Archive for the ‘ Directors ’ Category

Oscars

I wasn’t able to watch the Oscars last night, but they seemed to have mostly turned out as I thought they would. I was expecting The Artist to win big, and it did.

I’ve been finding it harder and harder to get excited about the Oscars. The last time I remember looking forward to watching the show would have been the year The Return of the King was up for thirteen awards.

I did miss watching it this year, but I also wish I cared more. I do hope the host was better than last year, because that was a bit of a disaster.

There and back again

This has been a long time in coming, but it looks to be worth the wait. I’m glad they didn’t go ahead with the project until Peter Jackson could be at the helm again.

It looks like the only bad thing about the upcoming Hobbit movie is that it’s not going to hit the theaters until next December. So until then, here’s a teaser for you!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0903624/

Sherlock Holmes 2

Guy Ritchie’s second foray into the world of Sherlock Holmes, in Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, opens with a bang. The first question one should ask about a sequel is if it lives up to the first one (actually, the first question should be whether or not to make a sequel). A Game of Shadows definitely lives up to the first Holmes movie, not the least because of Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law.

The villain is much realer and more sinister, in that he is a respected individual with a twisted soul. Moriarty is perhaps the most dangerous type of villain–the one who doesn’t dirty his own hands, but has minions to do his will.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is perhaps even more English than the first movie, and has even more intense fight sequences. The addition of Stephen Fry as Mycroft Holmes was brilliant, as well.

It’s a wonderful movie, made better by the excellent writing. One of my favorite quotes is, “Don’t be a dingy bird, bad people do bad things because they can!” The movie is full of lines like this, quotable outside the movie, yet even better in context.

Treat yourself to a Christmas present and watch A Game of Shadows.

Casting Issues?

I was rather confused when I first heard that Meryl Streep was cast to play Margaret Thatcher in The Iron Lady.  I’m still confused, actually.  It’s not that I doubt Streep’s acting ability, it’s that I find it odd that she was chosen when there are brilliant British actors who could fill the role.  Then I discovered that the director of The Iron Lady is Phyllida Lloyd, who also directed Mamma Mia!  So perhaps Lloyd enjoyed working with Streep and got her cast as Thatcher.  I’m looking forward to the movie, but I still think it’s an odd choice.

Perhaps not as odd, however, as casting Tom Cruise to play Jack Reacher in the upcoming One Shot, which is an adaptation of one of the popular novels by Lee Child.  This is apparently causing furor among Reacher fans everywhere.  One of the reasons is that Cruise is about a foot shorter than Reacher.  I do think there are better people out there than Cruise, but then I might not be as huge of a Reacher fan as some other people.

All we can do as moviegoers is “vote” with our tickets.  If we like the movie, we will recommend it and maybe watch it again.  If not, we will tell everyone why they should avoid it.  But then again, I think that Hollywood exists in a parallel universe, rather out of touch with reality in many cases.

Courageous

The movie Courageous models its title in more ways than one.  In an age where many people seem to enjoy fluffy action-driven movies or vulgar comedies, Courageous tackles the issue of the importance of faith and fatherhood.

A movie that is driven by a message is often lacking in other areas, so I was not expecting much cinematically when I went to see Courageous.  I was agreeably surprised.  Although the movie takes a while to get started, it is generally well-shot and quite well written.  It has good progression and character development.  And there are a few quite dramatic and action-packed scenes.  After all, the movie is about a group of policemen!

The director, Alex Kendrick, was also the co-author and starred as one of the main policemen in the story.  Directing and starring in a movie can be a bad idea, but it works here.  Kendrick is a believable and sympathetic character.

I would recommend Courageous to anyone who wants to see a movie about taking a stand, trying to make a difference, and living with integrity.  It’s a refreshing change from the rather typical Hollywood hedonism.

Cowboys & Aliens – The review

I was anticipating seeing Cowboys & Aliens since I saw a preview for it.  I figured it could go one of two ways: it could be fabulous or it could be terrible.  I think it was the former.

The western has truly evolved, in a sense, when someone comes up with the idea to incorporate aliens.  I think it was a brilliant, albeit bizarre, idea, and quite a risk and possibly one the director, Jon Favreau was able to take because he gained fame with his popular Ironman movies.  What is interesting about Cowboys & Aliens in contrast with Ironman is that the villains are the ones with the best technology.

It’s not hard to imagine Harrison Ford as a cowboy, but Daniel Craig might be a bit more of a stretch.  But he pulls it off.  Ford plays Dolarhyde, a rancher used to his own way.  He plays the gruff character so well, I found myself disliking him at moments.  But that’s the sign of good acting.  Craig is Lonergan, a man who wakes up not even able to remember his own name, and gets drawn into the troubles of the town he comes into.  Also of note are Sam Rockwell as Doc and Adam Beach as Nat.  Both played their roles convincingly and with charm.

The plot is somewhat typical for a western, even if the who the villains are is innovative.  It’s still an enjoyable movie, especially for anyone who likes westerns.  After all, it even has the right ending for a western.

Breaking the Chains of the Past

I decided to post a more in-depth analysis that I wrote, instead of my usual short reviews.  If you’re interested in watching the movie, you might not want to read this first as there are some spoilers.

On A Clear Day (2005), directed by Gaby Dellal, deals with a middle-aged Scottish ship-builder, Frank Redmond.  Frank, played by Peter Mullan, is haunted by an event from the past, so most of the movie focuses on whether Frank will be able to break away from the past.  Dellal’s thesis seems to be that one can obtain freedom from the past through an attempt to achieve something grand.

Dellal shows how an event in the past can isolate a man from his family and friends, as Frank Redmond has been isolated.  The movie begins with two boys playing on a beach, and the viewer understands that the scenes are from the past because they are partly in slow-motion and shown in desaturated color.  The realization that something bad happened in these past scenes is shown by seagulls flying slowly overhead and squawking ominously, and by the camera slipping underwater.  Furthermore, the scene is interrupted by metallic hammering, and then switches to full, even saturated, color and the present-day launching of a ship.  While a crowd watches the launch, Frank is in his office, packing his belongings.  It becomes evident that Frank works building ships, and that he has lost or quit his job.  He emerges from his office and stands against a large doorjamb, set apart from the crowd, which includes his wife Joan (played by Brenda Blethyn), his son Rob and Rob’s family.  Frank turns and walks into the black interior of the building, away from the crowd and into isolation.

This isolation theme continues through much of the movie.  The dialogue illustrates that Frank feels lost because he has no job.  He spends time with his former work buddies–Eddie (Frank’s oldest friend), Norman, and Danny (a younger man)–but there is tension even between them because some of them have remained at the work-place Frank left.

Frank is also isolated from his family.  It is soon evident that what caused these family problems, especially between Frank and his son Rob, was the drowning death of Stuart, Frank and Joan’s son and Rob’s brother.  This event from the past has affected Frank and his relationship with his surviving son.  He carries the weight of the past, which causes his isolation.

Frank is even somewhat isolated from his wife.  The main scene showing this occurs as Joan approaches their home after Frank’s last day at work.  The camera focuses through a window on Joan approaching the house, and even though the camera is inside with Frank, he is only visible as a reflection in the window that separates him from Joan.

The greatest tension and isolation is between Frank and Rob.  They are wary of each other and avoid each other on purpose at times.  This is illustrated by a scene where they meet on a street and stop to exchange a few words.  Frank asks Rob to have a cup of coffee with him, but Rob declines and they both walk away.  The scene then cuts to Rob sitting alone in a cafe, with a cup of coffee.  There is also a scene where Frank watches Rob and his family in the gym.  Frank had been there swimming, and they came to swim, but also presumably to see Frank.  However, Rob and his family never see Frank, who is undressing in a changing stall.  Instead of letting them know he is there, Frank watches them through his cracked-open stall door.  He eventually locks the door and sits down on the bench, in despair.  This illustrates his desire to communicate with Rob, but his inability to do so.  The past caused this inability.  Through dialogue, the viewer is told that Rob believes Frank blames him for Stuart’s death; in reality, Frank is burdened with guilt because he blames himself.  Because neither of them can talk about it, they remain isolated.

After Dellal sets up the element of the past causing isolation, the other main component emerges.  (However, both elements run simultaneously through most of the movie.)  This is the element of one man being able to overcome isolation by focusing his attention on accomplishing a goal.  Early on, Dellal sets up the goal Frank will focus on.  At a time when Frank needs something to give his life purpose, he goes on a boat-trip with his friends.  When he is out on the water, he stares at the sea while his mind flashes back to that day from the past.  This is when he first gets the idea that he will conquer the water that took Stuart–he will swim the English Channel.

An unlikely “confederacy” forms after Frank announces his intention of swimming the Channel.  Since Frank does not want his family to know what he is doing, this confederacy consists of Frank’s former work friends Eddie, Norman, and Danny, joined by Chan, who runs a food shop.  As the story progresses, the viewer sees that Frank’s unshaken determination to succeed inspires his friends, showing them that they can do the same in their own lives.

In spite of his stubborn determination, Frank nearly quits his swimming training after both Joan and Rob confront him because he lied about what he is doing.  While Joan’s anger is motivated by fear of what could happen to Frank, Rob takes it personally.  Rob is so angry that he comes to the pool where Frank is swimming and jumps in the water, fully clothed, to confront his father.  This scene unleashes the most visible emotion (up to this point), as both father and son scream at each other.  Frank is so upset by this encounter that he says he is quitting his training.  However, the next day, Frank’s friends find him sitting by the pool watching a boy swim.  Dellal illustrates Frank’s determination in this scene by showing it in another character, Aaron, the boy Frank is watching.  Although Aaron can barely walk or swim, he never stops trying.  Frank points to Aaron and says ” I’m not giving up.”

The greatest example of the result of Frank’s determination is the fact that he achieves his goal, although not without a struggle.  At one point, when he is only three miles from France, Frank almost gives up.  He is in pain from the extreme exertion, and he is fighting the tide.  He also flashes back to his inability to save Stuart from drowning.  He wants to give up, and screams in agony as his friends try to encourage him.  Eddie then steps up and yells at Frank–he tells Frank that Stuart is not out there in the water, and never was.  He finishes by telling Frank to “shut up” and finish the swim because he has no other choice.  Frank, still in the water, stares at Eddie for a moment and then calmly says, “Well, I’ll go on then.”

Frank makes it to the French shore, where Joan and Rob, and his family, are waiting for Frank, to surprise him.  Rob wades into the water to offer his hand to Frank, but throws himself out of reach when he realizes that if he touches Frank the swim will not be valid.  However, Frank stands and offers his hand to Rob, who is now sitting in the water.  Rob takes his hand and the two embrace.  This is the most powerful and moving scene in the movie–reconciliation takes place without a single spoken word.  Through the experience of achieving a goal, the chains of the past have been broken, and Frank and his family are together and happy.

Although this movie is short, it contains all the pertinent details for a complete story.  Dellal did an excellent job of tying the movie together–she does this by having the movie begin and end in nearly the same way.  The movie begins with two boys playing on the beach, and it ends the same way.  However, the difference is that the viewer knows something is wrong in the beginning, but at the end everything has come right.  Also, Dellal shows that Frank’s achievement frees him from his guilt about Stuart’s death, and allows him to be reconciled to Rob.  Perhaps the most powerful way that Dellal unites the movie is by showing Frank’s isolation at the beginning and his breaking of it at the end.  She shows this by having Frank enter isolation in a dark building, away from people, and then shows him breaking that isolation and emerging from the dark sea into the sunlight where his family is waiting for him.  All in all, On A Clear Day is a pleasant and genuine movie about a man who endeavors to free himself from his past by reaching for a high goal.  And he succeeds.

Larry Crowne

I watched Larry Crowne yesterday.  The movie is directed by and stars Tom Hanks.  He also co-wrote it with Nia Vardalos (of Big Fat Greek Wedding fame).

It was pleasant to watch a movie that was thoroughly enjoyable.  There were no real moments when I thought “They could have done without that.”  The story is interesting, the acting is good, and the characters are rather charming.

I was glad to see that people in Hollywood are still capable of making movies like Larry Crowne.  It’s essentially a movie about an ordinary man who tries to remake his life.  It’s a good movie, and worth watching.  I would recommend it for all.

12 Angry Men

12 Angry Men was one of Sidney Lumet’s first movies, if not the first.  I finally watched it.

It’s an interesting movie, especially since the entire ‘action’ of the movie is limited to the jury room (other than the first minutes in the courtroom).

One thing that I didn’t like was the first speech by the Henry Fonda character.  He goes on about how he’s not sure the boy is guilty, and then his initial reasons seem to have nothing to do with the facts, but rather that he feels sorry for the kid because he’s had such a hard life.  Well.  That’s almost an insult to all the people who have had hard lives and been able to rise above that.  People’s circumstances do not dictate who they will become.

The rest of the movie, however, was interesting and thought-provoking.  It shows how different people remember different ‘facts,’ often colored by preconceived notions or prejudice.

12 Angry Men is definitely worth watching, especially for those who enjoy the intricacies of the processes of law.

The Widowmaker

I finally watched K-19: The Widowmaker.  It was a lot better than I thought it would be.  I did not realize, until I watched the credits, that it was directed by Kathryn Bigelow of The Hurt Locker fame.  I must say, she’s got talent.

The Widowmaker is about a Russian nuclear submarine during the cold war.  The two main officers, played by Harrison Ford and Liam Neeson, struggle between their feelings of duty to their crew and their motherland.

Apparently the story was inspired by true events, but it was a story that could not be told for years, since the crew were sworn to secrecy.

The movie made me realize, once again, that I would never want to be on a submarine, let alone one carrying nuclear weapons.  No thanks, comrade!

I heard criticisms of Ford’s Russian accent, but it was actually quite good.  It was subtle, but there, unlike Neeson’s.  And after all, Ford is half Russian.

I would recommend K-19: The Widowmaker–it’s an interesting look at the cold war era, without going into the politics on the other side.  I admire that about Bigelow–she’s able to focus on how something would affect the men on the ground (or under the water) without making the story about whether or not they’re “on the right side.”