This film is excellent. Top-notch writing, entirely driven by strong characterization without contrivances. The acting is excellent, and the dialogue is believable, natural, and honest. This is not your average romcom, and it might not even qualify as a romcom at all, because although it asks many of the kinds of questions that romcoms try to ask, it answers them with far more maturity than most do. This story has themes that resonate and an ending that delivers. There are moments of the transcendent alongside moments of the awkward, and that gives the experience a ring of realism. The personal mysteries are revealed at a good pace, and the story never becomes saccharine, boring, or entirely predictable. I appreciated the good use of silence. I was occasionally annoyed by the unnecessary shakiness of the hand-held camera or the blurry focus of foreground objects, but that only happened a couple of times. This is otherwise a beautiful, thoughtful, quiet, poignant, and true character piece, and it's well worth the watching.
Reviews
32 Reviews
Well-balanced between action and thought
5 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
It's well-paced, well-acted, well-written, intelligent, action-packed, emotionally moving, visually gripping, painful, funny, sad, true, real, heightened-beyond-reality, and then brought back down to earth again. The moral weight of Captain America's position has always been one of his strengths and they make excellent use of it here, juxtaposing it very effectively with his sense of being uncertain in his personal life. The villains' position is tempting...and yet still morally wrong. There were some really nice touches with "average" people doing heroic things, too. I didn't expect this movie to be a game-changer in the Avengers universe, but just one more installment in Steve Rogers's tale. Instead, it came away having fundamentally changed the basic assumptions about the world and its structure and it leaves the door open for who-knows-what in the future. Excellent writing and I look forward to where Marvel goes next with this massive (and largely well-executed!) story.
Atonement
(2007)
Beautiful and thought-provoking
17 September 2013
I liked the narrative structure of this film; by the end, it had me thinking deeply about the nature of Story itself. What started out with the promise of a lush romantic tale eventually both did and did not fulfill that promise, in the most intriguing way. This movie was very well acted, emotionally resonant, and occasionally breathtaking in its cinematic techniques (e.g., a single panning shot against the backdrop of a massive set filled with a couple thousand people and animals, complex in its execution; a lighting change that achieved a powerful emotional effect). The costumes were gorgeous and effective, the settings were a perfect complement to the characters' emotions, and the character interactions were compelling. An experience you'll never forget!
Snow White and the Huntsman
(2012)
Unexpectedly Compelling
3 October 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I liked that the movie's plot didn't go entirely as I expected, in several key ways. We never get any big romantic scenes. That's not to say that there isn't a lovely romance happening quietly within it all, but it's not the win condition. Snow White doesn't resolve the conflict by winning the heart of her Prince Charming.
I also loved the fact that the writers had all the ingredients for a love triangle and they just don't go anywhere near it. Although both male leads are fond of Snow White, they don't let their feelings cloud their judgment. There's never a moment when either has even a single jealous glance. We never have a scene where Snow White agonizes over which one she's in love with. Both men are essential to the plot, but they are ultimately both incidental to Snow White successfully bringing the plot to a close. Again, a pleasant, well-executed surprise.
Charlize Theron chewed the scenery as the Queen, which made the character work. You hated the Queen and yet at the same time ached horribly for her. Her powers were formidable and yet frustratingly limited. She oozed evil but was never campy. Theron adds a level of believability to what otherwise could have been a cardboard villainess. In her hands, it was clear that the Queen wasn't shallow: she had plenty of depth, but the only things she had in those depths were pain, betrayal, fear, and a life without selfless, trustworthy love.
I also liked how the Queen never indicates that she's jealous of Snow White's beauty; the mirror is more of a measure of the strength of her magic than a means of perpetuating vanity. The word "fairest" takes on a different meaning in this movie, referring more to righteousness than to beauty. Snow White's claim to fame is repeatedly established as her moral blamelessness, not her looks. (Yay!) When the Queen asks the mirror if she herself is the fairest one, she's asking whether she still has the moral high ground, compared to the men in her life who have used her. When she encounters Snow White, though, her own sense of righteousness pales in comparison to true righteousness. This is a tale of a woman whose life was twisted around a lie that eventually destroyed her. Her actual death felt more tragic than triumphant and Theron was utterly convincing.
When Chris Hemsworth had a chance to do something other than swing a heavy weapon around and growl at things, which he's great at, he did it well. The Huntsman is almost immediately an interesting, unexpected character: he's a widower. That one fact of his existence drives nearly everything else he does and makes him more than just a thug. After all the physicality of the character throughout the movie, Hemsworth's performance in the pivotal waking scene was a marked contrast and was all the more powerful for it.
Kristin Stewart is believable an orphaned and imprisoned teenager: an old soul in some ways because of the pain she's endured, but a woman-child in so many other ways. Yes, her perpetually-open mouth is a bit tedious, but the fierce fragility she conveys is the right note for Snow White.
The movie is visually gorgeous: the landscapes are beautiful, the fairies looked otherworldly without being cutesy, Sanctuary was breathtaking, the dwarfs were a great mix of comic/tragic, and the Queen's scenes were all worth watching a second time. You never get bored with the visuals.
But the real reasons I liked the movie were all the ways in which it didn't go where I expected, and yet still worked. It was both satisfying and left me wanting more. Excellent.
I also loved the fact that the writers had all the ingredients for a love triangle and they just don't go anywhere near it. Although both male leads are fond of Snow White, they don't let their feelings cloud their judgment. There's never a moment when either has even a single jealous glance. We never have a scene where Snow White agonizes over which one she's in love with. Both men are essential to the plot, but they are ultimately both incidental to Snow White successfully bringing the plot to a close. Again, a pleasant, well-executed surprise.
Charlize Theron chewed the scenery as the Queen, which made the character work. You hated the Queen and yet at the same time ached horribly for her. Her powers were formidable and yet frustratingly limited. She oozed evil but was never campy. Theron adds a level of believability to what otherwise could have been a cardboard villainess. In her hands, it was clear that the Queen wasn't shallow: she had plenty of depth, but the only things she had in those depths were pain, betrayal, fear, and a life without selfless, trustworthy love.
I also liked how the Queen never indicates that she's jealous of Snow White's beauty; the mirror is more of a measure of the strength of her magic than a means of perpetuating vanity. The word "fairest" takes on a different meaning in this movie, referring more to righteousness than to beauty. Snow White's claim to fame is repeatedly established as her moral blamelessness, not her looks. (Yay!) When the Queen asks the mirror if she herself is the fairest one, she's asking whether she still has the moral high ground, compared to the men in her life who have used her. When she encounters Snow White, though, her own sense of righteousness pales in comparison to true righteousness. This is a tale of a woman whose life was twisted around a lie that eventually destroyed her. Her actual death felt more tragic than triumphant and Theron was utterly convincing.
When Chris Hemsworth had a chance to do something other than swing a heavy weapon around and growl at things, which he's great at, he did it well. The Huntsman is almost immediately an interesting, unexpected character: he's a widower. That one fact of his existence drives nearly everything else he does and makes him more than just a thug. After all the physicality of the character throughout the movie, Hemsworth's performance in the pivotal waking scene was a marked contrast and was all the more powerful for it.
Kristin Stewart is believable an orphaned and imprisoned teenager: an old soul in some ways because of the pain she's endured, but a woman-child in so many other ways. Yes, her perpetually-open mouth is a bit tedious, but the fierce fragility she conveys is the right note for Snow White.
The movie is visually gorgeous: the landscapes are beautiful, the fairies looked otherworldly without being cutesy, Sanctuary was breathtaking, the dwarfs were a great mix of comic/tragic, and the Queen's scenes were all worth watching a second time. You never get bored with the visuals.
But the real reasons I liked the movie were all the ways in which it didn't go where I expected, and yet still worked. It was both satisfying and left me wanting more. Excellent.
The Last Song
(2010)
Enjoyable for what it aims to do
2 October 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I subscribe to Ebert's approach to film reviewing: does the film achieve the goals it sets out to accomplish within its own genre? Sure, Nicholas Sparks's plots are never going to wow anyone with their originality and unpredictability, but they're not trying to. He specializes in writing small family dramas with characters that bear some resemblance to real human beings and that endure tearjerker events. Nothing groundbreaking. The question is: does The Last Song work on this level?
Unabashedly, yes. Miley Cyrus does a fine job of making me believe she's a pouty, hurt, self-centered teenager who at least has some sense of self-confidence amidst all her character's immaturity. Sometimes her character does frustratingly immature things, but at least they were in-character. She struck believable notes. There were never any off moments where a lack of acting skill on her part threw me out of the story. Of course, I don't have a history of following her work, so I just took her performance at face value.
Liam Hemsworth did a fine job too. He's got the unfortunate handicap of being so ridiculously good-looking that my first reaction upon seeing him was to laugh in disbelief. Assuming that we can get past that and give him a chance, he made me believe in his character, as well. Again, no off moments that threw me out of the story. (Although there was one scene involving him shirtless and some mutual hosing down that felt utterly gratuitous and annoyed me, but I'm blaming that on the director, not the actors. They did their best not to make that scene seem as barely-plausible as it was.) The scene where Ronnie breaks up with him was particularly well played on his part; his desire to hold her and restore the relationship was so evident and made me ache for his character. His motivations made perfect sense to me. Although I understood Ronnie's motivation and her childish desire to lash out, the breakup unfortunately hit the teen-melodrama button a little too hard and felt a little to mechanical for the plot. Again, the actors did a fine job of trying to make it feel believable and not just formulaic.
Greg Kinnear was excellent, providing a nice, steady, mature background to the teen drama. His performance never felt forced or cloying. He was believable as a slightly out-of-touch, frustrated, but loving father to his two children. His responses felt real and I cared about his character. I ached for his relationship with his daughter to be restored. Nice job on his part.
Bobby Coleman was unexpectedly fantastic! The first time I started to well up was when his character was working on the stained-glass window alone. Phenomenal job from so young a boy! I remember feeling like that as a child and he *nailed* that scene! He was good throughout, but he went from cute younger brother with the usual comedic notes to a real character at that point. He easily stole the scene from the two older actors.
So: for what this movie tried to do, I think it succeeded admirably. Yes, it's not art-house Oscar-bait, but it's not trying to be. If you let yourself settle down, forget your Miley Cyrus baggage, and enjoy this small-family, small-town, everyday-life (except needing to suspend disbelief regarding Hemsworth's appearance :) story, you'll be glad you did.
Unabashedly, yes. Miley Cyrus does a fine job of making me believe she's a pouty, hurt, self-centered teenager who at least has some sense of self-confidence amidst all her character's immaturity. Sometimes her character does frustratingly immature things, but at least they were in-character. She struck believable notes. There were never any off moments where a lack of acting skill on her part threw me out of the story. Of course, I don't have a history of following her work, so I just took her performance at face value.
Liam Hemsworth did a fine job too. He's got the unfortunate handicap of being so ridiculously good-looking that my first reaction upon seeing him was to laugh in disbelief. Assuming that we can get past that and give him a chance, he made me believe in his character, as well. Again, no off moments that threw me out of the story. (Although there was one scene involving him shirtless and some mutual hosing down that felt utterly gratuitous and annoyed me, but I'm blaming that on the director, not the actors. They did their best not to make that scene seem as barely-plausible as it was.) The scene where Ronnie breaks up with him was particularly well played on his part; his desire to hold her and restore the relationship was so evident and made me ache for his character. His motivations made perfect sense to me. Although I understood Ronnie's motivation and her childish desire to lash out, the breakup unfortunately hit the teen-melodrama button a little too hard and felt a little to mechanical for the plot. Again, the actors did a fine job of trying to make it feel believable and not just formulaic.
Greg Kinnear was excellent, providing a nice, steady, mature background to the teen drama. His performance never felt forced or cloying. He was believable as a slightly out-of-touch, frustrated, but loving father to his two children. His responses felt real and I cared about his character. I ached for his relationship with his daughter to be restored. Nice job on his part.
Bobby Coleman was unexpectedly fantastic! The first time I started to well up was when his character was working on the stained-glass window alone. Phenomenal job from so young a boy! I remember feeling like that as a child and he *nailed* that scene! He was good throughout, but he went from cute younger brother with the usual comedic notes to a real character at that point. He easily stole the scene from the two older actors.
So: for what this movie tried to do, I think it succeeded admirably. Yes, it's not art-house Oscar-bait, but it's not trying to be. If you let yourself settle down, forget your Miley Cyrus baggage, and enjoy this small-family, small-town, everyday-life (except needing to suspend disbelief regarding Hemsworth's appearance :) story, you'll be glad you did.
Charlie St. Cloud
(2010)
Engaging and heartfelt, if a bit pretty at times
31 July 2010
I enjoyed this movie, for what it tries to do. It's not trying to be an art-house Oscar-bait film. It's basically a story about a good man who loses himself to grief and how he recovers. The core message of letting go and moving on is a good one.
It's not a dumb, roll-your-eyes movie and it's not too clever. It sails the line between those two extremes, but manages to do so without being bland. There's a lot to enjoy here: Efron's excellent performance, Tahan's charm and chemistry with Efron, and Crew's solidity. Prew also has his moments, and although nobody manages to steal any scenes from Efron, they were all believable. I wish we could have seen a lot more of Basinger and Liotta, though, and Logue's relative lack of prettiness was actually a kind of relief.
Although the characters are clean, they still do foolish things, loose their tempers, and make poor choices about how to spend their lives. Personally, I'm not as moved by stories where the main character is a self-absorbed, self-destructive jerk who--no surprise--brings pain on him/herself and others and succumbs to the usual pitfalls: alcohol/drugs, meaningless sex, or general idiotic acting out. That might have made the movie "cooler" or made Efron seem edgier, but the story and character wouldn't have been as resonant for me. I can root for and identify with characters who are trying to do their best, to do the right thing, but it still leads them quite naturally into struggling with personal demons.
There's not much logic or explanation for Charlie's ability to interact with the dead physically. It's the conceit of the film and the whole plot falls apart without it, so if you're going to enjoy the story at all, you have to suspend that bit of disbelief. On the level of pushing emotional buttons, this film hits them pretty hard: everything from raw attraction (a nearly constant undertone) to outright laughing (I loved the running gag with the geese) to embarrassment (one scene shows how even someone as good-looking as Efron can fall completely flat on his face in an awkward blind-date situation) to aching from a sense of loss and separation and loneliness. I never actually got close to crying, but I certainly felt tugged (although more so with the Charlie/Sam relationship than with the Charlie/Tess relationship) more than once.
Clearly the main draw of this film is Efron. If you're going for Efron eye candy you'll get it in spades, but happily (despite the many reviews that sneer to the contrary), he actually spends most of the movie with his shirt on, so you have some hope of focusing on his face. Of course, easily a quarter of the scenes where he's got his shirt on, he's wet for one reason or another, so it doesn't actually help much. And even if you do manage to focus on his face, you again have to get past the "Damn, he's pretty!" reaction and focus on whatever emotions the character has. Happily, once you've invested that much effort, you find yourself caring about Charlie and responding to those emotions. The story is compelling because of Efron's acting, precisely because once you get past the pretty, there really is something there. When he finally does get around to taking off his shirt, it's not without reason, so at least you're not left laughing like you are with most of the embarrassing shirtless moments in the Twilight series.
Let me reiterate the part about the eye candy. There's lots of it. And not just the actors, but the indoor locations, the lighting, the framing, the ocean, the sailboats, the shoreline, even the sculptures in the graveyard. There's a gorgeous sculpture of a desolate angel crying on a gravestone near the end of the film. (Although there's a strange moment in the middle of the movie when the camera focuses on a child-angel gravestone for a little too long and you suddenly wonder if the movie is going to turn into a horror flick with the child-angel coming to life and terrorizing the townspeople. But the sensation passes, and you realize how clean the story is. Despite the fact that the main character talks to dead people, there's never a creepy sense of foreboding. It might have been more interesting if they'd taken it in that direction.) Perhaps the plot is a little bit predictable and the surprise twist isn't a huge surprise, but it does hit Charlie's character hard, and Efron and Crew make it work.
I gave it an 8 out of 10, because it mostly succeeds at what it tries to do. One interesting thing about it is that it tends to defy easy categorization. Is it a romance? A comedy? A tragedy? A star vehicle? A story about depression? A fable? A story about mental illness? A story about loss? A fantasy? A story about grieving? Predictable? Engaging? A thin excuse to watch pretty people standing in front of pretty things? Something with emotional resonance? The answer is yes. One thing I liked about it was the sheer variety of emotions that I experienced while I watched it. Small funny things happen alongside small moments of sadness, and vice versa. In that sense, it has resonance that dips below the pretty surface.
It's not a dumb, roll-your-eyes movie and it's not too clever. It sails the line between those two extremes, but manages to do so without being bland. There's a lot to enjoy here: Efron's excellent performance, Tahan's charm and chemistry with Efron, and Crew's solidity. Prew also has his moments, and although nobody manages to steal any scenes from Efron, they were all believable. I wish we could have seen a lot more of Basinger and Liotta, though, and Logue's relative lack of prettiness was actually a kind of relief.
Although the characters are clean, they still do foolish things, loose their tempers, and make poor choices about how to spend their lives. Personally, I'm not as moved by stories where the main character is a self-absorbed, self-destructive jerk who--no surprise--brings pain on him/herself and others and succumbs to the usual pitfalls: alcohol/drugs, meaningless sex, or general idiotic acting out. That might have made the movie "cooler" or made Efron seem edgier, but the story and character wouldn't have been as resonant for me. I can root for and identify with characters who are trying to do their best, to do the right thing, but it still leads them quite naturally into struggling with personal demons.
There's not much logic or explanation for Charlie's ability to interact with the dead physically. It's the conceit of the film and the whole plot falls apart without it, so if you're going to enjoy the story at all, you have to suspend that bit of disbelief. On the level of pushing emotional buttons, this film hits them pretty hard: everything from raw attraction (a nearly constant undertone) to outright laughing (I loved the running gag with the geese) to embarrassment (one scene shows how even someone as good-looking as Efron can fall completely flat on his face in an awkward blind-date situation) to aching from a sense of loss and separation and loneliness. I never actually got close to crying, but I certainly felt tugged (although more so with the Charlie/Sam relationship than with the Charlie/Tess relationship) more than once.
Clearly the main draw of this film is Efron. If you're going for Efron eye candy you'll get it in spades, but happily (despite the many reviews that sneer to the contrary), he actually spends most of the movie with his shirt on, so you have some hope of focusing on his face. Of course, easily a quarter of the scenes where he's got his shirt on, he's wet for one reason or another, so it doesn't actually help much. And even if you do manage to focus on his face, you again have to get past the "Damn, he's pretty!" reaction and focus on whatever emotions the character has. Happily, once you've invested that much effort, you find yourself caring about Charlie and responding to those emotions. The story is compelling because of Efron's acting, precisely because once you get past the pretty, there really is something there. When he finally does get around to taking off his shirt, it's not without reason, so at least you're not left laughing like you are with most of the embarrassing shirtless moments in the Twilight series.
Let me reiterate the part about the eye candy. There's lots of it. And not just the actors, but the indoor locations, the lighting, the framing, the ocean, the sailboats, the shoreline, even the sculptures in the graveyard. There's a gorgeous sculpture of a desolate angel crying on a gravestone near the end of the film. (Although there's a strange moment in the middle of the movie when the camera focuses on a child-angel gravestone for a little too long and you suddenly wonder if the movie is going to turn into a horror flick with the child-angel coming to life and terrorizing the townspeople. But the sensation passes, and you realize how clean the story is. Despite the fact that the main character talks to dead people, there's never a creepy sense of foreboding. It might have been more interesting if they'd taken it in that direction.) Perhaps the plot is a little bit predictable and the surprise twist isn't a huge surprise, but it does hit Charlie's character hard, and Efron and Crew make it work.
I gave it an 8 out of 10, because it mostly succeeds at what it tries to do. One interesting thing about it is that it tends to defy easy categorization. Is it a romance? A comedy? A tragedy? A star vehicle? A story about depression? A fable? A story about mental illness? A story about loss? A fantasy? A story about grieving? Predictable? Engaging? A thin excuse to watch pretty people standing in front of pretty things? Something with emotional resonance? The answer is yes. One thing I liked about it was the sheer variety of emotions that I experienced while I watched it. Small funny things happen alongside small moments of sadness, and vice versa. In that sense, it has resonance that dips below the pretty surface.
The Last Sin Eater
(2007)
This wrung me ten different ways simultaneously
28 October 2007
I was expecting an awkward preachy "Christian" movie, but the acting was excellent and the story twisted me around and I practically cried straight through the last half hour of this movie. Every single character was well motivated, and the plot and character development played out at a good pace. Characters that you hate you later come to sympathize with. No one is all good or all bad; they felt real. Their actions made perfect sense, in retrospect, given their experiences and their isolation. Their accents took a little while to become accustomed to, though. We found that we had to use the subtitles to follow everything that was going on. Once we got used to them, though, we were drawn into the story. The flashbacks at the end of the movie were particularly wrenching. You'll be emotionally drained and elated by the time you finish this movie. It's a must-see.
Serenity
(2005)
Smart, Powerful, & Funny
1 October 2005
This big-screen Firefly episode met all of my expectations and exceeded them spectactularly. It really grew to fill the big screen and surpassed just being another TV episode. I laughed, I (nearly) cried, I whooped with exhilaration and so (it seemed) did everyone else in the theatre with me. The acting and writing were excellent, the story and pacing really kept me engaged: even when I could see a plot point coming, it still came satisfyingly. There are maybe one or two SFX awkwardnesses, but they were by no means enough to take away from my enjoyment of this movie. The characters were well drawn and consistent with the series and the struggles that they went through (not just the fighting, but also the internal battles) were compelling. This movie functions both as a satisfying end to a brilliant TV show and just the beginning of an exciting universe of possibilities (I'm hoping someone picks the show up again!) This movie is well worth your time and money even if you haven't watched the show--you don't need to have seen the show to enjoy this movie--and I encourage you to see it! I'm planning on organizing some friends and going to see it again!
Murder by Death
(1976)
an unexpected surprise
2 August 2004
Amazon recommended this to us and when we ran across it at the video store and saw the cast list, we just had to pick it up. It had us still laughing over the lines and situations and the actors' performances an hour later. Some really great quips and digs at the mystery genre, and some absolutely wonderful character (and actor!) interactions. For anyone accustomed to Obi-Wan Kenobi, the Alec Guinness characterization done here is a hilarious departure from his accustomed seriousness.
My only objection to this film was Peter Sellers as Sydney Wang. Wang tended to ride the fine edge of funny/offensive; more often, he was just offensive. I was put off by the Caucasian-playing-an-Asian stereotyping, and just about every character aside he uttered was either racist or sexist. He did have some hilarious lines ("Putting many detectives on case like making lamb stew: all go to pot!"), but for the most part, I found his presence grating rather than funny. Sellers DID do a good job with the character, but I just plain didn't like the character.
Overall, I prefer the movie "Clue" to this one, but this is definitely a fun time!
My only objection to this film was Peter Sellers as Sydney Wang. Wang tended to ride the fine edge of funny/offensive; more often, he was just offensive. I was put off by the Caucasian-playing-an-Asian stereotyping, and just about every character aside he uttered was either racist or sexist. He did have some hilarious lines ("Putting many detectives on case like making lamb stew: all go to pot!"), but for the most part, I found his presence grating rather than funny. Sellers DID do a good job with the character, but I just plain didn't like the character.
Overall, I prefer the movie "Clue" to this one, but this is definitely a fun time!
The Void
(2001 Video)
an intelligent and fun little film
22 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
A friend of mine picked this up on a whim in the bargain box at a local video store, upon seeing the two stars' names together. We decided to watch it and skewer it, keeping expectations with the IMDb rating of (at the time) 3.7 that it had. Instead, we were pleasantly surprised at the
a) consistent and correct science mentioned
b) evident chemistry between the two leads
c) several bits of fun dialog (both actors have a talent for understated comedy)
d) redemption of the arch-villians at the end (unexpected!)
e) the refreshing lack of the scientists-turned-superheroes motif usually found in these movies
f) passable SFX
g) the sexual tension despite the fact that it was never unresolved
It's not a stunner of a movie, by any means, but for a fun and refreshingly intelligent little diversion, it's definitely worth watching. I thought the second sex scene was unnecessary to the plot or the characterizations, but that was my only quibble. Otherwise, settle in and have a good time watching two fun actors from two different and strong sci-fi/fantasy shows play together in a new universe. Very enjoyable! :)
a) consistent and correct science mentioned
b) evident chemistry between the two leads
c) several bits of fun dialog (both actors have a talent for understated comedy)
d) redemption of the arch-villians at the end (unexpected!)
e) the refreshing lack of the scientists-turned-superheroes motif usually found in these movies
f) passable SFX
g) the sexual tension despite the fact that it was never unresolved
It's not a stunner of a movie, by any means, but for a fun and refreshingly intelligent little diversion, it's definitely worth watching. I thought the second sex scene was unnecessary to the plot or the characterizations, but that was my only quibble. Otherwise, settle in and have a good time watching two fun actors from two different and strong sci-fi/fantasy shows play together in a new universe. Very enjoyable! :)
Loved it! Pass the rum! SPOILERS
22 July 2003
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is a classic. It's going up on my shelf the day the DVD comes out. It's so much FUN! :) Loved the acting, it was even better the second time, and I'm planning on going to see it in the theatres again. SFX were great, Johnny Depp is the heart and soul of this movie, my favorite swording-fighting scene was between Depp and Bloom in the rafters, Knightley is lovely and funny in her own right, and Cap'n Jack Sparrow's entrance has got to be one of the filmdom's classics. Great cinematography, the plot was great (and left room for a sequel :), and I don't have a single complaint about it. The thing I enjoyed the most about it was that it was just rolicking good fun. It's up there with quotables like The Princess Bride and Holy Grail. Rush played a very good ham to Depp's cheese. Depp played it like he'd had a bit too much rum...ten years ago. Pryce was even redeemed upon a second viewing. Great costumes, a totally plastered good time!
Down with Love
(2003)
A fun, if completely ridiculous, romp
17 May 2003
The cast gets to have a lot of fun in this over-the-top throwback to the 60s pink-and-formica sex comedies. Despite how much disbelief had to be suspended, I was never quite able to buy the total transformation of Catcher Block...so the film wasn't really romantic, per se. But it had a lot of laugh-out-loud moments and wonderful lines: (transformed playboy, moping on couch after losing the girl) "I don't care about sex anymore--I just want to be married!" Completely ridiculous. Pierce was great fun, McGregor appeared to be having way too much fun (what accent, exactly, was he supposed to be doing? It wasn't Scottish, it wasn't quite posh-English, and then it got even more muddled up with an overly-done Midwestern.), and Zellweger's 3-minute monologue was just wonderful. I really didn't expect it and she did it so well that my expression matched Catcher's by the end of it. I was starting to get annoyed with Zellweger's pert walking thing, but the hair and the clothes and the sets were a whole lot of fun. I loved the use of chocolate in the movie (somehow, when McGregor did it, it had completely the opposite meaning that it was intended :), and definitely stick around for the leads' music-and-dance performance during the credits. Personally, I think it's the best part of the whole movie. :)
The Matrix Reloaded
(2003)
Still a Powerful Double-Punch
15 May 2003
Most of the reviews for this film have said that the action scenes are great but the plot is either non-existent or incomprehensible. I disagree. The plot is as straightforward as it was in the first movie--plowing straight ahead--but since most of the truly thought-provoking battle takes place on a philosophical level, it's not hard to see why it would go over most viewers' heads. You can watch the Matrix movies on two levels: the action choreography and the raging philosophical debates about the nature of existence. The original movie set us up with some hard-to-follow content on both counts, and my biggest fear was that Reloaded would disappoint on the second. It did not; I loved the continual raging battle between predestination and free will in it, and the layers of questions-within-questions. Reloaded succeeded, for the most part, though it did not surprise. Quibbles: they should have axed the Morpheus-oration scene, and the Morpheus monologue in the finale was a bit heavy-handed as well. I commend Fishburne for dragging heroically along under the weight of such dialogue. I was somewhat disappointed with the obvious computer-generated Neos that showed up periodically in the fight scenes. I couldn't help but wonder why Neo hung around to fight hand-to-hand anymore, but then we're led to believe that Neo still doesn't seem to realize all that he is capable of doing. The first mention of the "Keymaker" made me wonder when we'd be picking up the "Gatekeeper," and (to borrow from a hilarious review on AICN), the party at the beginning really did look like the Pottery Barn had a rave on the Planet of the Gay Apes. We're battling to save this pathetic remnant of humanity? :) There were a great many wonderful moments in the film though, in humor and action choreography and the occasional line of dialogue. I was getting annoyed with the number of flipped cars (why bother after the first one or two?), and the (now-tired, and in this case, somewhat over-used) device of pausing and doing 180-camera-turns in the middle of action sequences. What took your breath away in the first movie does not have the same effect in Reloaded. I thought the "trade you a kiss for the Keymaker" scene was a complete waste. The least they could have done was cause some bad thing to happen because of the kiss...but no, it was just so this one small character could irk Trinity. (Unless the woman's situation is supposed to be a possible future fate for Trinity...but still. It was the only completely and truly lame idea in the entire movie.) I had expected the ending of this movie since I walked out of the theatre after the first one, but it was gratifying to finally see it. In all, a wild ride that leaves you exhausted. Not as clean or as ground-breaking as the original, but certainly worth taking the time to think about and enjoy.
October Sky
(1999)
Very solid film
19 October 2002
I was inspired, encouraged, and uplifted by this story. Wonderful understated acting by Gyllenhaal and Cooper; especially appreciated their characters' interactions on-screen. It's got dark elements, but you see that the father is essentially a good man who makes mistakes. A great movie, I'd definitely recommend it!
Benny & Joon
(1993)
whimsical and painful by turns -- SPOILERS
19 October 2002
Warning: Spoilers
It's an odd love story; it's unusual to find one in which a mentally-ill person really does fall in love. Quinn and Moore seemed bland compared to Depp and Masterson. Masterson shone out in parts, but it was Depp who entirely stole the show. I love how I couldn't make up my mind about him--was he crazy too? Or just suffering from dyslexia? Or very intelligent but masking it? Or a naive buffoon who happened to wander into the right kitchen? Or maybe all of the above? Completely loved the idea of making grilled cheese sandwiches with an iron (it makes perfect sense, and I loved the ensuing discussion), Buster Keaton reincarnated in the park, "Mommy?", and making mashed potatoes, all of which was entirely sold by Depp's performance. A bit strange, but then, that's the movie's appeal. I'd definitely recommend it.
Donnie Darko
(2001)
Strange, but not unlikable
17 October 2002
I'm not sure where to classify this film. It seems to defy all attempts. I initially saw it classified as horror/suspense, but I neither felt myself horrified nor on the edge of my seat. I almost felt some kind of weird kinship with the main character (played brilliantly by Gyllenhaal), and finished the movie in a fairly cheerful mood, which seems completely unexpected to me. I could feel my mind trying to make sense of content and realizing that there really was no point in trying to drag a concrete *thing* out of it. It simply is what it is, and you almost just want to laugh. So, if anything, it might be a dark comedy. But there's drama, too, and a serviceable young romance, and a little bit of action. Plus artful imagery and an almost Memento-like plot, at least in its feel. Not sure I'd recommend this film, but it's not bad, either. If you're into teen angst, 6-ft.-tall invisible rabbits, and a bit of dark comedy, you'll probably like this film.
Reign of Fire
(2002)
Lots of soot -- SPOILERS
12 August 2002
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is mostly a piece of apocalyptic fluff with an interesting premise. About the most enjoyable thing in it is Christian Bale's facial bone structure. Matthew McConaughey's appearances on-screen elicited a laugh nearly every time. He was trying to play nuts, but the bulging eyes and shaved head seemed terribly contrived. I'm thankful for the lack of sappy romance. I thought the plot got tied up a bit too neatly (boy who wakes up Poppa Dragon--thus causing the Apocalypse--is the One who kills aforesaid Big Daddy? And the Old Coot is the SINGLE key to freedom? Gimme a break. Lay it on a bit thick, won't ya...) Visually, some pretty nice stuff. I liked the touches of post-apocalyptic culture, derivative from what we know today. Wished they'd thought of bringing haircuts along, too. Lots of mops and soot. Oh, and huge plot holes. Giant ones. And meaningless deaths. Did I mention the lack of personal hygiene? :) It's a fun movie, but that's about it.
Spider-Man
(2002)
A lot of fun, and unexpected depth! SPOILERS
4 May 2002
Warning: Spoilers
I admit to having only known the barest of details about the Spider-Man story before going into the theater, but I found myself drawn deeply into caring about the characters, even unexpected ones. I had been skeptical about Maguire, but he turned out to be completely perfect for the part, and Dunst was wonderful and muted at the same time. Kudos to Franco, as well, for making me really feel sorry about his character. It's rare to find yourself really caring about an aimless rich kid who's taking the hero's girl. :) Dafoe had a moment here or there, but I mostly found his performance lacking true pizzazz. Perhaps it was the comic-book dialogue that he had with his floor-to-ceiling mirror. In any case, there was very little wit in his performance, and he didn't really appear to be enjoying himself, just functioning as the requisite bad guy. All of the Peter Parker "real-life" stuff was well-written and wonderful. Loved the WWF sequence, and found the ending sequence bittersweet. I figured out what he was going to do about 30 seconds before he did it, which made the scene turn into a twist in my chest. They set up every domino for an awesome sequel. Computer animation sequences for Spider-Man sometimes left something to be desired, but Maguire's enthusiasm for the part made the live-action sequences a joy to behold. Mmmmm. I went into this film expecting some light superhero fun, some witty lines, a pretty girl and man in a spandex suit, and general SFX fluff-and-magic. It did have all those things, but on a very human level, it also had a great deal of weight and interaction that made the whole thing ring true from the bottom up. Great story!
Buried on Sunday
(1992)
Totally Canadian in flavor
17 April 2002
This movie has its odd moments, but it's got fun performances from Chaykin (totally in his element), Gross (somehow making "unwashed" look sexy), and Virieux (whose character provides a somewhat saner counterpoint to the other two). Only in a Canadian film could you achieve such seriousness about such silliness, or vice versa, and still manage to throw in dark humor and good-looking leads. Moments of seriousness intrude; insane mobs and philosophizing, not-quite-kosher ministers; government-vs.-the-little-people; nuclear submarines and spontaneous combustion abound. You get to enjoy many of your favorite Canadian character actors with cameo parts ("hey! I've seen that guy somewhere!"), and by the movie's end, you find yourself wanting to don plaid and go catch some fish.
Crossing Delancey
(1988)
endearing and funny
8 March 2002
I really loved this love story because it seemed so average and normal. I loved the portrayal of modern secular Jewish life in a city, and the humor that can be found in it. I loved how Riegert played a pickle man--an utterly normal, practical, and wonderful character. Great story!
Bridget Jones's Diary
(2001)
Oh, this is so much fun!!
4 February 2002
I watched this movie unwillingly--a friend encouraged me to see it, since I thought it was just going to be a sex-diary sort of movie. As a fan of Zellweger's from "Nurse Betty," I really enjoyed seeing her in this film. She looked like a "normal" woman, and the humor was wonderfully down-to-earth. I've never been a fan of Grant's, but I was happy to finally seeing him playing the greasy playboy I've always thought he was, and happy that he DIDN'T get the girl! (Drove me nuts that he kept playing stuttering nice guys in all these period movies, getting all dressed up and looking innocently lost. Gag.) But the guy who DID get the girl... "Ummm," I thought (since I was unable to really get out a coherent thought :), "Who IS this guy?!" He gets the girl in this movie opposite two well-known movie stars, and I've never heard of him before!? So I wandered over to the IMDb and discovered Colin Firth (and "Pride and Prejudice"! WATCH THIS MOVIE!! :), and have never been the same since. :) People wrote articles asking the question: "Grant or Firth?" and I snort. Firth, of course. Hands-down. No competition, and there never was. Grant is just an overly-confident British guy with a posh accent. Firth...is worth admiring. The final sequence of the film with him in that great coat and turtleneck and look oh so...um... Anyway, that whole sequence makes up for all of the grating you have to endure for Bridget's sake to get through the Grant parts to the really good parts at the end of film, when Grant's character is finally out of the picture.
In any case, all three actors (and the supporting cast) do a really wonderful job with this movie. You will laugh--guys AND girls--and not mind watching it again. I've never before seen a fight scene like the one this movie has.
Downsides: a lot of obscenities. Otherwise, though, this is a really fun movie. And you have to appreciate the whole "Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy" background to understand how truly ironic and wickedly funny this movie actually is. There is a whole subculture in the female English-speaking world surrounding Mr. Firth, and this film capitalizes (and is actually partially based on) this subculture. Bridget Jones is the embodiment of 30-something unmarried females who love watching "Pride and Prejudice." :) Enjoy!
In any case, all three actors (and the supporting cast) do a really wonderful job with this movie. You will laugh--guys AND girls--and not mind watching it again. I've never before seen a fight scene like the one this movie has.
Downsides: a lot of obscenities. Otherwise, though, this is a really fun movie. And you have to appreciate the whole "Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy" background to understand how truly ironic and wickedly funny this movie actually is. There is a whole subculture in the female English-speaking world surrounding Mr. Firth, and this film capitalizes (and is actually partially based on) this subculture. Bridget Jones is the embodiment of 30-something unmarried females who love watching "Pride and Prejudice." :) Enjoy!
The Bumblebee Flies Anyway
(1999)
Powerful and bittersweet; MAJOR SPOILERS
22 December 2001
Warning: Spoilers
I admit to initially being interested in this film because of Wood, but Gore, Perrino, Garofalo, and Cook were strong, as well. Cook's role is muted; some of her fans may be turned off by the quietness of her performance, but I felt the portrayal entirely within reason, since her character is tied to the film mostly because her brother is dying. Her character was displaced and knew it, and her friendship with Wood's character was very much one of mutual comfort. They were basically just content to be in each other's presence; there were no unneeded theatrics between them. I thought it was cool.
The film began slowly and the pace it picked up to was not in action but in psychology. The premise (which you don't discover until the end), is that cancer may be put into remission if the mind forgets it must support the cancerous cells; mind over matter, so to speak. This "cure" comes at the expense of your memories of who you are, however. You have a sort of amnesia--the painful part is when you are faced with going through the procedure again when the cancer reappears, and you will probably loose all of the memories of the friends you made, and the things you learned, and once again, who you are.
It took me a few minutes to understand the premise after it was revealed, but the painfulness of what it would be like to live like that did not sink in until the scene where Wood's character effectively said good-bye to Cook's. They were two young people who were thinking and serious beyond their years. They were faced with death and illness when most of us are out partying.
When he is facing losing himself and his memories of their friendship, he grabs on to the lapels of her coat as if holding on to them will keep him there. You can see that she knows what she's loosing, as well: a friend who has just listened and not demanded. Someone who took the time to know her as a person, who she felt could understand when she expressed her own pain and frustration.
When they kiss, you realize with a start that they are both barely out of their teens. They somehow feel older until you see the innocence and the inexperience evidenced in their kiss. I've never before seen a moment quite like the one Wood portrayed there--a young man, desperate and saddened in the knowledge that he will lose what he holds in his arms, yet unwilling to let her go and trying to express his need for her for the first time. The moment that really struck me was not the initial feeling of desperation, but rather the expression that immediately followed it, of "wow" and relief and release of tension and a breath of stunned virginity, for lack of a better term. And then, immediately following on the heels of that, a desire for more--and then a moment of simply being held. It was young, it was old, it was poignant, sweet, painful, and very well acted.
I've seen my share of film kisses, but this one was different. Just go and watch this movie! It's under-appreciated, and it is not your usual sick-ward sort of movie. It was effective, but like Connie Willis' "Bellwether," you don't realize it until you reach the end--which in some sense is its brilliance. You are just as disjointed and in a fog as Wood's character, only finding definition as he does, as he builds friends and experiences. That is why it is so painful by the end, because you have begun to treasure what he does, and it will be gone.
The film began slowly and the pace it picked up to was not in action but in psychology. The premise (which you don't discover until the end), is that cancer may be put into remission if the mind forgets it must support the cancerous cells; mind over matter, so to speak. This "cure" comes at the expense of your memories of who you are, however. You have a sort of amnesia--the painful part is when you are faced with going through the procedure again when the cancer reappears, and you will probably loose all of the memories of the friends you made, and the things you learned, and once again, who you are.
It took me a few minutes to understand the premise after it was revealed, but the painfulness of what it would be like to live like that did not sink in until the scene where Wood's character effectively said good-bye to Cook's. They were two young people who were thinking and serious beyond their years. They were faced with death and illness when most of us are out partying.
When he is facing losing himself and his memories of their friendship, he grabs on to the lapels of her coat as if holding on to them will keep him there. You can see that she knows what she's loosing, as well: a friend who has just listened and not demanded. Someone who took the time to know her as a person, who she felt could understand when she expressed her own pain and frustration.
When they kiss, you realize with a start that they are both barely out of their teens. They somehow feel older until you see the innocence and the inexperience evidenced in their kiss. I've never before seen a moment quite like the one Wood portrayed there--a young man, desperate and saddened in the knowledge that he will lose what he holds in his arms, yet unwilling to let her go and trying to express his need for her for the first time. The moment that really struck me was not the initial feeling of desperation, but rather the expression that immediately followed it, of "wow" and relief and release of tension and a breath of stunned virginity, for lack of a better term. And then, immediately following on the heels of that, a desire for more--and then a moment of simply being held. It was young, it was old, it was poignant, sweet, painful, and very well acted.
I've seen my share of film kisses, but this one was different. Just go and watch this movie! It's under-appreciated, and it is not your usual sick-ward sort of movie. It was effective, but like Connie Willis' "Bellwether," you don't realize it until you reach the end--which in some sense is its brilliance. You are just as disjointed and in a fog as Wood's character, only finding definition as he does, as he builds friends and experiences. That is why it is so painful by the end, because you have begun to treasure what he does, and it will be gone.
Surprised by the darkness
21 November 2001
When I read the first book, I found myself disturbed by it; beneath the surface humor and the compelling fantasy world, there was a darker edge. I found myself unable to read more. I went to see the movie, expecting to find the dark edge gone, reduced to light and enjoyable kids' fare; I wanted to discover that the edge was only in my own mind. Instead, I was surprised to see these kids bleeding and being hacked at by magicked stones with swords. The dark edge I had felt in the books was magnified on the screen, not diminished. The flying keys being rammed into the closed door was a shock for me--these little kids are messing about with rampant and powerful evil. The defenses around the stone were meant to be strong, and they were supposedly cast by "good" people, but they were intended very seriously to kill indiscriminately--how "good" is that? I felt that the explanation of Harry's survival as having "skin covered with love" fell a bit flat for me, and the physical abuse in the opening sequence was accompanied by Exorcist-type supernatural disturbances (I found myself almost feeling bad for the Dursleys, being attacked by all that mail! Almost--but not quite.) Perhaps if this film was aimed at the 16-26 demographic and was billed as a film with a dark edge to it, I would not have been surprised by the presence of darkness. However, as a children's movie, I found it seriously lacking.
The Winslow Boy
(1999)
superb!
10 September 2001
Excellent writing, interesting direction, and great acting on all counts. The script is wonderful, and I was most impressed by the undercurrent romance woven throughout the story but never referred to by any of the characters. I highly recommend this film!
Fever Pitch
(1997)
a surprisingly complex and compelling film
10 September 2001
The cover of the video is COMPLETELY misleading. I must admit that I never expected a film about a football fan to be either interesting or in-depth. I was surprised to find its US release under "New Arrivals" at my video store, and being a fan of Firth, I decided to give it a try. It's a very human story, and it is well-done. Nick Hornby's script is excellent, and he actually managed to pull me, a non-rabid fan of football, into understanding a little of what his character was going through. The inclusion of the childhood scenes was great for setting up why the character is still human, though he initially appears insane when taken in the greater context of human existence. He was portrayed very effectively by Firth, whose previous stand-out performance as Mr. Darcy in "Pride and Prejudice" contrasts so sharply with the character that he plays in this film that I found myself almost cringing at the immaturity and madness portrayed by him...until the character grew on me and I felt more than just pity for him. Ruth Gemmell did a fine job of portraying Sarah, a woman who was frustratingly in love with a man who loved a sport. I liked watching the growth of both of their characters throughout the film. The thing that struck me about this film was the reality and "humanness" of it. I could see such a thing happening in actual life, and I appreciated the portrayal of the everyday struggles of learning to refocus your priorities and commit to loving someone.
Tell Your Friends