Change Your Image
philip-106
Reviews
Oliver Twist (2005)
a rare treat
A totally engrossing cinematic experience. The film is brimming with magnificent performances - among them, Sir Ben Kingsley as a pitiable Fagin, a pitch-perfect Barney Clark as Oliver, Jamie Foreman as a terrifying Bill Sykes. The viewer is transported into another world as the production stunningly re-creates the Victorian era in all its grime...and fussiness too. AO Scott in the NY Times put it succinctly when he says of the film, ""Oliver Twist" does not embalm its source with fussy reverence. Instead, with tact and enthusiasm, Mr. Polanski grabs hold of a great book and rediscovers its true and enduring vitality." Highly recommend!
Flightplan (2005)
tepid; preposterous
Tepid, preposterous thriller about a mother whose child goes missing aboard an intercontinental flight. A potentially intriguing "Lady Vanishes" type premise mangled by outrageous storyline that steers it from psychological thriller to mundane action flick. Visually flashy but utterly lacking in tension or suspense. The always-enjoyable Jodie Foster, plays a mother, trapped in a Kafka-esquire situation, her sanity questioned as she tries to convince a skeptical captain and crew that her child has somehow been snatched aboard the plane. Sadly, Foster is given little to do except look angst-ridden throughout her character's ordeal; Peter Sarsgaard is horribly miscast as an air marshal though Sean Bean is effective as the captain of the high tech airliner. A terrible waste of talent.
Dark Water (2005)
Carefully Calibrated Supernatural Drama
No jump-out-and-grab you moments; no gore; no violence. Instead, a carefully calibrated supernatural drama with shrewd casting and terrific performances. Dark Water is more of a thriller than a typical horror and is in the vein films like The Sixth Sense, Rosemary's Baby and The Shining. It's disappointing to see that this superbly crafted film hasn't connected better with viewers and critics. For me, it was a refreshing to see a film that didn't rely on typical Hollywood staples like video game pacing, vfx, violence and gore. Excellent casting, even in the smaller roles. Uncommonly great performances (when you consider this genre) by the entire cast, even in the smaller roles.
The Notebook (2004)
Predictable, sappy (spoilers)
South Carolina, 1940: young Noah Calhoun (Ryan Gosling) is a working guy who's willing to put it on the line for the girl he loves, wealthy debutante Allie Nelson (Rachel McAdams). Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, World War II comes and goes and the couple reunite years later. Present day: feisty old man Duke (James Garner) reads aloud this maudlin, predictable love story to delusional and vacant Allie (Gena Rowlands) as though it's some kind of extraordinary mystery. As you can predict, the two couples young and old are one and the same as any four year old could tell you, yet the film makers treat the connection like an alarming emotional revelation.
Alas, the film makers' condescension for the audience doesn't stop there; the film is clumsy and would've seemed terribly sappy even sixty years ago. The young lovers are never developed into credible characters so in lieu of their developing relationship we're treated to a series of improbable, Hallmark Card-pretty make-out scenes, utterly devoid of emotion or sexiness.
McAdams twinkles her alluring, knowing eyes and flashes her dimply smiles but her Allie is about as sexy as a squid. In what's supposed to pass for reckless passion she crushes her mouth against her co-star like she's trying to resuscitate him and wraps her legs around him like a crazed gymnast. At one point, Allie and Noah disrobe revealing their nakedness to one another. But director Cassavettes flinches and sternly depicts the encounter from shoulders up.
To make matters worse, the 1940's milieu is repeatedly shattered by clunky dialogue loaded with anachronistic contemporary vernacular and concerns.
The splendid Gena Rowlands (mother of Director Nick Cassavetes) tries bring some depth to this material but there's simply nothing there for her. Interestingly, James Garner comes off the best. We don't for a moment believe that this jocular, chatty old man is really the aged version of quiet and proud young Noah but at least Garner wears his role effortlessly.
I suppose young people brought up on a culture of vapid video games might find this PG rated romance involving. But if you're looking for a quality romance try renting 'Bridges of Madison County' or have a look at the superb 'Room With A View'.
Meltdown (2004)
amateurish and banal Die Hard ripoff (SPOILERS)
Director Jeremiah Checheck who brought us big budget debacles like "The Avengers" and the remake of "Diabolique" has directed this ripoff of the Die Hard concept, done on - what looks like - a Blair Witch budget.
A California nuclear reactor is overtaken by Arab terrorists. But - are you ready? - the terrorists aren't Arab; they're really disgruntled American soldiers masquerading as Arabs! We find out that they don't really intend to blow up the reactor just make a statement. We're not sure what the statement is but never mind. So there's really no threat. But then one of the terrorists decides to go it alone and actually blow up the plant because he's kind of crazy. So maybe there is a threat after all. But the army goes in and all the bad guys are killed. So there was no threat. Oh, and a good guy is killed too. Let that be a lesson to everybody.
If all of this sounds muddled and kinda of a waste of time then you got the idea of what watching Meltdown is all about.
The script never bothers to introduce the characters or to even give any personal details that might flesh them out or emotionally involve the audience. So we're left with one dimensional characters: the-expert-that-nobody-will-listen-to; the-trigger-happy-sergeant; the-slimy-politicians; the-dweeby-Engineers. The story skips from one cliché incident to the next in a formula composite of practically every action movie you've ever seen. But at nearly every turn, just when we think something may be at stake the script flinches and we find out there's actually nothing to worry about.
Like Die Hard, there's an police officer who's on the inside, unbenownst to the bad guys. The big twist is that the cop here is....A WOMAN! Oh and she's injured too. But not that bad, just enough to make her wince a couple times. Oh and instead of the walkie talkie that Bruce Willis had this cop has a magic cell phone that works everywhere...even underground! When he's not yelling at everybody else Bruce Greenwood - his jaw made out of granite - tries to soothe her over the walkie talkie. He even makes a joke once but we're afraid his face might crack. After all, this is serious business.
But mostly it's scene after scene of people arguing: the Military expert is arguing to wait it out (his reasoning doesn't seem particularly sound but he's supposed to be the smart guy in this movie so okaaaay); the people at the White House argue with him; the army sergeant argues with him too; the nice Pakistani Nuclear Engineer argues with the main terrorist. The dialogue is absolutely B Movie all the way and lines like, "stop the broadcast! STOP THE BROADCAST!!!" may have you in rolling off your sofa as you wonder if the characters are actually referring to this silliness.
Maybe to compensate for the lack of production quality the camera-work is kept jittery in that faux documentary 21 Grams style that's supposed to lend immediacy and energy to the scenes but the way it's indiscriminately and amateurishly applied here it's downright annoying; even pretentious. Further attempts to ratchet up the tempo are made with the inclusion of nonsensical black and white footage that's randomly intercut with the main action. But this, too, is pretentious and annoying in that Blair Witch kinda way. In short, the stylistic attempts look very amateurish.
The music lives up to the visuals - it's synthy and cheap sounding. Sort of like a porn movie but with less melody and lots more heart beat sounds. The graphic treatment is howlingly bad too: cheesy graphics in huge red font scream out to us "9:28 pm" as though the timeclock actually makes some kind of difference.
Meltdown may work as a marketing concept but it's clear that the script was a second thought. FX - part of Fox - put this cheesy production together and dropped several million dollars on it. Now THAT'S what I call a meltdown!
Before Sunset (2004)
Decent Premise; Terrible Film (*some spoilers)
Hitchcock's aphorism, "Film is life with the boring bits cut out" has been contradicted by "Before Sunset" - a film with the dramatic bits cut out and nothing left but tedious blathering.
The premise seems promising enough: two characters - amazingly reunited after a one night stand nine years earlier - talk for 95 minutes. They are clearly drawn to one another but have moved on in their :lives. We hang on wondering whether or not they will leave their current lives and partners and remain together, or go their separate ways once again.
The film feels like an extended improvised acting exercise or a really bad soap opera scene that doesn't know when to stop. The characters blather on and on but their conversation is flat; it lacks wit or charm. We're left to stare at these two young actors jabbering about getting old: Julie Delpy looks self-consciously coy - the years have given her face a bit more interest but she's lost some of her girlish sensualness; Ethan Hawke. looks more and more like Tom Cruise, flashing his eyes and baring his enormous white teeth. Probably a master like Woody Allen could have sustained this situation with wit and intelligence. But here the actors are left to direct the show themselves; wallow in horrible, self indulgent, shallow, vacuous conversation. It's downright painful and even embarrassing to watch.
Searching for Debra Winger (2002)
privileged beauties kvetch
Roseanne Arquette's personal documentary has a really great idea: several dozen top Hollywood actresses from the 70's, 80's and 90's discuss the difficulties facing women in Hollywood, particularly women over the age of forty. Interviewing them one-on-one or gathering them together in discussion groups, Arquette elicits refreshingly frank, unsanitized criticisms and confessions from some of Hollywood's outstanding actresses and beauties: Jane Fonda, Holly Hunter, Daryl Hannah, Salma Hayak, Angelica Huston, Meg Ryan, Sharon Stone, and many others including Debra Winger (who looks fabulous). The title takes its name from the idea that Winger chose to leave Hollywood at the height of her career in the 80's (though a quick check on IMDb.com shows that the actress has actually worked continuously since then.)
Roger Ebert provides a plausible - though unchallenged - explanation for the lack of good roles for women in their 40's. The audience, he explains, is thought to be comprised of young men 14-24 years old who are disinterested in films about women who might be the age of their mothers. Salma Hayak proposes a solution: she suggests that it will take powerful Hollywood women - like the ones interviewed in this documentary - to create more interesting opportunities for mature women in film.
The lack of meaningful roles for women, particularly mature women is a worthwhile subject and naturally has implications far beyond Hollywood; but Arquette's inquiry is disappointingly shallow. The documentary neglects the broader issues of our obsession with youth and beauty and women's role in society focusing exclusively on the impact of aging on Hollywood stars. (The choppy, MTV editing style and amateurish camera-work don't do a lot to elevate the topic either. But those are minor annoyances.)
At its worst, the film disintegrates into a kind of group kvetch for the over privileged. And watching these beautiful, wealthy women preen in front of paparazzi, compare jewellery, schedule dinner dates and party plans then complain that they don't have enough time to spend with their kids, well, it's kinda hard to feel a ton of sympathy....unless you, too, just happen to be a gorgeous, wealthy forty year old movie star. The irony is there for all to see but is never acknowledged: most of these actresses have clearly benefitted from the system they're now deploring; in their twenties, weren't these actresses eclipsing the previous, aging generation? So the laments come off as self-serving.
Despite these disappointments, SFDW is worth a look for its candid interviews. Debra Winger, Whoopi Goldberg and Jane Fonda are particularly good. Recommend.
Frantic (1988)
Understated Thriller (some spoilers)
Underrated, understated, compelling Polanski thriller stars Harrison Ford as Dr. Richard Walker caught in fish-out-of water story. Walker is forced to conduct a one-man search through Paris for his wife after she suddenly and mysteriously vanishes from their hotel room. Classic noir elements abound: a switched suitcase, bad guys who will stop at nothing, a conspiracy, a mysterious and erotic female.
Polanski, as always, directs with a sure hand, masterfully depicting Walker's frustrating search as a Kafka-esque hallucination. There's a conspicuous and refreshing lack of pyrotechnics here; instead, Polanski concentrates the story on Walker's weird and often banal encounters. Polanski has particular fun with Ford's bafflement and the disparity between his American man of action and the aloof, self-satisfied Parisians. Casting is inspired with John Mahoney ("Frasier") as a glib Embassy official; Emmannuelle Seigner as the femme fatal, Michelle. But it's Harrison Ford who's in the spotlight 100% of the time (he's in every scene) and we experience the excruciating and puzzling search entirely from his perspective. Polanski has an amazing talent for stories told from the hero's point of view. In this sense, Frantic is consistent with the Director's best work - Rosemary's Baby, Repulsion, Chinatown, The Tenant, The Pianist - stories all told in the first person narrative.
Sadly, Frantic (weak and silly title by the way) is likely to be dismissed as a mere Hitchcock exercise. And while the classic Hitchcock elements are certainly in evidence - complete with McGuffin! - Frantic is far less mannered than Hitchcock's works, Polanski playing his subtexts nearer the surface infusing his plots with a surreal, dreamlike quality. Frantic is really more David Lynch than Hitchcock. Sure, Frantic may not be Polanski's very best but it's a first rate thriller consumately realized by a Master. Highly recommended.
Monster (2003)
Director Jenkins delivers a superb film with a sure and steady hand
"Monster" follows the downward spiral of street person/prostitute/serial killer Aileen Wuornos. It's a bleak story, to be sure, but it's told with such compassion and it's so remarkably free of pathos that the film is thoroughly engrossing. From the start we sense that Aileen and her younger lesbian girlfriend are doomed - a sense of dread hangs over the characters. It may be the same kind of foreboding that we felt with "Boys Don't Cry".
Most of the comments are, of course, about the gorgeous Charlize Theron transforming herself completely into this character. It is astonishing, to be sure. But it's not simply a case of an actor gaining weight for a role; Theron delivers a startling performance; she has dug deep into this character and you can feel the layers to this woman. In "Raging Bulls" Robert DeNiro went through a similar, physical transformation but what was the point? It seemed to be an exercise for its own sake because his Jake LaMotta was beyond redemption - simply a brute - and it left us asking why should anyone glorify this character with a film.
Theron delves deep into her character too but achieves sympathy.
Not enough comments remark on the stunning achievement by first-time Writer-Director Patty Jenkins. She has delivered a superb film with a sure and steady hand. Bravo!
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
Underwhelmed (spoilers)
It's very difficult to criticize this film after the enormous effort and care that was poured into it and indeed the entire trilogy. It's a monumental achievement and Peter Jackson certainly deserves every bit of praise that's heaped upon him and the trilogy. Yet I feel the gushing reviews for this film need to be tempered with some down to earth criticisms.
Highlights include some terrific scenes with Andy Serkis; a superb giant spider and massive battle scenes that - hard to believe - manage to trump those in Two Towers.
Yet ROTK is a disappointing and underwhelming affair. The money is all there on the screen, to be sure, but the relentless enormity of the battle scenes leave one feeling numb, not thrilled. You just stop caring about the characters and the story and it dissolves into one big video game-like spectacle.
Huge disappointments include Sauron (which is basically a not-very-terrifying spotlight) and the lack of Christopher Lee from this film. His presence gave the previous two installments a sense of evil, even when he wasn't even on the screen. There just isn't the sense of Evil in this film which is a big problem.
The worst of it is the ending which seems to go on for 45 minutes and lays it on so thick you may find yourself feeling a bit embarrassed by it all - odd, furtive, non-verbal exchanges between the male leads that hints that there may be more to their relationships than meets the eye. I found myself squirming in my seat as reunions, kisses, marriages seem to linger relentlessly and uncomfortably on the screen in slow motion.
8 Mile (2002)
captures an artist, describes a culture (SPOILERS)
Being totally unfamiliar with Eminem or his music I didn't know what to expect from this film. So I'm not qualified to comment on its accuracy. From the little I've heard of rap it sounds to me hopelessly repetitive and whiny.
So one might naturally expect a rap film starring Eminem to be merely one long, drawn-out rap video but - surprise! - Eminem and Director Curtis Hanson provide us with a simple and small but deftly crafted, satisfying cinematic gem: the struggle of a freestyle rapper who fights to assert his style and maintain his dignity in a poor Detroit neighbourhood.
The story is alleged to be based on Eminem's actual background and examines the young rapper's life with a terrifically biased view: Eminem is presented to us as a brilliant iconclast; an inspired, hard-working artist; and an entirely decent, determined young man who defends his mother and protects his little sister. Which he may be, I don't know. Eminem plays a rapper nicknamed Rabbit who has practically everything and everybody against him: he's dirt poor; his mother (played by Kim Bassinger - a weird but successful casting choice) is an alcoholic; he's got a dreadful job at a factory where the foreman hates him; a competing gang of rappers is out to hurt him and his girlfriend cheats on him with one of his buddies.
But despite the whitewashing, it's a very enjoyable film. Eminem's performance is astonishingly masterful and carefully modulated; we never catch him acting. Of course, he is playing himself, after all, but nevertheless he delivers a winning performance that's full of shades and nuances. He glares, smolders and absorbs the barbs of his fellow rappers with an evaluative, Robert Mitchem-esque detachment.
Though this is a film about a form of music it bears far more resemblance to Boxing Films than musicals: 8 Mile is the "Rocky" of rap films. Which is to say that it's a predictable and one-sided presentation of a young rapper's struggle to earn the respect of his peers and maintain his self respect. The rap sequences are presented as competitions full of bravura and grandstanding with rappers competing in front of racucous crowds in short, time-limited sets, much like the rounds in a boxing match.
The beat-up texture of the Detroit locations is reflected in the look of the film which has a coarse, harshness; natural colour has been drained of all the scenes and replaced with a chemical green tint; skin is glossy and lit with ochre light. The dialgoue is clipped and choppy street patios and if you're like me you may find yourself wanting to watch this film with the subtitles turned on just to figure out what the hell people are saying now and again.
But all in all it's a great ride and I think this film - as good as it looks now - will only look better with time, seeing as it's a time capsule of a certain time and place, like "Saturday Night Fever", only better, in my view.
About Schmidt (2002)
Sensitive Dark Comedy but not for everyone
About Schmidt is a portrait of a man who retires and finds - all too late - that his life has no meaning. This is a comedy but a dark comedy that deals with very real and relevant issues, if you're an adult. If you're 14-24 chances are you'll probably feel that the deliberate, measured pacing - which works so brilliantly - is too slow and that "not enough happens". Untrue, but it's easy to see how some viewers accustomed to formula pacing are turned off.
Nicholson turns out an excellent, restrained performance and reminds us that he is in full command of his powers as an actor.
The theme is the search for meaning in one's life. Schmidt looks back on his life and comes up practically empty handed. Following his journey leaves one with a sense of sadness, even despair. Alexander Payne keeps the storytelling minimalist and restrained and almost never flinches. The tension is palpable as we're reminded of people we know who are sufferring in much the same way as Schmidt.
Payne is a shrewd filmmaker who writes and directs with an assured hand, much like Todd Solondz, another terrific talent, though less bleak than Solondz in his outlook.