The entry I posted to my blog earlier today was my 52nd film-related post. Those of you who read this column weekly (my Readership of Six, as I call you all) know that I have tried numerous times to consistently write and have always failed. Last year, I set a personal goal that I would write four posts per month, an average of one per week, for a year.
I didn’t know if I had the discipline in me to pull it off. Life has a tendency to get in the way with me, and other things seem to become temporarily more important. I’m so glad that with one exception (what the Brit in me wants to say was “going on holiday” but was in actuality a family emergency), I’ve done it.
I think the reason that I was able to write consistently was because I finally realized that MY blog was whatever I wanted it to be. These aren’t straight film reviews. You can get those anywhere. That’s why the dashboard says that it’s a cinematic journey. These are my reactions to the films that I’ve seen, for good or for bad. Although the films that I’ve chosen are sometimes the latest and greatest available, they usually tie into my life somehow. And naturally, they are all a reflection of my personal tastes and/or biases.
You all know that I have very strong opinions when it comes to film (ok, when it comes to almost everything). There have been times that I’ve changed my mind, or times I’ve been pleasantly surprised. You all also know that I’ll defend my positions to the last character. Just for the record, trailers are usually on target, but they have to be, given the lemming mentality the box office is built upon. I’ve done the Oscar candidates, the possible Oscar candidates, the box office winners, and the films that you may not have ever heard of. I’ve also learned that the more I see, the more I need to see. Given my obsessive personality, that’s perfect.
The only other thing I wanted to say in this totally personal and mostly non-cinematic (but rather theatrical) post is that I thank you all for reading. I appreciate it greatly when one of you remarks on something I’ve written, or even when you take the time out just to tell me that you read something.
So before I start approaching my standard 500-word limit to say nothing, let me just say thanks. And I’m far from being done. So I’ll keep writing, and please keep reading. Take care all.
10/31/2010
A Modern Film Noir
Film noir is one of my favorite cinematic genres. They were popular in the 40s, where the mols had long hair and the heroes were smart aleck, worldly types. When I heard that there was a contemporary film noir released on DVD, it was a must see. The film is called “Winter’s Bone”, and although most of the film’s accolades regard the breakout performance of the young lead, Jennifer Lawrence, I find that it is the film’s plot that kept my attention from start to finish.
Basically, this film is about a 17-year old girl who lives somewhere on a huge plot of land (love the fact that they never say where) with a dilapidated house, a mentally ill mother, and her much younger sister and brother. Her father is a meth dealer (updating the genre, I think), and is On the Run from the Law. He’s got a court date, and if he doesn’t show up they lose the house and the land, which were put up to the bondsman for collateral. To save the house, she has to find her father.
While I’m not exactly sure that I could call this a “breakout” performance (I hate that term, actually) I will say that Ms. Lawrence seems to be extremely talented. This isn’t an easy part to play by any means. She looks very munch like a young Renee Zellweger. As a matter of fact, she kept reminding me of Renee in “Cold Mountain”, and we all know how that one turned out. She has a plain, matter-of-fact delivery that is indicative of her character’s surroundings and her life.
Most of the films that I’ve seen lately have required more than one sitting to finish. I simply don’t have the attention or the time right now to watch a movie straight through. This one proved to be the exception. Each time I thought I would turn the film off and walk away, I gave myself the “five more minutes” routine. I actually found myself caring what happened to this family and especially to this young girl. What happened to her dad and how does she find her way out, if she does at all?
The film even has a certain feel – a grittiness to it, if you will. It’s similar to how I feel watching a Coen Brothers film. You may not be able to grasp everything that’s going on, but you have faith enough in the story that everything will be resolved in the end. And it is, in true noir fashion.
When I first saw the trailer for this film, I thought that I would heavily dislike it, or I might not even bother with it. It looked dark, depressing, and boring. I had heard it compared on some levels to last year’s disappointing “Frozen River”. I’m very glad I gave it a chance. If you can get your hands on it, you should as well.
Basically, this film is about a 17-year old girl who lives somewhere on a huge plot of land (love the fact that they never say where) with a dilapidated house, a mentally ill mother, and her much younger sister and brother. Her father is a meth dealer (updating the genre, I think), and is On the Run from the Law. He’s got a court date, and if he doesn’t show up they lose the house and the land, which were put up to the bondsman for collateral. To save the house, she has to find her father.
While I’m not exactly sure that I could call this a “breakout” performance (I hate that term, actually) I will say that Ms. Lawrence seems to be extremely talented. This isn’t an easy part to play by any means. She looks very munch like a young Renee Zellweger. As a matter of fact, she kept reminding me of Renee in “Cold Mountain”, and we all know how that one turned out. She has a plain, matter-of-fact delivery that is indicative of her character’s surroundings and her life.
Most of the films that I’ve seen lately have required more than one sitting to finish. I simply don’t have the attention or the time right now to watch a movie straight through. This one proved to be the exception. Each time I thought I would turn the film off and walk away, I gave myself the “five more minutes” routine. I actually found myself caring what happened to this family and especially to this young girl. What happened to her dad and how does she find her way out, if she does at all?
The film even has a certain feel – a grittiness to it, if you will. It’s similar to how I feel watching a Coen Brothers film. You may not be able to grasp everything that’s going on, but you have faith enough in the story that everything will be resolved in the end. And it is, in true noir fashion.
When I first saw the trailer for this film, I thought that I would heavily dislike it, or I might not even bother with it. It looked dark, depressing, and boring. I had heard it compared on some levels to last year’s disappointing “Frozen River”. I’m very glad I gave it a chance. If you can get your hands on it, you should as well.
10/25/2010
The Secret in their Eyes shouldn't be hidden from viewers!
This past year, I helped a friend win his annual Oscar party. The winning film, he told me, was in the Foreign Film category. I found this ironic because I myself waivered on that category. It wasn’t that I had seen the films in question – I hadn’t. But I figured that the winner would be “The White Ribbon” – a film about the Holocaust. (Oscar rules dictate that Holocaust films usually win, unless going against films containing a British Queen.) At the last minute, I changed my pick to the eventual winner – Argentina’s “The Secret in their Eyes”, which was recommended by my cinematic bible, “Entertainment Weekly”.
As the next year’s Oscar race starts to heat up, I still haven’t seen “Ribbon”, but this week I sat down and watched “Eyes”. It won because it’s simply fantastic.
It’s not an easy film to describe. If pressed to describe the plot, I’d have to say that it’s about a detective who is obsessed with the murder case of a young married woman, so much so that even after he retires he tries to write a book about it. But try as he might, he just can’t get the words right. (A feeling I’m very familiar with myself.) The killer isn’t the only one that got away, though. There’s also the possible love of his life, who just happens to have been his supervisor at that time.
The story juxtaposes between what happened 25 years ago as the case develops and what happens currently. They make it easy to follow as the lead actor’s hair suddenly becomes salt-and-peppery for the current events. The filmmakers also flip between the resolution of a murder case and the resolution of a possible romance.
The supporting cast may not be filled with familiar faces, but it is filled with familiar ideas. How does one continue when the love of your life is gone? What constitutes obsession? What’s the cost of doing the “right thing”? And then there’s the one that they keep repeating throughout the film - How do you life a life full of nothing?
One of the things that I hate most about American romances is that it’s clear from the first frame how the film will end. That applies to both comedy and drama unfortunately. And for me, it’s always better if the couple in question DON’T end up together (hence why I love “Casablanca”). But as this film went on, I found myself actually caring whether these people (all of them, not just the leads) made it or not – and I don’t mean romantically.
It’s rare for me to find a film with romantic overtones that I can actually stomach. This one I recommend wholeheartedly. I’m glad that they broke the Oscar rules for this one – it’s certainly well-deserved.
As the next year’s Oscar race starts to heat up, I still haven’t seen “Ribbon”, but this week I sat down and watched “Eyes”. It won because it’s simply fantastic.
It’s not an easy film to describe. If pressed to describe the plot, I’d have to say that it’s about a detective who is obsessed with the murder case of a young married woman, so much so that even after he retires he tries to write a book about it. But try as he might, he just can’t get the words right. (A feeling I’m very familiar with myself.) The killer isn’t the only one that got away, though. There’s also the possible love of his life, who just happens to have been his supervisor at that time.
The story juxtaposes between what happened 25 years ago as the case develops and what happens currently. They make it easy to follow as the lead actor’s hair suddenly becomes salt-and-peppery for the current events. The filmmakers also flip between the resolution of a murder case and the resolution of a possible romance.
The supporting cast may not be filled with familiar faces, but it is filled with familiar ideas. How does one continue when the love of your life is gone? What constitutes obsession? What’s the cost of doing the “right thing”? And then there’s the one that they keep repeating throughout the film - How do you life a life full of nothing?
One of the things that I hate most about American romances is that it’s clear from the first frame how the film will end. That applies to both comedy and drama unfortunately. And for me, it’s always better if the couple in question DON’T end up together (hence why I love “Casablanca”). But as this film went on, I found myself actually caring whether these people (all of them, not just the leads) made it or not – and I don’t mean romantically.
It’s rare for me to find a film with romantic overtones that I can actually stomach. This one I recommend wholeheartedly. I’m glad that they broke the Oscar rules for this one – it’s certainly well-deserved.
10/20/2010
Waiting for Superman
Movies, when they work, are supposed to elicit an emotional response from the viewer. Personally, I’m not an unemotional viewer or reviewer. Ask anyone who’s seen a film with me and they’ll tell you that all you have to do is look at me to tell whether or not I liked a film.
After seeing “Waiting for Superman” this past weekend, I didn’t know what to think. Or feel. As a former educator, I find myself unable to really articulate my feelings. I was ashamed. Ashamed for living in a country where things are obviously this bad, and ashamed that I left a profession that so obviously needs help – all the help it can get. I left the theater in tears.
It’s common knowledge the American educational system sucks. No Child Left Behind is the dumbest idea since people thought the world was flat. The statistics didn’t surprise me in the least – American kids are behind in everything.
But it’s easy to rationalize that. I usually blame it on lack of parental involvement. Then again, those same parents may be working two or three jobs just to get by in today’s economy, if they’re lucky enough to be working at all. If not parental involvement, blame it on lack of parental maturity. Babies are having babies. The trend started and isn’t stopping anytime soon. Parents don’t motivate their children to do well, or put any type of importance on education.
However, these parents did. All of them. And their kids are still getting the short end of the stick.
I’ve always been taught that education is just like anything else – you get out of it what you put into it. I still have this thirst for knowledge (although you could make the case that what some people call “drive”, others call an obsessive personality).
Personally, I can’t comprehend a lot of the obstacles facing these kids. I was lucky enough to be in a decent school district surrounded by kids that were just as smart as I was (in some cases, smarter). I didn’t have to worry about going tens of miles in order to go someplace decent, forget about above average. But that was over 25 years ago.
In my current office, they say that you can’t really air a problem until you devise and identify a solution. This film does that too. There are people making a difference. There are teachers that care and schools that work and kids that truly want to learn. It’s just heartbreaking to me that they are the exception rather than the norm.
I only hope that this trend eventually reverses itself. But it’s not something that’s going to happen soon. Not in this administration, not in the next. Maybe not even in my lifetime. But you just have to hope that it will. Because if not, this entire country isn’t waiting for Superman, more like waiting for Godot. They’re waiting for a rescue that simply will not come.
After seeing “Waiting for Superman” this past weekend, I didn’t know what to think. Or feel. As a former educator, I find myself unable to really articulate my feelings. I was ashamed. Ashamed for living in a country where things are obviously this bad, and ashamed that I left a profession that so obviously needs help – all the help it can get. I left the theater in tears.
It’s common knowledge the American educational system sucks. No Child Left Behind is the dumbest idea since people thought the world was flat. The statistics didn’t surprise me in the least – American kids are behind in everything.
But it’s easy to rationalize that. I usually blame it on lack of parental involvement. Then again, those same parents may be working two or three jobs just to get by in today’s economy, if they’re lucky enough to be working at all. If not parental involvement, blame it on lack of parental maturity. Babies are having babies. The trend started and isn’t stopping anytime soon. Parents don’t motivate their children to do well, or put any type of importance on education.
However, these parents did. All of them. And their kids are still getting the short end of the stick.
I’ve always been taught that education is just like anything else – you get out of it what you put into it. I still have this thirst for knowledge (although you could make the case that what some people call “drive”, others call an obsessive personality).
Personally, I can’t comprehend a lot of the obstacles facing these kids. I was lucky enough to be in a decent school district surrounded by kids that were just as smart as I was (in some cases, smarter). I didn’t have to worry about going tens of miles in order to go someplace decent, forget about above average. But that was over 25 years ago.
In my current office, they say that you can’t really air a problem until you devise and identify a solution. This film does that too. There are people making a difference. There are teachers that care and schools that work and kids that truly want to learn. It’s just heartbreaking to me that they are the exception rather than the norm.
I only hope that this trend eventually reverses itself. But it’s not something that’s going to happen soon. Not in this administration, not in the next. Maybe not even in my lifetime. But you just have to hope that it will. Because if not, this entire country isn’t waiting for Superman, more like waiting for Godot. They’re waiting for a rescue that simply will not come.
10/10/2010
The Social Network - let the Oscar Hate Begin!
In case you haven’t noticed, I march to the beat of my own cinematic drum. I like what I like, hate what I hate, and make very few apologies.
During the annual Oscar hunt, there is usually one film (now two, with the doubling of BP slots) that I cannot stand, no matter how much everyone else loves it. Last year was “The Blind Side” and “Precious”. (“Avatar” doesn’t count – I hated it, but so did lots of others.)
This year I already have one slot filled – “The Social Network”.
I don’t really feel like I need to explain how I feel about Facebook. If you’re reading this, you obviously know me and you already know. Basically I think Facebook is quite silly and reaffirms my belief that most human beings are at their core self-centered. Sorry, but if I know you casually from my office, does it look like I care when you do your laundry?
Moving past that though, I love Aaron Sorkin and David Fincher. I’ve seen every episode of “The West Wing” and I think writing dialogue is a talent I wish I had. Fincher, although at times overrated, knows how to set a mood and tell a compelling story.
Unfortunately, I don’t feel like I got either in “The Social Network”. Although the interspersing of the multiple lawsuit plot lines was interesting, what I saw (which I suspect may have been switched with some other print of this film) showed me a bunch of narcissistic college nerds who take their own self-serving aims and then turn on each other. The Masters of a small Universe become Masters of a much bigger one, and don’t know how to handle it. Sorry, but it’s not exactly a revolutionary thought. In fact, nothing about this is revolutionary. Even the acting was mediocre, which could be because these characters show no growth. Why? Because they are in their twenties and probably can’t.
To me, this is really an updated version of an 80s film. Geek loses girl, says a bunch of mean things (in our era, that’s posting on the net), and redirects his energy to get back at those who spited him. He gets self-motivated bad influence leading him down a morally questionable path and asking him to forsake his initial supporters. Does he give in? The last five minutes (the only part for me which actually works) show him trying to get girl back. Does he? I don’t know and couldn’t possibly care less.
But maybe there’s something that I missed. Maybe there’s something that I just didn’t see. Maybe what I saw was really an idea that was stolen from somewhere else and presented as something new and original and I’m just too old to understand what the charm was. PLEASE tell me if I am – I’m starting to think I’m cinematically crazy.
Or not. But either way, I need to go do my laundry now. I’ll catch you next week.
During the annual Oscar hunt, there is usually one film (now two, with the doubling of BP slots) that I cannot stand, no matter how much everyone else loves it. Last year was “The Blind Side” and “Precious”. (“Avatar” doesn’t count – I hated it, but so did lots of others.)
This year I already have one slot filled – “The Social Network”.
I don’t really feel like I need to explain how I feel about Facebook. If you’re reading this, you obviously know me and you already know. Basically I think Facebook is quite silly and reaffirms my belief that most human beings are at their core self-centered. Sorry, but if I know you casually from my office, does it look like I care when you do your laundry?
Moving past that though, I love Aaron Sorkin and David Fincher. I’ve seen every episode of “The West Wing” and I think writing dialogue is a talent I wish I had. Fincher, although at times overrated, knows how to set a mood and tell a compelling story.
Unfortunately, I don’t feel like I got either in “The Social Network”. Although the interspersing of the multiple lawsuit plot lines was interesting, what I saw (which I suspect may have been switched with some other print of this film) showed me a bunch of narcissistic college nerds who take their own self-serving aims and then turn on each other. The Masters of a small Universe become Masters of a much bigger one, and don’t know how to handle it. Sorry, but it’s not exactly a revolutionary thought. In fact, nothing about this is revolutionary. Even the acting was mediocre, which could be because these characters show no growth. Why? Because they are in their twenties and probably can’t.
To me, this is really an updated version of an 80s film. Geek loses girl, says a bunch of mean things (in our era, that’s posting on the net), and redirects his energy to get back at those who spited him. He gets self-motivated bad influence leading him down a morally questionable path and asking him to forsake his initial supporters. Does he give in? The last five minutes (the only part for me which actually works) show him trying to get girl back. Does he? I don’t know and couldn’t possibly care less.
But maybe there’s something that I missed. Maybe there’s something that I just didn’t see. Maybe what I saw was really an idea that was stolen from somewhere else and presented as something new and original and I’m just too old to understand what the charm was. PLEASE tell me if I am – I’m starting to think I’m cinematically crazy.
Or not. But either way, I need to go do my laundry now. I’ll catch you next week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)