Change Your Image
dstanmyer
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
The Wire: Not for Attribution (2008)
A classic episode up with the best!
Ever since I started becoming aware of The Wire and knew I had to soon start watching it, I've always heard, as a mantra, that Season 5 wasn't quite in the same ballpark as seasons 3 and 4. Season 5 seemed like an afterthought to some people I've spoken to, or read. Like, the series really ended after Season 4, for all intents and purposes. So, I went into the seasons with those thoughts, though knowing in the back of my mind that I might very well indeed love Season 5 just as much. After all, I sometimes hold Season 2 as my favorite, which few do.
Seasons 3 and 4 were great and I can see how they have become the standard bearers for the show. However, Season 5 so far has been tremendous to me, almost seeming like a "surprise", as I felt myself feeling down that I was done with the hyped-up seasons 3 and 4.
Episode 3 of the 5th season is brilliant. The newspaper/media angle is great and I foresee an awarding finish, rife with societal commentary and astute observations. After all, Simon saved his forte, journalism, to be the 5th and final institution that he examines, critiques, and ultimately holds accountable for some of our society's failings. He knows this stuff and you can bet that everything portrayed is going to be transcendentally real. The seeming set-up for journalistic in-fighting and strife is obvious and has me looking forward to how journalist Scott is going to make a contribution to the paper, and the show, in a major way.
"Not Attribution" continues the downward spiral of Jimmy, including a classically comedic scene of him having sex with a woman on a car hood, flashing his badge, as police roll by. Its entertaining as hell to watch him go about setting up a serial killer story, getting giddy and almost high from the prospects of what it would mean. And then to see the moral compass of Bunk in this regard is intriguing. At the end, the willingness of Lester to continue down that path with Jimmy was surprising and made me not want to wait to see where that storyline would go.
The dogs are closing on the Master Snake Clay Davis and that interplay with Burrell is great. There's a brutal scene where Butchie is tortured, still refusing to give up the whereabouts of Omar. After that, its priceless to see Chris Partlow and Snoop obviously express fear that Omar would be coming after them now, and questioning Marlo's plan. Speaking of Marlo, its great to see his "uncivilized" ways when dealing with the Greeks and their insistence on clean money. Then, at the end, the episode is capped as the writers finally show us what Omar is up to (living it up in an ocean front little town somewhere south of here), and its dramatic perfection to watch him learn of Butchie's fate (via Spanish) and the look that comes over his face, with tears in his eyes.
Blue Valentine (2010)
Engaging & intense performances carry the film!
Blue Valentine is an enjoyable, though raw and dark portrayal of a relationship between two flawed individuals. I may have falsely assumed that this film was meant to be reflective of the complicated duality and oft-neglected realism of love and relationships in today's day and age. For me though, it failed to register at such a level of all-encompassing reflection and did not fully work as a statement on relationship realism, minus Hollywood gleam and shine.
Though it wasn't quite what I expected, it doesn't mean it wasn't successful in it's own way.
We are shown a study on what can happen between two people that seemingly come from damaged pasts wrought with dysfunction. Gosling's Dean never graduated High School and holds odd jobs throughout the time we see him on screen and has a developing problem with alcohol. We also know that his mother abandoned him at the age of 10. Williams' Cindy clearly has scars from a childhood that included a father who, at the very least, from the one scene we're showed, engages in intense emotional abuse. Cindy lacks faith in functional relationships, most likely not trusting that they can work out and probably having deep seated issues with men in general. It appears that she is somewhat distant in her relationships, with Bobby and Dean, often coming across very serious and reticent to let go and have fun. It becomes clear that she most likely struggles with finding, and keeping, happiness.
Add to that the fact that her relationship with Dean accelerates very quickly on the heals of her relationship with her volatile boyfriend Bobby and then she discovers she's pregnant, goes through an emotionally wrenching abortion attempt, and then decides to keep the child that's not Dean's....is it any wonder that things do not work out? This is a cautionary tale about the benefits of taking relationships slowly while understanding they have ups and downs. Relationships need room to grow and evolve before both parties know what they're in for regarding the long haul of marriage and "forever". After two intense months, it's fair to say that you truly don't fully know the other person yet, what they're capable of, and how they handle themselves when the passion wears off and the going gets tough. Anything formed too quickly under intense emotional arrangements most likely won't work. Further, this movie does not speak to the "average" masses of people that are equipped with supportive families, coping skills, and the ability to think before acting. Then again, maybe it's not supposed to. Director Derek Cianfrance was successful at illuminating the above realities of love and relationships.
This movie was engaging and brought out many strong human emotions along its path of descriptively describing this couples' journey from quick love to absolute misery. The most heart breaking moments include those with their daughter. Williams and Gosling are revelations in their roles and can carry the weight of this movie. To watch the portrayal of such sadness and heartbreak, interspersed with the happy and passionate beginnings, is almost too much to take at times. I imagine that everyone can find moments about their life that started so "up" but ended so "down".
Though the overall story falls short of cinema mastery, the real and raw performances in this film are well worth the price of admission and worthy of much praise. Watching Williams and Gosling portray the full gamut of genuine human emotion was a pleasure to behold.
Treme (2010)
Treme....Another piece of American art work from Simon
Treme is definitely not a show for everyone. And that is fine. Most likely, if you're a fan of David Simon's The Wire, you will probably have the utmost patience with this carefully and skillfully constructed character drama, realizing there will be a payoff down the line.
In the mean time, the viewer slowly, yes slowly, gets to know a wide array of characters as well as become totally engulfed in a post-Katrina New Orleans. It is often depressing and saddening. It is true that the first 3-4 episodes are slow. The viewer does wonder where the story is going, where the intrigue will come from, and what exactly is Simon going for. There are several scenes each episode where the music seems to go on too long and is filmed just for the sake of the music, not necessarily because it helps the story. In this way, it is not quite the equal of The Wire. Things are sometimes too slow and meandering.
But....please....if you're a fan of well planned character studies, if you appreciate the art and skill in a form of film that is unique and original, stick with Treme for the entire season. If The Wire was a "slow burn", Treme is a long smoldering fire left to burn after midnight, just to still be there in the morning. You think it's going to go out, but instead it just continues to build and draw you in. By episode 5 or 6, the contemplative & intelligent viewer will be won over. By the end, you are completely riveted to the fortunes of the central 7-8 characters.
I cannot say enough for David Simon's ability to create something that is so different than 95% of what passes for drama and TV on the current airwaves. Every scene is crafted for a reason, every character is painstakingly created. Nothing is wrapped up in 55 (or 41) minutes, there are no shallow, one sided caricatures (other than maybe Sonny) that is the absolute norm on most network TV shows. CSI? Law and Order? The Mentalist? Child please....
Such episodic creations like CSI are for the average viewer who wants no challenge, wants a tidy ending tied in a bow, and who can care less for an artfully executed show. Treme attempts to reflect, and represent, true life as much as possible. Real life has an ebb and flow, very little is tidy, minimally is it black & white. There are gray areas. Sometimes you do the right thing, sometimes you cut corners. If you require ease and tidiness to be entertained, please don't attempt this show....instead stick with David Caruso's Horatio on CSI: Miami, an absolute farce rife with simple and obvious one-liners that exist no where except in the festering pool of prime-time network TV written for the average viewer who is incapable of deeper thought, critical thinking, and patience.
To call these characters one-dimensional must mean that you've watched with one eye or "didn't get it". Almost everyone in the show exhibits admirable traits but also some traits that may be annoying, irresponsible, or questionable. I can say the same things about almost everyone I know in real life. No one is perfect, but most people strive to be the best they can. Wendell Pierce's Antoine Batiste changes and fluctuates throughout the 10 episodes, turning into a well-rounded human being with depth. The same can be said for Steve Zahn's Davis, who starts very clownish, but who slowly turns into a real person with a serious and sensitive side. I could go on and on, referring to The Chief, his son, LaDonna, Annie, Creighton, Toni, etc. Nevermind Kim Dickens' Janette, probably the most well-liked character that the viewer pulls for the most. She is incredibly multi-dimensional and deep, from her struggle as restaurant owner to her relationship with Davis. Also, shame on some posters that seemingly have ZERO knowledge about suicide, why it happens, how it effects the survivors, and how it often occurs with little warning, committed by an individual with a "fine and normal" life. There was nothing wrong with how Simon portrayed this un-named characters' suicide which served to represent the many people that took this route in the aftermath of such trauma.
As far as New Orleans itself, it seems to be a believable and life-like portrayal of it. I've been there 3 times ('04, '05, '09) for a week each time and can say its a place I want to return to often. The food, the music, the history, the people...are all unique and quite a National treasure. Any vitriol for the city or its people completely makes ZERO sense to me and probably reflects ignorance and close mindedness. What the city and its people have had to go through is amazing and something that 99.9% of us will never have to experience. This show attempts to capture this feel, this struggle, the identity of a city and it's attempt to resurrect itself. The characters all reflect, seemingly realistically, an aspect of this struggle, the effects of such trauma, what happened to its citizens, and what it takes to come back, and who/what may be in the way of such recovery. Obviously, if you've never experienced New Orleans, "don't get" the city, care nothing about music, you may indeed be behind the 8 ball when it comes to the patience and focus needed for this show.
Once again, it is not for everyone. It takes focus, it takes time, and it takes faith. Many people may need more explosions, more "gotcha" moments, more spoon fed explanations, and more clichés.
Bravo to Simon for another wonderfully and painstakingly created drama that only HBO would have the courage to stick with. The art, skill, and vision inherent in what he has done with this show, and The Wire, is truly an American treasure worthy of all the praise that may come its way.
Edge of Darkness (2010)
Quality acting, good tension throughout but, in the end, lost its way
This film started out with the typical, conspiracy/mystery plot. Emotional oomph was provided with a strong opening with Gibson's daughter dying suddenly and shockingly.
Gibson was a strength of the movie as he played the grieving father very effectively & believably. He brought out the darkness and intensity requisite for this role.
High points were the performances of Denis O'Hare (as the security head to the cooperation) and Ray Winstone (as conflicted Brit in charge of carrying out security details).
There were high and lows throughout and it was all enough to hold my interest and really want to see Gibson "get em" at the end! However.....the last 20 minutes or so devolved into absurdity. It became hokey and chose an over-the-top ending that made me scoff. It was hard to believe at times and wasted much of the decent build-up up to that point.
Overall, an entertaining 2 hours but fell short of excellence or originality.
Lost: The End: Part 1 (2010)
Solid, though not great, ending. Lost will be missed!
Lost was an ambitious and daring show full of wonder, imagination, and tremendously complex and likable characters. The ending episode was pretty good, considering what was happening up to that point. So much was going on, including so many fantastical story lines that it would have been impossible to resolve and explain them all. Most loose ends were tied up and as the viewer, I was kept guessing and intrigued through the whole last episode.
The idea of the Flash-Sideways as an after life, or holding tank in which the characters can confront old issues, take care of certain things, and then move on to heaven together was definitely interesting. I liked it and felt pretty moved by the ending. Due to personal experience with death, I have a special interest in the afterlife and how it is envisioned by different people. I have read many different accounts and studies about death and heaven; and writers almost always describe "time" as not being what we think it is and that it really doesn't exist in whatever other realm death takes us. This would help explain how, upon Jack's death, he shows up in his afterlife with everyone else from the Island (even though they may have died 50 years in the future on earth). Also the idea of meeting up with family members and friends is strongly appealing to me and caused me to experience the ending of Lost in a highly emotional way. Also, even before we know what the Flash-Sideways is, I really enjoyed the scenes where the character began to "remember" their other life on the Island. I found these scenes highly moving and interesting. The Flash-sideways, I thought, was hugely centered around destiny and fate and that appeals to me as well. Obviously everyone has free-will but I also personally believe that we are meant to end up in a certain place or with a certain person (but that we can really screw that up if we make enough poor choices). I believe there is meaning to life and that fate and destiny are heavily a part of that meaning. The ending to Lost can be experienced in different ways by different people depending on one's life experience.
I can understand that some viewers ended the show frustrated. Frustrated that we don't really know what happens to the returning characters (Sawyer, Kate, Miles, etc.) or frustrated that Jack dies so soon on the island. Or maybe frustrated that no great realization came in reference to the Island; it merely "was" and the viewer never fully understood what it was, where it came from, and why it had all these properties. Maybe frustrated by the Flash-sideways being the afterlife and that everyone in it was dead. Those viewers frustrated by that probably don't believe in any level of such things and/or find such an idea to be silly and/or a cop-out. One idea that could have been tremendously powerful, had they had more time and had it not been done before, is the show could have flashed forward into each characters' life and gave a brief montage of how they lived, and died (Sawyer, Kate, Miles, Claire, Aaron, etc.). We can thank the great Six Feet Under for beating Lost to the punch on that one.
Also, some questions about the Flashsideways' that weren't quite answered. If the Flash-sideways was an afterlife, or "holding tank" for people going to heaven why would people forget their old life? Why would some people have a positive afterlife (Hurley) while others chose one filled with their past negativity (Charlie)? Why does it make sense for this afterlife to pick up mid-flight as if the original crash never happened?
At the end, it seems that Lost was about "Faith". I made this mention in between seasons 5 and 6. Everyone who was chosen to go to the Island by Jacob had a crisis of Faith and were, in general, not doing well. The battles between Jack and Locke were about Faith, and sometimes the lack-there-of. Jack never had Faith in himself as a doctor and tried to gain standing in his own mind by always being the hero and savior. Hurley never had "Faith" in himself as a good person or a person that had good things happen to them. You can go on and on down the list of characters. The series ends in a church (multifaith) where the main character, who struggled with Faith the entire series, finally comes full circle and has a full awakening of Faith upon his death (while we simultaneously witness him realize his "hero" identity by dying in service of the Island and his friends - with a smile on his face with the one creature, a dog, that truly never loses Faith in life or in us as humans).
I say kudos to Lost for 6 years of questioning, debating, and pondering.....the characters, the island, destiny and life in general!
8/10
Lost (2004)
Thanks Lost!
While I mostly enjoyed the final episode of Lost, I am of the opinion that Lost tapered off over the final 2-3 seasons and was never as gripping or quality as it was during the first 2-3 seasons. That being said, I still found Lost to be an entertaining, interesting, and well done and television show. The acting was quite good; the scenery was amazing; and the ambitious story lines were unique and intriguing. Towards the end, some of the characters did fade into caricature territory and were given the same old tired lines and quips. I noticed this to be most true in the last season during many of the on-island scenes. How many times can Sawyer say "son of a bitch!"? How many times can Hurley give pop culture references often having to do with Star Wars? And how many times can an intense and emotional Kate appeal to Jack in reference to them being in this together or her being able to trust him? I found that the characters, and corresponding dialogue, worked best, during the Flash-sideways. That held my interest fully and was better constructed than the island portion of the final season. I was very intrigued by what it all meant and how it related to destiny and ending up where you're "supposed" to in life.
The totality of Lost, for me, suffered from too many grand ideas and story lines that had limited, or no, basis in reality. I would include the following 4 more arcs (I make these critiques with the opinion that the first 2-3 seasons were amazing and some of the best television of all time, while over the last 2-3 seasons, things were not quite the same and I found myself bored and/or confused more than once):
- A supernatural island of unknown origins that has properties never fully defined (smoke monster, the "light", ageless people, polar bear, the "wheel", electromagnetism - among other far-out ideas). - God and immortality: Jacob vs. The Man In Black. Though we find out much about their origins, we still don't know if they're real people, or Gods, or immortal....and if so, why and how? What about drinking water makes Jacob (and then Jack and then Hurley) a God-like protector. The viewer must again suspend belief that Jacob and TMIB cannot be harmed and their need to follow certain rules. In addition, the fact that they have been there for many hundreds of years is not explained and really makes you think they are some sort of God. Throw in Richard too and the confusion only deepens. - Time Travel: The shifting of the island through time. What does this have to do with electromagnetism exactly? This is never fully understood. How does Daniel Farraday's mom exactly fit in and how is this possible? Just another element to make the viewer confused. - Heaven (and the afterlife): The viewer only finds out about this with idea about 10 minutes left in the series. I liked this idea of everyone coming together after their death to go on to heaven together but it's yet another fantastical occurrence that isn't fully explained. I thought the "multifaith" church was a nice touch and the idea that Jack had the most difficult time out of all of them realizing he was dead.
Anyway, some movies and/or books can be centered around ONE of these grand ideas (and still struggle to fully provide rules and explain it all and then make some sort of statement about life and life's possibilities and mysteries), let alone all FOUR of these together.
Four fantastical, far-out ideas was often too much I thought. It's asking the viewer to suspend belief way too frequently. For that to really work, specific rules need to be explained (and adhered to in the show). Sometimes this was true but then certain assumptions were broken and then never full understood.
That being said, Lost was an amazingly unique show and did so much right, especially considering it was a network show (and hence has constrictions that a network like HBO wouldn't have to contend with). Most shows struggle down the end with creative writing, plausible endings, and character caricatures (Sopranos, Entourage). The glory of the first 2-3 seasons were really never truly realized though the totality of the show was still pretty damn good and had complex, multi-faceted characters to wonder about and believe in. The ending was about as good as I thought, not worse. There was SO much going on and so many issues and questions to answer that there was no way the writers could end it in a way that was clean, concise, believable, and powerful, all at the same time (Six Feet Under achieved in that).
Lost and it's amazing scenery and gripping action and rich, well-rounded characters will be missed. One of the best Network shows you will come across!
Shutter Island (2010)
Entertaining & fascinating thriller!
Going into this film, I knew it would be difficult to get a true sense of how good a movie it was, seeing that I was such a big fan of the book and knew every twist and turn that was coming. I was locked into a state of trying to view it as someone who went in cold. I can say that the movie was very faithful to the book, only leaving out certain scenes in the interest of not wanting a 4 hour movie. So, while watching the film, it was hard to separate from the book and truly view it as only a film without all the back knowledge. I guess my point is that it's easier to be more critical on a film when you were such a big fan of the book and more difficult to just sit back and judge the film for what it is.
That being said, and after reflecting for a few days, I've come to the conclusion that the movie was largely well-done. The acting was first rate. Dicaprio rarely does a bad job and seems to be gaining skill and nuance to his characters as he ages. He played the dark & brooding character quite well. You definitely sensed he was on the verge of possible losing it. Mortimer, Kingsley, & Michelle Williams are all outstanding. I found Mark Ruffalo, who I have liked in previous roles, to be somewhat flat; though this may be more a function of his character he was supposed to play than it was of his talent.
The atmospheric quality to the whole movie, combined with some interesting cinematography, worked well. I seem to remember many short jagged shots intertwined with other shots (both in flashback form but also in a single scene where the camera went back and forth between characters). I think such a style lent to the schizophrenic feeling of the movie and made the viewer feel a little of the confusion & anxiety that Teddy Daniels was feeling. That was done quite well I thought. The island, partly CGI generated, felt very real and like quite a scary place to be. You definitely felt the mystery and anxiety throughout the whole film and, even though I mostly knew what was coming, felt myself tense up and sort of bites my nails at different times.
The story, though a bit hard to fathom in real life, hung together well and answered most all questions that would have been asked by anyone who had not read the book. I felt there were times when a viewer going in cold would be on the verge of catching on to what may be really happening. But then I thought that this was a mental hospital for the criminally insane so anything that didn't make sense could be chalked up to that. This was a top notch thriller that had the viewer guessing and ends up asking a thought-provoking question (or two). The questions offered in this movie in reference to 1950's America, mental hospitals, how we treat our mentally ill, and how human beings respond to trauma are all relevant and quite interesting.
Shutter Island is short of a classic though. The story worked but did have some jagged and hard to follow sequences intertwined with some forced or hokey parts that may have detracted from the final product of the film. Such an up-and-down and complex story can definitely "work" more easy in book form. Also, the "reveal" wasn't as quite as powerful as the book. Bottom line: while this won't contend for an Oscar in '11, it is a very entertaining and satisfying story with great acting in a world where the viewer can truly get lost in.
Up (2009)
Good but not great (A little surprised by all the superlatives used on this film )
Up was definitely a good, quality movie. The visuals and landscapes were very bright, defined, and full of wonderful detail and description. Easily the best aspect of this movie, story-wise, was the early montage showing Carl moving through life from a young child, to marriage, older adulthood, up through the death of his wife. Though you didn't know this character too well at this point, you felt for him rather deeply by seeing his life progress, start to end. This flow of life from childhood to old age is an immediately identifiable aspect of the movie. Anyone with a depth of personality and a reflective side, can identify with this. It is Film-making at it's best. We all know the feeling. The vibe and feel one gets when at weddings, graduations, funerals and any place at which one can be witness to the fast flowing nature of life and the reflection that naturally comes with such moments.
Unfortuntaley the rest of the film did not live up to the emotional weight that this scene created. The movie took turns for the inane and silly, without enough in place to "ground" it to the worthy beginning. The bird Kevin was sort of random and odd, as was the talking pack of dogs. These 2 plot creations would seem to be mainly geared towards the child audiences that any animated film is sure to garner. The weight and meaning from the beginning was lost in these campy moments.
Carl's hero, Mintz, as an aged, obsessed, evil, egomaniac seemed to be out of nowhere as well. It appeared to be like something out of a week-day cartoon. The movie again lost its direction and focus during these parts, particularly as Carl was attempting to get his house over to the falls. Once you make it within eye sight of the falls, you're there! As the film ended, some emotional, weighty moments did occur, culminating in Carl's friendship with Russell and the pictures shown during the end credits. There were not enough of these moments and too many moments that went for the "silly", specifically scenes with the dogs, the birds, and, Mintz.
I definitely understand the affinity for this film, yet I do not feel, when taking into consideration the loss of focus and random/silly moments in the film, the drive to describe this movie as one of the best Pixar movies of all time. Ratatouille, Wall-E, The Incredibles, for starters, were all more complete and quality films with more of a consistent flow, from cover to cover.