Background: Denzel Washington (American Gangster, Déjà Vu) directs for the second time in his career in The Great Debaters, written by Robert Eisele and based on the true story of the 1935 Wiley College debate team. Starring Nate Parker (Pride), Jurnee Smollett (Gridiron Gang), and the ironically named - and unrelated - Denzel Whitaker (Training Day) as the student debaters, the film also features Washington, Forest Whitaker (The Last King of Scotland), Kimberly Elise (Pride, John Q), and Jon Heard (Sweetland). Despite the star power and feel-good story, the film is sure to get lost in the award competition at this time of the year.
Synopsis: In 1935 at Wiley College in Marshall, TX, professor/debate team coach Melvin B. Talson (Washington) is recruiting for the upcoming season. On the side, he is also helping local sharecroppers form a union, much to the chagrin of local Sheriff Dozier (Heard). The team is selected in predictable fashion, and is anchored by disillusioned cool guy Henry Lowe (Parker), smart and beautiful Samantha Brooke (Smollett), and young yet mature James Farmer, Jr. (D. Whitaker), who is the son of Wiley’s theology professor James Farmer (F. Whitaker). The team rises to prominence while dealing with personal tensions, hormones, Talson’s communist activity, and dangerous racism in the local community. Before long they are off to Harvard for a nationally broadcast debate against the defending champs. Cue every scene from Hoosiers from here through to the end, but replace the basketball court with a debating stage.
I Loved:
+ The relationship between Denzel Whitaker and Forest Whitaker as father and son. It was the best character development in the movie and showed how frighteningly well Forest Whitaker can act.
I Liked:
+ Denzel Whitaker as James Farmer, Jr., who stole every scene he was in. The scene where he confronted a drunk Henry Lowe was especially well done.
I Disliked:
- That the story wasn’t very rich, as interesting story lines were only briefly dipped into, like racism and communism, which only seemed to be there to add some melodrama. But I guess you can only do so much in two hours, and the debate team was the focus.
I Hated:
- The poorly done ending, which was painfully predictable to the point of boredom. After the final speech, you don’t need to draw out the announcement and celebration scenes.
Grade:
Writing - 8
Acting - 9
Production - 7
Emotional Impact - 7
Music - 5
Significance - 5
Total: 41/50= 82% = B-
Last Word: The Great Debaters is a story of redemption and heartwarming triumph, but it lacks the genuine drama that would have made it an excellent movie. I’m pretty disappointed with Denzel Washington’s work as director here. As in the movie, a lot of his production seemed “canned,” most notably at the end, which was lifted straight from any other underdog-to-champion movie. Any creative effort here would have been an improvement, and Denzel showed he could do that when he directed Antwone Fisher. My favorite scenes featured Forest Whitaker, who makes every character believable. Overall, the acting was the strongest component of The Great Debaters, which never fully reaches its potential. I don’t even think it made me sob, which has to mean something wasn’t done right.
Background: Based on Stephen Sondheim's acclaimed Broadway musical by the same name, Sweeney Todd marks the sixth collaboration (and third in a row) between director Tim Burton (Corpse Bride, Big Fish) and Johnny Depp (Pirates of the Caribbean...). Also starring are Burton's wife Helena Bonham Carter (Corpse Bride, Harry Potter...), Alan Rickman (Harry Potter..., Die Hard), Sacha Baron Cohen (Borat), Timothy Spall (Harry Potter...), and newcomer Ed Sanders, who will probably be in the next Harry Potter judging by his influences here. All of the actors are indeed singing their parts in Sweeney Todd, though it's not the most challenging musical in terms of range.Synopsis: After being wrongly imprisoned for 15 years, Benjamin Barker (Depp) returns to London as Sweeney Todd, a scorned barber with a score to settle - not someone you'd want to cross. His primary target is Judge Turpin (Rickman), who not only locked him up but also stole his daughter, Joanna. Todd shacks up in his old shop on Fleet Street, which is now also where Mrs. Lovett (Bonham Carter) operates her "meat" pie shop. She becomes his caretaker and admirer as he plots revenge on Turpin. Also in the mix are Todd's former apprentice (Cohen), his apprentice (Sanders), Judge Turpin's assistant (Spall), and a local sailor who has the hots for Joanna. Plans are hatched, throats are slit, people are eaten, and songs are sung. Just another day on Fleet Street.
I Loved:
+ The overall feel of the production - almost like you were watching it on a really vivid stage.
I Liked:
+ Johnny Depp, waaaay more than in any of the ridiculous Pirates movies for he which he received Oscar consideration. Unbelievable then, but outrageous when compared to this.
+ The rest of the ensemble, especially Ed Sanders as Toby.
+ The music, specifically "Johanna," "Pirelli's Miracle Elixir," and "A Little Priest."
I Disliked:
- The feeling that the second half was either rushed or lacking in story. It just seemed to lose intrigue while it picked up energy. I haven't seen the stage musical, though, so I don't really know how it's supposed to flow.
I Hated:
- The throat slitting - and accompanying hooting, hollering and howling from the idiot behind me in the theater.
Grade:
Writing - 9
Acting - 10
Production - 10
Emotional Impact - 8
Music - 5
Significance - 2
Total: 43/50= 88% = B+
Last Word: What is it about seeing people's necks explode with gushing and gurgling blood that causes laughing cramps in the general public? Or, rather, what is it about me that prevents me from seeing the humor in violence, since I'm so nakedly in the minority here? If you can get past it - or you're just not me - then the darkest, bloodiest film of the year (though I didn't see Saw IV) will send you home in fits. I heard similar roaring laughter at The Passion of the Christ and Kill Bill. Anyway, when the camera is not streaked with blood, Tim Burton's dream world glows with great detail. There is hardly a director with such dark, distinct taste (was his Batman the best so far?). I'd like to see a Tim Burton romantic comedy starring Hugh Grant. Sweeney Todd features great musical numbers, a pretty interesting story, and perfect acting across the board. I'm especially excited about this Ed Sanders kid, who looks really familiar but has no other screen credits. All in all it's hard to imagine a different cast for this movie, especially when you consider that Meryl Streep was lined up to play Mrs. Lovett. Wow. To conclude - Sweeney Todd is a lesson in excellent filmmaking, probably on par this year with No Country for Old Men in terms of professionalism. However, it's just not a movie that I really loved. Maybe I could handle watching it on stage, where the blood flood is toned down a bit.
Background: Writer/Director/Producer/Hollywood darling Judd Apatow (Anchorman, Talladega Nights) squeezes one last film into 2007 with Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story, a spoof of the recent musical biopics Ray and Walk the Line. Directed and co-written by Jake Kasdan (The TV Set, "Freaks and Geeks"), it stars John C. Reilly (Talladega Nights, Chicago), Jenna Fischer (TV's "The Office"), and a crowd of other familiar faces. I'm not sure, but based on what I know of his talents, John C. Reilly probably did all of the actual singing and even guitar playing in the movie.Synopsis: Young Dewey Cox accidentally cuts his brother in half with a machete. Disowned by his father and newly aware of his ability to play the blues, Dewey (Reilly) sets off on a lifelong musical career. He follows the traditional arc: determination and luck gives him his big break, his marriage suffers to the temptations of the road, he has a tumultuous romance with a new woman (Fischer), he goes in and out of drug rehab, he alienates all of his band members, and he has a reawakening and redemption.
I Loved:
+ Tim Meadows, who was by far the funniest person on screen.
I Liked:
+ The spoofed bits of the biopics, as unoriginal as they may have been.
+ The bizarre cameos by everybody from Jack White to Frankie Muniz to Eddie Vedder. Weird, but memorable.
+ Paul Rudd and Justin Long as John Lennon and George Harrison, respectively.
I Disliked:
- John C. Reilly. I did. Since when is he supposed to be a comedic genius?
- Jack Black and Jason Schwartzman as Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr, respectively.
I Hated:
- The stupid machete plotline, including hearing "The wrong kid died!" every 6 minutes.
Grade:
Writing - 7
Acting - 8
Production - 9
Emotional Impact - 8
Music - 5
Significance - 2
Total: 39/50= 78% = C+
Last Word: Comedy kidnapped John C. Reilly! What has happened to this guy? I'm talking about Boogie Nights, Magnolia, The Anniversary Party, The Good Girl, and Gangs of New York, to name just a recent few. Somebody told him should be the next Will Ferrell and he's never looked back, to my great disappointment. In fact, Walk Hard made a dramatically better movie when I simply pretended Will Ferrell was playing Dewey Cox. Sure, maybe that's his typecast role, but he does it a lot better than anyone else. Reilly's awkwardness aside, I didn't really laugh much during this movie. As I've read elsewhere and totally agree with, it was like an SNL skit that just went on way too long. You know how those are, and it didn't help to have so many SNL-style actors riding along (Jenna Fischer, Chris Parnell, Kristen Wiig, Jack Black, Justin Long, Paul Rudd, Jason Schwartzman, Tim Meadows, and Jonah Hill). The writing wasn't very sharp, though the spoofed bits of Walk the Line and Ray were well done. So in conclusion I was pretty disappointed, but instead of blaming just Reilly, I'll chalk this dud up to Judd Apatow trying to copy someone else's story instead of telling his own. He doesn't draw the line clearly enough between whether he's making fun or having fun, but I'm not interested enough to see it again and figure it out - especially if I have the option to see any of his other movies instead, like my personal favorite Anchorman.
Background: In yet another "War on Terrorism" message movie of 2007, director Mike Nichols (The Graduate, Closer) works with Aaron Sorkin's (TV's "The West Wing") adaptation of George Crile's 2003 book about Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson, and yes, I know this was a long sentence. Charlie Wilson's War stars Tom Hanks (The Da Vinci Code) in the title role, with supporting performances by Julia Roberts (Closer), Philip Seymour Hoffman (Before the Devil Knows You're Dead), and Amy Adams (Junebug). I've been reading buzz about it for over a year now - probably because of the Nichols/Hanks/Roberts connection, but with the competition that has surfaced as of late I'm not sure what its award chances are beyond some token nominations. Then again, it's the strongest of the war movies thus far.
Synopsis: In the early 1980's, Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson (Hanks) is a boozing womanizer with no enemies and plenty of influential friends, including wealthy socialite Joanne Herring (Roberts). At the height of the cold war, she and several others (including Dan Rather) convince Wilson to take on the cause of the mujahideen in Afghanistan, who are fighting against the invading Soviets. While pushing an expanding budget through Congress, he quietly enlists CIA troublemaker Gust Avrakatos (Hoffman) - along with friends in Pakistan and Israel - to arm the Afghans with all kinds of weapons. Since Americans are not on the ground, the war goes unnoticed for years, and soon the Soviets are retreating while Wilson is earning accolades in Washington. Before it's all over, however, Avrakatos eerily warns Hanks of what will happen if the U.S. washes their hands of Afghanistan too soon...
I Loved:
+ Philip Seymour Hoffman, who strikes a perfect balance between chafing and charming.
I Liked:
+ The refugee camp scene, which was appropriate and timely (i.e., Darfur, many other places right now).
+ Tom Hanks, who added enough charisma to his role to carry the movie.
I Disliked:
- That the Soviet - Afghan political situation was not further explored. But I guess it didn't need to be, we were going to fight the Soviets no matter what.
- The office scene where Hoffman and Bonnie Bach's (Adams) girls were flying in and out of the room. It was amusing but exhausting.
I Hated:
- Julia Roberts's accent - ouch, that was not working.
- That all of the most important conversations in Washington happen spontaneously while walking in hallways. This is exactly why I don't watch "The West Wing."
Grade:
Writing - 8
Acting - 8
Production - 8
Emotional Impact - 8
Music - 5
Significance - 5
Total: 43/50= 84% = B
Last Word: There's something charmingly, maybe refreshingly contradictory about Charlie Wilson's War - it's a comedy about war. Of course that's been done before, but certainly not in recent months. As a stand-alone movie, it's entertaining enough and not too provocative. As a referendum on our current situation in Afghanistan, it isn't quite informative enough for me, and it borders on flashy. I guess I should read the book, though, or wait for a DVD interview with the real Charlie Wilson, who of course approved this production. Tom Hanks does an admirable - albeit sometimes awkward - job in the title role, while Julia Roberts seems to yawn through her role. Philip Seymour Hoffman perfectly delivers his juicy lines, and Amy Adams is very good as Charlie Wilson's assistant. All in all, I recommend seeing Charlie Wilson's War for an entertaining lesson on the cold war, despite a couple of minor annoyances.
Background: Director Jon Turtletaub and screenwriting couple Cormac and Marianne Wibberley join forces again to follow up on their 2004 smash National Treasure. The trio of Nicolas Cage (Ghost Rider, World Trade Center), Diane Kruger (Troy), and Justin Bartha are all back for the sequel, along with Jon Voight (Transformers) and Harvey Keitel (Pulp Fiction). Joining the regulars this time are Helen Mirren (The Queen) and Ed Harris (Gone Baby Gone). As with the first film, the sequel was filmed all over the world, from Paris to South Dakota, where Helen Mirren reportedly had to stay and pass up an opportunity to meet Queen Elizabeth II in recognition of her Oscar-winning performance in The Queen.Synopsis: Treasure hunter Ben Gates (Cage) and his father Patrick (Voight) are shocked to find out that their ancestor Thomas Gates was involved in the conspiracy to assassinate Abraham Lincoln, according to evidence presented by bad guy Mitch Wilkinson (Harris). Ben enlists the help of Riley Poole (Bartha) and his ex-girlfriend Abigail Chase (Kruger) to find a new treasure, one that involves trekking to Paris, London, the Oval Office, and Mount Rushmore. Oh, and also kidnapping the president to find out about the location of the secret "President's Book." The Gates team is in an "Amazing Race" against Wilkinson's crew, which sorely lacks the gadgetry and comedic relief of Riley Poole. Eventually all roads lead to a secret city buried behind Mount Rushmore, and somehow Thomas Gates is vindicated. A nice cliffhanger is also tacked on, surely foreshadowing a third National Treasure.
I Loved:
+ That the movie doesn't take itself seriously.
+ Justin Bartha as Riley Poole, once again. I don't know how he can be funny without being annoying, but he can.
+ The ridiculous high-tech wizardry - nothing is impossible to crack.
I Liked:
+ The musical score, same as in the original National Treasure.
+ Helen Mirren and Ed Harris, each of whom fit perfectly for their new role.
I Disliked:
- Diane Kruger's lingering German accent.
- The somewhat drawn-out ending.
I Hated:
- That it wasn't really a good movie. Lots of star power, but not enough charm or care taken with script to make it an Indiana Jones-quality movie.
Grade:
Writing - 8
Acting - 8
Production - 8
Emotional Impact - 9
Music - 5
Significance - 2
Total: 40/50= 80% = B-
Last Word: You simply can't take National Treasure: Book of Secrets seriously. Let's get that out of the way first. It's a Disney adventure movie with improbable twists, sensational stunts, and some light comedy and romance thrown in. OK, full disclosure: I loved the original National Treasure. Maybe it just grew on me because it was on the Starz channel every day, but it's a good time. I've got good news if you're with me on that - the sequel delivers. I still can't really follow the plot (basically, where does it come from?), but that hasn't stopped me from enjoying either installment thus far. The humor and action are plentiful and appropriate here, though I could have used some more wisecracking out of Justin Bartha as Riley Poole. Nicolas Cage and Diane Kruger have their bickering in good form, and Ed Harris fills in nicely for Sean Bean as the "bad" treasure hunter. National Treasure: Book of Secrets is more entertaining fluff than I usually see, but it's about as close as you can get to old-school adventure comedies these days.
Background: Francis Ford Coppola (The Godfather, The Godfather: Part II) returns to the director's chair for the first time in 10 years (his last time being for The Rainmaker). In his "time off" he has expanded his winery in Napa Valley (I remember driving by it quizzically) and served as executive producer on a wide variety of movies, from Jeepers Creepers to Kinsey. Youth Without Youth is adapted from Mircea Eliade's novella and was filmed in Eliade's home country of Romania. It stars Tim Roth (Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs) and Romanian actress Alexandra Maria Lara (Downfall).
Synopsis: Dominic (Roth) is a 70-something professor in 1938, I think. His wife Veronica (Lara) died recently, so he sets off for Bucharest, I think. Walking across the street one day, Dominic is struck by lightning. During his recovery, doctors discover that his body has regressed to that of a 35 or 40 year old man. He grows new teeth and dark hair, and he remembers everything of his "previous" life. He also has a second soul, or a body double, or twin, or something, and he no longer ages. And he has super powers, like mind reading and speed reading. This new Dominic is wanted by the Nazis as a guinea pig for aging experimentation, and he lives in Switzerland in secrecy. At some point he meets Laura (Lara), a young woman who has also been struck by lightning. She appears to be channeling a 15th century Indian woman, and she is haunted by terrible nightmares. She also has strange bouts of panic, when she speaks in ancient languages that Dominic apparently understands. The two enjoy a tragic love affair when all of a sudden Laura begins to rapidly age, a consequence of being with Dominic, I think. Dominic leaves and goes on to live the rest of his life, but he's not aging. In 1970 he goes to his hometown and has a dreamy meeting in his old cafe, I think. But maybe it's all in his head, I'm not sure. Then he dies on the street, I think.
I Loved:
+ Much of the cinematography and Romanian cityscapes.
I Liked:
+ The old-school opening credits. You haven't seen that for about 30 years.
I Disliked:
- The mumbling dialogue that made a disorienting story even more mysterious.
- Matt Damon's awkwardly placed cameo.
I Hated:
- The frustrating plot.
- The guy in the theater who was shouting on his cellphone many, many times while walking around and propping his bare feet over the row in front of him.
Grade:
Writing - 7
Acting - 8
Production - 5
Emotional Impact - 7
Music - 4
Significance - 4
Total: 35/50= 70% = C-
Last Word: "I should have understood this from the beginning." So says Tim Roth's character Dominic toward the end of Youth Without Youth. Don't feel bad, Dominic. If you even know what year you're in then you've understood way more than the rest of us. Granted, there was an outrageously obnoxious person in the theater, but I can't blame their many distractions on my complete inability to follow what was happening in this movie. Francis Ford Coppola has made a beautiful mess. The cinematography is rich and reminds of you a dream, but so does the plot, and that's the problem. Were this a David Lynch film, I might "get it." But Francis Ford Coppola is known for adapting dense material ("The Godfather", "Heart of Darkness" as Apocalypse Now) into accessible films, and he shouldn't have taken on such a huge project for his return to the director's chair. His next film is Tetro, an original story about an Italian immigrant family. Sounds much more promising and hopefully simple enough to understand for those of us who aren't philosophy scholars.
Background: I would be remiss here if I didn't first recognize the work of my friends at Invisible Children in raising awareness of the plight of the Acholi people in Northern Uganda. One of IC's earliest supporters was Okot Jolly Grace, who is currently their country director in Uganda and is also one of the heroes of this film. War Dance was directed and filmed by Sean Fine and Andrea Nix Fine, a married couple with primarily TV documentary experience, including National Geographic specials. They won the Documentary Directing Award at the 2007 Sundance Film Festival for their work on War Dance. Synopsis: We meet three pre-adolescent children living in the Patongo internally displaced camp in Northern Uganda, victims of the 20+ year bloody war between rebels from the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) and Ugandan government troops. Rose had to identify her parents' heads as they were pulled from a boiling pot. Nancy's mother had to bury the chopped pieces of Nancy's father. Dominic was abducted by the LRA and forced to kill innocent members of his own tribe, the Acholi. All three of them are now members of the camp's song and dance troupe that is preparing for the National Music Festival in Kampala. Jolly and her teaching counterpart (I missed his name) train the group in choral, instrumental, and dance performances. Soon enough it's time for the two day journey to Kampala, where we're witness to a Mad Hot Ballroom-like competition between Ugandan primary schools. The Patongo children are the underdogs to say the least, but they end up returning to their camp as the heroes of their generation. And I return to the restroom to mop up the tears spewing from my face.
I Loved:
+ Seeing Rose, Nancy, and Dominic smile.
+ The early rehearsal scenes.
+ The stunning digital cinematography - some of the best you're likely to see in a documentary.
+ The last line, spoken by Dominic.
I Liked:
+ The final dance performance and truly exhilarating award ceremony.
+ The great soundtrack featuring Ugandan musical artists.
+ The discussion between Dominic and the LRA soldier.
I Disliked:
- Some of the awkwardly staged scene recreations. They were jarring and emotionally effective but seemed a little too visually stylish, like when Nancy is brushing her hands through the high grass like Russell Crowe in Gladiator.
I Hated:
- Knowing that few people are likely to see this. (Standing in line) "Learn something about humanity that will better my life? Nah, let's go see Alien vs. Predator - Requiem. Oh, it's sold out? Shoulda known. How 'bout Wild Hogs?"
Grade:
Writing - N/A
Acting - N/A
Production - 9
Emotional Impact - 10!
Music - 5
Significance - 5
Total: 29/30= 97% = A
Last Word: What an inspiring story. It's times like this that I'm extremely grateful to live in a film market with three Landmark Theatres and numerous independent theaters. What do you go see at the theater in Louisville? I shudder to think. Anyway, War Dance is one of the best documentaries - and overall films - of the year, and I highly recommend it. Much of the criticism I've seen of it focuses on its visual style, which I concede above, as the cinematography was occasionally distracting. It almost looks too good, which is probably why people think they were focusing more on the scenery than the story. At the same time, however, the camera shows the beauty of an Africa that few people will ever see, especially those who have only seen Blood Diamond or Tears of the Sun. Visuals aside, there's no getting around the power of this story and the pain and joy you experience in watching Rose, Nancy, Dominic and the others release their unimaginable emotions through song and dance. While packing for the trip to Kampala, Nancy poignantly (and chillingly) says, "I'm excited to see what peace looks like." Quite a different world she and millions of others live in each day. One more thing I want to address is the criticism that the Fines are naive in thinking a trophy will solve all of the Acholi's problems. That's ridiculous. The strongest emotions I felt were not in simply watching the performances, but in thinking about the devastating complexity of the entire situation - not joy that they won something, but anger that they had to win something. Use War Dance as evidence that humans are wicked or that they are angelic, but don't so easily dismiss it as a "pandering" Christian Children's Fund ad. If you think the scenes were scripted and the kids weren't able to say what they did on their own, you're doing them a disservice. Oh, one last note: ThinkFilm is officially still the bomb.
I could get a lot of grief for this, but I thought I would take the occasion to discuss the 10 year anniversary of the highest-grossing and most awarded film in the history of the world. Titanic dwarfs most other movies like the actual ship would have dwarfed a canoe. It grossed over $1.8 billion worldwide and was nominated for 14 Oscars, of which it won 11, a total that tied it with Ben-Hur and later on with LOTR: The Return of the King, which is second on the highest-grossing list - and over $700 million behind Titanic. Keep in mind Titanic didn't have the advantage of millions of hobbit fanboys, either.
I saw Titanic on Christmas night, 1997, at the old Har-Mar theater. Turns out I wasn't the only one. Opening in a modest 2,600 screens, it would go on to be the #1 film in the country until April of 1998. If you don't follow these kinds of things you might not realize the magnitude of this - most blockbusters are lucky to be #1 for two weeks straight, let alone 15. (In 2007, 3 weeks was the longest streak). Even after Titanic was eventually knocked to second by (great trivia question) Lost in Space, it remained in packed theaters through the summer of 1998 (when I happened to see the musical "Titanic" on Broadway = awful). I remember people in school talking about having seen Titanic in the theater15-20 times. Wow. I think I only made it twice. That being said...I actually like the movie. Yep, I do - a lot.
First of all, the special effects were breathtaking - I hadn't heard gasps like that from the audience since seeing the dinosaurs for the first time in Jurassic Park (still probably one of the most amazing moviegoing experiences ever). Secondly, it was a great story - a major historical event told through the eyes of a likable participant. Third, it launched the careers of two of the most talented stars in Hollywood right now - Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio, each of whom has two Best Actor/Actress Oscar nominations within just the last three years. That's ridiculous.
Lastly, Titanic is everything you would ever want from a blockbuster. Simply stated, it's why you go to the theater, and it was certainly worth the price of admission. I know most people can't stand it and James Cameron is jerk and it went way over budget and blah blah blah, but if wasn't for productions like it, you wouldn't go to the movies - nor would you even be reading this.
I'm surprised more isn't being made of its anniversary, to be honest. A DVD boxed set or something? I guess it had its marketing run, but I thought somebody would try to cash in. Maybe I'll just look for it on TV to witness film history again.
Background: The third adaption of Richard Matheson's 1954 novel of the same name, I Am Legend stars Will Smith (The Pursuit of Happyness) in another heroic blockbuster. The film was almost made in the 90's with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ridley Scott, but production fell apart, fortunately. Will Smith hoped Guillermo del Toro (Pan's Labyrinth) would direct this version, but Francis Lawrence (Constantine) ended up at the helm. Filming was partially done on location and involved thousands of extras and all kinds of expensive production allowances. You can't just shut down Manhattan for a few months, even if you are Will Smith. By the way, his daughter Willow plays his daughter on screen, marking the second time in a year that Smith has played opposite his child in a film. Synopsis: In 2009, a cure for cancer is found. By 2012, humanity is virtually wiped out - something went wrong with the cure. Specifically, it turned people into cannibalistic vampire mutants called "Dark Seekers." Dr. Robert Neville (Smith) is immune to the virus and is New York City's lone survivor, stranded in Manhattan. He spends his days hunting wild deer in Times Square with his loyal German Shepard, Sam, broadcasting on AM frequency for any sign of life, and trapping mutants to take back to his Washington Square brownstone, which houses a lab for experiments - Neville is trying to find a cure for the cure. One fateful day his world falls apart, and he goes out into the dangerous night on what's essentially a kamikaze mission. Surprisingly he's not killed (that would be quite an ending), as a new twist develops and his mission becomes all the more important. A final man vs. zombie battle culminates in a "legend"ary epilogue. Sorry, couldn't resist.
I Loved:
+ The first five minutes - interview with Emma Thompson (Stranger Than Fiction), cut to stunning empty city shots.
+ Will Smith, whose diligence in selecting roles pays off again here. Dude knows what works.
+ The visual effects, cinematography and set design - truly an achievement in creating a new Manhattan.
+ The voiceovers, especially at the end.
I Liked:
+ The armrest-gripping suspense in the scene where Neville goes into the dark to get Sam.
+ The underlying what-if-that-were-me feeling throughout the movie.
+ Sam - great dog acting here. Seriously.
+ The first night scene we see: Neville and Sam in the bathtub, creepy noises outside.
I Disliked:
- Will Smith's occasional speechifying, only because it slowed the action.
- The all-of-a-sudden final 20 minutes.
- The drawn-out goodbye between Neville and his family. Didn't need to see it so many times.
- The fake look of the deer and lions.
I Hated:
- The "Dark Seekers" - really disappointing execution here, and a total ripoff of Voldemort from Harry Potter. Why do they have super-human strength? Why are they virtually invincible? Why can't they talk? These should have been human actors, not CGI products that sound like velociraptors.
Grade:
Writing - 8
Acting - 9
Production - 9
Emotional Impact - 10
Music - 4
Significance - 4
Total: 44/50= 88% = B+
Last Word: If ever an out-and-out action thriller produces an Oscar nominee, I Am Legend should be it. Will Smith is perfect for the role, and brings real depth to it (witness the final video store scene). He shouldn't win, mind you, but some recognition isn't as laughable as you'd think. Regardless, he continues to earn his astronomical paychecks because he knows exactly what he's good at, and what people want to see him do. I Am Legend is truly frightening at parts, though the zombies eventually lose their fright factor to mediocre special effects and some cheap thrills. I blame Francis Lawrence, who tried to pull the same tricks in Constantine. His work in the first part of the movie is great, though (the interview with Thompson is excellently placed, and she's excellent in it), and the last scene comes together nicely. I also liked that the world of 2012 looks realistic, though of course human progress has been nonexistent for three years. These philosophical ideas about the human condition are hinted at in some really awkward moments by Smith, but they are nevertheless intriguing, and they've stuck with me. All in all, I Am Legend is a unique and ultimately satisfying thriller that doesn't get too heady, which is a blessing and a curse. One last note regarding the production - wouldn't it have been interesting if Will Smith were silent throughout the movie, save some verbal commands with Sam? Or what if there wasn't even a dog at all? I think it would have created a more tense tone, if that's even possible.
Background: Brook Busey, a.k.a. Diablo Cody, was for a short time a stripper and City Pages blogger here in Minneapolis, though she hails from Chicago and now lives in L.A. A talent manager signed her to write "Candy Girl," a memoir about her stripping career, and soon after she wrote Juno, her first screenplay, which is directed by Jason Reitman (Thank You for Smoking). It stars Ellen Page (Hard Candy) and Michael Cera (Superbad), with support from Jennifer Garner ("Alias"), Jason Bateman ("Arrested Development"), and Alison Janney ("The West Wing"). Also watch for Cut Chemist from Jurassic 5 as the chemistry teacher. Though the story is set in Minnesota, it was filmed entirely in Canada, as is always the case when taxes are considered. Based solely on the unprecedented local buzz surrounding Diablo Cody (remember, Minnesotans embrace any chance at the spotlight - she's not even Minnesotan!),
I wouldn't be surprised to see her not only receive Oscar consideration, but outright win Best Original Screenplay. She already has several more screenplays in the early stages of production, so get ready for some overexposure.Synopsis: Juno MacGuff (Page) is a 16 year-old Minnesotan high school student who is the definition of sarcastic. Paulie Bleeker (Cera) is her Tic Tac-eating best friend and the father of her unborn child. After considering abortion and telling her oddly excited parents (Janney and J.K. Simmons) the big news, Juno decides to give her baby up to adoptive parents Vanessa and Mark Loring (Garner and Bateman). During her pregnancy, Juno deals not just with her own relationship problems, but also Vanessa and Mark's. She has moments of cynicism, vulnerability and wit, and she is always acting older than her age. By the time the baby arrives, she has learned an important lesson about love (something cliched about finding "someone who loves you for who you are"), and everybody goes home happy.
I Loved:
+ The opening credits.
+ The last scene.
+ Michael Cera - a perfect combination of nerdy and cool, as always.
I Liked:
+ Jennifer Garner - she was terrific in this role, and not at all annoying.
+ Ellen Page - a rising star if there ever was such a thing.
+ Some of the throwaway lines: "All you have in your stomach is Taco Bell."
I Disliked:
- The complete lack of accents. I know Fargo was overdone, but if you're going to go to the trouble to set it here, you need to include them.
- The misrepresented diversity at Elk River High School. The student body in exurban MN does not look like a United Colors of Benetton ad.
I Hated:
- Parts of the first half hour, like the store scene with Rainn Wilson and the abortion clinic scene.
- Hearing the punchlines for the 27th and hopefully final time. What a classic example of trailers completely ruining the jokes.
Grade:
Writing - 8
Acting - 10
Production - 10
Emotional Impact - 8
Music - 5
Significance - 3
Total: 44/50= 88% = B+
Last Word: Juno is well-made in the hands of Jason Reitman, and it features great acting and a nice soundtrack. But I didn't find it "uproariously funny." It wasn't the premise or the characters that were off, but Juno's outrageous lines - and outrageous doesn't always equal hilarious. This isn't really a coming-of-age movie - Juno has already come of age, and she's a 30 year-old trapped in a teenager's body. As such, she was an annoying character for me a lot of the time. Diablo Cody, to paraphrase Michael Cera's character, was trying really hard to be cool, so much so that I felt like she should have been cast in the movie, since she clearly seems to think her humor is in a class by itself (though you could find it in both Rocket Science and 2 Days in Paris just in the last few months). I think Matt said it best when he said parts of it were "overwritten." The last half hour really saved the movie, because the characters were allowed to act and speak like real people would in those situations. In conclusion, Juno scores high on technical and artistic measures, but its main element of humor isn't universal, and its lesson about love is ambiguous and somewhat contradictory. Like the Lorings, Diablo Cody just filed for divorce - isn't love supposed to conquer all, with a sweet song at the end?
Background: Not being an avid reader of historical romance novels, I missed the mania in 2001 for British author Ian McEwan's Atonement. The book's success no doubt paved the way for Joe Wright's (Pride and Prejudice) adaptation starring Keira Knightley (Pride and Prejudice, Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy) and James McAvoy (The Last King of Scotland; TCON: The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe). Also look for Benedict Cumberpatch and Romola Garai from Amazing Grace. The screenplay was adapted by Christopher Hampton (Dangerous Liaisons), who is almost certain to receive an Oscar nomination. In fact, look for Atonement to receive 10 or more nominations (including Best Picture) - it's been anticipated for over a year and is typical Oscar fare (see: The English Patient, with which it is already being compared).
Synopsis: On a rural estate in England in the summer of 1935, post-grads Cecilia Tallis (Knightley) and Robbie Turner (McAvoy) are spending the hot days flirting, fighting, and fooling around with each other, to the concern and confusion of Cecilia's 13 year-old sister Briony (Saoirse Ronan). One fateful night Cecilia witnesses the rape of her teenage cousin, and in a moment of jealousy and uncertainty, she implicates Robbie as the rapist, who is immediately sent away to prison and eventually the war abroad. His relationship with Cecilia is torn apart, and both lovers live in unbearable misery. As the war drags on, Briony succumbs to the guilt of her actions and attempts to make amends with Cecilia and Robbie, who are at this point truly suffering from the distance between them. Flash forward 50 years, and Briony is now a bestselling author. In her final book she tells the complete story of what happened to Cecilia and Robbie, and how she desired to atone for her sin.
I Loved:
+ The cinematography - sweeping shots, great angles, and an impressive long take on the beach.
+ The ending, which totally surprised me.
I Liked:
+ The musical score, except for the times when it was ruined by maniacal typewriter effects.
+ The casting of James McAvoy and Keira Knightley - they had believable chemistry.
I Disliked:
- Some dragging scenes that could have used more editing.
- Romola Garai's stilted performance as the 18 year-old Briony.
I Hated:
- Nothing, with the exception of the typewriter sounds here and there.
Grade:
Writing - 9
Acting - 9
Production - 9
Emotional Impact - 8
Music - 5
Significance - 3
Total: 43/50= 86% = B
Last Word: Although the ending adds a significant twist to the plot, there are no real surprises with what kind of movie Atonement is. Fans of the classic British period pieces will enjoy it, along with tragic romantics. I don't really consider myself either of those, but I was really impressed with the cinematography, acting, and finale. I don't know that Atonement will be any more memorable than its peers (The English Patient, A Very Long Engagement), though its actors and director (Wright is 35) are young enough that the movie will likely go down as a contemporary classic, whether it wins Oscar or not. I'm excited to continue seeing James McAvoy get meaty roles, and I'd like to see Keira Knightley (who is disconcertingly thin) take more of these roles instead of the silly Pirates of the Caribbean fare. Regarding Ian McEwan - eh, I don't know that I have any new interest in epic romance novels. Atonement actually seemed pretty unoriginal until the ending, but I guess I can't complain about a lack of story depth if I don't read the book.
The Hollywood Foreign Press Association announced its nominees today. See them here.
Wow. Not what I expected, really. Atonement leads the way with 7 nominations, followed by Charlie Wilson's War with 5, and No Country for Old Men, Michael Clayton, and Sweeney Todd, all of which have 4 nominations. Now I know it's still really early in the award season, and that the Golden Globes (and nominations) are always pretty ridiculous. That being said, where's the love for Into the Wild (Emile Hirsch!?), Once, I'm Not There, Zodiac, and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford? Almost totally ignored. Interesting to note that Casey Affleck is going to have his best acting year ever stolen away by Javier Bardem, as both are up for Actor in a Supporting Role. And what about Sidney Lumet? I thought critics were fawning over his direction in Before the Devil Knows You're Dead. Or Tommy Lee Jones in No Country for Old Men? Maybe most surprising of all was the fate of Judd Apatow, who in his biggest year ever was completely shut out of the Best Motion Picture - Comedy/Musical category. No Knocked Up, Superbad, or Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story.
If nothing else the nominees hint that this could be quite an interesting Oscar campaign. I'm especially interested in the Best Animated Film and Best Foreign Language Film categories. Keep in mind that a movie can't be nominated in two categories. Ratatouille was at one point considered a shoo-in to win Best Animated Film, or instead receive a more prestigious Best Picture nomination (the only animated film ever to receive one was Beauty and the Beast - weird, right?). Then Persepolis came along, which is being lauded enough to contend in three categories: Picture, Animated Film, and Foreign Language Film. But remember it can only be nominated for one. And what about Once, which was - once - a lock for a Foreign Language Film win or possible Best Picture nomination? Then there are Bee Movie, The Simpsons Movie, and Beowulf, all of which may be Best Animated Film contenders.
In conclusion: In a year of outstanding films that can technically be nominated in several categories, somebody's going to lose out big time - Once, Ratatouille, or Persepolis, to name a few. It all depends on how the studios market their Oscar campaigns for each movie. Then it's in the hands of the Academy voters...
The 3rd annual "Black List" has been released in what is becoming an increasingly anticipated (see: important and influential) event in Hollywood. The list is compiled by Frank Leonard, an executive with Mirage Pictures, and it ranks the most buzzed about screenplays that have yet to be produced. Leonard asks his peers to list their top ten scripts, and then compiles the responses into a list ranked by number of "mentions" a particular script receives (a minimum of two is needed to be listed). Its credibility confirmed after only two years, the list is now truly a preview of the most anticipated films of the next year or two.
Not surprisingly, a spot on the list has essentially become a career catalyst for amateur screenwriters. I noted in my Lars and the Real Girl review that its screenplay was rumored to have heavily benefited from inclusion (15 mentions) on the original list in 2005. The same goes for this year's Juno (24 mentions) and Things We Lost in the Fire (25 mentions). Inclusion on the 2006 list likely played a significant role in the production of this year's Rendition (19), Lions for Lambs (6), A Mighty Heart (4), Superbad (4), and a number of the thirty or so others that received the minimum of two mentions. Take a look at the two lists to see how many you recognize.
So the list has, for better or worse, become the defining achievement for many aspiring writers. Make it on the list, and your chances for production exponentially increase - every studio is paying attention. At least that's how it looks to me.
What, then, can we expect from the 2007 list? Some disappointments, If I'm honest as I look through the synopses (lots of cliched terrorism movies, for starters). Nevertheless, definitely watch for the top three: Recount (44 mentions!), Farragut North (43), and Passengers (38), all of which are reportedly already in production. Though there do not appear to be many interesting ideas here, I am excited for Selma (29), The Road (24 - see the influence of a bestseller), This Side of the Truth (17), The Human Factor (11), Get Back (5), Valkyrie (5), Blindness (3), Doubt (3), and Eli Webb (3), among others.
Despite the excitement surrounding the Black List, it must be even more frustrating to be a screenwriter now that you have to be on it to get ahead in your career. I'm sure there are a lot of politics behind the scenes here. Oh well, we're just here to watch what gets made...
Background: British author Philip Pullman took the U.K. by storm in the late 90's with his massively popular trilogy of books titled "His Dark Materials," the first installment of which was The Golden Compass. Capitalizing on the success of the Lord of the Rings and Chronicles of Narnia films, Chris Weitz (About a Boy) adapted the book with Pullman over several years and much controversy. The story is by Pullman's own admission a direct counterargument to C.S. Lewis's case for Christianity in the Narnia series. This has of course raised the hackles of many Christians, some of whom have called for a boycott of the film. Starring Daniel Craig (Casino Royale, Layer Cake), Nicole Kidman (Margot at the Wedding), Sam Shepard (Hulk, Ghost Rider), and newcomer Dakota Blue Richards, The Golden Compass was filmed in Norway, England, and Scandinavia, and features extensive use of computer animation. Synopsis: Lots going on here. Each human has a "daemon" - a talking animal that embodies the person's soul, and trots alongside them like a lifelong pet. Lyra Belacqua (Richards) is a troublesome young girl who lives as an "orphan" at Jordan College in England. Her uncle, Lord Asriel (Craig) is a dashing scientist who is on the verge of discovering the source of "dust," which binds all the worlds in the universe together, and which (I think) represents free will and/or the Holy Spirit. In the other corner is the Magisterium (the Catholic church), which seeks to control people's behavior and prevent humans from learning about dust by any means necessary, including attempts to dispatch of Lord Asriel. Its chief operative is Marisa Coulter (Kidman), who is leading a research experiment on the North Pole in which "Gyptian" children are kidnapped and inoculated with dust - their daemons are stripped from them, and they are forever the submissive property of the Magisterium. Back to Lyra: she attains a Ouija-board-like "alethiometer" - a divine truth-telling compass that can only be read by the child (her, of course) who will fulfill the prophesy of "the witches." (Does EVERY fantasy story have to have a "chosen one"?) On her quest to infiltrate and destroy the Magisterium's research experiment, Lyra befriends the wily aeronaut Lee Scoresby (Shepard) and the armored bear Iorek Byrnison (voiced by Ian McKellen), who has a score to settle with the illegitimate bear king Ragnar Sturlusson. Several surprisingly violent battles follow, and Lyra heroically frees the kidnapped children before setting off to save Lord Asriel (her father - gasp!), but not before the obligatory "war to end all wars" is prophesied by the witch Serafina Pekkala (Eva Green from Casino Royale). More to come in the next installment of the trilogy...
I Loved:
+ The visual effects - start the debate, because these are the best I've seen in any movie this year.
I Liked:
+ Dakota Blue Richards - and the other child actors, for that matter. She likely has a successful career ahead of her, and is not obnoxiously precocious like Dakota Fanning.
I Disliked:
- Sam Shepard, who showed up right off the set of Tombstone. "I reckoned you fellers was in some kind of trouble." What? Are you Virgil Earp or an "aeronaut" in a British religious fantasy film? The character of Lee Scoresby, by the way, was apparently originally intended for Samuel L. Jackson.
- That seemingly none of the characters could put two and two together: people's daemons represent their core psyche. Helloooo? The daemons of the children and "good" people are cute puppies, mice, kittens, sparrows, and rabbits. The daemons of the "evil" people are wolves, snakes, crows, and evil monkeys. Lyra, don't go in that door! His daemon is a preying mantis!
- The Gyptians - are they gypsies? Pirates? Egyptians? Why are they always hiding?
- The alethiometer - how exactly does it work again?
I Hated:
- Nicole Kidman's daemon - part Gollum, part evil monkey from "The Family Guy," part Gremlin, and part Satan-baby from The Passion of the Christ. I thought daemons were supposed to be regular animals? And what, hers is the ONLY one that can't talk?
- That the end of the polar bear faceoff was a reenactment of the climactic George McFly vs. Biff Tannen scene from Back to the Future.
- The most tacked-on cliffhanger ending in a long time - "We have so much to do! This, this, this, this, that, and this! Just try and stop us...in the next movie!" OK, I'm paraphrasing, but still...
Grade:
Writing - 7
Acting - 8
Production - 7
Emotional Impact - 7
Music - 4
Significance - 4
Total: 32/50= 74% = C
Last Word: I've not read any of the "His Dark Materials" trilogy, but what I've gathered so far is that the books are quite dark, and the themes of The Golden Compass have been toned down to make a more kid-friendly film. Further exploration of "dust" and the history of the Magisterium would certainly make for a more thought-provoking movie, but I don't think even that could save what is really just a poorly told story. The plot is fairly predictable and conveniently contrived in all the usual scenes. There is no subtlety to the evil of the "bad" characters, and we don't even know anything about the heroes - Lyra and Lord Asriel. Worst of all, the casting of the Gyptians and Sam Shepard seem completely out of place. The saving grace of the production is the dazzling display of visual effects, which are not necessarily better than those in The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe, but are more impressive here because they're used in almost every single shot. Regarding the religious aspects of the movie (and I'll admit I'm biased by my own convictions), it seems to me Pullman is not necessarily promoting atheism so as much as he is promoting the destruction of organized religion, particularly Catholicism. Though it may be simplified from the book, the symbolism is still quite clear, as muddled as his argument may be. Looking at it as a kid's movie, The Golden Compass seems dark, bleak, and hopeless. I'll stick with The Chronicles of Narnia, thank you very much.
Background: The musician biopic trend has had a resurgence the last few years, fueled by the success of Ray and Walk the Line. Todd Haynes (2002's Far From Heaven) offers what looks to be the only real entry of 2007 with I'm Not There, inspired by the life and music of Bob Dylan. Haynes, who also co-wrote the screenplay, experiments with a new kind of portrayal here: six different actors as Bob Dylan - Marcus Carl Franklin (in his film debut), Christian Bale (Rescue Dawn), Cate Blanchett (Babel), Heath Ledger (Brokeback Mountain), Ben Whishaw (Perfume: The Story of a Murderer), and Richard Gere (The Hoax). Several familiar faces act in supporting roles, notably Bruce Greenwood (Deja Vu) and Charlotte Gainesbourg (The Science of Sleep). Dylan gave permission for Haynes to use his music and life story (the only non-documentary filmmaker to ever receive it), but he does not make an appearance himself, except in archival footage. I'm Not There was a seven year project for Haynes, and was filmed primarily in Canada and L.A. Read more about it in this NYT Magazine article from October.Synopsis: Instead of a synopsis, I can only just (try to) explain the roles of each character, since the stories intertwine and cross-cut each other. The movie doesn't really start or end in any logical order. There is the youngest Dylan (Franklin), a Woody Guthrie wannabe who hops trains to anywhere and makes friends whenever he takes out his guitar. There is the brooding folk Dylan (Bale), who sings about civil rights and righteousness, but who we don't meet very intimately. There is the blase, Dinkytown-era Dylan (Whishaw), whose limited screen time is itself limited to black and white candid interview footage. There is the arrogant jerk Dylan (Ledger), who has a love-hate relationship with his wife (Gainesbourg). There is the pioneer/Billy the Kid Dylan (Gere), who lives in a bizarre Old West-era town, and whose character I understood the least. And, most prominently, there is the rebel Dylan (Blanchett), who simultaneously plugs in (musically) and pulls out (publicly). Much of this Dylan's screen time is a reenactment of an interview with a BBC reporter (Greenwood), and it includes the movie's trippiest moments.
I Loved:
+ The cinematography - the occasional use of black and white made the colors much richer, and provided a symbolism I don't think I even understood.
+ The music, of course - whether sung by the actors or by Dylan himself.
+ Cate Blanchett, who shattered my skepticism with an incredible performance.
+ The scene in which Bale, as a preacher, leads the choir in "Pressing On."
I Liked:
+ Heath Ledger and Christian Bale, both of whom continue to show their range.
+ "Ballad of a Thin Man"
I Disliked:
- Marcus Carl Franklin - it was an interesting idea, but he seemed a little too young...or something, I can't really put my finger on it. His acting seemed awkward, as if he were on stage.
- Julianne Moore, again. Eh. She's been in several of Haynes's movies, but why here? Just to be part of the project I guess.
I Hated:
- Not really understanding what was going on or who was who- the plot was inaccessible to those of us who aren't disciples of Dylan.
Grade:
Writing - 8
Acting - 10
Production - 9
Emotional Impact - 8
Music - 5!
Significance - 4
Total: 44/50= 88% = B+
Last Word: Let me first admit here that I don't have an extensive knowledge of Bob Dylan's life, or even his music, beyond of course his hits and covers of his work by others. That being said, I found I'm Not There pretty fascinating, even though I couldn't always connect the dots. The acting was superb, and Cate Blanchett should certainly receive Oscar consideration for her performance here. Todd Haynes tried an innovative storytelling process, and for the most part it worked. I'm tempted here to compare I'm Not There with this year's Across the Universe, another artistic musical movie. The difference of course is that I'm Not There is a representation of the artist and the not the music. But still I find similarities, most obviously in the fact that the movies are probably mind-boggling to the average person who doesn't have a baseline knowledge level going into it. I admit it's unfair to criticize the film because of that (if you don't know, then don't go), but I think I probably would have enjoyed it more if some parts were spelled out more clearly. In any case, I find myself more interested in the life and influence of Bob Dylan, and I think I'm Not There will stand as seminal film for future generations of Dylan fans.
December's Underrated MOTM is a little seen film that was deservedly praised as a "quietly devastating thriller" by the NYT's Janet Maslin, and as "one of the year's best films" by Roger Ebert upon its release in December 1998. I'm fairly certain it was the first movie I saw at the then-General Cinema theatres at the Mall of America, but I can't remember why Matt, Nicole and I went there to see it. Could it have inexplicably only been playing there? Anyway, I went to it again a week later and it has since remained in or bordered on my all-time top ten list.
A Simple Plan is based on Scott B. Smith's 1993 novel of the same name, and Smith adapted the screenplay himself (which is extremely rare), but admits that he made a number of changes for the film. A rumor that still shocks me is that Ben Stiller was originally set to direct, and at different times both Nicolas Cage and Brad Pitt were attached to star. Believe me, if you've seen it you know how ridiculous that would have been. Fortunately, Sam Raimi (who had previously directed Darkman and Army of Darkness and has since directed For Love of the Game and the first Spider-Man) ended up directing it, and the casting was pitch-perfect. Bill Paxton was coming out of a career decade (Navy SEALS, Tombstone, True Lies, Apollo 13, Twister, and Titanic); Bridget Fonda had a nice indie streak going and had just starred in Quentin Tarantino's Jackie Brown; and Billy Bob Thornton was just two years removed from his Academy Award-winning performance in Sling Blade. Aside from these, two additional performances are particularly outstanding: Brent Briscoe and especially Gary Cole, who will of course be forever known for his role just a few months later as Bill Lumbergh in 1999's Office Space. The strength of these five performances cannot be overstated - the overall acting in A Simple Plan is some of the best you're ever likely to see.
The plot of A Simple Plan is, in fact, pretty simple. Hank Mitchell (Paxton) and his hapless brother Jacob (Thornton) find a dead pilot and $4 million dollars in the wreckage of a small plane in the middle of the woods in rural Minnesota. The plane was thought to have disappeared; no one is looking for it. After some deliberation, the brothers decide to keep the money - Hank to care for his wife and baby daughter, Jacob to get a new lease on life. This "simple plan" goes awry, to say the least, as the brothers struggle to keep the secret from Hank's wife (Fonda), Jacob's friend (Briscoe), and local and federal law enforcement (Cole). There are moments of terrifying suspense, and you watch in shock as the morality of the characters is worn away as they become more and more desperate. Since you're initially so sympathetic to the characters, the disturbing conclusion leaves you crushed. It's an excellent "What would you do?" discussion starter.
It's not as if A Simple Plan wasn't well received by the critics. It received Oscar nominations for Adapted Screenplay and Supporting Actor (Thornton), and it maintains a 91% rating on RT. Nevertheless, I consider it underrated because few people have seen it and even fewer discuss it as one of the best movies of the 90's. Even here in Minnesota you never hear about it, a surprising phenomenon in a place that takes every opportunity to celebrate anything that could elevate its national reputation (see Fargo or this month's Juno). Anyway, A Simple Plan has incredible acting and gripping moments of suspense, while never needing to rely on cheap scares or gruesome scenes - even the musical score and cinematography are excellent! I recommend it for a cold winter's night rental.
Background: Writer/director Noah Baumbach's The Squid and the Whale was the critics' darling in 2005, and earned Baumbach his first Oscar nomination. He tries the same recipe of quirky family dysfunction with a dash of mental illness in Margot at the Wedding, starring Nicole Kidman (The Invasion), Baumbach's wife Jennifer Jason Leigh (The Anniversary Party), and Jack Black (The Holiday). John Turturro (Transformers, The Good Shepard) and Ciaran Hinds (The Nativity Story, Amazing Grace) act in supporting roles. You may notice a faded bronze fog in many of the shots due to cinematographer's Harris Savides use of old lenses while filming. Synopsis: Self-absorbed author/columnist Margot (Kidman) and her son Claude (Zane Pais) are off to Margot's childhood Long Island home for the weekend, where her hippie sister Pauline (Leigh) is preparing to marry unemployed Malcolm (Black) under the old climbing tree. All three adults are selfish, immature, and mentally unbalanced - a flammable combination when you throw in psychotic hillbilly neighbors, Margot's cloying husband Jim (Turturro), her former lover Dick (Hinds), and his sexually charged teenage daughter. In the days leading up to the wedding, screaming matches and spontaneous bawling outbursts are the norm, with a few disgusting scenes sprinkled in for a change of pace. At the end, each character is still immature and utterly miserable.
I Loved:
+ The first parts of the first scene on the train.
I Liked:
+ Jack Black, when he was in control.
+ The acting debut of Zane Pais as Claude.
+ John Turturro - is this guy ever bad?
I Disliked:
- One of the most truly frightening moments of the year - you'll know it when you see it.
- Nicole Kidman's continual inability to speak with an "American" accent - compare hers with Jennifer Jason Leigh's if you somehow need any evidence.
I Hated:
- Every character. "Despised" is a better word.
- Nicole Kidman's glasses.
- The unrealistically honest and disgustingly personal dialogue.
Grade:
Writing - 6
Acting - 8
Production - 7
Emotional Impact - 6
Music - 5
Significance - 4
Total: 36/50= 72% = C-
Last Word: There are two lines spoken at the end of Margot at the Wedding that accurately summarize the movie: "You don't need to tell me that, sweetie," & "Hey - you're acting like a baby." That's pretty much what I was thinking throughout the whole movie, as every character had multiple mental breakdowns - none more outrageous than Jack Black's final freakout. If annoying, chemically dependent, self-absorbed, neurotic characters are your thing, than Margot at the Wedding is for you. For the rest of us it's an unbearable crash course in failed marriages, failed families, failed parents, and manic depression. Noah Baumbach was able to find at least some comedy in The Squid and the Whale, but this is more cringe-inducing than anything. Are these unbearably cruel characters supposed to be charming in some pitiful way? Am I supposed to feel sorry for them? I'd rather spend time with the Vogler neighbors next door. Well, maybe not, but I would surely have a difficult time tolerating adults who act more immaturely than their children. Margot at the Wedding is like reliving all of your nastiest family arguments, with never a second to come up for air. Psychoanalytic New Yorkers (especially Baumbach) love to write and praise these oh-so-intellectual films as examples of their own tragic upbringings, but the inaccessible, esoteric family dysfunction really is tragic, not comedic, and the morally void characters in Margot at the Wedding are nothing to laugh about. Maybe that's the real tragedy here - an unfunny movie starring Jack Black.
