When I saw An Education with my roommate, he declared that in the last three days, "We've seen all the acting Hollywood has to offer." And although we've yet to see Nine, The Lovely Bones, Avatar, Up in the Air or Invictus, I am inclined to agree.
An Education, based upon Lynn Barber's memoirs, follows 16-year-old Jenny in pre-swinging 60s England as her parents push her towards Oxford and an older man begins courting her. We see hints of the youthful attitude that would spark The Sixties as we now know them, as Jenny questions the why and the wherefore of her uptight lifestyle. At the same time, the glamorous life of her suitor and his friends has a dark side that she is not ready for, making life quite difficult.
Carey Mulligan has been getting enough raves for her breakout performance. Must I really add fuel to this fire? Well--yeah! Yeah, of course I must! Mulligan gives a mature performance, utterly believable as an intelligent girl on the brink of womanhood. I am always most impressed with performances that remind me of people I know, and Mulligan reminds me of several. She's like Audrey Hepburn with a Daria-esque edge to her. It's a stunning performance that I can't do justice to, really. Suffice to say, she's among the year's best performances.
The female-heavy supporting cast is awesome. Cara Seymour is suitably loving yet a little distant as Jenny's pensive mum Marjorie. Rosamund Pike, who I love more and more, is tragic as the dim Helen, a woman desperately clinging to her ignorance as she becomes more aware of it. Sally Hawkins has only one scene and a few lines, but my God she's good. Emma Thompson and Olivia Williams are the teachers, and it is shocking to see the former so unlovable and the latter so plain. The men are represented by Alfred Molina, Peter Sarsgaard and Dominic Cooper. Molina is great as Jenny's exasperated, pushy father, and his monologue about the Oxford Tree is hilarious in both its writing and delivery. Sarsgaard is the older suitor, both charming and skeevy. Cooper is his bored friend, a more dastardly role than his turn in Mamma Mia!.
It's all good, really. Screenwriter Nick Hornby has crafted everyone believably enough, with the right dollops of humor, intelligence, and gravitas to make it all work. And director Lone Scherfig is brilliant, brilliant, brilliant. I love the way she moves the camera and arranges her actors and executes her scenes. It's perfect, just perfect. Music from the era complements the fine score by Paul Englishby. Cinematography by John Borman is subtle yet effective. And this is the 60s, which means costume designer Odile Dicks-Mireaux has a field day with the women's gowns and the men's suits. Gorgeous.
An Education is a genius film that you would be foolish to miss out on. You might as well have missed Juno in 2007. There's no reason for it: it's one of the best films of the year, and all ages can appreciate it. Grand.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Pros/Cons: Fantastic Mr. Fox, State of Play
FANTASTIC MR. FOX
Pros: Clever/funny screenplay, stellar voice work, great score (Alexandre Desplat) and soundtrack, a funny and catchy original song that actually progresses the plot, great production design/costumes
Cons: Too short
Comments: George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Michael Gambon and Wally Wolodarsky (as opossum Kylie) are the true stand-outs. For the first time since The Royal Tenenbaums, Wes Anderson's oddly anachronistic touches fit naturally. I have to see this again.
STATE OF PLAY
Pros: Great chemistry between Russell Crowe and Rachel McAdams, majority of actors bring their A-game, suspenseful and thrilling without resorting to car chases, actually had me at the edge of my seat, Robin Wright Penn
Cons: Final "twist" trifle annoying and out of nowhere, Helen Mirren plays one note, intrusive score, story needs more room to breathe
Comments: I feel like there was so much that wound up on the cutting-room floor, especially for poor Jeff Daniels. When is that guy going to get a break? I do think Russell Crowe is one of the most consistently watchable actors working today. I would have liked to see this done with Ed Norton in the Ben Affleck role, though. That would have been interesting.
Pros: Clever/funny screenplay, stellar voice work, great score (Alexandre Desplat) and soundtrack, a funny and catchy original song that actually progresses the plot, great production design/costumes
Cons: Too short
Comments: George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Michael Gambon and Wally Wolodarsky (as opossum Kylie) are the true stand-outs. For the first time since The Royal Tenenbaums, Wes Anderson's oddly anachronistic touches fit naturally. I have to see this again.
STATE OF PLAY
Pros: Great chemistry between Russell Crowe and Rachel McAdams, majority of actors bring their A-game, suspenseful and thrilling without resorting to car chases, actually had me at the edge of my seat, Robin Wright Penn
Cons: Final "twist" trifle annoying and out of nowhere, Helen Mirren plays one note, intrusive score, story needs more room to breathe
Comments: I feel like there was so much that wound up on the cutting-room floor, especially for poor Jeff Daniels. When is that guy going to get a break? I do think Russell Crowe is one of the most consistently watchable actors working today. I would have liked to see this done with Ed Norton in the Ben Affleck role, though. That would have been interesting.
Precious
It's not just the hype. Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire is a damn good movie. In adapting the novel for cinema, Geoffrey Fletcher manages to flesh out and add characters without compromising either the despair or the hope of Sapphire's work. Mario Grigorov's score, when we do hear it, has a sort of ethereal quality, reminding me of the work of Dominik Scherrer (PBS/ITV's Marple). Andrew Dunn's cinematography is appropriately gritty and "real".
And yet...Director Lee Daniels, though commendable as far as his work with actors goes, is a flashy director. And this, to me, is not a flashy story. Slow-mo, overlays, excessive dissolves...what's it all for? This movie works so well for the majority of the time, yet it is just distracting when Daniels adds his "flourishes". It's a shame, really, that what could have been a four-star film must instead be relegated to a mere three-and-one-half.
But yes, yes, we must talk about the actors. The ensemble of girls Precious meets at the alternative school is incredible. The easy chemistry between the six or seven girls we meet help get us (and Precious, of course) through the tougher parts of the film. The real stand-out among them is the talkative, jocular Joann, played by Xosha Roquemore. I know this girl. I went to school with this girl. When a character this small becomes this relatable, someone's doing something right. The actress? The writer? The director? The answer is yes. Paula Patton's Ms. Rain is almost saintly, the teacher trying to help these girls get by. She is as excellent as she is beautiful. Sherri Shepherd, Mariah Carey and Lenny Kravitz have small roles, with Kravitz's Nurse John clearly written in as an example of a good man (there's no such thing in the original novel). Shepherd is just fine, of course, and Carey reveals an acting ability that we never even suspected. So good on her.
And then there are the Joneses. Gabourey Sidibe is the titular Precious; Mo'Nique is her mother Mary. Ho. Ly. Crap. Sidibe will break your heart and warm your soul in this movie, and if you don't want to reach out and hug her -- not piteously, but to claim as a bestie for the restie -- then something must be wrong with you. Patton's character says at one point, "People do love you, Precious." And I heard several people in my theater claim their love for her under their breath. Mo'Nique, meanwhile, is the mom from Hell. I had chills. Her first monologue, raw and abusive, dropped my jaw. Her final monologue gave me goosebumps. Mark these two on your ballots, people; they're in.
A fine film, with commendable production values and an amazing ensemble. I just wish Daniels could have calmed down the style and trusted the substance.
And yet...Director Lee Daniels, though commendable as far as his work with actors goes, is a flashy director. And this, to me, is not a flashy story. Slow-mo, overlays, excessive dissolves...what's it all for? This movie works so well for the majority of the time, yet it is just distracting when Daniels adds his "flourishes". It's a shame, really, that what could have been a four-star film must instead be relegated to a mere three-and-one-half.
But yes, yes, we must talk about the actors. The ensemble of girls Precious meets at the alternative school is incredible. The easy chemistry between the six or seven girls we meet help get us (and Precious, of course) through the tougher parts of the film. The real stand-out among them is the talkative, jocular Joann, played by Xosha Roquemore. I know this girl. I went to school with this girl. When a character this small becomes this relatable, someone's doing something right. The actress? The writer? The director? The answer is yes. Paula Patton's Ms. Rain is almost saintly, the teacher trying to help these girls get by. She is as excellent as she is beautiful. Sherri Shepherd, Mariah Carey and Lenny Kravitz have small roles, with Kravitz's Nurse John clearly written in as an example of a good man (there's no such thing in the original novel). Shepherd is just fine, of course, and Carey reveals an acting ability that we never even suspected. So good on her.
And then there are the Joneses. Gabourey Sidibe is the titular Precious; Mo'Nique is her mother Mary. Ho. Ly. Crap. Sidibe will break your heart and warm your soul in this movie, and if you don't want to reach out and hug her -- not piteously, but to claim as a bestie for the restie -- then something must be wrong with you. Patton's character says at one point, "People do love you, Precious." And I heard several people in my theater claim their love for her under their breath. Mo'Nique, meanwhile, is the mom from Hell. I had chills. Her first monologue, raw and abusive, dropped my jaw. Her final monologue gave me goosebumps. Mark these two on your ballots, people; they're in.
A fine film, with commendable production values and an amazing ensemble. I just wish Daniels could have calmed down the style and trusted the substance.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Getting to the Gold?
At Universal's Oscar campaign site, they've finally given a listing to It's Complicated. And for now, they're only pushing four actors. Meryl Streep in lead, of course. Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin in supporting. But there's one other supporting actor campaignee on their roster.
Neato. I wonder how big a role he actually plays, though, Or just who he is, exactly. Still, once again, I am totally looking forward to this movie.
Neato. I wonder how big a role he actually plays, though, Or just who he is, exactly. Still, once again, I am totally looking forward to this movie.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Christmas in November
THE BOX
The Box is such an odd little movie. I mean, it's a Richard Kelly film, so head-scratching is inevitable. This is, after all, the guy whose previous films are giant bunny flick Donnie Darko and clusterfuck Southland Tales. The Box fits snugly in between, for while it at least has a story (take that, Southland Tales), it is not as consistently brilliant as Kelly's debut.
Another Virginia-set period piece, The Box revolved around a middle-class couple played by James Marsden and Cameron Diaz, and the Mysterious Arlington Steward (Frank Langella) who makes them a curious offer: they will receive one million dollars for pushing a button on a hollow box...but someone they do not know will die. And that's the first ten minutes of the film. The rest is the unraveling of the mystery. What is the Box? Who is this Mysterious Arlington Steward with half a face? What's it all about, Alfie?
Kelly's film is an uneven one. While I could not help snickering at some lines at the beginning, I was breathless by film's end. It's a brilliant finale, preceded by both genuinely chilling moments and head-shakingly cheesy ones. Marsden and Langella are consistently great, but Diaz teeter-totters between exquisite and just OK. I don't think Kelly's script is any big help, of course, as the role of Norma Lewis is too saintly for the film's premise to work. The cinematography by Steven B. Poster is oddly bright, and at times looks a little soft. It gives the whole movie a weird, dreamy effect that is appropriately uncomfortable.
I wish they had done more with the setting. Christmas 1976 looks awesome, but there's no real reason for it. Christmas matters not, except to give us a creepy Santa; at least give me some holiday-themed dialogue like William Hootkins in Hardware. The 1970s aspect is cool, but man do they beat you ober the head with it. Many scenes begin with a popular 1970s something on TV, someone switches it off, begin dialogue. This happens multiple times. Johnny Carson! The crying Indian! Alice's Restaurant! It's the SEVENTIES! But...why the seventies? Because of the references to the Mars Viking project? I don't understand its relevance to the plot, really -- though this may be due to the typical density of Kelly's stories.
The best part of the film? The score by Win Butler, Regine Chassagne and Owen Pallett, members of the Canadian band Arcade Fire. Eerie, beautiful, period-perfect. The violins, the piano, it's all very atmospheric. That's a guarantee in a Richard Kelly movie: the music will always be phenomenal.
At the end of the day, I know I would buy and re-watch this movie over and over. It's great fun, it's outrageous, and sometimes it's a damn masterpiece. It ain't perfect, but it's got spirit!
A CHRISTMAS CAROL
This is how all weekends should start: with a 3D spectacular that's determined to be a MAJOR FREEKING EPIC!!! God Bless Robert Zemeckis and team for not pulling any punches in what is sure to become a holiday tradition! Yes, yes, we all know the story by now. Scrooge and the ghosts and Cratchit and Tiny Tim and all that. And certainly, nothing will ever equal the 1951 version starring Alaistir Sim , easily the most atmospheric and darkly funny of all the films. But damn if this one doesn't come close.
This movie gets it. The gallows humor, the horror aspect, the spiritual LIFT that is achieved by journey's end. The Ghosts are horrifying, even the one of Christmas Present, to an extent. The figures of Ignorance and Want -- shit, I don't want no part of them. And it's truly the first version of this timeless tale that I felt that fear of either. The Ghost of Christmas Yet-to-Come is cleverly interpreted, though it must be said that a "harrowing" chase scene in his segment is awkward, a curious misstep for this production.
Alan Silvestri's score is made up of boisterous renditions of holiday hymns such as "Good King Wenceslas" and "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing". Andrea Bocelli sings an original song with a huge chorus of children over the closing credits. The effects are eye-popping and grand. A truly miraculous production, it demands hyperbole and multiple exclamation points!!!
Yet it also has its intimate moments. The Cratchit home during the Christmas Yet to Come sequence is heart-wrenching, and the breakup scene between young Ebenezer and his fiancee is almost uncomfortably quiet. Jim Carrey and Robin Wright Penn really sell this scene, of course. Indeed, Carrey does a wonderful job in a number of roles, including Scrooge through the years and the Three Ghosts. His eyes are not "dead", as is the regular complaint with mo-cap movies, but full of the bitterness or jocularity required. Zemeckis's pet etchnology is improving every year. Only Colin Firth's character, nephew Fred, was beset with emotionless eyes, but everyone else was surprisingly full of life.
Besides Firth and the chase scene, the only real problem with the film is a strange shoving-aside of Tiny Tim. When Scrooge pleads for Tiny Tim's life, all I could think was, "Why? What was he seen about this kid that makes him so sympathetic?" It's one of the most important aspects of the story, and it hardly seems relevant here. Bizarre.
I wish I had the money for the soundtrack. It's what Christmas should be.
The Box is such an odd little movie. I mean, it's a Richard Kelly film, so head-scratching is inevitable. This is, after all, the guy whose previous films are giant bunny flick Donnie Darko and clusterfuck Southland Tales. The Box fits snugly in between, for while it at least has a story (take that, Southland Tales), it is not as consistently brilliant as Kelly's debut.
Another Virginia-set period piece, The Box revolved around a middle-class couple played by James Marsden and Cameron Diaz, and the Mysterious Arlington Steward (Frank Langella) who makes them a curious offer: they will receive one million dollars for pushing a button on a hollow box...but someone they do not know will die. And that's the first ten minutes of the film. The rest is the unraveling of the mystery. What is the Box? Who is this Mysterious Arlington Steward with half a face? What's it all about, Alfie?
Kelly's film is an uneven one. While I could not help snickering at some lines at the beginning, I was breathless by film's end. It's a brilliant finale, preceded by both genuinely chilling moments and head-shakingly cheesy ones. Marsden and Langella are consistently great, but Diaz teeter-totters between exquisite and just OK. I don't think Kelly's script is any big help, of course, as the role of Norma Lewis is too saintly for the film's premise to work. The cinematography by Steven B. Poster is oddly bright, and at times looks a little soft. It gives the whole movie a weird, dreamy effect that is appropriately uncomfortable.
I wish they had done more with the setting. Christmas 1976 looks awesome, but there's no real reason for it. Christmas matters not, except to give us a creepy Santa; at least give me some holiday-themed dialogue like William Hootkins in Hardware. The 1970s aspect is cool, but man do they beat you ober the head with it. Many scenes begin with a popular 1970s something on TV, someone switches it off, begin dialogue. This happens multiple times. Johnny Carson! The crying Indian! Alice's Restaurant! It's the SEVENTIES! But...why the seventies? Because of the references to the Mars Viking project? I don't understand its relevance to the plot, really -- though this may be due to the typical density of Kelly's stories.
The best part of the film? The score by Win Butler, Regine Chassagne and Owen Pallett, members of the Canadian band Arcade Fire. Eerie, beautiful, period-perfect. The violins, the piano, it's all very atmospheric. That's a guarantee in a Richard Kelly movie: the music will always be phenomenal.
At the end of the day, I know I would buy and re-watch this movie over and over. It's great fun, it's outrageous, and sometimes it's a damn masterpiece. It ain't perfect, but it's got spirit!
A CHRISTMAS CAROL
This is how all weekends should start: with a 3D spectacular that's determined to be a MAJOR FREEKING EPIC!!! God Bless Robert Zemeckis and team for not pulling any punches in what is sure to become a holiday tradition! Yes, yes, we all know the story by now. Scrooge and the ghosts and Cratchit and Tiny Tim and all that. And certainly, nothing will ever equal the 1951 version starring Alaistir Sim , easily the most atmospheric and darkly funny of all the films. But damn if this one doesn't come close.
This movie gets it. The gallows humor, the horror aspect, the spiritual LIFT that is achieved by journey's end. The Ghosts are horrifying, even the one of Christmas Present, to an extent. The figures of Ignorance and Want -- shit, I don't want no part of them. And it's truly the first version of this timeless tale that I felt that fear of either. The Ghost of Christmas Yet-to-Come is cleverly interpreted, though it must be said that a "harrowing" chase scene in his segment is awkward, a curious misstep for this production.
Alan Silvestri's score is made up of boisterous renditions of holiday hymns such as "Good King Wenceslas" and "Hark! The Herald Angels Sing". Andrea Bocelli sings an original song with a huge chorus of children over the closing credits. The effects are eye-popping and grand. A truly miraculous production, it demands hyperbole and multiple exclamation points!!!
Yet it also has its intimate moments. The Cratchit home during the Christmas Yet to Come sequence is heart-wrenching, and the breakup scene between young Ebenezer and his fiancee is almost uncomfortably quiet. Jim Carrey and Robin Wright Penn really sell this scene, of course. Indeed, Carrey does a wonderful job in a number of roles, including Scrooge through the years and the Three Ghosts. His eyes are not "dead", as is the regular complaint with mo-cap movies, but full of the bitterness or jocularity required. Zemeckis's pet etchnology is improving every year. Only Colin Firth's character, nephew Fred, was beset with emotionless eyes, but everyone else was surprisingly full of life.
Besides Firth and the chase scene, the only real problem with the film is a strange shoving-aside of Tiny Tim. When Scrooge pleads for Tiny Tim's life, all I could think was, "Why? What was he seen about this kid that makes him so sympathetic?" It's one of the most important aspects of the story, and it hardly seems relevant here. Bizarre.
I wish I had the money for the soundtrack. It's what Christmas should be.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Oh, Hi, Christmas, You're Early!
Dear God,
I heard that Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin will be co-hosting the Oscars. Now, I know you and I have had our disagreements in the past, but I just want to apologize. If this kind of team-up is happening, then you must be real! You must exist! Thank you!
Love,
Walter
I heard that Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin will be co-hosting the Oscars. Now, I know you and I have had our disagreements in the past, but I just want to apologize. If this kind of team-up is happening, then you must be real! You must exist! Thank you!
Love,
Walter
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Disappointment/Delight
As October waned, I made the effort to see some 2009 releases when not working on other people's films. And I did it! But first, some news:
Because of my actual Film School activities and some last minute rigmarole concerning ticketing, I was unable to attend the Ian McKellen thing. That will teach me to brag prematurely. The absolute worse part? I overheard this conversation at Borders two days later:
MAN: I saw Ian McKellen speak the other day at the theatre school.
WOMAN: Who?
MAN: You know, the guy from Harry Potter?
WOMAN: Oh, yeah...
MAN: Yeah, he was interesting. He sure could talk, though. After two hours, I was like, "Come on, already."
You, sir, did not deserve to see Ian McKellen, and not just because you think he's Michael Gambon. You got tired of watching him speak. You can take whatever Armistead Maupin book you picked out and shove it up your ass, for while you may be able to read, you are certainly illiterate in the realm of theatre and all that is holy. Shithead.
And now the reviews:
17 AGAIN
So, Matthew Perry's life is going down the tubes, and Brian Doyle Murray magics him into his younger self, who happens to be Zac Efron. Now he gets to help his kids...in HIGH SCHOOL. I remember laughing out loud and finding it perfectly charming. Yet I cannot really remember the movie itself. Zefron and Perry do a surprisingly good job of playing different ages of the same man, so that was neat. Zefron got Perry's mannerisms down to a T. And I liked the romance between Zefron and Leslie Mann -- that they sold it as uncreepily as they did says a lot about their abilities as actors. Other than that, and an odd date scene between Lt. Dangle and Jan Levinson-Gould...meh.
SAW VI
Holy crap, is this really the first movie I saw in theaters since Jennifer's Body? A good way to end October, surely. It's probably the smartest in the series since Saw II (which I love), and even gets to be relevant by taking on the Vice President of a Health Insurance Company! The challenges in this game are actually pretty suspenseful, and I cared a LOT about what happened to the characters this time around. It was nice to finally care again. The editing was also a lot less ADD this time around. Great fun, if you're into it. But if you don't like Saw to begin with, you won't see this anyway. That's OK, but you'll be missing some great entertainment.
A SERIOUS MAN
Some movies get better and better upon reflection. This is one of those. True, I only just saw it Sunday night, but even now, I'm thinking it's probably one of the best movies of the year. It's basic plot: Larry Gopnik (Michael Stuhlbarg) goes through a week of crises in a mostly Jewish community in 1967 Minnesota. You would think a movie that basically tells you God doesn't care and religion won't help would be a downer. Ok, it is in a way, but it is uproariously funny at the same time. The Coen Brothers may have won their Oscar in 2007, but this film is their true masterpiece. Stuhlbarg's performance should be generating more discussion, but for me, it was all about Fred Melamed as Sy Ableman, a pompous intellectual whose eloquent phraseology is hilarious in its pretentiousness. A gem of a comedy -- but DARK.
WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE
Despite the pacing issues -- the middle portion is QUITE padded -- I really enjoyed Where the Wild Things Are. I wasn't ready to be hurled into the darker, more complicated second half of the film, but I liked that it took me there. There's some real genius in the expansion of Maurice Sendak's universe, as written by Spike Jonze (also director) and Dave Eggers (who co-wrote the disappointing Away We Go earlier this year). Some deep, disturbing shit goes down in this movie, and it hits hard. Catherine Keener's teeny tiny role as the mom is great (as always), but let us not forget the Wild Things. Although they are not in the costumes, James Gandolfini, Catherine O'Hara, Chris Cooper, etc., bring a lot to their table in their performances. And of course, Max Records, playing Max (appropriately enough), is just as talented as he is adorable. Can't wait for this kid to get more work.
Ack, but that Karen O score! Distracting, cacophonous, irritating! Yes, yes, it is appropriately "wild", but it was not my cuppa, thank you very much. Such a shame; "Maps" is my second favorite song of all of ever.
[Pic from AwardsDaily]
Because of my actual Film School activities and some last minute rigmarole concerning ticketing, I was unable to attend the Ian McKellen thing. That will teach me to brag prematurely. The absolute worse part? I overheard this conversation at Borders two days later:
MAN: I saw Ian McKellen speak the other day at the theatre school.
WOMAN: Who?
MAN: You know, the guy from Harry Potter?
WOMAN: Oh, yeah...
MAN: Yeah, he was interesting. He sure could talk, though. After two hours, I was like, "Come on, already."
You, sir, did not deserve to see Ian McKellen, and not just because you think he's Michael Gambon. You got tired of watching him speak. You can take whatever Armistead Maupin book you picked out and shove it up your ass, for while you may be able to read, you are certainly illiterate in the realm of theatre and all that is holy. Shithead.
And now the reviews:
17 AGAIN
So, Matthew Perry's life is going down the tubes, and Brian Doyle Murray magics him into his younger self, who happens to be Zac Efron. Now he gets to help his kids...in HIGH SCHOOL. I remember laughing out loud and finding it perfectly charming. Yet I cannot really remember the movie itself. Zefron and Perry do a surprisingly good job of playing different ages of the same man, so that was neat. Zefron got Perry's mannerisms down to a T. And I liked the romance between Zefron and Leslie Mann -- that they sold it as uncreepily as they did says a lot about their abilities as actors. Other than that, and an odd date scene between Lt. Dangle and Jan Levinson-Gould...meh.
SAW VI
Holy crap, is this really the first movie I saw in theaters since Jennifer's Body? A good way to end October, surely. It's probably the smartest in the series since Saw II (which I love), and even gets to be relevant by taking on the Vice President of a Health Insurance Company! The challenges in this game are actually pretty suspenseful, and I cared a LOT about what happened to the characters this time around. It was nice to finally care again. The editing was also a lot less ADD this time around. Great fun, if you're into it. But if you don't like Saw to begin with, you won't see this anyway. That's OK, but you'll be missing some great entertainment.
A SERIOUS MAN
Some movies get better and better upon reflection. This is one of those. True, I only just saw it Sunday night, but even now, I'm thinking it's probably one of the best movies of the year. It's basic plot: Larry Gopnik (Michael Stuhlbarg) goes through a week of crises in a mostly Jewish community in 1967 Minnesota. You would think a movie that basically tells you God doesn't care and religion won't help would be a downer. Ok, it is in a way, but it is uproariously funny at the same time. The Coen Brothers may have won their Oscar in 2007, but this film is their true masterpiece. Stuhlbarg's performance should be generating more discussion, but for me, it was all about Fred Melamed as Sy Ableman, a pompous intellectual whose eloquent phraseology is hilarious in its pretentiousness. A gem of a comedy -- but DARK.
WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE
Despite the pacing issues -- the middle portion is QUITE padded -- I really enjoyed Where the Wild Things Are. I wasn't ready to be hurled into the darker, more complicated second half of the film, but I liked that it took me there. There's some real genius in the expansion of Maurice Sendak's universe, as written by Spike Jonze (also director) and Dave Eggers (who co-wrote the disappointing Away We Go earlier this year). Some deep, disturbing shit goes down in this movie, and it hits hard. Catherine Keener's teeny tiny role as the mom is great (as always), but let us not forget the Wild Things. Although they are not in the costumes, James Gandolfini, Catherine O'Hara, Chris Cooper, etc., bring a lot to their table in their performances. And of course, Max Records, playing Max (appropriately enough), is just as talented as he is adorable. Can't wait for this kid to get more work.
Ack, but that Karen O score! Distracting, cacophonous, irritating! Yes, yes, it is appropriately "wild", but it was not my cuppa, thank you very much. Such a shame; "Maps" is my second favorite song of all of ever.
[Pic from AwardsDaily]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)