MOVIN' PITCHERS

2010-11-22T09:13:00.000-08:00

Top 100 Films

I had all but decided to abandon this particular blog of mine, when something someone said struck a chord. I was asked to name my favorite 'old movies' and this reminded me that I had actually constructed a 'Top 100' list a while ago and had never really posted it here. Therefore, I've decided to resurrect this blog, since movies are an age-old passion of mine.

I'm very proud of my list. It consists almost entirely of older films, movies made before the disintegration of 'proper' society-or times when things were pure, innocent, classic. Occasionally, a film is released in the present day that sticks with me and makes me reconsider this list. And then, after sleeplessness and much concentration- I alter THE LIST. It's a traumatic time, but I get through it.

I have been doing a few movie reviews on my fashion/ style website but am sticking to classic films for that blog. So this is a place to vent and discuss movies from other time periods or genres. Over the next few months, I'll be posting mini reviews of the following films, so feel free to check back if you are interested.

Top 100 Movin' Pitchers
1. To Kill a Mockingbird
2. You Can't Take It With You
3. Mr Smith Goes to Washington
4. A Room With a View
5. All About Eve
6. The Manchurian Candidate
7. Life Is Beautiful
8. The Great Escape
9. Gigi
10. On The Waterfront
11. Goodby Mr Chips
12. Singin' In the Rain
13. Giant
14. The Big Country
15. Mr Deeds Goes to Town
16. The Women
17. Sense and sensibility
18. Roman Holiday
19. Dead Poets Society
20. Sleeping Beauty
21. The Philadelphia Story
22. Rebecca
23. Jaws
24. Chariots Of Fire
25. The Bridge on the River Kwai
26. It's a Wonderful Life
27. The Sound of Music
28. Close Encounters of the Third Kind
29. Ben Hur
30. O Brother Where Art Thou?
31. Spartacus
32. The West Side Story
33.The Coal Miner's Daughter
34. The Shawshank Redemption
35. Gone With the Wind
36. The Best Years of Our Lives
37. The Quiet Man
38. Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
39. Funny Girl
40. The Emprie Strikes Back
41. Star Wars-A New Hope
42. An American In Paris
43. The Sting
44. Much Ado About Nothing
45. William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet
46. Sayonara
47. Hello Dolly
48. Empire of the Sun
49. The Miracle Worker
50. The Three Faces of Eve
51. Barefoot in the Park
52. The Red Shoes
53. The Black Stallion
54. My Fair Lady
55. Amadeus
56. Rear Window
57. Les Diaboliques
58. Moonstruck
59. Places in the Heart
60. The Year of Living Dangerously
61. Henry V
62. Babette's Feast
63. Citizen kane
64. Dr Zhivago
65. Oliver!
66. Tengoku to jigoku (High and Low)
67. Howard's End
68. Cool Hand Luke
69. The Incredibles
70. Arsenic and Old Lace
71. Psycho
72. High Society
73. The Truman Show
74. 12 Angry Men
75. Witness
76. The Wizard of Oz
77. Harvey
78. Schindler's List
79. The Last of the Mohicans
80. The Picture of Dorian Gray
81. Dr Strangelove
82. A Man for All Seasons
83. THe Road Home
84. High Noon
85. Becket
86. The African Queen
87. Office Space
88. The Apartment
89. Bringing Up Baby
90. Chicago
91. Charade
92. The Fugitive
93. Arthur!
94. Emma
95. Born Yesterday
96. Breaker Morant
97. Good Morning Vietnam!
98. Searching for Bobby Fisher
99. The Freshman
100. Green Card

2010-02-27T06:24:00.000-08:00

The Shadow of the Thin Man (1941)
Starring: Myrna Loy, William Powell, and Donna Reed
Directed by: W.S. Van Dyke
Once again, the flimsy story involving racetrack related murders, as well as the predictable outcome-are not what makes the film enjoyable. The chemistry between Loy and Powell is even more evident in this one, especially w/ their perky four year old son providing additional opportunities for that chemistry to develop. Without even knowing the story, without taking into account how lovely Donna Reed was at the start of her career, and even without appreciating the witty dialogue that these films are famous for...that endearing way that the two leads play off of each other is enough, on its own, to warrant giving this an easy
8/10

2010-02-24T10:32:00.000-08:00

Blow Up (1966)
Mini Review
Directed By: Michelangelo Antonioni
Starring: Vanessa Redgrave and David Hemmings

Without a doubt, for the fashion conscious movie-goer, this film has a lot to offer. It is a stylish, elegant, intriguing look into the hi fashion world of late-sixties London, that is laughingly billed as a 'thriller'. Though the story is not without its air of mystery (London fashion photographer unwittingly captures a murder in one of his random shots), the real draw of this film was its stunning style sense. The opening sequence is exquisite, taking us through a few chaotic hours in the life of this highly sought after photographer, as he attempts to helm two shoots back to back while simultaneously being accosted by aspiring models, co-workers, and a very dull wife. Vanessa Redgrave turns in a memorable performance as a nameless woman that is likewise photographed, but against her will. Large portions of the film are in silence and some scenes are purposefully abstract, the latter fact of which makes the end of the film inevitable, if not entirely crowd-pleasing.

My rating: 8/10

2010-01-29T13:00:00.000-08:00

Mini Review: Another Thin Man (1939)
Directed By: W.S Van Dyke
Starring: William Powell, Myrna Loy, and Ruth Hussey

The third installment of the Thin Man series brings the element of parenthood into the party-going, boozing lives of Nick and Nora Charles. Seeing Nick as a father was delightful, even if the fact that he was mostly inebriated throughout the film was just a little disturbing. Interestingly, this was the first film for Powell in two years. He had taken a leave of absence to cope w/ the loss of his fiance', Jean Harlow', in 1937. He steps back into the gumshoes with ease, while also making time to trade sarcastic barbs w/ Nora and cast mildly fawning looks at his new son. The mystery is not especially memorable-another murder, another predictable killer. But even though the story reads like a newspaper or magazine serial of the time, it still provides plenty of entertainment along the way. The principal reason for that lies w/ the great performances of the two leads as well as the welcomed edition of Ruth Hussey (what a great voice she had!) to the cast. All in all, it is at least as good as the 2nd entry to the series, though perhaps not quite as good as the first. I think I did laugh a little more at this one, and for that I give it a solid:
8/10

2010-01-14T14:01:00.000-08:00

After the Thin Man (1936)
Directed by : W.S. Van Dyke
Starring: William Powell, Myrna Loy, and James Stewart

This second edition of the series reads more like an exciting serial from some old magazine, as opposed to an actual cinematic 'thriller'. Still, it is successful in most respects. James Stewart is an able supporting player, even at this early point in his career, and the wonderful chemistry between the two leads is even more palbaple in this edition. I especially enjoyed the witty banter between Nick and Nora concerning her serious and straightlaced family. That said, the plot, as I mentioned before, is a bit predictable and comes across as more of a vehicle to get the two leads back together than an earnest effort to keep the audience riveted. James Stewart had not quite come into his 'gollies' yet and was attempting to pull off overly melodramtic roles that weren't yet his area of expertise. His final scene is a perfect example of this striving for effect and I didnt really 'feel it' as much as I just enjoyed giggling at it. All in all, there were parts of this film that I appreciated even more than the original, but those did not amount to enough to give it more than a
7/10

2010-01-07T14:18:00.000-08:00

Mini Review:
The Thin Man (1934)
Directed by: W.S. Van Dyke
Starring:Myrna Loy and William Powell

This 'THin Man Series' aired on TCM last week and I recorded all of them because up until now, I have only seen this first edition. I thought I'd supply a mini review of each one as I see it. It's an exciting little journey!

This original film introduces us to Nick and Nora Charles, played expertly by one of the monumental 'screen teams', William Powell and Myrna Loy. Nick is a former P.I. who has walked into a wealthy marriage and has chosen to give up his old job in order to manage his wife's estate. But all that changes when a murder is committed that links Nick to the case in more ways than one. Initially, Nick refuses to get involved but finds a surprising shot of ecouragement from an unexpected source-his wife. Nora has a head for problem solving it seems, and over the course of this twistng, martini shaking 'whodunit', she proves to be Nick's biggest ally. The 'mystery' doesnt play out as intriguingly as other films of the genre, but the sheer delight in watching Nick and Nora interract more than makes up for that. By the end of the film, I was anxious to see more...and an even bigger fan of Myrna Loy's darling self.

My rating: 9/10

2009-10-07T12:11:00.000-07:00

Mini Review:
Down Argentine Way
Starring: Don Ameche and Betty Grable
Directed By:Irving Cummings

Standard movie musicals of the late 30's involved fluffy stories with pretty locales and forgettable songs. This one has two things going for it that prevent it from falling into that category. One is the electric presence of Carmen Miranda during a few key numbers and the other is the brilliant dance number by the Nicholas Brothers. They were a phenomenon indeed, and this movie highlights their performance with beautiful technicolor and a lovely stage setting. Otherwise, the movie doesnt hold up to superior films of the genre. Betty Grable's dancing has always been a bit clumsy, in my eyes, and Don Ameche, although a credible male presence, was not much of an actor at this time. Still, the movie should be seen for the strong points and provides a pleasant diversion, in general.

My rating:6/10

2009-09-03T13:35:00.000-07:00

Mini Review:
He Loves Me, He Loves Me Not (2002)
Starring: Audrey Tatou and some other french people...:)
Directed by: Laetitia Colomban

This movie takes place in two parts and is equally appealing from both perspectives. The story initially follows luminously beautiful Angelique, a spritely girl who is deeply inlove with her married boyfriend. Blindly faithful to him, in spite of his obvious unwillingness to seperate from his pregnant wife, Angelique is confident that someday the two of them will be together. However, things may not be quite what they seem when the story spirals into a dark place from which it never recovers....thankfully. It's a surprising tale that quickly moves from 'girl loses boy' territory to something refreshingly different when it begins to follow prior events from the perspective of the boyfriend. What could have been a typical 'Fatal Attraction' style thriller is kept all the more satisfying as the direction keeps the mood light at unlikely moments, the performances hold true, and the screenplay tosses us surprises along the way.

Tatou is excellent here...and quite different than our lovely 'Amelie'.

My rating: 8/10

2009-09-03T08:34:00.000-07:00

Lars and the Real Girl (2007)
Starring: Ryan Gosling and Emily Mortimer
Directed by:Cragi Gillespie (

I wanted to see this film while it was at the theater but never was able to make it. I rented it on Netflix finally, and watched it three times in two days. Did I like it? Yes!!

Lars is a introverted young man who spends most of his time alone. He works in an unforgiving office job and lives in the apartment/garage of his family home, which is now inhabited by his older brother. Gus has recently married and sister-in-law Karin is expecting a child. Perhaps due to her maternal instincts, Karin has begun developing strong concerns for Lars-feeling that he is drawing further and further away, not only from his brother, but from society in general. Though Gus attempts to allay her fears, they are nonetheless proven to be of proper foundation when Lars quite suddenly brings home a girlfriend...a lifelike 'love doll' named Bianca. While Lars carries on conversations with his new love and parades her proudly around town, Gus and Karin turn to Doctor Dagmar (Patricia Clarkson) for help.

THe premise of this film is entirely original and proved to be all I expected. It is a character study, a comedy, and a psychological drama all in one. The setting, a small town in winter, gives the film a palpable atmosphere throughout-and somehow also proves to be an important factor for the story's progression. In addition to the main characters mentioned, there are also some very fleshed-out supporting characters which provide a proper sense of what type of town this is and how they feel about the protagonist, Lars. The town draws together to support this disturbed individual and provides yet another theme of the story that we didnt anticipate-family unity.

Gosling is phenomenal in this role. I am reminded of Edward Norton and his breakthrough performance in 'Primal Fear', where we realized how faceted an actor he really was. Gosling is that type of actor-handsome enough to be a leading man but brave and talented enough to take on challenges like this one. There are extended scenes of conversation between he and 'Bianca' that could not have been easy to pull off; yet he does so effortlessly. His lack of an oscar nomination for this film notwithstanding, it is one of the best performances I've seen by an actor of his generation. He is a 'loveable looney', on par with James Stewart of 'Harvey'. Charming, a good person, unthreatening...but obviously unhinged. Mortimer and Clarkson provide excellent performances as well, which is to be expected. The bigget surprise for me was Paul Schnieder, who I honestly can't remember from his previous films. Yet, in this movie he provides us with some extra levity during the pivotal first moments , discovering his brother's condition, and some touching moments when he comes to grips with the situation and joins the rest of the town in supporting Lars.

The direction and screenplay combine to make a story that looks rediculous on paper, become absolutely convincing and engaging. Though some people may feel that the sudden transition in Lars' personality is not believeble and that the relationship with the doll brings on too many changes in his societal behavior, I enjoyed the fact that the film leaves these changes and their origins open to interpretation. It's a movie that will move you, make you laugh, but also provide some good conversation when it's over.

All in all, I will be buying this one...and I doubt there will ever be anything like it again.

My rating: 9/10

2009-08-25T13:12:00.000-07:00

Mini Review:
Radio Days (1987)
Starring: Dianne Wiest and Mia Farrow
Directed By: Woody Allen
Considering my love for Allen's 'Purple Rose of Cairo' (see review below), it is surprising that I never saw this before. I absolutely loved the feel of the thing and ended up smiling throughout the entire film. Seth Green is the debated protagonist, a young boy approaching his teen years during the days just prior to WW2. But the movie really revolves around a series of 'radio stories' that Allen remembered having heard in his childhood. The resulting tableau is a series of 'events' that appear to happen to the same family...and one cigar girl. Some of the 'stories' are hilarious, some are warmly engaging, and one is a heart-tugger. Performances are all first rate but Wiest and Julie Kavner come off as slightly better than the rest, in my opinion. The funniest moments involve the bizarrely effectual parenting skills of Joe's parents, played effortlessly Kavner and Michael Tucker. The pairing of the cast with such a great director and a medley of fantastic 1940's hits made me wish I lived in the time before television, myself.

A few slight incongruities concerning costuming were not distracting enough to hinder my giving this a solid 8/10

2009-08-06T06:48:00.000-07:00

Mini Review:
The Namesake (2006)
Starring: Kal Penn, Tabu, and Irfan Khan
Directed By: Mira Nair

Synopsis: The story follows an Indian immigrant couple as they give birth to first generation American children and attempt to instill in them a love for their own culture as well as for their new home. Gogol, the firstborn, at first resents his name which doesnt reflect either culture but soon comes to learn the reason his father chose it and to come to a new understanding of, not only his heritage, but also his father's love.

Without being heavy handed or preachy, this movie manages to involve the viewer in what it means to be an Indian immigrant in America as well as to understand the focus on family that is so inherent in that culture. The early scenes in India are lovingly handled and joyful in nature, relaxing into a comfortable manner of story-telling that immediately pulls us in. Tabu, as Ashima, is especially endearing in these early scenes and her adaptation to American Society is fascinating to watch. The arranged marriage between she and Ashoke (Khan) results in the type of loving relationship that most of us dream of having but still remains markedly different than what American culture has led us to believe is 'the norm'. Penn plays Gogol with definite skill, managing to bring the different nuances of his character into complete harmony by the end of the film. We feel as if we are growing along with him, not only physically, but in our understanding of the Indian people and of human relationships. However, it is Tabu and Khan who particularly stand out in their ability to bring their respective characters to life and to make a strong impact. Though there are definite moments of tradgedy in this poignant family drama, it remains an uplifting movie experience and one that deserves repeat viewings.

My rating: 8/10

2009-06-17T12:07:00.000-07:00

Mini Review:
Sullivan's Travels (1941)
Starring: Joel McRea and Veronica Lake
Directed by: Preston Sturges

Another great flick! This one tells the story of John Sullivan, jaded Hollywood film director on a mission to tell the 'truth' to Americans. Not interested in filming any more 'comedies', Sullivan decides to disguise himself as a hobo and live the life of a vagrant to lend an even more realistic air to his new dramatic picture, tentatively titled 'O Brother Where Art Thou' (thanks, Cohen brothers, for that little homage). Along the way he meets a down-on-her-luck aspiring starlet, (played by Veronica Lake and known only as 'The Girl' througout the movie) who decides to join him on his travels. A classic case of mistaken identity and a signature Sturges 'twist' ends the tale on a positive note, as Sullivan comes to realize that the troubled masses need laughter in their lives more than realism.

In spite of my avid love for classic films AND Preston Sturges, this was my first viewing of this movie. It was also my very first Veronica Lake movie. She surely didnt disappoint. Though she is iconic in regards to her very 'avant guarde' hairstyle (for that time), she had a gorgeous face and a darling personality. I was also amazed how tiny she was and how impressive she remained during a large portion of the film when those signature tresses were covered by a boyish hat. The story plays along at a clip, nicely structured and easily followed. I also really loved the 'silent movie' segments, large portions of the film which were completely without dialogue and using only a peppy bit of score and some energetic acting to keep us involved. One scene in particular really stays w/ me and actually moved me to tears. It involves a group of convicts invited to join an all black congregation on their weekly movie night- a movie which happens to be a brilliant Walt Disney cartoon and which is , in itself, life affirming.

Though I adored The Lady Eve, this one is the better film of the two.

My rating: 9/10

2009-06-15T07:55:00.000-07:00

The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985)
Starring: Jeff Daniels and Mia Farrow
Directed By: Woody Allen

It is hard for me to love any movie of Woody's more than this one. Watching it again only confirms that feeling.

The story starts at the height of the Great Depression. Cecilia (Mia Farrow, in what I feel is her best role)is a waitress in a diner, struggling to make ends meet while supporting an out of work husband (Danny Aiello) who treats her badly. Her only escape is her frequent trips to the movie theater where she completely loses herself in the lives of the romantic heroes on screen. After seeing a recent film, 'The Purple Rose of Cairo', and developing a crush on its adventurer-hero, Tom Baxter (played by a handsome, young Jeff Daniels), her trips to the cinema become more and more frequent. During one of her repeated viewings of the movie, Cecilia is shocked to find that Tom seems to NOTICE her watching from the audience. Her shock becomes total amazement when he begins to speak to her from the film and steps off of the screen to talk to her. Over the next few weeks, chaos reigns as the studio attempts to find the actor that plays Tom, Gil Shepherd, and see if he can convince his onscreen creation to get back in the movie! To make things even more complicated, the rest of the onscreen cast has to wait patiently for his return in order to continue the picture and they are getting impatient, casting rude barbs at the remaining audience members and threatening to leave the screen themselves. Incidentally, the remaining cast and their quandry provides the movie's biggest laughs!

The miracle about this movie is the direction, which never fails to be utterly convincing in its 'feel' for 1940's cinema or the bleakness of the Depression era. Woody Allen has created a masterpiece here that succeeds in being a fantasy and a lovely human comedy at the same time. Costumes, scene construction, music, characterizations...all of these combine to become a wonderfully effective piece of entertaining fantasy/realism.

The acting is wonderful on all counts as well. Mia Farrow really carries the movie, however, and should undoubtedly had garnered an Oscar for this achievement. Her face is at once naively optimistic and painfully exhausted throughout the film. The final moments of the movie never fail to move me to tears and its the expression in her eyes that accomplish this emotion. Jeff Daniels, like the dual role he portrays, was a relative newcomer at the time and he is likewise impressive as both the happy-go-lucky Tom Baxter and the aspiring movie star, Gil Shepherd.

Like most of Allen's movies, the script is marvelous and played with such strength by the entire cast. There are not many films that can succeed in being qualified 'heart-tuggers' and laugh-out-loud funny but this one is does that...and does it effortlessly! I highly recommend this movie to any and all fans, not only of Woody Allen, but of the best romantic comedies.

My rating: an easy 10/10

2009-06-11T13:54:00.000-07:00

MINI REVIEW:
THE LADY EVE (1941)
DIRECTED BY: PRESTON STURGES
STARRING: HENRY FONDA and BARBARA STANWYK
Another BRILLIANT Sturges comedy along the same sexy, controversial style of The Miracle of Morgan's Creek (one of my favorites). This one stars Stanwyk as a vampy con woman out to 'fleece' rich men on a steamship thru her skillfull hand at cards. Henry Fonda is the naive young man she captivates and who promptly wins her genuine affections. Of course there is the inevitable break-up when Fonda realizes that Stanwyk's original intentions were less than 'honorable'. Ins spite of their feelings, the two are split apart and over time-believe they have forgotten each other. That is, until Fonda's character is introduced to society lady 'Eve', a dead ringer for his lost love!

Sturges' dialogue is always witty, always intelligent,and unfailingly entertaining. The romantic and electric first moments between the couple when they meet are some of the best that I've seen from the genre, and truly proved that Fonda could hold his own in lighthearted fare of this kind. Stanwyk is at her best here, in that same off-beat quick tongued style of the day. Edith Head's costumes are likewise memorable.

Can't wait to see it again!
9/10

2009-06-10T11:23:00.000-07:00

MINI REVIEW:
JEZEBEL (1938)
STARRING: BETTE DAVIS, HENRY FONDA, and FAY BAINTER
DIRECTED BY: WILLIAM WYLER

I can't watch a William Wyler movie and NOT review it. He's one of my favorite directors of all time and his catalogue is next to none. This movie is not one of his best movies but it is undoubtedly the one that made Bette Davis a formidable screen presence. It is no wonder that she was so requested for the part of Scarlett O'Hara after having puleed this off since she too portrays a spoiled, rebellious southern belle named Julie. The costumes and supporting performances are also impressive in this simple little predecessor of Gone With The Wind. Though this film will never live up to that one's historicity, it carries alot of weight on it's own and is worth watching if for no other reason than to revel in the power of Bette's oscar winning role. Her somewhat surprising transformation, from the daring and impulsive flirt that dared to wear red to the Liberty Ball into the strong and self sacrificing lady she becomes, is a joy to behold.

My rating: 8/10

2009-05-20T15:24:00.000-07:00

The Secret of Roan Inish (1994)
Directed by John Sayles
Mini Review:

I've been putting this one off for years. Not sure why. I'm so glad I finally made myself sit down and a give it it a watch. The story of a girl who suspects that her baby brother has been 'stolen by seals' does not seem appealing at first but the sheer execution of it, the loving way in which the tale develops, is absolutely captivating. The charming cast coupled w/ the fantastic visuals of cloud covered Ireland make this one that I would definitely put on my shelf. Key sequences of this film reduced me to tears of motherly sentiment and I adored the simple way that the cast involved the viewer in their respective plights without overdoing the dramatics.

My rating: 8.5/10

2009-03-26T06:52:00.000-07:00

Mini Review:
21 (2008)
Directed by: Robert Luketic
Starring: Kevin Spacey, Jim Sturgess, Lawrence Fishburne, and Kate Bosworth

I enjoyed this! It reminded me of the 1995 classic, 'Hackers'-a movie that revels in the brain power of a group of youngsters up against a supposedly unbeatable system. In this one, the youngsters are students of MIT who are invited by an ambitious teacher to accompany him on weekend trips to Vegas where they make a 'killing' counting cards. The system they use is supposedly 'fullproof' and indeed things go well for a while, especially after the addition of Ben Campbell (Sturgess), an exceptional student on a mission to earn his Harvard Med tuition before graduation. The teacher is played superbly by Spacey, and I have to say that I'm surpised he didnt get more critical acclaim for this part. It's the best thing I've seen him in since American Beauty. He really shines during a brief scene at the end where he dons a cowboy hat and southern accent in order to make one last score at the Blackjack tables. Sturgess is a credible lead and will obviously be a star, mainly due to his deft ability to appear awkwardly brilliant and loveable. Fishburne is always memorable and is no less so here, where he portrays an unethical casino security guard while the rest of the cast is on point, but given little to do. The story is engaging throughout and, much like Hackers, peaks at the point of the 'big score'. Also like Hackers, the characters are what really add an edge to the otherwise familiar 'david vs goliath' plot line. Vegas never looked more beautiful and the game of Blackjack takes on an entirely new appeal...a worthy piece of entertainment.

My rating: 7/10

2009-03-25T13:37:00.000-07:00

The Pursuit of Happyness (2006)
Directed by: Gabriele Moccino
Starring: Will Smith and Jaden Smith

Okay so I'll admit that the story of a single father making a life for he and his five year old son was instantly appealing for me. Jaden Smith's precious little face really seemed to shine in those commercials and there were lots of snips of Will Smith crying. It looked like a moving drama that I would enjoy. And I'll even go a step further and admit that when the final credits rolled, I was wiping my eyes a little. But upon reflection, I am heartily annoyed by this movie.

The story follows Chris Garder, an intelligent young husband and father who has made some poor business choices in his life. His wife is forced to work double shifts to pay for some of these mistakes (principally that of a 'sure' business deal involving medical equipment sales) and the couples' five year old son must stay in day care while they try to make ends meet. After a chance meeting w/ a stock broker, Chris realizes that he would do well as a broker himself and decides to vie for a position as an intern w/ a top brokerage firm in the area. No sooner is Chris accepted for the unpaid internship than his wife decides to leave he and his son behind and head for greener pastures. Saddled w/ the intense responsibilities of his unpaid job as well as trying to sell what is left of the medical equipment, Chris struggles mightily as he tries to provide the basic necessities for he and his son amidst great odds.

First of all, may I just say that this movie is not aptly titled. It should be called 'The Pursuit of Wealth' or 'The Pursuit of Self-Worth' since, in essence, that's REALLY what it's about. The idea that happinesss is somehow connected w/ monetary success does not resonate with me and I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way. When father and son spend the night on a bathroom floor due to having been evicted from their motel room, I know I could not have been the only one to wonder WHERE this man's friends were? Did he spend so much time working that he didnt have any? But no, because his whole job before the internship was supposedly attempting to sell 'bone density' machines and therefore he should have had plenty of free time to pal around w/ his cronies. What about his family? Surely there was someone to take them in. In addition, I couldnt help but be wholly disturbed by the fact that this man would rather drag his son along after him every day in a race to the local 'mission' in order to get his nightly bed than to abandon this crapshoot of a job opportunity and get a real job that paid regularly enough to keep a roof over their heads. Sheesh. What if he HADNT gotten the job w/ the brokerage firm (a one in 20 shot, no less)? Six months of sleeping in roach motels and running after buses would have been for naught. And we get the distinct feeling that this guy would probably have wallowed in self pity for quite some time afterwards. Wanting to make a success of oneself is one thing...doing so at all costs is another. And I certainly can't support the latter. After all, success is relative. While I suppose some people may feel that getting to the top of the carreer ladder qualifies as success, I happen to feel that keeping one's family clothed and fed (both physically and spiritually) is far more important and if one has to be a janitor to make that happen, the success is no less grand. So when our hero Chris arrives at his motel room one night only to find that he has been evicted , I can't say I felt all that differently than five year old Christopher did when he threw that big tantrum. After all, WHY did it have to happen? The truth is, it didnt.

In spite of all those factors, I didnt hate the movie. Will Smith is one heck of an actor and he plays this part well. It is a believeable struggle he has and you feel the redemption he feels at its conclusion (I'm not going to put spoiler warnings here because, c'mon, did you REALLY think he wasnt going to get the job?). Jaden Smith is a precocious little thing with a special gift for connecting with the audience. And the direction was quality stuff, with only a few scenes seemingly tacked on for effect. I guess the eighties backdrop was necessary since the movie is based on a true story but it would have been just as effective if it were pushed forward to modern day. People certainly seem to identify w/ this type of thing and ladies love to reach for their hankies when there is a child involved in any kind of life struggle.

I just find it really frustrating that this movie was touted as a tale of conviction in the face of adversity when the adversity was, for the most part, self inflicted.

My rating: 5/10 (gotta give Smith a nod for his acting)

2009-03-12T09:43:00.000-07:00

Mini Review:
THE CAINE MUTINY (1954)
STARRING: HUMPHREY BOGART, VAN JOHNSON, and JOSE FERRER
DIRECTED BY:EDWARD DYMYTRYK

The story of a naval captain with insubordination issues is naturally an appealing one, since it involves 'captive' persons under obvious stress. This movie handles the subject in an interesting way, telling the tale principally from the perspective of the crew.

When the 'Caine' is put under the authority of a new captain, Commander Francis Queeg (impeccably portrayed by Bogart in what is probably his best performance), all involved are initially pleased. But their pleasure quickly turns to dismay when the new captain proves to me far more demanding and meticulous than they anticipated. What is at first thought to be simply unfairness and strict adherence to rules soon becomes outright paranoia, in the opinion of the crew. Influenced by his shipmates, 2nd in command Lt Maryk (Van Johnson) takes it upon himself to commandeer the ship when Queeg's seemingly unbalanced orders during a dangerous storm at sea threaten the lives of the men. The story soon turns from exciting maritime adventure to courtroom drama as the instigators of the mutiny must face the consequences of their actions.

Bogart is brilliant in this role, which requires that he not only show salty stoicism but also manic frustration. His final scenes are especially memorable. As for the rest of the case, Jose Ferrer provides a standout performance as Lt Greenwald, a man with a tortured conscience. The direction is well done, though I felt that the film had difficulty deciding at times whether it wanted to be a comedy or a drama. The look of the thing will remind you of other films of the era (think Father Goose, Mr Roberts, or even South Pacific)-the seamen taking on that standard 1950's appearance of so many buttered rolls. Attractive, shiny, and shrowded in clean blue cotton, they don't necessarily bring the realism of their life at sea home to the viewer. That's fine with me since I don't necessarily go into these films for a true to life experience. It's a satisfying movie with one very important performance.

My rating: 8/10

2009-02-27T13:28:00.000-08:00

MINI REVIEW:
DARLING (1965)
DIRECTED BY: JOHN SCHLESINGER
STARRING: JULIE CHRISTIE

Portraying the flighty, sexy Diana Scott may not have been much of a stretch for Julie Christie but the range of emotions and the fact that she's in virtually every scene definitely qualified her for the oscar she won. However, I can't say I liked this movie all that much. Diana Scott is not a very likeable person after all, and therefore I didnt really care what happened to her throughout her many romances or her hasty marriage to an Italian prince. I found myself not even able to focus on the lovely direction by Schlesinger or the artistically constructed screen entrances which were probably the movie's strongest point outside of its principal performance. Sometimes a movie just doesnt grab you and I chalk it up to my inability to connect w/ the lifestyle or ambivelent attitude of all the characters involved with this one.

Not a waste of time, really, but I wouldnt watch it again.

My rating: 6/10

2009-02-27T06:49:00.000-08:00

Mini Review:
THE BAND WAGON (1953)
DIRECTED BY : VINCENT MINELLI
STARRING: FRED ASTAIRE AND CYD CHARISSE

As long as I've heard of this movie, I only just caught it yesterday on TCM. I'm glad I did. The ballet at the end is one of the greatest cinematic moments for either of the film's lead stars and the choreography is innovative and awe inspring, to say the least. Other than the final dance, however, the only other scene that stands out is the famous 'That's Entertainment' number early in the film. Along with Cole Porter's 'Another Opening, ANother Show' from 'Kiss Me Kate', it goes down in history as one of the 'theme' songs of the musical stage productions. Unfortunately, the rest of the movie does little else than build up to these two numbers and remains largely forgettable. Astaire is funny and charming, as always, but his character doesnt have the same draw as some of the earlier leading men he portrayed. It's a good film with two GREAT scenes.

My Rating: 7/10

2009-02-03T11:18:00.000-08:00

MINI REVIEW:
HUSH HUSH SWEET CHARLOTTE (1964)
DIRECT BY: ROBERT ALDRICH
STARRING: BETTE DAVIS, AGNES MOOREHEAD, JOSEPH COTTON and OLIVIA DEHAVILLAND

I've often seen this movie grouped in and compared with Whatever Happened To Baby Jane?, but I find it superior in almost every way. While the performances in 'Baby Jane' are noteworthy (Victor Buono underplays his character wonderfully), I find them a painfully over the top, for the most part. In this film, the acting by DeHavilland, Cotton and Davis is also memorable, principally from Davis who provides a layered performance as the half-crazed Charlotte while still retaining an air of poise. Cotton is a surprising scene stealer with his drunken drawl and DeHavilland's sinister grace is so unlike most of her films that we can't help but be impressed. The direction by Aldrich is on par w/ the crisp black and white style of 'Baby Jane' but it favors this lazy Southern landscape and comes off as even more atmospheric, almost regal. The grislier scenes are unique and suspenseful where they could have been formulaic and dull. For those reasons, I give this a nod and an easy:

8/10

2009-01-30T11:20:00.000-08:00

THE CLOCK (1945)
DIRECTED BY:VINCENT MINELLI
STARRING: JUDY GARLAND and ROBERT WALKER

Sometimes a movie comes along that immediately becomes a favorite. A little gem that you've never heard of, that slipped past the radar of critically acclaimed classics and goes down in history as one of the most underrated movies you've seen. The Clock is one of these wonderful little surprises.

Judy Garland and Robert Walker star as the principal characters in this sweet little romance that takes place during two days in Manhattan, close to the end of WWII. Walker is 'Joe', a serviceman on leave for 48 hrs only-a popular premise for films of this time and genre. He is , in his own words, very 'green'-a small town boy completely at a loss in this giant city. Alice, herself relatively new to Manhattan, is a cheery secretary who comes to his rescue by offering to show him around a little while after a chance meeting at Grand Central Station. Her spritely tour of the city, however, evolves into something much more as the hours pass and it becomes evident to both of them that they are falling deeply inlove. Over the course of Joe's leave, they begin to face the reality that they must either commit to the relationship in spite of adversity or never see one another again.

The movie starts out lightly enough, as the innocence of the newfound friends moves the story along in a humorous way. However, as the hours progress-even the viewer gets drawn into the sense of urgency that the pair feel when they realize their time together is coming to a rapid end. There is also a solemn anti-war message that lurks beneath the sweetness of the story as the lovers face all sorts of obstacles in their simple desire to be together as long as Joe's sense of duty will allow. Moments of the film are exquisitely crafted,such as one scene in particular in which the main characters realize beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are meant to be together. The scene takes place amid the sound of sirens, in a park after midnight. It is lovingly constructed, zooming in closely on Judy's tearful face and Robert's bobbing adam's apple with tender effort. And it will wring the heart. Another brilliant scene, in which the couple are being married in an offhand way by a harried justice of the peace who shows absolutely no regard for the solemnity of the occasion, is extremely memorable. A passing train drowns out his words so that the youthful pair are left struggling to maintain their composure in the face of such an disrespect. I have to admit, a tissue certainly comes in handy more than once during this movie.

Minelli's direction is phenomenal and it's unfortunate that his more lavish movie musicals overshadow this one so entirely. The film is beautifully shot in black and white and maintains it's moving sentimentality throughout. Judy Garland has never looked lovelier-you can almost feel Minelli's attraction to her in the way he frames her face. The one flaw, I feel, is the overly melodramatic music that is on occasion much too loud, a common problem w/ romantic movies of this time. But it's easy to overlook.

As far as romantic films go, this far outshines more popular ones such as Sleepless and Seattle or An Affair To Rembmer. It's just a classic, pure and simple.

My rating: 9/10

2009-01-29T07:13:00.000-08:00

WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION (1957)
STARRING: CHARLES LAUGHTON, ELSA LANCHESTER, MARLENE DEITRICH
DIRECTED BY: BILLY WILDER

Of COURSE it's directed by Billy Wilder. Looking at his list of movies, I'm utterly shocked at the diversity of them all. Having discovered this, I'm hard pressed to group him together with my favorite all time directors, Frank Capra and Alfred Hitchcock, in terms of the number of great films he has to his name. Anyway, on with this movie review:

Witness for the Prosecution is an Agatha Christie short story and it has been reported that this is the only film version of her work that she herself was completely happy about. It is a phenomenal little movie; I say 'little movie' because it is pretty light fare, even w/ the heavy subject matter.

The story follows ailing defense lawyer, Sir Wilfred Robarts (Charles Laughton) as he is released from the hospital after a serious heart attack. His doctor has instructed him to avoid stressful cases in court, alcohol, and smoking-all things that he loves and which he is quick to recommence immediately after leaving the hospital. This in spite of the strict watch of his endearingly militant nurse, Miss Plimsoll (Elsa Lanchester, the real life wife of Laughton in a role that was created principally for her since the character did not exist in the novel). Soon after his return home, Robarts is approached with exactly the type of case his doctor would warn against, a seemingly innocent man being charged w/ the murder of an elderly woman. The accused man, Leonard Vole (Tyrone Power), feels the charge is rediculous and claims that his own wife, Christine (Marlene Deitrich), would be able to support his allibi at the supposed time of murder. However, upon interviewing said wife, Robarts realizes that the matter may not be quite so simple since she herself seems intent on condemning her husband. What follows is a wonderful courtroom drama replete with great performances, fun twists, and plenty of wit.

In spite of the multitude of acclaimed English thespians in this movie, Laughton runs away with the movie (metaphorically of course; I doubt the poor man could have 'run' anywhere if his life depended upon it). He is a perfect mix of humor, smarts, and subtlety-while at the same time huffing his giant frame around the set like a petulant child when it comes to evading the watchful eye of Miss Plimsoll and her little white pills. His reactions to the inevitable plot twists are obvious and painstakingly heartfelt in their delivery. Incredible performance! In addition, Lanchester is wonderful as the charmingly devoted Miss Plimsoll and Tyrone Power is better than usual as Leonard Vole-a sympathetic hero indeed. Finally, how can we overlook the wonderfully layered performance of Marlene Deitrich as Christine Vole? She accomplished so much in this movie, making us feel the dilemma she faces-her cold sense of duty amid the obvious confusion of her husband who evidently holds her on a pedestal and loves her to distraction. I can't say more about her acting because it would partly give away the 'twist' of this story but if you've seen it-you know how good she is.

Billy Wilder adapts this story flawlessly to the screen and succeeds in something many directors have tried and failed, making the film version worlds more involving than the book. Even Christie would agree, I think.

This is one for the shelf. Even after repeat viewings, I find myself in just as much suspense-knowing full well how it ends but somehow still holding my breath for its exciting conclusion.

My rating: 9/10

2009-01-23T15:41:00.000-08:00

MINI REVIEW:
NEPTUNE'S DAUGHTER (1949)
STARRING: ESTHER WILLIAMS and RICARDO MONTALBAN
DIRECTED BY:EDWARD BUZZELL

Do yourself a favor: Start at the beginning. Watch Esther swim. Skip forward about 15 minutes to the little swimwear 'fashion show' in the movie that features some of the cutest vintage swimwear I've ever seen. Skip forward another 10 minutes or so to the quartet performance of 'Baby, It's Cold Outside'-probably one of the most darling songs ever written. Then, fast forward to the very end and watch the all too brief water ballet that concludes the film. Belive me, you've missed nothing.

There is supposed to be a story line involving two sisters and some confusion about the identity of a cuban polo player. Whatever, I lost complete interest after the cute swimwear.

My rating: 4/10 (but only for the bathing suits and the great song!)

2009-01-22T08:12:00.000-08:00

MINI REVIEW:
THE FOUNTAINHEAD (1949)
DIRECTED BY: KING VIDOR
STARRING: PATRICIA NEAL and GARY COOPER

An extremely pared down version of the Ayn Rand epic novel.

Gary Cooper stars as modern architect and 'man against the world', Howard Roarke, while Patricia Neal plays Dominique Wyland, a married woman who believes in his abilities but also happens to be madly in love with the guy. The story is compelling, one man's architectural dreams pitted against the popular masses and traditional building styles of the time, and it moves along at a clip. Unfortunately, the dialogue suffers from too much melodrama and becomes painfully wooden even when being delivered by these accomplished actors. Cooper's Roarke is a representative of modernity, not a living breathing figure. And Neal is token feminine support instead of a fleshed out heroine, in spite of her magnificent hair. The star of this movie, the thing that saves it from subtle failure, is Vidor's direction and the gorgeous black and white cinematography that speaks so fluently of the time. Certain shots were frameable in their pristine and stark construction, a perfect example of the beauty in contrast. Vidor proves himself here again to be a largely visual director, not so much a solid storyteller. However, it's certainly warrants a viewing and the look of it, like his 1928 masterpiece The Crowd, will stay with you.

My rating: 6/10

2009-01-21T14:01:00.000-08:00

MINI REVIEW:
THE FORTUNE COOKIE (1966)
DIRECTED BY: BILLY WILDER
STARRING: WALTER MATTHAU and JACK LEMMON

I caught this today on TCM and must re-emphasize what a great team Matthau and Lemmon make. Their brand of wit just pairs perfectly, especially when helmed by great director, Billy Wilder, and placed in a lovely black and white environ. The story focuses on an overly zealous camera-man Henry Hinkle( Lemmon) who, while attempting the perfect sports-shot, is plowed into by his subject-Quarterback 'Boom Boom Jackson' who is intent to making his touchdown. Placed in the hospital with only minor injuries, Hinkle finds himself torn between the sincere apologies of 'Boom Boom' and the persistent pressure of his lawyer brother in law ,Willie (Matthau in his oscar winning role), to 'milk' the situation for all its worth-insurance wise by feigning far more more serious medical conditions. It's a good solid story with great acting and a steady pace. There are plenty of funny moments to enjoy in both the script and the delivery of it but there is also a healthy message to take away. This is one I'd glady watch again, if for nothing else than to revel in the great onscreen chemistry of the two leads (non-sexually speaking of course...heh heh).

My rating: 8/10

2009-01-21T09:59:00.000-08:00

CAMILLE CLAUDEL (1988)
DIRECTED BY:BRUNO NUYTTEN
STARRING: GERARD DEPARDIEU and ISABELLE ADJANI

I rented this film from Blockbuster when I was about fifteen years old. During the three days that I had it (maybe more), I watched it probably four times. I'm not sure what impressed me the most-the art, the acting, or the romance. I haven't seen it since so when it premiered on OVTV this weekend, I gave it another view.

The biopic follows the life of famed sculptor, Camille Claudel-a young girl who trained under the tuttelage of Rodin himself and eventually became his lover. After a somewhat tumultuous relationship, Camille leaves Rodin behind, only to realize how strongly her work was defined by their love. Without his guiding hand, her creative strength wanes, as do her mental faculties. She becomes obsessed with his memory, convincing herself in the meantime that he is somehow stealing her ideas and stalking her person. Ultimately, she becomes an alcoholic and an agoraphobe-inprisoning herself in her studio and shunning all outside society. Without family to intervene, she would almost certainly have self destructed. Still, though her family had her committed to medical care in 1913, she never recovered from her mental illness or truly reached her artistic potential. Depressing? You bet.

Isabelle Adjani is a revelation as Camille. Her beautiful face, tiny frame, and porcelain skin are in complete contradiction to her character's boundless strength, harsh language, and latent self loathing. In short, she was perfectly cast and runs away with the movie. She makes the slow descent into madness even more painful to watch since we also much be confronted by her angellic looks and perseverance. Knowing her eventuality as we do from history, the journey is an arduous one. Depardieu is probably more physically attractive in this movie, as Rodin, than any other I've seen and he does an able job as well. Both of their faces are memorable and the physical demands of this part are handled with ease. Costumes and sets are consistent with the period, as are the subtle gray landscapes throughout. It's a very good looking movie.

I credit the director for the look of the film, but also with it's major flaw-that of being overly melodramatic. Though this story does have little to work with in terms of what is uplifting or positive, I feel like more effort should have been made in the last hour to focus on the beauty that came of the protagonists' relationship,some exquisite pieces of art. Instead, I felt that too much attention was paid to Claudel's decline to put sufficient emphasis on the sculptures and their meaning. The music was also extraordinarily tedious, assaulting us through most of the film and competing with the story itself in a distracting and overbearing way. Still, there are some worthy supporting performances in the film that deserve mention, principally that of Phillipe Clevenot as Eugene Blot.

Though I feel that this film lacks continuity in its construction and suffers from excessive melodrama, the good outweighs the bad and it remains a 'must see' movie. Adjani's portrayal is still one of my favorite performances ever put to film and it's pleasant to see Depardieu underplay a role for once. In addition, the chance to see the physical energy and strength needed to pursue this artistic medium , the closeup views of bloody knuckles being peppered with grains of marble as the chisel does its work, the sinewy paleness of bodies straining to accomplish artist- conceived poses, the stark constrast of unsculpted rock with the smoothe and flowing beauty it bcomes-all of these things will stay with you long after the credits roll.

Which leads me to give the film a well deserved 8/10.

2009-01-09T11:50:00.000-08:00

Itty Bitty Review:
MILLION DOLLAR MERMAID ((1952)
STARRING : ESTHER WILLIAMS and VICTOR MATURE
DIRECTY BY: MERVYN LERYOY

Just thought I'd stop in and say a few words about Esther Williams. She was magnificent. She was gorgeous. She accomplished things underwater that some dancers couldnt do on solid ground. And there is an entire Olympic event that is based solely on her unique abilities.

This movie is a 'biopic' about Annette Kellerman, the famed Australian swimmer who dared to wear a one piece swimsuit that hugged her body and was quite the pariah in proper society. Esther gives the character lots of spunk and a sweet smile while at the same time turning out some amazing underwater musical numbers that have yet to be duplicated or attempted. Storywise, this flick has little to truly grab you. However, it's worth seeing simply for Esther's uncanny underwater dancing and the gorgeous technicolor cinematography that would lift anyone's spirits.

My rating:7/10

*I'll probably be turning out alot of these mini reviews this month, as TCM goes into it's 30 days of Oscar and I catch alot of quality movies I've missed.

2009-01-08T11:13:00.001-08:00

SHALL WE DANCE (1937)
STARRING: FRED ASTAIRE and GINGER ROGERS
DIRECTED BY: MARK SANDRICH

Being a longtime fan of movie musicals, I have made it a personal goal to see all of them. Yep, I've even got Xanadu under my belt. This one, Shall We Dance, has long been considered one of Astaire and Rogers' best movies. Before today, I'd always managed to miss it but finally, after seeing it, I can adamantly say it IS their best.

The story follows ballet dancer 'Petrov'(Astaire)and his pursuit of famed broadway hoofer, Linda Keane. Peter (known as Petrov to the ballet elite) has been a fan for a long while but Linda is tired of her insipid admirers and won't give him a chance. The two finally meet up on a steamship bound for New York and immediately, sparks fly. However, the 'obstacle' to this particular love story presents itself in the form of an unwelcome rumor, that the two are already married by the time they arrive in New York. Linda feels used, assuming that Peter started the rumor and denies the marriage to all who will listen-which turns out to be no one. What follows is some great dance numbers, wonderful Gershwin melodies, witty repartee', and lots of fun.

The two leads have wonderful chemistry and its never been more evident than in this movie. They play off each other with ease, relegating the rest of the solid cast to well, comparitive insignificance. Neither of them are strong singers but the scene in which Astaire woos his lady with 'They Can't Take That Away From Me' is one of the genre's most romantic. The tears in her eyes...just lovely. I got a little misty myself. Ginger Rogers has always been a wonderful leading lady in my book, and one of the greatest things about she and Astaire as a couple is that since they both could act, the relationships-from movie to movie-from character to character-were always believeable.

The dancing is especially effective when coupled with the great George and Ira songs, such as the title number, 'Let's Call The Whole Thing Off', 'They All Laughed', and 'Slap that Bass'. The most memorable perhaps, is the dance on roller skates to 'Let's Call The Whole Thing Off' that foreshadowed a more complicated but similar number Gene Kelly performed in 'It's Always Fair Weather' over a decade later. Graceful but still retaining some comedic value.

Though I am still a huge fan of the MGM musical, there is no doubt that Astaire and Rogers were the best dance team that every graced the screen. The Berkleys of Broadway, later in their carreer, provides viewers with a glimpse of what could have been, had MGM gotten a hold of them sooner-in terms of color and brilliance. But still, this is definitely a crowning achievement and one I plan to watch many times.

My rating: 9/10

2008-12-16T06:31:00.000-08:00

AUSTRALIA (2008):
DIRECTED BY: BAZ LUHRMAN
STARRING:HUGH JACKMAN, NICOLE KIDMAN, BRANDON WALTERS

It took me awhile to post this review. I deliberately allowed a few days to pass since I've seen it because I wanted to be as unblinded by the 'glitz' of it all when I wrote my opinions. I've settled down somewhat and here is what I think, in retrospect.

Baz Luhrman is , in my opinion, one of the most ingenious directors working today. I adore his style, the chaos with which he opens each film and the subtle, almost imperceptible, way he slows down the pace of the film in order to tell a good story. Australia was marketed as a 'sweeping romantic epic' and the trailers made it appear very traditional indeed. However, it's evident in the first five minutes of the movie that it is not a traditional romantic period drama, at least, not one from THIS century.

The movie begins with a strange disclaimer, one that addresses the aborigine people and states that some of the characters depicted in the film are based on real deceased people; evidently the aborigines are not allowed to utter the name or see a representation of those who have died. Wha?? Anyway, that is neither here nor there...I just thought it was worth mentioning.

The actual story opens w/ the voice of the film's narrator-a small half white, half native boy named Nullah, and one of the movie's central characters. His voice is instantly mesmerizing and I felt provided a great basis for the tale to begin. Nicole Kidman portrays Lady Sarah Ashley, an english aristocrat who is called to Australia by her husband to assist in running their huge cattle property-which is currently being threatened by neighboring cattle-man and ranch-owner, King Carney. Upon her arrival, she is greeted by the sad sight of her dead husband lying prostrate on a table, presumably murdered by Aborigine Chief, King George. Determined to save her property from takeover, she enlists the services of Drover (Hugh Jackman)-a hot-tempered, super sexy, beautifully tanned cattle driver with a chip on his shoulder. She also discovers that with her property, she has inherited several Aborigine helpers, one of which is the narrator of our story-the halfbreed boy, Nullah. As Sarah and Drover work to save the property, a task that involves driving thousands of cattle across the outback, they fall in love and develop parental feelings for the recently orphaned Nallah. The advent of the Japanese invasion during WW2 causes lots of turmoil and inevitable seperations but 'love conquers all', as they say, and I'll just leave it at that.

Anyone who goes into this not being familiar w/ Baz Luhrman's directing style may find the first frantic 15 minutes of the movie a bit off-putting. It is almost cartoony in its execution, over-the-top and silly at times. Nicole Kidman's stiff english accent and Jackman's 'crikey's' and 'g'dyes' seem rediculously stereotypical and contrived. Nullah's traditional Aborigine-English 'speak' may also confuse many. The gorgeous vistas of Australia are a saving grace however, as are the enhanced colors of the scenery and costumes. I feel that Luhrman was making a brave attempt to recreate the 'technicolor' feel of great old epics like 'Gone With The Wind' or 'Raintree County' and in this, he was largely successful. The cinematography is unrealistically gorgeous, almost like a set, and those panoramic images coupled with the lilting score do provide one with an experience very like those grand old hollywood pictures. The dialogue is also very indicative of those older films and plays out as 'hit or miss' in this case. Love scenes are schmaltzy and overly dramatic (great kisses though) and the heartstring tugging is woefully apparent in turn. But whether those are 'faults' or 'perks' are really up to the viewer. I got it. But I didnt always 'buy it', if that makes sense.

On a personal level, I wish Baz had been just a bit more consistent in achieving his vision. Some of the brutal quality of the war scenes and one scene in particular that involves a character being 'trampled' by a runwaway herd of cattle were out of keeping with the dreamy atmosphere that prevailed during the rest of the film. If Old Hollywood were what he was after, I think he should have stayed there, instead of bringing us abruptly back to the 'now' of filmmaking with a dose of grisly realism. Also, while I loved the inclusion of "Somewhere Over The Rainbow", especially during one key scene that is Kidman's best of the film, I felt it was featured far too often. The constant reminders of the tune caused it to lose much of its initial appeal. Some of the scenes of 'love and loss' were also overplayed to a fault, again, causing them to lose much of their impact.

So the direction had it's moments and it's missteps, in my opinion. As far as the acting goes, I initially though Kidman was miscast but after seeing the movie, she was a good choice. Her performance is endearing after the first few uncomfortable moments and she warms to the role nicely. Jackman is a charming (and physically impressive )leading man who happens to also be a heck of an actor. The chemistry between the leads was palpable...though I'll admit I really wanted to see Wolverine's claws come out a few times, just for the heck of it. The love scenes would have been even better...heh heh. The supporting cast was more physically memorable (some great and camera friendly faces there) than for their acting ability in this film, with the exception of Brandon Walters who plays the boy Nullah and easily runs away with the movie's best performance. I was left with a better (if cinematically contrived) understanding of the Aborigine people and their ways as well as a depper admiration for the beauty of the Australian landscape.

To sum up, I feel strongly that if one is to see this movie as the director envisioned it, it needs to be seen at the theater. The enormity of it would not be appreciated on the small screen. For those of you who love a romantic film, this one is worth seeing. It's not perfect but it definitely serves it's purpose as gorgeous escapist entertainment for a holiday audience. And did I mention Jackman's abs?

My rating: 7/10

2008-10-07T05:14:00.000-07:00

BEAUTIFUL BLUE EYES 1925-2008

So long, Luke...looks like those fifty eggs finally caught up w/ you.

2008-09-12T12:49:00.001-07:00

BECOMING JANE (2007)
DIRECTED BY:JULIAN JARROLD
STARRING: ANNE HATHAWAY and JAMES MCEVOY

When I saw the trailer for this film last summer, I was very enthused. I love Jane Austen and I love looking at Anne Hathaway, especially when she smiles. But alas and alack, the idea of the film largely outshines the actuality of it.

'Becoming Jane' follows a glossy, idealized version of the writer as she struggles along with her large family. The brood lives in comparative poverty, the patriarch being a financially unstable clergyman and the mother, a dismally typical harpie (sorry, Julie). Jane writes to amuse her family and when a distant relative, Thomas Lefoy, visits from the city-her first impression if one of distate at his arrogant attitude. His judgement of her writing, while at first seeming harsh, eventually produces good fruit as Jane finally puts her hand to a story she takes pride in and falls predictably inlove with Thomas. Of cource, family refuses to approve of their marriage on either side and, as we all know, Jane Austen remains unmarried for the rest of her life. Not quite so satisfying as Emma or Pride and Predjudice, but there you have it.

Performances are all pretty good. McEvoy outshines his co-stars. Hathaway's English accent, which I thought seemed natural and polished in Nicholas Nickleby, came across as stiff and inconsistent here. It faltered during her more emotional scenes which is when her acting was actually superior. The rest of the big-name cast isnt given much to do with the spare script that is provided. I felt within the first 10 minutes a sense of familiarity that led me to believe I had heard much of it before. And indeed I have, in the heroine's own novels.

I have problems w/ the direction as well. While the cinematography is brilliant and crisp during the opening scenes, it seemed to become a little dark towards the end of the film and even the beautiful people in the cast began to look haggard. Shots and sequences were commendable and even the scene transitions were extremely smooth. However, I'll be the first to admit I missed Ang Lee's method of bathing his stars in golden sunlight and the sight of Keira Knightly standing against a fabulous landscape. There were some gorgeous moments, but the consistent feeling behind the film was, for me, a little blue.

As a classic love story, it just didnt impress me as particularly memorable or moving. It just 'was'. And whether there is any truth to the tale or not, there is no doubt that the telling of it pales when compared to the stories Jane Austen herself imagined. So it could probably have gone untold.

My rating: 5/10

2008-05-19T08:06:00.000-07:00

THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: PRINCE CASPIAN (2008)
STARRING: BEN BARNES, PETER DINKLAGE, GEORGIE HENLEY
DIRECTED BY: ANDREW ADAMSON

Since the development of CGI, Fantasy films go either of two ways: hit or miss. They can hit and hit BIG, as in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Or they can miss, some doing so more intensely than others. The Golden Compass = BIG miss. Gorgeous but flat (and SO not deserving of the special effect awards that should have gone to Transformers!). The Spiderwick Chronicles = slight miss. A fantastic series of books (the 'field guide' itself is a brilliant piece of work) that didnt translate to the screen with much impact.

Ever since I was a young'n, I have always ADORED the Narnia books. C.S. Lewis was such an intuitive author, and so respectful of the spiritual side of things. My son has recently taken up the reading of this series and he, even at age eight, is very entertained by them. If you read them as an adult, it's impossible to miss the biblical parallels based on Lewis' own study and love of scripture, but as a child-they're just great books. Good triumphs over evil and all that. Anyway, I was beyond thrilled when the first film installment (The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe)was released a couple of years ago. It was expertly cast, true to the source material, and the effects were endearing, warm, and beautiful. My only complaint was that it did not seem to translate to the screen as effectively as I once thought it would-after all my hopes and aspirations for the movie, it was just a smidgen anti-climactic. My score was 8.5/10

Not so with this second film, Prince Caspian, which outshines the first endeavor in every way. The book was always one of my least favorite of the series, so replete was it with battle scenes that the story seemed slim. It needed cinematic brilliance to bring it to life. Not only has Adamson brought it to life, he has made it one of the best Fantasy films that I've seen.

The story follows the four Pevensie children as they re-enter the world of Narnia hundreds of years after their rule. The castle in which they dwelt, Cair Paravel, is now in ruins and the mystical creatures of the land have all been in hiding for centuries. The evil Telmarines, humans (of Spanish descent?)who have crossed into the magical land, have vanquished and suppressed the Narnians until few believe they exist anymore. Prince Caspian, heir to the Telmarine throne, find himself in mortal danger from his wicked uncle, King Miraz, after the Queen gives birth to a son. The King wants his own son to inherit the throne and will stop at nothing to bring this to pass. Caspian escapes to the woods where many Narnians are hiding and with the help of they and the Pevensies, fights to win back his rightful place.

Because of the time that has passed, we have the opportunity to meet many new and interesting creatures. Badgers, large mice (R.O.U.S.'s anyone?), minotaurs, dwarves, and centaurs rally around the prince with passionate loyalty. Of the newly introduced characters, Peter Dinklage as Trumpkin the dwarf and Reepicheep the Warrior Mouse (ably voiced by Eddie Izzard) make the largest impression. The returning cast also brings alot more to this film. Other than Liam Neeson's late appearance as Aslan and Tilda Swinton in a small cameo as the White Witch, all of them are given a meatier, more layered role. We see Edmund and Lucy as noble adults (since they have already lived to adult-hood in Narnia, it isnt likely they would act like children in this film), Susan as a regal lady and cunning warrior, Peter as a great king-torn between his duty to Narnia and his loyalty for Aslan. They all do an excellent job, with Georgie Henley (Lucy) really standing out and coming into her own as an actress. Her close-ups are especially memorable; the camera loves her face.

The story moves along quickly, despite the 2 hrs plus run-time. Only the end of the film seems to drag a little, as the filmmakers attempt to prepare us for the next movie. But the body of the film scoots along at a spritely pace, providing ample time for character set-up and storytelling alike. The two key battles last for a long time but are interspliced with quieter segments that make the action stand out all the more. The visuals are absolutely stunning and the camera work is innovative in itself, a quality which I feel sets it apart from many other 'pretty' films of the genre. I felt that the actual fighting was on par with the battle at the end of Return of the King, and somehow a little more suspenseful since nobody wants to see a giant mouse or a kid kick the bucket. Though the film is darker than the first, it still resonates as a bit more 'kid-friendly' than the 'Rings' movies. There are some intense battle scenes but I felt they were skillfully edited and though the sound effects were cringe-inducing, very little blood is visually shed. Artistically and emotionally, I felt this movie was a treat.

The Voyage of the Dawn Treader is in pre-production and I'm even more anxious to see it brought to fruition now that this one is such a success. With the popularity 'Prince Caspian' is sure to bring to the franchise, I'm hoping the producers will continue to pull out all the stops and give us another gorgeous story to enjoy. The future looks bright, I must say.

My rating: 8/10

2008-05-16T12:43:00.000-07:00

THE MIRACLE OF MORGAN'S CREEK (1944)
STARRING: EDDIE BRACKEN and BETTY HUTTON
DIRECTED BY: PRESTON STURGES

Few people can deny the infectious joy of the 1940's screwball comedy. This one in particular really provides a proper representation of the genre, combining as it does quick-witted dialogue, lightning fast delivery, and excellent comedic performances from everyone involved.

'Miracle' tells the story of Trudy Kockenlocker-a spritely teenage girl with a sadly apparent lack of self control and thirst for adventure. Her childhood friend, addlepated Norvel Jones, is a loyal young man who remains hopelessly in love with her despite her impetuous ways. When Trudy asks him to provide an alibi for her as she heads off for a night of drinking and dancing w/ a group of departing soldiers, he doesnt hesitate. However, he soon regrets his chivalry when Trudy arrives the next morning and can't remember a single detail of the preceeding night. As her clouded memory recovers, the horrified girl realizes that in the midst of her drunken galavanting she has married a nameless officer and is expecting his baby with absolutely no proof of the union! Faced with the obstacle of having to tell her father and sister, Trudy once again turns to trusty Norvel to help her out of her predicament. The end of this film is one of the brilliant moments of cinematic comedy.

Preston Sturges is the obvious reason that this film works as well as it does. In spite of the controversial subject matter, he manages to make it uproariously funny while teaching valuable lessons about life and love along the way. The direction is very deft, w/ only a very few moments that go on too long-a common hazard of screwball comedies. The dialogue is fantastic and delivered so naturally from the key players that one can't help but be charmed. Betty Hutton plays Trudy with goofy panache, drawing the viewer farther into her muddled situation w/ each scene. Her facial expressions and physical gestures could convey the emotion of the story even without the snappy dialogue. Eddie Bracken is at the height of his slapstick talents, evoking some of the biggest laughs in the film. One scene in particular stays with me-when Trudy forlornly confesses her 'condition' to him right on the heels of his having declared his love for her. Classic stuff. Also memorable is the performance of Diana Lynn as Trudy's down-to-earth, level-headed sister Emily, who at fourteen years old, somehow provides the glue that holds the family together.

Though many published synopses of this film give away the 'Miracle' too quickly, I will let that part be a surprise. Suffice it to say that it is a particularly endearing little surprise, and one that lends a note of sentimentality to what would otherwise be just a funny movie.

In the words of William Shakespeare, so eloquently quoted at the end of the movie, 'Some men are born great. Some men achieve greatness. And some men have greatness thrust upon them.'

My rating: 9/10

2008-05-05T08:18:00.000-07:00

PRIDE AND PREJUDICE (2005)
STARRING: KEIRA KNIGHTLY, MATTHEW MACFAYDEN, JUDY DENCH
DIRECTED BY: JOE WRIGHT

Sometimes I see a movie and am not all that moved. Sometimes it just kind of lays there, pleasant but largely forgettable. I don't know if I was just in a 'mood' the first time I saw this adaptation of the Jane Austen novel or not, but now I think I must have been daft. Now, it makes me warm all over and goes down in my book as one of the most unabashedly romantic movies in years.

For Jane Austen fans, who like to see a faithful and detailed accounting of her work , the BBC Mini-Series starring Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle may be a more satisfying film. However the romantic girly side of me just loves this one. Keira Knightly was a great choice for Elizabeth, though I'll admit I thought at first she would be too pretty for the role. Jane was supposed to be the pretty one, after all, and Elizabeth was the witty, personable sibling. However, Rosamund Pike-as Jane- was a clever casting choice because she's just beautiful enough to stand out beside Knightly and the wardrobe and lighting lend her an ethereal glow throughout the film so that we are never astonished that she would naturally be the showier of the two. Matthew Macfayden was a handsome, sufficiently brooding pick for Darcy. He isnt given a whole lot to say but he does so with feeling and comes off as a quiet intellect-as we know him to be. The chemistry between Knightly and Macfayden works excellently as well-a good thing since without it, the film would fail miserably. Dench also turns in a small but impressive performance as the powerful Lady Catherine DeBourg. Another surprising casting choice was Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennet but I was very much amused by his patriarchal demeanor and English accent. And of course, Brenda Blethyn was a perfect choice for the neurotic, flighty Mrs Bennett.

For the romantic movie-goer, there is plenty to offer. Lots of lovers walking in and out of misty landscapes, gorgeous vistas bathed in golden sunsets, a lovely piano score that stays with you, and even one quiet intake of breath that lends itself to a key scene. The direction truly mesmerizes as Wright attempts to put the viewer into the story instead of just telling it. The cinematography, muted colors, and intimate camerawork all provide a truly satisfying film experience-one that becomes increasingly harder to overlook with each viewing.

Last night, after catching it on tv for the 4th time, I've decided that it's pretty silly of me not to have bought it yet. The lead characters have always reminded me of my husband and I-such different personalities but somehow such perfect compliments of each other. No wonder it makes me sigh.

My Rating: 9/10

2008-01-17T10:57:00.000-08:00

REDISCOVERING DISNEY/PIXAR:

As long as I can remember, I have adored annimated films. I suppose that love is also the real reason I adore movie musicals so much, since that is what most Disney films are...or were. With the advent of computer animation, I was at first a little disppointed w/ the non-musical, non fairy-tale direction that the story-telling was taking. But Pixar has changed all that.

Last night, I saw Ratatouille for the first time and was very impressed. It was wonderful and proved that Pixar and Disney have made a good choice in their permanant collaboration. The animation was beautiful, the voice talents of Patton Oswalt and Peter O'Toole were memorable, and the direction of Brad Bird is once again inspiring. This was quite a relief for me since I felt the creators slipped drastically with their production of Cars, the weakest of their efforts thus far. It was lovely and colorful but lacked the engaging characters and great story of the prior Pixar films.

Below is a brief synopsis and review of each of the Disney/Pixar films and my personal opinion and ranking of each:

1.THE INCREDIBLES:
Synopsis: Super Heroes must hide their powers and live like average people after the government decides that they do more harm than good. The sudden arrival of a mega-powerful nemesis makes their re-emergence necessary.
The only Pixar film to make it into my top 100 films of all time, The Incredibles is a shockingly wonderful human story in addtion to a phenomenal feat in annimation. The voice talents are perfectly cast, with Holly Hunter and Jason Lee standing out only slightly. Colors, action scenes, and story-telling all combine to make one smashing piece of movie entertainment with some fantastic dialogue to boot. It is at times hilarious, at times quite moving, and always the height of cinematic brilliance. Family squabbles are deftly handled as well, to the point that we sometimes forget we are watching drawings. It's a stunning achievement in every way.

My rating: 10/10

2.Wall-E
Synopsis: A darling little robot named Wall-E is left behind on earth to clean up the post-apocalyptic mess that human have left behind. With noone but a hearty cockroach to keep him company, Wall-E is pleased and surprised when a feminine robot visits earth and fulfills all his lonely dreams. Unfortunately, 'Eve' was sent for a purpose and when she is returned to her host ship, Wall-E hitches a ride. What he finds is a massive space station where the human race yet perseveres, as a rotund people that are entirely dependant on 'virtual reality'. A movie that has a thought provoking idea at its core while at the same time telling a moving love story.

Andrew Stanton made a fantastic movie here. Second only to 'The Incredibles', in my opinion, Wall-E succeeds on so many different levels. The story is compelling and as I mentioned before, has a bit of a social commentary to its credit. Wall-E is an absolutely precious little character and we are immediately entertained and drawn into his life where the music of 'Hello Dolly' gives him hope and piles of trash serve to occupy his limitless time. The odd juxtaposition of 'Put on Your Sunday Clothes' and the hazy deserted city make for an almost surreal experience. A large part of the movie contains absolutely no dialogue and this in itself was a brave attempt on the part of the creators. There is a huge ammount of 'silent-movie' style humor that will remind Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin fans of those stars' best work. I was completely bowled over by how significant this film has turned out to be in the stream of time and so happy that Pixar has another amazing film on which to base the next Disneyworld attraction.

My rating: 10/10

2.A Bug's Life
Synopsis: A laboring ant colony must find help when a gang of rowdy grasshoppers threaten to confiscate all of their winter's food supply. Flick, a brave worker ant, searches in vain until finally he comes across a troup of circus-insects anxious for a hit show. When it is discovered that they are actually expected to fight, a real test of the performers' bravery ensues. Think 'Three Amigos' for bugs.

A brilliant story coupled w/ superb animation make A Bug's Life one of the best Pixar endeavors. The colors are gorgeous and the landscapes, as seen through the minature eyes of ants, are impressive. Not only does this film succeed in making us care for the most unlikely of creatures, ants, but it also pulls out all the stops in the dialogue department. Some of the industry's greatest comic talent were cast for the voices in this film and the choices were spot-on with David Hyde Pierce playing a pessimistic walking stick, Dave Foley as the our brave hero Flick, and Denis Leary as a manly Ladybug. Kevin Spacey as the Hopper, the head grasshopper, was also a revelation; the character comes alive like no other Pixar villain, in my opinion. This film succeeds where so many animated movies fail-it is a great story that both adults and children can appreciate.

My rating: 10/10

3.Finding Nemo

Synopsis: Distraught father and clownfish, Marlin, must brave the perils of the ocean as he searches for his son, Nemo-caught by a fishing dentist for his aquarium.

The funniest of the Pixar movies, Finding Nemo is a wonderfully entertaining and stunningly beautiful film. Ocean life is depicted in all is glory, from colorful coral reefs to fields of floating jellyfish and each species is given its own painstakingly crafted personality. Voicework is also brilliant, with Albert Brooks leading the cast as the chronically stressed Marlin and Ellen Degenerous running away w/ the entire film as adorably forgetful Dory. Children will never glance at a blue tang in an aquairum without immediately calling it by that familiar name, a sign that the creators have truly done their job. Though John Ratzenburger ( a staple in Pixar voicework), Geoffrey Rush, and Willem Defoe all do wonderful jobs with their parts, it is truly Degenerous that draws the bulk of the laughs. Though much of this can be credited to the writers, its Ellen's own interpretation and delivery of the lines that make them great. The sweet story, comic genious, and sheer beauty of the underwater world make this another masterpiece.

My rating: 10/10

4.Ratatouille:

Synopsis: Remy is a rat with great talent for cooking. When he is seperated from his clan, a natural fascination for food draws him to Gusteaus, a formerly 5 star french restaurant in the middle of Paris. Through oddly endearing means, Remy is able to concoct wondrous dishes using the hands of talentless Linguini-a young man with little skill but big dreams.

I have already expressed some of my opinion in the opening paragraph of this post. Let me add that upon multiple viewings I am even more impressed w/ this film. The voice characterizations are so compelling and the beauty of Paris is so lovingly detailed. Not to mention the food. Who would have thought that animated dishes could make one's mouth water? I also feel that the climax of this film, featuring a restaurant critic's first bite of the title dish, is one of the three best scenes in the Pixar catalogue.

My rating: 9.5/10

5.Toy Story 2:
Synopsis: Stalwart Woody the Cowboy is kidnapped by a nasty toy collector and Buzz Lightyear, his loyal space-toy friend, must save him before Andy gets home.

While it may not have had the originality going for it that the first installment did, Toy Story 2 makes up for it by telling a wonderful story and showcasing some state of the art animation. WHere the first movie spent alot of time setting up the different characters, this film gets right into the story and contains more action that almost any Pixar film except The Incredibles. The addition of Kelsey Grammar as The PRospector and Joan Cusack as Jessie the Cowgirl were also strokes of genius. Details are again exceptional-especially during one scene where Woody is meticulously 'cleaned'-and one lovely song, tenderly sung by Sarah McLachlan, lends an unexpected note of tragedy to the story. As sequels go, Toy Story 2 may be one of the best ever.

My rating: 9.5/10

6.Monsters Inc.:
Synopsis: Monsters Inc, a company in existence for the sole purpose of entering children's rooms through closet doors and capturing the screams that supply the power for their city, is threatened when a 'dangerous' child enters the Monster world. Rather than face the consequences, Sully and Mike struggle to return the precocious little girl to her room but encounter unexpected problems.

Being a mother, I was immediately a fan of this film. The idea that monsters would be frightened of children was ludicrously appealing and the somewhat involved plot set-up succeeds surpisingly well. I also feel that 'Boo' the nameless little girl of indeterminate age (probably about 2) is the best representation of a toddler that Disney or Pixar has created to date. Her every motion and garbled word tugs at the heartstrings, along w/ the sweet brevity she exhibits throughout the film. Sully (John Goodman) and Mike (Billy Crystal) are also wonderful choices as the 'monsters' without malice. Though this film does lack the details and beauty of some of the others, one can't help but marvel at the brilliant color and the motion of Sully's fur as he moves. Incredibly entertaining and surprsingly moving, Monsters Inc has nothing to be ashamed of.

My rating: 9/10

7.Toy Story:
Synopsis: Woody the Cowboy toy must deal with his own jealous feelings as well as his friends apparent awe for a newcomer in the form of Buzz Lightyear, a space toy w/ special 'powers'. Adventures ensue as each toy vies for the admiration of their fellow toys as well as Andy, their child owner.

Toy Story was a revolutionary achievement in the world of computer animation. It proved that computers could accomplish an animated story every bit as appealing and impressive as Disney films of yore. Tom Hanks and Tim Allen were wonderful choices and lend a truly human aspect to the characters they voice, always making their respective 'toys' seem alive to the viewer. To the brilliant animation and appealing story, add a great script and you've got a wonderful film that remains a landmark even today. Though I prefer the sequel to this original take on the lives of toys, I still think 'Sid's Toys' is one of the greatest things to come out of any Pixar film. The rest of the cast is also great-many of which have gone on to voice characters in other Pixar films.

My rating: 9/10

8.Cars:
Synopsis: Hot-shot race car, Lightening McQueen gets lost on route to an important race and comes across a sleepy town of cars where people are nonexistent and friendship takes top priority.

Though I'm an avid hot-rod fan and loved the idea of cars with personalities, I feel Cars was the weakest of the Pixar movies. The desert landscapes are gorgeous, the voices well-chosen (Paul Newman stands out particularly), and the animation faultless. But the film lacked much of the heart that the others had and the idea of a world populated by automobiles instead of people looked better on paper than it came across in the actual viewing. The story also suffered and seemed to dwell a more on moral than entertainment value. Though Larry the Cable Guy seemed like a slam-dunk in the comedy department, his role paled in comparison to Degenerous' in Nemo. Not a bad movie, but not a rousing success either.

My rating: 6/10

That's all for now. As more Pixar films are released, I'm sure I'll be ammending this post.

2008-01-14T07:17:00.001-08:00

DISTURBIA (2007)
STARRING:SHIA LABEOUF, CARRIE ANN MOSS, DAVID MORSE
DIRECTED BY:D.J. CARUSO

I tell ya, sometimes it PAYS to go into a movie with little or no expectations. I had heard from friends that this modern-day teen remake of Alfred Hitchcock's 'Rear Window' was a good one, but needless to say, considering the source material, I didnt take those claims too seriously. After all, how could it POSSIBLY claim to be a remake when the star was a teenage hoodlum, the 'love interest' was a bikini-clad cheerleader-type, and the setting was middle-class suburbia? But I have to admit that not only is this one a worthy tribute to the original, it's a darn good movie all by its creepy li'l self.

My new FAVORITE young actor, Shia Labeouf, plays Kale Brecht, a high school kid whose father dies in a terrifying car accident at the beginning of the film. Since Kale was the driver of the vehicle, it is understandable that his hitherto sunny disposition and happy-go-lucky attitude are replaced by bitterness and guilt. The story picks up a year later where, after lashing out violently at an unsympathetic teacher, Kale finds himself under house arrest and bringing alot of stress to the already strained relationship he has with his hard-working mother. Boredom eventually reduces the boy to staring out the window at his neighbors, a past time he shares w/ a sexy new neighbor and a visiting friend. Of course, we know the story from there: The kids begin to suspect a neighbor of foul play and grisly discoveries ensue, coupled w/ a good ammount of taut suspense.

Make no mistake, the BEST thing about this movie is its lead. Labeouf is such a natural actor (as many of you 'Transformers' or 'I, Robot' fans know) and that gift is especially evident in the early moments of the film, as he becomes more and more stir crazy in his captivity. Though the character set up lasts an atypical ammount of time for a film of this genre, the key performance is engaging enough to maintain our interest. Kale's romance w/ his neighbor seems a little too rushed for my taste but the chemistry between Labeouf and Roemer works sufficiently and doesnt bog the story down too much. David Morse is cold and charming, almost a send up to the character he played recently on House. His chilling politeness was nerve-wracking to say the least. Moss, Yoo, and Roemer are all serviceable in their parts as well, if not standout.

Like I said, the movie is above average so the direction is good. The story moves along quickly without seeming to leave major holes in the plot or character developement. A few of the latter scenes are extremely well done and I found myself truly terrified, staring through my fingers even. Some of the more grisly moments were a little over-the-top but not glaringly so...the PG13 rating is an accurate one, I believe.

I would recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys a good suspense thriller..that is, if you can keep an open mind and prevent yourself from comparing it to the original masterpiece. It won't change your life or anything, but it's a good bit of entertainment nevertheless.

My rating: 7/10

2008-01-11T08:42:00.000-08:00

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END (2007)
STARRING: JOHNNY DEPP, KIERA KNIGHTLY, ORLANDO BLOOM, and GEOFFREY RUSH
DIRECTED BY:GORE VERBINSKI

Well, evidently we can't win them all. Disney had such a great thing on their hands w/ the Pirates franchise after the success of the first installment, but the last two films have proven that even the Disney folks can put too many proverbial feathers in their three-cornered hats.

Thought I usually begin my reviews by a quick plot summary, it's pretty difficult to do that here. I found this story to be so convoluted and strange that I don't know if such a thing would be possible...heh heh. Suffice it to say that SOMEHOW Geoffrey Rush's salty Captain Barbossa is brought back from the grave for SOME strange reason with a VAGUE and largely unexplained purpose that involves rescuing our wondrous Jack Sparrow from the bowels of the Kracken. He is given the help of his former enemies, including our now sadly de-feminized Elizabeth Swan and her beau (?) Will Turner. Along the way, other pirate leaders get involved in an inevitable fray w/ the British military that was kind of a no-brainer after Jack escaped hanging in the first movie.

Needless to say, The Curse of the Black Pearl (9/10) was a fantastic movie. It succeeded on so many levels, one of which was the wonderful characterizations of Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp's most endearing role since Edward Scissorhands) and Geoffrey Rush as Barbossa. So though I adored Bill Nighye as Davy Jones in the second film (Dead Man's Chest 7/10) as well as the Indiana Jones-esque action scenes in that film, I was so happy to have Barbossa back in this ones, even if by somewhat cloudy means. Unfortunately, though Rush still 'Arrghs' and 'Mateys' his way through this latest installment with panache, there is too much story to focus on his efforts. When I say 'too much story', I mean just that. So much tale was attempting to be told in this movie, we are left w/ having 'heard' very little of it. Where more time and energy should have been spent on Will and Elizabeth's romance, which was one of the staples of the original film, only about five minutes of screen time are allowed for this important point and STILL we are left w/ a question mark concerning their future.

I enjoyed a few things however, namely the performances of the lead actors, a few witty bits of dialogue, and the dark but pretty direction of Verbinski. These things alone will make the movie watchable, even if it isnt as enjoyable as the prior two. Keith Richards' cameo was a hoot as well, as was the final moments of the film which reminded me of the first movie and gave me an actual charge to see the next one. Who knows, we could end up w/ something great (think Indian Jones and the Last Crusade) if the creators can get it together.

SPOILER ALERT: Perhaps I'm just not smart enough to enjoy this particular Pirate movie but I just didnt GET major points of the story. WHY did we need Barbossa particularly? Because he could sail? Why was Calypso released exactly? What did that accomplish? Davy Jones' locker was neat I guess, but too little explanation was given as to the workings of it and why no one but Jack Sparrow happened to be there. Was it a 'dry' season (pardon the pun)? So Will Turner is now Davy Jones (with longer curlier hair)? And the former crew of the Dutchman are ...okay? Dead? Alive? I was not satisfied on any of these points really. I also did not enjoy or 'believe' the love angle between Davy Jones and the witch-character...it seemed very tacked on to me. Odd stuff. If any of you guys can answer these questions for me, I'd appreciate it.

As it stands, I did not hate this movie. I would probably watch it again, if for no other reason than to see what I missed. But I hope that if Disney truly intends to carry this any further, they put a little more thought into it...or maybe, a little less?

My rating: 5/10

2008-01-11T07:21:00.000-08:00

HAIRSPRAY (2007)
STARRING: NICKY BLONSKY, JOHN TRAVOLTA, CHRISTOPHER WALKEN, JAMES MARSDEN, AND MICHELLE PFEIFFER
DIRECTED BY:ADAM SHANKMAN

Alrighty folks, it's been a while. Allow me to crack my knuckles.

I just saw this movie yesterday on dvd since I truly don't get to the movies much....the last movie I saw at the theater was Transformers, if that's any indication. I won't bother comparing this to the original John Waters version however, like many critics did, because hey, we all know there IS no comparison to the camp of a Waters film. But let me assure you, this little gem stands quite remarkably on it's own.

Hairspray, as if you didnt know, is the story of pert and portly Tracy Turnblad (rising star Nikki Blonsky) whose bouffant hairdo and luminous smile belie the depth of her personal talents. The gal can sing, dance, and do so w/ a flair that was henceforth only reserved for black society in the sixties. Tracy has an obsession w/ a local 'dance tv' program called The Corny Collins Show and she will literally do almost anything to perform on the air. After a fruitless audition, during which Tracy is belittled and insulted by the current stars of the show due to her weight, all seems hopeless until our heroine finds herself in detention with a group of black students who seem to use the (unsupervised?) time to...well, dance. Thru the window, Tracy is discovered in all her soulful splendor by a current cast-member of the Tv Show, Link Larkin...who is also the object of her hitherto unreturned affections. Needless to say, an appearance on the Corny Show is inevitable as is her subsequent fame and pupularity. Unfortunately, things go awry when station manager Velma Von Tassel (Michelle Pfeiffer) attempts to sabotage Tracy at the height of her success and prevent racial 'integration' on the show as well. Though the story never seriously rises above sixties sattire, there is also a political agenda in the mix as the recurring subjects of racial harmony are addressed.

Performances in this film were all very good, some were great. The casting was carefully and lovingly handled w/ a few surprises thrown into the mix. Nicky Blonsky was sufficiently perky and sweet at Tracy. She's quite a little firecracker so the story centering on her was never a problem. Two of the most central characters, Tracy's Parents, were played by Christopher Walken and John Travolta, the latter decking himself out in hideously realistic drag to play Edna. Both shined in their respective parts, especially where singing and dancing were concerned. Queen Latifah and Michelle Pfeiffer were also extremely good, even if they didnt necessarily exhibit a purely original turn. We have seen both of them in these types of roles before. Supporting players Amanda Bynes, Zac Efron, and Elijah Kelly were all good, some standing out more than others but all sufficiently over-the-top and campy. The biggest surprise for me was James Marsden who was the epitome of charm and wit as Corny Collins with an exceptional singing voice. I had no idea Cyclops had it in him to be so likeable!

I really appreciated the direction and the musical numbers as well. There was evident modernizing w/out a complete departure from the original feel of the John Waters version (oops, I did it). John Waters even gave us a great little cameo in the beginning, which made me smile. I especially enjoyed the tongue in cheek humor of 'Nicest Kids In Town', the sweet and funny romance of 'You're Timeless To Me', and of course the contagious fun of 'You Can't Stop the Beat'.

Let me sum up by saying that I am more than pleased at the direction the movie industry is going with musicals. If there is anything that the success of Chicago has shown us, it's that audiences still crave the surrealistic mayhem of the movie musical and with great endeavors like this one and Tim Burton's Sweeney Todd (dark but lovely I'm told), the genre is finally back on the map. Actors like Michelle Pfeiffer, Renee Zelwegger, and James Marsden are joining the ranks of Gene Kelly and Katherine Grayson as ones that can be counted upon to deliver great performances along with their hoofing and crooning. And that's just fine with me.

My rating: 8.5/10

2007-08-21T06:44:00.000-07:00

THE ROAD HOME (Wo de fu qin mu qin) (1999)
DIRECTED BY: Zhang Yimou
STARRING: Ziyi Zhang
(in chinese w/ English subtitles)

I first saw this film in 2004, when I was eight months pregnant w/ my 2nd son. My father had recommended it to me based on the credentials of its great director, Zhang Yimou. He is the amazing man that brought us the visually stunning films 'Hero', 'House of Flying Daggers', and 'Raise the Red Lantern' as well as the gut-wrenching realism of 'To Live'. However, 'The Road Home' is an entirely different type of film and after watching it one time, it became one of my favorite movies. I was a blubbering mess by the final scene but it was one of those happy cry-sessions, where you end up feeling satisfied and pleased with humanity.

The simple story begins w/ a young businessman from the city traveling back to the village of his birth for his father's funeral. Upon his arrival, he finds that his devastated mother is painstakingly trying to observe traditonal burial customs for her husband, despite the changing times. One of these customs involves literally carrying his body back to the village in the dead of winter and as the dutiful son works out the problems of this daunting task, he reflects on the beautiful way in which his parents met and fell in love.

The luminously beautiful Ziyi Zhang (of Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Hero, and Rush Hour 2) plays the widow as a young girl. She has developed a crush on the new school teacher and like some sort of flitting nymph, she darts about the countryside trying to catch his eye as he walks to and from the schoolhouse. Along the way the girl, Zhao Di by name, endearingly attempts to set up precious encounters so they will chance upon a 'meeting'. Since arranged marriages were customary at that time, her attempts are considered very bold and meet with the villagers' dissaproval. However, eventually they do come to know each other and a sweet, almost wordless relationship develops between them that is extraordinarily effective in its simplicity. Over the months, you begin to see how connected the two young people are ,despite the fact that they never touch, and become equally convinced that NOTHING is going to keep them apart. When circumstances cause the young man, Luo, to leave the village temporarily, we feel Zhao Di's devestation most heartily. And as the obstacles continue we see that this is not just a love story, but a beautiful tableau of loyalty from which we can all benefit.

Most of the film is told in flashback and showcases gorgeous fall colors and brilliant scenery. The opening and closing sequences reflect the sadness of the occasion and the stark blue tones of winter so that when these flashbacks begin, we almost breathe a sigh of relief. Yimou is a master w/ visuals but his success in this film does not rely on the artistic overtones and brilliant colors of his flashier projects and instead on the fresh performances of his actors and the simple loveliness of his story. Don't get me wrong, the gorgeous hues of nature are used to their best advantage in this movie but without the freshness of the actors and the warmth of the simple story, it would never work. The final scene is absolutely one of the most moving things I've seen and I mean that in a good way-as a mother and a beloved wife.

The acting is very effective as in all of Yimou's movies. Ziyi Zhang is breathtakingly beautiful but her face is scrubbed youthfully bare for this movie so that we can feel the naievity and innocence of her character. Her athleticism also comes through, in a far more basic way, as she runs around for MOST of the movie in childish determination.

For those who love innocent and pure love stories, I strongly recommend that you see this movie! It's nothing less than a modern classic and not only should it be viewed more than once, but in my opinion the dvd should be framed and placed in a strategic spot on your wall as a reminder that sweetness and decency still lives in the minds of men.

My rating: 10/10

2007-07-05T06:24:00.000-07:00

TRANSFORMERS (2007)

DIRECTED BY: MICHAEL BAY

STARRING: SHIA LABEOUF, JON VOIGHT, ANTHONY ANDERSON, and JOHN TURTURRO

So I guess you could say I'm not necessarily an 'action movie' fan. I mean, I do LIKE action movies sometimes but they definitely aren't my favorite genre and there has to be more to them than big explosions or they completely lose my interest. It's important to know that so that you know where I'm coming from with this review.

Michael Bay's translation of one of my favorite 80's cartoons (and toys) to the big screen is an action movie in the ABSOLUTE sense of the word. It is a full-on, no holds-barred attack on the senses and because of this, could have been an absolute mess. But happily for me, it's not. It's actually a real success and like the rest of his movies, as entertaining (and fulfulling) as a fireworks display...I know, fitting isnt it? In other words, it's a blast while it lasts, you'd gladly go through it again, but it doesnt necessarily make you 'think' or stay with you afterwards. And that's not always a bad thing, you know?

The real secret to the movie's success is NOT the incredible special effects (probably some of the best I've EVER seen and sure to set the bar for future movies of this genre ), the intense action sequences, or the almost gut-wrenchingly vulgar ammount of money that must have been spent to achieve the look of the thing-but it lies in one simple little factor...a great lead. Shia Labeouf is an instantly appealing leading man with an excellent grasp on the character he portrays and a superb comic ability. He is somehow able to stand out, even when surrounded by 20 foot alien robots and gargantuan explosions. Sure, alot of this is due to the somewhat clever (and many times very funny) dialogue and stalwart supporting cast, but mostly it's just his own little achievement. I enjoyed watching him freak out for the whole 2 and half hours...and I think that's a pretty big deal. So three cheers for Shia and yes, now I'm excited for the new Indiana Jones flick!

So are the robots good enough? They're BETTER than good enough...they're phenomenal. I'll admit I was a little sad when Shia's character passed up the little yellow volkswagon bug at the car lot (the original concept of Bumblebee, I might add) for the crappy looking old Camaro but once that thing started working it's magic-running off on its own a la 'Herbie', 'speaking' through the radio, and finally transforming into quite a fantastic looking creature-I forgot all about that. Optimus Prime was perfect-loved the choice of Peter Cullan as his voice-and every bit as loveable as the simply drawn cartoon character I remember. My favorite part of the movie (besides the funny human segments with Shia and his family) was when the 'autobots' made their first appearance and the subsequent contact with Sam. That whole 15-20 minutes was vastly entertaining. I also loved when Bumblebee regained his voice at the end and sounded alot like the car from "Knight Rider' ('Cool', I said to Jonathan, 'He's gonna have his own 'Kit')! The 'awakening' of Megatron was also amazingly well done and the attack during the opening sequence was sufficiently spine-tingling. I was pleased to see that Bay tried to give the autobots more 'personality' so as to make us 'feel' for them but didnt have to use up too much screen time in the process. The Decepticons, on the other hand, were awesome looking but not given much 'conversation' time.

Stuff I didnt like: Not a whole lot, really. The last thirty minutes or so eventually began to wear me very thin (like all of Bay's movies) as the action took first place in the story and became this constant onslaught of spastic camera angles, noise, and movement that , to me, was very 'one note' and (dare I say it?) boring. The story was thin, as we all knew it would be, but that doesnt make for any real problems in an action movie. The sudden attempt (during the above-mentioned final battle) to move the audience to some type of emotional trauma w/ the injury of a lead robot was a little obnoxious as well...PLEASE don't try so hard to make me sad about the broken legs of a 15 foot robot when a whole city has just been basically levelled. I am much too tired for such things. And WHY, pray tell, must we throw 'potty' humor into the mix ...especially among creatures that do not even have the anatomy that calls for it? Yeah, I rolled my eyes a couple of times.

Supporting players were not given alot to do in this one. But Anthony Anderson supplied some pretty darn brilliant comic relief nevertheless and John Turturro took a surprising turn as the smarmy 'special agent' guy. I enjoy seeing him in something less 'quirky' than usual. Bernie Mac has a hilarious cameo. Megan Fox was our resident eye-candy and didnt supply much more than a pretty (albeit REALLY thin) physique and straight teeth. (Hubby and I both thought the blonde Australian chick was way better-looking...but she really didnt have much of a point either.) Jon Voight was completely forgettable. Shia's parents, on the other hand, were both great...I love that his father was played by the 'crying friend' from Seinfeld and both of us were impressed by the actress that played Sam's mom.

So again, Bay has a big hit on his hands...probably his biggest ever. Like 'Armageddon', he's got funny moments mixed with major jaw-dropping action and a really good lead performance that will keep audiences coming back. Unlike 'The Island', he didnt over-complicate a proclaimed 'action movie' with a deep science fiction story that most of his fans wouldnt get. And like 'Pearl Harbor' , the whole flick was replete with enough sweat-misted hero-types from the evidently infallible United States Military to satisfy even the most patriotic July 4th movie-goer.

I have to admit, I see the draw of this guy's films and though I'm never going to stick him up there with Peter Wier or Frank Capra in the ranks of great directors, he does his job. With flavah...;)

My rating: 8/10

2007-06-19T05:28:00.000-07:00

GIANT (1956)

DIRECTED BY: GEORGE STEVENS

STARRING: ROCK HUDSON, ELIZABETH TAYLOR, and JAMES DEAN (oh yes, it is starring James Dean...hummina hummina!)

(appears at number 13 on my top 100 films of all-time)

Recently, I finished reading the Edna Ferber novel that this movie was based upon (rather loosely based, as it turns out) and since this is one of the few instances where the movie surpasses the book, I felt the urge to review the film...one of my all-time favorites.

Giant is a 'giant' a movie, no doubt about it. It's a long one, clocking in at just under four hours, and tells the epic tale of one family as it crosses two generations and experiences significant and monumental changes in its dynamic. It's a monster of a movie for more reasons than run time though. Sets are virtually non-existent and the majority of the film is shot in wide (we're talkin' wiiiiide) cinemascope to encompass the enourmity of its main star-Texas. While we experience the romance, trials, and perseverence of the Benedict family, we also are greeted with gigantic vistas of the rolling Texas prairies, thousands of heads of cattle, and extravagant clouds of dust.

The story is as expansive as Texas itself. It follows the rocky but totally believeable love affair between Eastern-bred Leslie (played lovingly by Liz Taylor in one of her best performances) and Jordan "Bic" Benedict-a tall, dark and handsome rancher from the Lone-Star State. Rock Hudson was born to play this roll and does so w/ perfection, clenching that 'rock' hard jaw when his stubborn sense of pride calls for it and languidly strolling through his vast acreage like a man who truly feels that it is part of his soul. After a trip East to purchase a prize-winning stallion, Jordan Benedict meets Leslie Lynnton who captures his fancy with her sharp wit and beautiful face. A whirlwind weekend marries them far too quickly and Leslie is not prepared for the responsiblities facing her as Bic's wife and the lady of "Benedict"-literally half a million acres of ranchland and hundreds of thousands of beef cattle. During her first few days, she meets the 'cast of characters' associated with this little drama, including surly ranch-hand Jett Rink whose sheer animosity for Jordan is only bested by his blind desire for riches. Over the years, the Benedicts become a family unit-adding three youngns to the mix-and despite their differences and troubles, the couple remains steadfastly inlove. But this far more than a love story...it tells the important story of racial prejudice, relates the futility of materialism, and gives an interesting account of the struggle ranchers waged against the biggest enemy they ever faced-oil. The second half of the story focuses on the second generation and the choices they make as well as the continuing lives of our three main characters.

George Stevens did a brilliant job with the direction. The characters (all of them, including the supporting players) are extremely well rounded and given plenty of screen time. We feel that by the end of the film, we have experienced a true story and developed a relationship with these people. The broad landscapes do not take away from the fact that this is still a human drama and the story is very personable, despite the huge stage. The performances are all wonderful but, of course, James Dean (as Jett Rink) will most likey leave the largest impact. It was, after all, his final film and he proved beyond a doubt with this one (aging as he does 25 years during the telling) that he was an incredible actor. It's a meaty role w/ lots of oppurtunities for scene-stealing and scenery-chewing. I also love the wonderful handling of the elements and the stark contrast between the lovely green hills of virginia and the broad expanse of the Texas landscape. The sock-you-in-the face blasts of heat, the blowing tumbleweeds, that gigantic monstrosity of a house stuck flat in the middle of nowhwere and it's wonderful transformation over the years under the tender care of its Eastern mistress are all wonderful things to see. Carol Baker as young Luz, an almost unrecognizable Dennis Hopper as Jordy, Sal Mineo as the beautiful ill-fated Angel Obregon, and great character-actors like Jane Withers and Chill Wills round out an already righteous cast.

I can't help but feel a special affinity for the movie also because the relationship between the two leads reminds me so much of my own romance. I see pieces of my husband and I in those two characters and the way the film handles the evolution of their marriage over that 'breathless quarter of a century' is dear to my heart.

So I guess it's too late to condense this rambling review by saying: I love this movie. It's a perfect example of what an epic film should be.

*note* The dvd runs over four hours and has lots of extra footage. I haven't seen it so this review is based only on the cinematic version (though I'm sure even w/ the extra time it suffers very little)

My Rating: 10/10

2007-05-08T13:13:00.000-07:00

SPIDERMAN 3
DIRECTED BY: SAM RAIMI
STARRING: TOBEY MCGUIRE and KIRSTEN DUNST

Everyone who knows me knows that I am a big fan of comic book movies. Even though I've never really been an avid reader of any except the old Donald Duck comics, I have a deep an abiding affection for superhero stories. When I was a kid, I remember how I used to wait anxiously for Superman: The Movie to air on television and when Tim Burton's Batman was released, I was a staunch supporter. I actually loved both the Burton Batman movies, adore Christian Bale as the new Batman, and yes, I even watch Batman:Forever and Batman and Robin when they come on televison. As far as my critical opinion goes though, there are three films of the genre that stand out to me above the rest. To give you an idea of where I'm coming from with this review, here's my three favorites: X2-the second of the X Men Movies (for it's excellent story, wonderful characterizations, and great acting), Spiderman 2 (for the sweet love angle , well rounded villains, and brilliant action scenes), and The Hulk (for the tender moments that were lost on most people and the amazingly effective direction by Ang Lee that most accurately conveys the story's source material, in my opinion).

Spiderman 3 was a good movie and just as enjoyable as the other two films, in different ways. The characters are still just as loveable, the direction by Raimi is still very interesting and action-packed without trying to be overly-realistic, and the score is outstanding as always. It tells the continuing story of Peter Parker as he deals w/ his newfound popularity as Spiderman and his deep love for Mary Jane Watson, his childhood crush. Just as Peter is beginning to contemplate a marriage proposal to MJ, his childhood friend Harry Osborne begins to enact his revenge on Spiderman for having killed his father three years early. Add to that a new villain in the form of ex-convict Flint Marko (miraculously transformed into The Sandman by vague agri-scientific means) and Peter's days are pretty full, causing Mary Jane to feel slighted and unimportant. More chaos is thrown into the mix when a competing photographer at the Daily Bugle, Eddie Brock, begins to challenge Parker at work and Gwen Stacey, a beautiful model, vies for his affections. Finally, a strange alien substance begins to bond with Peter and forms a new 'black suit' that brings the dark side out in our hero.

Like I said, there were things about this edition that I really enjoyed. The run time was long (2 hrs 22 minutes) but nicely paced, even for this complex and somewhat maniacal story. Bryce Dallas Howard was memorable and perky as Gwen Stacey, a role very different from her darker, gothic heroines of The Village and Lady in the Water. The transition of Flint Marko into The Sandman was one of the highlights of the movie and I found it emotional and oddly moving. I also loved the story involving the alien costume. One of the best things about these movies has been it's nice stab at comic book humor and the unabashed handling of Peter Parker's goofy personality. This movie deals with that in an even more entertaining manner as the alien matter begins to turn Peter into a darker version of himself, still goofy but now also arrogant and kind of a meathead. Topher Grace is also an excellent addition to the cast and his transformation into Venom was extremely well done. All in all, the good stuff was really good and I was largely entertained.

Now for the bad: In my humble opinion, I felt there were just too many villains in this movie. Just when we're starting to get a feel for Harry has the Goblin, he's given a case of amnesia and replaced w/ The Sandman. The same goes for Flint Marko as he becomes the Sandman, wreaks some havoc, and then conveniently gets set aside as we dwell on the alien costume. So it's no surprise that just when the alien costume is getting super interesting, spidey rips it off and splits, leaving Eddie Brock to 'pick up the pieces' and become Venom. The sheer number of nemeses in this movie prevent true development of any of them, leaving the viewer (especially this Venom fan) understandably dissatisfied. I also felt this problem could have been solved by simply cutting Harry Osborne's amnesia segments altogether and focusing instead on the evolution of the various villains. The love story is nice, as always, but with everything else that is going on, it takes a backseat to the rest of the mayhem.

If you've got kids, this has about the same ammount of comic-booky violence that the first two had, with maybe a little more macabre imagery due to the alien sembiote and Venom's big ol' teeth. Also, the slow, 'human' sections are numerous so they may get a bit bored. If they enjoyed the first two, however, they are bound to love the spidey slinging and the great action sequences as much as the adults.

My rating: 7/10 (worth the theater ticket price but maybe more of a bargain during the day)

2007-02-05T05:44:00.000-08:00

SHATTERED GLASS (2003)

DIRECTED BY: BILLY RAY

STARRING: HAYDEN CHRISTENSEN, PETER SAARSGARD, CHLOE SEVIGNY, AND STEVE ZAHN

Sometimes, as we all know, movies come and go at the movie theaters like so much buttery popcorn. We may see a trailer or two but their life at the cinema is so short that by the time we remember 'hey, that looked good', its because we are seeing a commercial for the soon-to-be-released dvd. 'Shattered Glass' was one of these movies. I remember the trailer when I was sitting in the theater waiting for something else to start and I think I made a mental note that it looked good. I liked the idea of seeing Hayden Christensen as something other than a delinquent (My Life as a House) or Darth Vadar (though I'll admit that I loved him as Anakin).

We rented the dvd from Netflix a while back and I really liked it. Last week it came on IFC and I gave it another watch. I think I loved it this time. There are so many great elements to it and I highly recommend it.

The movie tells the true story of Steven Glass, a 24 year old reporter for New Republic magazine, that seems to have the midas touch when it comes to journalism. His sensational articles become nationwide subjects of controversy, touching on delicate matters of a political nature or delving into the dark side of pop culture. His stories are absolutely compelling always and told in such a way that make them instantly appealing to readers of all ages. He becomes a virtual legend in his field-sought after by top magazines and newspapers of the country. In 1998, however, Steven Glass wrote an article that began to be researched by Forbes-a then online magazine-due to the sensational nature of the subject and the strange fact that no other magazine or newspaper seemed to have been able to grab that particular story. A quick examination of that facts immediately brings a somewhat disturbing situation to light. Steven Glass doesnt seem to have 'real' sources for many of his stories. His editor, Chuck Lane, is called upon to research all of Glass's past articles and determine how much of what has been written is fabricated.

Hayden Christensen is finally granted a meaty and intelligent part to cut his teeth upon. Steven Glass is a complex character that comes off as smarmy, charming, and even a little naive. The marriage of his brilliant mind to his almost child-like demeanor is deftly handled by director Billy Ray-a relative newcomer to the field. Christensen makes quite an impact and truly milks his role for all its worth. It's a flashy part with lots of layers that allow for many nuances in his performance. But it's Peter Saargard that strikes me as delivering a truly great performance. His interpretation of New Republic editor, Chuck Lane, is fantastic. He underplays the character perfectly, lending such realism to every look and movement. There are scenes of confrontation between he and the staff of the New Republic (all staunch supporters of Glass) that will almost make you cringe with sympathy. And his scenes with Christensen are brilliant, even though he delivers probably less than a third of the dialogue in each. Other good performances are turned in by Steve Zahn as the Forbes reporter out to hang Glass, and Hank Azaria as Steven's loyal former editor. Chloe Sevigny and Melanie Lynsky (who I really like in everything I've seen her do) also turn in credible performances. I would have liked to see a little more characterization for the supporting cast as well as a little more developement of the Forbes crew and their magazine. But none of this casts a shadow on the positive elements of the film.

One of the best things about the direction is how personable it is. The lighting in the offices is cold and flourescent in nature, lending that sickly wan quality to everything it touches. It really rang true for me-having spent a large chunk of time in cubicles myself. You feel for the characters and their long hours under such a depressing artificial aura. Even so, the direction and cinematography is extremely easy to watch since it is nicely crisp and the colors are muted to highlight this fact. The relatively short run time of 90 minutes also makes it quite a fun watch. The film moves along at a good and compelling pace throughout.

I recently saw a trailer for the new film by Ray, 'Breach'-also based on a true story, starring Chris Cooper and Laura Linney. It looks equally interesting and possibly more exciting than Shattered Glass. This time, I won't forget to see it in theaters if I get a chance.

My Rating: 8.5/10

2007-01-30T11:41:00.000-08:00

A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS (1966)

DIRECTED BY: FRED ZINNEMAN

STARRING: PAUL SCOFIELD, ROBERT SHAW, and ORSON WELLES

(appears at number 82 in my top 100 and should be higher!)

I saw this again (for the first time) last week and I almost didnt feel worthy to review it. I don't claim to be all that knowledgeable or scholarly but one thing I do have is faith. I believe that faith means more than anything else and this movie speaks to that side of me.

Sir Thomas More was next in line to be Chancellor of England and was a dear friend of Henry VIII. His advice was second to none, for the king, and their friendship was boundless...or so it seemed. As we all know from history class, King Henry VIII was first married to Catherine of Aragon and though he sired four children thru this marriage, none of the sons survived, leading King Henry, desperate for an heir, to seek an 'out'. The means to and end came in the form of the charming and coquettish Anne Boleyn (herself ill fated but the fact of which is not touched upon in this movie) . King Henry became infatuated with her and more and more certain that their marriage would result in his heir. The only way a divorce could be granted, however, was with the sanction of the church. Fortunately for his majesty, the majority of the church and court officials had no morality to speak of. The king was able to obtain the title of Supreme Head of the Church and secure an easy divorce. Opposition did arise from unexpected places, however. Sir Thomas More was not going to buckle under the pressure of his counterparts. He knew his bible and he had faith in God. And he knew the divorce was not scriptural. Because of the circumstances, he refused to sign a proclamation stating that he acceeded to the divorce or the King's assumation of Head of the Church of England. This lead to his eventual execution.

Paul Scofield was born to play the role of More. The natural gravity of his countenance is so perfectly balanced with the levity of his eyes and the beauty of his voice. One gets the immediate impression that loyalty to God has not resulted in a solem shell of a man. He has a family and he enjoys life. He also never claims to be a bible scholar, just a simple man w/ a mountain of faith. And the principles of his Lord are very clear to him so that he is genuinely shocked that others can so easily blur the lines. Throughout the rendering of this story, it is interesting to note that Sir Thomas never desires to be a martyr. He tries very hard to stay free of the political decision he is faced with and never says a word of condemnation against his king. The reasons behind his refusal to sign the proclamation are never stated openly and as he is schooled in the field of law, he knows that this should protect him from incrimination. Even when faced with prison and the sorrow of his family, he maintains his stand for truth-with a very positive outlook. He is absolutely sure that his release is inevitable and refuses to believe that his friend, the king, will turn on him absolutely. It is with consternation that he looks upon the court as they perjure themselves in order to obtain a scentence of execution against him.

Zinneman never attempts to make this a movie about religion. It is about principal and the high price of morality in the face of opposition. He molds his cast into a group of well rounded characters that we can all learn from, as different as they are believable. The supporting players lend great depth to this drama as well. They consist of Orson Welles as a sinister Cardinal, Susannah York as More's intelligent and trusting daughter, Wendy Hiller as his bitter, resentful, but loyal wife, and the scenery-chewing Robert Shaw as Henry VIII himself. Vanessa Redgrave offers a cameo as Anne Boleyn and even without lines, she makes an impression... little wench. A final scene between More and his family will almost undoubtedly move one to tears...I don't know anyone who isnt affected by it.

I personally think that minority relgious groups who believe in pleasing God despite government pressures will benefit and identify the most with the movie. The plight of Thomas More may not be completely accurate by historical standards but it stays faithful to the basic idea, that the man died for his principals. And the fact that the movie is a wonderful cinematic achievement is just the icing on the proverbial cake.

Memorable Quote: (Sir Tomas More)-"Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!"

My Rating: 10/10

2007-01-09T06:37:00.000-08:00

IKIRU (1952)

DIRECTED BY: AKIRA KUROSAWA

STARRING: TAKASHI SHIMURA

Akira Kurosawa is a master of Japanese cinema. Though Roshoman, Seven Samurai, and Ran may be the glitzier and more well known of his works, one cannot overlook the power of his quieter films. My personal favorite Kurosawa film is an underrated thriller entitled Hi and Lo but after seeing Ikiru, I'd have to rethink that perhaps. Kurosawa directed this story at the relatively tender age of 42 and I find myself amazed at his grasp on characterization, depth, and humanity at this point of his life. Acclaimed directors twice that age can envy his capability w/ such a subject and mourn the absence of such an achievement in their own lifetime, I'm sure. It's a life affirming and moving glance at what 'could have been' that we won't soon forget.

Kanji Watanabe is a longtime bureaucrat in a city office that has devoted his life to little else than the tedium of his occupation. He sits at a desk and stamps papers, sending them to other city departments for perusal and this is his life...all day and all year. Through the years, he has devoted so much time to this job that his relationship w/ his son has severely suffered and his memory of his dead wife has somewhat faded...leaving Kanji a virtual shell of a man. Things change, however, when he discovers that he has developed a severe stomach cancer and death is close at hand. Frantically, he begins to seek meaning in his life-searching everywhere and through everything. He turns to all of the typical avenues of release-booze, women, parties, excess-and eventually finds a solemn comfort in the companionship of a young female co-worker that seems to have the happiness and contentment he lacks. This relationship causes Kanji to see a side to himself that he never knew he had-which results in a wonderful revelation of character and some drastic changes in his life. After his death, we find that he has somehow been raised to the status of hero in his community.

Kurosawa's long-winded narrative can lag at points. I felt that there were a couple of scenes that seemed to go on a little long and facial expressions that were somewhat puzzling . But the ideas and morals of this story are timeless and told with love. The performance by Shimura is never less than miraculous-absolutley beautiful-heartbreakingly real. The emotion on his face is always completely astonishing and never fails to make an impact. His slow painful movements that never belie the physical ailment he suffers sit so precisely juxtaposed with his determined and almost panicked eyes that search so fanatically for an answer. And the supporting players are likewise memorable, bringing depth and realism to Kanji's journey. There is a song that appears at recurring moments in the movie that also lends and especially sweet mood to the scenes in which it appears. It's a tune that you will find yourself humming for hours after the film's completion.

Needless to say, I strongly recommend this movie. It is an excellent example of Kurosawa's skill and Shimura's talent while at the same time supplying a beautiful moral and enduring story. You will feel moved and determined to live your own life to its fullest, never taking family or time for granted.

Yes, there are some movies that accomplish worlds of good.

My rating-9/10

2006-12-20T05:57:00.000-08:00

MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS (1974)

DIRECTED BY: SIDNEY LUMET

STARRING: (ready for this?) ALBERT FINNY, LAUREN BACALL, INGRID BERGMAN, SEAN CONNERY, SIR JOHN GIELGUD, DAME WENDY HILLER, ANTHONY PERKINS, MICHAEL YORK, VANESSA REDGRAVE, and RICHARD WIDMARK.

Let me open by saying that I am a die hard Agatha Christie fan. But I have never read this book. I have no idea why but there it is. I have read and re-read upwards of thirty of her novels without ever reading this one but I can be happy about that because it made the movie a pleasant surprise. Being familiar with Christie's plots and heroes (mainly Miss Marple and Hercule Poirot), I can't say I was really shocked by the story's signature 'twist', but it was nevertheless a wonderful ride. Christie adds such depth and strength of character to each of her players that the climax is really not the best part of her tales. It's the culmination of that climax following a slow-like-honey narrative which really makes the journey all the more satisfying.

Lumet really tried hard to bring Christie's style and cynicism to the screen. I just bought the book and haven't read it yet but I got the impression that he stayed quite faithful to the original story. After all, Agatha was noted as hating all film versions of her books excepting this one-which she felt was perfectly constructed. And how do you question that?

Hercule Poirot (Christie's recurring eccentric Belgian detective) is traveling on the Orient Express when a large snowfall slows the train's journey. Along the way, he becomes aquainted with many of the passengers, including a high-profile American businessman-Mr Ratchett. Ratchett confides to Poirot that he has been threatened due to his large bankroll and asks for his protection but Poirot, not accustomed to this type of responsibility, politely declines. The next morning, Ratchett is found brutally murdered in his train compartment and virtually every passenger on the train is found to have a motive. As Poirot questions each passenger, we become familiar with, not only their individual histories, but their strange and twisted connection with each other.

The opening sequence of this movie really surprised me. It's a bit abrupt and disturbing, using stark newspaper headlines and stills to outline a grisly crime. The crime is very quickly left behind as Poirot boards the train along with the other passengers and we almost forget it until it comes back full force during his interrogation. I felt that one of the movie's only weaknesses was the connection the detective was able to make between his suspects and this crime using very 'Macguyver-ish' means. I'm hoping the book sheds some light on this point.

The acting by everyone involved is, quite expectedly, brilliant. Albert Finney gained a large ammount of weight and a very delightful , over-the-top accent for the role. He portrays Poirot with the same understated wit that the books do, while adding a slight effluence of character for the sake of entertainment. A certain scene in which he is preparing for bed truly drives his eccentricities home while at the same time irrevocably displaying his humanity-thus endearing him to us. It's a great moment. Ingrid Bergman as introvert Greta Ohlsson is also extremely memorable and may provide us with one of the greatest performances of her career. The slight fading of her once distracting beauty works in her favor here since it allows us to truly see the brave actress that she is. With so many great great thespians in one movie, its hard to focus on individual performances. Suffice it say that each and every one of them shines in their respective roles. So much so that the wonderful ending, which I won't give away of course, is a great relief to the viewer.

There are very few great 'whodunits' anymore. They seem to have faded away with animatronics and gentle heroes. But this one was a great standard setter for the genre and hopefully more of today's directors will reaquaint themselves with it and allow it to influence their future projects. I think they'd find a very large and grateful audience.

My rating: 9/10

2006-12-14T12:00:00.000-08:00

MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS (1944)

DIRECTED BY : VINCENTE MINELLI

STARRING: JUDY GARLAND (and a long red wig)

It had been a few years since I'd seen this movie so, courtesy my dvr, I caught it again. Everyone knows me as an avid fan of musicals and this one meets most of my requirements. It's got songs, gorgeous costumes, and vivid technicolor that is hard to beat. It also has a credible lead in Judy Garland and her outrageous pipes. But it has its weakneses too.

The 'story' is really more of a 'tableau', if you will. A random segmentation of pretty family moments and mishaps. The Smith family is an All-American family with a strong attachment to each other and their city, Saint Louis. Leon Ames and Mary Astor play the Patriarch and Matriarch of this modern family and they do it well. The father is stereotypically gruff and the mother, quite predictably, dotes upon him. There is also a wise old grandfather, a snippety maid, and some youngsters of various heights. Tootie is the youngest. Agnes is her slight elder. Alonzo Jr is a grown son mooching off the folks (well, he IS) and the two oldest daughters, Rose and Esther, seem to be the veritable 'glue' of the clan. Rose is pining for a distant love and Ester for the boy next door. That's about it. Nothing really happens to this family and that's okay. We don't really want anything to marr the Norman Rockwell world they live in. But neither does it make for the most exhiliarating of films.

Judy Garland was considered a tour de force of American entertainment and I guess she was. I'm personally not that big a fan. Her skinny ankles get on my nerves (probably because they remind me of my own) and I find her pretty unattractive. Also, her voice-while undeniably powerful-doesnt strike me as particularly pretty. That said, the long wig and pretty clothes definitely show her off her to her best advantage and 'The Trolley Song' is one of the great musical moments of film-one song that truly works w/ her type of vocal. However, I believe that Margaret O'Brien was one of the best child actors and its her performance as michievous and death-obsessed Tootie that stands out in this movie. She actually outshines all of her adult co-stars, hamming it up while at the same time not visibly attempting to do so. There's a darling little number where she and Garland sing together that is especially memorable , if for no other reason than that voluminous nightgown that O'Brien gives an entity of its own. The performance is so charming that one almost forgets how deserving the kid is of a good spanking most of the time. I mean come ON. What parents are going to fawn like that over a child that has just caused a major trolly accident by playing a prank? .

The rest of the cast just kind of lays there. Tom Drake as the elusive John Truett-boy next door extroardinaire- is hardly the intellectual match for our heroine. Esther's infatuation with him is purely physical, if you ask me. But that's her business. Harry Davenport and Marjorie Main are always a joy but little is done w/ their characters to elaborate on this point. They're just kind of there to add some spunk and sass to this bluntly traditional family.

Minelli did a lovely job w/ the direction. It has the look of the era while remaining 'modern' somehow and the colors, as I said before, are fantastic. It makes the movie fun to watch even thru the insipid songs and bland performances. Actually, though I saw the movie yesterday, the only song I still find hummable is 'The Trolley Song' so that says alot, I think.

I gathered this viewing that there is a reason it is billed as a heartwarming Christmas Movie. Judy Garland singing 'Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas' is very pretty and of course the resolution of family difficulties in the midst of this 'most holy' of holidays is going to make a bold impact on the celebrating public. For me, it just came off as a bit forced and schmaltzy. But happy endings don't always have to be perfect to be satisfying. And it was still that.

My rating: 7/10

2006-11-22T11:48:00.000-08:00

FLY AWAY HOME (1996)
DIRECTED BY: CAROLL BALLARD
STARRING: JEFF DANIELS and ANNA PAQUIN

I'll be honest. When this came out at the theater I was not that interested. Sure, the little girl from the Piano was a great actress but it just didnt look all that good to me. A girl with some geese. But oh my, it is so much more than that!

The story is actually kind of human interest story since it deals with loss, love, and loyalty in addtion to the aforementioned geese. Caroll Ballard is a master at this type of movie. Even though his films are few and far between, they almost always strike a chord with me. Usually the plot revolves around a child who has lost a parent or loved one and ends up forming a deep attachment to some member of the animal kingdom. The odd thing is, this formula has worked so well on at least three occasions. The Black Stallion is a classic. Duma is absolutely gorgeous. And this one works too. It works so beautifully!

Jeff Daniels portrays Tom Alden, a somewhat eccentric metal sculptor/inventor living in Canada with his daughter, Amy-a thirteen year old child w/ whom he has little relationship. Amy was thrust upon him unexpectedly when his ex-wife dies in a car accident and due to their long estrangement, father and daughter know little of each other. While Amy attempts to get used to her father's odd whims and hobbies, Tom continues to find ways to side-step his responsibilities as a single parent. Amy's discovery of a flock of baby geese leads to their eventual reconciliation however, as the two attempt to 'teach' the geese to migrate south following Ultra Lite aircraft.

One of the things that makes this movie so brilliant is the direction itself. Ballard's direction is soothing and precise, using wonderfully placed closeups of Amy and the birds throughout the movie that serve to draw the viewer into their relationship. The scene in which Amy first discovers that the eggs have hatched is moving and sweet. In addition, there are gorgeous views of the Canadian and Eastern American countryside that rival any I've ever seen. Never should a movie lag or meander over moments of dialogue, especially when such spectacular vistas are there for the taking. And Ballard's camera takes full advantage of that fact. But the dialogue that remains is very well done, focusing as it does on Tom and Amy's relationship as well as the developement of a few side characters that become integral to the plot. Terry Kinney, as Tom's brother David, is especially important and adds a few comical moments to the pace of the story.

Acting by Paquin and Daniels is low-key, understated, and very solid. Amy is understandably grieved at the loss of her mother and therefore shuns, at first, the society of her father but the insinuation of their eventual familial relationship is very believeable and touching. Though the plot revolves around Amy and her geese, we never get the impression that she lacks support from her father and indeed he is the one who teaches her to fly. The moments of quiet that make up the meat of the movie are deliberate and consistent but always intriguing. A couple of scenes almost descend into schmaltz and there are a may be a corny line or two but these are almost not worth mentioning.

I think this movie is an absolute gem. There are scenes in it that will always render me misty-eyed and I will always feel warm after watching it. As a family film, it is hard to beat but even as an adult it can be watched again and again w/ out that liscensing child.

My rating: 9/10

2006-11-09T06:31:00.000-08:00

LE COMTE DE MONTE CHRISTO (french miniseries 1998)
STARRING: GERARD DEPARDIEU
DIRECTED BY : JOSEE DAYAN

The useful thing I took away from watching this film was this: some novels just do not translate well to the screen. I recently read the book, The Count of Monte Christo by Alexandre Dumas for the first time. At just under 1500 pages, it is a brick of a book. But as far as a rewarding read goes, this one places close to the top of the list. As Robert Louis Stevenson was quoted to have said, 'it is an piece of perfect story-telling from beginning to end'. The development of the characters, the evolution of Edmond Dantes and his plot for revenge, the romance, and the thrilling political intrigue are all elements that make for an absolute delight of a novel. After reading it, I had that warm feeling in my chest that makes me kiss the book I've finished like I'm bidding farewell to a cherished friend. The end was satisfying but still, even after 1500 pages, I wanted more.

The story is well known. Edmont Dantes, at promising lad of nineteen, is wrongly accused of Bonapartism by the three men most likely to prosper upon his imprisonment. After escaping prison and obtaining a vast treasure (upon the admonition of a former prison-mate), he begins the long and arduous process of making his enemies pay. His scheme for revenge crosses years and travels over whole continents in its culmination. In the end, we are left w/ the same question that Edmond himself must ask, 'Can a person who has devoted their life to revenge, live for anything else?'

The story has been brought to the screen, both big and small, on several occasions. I've seen three of them (and plan to see the fourth when it releases to dvd) with mixed feelings. The 1975 tv version of the film, starring RIchard Chamberlain as Dantes (and co-starring Tony Curtis, Kate Nelligan, and Louis Jordan) is fabulous on its own. It is pretty close to the book and extremely well executed. However, after reading the book, I realize that the movie's 119 min run-time does not allow for the developement of key elements of the story and that is dissapointing. The 2002 cinematic endeavor is an wildly entertaining swashbuckler of a movie, when you don't compare it to the book. Jim Caviezel is a gorgeous Dantes and Guy Pierce a formidable foe as Mondego. Newcomer Dagmara Dominczyk is a stunningly beautiful Mercedes and Kevin Reynold's direction is engaging. Fans of the book, however, will be horribly dissapointed in the 'adaptation'. Huge liberties were taken w/ the timeline and the story that almost make the word 'adaptation' ludicrous.

The 1998 mini-series made for french television was very intriguing for me, at first glance. It was very long which meant that important aspects of the story that were bypassed for the sake of time by the other versions, could finally be addressed. But I must admit I was also very turned off by the casting of Gerard Depardieu as Dantes. Physically, he is completely wrong for Dantes who was often mistaken for Middle Eastern royalty and who throughout the book, is incessantly referred to as a man with long black hair and a lean physique. But, watch it I did.

I was right, by the way. Depardieu, great actor that he is, was NOT a good choice for Edmond Dantes. He seems blunt and clumsy due to his size, not the lithe and athletic hero of the book at all. The opening scenes of the film, thankfully, did not attempt to pass Gerard off as nineteen and the much younger Gillaume Depardieu (Gerard's son), who is infinitely better looking than his father, did the honors. He does fine but so little time is devoted to these early scenes that it is severely off-putting. One of the great aspects of the novel is the time taken to involve us in Dantes' early life, his blissfull happiness and successful career. These scenes along with Edmond's damning accusation and time in prison as well as his relationship w/ The Abbe of Faria are almost completely passed over, assumably to devote more time to the enactment of revenge. Unfortunately, without these particular points that draw us close to Edmond and his degeneration (or ascendance) into the executor of judgement on his enemies, the story loses much. With over 400 minutes of run-time and only about 20 of those devoted to the imprisonment and escape of the title character, I expected great things from the rest of the movie's deliberate handling of the tale. But again, from the moment Dantes escapes prison, great liberties are taken that change the whole momentum of the original story.

Some very odd things are handling accurately, almost to a fault. The conversations between The Abbe and Caderousse are almost identical to the novel, where they could have been cut entirely. The relationship between Valentine and Morrel is addressed in this version only and that is a blessing since it is one of the great things about the novel, throwing as it does, such a wrench into Dante's inner-workings. The murderous vendetta held by the new Mrs Villefort is also included although it doesnt translate as stunningly to screen as it does via written word.

But such strange changes were made to the story as well...pointless ones. Benedetto had an snip of a role that was completely out of keeping w/ his pompous character in the book. A lusty love interest was introduced into the story for Dantes that was just ludicrous since his love for Mercedes was a blinding force behind his actions in the book. His eventual transfer of his affections to Haydee was also ignored in this adaptation, for reasons unknown. The public pronunciations against Villefort, Danglars, and Morcerf were extremely faithful to the book but such was unnecessary since at times and without Dumas' narration, it was just plain tedious. The pirates, Albert, and meetings w/ Mercedes were also very sketchy and full of liberties.

Acting was fine by the leads. I was impressed by Depardieu, miscast as he was, because he did seem to feel his interpretation of Dantes and his performance was moving. Stanislas Merhar as Albert was also a pretty picture and he left an impression. The same cannot be said of Julie Depardieu, Gerard's daughter, as Valentine. She retained the same expression thoughout the movie and the inflection of her voice rarely changed. The tortured innocence of Valentine was replaced by a bland paper doll of a girl.

To sum up, I guess there are some works of fiction too great and too large to be successfully brought to the screen. It was dissapointing, especially after seeing the great Jane Eyre production starring Timothy Dalton and it's avid attention to the story, that the same could not be accomplished w/ this book. But it's to be expected, I suppose. A book as long and detailed as this one would be very difficult to visualize completely.

I can say that the Richard Chamberlain version is the best accomplishment in this respect and the Jim Caviezel film is vastly entertaining when not compared to its source material.

But this one was a large-scale dissapointment in most respects.

My rating: 5/10

2006-11-06T06:45:00.000-08:00

THE PRESTIGE (2006)
STARRING: CHRISTIAN BALE and HUGH JACKMAN
DIRECTED BY: CHRISTOPHER NOLAN
rated pg-13

Needless to say, when I saw the trailor for this movie I was already in line mentally. You see, those of you who know me are fully aware of my fascination and admiration for Christian Bale. When you add to that my love for director Christopher Nolan ( Batman Begins, Memento, Insomnia) and my abiding adoration for Wolverine (aka Hugh Jackman-heh heh), it was inevitable that I be... well, let's just say excited.

It would have been next to impossible for me to be dissapointed in this movie. I knew that w/ Nolan at the healm and great actors like Michael Caine, Scarlett Johanson, and the two leads to help move the story along-the idea of failure was somewhat laughable. So, I'll just start by saying-yes, it's a great movie.

The story follows a troupe of magicians led by veteran magic-man, Cutter (played perfectly of course by the failsafe of english thespianism, Sir Michael Caine) ,putting on a show for the public that mainly involves slight of hand and escape arts. Two of the young magicians, Alfred Borden and Robert Angier, are especially intent on perfecting their trade. They both know that their current roles as audience 'plants' are only temporary and that their futures are respectively bright. The knowledge leads to tradgedy and a cut-throat rivalry that spans several years as the two men attempt to better each other and become the best at their trade. When Alfred puts an especially fascinating and jaw-dropping trick into his repetoir, Robert goes to obsessive lengths to accomplish it and ultimately find out Alfred's secret. The constant struggle between their professional and personal lives becomes especially evident during the great 'reveal' at the end of the picture.

The acting by both leads was brilliant, but my husband and I both agree that Bale held a slight upper hand. He really does a remarkable job slipping into his character and he never seems to be 'mugging' his way through the dramatic moments like so many other pretty actors we see. Jackman is also fantastic, playing the slightly more 'off-kilter' Angier, a man who is obsessed w/ perfection. He is more debonair than Borden and milks this for all its worth throughout the years of their competition. Scarlett Johansson is also extremely good, making the most of her corsets and cockney accent. Her character is flawed but very loveable always. Rebecca Hall also makes quite an impact as Borden's wife, Sarah.

The direction is incredible, of course. Nolan is a such a great example of a director that doesnt rely on visuals or storytelling alone, or even the strength of his actors. He is able to pull all elements into a harmonious mix that all others can envy. At first, I must admit I was a little confused by the use of flashbacks in the film since they seemed to be so sporadic initially. But then I realized that the multiple flashbacks were simply the pieces of an intricate puzzle and like in Memento, the pieces come together wonderfully during the last 20 minutes of the movie. After it was over, I immediately wanted to go back and watch again, just to see what I'd missed in the construction. It is a great feat in cerebral filmaking-with one heck of a pay-off.

I strongly recommend this movie. There is very little negative I can say. The pg-13 rating is warranted due to some cleavage and a couple of grisly visuals, I suppose but other than that, I found the movie to be wonderfully unoffensive. Enjoy!

My rating: 9/10 Abracadabra!

2006-10-25T10:39:00.000-07:00

Sybil (1977)
DIRECTED FOR TELEVISION BY: DANIEL PETRIE

STARRING: JOANNE WOODWARD and SALLY FIELD

About eight years ago, I read a book by Flora Rheta Schreiber called Sybil. The forensically constructed novel is difficult to read, detailing as it does the trials and tragic life of Sybil Dorsett, a girl suffering from dissassociative personality disorder (also known as multiple personalities). It is a true story based on the recordings of Dr Cornelia Wilbur, Sybil's psychiatrist and ultimately- her healer. I knew when I read the book that it had been made into a television movie starring Sally Field but I hadnt seen it because when it aired, I was too young, and when it re-aired later, my mother deemed it far too disturbing for me. She was right, of course.

First of all, certain aspects of the novel are beyond description here and that is mainly because I couldnt stomach relating it. Sybil was not aware of her disorder until she met Dr Wilbur. Over the course of many treatment sessions and years of evaluation, Dr Wilbur discovered 16 personalities living in Sybil-all with their own ages and talents. They surfaced when Sybil was unable to cope and they remained until they were no longer needed. All sixteen of the personalities were completely aware of one another, however Sybil remained completely ignorant of their existence. Therefore, Sybil lost years of her life, sometimes months at a time, when another personality had taken over. 'Vickey' was the leader-articulate and elegant, motherly and condescending. 'Peggy' was an angry child of 9 that popped out when Sybil felt trapped...she was the firstborn of Sybil's troubled psyche. 'Vanessa' was funloving and pretty, a great lover of art and music. 'Marsha' was suicidal, the voice of doom that resounded in Sybil's head. Of the other personalities there existed an old lady, several other small girls, and even two boys-Sid and Mike. All of these personalities remained the age of their birth, the oldest being 14-Sybil was 29 when she began to see Dr Wilbur.

The most disturbing thing about this story was the not the development of the personalities themselves, but the reason for their existence. Sybil's mother was a violent schizophrenic who subjected the child, from the time of her infancy, to unspeakable acts of abuse. Sybil's father remained blissfully ignorant to his daughter's plight, believing every word that Hattie (his wife) uttered concerning the child's constant injuries. The abuse is detailed throughout the book and for this reason, I cannot recommend that anyone who is a mother read it. I know that I could not stomach it now that I have children of my own. As a medical study, however, it is fascinating.

Sally Field was granted the part of Sybil after a rigorous round of auditions. She had not yet played this type of role and there were those who were doubtful of her abilities. But they became avid fans of the actress upon the film's release to television and you too will be amazed. She so completely dissappears into each of the respective characters she is challenged to represent that it is sometimes very unsettling. Joanne Woodward plays Dr Wilbur and she is also a perfect choice for the role. Having played the notorious Eve White in the 1960's film, The Three Faces of Eve, Woodward was keen to play the role of psychiatrist. Throughout her discoveries and revelations concerning Sybil's illness, you see her constant struggle to maintain a professional relationship w/ this 'child' that she has taken under her wing. In the end, the motherly instinct prevails and though the journey is difficult to watch, it has a very satisfying and warm conclusion. The flashbacks placed strategically through the movie of Sybil's troubled childhood are skillfully handed, depending more on mood than actual visuals. It is a made-for-tv movie, after all, and we are therefore spared the gut-wrenching realism that movie-makers today would no doubt utilize.

The direction is excellent for a small-screen endeavor. There are a few misses concerning dream sequences that seem sadly dated by today's standards. But for the most part, it accomplishes what it sets out to do-convey the deep psychological trauma that resulted from one woman's nightmarish childhood. The score is also very effective-an odd mix of childrens' voices and tuneless notes on the piano.

The odd thing about all this is that regardless of the talent involved, I can't truly recommend it to other mothers. You must fully prepare yourself for what a commitment to watching this 3 hour film involves and expect that you will be greatly disturbed. Even though the movie does not focus solely on the heinous abuse, it is alluded to and this is necessary due to the nature of Sybil's illness and why it seems so hopeless. However, as the book relates, it was not hopeless after all. With Dr Wilbur's help, Sybil Dorsett was able to confront her different selves and eventually bring them into harmony so that she was able to obtain a measure of happiness in her later life. She enjoyed painting and playing piano again and she was able, finally, to completely accept what happened to her.

As a film, it is extrememly well done and as a medical case history, it is remarkable.

My rating: 9/10

2006-10-10T07:19:00.000-07:00

GOODBYE MR CHIPS (1939)
DIRECTED BY: SAM WOOD
STARRING: ROBERT DONAT and GREER GARSON
(appears at number eleven on my top 100 countdown)

Ah 1939. It was a very good year. Not only did this great cinematic year turn out such great classics as Gone With the Wind, Mr Smith Goes to Washington, The Women, The Wizard of Oz, and Goodbye Mr Chips, but these classics all held universal appeal and still remain hugely popular worldwide. There are a few movies that I've seen that move me just as much after repeat viewings as they did at first. This is one of them. Granted, I was much younger when I saw it initially, so it was inevitable that I would appreciate the depth of the story more as an adult. So help me it STILL makes me swoon.

Arthur Chipping is a integral part of Brookfield school. But when he arrived as a young man , he was the school's straight-laced, reserved Latin professor. After making a few stumbles in the disciplinary area, he became universally unloved by most of his students and therefore his dreams of becoming Headmaster seemed unreachable. After years of strict and cold teaching, watching all the other professors receive gifts and accolades from the boys, he is somewhat jaded. Reluctantly, he agrees to go along with a fellow teacher on a walking tour of Germany-completely aware he was only asked out of pity. Surprisingly, the trip changes his life in every way when he meets beautiful Katherine who soon becomes his loving wife. Their relationship transforms 'Mr Chips' , as she calls him, to the point that by the end of his life he has become the school's most beloved and legendary personage.

This is a love story. Though there is little physicality to their relationship, or even a lot of screen time devoted to it, the connection between Katherine and 'Chips' is timelessly involving. It makes you think about all the relationships in your life, not just the 'significant other'. It's about support and loyalty and fawning looks that go straight to the heart. It's also about the wonderful effects of change that love can have on a willing heart. The way that the prude, unworldy Mr Chipping melts beneath Katherine's understanding eyes and insinuates himself almost unknowingly into kind and witty 'Mr Chips' is something that we can all appreciate and enjoy.

Without Robert Donat, the movie would fail. He is miraculous to watch. We actually forget we are watching the same man, since the progression of his age is so believeable and it is, after all, a movie. He becomes an old man effortlessly. The looks, the voice, the walk (that crazy-good make-up also helps) all just completely convince. His attitude at the beginning as he stammers through this foreign environment is discomfitting at the least...as it should be. But his complete ease when he finally opens up is even more wonderful. It's just a beautiful piece of work. Greer Garson is so lovely and loveable that words cannot express. She has never been prettier or more endearing. Supporting characters are also memorable, especially young Terry Kilburn who plays three generations of Peter Colley. All three 'Peters' are different and equally precocious.

In addition to the great acting, the direction by Sam Wood is loving and deliberate-focusing solely on developing the central character. It is a character study, after all-a life story- and without this approach it just wouldnt work. The music is also very moving, especially the lovely choir piece that serves as the Brookfield school anthem. The eventual placement of World War I is handled very well and we feel its effects without ever leaving the school's campus.

This is a beautiful movie and a wonderful story. You will be entertained and amazed ...and I dare you not to cry.

My Rating: 10/10

2006-10-07T11:04:00.000-07:00

SALUTE TO GENE KELLY 1912-1996

I've decided that it is high time I devote some quality blog-dom to the man of my

(cinematic) dreams, Mr Gene Kelly. Not only was Gene Kelly the most phenomenal dancer of his day, (no offense Estaire-fans) but he was one of Hollywood's only quadruple threats of the time. The man could sing, act, dance, and direct.

His feet were legendary and unfailing-so unfailing that when his body finally began to break down and the dancing feet to slow, Mr Kelly became a virtual recluse. He directed some great movies (such as the beautifully over-the-top Hello Dolly) and appeared in tributes such as That's Entertainment, but the man began to fall apart when he could no longer express himself through dance. It is one of the saddest declines on record, in the movie industry. And it still makes me ache, especially when I see photos such as the one above. He was the closest thing there is to a superhero.

Below are a list of Kelly's movies and a mini-reivew of each one. I have not seen every one of his films-he made quite a few-but the reviews below will encompass all of the ones I have seen and I will be editing this post as I see the rest. The movies listed below are in order of release as well.

FOR ME AND MY GAL (1942)

This was one of the biggest surprises for me. Other than it being Kelly's first major motion picture, I really didnt know much about it. But It was delightful! I'm not the biggest Judy Garland fan, admittedly, so that is probably why it took me a while to get around to this one. But she is at her best here, vocally she is a wiz. The title number where she and Kelly sing together is charming to say the least. It is pure and delicate , showcasing Garland's ability to suit her voice to her partner perfectly. The dancing is wonderful, of course-especially where Kelly is concerned. He tells Jo early in the film that she 'dances like a deer' and I could help but laugh at the simile. She does indeed dance like a deer-a baby deer. Gangly, clumsy, scrawny legged-it's funny stuff. But the film isnt really a lighthearted musical. It has a very dramatic turn half way thru that was very moving. I thought the story was intriguing and surprising for a film of this genre. Kelly and Garland both do great w/ their dramatic scenes and I was left very happy w/ the sweet conclusion. If it were in color, I'd venture to say it would be that much better!

Kelly-highlight: I loved the brief vaudeville number at the beginning in which Kelly dons some quirky hobo attire and performs a sheerly comical piece.

My rating: 8/10

DUBARRY WAS A LADY (1943)

The fact that so many movie musicals were made in the early fourties was evidence that this was probably the most popular type of film at the time. During the war, people went to the movies for an escape of sorts, something that helped them forget the problems of the world. I'm awfully glad Gene Kelly was there to help them through it. This movie is really just a 'variety show' w/ a stupid story thrown in for grins. It's fun to watch Lucille Ball in a somewhat serious role and only break into her signature comedic style during the last number. Red Skelton is the energetic lead player ( in an admittedly silly part) and Gene Kelly is there to donate one great dance sequence and a pretty smile. However his acting did not seem as effortless in this fluff piece and the smile was not as easy. The songs by Cole Porter are catchy but not especially memorable and the 'dream sequence' is absolutely rediculous. This is a movie that would work on a 'clip' show where the highlights could be seen w/out having to sit through the pitifully shallow story.

Kelly Highlight-also happens to be the best song in the movie. 'Do I Love You' is a beautiful song by Porter and Kelly sings it nicely. The last section of the song is coupled w/ a great dance number that only disappointed slightly since it was in the dark and therefore difficult to see Gene's flying feet.

My rating: 6/10

THOUSANDS CHEER (1943)

This movie was really just hollywood's answer to entertaining our soldiers and giving them a tribute. The story follows Katherine Grayson (soprano extaordiannaire) as a sweet little gal who joins the army to be with her estranged father. Kelly plays Eddie marsh, a brooding aerialist-turned-private who craves the airforce. Of course they fall in love and meet typical (and tepid) obstacles along the way. The real meat of this movie is the star-studded 'revue' that appears three quarters into the film. Mickey Rooney, Judy Garland, Lucille Ball, Red Skelton, Lena Horne, and others make charitable appearances that were obviously filmed in a completely different locale than the rest of the flick.

Kelly-highlight: Sadly, Gene only delivers one dance in the movie but it is a doozy. His charistmatic cavorting with a mop and other cleaning supplies rival Estaire's 'dance on the ceiling'.

My rating: 8/10 (the movie is cute and the one dance is exceptional. Plus the variety show of stars is memorable)

PILOT #5 (1943)

Okay, so this was Gene Kelly's dramatic debut and since it isnt a musical and the movie is very mediocre in itself, I'll make this brief. He didnt dance, he didnt sing, he didnt direct...he played an Italian named Vito Allesandro. He was involved in a tepid love triangle. It was all very contrived and ho-hum. But Kelly had pretty good acting chops, even then, and he was quite dishy. So I'll just say, it's worth a look for those reasons alone. Kelly has one pretty good dramatic moment later on the movie that is milked for all its worth.

Kelly Highlight- he's purty.

My rating: 5/10

COVER GIRL (1944)

This was the movie that made Gene Kelly an accepted leading man and ended up getting him loaned out to MGM for his oscar nominated tailor-made role in Anchors Aweigh. He truly deserved the acclaim he received for Cover Girl. Though the movie was actually made as a vehicle for rising star Rita Hayworth (who is absolutely one of the most gorgeous women ever!), Gene Kelly actually holds his own beautifully and his screentime is every bit as memorable as his glamorous co-star. The story is a good one: Beautiful chorus girl is offered the cover of a leading magazine and becomes a rousing success-to the detriment of her steady romance with fellow dancer, Kelly. The tunes aren't that great but the technicolor is stunning and the costumes and dance numbers are wonderful. And of course Phil Silvers adds some much needed comic relief to the whole shabang!

Kelly Highlight: I can't believe it took me so long to see the film since one of Gene Kelly's best dance numbers ever (and certainly his best up to this time) graces this movie. In the scene, Kelly's alter-ego and reflection jumps out of a store window and dances with him. Some of the shots are mind-boggling for the time and I still wonder how they filmed this so successfully. Gene also does some great acting in this movie.

My Rating: 8/10

ZIEGFIELD FOLLIES (1945)

In the style of the last 20 minutes of 'Thousands Cheer', this movie is a montage of brilliant performers doing less than brilliant things. The 'plot' involves William Powell as Ziegfield looking down from heaven on his 'dream revue' and that's pretty much where it ends. The settings are very grand and beautiful, in the signature style of Ziegfeld but the numbers are a bit bleak in comparison w/ other great musicals. One in particular, 'China Doll', showcases Lucille Beymer and Fred Estaire in a gorgeous middle-eastern style stage setting but the dancing is a bit flat and the music is utterly mundane. Katherine Grayson and Fanny Brice play their respective parts well but even these performances can't hold a candle to the piece de resistance of the film, 'The Babbitt and the Bromide' starring (for the one and only time) Fred Estaire and Gene Kelly. The two hoofers meet, trade witty barbs, and dance a phenomenal piece that goes down in history as one of film's most memorable. It is a wonderful staged and choreographed number where Fred and Gene each showcase their own signature styles and completely match one another in execution. Kelly is the 'looser' of the two and excels in the tapping and athletic movements while Fred definitely has the upper hand when it comes to poise, grace, and perfect extension. It's 'apples and oranges' and it makes the whole movie worth it.

Kelly Highlight: Not really fair since it's his only scene but 'TheBabbit and the Bromide' is the highlight of the whole movie, not to mention one of the highlights of the two dancers' career.

My rating: 6/10 for the movie...10/10 for the Kelly number.

ANCHORS AWEIGH (1945)

More great war-time eye candy for our boys abroad. This one involves two sailors on leave (Sinatra and Kelly) and their adventures. Katherine Grayson is again the female lead and again, she's paired with Kelly. The story is slim but most of the musical sequences are great fun, including the ones where Sinatra attempts to dance alongside Kelly-which is hilarious in itself. But Kelly isnt the sole star of this picture. Sinatra has some good and meaty screen time-crooning lullabies and love songs- and Grayson has a solo that is downright amazing. Plus, Jose Iturbi gets to show us his chops on the piano in several key moments. Actually, that's what this movie is all about-showing off.

Kelly highlights: Perhaps one of the most memorable musical numbers in history is in this movie. It involves Kelly dancing with 'jerry the mouse' in an entirely animated world. Not only was this worlds ahead of its time and astonishing even by today's standards, but it is unbelievably charming. In addition, there is an equally wonderful number where Gene dances with a little nymph of a girl in a Mexican-style plaza. Watch the little girl-she's fantastic.

My rating: 9/10- it's one heck of a great musical

THE PIRATE (1948) Remember that hilarious 'movie' in 'Singin in the Rain' called 'The Royal Rascal'? This may be the lving equivelent. However there are great moments and the technicolor is beautiful. Plus, Garland sings very well and Gene Kelly dances so it can't be all bad! Unfortunately, the Cole Porter songs are few and not especially memorable and the dancing seems tepid comparied to Kelly's other films. One number, a 'pirate' ballet in which Kelly sports a teeny tiny black leotard, is probably one of the gayest things I've ever seen. But his legs are gargeous so I'll let it slide, I suppose. The final dance routine, entitled 'Be a Clown', is coupled with the best song of the movie and entirely out of keeping w/ the supposed era in which the story is set. But it's rioutous and fun and really gives us Kelly at his best. There are also some funny sparring moments between Judy and Gene that provide some much needed tongue-in-cheek levity to the movie. If I were more of a Judy Garland fan, I'd probably like the whole thing alot more.

Kelly Highlight: 'Be a Clown' and some great acrobatics

My rating: 6/10

THE THREE MUSKETEERS (1948)

1948 was Gene Kelly's year for shameless fluff and this movie is a delightful piece of it. Kelly plays D'artagnan in this loose adaptation of Dumas' tale in which the other three Musketeers (the title ones) are blatantly outshone by their young apprentice. We all know that Athos Porthos and Aramis were amazing swordsman but this colorful lark conveniently forgets this point and focuses almost solely on the acrobatic cavortings of Kelly as D'artagnan. They are some stupendous sword fights complete w/ daring gymnastic efforts by Gene and beautiful cinematic landscapes. The supporting characters are all a bit flat and include June Allyson, Gig Young, Angela Landsbury, Vincent Price as Richelieu, and the ravishingly beautiful Lana Turner as Lady DeWinter. As a movie-going experience, it's great fun as long as one doesnt forget that it is by no means to be taken seriously and that the glorious swordplay and technicolor are really what it's all about. When viewing Gene's performance itself, one can't help but be reminded again of the over-the-top annimation that was made rediculous in his silent-screen hero Don Lockwood of Singin' in the Rain.

Kelly Highlight: The swordplay-acrobatics are really incredible.

My rating: 7/10

ON THE TOWN (1949)

Sailors on leave for 24 hours (hmmm, is there a pattern forming here?) are determined to see all there is to see in New York New York ( 'a wonderful town/the people ride in a hole in the ground/the market's up and the battery's down/New York New York-it's a wonderful town'). In the meantime, they all happen to fall in love with women who are apparently stalking them-so conveniently placed are they. Sinatra, Munshin, and Kelly are the sailors and the dancing ladies of interest are Ann Miller, Betty Garret, and Vera-Allen. The movie is one of the corniest of Donen's career and at times, quite hard to watch. But it's definitely got it's moments and it's got Kelly.

Kelly Highlight: the saving grace of the movie is a gorgeously choreographed ballet by Kelly that is inserted rather sloppily into the picture. Vera-Allen is a great partner for him and the entire segment is wonderful.

My rating: 7/10

TAKE ME OUT TO THE BALL GAME (1949)

Another raucous and lively (as well as colorful) musical starring the three 'On the Town' boys, Kelly, Sinatra, and Munshin. In many ways, this movie outshines 'On the Town' since the acting is far more solid and story more engaging. Esther Williams is a lovely dancer/entertainer and pairs nicely w/ Kelly. The songs are mostly forgettable aside from the very well known title number that also has some of the film's more memorable 'hoofing'. The dialogue is quirky and downright funny at times and Munshin gets alot more opportunities to 'clown around' than he did in On the Town. A Clambake at Giddy's Landing allows for some great production and great number for Kelly. All in all, an enjoyable movie to say the least.

Kelly Highlight: The Clambake allows Gene to show off a little more than the rest of the film. Much like 'On the Town', this one plays more as a 'three man show' than a Kelly vehicle.

My rating: 8/10

THE BLACK HAND (1950)

Another dramatic picture along the lines of Pilot No. 5 but which plays out much better due to some good direction by Richard Thorpe and some very crisp and clean cinematography. The story follows Kelley as Johnny Columbo, an italian 'lawyer in training' who is intent on avenging the death of his father by the notorious Black Hand, a group of men involved in a well-known extortion racket. His acting is okay but the movie suffers from a convoluted story, under-developed characters, and some glaring stereotypes for the Italian people. Obviously a Kelley vehicle, the casting director did not seem to spend much time on foraging for quality actors for the supporting players and this shows as most of the characters blend into each other tediously.

Kelly Highlight: unlike Pilot No. 5, which was much earlier, this movie showcases Kelley as a 'leading dramatic actor' and his experience shows. He does a good job for the most part and when his character sees that the law will not help and makes the decision to face the Black Hand face to face, we see his inner struggle.

My rating: 6/10

SUMMER STOCK (1950)

Summer stock again reunites Judy Garland and Gene Kelly. The bright color and happy melodies are nicely accompanied by several great dance numbers and some surprising comic overtones. Judy plays Jane, a farm girl who is afraid of losing said farm due to lack of workers. All seems ideal, however, when her sister Abigail arrives w/ a theater troupe in need of a rehearsal space. In exchange for the use of Garland's barn, the troupe (led by Gene Kelly as Joe Ross) agree to do her chores and she agrees to assist in any way that she can w/ their production. The story is quite predictable, resulting in an inevitable love triangle between the two sisters and Joe and a few farm mishaps along the way. The final 'show within a show' is quite good, featuring a goofy routine from Phil Silvers and Kelly, and the stunning 'Get Happy' number from Garland that has gone down in MGM musical history.

Kelly Highlight: Garland's 'Get Happy' performance has overshadowed most of the songs and dance routines in this movie but as a Kelly fan, his dance with 'the newspaper' on the empty stage is the best thing in the film. He utilizes a creaky stage, a few pieces of newspaper and his own marvelous feet to create a perfectly brilliant number. Pay close attention to how his feet 'split' the paper...it was unrehearsed and completely wonderful.

My rating-9/10-though most of the songs are forgettable and the story is simple, the scenes that shine are too magnificent to give this a rating any lower than 9.

AN AMERICAN IN PARIS (1951)

There is a reason this movie won best picture. Not only was it Kelly's best work to date, but in itself-the whole movie is a piece of art worthy of Leutreque himself. The score by Gershwin and the choreography by Kelly all combine to make a phenomenal and retrospective look into the superficial life of starving artist Jerry Mulligan (Gene Kelly ) and his friends. Leslie Caron, precious gift to cinema, makes her first appearance and dances her way through a montage of sequences that leave all others previously filmed in the dust. Though some have argued that the story is unengaging, I actually quite like it. I also like the supporting characters, especially Georges Guetary and his lovely pipes. But it's no secret that the American in Paris dream sequence at the end is what the movie is all about. And it's never been equalled.

Kelly Highlight: the dream ballet at the end is the thing that makes Kelly a tour de force of American Entertainment. He deserved the acclaim that he got for achieving this.

My rating: 10/10

SINGING IN THE RAIN (1952)

What can I say? There is a reason this has been named one of the Afi's top ten films. It is everything a great movie should be. It has a great story, charming dance numbers, great personalities, and one of the best supporting performances in history by the great Jean Hagen. There isnt one segment of the movie that lags, one performer that dips into the background, or one dance step that hasnt been relentlessly perfected by Kelly himself. I hear he was very hard on Debbie Reynolds in this movie but the final product is what made her a star, so even she can't complain.

Kelly highlights: The title number is one of the best ever so we'll set it aside for a moment and give it a nod. In addition to that, Kelly's Broadway Melody ballet sequence is phenomenal as well. The great gams of Cyd Charisse coupled with the sexy choreography in the night club are what really stand out. I usually refer to this number when I want people to see Kelly's range as a dancer. From the hokey geek shouting 'gotta dance' into audition doors to the incredible symphony of movement with Cyd Charisse that is a 'dream' within a dream-he is perfection.

My rating 10/10 (and undoubtedly Kelly's best picture)

THE DEVIL MAKES THREE (1952)

A surprisingly solid piece of entertainment. Gene stars as Captain Jeff Elliott revisiting Germany after the war to thank the family who saved his life. He finds that both the mother and father of the family are dead but sets out determined to find the daughter, Wilhelmina, that he is certain still lives. The story follows his search, his discovery of the young lady in a sordid night club, and in his attempt to help her, the revelation that she is involved in a smuggling ring healmed by former Nazi agents. Of course, Jeff falls in love with 'Willie' and has to decide between his feelings for her and his desire to help the police find the criminals she is helping. The story is actually very good and the love angle well played-though a little uncomfortable since Kelly is obviously decades older than his co-star. The black and white direction is also very stark and impressive with some great action towards the end. It's also of note that the movie was filmed entirely on location in Germany and a final scene was actually shot in Hitler's former home.

Kelly Highlight: With this and Black Hand, Kelley proves that he can easily carry a movie even when dancing is not involved. His physical love scenes are a bit stilted but the dialogue is delivered very believeably, even when dipped in schmaltz.

My rating: 7/10

BRIGADOON (1954)

Sadly, this was not the movie it could have been. Kelly had such high hopes for this one. He wanted to shoot it on location and if this had been granted, the movie could have been one of the most lavish musicals filmed up to that time. Unfortunately, his vision was relegated to a claustrophobic soundstage on a Hollywood backlot and therefore, we suffer. However, it still has many great elements -principally Kelly himself. The other dancers in the film are also excellent and this is no doubt due to the fact that since the movie wasnt going to be 'big budget' undertaking to begin with, it was possible to cast dancers who could act instead of big names. Cyd Charisse and Van Johnson are the only other 'names' in this one. Both do a credible job but Cyd's lame scottish accent will grate on the nerves in spite of her lovely yellow dress.

Kelly Highlight: Though the dancing is brilliant throughout, oddly enough it's Kelly's vocal performance of 'It's Almost Like Being Inlove' that really made the impression on me. His spare voice is just right for the mood and melody of the tune. The ballet accompanying 'Heather on the Hill' is beautiful but again, it pales in comparison with he and Charisse in Singin' in the Rain. Oh for an actual hill to dance upon!

My rating: 8/10

IT'S ALWAYS FAIR WEATHER (1955)

This movie is one of the ones that slips by the radar of great Gene Kelly movies and it shouldnt. It was originally conceived as a sequel to 'On The Town' but when Munshin and Sinatra were both busy w/ other projects, the story was changed to accomodate three army buddies who agree to meet at a bar ten years after their return from war to prove to the skeptical bartender that they will indeed be 'friends for life'. The army buddies are ably played by Dan Daily, Michael Kidd (who later went on to do the choreography in "Hello Dolly"), and Kelly with Gene easily outshining the other two. Cyd Charisse plays Kelly's love interest and her character is a refreshing mix of sex appeal and intelligence that was rare for this type of 'fluff-piece'. The musical numbers are inserted into the picture almost as an afterthought and do little to move the story along but the few that there are really do make an impression. When the 'army buddies' find that their ten year reunion proves to be a disappointment, they are given unsolicited help by a series of quirky characters and plot twists that make the movie a delightful little diversion, to say the least...and the dancing is the icing on the cake.

Kelly Highlight: Though the dance numbers w/ Daily and Kidd are very good (especially the opening sequence with the garbage cans), Gene definitely steals the show at the midway point when he dons a pair of roller skates and, preoccupied with being in love, inadvertantly leaves the roller rink while still wearing them. He then goes on to 'make the most' of this little mishap and taps and spins his way through a wonderfully choreographed dance on skates that I have never seen the likes of before or since. I dare you not to grin!

My rating: 8/10

INVITATION TO THE DANCE (1956)

Really more of an event than a movie, Invitation to the Dance, was Gene Kelly's answer to Ballet on Film. It is a three part story w/ absolutely no dialogue, beautiful cinematography, and phenomenal dancing. The first story tells of a circus performer struck by unrequited love, the second is a whimsical journey of one bracelet as it is given from lover to lover over the passage of time, and the third tells of the adventures of Sinbad in a mostly cartoon world. It is not the best dancing of Kelly's career nor the most memorable of his films. There are wonderful moments but one can't help but think of what 'might have been' with a little fine tuning.

Kelly Highlight-his pantomine as a heartbroken circus mime during the first story is beautiful and during the Sinbad story he shares some great moments w/ a exceptional child dancer and some cartoon characters.

My Rating: 6/10

Les Girls (1957)

Though this movie was not filmed during Gene Kelly's 'hey-day' and is not considered one of is best, it is still a solid movie. Mitzi Gaynor and Kay Kendall are the strongest supporting performers in this 'point of view' courtroom tale in three parts. The story is stronger than many of Kelly's earlier efforts and the acting is infectious by all players so that the dancing is not the most important thing in the movie. There are some great choreographed pieces but the comedy and dialogue of this film are its strongest points. Gene was an effortless actor at this stage in his career and his role is gallantly played. Cole Porter's songs are not particulary memorable in this one but they are still catchy as always and the costumes are especially gorgeous, in keeping w/ the Parisian setting. Its a lovely little movie that suffers only slightly from the minimal ammount of 'hoofing'.

Kelly Highlight- A great ballet sequence late in the film is an example of Cukor's great direction and use of color to complement Kelly and his partners' movements.

My rating-7/10

These are not all of Kelly's movies, by a long shot. But I'll see the rest eventually. After all, just in case you didnt notice...I'm a fan.

'Gaaaaaahhhhhhhtaaaaaaaaa Daaaaaaance!'

2006-10-02T06:27:00.000-07:00

SAYONARA (1957)

Directed by: Joshua Logan

Starring: Marlon Brando as Lloyd Gruver and Miko Taka as Hana-Ogi

Co-starring Red Buttons, James Garner, Ricardo Montalban, and Miyoshi Umeki

(appears at number 46 on my top 100 countdown)

There are a few love stories in movie history that stay with me as the best and this is one of them. The love story itself is believeable and moving but in addition to that, the complementary storytelling is equally compelling. It is hilarious, intriguing, and at all times vastly entertaining.

Marlon Brando stars as Ace Lloyd Gruver, a U.S. fighter pilot who has become a bit jaded with his career of choice. After an active run and quite a successful record in the Korean War, he is assigned some mandatory downtime in Kobe Japan, accompanied by fellow serviceman, Major Joe Kelley. Joe (phenomenally portrayed by Red Buttons) is intent on marrying a sweet Japanese girl, much to Lloyd's disdain. All ammount of persuasion on the part of Gruver and other superior officers will not disuade Kelley from his marriage and therefore Lloyd begrudgingly offers to be a witness at his wedding. During the days that follow, Lloyd becomes even more frustrated with his life choices as he realizes that his fiance is not all that he remembered her to be (she is a general's daughter and therefore visiting in Japan) and his future awaiting him in the states appears bleak. However, Lloyd's distaste for Japanese women and culture makes a quick 180 when he accompanies a buddy to the famed Matso Bayashi show and lays eyes on the beautiful Hana-Ogi, the country's most famous female dancer. The love story that results is one of the most satisfying I've ever seen and even through tragedy and racism-the lovers emerge triumphant.

Thought this may not be Marlon Brando's best performance, I'll venture to say it is his most loveable by far. He is the epitome of a die-hard serviceman turned goofy by infatuation. His southern accent is muddled and careful endevor is made that the viewer not know exactly where he comes from. But recognizeable or no, this accent makes him a doll. He is vulnerable and endearing-ignorant and wise. It is his performance on which the whole film hangs and he pulls it off with ease. Red Buttons and Miyoshi Umecki as the newlyweds are also fantastic in their respective roles. Red Buttons is the quintessential happy husband, just becoming aquainted with his little wife and her odd culture. Umecki is submissive, almost to a fault, while at the same time remaining absolutely adorable and strong. She speaks a precious broken english that succeeds in bringing me to tears (at one particular point especially) without fail. Miko Taka, as Hana-Ogi, is regal and impressive but mainly she is a vision of loveliness. Her 'I will love you hey-sa, if that is your desire' speech is the stuff of legends, especially coupled with the expression on Lloyds face when he hears it.

The direction is wonderful and the film is shot primarily on location, something that was not extremely common for this type of film-especially at this time in history. The Japanese culture is lovingly handled throughout, with special attention being paid to the ceremonial nature of the people. The Kabuki and Matso Bayashi scenes are overwhelmingly beautiful, as are the lovely scenes in the Japanese countryside. The japanese people themselves are portrayed in an unbiased and respectful light as well which, again, considering the year is quite astonishing.

All in all, this is a movie for the shelf. Even after repeat viewings, the great acting and adoring love of the lead characters never fails to move.

My rating: 10/10

2006-09-18T06:27:00.000-07:00

HAROLD AND MAUDE (1971)
DIRECTED BY: HAL ASHBY
STARRING : BUD CORT and RUTH GORDON
RATED: PG

The cult classic, Harold and Maude is unlike any other film in two major respects. For one thing, it involves a unlikely love story between a 79 year old woman and a 20 year old man-child. Secondly, it makes light of death-in a darkly hilarious way. While those two things may turn many people off at first glance, I highly recommend that everyone see it at least once. In my opinion, it is one of the most revealing, delightful, and profoundly sweet movies I have the pleasure to own.

Harold is a wealthy heir, just out of school who is less than impressed with life. He has a deep fascination with death-bordering on obsession- and he drives a hearse. His only joy is derived from visiting funerals and playing pranks on his mother by staging his own macabre end. These pranks are twisted and wierd but also somehow unsettlingly funny. His mother pays him no mind, no doubt assuming that her son is going through a harmless phase of some sort. She attempts, throughout the film, to set up fruitless dates for him-hoping he will eventually warm up to the idea of a companion with which to share his vast fortune. While visiting one of his beloved funerals, Harold comes across free spirit Maude-a 79 year old sprite of a woman with a lust for life. To Maude, the world is a playground and death is just its exciting conclusion. She herself hangs out at the funerals to reaffirm her own happy existence and pays no heed to rhyme or reason in her attempt at living life to its fullest. Harold is instantly drawn to her and the two of them develop a deep friendship that seems only natural under their respective circumstances. The love that ensues is strange but still absolutely believeable.

Bud Cort is a face worth remembering. His huge almost 'bugged' eyes are full of character and feeling. His lanky frame and quirky clothing only add to his appeal as the film's oddball of a hero. Ruth Gordon is the star of the movie though, make no mistake. There is no doubt that the woman was a phenomenal presence in every film she graced (I can distinctly remember her playing a very Maude-like character in the underrated teen flick-My Bodyguard). But as Maude, she's more than a presence; she's a downright inspiration. It is her sweet outlook ('I'd like to be a sunflower') that makes the movie so delightful, despite the blanket synopsis. She flits around the screen like some type of nymph, bringing to Harold a new opinion of life that remains with him even through the film's bittersweet conclusion.

Hal Ashby took on a huge challenge by directing this as his first film. He was an oscar winning film editor prior to this picture, and choosing such a strange black comedy for his first attempt at directing, was needless to say-a probable jump at failure. But he pulls it off brilliantly. The direction is superb throughout. The flow from Harold's dark and dreery mansion to Maude's luminous walks in the sun are virtually seamless. Cat Steven's upbeat music also lends a measure of harmony and lyricism to the whole experience. It's evident that Wes Anderson (who directed current cult classics 'Rushmore' and 'The Royal Tenenbaums' ) was heavily influenced by this particular film.

There are aspects of this movie that would probably warrant it having a 'pg13' rating today. Some of Harold's 'pranks' are a bit violent and some sexual activity is 'alluded' to in one scene. But thankfully, it doesnt dwell on the immorality for a significant ammount of time nor does it take itself very seriously at any given point. You must use your own discretion when approaching this subject matter, I suppose.

But, I'll just close by saying-I highly recommend it as both a love story and a wildly entertaining piece of film history.

My rating: 9/10

2006-09-12T06:27:00.000-07:00

LA PASSION de JEANNE d'ARC (1928)
ENGLISH TITLE: THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC
DIRECTED BY: CARL THEODORE DREYER
STARRING: MARIA FALCONETTI

One day I saw an article in a film magazine citing the greatest female performances in movie history. The performance by Maria Falconetti in this silent film was at the top of the list. Being only slimly familiar with silent film, I was puzzled and intrigued by this bold proclamation. The greatest performance by a woman ever ? Really? I put it on my netflix rental queue intending to watch it when I got to it.

My father called me last week to inform that the film was going to be playing on TCM and that I should give it a watch. So I did. Interestingly, in the film's introduction, it was stated that Maria Falconetti never made another movie. This was her first and her last. Now I am even more intrigued.

Most of the time, I am disappointed when something is built up as the 'best' of anything. The best creme' brulee'? meh. The best song? No way. The best band? C'mon. But this time, I must say that if Maria Falconneti's performance as Joan of Arc is not the BEST ever, it is definitely AMONG the best. Let me see if I can put it into words.

Have you ever been watching someone fall apart from a distance? You cannot hear them or read their lips even. But you see their face crumple, their eyes fill, their lips tremble as they try to get the words out. You feel guilty in your voyeurism but still...you don't want to look away. What could possibly have happened? Regardless of what the problem is, it has obviously turned their life, for the time being, upside down. Now imagine that you do know what is wrong. That somehow, just by their expression, you were able to read their thoughts. Their whole story is in their eyes. And you sit by, mezmerized in their power.

This is, in effect, how I felt about Maria Falconetti's performance. I felt that even if I had not seen any of her surroundings or known who she was portraying-I would still have somehow known. She is able to convey the broad spectrum of emotions that Joan of Arc underwent thru the course of her trial-of determination, grief, adoration, fear...simply by the use of her glorious eyes. I stared openmouthed as she wiped tears away, swatted a fly distractingly, bit her parched lips, wiped her runny nose with the back of her hand, and became a living breathing part of history. The dialogue cards were actually unnecessary, as strange as that may seem.

The story follows only the trial of Joan. We do not see her visions, her communication w/ the Dauphine, her march into battle. We see her before the judges, we see her in prison, and we see her die. It is not a light or joyous movie by any stretch of the imagination...not even once does it attempt to pull the viewer out of the doldrums. But where is rests-it accomplishes volumes.

The direction by Carl Dreyer is unprecendented and extremely ahead of its time. He used no make up, retaining a gritty and realistic feel throughout. It is this particular area that makes the film so timeless and the date of 1928 almost incomprehensible. Also, the movie is almost entirely shot in closeup. The different faces (principally that of Falconetti) are the story. And such wonderful faces were chosen. The characters are completely captivating from the outset, based as they are on looks alone. We despise the bishops and judges, love those who are sympathetic to her plight, and mourn for Joan as she bears it all. The realism is at times unsettling, such as when an arm is pierced for the customary 'bleeding', a nursing baby pulls away from his mother's moist nipple to watch the execution, and Joan's head is shaved as a final insult.

Since we know God did not speak to Joan, and that her visions were evidently hallucinations of some kind-the story is bittersweet. But to those of us who are more than willing to die for our faith, it also resonates in a way that many would not understand. Watching as the prosecutors try to attack her faith strikes home in more ways than one. The twisting of her words to serve their purpose, the onslaught of 'unanswerable' questions, the accusations-how can we not be moved by this?

I recommend this to anyone-but especially to those who are intrigued by this story, great acting, awe-inspiring filmmaking, or the strength of will.

My rating: 10/10

2006-09-05T06:45:00.000-07:00

SARATOGA TRUNK (1945)
DIRECTED BY: SAM WOOD
STARRING: GARY COOPER and INGRID BERGMAN
(based on the novel by Edna Ferber)

In the early months of this year my family and I were living temporarily in a one room cabin. During this time, I read two books-one of which was the novel Saratoga Trunk by Edna Ferber. I had gone to the library in search of her book 'Giant' (one of my all time favorite movies) and since they didnt have it, I settled on this one since I really just wanted to get familiar with her work. Let me say first, it is a great book.

Saratoga Trunk tells the story of Clio Dulaine, a beautiful bold female on a mission to right her mother's (and her own) sullied name. The story finds this elegantly dressed woman on a boat for New Orleans accompanied by her ominous black maid and another servant named Cupide who is a dwarf. While seeking vengeance for her mother, Clio also intends to marry a rich man so that, unlike her mother, she will be respected. However, this last plan becomes a bit complicated when she falls for long tall Texas smart alleck, Clint Marroon-a man who makes his living playing cards and has little or no money to speak off. The love story follows the two protagonists from the deep mood of New Orleans to the lighthearted ammusement of the Saratoga racetrack as Clio seeks to find her wealthy husband in full view of the man she truly loves.

I was thrilled to see that there was a movie version of this story-especially when the leads were so aptly cast. It's a long-winded spectacle, clocking in at almost three hours. But the ride, while it lasts, is a joy to watch. Ingrid Bergman is absolutely the physical manifestation of Clio Dulaine. She has never been more beautiful than she is in this film-with all her glorious costumes only adding to her charm. Cooper's lazy eyes speak volumes and his lines are delivered with effortless skill. Their love scenes are tumultuous but also very tender and funny. The development of their relationship is a bit confusing and sometimes leaves the viewer puzzled, but I was still satisfied with the outcome.

Unlike many film adaptions (The Count of Monte Christo for instance), this one truly struggled to stay close to the book and succeeded for the most part. The time spent in New Orleans was obviously filmed on a stage and a tight budget so much of the city mood is lost. But as the story journies to Saratoga Springs, we feel an 'opening up' that is very refreshing. Little Jerry Austin, who plays Cupide, does a great job with his physical role and is memorable. However, I was very turned off by the casting of Flora Robson ( a white woman) as Angelique, the black maid. This glaring problem destroyed her scenes, which could have been great.

The direction, by Sam Wood, seems a little claustrophobic at times (which I put down more to money constraints than lack of skill) but still manages to keep the viewer interested. The story flows along fairly well with the help of the great dialogue that was effectively adapted from the novel. An example: Clio is about to leave for Saratoga having been offered 10,000 dollars in 'hush money' by the Dulaine family. The Dulaine's lawyer is enamoured with her and is genuinely concerned for her future. " This money will not last you long, Miss Clio. What will you do?' "Do?"says she,'Why, I'll marry rich of course." The lawyer looks down bashfully. " You are very beautiful ma'am" he says. "Yes," she candidly replies, "Isn't it lucky?". The smile on Bergman's beautiful face with these words is what makes this movie, despite its faults, a wonderful piece of work.

MY RATING: 8/10

2006-08-15T06:38:00.000-07:00

THE NEW WORLD (2005)

DIRECTOR: TERRENCE MALICK

STARRING: COLIN FERRELL as John Smith and Q'UORINKA KILCHER as Pocahontas

Terrance Malick is no doubt a hit or miss director. When he hits, as he did with BADLANDS and DAYS OF HEAVEN, he hits big. His deft handling of natural elements is unequalled, in my opinion. The photography rivals the actors with its own breathtaking performance. The lighting is exquisite. In BADLANDS, Sissy Spacek was phenomenal and the dialogue between she and Sheen, though sparse, was electric. DAYS OF HEAVEN was not as well received as BADLANDS, but it still succeeded largely in moving the audience with both the innovative camera-work and the actors' performances. Then, there was the war epic THE THIN RED LINE which received an oscar nod but mixed reviews. It was dodgy but still stunning.

THE NEW WORLD is a disappointment for many reasons. The main reason is the unfathomable casting of Colin Farrell as John Smith. He is brusque, rude, vulgar, sullen, and mostly unattractive. The majority of his performance consists of brooding in the shade voiceing complaints in an infuriating monotone. He never truly seems to believe the role and therefore neither do we. His brief love scenes with Pocahontas are extremely dull, only lightening slightly during their final scene together.

An additional problem with the film lies in its lack of dialogue. Being a lover of this particular story, I was really in need of some great interaction between the characters. I wanted to hear wonderful expressions of love and intelligent humor. There should have been deep dialogue (subtitled of course) between the tribe members as they pondered the arrival of the Englishmen. Instead, Malick replaces most of the dialogue with quiet, minimalistic narration that truly confuses the viewer. We find ourselves watching the glorious portrayal of nature, listening to the pretty score, and completely forgetting the whispered words we've just heard. 'wait...what was that? was that important what he said?..eh...probably not'.) I'm not sure what his intention was with this approach, but it certainly didnt reach me. A few great actors (Wes Studi, Christopher Plummer) were completely wasted on such an austere project.
On a positive note, Q'Orianka Kilcher was a luminous Pocahontas. She conveyed more feeling with her eyes than most of her castmates and her lines seemed to flow naturally. Her skin glowed in the ethereal lighting (that is a Malick signature) and when she smiled, it was full of warmth. Add to her solid performance the presence of the GREAT Christian Bale ( and may I just say 'humina humina' ) and there were definitely high points to the film. Bale was the perfect John Rolfe. The fact that he would have played second fiddle to Farrell's John Smith is laughable in the extreme. When he is on the screen, I melt...I just do. His eyes, as they rested on his new wife, were full of love and believeable attraction. And therefore Bale has yet another film to his credit about which he can claim to be the saving grace (at least in my biased eyes).

For a christian, I didnt spot anything that would be especially offensive. There is some documentary style violence (realistic but not glorified) and some allusions to sexual activity but not much is shown. Even the indians are surprisingly modest, with only a few children taking advantage of the PG13 rating.

Even with all the aforementioned problems, I didnt hate this movie. I doubt I will ever watch it again (unless I happen to catch it after Bale makes his belated appearance) but it does have some very beautiful moments. The photography itself is undoubtedly on par with others of the genre. But when a historical epic lacks heart, it will not be universally loved.

My rating: 5/10

2006-08-15T06:25:00.000-07:00

THE LADY IN THE WATER (2006)

DIRECTOR- M NIGHT SHAYAMALAN

Recently, I made a little alone trip to the movies and saw this recent effort of a much loved director. Some of Shayamalan's work is just brilliant, in my book-namely SIGNS and UNBREAKABLE. Though THE VILLAGE received lukewarm reviews and critics and audiences are both beginning to doubt his abilities, I still find him comparable with Hitchcock in many respects.
If you make an effort to view some of Hitchcock's earliest work (especially the silent film THE LODGER), you can see alot of similarities between he and Shayamalan. Both directors have a great grasp on the visual while sometimes seeming a bit too ambitious with their respective stories. Character developement is often very defined while in the same film, sadly lacking. Both directors enjoyed adding a signature 'twist' to their film climaxes. Some critics think this makes for very one-dimensional filmmaking and therefore both Hitchcock (in his early days) and M (I am NOT spelling out that name every time! ) have had their nay-sayers.

The Lady in the Water is, however, much better than the critics would have you believe. The story is silly and sometimes a little over-ambitious. The movie is a bit self indulgent also-as Shayamalan has cast himself in quite a meaty role. But it succeeds in two very important areas-entertainment and acting.
The story is actually a tale within a tale. An eastern bedtime story is quickly related in which water nymphs must come in contact with a human and attempt to make much needed changes in society through their human 'vessel'. These water nymphs live underneath swimming pools, placed there as infants before the pools are constructed and surfacing only momentarily until it is time for them to contact their vessel. Once the narf (as she is called) is out of the water, she is pursued by ravenous beasts called 'scrunts' whose sole purpose is to defeat the nymph. Once her mission is safely accomplished however, the scrunt must relent and allow the narf to be safely taken back to her own world by a large eagle sent for this purpose. If the scrunt oversteps his bounds, he is punished by Tartuic-peacekeepers living in the trees*. It's all very involved and ponderous...but still a little exciting.

Paul Giamatti plays Cleveland Heep, caretaker of an apartment complex with, of course, a pool. Heep has a stutter and is completely wrapped up in the lives of his tenants. Giamatti plays him excellently and lovingly. He is funny and endearing-intelligent and vulnerable. The tenants are a collection of hilarious oddball characters that remain at all times intriguing in their eccentricities. Bob Balaban (Close Encounters, Mighty Wind) plays his signature 'straight man' with panache. As the movie progresses, Heep discovers the narf (played by lovely but ho hum Bryce Dallas Howard) in the pool and makes it a mission to help her find her vessel and protect her from the scrunts he is quite shocked to discover living in his lawn. A series of miniscule plot twists result as Heep discovers things about the tenants that relate in various ways to the narf and her goals. There are a few dramatic moments and brief scares but for the most part the film remains very upbeat. The special effects are pretty good as well, though they are not the main draw for me.

In closing, may I just say that I am especially thrilled by how clean this movie was. I did not detect any major language (though Kids-in-mind may refresh my memory) and sexuality is not an issue at all. The scenes between the narf and scrunts are a bit intense but not overly violent or at all gory. I am very pleased to see a director step away from the typical manner that most directors of this genre will approach such a story. Of course, since Shayamalan wrote the whole thing, he had no one to disappoint.

My rating: 7.5/10

*If you are interested in this little 'bedtime story', it's also noteable that Shayamalan has released it in book form for children. You can find it at your local bookstore.

2006-08-14T14:40:00.000-07:00

And we're OFF...

I've decided to open up a blog with the sole purpose of reviewing movies. That way, all of you who truly care will be able to determine beforehand whether a flick is worth your time or truly...well...sucks. Of course my opinion is of zero importance, especially if we don't share movie tastes , and that is what the comment window is for!

This blog is also open to submitted reviews so ya'll can just email those to me if you'd like to see your opinion shouted into cyberspace.