveys through her eyes, the weight that is on her shoulders from having to be the only one who sees, the only one who can ultimately guide everyone to freedom. Mark Ruffalo is very good as always, and plays his role in an everyman fashion hard to find in Hollywood. The always superb Gael Garcia Bernal is a little too at home playing the sadistic "King of Ward 3". This is the man, who sets the aforementioned rape in motion. In one scene, he sings to everyone through the PA system, happy as can be, laughing in between lines.

I do have a problem with the inconsistent narration from Danny Glover's character. In two or three instances, he has a brief narration that feels very out of place. Each time we hear his thoughts, he merely describes his feelings or what is taking place, mind you he does it eloquently. It is completely unnecessary and beneath a film of such substance because it halts our own thoughts and conclusions and subjects us to his, which at least for me, were already what I was thinking about on my own. It almost seems like it's an attempt to think for the audience so they don't have to. Fortunately I'm discussing just two minutes out of a two hour picture but it still degrades the
quality.

I have had a couple good discussions about what this film means, and most people I talk to, myself included have several ideas. My favourite theory can't be fully discussed because it involves the final act in explaining it. I do get somewhat of a pro-anarchist vibe, as these people all struggle to survive in the hospital, where they create a mini-society. The blind are leading the blind. Mark Ruffalo's character begins a democracy and "The King of ward 3" starts a supposed monarchy. It all crumbles. These people can not be free until they let go of such notions.

Blindness can be seen as how humans would actually react to the devastating "white sickness", or it can be taken allegorically in several ways. How many recent mainstream movies can you say that about? This may be the most thought-provoking film since Children of Men. That was a masterpiece, and this may be flawed, but Blindness is an admirable effort that mostly succeeds. Despite that the vast majority of critics dislike this movie, I highly recommend it. Especially to those who like being challenged by cinema. Otherwise, what's the point?





October 01, 2008

Ballast

VIFF 08 Movie Review.



Written & Directed by Lance Hammer
Starring Micheal J. Smith, JimMyron Ross & Tarra Riggs

Ballast is the story of how the suicide of one man effects his twin brother, ex-wife and son. The film begins with an exquisite shot of a young black male running in a field as a massive flock of birds takes off in flight. The brilliant title then fills the screen, causing a surprising emotional stir, considering it's the first minute of the movie. Unfortunately, that holds as the peak of the movie's power.

Next we see Lawrence, sitting on the couch in his obviously poverty effected home in the Mississippi Delta. Down the hall, lying in bed, is his dead twin brother. He has been there for a few days, but Lawrence is trapped by his despair. Fortunately, a concerned neighbour inquires about Lawrence's wellness and calls an ambulance. Lawrence, along with his brother, ran the local convenience store together, but now he just stays at home. Marlee, the ex-wife eventually expresses interest in running the store with the help of her troubled young son, James.

This is Lance Hammer's first feature film, which surprised me. This is a movie that sets out to be something and succeeds. I was fortunate to be present at a Q & A where he shed light on his inspiration. Hammer, when visiting the Mississippi Delta, felt a profound feeling of sadness and longing, particularly when in the poverty stricken area that he eventually filmed the movie in. He claims the landscape, housing and people made him feel this one thing so strongly that he wanted to put it in film. He uses several techniques to accomplish his goal; he casted local non-professionals; he gives the film a somber, blue tint; and made the decision to exclude all use of music. Hammer's most interesting decision was to not use a script. Of course, he wrote a script, but only as a guideline. Hammer would just describe a scene to his actors and ask them to say what they naturally would. This is a move that certainly pays off. Hammer is able to successfully convey the aforementioned feeling in every frame of his picture, but that's all Ballast really does.

The characters are merely there to help contribute to the mood. The plot is a little less than involving and a little more than slow-moving. While I admired the artistry and lack of convention, despite my best efforts, I found my mind wandering off a couple times. I feel a little guilty, because movies like this need support to live, but I can't recommend it to everyone.

I have to elaborate on how much I love the title as it is so rare that there is any figurative thought behind one. Ballast is something that gives stability. Each of the characters in this film are recovering from the trauma of someone close to them taking his own life. Each person is looking for stability, so they can move on. I only wish that there was more to the film than a great title and a consistent mood.

It is clear that Lance Hammer is a very talented film maker who should go on to great things. His control over tone, mood and his use of the non-professional actors he personally casted are most impressive. Supporters of indie film, or actual aspiring film makers will likely enjoy as well as learn a few things from Ballast. Other movie goers may have trouble paying attention.

September 30, 2008

The Masterpieces.

The Masterpieces is an ongoing list of the greatest films ever made. Any film can qualify, the only requirement being a movie can't be added until at least one year after it's initial release. Other than that, it's fair game. These are the films that set the highest standards for their art form and respective genres. They can be important socially, universally, or personally, or they can simply be damn entertaining. As long as a movie can be considered to have achieved true greatness, it can be added to The Masterpieces.

An alphabetical list of all films added to The Masterpieces (click to see the original article)...

2001: A Space Odyssey

The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser

The Royal Tenenbaums

The Bronze. Lists

Here is a summary of all lists published on The Bronze.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adam's Top Ten 2005

1. Serenity
2. Crash
3. Batman Begins
4. The 40 Year Old Virgin
5. Sin City
6. The New World
7. The Constant Gardener
8. Brokeback Mountain
9. Walk The Line
10. Oldboy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adam's Top Ten 2006

1. Children of Men
2. Clerks II
3. Little Miss Sunshine
4. The Departed
5. Letters From Iwo Jima
6. Borat
7. Blood Diamond
8. Pan’s Labyrinth
9. Babel
10. The Prestige
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adam's Top Ten 2007

1. Juno
2. Ratatouille
3. There Will Be Blood
4. Superbad
5. Once
6. Hot Fuzz
7. Knocked Up
8. No Country For Old Men
9. Into The Wild
10. Before The Devil Knows You’re Dead/The Savages (Tie)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List Logic
An article about the point of top ten lists, and why they work. The article includes a revised Top Ten 2007 list.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adam's Top Ten 2008

1. Synecdoche, New York
2. The Dark Knight
3. In Bruges
4. Entre Les Murs
5. Paranoid Park
6. The Wrestler
7. Wall-E
8. Milk
9. Rachel Getting Married
10. Revolutionary Road

Parker's Top Ten 2008

1. In Bruges
2. The Dark Knight
3. Synecdoche, New York
4. The Wrestler
5. Wall-E
6. Milk
7. Rachel Getting Married
8. Slumdog Millionaire
9. The Fall
10. Forgetting Sarah Marshall
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 10 Greatest Works of Joss Whedon (as of July 2008)

1. Once More With Feeling (Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 6, Episode 7)
2. Serenity
3. The Body (Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 5, Episode 16)
4. Hush (Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 4, Episode 10)
5. Restless (Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 4, Episode 22)
6. Dr. Horrible's Sing-A-Long Blog
7. The Chain (Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 8, issue #5)
8. Objects in Space (Firefly Episode 14)
9. Waiting in the Wings (Angel Season 3, Episode 13)
10. Fray
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Masterpieces, an ongoing list of the best movies of all time can be found here.

September 28, 2008

Il Divo

VIFF 08 Movie Review.


Written & Directed by Paulo Sorrentino
Starring Tony Servillo, Anna Bonaiuto, Piera Degli Esposti and Giulio Bosetti

Il Divo is the story of Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti's last couple years in office. He served as such from 72-73, 76-79, and 89-92. This film is so rich in politics and information, that one would assume it would unwatchable if politics did not interest you or if you knew nothing of Italian history. The movie even starts with tons of text on the screen, given you some background in political groups and events, but it's hard to absorb, and doesn't exactly tell you everything you need to know. At this point, I was a bit nervous, until the somewhat Tarantino-ish opening began, showing a bunch of political figures being killed to some Italian pop song. Nice. It turns out, that a serious political movie can be funny and a lot of fun, in the right hands.

There is humour throughout the film, and pride taken in making the direction interesting. When we are introduced to Andreotti's political pals, it does it in slow mo, as they all walk together, kind of like in Kill Bill when Lucy Liu and her people are walking down the hall. It keeps the film interesting, for those who nothing of Italian politics. Those who do have a knowledge of such things will probably be in cinematic heaven. I think there's serious "favourite movie" potential for some people here.

As one would hope in a bio-pic, the acting is top-notch. Toni Servillo as Anderotti would be a shoe-in for an Oscar nomination if Il Divo was American. He's subdued and meticulous, crafting one of the more memorable screen performances of recent years. He as at once distant and hard to like, but oozing with an odd charisma, that in certain moments is irresistible. The supporting cast are all perfect. The character who seems to advise Anderotti is the perfect complimentary personality to Anderotti. Instead of being quiet, reserved, mysterious, he is loud and open, and lots of fun. One outstanding moment is when he finally gets a moment to himself inside a giant empty room in Anderotti's mansion, he takes a run and slides across the floor and yells.

Things like this make Il Divo sublime entertainment as well as unmatched political brain candy. For some, that combo could be the best thing ever, or some may like only one of the two. Either way, there's no denying that this is masterful film making from Paulo Sorrentino. This is certainly one of the best films of the year, so for anyone who can withstand the political content, it is a must-see.

September 26, 2008

Momma's Man

VIFF 08 Movie Review.



Written & Directed by Azazel Jacobs
Starring Mike Boren, Flo Jacobs & Ken Jacobs


Momma's Man is the story of middle aged man, Mike, who abandons his wife and baby in California, to return to the apartment he grew up in with his parents in New York. His parents are pleasantly surprised to see their son, but it's odd that he showed up all of a sudden. Mike says he flew out cause of work, and there was a screw up with the plane, so he has to stay for a night. A night becomes a weekend which becomes another week etc. "Mikey" as his parents call him, has fled adulthood for the simple comfort of the childhood he once knew. He spends nearly all his time at home in his old room, flipping through old comic books, notes, song lyrics and finding all sorts of mementos.

His wife calls him constantly, trying to get an explanation. Eventually, Mike turns his phone off, silencing his wife, and his real life. The parents play dumb for most of the time. part of them does want him to stay home and be their little boy. Especially the mom, who longs for when Mike was a child, and when she was a younger woman. Seemingly everyone portrayed dreams of being in a different state of their life. Regret and nostalgia being a powerful combo to consume the present.

Of course he can't stay forever, but what will motivate him to move on? I believe it comes when he meets with an old girlfriend from high school. In his room he finds a note from Bridgette, a girl he liked. In it she curses him for hurting her. This prompts Mike to call her and ask her to get some coffee. He explains to Bridgette that he wanted to meet so he could apologize for hurting her. One must wonder, however, if his real reason is to have yet another memento to connect him to simpler times. When he sees her, and the baby she brings to the coffee shop, she doesn't connect him to the past, but reaffirms his responsibilities as an adult, a father and as a husband.

It's very easy to relate to this film. Growing up is scary, even when you've already done it. Being young, or at least younger is something everyone thinks about. Once you've started a family, you still fondly think of when you'd lie in your mother's arms. Perhaps the most touching moment of the film is when the mom embraces Mikey and he begins to cry. In an odd way, Momma's Man is at least partly an ode to parents and their unique bond to their children. I figure that's why writer/director Azazel Jacobs casted his real parents for the role, and shot the movie in the actual apartment he grew up in. In a way, Azazel Jacobs, like Mike, returns home to capture his childhood.

Jacobs is a very talented film maker. Momma's Man moves a little too slowly, but it's admirable that this story was given such a treatment. Instead of making the movie follow a traditional narrative, Jacobs merely presents an environment and explores the behavior of the people within it. Such a method should be praised, as it is far too rare in film. I eagerly look forward to his next project.

As thoughtful as the film is, the slow pace is damaging. Personally, I usually appreciate a slow careful pace, but here, even I was a little antsy. If you need something exciting or particularly funny in a movie it may be best to avoid Momma's Man. If you can be patient, I recommend you give it a try. It's not the greatest movie, but it'll give you something to think about, and it will make you feel. Two of the most important things a movie can do.

September 22, 2008

VIFF 08



Beginning on September 25th, 2008, the 27th Vancouver Film Festival Begins. It will be my first time attending and I'm really excited. I'm seeing 12 movies in about two weeks, so my head may explode with happiness...Or, if the movies suck, it may implode with disappointment. Anyways, I'm going to try to write about as many of the movies as possible. Below is an alphabetical list of the movies I'm going to see.

Ballast
Blindness
The Class
Hunger
Il Divo
Momma's Man
Rachel's Getting Married
Real Time
Religulous
The Secret of the Grain
Sugar
Tokyo!


September 16, 2008

Burn After Reading

New Movie Review.
Written by Joel & Ethan Cohen
Directed by Joel & Ethan Cohen
Starring Francis McDormand, George Clooney, John Malkovich, Tilda Swinton, Brad Pitt


Here is yet another great movie to be added to the Coen's already overwhelmingly impressive filmography. Like how The Big Lebowski came right after Fargo, Burn After Reading follows the Oscar-winning No Country For Old Men, and it provides the reminder that the Coens can do the serious thriller thing, and impress everyone, but still do the wacky comedy just as well. I wouldn't go as far as to say this is as good as The Big Lewbowski, but it's in my Coen top five.

The story kicks into gear when an airhead gym employee, Chad, played by Brad Pitt, finds a disc in the locker room. The disc contains what he describes as "C.I.A. shit". Thinking it's highly valuable top secret information, he along with co worker Linda Litzke decide to organize returning it to it's owner in exchange for a reward. In Chad's mind, he's being a good samaritan, but in an instantly classic scene when he and Linda phone Osborne Cox (John Malkovich), the ex-C.I.A. agent, that the disc belongs too, it quickly and somewhat accidentally becomes black mail. Chad and Linda become obsessed with somehow capitalizing on the situation,to get much needed cash. Linda has been planning on getting some plastic surgeries done, and the money from this could pay for it. Meanwhile, George Clooney's character, Harry, is having an affair with Osborne Cox's wife Katie, played by fellow Micheal Clayton alumni Tilda Swinton. The wonderful Richard Jenkins plays the manager at the gym who longs for Linda, unbeknownst to her.

The Coens once again paint a dark picture of humanity. Everyone in this movie is either greedy, self-centered, cheating, paranoid, vain or all of the above. Nearly every Coen movie is about normal people getting involved with dirty money and shady dealings. You might think it would have gotten old after 20 years of film making, but it's interesting each and every time. Just because all the characters have their vices doesn't mean they aren't likable. Every character in their own way is interesting and earns at least a slight bit of empathy. The other common trait of Coen movies is that the normal people get hurt for getting in such business, and things get real ugly here.

Of course the screenplay and direction are Coen-y, and near perfect, but the performances are outstanding and make Burn After Reading worth seeing on thier own. The most surprising turn is by Brad Pitt, who is a revelation here. In the trailer, it was obvious he was gonna be silly and fun, but it doesn't take long to realize he's doing something special. His comedic stylings are uproarious and brilliant. In two particular scenes, the first being the time he phones Cox, and second being when Chad meets Cox are comedic heaven. Brad Pitt is becoming a very respectable actor with last year's performance as Jesse James, what he has done here and hopefully in what he does in David Fincher's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, coming out later this year. Frances McNormand is Oscar worthy with what may be her best work since Fargo. Her character isn't quite as memorable, but she's not far off either. This is my favourite George Clooney role, and it's great to see him at his twitchy, paranoid best rather than seeing him play himself. John Malkovich is perfect, but that goes without saying, I think. Tilda Swinton is very good, but I question her staying power as a Hollywood top dramatic actress. The always enjoyable J.K. Simmons (Juno, Spiderman) shows up and does his thing with only a couple of minutes of screen time, but he nails it. The cast is one of the best this year, and in Coen canon it's beaten only by Fargo and Lebowski.

In a breezy 96 minutes, the Coens tell a comical, dark, hilarious, sad, surprising story. Each of their best films are sacred, precious, so different and smart that we will never see a successful imitation. Each must be savoured, appreciated, recognized. It's important to know how vital the Coens have been to American film, without whom we would be missing a vast portion of cinematic genius of the 80's, 90's and the early 21st century. These are film makers that will be revered, and studied years after they are gone. They are in their prime and they have 4 more movies on the docket, all set for release in the next couple years, according to IMDB. So, enjoy it while it lasts, because there will never, ever, be film makers quite like the Coen Bros.




September 04, 2008

Hamlet 2

New Movie Review.
Written by Andrew Fleming & Pam Brady
Directed by Andrew Fleming
Starring Steve Coogan, Catherine Keener, Elisabeth Shue, David Arquette


Hamlet 2 is the last hurrah of summer comedies, and as such, it's a bit underwhelming. The laughs are infrequent, and not exactly rumpus inducing. However, thanks to an above average start as well as finish, and a brilliant performance from Brit star, Steve Coogan, it's undeniably not terrible. It even manages to slide past mediocrity! It earns such a fervently expressed accolade by telling a conventional story in a slightly less than conventional fashion...Kinda.

The story follows a wacky, perhaps substandard, drama teacher Dana Marschz (don't worry, no one in the movie can pronounce his last name either) as he tries to keep drama class in school by putting on the ambitious original play, Hamlet 2. The movie seems to take aim at all inspiring teacher movies, such as Mr. Holland's Opus or Dead Poets Society, but it actually is one. Yes, it's a silly comedy with appropriately silly antics, but that's merely a charade to cover up that it really is an inspirational teacher movie that even seems to try to win over our hearts by the end credits. Deceptive methods aside, the conventional plot is presented in a peculiar way. Particularily the opening 15 minutes, which hands-down is the best part of this film, where we are immediately thrown at Coogan's character in a frantic, messy fashion. It feels like they didn't really know how to start this movie, or how to introduce the players, and it actually benefits it, becuase it feels fresh. Accidental success is no less succesful than other successes. Right? The movie loses it's unorthodox feel after a bit and soon it's nothing special, and nothing all that entertaining.

It's a long wait until it picks up again when Dana, and his students, finally perform the play to close out the picture. Even then, we only see two musical sequences, and while fun, they are not great. The hyped song, "Rock Me Sexy Jesus", is good and worth a chuckle, but nothing more. Then the movie ends, and it quickly escapes your memory, everything, except Steve Coogan.

Steve Coogan gives us a comedic performance for the ages. I'm not familiar with his previous work (other than Tropic Thunder and a memorable bit part in Hot Fuzz), but after seeing him in Hamlet 2, I'm convinced he's one of the most gifted comedic actors on this planet. He's the first to surpass Jim Carrey with use of facial comedy. He, like Carrey, has an uncanny awareness and subsequent control of his face, and he puts it to use with full force. It's very rare he delivers a line without some sort of hysterical contortion. After delivering his dialogue, the camera tends to sit on Coogan, as he delivers one of a variety of brilliant expressions, as if to be a signature for each line. I won't go as far as to say he's subtle, but compared to Carrey he's the utmost version of understated. Pretty much every laugh comes from Coogan's role, which prompts the realization that this could have been a train wreck, without such a conductor as Steve Coogan.

Hamlet 2 is co-written by Pam Brady, co-writer of South Park and Team America. I expected more from someone affiliated with some of the most brilliant, and thoughtful comedy in history. Oh well. The movie may be full of disappointment and David Arquette (annoying even with only having a couple brief lines) but it gives us an endlessly promising actor, already renowned in the Mother Country (lets just ignore that he was accused of eagerly supplementing his friend Owen Wilson's drug addction which lead to the infamous suicide attempt). More specifically it gives us a performance worth seeing. I can't reccomend you spend your hard earned cash at the theatre, but it's a must rent.

August 23, 2008

Boy A

New Movie Review.

Written by Mark O'Rowe
Directed by John Crowley
Starring Andrew Garfield, Peter Mullan, Shaun Evans and Katie Lyons

Boy A is a heartbreaking drama about a child criminal (Andrew Garfield), who, after 14 years, is released back into society to start again. In the opening scene, we are introduced to the two main characters, the child criminal, now 24, and his fatherly caseworker, Terry. We are thrown into the story with practically no exposition. Straight away, Terry (Peter Mullan) tells "Boy A" he can name himself. After some consideration, he settles on the name Jack. He must assume a new identity to avoid a life of scrutiny and danger. There are people out there who would like to exact revenge. He starts his new life in Manchester, he gets a job with some sort of shipping company. He loads the company van with packages and delivers them around town. This will come into play later, in a powerful and important scene, when Jack discovers a car that skidded off the road. He frequently meets with Terry to discuss his reintegration into a normal life as well as his coming to terms with his past.

As the movie goes on, we see flashbacks to Jack's childhood leading up to the incident that lead to his incarceration. We see him as a passive boy, who's best friend, Phillip, is a budding sociopath. We learn early on that Phillip took his own life from the guilt. Soon we discover they murdered a little girl, but it is not until the end of the film that we see what happened. Even then, we don't see the actual murder. Jack is portrayed as a broken but well-meaning person with a nearly unbearable weight on his shoulders. He does, however, make friends at work despite his social awkwardness. He even gets a girlfriend, Michelle, played by Katie Lyons. They begin to fall in love, he and his friends become close and he becomes somewhat of a town hero. Of course, we know this can't last.

It's surprising how long it does last, percentage wise, in the plot of this film. The major conflict emerges late in Boy A. Once it arrives, what has been a thoughtful but slow film becomes fast-paced and devastating. Unfortunately, in society, a person can end up being defined by one action, one mistake. That is the case here. We see Jack as not just ordinary but a valuable member of the community, certainly not as a murderer. That is the point of Boy A, that Jack as an adult is responsible and kind hearted, and not the killer he was sentenced as. Of course taking a life is nothing short of horrific, but he was a child then. Now Jack has become the victim, and the inner struggle is too much to bear.

I was unsure of Boy A early on, especially because it relied so much on Andrew Garfield's performance. Thankfully, Garfield ends up being successful in creating his sympathetic, tortured character. Peter Mullan is also very good as Terry, bringing just the right amount of charm and sincerity to the role. They are both instantly likable on screen, and their relationship is one of the most interesting things in the movie. Katie Lyons is another endearing personality that helps the film's cautious pace work.

John Crowley's direction allows the movie to take it's time with each detail to develop every scene carefully. He knows he must present Jack as a believable human being or the film's point is lost. The sensual scenes between Jack and Michelle are masterful and achieve a level of realism in their relationship. I was disappointed that Crowley decided not to show the murder, which would have contributed a lot to the film. It's almost cheating to do so, it makes it too easy to be on Jack's side. A more fair film would have let us see the crime. I think Boy A could have been more provocative if they did.

The movie is rather slow but it pays off late, when the levee breaks. I was deeply affected by the ending, one of the more memorable sequences in movies this year. I don't think I can recommend this to all casual moviegoers, but if you're patient it's worth it. Or, if you are someone who believes strongly in second chances, you will believe strongly in Boy A.