Review: The Road
The Road
Directed by John Hillcoat
Screenplay by Joe Penhall, based on the novel by Cormac McCarthy
Starring: Viggo Mortensen, Kodi Smit-McPhee, Charlize Theron
Runtime: 112 minutes
Plot Synopsis: Based on Cormac McCarthy’s groundbreaking novel, The Road explores the aftermath of an unnamed cataclysmic event, particularly focusing on its impact on a man (Mortensen) and his son (Smit-McPhee).
In a year when cinemas are littered with post-apocalyptic tales of destruction and moral ruin, no film comes close to the crushing, emotionally shattering power of The Road. Those who enjoyed McCarthy’s 2006 Tour de Force will be pleased to know that Hillcoat remains true to the novel, both literally and in spirit. The few changes that were made only add to the story’s power, helping smooth the transition from page to screen. The parts of Old Man (Duvall) and Wife (Theron) have been extended for the film, with both additions crystallizing the story’s theme and increasing its ferocity. In particular, a new scene shared between Mortensen and Duvall is one for the time capsule, with Duvall demonstrating that one needn’t more than ten minutes of screen time to blow an audience away.
Still, for a film to be exceptional it must possess more than great individual scenes, and The Road doesn’t disappoint. The film manages to be simultaneously horrifying and cathartic, filled with both gleaming hope and utter despair. Many have deemed Hillcoat’s vision uneventful and sluggish, but they must have been watching a different film. The Road is more concerned with exploring notions of fatherhood, hope, and the human spirit than relying on gore and cheap thrills. The film is often bleak and suffocating, but the rewards are endless for those viewers willing to sacrifice their psyches to McCarthy’s and Hillcoat’s mesmerizing vision.
Grade: A
Review: Antichrist
Antichrist
Directed by Lars von Trier
Screenplay by Lars von Trier
Starring: Willem Dafoe, Charlotte Gainsbourg
Runtime: 104 minutes
Plot Synopsis: He (Dafoe) and She (Gainsbourg) are going at it like animals when their son falls out of a window and dies. She goes ape. He, being a therapist and all, tries to fix her, but all she wants to do is have awkward sex. He takes her to a cabin in the woods (they refer to the area as Eden… no, really) and implements an unhealthy dose of exposure therapy, which makes everyone completely lose their shit.
After the film’s release, von Trier notoriously referred to himself as “the biggest filmmaker in the world.” No doubt he actually believes this to be true. Unfortunately for him, he made the statement while releasing a film that won a special award at Cannes for being the “most misogynistic film ever made.” It’s not surprising, considering the film is all about how women are evil and like to put their sons’ boots on the wrong feet and then watch them fall out of windows while Willem Dafoe makes them climax. Then, after they inevitably go nuts because of the guilt, they partake in some genital mutilation while a bunch of crazy animals (a doe with a stillborn baby hanging from its womb, a crow who pecks at Willem Dafoe’s face, and a fox who disembowels himself; they are referred to as “the three beggars”) run around the forest causing all sorts of shenanigans. That’s right, women kill baby deer and make foxes disembowel themselves. Just ask Lars von Trier.
Even if one is not bothered by lead-heavy symbolism, misogyny, and exploitative violence, the painstakingly dull path the film takes to get to the crazy is itself something by which to be offended. Von Trier utilizes several techniques to make sure viewers realize just how artsy Antichrist is, including excessive jump-cuts, intense shallow focus, and wavy imagery. Rather than add the texture and depth von Trier intended, these techniques make the film appear as though it were made by a student, and not a particularly talented one. The one bright spot is (ironically) Gainsbourg, who powerfully portrays a grieving mother drowning in guilt and regret. This, of course, is before her role is relegated to that of a sex-crazed monster.
There is an art to making these types of films; those films which, rather than following a traditional narrative, strive to express something bold and profound through ambiguity and madness. David Lynch is a master of the genre. Charlie Kaufman’s Synecdoche, New York, released in 2008, is among the best films of decade. But when a filmmaker is unable to express their supposed discovered truth, and instead rely on meaningless, self-important dribble to woo pretentious moviegoers, films like Antichrist inevitably surface.
Grade: D-
Review: Where the Wild Things Are
Where the Wild Things Are
Directed by Spike Jonze
Screenplay by Spike Jonze & Dave Eggers, based on the book by Maurice Sendak
Starring: Max Records, Catherine Keener, James Gandolfini (voice)
Runtime: 94 Minutes
Plot Synopsis: Adapted from Sendak’s beloved children’s book, the story follows Max (Records), a young boy experiencing both the joys and loneliness of childhood. After a fight with his mother (Keener), Max runs away; a wild rumpus ensues.
In the years since principal photography wrapped, Spike Jonze’s Where the Wild Things Are has become notorious for its turbulent production. After seeing Jonze’s first cut, the studio considered re-shooting the entire film, feeling that it was too dark to attract the audiences an 80 million dollar budget normally justifies. Apparently they were expecting something along the lines of Beverly Hills Chihuahua, not a poignant, complex journey into the mind of a young boy.
It’s not a coincidence that Sendak refused to allow any adaptation of his story to enter production until he had hand picked Jonze to direct, feeling the director was the only one up to the task of capturing the subtle sensibilities of his classic tale. The end result is mesmerizing. Jonze’s creation is a masterful piece of art, both visually arresting and exquisitely affecting. You will never see boyhood captured as truthfully on film as it is in the film’s first 20 minutes. Its richness only increases when Max runs away, the events of his odyssey reflecting the depths of his psyche.
The film is as visually stunning as anything released this or any other year. The images are paired beautifully with the tone of the story, a goal many filmmakers strive for but seldom accomplish. Striking images only carry a film so far, and it’s Max that gives the film its heart. Records delivers an exceptional performance in a truly complex role; he masterfully exposes Max’s inner pensiveness, expressing a range of emotions most adult actors strive to demonstrate their whole careers.
Those who know me are undoubtedly aware that Sendak’s book holds a special place in my heart. If anything, my feelings about the film are indicative of its successes, and should not be read as the words of a fanboy who would have adored the film regardless of its content. My expectations were astronomical, and the fact that the film exceeded those expectations are a true measure of its brilliance. It soars to heights I never could have imagined.
Grade: A
Review: An Education
An Education
Directed by Lone Scherfig
Screenplay by Nick Hornby, based on the memoir by Lynn Barber
Starring: Carey Mulligan, Peter Sarsgaard
Runtime: 95 Minutes
Plot Synopsis: In 1960s England, an Oxford-bound teenager’s (Mulligan) life is turned around when she begins mingling with a man nearly twice her age (Sarsgaard).
I’m a fan of movies that have something to say, and Scherfig’s An Education certainly falls into that category. It’s all about female angst in a pre-Beatles England, where the options were to either marry a wealthy man or fend for yourself and attempt to avoid the mundane. As much as I hate the phrase, it is very much a coming-of-age tale, one where people learn all sorts of lessons and such (the title is quite literal). The genre is among the most dangerous, since it basically breeds creative mediocrity, even in the most gifted artists.
Luckily the filmmakers avoid the trap. Since it is set in early-1960s England, the cinematography is breathtaking. There is a particular sequence from a trip to Paris (I’m not giving anything away; the trip is destined to happen from the opening scene) that will blow even the pickiest aesthetically oriented viewers away. The story is riveting and the actors are all on their game. That being said, the film rushes to a finish in the last two minutes or so, relying on the cliches it so vehemently avoided in the preceding 93 minutes. I haven’t seen such a great film end so badly in a long time, and it has nothing to do with the way the story concludes, but the manner in which it is expressed. Bollocks.
Grade: B+
Review: A Serious Man
A Serious Man
Directed by Joel & Ethan Coen
Screenplay by Joel & Ethan Coen
Starring: Michael Stuhlbarg, Richard Kind
Runtime: 105 Minutes
Plot Synopsis: In a small Jewish Minnesota town in the 1960s, professor Larry Gopnik (Stuhlbarg) watches his life unravel. His wife wants a divorce, his son is more concerned with avoiding his dealer than preparing for his Bar Mitzvah, and his loser brother lives on his couch. There’s more terribleness, but you get the idea.
Many comparisons have been made between the film and the “Book of Job” from the Old Testament. It’s a hard comparison not to make, since a mostly likable guy gets shat on for 100 minutes. With such a premise, the story could have easily fallen into idiocy and cheap thrills, but it never even flirts with such nonsense. I would presume this is because the story is so personal for the directors; they have stated in interviews that the protagonist is partially based on their own father, the story loosely based on their time growing up in a small Jewish community in Minnesota.
The Coen Brothers tend to cruise in one of two modes: misanthropic, stupidity-laced comedy or dark, searing noir. A Serious Man falls into neither category, though it utilizes techniques from both. It’s hilarious yet meaningful, philosophical yet not pretentiously so. Although the film is very Jewish, the questions posed and internal conflict experienced by Larry are those which all can empathize with. It’s the Coen’s most personal, moving film to date, and should not be missed.
Grade: A
Review: Jennifer’s Body
Jennifer’s Body
Directed by Karyn Kusama
Screenplay by Diablo Cody
Starring: Megan Fox, Amanda Seyfried, Johnny Simmons, J.K. Simmons
Runtime: 102 Minutes
Plot Synopsis: Jennifer (Fox), the school babe, and Needy (Seyfried), nerdilicious, are best friends who share little in common. After a fire at a local bar and subsequent botched human sacrifice attempt, Jennifer begins feasting on the neighborhood boys, leaving Needy to figure out what’s up before the sexy little succubus is discovered.
I’m not going to lie, I was incredibly pumped to see this. I anticipated a total blood bath, with scene after scene of intestine splattered delight. Unfortunately, the intensity level was actually only about a six. Moreover, this being a film penned by Diablo Cody, one can expect the inevitable bombardment of occasionally clever, often idiotic teenage lingo, most of which has never actually been uttered from the mouth of a real human being.
I’ve never been a fan of Megan Fox, but, going in, I couldn’t have envisioned a more perfect role for the young actress. I mean, let’s not kid ourselves, it’s clear from the bombardment of interviews Fox has done this summer that the role of a young, sexy, slightly stupid, man eating high schooler was perfect for her, ummm, talents. She doesn’t disappoint. Still, after an amusing and engaging first half, the film quietly sputters into a neither scary nor funny third act that just kind of sits there.
Grade: C+
Coming Soon: A Serious Man
Review: The Informant!
The Informant!
Directed by Steven Soderbergh
Screenplay by Scott Z. Burns, based on the novel by Kurt Eichenwald
Starring: Matt Damon, Scott Bakula, Melanie Lynskey
Runtime: 108 Minutes
Plot Synopsis: Mark Whitacre (Damon) is unwillingly pressured into working as an informant against the illegal price-fixing activities of his company. He adopts the idea that he’s a true secret agent. Zaniness ensues.
Matt Damon has become one of the more consistently excellent actors in Hollywood. He reportedly packed on more than 30 pounds for his role as the eccentric moron/genius who managed to swindle his company for millions, all the while wondering whether he had a secure future with the same company once everything settled. Damon’s Whitacre, whose hilariously irreverent (and mostly irrelevant) stream-of-consciousness inner-monologue runs throughout the film, is played pitch perfect by Damon, who blends the appropriate degree of delusion, simplicity, and (ultimately) cunning that helped make the real Mark Whitacre a name for the history books.
Soderbergh’s creative prowess is as potent as ever. One particular technique that stood out was the stylistic clash of the decades. The film is set in the ’90s, though appearing visually like a film set in the ’80s, all while containing a distinctly ’70s sensibility. In addition to being disorienting, which fits perfectly with the tone and plot of deception, it acts as a nice play on the corruption that has destroyed American businesses at an unsettling rate in the past few decades. Even if the zaniness in the film at times becomes overbearing, the theme of manipulation under the veil of idiocy (hey there, Sarah Palin) rings frighteningly true.
Grade: B
Reviews: June-September 2009
Hello everyone. It’s been a while since I’ve written on here, and I’ve seen quite a few movies since then, so I’ve decided to combine all of them into one post with mini-reviews. Because I’m lazy and easily distracted, I also reviewed some films that were released earlier in the year (January-May) that I never got around to writing about. Enjoy!
(500) Days of Summer
Directed by Marc Webb
Screenplay by Scott Neustadter & Michael H. Weber
Starring: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Zooey Deschanel
Quick Synopsis: A hipster quirk fable centered on a woman (Deschanel) who doesn’t believe in love and a young man (Gordon-Levitt) who falls for her.
The anecdote has surfaced many times, but it’s been years since it was recited so freshly, complete with split-screen action and animated birdies. The cinematography is great, and the story is laced with dry, potent humor. Gordon-Levitt offers a nuanced performance, while Deschanel mostly looks toward the camera with her “I want to eat your babies” gaze.
Grade: B
Away We Go
Directed by Sam Mendes
Screenplay by Dave Eggers & Vendela Vida
Starring: John Krasinski, Maya Rudolph
Quick Synopsis: A young couple (Krasinski and Rudolph) searches for the perfect place to raise their expected child. Along the way, they stumble upon different acquaintances; some insufferably quirky, some reminiscent of human beings.
Many reviewers have, for obvious reasons, called the movie and its plot pretentious. I can see that. Regardless, Maya Rudolph gives the film its heart and soul, which often pacifies those obvious weaknesses.
Grade: C+
Cheri
Directed by Stephen Frears
Screenplay by Christopher Hampton, based on the novels by Colette
Starring: Michelle Pfeiffer, Kathy Bates, Rupert Friend
Quick Synopsis: The son of a courtesan (Friend) and an older woman (Pfeiffer) have an affair. Then the shite hits the fan, and lots of yearning and dramatic gazing ensues.
I love angst-ridden fancy British people movies. Cheri is odd, however, since it is basically fancy British people porn with lush, handsome costumes in the place of organs.
Grade: C+
Funny People
Directed by Judd Apatow
Screenplay by Judd Apatow
Starring: Adam Sandler, Seth Rogen, Leslie Mann, Eric Bana
Quick Synopsis: George Simmons (Sandler), a seasoned comedian whose career is oddly similar to Eddie Murphy’s, is diagnosed with an incurable disease. He takes an inexperienced comedian (Rogen) under his wing, as much for the companionship as his joke writing ability. Then, completely shifting gears, the story focuses on Simmons’s desire to win back his lost love (Mann) from her douchey husband (Bana).
Apatow’s growth as a filmmaker is on display in Funny People, as he dedicates as much screen time to drama as his trademark penis-laced comedy. The results are encouraging, although the film eventually suffers from poor editing (146 minute runtime) and a shift in plot and tone so severe that it suffers to recover. Ultimately the story is as much about Ira (Rogen) and his journey as George’s, and when Apatow keeps that in mind the film soars.
Grade: B-
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Directed by David Yates
Screenplay by Steve Kloves, based on the novel by J.K. Rowling
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Michael Gambon, Alan Rickman
Quick Synopsis: Harry (Radcliffe) returns for his 6th year at the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. He and Dumbledore (Gambon) battle the ensuing emergence of Voldemort’s forces, while the dark lord’s past is explored.
I’ve never been a fan of the Potter films, primarily because they never seem to quite capture the spirit of the source material. While the magic (pun completely intended) isn’t quite in full effect, HP6 is awful close.
Grade: B+
Inglorious Basterds
Directed by Quentin Tarantino
Screenplay by Quentin Tarantino
Starring: Brad Pitt, Melanie Laurent, Christoph Waltz, Diane Kruger
Quick Synopsis: In Nazi-occupied France, a group of Jewish-American soldiers (The Basterds) spread fear throughout the Third Reich by scalping and brutally killing Nazis. Meanwhile, a French-Jewish teenage girl (Laurent) runs a cinema in Paris while plotting her revenge.
Whether or not one truly enjoys Tarantino primarily boils down to preference: style or substance. In my younger days, I thought Tarantino was a god. Now that I expect more than violence and potent cinematography from my film experiences, I find his work less satisfying, while still appreciating his mass appeal. When he blends the style with the substance it is surreal (see Kill Bill Vol. 2). Inglorious Basterds is a huge step back.
Grade: C+
Moon
Directed by Duncan Jones
Screenplay by Nathan Parker, based on a story by Duncan Jones
Starring: Sam Rockwell, the voice of Kevin Spacey
Quick Synopsis: Astronaut Sam Bell’s (Rockwell) 3-year stint on the dark side of the moon, where he and his computer GERTY (Spacey) work in a station that sends an unknown substance to earth that help the planets power problems, is about to end.
The film is painfully slow, bombarding the audience with pseudo-philosophical dilemmas that eventually become preachy.
Grade: C-
Public Enemies
Directed by Michael Mann
Screenplay by Ronan Bennett and Michael Mann & Ann Biderman
Starring: Johnny Depp, Christian Bale, Marion Cotillard
Quick Synopsis: The life and death of notorious bank robber John Dillinger (Depp) and the man obsessed with stopping him (Bale).
Excellent acting, cinematography (yes, including the shaky camera, which I love), and story. Depp and Cotillard share excellent chemistry. Go in expecting more of a love story than a balls out action flick.
Grade: B+
Taking Woodstock
Directed by Ang Lee
Screenplay by James Schamus, based on the book by Elliot Tiber
Starring: Demetri Martin, Imelda Staunton, Henry Goodman, Emile Hirsch
Quick Synopsis: A man (Martin) working at his parents’ motel in the Catskills sets in motion the generation-defining concert in the summer of 1969.
While not on par with Ang Lee’s best work, Taking Woodstock is a pleasantly understated coming of age tale, concerned more with the period’s impact on the characters than the namesake event itself. Much has been made about the film’s lack of music and near disregard for the event’s actual happenings. But such additions would detract from the narrative’s true nature, instead turning the film into the clichéd mock-doc most viewers were apparently anticipating.
Grade: B+
The Brothers Bloom
Directed by Rian Johnson
Screenplay by Rian Johnson
Starring: Rachel Weisz, Adrien Brody, Mark Ruffalo, Rinko Kikuchi
Quick Synopsis: Two con men (Brody and Ruffalo) decide to take on one last job showing a beautiful and eccentric heiress (Weisz) the time of her life with a romantic adventure that takes them around the world.
About half way through the plot becomes so smug and convoluted that the audience doesn’t care. A film can pat itself on the back only so many times before it cruises into eye rolling territory. That being said, Weisz, per usual, is a wonder to watch, lighting up the screen in every frame she appears.
Grade: C-
Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen
Directed by Michael Bay
Screenplay by Roberto Orci, Alex Kutzman, Ehren Kruger
Starring: Shia LaBeouf, Megan Fox
Quick Synopsis: Stuff blows up.
Awful.
Grade: F
Two Lovers
Directed by James Gray
Screenplay by James Gray & Ric Menello
Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Gwyneth Paltrow, Vinessa Shaw
Quick Synopsis: A Brooklyn-set drama about a damaged but good-natured bachelor (Phoenix) torn between a family friend (Shaw) his parents wish he would marry and his beautiful but volatile new neighbor (Paltrow).
Although the film is set in the present day, it has a timeless feel and, had it been better executed, could just have easily been pulled right from Shakespeare. The plot and weather are overcast and dreary, setting a nice tone for such a tale. That being said, it contains its share of awkward moments (the opening scene, the Paltrow boob-shot), and merely puts along when it could have soared.
Grade: B-
Review: Up
Up
Directed by Peter Docter and Bob Peterson (co-director)
Screenplay by Bob Peterson
Starring: Edward Asner, Christopher Plummer, Jordan Nagai
Runtime: 96 Minutes
Plot Synopsis: A cranky old man (Asner) and an overeager scout (Nagai) fly to South America in a floating house suspended from helium balloons.
Pixar is out of control. Every summer they release a new, breathtaking piece of art that transcends the limits of what we think animation can accomplish, both as a visual and affecting medium. Last year they tackled a post-apocalyptic planet earth with the amazing Wall-E. This year’s theme is the juxtaposition between young and old, between what we accomplish in life and those dreams that casually slip between our fingers.
Most of the promo stuff for Up has been strangely ambiguous. General plot quips (such as the synopsis listed above) have been released, but there really hasn’t been any substantial summary that actually lets viewers know what it’s all about. After finally seeing it, I couldn’t agree more with their strategy, and I do not intend to be the spoiler by offering too much in this review. Watching the film’s heart-wrenching story unfold makes you realize just how remarkable Pixar’s releases truly are; not just as animation films, but as glimpses into the human condition.
Grade: A-
Review: Terminator Salvation
Terminator Salvation
Directed by McG
Screenplay by John D. Brancato & Michael Ferris
Starring: Christian Bale, Sam Worthington, Anton Yelchin
Runtime: 130 Minutes
Plot Synopsis: In the year 2018, over a decade after Judgment Day destroyed almost all human life with a nuclear blast, John Connor (Bale) leads a resistance against Skynet to save what’s left of humanity.
The Terminator series, a franchise known as much for its soul as its action sequences, is on life support. In Terminator Salvation, its soul has been ripped out and spat on, replaced with more of the cold, shiny metal the franchise’s villains have immortalized.
The main theme is meant to be the difference between man and machine, and why machines can never replace humanity and yadda yadda yadda. Apparently the filmmakers decided the best way to convey this would be by making an icy cold collection of action sequences with no compassionate characters, dialogue, or plot. The actors (especially Bale) seem to confuse intensity with passion, believing that continuously yelling is the same as feeling.
If all you’re looking for is big and shininess, you won’t be disappointed. If you’re looking for the franchise to return to the days of James Cameron’s T1 and T2, a time when the characters and their humanity were as important as the explosions and battle sequences, don’t waste your dollas. Go see Star Trek instead.
Grade: D
