rating: ****
the story: A depressed man learns his ex deleted all her memories of their relationship, and so he resolves to do the same.
what it's all about: Jim Carrey is one of my favorite actors, and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is one of his most critically acclaimed films. So why have I struggled with it for fourteen years?
Carrey became famous after making films like Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, The Mask, and Dumb & Dumber. He transitioned into surrealist comedy with The Truman Show and Man on the Moon, although they could just as easily be described as existentialist. Eternal Sunshine was the next evolution from that, and he was never able to go further than that, with the closest being The Number 23, where he played someone with memory issues and an identity crisis. Again, all this because he became uniquely suited to embodying characters well beyond the societal norm, in a mostly humorous fashion.
Eternal Sunshine presents itself as something of a riddle. Mindful viewers will know that we begin actually at the end, and then rewind back to the circumstances that immediately preceded it (my summary), and then dive into his memories as they're being erased. Carrey begins to outrun the erasure, which provides the most amusing elements of the movie. But ultimately he can't, and his memory is wiped, and...he meets Kate Winslet, again, for the first time, just as we see in the beginning.
The whole thing becomes a meditation on the stresses of a relationship, and what will or will not, given a few variables, be deal-breakers. It's kind of (500) Days of Summer before (500) Days of Summer, with a more hopeful, if ambiguous, ending.
So why have I so long had a nagging problem with it? Well, for one the Jim Carrey who shows up in it, for long stretches at a time, isn't a familiar Jim Carrey at all. It's not that he's unidentifiable, but that he's so low-key it can be difficult to remember why he was cast. And then the sequences where he does resemble Jim Carrey...seem out of place.
Basically, is this a movie that's weird for the sake of being weird?
It feels like someone's idea of what happens if we turn Truman Show up a notch. Carrey experiences the erasures as if he knows they're happening, and comments on them, and even interacts with the technicians, to a certain extent, while they're working on him. All this makes for fascinating viewing, but it can also feel artificial, a movie rather than an experience, and yet the whole point of seeing what amounts to an idea of the "real" Carrey, the one who doesn't need to perform all the time, contradicts this. Charlie Kaufman, the screenwriter known for this kind of material, at least showed restraint previously. Nicolas Cage talks with himself, Kaufman's imaginary twin brother, throughout Adaptation. Most of Being John Malkovich is spent with the people using John as a glorified puppet. The lines are too blurred in Eternal Sunshine.
That's not to say the individual elements don't work in and of themselves. The technicians are played by Tom Wilkinson, who leads the team, Mark Ruffalo, Kirsten Dunst, and Elijah Wood. These are all reliable actors; only Wood is playing against type, which is something he was desperately pursuing in the years following Lord of the Rings. But he still feels natural. We learn, eventually, that Dunst once had an affair with Wilkinson, but her memories of it were erased. Like Ozymandias's supposed brilliant plan in Watchmen, the effects of the erasures aren't as binding as they seem. If you're attracted to someone, you're attracted to someone.
The object lesson is the ability to cope rather than hide from heartbreak. Wilkinson's wife comes closest, briefly though we see her, exasperated though she is, breaking the news to Dunst. At least she doesn't try to hide from it. She's the most rational person in the whole movie.
In the end, I suppose, this is the kind of story that can't have proper resolution, and so it's the ideas that are supposed to be its effect. It leaves one unsettled because life is messy. In that regard it's as successful a movie as there ever was.
But darn it, it's still weird not to be satisfied, from a movie starring Jim Carrey. This is the guy who made a modern Frank Capra (The Majestic). He may not be downright sappy, but he usually has more concrete things to say, even when exploring the life of a different Kaufman (Andy), who may or may not have faked his own death as his last and greatest prank on the world.
Oh well, there can always be exceptions.
Showing posts with label 2004. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2004. Show all posts
Thursday, May 3, 2018
Monday, April 16, 2018
Howl's Moving Castle (2004)
rating: ***
the story: A young woman inadvertently stumbles into a great conflict.
what it's all about: The films of Hayao Miyazaki are routinely rated as some of the best of the modern era. Miyazaki is a Japanese animation director. Whether or not you consider his work part of the overall Japanese anime scene may affect whether or not you've seen his work. I've long known about his reputation, but until recently catching Howl's Moving Castle my practical experience with Miyazaki was limited to Princess Mononoke, which to my mind is easily associated with the overall Japanese anime scene, which I've determined after a number of movies is not really my thing. As it turns out, Howl's Moving Castle isn't much like the overall Japanese anime scene. But I'm still not convinced about Miyazaki.
Like Pixar, Miyazaki seems to get a free pass from critics. If he's got something new, chances are more than good that critics will love it. I can appreciate general admiration. I've got actors and directors I'll always be interested in. The problem becomes if you like a specific movie regardless of its own merits. I don't think Pixar is a perfect movie engine, and I now have two experiences with Miyazaki that have failed to overly impress me.
Don't get me wrong; Howl's Moving Castle earns a lot of points from me for being a clear break from the anime scene. Its instincts are almost completely different, and generally they are quite charming, too. In fact, charm is Howl's greatest advantage. It's clearly an inventive work, even if it's based on a book. (Can we please retire the nonsense of adaptation somehow not equating with creativity?) It's got some truly fun characters in it, too.
A lot of its appeal for me is that Howl's is basically an Oz story. No, not Oz as in Judy Garland, or even as in the horribly unappreciated Return to Oz. Oz as in the L. Frank Baum books. I finally read through all of them a few years back, and I was thoroughly enchanted. If you've seen Howl's then you already have an idea about what Baum's Oz was like. That's what I mean. But where Baum was always light on his feet, Howl's is leaden.
As example I'll spend the remainder of my review talking about Howl himself. Maybe this is really a criticism of the Hollywood dubbing of the movie, but even the appearance of Howl himself is a criticism of Miyazaki's vision. Howl is one of the few characters in the movie who looks like he was ripped directly from a manga, a Japanese comic. Manga and anime are virtually indistinguishable in their instincts. In the Hollywood dubbing, Howl is voiced by Christian Bale. In 2004, Bale had yet to reach the height of his fame. He was one year away from playing Batman. He was best known for American Psycho, four years earlier. I have yet to see that one. I wonder if he uses a voice similar to the one he employs for Howl. If so...
The problem most people have with Bale's Batman is his voice. If Bale had used that voice as Bruce Wayne, too, there would have been a real problem. He doesn't. As Howl, it's basically as if Bale had used his Batman voice the whole film. It's not appealing. As an entire performance, it's distracting. By way of contrast, Billy Crystal as the fire demon is terrific. I couldn't even place the voice until I saw Crystal's name in the credits. I was convinced it was Kevin Spacey. In 2004, Crystal was already ebbing in popularity. Actually, the fire demon is Crystal's last notable role, not counting the Monsters, Inc. sequel. In contrast, Bale's career grew considerably following Howl's.
Bale's Howl is not only a bad performance, it's bad casting. He doesn't sound anything like you'd expect Howl to sound like, based on his design. With this one element, it becomes harder to see why Howl's is seen as anything other than an imaginative experience. There's certainly nothing wrong with imaginative films experiences. As an animated film, though, vocal performances are crucial. Even if it's not a celebrity, it can't be distracting in a bad way. Crystal is an example of a vocal performance being distracting in a good way; Emily Mortimer and Lauren Bacall are examples of vocal performances that don't draw attention to themselves so much as exist as elements of the movie. They work, they're functional, and that's all you need to know.
In sum? Interesting. Could have been better.
the story: A young woman inadvertently stumbles into a great conflict.
what it's all about: The films of Hayao Miyazaki are routinely rated as some of the best of the modern era. Miyazaki is a Japanese animation director. Whether or not you consider his work part of the overall Japanese anime scene may affect whether or not you've seen his work. I've long known about his reputation, but until recently catching Howl's Moving Castle my practical experience with Miyazaki was limited to Princess Mononoke, which to my mind is easily associated with the overall Japanese anime scene, which I've determined after a number of movies is not really my thing. As it turns out, Howl's Moving Castle isn't much like the overall Japanese anime scene. But I'm still not convinced about Miyazaki.
Like Pixar, Miyazaki seems to get a free pass from critics. If he's got something new, chances are more than good that critics will love it. I can appreciate general admiration. I've got actors and directors I'll always be interested in. The problem becomes if you like a specific movie regardless of its own merits. I don't think Pixar is a perfect movie engine, and I now have two experiences with Miyazaki that have failed to overly impress me.
Don't get me wrong; Howl's Moving Castle earns a lot of points from me for being a clear break from the anime scene. Its instincts are almost completely different, and generally they are quite charming, too. In fact, charm is Howl's greatest advantage. It's clearly an inventive work, even if it's based on a book. (Can we please retire the nonsense of adaptation somehow not equating with creativity?) It's got some truly fun characters in it, too.
A lot of its appeal for me is that Howl's is basically an Oz story. No, not Oz as in Judy Garland, or even as in the horribly unappreciated Return to Oz. Oz as in the L. Frank Baum books. I finally read through all of them a few years back, and I was thoroughly enchanted. If you've seen Howl's then you already have an idea about what Baum's Oz was like. That's what I mean. But where Baum was always light on his feet, Howl's is leaden.
As example I'll spend the remainder of my review talking about Howl himself. Maybe this is really a criticism of the Hollywood dubbing of the movie, but even the appearance of Howl himself is a criticism of Miyazaki's vision. Howl is one of the few characters in the movie who looks like he was ripped directly from a manga, a Japanese comic. Manga and anime are virtually indistinguishable in their instincts. In the Hollywood dubbing, Howl is voiced by Christian Bale. In 2004, Bale had yet to reach the height of his fame. He was one year away from playing Batman. He was best known for American Psycho, four years earlier. I have yet to see that one. I wonder if he uses a voice similar to the one he employs for Howl. If so...
The problem most people have with Bale's Batman is his voice. If Bale had used that voice as Bruce Wayne, too, there would have been a real problem. He doesn't. As Howl, it's basically as if Bale had used his Batman voice the whole film. It's not appealing. As an entire performance, it's distracting. By way of contrast, Billy Crystal as the fire demon is terrific. I couldn't even place the voice until I saw Crystal's name in the credits. I was convinced it was Kevin Spacey. In 2004, Crystal was already ebbing in popularity. Actually, the fire demon is Crystal's last notable role, not counting the Monsters, Inc. sequel. In contrast, Bale's career grew considerably following Howl's.
Bale's Howl is not only a bad performance, it's bad casting. He doesn't sound anything like you'd expect Howl to sound like, based on his design. With this one element, it becomes harder to see why Howl's is seen as anything other than an imaginative experience. There's certainly nothing wrong with imaginative films experiences. As an animated film, though, vocal performances are crucial. Even if it's not a celebrity, it can't be distracting in a bad way. Crystal is an example of a vocal performance being distracting in a good way; Emily Mortimer and Lauren Bacall are examples of vocal performances that don't draw attention to themselves so much as exist as elements of the movie. They work, they're functional, and that's all you need to know.
In sum? Interesting. Could have been better.
Wednesday, August 16, 2017
2004 Capsule Reviews
Alexander
rating: *****
review: This is my favorite all-time movie. I think it's Oliver Stone's best movie, the one where he stretches the most (and he's released enough versions of it where you know he still can't get it out of his system). I think it's a fantastic cast all the way around. I think its score is lovely. There's nothing I don't love about it. The fact that so many others don't is Exhibit A in the hall of modern cultural horrors.
Kill Bill Vol. 2
rating: *****
review: The confrontation between the Bride and Bill is the evolution of Tarantino as a filmmaker, in which he stops going for shock and instead focuses on timeless storytelling.
Troy
rating: *****
review: I have a great appreciation for the legacy of Homer's The Iliad and The Odyssey. I think this is a worthy modern retelling.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
rating: ****
review: While this is indeed the best of the series to this point, it got better.
The Passion of the Christ
rating: ****
review: Over the years, I've softened on this film, because becomes hard to justify watching in the face of the all the extreme violence. Otherwise I think it's as powerful an artistic statement in just about every way that's ever been achieved in film.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
rating: ****
review: As enchanting as it is, it's still weird to see such a subdued Jim Carrey. Will probably be destined to be his most studied film.
The Manchurian Candidate
rating: ****
review: This is the last time I really liked Meryl Streep, where she does a parody of Hillary Clinton. I'm also glad it gives Liev Schreiber something interesting to do. I'm glad Denzel Washington deviates from his increasingly action-oriented trajectory. Just an overall incredibly fascinating remake, which if you're going to do one this is probably what it ought to look like.
Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events
rating: ****
review: If Eternal Sunshine is Jim Carrey shrinking into the background, this is his last big character(s) hurrah, and it's a joy to watch on that level alone.
The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou
rating: ****
review: I'd love if Bill Murray did more outright surreal material like this, because when you see him like this, it's the perfect mode, like Groundhog Day scrubbed of its Hollywood sheen.
The Aviator
rating: ****
review: Scorsese was nakedly appealing to Hollywood with this one, but it's entirely worth it.
Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow
rating: ****
review: There's something incredibly wrong with critics who can't understand that movies are inherently a constant balance between style and substance. They're a visual medium. By necessity sometimes style comes first. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
I, Robot
rating: ****
review: Will Smith brilliantly enters his golden age as an embittered lead actor free from his earlier good cheer.
Shrek 2
rating: ****
review: A successful riff on what made the first one work so well.
Club Dread
rating: ****
review: Broken Lizard's spoof of horror movies is its biggest win for me, thanks to Bill Paxton's zany Coconut Pete.
Shaun of the Dead
rating: ****
review: The textbook definition of cult classic. "You've got red on you." The best horror movie years ahead of the surge it helped inspire.
Sideways
rating: ****
review: It may have been Paul Giamatti's best bid at remaining a critical darling, but Thomas Haden Church stole his thunder. Still, I don't think I'll ever take merlot seriously.
Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy
rating: ****
review: Even though this didn't originate from Saturday Night Live, it's about as perfect a movie as you could get from it.
The Alamo
rating: ****
review: This wasn't the movie as it was supposed to happen, but it's still an incredibly vivid depiction of a classic American tale.
The Village
rating: ****
review: M. Night Shyamalan had begun to cotton to audience expectations, and I think this whole movie was meant to mess with them. Audiences, I mean.
King Arthur
rating: ****
review: Clive Owen's star rose and fell so quickly it can be easy to forget just how singular his appeal really is, and how he sells this particular of the classic narrative so well.
Million Dollar Baby
rating: ****
review: Hilary Swank backed away from the image of her Boys Don't Cry so successfully that its polar opposite became equally hard to live down.
National Treasure
rating: ****
review: Nicolas Cage found a real winner in this movie, a persona that found a new angle on a Hollywood legend (Indiana Jones) that had seemed to swallow it whole. The affable nature of the performance gave Cage something new to work with, but it couldn't have come at a worse time. Because no one takes him seriously anymore.
Garden State
rating: ****
review: For a time it seemed as if Zach Braff was going to be able to make a whole movie career out of this.
Finding Neverland
rating: ****
review: This is the closest, to date, that Johnny Depp has transitioned from Peter Pan to the man he might have become.
The Terminal
rating: ****
review: Charming riff on Tom Hanks' traditional everyman appeal.
Collateral
rating: ****
review: Tom Cruise in his last universally admired role, in the movie that temporarily elevated Jamie Foxx to superstardom.
Layer Cake
rating: ***
review: Daniel Craig finally established himself in this one, but it's hard to remember what else is going on in it, besides Sienna Miller. Tom Hardy, I think, is in it in one of his more interesting attempts at career revival, totally against type as we know him today.
Alfie
rating: ***
review: Jude Law in a movie all about his rakish charm. I suppose it's different when it's Michael Caine in the role, because Law seems like if he's not finding ways to please all these women, it's because of a personality flaw that may not exist in the film.
The Princess Diaries 2: Royal Engagement
rating: ***
review: The same Disney flavor as the first, this time with added Chris Pine pre-stardom!
Dawn of the Dead
rating: ***
review: An effective way for Zach Snyder to get noticed.
EuroTrip
rating: ***
review: Another riff on American Pie, this time with Matt Damon in one of the most unexpected film appearances of all time.
DodgeBall: A True Underdog Story
rating: ***
review: I have no idea what this would've looked like with Ben Stiller's character as the focus of the story, but I would probably prefer that. But only if this were still in it: "If you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a ball."
The Ladykillers
rating: ***
review: I love Tom Hanks in this. Reason enough to see it.
Ladder 49
rating: ***
review: John Travolta has been on a failed comeback tour for years. This was an engaging attempt at winning over fans of thematic drama.
Hellboy
rating: ***
review: Ironically, the Avengers model can be traced back to a Dark Horse Comics adaptation.
Meet the Fockers
rating: ***
review: Kind of distracting to take the focus off Stiller and De Niro.
Saw
rating: ***
review: As enduring as the concept became, the main reason to watch the first one is to marvel at how low Cary Elwes' stock fell after Princess Bride.
Spider-Man 2
rating: ***
review: I love Kirsten Dunst. But the MJ sequences in this one sunk what many fans consider to be a perfect superhero movie. It's off-putting to make the love interest a de facto antagonist, no matter how hardluck Peter Parker is supposed to be.
The Incredibles
rating: ***
review: The Pixar model is exposed as not particularly caring whether or not it appeals to its target audience.
Van Helsing
rating: ***
review: I like the concept just fine, but Hugh Jackman goes from iconic Wolverine to a character whose main function is to unite all the monsters against him.
Catwoman
rating: ***
review: Halle Berry had such shit poured on her for making this, but I only ever saw it as an attempt to make an empowering female superhero. It's somewhat the opposite of the character as depicted in Batman Returns, but I see that as a good thing.
The Chronicles of Riddick
rating: ***
review: The only real problem here is that it attempts to recast Riddick as a hero, when he's really pretty obviously an antihero at best.
Walking Tall
rating: **
review: Disappointingly attempts to take Dwayne Johnson straight. Turns out to work best when he's hunting the dude from the previous movie (the actor, I mean).
The Big Bounce
rating: **
review: There's nothing particularly wrong with this. Seems like an ideal Owen Wilson vehicle. Maybe I just need to actually watch it again.
50 First Dates
rating: **
review: Adam Sandler in a creepy romantic comedy.
Man on Fire
rating: **
review: There's nothing particularly wrong with Denzel Washington in action movies. But again, it's a huge waste of talent.
rating: *****
review: This is my favorite all-time movie. I think it's Oliver Stone's best movie, the one where he stretches the most (and he's released enough versions of it where you know he still can't get it out of his system). I think it's a fantastic cast all the way around. I think its score is lovely. There's nothing I don't love about it. The fact that so many others don't is Exhibit A in the hall of modern cultural horrors.
Kill Bill Vol. 2
rating: *****
review: The confrontation between the Bride and Bill is the evolution of Tarantino as a filmmaker, in which he stops going for shock and instead focuses on timeless storytelling.
Troy
rating: *****
review: I have a great appreciation for the legacy of Homer's The Iliad and The Odyssey. I think this is a worthy modern retelling.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
rating: ****
review: While this is indeed the best of the series to this point, it got better.
The Passion of the Christ
rating: ****
review: Over the years, I've softened on this film, because becomes hard to justify watching in the face of the all the extreme violence. Otherwise I think it's as powerful an artistic statement in just about every way that's ever been achieved in film.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
rating: ****
review: As enchanting as it is, it's still weird to see such a subdued Jim Carrey. Will probably be destined to be his most studied film.
The Manchurian Candidate
rating: ****
review: This is the last time I really liked Meryl Streep, where she does a parody of Hillary Clinton. I'm also glad it gives Liev Schreiber something interesting to do. I'm glad Denzel Washington deviates from his increasingly action-oriented trajectory. Just an overall incredibly fascinating remake, which if you're going to do one this is probably what it ought to look like.
Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events
rating: ****
review: If Eternal Sunshine is Jim Carrey shrinking into the background, this is his last big character(s) hurrah, and it's a joy to watch on that level alone.
The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou
rating: ****
review: I'd love if Bill Murray did more outright surreal material like this, because when you see him like this, it's the perfect mode, like Groundhog Day scrubbed of its Hollywood sheen.
The Aviator
rating: ****
review: Scorsese was nakedly appealing to Hollywood with this one, but it's entirely worth it.
Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow
rating: ****
review: There's something incredibly wrong with critics who can't understand that movies are inherently a constant balance between style and substance. They're a visual medium. By necessity sometimes style comes first. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
I, Robot
rating: ****
review: Will Smith brilliantly enters his golden age as an embittered lead actor free from his earlier good cheer.
Shrek 2
rating: ****
review: A successful riff on what made the first one work so well.
Club Dread
rating: ****
review: Broken Lizard's spoof of horror movies is its biggest win for me, thanks to Bill Paxton's zany Coconut Pete.
Shaun of the Dead
rating: ****
review: The textbook definition of cult classic. "You've got red on you." The best horror movie years ahead of the surge it helped inspire.
Sideways
rating: ****
review: It may have been Paul Giamatti's best bid at remaining a critical darling, but Thomas Haden Church stole his thunder. Still, I don't think I'll ever take merlot seriously.
Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy
rating: ****
review: Even though this didn't originate from Saturday Night Live, it's about as perfect a movie as you could get from it.
The Alamo
rating: ****
review: This wasn't the movie as it was supposed to happen, but it's still an incredibly vivid depiction of a classic American tale.
The Village
rating: ****
review: M. Night Shyamalan had begun to cotton to audience expectations, and I think this whole movie was meant to mess with them. Audiences, I mean.
King Arthur
rating: ****
review: Clive Owen's star rose and fell so quickly it can be easy to forget just how singular his appeal really is, and how he sells this particular of the classic narrative so well.
Million Dollar Baby
rating: ****
review: Hilary Swank backed away from the image of her Boys Don't Cry so successfully that its polar opposite became equally hard to live down.
National Treasure
rating: ****
review: Nicolas Cage found a real winner in this movie, a persona that found a new angle on a Hollywood legend (Indiana Jones) that had seemed to swallow it whole. The affable nature of the performance gave Cage something new to work with, but it couldn't have come at a worse time. Because no one takes him seriously anymore.
Garden State
rating: ****
review: For a time it seemed as if Zach Braff was going to be able to make a whole movie career out of this.
Finding Neverland
rating: ****
review: This is the closest, to date, that Johnny Depp has transitioned from Peter Pan to the man he might have become.
The Terminal
rating: ****
review: Charming riff on Tom Hanks' traditional everyman appeal.
Collateral
rating: ****
review: Tom Cruise in his last universally admired role, in the movie that temporarily elevated Jamie Foxx to superstardom.
Layer Cake
rating: ***
review: Daniel Craig finally established himself in this one, but it's hard to remember what else is going on in it, besides Sienna Miller. Tom Hardy, I think, is in it in one of his more interesting attempts at career revival, totally against type as we know him today.
Alfie
rating: ***
review: Jude Law in a movie all about his rakish charm. I suppose it's different when it's Michael Caine in the role, because Law seems like if he's not finding ways to please all these women, it's because of a personality flaw that may not exist in the film.
The Princess Diaries 2: Royal Engagement
rating: ***
review: The same Disney flavor as the first, this time with added Chris Pine pre-stardom!
Dawn of the Dead
rating: ***
review: An effective way for Zach Snyder to get noticed.
EuroTrip
rating: ***
review: Another riff on American Pie, this time with Matt Damon in one of the most unexpected film appearances of all time.
DodgeBall: A True Underdog Story
rating: ***
review: I have no idea what this would've looked like with Ben Stiller's character as the focus of the story, but I would probably prefer that. But only if this were still in it: "If you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a ball."
The Ladykillers
rating: ***
review: I love Tom Hanks in this. Reason enough to see it.
Ladder 49
rating: ***
review: John Travolta has been on a failed comeback tour for years. This was an engaging attempt at winning over fans of thematic drama.
Hellboy
rating: ***
review: Ironically, the Avengers model can be traced back to a Dark Horse Comics adaptation.
Meet the Fockers
rating: ***
review: Kind of distracting to take the focus off Stiller and De Niro.
Saw
rating: ***
review: As enduring as the concept became, the main reason to watch the first one is to marvel at how low Cary Elwes' stock fell after Princess Bride.
Spider-Man 2
rating: ***
review: I love Kirsten Dunst. But the MJ sequences in this one sunk what many fans consider to be a perfect superhero movie. It's off-putting to make the love interest a de facto antagonist, no matter how hardluck Peter Parker is supposed to be.
The Incredibles
rating: ***
review: The Pixar model is exposed as not particularly caring whether or not it appeals to its target audience.
Van Helsing
rating: ***
review: I like the concept just fine, but Hugh Jackman goes from iconic Wolverine to a character whose main function is to unite all the monsters against him.
Catwoman
rating: ***
review: Halle Berry had such shit poured on her for making this, but I only ever saw it as an attempt to make an empowering female superhero. It's somewhat the opposite of the character as depicted in Batman Returns, but I see that as a good thing.
The Chronicles of Riddick
rating: ***
review: The only real problem here is that it attempts to recast Riddick as a hero, when he's really pretty obviously an antihero at best.
Walking Tall
rating: **
review: Disappointingly attempts to take Dwayne Johnson straight. Turns out to work best when he's hunting the dude from the previous movie (the actor, I mean).
The Big Bounce
rating: **
review: There's nothing particularly wrong with this. Seems like an ideal Owen Wilson vehicle. Maybe I just need to actually watch it again.
50 First Dates
rating: **
review: Adam Sandler in a creepy romantic comedy.
Man on Fire
rating: **
review: There's nothing particularly wrong with Denzel Washington in action movies. But again, it's a huge waste of talent.
Wednesday, August 17, 2016
Fantasy films 1982-2008
Today we're going to talk a little about these movies:
The Dark Crystal (1982)
The NeverEnding Story (1984)
Return to Oz (1985)
Legend (1985)
Labyrinth (1986)
The Princess Bride (1987)
Willow (1988)
Hellboy (2004)
Pan's Labyrinth (2006)
The Fall (2008)
Today's discussion is about fantasy movies. Obviously, it's a subject today that involves the Harry Potter films and Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings and Hobbit trilogies, but for my purposes these will be omitted so we can concentrate on the '80s push that helped make them possible, as well as a few other more recent entries.
Jim Henson's production offices got the ball rolling back during the first season of Saturday Night Live, where the concepts behind The Dark Crystal were first explored. The same company later developed Labyrinth, which has been the standard memory of the '80s fantasy push, thanks in part to the participation of David Bowie and Jennifer Connelly. Younger fantasy fans had The NeverEnding Story and its sequel, while Return to Oz was an attempt to follow-up the iconic Wizard of Oz.
Legend proved to be a bomb, and only took on cult status when Ridley Scott later released a director's cut. It can be argued that Legend has the longest creative legacy. Besides the look of Hellboy (which evokes Tim Curry's character in the movie), it can also be said to have inspired Pan's Labyrinth, the breakthrough critical success of Guillermo del Toro. Willow might be said to be the first attempt at correcting the perceived mistakes of Legend.
Following the mixed fortunes of these early efforts, The Princess Bride went in an entirely different direction, downplaying the fantasy elements and instead focusing on the comedic potential of the humans involved. The Fall later went further and made the whole thing dramatic.
It's interesting to think of these movies in relation to each other, whether or not the filmmakers did at the time they were being made. Genre fans will no doubt have spent some time comparing them, or simply making preferences (that's the business of being a genre fan right there). Some of them will no doubt have fallen through the cracks, so that unless you know they exist you might think the ones you do know are all you need to know. Hollywood has never embraced fantasy as fully as other genres, which makes the '80s explosion all the more notable. Yet, with the genre's fanciful elements, these films are often the source of remarkable creativity, and as such are capable of being among the most breathtaking movies you'll ever experience.
Tuesday, February 17, 2015
2004
Viewed/Ranked
- Alexander
- Kill Bill Vol. 2
- Troy
- Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
- The Passion of the Christ
- Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
- The Manchurian Candidate
- Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events
- The Aviator
- Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow
- I, Robot
- Shrek 2
- Club Dread
- Shaun of the Dead
- Sidways
- Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy
- The Alamo
- The Village
- King Arthur
- Million Dollar Baby
- National Treasure
- Garden State
- Finding Neverland
- The Terminal
- Collateral
- Layer Cake
- Alfie
- The Princess Diaries 2: Royal Engagement
- Dawn of the Dead
- EuroTrip
- DodgeBall: A True Underdog Story
- The Ladykillers
- Ladder 49
- Hellboy
- Meet the Fockers
- Saw
- Spider-Man 2
- The Incredibles
- Van Helsing
- Catwoman
- The Stepford Wives
- The Chronicles of Riddick
- Walking Tall
- The Big Bounce
- 50 First Dates
- Man on Fire
Other Notable Releases
- Alien vs. Predator
- The Bourne Supremacy
- Closer
- Exorcist: The Beginning
- Friday Night Lights
- Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle
- Hidalgo
- I Heart Huckabees
- The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou
- Mr. 3000
- Mean Girls
- Napoleon Dynamite
- The Notebook
- Ocean's Twelve
- The Polar Express
- Ray
- Shark Tale
- Taxi
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Alexander
*****
directed by: Oliver Stone
starring: Colin Farrell, Angelina Jolie, Val Kilmer, Anthony Hopkins, Jared Leto, Rosario Dawson, Christopher Plummer, Jonathan Rhys Meyers
Released in 2004.
This is my favorite movie. Oliver Stone is among my favorite directors and Colin Farrell is my favorite actor. If a convergence of Stone and Farrell weren't enough, the movie itself exactly fits the parameters for everything I want from a movie. It has an excellent cast, it knows what to do with that cast, the characters are compelling and relevant in relation to each other, and the scope of the narrative is broad and intimate at the same time.
Some of this, again, is reflected by the talent assembled. Stone made his name as a director who was interested in exploring big issues on a small (though epic) scale. Alexander is a movie about Alexander the Great, the Macedonian conqueror who came as close to ruling the known world as anyone. He died young, his empire was broken back into the pieces he had briefly united, and in 2004 no one seemed to really like the movie Stone made about him. Tough break. But nice try!
Stone's vision is all about the motivations that inspired his famous subject, chief among them his parents. Philip was not only his immediate predecessor in the conquering game, but Alexander's father, who found it remarkably easy to both embrace and reject his son before his assassination. Olympias surely fascinated Philip at some point, but she became a liability as he continued to formulate his plans. She instead found lasting influence through her son, "my avenger," as she calls Alexander at one point. Kilmer has perhaps his last great role, almost unrecognizable behind woolly hair and a missing eye, portraying Philip, while Jolie's accent as Olympias makes a dubious impression on some but is ideal in distinguishing her unmistakable appeal. To my mind, it's a defining role for her.
Farrell is always the soulful loner caught in someone else's story. This is probably not how most historians choose to view Alexander the Great, but as Alexander the man, Farrell is once again firmly in command of the screen, forced to exert himself the more those around him doubt his methods. He's muted around Jolie, hopeful around Kilmer. As a warrior, he's every bit the match for Alexander's own inspiration, Achilles, portrayed in Troy by Brad Pitt.
Much of what anyone knows about Alexander is its depiction of homosexuality, as embodied by Farrell's interactions with Jared Leto's Hephaistion, Alexander's own Patroclus (who was Achilles' favorite). The story here is really about Alexander's reasoned passion. The less it becomes reasonable, the more he appears to spiral out of control. So of course Hephaistion dies before the end.
Alexander learns his reasoned passion from Christopher Plummer's Aristotle, the famed philosopher. It's always a good thing to have Plummer involved, and he's the rare actor who becomes more dignified with age. Anthony Hopkins is another. He narrates the film as Ptolemy, who served with Alexander and then later succeeded him as patriarch of Egypt. Some might find this aspect of the film to be pedantic, but I like perspective. Stone already provides plenty of that, but Ptolemy exists to ensure that none of it is overlooked, the broad scope, and to remind the viewer that Alexander was indeed great, even if most of what happens in the film is about what undermines his greatness.
In smaller roles are Rosario Dawson as Roxana, the "barbarian" bride Alexander takes on his travels, and Jonathan Rhys Meyers as Cassander, one of many military advisers who don't share Alexander's vision.
Also significantly adding to the movie is the score from Vangelis, appropriately sweeping in nature and evocative of the momentous life being examined.
There are three cuts of the film: the original theatrical cut, the director's cut, and Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut, which came a few years later. Each succeeding version seeks to guide the viewer into an easier journey along Stone's central vision, adding and resequencing scenes.
directed by: Oliver Stone
starring: Colin Farrell, Angelina Jolie, Val Kilmer, Anthony Hopkins, Jared Leto, Rosario Dawson, Christopher Plummer, Jonathan Rhys Meyers
Released in 2004.
This is my favorite movie. Oliver Stone is among my favorite directors and Colin Farrell is my favorite actor. If a convergence of Stone and Farrell weren't enough, the movie itself exactly fits the parameters for everything I want from a movie. It has an excellent cast, it knows what to do with that cast, the characters are compelling and relevant in relation to each other, and the scope of the narrative is broad and intimate at the same time.
Some of this, again, is reflected by the talent assembled. Stone made his name as a director who was interested in exploring big issues on a small (though epic) scale. Alexander is a movie about Alexander the Great, the Macedonian conqueror who came as close to ruling the known world as anyone. He died young, his empire was broken back into the pieces he had briefly united, and in 2004 no one seemed to really like the movie Stone made about him. Tough break. But nice try!
Stone's vision is all about the motivations that inspired his famous subject, chief among them his parents. Philip was not only his immediate predecessor in the conquering game, but Alexander's father, who found it remarkably easy to both embrace and reject his son before his assassination. Olympias surely fascinated Philip at some point, but she became a liability as he continued to formulate his plans. She instead found lasting influence through her son, "my avenger," as she calls Alexander at one point. Kilmer has perhaps his last great role, almost unrecognizable behind woolly hair and a missing eye, portraying Philip, while Jolie's accent as Olympias makes a dubious impression on some but is ideal in distinguishing her unmistakable appeal. To my mind, it's a defining role for her.
Farrell is always the soulful loner caught in someone else's story. This is probably not how most historians choose to view Alexander the Great, but as Alexander the man, Farrell is once again firmly in command of the screen, forced to exert himself the more those around him doubt his methods. He's muted around Jolie, hopeful around Kilmer. As a warrior, he's every bit the match for Alexander's own inspiration, Achilles, portrayed in Troy by Brad Pitt.
Much of what anyone knows about Alexander is its depiction of homosexuality, as embodied by Farrell's interactions with Jared Leto's Hephaistion, Alexander's own Patroclus (who was Achilles' favorite). The story here is really about Alexander's reasoned passion. The less it becomes reasonable, the more he appears to spiral out of control. So of course Hephaistion dies before the end.
Alexander learns his reasoned passion from Christopher Plummer's Aristotle, the famed philosopher. It's always a good thing to have Plummer involved, and he's the rare actor who becomes more dignified with age. Anthony Hopkins is another. He narrates the film as Ptolemy, who served with Alexander and then later succeeded him as patriarch of Egypt. Some might find this aspect of the film to be pedantic, but I like perspective. Stone already provides plenty of that, but Ptolemy exists to ensure that none of it is overlooked, the broad scope, and to remind the viewer that Alexander was indeed great, even if most of what happens in the film is about what undermines his greatness.
In smaller roles are Rosario Dawson as Roxana, the "barbarian" bride Alexander takes on his travels, and Jonathan Rhys Meyers as Cassander, one of many military advisers who don't share Alexander's vision.
Also significantly adding to the movie is the score from Vangelis, appropriately sweeping in nature and evocative of the momentous life being examined.
There are three cuts of the film: the original theatrical cut, the director's cut, and Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut, which came a few years later. Each succeeding version seeks to guide the viewer into an easier journey along Stone's central vision, adding and resequencing scenes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)