The Machinist (oh...and The Foot Fist Way)

The Machinist(2004)
R
Running Time: 102 Minutes
Spain
4.5 Nuggets

Some method actors make me roll my eyes at their pathetic attempts to get in touch with the characters they play...others make me respect the trade. I hadn't heard anything about this movie until I got it in the mail. After watching the first few minutes and wondering out loud "I thought this had Christian Bale in it..." my jaw hit the floor, realizing that the skeletal figure I was staring at in disbelief was The Dark Knight himself. Method actor? I should say so...

Mr. Bale lost 63 lbs to play the role of Trevor Reznik (yes, that picture is REALLY him), a machine worker that hasn't slept for over a year and whose body is obviously paying the price. The movie centers around some strange events that take place in the shop which lead him, and the audience, to question his sanity. Nobody is sure if he's seeing things or if it is a huge conspiracy, out to exact revenge on the sleepy protagonist. With strong supporting roles played by Jennifer Jason Leigh and Aitana Sánchez-Guijón, Brad Anderson directs a truly thrilling and Hitchcockian drama about just how badly our head can mess with us in the event of sleeplessness. The film was shot entirely on location in Barcelona but was made to look like a run down part of LA. Great cinematography, awesome tension built through fantastic mise-en-scène and the fact that Christian Bale is literally a walking skeleton make this one movie you should definitely check out. It's rated R for some graphic violence, sexual images and adult language...but worth it. Trust me.

Oh, and don't waste your time with The Foot Fist Way. 0 nuggets. Worthless. Not Funny. Makes me want to punch Will Ferrell and Adam Mckay (producers) in the junk and make them tell me some jokes to bring laughter back into my life. Even Danny McBride couldn't salvage this one. BOOOOOOOOO.

Appaloosa

Appaloosa (2008)
R
Running Time: 114 minutes
4 gold nuggets

At one point in this film there is a shootout between 6 of the fastest guns. The scene happens fast. There is no standing and talking about the size of the town, no waiting for the other guy to draw, no drawn out Italian interpretations of samurai fight scenes (not that those are bad things). Virgil Cole (Harris) and Everett Hitch (Viggo) walk up to the jailhouse and five seconds later, three men are dead, one has escaped jail, and Cole and Hitch are both lying wounded on the ground. Hitch remarks, "that happened fast." To which Cole replies, "everybody could shoot."

The humor is as dry as the surrounding landscape, the one-liners are great, and what is left unsaid is even better. Harris and Cole do a great job acting. Zellweger, in my mind does a great job too. Although not on par with her performance in Cold Mountain, she adds a certain softness that distinguishes the violent tension that runs throughout the film. (I haven't read the book, but I have it on good authority that Zellweger strays slightly from the original character's manipulate ways.)

I just want to make sure everyone knows that Hitch walks around with an eight-gauge shotgun. It's like a portable canon.

The film does a good job of developing tension. The plot line is a little thin, so the suspense of certain scenes really helps to carry the film. Basically, Zellweger wants the alpha male who is, in here estimation, one of at least three people. Supposedly she loves Cole, but is kind of into Bragg (the bad guy, yeah, he's bad), and she makes a pass at Hitch. Hitch is some sort of a Galahad. He's with Cole and Ms. French (Zellweger) is with Cole. Bragg, however, is not with Cole, he hates Cole, so it's really easy for him to shack up with Zellweger (plus I think she is the only pretty girl that lives in Appaloosa).

Every so often, there is a scenic shot. They are all pretty, and they add to that soft/harsh contrast, setting a lonesome silent tone. But, there is one really sucky cut scene where a mountain lion watches a train go by, like this guy. I've yet to be convinced that mountain lions watch trains from mountain tops despite all the westerns that I've watched.

Catch up - not to be confused with Catsup (or Ketchup)

Ok...I've slacked. I'll admit it. All this free time with being jobless and you'd think that I have ooooooodles of time to write and alas...here I am, playing catch up. Because I've watched quite a few movies in the past few weeks and haven't dedicated any time to reviewing them properly, I'll just do a quick summation and pick up where I left off. Please forgive me...but hopefully I'll have some good suggestions in there for you to check out. Oh, and I'm going to start giving things a rating scale...and since stars, thumbs and smiley faces are SOOOO 15 minutes ago, I'm going to use gold nuggets (a 1 - 5 scale, 1 being a piece of crap and 5 being the bomb.gov) soley because I think the word nugget is pretty funny:

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist - 2 nuggets. I'll be honest...this was Peter Sollett trying to recreate Juno and falling WAY short. I love Michael Cera, as I've said before...and Kat Dennings did a decent job at being his counterpart. However, there were a LOT of disjointed pieces, leaving me with a curiosity to read the novel that it was based on. More than likely those scattered pieces made sense in that context. The soundtrack was pretty good, though...I'll admit. Check it out but don't expect too much.

Out of Africa - 4.5 nuggets. A stunning, epic tale of romance, relationships, oppression, feminism and politics. Robert Redford and Meryl Streep give incredible performances in a true story about courage, compassion and love. Yes, it's a "chick flick" to some degree...but let's be honest: All men could use a little estrogen to balance out the macho bull sh** that resides within us. Snuggle up to your loved one, relax and enjoy this one. I promise it's worth it.

Jump Tomorrow - 5 nuggets. Seriously, I LOVED this movie. It reminded me of an appropriate mix of Bottle Rocket and Napoleon Dynamite (stop it...I know what you're thinking...and yes, Napoleon Dynamite was good before it became a cultural icon. Don't fight it). Very quirky, very "indie" and VERY funny. This was a Sundance entry that should have gotten more exposure, in my opinion. Definitely check it out.

What the #$*! Do We (K)now!? - 3.5 nuggets. I've been fascinated with string theory, quantum physics and general relativity for a while now (I'm not trying to sound smart...just think it's interesting) and this movie attempts to put them in layman's terms. It's a bunch of documentary style interview clips surrounded by a narrative story line. Honestly, the narrative bugs the hell out of me but I think it's worth watching for the factual pieces. Watch it with the intent to discuss afterwards. Good brain food.

Eddie Izzard: Dress to Kill - 3.5 nuggets. If you're not familiar with Eddie's work, then you may be a little shocked to see him on stage. Yes, he's a British transvestite. Yes, he is a little abrasive. YES, he's hilarious. Watch it if you can handle a lot of cursing and some "adult" material. Pretty funny stuff.

Ok...that's enough for now. I'm recommitting myself to the blog. Look for more soon.

Blame it on Fidel!

La Faute à Fidel! (2006)
NR
Running Time: 99 minutes
France

For a really long time I couldn't get over the acting of Victoire Thivisol of Ponette. It's really good, and she was 4 years old. Nina Kervel-Bey, however, gave Victoire a run for her money in 2006 with her sullen yet sassy role in Blame it on Fidel. I would be bitter too if I grew up in the comforts of bourgeois France only to be deprived of these things because my parents decided to become activists.

The story is probably hard to relate to. It might be offensive to some because of the film's glorification of radical (not liberal) ideals. It is even arguable that Anna (Victoire), who voices all the objections a spoiled capitalist would raise, embodies an infantile and inferior view to that of the radicals. (i.e. liberal = sophisticated, fiscally conservative = not yet educated on the matter.) This may, however, be a poor interpretation. It is important to remember that Anna is the protagonist.

In 1970, Anna's parents decide to go to Chile and help their comrades establish a new order. I'm not going to tell you the whole story because I'm lazy, and I have class soon. Essentially, the parents throw themselves into their work and neglect their children. Anna, in particular, resents this.

Anna is very perceptive. She questions her parents current and past actions, articulately observing the hypocrisy in their lives. The father is inconsistent in standing up for causes (he missed out on the 1967 French student revolt because he had a cushy job.) The mother jeopardizes their roles in Chile by getting involved in an advocacy group to legalize abortion.

Anna is also selfish (capitalist?). She has a conversation with "les barbus" (bearded men) who often congregate at her home about the merits of capitalism (you get lots of money for yourself) verses the merits of communism (there is no self interest). As much as the film is black and white or left and right, it is subtly complex in how it portrays the way the characters have to relate to each other given their ideals.

The film is pretty heavy handed. So, if you hate liberal ideals, don't watch it. You will be distracted and perhaps infuriated by the ideology.

The film ends on a very optimistic note. Anna transfers to a public school, and unwittingly the other children invite her to join them. I think the symbolism is we always ought to remember that a human being is more important than any ideal, left or right. I don't think that Julie Gavras really got the point across in any explicit way, but this is alright given that Hollywood beats us over the head with whatever they think is important. ( I have to disagree slightly with DC's review of Wall•E. The first 30 minutes were amazing. When the humans come along it was like we had to be bludgeoned to death with the fact that if we don't eat healthy and exercise, we will be obese, or the fact that the earth is nearly dead, but if a little plant can do it, (do what?!?) we can too! I absolutely agree that these are important issues, I just feel that the film was a little didactic. But, barring that barrage of if-you-didn't-get-the-point-we-will-reiterate-it-over-and-over-just-to-make-sure, Wall•E was great.) Okay, I better end the review there...

Smart People

Smart People (2008)
R
Running Time: 95 minutes
USA

I love double entendres...especially when used skillfully to make your mind think in ways that it probably wouldn't otherwise. This film is obviously about some of the smartest idiots on the planet...brilliant in some ways, socially retarded in others. Seems to me that in life there are certain trade offs when it comes to talents and abilities, something that Noam Murro explores through these complex characters that were created to demonstrate just how difficult it is to maintain "healthy" relationships when crippled emotionally.

Lawrence Wetherhold (Dennis Quaid) is the the widower father of two children and a professor at Carnegie Mellow. Self absorbed, arrogant and prideful, he can't even remember current student's names, let alone former one's. After a fall/seizure, he ends up in the emergency room as the patient of a former student and, painfully at times, a romantic friendship ensues. During all of this, Lawerence's adopted brother Chuck (Thomas Hayden Church) shows up for a handout and a place to stay and begins to stir the proverbial pot.

This movie was fairly well done. Strong performances by Quaid, Church, Ellen Page and Sarah Jessica Parker keep the story moving with comedic moments and an occassional heart string pull. It's rated R for language, some sexuality and drug use, some involving teens (I totally sound like a real movie reviewer! I'm proud of myself!). I was well entertained and would recommend it to anyone in the mood for a quirky, romantic comedy...but I would definitely suggest seeing Running With Scissors, if you already haven't. Smart People felt like a small step down from RWS...albeit both are worth seeing. Enjoy!

Evelyn

Evelyn (2002)
PG
Running Time: 95 minutes
UK

For those of you who managed to nail your eyelids open long enough to watch the newly released Mama Mia!, Evelyn may interest you too. Actually, all that the two films share in common is Pierce Brosnan singing. But, if James Bond singing ABBA songs to Meryl Streep doesn't deter you, then James Bond singing Irish Pub songs can only be that much more enticing. Supposedly this film is based on actual events. Desmond is the father of three children. His wife leaves him, and he subsequently looses his children because he drinks. The children are sent to a Catholic orphanage. James is poor and he is an alcoholic. He gives up the drink, teams up with some lawyers and they try to overthrow the Irish system of family law. The law can be interesting, sometimes, and this film does an fairly good job of exploring the social and political aspects of any good lawsuit, but so far as movies about the law are concerned, this one is pretty typical.

This film has good nuns and one bad nun, bad lawyers and a few good lawyers, cute little kids, and a grip of Irish people hanging out in pubs. But, there is only one lay Irish folk singer, and though he doesn't quite measure up to The Pogues, Dropkick Murphys, or Flogging Molly, he most certainly outdoes his performance in Mama Mia! (Trust me, that film was so bad that I didn't even see it.) The best part of this film is Evelyn's (Sophie Vavasseur) testimony.

This film is a 3 out of 5. It is mediocre, inspirational, and moderately paced. (Want to see a really good portrayal of politics and law? See the recent John Adams mini-series, episode 1.)

Pineapple Express

Pineapple Express
R
Running Time: 111 minutes
USA

Why do I do this to myself?

Let me clarify before your thought processes get off track. There is a certain skill in overcoming what I'd like to officially label as "Christmas Syndrome™" or "CS™". This malady involves seeing an ad for any given product and completely allowing it to define your perception of said item, whether that be a toy, piece of clothing or even a film. Sadly, I fell prey to my own made up disease with this film and would like to hopefully shed some light as to why.

Judd Apatow is an incredible filmmaker. He uses horrible language, extremely crude humor and somewhat gimmicky sight gags...but the skilled part is, he makes you care about characters who are complete and total losers. That's not easy to do...and Mr. Apatow seems to have the capacity to pull it off with regularity. HOWEVER, that only seems to be the case when he directs his movies. When the Apatow name appears only as a producer, the film seems to suffer some...

Which brings me to tonight's word...I mean, review (please don't sue me Mr. Colbert). Plot? Don't bother...it's hardly relevant. A good stoner movie (which, admittedly, this is) cares not for such things. Comedic value? I laughed hysterically for the first half of the movie...almost on par with Superbad...and then it was like watching a firecracker whose fuse reaches the flash point, fizzles and then slowly tips over. It left me wanting. Not a good feeling. It's like the girl that winks seductively, gets your attention and then runs screaming in the other direction (admit it..it's happened to you, too). And this is where CS™ set in. I just kept thinking "Why?! Why did you build this up into another 40 Year Old Virgin when you know that's an incredibly high bench mark to reach?" But then I remind myself...Seth Rogen is good in everything he's been in (I even liked his minuscule role in Donnie Darko), it's at least an Apatow production and James Franco as a stoner looked hysterical. Therefore, after reflecting back on what I just viewed, I can conclude that, based on previous experience with Apatow films and with Seth Rogen, I contracted a slight case of CS™ which most likely affected my overall satisfaction with the film (not to mention the poor casting of Rosie Perez and the fact that the gore at the end almost seemed to be an inside joke between cast and crew). This happened to me somewhat with Superbad...and I'm happy to say that several viewings later I have come to enjoy it thoroughly. Not sure if that will be the case with this latest installment...but we shall see.

If you like stoner flicks, or if you're an Apatow/Rogen fan, check it out. Just lower your expectations a bit, the sure way to cure any lingering CS™.

ADDENDUM: I just remembered something that bothered me, too. Not sure if I was just making things up or not but I could have sworn that there were about 10 plugs for AT&T's "My Moment" ad campaign. If that's true, it bothered me somethin' fierce. Not that I disagree with product placement in films...but if you're gonna do it, do it subtlety!! If anyone else noticed it please let me know so that I don't think I'm crazy...

The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight
PG-13
Running Time: 152 minutes
USA

I have no idea where to begin with this review. My head is filled to capacity with geekdom and is ready to explode. Truthfully, I don't consider myself all that geeked-out or nerdy...but when I see a movie of this quality all my self-perceived "coolness" goes out the window and I revert to '92 when comic books and my imagination were king.

I won't bother with plot outlines, seeing as how this is one of the biggest movies to come out all year and I assume that most everyone will see it...

...which leads to the only thing I want to talk about: Heath Ledger. Oh-my-hell...words cannot express the shock and awe. There are some phenomenal actors working currently and there have been many notables in the past. However, I am here to prophesy that Mr. Ledger will go down in history for this role as one of the most memorable, powerful and believable performances ever captured on film. Truly, movie-goers everywhere should be saddened at his passing, not only for his human worth and goodness, that being the main reason, but also for the fact that this one performance would have rocketed him into acting immortality. He most certainly would have graced us with a myriad more characters and performances sure to shake the dust off our souls.

It is extremely rare to come across a character that is so creepy, so insane, so despicable and conniving...and yet so charismatic, so strangely charming and so spellbinding. This is how I always pictured the "real" Joker when I would read the comics. This is the character that I have had in my head all this time. This is the human portrayal of my inner demons. Truly, this is as close to acting perfection as it comes...I've only seen it a handful of times: Daniel-Day Lewis (There Will Be Blood) and Javier Bardem (No Country For Old Men) to name a few. However, Heath Ledger now joins that list and becomes a part of acting legends that will never be forgotten.

In fairness to the rest of the film, it was incredible all around. Christian Bale, Morgan Freeman, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gary Oldman, Aaron Eckhart and Michael Caine were outstanding. The script was tight and even the one-liners hit on all cylinders. The CGI was flawless and the fight choreography was fast-paced and exciting. Honestly, if you only see one movie this year, it needs to be this one. Let the geeks run free!!!

Chaos Theory

Chaos Theory
PG-13
Running Time: 87 minutes
USA

This movie review is dedicated to my mother who is in constant pursuit of truth, "normalcy" and sanity. Not to suggest that she is insane...only that we are all searching for a sense of validation and stability. Everyone's in the same proverbial boat...which is what director Marcos Siega tries to show his audience in this romantic comedy drama.

Ryan Reynolds plays an efficiency expert who meticulously follows a daily schedule that is hand written on index cards. He feels that by doing this his life will have order, through which he can maintain control of his surroundings. As the title suggests, however, his very structured life turns chaotic after a series of unsettling events, leaving him reeling and trying to regain any semblance of control that he once had. I'll leave the details vague...no spoilers here.

As I'm writing this review and reflecting back over what I just watched, I'm picking out more lines that struck me as profound. Which, really, is sort of odd given that the movie had more comedic overtones than I thought it would. Still, Siega and writer Daniel Taplitz were able to include several very insightful commentaries about just how randomized life tends to be. I would suggest picking this one up, mainly because Emily Mortimer and Ryan Reynolds give great performances (I've always liked Reynolds, in spite of some of his movie choices). It's very light hearted, in spite of some dramatic scenes and is one to watch with your spouse/significant other since it's got the romance element as well. Plus, it's got the nerdy stop-and-think-about-what-you're-watching tidbits that keep it interesting for geeks like me. I liked the movie a lot...but it's nowhere close to breaking into the top 50. Just a good Friday night flick in with the loved one. Enjoy!

The Tracey Fragments

The Tracey Fragments
R
Running Time: 77 minutes
Canada

Artsy flicks can be problematic for me. Some are extremely well done and others are, well, not. Truthfully, the factors that surround my enjoyment of each one are mysteries since there's no real criteria that I can pinpoint which would help me determine the individual quality. That said, I know a good artsy flick when I see it...and this is definitely one of them.

The human brain is a strange, sometimes scary and overall fascinating place. Trying to make sense of everything that goes on cerebrally is an impossible task...and one that has literally driven people insane. The Tracey Fragments attempts to tell a linear "story" in a VERY non-linear fashion by showing bits and pieces of the heroine's thoughts, fears and versions of the truth, all through divisions within the main frame of the camera, crazy montages of objects and mementos and flashbacks. Bruce Mcdonald visually takes his audience into the mind of a 15 year old girl that has gone through some very traumatic experiences and allows us individually to attempt understanding of what actually took place.

I have another confession to make: Hollywood-ites are generally uninteresting to me. Until recently, there were only 2 people that I would actually care to meet and converse with, those being Bill Murray and Wes Anderson. However, Ellen Page has not only made that exclusive list but she will be receiving a wedding proposal in the mail shortly. Ok...I jest about the marriage but honestly, this woman can act! Juno was good and showcased her talents well...but if you see this movie (and I STRONGLY suggest you see Hard Candy as well...she was unbelievable) your eyes will be opened to just how well she can perform. Honestly, besides the vision that McDonald brings to the story, Page's performance is what makes this a truly remarkable film. The subject material is pretty heavy (attempted rape, murder, sex, missing child, abuse, etc.)...but, like I've mentioned in previous posts, I tend to like these movies because they're more true to life. Maybe not mine, maybe not yours...but most of us know people who have experienced some of these things which hopefully brings us as close to real empathy as we ever have to come. This was a great film...I suggest you see it...and tell me what you think.

By way of brief introduction...

Just an FYI for all those who read this blog...I would like to introduce a good friend of mine who will be contributing posts from now on: Christopher Wallace, Jr.. Chris is living on the east coast (the EC as I like to call it) and will be able to add a fresh perspective to my west coast (yes...The WC) rants. He's EXTREMELY well versed in the ways of indie film and music so we should all be looking forward to getting introduced to some radical sweet shizzo.

Bienvenue, Chris!

Hancock

Hancock
PG-13
Running time: 92 minutes
USA

Ok...before you start wondering...I really DON'T have any physical attraction to Will Smith. Yes, I mentioned I have a man crush on him and this is the second WS movie that I've seen in the past week or two...it's nothing serious. Let's just leave it at imaginary friends and call it good. Deal? Ok. Moving on...(awkward)

A few people in the office and I went to see this movie at lunch today because it was one of their birthdays. It was a matinée, I was semi-interested in seeing it (thanks to Charlize Theron and Jason Bateman) and it got me out of work. Why not, right? I read the reviews this morning (it's getting panned almost universally), leaving me with extremely low expectations. Plus, it is a WS movie that's coming out on the 4th of July weekend which usually means huge explosions, little plot and some cheesy one-liners. However, I was pretty surprised at not only how entertained I was throughout the majority of the movie but at how well done it was. The story line concerns one John Hancock, a mysterious superhero that does inordinate amounts of damage to the city every time he helps someone. He's also an alcoholic which leads to several raucously funny scenes at the first of the film. After saving the life of a PR man (Bateman), Hancock decides to allow him a chance at reviving his image of the superhero that everyone thinks he should be...thus allowing the plot to unfold.

I'm keeping this post short for a few reasons: first, it's not anything masterful. It was never intended to be. Therefore, very little "insight" needs providing, in my opinion. Second, it's a summer blockbuster that needs little selling. If you're into this type of movie, you'll enjoy it thoroughly. Third, my fingers hurt (and now my back's gonna hurt 'cause I just pulled landscaping duty...anyone?). This movie was a pleasant surprise for me. WS, Theron and Bateman (I'm seriously SO excited for the Arrested Development movie...I can't even begin to tell you) make it what it is. They are very good mixes of comedic and dramatic actors...able to switch gears quickly and seamlessly. The explosions and CGI seemed a little hokey in places but for the most part I enjoyed them. All in all, go check it out...and see it in the theater during a matinée. It's meant to be seen on the big screen.

WALL·E

WALL·E
G
Running time: 97 minutes
USA

I've been looking forward to Pixar's latest installment for months and months. Finally, after overcoming laziness (which was strange, given my desire to see it) and the fact that I wanted to see it with London, I was able to see it last night. For anyone who doesn't know already, I have a strange fascination/love for Pixar (notice, I'm leaving out Disney because I'm not that big a fan without the Pixar addition). I'll spare you my petite soapbox and just remind you that these are no mere cartoons. They're cinematic masterpieces. Don't believe me? Go see another kids movie sometime and compare them (dare I say it? Ok...I will...Daddy Day Care! I just vomited all over my typewriter).

As I'm sure most of you already know, whether through personal viewings or the inundation of promos for the show, WALL·E is a small robot left on earth to clean up the trash of its previous inhabitants who now reside on a space station. He has picked up some knowledge of human culture by sifting through the junk and has developed a personality along the way. I won't go too much further into the plot as I think it's better left experienced than read. I will say this, though: Andrew Stanton and crew are fantastic story tellers and can take even robots that are programmed for mundane tasks and make them interesting characters.

Ok...now down to the nitty gritty. The question that I've already been asked by several people is "how does it rank in comparison with the rest of the Pixar library?" My honest opinion? Top 3 for sure. My favorites have been going back and forth from The Incredibles, Finding Nemo and Toy Story 2...and it's sad to say but WALL·E just knocked Toy Story 2 out of the top 3. Now, I'll address the concern that has been brought up by several people to me already...but only briefly. Yes, there is a "message" to the movie. Yes, it is a bit heavy handed in ONE part. Yes, it distracted me for a millisecond. However, that millisecond was not even close to being a detraction to the film as a whole. I don't consider myself an extreme environmentalist (ask my dad how I feel about recycling) but I didn't consider the underlying theme was obtrusive. I think Stanton kept it inline with the story about 99% of the time. And more power to him. That's what good story telling is all about. Every story has a point, moral, joke, etc. That's what makes them interesting. Again, I don't think Stanton/crew went overboard...they just got their point across, effectively enough to make some of us squirm.

I was absolutely blown away by the animation, again. Each installment makes me question whether or not they can top the previous one...and each time they come through with honors. The colors, the landscapes, the starscapes, the attention to detail...it's absolutely mind boggling how much work went into making this movie LOOK the way that it did. Let alone the writing, direction, design, physics, acting (which was minimal), etc. that tied the look together. There were some great sight gags and quite a few lines from the Captain of the vessel (voiced by Jeff Garlin) that got me laughing. Plus, and yes it's embarrassing to admit, I got emotional at the end. Yes, they were robots...ANIMATED robots at that. And they made me a little teary. In other words, and I'll leave it at this, I really enjoyed the movie. I'm frankly shocked at all the negative reviews and opinions from people so far. What's wrong with you people? Don't you know a good movie when you see one?! Get on board, fools!

p.s. j/k, lol, omg, rofl, brb

p.p.s. The animated short that plays before the feature, Presto, was hilarious...one more reason to go and see it and one more reason for me to love Pixar. Do you think Pixar's available? 'Cause I'd marry it...don't tempt me.

Running With Scissors

Running With Scissors
R
Running time: 116 minutes
USA

Such a head trip. A mind job, if you will. I'm still reeling from last night's viewing...even with a good night's sleep and some time to think about what happened. To me, that's the sign of a good flick...left me unsettled and picking up the pieces of my shattered subconscious.

This is another Sundance entry from a few years back (I got to be in the car fleet that drove them to the premiere...Evan Rachel Wood is FOXY btw) that I never got to see until now. It's actually based off of true events, which I didn't find out until the end of the movie. Augusten Burroughs (Joseph Cross) grew up in a CRAZY situation: a mother with delusions of grandeur (Annette Bening), an alcoholic father (Alec Baldwin) and a mixed personality that left him feeling like he didn't fit in anywhere. After a huge fight with her husband, Augusten's mother decides it's time to seek mental help and contacts a "doctor" named Finch (Brian Cox) to help her get out of the funk she's in. To make a long story short, this leads to the Finchs adopting Augusten when his mother goes to start a new life so that she can concentrate on writing poetry (or attempting to write, I should say).

Ryan Murphy did a fantastic job in this movie with attention to details. Set in the 70's, the costumes, cars, music, etc. are perfectly used. Most impressive, however, was Dr. Finch's house, one of three homes shown in detail throughout the picture. This was probably my favorite part of the movie in that each house was a different representation of the mental states that the characters were in. The Burroughs home was pristine...very ornate with that classic, HIDEOUS 70's furniture, linoleum floors and art all over the walls...to me, a representation of the attempt at maintaining appearances while underneath everything's in shambles. After Augusten moves out, Dierdre's new place is just as ultra modern but has a more disheveled look, again representing her slowly unraveling mental state. The pièce de résistance for me was the Finch house...an absolute train wreck, covered from head to toe in junk, oddities and, to top it all off, a fluorescent pink exterior paint job. Within its walls, the members of the household were no less strange. In fact, you realize quickly that they're all pretty much out of their minds (the casting/acting was really well done). However, (and this is where I'm still trying to wrap my head around how I feel) there are a few brief moments Murphy extracts from the chaos to show you that maybe there is more method to the mayhem than previously thought. In fact, there were a few really touching scenes, especially between Augusten and Mrs. Finch/Natalie, that I thought gave glimpses of hope and understanding where there appeared to be none at all. One of the reasons why I am so drawn to movies like this is because I see myself in them so much. Our minds have the tendency to appear like the Finch house at times while others can feel more like the Burroughs'. In the end, at least for me, I catch glimmers of sanity and understanding in very complex mental/emotional situations...which gives me hope. Good hell, I love film...when it's done well. I recommend you check this one out, if you're so inclined.

Interpol

Interpol
Formed: 1997, NYC
Current Members: Paul Banks, Daniel Kessler, Carlos Dengler, Sam Fogarino
Discography: Turn On the Bright Lights, Antics, Our Love to Admire
Wikipedia Info

Since this is my first music post, I'm undecided on how the format should be. What information is the most pertinent? What are you, the avid readers (reader, actually...Hi Liz ;)), wanting to know about the bands that I'll post? I guess I'll stick with their official website, the members, year formed, discography and a link to their wikipedia page? Who knows...the point, however, will be this: These bands have changed my life in some way, shape or form. Music is more than just a pastime for me. It's a way of life. Without it I would literally be lost. So, if you've heard of them let me know what you think...if you haven't, then I urge you to check them out.

Interpol is one of those bands that you either love or hate...there's no middle ground. They have been compared to Joy Division quite often...but I don't really see the correlation. I'm not sure why...but Interpol has stood the test of time for me in a HUGE way. For some reason I'm always in the mood to listen to them...always. That's probably because their music is very ambient sounding: lots of reverb on the guitars, multiple layers of guitar/bass, technical drum work that's not overbearing and Paul's almost apparition-like voice. An admission: I have fallen asleep to music every night of my life except for the nearly 3 years that I was married. Which music totally depends on the mood I'm in but, as you can probably imagine, it's usually mellow. One of my go-to albums is Turn On the Bright Lights because it instantly calms me down. It's like a nice sedative...simplistic enough to not keep my mind engaged but also complex to the point that I don't get bored with it. It's actually quite a phenomenon...'cause they play VERY simplistic riffs and add occasional keyboard arrangements but it produces an incredibly full sound. For anyone that hasn't heard them, I suggest you start of with the track "Untitled" off of Turn On the Bright Lights. Honestly, that's what did it for me...it was true love at first listen. Lucky for me, I don't think this relationship will ever end...and after their latest album's release, I can only imagine that our love will grow stronger with time.

I Am Legend

I Am Legend
PG-13
Running time: 101 minutes
USA

Sometimes I baffle myself...especially when I get the urge to watch a movie that I know will only disappoint me in the end. Also, I am bewildered by my man crush on Will Smith because he really hasn't done many films that I have cared for. However, there's just something about him that I can't put my finger on that makes me love that guy! Anyway...I digress. I added this to my queue a while back just for fun and then totally forgot about it. Lo and behold, it showed up at my door yesterday so I figured I'd give it a quick viewing.

I'll keep the synopsis and commentary brief because I figure most of the world has already seen it. Smith's character is the only apparent survivor from a cancer cure gone awry. Most of the visually stunning scenes are of him and his dog driving through the barren streets of New York, hunting or trying to capture the "creatures" that survive in the darkness.

I was pretty entertained for the first half of the movie. Francis Lawrence uses dreams/flashbacks to give enough back story to make you care about Smith's character. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, the backdrops of a post-apocalyptic NYC are beautiful. My brain started to shut down entirely, however, when the infected humans started to play a bigger role. Apparently they either hired completely different companies to do the cityscapes and the zombie-types or they just got lazy. The CGI goes from believable to comical in a span of about 30 seconds right around the half way point of the film. I started wondering if I was watching two different movies...the latter of which was getting under my skin. The worst part being the lack of credibility destroyed any tension that had been built up to that point...which was a shame 'cause the first half had me curious. Oh well...I guess I had little to no hope that the movie was going to be good so I wasn't all the disappointed...just a little irked? Miffed, maybe? Kerfuffled? Nope...irked it is.

It's a popcorn eater...if you're gonna see it just sip a horse tranquilizer or something equivalent and let your mind fall asleep for a while. You'll enjoy it just fine.

Crash

Crash
R
Running Time: 112 Minutes
USA

For those of you who know me well, it's almost a certainty that at one point my distaste for most things "mainstream and/or popular" has surfaced in conversation. I've softened on that position somewhat over the years...but I reserve the right to prejudge any film that is presented to me. Crash has been on my list of movies to see ever since I heard about it my first year working at Sundance. However, and this is where my prejudgment comes in, it has never been a priority because EVERY review that I've seen has been EXTREMELY positive...scary, right?

Wrong.

Allow me to make a bold statement: this movie should be shown on public television...everyone should have access to it. Not very often do movies come about that affect me deeply...but this is one of them. Paul Haggis deserved his two Oscars and the rest of the nominations which isn't always the case (Halle...I'm looking in your direction). Honestly, some of the scenes in this movie are so intense I was poised to fall off my couch. I'm pissed at myself for not seeing this earlier...but hopefully I can reach out and help any of you that may have made the same mistake to repent and change your evil ways.

The story plays off the idea that we are all affected daily by complete strangers. Each set of characters goes through the course of two days and, without knowing, affects the outcomes of all the other's lives. You know you have a good movie when the likes of Sandra Bullock and Brendan Fraser give excellent performances...on top of the abilities of veterans such as Don Cheadle and Jennifer Esposito. Plus, Matt Dillon's Oscar was well deserved (he has probably the most intense scene in the movie...I was floored).

I love when a director can take social issues, craft them around beautiful writing and flawless acting and use his direction to POSE questions...leaving us to answer them accordingly. Given a new life and a new set of talents, that is what I would dedicate my time to...because I think, like other mediums, art is the catalyst that forces us from our comfort zone and into alternate realities. Crash is one of those films that accomplishes that...at least, for me. I STRONGLY suggest you see it...and let the questions be asked.

Kung Fu Panda

Kung Fu Panda
PG
Running Time: 92 minutes
USA

I would like to take this opportunity to thank my daughter, London, for forcing me to open my world to the wonders of animation. Ever since she was born 4 years ago, I've been fascinated by the Pixar movies (a side note: I am STOKED to see Wall E...don't laugh but it's true) and have taken moderate interest in the Dreamworks additions as well. I don't know if it's the amount of collaboration that goes into each of these creations, dumb luck or both that makes them so special but honestly...these aren't just silly kids movies anymore. They are actual films with great writing, voice talent and style. Kung Fu Panda fits those descriptions perfectly.

The plot revolves around Po, a clumsy panda who is destined to inherit his father's noodle business but who dreams of being a great kung fu warrior. Through a series of mishaps, Po winds up with more than he bargained for and becomes nominated as The Dragon Warrior who will defend the town from Tai Lung, a rogue warrior who defected long ago. Although this story line has been done many times before, the style that Osborne and Stevenson give the film almost makes you forget the myriad other movies similar to it. The cut scenes and fight choreography are excellently constructed, too...so much so that several times throughout the movie I thought I was watching either the best video game I'd ever seen or the most incredible Jackie Chan flick to date. However, the biggest reason to throw down the money for this one is Jack Black who definitely steals the show...which given the cast of voices (Angelina Jolie, Lucy Liu, Dustin Hoffman, Seth Rogen and Jackie Chan himself) is a feat unto itself. I'll be totally honest with you...Jack Black is a hilarious man. Not sure if you've realized that yet...but if not, go watch Orange County, High Fidelity or School of Rock to assist you...not to mention his jaunts with Kyle Gass, known to some as Tenacious D. I don't think I need to sell anyone on this movie...for once there's a summer blockbuster that delivers exactly what it promises: a family friendly, freakin' funny, fast paced fight film...hooray for alliteration!

Rambo/The Grand

Rambo (aka: Rambo 4)
R
Running time: 91 minutes
USA

I don't know if it was heat stroke from playing golf or the fact that I had a 4 hole stretch that built up such a rage inside me that I had flashes of First Blood running through my head...but when I got home I felt like watching a mindless, violent, ridiculous movie, the likes of which only a man such as Sly could create.

I'll be brief with this one seeing as how you can imagine what I'm capable of writing about such drivel. In my opinion, the sole reason for making this movie was to allow Sly one last chance to look at himself on the big screen. Sad really. I was hoping for a few good one liners or some well choreographed fight scenes but was instead spoon fed some CGI exploding bodies and some of the worst writing I've ever been exposed to. I know, I know...I got what I paid for. Still...is it too much to ask for maybe a HINT of talent? I guess the answer to that rhetorical question depends on who I'm asking. In other words, remind me to never ask Sly anything again unless it's for a refund of my $1.06.


The Grand
R
Running Time: 104 minutes
USA

Fact: Christopher Guest and crew are the best "mockumentary" makers in the business. Waiting For Guffman is pure genius. There's no denying it...which is why I am always hesitant to watch similar movies by any other filmmaker. However, with a stacked cast and an entertaining premise, I figured I had little to lose. I love Woody Harrelson, David Cross, Chris Parnell, Denis Farina and Cheryl Hines. Plus, small cameos by people like Werner Herzog, Jason Alexander, Hank Azaria and Ray Romano were enticing enough to make me spend that Redbox dollar.

Basically, the movie revolves around 6 main characters who are all vying for the chance to win 10 million dollars in The Grand poker tournament at the Golden Nugget. In analogous fashion to Guest, Zak Penn gives enough back story on each character to make you care about whether they win or lose...in life and in the tournament. It's difficult to take a ridiculous persona and give it enough humanism to make the viewer feel empathy towards it. Surprisingly, Penn pulls it off extremely well which, to me, is the sign of a great director. The other tough part of a film such as this one is keeping the audience laughing. Let me just say...I haven't genuinely laughed this hard at a movie since The 40 Year Old Virgin (although that's one of my all time favorite comedies so I hesitate to compare them). The writing/improvisation is fantastic...reminded me of Guffman and This is Spinal Tap. If you are looking for a good, quick paced, dialog heavy comedy, pick this one up. You won't be disappointed.

Funny Games

Funny Games
R
Runtime: 111 min.
USA

I'm somewhat unclear as to why certain films appeal to me, especially when they deal with extreme violence and depravity. Funny games fits perfectly into that category. It centers around an affluent family of 3 that goes on vacation to their summer home and quickly find themselves at the mercy of a pair of psychotic youths who torture them mercilessly, simply to satisfy their own whims. Good times, yeah?

The film is actually a remake of Michael Haneke's own 1997 original, shot for shot. I'm not sure why any director would take a movie that they had made and feel like they needed to recreate it with different actors...but apparently Haneke did. Don't get me wrong...Tim Roth and Naomi Watts (EXCEPT for her performance in King Kong...why?!) are phenomenal (one of the principal reasons I wanted to see it in the first place) but it seems like either an attempt to make more money from an existing idea or an act of retribution because he felt his first attempt wasn't good enough. Who knows.

After my late night viewing, I went to bed feeling pretty unsettled. Not surprising, given the subject matter. I was hoping for some resolution or a partial understanding of the two crazies' intentions. Didn't happen though and I ended up with the same empty sensation that I had after watching Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange for the first time. (as a matter of fact, there were a lot of similarities to ACO, even down to their white attire, gloves and mannerisms) The strange thing is that I consider myself a realist and usually want to vomit after seeing a movie with a nice "hollywood" ending...but this conclusion left me wanting just a hint of humanity. Unfortunately, I think the film was a glimpse into the reality that the world provides on occasion: random acts of violence, without explanation, happening to seemingly normal people. Most people (myself included sometimes) want to have an explanation for all the "why's" but it's just not always possible. I won't give away any of the "games" that they play...suffice it to say they're pretty gruesome. That said, it kept me enthralled through the whole movie with pretty convincing performances from Naomi Watts and Tim Roth (although Michael Pitt bugs the HELL out of me...I wish I never saw Murder By Numbers). I'd recommend it for anyone with a penchant for the deranged...if that's not you, don't bother.

Son of Rambow

The Son of Rambow
PG-13
Runtime: 96 minutes
UK

I really wanted to see this film up at Sundance this year but wasn't able to. A few friends of mine went to the Broadway last night and checked it out and, I have to say, I was thoroughly impressed. It centers around a young boy named Will Proudfoot who has no friends and an overactive imagination. He also belongs to a cult called The Brotherhood which, as is apparent fairly early in the film, believes that imagination isn't something that should be explored or dealt with.

Will's character is contrasted by the school outcast, Lee Carter, who is constantly being thrown out of class and finds trouble at every turn. He pirates movies by sitting in the theater and recording them with a video camera which leads to a chance encounter with Will, allowing them to combine forces and make a short film called "The Son of Rambow."

The movie deals with some interesting topics (i.e. close friendships, the roles of parental figures, brother/sister bonds, popularity, defining art, etc.), sometimes subtly and other times not so subtly. Luckily, the superb acting from the young cast kept me from feeling manipulated or forced into believing something I didn't agree with. It was shot in rural France, Germany and the UK and has some beautiful backdrops and locations. The stylized animation sequences reminded me of a cross between Napoleon Dynamite and The Life Aquatic but maintained the identity that the director intended...tough to pull off but he did. All in all, I walked away feeling like I had received a quick lesson on relationships from a skilled teacher who kept me interested, start to finish. Go check it out...you won't be disappointed.

It Begins

My friend Liz posted a request on my personal blog yesterday that got me thinking. I spend an inordinate amount of time debating, dwelling on, researching, watching, listening and participating in movies and music. I study opinions and critiques a great deal, love to hear conflicting viewpoints and thrive on good, healthy rebuttals to my occasional fierce opinions. Therefore, I'm going to attempt an additional blog that will be solely dedicated to inking my thoughts on the subject of film and music. Now, before the few readers of my personal blog begin to scoff and mutter "how could he possibly maintain two blogs when he can hardly muster up the courage to update one?" I have a plan. Due to my love affair with Netflix and also being privileged enough to associate myself with many diverse music lovers, I will force myself to be proactive in writing about which films cross my path as well as particular artists that I happen to be listening to at the given moment. The goal is to write at least twice a week so please be patient with me as I begin the process. As far as structure or format is concerned, I don't have one. The ramblings to follow will be pure, unadulterated cerebral matter flowing from the mind of an obsessed junkie. Whether you agree with anything found within the virtual walls of this blog or not is fine by me...just don't be afraid to tell me what you think. Really...chime in. As Aristotle once said "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." That's what makes film and music so wonderful...because, in my opinion, they are microcosmic dissections of humanity that offer absolutely fascinating insight into the complexity that is man. Anyway, I wax verbose. Here are my thoughts...enjoy (or don't!)...