Ahhhh The Golden Globes. The people who thought that Pia Zadora was the next hot thing in acting. The people who believed Julia Roberts performance in "Duplicity" was worthy of recognition. The folks who actually gave Robert Downey Jr.'s turn in "Sherlock Holmes" a statuette. Just how much faith can you put in the opinions of a bunch of drunken foreign journalists? Not much.
Only about a hundred journalists actually vote for these awards, making them the least reliable of all the Oscar precursor awards. They're given to vote for the biggest stars (so they'll attend the show) which is why Julia Roberts got nominated for her mediocre performance in a forgettable film. They hand out awards based on conventional wisdom so Mo'nique and Jeff Bridges get a pass (even though they both deserve it) or (and this bugs me) they go with the buzz of the moment which is why "Avatar" was a big winner.
The Oscar for Best picture is almost impossible to call because the Ten nominated films will be splitting votes all over the place. Anything could win, but "Avatar" has a real advantage. It will have the techno-vote, all those guys and gals in the editing, cinematography and sound memberships will probably go blue while films like "Up in the Air", or "The Hurt Locker" or "Precious" will have to share their voting blocks. It looks good for the Blue Folk but this year, who knows. Just because the crazy Foreign Press went Sci-Fi doesn't mean the Oscar Voters will. One thing you can count on, Robert Downey Jr. will NOT be getting an Oscar nod this year.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Eli's Comin'
For a while there I was worried about all these post-apocalyptic cinematic visions of the world. What a desolate and violent place this country is gonna be after the destruction. But I have good news. The world in "The Book of Eli" is full of hot babes. Phew! For a while there I thought it was gonna suck.
So Eli is the guardian of the last bible (that's not a spoiler at all, in the movie it's a given). He's literally the keeper of the Word of God. Bad guys want to use the word to control the world. Gary Oldman is said bad guy. I'm sure Oldman owns property on three continents just simply because he's plays a mean bad guy. No exception here. He's fun and scary at the same time.
"The Book of Eli" has an advantage over it's cinematic brother "The Road". Unlike "The Road", Eli's source material isn't a Pulitzer Prize winning piece of literature. So anytime The Hughes Brothers thought things were getting a little slow, they could just lop off a head, or blow someone up in a post-apocalyptic hail of gunfire. This makes "Eli" more of a popcorn muncher, a Saturday matinee version of world distruction. "The Road" aims for loftier storytelling. Both films are concerned with how mankind will keep the light of faith and spirituality lit in the face societal breakdown. "The Road" takes a more subtle approach. It is seeking sanctuary for an allegorical inner "flame", a non-tangible purity of soul. "Eli's quest is more concrete. It's all about the Bible, the Word of God on which man has built a religious foundation. So really Eli seems to be more concerned with the preservation of Christianity than the struggle of good and evil. Not that "Eli" doesn't take advantage of some of the literary devices you learned about in High School. For instance Eli's quest eventually leads him to that bastion of scholarly Bible study, San Fransisco. Gotta wonder if Eli censored out any of those anti-gay passages found in Leviticus. Now that would be irony. The Book of Eli is flawed, sometimes even silly and the final twist is well, hard to swallow. But it might be worth buying the popcorn and watching some good actors do their post-apocalyptic thing.
So Eli is the guardian of the last bible (that's not a spoiler at all, in the movie it's a given). He's literally the keeper of the Word of God. Bad guys want to use the word to control the world. Gary Oldman is said bad guy. I'm sure Oldman owns property on three continents just simply because he's plays a mean bad guy. No exception here. He's fun and scary at the same time.
"The Book of Eli" has an advantage over it's cinematic brother "The Road". Unlike "The Road", Eli's source material isn't a Pulitzer Prize winning piece of literature. So anytime The Hughes Brothers thought things were getting a little slow, they could just lop off a head, or blow someone up in a post-apocalyptic hail of gunfire. This makes "Eli" more of a popcorn muncher, a Saturday matinee version of world distruction. "The Road" aims for loftier storytelling. Both films are concerned with how mankind will keep the light of faith and spirituality lit in the face societal breakdown. "The Road" takes a more subtle approach. It is seeking sanctuary for an allegorical inner "flame", a non-tangible purity of soul. "Eli's quest is more concrete. It's all about the Bible, the Word of God on which man has built a religious foundation. So really Eli seems to be more concerned with the preservation of Christianity than the struggle of good and evil. Not that "Eli" doesn't take advantage of some of the literary devices you learned about in High School. For instance Eli's quest eventually leads him to that bastion of scholarly Bible study, San Fransisco. Gotta wonder if Eli censored out any of those anti-gay passages found in Leviticus. Now that would be irony. The Book of Eli is flawed, sometimes even silly and the final twist is well, hard to swallow. But it might be worth buying the popcorn and watching some good actors do their post-apocalyptic thing.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Funny yes, People no.
"Funny People" has a lot of negatives for me right off the bat. I'm not a big fan of Judd Apatow (sacrilege, I know). Stand up comedians are mostly the darkest, most depressing, most annoying, and most unhappy people I know. "Funny People" is all about them. It inhabits a world in which people make bad choices for unapologetically bad reasons and then avoid the consequences by making jokes about genitalia. I've seen this world first hand and I don't choose to visit very often. Add to this, my intense dislike of Adam Sandler as an actor, well, you get the picture.
That being said, there are things to appreciate here. If I had met Judd Apatow on the street and got a chance to talk to him about making movies I'd probably say "Hey, you know how to make funny movies for adolescents, why don't you make one for adults?", or something like that. Well, he kind of did that. "Funny People" tackles more adult issues than just getting laid (or should I say in addition to). Themes of loneliness and isolation are the same ones that pop up in "Up In the Air". A more serious slant and a good central performance by Seth Rogan make for interesting story telling. But man, the differences in what make people laugh are sometimes just enormous. What passes for funny with these characters and by extension these film makers is sometimes just painful to watch. An opening scene of Sandler as a young college student making prank phone calls is so juvenile that it took all my focus just to continue watching. The stand up was at best mediocre. A scene where a young girl sings "Memories" from "Cats" was fingernails on a chalkboard, the subplot involving Rogan's roommates, almost unwatchable (the girl was good), and Sandler as usual had the emotional depth of a sidewalk puddle. Rogan makes this watchable but he's not always on. Oh, and this movie is over-long by forty minutes.
If I ran into Apatow I'd say there was some good work here. Glad to see you've grown up as a filmmaker. Now grow up some more.
That being said, there are things to appreciate here. If I had met Judd Apatow on the street and got a chance to talk to him about making movies I'd probably say "Hey, you know how to make funny movies for adolescents, why don't you make one for adults?", or something like that. Well, he kind of did that. "Funny People" tackles more adult issues than just getting laid (or should I say in addition to). Themes of loneliness and isolation are the same ones that pop up in "Up In the Air". A more serious slant and a good central performance by Seth Rogan make for interesting story telling. But man, the differences in what make people laugh are sometimes just enormous. What passes for funny with these characters and by extension these film makers is sometimes just painful to watch. An opening scene of Sandler as a young college student making prank phone calls is so juvenile that it took all my focus just to continue watching. The stand up was at best mediocre. A scene where a young girl sings "Memories" from "Cats" was fingernails on a chalkboard, the subplot involving Rogan's roommates, almost unwatchable (the girl was good), and Sandler as usual had the emotional depth of a sidewalk puddle. Rogan makes this watchable but he's not always on. Oh, and this movie is over-long by forty minutes.
If I ran into Apatow I'd say there was some good work here. Glad to see you've grown up as a filmmaker. Now grow up some more.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Public Enemies
I think I'll catch up on some movies that were sent to me but I didn't get a chance to see for awards consideration. Last summer I was genuinely interested in how Johnny Depp would tackle gangster John Dillinger in Michael Mann's "Public Enemies". Depp always makes bold and interesting choices for his characters and Mann's stylized camera makes for dynamic story telling. In this film I understand that Mann's idea was not to rehash the highly mythologized character of Dillinger or to glorify gangster life in the late 1920's and the 1930's. My instinct would usually be to applaud this sort of thing.
Sure enough, Depp's Dillenger is ruthlessly understated, unless he's robbing a bank or escaping from prison. The film is a series of frenetic bursts of criminal activity followed by Dillinger's mundane life followed by more gunfire followed by more of Dillinger's routine. I found it to be kind of well, mundane and routine. That may have been the point but it just makes for a rather flat and uninteresting take on a legendary gangster. Don't let this turn you off to the film. You may like it better than I did if you know going in that this is a low key portrayal of a high key criminal. For me, true life doesn't always make for great cinema. In Dillinger's case, I think I liked the myth better.
Sure enough, Depp's Dillenger is ruthlessly understated, unless he's robbing a bank or escaping from prison. The film is a series of frenetic bursts of criminal activity followed by Dillinger's mundane life followed by more gunfire followed by more of Dillinger's routine. I found it to be kind of well, mundane and routine. That may have been the point but it just makes for a rather flat and uninteresting take on a legendary gangster. Don't let this turn you off to the film. You may like it better than I did if you know going in that this is a low key portrayal of a high key criminal. For me, true life doesn't always make for great cinema. In Dillinger's case, I think I liked the myth better.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
2009 Top Ten
Here are my 10 favorite movies of 2009 in no particular order. I saw a almost everything this year so it's a pretty informed list.
The Hurt Locker- As close as you can get to knowing what the experience of war is like for our troops. Powerful and tense filmmaking.
Sin Nombre- Seek this one out before you spout off about the immigration problem. First time director, Cary Fukunaga, does amazing work with inexperienced actors. The train sequences are some of the best filmmaking of the year.
Up In the Air- Jason Reitman is rapidly becoming my favorite new director. Funny and poignant and truthful. Clooney channels Cary Grant in all the best ways. Strong women in a strong script.
The Messenger- The Iraq war at home. All of the emotional punch of "Brothers" without the melodrama. Woody Harelson proves just how good an actor he can be when he puts the bong down. Samantha Morton as usual is stunningly good.
Avatar- Oh, shut up and see it. Certain achievements are possible only with big bucks (i.e. "Titanic") Cameron delivers on revolutionary FX and a complete and unique world. Alright, the ending needs some work.
Adventureland- What "Dazed and Confused" was to us children of the 70's, "Adventureland" is for the big-haired 80's crowd. A coming of age story for the ages. The teens here have brains to go with their flowing hormones.
Crazy Heart- It's all about Jeff Bridges. A tour-de-force performance that relies on understatement rather than histrionics.
Precious- Director Lee Daniels does the impossible. He takes marginal or inexperienced actors and pulls the performances of their lives out of them. Maybe the best of the year. You certainly won't forget this movie.
500 Days of Summer- Hands down my favorite script of the year. Single-handedly saving the entire Romantic Comedy genre.
Up- Pixar makes great films with astonishing regularity. Dug the talking dog could drive the cynicism out of a conservative talk show host.
Wish I had room for these films- "Star Trek", "The Hangover" "The Young Victoria" "Julie and Julia" "Sunshine Cleaning" "District 9"
The Hurt Locker- As close as you can get to knowing what the experience of war is like for our troops. Powerful and tense filmmaking.
Sin Nombre- Seek this one out before you spout off about the immigration problem. First time director, Cary Fukunaga, does amazing work with inexperienced actors. The train sequences are some of the best filmmaking of the year.
Up In the Air- Jason Reitman is rapidly becoming my favorite new director. Funny and poignant and truthful. Clooney channels Cary Grant in all the best ways. Strong women in a strong script.
The Messenger- The Iraq war at home. All of the emotional punch of "Brothers" without the melodrama. Woody Harelson proves just how good an actor he can be when he puts the bong down. Samantha Morton as usual is stunningly good.
Avatar- Oh, shut up and see it. Certain achievements are possible only with big bucks (i.e. "Titanic") Cameron delivers on revolutionary FX and a complete and unique world. Alright, the ending needs some work.
Adventureland- What "Dazed and Confused" was to us children of the 70's, "Adventureland" is for the big-haired 80's crowd. A coming of age story for the ages. The teens here have brains to go with their flowing hormones.
Crazy Heart- It's all about Jeff Bridges. A tour-de-force performance that relies on understatement rather than histrionics.
Precious- Director Lee Daniels does the impossible. He takes marginal or inexperienced actors and pulls the performances of their lives out of them. Maybe the best of the year. You certainly won't forget this movie.
500 Days of Summer- Hands down my favorite script of the year. Single-handedly saving the entire Romantic Comedy genre.
Up- Pixar makes great films with astonishing regularity. Dug the talking dog could drive the cynicism out of a conservative talk show host.
Wish I had room for these films- "Star Trek", "The Hangover" "The Young Victoria" "Julie and Julia" "Sunshine Cleaning" "District 9"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)