I decided to skip this week’s previously scheduled film “Eve’s Bayou” for two very important reasons: First, I needed to get out of my head for a bit. Secondly, I needed an RDJ (that’s Robert Downey Junior for anyone not familiar with my ubiquitous acronyms) fix before “Iron Man 2”, this year’s birthday film. (You didn’t really think I was going to spend my Special Day cinematically with Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe’s “Robin Hood” aka the English Gladiator, did you?)
I sat down yesterday and ordered “Sherlock Holmes” from Comcast on Demand. For two hours, I had intelligent dialogue, my lovely dreary London, lots of action, one of two laughs, and of course RDJ. I also wanted to use British colloquialisms for the rest of the day, but that’s not really new.
I admit to being skeptical before the film’s release. Not about teaming Downey with Jude Law as Dr. Watson – that’s a stroke of genius. Giving Holmes a love interest (Rachel McAdams) didn’t quite seem right. But I hadn’t read the books so perhaps I was uninformed.
My biggest question was around the director – Guy Ritchie. It was obvious from the trailer that this film would make a mint, and the release right around Christmas would certainly add to the box office. But I’d only seen one of Ritchie’s films – “Rock N Rolla”, and to be honest, I bloody hated it.
I’m very glad that I gave this film a try. It’s an opening franchise film without being an origin film. Holmes is already established as a depraved, brilliant detective who almost runs Scotland Yard exuding confidence in his mind but has the emotional maturity of a gnat. Downey nails it all, in a Golden Globe nominated performance. Law is capital as the straight guy who often bears the brunt of Holmes’ shenanigans, and simply cannot leave him for the respectability of a wife and home of his own.
The main criticisms I offer of the film are that many of the externals shots are quite dark, although I also submit that my tele is not the cleanest in the world. My second criticism involves the fact that the inevitable sequel isn’t set up in the last ten minutes, but the last thirty. Personally, that’s a bit too long of a tease for my liking. But I’m more than willing to wait as Mr. Downey continues to juggle not one but two franchises (or perhaps three, if you consider “The Avengers” another, directed by Joss Whedon).
Here’s a side note to all the detractors skeptical about the “Iron Man 2” hype. I don’t often say this, but if you read the comics or at least research them, you know where this is all going. And for God’s sake, just sit back and watch the film without critiquing it along the way. Trust me you’ll enjoy it all the more. I sure did. And I will again. Must go now – “Eastenders” is calling. :)
4/24/2010
Film 138: Sling Blade
Miramax Studios (the studio Tarentino built) used to be an Oscar powerhouse. They were usually good for at least one Best Picture nominee or win – from “Pulp Fiction”to “Shakesepeare in Love” to “The Cider House Rules” to 1996’s entry “Sling Blade”.
“Sling Blade” tells the story of Karl Childers, played by Billy Bob Thornton. Karl has recently been released from a mental hospital after several years’ incarceration for the death of his mother and her young lover.
Thorton wrote, directed and starred in the film. He’s never been as good since, and I don’t think he ever could. The film earned an Oscar for its screenplay, but unfortunately Thornton lost the Best Actor race to Geoffrey Rush for “Shine”.
“Sling Blade” is, in its own way, a comfort film for me. It’s a solid drama (my favorite) and a reminder of how good films can be. It layers itself slowly, event by event, giving the viewer hope and a sense that all will be well. When tragedy asserts itself again, it’s acceptable and even understandable.
The other great thing about “Sling Blade” is the supporting cast, some of whom are no longer with us. John Ritter does a great turn as Vaughan, the gay store manager who lives in the closet with a door that’s wide open. The other supporting role is JT Walsh as a fellow inmate in the hospital, who is the only person speaking for the first 10 minutes. Jim Jarmusch also does a cameo, which I didn’t realize until I saw the credits. And the young boy playing Frank, Lucas Black, is a force to behold. Since “Sling Blade” he has continued his career on the big and small screens.
I know that people have made fun of Thornton – people who don’t understand. Certainly Thornton himself is an odd person, and he’s had his tabloid appearances. But for someone to make this brilliant of a film, chiefly of his own design is nothing short of remarkable.
The other thing that stays with me about this film is its solidity. This story could have been made into a Lifetime movie, where society beats down the killer to force him to go back to the only mode of conduct that he knows. But the idea is respected and the material never panders down to that level.
It’s yet another example of the prevalent trend of making characters we should abhor understandable and likable. This continues through Tony Soprano, Dexter Morgan and now Walter White. We don’t love their actions, but we know they only want to do the right thing – even if that’s illegal or immoral. And we love them for it the whole way.
Has my opinion of “Sling Blade” changed? Nope. I reckon it was a great film the first time, and almost 15 years later, it still is. It’s just unfortunate that Miramax isn’t around anymore to showcase great films such as these.
“Sling Blade” tells the story of Karl Childers, played by Billy Bob Thornton. Karl has recently been released from a mental hospital after several years’ incarceration for the death of his mother and her young lover.
Thorton wrote, directed and starred in the film. He’s never been as good since, and I don’t think he ever could. The film earned an Oscar for its screenplay, but unfortunately Thornton lost the Best Actor race to Geoffrey Rush for “Shine”.
“Sling Blade” is, in its own way, a comfort film for me. It’s a solid drama (my favorite) and a reminder of how good films can be. It layers itself slowly, event by event, giving the viewer hope and a sense that all will be well. When tragedy asserts itself again, it’s acceptable and even understandable.
The other great thing about “Sling Blade” is the supporting cast, some of whom are no longer with us. John Ritter does a great turn as Vaughan, the gay store manager who lives in the closet with a door that’s wide open. The other supporting role is JT Walsh as a fellow inmate in the hospital, who is the only person speaking for the first 10 minutes. Jim Jarmusch also does a cameo, which I didn’t realize until I saw the credits. And the young boy playing Frank, Lucas Black, is a force to behold. Since “Sling Blade” he has continued his career on the big and small screens.
I know that people have made fun of Thornton – people who don’t understand. Certainly Thornton himself is an odd person, and he’s had his tabloid appearances. But for someone to make this brilliant of a film, chiefly of his own design is nothing short of remarkable.
The other thing that stays with me about this film is its solidity. This story could have been made into a Lifetime movie, where society beats down the killer to force him to go back to the only mode of conduct that he knows. But the idea is respected and the material never panders down to that level.
It’s yet another example of the prevalent trend of making characters we should abhor understandable and likable. This continues through Tony Soprano, Dexter Morgan and now Walter White. We don’t love their actions, but we know they only want to do the right thing – even if that’s illegal or immoral. And we love them for it the whole way.
Has my opinion of “Sling Blade” changed? Nope. I reckon it was a great film the first time, and almost 15 years later, it still is. It’s just unfortunate that Miramax isn’t around anymore to showcase great films such as these.
4/16/2010
Bad Lieutenant and How to Date a Film
Twenty plus years ago, David Lynch came up with a TV show called “Twin Peaks”. Ahead of its time, its run was short. It was one of the first big “mythology” shows that I watched faithfully. Unfortunately, I tried to re-watch the show about a year ago and found it to be dated and nonsensical. As a college student, I was proud of myself for figuring out the mystery and was extremely sad when it was cancelled. But as an adult, what was genius is now just moronic.
I thought the same thing while watching “Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans”. Despite my Nicolas Cage hatred, I had an open mind. The film has an 80s grittiness to it, although it’s set in the recent past (I think). Cage is a police lieutenant who tried to do the right thing by saving a subject from drowning in the floods, and ends up being rewarded with permanent back pain. He naturally turns to drugs to deaden the pain – first starting with prescriptions and building it all up from there. He eventually spends more of his time high than straight. In the midst of this there is a murder investigation that he’s leading. But the murder is insignificant.
This is essentially a character study. And although the director shows you the underbelly of the society and tries to give you a stark contrast, he instead inserts random, nonsensical images in order to throw the viewer off, and to show the distortion of Cage’s perception. Eventually you aren’t really sure what’s happening when. Again, what could be genius to one person was just idiocy to me. I’ve already seen one film where Cage goes down a long and winding road into oblivion. I spent that one waiting for him to die so the movie would end. I guess you could say I was apathetic – primarily because this was a pathetic excuse for a crime drama. (*)
But the idea of something being dated stayed with me this week. What if the movies I’ve spent years ranting about really aren’t that bad? What if my perceptions have changed as I’ve gotten older? What if the ones that I think are great really aren’t? I know I’ll always have a soft spot in my heart for “The Fabulous Baker Boys” and “Xanadu”, but what about “The Matrix” and “Jurassic Park” and even “Forrest Gump”?
Yesterday as I pondered all this I clicked onto Yahoo and found two lists – one of classics from since 1999 and another full of classics of all time. These aren’t just award winning films – these are the “100 Films to See Before You Die”. So I’ve decided to give it a whirl. I make no commitments on how many to get through or when, but I’m going to work toward re-evaluating some films. If you’d like to come along, check in once in a while. I’ll be posting everything here.
Wish me luck!
PS - If you're interested in the lists themselves, you can find them here:
http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/100-movies-to-see-before-you-die-modern-classics.html
I thought the same thing while watching “Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans”. Despite my Nicolas Cage hatred, I had an open mind. The film has an 80s grittiness to it, although it’s set in the recent past (I think). Cage is a police lieutenant who tried to do the right thing by saving a subject from drowning in the floods, and ends up being rewarded with permanent back pain. He naturally turns to drugs to deaden the pain – first starting with prescriptions and building it all up from there. He eventually spends more of his time high than straight. In the midst of this there is a murder investigation that he’s leading. But the murder is insignificant.
This is essentially a character study. And although the director shows you the underbelly of the society and tries to give you a stark contrast, he instead inserts random, nonsensical images in order to throw the viewer off, and to show the distortion of Cage’s perception. Eventually you aren’t really sure what’s happening when. Again, what could be genius to one person was just idiocy to me. I’ve already seen one film where Cage goes down a long and winding road into oblivion. I spent that one waiting for him to die so the movie would end. I guess you could say I was apathetic – primarily because this was a pathetic excuse for a crime drama. (*)
But the idea of something being dated stayed with me this week. What if the movies I’ve spent years ranting about really aren’t that bad? What if my perceptions have changed as I’ve gotten older? What if the ones that I think are great really aren’t? I know I’ll always have a soft spot in my heart for “The Fabulous Baker Boys” and “Xanadu”, but what about “The Matrix” and “Jurassic Park” and even “Forrest Gump”?
Yesterday as I pondered all this I clicked onto Yahoo and found two lists – one of classics from since 1999 and another full of classics of all time. These aren’t just award winning films – these are the “100 Films to See Before You Die”. So I’ve decided to give it a whirl. I make no commitments on how many to get through or when, but I’m going to work toward re-evaluating some films. If you’d like to come along, check in once in a while. I’ll be posting everything here.
Wish me luck!
PS - If you're interested in the lists themselves, you can find them here:
http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/100-movies-to-see-before-you-die-modern-classics.html
4/08/2010
What to Watch when there's Nothing to Watch
April’s slate is pretty dead – both theatrically and on video. There’s simply not much there. I may see “Date Night”, but not at full theatrical prices and I can always rent an omitted Oscar nominee, but for right now I’m in a stalled pattern.
That makes me restless and hard to satisfy.
On Saturday, I went to see “Chloe” at my local Cineplex. After bemoaning increased ticket prices last week, I found out first showings have an “early bird” rate of 6.00. This won’t work at 10:00 AM, but isn’t bad at 1:30 PM. Upon arrival, I noticed their concession renovations are semi-completed. It’s now done cafeteria-style. Why anyone would pay 4.00 for a 20 oz coke eludes me, unless it’s to avoid the line amassing at the single fountain soda line. People mill about randomly, and I finally pay for my 3.50 soda, dodge the “Dragon” crowd and find my showing, hiding in the back.
How was the movie? Not great, but I should have known better. I went for the cast – Julianne Moore, Liam Neeson and the increasing interesting Amanda Seyfried. I knew the basic premise – infidelity or imagination? For the first third, I was entertained. I should have remembered the director, Atom Egoyan, specializes in films that “push the sexual envelope”. About one-third of the film is something from Cinemax, not Cineplex. Afterwards I felt like I had seen far too much of Julianne, and wanted a shower. The film was tired, and so was I.
A few days later, I tried to clean out my Netflix, which were gathering dust due to my increased work schedule. I watched “North by Northwest” – an undisputed masterpiece. Unfortunately, I felt disillusioned. Although it held my interest, and Cary Grant and Hitch can do no wrong, the dialogue is erratic and I already knew all the big surprises. The dialogue in the train is fantastic (I wish they would have had that blatant sublety in “Chloe”), but the political diatribe is just too dated. The framing is spectacular, the effects are dazzling for their time, but it just didn’t gel completely for me. Sorry.
So what do you watch if there’s nothing to see? I turn my attention to the one forum consistently delivering –television. My favorite show right now is “Breaking Bad”. If you are not currently watching this show, (you probably aren’t), you OWE it to yourself to get the first two seasons and then hurriedly catch up. Bryan Cranston’s back-to-back Emmy wins aren’t a fluke. The writing never ever disappoints, the cast is spectacular and for 40+ minutes, I am riveted.
There’s also “Damages” and the upcoming “Top Chef Masters” to watch. And there’s always my Nook. I’ve been reading “The Help” for far too long, savoring it until Spielberg kills the story by making the film. I can even treat myself to reading on my porch.
So even if there isn’t anything to see, there’s still EVERYTHING to do, if you know where to look - or Nook.
That makes me restless and hard to satisfy.
On Saturday, I went to see “Chloe” at my local Cineplex. After bemoaning increased ticket prices last week, I found out first showings have an “early bird” rate of 6.00. This won’t work at 10:00 AM, but isn’t bad at 1:30 PM. Upon arrival, I noticed their concession renovations are semi-completed. It’s now done cafeteria-style. Why anyone would pay 4.00 for a 20 oz coke eludes me, unless it’s to avoid the line amassing at the single fountain soda line. People mill about randomly, and I finally pay for my 3.50 soda, dodge the “Dragon” crowd and find my showing, hiding in the back.
How was the movie? Not great, but I should have known better. I went for the cast – Julianne Moore, Liam Neeson and the increasing interesting Amanda Seyfried. I knew the basic premise – infidelity or imagination? For the first third, I was entertained. I should have remembered the director, Atom Egoyan, specializes in films that “push the sexual envelope”. About one-third of the film is something from Cinemax, not Cineplex. Afterwards I felt like I had seen far too much of Julianne, and wanted a shower. The film was tired, and so was I.
A few days later, I tried to clean out my Netflix, which were gathering dust due to my increased work schedule. I watched “North by Northwest” – an undisputed masterpiece. Unfortunately, I felt disillusioned. Although it held my interest, and Cary Grant and Hitch can do no wrong, the dialogue is erratic and I already knew all the big surprises. The dialogue in the train is fantastic (I wish they would have had that blatant sublety in “Chloe”), but the political diatribe is just too dated. The framing is spectacular, the effects are dazzling for their time, but it just didn’t gel completely for me. Sorry.
So what do you watch if there’s nothing to see? I turn my attention to the one forum consistently delivering –television. My favorite show right now is “Breaking Bad”. If you are not currently watching this show, (you probably aren’t), you OWE it to yourself to get the first two seasons and then hurriedly catch up. Bryan Cranston’s back-to-back Emmy wins aren’t a fluke. The writing never ever disappoints, the cast is spectacular and for 40+ minutes, I am riveted.
There’s also “Damages” and the upcoming “Top Chef Masters” to watch. And there’s always my Nook. I’ve been reading “The Help” for far too long, savoring it until Spielberg kills the story by making the film. I can even treat myself to reading on my porch.
So even if there isn’t anything to see, there’s still EVERYTHING to do, if you know where to look - or Nook.
3/30/2010
Ponderings from the Cinematic Princess...
I made it my goal this year to write one of these entries (I call them columns) per week, or four per month. Unfortunately, I haven’t really been watching many movies lately. The only thing I’ve seen lately was “Ninja Assassin”, a 2 and a half at best. Think a Tarentino bloodbath with a tired and underdeveloped story. Not bad, but not great.
But what I wanted to write about this week are cinematic shifts, both theatrical and DVD, which indiciate the way things are a changin’ – not for the better.
Firstly, four of my local video stores are all closing. While that’s good news if I have extra money and want to score a decent copy of a classic film on the cheap, but not for the fact that Redbox is now the main way for me to rent a DVD.
What I hate the most about this change is that I won't have the opportunity ever again to enter an actual video store. You can laugh at me if you want to because that's a really dorkish thing to say (it is and I am), but I’ve met some great people in a video store. I met the love of my life in a video store (my actual other half, not just the concept of film in general). We still talk about film all the time, and I wouldn’t have even met him if I hadn’t gone there, the idea of which frankly scares the hell out of me. The video store was the one place where I knew that I could always find someone who “knew their shit” (except at Blockbuster), and I’d find some film that I hadn’t heard of that I had to see, which led to another film, and so on.
Gone. And I understand the market had evaporated, and I understand that it’s easier to hit the stream button on Netflix, but I’ll still always miss the mortar-and-stone building. I used to say that Norm had his Cheers, and I had my video store. Now, I guess I have a box. Lucky me.
Secondly, I saw an article over the weekend announcing that theatrical ticket sales are again going to spike – just in time for the summer film season in a few months. Although again I realize that it’s a business decision, this one doesn’t make as much sense. Year over year, the box office is growing, crowds are growing, but the quality of the films on the whole is staying stagnant. There’s yet another remake, or sequel, or unnecessary 3-D epic. Most of these aren’t worth paying 4.99 for, much less the 15.00-17.00 to which they could possibly escalate.
So it looks like I’m going to have to change my habits again. I’ll do my research on the websites I follow to get the upcoming slates, and I’ll watch what I want when I can. My Wii now accommodates streaming Netflix options. But as for the rest of it, there’s nothing to take its place. And I don’t want anything to even try.
But what I wanted to write about this week are cinematic shifts, both theatrical and DVD, which indiciate the way things are a changin’ – not for the better.
Firstly, four of my local video stores are all closing. While that’s good news if I have extra money and want to score a decent copy of a classic film on the cheap, but not for the fact that Redbox is now the main way for me to rent a DVD.
What I hate the most about this change is that I won't have the opportunity ever again to enter an actual video store. You can laugh at me if you want to because that's a really dorkish thing to say (it is and I am), but I’ve met some great people in a video store. I met the love of my life in a video store (my actual other half, not just the concept of film in general). We still talk about film all the time, and I wouldn’t have even met him if I hadn’t gone there, the idea of which frankly scares the hell out of me. The video store was the one place where I knew that I could always find someone who “knew their shit” (except at Blockbuster), and I’d find some film that I hadn’t heard of that I had to see, which led to another film, and so on.
Gone. And I understand the market had evaporated, and I understand that it’s easier to hit the stream button on Netflix, but I’ll still always miss the mortar-and-stone building. I used to say that Norm had his Cheers, and I had my video store. Now, I guess I have a box. Lucky me.
Secondly, I saw an article over the weekend announcing that theatrical ticket sales are again going to spike – just in time for the summer film season in a few months. Although again I realize that it’s a business decision, this one doesn’t make as much sense. Year over year, the box office is growing, crowds are growing, but the quality of the films on the whole is staying stagnant. There’s yet another remake, or sequel, or unnecessary 3-D epic. Most of these aren’t worth paying 4.99 for, much less the 15.00-17.00 to which they could possibly escalate.
So it looks like I’m going to have to change my habits again. I’ll do my research on the websites I follow to get the upcoming slates, and I’ll watch what I want when I can. My Wii now accommodates streaming Netflix options. But as for the rest of it, there’s nothing to take its place. And I don’t want anything to even try.
3/22/2010
Why Ponyo is better than Pixar
From reading my last post, it’s clear that I’m not thrilled with Disney right now. I’m sick of their endless, mindless marketing and their many-times-told sequels.
Then I sat down and finally watched “Ponyo”.
“Ponyo” is the latest film from Miyazaki, (or Mr. Miyazaki, as my godson used to call him) the Japanese genius who made such great films as “Spirited Away” and “My Neighbor Tortoro”. As with all Miyazaki films, there is an English dubbed version of this film that contains a host of celebrity voices. This time it’s Matt Damon, Cate Blanchett, Tina Fey and Liam Niesson, just to name a few.
“Ponyo” is similar to Disney’s breakout hit “The Little Mermaid” in that it tells the story of a female creature (a goldfish) who wants desperately to become human in order to be with her love. But this isn’t really a “true love, happily ever after" thing, it’s more of a being accepted and loved thing.
Young (and not too bright) Souske finds a goldfish one morning on death’s door. He rescues her and names her Ponyo. Souske is raised mostly by his mom Lisa, because his father is a longshoreman and is often away at sea. He goes to school next to the senior center where his mother works.
Ponyo lives under the ocean. Her dad is controlling and threatened by her magical gifts. He wants to keep her in a bubble (literally). When he finds out her plans to become human, he sends all his cohorts to take her back – leaving mindless destruction in his wake.
One of the greatest things about Miyazaki films is that he makes you completely go with the story – no matter how ludicrous it actually is in reality. Just like “Spirited Away”, there are an abundance of cute little creatures coming in and out. But there are just as many ominous ones to balance it out.
The entire opening non-dialogue shot of Ponyo riding jellyfishes to the surface is just magical – and rare in today’s climate.
This is the film I wish “Up” could have been. I’m getting quite tired of Pixar, with their marketing ploys and stupid songs. The stories are repetitive and the creatures are supposed to be realistic but look too and act far too bubbly for my taste. With Japanese animation, it’s not drawn as well, but it is certainly more colorful. That’s a great help when you’re trying to portray the depths of the ocean.
It’s a very charming film, and it’s a crying shame that in all the overextended “Up” hype this film seems to have gotten lost. It did have a theatrical run last summer, and most people (including myself) didn’t make it out there.
But once again I am reminded of Miyazaki’s genius. I’ll be sorry when he stops making films. I guess, since Disney does have the rights to all Studio Ghibli films now, I actually owe Disney for this one. But that still doesn’t make up for everything else, especially Pixar.
"Ponyo" - 101 minutes (****)
Then I sat down and finally watched “Ponyo”.
“Ponyo” is the latest film from Miyazaki, (or Mr. Miyazaki, as my godson used to call him) the Japanese genius who made such great films as “Spirited Away” and “My Neighbor Tortoro”. As with all Miyazaki films, there is an English dubbed version of this film that contains a host of celebrity voices. This time it’s Matt Damon, Cate Blanchett, Tina Fey and Liam Niesson, just to name a few.
“Ponyo” is similar to Disney’s breakout hit “The Little Mermaid” in that it tells the story of a female creature (a goldfish) who wants desperately to become human in order to be with her love. But this isn’t really a “true love, happily ever after" thing, it’s more of a being accepted and loved thing.
Young (and not too bright) Souske finds a goldfish one morning on death’s door. He rescues her and names her Ponyo. Souske is raised mostly by his mom Lisa, because his father is a longshoreman and is often away at sea. He goes to school next to the senior center where his mother works.
Ponyo lives under the ocean. Her dad is controlling and threatened by her magical gifts. He wants to keep her in a bubble (literally). When he finds out her plans to become human, he sends all his cohorts to take her back – leaving mindless destruction in his wake.
One of the greatest things about Miyazaki films is that he makes you completely go with the story – no matter how ludicrous it actually is in reality. Just like “Spirited Away”, there are an abundance of cute little creatures coming in and out. But there are just as many ominous ones to balance it out.
The entire opening non-dialogue shot of Ponyo riding jellyfishes to the surface is just magical – and rare in today’s climate.
This is the film I wish “Up” could have been. I’m getting quite tired of Pixar, with their marketing ploys and stupid songs. The stories are repetitive and the creatures are supposed to be realistic but look too and act far too bubbly for my taste. With Japanese animation, it’s not drawn as well, but it is certainly more colorful. That’s a great help when you’re trying to portray the depths of the ocean.
It’s a very charming film, and it’s a crying shame that in all the overextended “Up” hype this film seems to have gotten lost. It did have a theatrical run last summer, and most people (including myself) didn’t make it out there.
But once again I am reminded of Miyazaki’s genius. I’ll be sorry when he stops making films. I guess, since Disney does have the rights to all Studio Ghibli films now, I actually owe Disney for this one. But that still doesn’t make up for everything else, especially Pixar.
"Ponyo" - 101 minutes (****)
3/14/2010
Alice in Wonderland - Redux
Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland” made me curiouser and curiouser as its release date approached. I’ve always loved the story. I have memories of the annual Enchanted Forest trip with my cousins and riding the teacups to eventually see the cobwebbed Giant Alice in a much-too-small-room. I even have an old beat up copy of both books on my shelf.
While waiting to go, I unfortunately read press. Reviews were scattered, but most were mediocre. I got suspicious, reminding myself that it is still modern-day Disney infected (wrong word use intentionally).
So when I went on Saturday, my expectations weren’t that high. I wasn’t disappointed, and I was entertained. But I almost fell asleep, as the 108 minutes can drag. I wanted to poke the White Rabbit and ask him to hurry them along.
The entire film is a set of bulls eyes or dead misses. Spot on is Helena Bonham Carter, who makes the big headed Red Queen a complete hoot. She’s great, especially as she yells “Off with his head!” It’s hysterical, but I’d expect nothing less. Unfortunately, the miss for me was my girl Annie Hathaway as the White Queen, who seems to channel a fractured version of Glinda from “The Wizard of Oz”.
I appreciate the filmmakers trying for an original story. I like the fact that they state the obvious – Alice has been here before (as have we). I’m a sucker for all things metaphorical, as this story tends to be. Alice’s current trip starts when she’s offered a marriage proposal she has zero interest in accepting from a total cad of a guy. Through her journey she finds herself and cue female empowerment Disney message, which is fine.
You’ll notice no Depp mention yet. That’s because I’m not really sure how he fits here. You can’t have a Burton without a Depp, just like you can’t have Scorsese without DiC(r)aprio. And yes, he is over the top. But there were a few moments where I thought I was watching Edward Scissorhands – right down to the pout on his white-powdered face. Giving the Hatter an expanded role is ok, but I think it just goes too far.
Mia Wasikowska is fantastic as Alice. I remember watching her on HBO’s “In Treatment” and realizing that she’d go somewhere. This role will put her on the map, and that’s just fine by me. As Alice finally takes control and decides to live her life on her terms, you can’t help but wish her well, a sign of a solid performance.
Although it’s made a boatload of money, this is not a kids movie. Little ones in my showing were bored and talked loud. It’s too story driven to be entertaining for youngsters, and the characters aren’t cartoonish enough to hold their interest. And as stated, it's part of the Evil Disney Modern-Day-Pitching-Everything-Under-the-Sun-Remake-Sequel-Hell Empire.
Was it worth the latest trip to Wonderland? I guess so, but it’s not really a trip that I’d want to repeat, even in 3D.
"Alice in Wonderland" - Rated PG, 108 minutes (**1/2)
While waiting to go, I unfortunately read press. Reviews were scattered, but most were mediocre. I got suspicious, reminding myself that it is still modern-day Disney infected (wrong word use intentionally).
So when I went on Saturday, my expectations weren’t that high. I wasn’t disappointed, and I was entertained. But I almost fell asleep, as the 108 minutes can drag. I wanted to poke the White Rabbit and ask him to hurry them along.
The entire film is a set of bulls eyes or dead misses. Spot on is Helena Bonham Carter, who makes the big headed Red Queen a complete hoot. She’s great, especially as she yells “Off with his head!” It’s hysterical, but I’d expect nothing less. Unfortunately, the miss for me was my girl Annie Hathaway as the White Queen, who seems to channel a fractured version of Glinda from “The Wizard of Oz”.
I appreciate the filmmakers trying for an original story. I like the fact that they state the obvious – Alice has been here before (as have we). I’m a sucker for all things metaphorical, as this story tends to be. Alice’s current trip starts when she’s offered a marriage proposal she has zero interest in accepting from a total cad of a guy. Through her journey she finds herself and cue female empowerment Disney message, which is fine.
You’ll notice no Depp mention yet. That’s because I’m not really sure how he fits here. You can’t have a Burton without a Depp, just like you can’t have Scorsese without DiC(r)aprio. And yes, he is over the top. But there were a few moments where I thought I was watching Edward Scissorhands – right down to the pout on his white-powdered face. Giving the Hatter an expanded role is ok, but I think it just goes too far.
Mia Wasikowska is fantastic as Alice. I remember watching her on HBO’s “In Treatment” and realizing that she’d go somewhere. This role will put her on the map, and that’s just fine by me. As Alice finally takes control and decides to live her life on her terms, you can’t help but wish her well, a sign of a solid performance.
Although it’s made a boatload of money, this is not a kids movie. Little ones in my showing were bored and talked loud. It’s too story driven to be entertaining for youngsters, and the characters aren’t cartoonish enough to hold their interest. And as stated, it's part of the Evil Disney Modern-Day-Pitching-Everything-Under-the-Sun-Remake-Sequel-Hell Empire.
Was it worth the latest trip to Wonderland? I guess so, but it’s not really a trip that I’d want to repeat, even in 3D.
"Alice in Wonderland" - Rated PG, 108 minutes (**1/2)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)