Friday 2 March 2012
Monday 9 January 2012
The Adventures of Tintin (2011)
8/10 | IMDb | Steven Spielberg
"Tintin" builds from modest joys to top tier Spielberg, then goes on for another twenty minutes. Those with their wits about them won't let a disappointing finale spoil their appreciation of the rest. Spielberg might be too tethered to his experience in live action to validate the form, but it doesn't matter in the face of the kineticism and heart that have become his hallmark.
"Tintin" builds from modest joys to top tier Spielberg, then goes on for another twenty minutes. Those with their wits about them won't let a disappointing finale spoil their appreciation of the rest. Spielberg might be too tethered to his experience in live action to validate the form, but it doesn't matter in the face of the kineticism and heart that have become his hallmark.
Auto Focus (2002)
1/10 | IMDb | Paul Schrader
I think in future I won't bother to watch bad movies all the way through. I've had the same idea before but I've not been able to follow through on it because it's hard. I want to see every movie to the end no matter how bad it is. It's a sickness. I should have stopped "Auto Focus" as soon as I realised what I was in for but I didn't. I'll regret it for at least a week.
I think in future I won't bother to watch bad movies all the way through. I've had the same idea before but I've not been able to follow through on it because it's hard. I want to see every movie to the end no matter how bad it is. It's a sickness. I should have stopped "Auto Focus" as soon as I realised what I was in for but I didn't. I'll regret it for at least a week.
Sunday 8 January 2012
The Incredibles 2: Hot Blonde with Bangs - The Movie (2011)
6/10 | IMDb | Brad Bird
Doug Benson said on his most recent podcast that Brad Bird did a pretty good job for his first live action movie and I more or less agree. There were some cool cartoonish moments but it's too similar to previous entries in the series to stand out.
I learned from "Ghost Protocol" (though I should have known it already) that I shouldn't expect great actors to do anything of interest in blockbusters like these. I like Jeremy Renner and will continue to as long as he can balance roles worthy of his talent with easy money but those who don't know of his previous work won't find anything of note about him here. I wish Tom Wilkinson would do something other than appear in big budget movies for five minutes or so because he's capable of so much more. I love Michael Blomkvist but there's no reason for his inclusion in the cast outside of to lure in fans of the "Girl..." movies.
I might have liked this better if Brad Bird's name wasn't on it. I liked it alright but I was disappointed.
Doug Benson said on his most recent podcast that Brad Bird did a pretty good job for his first live action movie and I more or less agree. There were some cool cartoonish moments but it's too similar to previous entries in the series to stand out.
I learned from "Ghost Protocol" (though I should have known it already) that I shouldn't expect great actors to do anything of interest in blockbusters like these. I like Jeremy Renner and will continue to as long as he can balance roles worthy of his talent with easy money but those who don't know of his previous work won't find anything of note about him here. I wish Tom Wilkinson would do something other than appear in big budget movies for five minutes or so because he's capable of so much more. I love Michael Blomkvist but there's no reason for his inclusion in the cast outside of to lure in fans of the "Girl..." movies.
I might have liked this better if Brad Bird's name wasn't on it. I liked it alright but I was disappointed.
Saturday 7 January 2012
SECRET REVIEW - Half Nelson (2006)
8/10 | IMDb | Ryan Fleck
Ryan Gosling delivers one of his better performances in a movie so good I can't believe it's from Ryan Fleck and Anna Boden, writers and directors of "It's Kind of a Funny Story." I didn't relate to the race stuff here because I don't live in the States, but as a study of addiction it's as honest as middlebrow indie films get.
Gosling's ever escalating cocaine habit doesn't make a monster of him, but instead makes chaos of his emotions. Anyone who's ever drank alcohol or coffee should know that recreational drugs alter not personality but mood yet time and time again the makers of movies on the subject make the same mistake and inadvertently reveal their own delusions and prejudices. It's unfortunate that this in itself qualifies "Half Nelson" as essential viewing. Gosling is written as a good person afflicted by a self destructive streak of which his habit is a consequence (if it wasn't coke it would be something else) and in doing so Fleck/Boden avert the great fallacy of drugs in themselves ruining people's lives, as opposed to people ruining their own lives with drugs.
How did Fleck/Boden go from writing and directing this to more or less reimagining "Girl, Interrupted" with Galifianakis filling Whoopi Goldberg's shoes? They've abandoned humanism in favor of Hollywood convention and in doing so have disqualified themselves from artistic credibility.
Ryan Gosling delivers one of his better performances in a movie so good I can't believe it's from Ryan Fleck and Anna Boden, writers and directors of "It's Kind of a Funny Story." I didn't relate to the race stuff here because I don't live in the States, but as a study of addiction it's as honest as middlebrow indie films get.
Gosling's ever escalating cocaine habit doesn't make a monster of him, but instead makes chaos of his emotions. Anyone who's ever drank alcohol or coffee should know that recreational drugs alter not personality but mood yet time and time again the makers of movies on the subject make the same mistake and inadvertently reveal their own delusions and prejudices. It's unfortunate that this in itself qualifies "Half Nelson" as essential viewing. Gosling is written as a good person afflicted by a self destructive streak of which his habit is a consequence (if it wasn't coke it would be something else) and in doing so Fleck/Boden avert the great fallacy of drugs in themselves ruining people's lives, as opposed to people ruining their own lives with drugs.
How did Fleck/Boden go from writing and directing this to more or less reimagining "Girl, Interrupted" with Galifianakis filling Whoopi Goldberg's shoes? They've abandoned humanism in favor of Hollywood convention and in doing so have disqualified themselves from artistic credibility.
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
6/10 | IMDb | Steven Spielberg
The third "Indiana Jones" is nowhere near as nerve wracking as the second which I think stems from a misguided desire to pander to fans of the first. "The Last Crusade" corrects the most grating missteps of "Temple of Doom" but it doesn't matter when you consider that treading water shouldn't be held in the same esteem as innovation.
The third "Indiana Jones" is nowhere near as nerve wracking as the second which I think stems from a misguided desire to pander to fans of the first. "The Last Crusade" corrects the most grating missteps of "Temple of Doom" but it doesn't matter when you consider that treading water shouldn't be held in the same esteem as innovation.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
8/10 | IMDb | Steven Spielberg
Discussions of Spielberg's unapologetic sentimentalism often prompt apologists to point to "Jaws." Why don't they ever mention the superior "Raiders of the Lost Ark"? After the failure of "1941," I suspect Spielberg became a little bitter and a lot less preoccupied what the audience would think, if only because I can't think of any better way to explain "Raiders," a movie so lacking in polish and focus that it wouldn't be released by a major studio today without first being ruined in post. There's a great feeling to it that we should attribute to Spielberg's recklessness and freedom, an attitude which happens to manifest itself in a diminished interest on his part in obscuring his own sleight of hand, revealing the clearest window into his mind to date and the great extent of his fluency in the language of cinema better than ever before or since. The degree to which this offsets his lack of real insight into human behavior/emotion is a discussion for another time.
"Temple of Doom" never had a chance of matching its predecessor. Not even someone as talented as Spielberg can recreate the kind of wild inspiration that made "Radiers" so great. Instead of xeroxing its template as would a lesser director, he abandons its realtive genre reverie for sustained white knuckle tension I won't compare to anything else for fear of understating or overstating the case.
Discussions of Spielberg's unapologetic sentimentalism often prompt apologists to point to "Jaws." Why don't they ever mention the superior "Raiders of the Lost Ark"? After the failure of "1941," I suspect Spielberg became a little bitter and a lot less preoccupied what the audience would think, if only because I can't think of any better way to explain "Raiders," a movie so lacking in polish and focus that it wouldn't be released by a major studio today without first being ruined in post. There's a great feeling to it that we should attribute to Spielberg's recklessness and freedom, an attitude which happens to manifest itself in a diminished interest on his part in obscuring his own sleight of hand, revealing the clearest window into his mind to date and the great extent of his fluency in the language of cinema better than ever before or since. The degree to which this offsets his lack of real insight into human behavior/emotion is a discussion for another time.
"Temple of Doom" never had a chance of matching its predecessor. Not even someone as talented as Spielberg can recreate the kind of wild inspiration that made "Radiers" so great. Instead of xeroxing its template as would a lesser director, he abandons its realtive genre reverie for sustained white knuckle tension I won't compare to anything else for fear of understating or overstating the case.
Friday 6 January 2012
Winter's Bone (2010)
7/10 | IMDb | Debra Granik
I wasn't impressed with Jennifer Lawrence and John Hawkes as much as I was with director Debra Granik whose choice of actors I thought was more remarkable than the performances themselves. Hawkes strikes me as a good actor given a role he couldn't better suit and I think that to expect anything else of note from Lawrence would be to end up disappointed.
I wasn't impressed with Jennifer Lawrence and John Hawkes as much as I was with director Debra Granik whose choice of actors I thought was more remarkable than the performances themselves. Hawkes strikes me as a good actor given a role he couldn't better suit and I think that to expect anything else of note from Lawrence would be to end up disappointed.
Wednesday 4 January 2012
The Ninth Configuration (1980)
6/10 | IMDb | William Peter Blatty
The DVD skipped at the end so I missed about ten minutes but I got the idea I think. I saw the final scene after some messing around with VLC and it spoiled the movie for me. It might have been because I hadn't seen what came before but I can't be sure. I'll allow myself to review it only because I don't have the time to watch something else.
"The Ninth Configuration" is theatrical in the sense that if the actors performed it in my living room it wouldn't lose much in the translation. This brings the artifice to the fore so much that it alienates us from the characters and helps us see them for what they are: symbols for aspects of the psyche. The sane and insane characters blur into each other because the message of the movie, as far as I can tell, is that sane people must sometimes be mad.
I thought it was a good film until it answered its most interesting philosophical question (are all selfless acts done for selfish reasons?) with an emphatic though groundless answer (no). It cheapened all that came before and convinced me that it was an idiot's fruitless intellectual exercise all along.
The DVD skipped at the end so I missed about ten minutes but I got the idea I think. I saw the final scene after some messing around with VLC and it spoiled the movie for me. It might have been because I hadn't seen what came before but I can't be sure. I'll allow myself to review it only because I don't have the time to watch something else.
"The Ninth Configuration" is theatrical in the sense that if the actors performed it in my living room it wouldn't lose much in the translation. This brings the artifice to the fore so much that it alienates us from the characters and helps us see them for what they are: symbols for aspects of the psyche. The sane and insane characters blur into each other because the message of the movie, as far as I can tell, is that sane people must sometimes be mad.
I thought it was a good film until it answered its most interesting philosophical question (are all selfless acts done for selfish reasons?) with an emphatic though groundless answer (no). It cheapened all that came before and convinced me that it was an idiot's fruitless intellectual exercise all along.
Tuesday 3 January 2012
Duplicity (2009)
8/10 | IMDb | Tony Gilroy
"Michael Clayton," for those who don't know, is a loose, digressive thriller notable for Tom Wilkinson's performance which is one of the best ever. He plays a bipolar laywer in the throes of mania and it's one of the few accurate, not to mention affecting, cinematic representations of mental illness I've ever seen. I won't give him all the credit, though. Tony Gilroy, writer and director of the film, penned all the character's decisions and dialogue before Wilkinson entered the picture. Gilroy exhibits in "Michael Clayton" an understanding of bipolar disorder far more profound than that of the makers of any "real" mental illness movie I can think of.
Until yesterday, all I'd seen from him otherwise were those "Bourne" movies he wrote. The first one was alright. The second two were awful. They made me wonder if "Michael Clayton" was a fluke. Now I'm thinking maybe not. I'm thinking they have been good had he directed them himself.
"Duplicity" is a knowing twist on the espionage genre that I'd recommend it for its cleverness, rapid pace and many twists and turns. There's nothing wrong with it outside of Julia Roberts who as usual made me want to punch her in the cunt. It's so weird to see Clive Owen treat her like a babe when in real life he would, again, punch her in the cunt.
"Michael Clayton," for those who don't know, is a loose, digressive thriller notable for Tom Wilkinson's performance which is one of the best ever. He plays a bipolar laywer in the throes of mania and it's one of the few accurate, not to mention affecting, cinematic representations of mental illness I've ever seen. I won't give him all the credit, though. Tony Gilroy, writer and director of the film, penned all the character's decisions and dialogue before Wilkinson entered the picture. Gilroy exhibits in "Michael Clayton" an understanding of bipolar disorder far more profound than that of the makers of any "real" mental illness movie I can think of.
Until yesterday, all I'd seen from him otherwise were those "Bourne" movies he wrote. The first one was alright. The second two were awful. They made me wonder if "Michael Clayton" was a fluke. Now I'm thinking maybe not. I'm thinking they have been good had he directed them himself.
"Duplicity" is a knowing twist on the espionage genre that I'd recommend it for its cleverness, rapid pace and many twists and turns. There's nothing wrong with it outside of Julia Roberts who as usual made me want to punch her in the cunt. It's so weird to see Clive Owen treat her like a babe when in real life he would, again, punch her in the cunt.
Monday 2 January 2012
The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets' Nest (2009)
5/10 | IMDb | Daniel Alfredson
I lost interest between this and the last one. Lisbeth Salander remains a compelling character and Michael Nyqvist is still charming but that's all there is of interest here. To be honest I kept knocking the mouse to see how much of the movie was left because I wanted it to hurry up and end.
Again, Lisbeth battles men who hate women, this time within the confines of the legal system. She can't hack or fight due to injury but in one scene she does inhale a risky amount of hairspray. Michael Blomkvist and his team of journalists write an article which ought to avail Lisbeth if published, though chances are low, seeing as Lisbeth's enemies are scaring everyone into submission with tactics from "The Insider."
I liked "Dragon Tattoo" because of the intrigue and atmosphere. I thought "Fire" was good because I liked Lisbeth and cared about what happened to her. "Hornets' Nest" is no worse than "Fire" but I think that's the problem with it. Fool me once, etc.
I lost interest between this and the last one. Lisbeth Salander remains a compelling character and Michael Nyqvist is still charming but that's all there is of interest here. To be honest I kept knocking the mouse to see how much of the movie was left because I wanted it to hurry up and end.
Again, Lisbeth battles men who hate women, this time within the confines of the legal system. She can't hack or fight due to injury but in one scene she does inhale a risky amount of hairspray. Michael Blomkvist and his team of journalists write an article which ought to avail Lisbeth if published, though chances are low, seeing as Lisbeth's enemies are scaring everyone into submission with tactics from "The Insider."
I liked "Dragon Tattoo" because of the intrigue and atmosphere. I thought "Fire" was good because I liked Lisbeth and cared about what happened to her. "Hornets' Nest" is no worse than "Fire" but I think that's the problem with it. Fool me once, etc.
SECRET REVIEW - Exam (2009)
3/10 | IMDb | Stuart Hazeldine
The directorial debut of Vincenzo Natali is... whoops! I mistook this movie for "Cube," to which it is identical.
I hope that this woman Adar Beck (pictured) isn't the person she is in this movie. I was so bothered by her that I wanted to give her a swift kick in the face. I wanted to fingerbang her for being a bitch like Don Draper did to that one lady. Remember that?
I do.
The directorial debut of Vincenzo Natali is... whoops! I mistook this movie for "Cube," to which it is identical.
I hope that this woman Adar Beck (pictured) isn't the person she is in this movie. I was so bothered by her that I wanted to give her a swift kick in the face. I wanted to fingerbang her for being a bitch like Don Draper did to that one lady. Remember that?
I do.
Sunday 1 January 2012
There Will Be Blood (2007)
10/10 | IMDb | Paul Thomas Anderson
In an interview shortly after the release of "Magnolia," director Paul Thomas Anderson said that it was, for better or worse, the best film he was ever going to make. How wrong he was.
Daniel Day Lewis in one scene reveals that he only sees the worst in people and wants to remove himself from society to escape everyone at last. He has a son who he raises only to project an image of himself to investors as a family man. The son goes deaf and Daniel's long lost brother appears, so the son is abandoned in favor of the brother. The brother exits the picture, so Daniel reconciles with his son. It's all causal and all about money.
The other main character is preacher Eli. His faith, petulance and misplaced gall (among other things) render him a bigger piece of shit than Daniel, which is important. Eli is the reason our interest in the protagonist never wavers. Daniel is not so bad in comparison, so even if we don't root for him, we can't put him a box and detach from him emotionally either.
Daniel represents greed. Eli represents religion. Anderson attacks both, that much is obvious. But he also does so much more.
In an interview shortly after the release of "Magnolia," director Paul Thomas Anderson said that it was, for better or worse, the best film he was ever going to make. How wrong he was.
Daniel Day Lewis in one scene reveals that he only sees the worst in people and wants to remove himself from society to escape everyone at last. He has a son who he raises only to project an image of himself to investors as a family man. The son goes deaf and Daniel's long lost brother appears, so the son is abandoned in favor of the brother. The brother exits the picture, so Daniel reconciles with his son. It's all causal and all about money.
The other main character is preacher Eli. His faith, petulance and misplaced gall (among other things) render him a bigger piece of shit than Daniel, which is important. Eli is the reason our interest in the protagonist never wavers. Daniel is not so bad in comparison, so even if we don't root for him, we can't put him a box and detach from him emotionally either.
Daniel represents greed. Eli represents religion. Anderson attacks both, that much is obvious. But he also does so much more.
Everything Must Go (2010)
2/10 | IMDb | Dan Rush
Do alcoholics really get over the DTs that quick? He was just drinking beer I guess but I don't buy that it took only one night for him to recover. He, by the way, is Will Ferrell who has no place in a serious movie. His impression of an unfunny person is, I think, so draining for him to do that it robs him of the energy he needs to do anything worth watching. Sure, he might have wanted to test his limitations but didn't he already do that in "Stranger Than Fiction"? It's awful to him fail like he does and that ought to be reason enough to avoid "Everything Must Go."
Do alcoholics really get over the DTs that quick? He was just drinking beer I guess but I don't buy that it took only one night for him to recover. He, by the way, is Will Ferrell who has no place in a serious movie. His impression of an unfunny person is, I think, so draining for him to do that it robs him of the energy he needs to do anything worth watching. Sure, he might have wanted to test his limitations but didn't he already do that in "Stranger Than Fiction"? It's awful to him fail like he does and that ought to be reason enough to avoid "Everything Must Go."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)