Thurgood Marshall graduation 2012
Badin vs. Versailles
Law Enforcement Memorial Day
Home > Blogs > Sir Critic on Cinema > Archives > 2009 > July
July 2009
Luxuriate in ‘500 Days of Summer’
For a movie about heartbreak, 500 Days of Summer sure put me in a great mood.
Here is a film so willing to wear its heart on its sleeve, so willing to try something outre, that it’s nothing less than utterly endearing, even when it’s clearly showing off. I connected strongly to this picture because I saw parts of myself in it.
The movie has been called a romantic version of Memento, but that’s not quite accurate. That film moved backwards in time. 500 Days of Summer moves forwards, backwards, backwards some more, forwards some more, backward a little bit, then foreward a lot. And that approach is absolutely right for this chronicle of romance gone wrong.
500 Days of Summer knows that when we look back on life-changing events, especially anything traumatic, we don’t remember them in a straight timeline. I don’t go from A to B to C. I move from F to K to B to X to H and back to F and B again. Far from being confusing, 500 Days of Summer’s scrambled chronology only makes it feel more lived in, more genuine.
But let me back up and start at the beginning. Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a would-be architect marking time as a greeting card writer in LA. When he meets the boss’ new assistant, Summer (Zooey Deschanel), he is instantly smitten. He knows right off the bat of his eyes that Summer is The One.
Problem: Summer isn’t such a romantic. She doesn’t believe there is The One. For her, relationships are fun and often fulfilling, but are never meant to last. She’s such an iconoclast that she has the audacity to call Ringo her favorite Beatle and “Octopus’ Garden” her favorite Beatles song. Still, she’s the sort of girl who beguiles men beyond reason, and fool in love that he is, Tom tries to make it Forever. And it’s giving nothing away to say Forever doesn’t take.
Two reasons 500 Days of Summer works so well are Gordon-Levitt and Deschanel, both of whom are ideally cast. Tom could have come across as a self-absorbed sad sack, but he does have talent and ability - it’s just that Tom has a hard time believing in himself, and Gordon-Levitt conveys his mixed emotions persuasively. Deschanel, long one of my favorite actresses, has never been better. Her offhand charm shines, making it resolutely clear how Summer can be so lovable, yet so frustrating,
Dirrector Marc Webb and writers Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Webber have created a dazzling and delicate balancing act of a movie. Many films that come out of Sundance often come across as too self-consciously clever and quirky, and there are times when 500 Days of Summer almost crosses those lines. Yet it never does, because anytime it threatens to be too cute and clever, something cynical pulls it back. And when it threatens to be too cynical, something cute and clever pulls it back again.
For instance, the first time Tom spends the night with Summer, he breaks out into a song and dance routine to the tune of Hall and Oates’ “You Make My Dreams Come True,” complete with animation. It’s like the hipster’s version of “That’s How You Know” from Disney’s Enchanted.
However, the film also ingeniously demonstrates angst in a split-screen sequence when Tom reunites with Summer after the breakup. One screen shows his idealized expectations, the other shows the disillusioning reality. Most romances are lucky to get the in-love portion right, to show both romance and heartache with equal imagination is a rare feat indeed.
From its hilarious opening disclaimer to its finale that strikes just the right what-if note, 500 Days of Summer is a whirlwind that makes its high and low notes soar. This is the best offbeat romance since Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - and one of the very best films of the year.
GRADE: A+
The movie opens in Cincinnati today and in Dayton next Friday. It’s worth every mile of the drive.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
What’s opening Friday, July 31?
This Friday brings us a weird mix of comedy, horror and Ashley Tisdale.
Aliens in the Attic: This downright strange-looking movie seems to get most of its press lately as a vehicle for High School Musical star Ashley Tisdale. I cast no judgments - take that as you will.
The Collector: The creators of this film are well known among genre buffs for the movie Feast and for their contributions to the Saw series. It will probably appeal only to said buffs.
(500) Days of Summer: This doesn’t open in Dayton until next week, but theaters in Cincinnati will have what I consider to be the second best film of the year, after Up, and the best offbeat romance since Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. I will review it Friday.
Funny People: Critics seem to agree that Judd Apatow’s latest movie, starring Adam Sandler, Seth Rogen, Jason Schwartzman and Leslie Mann (AKA Mrs. Apatow), is his most ambitious. However, there’s disagreement as to how well it works. Some say this is his best film, others say it falls apart in the final third. I am sadly unable to screen it this week, but I will try to post a review next week.
At the arthouses
Little Art and Neon both open Cheri. The film has a heck of a pedigree - Michelle Pfeiffer and Kathy Bates star, and it has the same writer-director team as Dangerous Liasions, but reviews are decidedly mixed. When the trailer comes up with review quotes like “Michelle Pfeiffer is radiant,” I can only respond, “Duh.”
At the Cool Films Series
An American in Paris: This is one of of only two MGM musicals to win Best Picture (the other being Gigi), and I find that rather astonishing. I don’t find this movie nearly the equal of Singin’ in the Rain, The Band Wagon or Meet Me in St. Louis, to name only three. Still, even though the story is creaky, the dance numbers cannot be denied. The long ballet is justly famous, but I personally prefer the much simpler “Our Love is Here to Stay,” with Gene Kelly and Leslie Caron dancing by the river. GRADE: B+
Any interest in any of these?
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: In Area Theaters
How do you know when you’ve seen a great movie?
I saw one of the very best films of the year Tuesday night, and that got me to thinking. And when I get to thinking, that means I’d like you to get to thinking as well.
So, query time: How do you define a great movie?
I don’t mean a great story, characters, stands the test of time, etc. Those are givens. I’m talking about the emotional effect it has it you when you see it.
Here’s how I would define it. A truly great movie - the best of the best - is one that makes me forget I’m watching a movie. At some point, I become totally unaware of my surroundings. All that I am experiencing is the movie. The movie is happening to me.
One of the most vivid examples of this was when I saw Peter Weir’s 1993 film Fearless, starring Jeff Bridges as the survivor of a plane crash who becomes convinced he can’t die. That movie consumed me pretty quickly. About halfway through, there was a scene with a character named Eric. My best friend ribbed me - and I jumped a country mile out of my skin.
I would say that a great movie is any movie that makes me jump a country mile when you rib me, but since I don’t always have someone around to rib me, I’ll stick with the movie happening to me.
Just for contrast’s sake, Roger Ebert likes to use this definition, from British critic Derek Malcolm: “A great movie is a movie I cannot bear the thought of never seeing again.”
So how do you know when you’ve seen a truly great movie? How do you define it?
Permalink | Comments (16) | Post your comment | Categories: Ask the Audience
What Are You Watching near the end of July?
I’m afraid it’s slim pickins’ today in both the DVD department and in the What Are You Watching Department.
As far as DVD’s go, the big releases today are Fast and Furious (the one without 2 or “the” in the title) and Dragonball Evolution. I have seen neither one and am interested in neither one. If you are, well, have fun with your exhaust fumes and mindless visuals.
Alas, I’m afraid I haven’t had a chance to watch much of anything new this week. I did, however, catch Harvey at the Victoria Theatre on Sunday, which I had not seen in quite some time. The movie’s a little bit stagy and not nearly as good as some of Jimmy Stewart’s true classics, but it’s easy to see why Elwood P. Dowd was one of his favorite characters. No other actor but Stewart could have pulled off such a guileless, mirthful performance. Elwood looks like he could be mugged by six people at once and probably wouldn’t mind all that much.
Moreover, the movie is a Valentine to people like myself who pride themselves in being off the beaten track. That theme is best encompassed in this exchange, when a taxi driver talks about taking people to a psychiatric home for a “cure.”
The Taxi Driver: …I’ve been driving this route for 15 years. I’ve brought ‘em out here to get that stuff, and I’ve drove ‘em home after they had it. It changes them… On the way out here, they sit back and enjoy the ride. They talk to me; sometimes we stop and watch the sunsets, and look at the birds flyin’. Sometimes we stop and watch the birds when there ain’t no birds. And look at the sunsets when its raining. We have a swell time. And I always get a big tip. But afterwards, oh oh…
Veta Louise Simmons: “Afterwards, oh oh”? What do you mean, “afterwards, oh oh”?
The Taxi Driver: They crab, crab, crab. They yell at me. Watch the lights. Watch the brakes, Watch the intersections. They scream at me to hurry. They got no faith in me, or my buggy. Yet, it’s the same cab, the same driver. and we’re going back over the very same road. It’s no fun. And no tips… After this he’ll be a perfectly normal human being. And you know what stinkers they are!
Couldn’t say it better myself. GRADE: A-
So what are you watching? Remember, anything goes, whether you saw it on the big or small screen, or whether the movie is new or old.
Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment | Categories: What Are You Watching?
‘Every Little Step’ a singular sensation
Many a Broadway performer will tell many an aspiring amateur that if they can picture themselves doing anything - anything - else besides Broadway, then they really should do that.
The outstanding new documentary Every Little Step - one of the best films I’ve seen this year - amply demonstrates why. The film, which chronicles the casting of the 2006 Broadway revival of the seminal musical A Chorus Line, vividly demonstrates just how grueling, how stifling, how cruel, the audition process it.
And yet at the same time, the movie also makes it clear why so many hopefuls are out there with stars in their eyes. For them, performing is electrifying, a reason for being. And for those of us not blessed with that sort of talent, it’s a thrill to watch the performers.
Every Little Step takes us all the way from the initial tryouts to those final phone calls when performers either get the best news of their lives or their hearts broken. Granted unprecedented access to the audition process, directors Adam Del Deo and James D. Stern brilliantly assemble what had to be countless hours of footage into a thrilling story.
If that were all the movie did, it would be great. What makes it truly remarkable, however, is how it compares and contrasts the 2006 footage with archival material from the original show, including the absolutely fascinating audio interviews that director Michael Bennett made with a group of dancers, which formed the basis for A Chorus Line.
Back then, we see the original Connie, Baayork Lee, the diminutive dynamo who goes on to help stage the revival. In the 2006 footage, we see a powerhouse audition by Jason Tam for the role of Paul, who comes out as a gay man. Tam’s performance is so effective, there’s not a dry eye from anyone who witnesses it. It just may be the most powerful bit of acting I’ve seen in any movie this year.
My one quibble with the film is that I wish I knew more about what happened to some of these hopefuls. The movie basically stops at opening night and doesn’t go beyond that. I know, for instance, that one of the auditioners, Nikki Snelson, eventually found success playing Brooke Wyndham in the Broadway version of Legally Blonde.
That aside, Every Little Step never mis-steps. For anyone with even a mild interest in theater, it’s an absolute must- see. It’s playing at the Neon only through Thursday. It made me wish I could see A Chorus Line very soon - and it almost made me wish that I couldn’t picture myself doing anything else besides perform.
GRADE: A
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
‘The Ugly Truth’ rings false
Every romantic comedy must answer a key question: Do I like this guy and this girl?
Even though The Ugly Truth gets that question right, it still fails because it gives the wrong answer to the other key question every romantic comedy must answer: Do I really care if this guy and this girl end up together? Ultimately, I didn’t.
From the very first time they share the screen, it is glaringly, blatantly obvious that Katherine Heigl and Gerard Butler are made for each other. She’s a successful TV news producer, he’s an up-and-coming talk show host who leaves viewers aghast with his ragingly misogynistic romantic advice.
So when Butler comes to work on Heigl’s show, she’s aghast. Sparks fly, and she and Butler can’t stand each other, so of course, we all know they’re just right for each other. However, a third party intervenes when Heigl spots The Perfect Guy (Eric Winter) next door. After these two start dating, Butler tells the insecure Heigl that he’ll coach her through the process and help her score.
This premise makes absolutely no sense, but I was willing to suspend my disbelief to a degree because Heigl and Butler are fun to watch and have very good chemistry. Heigl is playing another variation on her “steely ice queen” persona, but when she lets her hair down and plays more comic scenes, she’s very funny, particularly in what is bound to be the infamous “vibrating underwear” scene, which I can’t detail in a blog as polite as this one. Butler is so charismatic, he actually makes it somewhat believable that Heigl could fall for him. He takes what is essentially a one-dimensional character and gives him more shading than the screenplay requires.
Two of the writers of this movie scripted Legally Blonde, which was also directed by Robert Luketic. However, lightning doesn’t strike twice. This time, the writing is so predictable, I was constantly one step ahead of the movie. Maybe two.
Granted, many Hollywood romantic comedies are predictable to one degree or another, but The Ugly Truth botches the third party. Winter is so bland as “the other guy,” he’s never once a compelling threat to Heigl and Butler. Winter is the romantic comedy equivalent of the “Goose” character in Top Gun - the one you might as well call “dead meat.” The character wrecks any real drama this comedy needs. And it doesn’t help at all that the romantic climax is so badly shot it practically screams “We didn’t really go up in a hot air balloon - we’re against a green screen!”
All this undermines an appealing lead couple, and that’s a shame. I didn’t think The Proposal was any great shakes, but that’s still the romantic comedy of the summer by default.
GRADE: C+
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
What’s opening Friday, July 24? Lots!
The movies bring us lots of variety this weekend, although the best choices are found outside the megaplex - which is so often true these days.
G-Force: The only bad thing about seeing Up so many times was having to endure repeatedly the stupid trailer with CGI guinea pigs. Plecch. This is actually scarier to me than Beverly Hills Chihuahua last year - and that’s no small feat. I mean, come on - when your kicker line in the trailer is “Poop in his hand,” well, let’s just say I’m reaching for the Lysol.
Orphan: For all the world, it looks like The Omen in a dress. And it was directed by the same man who made the House of Wax remake, with Paris Hilton. Not at all promising. And yet Peter Sarsgaard and Vera Farmiga are in it. Are there deals with the devil in the mix here or is something else up?
The Ugly Truth: Gerard Butler and Katherine Heigl can’t stand each other. Gee, wonder if they’ll fall in love. The trailers don’t promise much, so I hope the stars save it. Review posts Friday.
At the Victoria Cool Film series
It’s Jimmy Stewart weekend, with a different film playing each day starring my favorite actor of all time. And I intend to attend all three.
Vertigo: I never miss a chance to see my favorite film on the big screen, and I won’t this weekend, even though I already saw it in a theater in Columbus earlier this year. Plays 7:30 p.m. Friday.
The Philadelphia Story: Plays at 7:30 p.m. Saturday. You can’t get any better than Stewart, Cary Grant and Kate Hepburn - but Virginia Weidler did steal several scenes from them, like this one:
Harvey: The first time I’d heard of this film was when I saw Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The nasty Judge Doom is looking for Roger at a bar, asking the regulars where he is. One of them says “Yeah … I seen the rabbit. Say hello … Harvey.” I didn’t get the joke then, but I do now. Plays at 3 p.m. Sunday.
At the arthouses
The Neon hangs on to Every Little Step and adds The Hurt Locker, the acclaimed Iraq war film directed by Kathryn Bigelow that actually stands a chance of becoming a hit. Also opening is Rudo y Cursi, which reunites the stars of Y Tu Mama Tambien, Diego Luna and Gael Garcia Bernal. The director is Carlos Cuaron, who co-wrote Y Tu Mama Tambien with the director of that movie - his brother Alfonso.
Starting Friday, the Little Art plays Sam Mendes’ Away We Go.
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: In Area Theaters
Michael Jackson’s “Last concert” movie - will you see it?
Word broke this week that Sony will likely release a theatrical film culled from more than 80 hours of footage of what turned out to be Michael Jackson’s final rehearsals. The director may be Kenny Ortega, best known most recently for helming the three High School Musicals.
I greet this news with, if you will, an understanding shudder. On the one hand, the idea strikes me as incredibly crass and ghoulish - especially since some of the rehearsal footage was shot the night before Jackson died.
And yet, we all know that crass commercialism and Michael Jackson go hand-in-hand - even beyond the grave. Some might say especially beyond the grave. And the concert promoter AEG has to find some way to make back all the money they lost in the original concert investment.
Still, I can’t call myself terribly interested in this concert film - the whole endeavor leaves a bad taste in my mouth. There is a tribute concert being organized for Aug. 29 - what would have been Jackson’s 51st birthday - using the same set list Jackson was to have performed. That will appear on TV - and I find that much more palatable.
LATE UPDATE: The movie is still moving forward, but plans for the TV tribute special have fallen apart, according to the LA Times. Figures.
But will you see the Jackson concert film?
Permalink | Comments (15) | Post your comment |
DVDs: Coraline, Watchmen and What Are You Watching?
After a few moribund weeks, the DVD selection perks up today with two high-profile titles - and one of them is one of the best films of the year.
Coraline: For my money, this absolutely marvelous, stop-motion animated fantasy about a girl who discovers a parallel world is even better than The Nightmare Before Christmas, also directed by Henry Selick. With or without 3D, (the DVD is available both ways), the story and visuals are wondrously imaginative and eerie. GRADE: A
The Great Buck Howard: This film starring Colin Hanks and Emily Blunt, about a man who becomes a PA to a fading illusionist, flew under most people’s radar when it was in theaters early this year, but attracted some good notices from people who did catch it.
Watchmen: If ambition equaled quality, this would be one of the best films of the year. The movie looks great and sports an Oscar quality performance from Jackie Earle Haley as the ultra-violent Rorschach - but Zack Snyder’s film feels oddly stilted and lifeless. My sense is the filmmakers tried to be so scrupulously faithful to Alan Moore’s graphic novel, but what may have worked great in print doesn’t come across so well on screen. (This, Harry Potter fans, is why the films are better when they are more freely adapted.) Some DVD editions sport a director’s cut, but I don’t see how anything short of a remake from the ground up would be an improvement. Full review. GRADE: C
What Are You Watching
Moon: This is what I might rather brusquely call a “WTF movie” - but in that good kind of way. Sam Rockwell stars as an astronaut anxiously awaiting the end of a long stint on the moon when he discovers there’s someone else up there - someone who looks exactly like him. It’s an extremely clever mind-bender, well-directed by Duncan Jones (son of David Bowie) and well-acted by the undervalued Sam Rockwell. GRADE: A-
The Women: George Cukor’s 1939 film boasts an entirely female cast, right down to the smallest part. There’s nary a man in sight, not even as an extra. It’s a little dated, and the Technicolor fashion show sequence is uncharacteristically gimmicky for Cukor. Still, with stars like Norma Shearer, Joan Crawford, Rosalind Russell, Paulette Godard and Joan Fontaine on hand, it’s highly entertaining. One of my favorite performances was by young Virginia Weidler, who stole scenes left and right from Hepburn, Stewart and Grant in a little movie called The Philadelphia Story. GRADE: A-
Tell me what you think of this week’s picks, and tell me what you’re watching.
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: Ask the Audience, On Video/DVD, Reviews
What are the best space exploration movies?
With today being the 40th anniversary of the moon landing, I think it’s an ideal time to list the best space exploration movies.
Please note that’s space exploration movies, NOT movies set in space. So Star Wars and Star Trek and its ilk do NOT count, nor do other movies about battling aliens. I’m talking about movies that are about either going from Earth to space, or exploring the deep reaches of space from earth to find out what’s out there.
Those who are interested in space exploration would be well advised to see Moon, which I caught yesterday at the Little Art Theatre. I’m still absorbing the movie, but it’s an engrossing little puzzler starring Sam Rockwell as a lone moon explorer who has a strange close encounter when he finds - himself. See it to find out what I mean.
Here are five of my favorites, in mostly alphabetical order. The list does not include documentaries.
Apollo 13: Everyone who knows their history knows how this ends, and yet it’s still incredibly suspenseful. Ron Howard’s best film to date.
Contact: Robert Zemeckis’ adaptation of Carl Sagan’s novel posed some fascinating questions about belief and did so with extraordinary visual panache. Generally underrated, this was one of the best films of 1997.
Solaris: I can already hear people groaning about this one, but I flatly disagree with them. I thought this film starring George Clooney was an absolutely fascinating mind-bender about love and loss and what’s real and what’s not. Unlike a lot of folks, I like movies that don’t feed you all the answers and ask you to try to puzzle things out yourself. (For the record, I have not yet seen the 1972 original Russian film.)
2001: Well, since this is one of my 10 favorite films, I kind of have to put it on here. And it’s another great mind-bender too.
October Sky: OK, this one’s a bit of a cheat, since it’s not actually about space exploration, but it’s an entertaining and moving story about Homer Hickam (Jake Gyllenhaal), a rocket scientist without whom the space program would not have been possible.
You may be asking “Where’s The Right Stuff?” While I like that film a lot, I don’t like it quite as much as the ones I list here.
And here’s a question: How come a theatrical movie hasn’t been made about Apollo 11 yet? is the story too good?
Your turn - tell me your favorite space exploration movies.
Permalink | Comments (16) | Post your comment | Categories: Ask the Audience, Lists
My new ranking of the Harry Potter films
To carry Pottermania going over the weekend, I present my new ranking of the Harry Potter films.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban A
Potter fans like to complain about this one because it dared to muss their beloved text, but I think that’s exactly why this is the best film of the series by far: it lives and breathes on own without being shackled to the words of J.K. Rowling (who, it must be said, had no problem with the changes). Everything, from the direction to the performances to the digital effects, is greatly improved from the first two films. The time travel scenes at the end of the movie, which double back on themselves, are outstanding, thanks to director Alfonso Cuaron’s clever eye.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince A
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire A-
The series gets its first British director, Mike Newell, and having someone who knows what a British school is like goes a long way toward making the film feel authentic. Contains some breathtaking scenes, like the opening World Cup of Quidditch, and the truly terrifying climax with he who shall not be named. Debits: the pace goes slack in a few places, and some characters, like Rita Skeeter, feel like window dressing.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone A-
This was my introduction to the Potter world, because I hadn’t read the books at the time, and I was quite enthralled. The pacing is a bit sleepy at times, but that’s a result of having to spend so much time on exposition. (Too bad about the dodgy Quidditch effects, though.) Too many people like to crack on director Chris Columbus for not being a visionary aritste. However, he deserves a great deal of credit for establishing the template for the series, and especially for his role in finding Radcliffe, Watson and Grint.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix B+
When the film works, it works very well, particularly during the action scenes, and whenever the deliciously nasty Dolores Umbridge (Imelda Staunton) is onscreen, but on the whole, the movie feels too rushed, trying to cram too much into too little time. Full review.
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets B+ This tends to be the film I remember the least well, maybe because the thrill of discovery was gone for me. I read the book before seeing the film, and the film follows the novel so slavishly, there was no sense of surprise. On the plus side, it’s much better paced than the first film. Kenneth Branagh is a hoot as the stuck-up but really rather hapless Professor Lockheart.
That’s my ranking of the films now. What’s yours?
Permalink | Comments (5) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
What’s opening Friday, July 17?
Well, not a lot is opening Friday, really. It goes without typing that Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is all the rage, so all the other studios are basically saying “DUCK!!!”
And with good reason, too - the movie banked $22 million from midnight showings alone, besting the midnight record set by The Dark Knight. My review of the film is over here, where the discussion is getting increasingly interesting.
If you’re looking for something new at the theater besides Harry & Co., you’ll have to turn to the arthouses, or to downtown Dayton. The Neon opens Every Little Step, a documentary about the legendary Broadway show A Chorus Line. I’m very anxious to see this one. The theater also hangs on to Away We Go (reviewed here) and Woody Allen’s Whatever Works (reviewed here).
Over in Yellow Springs, the Little Art hangs on to Moon and adds Whatever Works. The Saturday Picture show for kids is Dr. Dolittle: Million-Dollar Mutts.
I’ve been remiss by not including Victoria Theatre’s classic film series in these posts. This weekend, it’s Paul Newman and Robert Redford in the The Sting, the 1973 Best Picture winner (though I would have picked either The Exorcist or Cries and Whispers from the nominees.) In an interesting coincidence, Columbus’ similar series opens this weekend with the other big Redford/Newman hit, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.)
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: In Area Theaters
Crowning Potter’s ‘Prince’ among Harry’s best
About half a year ago, one couldn’t find much good press regarding Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
First Warner Bros. had the GALL to delay the film. Why, there HAD to be something wrong with the movie, people groused. Rumors flew that the movie had tested poorly and that director David Yates and company had botched the book’s famously heart-rending climax.
As of July 2009, those complaints are officially bollocks.
Not only is Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince a considerable improvement over the last film, Order of the Phoenix, it’s the second best film of the series, behind only Alfonso Cuaron’s Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.
While I enjoyed Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, that film felt like the first time the series had taken a major step backwards. While its best moments worked very well, overall it felt too compressed, too rushed. One of this blog’s readers put it very well when she said the filmmakers made a major mistake turning the longest book into the shortest film.
This time, however, those shortcomings have mostly vanished. Regular screenwriter Steve Kloves, who sat out Phoenix, has returned, and so has the confidence in the storytelling. The direction, too, is much bolder and more assured, with Yates turning in some of the most visually striking set pieces in the entire series.
By now it seems almost a habit to say the series is growing increasingly darker and more foreboding, but it’s especially true in Half-Blood Prince, the somewhat questionable PG-rating notwithstanding.
The armies of the villainous Voldemort are gathering strength, even to the point of invading our Muggle world. To stop the dark lord, Harry and his allies must discover secrets of Voldemort’s past - secrets so deeply buried that uncovering them portends dire consequences.
One of the major drawbacks of Order of the Phoenix was that it felt too episodic, rushing through sequence after sequence, thereby glossing over what really makes this series work - not all that magic razzmatazz, but the interaction between Harry and his closest confidantes, Ron and Hermione. That chemistry is back in full force this time, with each actor playing to their strengths, and sometimes revealing new ones.
Daniel Radcliffe grows ever more confident in the title role. No longer playing the straight man to all the wild things around him, the actor legitimately commands the screen. Rupert Grint, who has always worked best as the comic relief, does some of his funniest work here, and Emma Watson, my favorite from the beginning, shows increasingly impressive emotional range, particularly when Hermione comes to grips with the fact that she just might be in love with Ron.
Of the new faces in the cast, Jim Broadbent is, unsurprisingly, a standout. He’s ideally cast as the somewhat befuddled but ultimately steadfast Professor Slughorn, who holds the most crucial key to Voldemort’s past - one he does not give up so easily.
Just as Radcliffe has grown into his role well, so has Yates. Deftly balancing the comedy and the drama of the story, he very cleverly segues between the scenes, making Half-Blood Prince flow much easier than its predecessor. The director’s visual command is impressive too, thanks in no small part to the imaginative cinematographer Bruno Delbonnel (Amelie, Across the Universe). They create some surreal visions and tense action scenes that are peaks for this series.
As for that famously emotional climax, I don’t want to give too much away, but I will say it is true to the spirit of the book, even if it is staged rather differently. The audible sniffles I heard from the crowd told me the ending did its job. It’s a powerful setup for the final chapter, Harry Potter and Deathly Hallows, which has been split into two films, again directed by Yates.
Any complaints I have are barely worth mentioning. The second half has a few minor lulls that keep this film from matching my favorite, Azkaban, but I’m not going to quibble when a film delivers as well as this one does. From here on out, the press on Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince ought to be nothing but good.
GRADE: A
Permalink | Comments (25) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
Before the Potter storm - what are you watching?
Harry Potter and the Massive Juggernaut, AKA Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince opens this Wednesday (unless you want to see the IMAX/partly 3D version, which opens July 29).
Amusing aside: The way my screening pass printed out, it looks like the title of the movie is Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince Eric Robinette. Wow. I didn’t know I had it in me.
My review will post Tuesday, in advance of the midnight screenings, so that means there will have to be some shuffling on the blog this week. Today I’ll cover Tuesday’s DVD releases and ask the weekly What Are You Watching question.
DVDs
The Haunting in Connecticut: Even though I’ve heard the movie isn’t so bad, I’m still wondering if this is truly the best material an actress as talented as Virginia Madsen can find. Seriously.
12: My favorite court drama of all time is 12 Angry Men, so I was curious to see how this Russian version, an Oscar nominee for Best Foreign Language Film, would compare. The answer is, very well. This film follows the outline of the original pretty closely (12 jurors debate the fate of a young man accused of killing his father), but makes the dynamics between the 12 a bit different and takes some detours into the life of the defendant. Those detours distract from the jurors and make the film run a bit longer than it should, but it’s fascinating to see the story play out in a Russian milieu. GRADE: B+
What I’ve Watched
The Thief of Baghdad: If this isn’t one of the best adventure movies I’ve seen, it’s certainly one of the most vibrantly colorful. I saw it on TCM, and even there, the colors popped off the screen. I can only imagine how it must look on DVD. And it’s fun to see just how much material Disney pilfered from this movie when they made Aladdin; there’s even a dotty sultan character much like Princess Jasmine’s father. Great old-fashioned fun. GRADE: A
Waltz With Bashir: I missed this when it was in theaters earlier this year, and having seen it, I’m very sorry I missed it on the big screen. The visuals, composed with stylized flash animation are dazzlingly surreal, making this one of the most unique films I’ve seen in recent years. After all, how many animated war documentaries are there? A must-see for arthouse fans. GRADE: A
What have you seen lately, whether it’s in theaters, on TV, or on DVD?
Permalink | Comments (2) | Post your comment |
‘Bruno’ not as shocking as it thinks it is
By now, Sacha Baron Cohen has made it plain that he is a fearless provocateur who will do anything - and I mean anything - for a laugh.
And that’s exactly the problem with his new movie Bruno. Most of the sense of surprise and discovery Cohen had carried with him is gone now.
I wasn’t a great fan of Cohen’s breakthrough film, Borat, but I understood its appeal. It was subversive when the character made his subjects - and often his entire audience - into unwitting fools. I admired the boldness of the attempt, but thought the repetitive humor wore out its welcome.
Even though Bruno is not a sequel to Borat, it plays very much like a typical part two: It’s bolder, it’s brasher and it’s louder - but it’s not better.
Bruno is a flamboyantly gay Austrian fashion commentator who gets fired, so he desperately seeks ways to make himself famous, with a camera always in tow. Along the way, he comes across several “real world” interview subjects, ranging from redneck hunters to presidential candidate Ron Paul, and watches them squirm at his outlandish antics.
When Cohen did this as Borat, the character seemed so guileless that it was easy to buy the idea that he could completely fool people. Not so much with Bruno. He’s so in-your-face, so ridiculously bizarre, that it’s hard to believe anyone fell for him. Instead of laughing at Bruno’s targets, I sat there incredulous at how gullible they were. Perhaps that’s part of Cohen’s point, but I didn’t usually find the endeavors funny.
On top of that, Cohen’s tendency to surprise has worn off. Because I knew going in that the movie was going to “shock” me, I ended up not being very shocked at all. No matter how deranged his tricks were, I watched most of them impassively. The genie was out of the bottle, and there was no putting him back in.
What little point Bruno has, Cohen takes too long to make it. He spends most of the early part of the movie staging “How sick is this?” sex gags, then engaging in stunts that have little or nothing to do with perceptions of homosexuality, such as Bruno’s attempt to broker peace between Jews and Arabs.
When Bruno finally does tackle gay-bashing, individual scenes stand out. Watching Bruno mingle with beer-chugging hunters is a hoot, and a scene in which Bruno tries to pass himself off as a straight man at a southern-fried Arkansas wrestling match is riotous when chaos ensues.
By that time, however, it’s too much, too late. What, I asked, was the point of all this? That many people are homophobic, whether it’s blatant or subtle? Sorry, but that’s not exactly front page news. In the end, I greeted Bruno with the reaction he probably fears the most: indifference. GRADE: C
Permalink | Comments (9) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
My half-year 10 Best List
Now that the year’s half gone, and with the prospect of 10 Best Picture nominees looming on the horizon, it’s time to take stock of the best films of the year - so far. If I reviewed the film, the title links to it.
Note: I am considering films released this calendar year in the Dayton area, so some of these titles were actually last year’s Oscar contenders.
1) Up - Not for nothing is this now PIxar’s second highest grossing picture. And don’t be surprised to see it still atop my list at the end of the year.
2) Revolutionary Road: Underrated, underseen, and sorely misunderstood. As an acting showcase alone, it’s much worthier than many people are willing to admit.
3) The Wrestler: With all due respect to Sean Penn’s outstanding performance in Milk, Mickey Rourke really should have won the Best Actor Oscar as a onetime superstar past his prime, desperately seeking redemption
4) Coraline: Marvelous, dazzlingly inventive stop-motion animated fantasy/nightmare that I think is even better than The Nightmare Before Christmas, also directed by Henry Selick.
5) Frost/Nixon: Ron Howard took a decidedly uncinematic event and made it more tense than most thrillers.
6) Star Trek: One of the most purely entertaining films of the year. Great fun.
7) Adventureland: I quite liked this coming-of-age story when I first saw it and liked it even better the second time around. It’s this year’s “movie that got away.” I hope it finds a wider audience.
8) Duplicity: Another underappreciated gem, the Julia Roberts/Clive Owen duel of wits was actually faulted for being too smart and clever. Um - since when are those bad qualities?
9) Let the Right One In - This vampire romance import certainly seemed quite effective when I saw it on DVD - and that’s with supposedly faulty subtitles.
10) Public Enemies: Johnny Depp and Michael Mann are firing on almost all thrusters in this engrossing take on the last days of John Dillinger.
Runners Up: The Hangover, I’ve Loved You So Long, Sunshine Cleaning
Very strong, if not quite excellent: Away We Go, Defiance, Drag Me To Hell, Gran Torino, I Love You, Man; State of Play, 12
Tries way too hard, but admirable for it: The Brothers Bloom
Solid if unexceptional: Inkheart, The International, Last Chance Harvey, Monsters vs. Aliens, Observe and Report, Push, Race to Witch Mountain, The Soloist, Taken, The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, Whatever Works
Nice try, but lacking: Angels & Demons, He’s Just Not That Into You, The Proposal, 17 Again, Terminator Salvation, X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Meh: Ghosts of Girlfriends Past, Night at the Museum: Battle for the Smithsonian, Paul Blart: Mall Cop, Paris 36
Ambitious, but still a misfire: Watchmen
WTF was that supposed to mean: Knowing
WTF did the Academy see in this pretentious crap: The Reader
So it made a ton of money. It still sucks: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.
What are your picks for the best of the year so far?
Permalink | Comments (6) | Post your comment | Categories: Lists
What’s opening Friday, July 10?
Movies settle back into their normal Friday slot for a week, representing sort of a calm before next Wednesday’s Harry Potter storm.
Bruno: Sacha Baron Cohen, AKA Borat, pushes more hot buttons again, bringing his flamboyantly gay fashionista to the big screen and embarrassing everyone who crosses his path. Reviews are mostly positive; but I have a feeling this won’t match Borat’s success. My review posts Friday.
I Love You, Beth Cooper: Director Chris Columbus’ first film as a director was Adventures in Babysitting; he returns to teen comedy with this story about a geeky valedictorian (Paul Rust) who declares his undying love for the class hottie played by Hayden Panettiere. So far its scored a whopping zero percent on Rotten Tomatoes. Granted, that’s based on seven reviews, but still - not so lucky.
At the arthouses
The Neon hangs on to its current lineup of Woody Allen’s solid Whatever Works, (reviewed here) and Sam Mendes’ also solid Away We Go (reviewed here). The Little Art opens its exclusive engagement of the acclaimed sci-fi film Moon.
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: In Area Theaters
What is the saddest movie you’ve ever seen?
Recently I watched the movie The Children’s Hour, starring Audrey Hepburn and Shirley MacLaine as women whose lives are ruined when they’re suspected of having a lesbian affair. A friend of mine commented that it was the “saddest movie” he’d ever seen.
And that got me to thinking - what was the saddest movie I’d ever seen? Here are a few candidates, in no particular order.
Vertigo - Unfortunately, I cannot speak about WHY this is the saddest movie I’ve ever seen without spoiling the film, but those who have seen it will surely know what I mean. You can always find out for yourself when it plays at the Victoria Theatre July 24, as part of Jimmy Stewart weekend.
The Godfather Part II: I saw this on the big screen recently, and even though I’d seen it before, I was struck at just how bleak and unforgiving the ending felt.
Unforgiven: “Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.”
Schindler’s List: As hard as it is to watch this film, I saw it several times in the theater because I wanted to analyze Spielberg’s technique. Never worked. By the time the movie depicted the first ghetto massacre, I would dissolve in tears.
Those are just four off the top of my head. So what are the saddest movies you’ve ever seen? I don’t necessarily mean ones that make you cry like The Wizard of Oz, or E.T., which both end happily. I mean ones that make you cry and/or wipe you out emotionally, making you feel wrung out at the end.
Discuss. And pass the tissues.
Permalink | Comments (22) | Post your comment | Categories: Ask the Audience
New DVDs/What Are You Watching?
Today’s new DVDs don’t offer much variety or quality, so it’s a good thing I was able to watch quite a few movies over the fourth of July weekend and recommend those to you instead.
DVD
Knowing: This film held real promise, with an intriguing premise of Nicolas Cage being able to foresee disasters through a numerical code. Director Alex Proyas (Dark City) directs the action scenes very well, but he can’t keep the movie from falling apart when the story turns metaphysical, absurd and extremely dopey in the last act. Full review: GRADE: C-
Push: This sci-fi action thriller, sort of a young X-Men, didn’t get much attention when it came out earlier this year, but I thought it was far better than the similarly themed and airless Jumper. Director Paul McGuigan stages some very snazzy action scenes. Full review. GRADE: B
The Unborn: Why bother? Really, why?
What Are You Watching?
The Big Parade: A silent war film may seem like an oxymoron, but this World War 1, which put MGM on the map, still retains a lot of power, thanks to powerful direction from King Vidor. Small debit: a tacked-on ending. GRADE: A-
The Crowd: MGM allowed Vidor to make this smaller, more personal film about a frustrated New York City family who struggle to realize their dreams after The Big Parade became a hit. This film is even better, filled with striking shots that Vidor sometimes caught on the fly, using hidden cameras. GRADE: A
David Copperfield: Delightful Dickens adaptation directed by George Cukor, with a marvelous cast, with WC Fields seemingly being born to play Mr. Micawber. The film loses momemtum in the second half, but not much. GRADE: A-
The Little Princess: I much prefer the 1995 film directed by Alfonso Cuaron, but this 1939 version has its charms, most of them coming from one Shirley Temple. GRADE: B
The Gay Divorcee: Prime entertainment with the inimitable Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, whom I could watch all day long. The only problem I had with the movie is it cuts away from the stars too often. GRADE: A-
The Seven Year Itch: This movie is as dated as the telegraph and is second-tier Billy Wilder, but second tier Wilder is still better than first-tier most anyone else. And Marilyn Monroe was a knockout, in more ways than one. GRADE: B
Whatever Works: Woody Allen’s latest film loses its way whenever it focuses on anybody besides the two leads of Larry David and Evan Rachel Wood, who form an improbable but endearing romance. Still, David and Wood are front and center often enough to put the movie across, and David makes a great Allen surrogate. GRADE: B
So what are YOU watching?
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment |
Yahoo’s ridiculous list of the ‘top rated’ animated films
Movie lists so dominate the Internet that one could wallpaper every apartment in New York City with them. Let’s face it, the things are a dime a dozen, and most of them are quickly forgotten.
Every once in awhile, however, a list comes along that’s so egregiously ridiculous I can’t not blog about it. The latest list is the Yahoo Users Top Rated Animated Films.
I know, I know. “User” lists are always suspect, but some of the rankings here are so off the reservation, I don’t just disagree with the opinion. This one crosses the line into FACTUALLY wrong.
First, consider what’s NOT in the list: Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Pinocchio. Bambi. Smell suspicious yet? Just get a load of these rankings.
30) Transformers: The Movie: Oh hell no. I’d be willing to bet every circuit in my home theater system this woudn’t make the list if Transformers: ROTF weren’t in theaters now. That’s almost as revolting as the new movie.
29) The Simpsons Movie: Sure, why not.
28) Happy Feet: Not one of my favorites. I thought Cars and Monster House, which came out the same year, were both better, but I can see why some people love it.
27) Ice Age: The Meltdown: The stupid sequel makes the list but the halfway decent original does not? WTF?
26) Shrek 2: So it made more than $400 million. That doesn’t make it one of the best animated movies ever made. At least Shrek the Third didn’t make it.
25) Cinderellla: You bet your bibbidi-bobbidi-boo.
24) The Incredibles: Surprised it placed this low, actually.
23) Cars: Pixar’s weakest film, but it was a merchandising bonanza.
22) Shrek: It already looks dated, and many of the jokes are too.
21) Lady and the Tramp: Not gonna bark about that one.
20) Monsters Inc.: Nor that one.
19) Mulan: Wow. Higher than I thought.
18) The Little Mermaid: Wow. Lower than I thought.
17) Monsters vs. Aliens: You have GOT to be kidding me. NO!
16) Aladdin: How low can you go?
15) Coraline: Wow. That is one of the best movies of this year. But do you see a pattern here?
14) Finding Nemo: Not my favorite Pixar movie, but the favorite of many.
13) Princess Mononoke: Miyazaki rules. And this is one of his lesser efforts.
12) Ratatouille: I always loved that the critic got the best speech.
11) Howl’s Moving Castle: More great Miyazaki.
10) Beauty and the Beast: Higher. Higher still.
9) Toy Story: Great film, but I prefer the sequel, which … isn’t on the list. Urge to destroy rising.
8) The Nightmare Before Christmas: Urge to destroy falling …
7) My Neighbor Totoro: The Miyazaki film I haven’t seen I really need to see.
6) The Lion King: Inevitable, but still overrated.
5) Spirited Away: I agree this is Miyazaki’s best.
Now … get a load of the top 4.
4) Kung Fu Panda
3) Bolt
2) WALL-E
1) Up
What IS this, a list or a memory test? I know user ratings favor recent movies, but ye GODS! I would really love someone to look me in the eye and tell me with a straight face that Kung-Fu Panda is a better movie than, say, Dumbo.
You know that concoction in Who Framed Roger Rabbit called “the dip” that could kill toons? I’d like to pour that all over this preposterous compilation.
How about you?
Permalink | Comments (8) | Post your comment | Categories: Lists
RIP: Karl Malden and Harve Presnell
And the tribute montage gets longer and sadder, now that both Harve Presnell and Karl Malden have left us.
I rather sheepishly admit I cannot write in depth about either man - my best memory of Presnell is his role as the irascible father-in-law in the Coen brothers’ Fargo. I most remember Malden for his roles in Elia Kazan’s A Streetcar Named Desire and On the Waterfront - NOT for his American Express commercials, I hasten to add.
Still, if you’re going to be remembered for something, it might as well be those three movies. And if you’re remembered for movies like those, I’d say you’ve done pretty well.
For more on these actors, I direct you to Joe Leydon’s evocative tribute to Presnell and to Glenn Kenny’s brief but punchy summation of Malden.
Both will be missed. TCM will pay tribute to Malden July 10.
In case you’re wondering where my weekly review is, that’s for Public Enemies.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Tributes
‘Public Enemies’ fires a near-bulls-eye
With Public Enemies, director Michael Mann has delivered the best live-action movie of the summer.
So why do I have this funny feeling that I’m going to be among the few who really loves this film with Johnny Depp playing legendary gangster John Dillinger?
Maybe it’s the somewhat muted reaction I’ve read in other reviews so far. The consensus seems to be, “Well, it’s good, but it’s just not the classic it should have been.”
I will agree that Public Enemies does not deserve the label “classic,” but I think some have burdened the movie with overly high expectations. That’s not hard to do, given the talent involved. Anything less than a home run will seem like a disappointment to some - but any disappointment I felt with this movie was relatively minor. Mann is a master of the crime drama, and his portrait of the last days of Dillinger pulses with energy.
For some people, the movie may seem too cerebral, too studied, even though there are more than a few action scenes. Nobody shoots a gun battle like Mann does, but for me, the best parts of the film happened between the shoot-outs.
Mann, who also made Heat and Collateral, is legendary among filmmakers for his attention to even the minutest detail. He approaches his movies like a scientist, a historian, a psychologist and a sniper all rolled up into one. He particularly excels at getting inside the minds of his characters to show why they do what they do. With Dillinger, however, the key may be more why he doesn’t do things.
As played by Johnny Depp in an outstanding performance, Dillinger is someone who very much lives in the now. He doesn’t know how to do much of anything other than rob banks, but he has an effortless charisma that charms his enemies and his friends, especially a girl named Billie Frechette (an excellent Marion Cotillard, who won an Oscar for La Vie en Rose).
(For local history buffs, Dillinger’s Dayton arrest is referenced via a mug shot, but that event is not depicted in the film).
What Dillinger cannot do, however, is see much into the future. He is so caught up in the moment that he fails to grasp how law enforcement is gathering strength against him. Under the oppressive thumb of J. Edgar Hoover (Billy Crudup), a new agency called the FBI is not above using questionable tactics to capture public enemy number one - something that very much haunts the lead investigator, Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale).
It’s the portrayal of that lead investigator this is the film’s one significant misstep, for two reasons. I don’t think Mann and his co-writers get into Purvis’ head nearly as well as they do Dillinger’s. I wanted to know more about him, and that part of the film left me wanting.
The other problem, I’m sorry to say, is Bale himself. His performance is too insular, too one-note. As he did in Terminator Salvation, Bale gets too caught up in playing the brooding hero, so Purvis seems shallow and opaque.
What overcomes that flaw is the terrific sense of time and place Public Enemies creates. One of Mann’s more controversial decisions was to shoot the movie with digital cameras, which he has used ever since Collateral. Such a choice may seem anachronistic for a movie set in the 1930s, but it gives the imagery a washed out look and a feel of immediacy that energizes the story about a man who slowly but surely is losing his moment in history.
And that, finally, is what makes Public Enemies so memorable, particularly in its final act, when Mann tightens the noose around Dillinger, ratcheting up the tension. The movie excitingly captures a moment in time when crime really did pay - and how the criminals let that slip through their fingers.
GRADE: A-
Permalink | Comments (6) | Post your comment | Categories: Reviews
