tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-169170552011-09-20T14:50:42.214-04:00Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.comBlogger781100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-39683600423767368922009-05-31T01:51:00.001-04:002009-05-31T01:51:40.360-04:00<p class="graf-intro"><img border="0" src="http://www.massmediareview.com/images/film/review_089.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left" alt="Russell assists Carl amid a lost Peruvian Jungle in Pixar's 'Up'"><I>Up</I>, the tenth feature film by Pixar Animation Studios, is an impossible picture to pin down. It borrows liberally from our collective subconscious, not the least of which with its iconic image of the house floating through the air, carried by a massive swarm of balloons. It is a love story, a tragedy, a coming of age story and an adventure serial. It has talking animals, but it is not a talking animal picture. It is a children's film starting two old men (and a Wilderness Scout), told from an elderly perspective. It is joyous and melancholy, brazen yet at times incredibly subtle. Most of all, it is a celebration of living.</p> <p>The film opens with a news reel about the great adventurer Charles F. Muntz, a heroic Charles Lindbergh-esque adventurer who returns to the jungles of Peru for proof of his disputed discovery. Inside a dilapidated old house on the way home with the name of Muntz's zeppelin scrawled on it, he meets Ellie. Another passionate Muntz fan, she is as talkative and outgoing as Carl is laconic and introverted. A beautifully rendered montage follows their life together, through all of the blissful small moments as well as a few cruel tragedies. It ends with Carl at Ellie's funeral, alone again.</p> <p>To picture Carl Fredrickson as the film resumes, imagine Walter Matthau at the end of his career with hair just a shade darker than snow -- and then squash him to a third of his height. His personality is all Ed Asner, though: curt, growled opinions often hastily reconsidered. All of fire of Lou Grant, but with the additional gravel of an additional four decades of living. Unlike Asner's famous TV incarnation, Carl is as unabashedly sentimental anyone who says so little can be. Ellie was the light of his world, and his devotion to her is the guiding force of his life.</p> <p>He is joined by Russell, an overly eager wilderness scout who floats away with Carl while searching for an animal under the old man's porch. He frustrates Carl, who seems him as both an obstacle to fulfilling a promise and as a symbol of the child he could not have. Russell has his own share of vulnerabilities, leaving himself emotionally exposed as only an innocent child can. Watching the two bond is one of the great pleasures of the film, as they slowly peel back the layers of each others' lives. Russell helps complete Carl's story, and Carl helps preserve Russell's innocence for just a little while longer.</p> <p>They relationship grows over the course of a 1930's adventure yarn full of exotic jungles, mysterious creatures, a mustache-twirling villain and thrilling mid-air acrobatics. Though anchored by the poignant human developments, Pete Doctor's setpieces are arguably the broadest and most fantastic in Pixar's history. Only minor concessions are made to the rules of gravity and physics, with many moments that would be impossible even by standard action movie logic. Anyone who has a problem with it should remember they bought a ticket to a film with a house floating through the air on balloons on the poster.</p> <p><I>Up</I> aims for something unusual in for modern cinema, especially animated fare: it reflects on how time changes us and effects us, how we miss out on things we deeply desire and discover wonderful things we'd never have expected. It explores what it means to be old with a lifetime of experiences and relationships behind you, and from that perspective it witnesses youth with a lifetime of experiences and relationships yet to be had. It is a coming of age story for a man nearing the end of his life; a man who experienced the kind of love we all hope for faced with the opportunity of experiencing the kind of love he'd long since given up hope for. Despite occasionally going too far out on a limb, it stands as an instant classic.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1049413/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-3968360042376736892?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-68471777655455687822009-05-27T00:48:00.001-04:002009-05-27T00:48:58.915-04:00<p class="graf-intro"><img border="0" src="http://www.massmediareview.com/images/film/review_088.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left" alt="Humans battle machines in 'Terminator Salvation'">"Come with me if you want to live," Kyle Reese barks at Marcus Wright and it's to Anton Yelchin's credit that we aren't distracted by the callback. His performance, quickly following his take on Chekov in the rebooted "Star TreK" in a grim commentary on Hollywood originality, channels Michael Biehn's crazed eyes and unwavering intensity. His supporting role is one of the few highlights of McG's strange little hybrid of a movie, a frustrating war epic that marries the mythology of the earlier Terminator films with the iconography and sensibility of the Mad Max films.</p> <p>This is not the Future War we saw flashes of in the earlier films; it's browner, dirtier, more rural. Unanchored from the real world of the present, there isn't the same tension and weight to the proceedings. Cameron's films and Mostow's follow-up were all deceptively intimate films; two or three good guys at war with one seemingly unstoppable bad guy in a world that largely failed to acknowledge either. With more primitive machines hunting far better trained and equipped humans, McG's end of the world feels far less threatening than 1984. A rotating roster of protagonists and the lack of a clear villain results in a two hour epic with shockingly little character development.</p> <p>After opening in 2003 with Marcus Wright donating his body to science minutes before being executed, the film quickly jumps to 2018 where John Connor and Kate Brewster have emerged from the fallout shelter and joined the burgeoning resistance. Despite repeated successes on the battlefield, Connor's superiors are highly suspicious of him. Their unease has a lot to do with his ham radio broadcasts, which mix seemingly uncanny predictions about the enemy with the gospel of the late great Sarah Connor. Christian Bale's performance doesn't help either; Edward Furlong and Nick Stahl played Connor as compassionate, brilliant and visibly tormented by the weight of destiny. Both played the character with a warmth that made them easy to like and trust. Christian Bale's steely and impenetrable performance keeps us at arm's length, one of the most crucial missteps of the film.</p> <p>The closest thing to a human performance is Sam Worthington's Marcus Wright. His character development, while sparse, far exceeds the glimpses we get of Bale's John Connor. Worthington gamely works his way through action setpiece after action setpiece with obvious athleticism. The twist involving his character, spoiled in seemingly every trailer and TV spot, raises some of the film's more interesting questions. Nothing were shown, however, demonstrates why a new protagonist had to be created when fans walked into the theater far more interested in what Kyle Reese and John Connor were up to. Had the focus been on either of those two as the sole protagonist, the result would have been a far more cohesive final product.</p> <p>And yet for all of my criticisms and disappointments, the film remains an enjoyable two hour thrill ride. The use of apocalyptic cliches like the mute child sidekick and the roaming nomadic tribe led by a frail old lady don't seriously detract from what is already a flawed enterprise. McG's elaborate pyrotechnics and action choreography are unlikely to be paralleled again this year. Compared to Mostow's slavish recreation of Cameron's style and pacing, the production here feels like a bold leap forward.</p> <p>As a preposterous but entertaining ride that showcases key events from the Terminator mythology, <i>Terminator Salvation</I> is perfectly satisfactory. The disappointment comes from remembering that it is the successor to one of the most critically acclaimed action series of all time. Sometime around Judgment Day, the franchise lost track of its characters and story.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">**</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0438488/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-6847177765545568782?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-55144721499984634732009-04-05T02:28:00.002-04:002009-04-05T02:34:53.318-04:00<p class="graf-intro"><img border="0" src="http://www.massmediareview.com/images/film/review_087.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left" alt="Jesse Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart find love over water races and ring tossing in 'Adventureland'">There are moments in our lives that are preserved with crystal clarity, such that when our present reality bumps into one of them an aching burst of emotion tears through us. We can go back to places, which may or may not have changed over the years, but we can't go back to the moments. With <i>Adventureland</i>, Greg Mottola recaptures a microcosm of American life in 1987 with all the intensity of the original experience. The promos for this film promise another <i>Superbad</i>, but the reality is something both deceptively simpler and more unembellished.</p> <p>James Brennan is the well-to-do son of well-to-do parents. After graduating from Oberlin with a liberal arts degree, he is excited to embark across Europe with his well-to-do friends before heading to Columbia for grad school in the fall. But fate intervenes: his father has been transferred to a different department at a much lower pay scale. Suddenly Europe is off the table, and Columbia looks threatened unless he can raise some cash. For the first time, he's going to have to work.</p> <p>Possessing no employment history and unqualified for even manual labor, the summer job picture looks bleak. He finally turns to his immature neighbor for a job operating the midway games at the local low-rent amusement park.</p> <p>Adventureland has a certain internal rhythm native to dead end jobs like it. Everybody with someplace better to be is alread gone, so the teens and twentysomethings are left marking time with nobody left but each other. A couple days in, NYU undergraduate Em slips in from the neighboring booth to save James from an altercation with public. Under the circumstances, that's all it takes for her to become an increasingly important part of his world. James, Em and everybody else have plenty of time to get to know each other from trash duty in the morning to conversations in the parking lot (sometimes enhanced with a little well-to-do pot) as the garish lights flicker out.</p> <p>Like most young on-screen couples, James and Em face their share of complications. But in this case none of those complications feel even the slightest bit artifical. Everything that happens in this movie not only <i>does</i> happen, but has happened many times before. A party in this case is a dozen co-workers hanging out in an empty house, not the bash of the century. Late night drives with mixed tapes filling the silence chart out James and Em's growing closeness. A booth in a dive bar gets under the neon glow of a beer sign is the setting of their first extended conversation.</p> <p>The dynamic between James and Em works because Jesse Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart are extraordinarily gifted at communicating a lot without saying anything. Em initially seems quite forward, but the closer James gets the more she seems to be retreating. Ever-serious James's has an innocence that she longs for. Moments when James's intellectual aspirations are undercut by a certain base horniness provide some of the movie's best laughs. Eisenberg offsets that awkwardness with a sturdy even-headness that earns the respect of those around him. It's an essential quality that separates him from the goofier and more lovable Michael Cera.</p> <p>The supporting cast is composed of the type of people we all know. The comedic moments depend on the memories they stir up as much as the delivery. I've had these conversations, been around these people. As the park owner, Bill Hader completes his takeover of Dan Akroyd's old niche. Ryan Reynolds is the biggest surprise, trading his smarmy onscreen persona for an understated, largely dramatic performance weighted with long-settled sadness over a life that didn't quite turn out as planned.</p> <p>At key moments James and Em hurt each other deeply. Remarkably, they respond by empathizing with their transgressor. After the immediate emotional reaction, they march ahead with eyes a little more open. Who happens to them after the credits roll is left to our imaginations. But one thing is for sure: the summer they shared together is a memory they'll be bumping into for the rest of their lives.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1091722/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-5514472149998463473?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-24436718158176996162009-02-21T03:31:00.000-05:002009-02-21T04:01:08.098-05:00<p class="graf-intro"><img border="0" src="http://www.massmediareview.com/images/film/review_085.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left" alt="Vivien Cardone attempts to save condemned animals in 'All Roads Lead Home'">It's easy to find reasons to dismiss <I>All Roads Lead Home</I>. Shot in Kansas City by a small independent producer on a shoestring budget, it bears many of the unfortunate hallmarks of the direct-to-video family genre: cinematography that's only a step or two up from amateur video, a cloying and overly literal score and a screenplay full of overly familiar archetypes and cringeworthy dialog. None of that changes the fact that it's an incredibly hard film to dislike.</p> <p>The story centers around Belle Lawlor, the daughter of a dog catcher and the granddaughter of a horse breeder. This resulted in a childhood surrounded by animals. She loves them as much as her mother does. But when her mother dies, very early in the film, that love causes her regular heartache. One of her father's responsibilities is to euthanize the animals that require it. Culling the inferior offspring is a necessary part of her grandfather's business model.</p> <p>Though the film pulls back from the worst of its punches (don't expect your kids to be blindsided by an <i>Old Yeller</i> ending), it doesn't shy away from tackling the difficult questions it raises. The film is emphatically promotes alternatives to euthanasia, but recognizes that there are times when euthanasia is necessary. Belle's grandfather indulges her desire to save all of the animals near the end of the film, but is frank that he can't do it forever. Belle's father is equally frank about the circumstances of her mother's death. At the hospital, he repeated refused to sign off on a do-not-resuscitate order. But after 39 hours of trauma, his wife died anyway. In the end, he wished he'd done the thing his daughter had resentfully assumed he'd done. I appreciated that the film respected its young audience enough to think they could handle dealing with these issues.</p> <p>Aside from a few local supporting actors, the performances are a step above what you normally get from movies with this kind of budget. Vivien Cardone had years of experience playing a grieving daughter on "Everwood" and it no doubt helped her with the formidable burden of carrying the film on her shoulders. Peter Coyote brings an incredible warmth to the grandfather, essential for a character that must share many horrible truths. I've long considered Jason London one of Hollywood's most wooden working actors, so I was very surprised with his convincing portrayal of Belle's dad. As written Evan Parke's character seems dangerously close to the Magic Negro stereotype, but his execution helps to counter that. Patton Oswalt got the best written character of the bunch and makes the most of it. Vanessa Branch got the most poorly scripted character of the bunch but makes the most it too. I don't know if it's because he so close to the end, but the late great Peter Boyle brings an entirely different energy than we expect from him for his last on-screen role. His inn-keeper character is either a little crazy, or wants everybody to think so.</p> <p>While the film snob in me found plenty to sneer at, again and again I kept wishing more family films had its convictions. For all of their gloss and technical accomplishment, most Hollywood family films are ultimately pandering diversions. If When I was in the targeted age range, <i>All Roads Lead Home</i> would have given me a lot to consider. And given the choice, wouldn't you rather your kids watch a humble little movie that engages their minds instead of a flashy blockbuster that merely dazzles their senses?<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">**</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0821810/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-2443671815817699616?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-6638249991203370172009-02-19T03:41:00.001-05:002009-02-19T03:41:28.651-05:00<p class="graf-intro"><img border="0" src="http://www.massmediareview.com/images/film/review_084.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left" alt="Henry Poole revisits childhood haunts in 'Henry Poole is Here'">What little critical attention was paid to <i>Henry Poole is Here</i>, one of 2008's overlooked gems, alternately embraced or dismissed the film as a celebration of religious faith. It is unquestionably a celebration of faith, but only in the broadest sense of the word. It's about finding yourself in a place where you can't see your way to tomorrow&#8212;and discovering that meaning is everywhere around you. <p>The film opens with Henry Poole's homecoming. When his perky and persistent realtor shows him a dump of a house in a dilapidated L.A. neighborhood, he decides to buy it on the spot. Yes, he wants to pay full asking price. No, he doesn't want any repairs made first. He's not going to be living in the house long anyway. The full significance of that assertion is unraveled slowly.</p> <p>Henry's trips to the grocery store center around the acquisition of large quantities of alcohol. The cashier, peering at him through Coke-bottle glasses, and tells him he looks angry and sad. Her observation is spot on, and has everything (or maybe nothing) to do with the secret he's hiding.</p> <p>And yet, despite his tightly coiled despair, Henry is reveal through a series of small and beautiful articulated moments to be a fundamentally decent person. He really listens to his overly intrusive and deeply passionate neighbor Esperanza, even as he attempts to drive her off his property. When he discovers Millie, the young daughter of his neighbor next door, taping his conversations through the fence, he approaches her with the deliberateness and gentleness one would afford to a cornered animal. Rather than confront the child, he affords her the space she needs to express her own turmoil.</p> <p>His neighbors are all just as fundamentally decent. The neighborhood has visibly decayed in the years since Henry moved away, transformed from a symbol of the American Dream to a place where dreams go to die. Its current inhabitants form a community more social than is strictly desirable. Millie's mother Dawn went through a break-up so traumatic that the girl hasn't spoken since. Patience, the cashier, faces Henry and the world with an indomitable optimism. A water stain on the side of Henry's house provides Esperanza with an affirmation of the love she shared with the man who previously inhabited it. Father Salazar tries to stay on top of the fervently Catholic Hispanic congregation that surrounds them.</p> <p>The neighborhood responds to the water stain, which may or may not be a divine image representation of the Savior, in ways that range from the profoundly symbolic to the regrettably unambiguous. Henry remains steadfastly unconvinced through it all, though his experiences with Dawn and Millie leave him with a desperate desire to persuaded.</p> <p>The ending feels maddeningly artificial and contrived, but how could it end anyway else given everything that has come before? Either way, Luke Wilson sells it from the first frame to the last in a performance that captures all the humanity and complexity of his on-screen personality. Through his skeptical eyes, we are greeted with a vision of humanity that is honest and affirming. Adriana Barraza makes an irritating woman sympathetic and endearing. At seven years of age, Morgan Lily turns in a three-dimensional performance in a role with virtually no dialog. Radha Mitchell and George Lopez each do a great job with a thankless role. Rachel Seiferth's first scene convinces us that Patience is pathetic. It takes a remarkable performance over the rest of the time to prove otherwise. Don't let the films few irritating contrivances detract from an artistically sound and incredibly moving embrace of hope.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1029120/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-663824999120337017?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-15386946026972444102009-02-09T00:23:00.003-05:002009-02-09T16:37:57.456-05:00<p class="graf-intro"><img border="0" src="http://www.massmediareview.com/images/film/review_083.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left" alt="Dakota Fanning sees the future in 'Push'"><i>Push</i> is an intriguing but unexceptional scifi thriller in dire need of a final act. Functionally, the movie plays like <i>Minority Report</I> crossbred with "Heroes" in the back alleys of Hong Kong. What sets it apart is a unique visual palette and editing choices that favor small character beats over blistering action sequences.</p> <p>As thirteen-year-old clairvoyant Cassie Holmes explains over the opening credits, ordinary people with extraordinary abilities walk among us. Beginning with the Nazis during World War II, governments around the world have tried to weaponize these individuals. Until Kira Hudson, all of these efforts had been lethal. But Kira survived, and escaped to Hong Kong—where Cassie and telekinetic deadbeat Nick Gant are destined to find her.</p> <p>Dakota Fanning and Chris Evans anchor the film. When Nick is introduced as a failed gambler and general loser, Evans plays him as a man living far below his potential. Because he doesn't let Nick seem naive, it makes his rather sudden transition to ringleader of a complex and intricately plotted conspiracy more credible. Fanning imbues Cassie with depth; she manages to balance moments of true youthful innocence with a factitious snarky exuberance that masks the heavy burden of knowing too much.</p> <p>The rest of the characters exist to serve a function. As Kira, Camilla Belle is impenetrable. A human MacGuffin, Kira exists so that Nick and Cassie have something to chase after. Djimon Hounsou, Joel Gretsch, Cliff Curtis, Ming-Na, and a large cast of most Chinese cohorts serve as pieces in an ever changing puzzle.</p> <p>That puzzle demands the audience's full attention, and will leave many scratching their heads. I enjoyed keeping track of it all, and appreciated the obvious work that must have gone into bringing things together cleanly. Unfortunately, there's more puzzle than the movie's 111 minutes can hold. The ending is beyond frustrating, cutting to credits just when the characters are poised to dive into the larger mythology. Good movies know better than to dangle characters in front of the audience they'll never get to meet. Imagine if <i>The Third Man</i> had ended right before the Ferris wheel scene, and you'll understand <i>Push</i>'s biggest failing.</p> <p>There is much to be admired about <i>Push</i>, including a great cast, fantastic location shooting, and a smarter-than-average plot. Unfortunately, the good parts don't overcome cardboard cut-out supporting characters and an ending that doesn't resolve anything. All things considered, it would have made a better television pilot than a movie.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">**</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0465580/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-1538694602697244410?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-83545495383612187062008-07-10T02:07:00.001-04:002008-07-10T02:07:49.411-04:00<img border="0" src="http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/3707/review082xe5.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left" alt="Will Smith is a drunken superhero in 'Hancock'"><I>Hancock</I> is a mess. This is a movie that, like its title character, lacks purpose and direction. <I>Hey, this is funny</I>, I thought to myself as I watched. <I>Why is everyone so down on the movie?</I> And then it ended, just as the movie seemed to be gearing up for its second act.</p><p>There <I>is</I> a climax, albeit a rather lackluster one, but it's plopped down right after we've finally gotten a hang of all the relationships. The romantic leads' very miniscule shared screen time is dominated by scenes where Hancock asks what the hell is going on.</p> <p>He's confused because eighty years ago he woke up in the hospital with no memory and a whole bevy of superpowers. He's filled the decades since with heroics and hangovers that dull a sense of longing for something that he can't quite place. Like Marty McFly from <I>Back to the Future</I>, he's got a bit of a temper problem and <I>really</I> doesn't like being called a certain word. He seems destined to continue on his self-destructive &#151; really, just plain destructive &#151; path indefinitely until he saves a do-gooder PR flack from a train wreck and gets invited to dinner as a show of gratitude.</p> <p>Hancock has a major impact on the PR flack and his family, and they on him. He works to clean up his act, and public opinion turns in his favor. I actually appreciated the pro-responsibility message of the movie, but I wish it had come in better packaging. Hancock's journey is largely passive &#151; totally submissive to the PR flack's patient direction and the PR flack's wife's fiery declarations. His only truly independent decision comes at the end of the picture, and the build-up isn't sufficient enough for his sacrifice to carry any real meaning.</p> <p>There are some deliciously un-P.C. moments scattered throughout the first half of the film, though most have been spoiled by the advertising campaign. This movie had a rough go getting through the MPAA, and much of the movie's off-color flavor seems to have been lost in the process. Will Smith makes the most of a severely underwritten character; his Hancock seems to process everything that happens around him though a world-weary haze, like he isn't surprised but he somehow expected better. As the PR flack, Jason Bateman does a solid job playing the same happy-go-lucky mortal that Luke Wilson and Dick York have played before him. His even-keeled response to even the most shocking and extraordinary developments was endearing, though his nice guy nagging to do the right thing quickly becomes trying. Charlize Theron handles the wild change from stone-cold psycho in the first half of the film to bereaved martyr in the second as well as can be expected.</p> <p>The ending is interesting and complex, and promises a movie full of complex characters and emotions that it has no time to deliver. The first half is a lot of fun, though each step in Hancock's rehabilitation makes the movie a little more bland. Had the movie not waited until the 11th hour to declare its ambitions, the filmmakers might have had something &151; a <i>Highlander</i>-esque world with polytheistic overtones. I don't mind a bait and switch, if it's interesting and well-executed. The plot twist in <I>Hancock</I>, in addition to being ruined in the trailers, is ultimately neither.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">**</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448157/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-8354549538361218706?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-48094533892479022342008-07-06T00:40:00.000-04:002008-07-06T00:45:16.131-04:00<img border="0" src="http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/6175/review081tx8.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left" alt="WALL·E on mound of trash">As the incredible end credits unfurled for Disney/Pixar's latest effort, <i>WALL·E</i>, I thought to myself <i>this must be what it felt like to be in the audience for </i>Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs<i> the first time</i>. There are moments in the film, like a sequence involving a fire extinguisher amongst the stars, that are pure poetry. There are moments, like the aforementioned end credits, that redefine the possibilities of cinema. I'd have to go back a long time to find a better film than this one; I certainly don't expect any other film to be topping my top ten list at the end of the year.</p> <p>The title character is the sole remaining and most idiosycratic of the Waste Allocation Load Lifters, Earth-Class. Mobile trash compactors on bulldozer treads, they were left behind by the Walmart-esque Buy 'N Large corporation to clean up the mess humanity abandoned. The landscape is a G-rated take on the universe of Mike Judge's <i>Idiocracy</i>, several generations further devolved. WALL·E travels the urban wilderness virtually alone, a persistent little cockroach his own companion. The compacted cubes he's made form towering mounds of garbage that fill the spaces between the skyscrapers. Michael Crawford's rendition of "Put On Your Sunday Clothes" from the <I>Hello Dolly!</I> cast album is the only voice we hear for a long opening stretch.</p> <p>In fact, despite a heavy audio presence, the film's rythym and pacing owe more to Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton than anything that's been released since. While WALL·E's physical appearance owes a lot to <I>Short Circuit</I>, his personality is Chaplin's enduring tramp. He's outdated, outmoded, obsolete but tender and devoted. The object of his desire is a robot named EVE; she is sleek, shiny, powerful &#151; and totally blind to that which is outside her mission. The dynamic that plays out between the two is somewhat similar to <I>City Lights</I>, right down to the lack of dialogue, with the roles of the two leads reversed for that timeless ending showcasing the power of intimate physical contact.</p> <p>That longing to connect reverberates throughout the film. When WALL·E makes it to the sleek, resort-esque holding the fat, toddler-esque successors to humanity, he's <i>still</i> the only one truly alive. His dogged pursuit of EVE cuts a chaotic part through the diverted masses. His interruption causes one couple to turn away from the screens that float mere inches from their faces for the first time in perhaps their whole lives: "Hey, I didn't know we had a pool!" At the height of a spectacle engineered by WALL·E and EVE, the two make physical contact for perhaps the first time ever. Who'd have thought it would take a computer-engineered product to warn us about the dangers of a computer-generated life?</p> <p>The most optimistic note comes from the ship's captain, voiced by <I>Curb Your Enthusiasm</I>'s Jeff Garlin. He starts out nearly as docile and unmotivated as the rest of his species, but the shake-up of his daily routine ignites his curiosity for the first time. He seeks out information of his own choosing, instead of letting the system spoon feed him what it thinks is best. That act of intellectual independence, mirrored by WALL·E's emotional pursuit, lays the groundwork for the ending to come.</p> <p>I won't give away the ending, which simultaneously fufilled and subverted my expectations. But I will say that it is unequivocally earns what sentiment it chooses to indulge in. In a vision of the future that is arguably as dystopian as you can get, G-rated and everything, it's hard to begrudge the film a little optimism. A biting satire, a tender love story, a stimulating scifi parable and a gorgeous celebration of our cinematic heritage in a package that will easily transition across foreign languages and cultures. All of these things make <I>WALL·E</I> an instant classic that will be appreciated even more in the years to come.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">****</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910970/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-4809453389247902234?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-73231336572460997112008-03-20T22:59:00.002-04:002008-03-20T23:02:41.293-04:00<img border="0" src="http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/3271/review080to1.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left"><I>Run Fatboy Run</I> isn't the best entry into the hottie-falls-for-nottie genre, but it is among the most affirming. The titular fat boy, Dennis, is an absolute hopeless failure at life. But refreshingly, the movie takes the time to show why an intelligent beauty like Thandie Newton's character, Libby, could be attracted to him. And when a dashing new man sweeps Dennis aside, the movie studiously hints at flaws beneath his spotless veneer long before the plot demands it. The new man, Whit, attracts Libby because he is the exact opposite of the Dennis. While the new beau brings some considerable qualities to the table that Dennis lacks &#151; among them success, class, ambition, and a stable financial situation &#151; he lacks in areas that are less celebrated but ultimately more essential.</p> <p>The movie opens with Dennis having a panic attack before his wedding. The looming responsibilities of a lifetime with the very pregnant Libby have become too much. So he flees through a window. The title card blazes across the screen as Dennis turns the corner, yelling back a very earnest apology in mid-sprint. To its credit, the movie never quite lets him off the hook for his cowardice.</p> <p>When the action resumes, their son Jake is now five years old and Libby has only just recently permitted Dennis a role in his upbringing. Dennis never stopped loving Libby during the intervening years, but this is not a movie where the beauty waits to give the slob a second chance. Instead of a juvenile male fantasy, <I>Run Fatboy Run</I> plays out the rather grim consequences of living like a man-child. Dennis is too much of a failure to find appealing, too pathetic to inspire emulation. His job as a security guard doesn't cover his rent. For him, not forgetting his keys is a noteworthy accomplishment.</p> <p>But time pushes on, and new patterns develop. The thing that scared him the most &#151; fatherhood &#151; has turned out to be the only thing that redeems him. Because he's so pathetic, he doesn't have any commitments to distract from being a father. And relating to the kid comes naturally to him, perhaps because he is in many ways still so child-like himself. Even though his promises to Jake frequently fail to materialize, Dennis's affection is so earnest and so obvious that his son still adores him.</p> <p>The rest of his life is spent wrapped up in a circle of weirdos and fuck-ups that has remained largely stagnant for years. As a hobby, he sits in on backroom card games he has absolutely no idea how to play. Gordon, Libby's cousin and Dennis's best friend, mirrors Dennis's least flattering attributes. Whereas Dennis's failings are marred by the occasional redeeming quality, Gordon has made free fall into a kind of lifestyle. Unburdened by Dennis's longing for something better, his absolute lack of ambition gives him a sort of grace under meltdown that provides some of best laughs.</p> <p>The story comes to life as Dennis watches Whit worms his way further and further into Libby and Jake's lives. At first Dennis seems willing to let them slide away. But slowly he begins to put up a fight. His early pleas to Libby are pitiful and sad, but he doesn't give up. Each attempt to woo her forces Dennis to attempt further self-improvement in order to succeed. To make a more better pitch, he unconsciously makes himself into a better man. There are false steps and distractions along the way, but Dennis eventually reaches a point where success might be within reach &#151; if he can only do something extraordinary.</p> <p>Simon Pegg, who plays Dennis, wrote the script with Michael Ian Black from Black's story. Black's schtick has always grated in the past, and some of it shows up here to the film's detriment. But Pegg, who has been writing brilliant roles for himself as long as he's been acting, really captures a plausible arc for this pitiful character. It's probably perilous to try and guess who wrote what. But let it be said that this is far and away the best thing Black's been involved in, and a solid addition to Pegg's already solid resume.</p> <p><I>Run Fatboy Run</I>succeeds despite feeling frustrating uneven. Not enough of the jokes hit for the film to succeed on laughs alone. The resolution lacks the nuance necessary to be taken seriously. But both the comedy and the drama creep up in just the right ways, like a romantic comedy stripped of any sentimentality. Personal redemption is possible, the film declares, but not without pain and sacrifice. The weight and meaning of Dennis's journey comes from all his hard work along the way. What's more affirming than that?<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0425413/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-7323133657246099711?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-51963949083563767062008-03-09T17:36:00.004-04:002008-03-20T22:59:02.143-04:00<img border="0" src="http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7854/review079vt2.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left">There are some movies destined to be loved by everyone. <i>Across the Universe</i> is not one of them. A movie for youth &#151; and those who fondly remember youth &#151; it has left me with a lightness to my step and a song at the tip of my tongue each of the three times I've watched it. It's a joyous confection of a movie that takes liberties with history and its own timeline in service of an engaging journey with staggering visual beauty and depth. Though it begins fractured, real characters with hopes and burdens rise from the hodgepodge of Beatles classics as the film picks up steam. For those that are open enough and lighthearted enough to be swept up by the film's charm, this film is a bonanza.</p> <p>The film opens at the story's climax with Jim Sturgess's young Liverpudlian Jude on a beach singing his lament to the waves. As he turns to face us, he pleads: "Is there anybody going to listen to my story?" And abruptly, we're off.</p> <p>Vietnam-era newspaper copy tears across the screen to a jarring, Joplin-esque spin on "Helter Skelter" in a brief interlude before landing at the beginning, wherein each of our characters is introduced with a song.</p> <p>"Hold Me Tight" intercuts between Jude with his girlfriend at the club where the Beatles first met their manager in Liverpool and post-World War II suburbanite Lucy at her high school prom. On a football field in Ohio, cheerleader Prudence expresses her unrequited longing for a teammate on the squad with a sorrowful take on "I Want to Hold Your Hand." On the grounds of Yale, a rambunctious rendition of "With a Little Help from My Friends" tosses unruly but amiable Max into the mix. Jude belts out a rousing, jubilant "I've Just Seen a Face" at the bowling alley after meeting Lucy &#151; before a stirring Gospel performance of "Let It Be" plummets us back to stark reality. By this point we realize, if we haven't already, that we care what happens next.</p> <p>The journey that follows takes us from sometime shortly before July 23 1967, the date of the 12th Street Riot in Detroit, until an unspecified point after March 6, 1970, when a bomb under construction at a Weather Underground safe house in Greenwich Village prematurely detonated and killed three of the group's leaders. The story hops between Liverpool, small town America, Detroit and Vietnam, but it finds its center in New York City. Looked at objectively, the plot is a Forrest Gump-style travelogue of period history that should feel artificial. But like the music, what shouldn't work does.</p> <p>Instead of straining credibility, the weight of history colors the actions of characters with a honest inevitability. Each time the characters seem to find peace and stability, the world drops another bombshell that forces them back into motion. Making a nostalgic showcase of the era would have been the easy thing to do, but what director Julie Taymor does is more subtle. She uses period events as catalysts, and the disparate reactions to each development further delineate the characters. The past compounds on itself in this way, pulling the characters slowly &#151; and on occasion suddenly &#151; apart. Gump toured history; these characters live it. The distinction is key to the film's vitality.</p> <p>Also key is the exuberant often surreal landscape they inhabit. Cinematographer Bruno Delbonnel doesn't shy away from rich saturated colors, making him somewhat of a treasured anachronism in today's post-<i>Matrix</i> world of blues and greens. The world of <I>Across the Universe</I> pops with bright tie-dye color. His brilliant lighting is matched by the director's unique vision. Neither of Taymor's past works on screen, <I>Titus</I> and <I>Frida</I>, were limited by the bounds of reality and neither is this. Her penchant for blurring the line between the actual and the imagined allows her to get away with traditionally-executed musical. Having a character burst into song mid-scene would normally clash with the conventions of cinema but feels completely natural in a Julie Taymor film. Each number is used to showcase the characters' state of mind, and this invites the visual extravagance of layered visuals and thinly disguised choreography that results from each set piece. Taymor employs the same ingenuity required of the inherently limited stage to the limitless three-dimensionality provided by film.</p> <p>The cast is uniformly excellent. Sturgess's Jude, in addition to looking like a cross between Paul McCartney and George Harrison, provides the vocal performance we expect from the Beatles. By contrast, Joe Anderson (the film's other limey) plays the quintessentially American Max flawlessly. Like Hugh Laurie, Anderson never feels encumbered by the accent &#151; even singing. He brings a rumpled untidiness to his performance that helps carry Max past his Ivy League roots.</p> <p>Evan Rachel Wood is probably the most well-known of the core cast, so the biggest shocker is how well she can sing. Also surprising is the way Taymor softens up her appearance. Wood's hard, classic features tend to make her look years older than she is, so it was a nice change to see her play a Lucy with the foolish single-minded idealism of a kid. The Vietnam War has played havoc with Lucy's life, and Wood brings forth the tangible agony of that unrestrained. The best thing that can be said about Wood's performance is that it is not precocious.</p> <p>Broadway veteran T.V. Carpio achieves something extraordinary right from her introduction: her Prudence requires a total reevaluation of a Beatles song. Though Prudance is something of a cypher, with long stretches of time unaccounted for, Carpio broadcasts the character's emotional state between and especially during each musical number she's a part of.</p> <p>As the sexy landlord/bandleader Sadie, Dana Fuchs proves intriguing yet ultimately impenetrable. While the other characters are introduced participating in the universalities of living, she is introduced on stage. The lack of character development frustrates Fuchs' attempts to move beyond a Janis Joplin impersonation. Still, she provides a laid back, West Coast energy that balances out her more intense cohorts.</p> <p>Martin Luther McCoy, a vocal artist who has toured with The Roots and recorded two solo albums, makes his big screen acting debut as Sadie's guitarist JoJo. Serving primarily as a Jimi Hendrix surrogate, JoJo is afforded minimal screen time but deals with some of the movie's weightiest issues. Luther McCoy manages to convey that suffering and inner suffering in every scene he gets.</p> <p>All six members of the core cast came to the film with previous musical talent. Musical cameos from Joe Cocker and Bono add to the film, while an appearance by Eddie Izzard is a jarring distraction. Salma Hayek gamely makes a brief appearance near the end.</p> <p>As compelling as the performances are, however, neither the characters nor the plot rise to the surface first. It's the color, pageantry and spectacle &#151; like a particularly bright carnival midway on a pleasant late summer night. The film's two hours and change are consumed by a dance between Julie Taymor and the Beatles &#151; a carefree and often feverish waltz that spins out in a number of wild and often surprising directions.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0445922/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-5196394908356376706?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-48641781073978290662008-03-02T02:17:00.001-05:002008-03-02T02:19:50.726-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/2938/review078oo1.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left"><I>Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix</I> would be a less frustrating experience if it were an outright failure. Instead we get occasional moments of brilliance trapped like flies in amber by incompetent editing and a fundamentally flawed screenplay. Scenes that should build up each other don't; characters are introduced to deliver setup up that is never followed through with the pay off. Most importantly, after coming off the fourth film &#151; which so brilliantly navigated both the word and the complex network of characters &#151; it's depressing to see characters trotted in and out like cardboard cutouts to deliver bits of ham-fisted exposition. A lot of complex story managed to stick around for the movie, but too much of the characterization did not.</p> <p>In David Yates's film, there are only two truly developed characters: Harry Potter and Senior Undersecretary to the Minister Dolores Umbridge. The power struggle between the two grounds the core of the film, and plays out rather satisfyingly in a <I>One Flew Over the Cookoo's Nest</I> sort of fashion. Both Daniel Radcliffe and Imelda Staunton turn in terrific performances. The problem is that everyone else is left portrayed as two-dimension bystanders. From the moment Harry wards off a Dementor attack against him and his cousin at the very beginning, the explanations begin and never stop. Scene after scene of explaining; by the time the train reaches Hogwarts I was already exhausted by it and certainly didn't care. Here is a movie full of characters that had previously tickled me and moved me. And now all they seem to do is explain. In a way, Umbridge's high-pitched little cough came as a relief. She may be torturing poor Harry, but at least she's not wasting time <I>explaining</I> anything.</p> <p>And yet, Umbridge is not a relief. So focused is Yates on the political undertones of her reign of terror, she is allowed to stamp out most of the fun in the film as well as in Hogwarts. The only exceptions come in the scenes when Harry takes it upon himself to train his classmates in secret so that they will be prepared for the war the Ministry refuses to admit is coming. The magic stifled everywhere comes to life with color and spark. It's a hopeful sign that the kind of fun this series had previously provided dependably hasn't been eradicated, just momentarily repressed.</p> <p>There are flashes of inspiration. Ron Weasley, given nothing important to do as usual, is one of the few characters unobstructed by exposition. Rupert Grint's portrayal as an amiable everyman adds real depth to the character without sacrificing any of his previous charm or humor. And in a film this dreary, every once of humor is essential. News coverage in <I>The Daily Prophet</I> is put into motion with real humor, deftly handling the politics and the exposition far more clearly, concisely and cinematically than the vast sum of dialog. Likewise, Yates unabashedly weaves in flashes from the previous four movies to construct flashes into Harry's mind. Anyone who has stuck it out to the fifth film will have accumulated a lot of affinity for this movie series, and that provides automatic emotional gravitas that the film struggles to develop on its own. It's a fitting acknowledgement of the unique journey this film project has taken.</p> <p>But the filmmaking failures are fundamental. The editing is not merely unevenly paced but actively chaotic. It's like all of the connective tissue was stripped out. <I>Prisoner of Azkaban</I> moved fast &#151; often too fast &#151; but it always moved fluidly. Here characters will be twenty yards away in one shot and then right next to Harry by the next cut. Occasionally a crowd will appear in a room mid-scene without ever being shown entering. The result not only disorients but paralyzes. Each occurrence distracts savvy audience members from the story.</p> <p>On a macro level, it felt like chunks of the movie were missing. Not stuff from the books, mind you, but the movie itself. Like a bad airline edit where chunks are yanked out to bring it down to time. Screen time was wasted introducing Kreacher, but his big scene in the book never made it to the movie. Either the character should have been removed or the storyline should have been completed. Another character is brutally attacked in one scene and returned from the hospital, presumably months later, in perfectly adequate health. Either the scene should have been cut or the storyline should have been completed. There were several other examples of this phenomenon. Leaving out a few would have made room for the others to breathe and develop to a resolution.</p> <p>The only part of the film that works as an intact experience is the climax in the Ministry of Magic. The editing is not troublesome, the dialog is kept minimal, and the exposition is finally out of the way. It plays off the training sequences earlier in the scene to give us a core group that we are familiar with, employing an arsenal of techniques which we have seen them learn. They are outmatched by the bad guys in a very claustrophobic environment, but prolong the inevitable for a tense couple minutes. When the good guys sweep in, the battle of shadows and light (a complete departure from the book) shows that the kids still have a great deal more to learn.</p> <p>Most fascinating is the final duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort. They engage in a pyrotechnic battle of the elements, but what they're really fighting for is Harry's soul. Daniel Radcliffe does a terrific job playing Harry possessed, and a moment comes that best utilizes the flashes from previous films. Voldemort assaults his mind, drives into the very core of Harry's being, and all he can dig up are memories of love and companionship. Dumbledore, in a particularly gentle and singularly powerful moment for Gambon in the role, whispers in Harry's ear. The same Dumbledore who has determinedly ignored Harry all year demonstrates in a single sentence how much he understands him: "Harry. It isn't how you are alike; it's how you are not." Then Harry does something extraordinary. In a showcase of the human spirit, he moves past the unmagical and almost antiseptic rest of the movie, past everything that has been taken from him, and meets Voldemort's furious power with pity because the Dark Lord will never know love. Considering how the bulk of the movie is, that gloriously earnest moment was like a slap across the face it was so beautifully human. For the first time in a Harry Potter movie, I was nearly moved to tears.</p> <p>Then the scene ends and the qualities that previously frustrated me reemerge. The emotional climax of the book, in which Harry breaks down in Dumbledore's office, is too stripped down to carry any of its original power. When the film finally cuts to the credits, my disappointment in the whole still outweighed my appreciation for many of the well-executed parts. To be fair, it's the hardest of the seven books to translate to the screen. And yet I can't help feeling a little disappointed. When I left the theater for Goblet of Fire it was the jazzed feeling of experiencing a new classic. When I left the theater tonight it was the uneasy feeling of experiencing a "That would have been better<br>if..."<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">**</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373889/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-4864178107397829066?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-59008885417815226072007-12-30T22:35:00.001-05:002007-12-30T22:36:36.940-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/645/review077ey2.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left"><I>Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street</I> is, point blank, one of the best musical adaptations I have ever seen. There is a lot that is cut out or trimmed down, but unlike most adaptations this one doesn't feel the slightest bit incomplete. The marriage of Tim Burton's nightmarish visuals with a soundscape much closer to the material's theatrical source proves inspired and both the humor and suffering make it to the screen intact.</p> <p>Benjamin Barker was among the best barbers in London with a beautiful wife and child that meant the world to him. Unfortunately, they also meant the world to one Judge Turpin. The judge in question managed to conjure up charges that resulted in a life sentence to Australia. Now undeniably changed by fifteen bruising years abroad, the man has returned to soot-covered 19^th London under a new alias to have his revenge.</p> <p>The cinematography, very similar to the kind I hated in the fifth Harry Potter movie, works splendidly here. Both bringing to mind a Dickensian industrial-era London and London as filtered through newly-named Sweeney Todd's crazed and obsessive perspective. The lighting and set design force us to see Sweeney's world through Sweeney's eyes. Telling flashbacks reveal the same places and people through Barker's eyes and it is a very different London that is impossibly if subtly dissimilar. It's the blackest of comedies, with a suitably tragic ending, so the look fit it like a glove.</p> <p>Also inspired was the decision to bring in the stage show's original orchestrator, Jonathan Tunick, to map out the score for the screen. Most film adaptations take an orchestra score that was broad and powerful and minimize it into something more intimate &#151; if they use the original score at all. Tunick took the theater orchestration and nearly tripled the number of performers. From the front row of the multiplex, I felt like I was just behind the orchestra pit. The traditional score counterbalanced Burton's twisted and out-there visuals and helped anchor the film.</p> <p>In terms of performances, the secondary characters are by far the most accomplished vocally. Laura Michelle Kelly has had an extensive and acclaimed career in West End musicals, including a standout performance in the title role for "Mary Poppins." As the street beggar with surprising secrets, she finds a balance between the craziness of a woman driven mad and the vocal clarity expected of a musical performance. I'm not a big fan of sopranos, but Jayne Wisener as is classically trained and nailed what she was given as Johanna. Jamie Campbell Bower and Ed Sanders came into this production unknowns as far as I can tell, but their performances of "Johanna" and "Not While I'm Around" respectively are the standouts of the film.</p> <p>Alan Rickman doesn't bring anything special vocally, but he doesn't have to. His character is supposed to grate, after all. His Judge Turpin, oozing perverse desire at the expense of virtually all other thought, is a revelation. He is sufficiently menacing and cunning in his early scene with to establish him as a credible threat, but from that point on it is to witness a pedophile coveting poor Benjamin Barker's daughter. Both he and Timothy Spall as the judge's heartless henchman are utterly at home with the theatrical vibe required. Their performances found a perfect equilibrium between the broad strokes necessary in the theater and the more subtle performance enabled by the screen.</p> <p>The casting of Sacha Baron Cohen was the most troubling going into the picture, but it proved inspired. Signor Adolfo Pirelli, the showy scam artist, is essentially a reflection of Cohen himself. Thanks to the character's final scene, here he gets to play both the caricature and the reality behind the caricature. To his credit, he is as capable performing the latter as he is performing the former. Despite his theatrical instincts, he could be a real actor if he wanted to. And yes, the rumors about him rapping his songs were wrong: he sings and sings more than adequately.</p> <p>Helena Bonham Carter proves hit or miss vocally, but she has infused Mrs. Lovett with such character and life that I found myself not minding in the slightest. It's the first time one of her performances has really had me sit up and take notice. I'm told that she doesn't play the character nearly as broadly as Angela Lansbury' take, but the humor and quiet longing come through intact. Sweeney is so focused, so single-minded that Mrs. Lovett is the only truly human character for long stretches at a time. Carter brings vivacity and life to the role as well as, at times, a real sense of self-reflection and regret.</p> <p>Which leaves Johnny Depp as Sweeney Todd. He is vocally unexceptional, there's no doubt about that. But he indisputably carries the film, and carries it effortlessly. The younger than customary casting of Mrs. Lovett meant that she could have been a viable match for Sweeney, but Depp's performance utterly eliminates that as a possibility. From the moment he learns the fate of his wife and child, or seems to, he is uncompromising in his obsession. Where some predecessors in the role have played Sweeney with crazed abandon, Depp takes the opposite tact. His Sweeney Todd shuts out the world and himself from it. The intensity of his passion rushes forth only in moments of shocking violence. This is a Sweeney Todd that doesn't like to speak, doesn't like to make eye contact, doesn't like to connect. This take on the character adds greater legitimacy to the way events transpire in the final act, because a character would have to be closed off to miss the things that Sweeney misses. But it does place a greater burden on the supporting characters to keep the picture alive.</p> <p>Despite extensive cuts and reconstruction, Stephen Sondheim's tale of the great British anti-hero is well represented here. The comedy is captured perfectly as is the tragedy. The narrative plays out so logically and completely that any poor soul that enters fresh will have no trouble following the story, right to the gruesome end. Burton doesn't waste time trying to make the characters overly sympathetic, but succeeds wildly at making them compelling. These people are what they are for better and especially for worse, but that's plenty thanks to Sondheim's distillation of the myth and John Logan's expert distillation of Sondheim.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0408236/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-5900888541781522607?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-48165924891473979972007-12-29T13:29:00.000-05:002007-12-29T16:04:57.384-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/5623/review076qx6.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left">The <I>National Treasure</I> franchise can be boiled down to this: Likable characters spouting punch lines unravel ridiculous but spectacular pulp fiction mysteries. It's an exceptionally sturdy concept based on well-worn elements that should be able to continue on successfully indefinitely. Neither film thus far is what could be called high entertainment, but it's hard to deny that both are extraordinarily entertaining. <I>Book of Secrets</I> fell short of its predecessor only because I didn't go into the theater expecting trash.</p> <p>Benjamin Franklin Gates and his crew should be living the good life after their enormous haul from the first film. But as the expression goes, "Mo' Money, Mo' Problems." Riley is peddling his spectacularly unsuccessful new book on the previous movie's caper when his car is seized by the IRS. Abigail has had enough of living under Ben's obnoxious brilliance, which has in turn left him sleeping on the sofa in his father's living room.</p> <p>Fortunately, Ed Harris's ultimately sympathetic if thinly-drawn antagonist sweeps in to accuse the Gates' ancestor of collaboration in the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. He has a missing page of John Wilkes Booth's in his possession, it seems, with the name of Benjamin's great grandfather inscribed on it. The implications and authenticity of the written name are never adequately explained, but the plot point will take our protagonists to Paris so I'm not going to stress about it.</p> <p>From here the film follows the usual pattern of snapshot history lessons, action set pieces and globetrotting hijinks. An intriguing piece of Olmec-carved driftwood hidden in the Queen's desk drags Ben's mother into the proceedings. Played by Helen Mirren, she's a delightful counter-point to Jon Voight's patriarch. An academic as respected in her field as he is ridiculed, she carries on with a biting, imperial manner that brooks no argument or contradiction. Naturally, she is dragged along with almost no influence on events, her dignity compromised at every turn. The relationship between Ben's parents ultimately resolves itself into an upper crust take on "The Honeymooners."</p> <p>One of the joys of the first <I>National Treasure</I> was its abundant use of a cross-section of iconic historical imagery. Its follow-up preposterously and spectacularly continues the tradition. This time we get Ford's Theatre, a Statue of Liberty, Buckingham Palace, Mount Vernon plantation, the White House, the Library of Congress and Mount Rushmore. It was once again terrific fun seeing each landmark experienced from unconventional perspective for unbelievable reasons. I wasn't alive for the Saturday serials, but I imagine they must have provided an experience something like this.</p> <p>Like its predecessor, <i>Book of Secrets</i> fills a void that Hollywood can't seem to understand exists. After the spectacular success of Indiana Jones, we should have been barraged by an onslaught of adventure films driven by ideas instead of depleted ammo. Instead we got endless variations on <I>Lethal Weapon</I>. It took the success of <I>The DaVinci Code</I> in print (which would also be adapted into an enormously successful idea-driven blockbuster) and "The Amazing Race" to green-light the first <I>National Treasure</I>. The fourth Indiana Jones film looks set for spectacular success next summer. Has the end come for blockbusters that celebrate violence for its own sake? Or are we merely enjoying a rare moment while studio executives' heads are out of the sand? Either way, I'm going to enjoy it while it lasts.<span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p><i>On a side note, I have to ponder whether all future pictures released under the Walt Disney banner will run cartoons before the feature. The Goofy Home Theater short brought the house down and reminded me of when a Walt Disney picture really was something special.</i></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0465234/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-4816592489147397997?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-33555383635949716572007-11-26T01:51:00.001-05:002007-12-22T12:17:32.629-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/5539/review075ti9.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left">Most critics hated <I>August Rush</I>, and the few who liked it were almost apologetic in their praise. Well, I liked it and I&#39;m not apologizing for it. I loved it when my mother brought this kind of movie home from the video store when I was growing up. It&#39;s the kind of wholesome movie she was happy to have me love. And to my surprise, and great relief, it's the kind of movie I'm still able to love: a truly stirring fable.</p> <p>The film&#39;s only weakness is the necessary back story; the cookie cutter drama and PG excuse feels a little too stale. When we meet August Rush at an orphanage in what appears to be western New York, he's known as Evan Taylor. The world sings to him in a language that only he can seem to hear, with a melody that connects him to the parents he never knew.</p> <p>The other orphans mock him for believing his parents will come for him, but lengthy flashbacks confirm August's intuition. Fate, Van Morrison and a serendipitous harmonica-playing street performer had brought his classical cellist mother and indie rocker father together. A complicated series of events pulled them apart and left them ignorant of their son's existence.</p> <p>At the orphanage, August is oblivious to neither the bullies&#39; opinions nor their intentions; he&#39;s simply blessed with enough self-assurance to remain unfazed. And like any miracle of goodness who lights up a bad situation, young August attracts supporters who do resent him. August's bunkmate volunteers the lies that August won&#39;t say to protect him from the bullies&#39; beatings. He has largely given up on his own chances, but senses and appreciates that August is destined for something greater. Even the child services agent that interviews August takes a liking to him and becomes a valuable advocate in the events to come.</p> <p>August ultimately takes matters into his own hands. The movie really begins with him walking along cold winter roads toward the Thruway as the power lines hum him a tune. A trucker picks him up and brings him all the way to Manhattan, where the man from child services might know what to do with him. August Rush quickly becomes Oliver Twist, just sprung from the work houses. The less-than-seedy underbelly of the film's fairy tale New York is his 1830's London.</p> <p>The director, Kirsten Sheridan, was one of the two daughters fictionalized in his father's terrific autobiographical New York fable, <I>In America</I>. Her introduction to New York feels more authentic: an overwhelming onslaught of sights, sounds, sensations. August, who hears music in everything, becomes lost in it until a car strikes him and brings him back to reality. Even in her glossy take on New York, it seems some facts of urban life are just too blindingly obvious. A certain lyricism develops in the way she takes August from place to place along the journey, paralleling his comfort level with the city as it quickly grows.</p> <p>A whisper of music leads him to a black street musician roughly his age who roughly approximates the Artful Dodger from Dickens&#39;s tale. A hot pizza convinces the young musician to let August tag along back to the abandoned theater he calls home.</p> <p>There we meet Wizard, the manager of a whole army of young street musicians. He feels the music in his soul too, and cares for many young boys who would not be cared for otherwise. But like Fagin, the <i>Oliver Twist</i> character on whom he is obviously based, it is much easier to join Wizard&#39;s ranks than it is to escape.</p> <p>Robin Williams's performance of the character is challenging. By employing on the body language and gentle voice that made him so endearing in films like <I>Dead Poets Society</I> and <I>Patch Adams</I>, it&#39;s hard not to warm up to his character. The scene where he names August Rush is triumphant, even. The use of his family friendly persona makes it more shocking than it should be when he starts to more sharply exert his crass claim over August's talent and soul. Wizard is the most complex character in the film, a pimp that manages musical talent instead of sexual liaisons.</p> <p>August's continued survival and well being amongst nefarious people is the conceit of the film. That isn&#39;t to say Sheridan&#39;s New York is free of problems. It just that the mechanisms by which we deal with those problems are optimistically showcased working at their best. A particularly poignant sequence comes when August finds his way into a black church during choir practice. The gospel choir is full of the products of broken families, and they&#39;re singing about their common threads of misfortune. August finds refuge in their shared sadness just like they do.</p> <p>The progression of August's musical talent is not as flimsily conceived as I thought it would be. He is presented as a genius, to be sure, but he never simply picks up a new instrument and plays. Freddie Highmore does a great job with his face when August watches other musicians even before he starts to play. You can almost see the gears breaking it all down in his head.</p> <p>When he finally gets his hands on a guitar, he meticulously fiddles with each component and listening to how it affects the sound. A little girl at the church has to teach him the scales on sheet music before he can put the song that is all around down on paper. The pastor at the church gets him enrolled in formal study at Juilliard. People aren't as lucky as August in real life, but I could believe that a true prodigy in August's situation given the same improbably opportunities could become so accomplished. The fairy tale is able to forgive what the circumstances don't quite account for.</p> <p>If you've read <I>Oliver Twist</I>, the plot won't be much of a surprise to you. If you haven't the plot still probably won't be much of a surprise to you, especially after reading this review. Go anyway. The film has the most unabashedly heartfelt climax you'll see this year, matched with one of the most rousing and meticulous scores I've ever heard. August Rush is a protagonist worth cheering for. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0426931/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-3355538363594971657?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-69810283299648670442007-11-02T00:43:00.000-04:002007-12-22T13:01:41.149-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/8438/review074ng8.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left"><I>Juno</I> is the answer to movies like <I>Ghost World</I> and <I>Napoleon Dynamite</I>, which think that an off-kilter, heavily stylized universe filled with quirky characters who craft a lexicon out of pop culture references and ridiculous catchphrases is enough. From the first shot and first line of dialog, this film follows all of the conventions that made those films so celebrated. But here, finally, real people emerge from under all of the artifice. The protagonist with her stylishly outdated cultural vocabulary could have stepped out of MTV's old loser-chic hit "Daria", but strip away the verbal flourishes and Juno still succeeds as a girl with all of the overwrought drama, passion, false assumptions and optimistic naiveté that comes with being 16 years old.</p> <p>And unlike the armies of dysfunctional and often antagonistic families in previous indie portraits of suburbia, Juno was raised by a father and stepmother who, despite a steady flow of biting insults, never let her forget for a moment that she is loved.</p> <p>The film begins with a chair where, we quickly learn, Juno fornicated for the first time only time with her track star best friend and band mate &#151; a boy so timid he's practically non-verbal. Three pregnancy tests soon prove that his sperm were a good deal more assertive than he.</p> <p>So Juno, surrounded in her well-worn bedroom by artifacts that range all the way back to birth, calls up her girl friend on her hamburger phone and asks what to do. Her friend recommends an abortion, but a surprising bit of information from a girl outside the clinic ultimately changes her mind. The nine month pregnancy becomes one of the most perfectly executed coming of age stories I've ever seen, in which our protagonist learns a great deal about who she is, what she wants and what she already has.</p> <p>Ellen Page, who still looks far younger than her age, wields the unconventional and sophisticated dialog with remarkable ease. Her performance is bright and friendly and remarkably open; when Juno unintentionally makes some devastating social faux pas Page's complete refusal to acknowledge them maintains Juno's innocence.</p> <p>As Juno's understanding of the world broadens, my perceptions of the characters surrounding her expanded as well. What begin as exaggerated caricatures reveal themselves over the course of the film to be no less complex than Juno herself.</p> <p>Michael Cera in particular manages to make timid track star father-to-be Paulie Bleeker remarkably expressive. Juno talks incessantly and Bleeker barely says anything; yet their dynamic proves surprisingly egalitarian: he sees right through all her chatter and she intuits what he does not say.</p> <p>I waited the entire movie for the adoptive father-to-be to assert himself to his domineering O.C.D. wife and left the theater almost wishing he hadn't.</p> <p>Allison Janney transplants the fiery intellect and acidic wit of her West Wing performance to the opposite end of the economic spectrum as Juno's stepmother, a woman who communicates in insults but manages to be comforting as well cruel. Juno's father speaks in the stark, blunt language of a former military man. But somehow, his words carry another meaning that is clear as glass to his wife and eldest daughter. He is a blue collar man that is allowed to be wise, intelligent and sophisticated.</p> <p><I>Juno</I> is the rare art house comedy that treats its characters with the dignity afforded to people instead of the expediency afforded to punch lines. It is also the rare art house comedy that remembers even unconventional families are built on a foundation of love. The stylized elements, as employed here, reinforce the film rather than support it. Kimya Dawson's oddly affecting anti-folk suspended-adolescent duets scattered throughout complement the picture well. <I>Juno</I> operates on a far stranger plane than director Jason Reitman's feature-length debut <I>Thank You For Smoking</I>, but the result is a tighter more focused final result. I can't point out a single misstep, and the final product is probably my favorite film of 2007 so far. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">****</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0467406/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-6981028329964867044?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-78587104131666978152007-10-23T01:47:00.001-04:002007-12-22T12:31:12.788-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/5197/review073ks4.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left"><I>The Darjeeling Limited</I> is Wes Anderson's most focused film to date. It isn't a particularly ambitious picture, but it steams ahead with a confident focus and charisma not found in his earlier efforts. A title card from the director at the beginning requests that the audience see "Hotel Chevalier" first even though everyone has already pretty much committed themselves regardless once they've taken their seats. It just so happens that I had seen it; I agree that it adds something, but I'm happy it was left off here. The opening sequence as presented, fuelled by an absurdist urgency reminiscent of Godard's <I>Breathless</I>, perfectly sets the tone of picture: light, whimsical and painfully human.</p> <p>The main characters, once the film finds them all, are brothers of the classic Wes Anderson archetype: intelligent, articulate, manipulative and extraordinarily wounded. Jack is unlucky in love and passive aggressive, forced out of his comfortable exile by his domineering former lover. Peter is pessimistic and arrogant in his emotional distance, fleeing his pregnant wife primarily because he always saw himself as a future divorcee. Francis is domineering, self-hating, and lonely. He crashed his motorbike into a hill and survived only because the doctors rather regrettably managed to do every single thing right. Over the course of this movie, their lives will not progress meaningfully so much as evocatively.</p> <p>The film hops across India from a train to a river to a village to a mountaintop, with these three peculiar gentlemen leading the way. Each setting is presented with full three-dimensionality; by the time the brothers part with the train, I knew their sleeping car inside and out, not only physically but emotionally and socially. Each stop in their journey is a jigsaw puzzle, and all of the pieces fit together perfectly. I've seen dozens and dozens of ethnographic films, and many of them popped back into my head as I kept track of the Indian Other that constantly lingers at the periphery of the film. Here the ethnographic lens, magnified by fiction and imagination, finds joy and common humanity in sometimes heartbreaking events, skewed heavily by a style that Others the three American brothers at least as much as it Others the natives. Neither depiction is particularly plausible, but that just adds to the charms of this travelogue dreamscape. Robert Yeoman's vibrant and earthy anamorphic photography is perhaps the best of his career.</p> <p>Everything the brothers do separates them from the world around them; the larger world leans in from all directions and drags them inexorably forward but never quite penetrates their melancholy narcissism. The screwball tone of the picture is made possible by leads that are compelling and sometimes sympathetic but ultimately unlikable enough that pleasure can be taken in their failures. The issues that drive the tension of the picture exist primarily because these characters cannot see beyond their own stake in the related events. The script and performances explore all of the nuances of their collective sense of entitlement, mocking them for their excesses while evoking pity and compassion for the tragic place such excess has left them.</p> <p>Indeed, the acknowledgment of a world outside his eccentric protagonists feels like a sign of maturation for Wes Anderson, who can be accused of being a little myopic himself. I can't picture the auteur behind <I>The Royal Tenenbaums</I> exploring the very ordinary history between luminous stewardess Rita and the Chief Steward on the train, nor pausing to give a father a moment to express his very personal and yet universal grief. Little touches like these rooted the journey in something more meaningful that the director's usual proactively artificial universe.</p> <p>When the brothers finally reach their mother in the convent, Anjelica Huston uses her couple minutes of screen time to craft a performance that utilizes the artifice to explain exactly how these men became who they have become. The tragedy of her character is that she can never stop running, and it's most unfortunate that her sons have learned from her example. If the brothers' journey accomplished anything, it was to discover that they are not doomed to repeat their mother. The movie's optimistic final line hints that for them, at least, it might not be too late to reach out and think of someone else. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0838221/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-7858710413166697815?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-7968530256442391992007-08-18T00:26:00.001-04:002007-12-22T12:36:03.089-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/2835/review072kc2.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left">I came back from <I>Superbad</I> with the same feeling one gets after a really great party: flush with adrenaline from the festivities, and a little bummed now that it&#39;s over. <I>Superbad</I> is easily the funniest thing I&#39;ve seen this year. It might actually be the funniest thing I&#39;ve seen this millennium.</p> <p>Seth and Evan have been Best Friends Forever. Seth is a fast-talking force of nature. Evan hesitantly follows, muttering biting commentary just soft enough that nobody else can hear. Despite all the talk, they&#39;ve never actually done anything. People either spit on them, step on them, or remain completely unaware of their existence. Each has a girl he rather likes. Early scenes hint that the girls just might like them back.</p> <p>Fogell, narrow-shouldered with glasses that appear to hold up his head, is the least popular kid in school. He abides his condition with understated and unpredictable rhythm. When Seth and Evan need to obtain alcohol for their ladies&#39; party, Forgell just happens to have obtained a fake ID.</p> <p>What happens next combines the moment-in-time feel of <I>Garden State</I> with the raunchy surprises of <I>Animal House</I>. Anyone who has seen the trailer knows that the boys make it to the party. But the journey is hardly A to B. Pit stops along the way include drugs, sex, alcohol, violence — including drug-induced sex, sex-induced violence, and sex-induced alcohol. Along the way you&#39;ll meet violent old men, crack heads with hazy memories, unconventional police officers, and McLovin. You&#39;ll experience a sing-along, gun violence, discoloured alcohol, and a gross-out scene that makes <I>There&#39;s Something About Mary</I> look like an after school special.</p> <p>And yet, for all of that, a little of that warmth and emotional honesty from that other movie starring Jonah Hill and Seth Rogan seems to have rubbed off. The hefty young protagonist and his gawky best friend may have filthier mouths than the American Pie boys, but intercourse is not so neat a finish line for them. Like all things unknown, it is a prospect more terrifying than exciting. Elaborate plans are concocted without any real expectation of follow through.</p> <p>And then Fogell gets picked up by the cops while the other two boys find themselves in the backseat of the car that just hit Seth (the character, not the actor). Like it or not, gears are in motion, promises have been made, and the boys amble on the best they can. Is there anything more true to life than that?</p> <p>This movie will be successful for many reasons. It celebrates everything fun that&#39;s Really Unacceptable Behaviour: smoking, under-age drinking, drunk driving, drunk sex, drug use, fake IDs, driving erratically, objectification of women. The young leads, Jonah Hill and Michael Cera, are real comic talents with impeccable timing. McLovin has entered the popular vernacular. It will be remembered because it remembers the unique agony of having everything ahead of you, with all the mistakes and success stories tantalizingly out of reach. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">****</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0829482/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-796853025644239199?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-70994671776325123242007-06-02T01:48:00.001-04:002007-12-22T13:04:10.386-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/5976/review071hj0.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left">If you enjoyed <i>40 Year Old Virgin</i> you'll probably like <i>Knocked Up</i>, too. The style of humor, the characterizations, and even the cast are largely the same. But much like Kevin Smith transitioned from <i>Mallrats</i> to <i>Chasing Amy</i>, Judd Apatow takes his new film to deeper and darker places. If <I>40 Year Old Virgin</I> was about getting laid, <I>Knocked Up</I> is about what can happen next.</p> <p>Alison Scott is at the top of her game. A statuesque blond working behind the scenes at E!, she has just been given a shot at on camera. Ben Stone has sunk about as low as he can go. A short, husky Canadian living in America illegally, he's been living off a $14 thousand settlement from when a truck ran over his foot several years ago. He lives with several similarly dubious buddies in a dilapidated ramshackle shack on the verge of being condemned.</p> <p>When Alison goes out to celebrate her promotion with her sister Debbie, the bouncer waves them past the line. Ben and his friends gawk from behind the velvet ropes. Despite being vastly out of his league, events and alcohol conspire to bring Ben into Alison's bed. He can't get the condom wrapper open; she's impatient. Eight weeks later, she suffers her first bout of morning sickness.</p> <p>Most comedies avoid addressing unplanned pregnancy. The few that have either shoehorn it into a dark subplot (<I>Fast Times at Ridgemont High</I>) or are pushed to the margins of popular culture (<I>Saved!</I>). As he did with <I>Virgin</I>, Apatow mines his premise for the humanity as well as the laughs. Whatever else Alison and Ben might do or say in the film, they take the consequences and responsibility of the baby seriously. Ben &#151; who has probably spent his entire life actively avoiding both &#151; never once pressures Alison to get an abortion, despite the impassioned urging of his friends. Alison sees her baby's heartbeat on the ultrasound and tearfully finds she has already made her decision, despite seemingly nothing to gain and everything to lose.</p> <p>What follows is an in-depth study of Ben's pathetic lifestyle and the troubled marriage of Alison's sister. Both convince Alison to keep Ben at arm's length despite his awkward but lovable stabs at showing affection. It is to the movie's credit that the relationships evolve not from outside pressures but from within. What happiness there is at end is tenuous but hard-earned.</p> <p>Debbie's marriage to Pete is bitter and poisonous, but both show all the battle scars of parents that care. As Pete's daughter prepares to blow out birthday candles in the backyard, Ben launches into a rant that goes right for Pete's jugular and storms off. Pete pauses for a moment to digest the vitriol, shrugs, and brings out the cake with a smile. The children in the film, both born and unborn, and not merely something to talk about; they have a genuine and fundamental impact on these characters' lives.</p> <p>For Ben, the pregnancy provokes and parallels his coming-of-age. If Pete's journey is about coming to terms with his place in the greater world, Ben's journey is about coming to the realization that a greater world outside his drug-induced haze even exists. He simultaneously rails against it and increasingly yearns for it. As he begins to pull his life together, his steps toward respectability don't feel like sacrifices but an acknowledgement of an increasing incompatibility with his prior lifestyle. Seth Rogan, normally relegated to supporting roles, takes Ben's consistently vulgar and juvenile dialog and delivers it with gradually increasing self-awareness.</p> <p>Ann Hathaway was originally cast as Alison but balked at how Apatow wanted to handle the pregnancy. Instead he captured lightning in a bottle with Katherine Heigl, now best known for her role in the breakout television hit "Grey's Anatomy." Thank God; she is the perfect Alison. Heigl is able to both appear unattainable and embrace Ben's vulgar sensibility; sometimes simultaneously and always effortlessly.</p> <p>Some audience members expecting the soft touch of <i>40 Year Old Virgin</i> will be put off by the film's bite. The characters are harsher people and the jokes reflect that. If you watched the trailer and the line "Don't let him near the kid, he wants to rear your child!" offended you, this film probably isn't for you. But <I>Knocked Up</I> will prove a rougher but more meaningful journey than Apatow's freshman effort for everyone that clicks with the film's subversive sensibility. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0478311/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-7099467177632512324?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-27355851007348861822007-05-26T02:24:00.001-04:002007-12-22T13:05:05.150-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/4603/review070du1.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left">The opening sequence of <I>Pirates of the Carribean: At World's End</I> had me convinced that it would be the best one yet. It was a little strange and mysterious, but the pieces clicked together with an efficient precision. All of the characters we love pop back up again (well, except the one that died last film) It plays like the beginning of <I>Return of the Jedi</I>, only prettier, funnier, and more tightly edited.</p> <p>And then we cut to Jack Sparrow. He was the best thing about the first two films, so it's incredibly disappointing that he's the lead weight that drags down this one. The film literally stalls as we find him trapped in Davey Jones's locker. The scene feels like it was ripped from another movie, dragging on forever with the focus entirely on the special effects at the exclusion of everything else. With the aid of ILM's incredible computer artists, director Gore Verbinski has spent millions to retread the same sort of cheap sight gags that bogged down the Superman sequels.</p> <p>When our heroes do finally retrieve Jack and escape death's clutches, I thought for sure the film would pick up, but no. <I>At World's End</I> takes plot threads which were introduced with elegant simplicity in <I>Dead Man's Chest</I> and piled on subplots, twists and conspiracies until I stopped caring. Tom Hollander's Lord Beckett, a sniveling fool in the original film and a distant threat in the second, proves to be an overbearing presence here. He's not a character like Darth Vader that we love to hate. I just plain hated him &#151; him and the way he bogged down characters I liked in treacheries I didn't care about. Allegiances flip flop and realign at such a dizzying speed that the script supervisor must have gotten whip lash. After each character changed allegiance at least twice, I stopped caring.</p> <p>Despite a plot bogged down in unsatisfying revelations, the film certainly has qualities to admire. Verbinski and his team capture moments of true visual poetry, revealing dream-like events and transformations that put Terry Gilliam to shame. Except for one heavy-handed speech by Elizabeth Swann, the humour remains largely intact: for every sight gag that falls flat there's at least two that hit the mark. Swann and the heroic but previously bland Will Turner draw themselves are finally permitted to suffer humiliations in the vein of the ones Jack has become so known for. Will has at last crafted a credible pirate out of his pretty boy exterior. And Elizabeth, carefully wrapped in short silk Asian robes throughout, has never looked more stunning. Their final scenes together imbue what has been a rather static and perfunctory relationship with real depth and nuance.</p> <p>The climactic battle might also be one of the greatest action action sequences ever shot. Each beat is perfectly realized, fantastically absurd and terribly dramatic. The duel between Jack and Davey Jones, in particular, is like <I>Peter Pan</I> on steroids. With a better build-up that hadn't sapped me of my energy and investment, I would have undoubtedly enjoyed it. Instead, I was wondering how long before it was over and I could go home.</p> <p>There is no question that Jack, Elizabeth, Will and the crew will have a place among the greatest film characters of all time. Together, the three films are a thrilling reminder of how potent the adventure genre can be when unchained from the twin burdens of historical realism and cultural sensitivity. All the elements for a great film were here. The plot just wouldn't get out of the way. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">**</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449088/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-2735585100734886182?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-56999587527212079522007-05-26T01:13:00.001-04:002007-12-22T13:05:24.151-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/444/review069sw8.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left"><I>28 Weeks Later</I> is crafty enough at what it does. The problem is that what it does is not very much. Over its 99 minute running time &#151; I left the theater shocked that was that long, so very little happened under such relentless pacing &#151; we barely meet, much less understand any of the characters. Their journey is relatively brief, covering little geographic territory over a fair miniscule period of time.</p> <p>The film begins around the time of the first film, in a house full of strangers totally boarded up against outside eyes. Owned by an elderly couple, the house has become a sanctuary for a handful of uninfected. We see things through the eyes of Don and Alice. We learn very little them &#151; I had to look up their names afterward &#151; except that they're married with children who are far away and safe from the outbreak. As the survivors sit down and prepare to eat, a young boy pounds on their door and is let in. His commotion alerts the infected to the presence of human life in the apparently abandoned country home, and Don is soon forced to choose between saving his wife and fleeing. He chooses the latter.</p> <p>We jump forward a few months to 28 weeks after the initial outbreak. The infected, having exhausted their pool of victims, have long since died of starvation. American-led NATO troops have started cautiously repopulating London. Don's children are among the first British expatriates arriving for resettlement. Andy is precocious and shares his mother's mismatched Kate Bosworth-esque eyes. Tammy is an attractive, blond haired blue-eyed teenager, almost excessively British in speech and appearance. It should not spoil anyone's experience to know that the two children manage to circumvent the American military's carefully laid out restrictions, nor that an unforeseen element triggers a new outbreak of the virus.</p> <p>We follow Andy and Tammy (their guilt-ridden father otherwise sidelined early on in the tale) with a group of survivors that is quickly whittled down to two AWOL members of the American military: Doyle, a sympathetic sniper that abandons his post after being ordered to target innocent civilians and Scarlet, a medical officer who believes the children might hold the key to developing a vaccine against the virus.</p> <p>At no point on their journey do we learn much else about any of them; They are separated mainly by physical characteristics. Scarlet is a brunette so we can tell her apart from Tammy. Doyle is separated from Andy by his taller stature, shorter hair and ever prominent army fatigues.</p> <p>Despite the lack of any satisfying narrative or character development, the film does have its strengths. The depiction of a perfectly preserved London more devastated than if it had been hit by an atomic bomb is more than a little unsettling. The film uses stillness and silence in a way that few horror movies have the time or patience for any more; very few of the scares rely on pounding bass or a sudden prelude of shrill strings. One scene in particular, in which infected and uninfected alike pour out of a breached containment zone as overwhelmed snipers try to pick off the former from within a fast-moving and panic-stricken crowd of the latter, captures a particularly gripping horror. I could not help but imagine what it'd be like on the ground as seemingly random bodies were torn to shreds by gunfire all around me.</p> <p>Even with horrors like that, though, the scenario faced by our protagonists would still seem much better than the circumstances of the original outbreak. Instead of the millions of infected presumably roaming around during the original outbreak, these characters should only have to deal with the mere hundreds that had both returned to the country and survived the original slaughter. The film compensates for the lack of infected by making the American military the primary antagonist. Their all-out offensive to wipe out every molecule of the virus pins the survivors into tight corners where, with the exception of one scene brightly lit and out in the open, the infected attack in ones and twos.</p> <p>The portrayal of the military is a convenient parallel to current world opinion. At the same time, the two soldiers guiding Andy and Tammy to safety are "be all you can be" personified: noble, selfless, and unerringly competent.</p> <p>The lack of plot doesn't prove to be a big problem. Even the lack of anything engrossing or enlightening about these strangers' lives proves to be neither surprising nor fatal to the movie's objective. But it is disappointing that by the end, after hundreds have been infected and/or killed and a large section of London has been obliterated, so little within our microcosm has changed. The blonde daughter is still pretty to look at and the boy with the mismatched eyes is still creepily precocious. Not much changes from when they start running to when they stop, on either a micro nor macro level. The set pieces can be counted on one hand, and the creepy deathly perfectly preserved stillness has been replaced by a burned out, smoked out, bombed out wasteland. And finally, when all is said and done the film cheats us out of a proper third act with gimmicky horror movie ending that feels perfunctory rather than shocking. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">**</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0463854/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-5699958752721207952?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-72054961421624071872007-05-08T00:29:00.000-04:002007-12-22T13:10:29.603-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/9917/review068yc2.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left"><I>In the Land of Women</I>, written and directed by the son of famous writer/director Lawrence Kasdan, is a very specific movie made for a very specific sort of person. Though it is both romantic and a comedic, it never really develops into a romantic comedy. The characters examine the world more deeply than those around them, but are destined to be less satisfied with what they find in it. I surround myself with people like them and laugh at the things they find funny. Your mileage may vary.</p> <p>Adam Brody plays Carter Webb, a twentysomething drifter who maintains his lifestyle scripting "premium softcore porn" in Los Angeles. A devastating break-up with Sofia Buñuel &#151; a famous model-actress that is adored by seemingly <I>everyone</I> &#151; inspires him to flee the city to watch over his flighty grandmother in suburban Michigan. Carter addresses the world with a leisurely calm; he lets events and revelations soak in at their own pace, reacting with shock or surprised only when absolutely warranted.</p> <p>Otherwise, every interaction with grandmother Phyllis (Olympia Dukakis in Cloris Leachman territory) would consist entirely of shock and surprise. On the razor's edge between perfect clarity and total dementia, Phyllis has convinced herself that she is on the verge of death even though there is nothing medically wrong with her. The film doesn't treat her with any reverence. In mercilessly poking fun at all the baggage that comes with getting old, I was brought much closer to all of the old people I have known and loved over my twenty young years on this planet. Phyllis is old, and probably a bit crazy, but she isn't stupid or frail. She's survived long enough to be the toughest old broad of the bunch, and her insights &#151; both shallow and profound &#151; are informed by all her years of plodding on through.</p> <p>It isn't until Carter meets the Meg Ryan's M.I.L.F. next door that he makes a real human connection. Sarah Hardwicke is also observes the world with patient ardour. But nearly two decades further along, her incredulity has evolved into a quiet desperation for a life not lived. Her marriage is antiseptic, and she hasn't known her eldest daughter in years. For her joy comes only in flashes between long stretches of living exactly as she is expected to. Sarah adores Carter for his passion and his future not yet lived. Carter adores Sarah for her insight and her bravery. Over walks with the dog and awkward trips to the supermarket, they delight in sharing their lives with someone who knows what to listen for.</p> <p>In a daring rebuff of contemporary social mores, Carter meets Sarah's distant daughter Lucy over a cigarette. Kristen Stewart, whose career has largely languished in an awkward mix of horror movies and children's films since her promising introduction as Jodie Foster's androgynous daughter in <I>Panic Room</I> finally returns to work worthy of her talent. Though Lucy is smart, pretty and talented, Stewart embodies her with a constant clenched-up rigidity that gives her insecurities credibility. Filled with a devastating mix of shame and resentment, Lucy is so afraid of making her mother's mistakes that she's unable to live at all. As intense as Carter is mild, she obsesses over shallow high school dilemmas and life-altering crises with the same self-conscious eloquence. Lucy adores Carter because she senses that he is the kind of man her mother should have married. Carter adores Lucy because she could never become her mother.</p> <p>Along for the ride is Paige, Lucy's preteen sister and the only uncomplicated source of joy in Sarah's world. She is as abnormally sane as Phyllis is crazy, as seemingly adult as Phyllis is child-like. Together, the oldest and youngest characters occupy the margins of the events with a startling directness. Both have big, real worries and address them with matter-of-fact sincerity.</p> <p>As Carter and these four astounding women co-exist, important things happen and almost happen. Major events and minor ones. Some hilarious, some devastating, and others unsettlingly melancholy. All swell with an unspoken, uncalculated sort of love. When the film asks us to laugh at horrible things, they're the kind of undeniable truths that won't benefit from crying. These are witty, introspective characters who are too romantic and nakedly human to be anything but earnest. Those are the kind of people I'm drawn to, so the film spoke to me in a surprisingly personal way. If you don't resonate with what I've described, proceed with caution. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-half">&#189;</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0419843/">Research more</a> </div><!-- End .post --><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-7205496142162407187?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-46564341972683563522007-04-14T18:05:00.000-04:002007-12-22T22:09:02.492-05:00<i><b>NOTE:</b> Originally published at the following location:<br> <a class="reviews-extras" href="http://media.www.jsons.org/media/storage/paper139/news/2007/01/31/Entertainment/The-Last.Mimzy.Mixes.FamilyFriendly.Characters.With.An.Unconventional.Plot-2828358.shtml">The Last Mimzy mixes family-friendly characters with an unconventional plot - Entertainment</a></i> <p><img border="0" src="http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/6274/review067bv7.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left">There is a certain irony in using a technological medium to praise a cautionary tale about the effects of technology. <i>The Last Mimzy</i> is more interesting than it is significant, more audacious than it is involving. The characters are rather cookie cutter. For all of the twists and visual effects, its vague socioenvironmental message is most effectively captured by the subtle depiction of how ubiquitous technology has become in our daily lives.</p> <p>There is an early scene when the relatively average American family is riding a bus through the city. There's nothing particularly remarkable about it, until you notice the zombie-like stare of Noah, our young protagonist, as he plays his PSP. Look at those around him, and you'd notice something else: Every single person on the bus is staring at a screen or wearing ear buds, lost in his or her own separate world. It could be any morning on the T.</p> <p>When Noah arrives at the family summer home with his mother and sister, they delight at swimming, playing on the beach, and eating outdoors. These are all hallmarks of my own childhood not too long ago, but the lack of laptops and PlayStations sticks out like a sore thumb here. The scenes resonate with a certain wistful nostalgia. Then something mysterious washes ashore. Noah and his sister aren't sure what it is, and neither are we. It opens upon the children's touch to reveal a menagerie of unorthodox toys. They will prove to be technology too, of a sort.</p> <p>Meanwhile, Noah's science teacher Mr. White has been having strange dreams. Some are oddly prescient, like the one that gave him the six winning numbers if he'd bother to buy a lottery ticket. Most involve visions of mandalas. The first shot of the film captures a mandala in a field of flowers. Later, after Noah has been playing with the toys for a while, he has drawn a notebook full of mandalas. The source of the connection between all of these disparate sources is only vaguely explored. Much like Alice down the rabbit hole, the film is more focused on becoming exponentially peculiar with every turn.</p> <p>The metaphor becomes particularly fitting when the film subtly suggests a more concrete connection between Alice's rabbit hole and Mimzy, the stuffed rabbit Noah's sister pulled out of the strange container. As events begin to spin wildly out of control, the Department of Homeland Security becomes involved. Expect neither a favorable nor realistic portrayal. Meanwhile, the rest of the characters are brought together by a strange calling to bring the toys' mysterious purpose to fruition.</p> <p>The performances here are entirely serviceable. Michael Clarke Duncan is rather enjoyable as FBI authority that navigates the confusion and insanity all around him with a serene, good-natured attitude. As a psychic well-versed in the arcane customs of obscure eastern philosophy, Rainn Wilson plays against his Dwight Schrute persona from "The Office." As events become increasingly more surreal and outlandish, he plays Mr. White like he's the only one that seems to notice. Timothy Hutton's portrayal of Noah and Emma's father changes radically from scene to scene. The screenplay doesn't know where it wants to go with his character, and it shows in the performance. As Noah and Emma respectively, Chris O'Neil and Rhiannon Leigh Wryn do a good enough job capturing the emotions demanded of them but fail to make their characters truly distinctive, either.</p> <p><i>The Last Mimzy</i> lacks the character development and sophistication to hold up as standout family cinema. The first film from New Line studio head Robert Shaye since 1990, there is no hint that we'd lose something if he didn't direct again for another seventeen years. As an engaging experience, it survives on sheer strangeness and audacity. The characters don't offer anything new and make little effort to rise about the archetypes from which they've sprung. But plot spins and twists on a dime, and none of the revelations approach conventional. <I>The Last Mimzy</I> is enjoyable, if conventional, family storytelling set more than a little off the beaten path. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">***</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0768212/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-4656434197268356352?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-73536301483046171222007-03-25T02:46:00.000-04:002007-12-22T22:18:09.935-05:00<img border="0" src="http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/7364/review066pn8.gif" class="reviews-image" align="left"><I>Bridge to Terabithia</I> is a milestone book in children's literature. Most children are different people after they finish reading it. Most stories they will have read before it focus on happiness and personal triumph. <I>Terabithia</I> goes for the jugular. The best thing that can be said about this film adaptation is that it aims for the same target with similar effectiveness.</p> <p>Jesse Aarons is the only son of a poorer than average farmer in a a poorer than average town. For him, hand-me-downs from an older brother would be a blessing. The hand-me-downs he inherits from his older sister are considerably more humiliating. A quiet boy that bullies target, we meet him as he prepares to finally make his mark in the boy's footrace during recess. He's trained long and hard, and even his pink sneakers won't keep him down. In the end, he does beat all of the boys; but to his chagrin the new girl in school beats all of them. Neighbours in a region where houses are more than just a few feet apart, Jesse and Leslie ride the bus together and get off at the same stop. As the afternoons tick on, a bond slowly and hesitantly develops.</p> <p>Jesse draws, and Leslie writes. In a poverty-stricken environment where despondency hangs heavy in the air, Jesse creative aspirations are uncommon and audacious. Leslie, the only child of rich novelists, is the first to appreciate and admire his talent. When Leslie uses an essay to bring an experience to life, Jesse is the only one who let her story carry him along.</p> <p>When they find an old rope swing by a creek at back of Jesse's property, they use it to cross to a world of their own creation. Their imaginary friends and foes in this world &#151; externalized with computer-generated creatures &#151; prepare them to face the challenges and problems in their real lives. Leslie names their new world Terabithia. Loneliness and isolation, which have filled the life of each, cannot intrude. Their lives have never looked brighter.</p> <p>(NOTE: To venture forward from here, I need to spoil something essential to the film. Unless you've read the book, continuing further will blunt the full impact of the story. You've been warned.)</p> <p>When Jesse's vibrant young music teacher invites him to visit an art museum in the city, he is only too happy to accept. Ms. Edmonds is his first crush. His mother, half-asleep, acquiesces without really listening. Teacher and student have a fantastic time, as Jesse finds his horizons expanding. While he was gone with Ms. Edmonds, however, Leslie tried to cross to Terabithia alone. The rope swing, ancient and weathered when they found it, snapped. She hit her head when she landed in the gushing brook and drowned.</p> <p>The plot turn is brutal enough. But like its source material, the film is unflinching as it addresses the aftermath. Jesse, unequipped to handle the enormity of his grief and guilt beyond his capacity to understand, shuts down. If Leslie's death doesn't bring you to tears, one of the key moments on his journey towards acceptance certainly will. Josh Hutcherson is making a career out of performances that rock me to the core, and his work as Jesse is no exception. He has fully internalized Jesse's loss here and the grief bubbles out of him in small, heartbreaking ways. His performance increasingly acknowledges Leslie's death even as he's still in denial, a feat many adult actors would have trouble pulling off. AnnaSophia Robb deserves credit for creating a character strange, warm and lovely enough that losing her hurts.</p> <p>Robert Patrick's performance as Jesse's father is a stunning counterpoint to his role in <I>Walk the Line</I>. Both characters are poor farmers, and both express themselves in largely small but incredibly significant ways. Johnny Cash's father used every word and gesture to tear his son down. Jesse's dad may not show Jesse the same affection he shows his youngest, but he is fair, steady and well-intentioned. He trusts his son, and his son trusts him. Less significant than when he reprimands Jesse for doodling all day is the early times when he sees his son's artwork and holds back his disapproval. When Jesse pushes his little sister down and she goes running to her father, it is a validation of his character that he sees instantly through the particulars to the heart of his son's sorrow. When Jesse worries that God will damn Leslie to hell because she wasn't a follower, the way he meets his son's eyes as he answers brings tears to my eyes just thinking about it: he doesn't know God, he tells Jesse, but no God would send that girl to hell. When movies and television increasingly tell us that fathers must be absent, abusive or effeminate, Patrick bucks the trend.</p> <p>There are a few decisions I disagree with. The use of CG in capturing Terabithia is excessive, particularly at the end. References to 2007 video game systems and technology were unwelcome. I read the book before iPods and blackberries, and it was written before walkmans and game boys. The story and setting provide for a timeless quality. The omission of such technology would have made the economic depression outside Jesse's immediate family more believable. Along the same lines, giving Jesse's family cable counters the financial desperation the film takes great pains to establish.</p> <p>But these a quibbles. As one of the early readers traumatized by this book, I can say that the thoughts and emotions of the text were faithfully replicated. Not an ounce of the whimsy, hope, love, pain and loss was missing. The performances from the adults and children alike flawlessly zero us in on the emotional centre of the story. <I>Bridge to Terabithia</I> is destined to join <I>Bambi</I> and <I>Old Yellers</I> among the most depressing and beloved entries to family cinema. <span class="reviews-rating"><span class="reviews-paren">(</span><span class="reviews-star">****</span><span class="reviews-paren">)</span></span></p> <p></p> <div class="reviews-byline"> &nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT </div> <div align="center"> <hr class="reviews-rule"> </div> <div class="reviews-imdb reviews-extras"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0398808/">Research more</a> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-7353630148304617122?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-80420471220691069702007-03-19T23:46:00.001-04:002007-03-19T23:46:54.209-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img451.imageshack.us/img451/9224/review065lt9.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Mike Binder was the perfect person to make this film. There are many filmmakers that could have captured the outbursts, the anger and the despair. But depression is about more than anger and despair. In <I>Reign Over Me</I>, Binder focuses his film on all of the time that passes in between, when people filled with loss and hopelessness have to exist and fill the time.<br> He doesn't make his subject, Charlie Fineman, psychotic or insane. Despite the manner in which we first meet him, Charlie's problem isn't lack of clarity. It's too much clarity, seeing the things that matter to him most every single day and having to deal with the fact they're never coming back. Charlie wants so desperately to be insane, to be a person damaged enough to lose the part of him that matters most.<br> The protagonist, Dr. Alan Johnson DMD, has a beautiful wife and lovely polite little children. He runs a successful practice and maintains a comfortable lifestyle. But he is no less alone than Charlie, and like Charlie does little more than count his days. Henry David Thoreau once said that "the mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation." These two are certainly ringing endorsements of his theory.<br> Alan and Charlie find in each other a friendly face from a time before their present problems. Together they still do little more than pass the time, but they make a much better go of it with the extra company. Gradually Alan gets glimpses into the part of Charlie's world that is no longer directly acknowledged. Gradually Charlie is entrusted with the areas of Alan's life that he insists are fine to every one else.<br> As it turns out, Charlie had a beautiful wife and three beautiful little girls once. They even had a little dog. They were visiting family in Boston, and he was going to meet them in Los Angeles. They got on one of two American Airlines flights from Logan to LAX that did not make it that morning.<br> <i>United 93</i> made 9/11 feel like the present in one very real and tangible way. <i>Reign Over Me</i> makes 9/11 feel like the present another way. Days, months, years may have passed, but Charlie's grief has not. I was one of the lucky ones; I didn't lose any people on 9/11, I sat back and watched the nation change. Watching documentaries, news specials, and objective representations like <I>United 93</I> thus stir up a more detached and abstract sense of grief. There is nothing detached or abstract about Charlie's grief. His grief springs from the same spring as all real, <I>human</I> loss.<br> As such, 9/11 has never felt more tangibly present and terrible than it did with this movie. There were moments when the whole audience cried. I have no doubt that 9/11 caused some of those tears; the tragedy certainly colours both the film and its audience. But most tears, I expect, were reserved for Charlie.<br> Don Cheadle should be given a great deal of credit for making our window into Charlie a complete and believable character. Liv Tyler is a soft, needed presence. But the focus will be and should be on Adam Sandler's performance, easily the best of his career. He has given skilful performances before; <I>Punch-Drunk Love</I> and <I>Spanglish</I> come to mind. But this is the first dramatic performance that will be remembered as more than a vivid contrast to his usual comedic fare. The humour of many of his Happy Madison characters is here. So too is the rigid restraint of his <I>Punchdrunk Love</I> persona. But while those performances were driven by anger, this performance is driven by despair. This difference results in completely different body language and verbal rhythm. Even the outbursts are completely different. When Sandler releases that despair, he achieves something that is all at once brave, honest, unflinching and private. Sandler is a lifelong New Yorker, and he doesn't hold that back. His performance refuses to let 9/11 be anything other than personal. We're only into March, but he is my early favourite for Best Actor next year.<br> Mike Binder took ideas he'd been playing around with in the underrated <I>Upside of Anger</I> and placed them front and centre in our cultural consciousness. <I>United 93</I> gave us the objective story last year, and now here <I>Reign Over Me</I> comes to give us a subjective version. It&#39;s time.<br> (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0490204/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-8042047122069106970?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-22815162578261097452007-03-10T01:44:00.001-05:002007-03-10T01:44:40.053-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/4417/review064zc6.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">When I saw <I>Bridge to Terabithia</I>, the deceptive advertising made me furious. I can't say that the advertising for <I>Black Snake Moan</I> is any less deceptive, but unlike the <I>Terabithia</I> campaign it is totally in-sync with the off-kilter sensibility of the film it represents.<br> Yes, <I>Black Snake Moan</I> centres around a black man who chains a white nymphomaniac up in his house. No, that&#39;s not what the film is about. These two people offer each other something they cannot find within themselves. The film captures a common humanity, clashing Southern sensibilities, and the humour inherent in that which is dark and tragic.<br> Yes, despite my lofty declarations, there is plenty of humour. Those who venture into the film looking for the laughs the trailers promise will not be disappointed. But don't count on spending the running time laughing at outlandish caricatures. Both the laughs and the characters dug much deeper than I'd expected.<br> The scenario may be outlandish, but the lives they led to bring them to this point are driven by demons all too common and real. Flashes of symbolic imagery and veiled yet weighty inferences map out a childhood of abuse and neglect for Rae, the little nympho. Lazarus, the black man, loses his wife to his younger brother &#151; she made a tragic decision that extinguished the flame they shared.<br> Samuel L. Jackson infuses Lazarus with many of the distinctive qualities that we've come to expect from his performances. At the same time, he pulls back in small but important ways. Lazarus is a man of fire and violence. But he is also a gentleman, charming and careful as a matter of course. When he finds another woman who can kindle his flame, he doesn't sweep her into his arm. He courts her, conveying his affection with just the right words and little gestures of friendship and kindness.<br> Christina Ricci manages to find a true Southern lady inside Rae. She correctly treats the lewd behaviour and crude language asked of her as emotional scar tissue that has gathered over the top. Once Rae finds herself forcibly taken under Lazarus&#39;s care, the emotional scarring begins to fade away and the Southern belle is there to shine through. By the time she finally rejoins the outside world, she is able to be flirtatious and yet somehow chaste. Lazarus's chains have let Rae take control over the sexual fire within.<br> I highlight the surprising complexity of these performances for a reason. It's not the characters that the film allows us to laugh at, its the sheer audacity of the film itself. Immediately after the preacher from Lazarus's church first sees Rae, half-naked and chained up to the radiator, Lazarus calmly and sensibly explains the situation and insists that he stay for dinner. The humour comes from the way events organically conspired to bring us rationally to a moment of such absurdity.<br> Speaking of the preacher, religion proves key to the movie's soul. That Rae should be dumped at the end of Lazarus's driveway is an act of providence. That the preacher should support Lazarus, and that Lazarus should support Rae is an act of humanity at its best. At one point, the preacher stares Rae in the eyes and tells her not to worry about heaven. For these characters, it's enough to seek God for the here and now. Movies with a Northern sensibility address God with suspicion and cynicism. This movie &#151; moving to slower and sturdier Southern rhythms &#151; takes for granted God's role as a focal point for hope, civility and self respect.<br> Music is also essential to the film's soul. Frederick Douglass wrote in his first autobiography that any one who heard the singing of a slave as he did would be an instant convert to the cause of abolition, the sound was so desperate and pained. That's the kind of music Lazarus plays. Even when he has a bar full of people on their feet dancing, that's the kind of music Lazarus plays. As temperate and composed as he is, his guitar is the only outlet he has to unburden his soul. At one point, as the thunder and rain pours down outside and Rae holds close like a child, his play reaches such an intensity that it's actually frightening.<br> Rae also finds catharsis in Lazarus's music, and gradually begins to find music of her own. While music allows Lazarus to feel angry and sad and lost, music allows Rae to feel joy. Her voice, high and clear like a bell, captures something she looked to sex for but could never find. The song that rises out of her, fittingly enough a negro spiritual, is a perfect metaphor for her journey.<br> This is the best executed coming of age story I've seen in a long time. Every decision strikes confidently true. The characters grow in real and meaningful ways, and the journey &#151; while completely outrageous &#151; never takes a shortcut or cheats. The visual metaphors, captured in quick cuts that serve a thematic rather than narrative purpose, aren't clichés but fit so well they feel like they should be. I'd heard good things about <I>Hustle & Flow</I>, Craig Brewer's first film, but never bothered to see it. <I>Black Snake Moan</I> cements Brewer as a unique and important Southern voice. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0462200/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-2281516257826109745?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1168404139339368632007-01-09T23:42:00.000-05:002007-01-09T23:42:19.366-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/9522/review063lu4.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Watching <I>Children of Men</I> was like being Alice as she fell down the rabbit hole. Each time I thought I understood who could be trusted and who could not, the rug was pulled out from under me and the situation was filtered through an entirely different light. The movie doesn&#39;t reach the bottom of the rabbit hole until the very last scene. It is a movie of horrors, and shocking truths. But it is also a story of beauty and love, compassion and faith. Being all of these things, it is as human of a movie as I have ever seen. Unquestionably, <I>Children of Men</I> is the best film of 2006.<br> A weathered photograph in the sill of a bathroom window. A run-down school, the simple murals on the wall covered in overgrown and stripped down by rain and mildew. Little touches like these are all that remain of humanity&#39;s children. It is the year 2027, and the youngest human being on the planet has just has just died at 18 years, 4 months, 20 days, 16 hours, and 8 minutes of age. The survivors that are left carry on joyless lives of increasing desperation. Humanity&#39;s time is through. The stragglers that are left have little else to do but mark off the days until the end. ("Last one to die please turn out the light" reads one bit of graffiti on a crumbling concrete wall.)<br> One of these stragglers is Theodore Faron. Theo works a miserable desk job in a miserable city, in a miserable country, in a miserable time for the world. His only friend is Jasper, an old political cartoonist with a brain dead wife who has etched out a pleasant existence growing pot in a solar powered house in the middle of a forest. The time outside Jasper&#39;s sanctuary is spent in a grey world of charred bodies and crumbling rubble. The rest of the world is in chaos - forced to choose between security and liberty, the other countries chose liberty and crumbled for it. Now, as the BBC bulletins triumphantly proclaim, "Only Britain soldiers on."<br> Theo's dangerous yet monotonous existence is shaken up when he is kidnapped by a terrorist group run by Julian, the estranged mother of his long dead child. She recruits him because their history together has made him the only one she can really trust. What she's trusting him with is the greatest secret imaginable on a planet that is exponentially greying: the first pregnant woman in 18 years. Sweeping immigration reform to stop the flow of refugees from the devastated outside world has made Kee (born in Fiji) an illegal citizen. She is funny, pretty, and &#151; eight months pregnant &#151; positively swelling around the midsection. The relationship between Theo and her defines the movie.<br> Theo and Kee defy all of the horrors that threaten to engulf them, whether they be from the barrel of a gun or the treacheries of a false smile, by sharing a bond of warmth and trust. Theo, who sought hangovers to overcome the numbness of a dead child a dying world, has finally again found something he believes in enough to die for. Everything he does from the moment he learns Kee&#39;s secret is aimed at protecting her. Kee, for her part, is the most important person on the planet. It'd be understandable if she were arrogant and conceited. But she loved Julian, and Julian loved Theo, so she trusts him without question and treats him with the respect implicit in that trust. In a world with nothing to offer but final and complete death, they are beacons of life and hope.<br> During their journey we see people dying and dead by very gruesome ways. The horrific acts are shown unflinchingly, even casually, yet they carry more impact than the bodies that pile up in so many films. Cuarón spaces each despicable sight perfectly, holding back just enough that we never become desensitized to the violence and brutality. And I could think of place in the real world, often right at this point in time, where each horror had been or was being committed. These are the sickening sights, yes, but ones we need to see more of in order for things to change.<br> And yet, <I>Children of Men</I> does not condemn humanity for our failings. It sizes us up honestly, meditates on how we are at worst and meditates on how we are at our best, and decides finally that the former outweighs the latter. It is a dark, dreary, gruesome, brutal film. But I can't think of one that is more optimistic or more hopeful. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-116840413933936863?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1166687057564995062006-12-21T02:43:00.000-05:002006-12-21T02:44:32.243-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9237/review062qy4.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Robert De Niro's first directorial effort since <I>A Bronx Tale</I> in 1993, <I>The Good Shepherd</I> purports to be "the untold story of the birth of the CIA." It is actually an interminable series of only loosely related scenes about characters that we don't much care about doing horrible things we don't much care about either. By the time the only character with any personality arrives on screen, played by a seemingly ancient Joe Pesci, my mind was screaming "why God why isn't this movie over yet?"<br> Matt Damon plays Edward Wilson, a man with an unreadable poker face and the barest minimum of personality. He is smart, of affluent upbringing, with very little sense of humour. Perfect for international espionage. Not so perfect for carrying a three hour journey that spends too long saying too little. Only one character gets him to crack the slightest smile. She gets less than five minutes of the total running time. He's smart, he's unreadable. I get it. I'm bored now.<br> As a fresh inductee to Yale's Order of Skull and Bones, he knocks up a senator's daughter and thus is obliged to marry her. We get the obligatory scenes of her complaining that he's never home and never shares anything with her. They son is a complete tool, constantly a day late and a dollar short. It's a dysfunctional family, but not in a particularly unique or interesting way. He's a shitty family man. We <i>get</i> it. We got it the first time. Quit repeating yourself.<br> The espionage elements are only mildly more interesting, and considerably less focused. I kept waiting for all the divergent story lines to come together in a fascinating and worthwhile way, but no. By the time the movie ends, I didn't care anymore. Whatever I was going to get out of it, I'd already long figured out anyway. Was it that he betrayed the United State of America during the Bay of Pigs to protect his son? Then why'd they kill his son's fiancé anyway? The answer is that after the 150 minute mark, I was entirely focused on the exits.<br> Never before have I seen a movie so pointlessly bloated with so little to say. Every whiff of promise is relentlessly stomped out as soon as possible. Michael Gambon's sexually deviant professorial spymaster ends up a floater. Joe Pesci's mobster is in and out after one scene, with nothing particularly resulting from it. William Hurt's leadership character, who isn't even that interesting, goes out in a perfunctory web of intrigue that wasn't really elaborated on. Never have I seen a collection of professionally shot and acted scenes so utterly fail to build and expand on each other. They're all free floating islands, which means every cut has to build its momentum fresh. It makes the running time &#151; did I mention the movie is three hours long? &#151; feel much more epic than it otherwise would have.<br> And what did the movie ultimately have to say about the CIA? It was founded by rich white boys from secret societies whose mistakes affected the history books. There's a big surprise. What a waste of a night. With a different script and a different editor, they might have had something here. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0343737/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-116668705756499506?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1159498179044089182006-09-28T22:47:00.000-04:002006-09-28T22:49:39.056-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/7577/review061ta8.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>The Guardian</I> is really three movies. The first has the makings of a great film, full of drama and suspense and a first-person perspective of a dangerous and heroic job many of us &#151; until Katrina at least &#151; had never really thought about. The second is a fun if formulaic coming of age film, part buddy comedy and part sports drama. The third covers pretty much the same territory as the first, only from the outside looking in. All three star Kevin Coster, and the sum of the respective parts feels much longer than the 136 minute running time.<br> If this movie proves anything, it's that Kevin Costner still has what it takes to lead a movie. He gets equal billing with Ashton Kutcher, but this is his movie through and through. If anything, age has only made him more fascinating to watch onscreen. And he's kept in good enough shape that I never once doubted that his character could do what he was shown as doing. For his part, Ashton Kutcher held his own better than could be expected.<br> The movie begins with narration, and ends with narration. They might as well have been the same narration, since the opening narration tells you in so many words exactly what's going to happen at the end. The journey in between was interesting and consistently involving, but never really truly inspiring. The people they portray, the Coast Guard rescue divers, are truly inspiring. The times when the movie is actually about rescue diving are the times when the movie hits its truest notes. Staring out the side of a helicopter as the ocean churns twenty feet below is a powerful moment to capture. A story that spends the bulk of its time passing the mantle from one generation of actors to the next is far less so. At the end of the film I still liked Kevin Costner's character a lot more than I liked Ashton Kutcher's. For whatever reason, the baton never got passed on.<br> Sela Ward, for her part, tackles Costner's character like she tackles Laurie's on "House." Kutcher's love interest gets a good introduction but largely left me wanting more of Sela Ward. The motley crew of Coast Guard recruits were bearable (a few even enjoyable). I found the ending unnecessary, but otherwise nothing stuck out as being less than competent. There really isn't anything, though, that we haven't seen before. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0406816/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-115949817904408918?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1157860752021057282006-09-09T23:58:00.000-04:002006-09-09T23:59:19.720-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/6274/review060pe5.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Akeelah and the Bee</I> is one of the most important films I've ever seen. That word gets thrown around fairly often: i-m-p-o-r-t-a-n-t. Of much or great significance or consequence. How many pretentious costume dramas or political dramas are really important? The things that are truly significant are rarely political. <I>Akeelah and the Bee</I> is about inspiration overcoming desperation. It's about finding in oneself enough value to counter outside adversity. In a popular culture which focuses on sex and violence with increasingly idolatry, it's <I>important</I> to find an urban movie that values dedication, hard work, and individual achievement.<BR>I grew up in a household where my parents always asked nothing more or less than the best that I could do. They gave me the best head start they could and then trusted me to do the best I could from there. Though the film never introduces us to Akeelah's father, I get the very strong impression that he did the same thing for her. Unlike Akeelah, I still have my father today. And unlike Akeelah, I was educated in an upper-middle-class culture where achievement and success are valued and praised &#151; perhaps to excess. Akeelah's education was entrenched in a low-income culture of desperation and disappointment. Any individual&#39;s success in a culture like that is threatening, because raising the bar for one means throwing the spotlight on everybody else's failure. It's rude.<br>Akeelah is languishing in a school that offers her nothing. She is also a sensitive and perceptive child, who appreciates the value in others who probably don't appreciate the value in themselves. Her father was a word enthusiast, and spelling became the last link she had left to him. Too polite and too intimidated to make an anomaly of herself at school, internet Scrabble serves initially as the only outlet for her particular gift.<br>When first her teacher and then her principal goads her into taking part in the school's first spelling bee, it's therefore no surprise that she wins it. After her victory, the principal's associate Dr. Joshua Larabee starts firing much harder words at her. She goes for quite a while before he tries a zinger on her and she breaks. The room, with her through all her increasingly improbably successes, turns instantly against her and she flees. As she defied the odds, they supported her because her success was their success. But nobody in that room needed to be a part of any more failure. Drained of her own confidence and filled back up with their desperation, she cries out to her principal in the stairwell, betrayed that he would force her to succeed and so allow her to visibly fail. "Mr. Welch, I told you I did not want to do this! They're laughin' at me!" Dr. Larabee's unsympathetic response, delivered authoritatively from a dozen steps above, is full of dire truth: "They laugh because you intimidate them. But if you'd stood your ground you might have earned their respect." If this film is about anything, it's certainly not spelling. It's about the process by which Akeelah grows to live that advice.<br>By the time she'd matured enough to accept Dr. Larabee's tutelage, she already had dreams of the national spelling bee firmly rooted. She wanted it bad enough to let not family, community, nor herself get in the way. Dr. Larabee teaches her vocabulary and etymology, yes, but he is careful to imbue the words with real meaning. Akeelah expands not only her vocabulary, but also the power of these words and their purpose. Larabee draws from Douglass, DuBois, King, among others. With their essays and their ideas, Larabee aims to counter a lifetime of negative cultural self-image. As the bond between tutor and pupil softens, they each increasingly look to the other &#151; in spite of their own best efforts &#151; to fill the major holes in their lives. Not all tragedies can be blamed on society; Akeelah Anderson and Dr. Joshua Larabee have wounds that are deep, and personal.<br>Some moments in the beginning are excessively dewy-eyed, and some plot threads get lost along the way that I'd have liked to see resolved. But these complaints are immaterial compared to the momentum and honesty of the journey. When I mentored at a Boston charter school for a college debate class, I was first introduced to the anti-achievement mentality that is at the heart of the crisis in America's inter-city schools. One of the girls in my assigned group was all too eager to help, and was mocked relentlessly by her classmates for it. Another contributed quietly and discreetly, lest the others notice. She was screaming with intelligence and potential in spite of her best efforts to be just another face in the crowd. Keke Palmer's performance as Akeelah started as a dead ringer for this second girl, and progressed to what she could have been. I expected strong performances from Laurence Fishburne and Angela Bassett; they're marquee names. But Palmer, the eleven-year-old this whole venture is built upon, goes toe-to-toe with both of them. There are innumerable influences, emotions, and expectations swirling around Akeelah, and Palmer internalizes all of them.<br><I>Akeelah and the Bee</I> is a reminder that talent is everywhere, and proof that ability and success are both measured in the love that fosters them. It celebrates love &#151; of self, from family, for family, from community, for community. Akeelah isn't extraordinary because she can spell, but because in a world of hatred and fear, she is brave enough to love. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0437800/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-115786075202105728?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1157431773575131772006-09-05T00:49:00.000-04:002006-09-05T00:49:33.590-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/7820/review059kx1.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><i>Crank</i> is not a film that can be judged by normal standards. It meets barely any of the objective qualities I normally look for in a film. It abandons any attempt to appease the normal laws of physics or medicine and indeed has a hit-or-miss record in staying consistent with what lip service it pays to each early on. The only thing this movie has going for it is Jason Statham. Fortunately, Statham's enough.<br>The movie begins with Statham's character, Chev Chelios, regaining consciousness on the floor of a dismal room. He soon discovers that the triads have laced his blood with chemicals that block the release of adrenaline. His only hope is to keep his heart rate pumping and his adrenaline flowing, or so his doctor tells him. What follows is nothing more or less than a greatest hits list of &quot;Grand Theft Auto&quot; scenarios played out over virtually the rest of the running time. Cars go through buildings. Cars trash other cars. Motorcycles send passengers flying. There's sex in cars. There's sex out of cars. There's a dumb blond, a Cuban gang, and a severed hand. If you expect story or viable characters you will be cruelly disappointed. If you expect the most casual and relentless violence in recent memory coupled with sophomoric, homophobic taunting and the occasional racial stereotype you will get more than your money&#39;s worth. In fact, iff the projector broke twenty minutes in, you&#39;d have your money&#39;s worth.<br>Stimulants are snorted, chugged, sniffed, and injected. Chelios destroys half the city and kills probably one out of every two human beings that appear on screen. People are drowned, stabbed, shot, sucked off, screwed, and cut into pieces. Oh, and the occasional neck gets snapped. The film builds and builds, until it finally reaches it crescendo, hundreds if not thousands of feet above the city outside a helicopter. Throughout it all, Chelios keeps things practical and to the point. He doesn't really savour the violence; he does what he has to and moves on. And what he has to do is kill people. Frequently.<br>I can't really recommend this as a movie. It was a pretty great thrill ride, though. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em">^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"><hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"><span style="text-transform: none"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0384793/">Research more</a></span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-115743177357513177?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1156049114741279012006-08-20T00:44:00.000-04:002006-08-20T00:45:14.766-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/7718/review058jo6.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">The same thought ran through my mind the entire time I was watching <I>Accepted</I>. Sure, these kids are going to have an awesome four year experience, but aren't they going to be completely screwed once they graduate? Assuming tuition stays flat over the entire four years, that's over $80,000 of their parents' money down the drain with no concrete results to show for it. The film's celebration of something so naive and so childish is an extraordinarily weak foundation upon which an otherwise surprisingly enjoyable comedy is crafted.<br>Justin Long, who made pathetic likable and even brave in <i>Dodgeball</i>, takes the central role as Bartleby, the ringmaster of a desperate, last ditch scam launched after that perennial high school senior fear &#151; what if none of the colleges I applied accept me? &#151; is realized. If you live in a world without community colleges or indeed open admission of any sort, as Long's character Bartleby surely must, the solution<i> Accepted</i> presents would make a certain sort of sense.<i> </i>Together with single-minded redhead Rory and under-funded jock Hands, a shell of a university is crafted out of an abandoned mental hospital. Bartleby&#39;s friend Schrader, channelling Flounder from Animal House, handles the paperwork and gives the concocted website all of those realistic flourishes.<br>It's so real, in fact, that on opening day of orientation, roughly 300 students show up on the curb. Like Bartleby, South Harmon Institute of Technology (you can imagine how many jokes revolve around that acronym) is their very last fleeting hope. Gradually and rather haphazardly, a rough approximation of an institution of higher learning takes shape.<br>The student body is, to put it mildly, colourful. But none, not even the twitchy slouchy ADHD kid in a straight jacket, approaches the man Bartleby hires as dean of students. A burned out academic and raging alcoholic, Dean Lewis is Lewis Black unburdened by subject matter or structure. Initially introduced as a verbally abusive shoe salesman, Lewis trailer-side rants on the South Harmon lawn become one of S.H.I.T.&#39;s most popular classes. Coupled with his offhand comments throughout, this is Lewis Black being the funniest I've probably ever seen him.<br>The plot, as it exists, involves a neighbouring enemy school filled with affluent white dudes, apparently the only target still fair game in our overly politically correct culture. But the plot's not really important. <i>Accepted</i> is a funny movie with likable characters. It's not terribly intelligent. It&#39;s not terrifically original. It's not even all that inspiring. It's simply good-natured fun that parodies the self-expression movement even as it embraces it. Sure, the students at S.H.I.T. will graduate without any real prospects to speak of. But the movie makes the case that they&#39;ll probably do more living in those four years than many of us will do our whole lives. And extending that logic, if the real world sucks too much after, so be it; they can balance the differential by killing themselves at the culmination of 22 fulfilling years of self-discovery.<br>See, if I myself had gotten a stronger formal higher education, this review would have had a real ending. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0384793/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-115604911474127901?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1154219471235738962006-07-29T20:30:00.000-04:002006-07-29T20:31:11.250-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7963/review056vs4.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">I can&#39;t claim to hold the slightest degree of expertise about fashion, or the culture that surrounds it. I have worn beat up old t-shirts and beat up old jeans (or in this weather, beat up old shorts) every single day, for as long as I can remember. Still, in a perverse way, I admired this film&#39;s moral compass. It would have been a wreck for the naive college graduate at the centre of this film, an impulse hire by the titular devil atop the hierarch of a trendy fashion magazine, to somehow elevate such a shallow industry. Even as the trends, buzzwords, and faces change seemingly daily, the fashion industry is and will always be too large to be fundamentally changed by any one person. Likewise, it would have been meaningless to watch that same shallow industry corrupt and deflower the naive college grad&#39;s sense of morality. Watching a movie about a character so impotent as to be completely molded and transformed by her environment is, for this reviewer at least, thoroughly uninteresting.<br> Watching the oppressive and ulcer-inducing fashion industry push that naive college grad, Andrea, down isn&#39;t the only thing that makes <I>The Devil Wears Prada</I> so interesting.&nbsp; A large part of the film&#39;s substance comes in watching Andrea push back. It would have been easy to make the title character, fashion mogul Miranda Priestly, the story&#39;s outright villain. Miranda's a monster, to be sure. But Andrea&#39;s supposed to be an adult now, and the film refuses to let her shirk responsibility.<br>In one memorable scene, Andrea runs to her superior and office confidante, Nigel, in tears over their boss's latest beastly transgression. Nigel, despite being obviously quite fond of the girl, refuses to give her an inch. Grow up, he tells her, and stop complaining about an opportunity others would kill for. "Other girls dream of working here," he reminds her. "You only deign." In a world increasingly satisfied with the Bare Minimum, how refreshing it is to find a film that expects not merely effort from its protagonist, but passion &#151; and results.<br> It&#39;s also refreshing to find a film that goes beneath the usual noble bohemians oppressive corporate oppressors dichotomy to explore the shifting sands of overlapping moral values. It's easy and popular to say that friends and family should always come above all else. But that course ends on the street with no prospects, what's then? Or how about if making the office first priority is necessary to do the job right? <I>The Devil Wears Prada</I> treats these, shockingly, as serious questions &#151; worthy of exploration and deliberation.<br> While I admire the film for all of those reasons, it's the characters that allowed me to enjoy it. Meryl Streep, always so irritatingly practiced and deliberate in her roles, finally has found a character her style suits. Anne Hathaway, in her first leading role of any real weight, proves up to the challenge. This is the first time I've seen Emily Blunt, but her turn as the frigid and perpetually emotionally wrecked senior assistant swings wildly from venomous impatience to vulnerable gratitude, to devastated anger. She comes close to stealing every scene she's in. Nigel might be the smallest role I've seen Stanley Tucci in, but it's probably the best. Imbuing the role with kindness, passion, and patience, he steers Nigel through the gamut of emotions with a flamboyant yet mature sort of a courage.<br> <I>The Devil Wears Prada</I> dresses complex characters with well-suited performances and unveils them in a world full of painful truths that imbue what triumphs there are with real validity. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br> </p> <div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0377107/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-115421947123573896?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1153540497261029712006-07-21T23:54:00.000-04:002006-07-21T23:54:57.280-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/8930/review057xp9.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">It's strange, I think, that <i>Clerks II</i> is what it is. Eleven years, nine months and two days after the original hit the art houses, this sequel feels more like that one than any of Smith's others. More than a sequel, it's almost like a second draft; a draft with stronger characterizations, a better balance between the comedic and the dramatic, and an adept hand at weaving the same characters in and out of the plot at exactly the right times and in exactly the right ways. With a return to David Klein's raw, stripped-down photography &#151; underrated for its role in the gritty, independent flair of Smith's early films &#151; the words and dialogue are again allowed to take centre stage. Like the original, this is a film almost exclusively composed of people talking at each other. But six films later, Smith has elevated the form to a symphony of clashing and complementing phraseologies, backgrounds, and points of view.<br> Not since <i>Chasing Amy</I> has a Smith script grown so squarely from its characters. With the exception of a donkey subplot, all of the humour seemed to flow naturally from who the characters are and what they know (or don't) at a given moment. Some scenes proceed with an unflinching disregard for politically correctness. But Smith uses them not merely to shock the audience but to highlight characters that are outspoken even in the face of sometimes staggering personal ignorance. What few customers there are serve merely to launch the clerks that serve them off on new tangents; to raise new topics of discussion and explore different dimensions of how each character relates to all of the others.<br> Without the burden of a greater plot to serve, Smith&#39;s characters are finally unchained to behave exactly as they would. Dante and Randall still fire words back and forth at each other much like they did over a decade ago. But the intervening years have imbued their bitter banter with a certain urgency: time is ticking, yet the previous decade has only cemented the role each plays in the other's life further. They didn't have to worry about each other's feelings in the original; years of disappointment have taught them that they only lasting relationship each has ever had is with the other.<br> Jay and Silent Bob, elevated by the movies in between this and the original to cinematic heroes, are returned from the stratosphere to the low-level dope peddlers that they&#39;ve always been. Foulmouthed and dimwitted yet naive and good-natured, Jay serves as the perfect window dressing. His unique and consistently incomplete understanding of any given situation can snap humour to drama and vice-versa at the drop of a hat. You can&#39;t really have Dante and Randall without Jay and Silent Bob, and Smith&#39;s script remembers to recognize what impact the foreground characters' decisions will have on them.<br> But in terms of the sheer bat shit bug-eyed crazy factor, Trevor Fehrman's Elias does the heavy lifting. Both fundamentalist Christian and fantasy fanboy, Elias is so repressed and socially insecure that he makes Will Ferrell's Corbit from <i>Winter Passing</i> look like a well-adjusted party animal. Randal sometimes said things in this film that made my jaw drop, yet Elias comes up with some out-of-the-blue statements that make <i>Randal</i>'s jaw drop. Elias maintains a certain earnest likeability, much like Jay, in spite of his dysfunctional insanity.<br> Becky is Rosario Dawson exuding a sensual warmth, her speciality. She adds a certain down-to-earth charm to this role that made Becky less like an unattainable move star and more like the women I remember most fondly from my own daily living. In a movie centred around unknown actors, Dawson's challenge was to dim her star a bit, so that her character might work at their level. The greatest praise that I can give her is that she succeeds without impairing any of the qualities that make her so attractive to begin with.<br> <i>Clerks II</i> is a revelation. Film is a medium in which the script is just the starting point. As Smith the filmmaker evolved, his greater exploration of that medium left less and less room for Smith the writer. This is the first film since <I>Chasing Amy</I> where the writer came out on top. Smith the writer has honed his craft to create what is probably his very best screenplay. If Smith the filmmaker resigned himself to merely putting Smith the writer's blab-fests to celluloid, I don't think I'd mind a bit. It's what he's apparently best at. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0377107/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-115354049726102971?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1152400003236332422006-07-08T19:06:00.000-04:002006-07-08T19:06:43.250-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/5038/review0559kk.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><i>Proof</i> is an extraordinary achievement of true and literal first-person cinematic storytelling. It deals with a woman at a moment of severe emotional instability, questioning everything about her life and putting the pieces together as the film does. That woman is Catherine. With the passing of her genius mathematician father, she must decide whether to rejoin the outside world or sever ties with it forever. But she is so beaten down by the shadow of her father's genius (and mental illness), so flattened by the manipulations of a sister that casually undercuts her at every turn, the decision becomes increasingly complicated as the stakes rise with each new scene.<br> The film's non-linear editing brought me inside her shattered state of mind; the film only allows its audience to trust her, in any given moment, as much as she trusts herself. A second viewing therefore became a totally different experience. The film transformed into an instantly objective third-person narrative in which my more complete understanding justified and deepened the actions and behaviour of the characters. It is a credit to director John Madden – who previously directed Auburn’s play on the London stage – that everything holds together so well through that alternative lens. It’d be a criminal act to reveal whether Catherine is sane, partially crazy, or completely crazy. Instead I promise that, going through the film again, each scene built off the others to reinforce the truth. Even if the film never comes out and literally says it, there is the satisfaction of a definitive answer to work forward from.<br> There’s an arch sort of humour that a film all about mathematicians – eventually centered on a titular mathematical proof even – has virtually nothing in the way of actual mathematics. Math is the MacGuffin that guides the characters, raising walls between some and building bridges between others. Catherine connects through her father primarily through their shared mathematical genius, and it is that symbiotic relationship between his genius and his illness that causes the proof to haunt her so. If the proof is hers, she is of her father’s magnitude, clearly with his genius and likely also with his instability. But if the proof is his, her own memory is so undependable as to render her insane already. So it’s safer for her to keep it locked safely away, even as she lives with it &#151; literally and emotionally &#151; every single day. When a young protégé of her father’s slowly liberates her from her own mounting insecurities, she trusts him to bring that proof back out into the open. Everything she is and could be hangs on what he does with that proof.<br> There are many people out there in the world beaten down by those who might also love them. Beaten down by the formidable presence of their families’ booming personalities, beaten down by the way those they trust chip away at their self-confidence by saying: "You're instincts are wrong. For your own good, do it my way." And once they're beaten down sufficiently, they don't need the outside influences anymore to cause them pain. Once we grow to distrust ourselves enough, our own self-doubt provides plenty of anxiety to feed back into itself. Once someone gets to that point, robbed so completely of a foundation on which to build his sense of self, what can bring that person back? <i>Proof</i> has one suggestion, optimistic and compelling in the right sort of ways &#151; ways that, ironically enough, mathematics can't account for. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0377107/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-115240000323633242?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1151644038928199412006-06-30T01:07:00.000-04:002006-06-30T01:07:18.950-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/815/review0541fg.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Superman Returns</I> is the most subversive superhero movie I've ever seen. The leads may be young, but this movie emphasizes change and maturity in a genre that values by stability and youth. Indeed, the marvel is that these characters still intrinsically feel like the ones I remember in a story that places each one in a position they've never been before. Some new characters get more screen time than established favourites. Jor-El's lines of exposition from the 1978 film serve as emotional sign posts along his son's journey, until his original prophecy, that "the son becomes the father, and the father the son," is realized in a unexpected and resonant way. A way that finds real emotional truth out of dialogue conceived originally to forward a Christian allegory.<br> That beat, which I&#39;ll cover at the end, is even more revelatory in a movie that transforms that Christ allegory into a rather extreme and literal parallel. <I>Superman: The Movie</I> was a celebration of Superman as a Christ-like figure of hope. <I>Superman Returns</I> treats its hero's calling as a burden rather than a blessing. It spends almost too much time mourning our hero's sacrifices and &#151; after the first big action scene &#151; little to no time celebrating his most visually epic accomplishments. This will be a deal breaker for many; its the most radical thematic break from tradition. After seeing what the movie gave us instead, though, I decided I was okay with it. The victories this film gives instead are smaller and messier but more meaningful. Being responsible for the whole world is abstract and grandiose. Being responsible for people, for a family, is unglamorous but tangible; since mistakes on this level won't destroy civilization, you have to live with them when you wake up the next morning. What a strange truth to find in superhero movie.<br> Each and every cast member is perfect and unfailing. Routh's Superman, so awkward and gawky in stills, inhabits the role with grace and natural believability. All he had to do was save a spacecraft and an airplane, and I never really questioned him in the tights again. It's not a matter of a good performance or a bad one. He simply <i>is</i> Superman. Bosworth, whom I've never liked in anything else, makes a better brunette than a blonde and straddles perfectly the line between fearless reporter and mother. She didn't remind me of any other Lois, so much as conjure my collective memory of all of them. Sam Huntington fleshes out the gag of Jimmy Olsen into a cohesive manner of being. Frank Langella, faced with J.K. Simmons&#39;s powerhouse J. Jonah Jameson, ventures out in the opposite direction. As the world falls to pieces around him, he confidently and casually rides the wave, keeping his headlines up-to-date all the while. Langella remembers that Editor-in-Chief is a job as well as a mouthpiece &#151; and his Perry White is damned good at his job. Eva Marie Saint isn't given much to do as Ma Kent, but she does it with professionalism and class.<br> Then there's the bad guys. Spacey's Luthor was the character I was most scared about. He ended up unquestionably one of the highlights of the movie. Definitely in the lineage of Hackman's goofy take on the role, Spacey departs to the character&#39;s gain by imbuing the role with real menace. Lex&#39;s collection of wigs was a fun gag in 1978. The wigs are no laughing matter after spending some time with Spacey's Luthor in 2006, because like the cry of a wolf they're a sign that danger is near. Parker Posey's Kitty Kowalski is Miss Tessmacher with a dangerous streak: dumb as she is, unlike the latter I could actually believe her handling day-to-day living with a criminal mastermind. One of Lex's thugs, in guarding the prisoners, also standouts in one particular scene.<br> Then there's Lois's fiancé, Richard White. Given more to do here as a mortal than as Cyclops in the X-Men series, Marsden has created a strong emotional antagonist. It would have been easier on everybody if he'd made the character a prick, but his Richard is decent down to the bone. We'd all be cheering if Superman swooped in and saved Lois from a prick. Instead, we like him almost as much as our hero. On some level, even Superman respects Richard if he doesn't outright like him. The family that Richard and Lois have created is functional and warm. It would cheapen the character of Lois Lane if it were anything else. It would cheapen the character of Superman if he allowed himself to be a home wrecker. Yet Superman and Lois Lane, more clearly than ever before, are meant for each other. And so <I>Superman Returns</I> asks questions that no other superhero movie, perhaps even no other superhero story, has asked before.<br>Bosworth's Lois is guarded, the eagerness of Routh's Superman is tempered by concern. The love of each for others, and especially for each other, is deepened as a result. Lois wouldn't accept Superman back easily. Superman wouldn't get Lois back easily. Lois, always the awestruck schoolgirl alongside damsel in distress before, now faces a real emotional journey of her own. Accepting Superman back into her life, allowing the emotions she has for him &#151; and perhaps more importantly the trust she had in him &#151; to seep back in is a more elusive and more rousing victory than the most astonishing and exhilarating rescue.<br> In order to discuss Superman's victory, I have to spoil it all; his victory comes not up on the figurative pedestal of an adoring crowd, not set to rousing up tick in the score, not soaring victoriously over the fields of battle. It's found sitting on a bed in a small suburban home, watching the sleeping form of his child for the first time, seeing through his father's eyes, repeating his father's words, and finally understanding what it means to be part of something and not alone. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0348150/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-115164403892819941?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1148198632926419802006-05-21T04:03:00.000-04:002006-05-21T04:03:52.940-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/2995/review0534fh.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">At the end of <I>Little Manhattan</I>, I felt ready to puke. These are children, yes, but that only makes the whole damn thing more excruciating. They don't have years of rejection and disappointment to prepare them. They don't have the years of recoveries to let them how normal it is to feel like nothing will ever be alright again. Jennifer Flackett's screenplay stabs right at the heart of what it is to place so much of yourself upon someone else's glances. Mark Levin, in his directorial debut, utterly refuses to back down or cushion the blow.<br> These are fairly-well-to-do up through very-well-to-do people we're dealing with here, and yet the experience is so universal that it transcends age or economic station. Charlie Ray, age eleven at the time, captures innocently with a smile here and a glance there all of the wonder and mystery that have haunted men through the ages. Josh Hutcherson is the perfect analogue for every step of that wonderful and often terrifying roller coaster. His narration is often frantic; but then, his is a frantic situation. As his parents, Bradley Whitford and Cynthia Nixon make a compelling case that man and women will <I>never</I> reach a place of saying what they actually feel.<br> In his review of <I>Say Anything</I>, Roger Ebert wrote that, "a movie like this is possible because its maker believes in the young characters, and in doing the right thing, and in staying true to oneself. The sad teenage comedies of recent years are apparently made by filmmakers who have little respect for themselves or their characters, and sneer because they dare not dream." The protagonists of <I>Little Manhattan</I> are even younger, but at least our narrator is no less serious. The movie is filled with moments of Gabe and Rosemary merely standing and looking at each other. Rosemary sees something elusive and quietly wonderful in Gabe, and Gabe sees everything in Rosemary. Levin knows that with his two leads he has captured something magical, and he (unlike so many of today's directors) has the respect and the vision not to get in their way.<br> We live in a world filled with people making wrong choices, interpreting the wrong things, and idly hoping for the impossible. Most of us become hardened and cynical early on. Gabe takes the wreckage of his own parent's love, and sees the right choice as his only available option. It is rare to find <I>anybody</I> that still thinks like that. The characters in this film dare to dream, and they suffer for it. The miracle is that the filmmakers take care to remind us frankly and unapologetically how beautiful and how treasured that suffering will always be. Flackett and Levin have looked back to childhood to craft the <I>Say Anything</I> of the twenty-first century. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0412922/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-114819863292641980?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1148154991663217532006-05-20T15:56:00.000-04:002006-05-20T15:56:31.680-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/6954/review0523ey.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Ron Howard's <I>The DaVinci Code</I> is recognizably the same story as Dan Brown's mega-selling novel. Every scene was directly drawn from the text, even much of the dialog. But with the exception of a few scenes of shocking violence, this might be the first thriller adaptation that's actually <i>less</I> thrilling than its source material.<br> In an effort to cram as much of the novel's mythology into the script as possible, the movie audience is denied the joy of the mystery. Revelations are clunked down in chunks of weighty narration that Brown gave the reader time to consider and think about before revealing. Without the joy of discovery, what sparked on the page fizzles on the screen.<br> And what few changes there are seem created to undermine the tension inherent in the text. The book makes it clear that Langdon has been thrown into being a fugitive before he even has any time to think about it. He is consistently, right up until the climax, a day late and a dollar short. It gave his character inherent fallible charm that made the reams and reams of history more digestible. Sophie Neveu, so much the equal partner in the book, is reduced to mere audience surrogate in the film. Of the novel characters only Silas, the albino monk, was adapted even adequately. And only Sir. Leigh Teabing survived with life and zeal. McKellan's portrayal, packed with all of the humour and inherent eccentricity of the character, is the movie's only saving grace. He makes the middle passages at least bearable.<br> If the Catholics found the book blasphemous, they have even less to like about the film. All of the religious figures, who must shoulder the mythology first and be human beings second, lack almost all of the human qualities that made them sympathetic in the book. Characters that were misguiding on the page are more universally evil here. Scenes that words made intimate and personal and granted a false sense of grandeur here. Goldsman's script plays to the broad strokes which it should focus more on the detail work.<br> The film had a neat visual device of going back in time through an overlap with the modern places. Buses drive through knights on horseback. It was took advantage of the film medium in the way very little else in the film did.<br> The movie, like the book, has two endings. The first, at Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland, is representative of everything this movie has gotten wrong. A scene originally between four people is now filled with dozens. Revelations that should be personal are made merely historical. Changes are made that bog everything down rather that allow the movie to breath.<br> The second ending has no dialog. It was perfectly realized, and rather moving. It is a masterful use of cinema to relate a literary idea. I left the theatre wondering: Why couldn't the rest of the movie been handled like <i>that</i>? (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">)</font><br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0382625/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-114815499166321753?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1148154885042623322006-05-20T15:50:00.000-04:002006-05-20T15:54:45.070-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/6959/review0516ea.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Sky High</I> reminds me of the kind of programming I used to watch as a child. Everything about this movie is a cliché: I saw every plot point coming in advance and I could pretty much set my watch to the regularity with which tired overused character beats dropped. And yet, strangely enough, over the course of that hour and a half, the character beats felt instead warm and familiar, the plot had an inevitability that was charming: the movie delighted so in its clichés that it was impossible for me to turn my nose.<br> The thing that this movie has in common with the shows and movies of my childhood is that the movie likes its characters, roots for them, and wears its enjoyment on its sleeve. In a movie cobbled together from used story parts wrapped in a clever premise, nothing about it feels perfunctory. Sure, we all know that the girl next door is hopelessly in love with our hero. And, of course, we know that our hero couldn&#39;t be more oblivious. We know what will happen to them, and yet both characters are realized so affectionately that I couldn't help but to invest myself anyway.<br> Our hero's schoolyard nemesis is handled with no less understanding. The first time we see him on his own terms, as a busboy at a Chinese restaurant, we realize that he's too three-dimensional to be the villain of this story. He's actually the Misunderstood Loner, and yet his instinctual kindness elevates him above another cog in the plot's machinations.<br> The colourful gang of misfits that trails after our hero represents the usual motley crew of high school clichés. There&#39;s a punk chick, a nerd, and a poser. It'd be deceitful to call them fully realized, but each is given a moment to shine (sometimes literally) and each is given a beat that reveals something human underneath their genre role. The nerd is given a physical victory. The poser is, in the end, rewarded for his open pursuit of social acceptance. The punk chick is allowed to be, for a moment, feminine.<br> To break down the adult cast in a similar fashion would be redundant. It's no surprise for instance that Kurt Russell, the family patriarch, is the world's greatest superhero. Just think about who Lynda Carter, Bruce Campbell, Cloris Leachman, and Dave Foley are, and you're probably already half way to guessing their respective characters. Lynda Carter is basically just Wonder Woman as principal, but Campbell, Leachman, and particularly Foley turn in great character performances. Kevin Heffernan, from <I>Super Troopers</I>, is a stand out as Ron Wilson: Bus Driver.<br> Yes, we've all probably seen this movie a hundred times before. But <I>Sky High</I> makes a surprisingly engaging and delightful hundred and first.<br> (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405325/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-114815488504262332?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1147383283780930862006-05-11T17:34:00.000-04:002006-05-11T17:34:43.803-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/4969/review0505mk.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">I saw <I>RV</I> at the drive-in on Sunday. Early in the season, we were one of about six cars in the place. My buddy was in the backseat, his buddy was riding shotgun. Unlike the theatre, I couldn't expect total silence and focus on the film. I couldn't hope to decipher every nuance and plot turn. Between the conversation and in car banter, I had to grab was snippets I could.<br> <I>RV</I> is the perfect drive-in movie. Take the plot of any <I>National Lampoon's Vacation</I> sub out Chevy Chase and Beverly D'Angelo's breasts, sun in Robin Williams and Cheryl Hines's believability, and you've got this movie. Not having to learn a new plotline or story was a Godsend. Some business about corporate speeches, Jeff Daniels and Co. as a smarter less disgusting substitute for Cousin Eddie's clan and fountains of feces that will land on Robin Williams at least twice. Got it.<br> What's left after you muddle through that are charisma and punch lines. Robin Willams and Cheryl Hines are just plain better actors than Chase and D'Angelo. <I>Vacation</I> will always be the classic, because it was the first, but I believed these characters more. The snide back and forth retorts reminded me of my family. So did the inevitable warmth beneath them. The kids are neither cute nor likable, and for a girl like Joanna "JoJo" Levesque &#151; who has worked so hard to attain the status of a slightly classier manufactured Duff-esque preteen pop idol &$151; being believably unlikable is really sort of courageous. But nor are they unholy terrors like those brats from <I>Are We There Yet?</I>. If they wind up a little TOO sweet by the end, well, that's probably the better side to err on anyway. I liked them all in spite of (or perhaps because of) how imperfect they were. Hell, I even liked the Gornickes though, anti-social as I am, I'd never want to actually meet them.<br> The <I>Vacation</I> movies had better gags, and what you see here will remind you of them &#151; and many others. It's a fond sort of recollection though, like sitting in front of the TV at 3 in the morning and letting a movie you haven't seen in years make the insomnia a little more tolerable.<br> So, in the end, while I definitely think there's better movies to see out there right now, there's a hell of a lot worse, and at least this one made me laugh. Laugh, yes, and even smile.. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449089/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-114738328378093086?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1142840676793770582006-03-20T01:20:00.000-05:002006-03-20T02:45:15.596-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/7199/review0491dz.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Reflecting back, <I>Winter Passing</I> is easily the best film of 2006 so far. I can't recall exactly what the competition is, but that really only cements my point. It&#39;s an unsatisfying film, I won&#39;t argue about that. Not much really happens. A lot of plot threads and revelations are thrown out there to hang; the characters don't really pursue them so much as let themselves be informed by them. In any mainstream movie, 90 percent of the footage would have been left on the cutting room floor. The plot, about selling the old love letters between two famous authors, is simply a MacGuffin to shatter the stagnancy of these people's quiet and depressing lives.<br> We see the film through the eyes of Reese Holdin. She is vaguely aware that her mother, one of the aforementioned famous writers, has passed away recently. Lots of people ask her if she's okay. She snaps back "I'm fine" like it's a reflex. A stage actress, her current show is on the verge of closing. Her cat is dying of leukaemia. She uses a potent combination of alcohol, cigarettes, and cocaine to feed her numbness, then slams desk drawers on her palms in a struggle to feel something real. As circumstances slowly force her to confront the fact that there is literally nothing holding her to New York City, she takes the book publisher's money and hops on a bus home.<br> The man who answers the door introduces himself as simply Corbit, and nobody else calls him anything different. Reese's father Don &#151; the other famous writer &#151; walked down stairs one morning to find him asleep on the couch, and he's been living there ever since. A quiet and constrained man, he is a casual devotee to Christian rock and karate. When Reese introduces herself as the reclusive author&#39;s daughter, he asks to see a valid driver's license or passport.<br> The woman who cooks the food, does the laundry and generally enables Don&#39;s downward spiral is Shelley. A former student of Don&#39;s, he took her in during a personal crisis and they&#39;ve fulfilled a mutual need ever since. Reese treats her with unfair cruelty. To Reese&#39;s credit, Shelley treats her like a missing piece in the jigsaw puzzle that is her parent&#39;s life.<br> Don, now living in the decrepit garage, takes his daughter's self-destructive approach to life to fresh and devastating extremes. Had we not already met Corbit and Shelley, it would be all too easy to dismiss Don as merely a prolific writer who has stayed alive several decades too long and is working to rectify the situation. He is often impenetrable, and occasionally immobile &#151; there is a particularly pitiful scene at the dinner table where he becomes so paralysed by his depression that he no loses the will to even hold his fork.<br> In a character-driven movie, the performances need to be top rate &#151; and they are. As our protagonist, Reese is our emotional point-of-view. As a character, Reese does a lot of things that could turn an audience against her. When faced with her cat's disease, she opts to take the little creature by taxi to the Hudson River, pet her a few times, then zip her up in a duffel bag and throw her in to drown. It's a truly despicable act, but Zooey Deschanel&#39;s stand out performance forces us to feel pity for a girl too wounded by life to even cry. Later when Reese congratulates herself on giving Shelley a particularly vile verbal thrashing, Deschanel allows us to enjoy that Reese is smiling at all. And the scenes further on when she is finally allowed to open up and express herself, she knocks it out of the park. The pain in her voice and face when Reese confronts Don about her mother&#39;s death is heartbreaking; when Corbit&#39;s big moment arrives, her encouraging smile could melt icebergs.<br> For Will Ferrell, this film might be looked back upon as a turning point. He&#39;s played characters like Corbit before, but this is the first performance he has laced with real pain and uncertainty. Signature Ferrell scenes like one in which he verbally assaults one of Don&#39;s fans are enriched by the quieter scenes that no exaggerated body language or goofy expression could have gotten him through. Corbit is the first Ferrell creation deep enough and complex enough to believably exist in the real world. Ferrell is such an utterly unique personality that his possibilities as a dramatic actor are particularly exciting.<br> In a film where describing the characters as eccentric would be putting it mildly, Amelia Warner is admirable for resisting any quirks or tics to make Shelley stand out. Shelley never really becomes the dramatic focus, serving mostly as a point of conflict and conversation between Reese and Don. The character is never really fleshed out by the screenplay, so Warner's great feat is making us believe Shelley at her word.<br> As Don, Ed Harris crafts a character that is an antithesis to Bernard from <i>The Squid and the Whale</i>. Where Bernard is domineering, argumentative, it requires a good deal of effort to get Don to say anything at all. While Bernard left a trail of careless and unavoidable monuments to his own focused self-absorption, Don drops easy-to-miss little breadcrumbs that show exactly how much he cares. Reese provides plenty of arguments for Don being a Bernard. If he ever was, he used his decades of decline to learn something about life &#151; and people.<br> At the end of the film, we leave the characters almost exactly as we met them. But everything in between happens so achingly, so desperately, and so affectionately that I would gladly pay another nine bucks to walk another 98 minutes in these characters' shoes. On a scale this microscopic, small moments of connection carry the impact of moving mountains. A motley crew deeply troubled strangers heal each other in tiny but profound ways. Adam Rapp has created characters that, for all of their problems and failings, I grew to love and missed leaving. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0380817/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-114284067679377058?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1142650977362419672006-03-17T22:02:00.000-05:002006-03-17T22:02:57.376-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/980/review0487ph.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">I've wrote often about my adverse reaction to dark comedies in general. So imagine my surprise at just how enjoyable <I>Thank You for Smoking</I> truly was. A delight that my fellow audience members were equally vocal about on their way out the door.<br> The film follows Aaron Eckhart as Nick Naylor, a P.R. flack for Big Tobacco. He's good at spin. Really good. So good that when he goes on an Oprah-esque talk show about the dire consequences of smoking, he leaves shaking Cancer Boy's hand. The performance attracts the admiration of his higher-ups in the Tobacco industry (including a gruff J.K. Simmons and an utterly tweaked Robert Duvall) and the ire of the ultra-liberal Senator Finistirre from Vermont (cut-throat for William H. Macy).<br> His travels bring him in contact with horny reporters, flaked out Hollywood deal brokers, and a cancer-riddled Marlboro Man. Tagging for most of the journey is Naylor's young son, who admires everything about him &#161; even the less than admirable parts.<br> A big part of what makes this film stand out is its cheerful nonchalance about matters of utter moral depravity. It would have been easy to make a movie about a guilt-riddled Naylor or a Naylor that's a true and utter prick. Besides defending an industry that (as he proudly declares at one point) kills many multiples more than alcohol abuse and fire arms combined, Naylor's a pretty likable guy. He's a little <i>too</i> good looking, a little too slick to be taken seriously. But it's undeniable that he's good at what he does.<br> The movie doesn't hold back much in its scathing sarcasm of the tobacco industry, but it doesn't give the militant anti-smoking lobby a free pass either. The way Naylor outmanoeuvres his opponents (who on a personal level are far less likable than he is) is sometimes a marvel to behold. The screenplay by Jason Reitman mines the hypocrisy of both extremes for every ounce of humour. The diverse cast &#151; of which I have only sampled &#151; is uniformly effective, offering new surprises at every turn.<br> Unlike <I>The Weather Man</I>, <I>Thank You for Smoking</i> doesn't keep the audience at arm's length. The humour is crisp and inviting. The characters might not be nice, but they're at the very least not exasperating. And when Naylor finally turns a corner at the end, it's not the result of some broad transformation in political ideals. He simply examines his options and makes the right decision for him. I wish more satires could have this film's spark and desire to please. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0427944/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-114265097736241967?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1138679247852116252006-01-30T22:47:00.000-05:002006-01-30T22:47:27.866-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/1967/review0478hg.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">The locations and scenarios of Steven Soderbergh's <I>Bubble</I> feel like a world that I know. Specifically the world of <I>Bubble</I> is the world of Rust Belt America, and the hopeless monotony of their day-to-day lives stirred up many of my own memories of living in Rochester, not too far from whatever small Ohio town this story takes place in.<br> The characters range from a perfect snapshot of the people I knew from that world to utterly ridiculous concoctions whose reactions I can't imagine coming from any member of the human race. The interplay between Soderbergh's two impulses is highly unnerving; every time I began to identify, I was shocked by gross displays of apathy or tacit acceptance over revelations that deserve the loudest possible reaction.<br> This strange dichotomy surfaces in the filmmaking itself. There are no plot twists, no revelations. It is a straightforward mystery in which virtually no effort is made to conceal the culprit. Yet the story is almost entirely told in the facial reactions and the meaning between words. I can't recall a single forthright line of dialog in the entire film, yet the meaning was never less than clear. What surprises there are come from characters that brazenly defy and subdue whatever human impulses they might have. When those impulses do manage to bubble to the surface, the consequences are tragic.<br> The final shot sums up the film, and the dark dreary world that creates creatures like these. The cast is reportedly composed of local non-professionals, and despite the skilled performances over the course of the film, that shot made me believe it. As <i>Bubble</i> makes clear, the Rust Belt is more than just an economic region. It&#39;s a state of mind. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0454792/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113867924785211625?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1138173551758419992006-01-24T15:12:00.000-05:002006-01-25T02:19:11.833-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/3003/review0462hk.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Imagine Me & You</I> is the most enjoyable British rom-com in a while. It features likable characters, sharp and biting humour, a decent soundtrack, and lively pacing. It would be above-average standard fare except for two things: the obstacle between the two lovers is a likable, decent, funny man when it would be far easier if he weren't, and the two lovers themselves happen to both be women.<br> I'll jump back the fact that, yes, this is a <I>gay movie</I> in a second. First I must draw attention to the absolutely smartest decision the filmmakers have made: They actually used the song the film is named after in the film. On the reverence scale from the <I>American Pie</I> movies &#151; no use of the song or even a reference to it &#151; all the way up to <I>Pretty Woman</I> this film neatly slides into place at the latter. Almost everyone knows the song, and as the movie goes along it teases with traces of it from whistling passer-by and the like. At the climax it takes an utterly central role. Some may consider it an overbearing artistic footprint on the work, but I loved it.<br> Now back to the gay stuff. This is more <I>Notting Hill</I> than <I>Brokeback Mountain</I>, and the movie doesn't get dragged down by it. That it is stirs up the emotions it does is less because the affair is between two women and more because the movie makes the man that would be left in their wake, Heck, at least as sympathetic as they are. That being the case, I found my own emotions perfectly aligned Rachel, the bride. Heck deserves happiness, but so does she, and even if she stays will either of them be truly happy with the lie?<br> The home wrecker Luce (looking like Kiera Knightley will in a decade should she be very, very lucky) is no less likable or deserving of happiness than Heck. She lives with her mum, who is comforting and sympathetic but also depressed and unmotivated. She runs a flower shop where customers seem to perpetually arrive at exactly the wrong moment. She's not entirely sure she wants to break up Rachel and Heck either and so doesn't make a movie. Their relationship progresses through inference and subtext. You can undoubtedly guess how things resolve themselves, so I will only add that the movie raises the stakes higher and makes the costs higher than its brethren in the genre.<br> The true surprise is the dialog, which fires along like a Richard Curtis drive-by. If you like his scripts you'll feel comfortable here. If I had to pinpoint a key difference it'd be that Ol Parker is meaner, more shocking,1 and more unpredictable. Rachel's father Ned ("Buffy"'s Anthony Head) and Heck's licentious best friend Coop nearly steal the film. They are, as Henry Higgins would say, most original moralists. Even with the girl-on-girl twist, it's these two characters that elevate the movie from the sea of bland competitors.<br> When it comes right down to it, we have seen this same basic film plenty of times before. What makes me recommend this film so highly is it does those same old things in an exceptionally engaging way. There is a scene between Heck and his eight- or nine-year-old niece that would be a cutesy bit of role reversal. Here it works on a more truthful level. Were it not for a post credits scene that lets the movie off the hook too easily, it would have been an entirely satisfying experience. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421994/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113817355175841999?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1137737032469164552006-01-20T01:03:00.000-05:002006-01-20T01:03:52.496-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/1953/review0453wa.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Noah Baumbach's <I>The Squid and the Whale</I> is an odd little film. On one hand it openly mocks the artsy fartsy types that thumb their noses at anything mainstream. There is a great little moment where Bernard, Jeff Daniels&#39; character, declares that his ex-wife&#39;s new lover is a philistine. What is a philistine, the younger son, Frank, asks. Bernard explains that while he himself is someone &quot;who enjoys books and interesting movies,&quot; a philistine is someone who doesn&#39;t. Frank thinks it over for a minute, then decides that under his father's criteria he must be a philistine too. The movie is full of moments that deflate yuppie self-importance like that.<br> Yet at the same time, Baumbach revels in utilizing a stripped down version of Wes Anderson's quirky cinematic language. In many ways, this <i>is</I> an artsy-fartsy film. It's not impenetrable the way David Lynch's work &#151; which makes a brief cameo &#151; is; indeed, it's not even as frustrating as <i>Rushmore</i>, which Baumbach co-wrote. But the way it's shot, the way it's edited, even the rhythm of the dialog shuns our traditional mainstream expectations. Thinking it over, I can only conclude that in order to tell the story of New York City liberal-intellectuals, you need to speak their language.<br> If this film were a donut (or, since it's New York City, I suppose a bagel) the hollow empty centre would be Bernard. Jeff Daniels tackles the character with total dedication. From the first frame to the last, he never once betrays that there might be a worthwhile, caring human being under all of that pompous self-importance. The last scene he has with Anna Paquin's character Lili, for instance, is especially revolting when you consider he once played her father in 1996's <I>Fly Away Home</I>. But more about that later.<br> Bernard is the fading patriarch of the Berkman clan, one of the few surviving nuclear families in the two children's school. That changes when Bernard spots his wife Joan (Laura Linney, bringing everything I love and hate about her to the role) involved with another man. The affairs have, it seems, been ongoing for four years. The split tears the family apart, with each boy reacting in an entirely different way.<br> Frank, being the more perceptive and emotional aware of the two, turns to alcohol at home and masturbation in public. His older brother Walt is so desperately devoted to his vision of Bernard that he takes up many &#151; though importantly not all &#151; of his father's crucial failings.<br> The turmoil escalates to such an extent that I was convinced I was watching the darkly comic tale of how one man&#39;s unstoppable ego can destroy a family. Thankfully, events take a more hopeful turn. True, there is some perverse pleasure in watching Bernard and Walt get their come-uppance. The choreography of their downfall reminded me of the wonderfully constructed gags in <I>The Family Stone</I>, though without quite the depth or the density. But unlike contemptible movies like <I>The Weather Man</I>, Walt's misery serves a purpose. When the empty highbrow veneer he has so dutifully crafted is finally penetrated, the sensitive and honest soul underneath proves to be surprisingly winsome. The childhood memory he unearthed was something I could relate to. It put all of the earlier childhood misery into a context that made sense.<br> Walt&#39;s self-discovery in the final act put Bernard&#39;s lack of depth into an even sharper focus. When that revolting scene I mentioned earlier finally arrives, where it is strongly implied that Bernard is forcing himself sexually on college student Lili, Walt walks in on it. Still backed against the wall, Lili shares a glance with Walt that knows things Bernard will never understand. When we leave Bernard at the end, he is as narcissistic as he was when we met him. But I was okay with that, because Walt has been spared a similar fate.<br> <I>The Squid and the Whale</I> is too rooted in reality to have the surreal joy <I>The Royal Tenenbaums</I>. Bernard has most of Royal's wit but none of his charm, and his non-arc isn't as emotionally grabbing as Royal's turn-around and ultimate redemption. That other movie is without question the better experience; but this is the more honest of the two, with truths both painful and all too real. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0367089/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113773703246916455?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1136854309168341792006-01-09T19:51:00.000-05:002006-01-09T19:51:49.193-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/9546/review0449sf.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>The Family Stone</I> is a surprise not so much for what it is &#151; if you think the trailers hint at a <I>Meet the Parents</I> redux, plot-wise you're really not too far off &#151; but for how perfectly well it is what it is. Sarah Jessica Parker is an analogue for Ben Stiller to be sure, but while the Byrnes are a clan of utter farce, the Stone family is complex, believable, and honest. Meridith's offences thus struck far closer to home than those of a certain Focker, because I was more invested in the outcome on both sides.<br> There are plenty of times where I laughed at the chaos and tension, but plenty others where I didn't. One scene at the dinner table had me shifting in my seat I was so uncomfortable; I had already grown to care for all of the characters by that point, and the deep pain boiling just under the surface felt all too real to me. Perhaps the best screenplay of the year, the gags and the drama are cut from the same truthful cloth. Had the movie kept me a little more distant the culture clash may have been hysterical; instead, it sat me at that table and made me linger for a while, giving me no choice but to examine a divisive issue from an entirely new perspective.<br> The movie takes a similarly no nonsense approach with its characters. Meridith is the constricted conservative and the Stones are the lenient liberals. By refusing to approach either camp anything less than objectively, the film finds plenty to criticize and celebrate about each and every character. That none of them are without flaws makes it them that much easier to connect with. That the Stones (one in particular actually) help Meridith to strip away her rigid pretentiousness is no surprise. That the Meridith they unearth helps them strip away their own thinly veiling judgemental pretentiousness, forcing them to confront uncomfortable truths and help them face approaching tragedy is something of a revelation. We see the best and worst of all their natures.<br> Despite all of that, the humour remains threaded quite abundantly throughout, and it is almost certainly the sharpest and most intelligently-crafted humour of the year. When the punch lines do come, and in some cases pile up rather magnificently, its because the groundwork had already been laid well in advanced, doled out in natural little bits that never bog the film down. The materials builds throughout the movie, and then drops like dominoes, each revelation spotlighting the next until my sides hurt from so much laughing.<br> Diane Keaton's performance as the Stone matriarch is Oscar-worthy, the first performance of hers in a long time that reminded me that yes, this woman was Annie Hall. Dermot Mulroney's golden boy Everett reminds me why he's cast in so many romantic comedies. Sarah Jessica Parker, an actress I generally rather despise, turns in a unflinching performance worthy of admiration. Craig T. Nelson&#39;s patriarch is a humble and generally quiet figure that tries to hold the family together through trials expected and unexpected. Rachel McAdams plays the cruellest and most forthrightly judgemental, but she brought just enough vulnerability and insecurity to the role to win me over. Luke Wilson&#39;s promiscuous, waste particle pot-smoker is the only Stone not to judge Parker&#39;s character and the first one to get through. In smaller roles, the other actors use their limited screen time to make their presence felt. As the lone kid and the perpetual observer of the chaos all around her, Savannah Stehlin showcases better sheer listening than any performance in recent memory.<br> The movie I&#39;ve described should feel heavy-handed and self-important. But it&#39;s far too skilful and honest for that, especially the conclusion &#151; which is neither too abrupt nor too tidy. All my questions were answered and I left the theatre quiet but hopeful. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0356680/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113685430916834179?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1136319548798676112006-01-03T15:17:00.000-05:002006-01-03T15:19:08.836-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img312.imageshack.us/img312/971/review0395or.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Bee Season</I> explores the role religion and faith play in our daily lives perhaps better than any other film I have seen. Other films "get it" &#151; <I>In America</I> comes to mind as an example. But <I>Bee Season</I> is almost a dissertation.<br> The Naumann family is composed of four characters isolated by perceptions of the world that seem mutually exclusive. Saul, the patriarch, is a theology professor who has devoted years of his life to unlocking the secrets of the Kaballah. But he is arrogant and mundane, and will never find faith no matter how hard he tries. Miriam has been blessed with the gift of the divine; though Saul married a scientist he ended up with, unbeknownst to him, a closeted artist. But she is broken and quiet, and doomed to be marginalized. Though Aaron begins as the apple of his father's eye, he has neither his mother's gifts nor his father's ambition. Only after his father has casually spurned him does he begin to search for a life based in something deeper. The abandoned child story has become all too ordinary and yet this particular abandoned child is thoughtful and kind in the face of adversity; that must surely count for something.<br> And then there is Eliza. She was the abandoned child for the great sum of her short life while Saul focused on her brother's musical talents. For lesser children this would be disaster but in Eliza &#151; like Roald Dahl's Matilda and other great young heroines of the past &#151; it merely breeds independence. She sees the world through her mother's extraordinary eyes, but speaks with a confidence similar to her father's ever-present voice. But unlike him, she has the advantage of sharing things actually worth saying.<br> Her goals are the same small yet immense ones of any child stuck within a family in crisis: bridge the chasms that divide it and heal the wounds that have ravaged it. The spelling bee is her outlet, and the way she slowly grows in the process from the quiet girl desperate for attention from within the crack underneath her father's office door to someone that is brave and even courageous crept up on me in a rather startling yet decidedly natural way.<br> It is a coming-of-age tale cut from the best cloth. That this particular character is a child is almost beside the point. Many people face the quiet tyranny of an overbearing home life. Few have the courage to confront it at all, much less as constructively and sensitively as Eliza has.<br> And then there is the way religion weaves itself in and out of this picture. Throughout this movie, the feeling of something divine, mysterious and immense, peaking in from just out of sight is unshakable. Subliminal imagery like the stoplights in in an establishing shot take on an almost awe-inspiring power. When Miriam's big secret is finally revealed, the movie shows its audience literally what Saul is seeing. And yet somehow it also got me to feel what it meant to Miriam, and what she saw in it, as well. What limited experience I've had with religion and God has all been in such indistinct rumblings of beauty and emotion, so this movie rang true to me on a deep and fundamental level. Yet it also ventures into organized religions and the interplay between the deeper faith and the surface politics that tie into all of it. Finally there is of course Eliza's experience &#151; which is direct, enormous, and majestic.<br> I defy anyone to look at the world as anything less than quietly magical and tragically beautiful after experiencing this film. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387059/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113631954879867611?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1135320384631676902005-12-23T01:44:00.000-05:002005-12-23T01:47:01.323-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/4699/review0386tj.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">If you decide to go see <I>Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe</I> you will witness many marvels and wonders. And yet by the final frame, I had found no marvel greater than one little girl's ability to love so openly, freely, and selflessly. I've seen cuter and prettier little girls in movies, but Georgie Henley &#151; who's credited first and deserves to be &#151; towers above the lot of them. Watch her eyes the first time she steps through the wardrobe, and you'll see the wonder so many of us felt the first time we entered Narnia through the pages of a worn old library book. When real terror undercuts that fantasy, she grieves openly and with the fullness of her being. To love is to suffer loss, and one of the film's other great wonders is its steadfast refusal to shy away from consequences or suffering, or let its characters either.<br> When the Christ parallel reaches its inevitable climax, the movie forces us to watch &#151; and young Susan and Lucy too. They witness the brutality unflinchingly, taking solace in each other of all things, and then grieve over the body and repair some small shreds of dignity to this disfigured form. It won't do any good, they know, but the movie is smart enough to understand the meaning in it. These are children who were raised in an age of horrors, before MTV made genuine feeling passé. Every triumph and loss shines over them; investment in the characters is very nearly unavoidable.<br> The supporting cast is impeccable. James McAvoy captures the look and spirit of Mr. Tumnus perfectly. I've never heard a beaver talk, but if one did I have little doubt it'd sound like Ray Winstone. Tilda Swinton very nearly Barbara Kellerman as the White Witch in my head, and Kellerman has my childhood on her side. In fact one of the strengths of the movie is the visual interpretation of Narnia, which seemingly springs almost directly from my head. The movie is like a realization of my memory of the BBC miniseries, capturing all of the amplification and texture that my childhood imagination could muster and removing the tell-tale signs of reality that would trip me up today.<br> Most impressively, it's a fantasy film that remembers colour. The Lord of the Rings series and the last two Harry Potter movies exist largely in a world more grey and dismal than our own. Narnia, especially once the descendants of Adam and Eve rouse it, remembers that fantasy has the potential to be truly fantastic.<br> And then there is Liam Neeson as Aslan. He is not perfect &#151; the deep throaty rumble of my memory suits a lion far better than a soft Irish brogue, especially one as majestic as Aslan. It bothered me for a while, but then the power and sincerity of what Neeson did achieve took over and I was hooked. More Gandalf than Dumbledore, Aslan doesn't protect our leads from their own failings &#151; or relieve them of sorrow and despair. He does help them realize the potential within themselves for facing and overcoming them. While I would have liked a little greater sense of danger, the famous book declaration that “‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good” still applies. One of the great feats of the movie is that by the time He returns the characters have already decided to soldier on without Him, whatever the cost or outcome.<br> During the final battle, the brothers dive into battle while the sisters nurse the fallen lion's wounds and marvel at his resurrection. It is perhaps an inherently sexist statement, but I left the theatre with the firm belief that the girls were the more heroic.<br> Finally, I most commend the film for rousing one of the great classics in children's literature from those dusty shelves in the back of the library, and so accurately capturing its many facets. Now perhaps the lingering image of a glowing old lamppost in the middle of a snowy forest clearing won't be limited to the childhoods of the dwindling ranks of the eccentric and exceptionally resourceful variety. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0363771/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113532038463167690?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1134005626256171982005-12-07T20:31:00.000-05:002005-12-07T20:33:46.273-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/7912/review0374ut.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Rent</I> is like every other Chris Columbus movie I've ever seen. It is impossible to enjoy it without reservation, but the good outweighs the bad in the end. In case you've been living under a rock for the past decade, <I>Rent</I> is an update of Puccini's opera <I>La Boheme</I>. Paris's Latin Quarter become New York City's Alphabet City. The painter Marcello becomes the filmmaker Mark Cohen. The poet Rodolfo become the rocker Roger Davis. His object of affection is a stripper, not a seamstress, though still named Mimi. The flirtatious Musetta become the flirtatious Maureen. The philosopher Colline becomes the professor Collins. Tom Collins. Schaunard becomes Angel Dumott Schunard, a transvestite.<br> The soundtrack is amazing, brimming with with and invention. For many, myself included, the only exposure to this production had been through the Original Broadway Cast Recording. If you too are one of those people the first half of the film will be especially awkward as songs are rearranged and bits that were sung are now spoken, even though the words rhyme. It's an awkward mechanism, and makes segueing into song more difficult than if the whole thing hadn't been song. I was more enamoured of the visual creativity that went into translating a stage production into the three-dimensional universe that film is capable. Right from the get-go, I couldn't imagine seeing this production on the stage.<br> The movie finally connected emotionally with the first rendition of <I>La Vie Boheme</I>, my favourite song. It is a massive group performance with insane choreography sold by the complete and utter joy on each and every face as they bring it to life. This sequence alone was enough to hook me. So it make the tragedies that followed all the more powerful. I felt the pain in "I Should Tell You" and "Take Me Or Leave Me" even as I acknowledged how over the top they were. Love done right is supposed to be over the top. We tread back into familiar territory and then "Without You" hit with unexpected power and pain. It was the first time I got choked up in a movie theatre in long time, the height of film musical craft, with visuals that reinforce and deepen what I hearing. There are some startling contrasts to earlier visual moments and one bit of manipulative flourish that absolutely positively works. To say anything more would be to deprive of the experience. If you've already seen it, you know which one I'm talking about. With a set-up like that, the reprise of "I'll Cover You" would have struck home no matter what they did to it. "Goodbye Love" is equally magnificent, with a performance by Rosario Dawson that is piercing, and tragic, and transcendent. Adam Pascal does an equally amazing job on "Finale A"/"Your Eyes"; another scene where the emotion struck right in the chest.<br> Once "Finale B" finished, I wasn't ready for it to be over. It ties with <I>Revenge of the Sith</I> for the most dramatic turn-around of 2005. Viva La Vie Boheme! (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0294870/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113400562625617198?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1133861763806556542005-12-06T04:35:00.000-05:002005-12-06T04:36:06.203-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/1014/review0362zf.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Dick</I> tackles the Watergate scandal with the broad yet pointed humour that "The Simpsons" used to be known for. It is therefore not a surprise that one of the chief architects, G. Gordon Liddy, is played with an utterly hilarious moustache by the voice of Montgomery Burns. A casual understanding of the scandal will enhance the humour and make some of the peripheral punch lines hit home. If you've spent even as much time looking into Woodwood and Bernstein's investigation as I have, some of the key scenes fall apart &#151; even ignoring W. Mark Felt coming out as Deep Throat (which one can't fault the film for since it was made first) But it covers the bases nicely, bouncing earnestly from sight gags and drug humour to wicked satire to delightful character sketches.<br> It's the characters that make <I>Dick</I> work. We follow two fifteen-year-old girls who are dim and seem shallow but prove spirited and resourceful as they soon find themselves wrapped up completely within the unravelling Nixon White House, but we get to see wonderful little asides that they obviously miss. Many of the featured White House staffers appear in both <I>Dick</I> and <I>All the President's Men</I> played in wildly different fashion. But while that straighter take chose to capture the panic in their voices, <I>Dick</I> seems to capture the essence of people in such positions more clearly &#151; with liars and thieves whose calm confident voices say one thing while their wild and darting eyes say something completely different. Dan Hedaya's performance as the President is masterful: after <I>Dick</I> I understood both the qualities that attracted people to Nixon and the qualities that led to his downfall &#151; and how they were often the very same things.<br> Will Ferrell is better than average here, playing Woodward in the broad strokes one would expect from one of his performances but without the baggage of past successes. In fact, Ferrell is only one of the many guest shots from cult heroes. Dave Foley plays Bob Haldeman like the straight man in the most zany of sitcoms. Watching him as he is confronted with one colossal disaster after the next is a truly hilarious treat. Ana Gasteyer is also fun as Nixon's secretary whose loyalty to the president borders on obsession. Ted McGinley was a casting masterstroke as the operative placed to nail the mother of Michelle Williams's character. The fact that he's Ted McGinley tells us all we need to know about him. Ryan Reynolds pops up in an early role that perfectly sets him up for the huge disaster called <I>Just Friends</I> that was to come. Then there's French Stuart at the beginning as an news interviewer clearly patterned after Larry King. Casting French Stuart as essentially Larry King is a fairly good representation <I>Dick</I>'s approach to history.<br> If this movie were even a hair meaner, it would be a failure. It is not nearly enough for a comedy to make people laugh. It has to make people smile as well. What keeps this one afloat is a good-natured inspection of humanity at its sleaziest. Sure, the events didn't play out like this the first time around, but they might as well have. Watergate, when it comes down to it, is just a case of school children not willing to play fair &#151; played out upon a national stage. <I>Dick</I> remembers that, and mines all of the humour such an understanding entails. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144168/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113386176380655654?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1132630501070950072005-11-21T22:34:00.000-05:002005-11-21T22:35:01.090-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/5699/review0350hn.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire</I> is the forth film in the series based on J.K. Rowling's books, but the first to get it absolutely right. I enjoyed the first three films, and rated each highly. The first two had charm, and real human heart. The third was a visual sensation, and a generally wiser adaptation. <I>Goblet of Fire</I> is all of these things &#151; but where the first two were occasionally cloying this one is sincere, where the third was pragmatic and drab this one takes the necessary beats to marvel at its own invention and find flashes of vibrant colour in the most dark and foreboding of settings.<br> If <I>Prisoner of Azkaban</I> can be credited with turning Hogwarts into a cohesive world, than <I>Goblet of Fire</I> must surely be credited with turning Hogwarts into a cohesive community. Where before the trio essentially existed in isolation, with other characters popping up now and again to fulfil their given moment of exposition or plot, now everyone is everywhere. Snape barely says a word in this film, as an example, but he is seemingly always peering over Harry's shoulders. Ginny Weasley is Neville's dance partner, but she also fills Harry's slot when Ron and him have a falling-out, and alternatively consoles or admonishes her siblings with each moment of bruised ego. Harry helps and is helped by Cedric Diggory, the Hogwarts champion, who is dating Cho Chang; the same girl Harry has a crush on. The weaving of the subplots between each other helps unify the whole. It also saves time. When a character is needed for one, they can be recalled with a sort of shorthand because they have already been established in another capacity.<br> As an adaptation, this is also the best yet. More has probably been lost from this book than from any of the others. But I didn't feel than anything essential was missing, nor did I feel like the alterations rubbed against the grain. The first film would have been better off with the dragon left out and the potions challenge at the end left in. The second film would have been perfect if it has ended with them all leaving the Chamber. The third film would have highly benefited from making the connection between the Marauder's Map and its creator; and between Harry's Patronus and his dad. By contrast, <I>Goblet of Fire</I> trims plot instead of character. The emotions of the book came through with perfect clarity, so it was all too easy to forgive when the details didn't. I missed Dobby giving Harry the gillyweed, but I don't think his absence hurts the movie; indeed having Neville do it credibly threads the plotlines even tighter. The conspiracy behind the tournament is substantially streamlined, but then it's really enough just to know there's a conspiracy in the first place.<br> This condensation &#151; even of the big set pieces like the three tasks &#151; gives the characters room to breathe. When a strange new man with a fake eye and a fake leg hobbles into the room, it is Ron who rightly provides the exposition as to who the hell he is even though Hermione is the one with all of the books. Since Ron's dad and this stranger both have worked at the Ministry it makes more sense that he would know. When Harry and him get in a fight, it is mined for the humour inherent of the scene but without disregarding the pain felt when lasting friendships start to sour. Amos Diggory is recognized as a blustering fool, blind behind the abounding pride he holds for his son. But that doesn't make his aching sorrow any less searing at the end.<br> Michael Gambon fails again to fulfil the expectations for Dumbledore that Richard Harris created in embodying the headmaster in the first two films. But while I recognize that this isn't nearly the definitive take on the character, I admire the way it plays into the tale being crafted. Having Dumbledore nearly as mystified and confused as our title character makes the stakes all the higher as the film charges along toward its finale. He nails the physical presence Dumbledore should have if coming up just a hair short on the emotional presence. Still, in a lesser film this would be a showcase performance.<br> Our other returning players are as pitch-perfect as can be expected, and Brendan Gleason as Moody is a revelation. He's not a perfect reflection of my mental image of the character, but he captures exactly the manic and unpredictable energy and even menace that Moody has to possess. Afshan Azad and Shefali Chowdhury as the Patil twins makes the most of their small screen time, brilliantly realizing their utter disgust at dates that turn out to be entirely less than satisfactory. David Tennant as Barty Crouch the junior has eyes and a tongue that are more disturbing than perhaps anything else in the film. Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort doesn't bring all the menace I'd imbued in the character while reading the books, but neither does he let the film crumble into the anti-climactic. His Voldemort doesn't chew scenery like I might have desired; his menace is lethal, simple, and direct.<br> The younger returning cast is the biggest area of improvement. Rupert turns Ron from a series of elastic faces into a character with real bitterness and sorrow behind the humour. Emma as Hermione trades in girl power for fragile optimism, in a take that has never been so courageously emotionally exposed. Dan has banished any traces of stiffness from his portrayal of Harry, bouncing effortlessly from moments human to moments heroic. Among the secondary schoolchildren there are some genuine surprises as well. The Phelps twins finally got a handle on the mischievous essence of Fred and George last time around; this time they attack the characters with fearless swagger. Bonnie Wright as Ginny steps up to her expanded role with confident articulacy, slick dance moves, and a sense of comic-timing nearly that of the Phelpses. Finally, Matthew Lewis turns Neville Longbottom from a lovable loser into a character with real tragedy and true courage. They, along with newcomers Katie Leung and Clémence Poésy, provide much of the wild and uncontained joy of Newell's Hogwarts.<br> The fourth time is the charm for Steve Kloves, who finally turns in a screenplay I can enjoy without reservation. Mike Newell as director brings Harry Potter's world some much needed joy. Roger Pratt's cinematography is spot on, pitch perfect; bringing the colour, light, and composition from his <I>Chamber of Secrets</I> photography and marrying it with the evocative motion of Michael Seresin's work on <I>Prisoner of Azkaban</I>. All of these elements come together for a smooth and grandiose ride, heads and shoulders above its predecessors. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0330373/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113263050107095007?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1131416795787559882005-11-07T21:26:00.000-05:002005-11-07T21:26:35.790-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/1895/review0346sj.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">I desperately admired <i>Good Night, and Good Luck.</i> for its purpose and its conviction. The things the movie has to say are more relevant now than ever, and they desperately need saying. Murrow's time was dominated by a culture of fear driven by the threat of communism. Our time is dominated by a culture of fear driven by the threat of terrorism. The threat is the same, and all too real.<br> Secondary to the message is the craft. This film looks and feels like it was made in the era portrayed; indeed many of the key figures &#151; McCarthy chief among them &#151; are portrayed with actual footage from the era. The soundtrack, dominated by an onscreen studio singer, comments on the going goings-on much like the stage performances of Bob Fosse's film adaptation of <i>Cabaret</i>. The believability of this world is otherwise absolute.<br> Still, it is not a perfect film. Unlike the charismatic and emotionally gripping <i>All the President's Men</i>, this one engaged me almost solely on an intellectual level. Throughout too much of the film, the immediacy of the threat is kept at bay. At one point, the ridicule against one of the CBS journalists (Don Hollenbeck) accused of being a communist gets so bad he commits suicide. <i>Boy, now </i>that's <i>interesting!</i>, I thought to myself; but alas, the character gets only a handful of lines before he offs himself and only the most minimal exposure as to what he was up against.<br> The Robert Downey Jr./Patricia Clarkson subplot was undoubtedly aimed at humanizing the film, but this effort largely falls flat. They&#39;re likable enough, and sometimes the source of some cut understated humour. But I can&#39;t really relate to their situation and so my capacity to invest emotionally is limited.<br> At the end of the screening I attended, an elderly man seated in the row in front of me leaned over to his wife and complained, "It was a documentary." That it feels like one explains both the film's power and its shortcomings. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0433383/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113141679578755988?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1131416544398314642005-11-07T03:15:00.000-05:002005-11-07T21:22:24.410-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/7029/review0336ib.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Jarhead</I> is surprising not so much for its commentary as its lack of commentary. Neither a pro-war movie nor an anti-war movie, it would be more appropriately categorized as a barely-war movie. It takes a while to get to the Gulf War, and even once it does, the most we see of battles is the jet fighters blasting by overhead. There are a couple altercations with the enemy, but unlike <I>Midway</I> or <I>Saving Private Ryan</I> we get nothing for the history books &#151; or even for that matter, the nightly news.<br> This is just as well, because the film wouldn't stand out as a war movie. The lack of a clear political message or goal leaves it free to explore characters that embody the full spectrum of philosophies, temperaments, personalities, and ideas. Some characters, like Anthony Swofford &#151; also the man whose memoirs the film is adapted from &#151; want nothing more than to get out and go home. Others, like Fowler, Troy, and Staff Sgt. Sykes, live to be Marines. Neither viewpoint is elevated about the other; we spent enough time with these characters to judge them by other means.<br> Fowler, played by Evan Jones, is the typical stupid, blood-thirty war nut. But Troy and Sykes, Peter Sarsgaard and Jamie Foxx, are complicated and introspective. Swofford, soured on the military, is the one who nearly lowers himself to savage action. Troy, who lied about his criminal past he so wanted to join up, is the one who reigns him in. Sykes proves to be a true hard ass in some scenes, but in others he appears fatherly if not likable. He is the smartest kind of leader, one who takes the time to know his men well enough to understand their individual limits and how to use the others shore up weaknesses.<br> The presence of sex in the film dominates in many large and small ways. Much of the lingo is sexually-oriented. When they go to war, they are denied sex for long periods at a time. Their girlfriends and even wives back home stray and move on. After one scene, I came away not only never being able to view <I>The Deer Hunter</I> the same way again, but also understand through the myriad of sexual and emotional tensions that being a serviceman creates. It was at once amusing, heartbreaking, and enlightening.<br> Mendes's attention to the mundane little details is pitch-perfect. His more artistic flourishes are hit-and-miss. The way he uses the igniting of the oil wells to turn the stark desert into a hellish landscape is inspired. So too is the use of music to alternatively support and counter the mood of the action on screen. On the other hand, Swofford's hallucinations feel out of place in a movie so otherwise grounded in reality. The connections drawn with the war movies of the era of Vietnam felt forced and off.<br> Still, the total effect is something new and unique. At one point Troy declares, "Fuck politics. We're here. All the rest is bullshit." <I>Jarhead</I> captures the truth of that statement with illuminating clarity. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0418763/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113141654439831464?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1131079314403210052005-11-03T23:41:00.000-05:002005-11-03T23:41:54.416-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/676/review0323xg.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Never can I recall being so furious at a movie as I was near the climax of <I>Pieces of April</I>. It was right before April's disapproving family were about to go up to her apartment. Bobby, April's boyfriend, comes flying at the car, bloodied and beaten from a run in with Tyrone &#151; the new incarnation of April's drug-dealing ex-boyfriend Eddie. He goes up to send her down. They take off. Were I not in a public theatre, I would have screamed at the television. There are movies for disappointment and misunderstanding, but they need to be structured differently. Had this been the end of the story, I would have left the theatre betrayed. I still feel like the plot twist exploited the audience, but fortunately the movie finds its way to the right ending in the end.<br> April's dying mother Joy is in the bathroom when she hears another mother yelling at her young daughter, then watches as she storms out. The girl, in the stall, makes sorrowful eye contact with Joy before quietly pulling herself together and leaving the bathroom. It is a low-key moment, but it comes very close to justifying the plot point at the heart of my fury. Joy, having desperately disappointed April as April had so often disappointed her, the moment of eye contact with this total stranger finally allows her to relate to and connect with her black sheep offspring. So she and her pot-rolling son take off in the bitch seats of two other patrons' motorcycles. It is a moment typical of this movie &#151; where the quirky details for a change feel true, right, and natural instead of tacked on and deliberate.<br> The film begins with an April that is hopeless, lifeless, and aimless. It ends with an April that is optimistic, resourceful, and connected. The main reason having the family take off was such a big slap in the face was because we watched this girl over the time it takes a turkey to cook grow, change, and aspire for that which all parents and children should share. She had earned that happiness and the movie had crafted no obvious reasons to deny her that. I never watched "Dawson's Creek" and was underwhelmed by her performance in <I>Batman Begins</I>. But here she has a real likable vulnerability about her. It's a performance that is affecting with its openness.<br> When her previously unused stove turns out not to work at all, she scours the building looking for someone to lend her theirs. One couple she meets, Evette and Eugene, begin by laughing at her and end up rooting for her. Their world has a warmth and safety to it, recalling the feeling a child has when under the roof of his protective elders. They introduce her to the heart and soul of true Thanksgiving cooking, but soon need their stove back for their own Thanksgiving bird. Her back-up stove doesn't pan out when its owner, a vegan with a door plastered with bumper stickers for liberal causes, decides she wouldn't be able to stand the smell of flesh cooking. The bird's next home, in the apartment of a character representing Sean Hayes at his most unusual, only lasts an hour and costs fairly literally an arm and a leg. The dinner's saviour finally comes with an apartment of Chinese whose English is limited but whose generosity extends beyond cultural boundaries.<br> With each, the film recognizes the inherent humour but looks beyond to find the humanity. Like the population of a Wes Anderson film, all the characters seem half a notch off-kilter. But writer/director Peter Hedges is able to make the off-kilter relatable nearly effortlessly. Anderson's characters are caricatures. Hedges's are living and breathing human beings.<br> Yes April's sister was irritating, and yes the grandmother had nothing really to do. Bobby's storyline was probably a distraction, and that plot twist at the climax pissed me off. But once the film gets back on track, the final moments are captured poignantly through pitch-perfect music and the sheer emotion of April's brother's camera lens. Finally, with those few still frames, the film gives me the only thing I was really asking from it. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0311648/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113107931440321005?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1130802036569928092005-10-31T18:40:00.000-05:002005-10-31T18:42:36.876-05:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img492.imageshack.us/img492/5663/review0310ab.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants</I> has all of the trappings of a flick for the preadolescent girl. Indeed, it services that market well. Those trappings give the movie structure, but fortunately for all of us, they do not give the film its soul.<br> Rarely have I seen a movie that so unabashedly celebrates the beauty of the human spirit, or the wonder of the world in which we all reside. It is not afraid of the darker side of the world either. In being compatible with the twelve-year-old psyche, it never peers too far down the dark alleys of our world, but there is a clear recognition that few of us really live in the sunlight world the Lizzie Maguires seem perpetually graced to inhabit. The supporting characters, like the video gamer at the local 7-11 type shop or the woman who inhabits the truth behind Wal*Mart's P.R. campaign, force us to stare at world that is cruel and unfair and seemingly dead end.<br> Then it does something truly amazing. It shines its light on these dismal prospects and unveils the extraordinary behind them. In doing so, the people aren't changed. Their threads and futures are much the same as they would have been had the movie never paid them much mind. The only thing that changes is our perception of them. There is love, there is loss, there is misery, heartache, and disappointment. The four girls experience all of these things and so do we, right in the stomach. But above all, the four girls experience hope. Things are no more perfect at the end of the film than at the beginning, but the people who must deal with the imperfection are more equipped to do so. This is a coming of age film in the most essential and central way.<br> It was not long ago that I reviewed <I>The Weather Man</I>, starring Nicholas Cage. Things were no worse in his life than these four girls'. And yet that movie preached that despair and disappointment and insurmountable, that love and hope are lost causes. The filmmakers of that movie need to meet a young girl named Bailey, who at twelve years of age already knew more about this world and humanity than all of them put together.<br> Nicholas Cage's character in that film needs to meet Bradley Whitford's in this one, whose failures as a father are far more damning and yet who learns over the course of a phone call that small fundamental gestures are far more powerful than grand empty ones.<br> Michael Caine's character in that film needs to meet Amber Tamblyn's in this film, and realize that to understand capture the world around you is not enough. At some point, you need to let go of your judgements and discover the beauty of imperfection and intent.<br> I can recall a few times when the Sisterhood made me cry. Tibby and Carmen's storylines are beautiful, and tragic, and pure. They pierce at the heart of what it is to love, to expose yourself and invest in another human being to such an extent that losing them can destroy everything about you. Bridget and Lena's are more pedestrian, and yet in their characters I found certain understated truths. In my review of the <I>The Weather Man</I>, I noted that "I do know that I look to cinema to show me something new, to inspire me or entertain me or challenge me." That film, for all of its artistry, provided me none of those things. And yet a movie about a pair of pants made me laugh, made my cry, made me smile, and made me think. <I>The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants</I> made me reconsider how I view the world, and that is cinema at the very peak of its power. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-2" width="12" height="12">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0403508/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113080203656992809?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1130485918569816932005-10-28T03:51:00.000-04:002005-10-28T03:51:58.586-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img464.imageshack.us/img464/8896/review0302pe.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">In Michael Caine, <I>The Weather Man</I> has one of the year's great performances. The cinematography is wonderful, the overall craft virtually impeccable. And yet the film ranks among the bottom of my list. Why? Because when I left the theatre, I didn't come away with anything more than I went in with. It's a lot of talent and artistry towards no true end. They're a bunch of likeable interesting losers, yes, but losers none-the-less. <I>The Weather Man</I> is <I>Broadcast News</I> from William Hurt's perspective. The flash is there, but there's no urge or real desire to go any deeper.<br> The film reminds me of another piece of Oscar bait. <I>About Schmidt</I> also had an interesting script with big name actors doing challenging things. This film is funnier and truer than than that one, but the journey &#151; or lack there of &#151; is essentially the same. Even when Cage's character is trying to be deep, he focuses on the surface issues: he didn't get his father the newspaper, people will think his eulogy was shallow and sucked. He wonders why everyone is so unhappy but makes no real headway into resolving it. Two moments truly affected me: when he broke down in tears in the passenger's seat of his fathers car, and when he kicked the shit out of the man who was making moves on his son. They were the two scenes of advancement and truth, the only whiffs of where a better movie would have gone.<br> There is a very strong argument to be made that this was the only reasonable path that these characters could have taken. I accept that, to the extent that it's true. I'm not asking for him to become father-of-the-year, I'm just asking that he show some signs of growing from the previous scene in the movie.<br> Or maybe, like so many dark comedies, I just don't get it. I do know that I look to cinema to show me something new, to inspire me or entertain me or challenge me. This movie did known of those things. It simply spread a blanket of isolation, loneliness, and despair in a world that already has too much of each. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0384680/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113048591856981693?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1130221623244033962005-10-25T02:26:00.000-04:002005-10-25T02:27:03.253-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img498.imageshack.us/img498/9555/review0293yj.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Nine Lives</I> is the sort of movie I don't have much experience with. There is no traditional unifying narrative structure. There are only nine real shots. And for the duration of each shot, we are stuck with these people whether we want to be or not. There's something unflinching about that. As the time builds, so does the tension. We are trained to expect cuts every couple of frames these days; by the time minute six rolls around there is a connection to place and time that is concrete and absorbing.<br> A large part of its power is derived from this novelty. Some of the scenes engaged me much stronger than others, and when I wasn't involved with the drama I used the time to admire the craft. By the time I'd gotten my head around the flow and form of the film, it ventured into places surprising and exciting. The first scene creates a feeling of repressive, overbearing reality. The last scene is a delight of barely disguised abstract and whimsy. The seven sandwiched in the middle thread between the two philosophies, creating seemingly impossible connections and raising serious questions of how the world relates to itself, both literally and thematically.<br> It is ostensibly a film about seven woman and seven relationships. My experience was that some lingered with me more than others. Elpidia Carrillo sticks because the scene gives us little else to cling to. I recognized the skill in crafting the cohesive transformation from humble mopper to arrogant rabble-rouser. But it failed to engage me on a personal level. Contrast that to Robin Wright Penn, where the slightest shift in facial expression changes the whole feeling of the scene. Carrillo was working against a void, and in contrast Penn and a hauntingly understated Jason Isaacs share a familiarity that is rather claustrophobic. Every turn, every moment &#151; even the funny ones &#151; carried a feeling of unease.<br> Then there's Lisa Gay Hamilton, with the performance of the film. Though her character shares the bulk of the screen time with Sydney Tamiia Poitier's character, the latter's role is so reactionary that Hamilton has full reign. There is something so fragmented, unhinged, and fatally wounded about the performance that nearly knocked my breath away. From moment to moment, her actions are completely unpredictable and yet never less than believable. The character is a prime candidate for scenery chewing, but Hamilton internalizes the drama to such an extent that each outburst pierces to the core.<br> I could spend two hours watching Holly Hunter pick at her toe nails and come away better for the experience. But what she and Stephen Dillane achieve here is something rather than extraordinary. The scene utilizes the vulnerability inherent in Hunt's film persona and radicalizes it. She is open and optimistic, and so the most open to disappointment. Dillane is the antithesis of all of these things. From the very first moment, I understood why they were together. They're banter was vibrant, a much needed respite from the heavy drama that had preceded it. But like Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton in <i>Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?</I>, the vitrol that quickly accumulates underneath the dialog undermines much of the appreciation. The arcs of the two couples will run parallel, without quite the over-the-top theatrics of that celebrated 1966 affair.<br> Amanda Seyfried's Samantha in the next story is perhaps the most relentlessly watchable character of the film. As she bounces back and forth between the dominant personalities of each parent, I found myself totally drawn into each shift in body language and every slightest facial expression. I found myself regarding this passive personality, and watching the way the camera regarded her. I can't remember a word of dialog from this scene, but I remember every slightest twitch.<br> The Lorna scene isn't driven so much by Amy Brenneman's perfectly acceptable performance so much as by a narrative thrust that offers some exciting new twist with each new encounter. It consistently surprised me, and entered places that I couldn't have expected going in. A true delight.<br> "Ruth" shifts the focus to the depressed and disappointed mother from two sketches back. In the time it took me to make the connection, I had already shifted my allegiance to the Other Man &#151; in this case, Aidan Quinn. The details of their affair are utterly mundane. Yet the perspective of the Quinn character is utterly unique. He takes one look at the ordinary and in a simple turn of phrase unearths the extraordinary.<br> "Camille" gives Kathy Baker and outlet to just bat for the fences. But it's her straight man, Joe Mantegna (brilliant in almost anything), that imbues her ravings with depth. Despite her behavior throughout, there is never a doubt that the bond between them is concrete. Something that could have been merely amusing becomes one of the most poignant experiences in the movie.<br> Finally, "Maggie" ties everything thematically to a close. The rapport between Glenn Close and Dakota Fanning is natural and true. Before we even know how they relate, we realize that the presence of this child is what makes Maggie complete. It isn't hammered into the audience. It is enough simply to observe them, and everything makes sense. That's all it takes to drive Maggie home.<br> I cannot say whether <I>Nine Lives</I> would have been so effective had the novelty of it not felt so original and fresh. The fact is, it <i>did</i> feel original and fresh. I left the cinema with a greater appreciation of film and the ideas that it captures. It is a film with a thorough understanding of what it means to only connect. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0420015/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-113022162324403396?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1129785760366469212005-10-20T01:22:00.000-04:002005-10-20T01:22:40.376-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/2690/review0288or.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Ghostbusters II</I> is the kind of sequel that was the norm in the era before the franchise. The first film wasn't designed for sequels; it was a funny, well-constructed, stand-alone film. But the characters connected with the American public. The key players got back together and threw together this entertaining second go around.<br> The premise is basically that all of the good that was shown at the end of the first film has been undone by the beginning of this one. Banned from fighting ghosts, Ray Stanz and Winston Zeddemore resort to entertaining at kids' birthday parties &#151; a disappointment to the generation raised on He-Man. Peter Venkman is the host of a show on the supernatural produced by the local NBC affiliate. He appears, if anything, less interested in his guests than his audience. Egon Spengler is doing behavioural testing in a lab. Stanz runs a bookstore on the occult. Dana Barrett left Venkman, got married, had a kid, then got divorced.<br> Much like the cast of a long-running television show, this time out these guys know their characters inside-and-out. The performances are so fluid and comfortable that the ghostbusting is almost beside the point. Murray, in particular, is on top form here. He brings fierce intelligence, timing, and wit to a character that is a loser who stands out mainly because Egon and Ray are the benchmark. By throwing the baby in as an obstacle between him and Dana, the sexual tension is able to flourish, with an undercurrent that energizes the entire flick. I'm not sure anything can top Rick Moranis's performance in the original, but his re-introduction in an early courtroom scene here had me on the floor in a way no comedy in recent memory has been able to muster.<br> What problems are there are a natural result of the original so effectively drawing its story to a close. Rebooting all of the character relationships allows more of the same character dynamics so loved in the first film. But it also meant that the characters themselves are fairly stagnant. There's no particularly new territory entered here, unless you count a romantic subplot between Louis and Annie Potts's definitive secretary Janine. The results are satisfying but neither enriching nor enterprising. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097428/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112978576036646921?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1129594652107084282005-10-17T20:22:00.000-04:002005-10-17T20:22:11.880-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img414.imageshack.us/img414/7614/review0274tv.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>A History of Violence</I> spends the first half of its running time introducing us to Tom Stall, and the second half introducing us to Joey Cusack. Like the two men, the two halves of the film are indivisible. Like the two men, the whole is disturbingly less than the sum of its parts.<br> The first half of the movie establishes itself within the life of Tom Stall, owner and operator of a small diner in the rural town of Millbrook, Indiana. The early scenes, concerning themselves as they do with the minutia of small town life, seem to play out in almost real time. I liked that. I liked even more than the concerns of these people were the concerns of everyone; mundane things like buying a new pair of shoes. Still, there is something wrong &#151; something disturbingly off just under the surface. Stall is an involved father and husband, a pillar of the community. But he is bland, almost calculatedly so. The sex scene was one of the most disturbing scenes in the movie. He brings as much energy and spark to the table as he would to butter a slice of bread. When something happens, we see the concept of it drift over Stall, taking route ever so slowly. Behind his eyes there is nothing; an emptiness where the human soul should be.<br> But then violence ensues. Two men with a corrupt agenda &#151; what or for who is never explained; the movie is content to just have its McGuffin without probing too thoroughly &#151; threaten the wrong rural diner. In the flash on an instant they are dead in a most barbaric way, the flash of violence poring out of Stall's tall worn frame. The town and the media declare him a hero. In his own bland quiet way, he's not so sure. New visitors to the diner hold the key to what makes him so good at killing people. The persona of Tom stall begins to chip and crack. The visage of Joey Cusack is slowly unveiled in fits and starts of true ugliness, an effect that begins stir up the truth under the empty facade of Tom Stall's world.<br> When Joey Cusack takes front and centre stage, he is hardly more engaging than Stall. True, the blandness is gone. It's difficult to be a bland one-man killing machine. But there's that same stillness, that same reluctance that showcases that key parts of being human have utterly and completely been driven out of this man. We hear stories of the artful slaughter that young Joey would unleash. We see moments of primitive savagery. These are what makes him an effective killer, and what draws Mrs. Stall into a moment of sexual release when she should be fleeing from this betrayer.<br> Above all else, though, Joey wants to preserve as much of Tom Stall as he can. He proves in several instances that he is willing to kill gruesomely and indiscriminately to do so. I kept waiting for some greater truth, some greater epiphany. Some sign that our protagonist, if you can call him that, had changed or grown by the experience. Such a scene never came. He returns to the Stall home, presumably having pieced back together Tom or an approximation of him, and takes his seat at the dinner table. The other members of the family resume their facade roughly where they left off, a scene of intended tragedy and darkness. It is an appropriate enough ending, but it lacks any true struggle from which to be earned. Much like the endings of <I>About Schmidt</I> and <I>Mystic River</I>, I found myself isolated and uninvolved. I find it impossible to sympathize with characters who understand their problem and refuse to make any effort to resolve it.<br> <I>A History of Violence</I> is a beautifully-shot, well-acted, expertly-structured piece of cinema. But like Tom Stall, it fails to satisfy, because it only takes one glimpse at its soul to realize there's nothing there. There are twinges of humanity, but they were quelled by in a manner that betrays the characters to forward a theme. It's an admirable achievement in many ways but lacks the substance necessary to be anything better. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399146/">Research more</a></span></div></div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112959465210708428?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1128155144643970392005-10-01T04:25:00.000-04:002005-10-01T04:25:44.653-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/6163/review0262kx.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">About a half hour into <I>Groundhog Day</I>, Bill Murray's weatherman has finally come to terms with a world in which time doesn't keep on ticking. "What would you do if you were stuck in one place and every day was exactly the same and nothing you did mattered?," he asks. Sure, it serves as a plot summary, but it also penetrates the heart of the movie's power. I certainly had a point in my life where that seemed to be the case, and I bet almost everyone else has too.<br> The remainder of the movie is spent with Murray exploring all of the avenues walked by men who face a hopeless future. He throws caution to the wind and fulfils all of the fantasies of men who have nothing to lose and therefore nothing to fear. He attacks the world and exploits it. He desperately works to defy the preordained script any way he can. As his affection for his producer cohort grows, he tries manipulating her into loving him. No matter how well he perfects the ruse, his efforts bear no fruit.<br> Reaching finally an ultimate point of desperation, he tries suicide, but even that is denied to him. No matter the method of death, the same bed on the same morning of the same day is there to greet him. Trying a different tactic, he finds a way to explain his situation to said producer and convince her of its truth. This works better, but it still leaves him stuck among stagnant waters.<br> Slowly, as he becomes adept at utilizing the rules of eternity, he makes forward progress against all odds. Even in a world that never changes nor grows, he discovers his own potential for betterment. He learns the people and places of that world and works out a short hand such that by the end of each day they know him like he knows them. He becomes a man of many talents, a man of accustomed to many points of view.<br> Over a decade later, it's hard to appreciate the film outside of the legacy of its own success. The basic plotline has been recycled many times since, but none of the knockoffs come close to capturing the depths of the original&#39;s sorrow and joy, nor do they feature a protagonist with the wit and complexity showcased by Murray's performance. It is undoubtedly for me the most true performance of his career &#151; the bridge between Peter Venkman and Bob Harris, Phil the weatherman highlights the truthful parts of each and places them within a greater canvas and a more believable whole. More than any other picture I can think of, this picture rests on the shoulders of its lead and he pulls surprises out of his hat that we hadn't seen before and likely won't see again.<br> Simply put, this is fantasy utilized to its fullest, most human potential. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107048/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112815514464397039?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1128065572739988022005-09-30T03:30:00.000-04:002005-09-30T03:32:52.750-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img345.imageshack.us/img345/3180/review0259ym.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Captain Malcolm Reynolds first became wounded and incomplete at a place called Serenity. A show called "Firefly" spent its very first moments bringing the exact moment of defeat to life in potent fashion. The series then paired him with eight other incomplete souls and became immersed in their collective journey through the black as they slowly filled in the emptiness with each other. The last episode, "Objects in Space", ended the series optimistically; leaving us on a final note with all the characters engaging simple, mundane moments of beautiful connection.<br> <I>Serenity</I> (the movie) picks up with the same people more fractured and miserable than we'd seen them at any point in the show. Book and Inara, the two civilizing influences on Mal, have either chosen to leave or been driven away. The limited work available to a crew harbouring wanted fugitives in the face of an ever-expanding central government has left them so destitute they can barely keep the ship in the sky. Tensions are running at an all time high, and Mal's nobility and compassion have sunk to an all time low.<br> There was a lot of darkness peering in from the edges of "Firefly", and it all comes to the fore here. The show was focused on Mal and River learning to compensate for their emotional and spiritual wounds. Movies have no time for such progression, of course, so <I>Serenity</I> places them on the brink of ruination and forces them to either confront their pain or be consumed by it. As their internal journeys progress, the progress is reflected by the attitudes and actions of everyone around them.<br> The universe &#151; a stew of ingredients from traditional China, the American frontier, and <I>Star Wars</I> &#151; strikes a balance that is never less than seamless and true, wisely forgoing the jokey conceits that would occasionally mar the series. The film's plot takes elements of <I>The Fugitive</I> and <I>Dawn of the Dead</I> and ties them together with a classic science fiction concept rooted in the most central theme of the Western genre: civilization versus nature.<br> The result is an immersive stand-alone experience that provides pleasures and surprises entirely different and separate from the series. From the surreal and duplicitous opening all the way through the horror-movie climax, this doesn't feel anything like television. It means that newcomers can watch the film without feeling like they're walking in after intermission. But it also means that as a fan I felt like a visitor among people and places that once felt like home. The ship was rusted brown on the show, and felt welcoming. Now it is composed of metallic blues and greys that seem at once cold and hard.<br> The rhythm of the show was focused on inhabiting the ship and letting its environs expand outward into the black. For the majority of the running time, the rhythm of the movie focuses on inhabiting the black and letting it increasingly press inward on the ship from all sides. As the tension builds, the noose gets tighter. It was only once the outer pressures are finally confronted and &#151; after surprising consequence and real loss &#151; overcome that the space and rhythms of the show flooded back in and I felt, finally, like I was home.<br> <I>Serenity</I> is a rewarding journey and a marvellous reintroduction to characters that I love. Hopefully the sequel, if there is one, won't take so long to immerse the audience in its world. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379786/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112806557273998802?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127540268967108232005-09-24T01:34:00.000-04:002005-09-24T01:39:09.066-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/5060/review0242fb.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">About ten minutes into <I>Corpse Bride</I>, I was ready to dismiss it as another example of textbook Tim Burton style and aesthetic over substance&nbsp;&#151; and even more disappointingly, the style of this is less thrilling and engaging than that of its predecessor, 1993's <I>The Nightmare Before Christmas</I>.<br> Walking out, I more fully understood the depth of Burton's evolution. He is so adept at wielding fantastic and curious style and slightly ominous whimsy that these elements no longer need to be the focus nor the point. The setting captures what I was maybe hoping for in <I>The Brothers Grimm</I> with the such curious reversals as a monochromatic world of the living sketched over a vibrant underworld of passion and lust. The Corpse Bride herself draws the eye to her tarnished beauty at any given moment because she alone among our leads has colour in her cheeks. (Never mind that they are blue...)<br> Still, the sheer invention on display here doesn't command a fraction of what <I>Nightmare</I> unleashed upon the screen. That was a whirlwind, a carnival, throwing fantastic things at the audience without ever truly pausing to catch its breath. Danny Elfman's songs here are a distraction instead of a centrepiece. It isn't <I>Nightmare</I>, and thankfully it doesn't try to be.<br> Because somewhere between 1993 and 2005, Tim Burton became a true storyteller. Not as much needs to be on the screen when the characters carry the burden instead of the set pieces. This film realizes finally the potential of <I>Big Fish</I>. After a impressive career of memorable theatrics, Tim Burton has finally made me care.<br> The entire plot revolves around a classic love triangle in the most undisguised of terms. I am ready to be tired of the plot device, and yet this story (based on a Russian folktale) utilizes it to its fullest and most honest potential. Unusually, the groom, his living fiancée, and his not-so-living bride are all fundamentally decent beings. Which pairing I rooted for at any given moment depended entirely on the revelations that had come immediately before. We spend the most time with Victor and his late espoused Emily, so they are each allowed a greater share of the flaws and indecision. But once the time had come for a final decision to be made, my heart went out equally to all three. It seemed that there was no solution that would not leave a character I empathised with disappointed and alone.<br> The actual solution is the film's greatest hat trick of all. For the first time, Burton transcends his trademark haunted immature affection of death for a moment of graceful awe that approaches the truly divine. I wish more fairy tale adaptations would capture both the focused simplicity of narrative and the undiluted integrity of storytelling on display here. In its own unassuming way, <I>Corpse Bride</I> has mined the secrets behind Walt Disney's early magic and repackaged the effect for modern audiences. An utterly involving confection. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0121164/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112754026896710823?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127188774056010752005-09-19T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-20T01:53:42.420-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/4662/review0238co.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>The Constant Gardener</I> is one of those wonderful films that takes on a global conflict and presents it on the smallest, most delicately personal scale. I have seen few films that present real life human crises so powerfully &#151; and yet in spite of (or perhaps the reason for) this is that it never makes an attempt to preach.<br> Much of the film revolves on an impassioned and enigmatic woman named Tessa who kisses the title character good bye and then promptly turns up dead on the continent of destination. The man left behind, Justin Quayle, relives her time with her as he slowly unravels exactly who she was. A mid-level diplomat with limited opportunity for advancement, Quayle meets her when she hijacks his presentation with an impromptu rallying cry against the current war in Iraq. The movie never reveals its own opinion on that matter, only that the spirit behind it is a major factor in Quayle's attraction to her.<br> Trailers for the film made it appear to be about Africa. This reputation comes from the film&#39;s painting its setting with unflinching realism. But Africa is important to the movie only because of its interaction with the characters. Africa moves Tessa to action. Justin loves Tessa. His love for her ultimately moves him to action as well. Though an interesting political thriller plays out on the edges of the stage, the film never looses focus on its themes of love, passion, and connection. Tessa's death propels a meek man into political action, yes. But more importantly it allows him to connect with his wife in a way that they never could in life.<br> Each successive wave makes us re-evaluate their marriage. One moment I'm certain that she's just using him as a key to the people and places that matter for her cause. The next moment I'm certain that nothing else in that world was so right and pure. Indeed, the only character that's never put under the microscope is Tessa's cousin Ham. It is his purity of emotion if not intention towards his relative and as a result his relative's husband. Since he is the only honest character, it is only through his correspondence with Tessa that we get an honest look at what she really felt.<br>As Justin wades through the human impact of the crisis in Africa to piece together the truth, my faith in humanity is alternately shaken and reaffirmed. As a political thriller, this is one of the most cynical movies I've ever seen. As a romance, it is one of the most optimistic and uplifting I've ever seen. In a world as dark as this one, the fact that true love can not only survive murder but transcend it is a particularly beautiful thing. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387131/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112718877405601075?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127418839635679502005-08-14T15:52:00.000-04:002005-09-22T15:53:59.636-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/3599/review0216dt.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126"><I>Four Brothers</I> is not the type of film I should have liked. I have problems relating to the urban/"street" culture to begin with, and I hate brainless shoot-em-ups. So the proposition of a brainless urban shoot-em-up didn't exactly fill me with anticipation. Yet slowly but surely the film grabbed my attention. By the time I'd made it through the early scenes of overly forced camaraderie and fell into the beat of the rather hit-or-miss banter, the film had me fully engaged for the duration.<br> This film isn't shy about its influences. There's a shot in the film's climax that serves as a staggering parallel of Omar Sharif's entrance in <I>Lawrence of Arabia</I>. A dozen other film critics have noted that it's inspired by the 1965 John Wayne western, <i>The Sons of Katie Elder</i>. I haven't seen that film, but a Google search for its plot summary revealed almost exactly the same plot. Its roots as a Western validate the use of such a larger-than-life introduction, and begin to justify a body count that surely wouldn't go un-investigated by the rules of the real world. In many ways, these boys are also on the only marginally civilized frontier.<br> Placing it within a Western genre framework also makes it far easier for me to get my bearings in such an alien environment. These four brothers are motivated by the same things that have motivated cowboys since Westerns started being put to film. Mark Wahlberg plays Bobby, a character that exists perpetually upon the uncivilized edge. Andre Benjamin (of Outcast fame) plays Jeremiah, the one who went straight and settled-down; the voice of caution and responsibility. Garrett Hedlund as Jack (the youngest) tags along, spewing exposition and generally being the likable target of everyone's jokes. All three serve their roles admirably, but being archetypal characters they are limited in their ability to truly expand into three dimensions.<br> The last brother is Angel, played by Tyrese. His introduction didn't lead me to expect much: at first glance, he is the very image of the urban black stereotype, right down to the Latino girlfriend that he ignores and oppresses in alternating doses. I expected him to fall into line with Bobby, but no &#151; he has methods and motivations of his own. The way he investigates the troubling events swirling around the four of them, and the care he takes in accounting for and containing the others' colourful reactions to what he discovers is one of the film's small pleasures. It is a roles of some depth on a canvas otherwise painted with broad strokes.<br> <I>Four Brothers</I> is a schizophrenic experience, but that's a large part of how it surprises. The action set pieces are outrageous to the point of absurd, like an icy car chase through the street of Detroit during which Bobby exclaims every &quot;gritty&quot; urban catch phrase he can possibly invent. The family scenes can become so cloying that the mood shifts from touching to laughable. The villain of the piece enforces humiliation so cruel and inventive that the Joker would be put to shame. And yet at the centre of the film are four characters that I couldn't help but invest myself in, and whose outcome I couldn&#39;t stop myself from caring about. That, to me, is the mark of skilful storytelling. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0430105/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112741883963567950?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127420392567471342005-08-14T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-22T16:19:52.593-04:00<img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/425/thefilm7qd.gif" width="64" height="15"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/1574/review022a9hu.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="One of the scenes that now reminds me of the live-action &quot;Tick&quot;"><br> <I>Mystery Men</I> sported some of the biggest up-and-comers of 1999. Of them, only Ben Stiller and Greg Kinnear have gained success &#151; and only Stiller has achieved true stardom. Kel Mitchell, of <i>Good Burger</I> fame has since faded into oblivion. Hank Azaria is still looking for his big break, and the rest are floating some where around the C-list. Still, the energy and possibility of that time right before the bubble burst still carries through in this enterprise, which mixes the younger comedy club with veterans like William H. Macy (who hilariously spoofs his own nice guy persona) and Geoffrey Rush (whose Casanova Frankenstein anticipates Barbossa in 2003's surprise hit <I>Pirates of the Caribbean</I>).<br> The film tries to replicate <I>Men in Black</I>'s success with an indie comic source to varying degrees of success. The low-tech nature of the underdog protagonists is countered by a city with architecture of such sheer excessive and over-the-top grandiosity that the <I>Batman</I> movies are put to shame. Looking back six years later, it's pretty much the live-action <i>Tick</I> series with an actual budget behind it. There are definitely some lazy patches in the middle, but it features a shocking plot twist that is more hilarious than perhaps any I've ever seen. That, matched with it's likable characters, is enough of a reason to seek it out.<br> <img border="0" src="http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/3716/review022b9pw.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="The full team assembled and ready to roll."><br><br><img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5172/thevideo2qw.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/4223/review022c1gn.jpg" hspace="2" alt="The cityscapes in this film are astounding" width="421" height="238"><br> An excellent transfer for its time, <i>Mystery Men</i> never-the-less shows its age a little bit. On the plus side, the anamorphic widescreen picture is generally clear with strong detail, vibrant colours, and very little edge enhancement. Blacks are actually black, and flesh tones are right on target. The downside comes from outmoded compression; shimmering, mosquito noise, and occasional pixelization rear their ugly head from time to time. Grain can also become intrusive on occasion.<br><br><img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/3549/theaudio4mo.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/6286/review022d3sm.jpg" hspace="2" alt="An example of how vibrant and colorful this film can be at times." width="421" height="238"><br> The Dolby Digital track is surprisingly interesting, with more use of the surrounds than you&#39;d expect from a comedy. Bass is also surprisingly strong. Both dialog and music are crystal clear.<br><br><img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/4664/theextras4ry.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/7500/review022e1cs.jpg" hspace="2" width="421" height="238" alt="Bonus Features Menu: More than you'd expect from a DVD of this era"><br> This single-disc release puts many two-disc sets to shame. It is one of the most extensive releases I&#39;ve seen that doesn&#39;t claim to be a special edition.<br> &quot;Spotlight On Location&quot; is your typical EPK-style fluff piece. The people involved are still so funny as to make it a bit more interesting that most of this ilk. One weird quirk is that Paul Reubens never goes out of character for his interviews.<br> The director&#39;s commentary with Kinka Usher is better than average. Usher is very comfortable with the format, never sounding rushed nor awkwardly pausing for long periods of time. At times, he suffers from just describing what&#39;s on screen. But from what I listened to, he did a good job of really covering all aspects from the technical to the story, to the actors, mixing in broader ideas with specific anecdotes. Really easy to listen to without being sleep inducing.<br> The &quot;Deleted Scenes&quot; start without preamble in non-anamorphic widescreen. Tom Waits&#39;s character gets an extended introduction; the Shoveller doesn't get any respect from his kids; the Blue Raja hides his identity; Mr. Furious pays the Shoveller a visit at work; Mr. Furious and the Shovellor pay the Blue Raja a visit at work; Mr Furious, the Shoveller, and the Blue Raja discuss recruitment; the search for the Sphinx brings about a cameo by Luis Guzmán; more post-battle interaction at the bar; bird calls before attack; the Blue Raja versus the suit-wearing henchmen; more hesitation at the climax.<br> &quot;Universal Soundtrack Presentation&quot; features a music video with a cheesy rap song by Kel Mitchell. That&#39;s it; pretty much a waste of disc space.<br> &quot;Music Highlights&quot; is far more useful. Presenting the user with a chapter menu, each option takes you to a clip of the movie in which that song is featured. The only thing that would have been cooler is if they&#39;d made the audio for the clips music-only. In some clips you can barely hear the song over the dialog and sound effects.<br> &quot;The Origin of the &#39;Mystery Men&#39; comic book characters&quot; is an in-depth, text-only retelling of how the characters came about first in the comic and then how they evolved to reach the big screen. A bit dry, but very informative.<br> &quot;Production Notes&quot; operates via the same text-only method as the previous feature, this time containing in-depth information specifically about the movie. Pretty dry stuff, overall, that&#39;s mostly covered in the other features.<br> &quot;Cast &amp; Filmmakers&quot; offers profiles about the principal characters in front of and behind the camera.<br> &quot;Theatrical Trailer&quot; is just that, presented in non-anamorphic widescreen.<br> &quot;Universal Showcase&quot; features the theatrical trailers of <i>Man on the Moon</i> and <i>Snow Falling on Cedars</i>, both in non-anamorphic widescreen.<br> &quot;Recommendations&quot; features a non-anamorphic widescreen trailer for <i>American Pie</i> and fullscreen trailers for <i>Army of Darkness</i> and <i>Darkman</i>.<br> DVD-Rom features consist of web links to the various Universal departments and Panasonic; a Mystery Men jigsaw puzzle; some HTML text-only content, Mystery Men internet postcards; production sketches; and real media versions of the soundtrack.<br> <br> <img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/2418/conclusion2xp.gif" width="70" height="12"><br> <i>Mystery Men</i> has become a key timemarker of that optimistic moment right at the peak of the internet bubble. The possibilities were seemingly limitless. It was in some ways a happier era, and in many ways a shallower one. For better or worse, the film captures both qualities. It doesn't hold up with the best of what's coming out today (neither in terms of comedies nor in terms of DVDs) but it's an above average effort on both counts for the time. A quirky little film in a rather thorough quirky little package.a movie that shouldn&#39;t have been good, but is. Recommended for its fans.</font> <div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none; text-decoration:underline"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0263757/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112742039256747134?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127418601921960802005-08-10T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-22T15:50:01.926-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><i><img border="0" src="http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/1263/review0201vp.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Children of the Damned</i> is a classic Cold War parable, as campy as can be in the handling of the horror elements but something rather deeper in idea. It is the rare horror film that sympathizes with its monsters and understands that only the world in which they exist makes them monsters at all.<br> The beginning of the film &#151; and the title &#151; appear to make it clear that Paul and his international compatriots are the offspring of Satan; some evil and unnatural creation who are wont to stir evil throughout the world. The two investigators &#151; a psychologist and a geneticist &#151; take a neutral view at first, but the movie seemingly has them marked.<br> The final shot of the film is of a screwdriver lying amongst the rubble of the final confrontation. Like many lesser films of the era, it's condemnation of Cold War policies and fears becomes slowly overbearing. Still, moments of brilliance seep in.<br> The first time I began to shift my allegiance towards the six prodigies was when the little Asian prodigy admitted her fears to the aunt. Even as they control the events around them with despicable certainly, the unemotional little child admitting the group's fears to Paul's aunt was more affecting than it had any right to be.<br> As the psychologist slowly penetrates what's going on inside the hearts and minds of these seemingly soulless creatures, the human governments and the fearful geneticist become more and more radicalized against them. By the end of the film I compared the transgressions of the prodigies and the transgressions of the humans, the humans did not come across favourably.<br> We've seen this story before, and in better wrapping, but never was it approached so warily. If the filmmakers saw things from the prodigies' point of view, we would sympathize with them from the beginning. If the filmmakers saw things from the humans' point of view, their actions would be unforgivable, their motivations utterly beyond understanding. Either way, falling into the trap of trying to create characters much smarter than either the filmmakers or the audience and winding up with a stilted conceit is unavoidable. Still, the conflict is engagingly drawn. It is rare that such a film takes the time to make me to see things from both sides; only by arguing with itself a bit can a "message" film be anything approaching relevant. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056931/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112741860192196080?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127418305611661852005-07-19T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-22T15:45:05.613-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><i><img border="0" src="http://img313.imageshack.us/img313/2289/review0196ss.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Wedding Crashers</i> is a messy sort of film starring two modern comedy heavyweights finally unleashed from their PG-13 expectations. We&#39;ve seen this storyline many times before, but Vaughn and Wilson attack it with such low-key ferocity that stars of lesser films of this ilk are revealed for the pretenders to the throne that they are.<br> Unquestionably, what allows this film to stand out from the other derivative crap is its rating. Finally, a modern screwball comedy that doesn&#39;t feel the strain of pushing PG-13 limits. The picture is comfortably R; not border-line PG-13, not hard R, just R. It doesn&#39;t reinvent the wheel, but it gives it a somewhat raunchier spin than we&#39;ve been used to lately.<br> Like all meeting-the-family comedies, this one features jokes with the inappropriate grandmother. Heavily mined terrain, but here the shock value comes as much from what&#39;s being said as the fact that it&#39;s an elderly woman that is saying it. Another scene involving Vince Vaughn's character and a priest will surely go down as one of the most hilarious film moments of 2005. And Christopher Walken plays against type as a father-in-law that &#151; rather than being the expected villain of the piece &#151; actually conveys some genuine warmth.<br> It&#39;s details like this that elevate <i>Wedding Crashers</i>, if only slightly, above what I expected. This is a name picture, and the two leads are charismatic enough to keep the picture afloat through the dry patches. Even when the movie wasn&#39;t doing anything new, their characters were enjoyable enough to sustain my interest &#151; much like the easy pleasure of crashing in front of the tube to distant repeats of a well-oiled sitcom. Vaughn and Wilson only worked together once before, in last year's surprisingly enjoyable <i>Starsky & Hutch</i>. But they star with the same people enough that their on-screen chemistry is almost expected as a matter of course. They bounce of each other with ease, two different styles of understated comedy coping in differing and fascinating ways with an onslaught of slowly escalating insanity.<br> Their command over the picture is tested late in the game when a frequent co-star of both Wilson and Vaughn makes a cameo appearance. The fact that the marketing team didn&#39;t blaze his name across every trailer is a minor miracle, and I will not ruin the surprise here. Suffice to say that it is the modern equivalent of John Belushi blasting in on the proceedings, and it is a sign of the wonderful dynamic forged between the two stars that they are never once in danger of losing command of the screen.<br> This film will never go down in history as a classic about great and important things. Yet it is fun, immature, wild, and quite probably inspired. The perfect summer movie, it is fun and harmless; a happy night at the movies, without all the sharp edges sanded smooth. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0396269/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112741830561166185?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127417622672527042005-07-04T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-22T15:34:48.170-04:00<img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/425/thefilm7qd.gif" width="64" height="15"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"> <font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br><img border="0" src="http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/7628/review018a0nm.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="Molly Gunn and her father's guitar"><br> The original title of <i>Uptown Girls</i> was <i>Molly Gunn</i>, which gives me an idea of what this movie was before the MGM marketing department wreaked its havoc upon it. This film is packaged and marketed as as girly-girl comedy, but underneath is a film of surprising grace and power. Revisiting it two years later, it still managed to get under my skin.<br> Like any Boaz Yakin picture, the cinematography is inventive and marvellous and the performances far more engaging than they have any right to be. Don't let the title or menu fool you; stirring under the farcical moments (which can border on asinine) is one of the most stirring portraits of desperation and revivification I've ever seen. Much like its characters, this film quickly grows past the stereotypes it seems to be doomed to occupy.<br> Molly Gunn is a creature of histrionics, but the emotional moments are quiet, and true. The trailers would have you believe that the rigid little girl, Ray, is every irritating precocious child character wrapped up into one, but this is not so. She is no more or less fragile than Molly, though they look in the opposite places to cope. It is this fact that makes they perfect for each other, yes, and the simple fact that they both are willing to care.<br> <img border="0" src="http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/7696/review018b3ie.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="Ray on her way to an amusement park for the first time; the idea of it bemuses her."> <br><br> <img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5172/thevideo2qw.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/6972/review018c4cy.jpg" hspace="2" alt="One of the film's many inventive shots" width="421" height="238"><br> <i>Uptown Girls</I> is presented in an anamorphic widescreen transfer which preserves its original 1.85:1 aspect ratio. The transfer is generally pleasing, with colours as I remember them and detail and sharpness usually as good as one could expect. However, grain was occasionally obtrusive, and there are print defects if you look for them. Edge enhancement was minor but present. The most shocking flaw was compression artifacts, which I thought had been eradicated from modern transfers. <br><br> <img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/3549/theaudio4mo.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/5749/review018d9rf.jpg" hspace="2" alt="The love interest takes to the stage one last time." width="421" height="238"><br> The Dolby Digital track never rises above the pack, but I have no real complaints for what it is. Dialog always remains clear, with motion across the front of the soundstage that rarely makes it into the rear channels. Bass is strong, particularly for the music, but never stands out. The music is mixed well, never overpowering the dialog or fading into the background. A comfortable track that never does anything good or bad to call attention to itself. <br><br> <img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/4664/theextras4ry.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/6518/review018e2ir.jpg" hspace="2" width="421" height="238" alt="This menu is everything that makes me cringe about marketing today."><br> One of the most disgustingly girly menus I&#39;ve ever laid eyes on, this single disc release never the less has a number of interesting special features.<br> &quot;The Lowdown on <i>Uptown</i>" is a thirteen-minute featurette plays out like your typical fluff piece, standing out because the participants are generally a little more honest than usual. The director openly defies the marketing edict to lay out what it&#39;s really about. Brittany Murphy pats a few too many backs, but it&#39;s more charming than irritating. We learn that Dakota Fanning is what got the film greenlit, a fact which clearly bemused the director at the time. But the back and forth comments between Yakin, Fanning, and Murphy is filled with anecdotes that transcends the &quot;What a joy it is to work with...&quot; comments these usually have. I also love Turk on <i>Scrubs</i>, so any extra Donald Faison goodness is welcome. It was also nice to hear Yakin go into the look and influences at play in the film. That exploration is another way this is just a smidgen better than an EPK.<br> &quot;Rockin&#39; Style&quot; is a featurette on the costumes. This is also pretty standard fare, but some of the costumes took more ingenuity that you expect from seeing the film; the rare craft featurette that has a bit of personality.<br> &quot;Video Stills Gallery&quot; takes what would be in the average DVD&#39;s stills gallery and sets them to motion against music. The concept seems pretty iffy on paper, but I found it far more engaging than flipping through manually with the remote. The way it&#39;s put together actually manages to create some energy with the stills.<br> The vast majority of the &quot;Deleted Scenes&quot; embrace the qualities that the marketing campaign played up. Since this film is at its worst when it tries to play up the slapstick, I was fairly relieved that these didn&#39;t make it into the film; many are really groaners.<br> &quot;Music Video: Chantal Kreviazuk - &#39;Time&#39;&quot; is exactly what is says. I&#39;ve been a fan of the song since I heard it in a <i>Smallville</i> episode a while back. Time is a powerful theme in the movie, so it seems like it would be a good fit. Efforts to integrate the video with the movie are mixed, however, sometimes it works great, sometimes it doesn&#39;t work at all. Chantal&#39;s lip syncing is also less than perfect. I&#39;m glad it was included though, as one of the movie&#39;s few tie-ins.<br> &quot;Soundtrack Spot&quot; does little more than make me hate sky blue and pink just a little bit more.<br> &quot;Theatrical Trailer&quot; is just that, presented in anamorphic widescreen.<br> &quot;Other Great MGM Releases&quot; is pretty much the same ads you find on all DVDs anymore; at least this one avoids sticking them before the menu.<br> <br> <img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/2418/conclusion2xp.gif" width="70" height="12"><i><br> Uptown Girls</i> is a movie that shouldn&#39;t have been good, but is. Once it abandons the early slapstick and stereotypes, the film becomes almost entirely enjoyable and at time incredibly stirring, with two leads that know how to hit the right emotional notes. The DVD, like the movie, is better than you&#39;d expect - a good case for not judging a book by its cover. Strongly recommended.</font> <div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none; text-decoration:underline"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0263757/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112741762267252704?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127416477660596732005-07-03T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-22T15:15:58.873-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img270.imageshack.us/img270/8721/review0175uk.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">Let me say right off the bat that this incarnation of <I>War of the World</I> has one of the most inappropriate and embarrassingly awful endings I've ever seen. Lest you think my problem is with the story itself, think again; the concept is one of the great masterstrokes of science fiction, one whose novelty far exceeds the drawback of the plot holes that result. I loved <i>Signs</I>, I loved the original Wells story. The embarrassment of the ending is unique to this particular telling.<br> And yet I find myself forced to recommend the film even considering, because everything up to that point represents disaster filmmaking at its finest and most horrifyingly real. I've never seen an alien invasion but if I'd had I'm certain it would almost exactly like this. The tripods are an aesthetic decision, a nod back to the source material. But the view from the ground nails human nature more accurately and more comprehensively than any film I can remember. There is a moment early on where Rachel gives her father parenting advice. It raises the irritating precocious child red flag and is notable for being the only time I doubted the believability of a character's actions in the entire movie.<br> And thank God, because the film peaks with its human moments. I winced at moments of humanity's worst, like when men murder innocents without hesitation such is their desperation for a leg up in the game of survival. I was inspired by moments of humanity's best, as when the son risks helping a couple people onto a ferry after he has already made it to safety. I've seen masterpieces with one view or the other, but by placing them in sharp relief within the same movie, Spielberg allows the reality to finally cut through the editorializing. The matter-of-fact presentation is the opposite of what we expect from him, and gives the money shots real power. When we see bodies floating down the Hudson, for instance, he allows the image itself to do the talking &#151; its lack of fanfare caught me off-guard and shook me to my core. Likewise, there is a sequence where Rachel sings herself a lullaby while her father does what must be done behind her that is a formalistic masterstroke, presented in the most realistic of ways. I have seen other sequences in other movies that operate off the same principle. None achieves what this does here, surely one of the best of Spielberg's career.<br> Both <I>War of the Worlds</I> and <I>Mars Attacks!</I> feature tripods firing heat rays that vaporize people. The fact that the former never once reminded me of the latter throughout its entirety speaks to the staggering level of verisimilitude achieved here. They operate as opposite ends of the same spectrum, with the decision to shoot the majority of exteriors on-location grounding the proceedings with an inherent reality that the other apocalypse movies can't even approach.<br> So it is that an ending which very nearly undoes everything the movie has worked so hard for previously cannot entirely rob this film of its power. Snip off that final scene and move right into the closing narration, and this film would have surpassed <I>Batman Begins</I> as the best film of the year. Even as it stands, there's far too much greatness here to be ignored. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" width="12" height="12" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0407304/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112741647766059673?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127416143714362482005-06-16T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-22T15:09:03.716-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><i><img border="0" src="http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/4144/review0159aa.gif" align="left">Batman Begins</i> is, to put it bluntly, the best film I've seen the year. The promise I'd seen in every other incarnation of the character, be it the mediocre preceding films or the very solid but episodic animated series, is realized here. Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, and Gary Oldman all provide the definitive portrayals of their respective Batman supporting characters. While Batman himself is probably too big for any definitive portrayal, Bale is the best actor in the suit, and the second behind Kevin Conroy for best voice for the role.<br> Like Reeve for Clark Kent/Superman, Bale creates essentially two extraordinarily different characters for the lead. The movie spends nearly the entirety of its running time bringing us into Bruce Wayne's life, so that we understand and sympathize with him by the end. We never see Batman from Batman's point of view. Only through three characters' eyes do we even get to see him clearly &#151; Sgt. Gordon, the last honest cop, Rachel Dawes, assistant D.A. and Wayne's childhood friend, and finally a little boy, who comes from a broken home and takes inspiration where he can get it. The rest of the characters who encounter Batman are criminals, and they see only the legend behind the man. A flash here, one bad guy's gone. Turn around, the other guy just disappeared. You're next, living a horror movie and Batman is the monster.<br>Unlike the previous movies, where the villains overshadowed Batman in presence as well as screen time, Batman hangs over the Gotham underworld like the Shadow over Mordor in Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy. One of the great achievements is that this Gotham <i>has</i> an underworld, among everything else you would expect of a fully fleshed-out city. It strikes a completely opposite take from the previous Batman saga, where Gotham was cramped and repetitive but never comprehensible. This Gotham <i>feels</i> huge, yet the movie takes the time to paint all of the proceedings into a coherent urban geography. This is the Narrows, mob boss Carmine Falcone (masterfully played by Tom Wilkinson)'s domain. That is Wayne Tower, at the centre of upscale downtown. Each location has it's cast of key players, who fit in like extensions of the set. It is essential that each be placed instantly as their given piece of the puzzle, because this film is ambitious - no less than six signature villains of various types and inspirations, all interconnected in a complex exchange of affairs.<br> If Clark Kent had the conflicting influences of Jonathan Kent and Jor-El to help shape his adult identity as Superman, this film gives Bruce way the conflicting influences of Thomas Kent and Henri Ducard to help shape Batman. Batman, as conceived in this film, could not exist without either. Thomas Wayne gave Bruce his idealism and his drive to see Gotham towards safety. Henri Ducard gave him the cruel brutal means and tactics through which to succeed. Bruce Wayne lacks super powers, so it is through Ducard's training that he becomes more than a man. The clash of ideals between Thomas Wayne's mission of compassion and Ducard's unyielding quest for vengeance is at the heart of this film. Both play into what Batman is, and each provides the check against the other that allows Batman to succeed where both ultimately fail. Justice unhampered by compassion is as criminal as the acts which required justice in the first place. Yet compassion without consequence for failure is neither sustainable nor ultimately desirable.<br> Finally all the pieces fall into place in a single medium and in a single story: how a scared and traumatized boy grew up to fight back against the darkness. The tenuous relationship between justice and the law, personified through Batman&#39;s relationship with Gordon. The full dimension of the relationship of between Bruce Wayne and his butler - which not only moves the plot along but has surprising emotional heft as well. The fantastic criminals, like the Scarecrow, are placed in a greater tapestry of Gotham&#39;s criminal underworld, and pleasingly, the real villains wear suits and ties rather than Halloween masks and garish costumes. The whole thing builds to a cohesive whole, creating a world no less complete or innovatively conceived than the Star Wars saga. We may never get a portrayal of Batman this good again. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372784/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112741614371436248?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127415494503470282005-06-01T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-22T15:01:13.880-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/4346/review0149he.gif" align="left" width="160" height="126">The final hour of <i>Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith </i>may rightfully go down as one of the finest examples of filmmaking ever. It represents George Lucas in top, almost effortless form. He achieves the amazing without ever stopping to admire what he has achieved, because there is so much more amazing left for him to get to. It is a staggering collision of story, character, and spectacle that comes together almost exactly as it should.<br> The first hour of <i>Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith </i>may rightfully go down as one of the most unmemorable in filmmaking history. It represents George Lucas at his sloppiest, rustiest form. It begins with such blinding fury that the result is largely incomprehensible, and pauses only for dialog that makes Godzilla dubs sound like Shakespeare. There are moments of promise to be sure — that first epic shot that goes on and on and on, the way that Palpatine’s serpent tongue meticulously leads Anakin astray, and the final parting of Anakin Skywalker and Obi-Wan Kenobi. But they are awash in a sea of such mediocrity that a greater effort is required to invest myself in the proceedings than at any other point in the entire saga. The first two episodes each have deep and fundamental flaws, but even where they’re failing I still feel compelled and engaged, as I’m carried through the rough patches by the sheer energy of the tide they are awash in. Despite all the daring-do, the first epic action set piece utterly fails to rouse me, and the remainder of the first half takes a long time to recover from its stalled momentum. In fact, I’m just starting to think it may salvage itself as an acceptable movie when the rug is pulled right out from under me.<br> Because what many fans waited through <i>Phantom Menace</i> and <i>Clones </i>for happens in one blazing moment. Anakin is given a clear choice between the Jedi and the Sith, much like his son at the end of <i>Return of the Jedi</i>. And he chooses the other path. The great leader of the Jedi plummets to his death and Anakin Skywalker prostrates himself before the soon-to-be Emperor. This sounds perhaps lame on paper but in the space of a minute it is both shocking and electrifying. Much of the power of the final act comes from the ruthless — even brutal — efficiency with which Lucas sets the stage for the original <i>Star Wars</i>.<br> But not all of it. There are moments of profound beauty and joy too, the final shot of the film first and foremost among them. And there are several others: Yoda’s final moment on Kashyyyk has surprising poignance as he is carried away with a stirring rendition of the Force them, our only shot from the surface of Alderaan shows that one couple’s tragedy will allow for another couple’s greatest joy. These are small touches of humanity that challenge any critics’ decree that Lucas was never good at telling human stories. They further the mystery of why the first half is so lacking, all while helping the film transcend that first half into something really sort of wonderful.<br> Then there is the acting. Even as a generally big fan of the prequels I couldn’t find one cringe-worthy performance this time around, even when the words they were speaking were less than stellar. The only thing in the film that made me cringe at all was the droid humour, which seemed out of place compared to what the prior films showed us about the limitations of their abilities — particularly R2D2. The rest of the distasteful parts were able enough to be merely boring, which is perhaps a greater sin than outright terrible in the world of film.<br> Finally there is the melancholy. Critics like Roger Ebert insist that either Lucas or his company will go back to the well at least a couple more times before letting the franchise finally rest in peace. The film itself serves as a fundamentally clear rebuttal of that theory to me. By the time the blue Lucas credit pops on the screen, the entire saga has been completed. It feels complete, one seamless entity with a clearly defined beginning and end. Any other stories that are told in this universe will need to be peripheral. Coming out of the theatre on May 19^th with my father just like <i>Return of the Jedi</i> years earlier, I felt I’d seen it all. And that is a very bittersweet thing. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" width="12" height="12" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0121766/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112741549450347028?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127415215078509822005-05-29T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-22T14:53:35.086-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/287/review0137nu.jpg" align="left" width="160" height="126">I saw Adam Sandler's remake of <i>The Longest Yard</i> tonight at the drive-in in the rain. One might think that the adverse viewing conditions would negatively affect my opinion of the film. While that may be true with good films, the fact that the night was an interesting and satisfying experience was the only thing that allowed me walk away content; in a movie theatre it would have been a much harsher reaction.<br> The villains are never threatening, the heroes never rise up to a point of real sympathy, and the character motivations never feel all that plausible. I'm sitting in my car and the movies playing out on the screen, and we're not really bothering each other all that much. It's not that it pushes out into reality like a Wes Anderson film does, it's that it never really makes any effort to draw you in. If this film were personified, it would be Shaun's fat best buddy in <i>Shaun of the Dead</i>. It's in no rush to do anything, and it's likeable enough that we don't so much mind when nothing serious ends up getting done.<br> It rises about movies like <I>About Schmidt</I> and <I>Napoleon Dynamite</I> in that it doesn't piss me off any. But that's probably because unlike those two, it never sets off to do anything all that intrusive in the first place. And having caught a whiff of a good movie in there somewhere, it has me inclined to see out the original. In that way, it has perhaps succeeded in something. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="-1"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" width="12" height="12" vspace="-2">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0398165/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112741521507850982?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127279114813402412005-05-27T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-21T23:07:58.286-04:00<img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/425/thefilm7qd.gif" width="64" height="15"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"> <font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/6458/review012a3ve.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="Average Joe's: Team motto - &quot;Aim low.&quot;"><br><i>Dodgeball</i> manages to pull off something completely unexpected; it's a great time at the movies that mostly avoids the gross out tactics without ever ceding its edge. Much like some of the great stupid comedies of our past, it features a likeable and good-natured set of quirky underdog protagonists against an incredibly stupid and often quite out-there villain who drops the IQ level of the room a few dozen points every time he opens his mouth.<br> It takes that classic setup and pushes it to the limits. You've never met underdogs quite so incapable, nor a villain so jaw-droppingly stupid. Every single sports cliché is either utilized or satirized over the course of the film and a wide variety of celebrity cameos provide almost snapshot punchlines.<br> It is also notable for featuring one of the great casts in modern comedy. Vince Vaughn (fresh of the success of <i>Old School</i> at the time) and Ben Still provide the star power in the leading roles, but the supporting cast is a veritable who's who of cult comedy. Alan Tudyk of "Firefly", <i>28 Days Later</I>, and <i>A Knight's Tale</I> fame makes a show-stealing turn as Steve the Pirate. Steven Root (Jimmy James on "Newsradio", Bill on "King of the Hill", and of course Milton in <i>Office Space</I>), Jason Bateman ("Silver Spoons", <i>Starsky & Hutch</I>, and most currently and hilariously "Arrested Development"), Hank Azaria ("The Simpsons" and <i>Mystery Men</I>), Gary Cole (<I>Office Space</I>, the Brady Bunch movies, <I>A Simple Plan</i>, and "Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law") all create memorable characters that fuel this film's comedic spark. Each of their characters could go head to head with anything SNL has created in the last twenty years. But Rip Torn stands above them all by creating one of the most memorable performances of his career with Patches O&#39;&#39;Houlihan, the dodgeball coach from hell.<br> And while there are times when the gags are dead in the water, when they do hit they provide some of the best laughs of 2004. And of course, <i>Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story</I> will be forever immortalized for adding the line, "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball!" to our cultural vocabulary.<br> <img border="0" src="http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/7100/review012b6nn.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="Patches O'Houlihan: Master of a sport of violence, exclusion, and degradation."> </font> <br><br><img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5172/thevideo2qw.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/3382/review012c6un.jpg" hspace="2" alt="Globo Gym Purple Cobras: They're taking the bull by the horns. It's a metaphor. But they actually did, though." width="421" height="238"><br> Being a relatively low-budget sleeper hit, <i>Dodgeball</i> is not the kind of film you'd expect a standout video presentation from. But the widescreen version provides a better than expected anamorphic experience, with a clean and sharp picture with vibrant colour, natural skin tones, and solid blacks that never obscure detail. There was the occasional shot that was a tad on the soft side, but each instance appeared to be a result of the original print rather than any transfer-related defect. Any edge enhancement was minimal, and never stood out on either my CRT or LCD displays.</font><br><br><img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/3549/theaudio4mo.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/1865/review012d5uf.jpg" hspace="2" alt="Welcome back to the Ocho: They're your announcers, Cotton McKnight and Pepper Brooks." width="421" height="238"><br> <font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> The English Dolby Digital mix is pretty standard fare for a comedy. Since the film is primarily dialog driven, the mix remains rooted in the front speakers for the majority of the film. Some of the bigger sports scenes open up the mix a little bit, but generally lack the power and creativity of other sports films. Some of the commentator voiceover work stood out in mix in a less than desirable fashion; otherwise, dialog and sound effects were clear and undistorted. This isn&#39;t a DVD to turn to if you want to give your system a workout, but it never detracts from the movie experience.<br><br><img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/4664/theextras4ry.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/3802/review012e9fv.jpg" hspace="2" width="421" height="238" alt="Dodge This: Even the special features menu takes a beating."><br> First the bad: This is one of the first Fox DVDs I&#39;ve owned that has a series of trailers and commercials before loading the main menu. Fortunately all can be skipped via the next chapter button, providing minimal disruption in accessing the features. Once you make it through, the extras are surprisingly numerous for a single disc release.<br> Off the main menu, &quot;First Look&quot; provides another commercial in the form of a featurette on Fox&#39;s &quot;Elektra&quot;. Strangely, it&#39;s non-anamorphic widescreen video window-boxed inside an anamorphic widescreen frame. This results in black bars on all four sides of the picture regardless of your display device. A rather ill-conceived feature, altogether.<br> From the special features menu, we have a variety of more interesting options. The first (not including the hilarious easter egg) is a commentary with the first time writer/director and his two stars. It&#39;s a relatively low key track with the main running gag being all of the things Fox legal told them they weren&#39;t supposed to say. The participants are often informational, but the track falls into self-congratulatory territory a little bit more often than I&#39;d like. Not a bad listen, but I&#39;ve heard plenty better.<br> The Deleted Scenes section provides a number of scenes either cut or trimmed from their original length for the theatrical release. The director was quite fond of them in the feature commentary, but I didn&#39;t see anything that would have really added to the film.<br> The Alternate Ending plays off one of the film&#39;s red herrings in a truly hilarious fashion. Quick to watch and highly recommended.<br> The four featurettes are mostly fluff, but they give a good idea of how much preparation went into getting the cast trained and ready as believable dodgeball champions.<br> The blooper reel is surprisingly lacklustre considering the geniuses of comedy on this film&#39;s cast. The best ones play off one of the cameos&#39; previous roles, Alan Tudyk&#39;s pantomiming, and the gruff referee&#39;s increasing irritation as the leads screw up take after take for his big scene.<br> Two of the film&#39;s trailers are provided along with a trailer for the Johnny Knoxville vehicle <i>The Ringer</i> and one for &quot;Arrested Development&quot; &#8213; proving once again that Fox can&#39;t market that show for beans.<br> <br> <img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/2418/conclusion2xp.gif" width="70" height="12"><i><br> Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story</i> placed sixth on my list of the top ten films of 2004 at the beginning of this year<i>.</i> It didn&#39;t hold up quite as well on the repeat viewing, but it remains one of the most likeable and enjoyable comedies in recent memory. This single disc DVD presentation reminds me of exactly how thinly stretched most two-disc sets are these days, providing me with every extra I&#39;d really care about for this film without ever affecting the picture quality. If you&#39;re a fan of the film, this disc is a no-brainer. If you haven&#39;t seen it yet, chances are you&#39;ll probably be a fan soon. Strongly recommended.</font> <div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <font color="#99AADD"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361243/">Research more</a></span></font></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112727911481340241?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127246211313857202005-04-16T12:00:00.000-04:002005-09-20T16:11:15.993-04:00<img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/425/thefilm7qd.gif" width="64" height="15"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" width="12" height="12" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"> <font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/5093/review011a4wh.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="&quot;&quot;Anger...fear...aggression. The dark side of the Force are they.&quot;"><br>Having been minorly let down by the final set of "Clone Wars" chapters which aired on Cartoon Network recently, it was refreshing going back to the original twenty on this set and realizing they're just as excellent as I remember. These early episodes prove the old adage that sometimes less truly is more; being held to a three-minute average running time for the first nineteen meant that Tartakovsky and his team couldn&#39;t waste a single frame on filler. It is rare to see storytelling as lean and stripped down as I found here, and even rarer to see such stripped down storytelling work so effectively.<br> If the last two movies are any indication, Star Wars seems to work better the less dialog there is to muck things up. In those terms, these first twenty chapter more than live up to the idea. Dialog comes rarely, and when it does it feels like each word was weighed heavily before being allowed to make it through. The result is beautiful word-less moments like Anakin&#39;s farewell to Padmé in Chapter 1, Mace Windu&#39;s utter domination of an entire battlefield in Chapter 13, and Anakin&#39;s rage at the end of Chapter 19. It also means that every sound effect, every shot, every glance relays something new and important to furthering the story along. The pace rarely lets up, but the staggering variety of locales, character dynamics, and objectives keeps the affair from ever getting boring or monotonous.<br> Many fans were ecstatic when it was announced Tartakovsky would be heading up &quot;Clone Wars&quot;, and the reason has become obvious. Every frame of this series is absolutely beautiful. Many shots could be frozen, framed, and hung up on my wall. Traditional 2D animation dominates the foreground, but it is integrated seamlessly with gorgeous painted backgrounds and CG modelling work from Rough Draft, the people who pulled off a similar blend on &quot;Futurama&quot;. The CG results in an unparalleled scope for many of the series&#39; battle scenes. The movies don&#39;t touch some of the action scenes that take place here - indeed, conceived in live action, they would look ridiculous they are so unabashedly epic. Tartakovsky&#39;s previous show &quot;Samurai Jack&quot; was heralded for the humanity it injected into its characters through subtle changes in expression. The characters of &quot;Clone&nbsp; Wars&quot; are presented with the care and investment that one would expect.<br> The first twenty chapters won an Emmy, and no wonder. They are spectacular entertainment. Not the best television I&#39;ve ever seen, but easily some of the most breathtaking.<br> <img border="0" src="http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/3249/review011b0yg.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="&quot;She was... very beautiful. Kind, but sad.&quot;"> </font> <br><br> <img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5172/thevideo2qw.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" width="12" height="12" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"> <font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/1661/review011c2oj.jpg" hspace="2" alt="&quot;Wow. Thanks, Mean Joe!&quot;" width="421" height="238"><br> This DVD is the best presentation of "Clone Wars" to date. The analogue broadcasts and the Hyperspace QuickTime files don't even come close. This anamorphic widescreen release is stunning. This transfer reveals new detail to the image and makes already vibrant colours positively pop off the screen. The image is also completely clean, without a speck of dust on it. The only thing that kept this from being a perfect score was some small scale aliasing issues on the sharpest of lines (usually where the 2D animation met the backgrounds). This was not distracting at normal speeds but stood out when I went hunting for screenshots. I noticed no instances of colour bleed nor edge enhancement. A very spectacular presentation for a made-for-TV production. </font> <br><br> <img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/3549/theaudio4mo.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" width="12" height="12" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/906/review011d0lj.jpg" hspace="2" alt="&quot;I have to admit that without the clones it would have not been a victory.&quot;" width="421" height="238"><br> The English Dolby Digital mix leads more towards the front channels, but is never short of engaging, with sound effects and dialog never less than crystal clear. As is so often anymore, the music never really rises above the pack, but in terms of audio presentation, there is nothing that will pull you out of the experience. When the rear channels are used, they are used effectively, particularly towards the end of the film, when the zombies are coming in from all sides. </font> <br><br> <img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/4664/theextras4ry.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"> <font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/270/review011e1ga.jpg" hspace="2" width="421" height="238" alt="Special Features: &quot;Bridging the Saga&quot; is particularly memorable."><br> Immediately after watching the disc through with the English track, I popped on the Hyperspace commentary. While Tartokovsky succumbs to merely describing the onscreen action more than I'd like, the track has a good deal of behind the scenes tidbits and supplementary information through in as well. He is surprisingly candid about the restrictions Lucasfilm put on the production, and opens up about what he thought could have been done even better with more time and better planning. This track was originally recorded for the Hyperspace videos on Starwars.com, so you won't find any tidbits about Volume Two or Episode III on this one, aside from the limited information they had about Grievous for Chapter 20.<br> I listened to the first few minutes of the Director's Commentary after that, but was disappointed to learn that it is almost entirely just explaining the on-screen action for Star Wars outsiders. Worthwhile to the uninitiated, I suppose, but not much interest to me. I flipped through the track and listened in at random intervals, which merely confirmed my suspicions.<br> By far, the highlight of this disc in the featurette "Bridging the Saga". It opens with George Lucas lamenting the fact that the Clone Wars, this great people of adventure, would not be covered in their majority by the films themselves. That's where the microseries comes in. Lucas shows a surprising amount of knowledge about both the microseries and Tartakovsky's prior work. We also go inside the Clone Wars offices to get a glimpse of how Volume Two was conceived and completed. Star Wars diehards will find it most notable for the 20 or so seconds of new Episode III footage scattered throughout, but it is a very worthwhile featurette aside from that.<br> As it seems every Star Wars DVD now must also be a video game commercial, it is perhaps inevitable that a "Videogames" section would be included. The menu features three options. "Episode III Game Trailer" is very spoilerific about the new movie and mostly shows Anakin chopping everything in sight to bits. "Star Wars Republic Commando™ Game Trailer" features a variety of shots of bulked up clone troopers blasting things and running. Finally, the DVD apparently also contains a separate partition so that the disc can be played in an XBox as a Republic Commando demo. Good stuff for gamers, I suppose, but of no interest to me.<br> The "Behind the Scenes" section proves more a bit more interesting with a short featurette from when Volume One was made which shows both the artists and the voiceover talent doing their thing. There is also a gallery of character sketches and a gallery of promotional art. Each is worth your time, though both have previously shown up on the web in some form or another.<br> Finally, &quot;Episode III Teaser Trailer&quot; features the first trailer that played in theatres for <i>Revenge of the Sith</i> - the one with Obi-Wan from <i>A New Hope</i>&#39;s voiceover as we see what he&#39;s talking about onscreen. Pretty cool, and nice to have logo free in DVD quality. </font> <br><br> <img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/2418/conclusion2xp.gif" width="70" height="12"> <font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br> Considering the comparatively low price for this disc (I got it for less than $15 at Best Buy weeks after the new release deals), it is more than worth your valuable time. Some of the most beautiful animation to come out of American television in years, taken just visually it would be worth your valuable time. Throw in a top-notch transfer and a surprising amount of extras, and picking this one up is a no brainer - especially for all of the <I>Star Wars</I> fans like me out there. Recommended. </font> <div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <font color="#99AADD"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361243/">Research more</a></span></font></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112724621131385720?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127240506821679722004-12-19T12:00:00.000-05:002005-09-20T14:21:46.826-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/4347/review0062ly.jpg" align="left" width="160" height="126">Coming out of James L. Brooks's new film <i>Spanglish</i>, I can identify two key points of contention that could derail the film for a viewer: The implausibility of some of the plot turns, and Téa Leoni's character.<br> The plot conveniences were a blemish on a film that was at times spectacularly involving for me. But while I absolutely hated Leoni's character by the end of the film, it is an absolutely skilled creation. Her bundle of neurotic tendencies resolve themselves in a variety of different ways; she is always a ticking time bomb that resolves in outbursts and displays of extreme thoughtlessness and unintended (and occasionally intended) cruelty. If she were all this film had to offer, it would be a despicable film. (and have far more Oscar buzz as a result)<br> But she is only one piece is a spectacularly complex pie. The interaction between Leoni, husband, children, mother, maid, and maid's daughter is endlessly involving; each character is distinct in their emotions and motivations. And the effect that each personality has on the others spreads is ways large and small, profound and tragic. Standing out from the rest are two relationships that parallel and stir even as they interact.<br> Leoni's character, Deb, is married to Adam Sandler's character John. Deb and John's relationship is not one of those two; it never approaches that territory until the end. But Deb and John have an funny, charming, sensitive, and overweight daughter named Bernice. Even as Bernice is devastated by Deb's actions which alternate between active cruelty and neglect, she shares with her father one of the purest on-screen relationships between a parent and their child in years. As Deb dotes on the maid's beautiful young daughter Christina in her endless search for validation, Bernice watches from the sidelines at all of the things her mother should have been doing for her. When Christina cultivates friends at school, again Bernice is the outcast. This is a C-plot in terms of focus, but it is ever present throughout the proceedings, and it is (with one notable exception) the focus of Sandler's character. When the rest of the world shuns this poor girl, John lets her seek comfort in his familiar hugs. When the rest of the world tells her that she needs to be corrected, John tells her that she's spectacular and just how much he loves her. With fitness freak Deb clearly not an appealing contrast, this film is powerful in its counter-movement to American society's focus on conformity at any cost. At one point, John notes that "between odd and the same, you gotta be rooting for odd, don't you?" when the maid reveals her two fears about her daughter attending a private school.<br> Christina, the object of Deb's misplaced affections, is an innocent along for the rider; her older wiser self narrates the film in terms of a college admissions essay. Her relationship with her mother is equally unique. The maid, Flor, gives up everything for her daughter, including a somewhat dicey trip across the border. Deb represents the temptation of the excesses of modern upper-middle-class white America. Flor represents the purity and honesty of her roots both in her mother's love and her mother's culture. The interplay between these two often opposing forces is a source of fascination, one that Shelbie Bruce handles perfectly. There is a scene late in the film which gives the indication that Deborah's philosophy has completely only one brief change in expression belies the actual truth.<br> Through out this all, hovering around this whole mess is Deb's mother Evelyn. Evelyn, who was once a jazz singer of some renown, is played by Cloris Leachman and hovers over and around the action with a wonderfully sardonic sense of humour. In her character we gain an indication of where some of Deb's issues came from, but we also gain an understanding of how much further Evelyn has come sense. Now she balances her time between hiding her alcoholic tendencies and prodding her daughter in the right general direction and shielding the rest of the group from the aftermath. I have seen Cloris Leachman play kindly and I have seen Cloris Leachman play sarcastically un-PC and cruel. In <i>Spanglish</i>, she strikes a somewhat realistic balance of the two.<br> I'm still not entirely sold on an woman as beautiful as Paz Vega experiencing what her character does. The means of her moving herself and her daughter in with the family can only partially be explained away by Deb's manic behaviour and decision-making. The hand of the screenwriter can be felt guiding the action a little more than it should.<br> But in the end, this was a fantastic range of characters, and as they gained and grew and hurt and hugged I felt for them and felt with them. I feel guilty giving this that extra-half star, but when this movie's at its peak there are moments that simply can't be found in <i>National Treasure</i>. Leoni inhabited that wretched soul. Sandler made fatherhood admirable again. Cloris Leachman went up a notch in my book. And Paz Vega and Shelbie Bruce reminded me that not all struggles to preserve <span style="vertical-align: middle">cultural identity can be outside of my ability to relate. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" width="12" height="12" vspace="-1">) </span> </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0371246/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112724050682167972?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127241218832876362004-12-10T12:00:00.000-05:002005-09-20T14:33:38.836-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/6017/review0049yh.jpg" align="left" width="160" height="126">I went into <i>Blade: Trinity</i> expecting the worst. What I got was at least mildly better than my expectations. The reviews were horrendous and Goyer had none of the experience that either of the prior directors brought to the game. It shows; this third entry lacks the plotting of the original and the stylized universe of <i>Blade II</i>. Still, much like the last few levels of "Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast" there's much fun to be had in watching the bad guys get chewed up and spit out by a hero with whom we already share two movie's worth of familiarity.<br> The primary difference from the other two stands out damn near immediately, however. After a trip inside an Iraqi tomb, we are presented with a traditional opening Blade action scene. The trouble begins when he stakes a human by mistake; the human world encroaches immediately. Suddenly Blade's running from police cars and his face is all over the news. This time around, the FBI is nearly as much of a nemesis as the vampires.<br> Other changes come in the form of Hannibal King and Abigail Whistler. The latter has at least as much comics history as Blade does, and is played by <i>Van Wilder</i> himself, Ryan Reynolds. His humour falls flat through the first half of the film and provides one of my chief complaints with the movie. From King's first interaction with Parker Posey's character, however, I was consistently entertained. Abigail is your typical action heroine, but at least Goyer didn't try to force a romantic connection with any of the male leads. Her character is primarily notable for looking extremely hot in a belly shirt. Damn.<br> A lot of conceptions are introduced and disposed of with flourish, each fluctuating between varying degrees of absurdity, with the UV laser thingy being the most absurd of all. Or the iPod. What the fuck is an iPod doing in an action movie, anyway? I know a lot of the troops over seas like to pump music into their tanks as they head into battle. But you'd think that when you're partaking in hand-to-hand combat, being able to hear what's coming at you would be important. Sheesh.<br> The film's primary villain is supposedly Dracula, or "Drake" in the Blade film. Because, you know, even the greatest horror villain in history needs to keep up with the times. He's played by Dominic Purcell, so great as "John Doe" and misused ever since. The movie's more fascinated by Posey's character, whose name I still can't recall, and he only gets a couple scenes and an action sequence before the final confrontation.<br>The final confrontation itself was the most disappointing thing about the film; had it really chosen to go out with a bang, this movie could have worked itself up to four star territory. I won't reveal what happens, so as to maintain what little suspense and tension there is. I will only say that it seems more geared towards opening the door for spin-offs that resolving Blade's story. Sure, he gets his big action scene. But the final narration is hardly the kind of wrap-up this character deserves. I still had an overall good time, but more in the fashion of a Scifi Channel Original TV movie than the theatrical experience the previous two provided. A solidly made but bland and relatively uninvolving entry to the series. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0359013/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112724121883287636?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127240870672675032004-12-05T12:00:00.000-05:002005-09-20T14:27:50.676-04:00<font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"> <img border="0" src="../../../images/spacer.gif" width="1" align="left"><img border="0" src="http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/2382/review0039ak.jpg" align="left" width="160" height="126">Despite being at times preposterous and logically quite flawed, it's the first film since <I>Indiana Jones and the Lost Crusade</I> to earn the right to be compared to an Indiana Jones movie. It had the action set pieces (here even more outrageous and implausible) but more importantly it has the an impressive knowledge of history - or at least gives the impression of having an impressive knowledge of history - that the Tomb Raiders and their like sorely lack.<br> While many of the facts were probably fabricated for the purposes of the story, many weren't and that drew me in. More importantly, however, the facts were treated as the meat of the story rather than the exposition between explosions.<br> Here is a movie that is more concerned with its ideals and its motivations than taking the audience on the latest thrill ride. It's easily identifiable as a Bruckheimer production: you have the heroic male lead, the female sidekick/love interest, the intellectual villain, and the geeky comic relief. The difference is in the details; the heroic male is more historian than action hero, the attraction to the love interest is first and foremost a shared passion for history, the villain and the hero share a respect for each other as obvious as the conflict that divides them, and the comic relief is as able as he is oblivious.<br> The conspiracy theories are chained one after another; they weave into, out of, and around history with a gleeful abandon. Obscure real facts are intertwined with a fictionalized mythology around the free masons. Perhaps my favourite part was the way all of the elements of the puzzle were as old as the mystery itself; it leads the movie to a lot of the lesser-used historical sites in the colonial-area America. When the movie final breaks away from reality into a true Indiana Jones style tomb deep in the underbelly of Manhattan, the entrance is through a building that is plausibly as old as the treasure underneath it.<br> In the end I didn't believe all of it - where the hell were all of the guards in these historical sites post-theft anyway? - but I was consistently entertained and mentally stimulated by it. Part of me wishes a little more plausibility would have pushed it that extra step into being something substantial. But deeper down, I know that plausibility would ruin most of the charm. (<img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10">) </font> <br><div style="font:78%/1.4em Trebuchet MS,Trebuchet,Arial,Verdana,Sans-serif; text-transform:uppercase; letter-spacing:.1em; font-style:normal; color:#777; margin-right:.6em"> ^{&nbsp;&nbsp;- ADAM LENHARDT} <div align="center"> <hr color="#003300" style="border-bottom:1px dotted" size="1" width="97%"> <span style="text-transform: none"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368891/">Research more</a></span></div> </div><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/16917055-112724087067267503?l=film.massmediareview.com' alt='' /></div>Adamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16696064681287038332noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16917055.post-1127196677412640892004-11-26T12:00:00.000-05:002005-09-20T03:11:39.436-04:00<img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/425/thefilm7qd.gif" width="64" height="15"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/3600/review002a2ce.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="Ah, the joys of puberty: Small and sniveling nemesis Draco now positively towers over our hero."><br>I still contend that <i>Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban</i> is a less satisfying adaptation than either of its two predecessors. Watching the DVD today marked my third time with the film, however, and my appreciation grows with each viewing. The first two have proven less satisfying with each viewing, made perhaps more aggravating by the fact that they get so much so spot on that the omissions and alterations stick out like a sore thumb. Frustrating as it has turned out, with <i>Azkaban</I> Cuarón and Kloves have crafted a work that stands better on it's own than as a companion piece.<br> Perhaps the most striking difference is the difference in approach; the first two films went for the "throw in everything up to and including the kitchen sink" approach, which I quite liked. <i>Azkaban</i>, in adapting a longer work into a shorter running time, doesn't even try. Events are reordered, revamped, and replaced. Sections of dialog again come verbatim from the text ("Turn to page 394.") but it is rarely utilized in the same fashion as Rowling had it. For as many times as I felt they got it right &#8213; alluding to but not expanding on the origins of the Marauder's map; Sirius and Lupin's mentions of James and Lily &#8213; there were an equal number of times where they should have just let be; the Three Broomsticks revelation in particular was far more powerful in the book.<br> Still, I found myself far more engaged this time around. While the relentless and breathless editing that always seems to cut away a moment and a half too soon still irritates me, I'm familiar enough with the movie now to keep pace. The texture of the film, and the sense of place in particular, get better with each viewing. Columbus's take on the Potter world was more or less how I imagined it, and is indeed one of the things I admire most about his two entries in the series. That said, it always felt more fanciful than real; Harry's world was another world that I could quickly immerse myself in, but it never felt particularly real. Though I never minded, I really dig the way Cuarón has taken Columbus's world and grounded it in reality. It's the same storybook castle in the distance, with all of the towers in all the right places. But getting closer, the courtyards feel lived in and the geography is navigable. I knew that Hogwarts had the all of these locations already, but it wasn't until Azkaban that I could place the Quidditch pitch in relationship to the courtyard in relationship to Hagrid's hut. Even during my lacklustre first viewing of this flick in theatres, I revelled in the time travel sequences both as a way to finally slow the pacing down a pitch and as a way to travel all around Hogwarts without any significant cut aways.<br> Oh yeah, and the use of the Weeping Willow as both a calendar and a gag was awesome.<br><img border="0" src="http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/4348/review002b6fy.jpg" width="421" height="238" hspace="2" alt="Cat Quandary: &quot;Ronald has lost his rat.&quot;"></font><br><br> <img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5172/thevideo2qw.gif"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/5282/half7ea.gif" vspace="2"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/3327/endparen2pj.gif" width="5" height="15"><font face="Trebuchet MS, Trebuchet, Arial, Verdana, Sans-serif" size="2" color="#CCCCCC"><br> <img border="0" src="http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/2045/review002c4sv.jpg" hspace="2" alt="Dumbledore Distracts: &quot;See all those strawberries?&quot;"><br>IIf anything contributed to my increased appreciation for <i>Prisoner of Azkaban</i>, it was the visual presentation. It is a very dark and gloomy movie, with a relatively subdued colour palette. Throughout the vast majority of the movie, it's seems to have just rained (or in some cases, is raining violently). In theatres, this amounted to a washed out, dreary sort of look. The DVD perfectly captures what colour there is, bringing a look to the film that is more natural than it is theatrically gloomy. If there is any problem with the presentation, it's that the transfer tries to compensate for the lack of colour by pushing the contrast slightly high, which makes the blacks, while true blacks, slightly lacking in detail. Grain pops up occasionally but never becomes problematic to enjoyment.</font><br><br> <img src="http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/3549/theaudio4mo.gif" width="73" height="15"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" width="10" height="10" vspace="3"><img border="0" src="http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/9578/star3uj.gif" vspace="3"><img src="http://img361.imageshack.us/img3