Some years ago I came up with the idea of an "Oscar Pass" - a "Skip this Film" card. Oscar Passes could be used once per year. The films I Passed on were overdone ("Munich"), contained a star I avoided ("Master and Commander"), or played too far away to see at the time ("Secrets and Lies").
This year, I was going to Pass on Danny Boyle's "127 Hours". Given the subject matter, and my current circumstances, the very LAST thing I wanted to watch was a film extolling The Survival Instinct. I think I already have that concept down.
But as the Oscars got closer, I decided I would try it. Boyle is, after all, a great director, and any film with his name had to be deeper than a two-sentence plot synopsis would indicate. And James Franco is nothing if not interesting. So I left this year's Oscar Pass in a drawer.
I'm glad I did. This isn't an easy film to watch. Being a horror veteran, it takes a lot to gross me out or make me squeamish. This film, however, had me turning my head several times, and way before the "money shot".
I can't image this was an easy film to make. The film literally and figuratively rests on the limbs of Franco. Normally with true stories, knowing the outcome makes the film boring or anticlimactic. In this case, knowing the final outcome was the only way I got through it. Franco gives a powerhouse performance, no doubt. It's too bad that it's an "In Any Other Year..." performance. But I have a feeling he'll eventually get his.
Combine the lead performance, the introduction of a video camera as a character/catalyst, and the tight framing, and you almost develop a sense of claustrophobia. I was expecting to go through the film thinking the main character was an idiot and rooting against him, as I have so many times before. I don't know if it's my age, my situation, or the fact that I actually "get it", but I was in tears by the closing credits.
I had a conversation with my other half shortly after the film ended. I said I couldn't believe after everything the main character went through, he still decided to continue climbing. He maintained that climbing is apparently part of who he is, and that he wasn't going to let fear beat him. If he never went back into a canyon, then he had been defeated. But he made a concession so that he wouldn't be in the same situation again. To me, that's the definition of growth - realizing you could be in the same situation, but taking an alternate action to make sure the outcome differs.
Perhaps Aron wasn't the only one who learned something from his predicament - which is why they make films about true stories like this in the first place.
2/20/2011
This "Salt" Leaves a Bitter Aftertaste
There was an article printed this week where a high-placed Hollywood studio official decried Hollywood is not in the business of telling stories - they are in the business of making money. Most people realize an approach like this can't really sustain an industry for long (Take note, Peter Angelos!). To that official I reply that you may be in the business of making money, but given your current watered down product, and the price you demand for your "service", it's only a matter of time before people start catching on and staying home. It's already started.
I had a movie I wanted to watch for my first weekly Girls Night with a friend - "Red". We'd been planning this for weeks and we decided that was the film we wanted to see. However, I forgot to reserve it through Redbox online and by the time we went to get it, it wasn't there. So we settled for "Salt".
"Settle" describes this film perfectly. Let's talk about all the people who settled for this movie. Firstly, the studio. They were naive enough to actually think that this could be the start of a female-driven action franchise. Actually it could have been - twenty years or so ago. They locked up start Angelina Jolie, who settled for a paycheck. They hired writers who wanted to write about the villainous Russians, in a time when international cinematic villains are usually from the Middle East. That's story settling if I ever heard it (that doesn't involve Nazis, that is).
The second part of the article says that the reason films are unimaginative is that studio heads are my age - people who grew up with a lack of storytelling. They mention the creation of the "summer blockbuster" as the time when it all started to go downhill. It is true that "Salt" was released in July, during the height of the summer season, when Disbelief and Plausibility have also gone on vacation. However, I do have limits. Given the fact that it made under 125 million domestically, I'm not alone.
It's funny how the less you pay for something, the less you expect. There's really no such thing as a bargain. That's why Redbox is so popular. I won't pay 4.99 to see most things On Demand. I sure as hell won't pay 10.00 (or 13.00) to see them theatrically. But for 1.06 my standards do drop. Was it worth 1.06? Sure. My friend and I sat in her living room, and although we don't usually agree cinematically, we were right in synch with this one. We both agreed that it was ridiculous, and we groaned in all the same places.
But as we go into Oscar Week, let's remember that there's a time to settle, and a time to select. Here's hoping that Hollywood (and Mr. Angelos) eventually get the hint. I only have faith in one of them.
I had a movie I wanted to watch for my first weekly Girls Night with a friend - "Red". We'd been planning this for weeks and we decided that was the film we wanted to see. However, I forgot to reserve it through Redbox online and by the time we went to get it, it wasn't there. So we settled for "Salt".
"Settle" describes this film perfectly. Let's talk about all the people who settled for this movie. Firstly, the studio. They were naive enough to actually think that this could be the start of a female-driven action franchise. Actually it could have been - twenty years or so ago. They locked up start Angelina Jolie, who settled for a paycheck. They hired writers who wanted to write about the villainous Russians, in a time when international cinematic villains are usually from the Middle East. That's story settling if I ever heard it (that doesn't involve Nazis, that is).
The second part of the article says that the reason films are unimaginative is that studio heads are my age - people who grew up with a lack of storytelling. They mention the creation of the "summer blockbuster" as the time when it all started to go downhill. It is true that "Salt" was released in July, during the height of the summer season, when Disbelief and Plausibility have also gone on vacation. However, I do have limits. Given the fact that it made under 125 million domestically, I'm not alone.
It's funny how the less you pay for something, the less you expect. There's really no such thing as a bargain. That's why Redbox is so popular. I won't pay 4.99 to see most things On Demand. I sure as hell won't pay 10.00 (or 13.00) to see them theatrically. But for 1.06 my standards do drop. Was it worth 1.06? Sure. My friend and I sat in her living room, and although we don't usually agree cinematically, we were right in synch with this one. We both agreed that it was ridiculous, and we groaned in all the same places.
But as we go into Oscar Week, let's remember that there's a time to settle, and a time to select. Here's hoping that Hollywood (and Mr. Angelos) eventually get the hint. I only have faith in one of them.
2/13/2011
Companion Films - "The Social Network" and "Catfish"
I've been looking for a way to supplement Oscar Quest 2010-2011. After seeing most of the nominees, and being underwhelmed by most, I needed to find something more. So earlier this week, while in the shower (where I usually get my best ideas), I came up with the idea of a "Companion Film". Companion Films share the basic premise or theme, but present it in two totally different ways. I'm hoping if I find a Companion Film for each of the BP nominees, there will be SOMETHING that energizes me, just a little.
For example, take "The Social Network" and "Catfish". While I'm sure you've heard of the former, the latter has gone relatively unnoticed. It documents the story of Nev, who frequents Facebook and become attached to the "family" that he finds there. It starts with 8-yr old Abby, a talented painter and branches out to Abby's mother, half-sister and other family members. The entire experience is filmed by Nev's brother.
But, as the axiom goes, don't believe everything you read, or everything you hear. When Nev develops feelings for Abby's half sister Megan, he decides they should meet. Without giving anything away, let's say the results are surprising - for Nev and the viewer.
Personally, I get it. I had my years where I obsessed over my internet friends. I still have a few of them, and I've even met one personally. Although I never had any issues and the people I befriended were all upright and honest, that doesn't apply to everyone. Just like in real life, virtual life has its fair share of liars.
What I preferred about "Catfish" is that it's true. More than the other Facebook film, things weren't manipulated or sensationalized for effect. Even though I thought I knew where it was going, it still kept me entertained for its run time (about 90 minutes).
I also found the film relatable. Although I'm not on Facebook for my own reasons, I understand why other people are. I even understand the need for constant updating - on your phone, at work and now even in your car. It's just not for me at this stage of my life. Guess I miss the days where it wasn't necessary to announce you were going to the grocery store to buy milk. I also like the fact that I communicate with the people I know NOW, not twenty years ago. There's enough high schoolishness (yes, I made that up) in my life without having to correspond with someone I actually attended high school with. But that's my choice, and I realize it's not a popular one.
"Catfish" wasn't a film that was going to make the critical splash of "The Social Network". And that's really unfortunate, because I think it should have. It's a much better film, and I highly recommend it.
For example, take "The Social Network" and "Catfish". While I'm sure you've heard of the former, the latter has gone relatively unnoticed. It documents the story of Nev, who frequents Facebook and become attached to the "family" that he finds there. It starts with 8-yr old Abby, a talented painter and branches out to Abby's mother, half-sister and other family members. The entire experience is filmed by Nev's brother.
But, as the axiom goes, don't believe everything you read, or everything you hear. When Nev develops feelings for Abby's half sister Megan, he decides they should meet. Without giving anything away, let's say the results are surprising - for Nev and the viewer.
Personally, I get it. I had my years where I obsessed over my internet friends. I still have a few of them, and I've even met one personally. Although I never had any issues and the people I befriended were all upright and honest, that doesn't apply to everyone. Just like in real life, virtual life has its fair share of liars.
What I preferred about "Catfish" is that it's true. More than the other Facebook film, things weren't manipulated or sensationalized for effect. Even though I thought I knew where it was going, it still kept me entertained for its run time (about 90 minutes).
I also found the film relatable. Although I'm not on Facebook for my own reasons, I understand why other people are. I even understand the need for constant updating - on your phone, at work and now even in your car. It's just not for me at this stage of my life. Guess I miss the days where it wasn't necessary to announce you were going to the grocery store to buy milk. I also like the fact that I communicate with the people I know NOW, not twenty years ago. There's enough high schoolishness (yes, I made that up) in my life without having to correspond with someone I actually attended high school with. But that's my choice, and I realize it's not a popular one.
"Catfish" wasn't a film that was going to make the critical splash of "The Social Network". And that's really unfortunate, because I think it should have. It's a much better film, and I highly recommend it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)