New Reviews: True Grit & The King's Speech

Wild Wild West

It seems that westerns are slowly but surely trying to make a comeback in today’s cinema landscape. They used to be constant big winners at the box office, but somewhere along the way, people lost interest in the cut-and-dry, good guys vs. bad guy aesthetic. I have to be honest and say that I am one of those who have drifted away from that type of storytelling so prevalent in the Westerns of yore. I’m not adverse to all of them, however, as The Assassination of Jesse James and Unforgiven are some of my all-time favorite films. I may not have total respect for the genre at hand, but I do have much respect for Joel and Ethan Coen. The combination of the two has provided yet another engaging film in their already impressive library.

The novel by Charles Portis has been made into a film once before, starring John Wayne in the only role to win him an Academy Award. This time, it’s reported that the Coens have chosen to more closely resemble the novel, although the story remains intact. Fourteen-year-old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) is on the quest to find Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), the man who brutally killed her her father, and bring him to justice. She hires ornery U.S. Marshall Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) to find the killer. Matt Damon tags along as LaBoeuf, a Texas Ranger also on the trail for Cheney for the murder of a Texas senator.

The Coens have been working long enough now to establish a certain beat and style to their work, and even though this film is one of their most conventional works, it still no doubt has that touch we expect from them. The drama carries a distinct power to it and feels genuine, while at the same time adhering to that off-beat sense of humor the Coens love to indulge in. They fill the film with clever characters and quirky bits that can punch through even the most serious of moments. It doesn’t translate to many false notes, and creates a breezy pace that includes all the right moves.

The is the second Jeff Bridges movie to be released in a matter of days from each other, and this is obviously the better film in which Bridges delivers the obviously better performance. He perfectly captures the essence of Cogburn without once playing on what Wayne produced more than forty years ago. It’s a pleasure to watch him on screen, always entertaining whether falling over in a drunken state or staring down harassing lawyers. Damon has a sly charm to his role, and he’s a fine addition to the cast as well. If it were not for the fact that Brolin and Barry Pepper have mere cameos as the villains, they would have had a greater impact in their roles as well.

The breakout role for Steinfeld here is really a revelation. She’s perfect, like Bridges, in capturing the rambunctious spirit of her original player while also executing the part in much better fashion. She manages to hold her own against all the big boys in the film, and carries every emotional beat flawlessly. It’s amazing to watch her play out her role to perfection.

I have not read the novel on which the film is based on, but I have seen the 1969 film that was the first adaptation, and with the exception of a few details and a darker/more realistic epilogue, it’s pretty faithful. The only difference being that it’s better: better directed, better acted, better written, better shot, better everything. I do think the film has a little trouble getting out of its first act, which feels a tad sloppy and rushed. However, once out of the gate, it’s a great ride, filled with fantastic performances and a scenic landscape so carefully crafted my master filmmakers. With their help, perhaps the Western can evade that sunset for a little bit longer.

A-

Science Diction

For many, and more specifically me, this remains one of the last big hurdles to jump before being completely immersed in the award season race. This film has the perfect pedigree to go the distance, and the prestige attached to the film is pitch perfect. There’s an Oscar friendly cast attached, an acclaimed director known for tackling such lofty subject matter, there’s the true story aspect to it, and an uplifting story about trying to overcome one’s personal obstacles. All of those are ingredients to make a flawless film. Put into practice, the results aren’t completely without fault, but it does indeed come together to make a truly wonderful film.

Colin Firth stars as King George VI, a royal figure who came into power shortly before the launch of World War II. He ascends to the role of king after his brother Edward (Guy Pearce) gives up the throne in order to marry a divorced American woman. However, George is reluctant to take the power because of a debilitating stutter that embarrasses and shames him to no end. He and his wife (Helena Bonham Carter) seek out a speech therapist Lionel Logue, brilliantly played by Geoffrey Rush, to help him with his problem. The two end up becoming friends along the way, with Logue helping the king with his first wartime speech.

Firth has been making the rounds lately as a viable candidate to be nominated for the Best Actor Oscar, and even possibly win it. It’s certainly a performance that earns that praise, and it is without a doubt one of the best performances of the year. Firth captures so much passion and emotion through this role, and never has a false note in the entire piece. His pain feels genuine, and he manages to sell an incredible amount of empathy. Firth has delivered two great performances in two back-to-back years, and that should be heavily applauded. The entire cast also delivers well, particularly Rush who not only does great with personal scenes for himself but also with the powerful mono e mono scenes with Firth, some of the films best moments. Carter is also good here in the typical supporting wife role, never stealing the show but always keeping her own in her space.

Tom Hooper has had some experience tackling fact based, epic storytelling, with his most notable efforts being the television miniseries Elizabeth I and John Adams. However, from a directorial standpoint, I’d say those television projects were better executed. Their scope was grand, but it felt like there was a steady hand there, carefully executing the story to at least maintain a narrow scope on the bare necessities of the story. Here, it feels like Hooper overcompensates in some areas, allowing the fish eye lenses and fluid camera moves to flood the frame as if to overcome a potentially stuffy film. It’s odd to see him stray away from a more simple way of directing television, and oddly enough, I think it could have suited this film more. Still, he does his job well enough, and along with David Seidler’s script, originally envisioned as a play, creates a smart, witty and emotionally engaging piece of work.

The film’s more eccentric directorial flares gets in the way of the emotions a bit, and I think the movie could be about ten or fifteen minutes shorter, but those are minor complaints against an otherwise great movie. The performances are what particularly sells it, featuring outstanding performances from nearly everyone, with the standouts being Firth and Rush. This will more than likely be qualified as a serious Oscar contender in the coming weeks, and one couldn’t ask for a better film to fit the typical profile.

A-

New Review: The Tempest

Magic Dour

William Shakespeare is a gift that truly keeps on giving. The number of different adaptations, retellings, re-imaginings and modernizations of the seemingly countless tales he has thrust into the world is in an endless supply. Among the current slate of nominees, Kenneth Branagh is probably my favorite, as he always manages to balance the line between capturing the spirit of Shakespeare’s time while also infusing a modern soul into his projects. In terms of Julie Taymor, for me, she falls severely behind. However, I saw potential in this project. Although, that potential was mainly because this particular source material was the inspiration for one of my favorite science-fiction films Forbidden Planet. That film is an exciting and intelligent classic. This, suffice it to say, is not.

Helen Mirren stars as Prospera (changed from Prospero, a male in the play), a sorceress whose rightful role as the Duke, or Duchess in this case, of Milan is usurped by her dubious brother Antonio (Chris Cooper). Deserted to an island, she plots revenge on her family while also trying to return her daughter to the rightful place in the kingdom. She wrecks the ship, stranding Antonio and the King of Naples (David Strathairn) on one end of the island and the king’s son on another, where a romance between him and Prospera’s daughter blossoms. There’s also room for a slave (Djimon Honsou) who is falsely taken in by a couple of fools (Alfred Molina, Russell Brand) and a spirit servant (Ben Whishaw) wistfully going in and out of the story to serve his master Prospera with the promise of eventual freedom.

I confess that I have not read Shakespeare’s original source material, but I have to say that Taymor has crafted one of the worst adaptations I’ve ever seen, at least from a screenwriting standpoint. Scene after scene indulges on ridiculous monologues that are incredibly dull and creates a stand still in the pace. There’s more scenes of expository dialogue here than in Inception, and everytime it lets the air out of this film. At the same time, Taymor’s direction still maintains that wildly flamboyant style that is still better suited to the stage. I would say that the film is not as visually obnoxious as something like Across the Universe, but it doesn’t have half the charm of Jim Sturgess belting out a Beatles tune. Her eye is quite unique, but it only goes so far when the story is lacking, particularly when it reaches what feels like an anti-climax and a drawn out ending.

Mirren tries her best to hold this thing together, and there are times when she actually gives some humanity to her character. However, she seems to disappear halfway through the film and becomes an uninteresting character. The two young leads feel the most inexperienced, feeling like they’re reading the Shakespearean dialogue via off-screen cue cards. Hounsou wildly overracts, Molina and Brand are mismatched beyond belief and competent veterans like Cooper and Strathairn get outacted by Alan Cumming. Whishaw actually has some nice moments in the film, even genuinely tender in some places, but he’s saddled with a character that is not very interesting.

I respect Taymor’s vision as a creative person, and the success of her efforts for Broadway’s Lion King is a testament to how that vision can succeed in a certain kind of arena. However, I have still never figured out why her persistence as a filmmaker has maintained. She tries to pull all these wildly different tones together, but it’s mostly a failure. Sandy Powell’s unique costumes are interesting to look at, and hubby Elliot Goldenthal’s ambitious score provides some pleasure in some places, but that’s hardly enough to recommend a film that is shallow in the story and character department. Mr. Branagh, I call upon you to rescue me. Wait, you’re busy doing Thor? Oh, well...good luck with that.

C

New Reviews: TRON Legacy & The Fighter

Game Over

This is one of those movies that I feel like I’ve been hearing about for a long time now. Indeed, Disney has been pushing this film for about three good years now. Well, the “good” in those years might be a relative term by now, as I think the public at large might be reaching TRON overload right now. I don’t have a lot of affection for the original film, I actually think it’s a mediocre film at best, and initially had little interest to check this film out in the beginning. But I must admit that as the advertisements started to show more of the grand visual spectacle, I became more intrigued. Then the initial word of mouth justly put my expectations back down to where they had been before. Good thing, too, because the film delivers on many elements but is severely lacking in compelling storytelling.

It’s been decades since the events of the original film, and Kevin Flynn, played by a returning Jeff Bridges, has gone missing. The control of the company still belongs to his son Sam (Garret Hedlund) who doesn’t like the privatized aspect of the company so much. However, when a message is sent supposedly from his father, he goes investigating. That leads him into that digitized world inside the computer, where Flynn’s creation Clu, also played by Bridges digitally looking like his old self, has taken over the grid with the intention to break free into the human world. Sam teams up with his father and a sophisticated computer program with the possibility to make the world a better place, played by Olivia Wilde.

First and foremost, this is a beautiful movie to look at. Director Joseph Kosinski, tackling his feature film debut, creates a world that is absolutely gorgeous. While I’ll give Inception’s blend of practical and digital effects the upper hand, the grandiose visual spectacle in this film is absolutely astounding. Kosinski hasn’t really shown much of a defining edge in his creative work here, but he does show how competent he is at handling such traverse visual terrain with some impressive action sequences from a directorial standpoint.

Where the film does come up quite short is in the storytelling. This script, put together by a hodgepodge of writers headlined by a couple of Lost alumnus, is, to put it mildly, absolutely horrendous. This story is dead on arrival, and never really succeeds as a decent piece of storytelling. It is a lazy script that is so sloppily put together, filled to the brim with convoluted plot points and idiotic ideas that are masking ambition. By the time you get to the ridiculous ending that doesn’t even make logical sense. It’s a terrible story that is the deadly anchor for this film.

You know upfront that this isn’t going to be a film to commend on the acting, and the film does deliver on that promise. Hedlund is a blank slate, lacking on the charm and charisma to make up for the deficit in acting abilities. Bridges is cashing a paycheck all over this film, with the only highlights being you can catch occasional shades of The Dude in his performance. His role as Clu would be more effective if the character didn’t have such weak motivations and had such an odd look through the animation. Wilde is pretty much a stick figure, and Michael Sheen shows up halfway through for a weird David Bowie impression (also, you can a look for a blink-and-you-miss-it cameo from Cillian Murphy in the beginning of the film).

I do believe the film is very beautiful to look at, and the sound design is top notch as well. By far the best thing in it is the Daft Punk score, which has an old school vibe that sounds like a mixture of 80s Disney punk scores and classic Vangelis. I enjoyed some parts of the film, but the storytelling is just atrocious. However, sometimes those problems don’t seem that grand when you watch them in the comforts of your own home, and since the 3D is an enhancement but not a necessity, a Blu-ray rental will do just fine. If you have strong affection for this story, or at least the visual spectacle that is promised, you might have a good time with it. Otherwise, there’s just one too many valleys to go along with the mountaintops.

C+

Punch Drunk Love

Boxing movies have been recently hitting a big streak now, probably since the mega success, both critically and commercially, of Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby has led to the outpour of these projects. Although, like most genres, these types of films have been around pretty much since award recognition began. This film has been wowing people left and right, and certain members of this ensemble are garnering considerable attention that might be rewarded with a nomination or two come early next year. That’s certainly an aspect of the film that admirable, but unfortunately, the whole of the film fails at working the most important muscle it has: the heart.

Based on the true story of boxer “Irish” Mickey Ward, Mark Wahlberg has the lead as Mickey, an aging boxer training with his half-brother Dickie (Christian Bale), a washed-up fighter himself struggling with a crippling crack addiction. Their mother Alice (Melissa Leo) is the stern matriarch of a wildly eccentric family which includes Mickey’s ambush of crazy sisters. When Mickey starts to lose fight after fight, he decides a change is needed. With the encouragement of his new girlfriend Charlene (Amy Adams), he tries to limit the ties to his family while trying to be the champion everyone believes he could be.

If there’s anything to be really praised here, it is the acting. Wahlberg is an actor who has aged well into taking more grounded and mature roles, and he delivers probably the best performance in his career. It’s not a spectacular performance, but it’s genuine enough to be a center for a film like this. Leo veers close to over-the-top theatrics, but she manages to make it work for that type of character, and she’s electrifying whenever she appears on screen. Adams is okay, and she plays against type, but she doesn’t floor an audience. Bale is the obvious person to take notice, as his physical and mental dedication to roles is clearly seen here. Not only that, but he carries most of the emotional weight of the film, and he creates the most interesting character in the film. I do think there’s a bit of “been there, done that” shade to his performance, it is no doubt an outstanding role that deserves almost all of the attention it has received.

David O. Russell has built up a rather seedy reputation over the years, particularly known for his well publicized rants against actors on set, which includes George Clooney and Lily Tomlin. His last film, I Heart Huckabees, is a quirky mess that just also happened to feature one of Wahlberg’s better performances. The film doesn’t falter because of him, although not every eccentric flourish from him is the right tone, nor saves it from some dull stretches. The main reason why I didn’t fall in love with the film was because there’s no emotional core to the film. A lot of the characters and plot directions feel wildly eccentric, particularly Mickey’s family. While intriguing, it presents a wall that always left me emotionally distant. Because of that, it’s difficult to get invested in the story, and what I see is an interesting presentation of events with very little cause to become alive. It’s a noble effort, but despite its best efforts, it feels a little cold to the touch, and in that respect, it’s disappointing.

Say what you will about films like Million Dollar Baby and Cinderella Man, but at least those films knew where the emotion was and struck accordingly. Russell is trying to traverse tricky territory here, blending boxing and family dramas together. I don’t think he totally succeeds, and for all his efforts, only gives us a film that is to be appreciated for its technical accomplishments, including the acting, but very little else. This will probably make a big dent at the big awards show that we all look forward to, and I’m even predicting it to make that appearance. Personally, it didn’t knock me out like it has so many others.

B

Commentary: 2010 Chicago Film Critics Nominations

It’s certainly clear now that the award season is heavily upon us. The critics groups and different awards bodies having been showering their praises for different films, or more specifically, one particular film. Today, the Chicago Film Critics Association announced their own nominees. Since I currently live very close to the city, and read many of its critics, I pay attention to these nominees closely every year. I also tend to give a commentary on the nominees, and try to predict the winners to see how well I know my Chicago critics. Sometimes it doesn’t happen often, but I’ll try it again.

Best Picture

Black Swan

Inception

The King’s Speech

The Social Network

Winter’s Bone

Every once in a while these critics pick some interesting choices like The Departed and WALL-E, and were even the only critics group to award Crash the Best Picture prize. Most other times, they tend to follow the pact with the other groups. I’m predicting that trend to continue here. The Social Network has been tearing up the circuit so far, and I expect Chicagoans to deliver a win in its corner yet again. Maybe The King’s Speech or even Black Swan can upset, but I think it’s unlikely. As for the nominees themselves, it’s a pretty tame slate with no major complaints.

Predicted Winner: The Social Network

Possible Upset: The King’s Speech

Best Director

Darren Aronofsky - Black Swan

David Fincher - The Social Network

Debra Granik - Winter’s Bone

Tom Hooper - The King’s Speech

Christopher Nolan - Inception

Third consecutive year with a five-for-five matchup for Best Picture and Director. Granik is the big surprise here, one that I understand but might not totally agree with. Winter’s Bone is a well directed film, but I’d have others far ahead of her. Yet again, I’d go with a win for The Social Network, as Fincher has been popular with this crowd anyway. One of these days the Chicago love for Christopher Nolan will pay off, so I’ll name him an unlikely upset.

Predicted Winner: David Fincher - The Social Network

Possible Upset: Christopher Nolan - Inception

Best Actor

Jeff Bridges - True Grit

Jesse Eisenberg - The Social Network

Colin Firth - The King’s Speech

James Franco - 127 Hours

Ryan Gosling - Blue Valentine

An excellent lineup of nominees with a an extremely strong and competitive category. Last year, this group passed over Jeff Bridges, George Clooney and Colin Firth (who wasn’t even nominated) to award Jeremy Renner. Anyone of these guys could conceivably win, but I’ll call it for Firth who has the momentum. I’d love to call Franco as the upset, but I think if there is one, it will be Eisenberg who gains from his film’s momentum.

Predicted Winner: Colin Firth - The King’s Speech

Possible Upset: Jesse Eisenberg - The Social Network

Best Actress

Annette Bening - The Kids Are All Right

Jennifer Lawrence - Winter’s Bone

Lesley Manville - Another Year

Natalie Portman - Black Swan

Michelle Williams - Blue Valentine

Another good crop of nominees, and Michelle Williams and Lesley Manville get some love after showing up sparse throughout most of the other awards groups. Conventional wisdom says Portman will take it, but I’ll go out on a limb and say that Bening will finally win an award here. She’s been without major award recognition for most of the year, and I think there might be a turn of events here. If Portman does take it, I won’t be surprised, but it’s just a hunch I have.

Predicted Winner: Annette Bening - The Kids Are All Right

Possible Upset: Natalie Portman - Black Swan

Best Supporting Actor

Christian Bale - The Fighter

Andrew Garfield - The Social Network

John Hawkes - Winter’s Bone

Mark Ruffalo - The Kids Are All Right

Geoffrey Rush - The King’s Speech

John Hawkes is making a dent in the season so far, as his recent surprise SAG nomination speaks volumes to the support he now has. I have no major complaints since it’s actually a good performance from a good actor. Bale has a tremendous amount of momentum right now, and I suspect he will take it. Rush might be the one to take it as an upset (even though I’d pray for Garfield).

Predicted Winner: Christian Bale - The Fighter

Possible Upset: Geoffrey Rush - The King’s Speech

Best Supporting Actress

Amy Adams - The Fighter

Helena Bonham Carter - The King’s Speech

Melissa Leo - The Fighter

Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit

Jacki Weaver - Animal Kingdom

A predictable slate of nominees that will probably be repeated at the Oscars. The category is a little weak this year, so anyone could potentially take it. Right now, I’d call it for Leo, but anyone of them could also be an upset. I’ll say Carter, but your guess is as good as mine.

Predicted Winner: Melissa Leo - The Fighter

Possible Upset: Helena Bonham Carter - The King’s Speech

Best Original Screenplay

Black Swan

Four Lions

Inception

The King’s Speech

The Kids Are All Right

The Four Lions mention is the real surprise that I can guarantee won’t show up anywhere else. Apart from that, it’s another typical slate of nominees. I’ll say The King’s Speech, but again I thinking that Nolan love will pay off eventually in this city. The Kids Are All Right could end up taking it as well.

Predicted Winner: The King’s Speech

Possible Upset: Inception

Best Adapted Screenplay

Rabbit Hole

The Social Network

Toy Story 3

True Grit

Winter’s Bone

The only slightly surprising mention is probably Rabbit Hole. One would take a big risk betting against Sorkin’s screenplay here. If you want to find some upset, I’d point to Toy Story 3, since animated films have won in the writing categories before. But really, expect The Social Network to pick up another award.

Predicted Winner: The Social Network

Possible Upset: Toy Story 3

Best Foreign Language Film

Biutiful

The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo

I Am Love

Mother

A Prophet

Predicted Winner: A Prophet

Possible Upset: Biutiful

Best Documentary Feature

Exit Through the Gift Shop

Inside Job

Restrepo

The Tillman Story

Waiting for “Superman”

Predicted Winner: Exit Through the Gift Shop

Possible Upset: Inside Job

Best Animated Feature

Despicable Me

How to Train Your Dragon

The Illusionist

Tangled

Toy Story 3

Predicted Winner: Toy Story 3

Possible Upset: How to Train Your Dragon (if Hell freezes over)

Best Cinematography

Black Swan

Inception

Shutter Island

The Social Network

True Grit

Predicted Winner: True Grit

Possible Upset: Inception

Best Original Score

Black Swan

I Am Love

Inception

The Social Network

True Grit

Predicted Winner: Inception

Possible Upset: The Social Network

Most Promising Performer

Armie Hammer - The Social Network

Katie Jarvis - Fish Tank

Jennifer Lawrence - Winter’s Bone

Tahar Rahim - A Prophet

Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit

Predicted Winner: Jennifer Lawrence - Winter’s Bone

Possible Upset: Tahar Rahim - A Prophet

Most Promising Filmmaker

Banksy - Exit Through the Gift Shop

Derek Cianfrance - Blue Valentine

David Michod - Animal Kingdom

Aaron Schnider - Get Low

John Wells - The Company Men

Predicted Winner: Derek Cianfrance - Blue Valentine

Possible Upset: Aaron Schnider - Get Low

I’m not totally sure when the winners will be announced. I hope it’s soon, and I can’t wait to see.

New Review: Black Swan

Bird of Prey

Darren Aronofsky is a filmmaker who I try so desperately to love. Every time he has a new film coming out, I hear the opinions of many people that I admire and respect, and they all clamor to sing the highest of praises for his latest masterwork. However, I can’t help but admit that of almost everything I’ve seen from him, I always end up slightly disappointed. I end up liking the films a good deal, but I don’t find them to be particularly worthy of quite all the acclaim they receive. This film is another such example. A lot of people are saying it’s a masterpiece. I don’t agree with them. However, as an intriguing cinematic exercise that tempts the intellect, it does indeed offer a lot to be seen.

Natalie Portman stars as Nina Sayers, a dedicated ballerina who tortures her body and soul in order to mold her art to perfection. At her ballet group, the boss (Vincent Cassel) is putting on an interpretation of the classic “Swan Lake,” with one girl dancing as both the elegant and pure White Swan and the lustful, darker seductress that is the Black Swan. Nina wins the role, but he is breaking down into paranoia, fearing the younger ballerina Lily (Mila Kunis) who might steal her role, her overbearing mother (Barbara Hershey) pushing her daughter toward the career she had to give up, and a whole lot of mental hallucinations.

Aronofsky is familiar with this type of territory, and mental mind trips and body horror are his speciality. I think he does a very capable job at creating an erie mood that is felt throughout the film, and we get pulled into the story nicely. However, I believe he misses the mark when he starts descending into the more horror elements of the story, and as Nina’s mind becomes even more fragile, the tone becomes so wildly over the top that it almost approaches camp value. I understand why the movie goes there, and there certainly is some inventive imagery, but I feel like it loses ten other things by gaining only one. Had this film focused more as a character piece with few eccentricities (like The Wrestler did), this would have been a much stronger film.

The best performance in the film, bar none, is Portman. You can feel the dedication she has to the role, and she sinks into it completely. Even her moments of histrionics come across as justified in the world of the film. Particularly by the time the film starts to reach the end, she is giving a performance that is such a grand transformation that it’s quite astonishing to behold. She is a great redeemer for a lot of the film. Kunis is also fantastic in her role, so good that I wish she had more screentime. It’s a role that should make her a qualified movie star, and her sly presence and unknown intentions always light up the screen. Cassel is good, but I really felt he was held back a bit from his real potential (I’ve seen that potential), and this time I simply wasn’t wowed. The same goes for Hershey, who really doesn’t camp it up as much as she probably could. I’ve always said that if you have a character who can get away with a bit of histrionics, you should take it because, if handled right, it is fun to watch. Hershey doesn’t play it in that tone, and she services the part well, just not enough as I would have hoped.

I suppose I should mention Winona Ryder is in this movie, particularly because very few others are. She plays an aging ballerina, recently dismissed by the company, who holds contempt for Thomás, Cassel’s character. It’s actually a bit of a throwaway role that could be condensed down to practically nothing. Ryder is a lovely actress, but she feels wasted in a role that indulges on far too many of the fantastical, horror elements and ultimately comes up short even compared to her mere cameo in last year’s Star Trek. I suppose that’s why she hasn’t been mentioned much, and I can almost agree with that statement.

I really, really wanted to fall in love with this film. There are plenty of people who already have. However, for me, I can’t bring myself to do so. The story is all over the place, hardly finding any consistency with its tone or characters, and plays up sensationalism instead of earnest character drama. In that sense, it’s a tad disappointing, and even though the I’ll admit some of the mind games played are fun, there could have been a better balancing act. As it stands now, it is a well made film, handsomely acted and put together, but stops short of becoming something to really sink your teeth into. I hope one day to experience the Aronofsky love-fest that occurs every time a new movie of his is out. Unfortunately, it isn’t this day.

B

New Review: Fair Game

Secrets and Lies

It’s rough terrain now for the politically inclined film today. It has been well documented that most audiences today don’t have any use for films that attempt to decipher the American political system, particularly of the recent past. It is a shame, but sometimes they simply respond to the marketplace because a lot of the films that are produced border on sensationalism and feel rather shallow. For the most part, people have tended to have the same pattern with this film. Now that is the real shame because this is, surprisingly, one well made film that I think stands as one of the year’s better achievements.

This tawdry tale begins a month after the 9/11 attacks, and C.I.A. analyst and field agent Valerie Plame (Naomi Watts) is part of the team gathering intelligence on whether or not the United States will enter into conflict with Iraq. Few people know that she’s an embedded agent, one of them being her husband Joe Wilson (Sean Penn). Wilson was contracted to investigate whether Iraq was purchasing uranium for Niger. Wilson said the intel was false, but was ignored when the narrative was pushed anyway to justify action. Wilson retaliated with an editorial and the White House, with the aide of Scooter Libby, pushed back themselves by outing Plame and creating a media frenzy.

I was confident the film had the potential to be good, but I was genuinely surprised at how well this film grabbed me pretty much from the beginning. Doug Liman directs this piece like a political thriller and crafts a lot of the intrigue and behind-the-scenes deal with tension and excitement. Liman, working off of a pretty good script, does a really good job of keeping this story interesting as it jets off to many places. I will say that the film doesn’t quite handle the political grandstanding and domestic life that consumes the last twenty minutes of the film, but there are many elements in play that try to make it work.

One of those much appreciated elements is the cast. Watts and Penn cash in well on their chemistry from 21 Grams, and they successfully craft a relationship that is strained but also knows how to deal with one another. It’s great to see them working so well together. Watts has a really grounded performance that feels genuine to the character. She doesn’t blow the role out the water, but she’s capable enough to take on such a stern and vulnerable role. I was more impressed with Penn here. I’ve been on record with saying he is, without any hyperbole, is the greatest actor of his generation, and this is one that he sells with so much authenticity. You really believe his dedication to clear his name and frustration with the system. Like Watts, it’s nothing spectacular but solid nonetheless. The supporting cast is reliable but limited, with the only one worth singling out being David Andrews who plays Libby. The role is very small and not showy at all, but Andrews sells the sleazy guy incredibly well.

The film does sag a little bit in the drawn out ending, but overall I think this is a pretty great film. It’s well crafted, smartly written and ably performed by a very capable ensemble, headlined by Watts and Penn. I really hope people give this film a chance, but I have a feeling that for most the time has already passed. It’s really unfortunate, and I think this will probably go down as one of the most underrated films of the year. If you have the opportunity, check it out before it disappears forever, lost in the political black hole where so many films end up.

A-

Behind the Scenes: Paul Thomas Anderson

PAUL THOMAS ANDERSON

Born: June 26, 1970

Occupation: Director, Screenwriter

Best Work: There Will Be Blood

Other Highlights: Boogie Nights, Punch-Drunk Love, Hard Eight

Upcoming Film: The Master

Paul Thomas Anderson has only made five feature films to date in his entire career. However, each film offers so much conversation and deep exploration into its subjects that it gives back with multiple viewings. Few filmmakers have the potential to enrich so much out of their material, especially when their material is self-generated. You may not always like what he has to offer, but the invitation to dive into the worlds he creates is one that is undeniable.

His first feature was a little movie called Hard Eight, a notoriously dogged production as Anderson had the least control over this project and wrestled with much studio interference. Even with all that baggage, the movie is a pretty solid effort for a first timer. There’s not a great through-line with the film, however, and it actually plays more like three short films strung together by, admittedly, some weak glue. Still, Anderson shows us what’s to come in his future, and plays with audiences’ sensibilities while also giving us some really good performances to admire.

His next film, Boogie Nights, is like a mini-masterpiece in his filmography. I’m completely fascinated with “industry films”: when a film pulls back the curtain on a type of business and gives a look behind the scenes. Before I saw the film, I would never have guessed the porn industry would be such an interesting backdrop for this fascinating tale. Anderson laces all these interconnecting characters with genuine detail, and he’s a master juggler with a slight of hand that invokes a magician that knows exactly how to pull it off. He’s bolstered by a terrific ensemble, but his direction is quite skilled.

Magnolia is probably the most divisive film not only in Anderson’s career, but in the history of cinema itself. There’s very few moderate opinions out there on this film: either you think it’s a fantastic work of art dealing with a layered and complex story, or you think its an overwrought, overstuffed, meandering, dull mess. I actually belong to the latter group. I’m not a fan of this film and quickly became disinterested in its disassociated characters and a howler of an ending that threw any credibility it had out the window. Thankfully I find solace in a great performance from Tom Cruise, but for me, this is my least favorite of his entire works. I’m not alone on the issue, but I’m well aware I’m not unified either.

When Anderson announced that his follow-up to such heavy dramas Boogie Nights and Magnolia was going to be an Adam Sandler comedy, many people thought he was joking. On face value, Punch-Drunk Love would seem like an invitation to be a part of something lower of desired quality. But like most Anderson films, it can’t help but be something more. The film actually works as an answer to all those annoying characters Sandler plays, giving an understanding to the frustration and anger that boils beneath the surface. It will make you see Sandler in a completely different light. I do think the film has some pacing issues and not every off-kilter music choice works, but as the story unfurls into something more ambitious than it originally intended, it’s a great discovery to make.

There Will Be Blood is great. Not only is it great, but I’ve now come to recognize it as the cream of the crop in an already great year that was 2007. Not only that, but I think it’s the best film of the 2000s. Everytime I revisit this film, I’m constantly amazed at how much it is able to give back. I’m still picking out tiny details from the film, and it’s like I’m rediscovering it for the first time again. Anderson’s direction compacts a lot of great elements on the surface, and as you dive down deeper into his layered screenplay, you are filled with a sense of wonder and enchantment. No doubt much of that also has to do with a bravado performance by Daniel Day-Lewis, but it’s Anderson’s work that is really held to a high standard. He lays out a map filled with unchartered terrain, and even as a guide he doesn’t lead us directly to the end. What he does do is start the path and then ascends into the omnipotent role above, leaving us to fend for ourselves. But he doesn’t desert us, and the idea that we are making a self-discovery while never knowing the manipulated hand takes a master craftsmen.

There’s not many people who are able to pick up the tools and automatically create something fantastic. Paul Thomas Anderson is one of those people, and I believe he is a certified genius. While though I don’t like every film of his, even four out of five is enough to get a recommendation on toothpaste. Anderson is currently working on his upcoming Scientology film set to star Philip Seymour Hoffman and Jeremy Renner. Unfortunately, the film has hit walls regarding its financing and creative endeavors, and is currently put on hold. I’m eagerly awaiting for the film, which sounds like more fascinating territory to be explored. Everything this man does is a gem of artistry. I hope this jeweler never retires.

New Reviews: Harry Potter & 127 Hours

End Game

I do believe I can comfortably count myself as a genuine fan of the Harry Potter franchise. I’ve read all the books, seen all the films and have yet to find one that I can’t recommend. I may not know all of the prose that J.K. Rowling puts out, but I can say I am devoted. For example, during a moment where the heroes find themselves trapped in a rather crude predicament, my mind was shouting the necessary spell they needed to cast in order to safely escape. Keep in mind that these spells are not real, and the whole situation is manufactured, but I still have that knowledge stored away. As fun as a moment like that is, it can’t hide the fact that this film, while enjoyable to an extent like them all, is seriously over-stuffed and dull at many occasions.

In case you’ve been living under a rock for the past decade, this is next and penultimate installment in the wildly popular Harry Potter franchise, with the final continuation being released next summer. The light magic world is all but disappeared now, Hogwarts is not even visible here, as Harry, Ron and Hermionie have abandoned school studies in order to find a way to destroy the evil Lord Voldermort.

I wish I could go deeper into what happens in the film, but ultimately it doesn’t really matter. All the film is leading up to the final and epic climax, and while there’s some nice moments of action and tender scenes, a lot of it feels like fan service and useless to the benefit to the overall narrative. If given the choice between remaining extremely faithful to the text or taking liberties with the source material in order to make a crisper film, I’d choose the latter. The screenplay by long-time Potter scribe Steve Cloves is noble and good intentioned, but it fills the movie with many laborious scenes that drag on too much.

David Yates returns as the director, and he shows much of the improvement he made upon himself in the last film, my favorite in the franchise so far. Yates does his best to deliver good on some really exciting action sequences that find the right notes of suspension and excitement. Even in the more quiet moments, he tries to find a somber tone that can pay off on the emotions, and he does that for the most part. The dullness that exudes on so many scenes are not entirely his fault (they were his fault in Order of the Phoenix), but even he can’t save the mess this time.

Other than Yates, I’d put the acting as the real reason this film has any kind of success. We’ve watched Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson grow into these roles for many years, and it’s comforting to see them be able to maintain a genuine, dramatic portrayal. Radcliffe is really fantastic, and I was quite amazed at how he was able to take a character known so well and still put forth a performance that feels fresh and riveting. In complete honesty, if he can keep the same key for the next film, I’d harbor serious award consideration for him. Watson also is lovely in her role, and Grint, while always the most limited one of the trio, gives his Ron a bit more drama to cling onto. Not much more else to speak of on the supporting players (this one’s really about the kids), and the only real standout is a hammy Helena Bonham Carter who I am convinced brought her own clothes and hairstyling to the set.

Even though I’ve been cooler on some of the Harry Potter films than others, I’ve always ended up recommending them. I can’t quite go that distance with this one because it’s only half of a film, and it will more than likely end up being the weaker half. There’s just too much stuffed in here in order to please fans begging for an adaptation slavishly devoted to its source material (didn’t work out too well for Watchmen either). Still, some well conceived scenes here and there, along with some strong central performances pull it out of the gutters entirely. When the final conclusion comes along next summer, I’m sure I’ll join the chorus of praise. Until then, I remain somewhat silent.

B-

Stuck in the Middle With You

Those who know me well know that my affection for filmmaker Danny Boyle is pretty high. Even though I wasn’t completely over the moon for his last film, I still thoroughly enjoyed it, as well as his efforts. As I’ve repeatedly said, Danny Boyle is a man who can film cows grazing for an hour and a half and make it cinematically interesting. That crude example is put to the test with this film. No, it’s not about grazing cows, but it has a premise that is just as immobile: a guy literally stuck between a rock and a wall. However, leave it to Boyle to take that premise and turn it into an exciting and emotional journey that is to be surely remembered.

Some might remember, about seven years ago, a hiker named Aron Ralston who fell in an off-the-beaten-path canyon in Utah when a boulder fell on him. The rock pinned his right hand against the canyon wall, cutting off circulation as well as his ability to move from any other position except standing upright next to the boulder. Ralston was stuck there for five days before finally resorting to amputating his arm to escape.

The real-life Ralston may have conquered mountains, ice tops, mudslides and death itself, but the one obstacle he couldn’t overcome was literature. His memoir Between a Rock and a Hard Place, which the film is based on, is not the most eloquent piece, arbitrarily going back and forth from his past to his present entrapment with very little artistic flourish. Boyle and Slumdog Millionaire writer Simon Beauofy have taken that source and vastly improved upon it. They present a quick story that doesn’t linger too much on exposition, indulges in flashbacks only when provoked, and keeps tight on the much deserved focus, that of the main character. It’s not the most flashy script out there, but it treats its situation with genuine reality.

Still, it is Boyle who makes the great stride here, as his kinetic energy is put to good use, constantly keeping the audience involved in a story that has the potential to turn static. Boyle’s hyped-up, ADD presentation is much appreciated here, and he knows how to spin quite an interesting tale. Some might see this as overcompensating for a story that doesn’t go anywhere, but I’d say it’s more of a reflection of the character’s motives, and I feel they are justified. Boyle can be flamboyant, but he always finds a way to make it work, and this is certainly no different.

A film like this lives or dies on the casting, and whoever steps up for the role better be prepared for a very close proximity. We get very close to James Franco here, and he solidly delivers the best performance of his career. He’s been impressing me for a while now, but here, he’s simply fantastic. There’s not a moment of doubt in his portrayal, and he sells every emotional beat of this character. He captures the cockiness in the beginning well (maybe a bit too well), and then feels so believable as he brakes down in the canyon. It’s a marvelous job that I hope lands him a well deserved Oscar nomination, overdue anyway for his performance in Milk.

I could say that I thought the beginning of the film was a bit rocky (no pun intended), but even that minor hiccup started to feel like it flowed with the rest of the film later on. It can be a tough movie to sit through, but it’s worth it to find something that’s as wonderful as this. Franco’s performance is superb, Boyle’s kinetic direction is enthralling, and the whole thing delivers as an emotional roller-coaster that manages to haunt endearingly. It’s certainly one of the best films of the year, and I hope others can take note of it as well.

A