tillc Reviews

Melinda and Melinda (2004)

Melinda & Melinda Presents Conventional Themes in a Unique Way

[6/10 · 6 April 2009]

Read more at http://blog.ParcEntertainment.com

Follow me on Twitter - http://www.Twitter.com/ParcHDVideo

How one goes through life depends entirely on his or her perspective. One individual might see the tragedy inherent in a specific event, and yet someone else might perceive the same event to be a positive. Is the event itself tragic or comic, or does it depend solely upon your point of view?

This philosophical merry-go-round is the foundation for Woody Allen's 2004 film, Melinda and Melinda. The film opens at a restaurant where four friends are in the middle of a conversation about life and relationships. Two of the friends are playwrights. One friend says that life is inherently tragic, but the other claims that life is inherently comic. A third friend sets the plot in motion when he asks the two playwrights to listen to a story and then comment on whether the tale is best viewed as a tragedy or comedy.

From that point, the film follows two parallel stories, centering on Melinda, a young woman trying to get her life back together after a series of bad relationships and self-destructive behavior. One story follows a dramatic interpretation, and one follows the conventions of a romantic comedy.

The premise of following parallel stories is engaging, although clichéd and formulaic. This movie would not seem quite so original had it been produced as a stand-alone tragedy or comedy. But because both story arcs are shown side by side, the film is much more interesting. I think most people enjoy contemplating how life's course can be set in one direction or another by events outside their control. It's fun to imagine what if? scenarios, thinking how things could have been different, if only…

The dialogue in the film is a number of things - snappy, clever, poetic, and philosophical. Allen allows his characters to speak what many of us only think. The danger of doing so, however, is that a lot of the dialogue is too on-the-nose and expository. It doesn't ring true for real life. Characters (Melinda especially) engage in reflective and introspective monologues that are often tedious. At times it feels more like a stage play than a film, but perhaps that's the intent, considering that we are seeing this story through the eyes of two playwrights.

Of the two "Melinda" stories, the light-hearted, comedic tale is much more interesting, due to the talents of the actors on screen. Will Ferrell plays Hobie, a struggling actor married to an up-and-coming director played by Amanda Peet.

Ferrell's Hobie is charming and innocent, and he falls for Melinda (played by Radha Mitchell) when he realizes his marriage is going nowhere. Peet is equally likable as the ambitious workaholic filmmaker, striving to lock in the extra money to get her first feature into production. The dynamic between Ferrell and Mitchell is fun to watch, and the dialogue between the two rings truer than the dramatic counterpart of the film.

The weaker of the two stories is the dramatic interpretation. Here, the characters are far less interesting, the dialogue far too stilted, and the acting too melodramatic. Aside from Mitchell's performance, the ensemble around her was flat, stiff, and too over-the-top. Mitchell's portrayal as the emotionally disturbed and suicidal Melinda really carried this portion of the film.

Overall, Melinda and Melinda explores some very human themes in very conventional ways, but presents them in a unique way.

Gran Torino (2008)

Eastwood Learns About Living in 'Gran Torino'

[8/10 · 2 February 2009]

Read more at http://FrameRate.blog.com There's a surprising amount of humanity and emotion packed into Clint Eastwood's latest film, Gran Torino. The story is so much more than what's on the surface. It touches on topics like race relations, generational gaps, aging, loss, regret, family, and culture. And this multi-level facet of the story makes the movie powerful, emotional, and moving. So many films rely on big budgets, special effects, up-tempo pacing, and surprise endings as crutches. In contrast, Gran Torino simply tells us about people -- people trying to deal with their own issues and cope with the obstacles that life throws at them.

Clint Eastwood plays Walt Kowalski, a bitter and angry Korean War veteran who spends his days complaining about the deterioration of the neighborhood around him, and the minorities who have invaded his territory. He's particularly irritated by a family of Asians who live next door and much of the film is filled with Walt's incessant racial slurs. But Walt makes no apologies for his behavior. He is who he is. Even the Asian teens who live next door aren't offended by his remarks, because they learn to connect with him in ways that Walt doesn't expect. And he finds that he too is somehow drawn to their innate goodness.

The trailer and movie poster for this film can be misleading. They seem to speak about an old man taking the law into his own hands and dishing out vengeance on the gang bangers in his neighborhood; a geriatric Rambo, if you will. That certainly plays a part in the story, and leads Walt to learn more about his neighbors. But Walt's confrontation with gangs only opens the door to deeper, more meaningful commentaries on human understanding and true friendships. Through Walt's past in Korea he learned a lot about dying, but in this film we see that Walt has a lot to learn about living. And the beauty of the story is found in that journey.

Defiance (I) (2008)

Defiance Tells an Important Story

[7/10 · 29 January 2009]

Read more at http://FrameRate.blog.com

When most people learn about World War II during their American History classes, they hear all about the major stories and the major players: D-Day, Eisenhower, the Holocaust, Hitler, Axis vs. Allies, Battle of the Bulge, but there are literally thousands of lesser-known stories from that era that many have not yet heard. It was one such obscure story that is the basis for the film Defiance, starring Daniel Craig.

The film begins with a familiar theme -- Nazi soldiers rounding up Jews in Western Europe. The grainy, black-and-white style tells us that this is a true story. However, as events unfold, we realize that this isn't the Holocaust story that we're accustomed to seeing in films like Schindler's List. In fact, it's a story about hundreds of Jews who fight for survival as free men and women in the dense and expansive forests of Nazi-occupied Poland.

Daniel Craig gives perhaps one of his best performances as Tuvia Bielski, the eldest of four Jewish brothers and the eventual leader of the Bielski partisans. Although the Bielski's and fellow Jews are forced to watch as their people are rounded up and killed by the Nazis, Tuvia wants to avoid becoming a group of vigilantes. The conflict arises from younger brother Zus (Liev Schreiber) who desperately wants to avenge the deaths of those he loved. Tuvia is conflicted by the knowledge that in extreme circumstances one must often take extreme measures in order to survive and protect others.

Throughout the film tension is woven by utilizing a number of different methods, all of which make the movie much more compelling. First, as mentioned, is the conflict between fighting and surviving. Second, is the suspense created by the knowledge that the Nazis are closing in around them. Third is the conflict between the Bielskis and the local police who are loyal to the Nazis. Fourth is the inner struggles the Bielskis face when some of their own decide to cause disagreements and divisions. For those unfamiliar with the story, the fate of the Bielskis is constantly in doubt.

The cinematography of the film is gray and muted, reflective of the somber tone of the subject matter. The musical score is reminiscent of John William's score in Schindler's List -- soft and sad with the cello and violin taking the melody. In some ways it feels that Defiance takes its visual cues from Schindler's List as well; there's something about the look of the movie that seems familiar. The battle scenes are similar in style to Saving Private Ryan, complete with the dazed, ringing-in-the-ears experience following a grenade that goes off too close to Tuvia. I would have appreciated a more unique perspective to the aesthetics of the film to coincide with the uniqueness of the story.

In all, Defiance is an important story that needs to be heard. Daniel Craig leads a great cast of characters in an emotional journey of community, camaraderie, and hope.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)

An Introspective Journey

[8/10 · 12 January 2009]

Rarely does a film really make a person think about himself, his life, and his philosophies. Some movies simply provide a brief escape from reality -- entertainment and nothing more. Other films raise awareness on issues, or call people to action. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is one of those rare films that can inspire, teach, and entertain and it's one of the best films of this year.

The movie is based on a story by F. Scott Fitzgerald and follows the unique life of Benjamin Button, a man born with the physiology of an old man. As he grows in age, Benjamin's appearance becomes younger -- he is life actually unfolds in reverse. This gives him an interesting perspective on life, allowing him to see the world and the people around him in ways that no one else can.

Benjamin Button is an epic story that takes us through many episodic moments involving the people and the places that surround Benjamin. There are no traditional "bad guys" in the film. No discernible conflict that weaves its way through the story. Just moments. Moments that come and go, but that make lasting impressions upon Benjamin and the audience as well. What it teaches is that life is fleeting, that things change, and that "you never know what's coming for you." Benjamin has to deal with all of these issues. He has to learn that death is part of life. He has to overcome his own disabilities. He has to make tough decisions that affect him and others. The film is deep, philosophical, and moving, and even after the last frame fades away, its themes resonate in the mind.

The movie's look and feel is as grand as its subject matter (and running time too -- nearly 3 hours). The cinematography is rich in color, each tone and palette supporting the needs and moods of a particular scene. Pacing is often a problem in the early stages of the film. Some moments seem too drawn out. Some of the dialog and acting seems too melodramatic. Some of the gags are overdone. However, the last act of the film moves very quickly. Perhaps this was done on purpose, for in real life, time seems to move quicker as we grow older.

Overall, this is a powerful film that will take you on a wide range of emotion and will also take you on a journey of self reflection.

Read more at http://FrameRate.blog.com

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

Spielberg & Lucas Stick to the Formula for Indy IV

[7/10 · 28 May 2008]

As the first images of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull washed over me, I felt like I was revisiting an old friend in that old familiar place that I hadn't seen in quite some time. For the fourth Indy installment, Spielberg and Lucas stuck to a formula that proved successful for the previous three films, and I felt it worked once again - despite the almost 20 year gap between The Last Crusade and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Fans who go in to this film expecting a completely different style and formula will certainly be disappointed. I left the theatre, however, having thoroughly enjoyed the adventure.

In this Indiana outing, 19 years have past since The Last Crusade, placing this movie in the year 1957 - right at the height of the Cold War and the Communist scare. Indiana must now go toe to toe not with Nazis, but with a group of Russians hell bent on finding an ancient and mysterious crystal skull - which they believe will give the 'ole Soviet Union an upper hand in the quest for world dominance. Indiana Jones, of course, is there every step of the way to thwart their efforts. Spielberg wastes no time in getting to the action, as Indiana is already captured when the film opens. What he doesn't know is what exactly the Russians are looking for and why they want it. As the story progresses he begins to believe in the power that the legendary skull possesses.

The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull features many of the familiar elements from the previous three films. Indy sabotages a Russian convoy, much like in Raiders of the Lost Ark. He searches for clues in old tombs, like in The Last Crusade. He explores an ancient, tribal civilization, like in The Temple of Doom. He runs into snakes, killer ants, and other dangerous predators. So, there are moments from all three films peppered throughout the fourth, making it a typical Indiana Jones adventure. The downside of this approach is that viewers might find it a little too familiar, thinking, "Hey, I've seen all this before." It all depends on what you're expecting when you enter the theatre.

After a 19 year absence from the hat and whip, Harrison Ford does a surprisingly good job of recapturing the character and the essence of Indiana Jones. He's older, yes, but he's still in good shape and he still looks the part. The same charm is there, along with the same dry wit. But there's a bit of an edge to the character now. He's a little more crusty and grumpy, and at times the mannerisms of his dad, Henry Jones, Sr. show through. Ford manages a nice balance between the two. Karen Allen reprises her role as Marion Ravenwood from Raiders of the Lost Ark, but she doesn't quite have the same spunk or spirit from the original movie. Cate Blanchett takes her turn as the villain, playing evil Communist Irina Spalko. Her character is more threatening than Beloq from Raiders, but much less threatening than Mola Ram from The Temple of Doom. So, it's a nice balance, but the story is somewhat limiting for Blanchett, whose character is reduced more to a stereotype who likes to brandish her sword a lot.

Many Indy purists might be disappointed to learn that there are CGI effects in the movie, but most of the effects are still practical. The actual number of CGI shots in the film are very minimal and they fit in with the rest of the set pieces great. So, if you find yourself griping about the CGI effects in this movie, just take a look at Spiderman sometime, which looked more like a video game than a movie.

One of the shortcomings of Indy IV lies with the plot. This story seemed much more straightforward than the previous films, with very little turns or twists to hold the audience's interest. The writers simply steered a course straight from point "A" to point "B" and then blew stuff up in the middle. It seemed that the plot followed a certain repetitive pattern: Indy and his pals get captured. Indy and his pals escape. A chase ensues. Indy and his pals are recaptured. No, wait, they escaped again. The first three films were special because there were more plot turns and more subplots throughout the story.

Despite its shortcomings, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull marks another great outing for the famed archaeologist, and one that audiences shouldn't miss. It was fun and exciting, and the two hours I spent in the theatre simply flew by.

Read more at http://FrameRate.blog.com

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

Ultimatum Lives Up to Its Predecessors

[9/10 · 6 August 2007]

http://www.ParcEntertainment.com

http://FrameRate.blog.com

I quickly found out by watching The Bourne Ultimatum that I can hold my breath for about 100 minutes. The intensity and energy of this film is unbelievable and easily lives up to the previous two installments. Ultimatum rounds out the trilogy nicely, but it left me hoping for a fourth adventure.

Part three begins exactly where part two left off. In fact, as complicated as it may sound, some events in Ultimatum actually coincide with events that were seen in Supremacy. The chronology of the two films overlap in places, which I found quite a remarkable achievement for the writers and continuity people on the crew. For example, the very last scene of Supremacy shows up about 3/4 of the way into Ultimatum, and yet the two stories are completely different.

Matt Damon again reprises his role as the infamous forgetful assassin, Jason Bourne - the product of a top secret CIA behavioral moderation program. But the memories of his past still prove elusive and he still yearns to put all the pieces together. His hope of uncovering the past lies with a British journalist, Simon Ross (Paddy Considine) who has a source within the CIA who holds the answers. As Bourne picks up the trail to find this informant, top CIA man Noah Vosen (David Strathairn) and his team work tirelessly to keep the lid on tight. And if that means killing Bourne in the process - so be it.

The action of this film starts at the very onset and doesn't let up. The viewer is taken to locales all over the world, including Turin, Italy; Tangier, Morocco; Madrid, Spain, and New York City. Once again Bourne proves to be a smart operative, dodging the CIA's hit squad and staying once step ahead of the guys in Langley. The entire film is hip, intelligent, and clever, without being overly-complicated. The plot is easy enough to follow, but is similar in places to The Bourne Identity. The story doesn't quite separate itself from the original as Supremacy managed to do.

Paul Greengrass, who helmed Supremacy, once again takes on the chores of directing. His documentary style of shooting puts the audience right in the action, with enough subjective hand-held shots and shaky camera work to make anyone nauseous. Greengrass would have done well to pull out on some of these fight scenes and car chases to give us more establishing shots. It's very disorienting to the point of distracting. Often it's difficult to tell just exactly what's going on.

Matt Damon fills the role of Jason Bourne nicely, blending cold intensity with a sense of vulnerability. However, more attention was placed on characterization in The Bourne Identity than in The Bourne Ultimatum. It seemed to be all action with no depth of character. The fault here lies with Greengrass, who apparently didn't want to take the time to flesh out the characters and their motivations. What comes across is a cast of so-so performances, when (with a little attention) they could have been just as explosive as the action.

In all, The Bourne Ultimatum is raw and intense with a ton of action - spectacular fight scenes, car chases, and gun battles. Bourne is the new Bond.

Transformers (2007)

Transformers, It Is What It Is: Mindless Action, But a Lot of Fun

[5/10 · 30 July 2007]

http://www.parcentertainment.com

http://framerate.blog.com

July 4th weekend just wouldn't be the same without some over-hyped movie blockbuster with a whole lotta action and very little plot. And this year proved no different with the release of Michael Bay's Transformers. I have to admit, when I first saw the teaser trailer for this film over a year ago, I thought to myself, "You have to be kidding?" First, I didn't even know the Transformers were still that popular. Sure, I owned the toys when I was a kid. I watched the cartoon. But I wasn't sure if the young whipper-snappers of today's generation had a clue about Transformers. Second, I just didn't think that a film adaptation of the Hasbro action figures would be worth my while. And so I went in a skeptic, only to reemerge some two and a half hours later with a different opinion.

Oh, don't kid yourself, the plot is VERY thin. This won't be an Oscar contender, but if you're looking for a lot of action with incredible special effects and a lot of destruction, then this is your film. Let's begin the review with the high notes: 1. SPECIAL EFFECTS - I have one word here: UNBELIEVABLE. With today's digital technology, a film's special effects will always come under close scrutiny, and it's difficult to claim that a film's special effects are revolutionary, like, say, Star Wars. But I have to say, the robots in this film look incredibly real. The detail of each Autobot and Decepticon is remarkable. Very well done indeed.

2. SOUND DESIGN - These sound designers deserve a lot of credit. I know it's tough to shell out money at the theatre these days, but if you can dig deep enough into your couch cushions, I would highly recommend that you do so. Scrape up enough cash so you can catch this one in the theatres where you can really appreciate the sound.

3. HOT GIRLS - Megan Fox. Wow. She plays opposite Shia LaBeouf as the sexy love interest. Let me just pause right here to stand up and applaud the casting director. Tip of the cap to you, sir.

4. ACTION - If you want to see a lot of property destruction, explosions, giant robot fight sequences, and car chases, then pull up a seat and enjoy yourself. This one is action from the get-go. It's as if the studio exec's took a look at the first draft of this screenplay and said to the writers, "Okay guys, all this exposition here? Pages 1-21? Just cut all of that out." And now for the criticism: 1. LAME DIALOGUE - The Decepticons (AKA, the Bad Guys) never speak English. They speak to each other in their own alien language, which is translated for us via subtitles. This made them seem more ominous and gave the film a darker tone, which I enjoyed. Then the Autobots (AKA, the Good Guys) started speaking. Big mistake. They speak English throughout the film and their dialogue is extremely lame and stifled.

2. COMIC RELIEF - In one particular scene, the Autobots are trying to sneak around the exterior of a house without being detected, but their antics resemble something out of Three Stooges short. They knock things over, they break things, they stumble around. They utter things like, "My bad." The whole scene came off childish and annoying. Many of the gags were forced and predictable, and there was no shortage of over-acting.

3. CONFUSING FIGHT SCENES - Although the fight scenes between the robots were incredible, characters were often too close to the camera. The bodies got so jumbled together, it was hard to distinguish the good guys from the bad.

I left the theatre with a good impression of the film. Yes, it definitely had its weak points, but your reaction to the film will definitely hinge on what type of movie you're expecting before you walk into the theatre. If you're expecting a well thought out story with wonderful dialogue and deep characterization, then you'll be in for a big disappointment. If you're looking for mindless action with great special effects, then you will probably enjoy it. Just remember, there's more to this film than meets the eye.