Review: Topsy-Turvy (1999)

30 08 2009

Topsy-TurvyHave no fear that Topsy-Turvy will so disorient you that you’ll lose all track of time; I had no trouble keeping the time considering how often I looked at my watch throughout the course of the film. A Gilbert and Sullivan operetta wouldn’t last as long as this film and that’s including an intermission. I can’t recall a film in recent memory so much in need of an editor as this one. Scene after scene runs unnecessarily long and the first half of the film prior to the staging of The Mikado itself could have been drastically reduced.

Perhaps films such as Moulin Rouge! and Chicago have placed in my mind unrealistic expectations on Topsy-Turvy seeing that these former films fall more squarely in the musical genre while the latter is a drama about theatre and music. Still, I had high hopes that Topsy-Turvy would sail along more like the whimsical HMS Pinafore and less like a labored three-week Atlantic crossing. Alas, there is little full-steam ahead in this film.

In all fairness, the movie does contain some strong points. First and foremost, the acting. The entire cast from bit player all the way up to the leads Jim Broadbent (Gilbert) and Allan Corduner (Sullivan) own their characters and fully commit themselves to their craft. I also love that there is hardly an attractive person in the entire cast; something about that feels right to me – like the filmmakers cast the best actor for a role and not the most attractive one (for this reason alone, you must love British cinema). Outside of acting, the film’s costume design won an Oscar and one doesn’t have to venture far into the film to see why. Perfect period costumes and wonderful stage costumes reveal both a strong attention to detail and an eye for beauty.

I believe that even a novice fan of the works of Gilbert and Sullivan will enjoy the second half of Topsy-Turvy as the film finally settles down to focus specifically on the staging of perhaps Gilbert and Sullivan’s most famous operetta, The Mikado. One can’t help but find compelling the sheer logistics and internal wrangling that accompanies the production of theatre.

If you’re a die-hard fan of Gilbert and Sullivan, theatre, or films about 19th Century England, you will likely find this film delightful. For everyone else, I recommend picking up the film’s soundtrack and skipping right to the good stuff – the music.





Review: Tortilla Soup (2001)

27 08 2009

Tortilla SoupI’ve never actually eaten tortilla soup, but I imagine it tastes spicy, perhaps a bit tangy, and would likely please my palate. Unfortunately, Tortilla Soup the film needed a few more chilies in the pot to overcome its mostly predictable, cliche, and rather uninspired story.

I admit that I enjoyed watching the preparation of the food (what is it about seeing people prepare food that is so romantic?). I think I could have watched a whole film of Hector Elizondo (or his hand-double) cooking beautiful food and been satisfied.  Now, this isn’t to say that the rest of the story was unappealing, only a bit more bland than I would have preferred. I can’t say that I really expected more out of the film, but I hoped for a bit more kick along the way or at least a pleasing aftertaste.

For lovers of food, Tortilla Soup may tickle the taste buds; for lovers of film, it’s a mediocre appetizer one nimbles on in anticipation of a more appealing entree (Julie & Julia, perhaps?).





Review: Iris (2001)

26 08 2009

IrisI imagine Iris would have made a far greater impression on me had I known something of the person or writings of Iris Murdoch prior to my viewing the film. In fact, I suspect the nature of the storytelling (i.e., the movie’s chronological leapfrogging between past and present) might even mimic the type of narrative structure that Dame Murdoch uses in her novels, but having read none of them this point was surely lost on me. This said, I feel it best if I stick to examining Iris in light of its film qualities and avoiding a piercing examination of the story itself.

Without a doubt, Iris allows thespians the opportunity to shine, and that they do here. Dame Judi Dench plays Iris during her sunset years as the light slowly fads from her mind’s eye. She gives a masterful performance that heartbreakingly captures the disappearance of person behind the cloud of Alzheimer’s. Her honest performance creates the perfect space for Jim Broadbent to shine as her desperate and loving husband John Bayley. Broadbent is well-worthy of his Oscar win here as he deftly moves between hope, anger, love, and heartache in portraying a man desperately trying to keep his head above water while his wife slowly sinks below the tide. As for Kate Winslet’s performance as the young Iris Murdoch, she does an adequate job given she rarely has time to do much more than lose her clothing and say her lines before we jump forward in time to the end of Murdoch’s life.

Beyond the acting, James Horner provides a solid score, which has moments of true beauty. The film’s editing succeeds wonderfully at times in the shifting between past and present. Other than these two elements, the rest of the package is perfectly adequate. As for the story, I think the need for the chronological shifting was necessary to give a sense of the true loss of this great mind to a horrible disease. Even with this said, I would have liked to have spent more time with the younger Murdoch as I don’t think the audience was given much more than a hint into the character of this person who would become a significant 20th Century English literary figure.

I feel I should end with a warning concerning this film’s pacing. It is slow . . . painfully so at times. I imagine a person more familiar with Murdoch and her writings would find the story more compelling than I did, and I have few suggestions for how the pacing could be improved other than spending more time with the younger, more vibrant Murdoch. I recommend this film for those obviously interested in Iris Murdoch as well as those who want to see actors excel in their craft.





Review: Moon (2009)

24 08 2009

MoonMoon may have a slow orbit in comparison to most current science fiction films, but it nevertheless provides a compelling reflection on the nature of humanity in an evolving technological world. Sam Rockwell plays Sam Bell, a solitary astronaut working for Lunar Industries on the far side of the moon. Mr. Rockwell gives a tour de force performance in what is essentially a one-man play. As the story unfolds, Sam encounters not only his loneliness and need for human touch, but must come to terms with his humanity in light of some very important discoveries made on the moon and in himself. The film poses some important questions concerning what makes a human being human and the dehumanizing power of corporations.

Along with Rockwell’s strong acting, kudos belongs to novice director Duncan Jones who not only wrote the original story on which the screenplay is based, but excels in getting the most out of his $5 million budget. Yes, the limited CG effects are poor, the cinematography is more reminiscent of 1977’s Star Wars than 2009’s Star Trek, and the set design is adequate at best, but none of these elements detracts from the story at hand.

Even with my limited knowledge and love of sci-fi films, I found Moon a tautly told drama that had me thinking well after its final frame. If you enjoy this genre or simply want something other than the mindless drivel so often served up by Hollywood, I highly recommend this film.





Review: Iron Man (2008)

23 08 2009

Iron ManI have a love hate relationship with superhero movies. OK, truth be told, Spiderman 3 so infuriated me with its arrogance and ridiculousness that I wrote off the whole genre. Unfortunately, films like X-Men 3 and the Fantastic Four series only further cemented in my mind the growing trend of dressing poorly scripted superhero drivel in the finest CG suits money can buy. This said, you can perhaps more fully appreciate why I avoided Iron Man up to this point. I’m sorry that I did.

Credit belongs to the whole sea of screenwriters who banded together to create in Iron Man a funny, well-reasoned screenplay that lays the groundwork for a most enjoyable film experience. Thank you for redeeming the superhero from its abyss of mindlessness. The film’s opening scene in the Humvee set the tone for the film, Tony Stark’s character, and just about everything else that follows. It’s truly amazing what one can accomplish when dialogue is smartly written and perfectly delivered.

Speaking of well delivered, no matter the quality of one’s script it simply won’t fly without a cast to enliven it, and I couldn’t have imagined a better group of actors than those found here. As brilliant as ever, Robert Downey Jr. shines as Tony Stark where finally his sarcasm meets his sensitive side in perfect harmony. Even Gwyneth Paltrow hits a very solid double in this film, which is saying much considering her sheer number of strike-outs as of late. Ever since Seabiscuit, I’ve had a soft spot for Jeff Bridges and he proves here that even with a dark edge, he can deliver a knock-out performance. He provides in this film the best “villain” since Alfred Molina’s Dr. Ock in Spiderman 2.

Outside of its solid script and first-rate acting, one must mention Iron Man’s spot on soundtrack. The use of heavy metal music throughout provides the beat for the character of Iron Man and captures perfectly the pent up anger and frustration of the man behind the mask.

Iron Man has shown me the light and has renewed my hope in the superhero genre. I have been redeemed and maintain hope that Iron Man 2 will only continue to carry me along this new path. Join me in my conversion by watching this film for the first time or the tenth time and I guarantee that your eyes too will be opened and you’ll be thoroughly entertained.





Review: The Nines (2007)

19 08 2009

The NinesThe Nines mostly works. A cross between The Matrix (sans the action and violence) and The Sims video game, with a minor nod to the Incarnation of Christ, The Nines asks the question, “What if humans lived in a multidimensional world and were not the players with the highest power rating?” The narrative takes the form of three overlapping acts where the same actors play different, yet related characters.

This type of storytelling creates a perfect opportunity for actors to show their range or lack thereof. Thankfully, the casting director made a fortuitous discovery in Ryan Reynolds who perfectly embodies each of his characters and shows here why he’s now one of the most sought after actors in Hollywood. My only regret is that the screenwriter didn’t write more characters for Mr. Reynolds as I found myself greatly looking forward to what he would be or do next.

Second only to Ryan Reynolds, Melissa McCarthy gives a powerful performance in this film. Have you ever experienced that moment when watching a film when you realize an actor is finding great enjoyment in her craft? Somewhere in the middle of the first act here, I recognized that Ms. McCarthy just loved what she was doing and this not only made her performance stronger, but increased my respect for her.

Outside of the strong acting, the cinematography and lighting deserve special mention. One can tell that the director and cinematography worked hard to create a different look for each of the film’s three acts and did this most successfully with lighting and a strong eye toward color. I know that some may find it gimmicky that the acts were so obviously delineated, but I found it helpful in keeping stories and characters straight.

If I had to name one frustration with the film, I would quickly point to the first act which not only lasts too long, but is the most uninteresting of the three; this is a deadly combination at the beginning of a rather complex film and I fear many viewers will not stick with it to enjoy the richer second act and the fitting conclusion. I recognize that eliminating some of this belabored first act may not be possible as significant foundation is laid for the remainder of the story, but I think another editing pass might have been in order.

For those folks willing to follow where this film leads, you will find yourself a bit confused at times, but satisfied in the end. Unlike a great mass of films produced today, The Nines falls into that special lot that requires critical thought and, perhaps, a dedicated discussion with friends afterward to tease out its many layers and the potential moral(s) of its story. I recommend it.





Review: Paradise Now (2005)

17 08 2009

Paradise NowI actually saw Paradise Now over a month ago and have waited to write my review because I didn’t have the words to describe my feelings concerning this film. For some reason, this movie rubbed me the wrong way. Perhaps that’s the point, but I’m not sure the chaffing was due to the quality of the filmmaking.

My greatest struggle in this film centered on the believeabilty of the main character Said (Kais Nashif). The choices made by Said, if accurate to reality, made no sense to me. Again, this may be the point. But to say that Westerners and those in the Middle East don’t understand the world in the same way is not really saying much of anything. What is it exactly (or, at least, more exactly) that causes or encourages this gulf in worldview? Addressing that question would have made for more interesting viewing. Yet, as I’ve said in other reviews, to knock a story for not addressing a question you want it to address is unfair. Still, concerning the story they have chosen to tell, it is one that I neither comprehended nor enjoyed terribly much.





Review: Smilla’s Sense of Snow (1997)

16 08 2009

Smilla's Sense of SnowOccasionally, a quality film flies below the radar such that you only hear about it many years after its initial release. Smilla’s Sense of Snow is not one of those films. I had high hopes for this winter tale upon discovering that its cast included the likes of Tom Wilkinson, Jim Broadbent, Richard Harris, and Julia Ormond. Unfortunately, even strong actors can’t overcome a ridiculously bad screenplay. The screenwriter’s plot trappings are so nonsensical that one wonders, for instance, why someone didn’t stop and ask, “Why does this doctor have a light panel to view x-rays wall-mounted in his dining room?” And, yes, the film does reach that level of lunacy.

I’d like to say that this movie, which is filmed mostly in Scandinavia and Greenland, has beautiful cinematography to make up for its lack of a taut story, but even on this point it mostly fails. Now, to be fair, this film is over 12 years old and camera technology wasn’t then what it is today. Still, movies like Titanic and Saving Private Ryan were filmed at roughly the same time and they have breathtaking cinematography. I expected more especially with regard to the Greenland insert shots.

My greatest fear in reviewing Smilla’s Sense of Snow is that I might actually cause it to appear on your radar screen. So, to avert that possibility I encourage you for the first, and hopefully last time, to forget everything I wrote in this review . . . especially the name of this film.





Review: Little Women (1994)

15 08 2009

Little WomenWhile I’ve watched Little Women at least two times prior to my viewing of it for this review, I have never stopped to consider its values (or deficits). I always thought highly of it, but the more I’ve consider it critically, the less I like it. I think the story pales in comparison to Jane Austen’s work which is far more intelligent and witty. Granted, it may not be fair to compare the two, but nonetheless, I found this film rather flat and one-dimensional. Of course, I’m comparing Austen films with Alcott films . . . and that’s saying nothing concerning the quality of the writing that inspired these films.

Beyond my comparative dislike of the story, I found the acting in this particular film rather one-dimensional. Each daughter seemed to cover a particular “emotional state” and something about that didn’t sit well with me. I actually liked Claire Danes performance better than the rest and while I didn’t fully comprehend Christian Bale’s motivations, I thought he was solid. In spite of some of its quality acting, I found the film too glossy for my liking. I recommend Ang Lee’s Sense and Sensibility as a better film from this same cinematic period (i.e., mid-1990s).





Review: The Nanny Diaries (2007)

13 08 2009

The Nanny DiariesI wish someone would have warned me to avoid The Nanny Diaries. For the sake of my cinematic self-esteem, you have to agree that the film does seemingly have promise. Successful and talented actresses such as Laura Linney and Scarlett Johansson don’t generally make schmaltzy films. Further, having Paul Giamatti on board certainly adds cache. Yet, this film is bad . . . very, very bad.

I can’t quite put my finger on where it goes wrong. Perhaps it’s the flat story that tries to be humorous or significant, but comes off one-dimensional and forced. Not a single actor seems to be having any fun and when you watch the DVD’s outtakes you are struck by the absence of chemistry among the cast. Scarlett Johannsson is a wet fish throughout and Laura Linney, while solid, has played this same character so many times it’s tiring. As for onscreen romance, Johansson and Chris Evans suffer under such a contrived storyline that they don’t have much hope of success in pulling off anything even remotely genuine.

Outside of acting and story, the film has little else to commend itself. The soundtrack is forgettable, the set design unoriginal, the costuming perfectly adequate, and the cinematography spectacularly bland.

All told, The Nanny Diaries makes for such a mess of a film one wonders why no one on the creative team stopped to ask, “What the heck are we doing here?” Perhaps I should have known better than to watch a film that made zero impact on the cinematic Richter scale, but I followed my blind (and, yes, naive) optimism. At the very least, I’ve sacrificed myself so that you too don’t have to suffer this dreadful film. And, yes, that’s what I whisper to my inner child to console myself over my lost naivete and the disappearance of 104 minutes of my life.





Review: The Hurt Locker (2009)

10 08 2009

The Hurt LockerPerhaps I give film critics too much credit. Have you ever had a similar thought as the credits roll on a film that “shouldn’t be missed” or is “one of the year’s ten best”? As I walked out of the theater following a showing of The Hurt Locker, the most intelligible statement I could make was “huh?” What in this particular film so caught the attention and high praise from such a plethora of critics? Here is a film, after all, about the war in Iraq — a topic far from the most popular with critics or the general populace.

My first thought was that somehow I missed an underlying anti-war message, which I could see people rallying behind. Yet, after racking my brain, I couldn’t arrive at a single scene in the film that spoke for or against the war. I give the filmmakers credit that they rightly let the war be the backdrop for the telling of a very particular story. Truth be told, one could have chosen the Vietnam War or Korean War and told a very similar story.

So, where does this leave us? Why do critics love this film? Sure, the cinematography is amazing and things being blown up is a definite draw. Yes, the acting is quite good, but not so stellar as to warrant the critics’ current love fest with this film. As for the story itself, it is compelling enough and does have a particular point which the filmmakers make blatantly obvious at the beginning (see the quote in the film’s first frame). Still, many films have similar qualities yet don’t garner half as much praise as The Hurt Locker. The movie is entertaining, but far from worthy of the critical accolades it has received.

Don’t get me wrong, I liked the movie for what it was — an interesting story about a bomb squad unit during the Iraq War. The storytelling gets a bit muddled in the middle when the film moves away from disarming bombs and spends a good 20 minutes in the desert with snipers. Even with this slight hiccup, however, I found myself committed to the story and its characters. Yet, let’s be honest here, the “moral” of the story (if you will) is not particularly new or mind-blowing; and the film’s images, while beautifully shot, aren’t so revolutionary as to warrant special attention.

At the end of the day, I can only hypothesize concerning why critics have crowned The Hurt Locker their current film prince. I suspect that due to the recent void of decent war movies, a film with modest qualities like this one appears amazing. Yet, hold it up to say a Platoon or a Saving Private Ryan and one quickly sees The Hurt Locker for what it is — an entertaining, but unoriginal film that won’t much be remembered one year from now.





Review: 12 (2007)

9 08 2009

12This Russian-language film provides a powerful retelling of Sidney Lumet’s brilliant 1957 film 12 Angry Men. Set in contemporary Russia, 12 does a masterful job of re-framing the story to be both culturally relevant and current. Like the original classic, this film takes place predominately in a single room — in this instance, a school gymnasium where the jurors meet to decide the fate of a young Chechen teenager accused of murder. I stand amazed that in an era of green-screening and multi-million dollar special effects, a 160-minute movie can be set in a single locale and remain captivating.

This film’s story arc and plot focuses more on community, relationships, and storytelling than the original 12 Angry Men. The 1950’s classic was bent more toward reason and persuasion, while this film tended toward the heart as the motivating factor in determining guilt or innocence. Reason wasn’t all together disregarded, but it became a minor consideration in comparison with the need for each juror to connect with the details of the case from an experiential level. This form of plot structure created a wonderful opportunity for the 12 actors to shine as each told a portion of his personal story. I’ll admit, however, that there were at least two occasions where I struggled to see the connection between the story and the case at hand, but this didn’t necessarily make the story itself any less engaging.

Potential viewers of this film should be forewarned that it is long (over 2.5 hours) and that the first thirty minutes test your patience as the jurors settle themselves in the jury room and get down to business. I think this beginning portion of the film could have been substantially shortened with little loss, but this matter is quickly forgotten when the jurors start telling their stories. The inter-splicing of scenes from the defendant’s childhood do eventually help to explain elements of the case and provide some emotional connection with the accused; however, the repetition of the images does get slightly annoying after two hours. One particular scene of a dog carrying a portion of a man’s arm still makes no sense to me and had seemingly no relevance to the story at hand.

While not a perfect film and definitely in need of some minor edits for time considerations, 12 provides a fascinating look at Russian culture. The acting is top-notch and the stories told so compelling that you’ll be glad you stuck with it. I recommend this film to those interested in foreign cinema and those who loved 12 Angry Men.





Review: (500) Days of Summer (2009)

8 08 2009

(500) Days of SummerHave you ever had the experience of walking through a local art fair and finding, sandwiched between the caricatures of rock stars and stale cityscapes, a unique piece of art that’s as refreshing to the imagination as it is stirring to the soul?  A special something that resists being categorized, yet beckons like a good friend to sit with it a spell and enjoy its company.  In the realm of film, (500) Days of Summer waits quietly between the mindless CGI-riddled blockbuster and the drunk road-trip movie for its opportunity to steal you away and remind you of the beauty and magnificence of true cinematic art.

(500) Days of Summer tells the story of a man, Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who meets a woman, Summer (Zooey Deschanel), but is not a love story (or so we are told by the narrator). The story unfolds in a most unusual manner eschewing the linear and embracing relational intersections.  Lest you worry that the clever, non-sequential manner of the narrative will leave you confused, the film’s editing and overall story structure provides plenty of tracking beacons.  Unlike almost any film in recent memory, (500) Days of Summer succeeds in capturing its story’s emotional reality not through words or character, but in the very nature of the shots and the manner in which they are ordered.  The movie’s amazing soundtrack also lends much in providing emotional context to the film.

As for the story itself, one is tempted to call the film’s narrator to account for it feels very much like a love story; however, the more one sits with it, the more he realizes that the story is about the nature of love and not the love of two particular people.  This may all sound like arguing over semantics to you, but understanding the difference here is crucial for determining whether you walk away from this film crestfallen or with the hope that love can exist and should be sought.

The film’s technical qualities are top-notch.  I rarely have opportunity to highlight a film’s editing, so special credit goes to editor Alan Edward Bell for weaving seamless a story that could have easily ended up more a ball of tangled yarn than a beautiful tapestry.  Both Gordon-Levitt and Deschanel rise to the challenges presented to them in this film and move their characters between the ups-and-downs of love with a pitch-perfect amount of joy and despondency.  Music supervisor Andrea von Foerster’s experience in television is evident by the song choices in this film as she deftly selects a wonderful mix of music from fringe artists.

I loved the use of split-screen in this film, but admit that while this was the correct choice for the particular scene it made for nearly impossible viewing (i.e., I could really only watch one side or the other).  Outside of this small blemish, the movie’s only other drawback might be that the non-linear storytelling almost necessarily demands that the viewer stand outside and peer into the action versus truly entering into the story.  This wasn’t so much my experience, but I could see this easily happening for those audience members who want a straight-forward love story (of course, for those viewers, I’d also like to remind them that this isn’t a love story at all).

If you’re like me and appreciate the hidden gem of a film tucked in amongst all the cinematic riffraff forced upon modern audiences today, (500) Days of Summer is a must see.  While not exactly the “feel good” movie of the summer, it is perhaps the best piece of film art thus far presented in 2009.





Review: On the Edge (2001)

7 08 2009

On the EdgeAs I say about so many films that tackle deep subjects, “I wanted to like this movie,” but for all its fine elements (acting and soundtrack are first rate) On the Edge doesn’t fully succeed as a story.

I suppose there is a start of a story here and my real struggle with the film is that I didn’t want the answer to be that if a man finds a woman and a woman finds a man then all will be resolved and healed. This is a typically American “happy ending” and I expected this European film to give me something a little weightier. Now, it doesn’t have a ticker-tape happy ending, but (sadly) the film does very nearly acquiesce to the American sentiment that a male-female relationship is the cure for significant past hurts.

Healing is complicated and far from linear, so I felt the screenwriter diminished his voice and thereby his story by resting his ending so firmly in the embrace of two young lovers.  Still, for a small, low-budget film, On the Edge has some quality scenes and a strong cast committed to their characters.  There are far worse movies one could watch on a Friday night, although this one will not necessarily leave you feeling all warm and fuzzy on the inside.





Review: Everything is Illuminated (2005)

6 08 2009

Everything is IlluminatedIronically, Everything is Illuminated defies description. Not a straight comedy nor drama, but an amalgamation of the two with a strong east meets west feel. Minimalist set decoration, color palette, and even dialogue provide a strong post-Soviet sensibility to the film, yet moments of great beauty shine through like a field of sunflowers on a gray day. The film’s cinematographer, Matthew Libatique, deserves special recognition for blending perfectly these two worlds and painting an appealing landscape that defies gross sentimentality while maintaining a stout heart.

The film is wonderfully cast. Elijah Wood is especially brilliant as he combines wide-eyed wonder with a deep well of thoughtfulness and, dare I speculate, sadness in his portrayal of Jonathan Safran Foer. This may be the perfect role for Mr. Wood as it draws upon his natural ability to express internal struggle with little more than his body language. Eugene Hutz plays his character, Alex, with real warmth and compassion hidden beneath a layer of silly naivety.

As for the story itself, I found it strangely compelling and engaging. Important is the story’s moral of finding peace with oneself, one’s life, and one’s decisions in spite of the sands of time continually slipping away. The juxtaposition of the two main characters, one always looking back and afraid to look forward and the other always looking ahead and afraid to look back, proves that perhaps the best we can do in life is to live in the moment and show ourselves great grace with regard to what has been and what will be.

[Warning: The following paragraph contains a major spoiler]

This said, my greatest dissatisfaction with the film is that the grandfather kills himself in the end. For a film that labels itself as “illuminating,” this plot twist did little to help its cause. We are led to believe that the grandfather has come to a place of freedom with regard to his sad past; this final act, however, proves that perhaps, in spite of what we’re told, he did not. It’s this “perhaps” that I’m struggling with. The opaqueness of the sentiment behind the suicide left me feeling anything but illuminated.

All told, Everything is Illuminated remains a captivating little story that has a somber joy about it. I would recommend it for its acting and beautiful photography, but encourage viewers to prepare themselves for a less than fully illuminating film.