Playing With the Truth: Film in 2010

Based on a true story.

Inspired by actual events. 

I'm not sure if it was an actual trend in 2010 or just a common trait of the few movies that I saw, but phrases like those above seemed to appear on screen in quite a lot of films, including 127 Hours, Conviction, Howl, Carlos, North Face, and even more that I didn't see, such as Made in Dagenham, Casino Jack, Eat Pray Love, I Love You Philip Morris, Mesrine: Killer Instinct & Public Enemy #1, and Nowhere Boy, to name only a few (and to say nothing of the tricky-truthy documentaries like I'm Still Here, Catfish, and Exit Through the Gift Shop).

Are there this many films based on true events every year and I only noticed it in 2010, or is this a newly developing trend? Either possibility would surprise me. If this is common every year, why have I not picked up on it so acutely, particularly considering I usually see twice as many movies as I did in 2010, and that I have a running series about movies based on real life? On the other hand, if this is a newly developing trend - why?

I'm almost positive it's the former, that this is not a new thing at all, but in any case it doesn't matter. I'm always more interested in how these films depict the truth they are meant to represent and, in doing so, how they shape our understanding and perspective on past events. For example, when I ask you to imagine the sinking of the Titanic, what images come to your mind? What about Roman gladiator fighting in the Colosseum? What do you picture when you think of John Smith and Pocahontas, or the Zodiac killer who terrorized San Francisco, or the fate of United Flight 93, or the storming of Omaha Beach on D-Day?

You see where I'm going with this: for many people, films based on true events serve as the primary influence on the subconscious in remembering or imagining those events. If you've seen those movies - Titanic, Gladiator, The New World, Zodiac, United 93, Saving Private Ryan - you bring their images to mind without even realizing it, particularly when a.) the images are astonishingly rendered (Titanic), and b.) there are few other film adaptations, documentaries, or other visual aids to provide alternative images in your mind (United 93). In essence, perception becomes reality; what we see becomes what actually happened, even if it didn't actually happen.

But does it matter when those images and those memories produce a reality that didn't actually exist? Where does the truth end and the dramatization begin, and is the truth ever interesting enough to stand on its own, free of embellishment? I'm sure it's a question as old as film itself - as art itself, really - but I'd like to consider it in the context of five films I saw in the last few months of 2010: The Social Network, The Fighter, Fair Game, The King's Speech, and All Good Things.

300 Words About: Terminator Salvation

If you look really closely, you just might recognize some elements of James Cameron's creation...

There are a few things that don't belong in Terminator movies: little kids, huge talking heads on screens explaining the plot, celebrity cameos, inexplicable romance that threatens to overtake scenes, and talking dogs. The guy who insists on referring to himself by his childhood nickname has haphazardly inserted the first four of those elements into Terminator Salvation, and in all likelihood we can look forward to the fifth one in the upcoming sequel.

What bothers me about the utterly mediocre Terminator Salvation is not simply the fact that it was made. I'm not necessarily a Cameron purist and I actually liked Jonathon Mostow's Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, even if was significantly inferior to Cameron's first two. No, what bothered me about Terminator Salvation is that despite, or maybe because of, the frequent references it made to the quotes and action elements from the earlier movies, it severely lacked vision, terror, originality and confidence. Worse, the guy who insists on referring to himself by his childhood nickname thought that he could actually adapt or update or otherwise modify this story for a new generation by adding "fresh" ideas that simply leaving you scratching your head.

For example, what in the world is a mute child doing as an important character in a Terminator movie? Where were the typically heavy - and heavily intriguing - dialogues/monologues about the war and Judgment Day? In the future, shouldn't the aiming accuracy of both the humans and machines' weapons be far more advanced, not worse than ever before? And why was Common given any face time in a completely worthless role? (And don't think I'll let slide the fact that he was wearing stylish aviator sunglasses during the climactic nighttime assault.)

I imagine the guy who insists on referring to himself by his childhood nickname would explain these bizarre decisions by saying he was trying to bring his own style to Cameron's vision, but it almost seems from Terminator Salvation that he didn't even see the first two movies, but just heard about them and picked up on the popular catch phrases. After this movie, well I'm tempted to say we'd be lucky if Judgment Day actually arrives before his tentative sequel comes out in 2011.

REVIEW: Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (B+)

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.