Cloverfield

My quickest review yet, summed up as follows: the cast of The Hills wanders onto the set of a Godzilla movie and thankfully die.

Cloverfield
Score: 38%

Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon

Wanting to get in the Halloween spirit, I decided to watch a horror movie I had been putting off for quite a while: Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon. Although the movie has its moments, almost all of which occur in the first two acts, for brevity's sake I will primarily be focusing on what I didn't like.

Let's begin with the lack of originality. This movie is Man Bites Dog meets Scream. I'm not a fan of Scream (or its shitty sequels, for that matter) but will admit it is far more original and clever than this film. And I'm not even going to compare this film to the immensely superior, Man Bites Dog. Behind the Mask borrows heavily from both of these movies but still only manages to produce a mediocre movie.

In fairness, this is a low budget horror film, so I shouldn't nitpick the script nor bother discussing the quality of acting. But I guess it's not nitpicking when the script is filled with plot holes (big, gaping ones too). The script is at its best during the mockumentary stretch, but the humor is too sparse to carry the movie, let alone make up for the very weak third act. For a movie (and director) so obsessed with the glory of 80's slasher films, the third act is a rushed nightmare of lameness. Part of this has to do with the tired "joke" that all of this has to play out in cliched horror movie fashion; but mostly, it's the lack of an attempt to emulate 80's slasher movies. Sure, the setting is fine, but all of the kills are boring and practically bloodless. The best kill in the film was an accident not involving the killer!

The bottom line: there's just not enough that works here to overlook what doesn't. There's enough here for one viewing, but that's it. I don't want my time back, but I would not give this movie anymore of it, even if a sequel arrives sometime in the future.

Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon
Score: 40%

Quick Hits

Some other films I watched recently that I don't have time to write posts.

Hobson's Choice
Score: 80%

The Visitor
Score: 70%

Into the Wild
Score: 62%

Momma's Man
Score: 66%

Dear Zachary: A Letter To A Son About His Father

A heart-wrenching film, Dear Zachary: A Letter To A Son About His Father, will leave you emotionally exhausted. This is a film that shows the best of humanity, through the pure love of friendship, family, and two amazing parents. But it also depicts the worst of humanity, and a broken judicial system. Some have argued that the movie is manipulative, and that's a somewhat fair argument, although I disagree with the use of the word manipulative and its negative connotation. A good man was murdered, and his friend created this movie, initially to memorialize him, and to share the film with friends and family only. But as new events sprang from this tragedy, the film changed, along with the purpose of the film. Does the filmmaker have an agenda? Sure, but I think every filmmaker has an agenda. Given the highly subjective nature of the documentary, and how close the director is to the subject, I see it less as manipulation and more as an unfettered emotional release of love, hatred, anger, and frustration in the face of tragic circumstances as they are unfolding, channeled through a camera's lens. It's impossible to really critique such a film. I did find moments in the film to be overwrought and heavy-handed, too frenetic at times, overly stylized in places, but certainly nothing that robs the movie of its real power; it never distracts and the movie maintains its firm grip on our hearts, squeezing and never letting go.

Dear Zachary: A Letter To A Son About His Father
Score: 70%

Slacker (me, not the movie)

Yes, I've been slacking off on my blog. And to commemorate my slackdom, here's a poorly thought out, less than interesting, totally uninspired list of some movies I've seen recently with merely a rating.

Rec
Score: 67%

Young @ Heart
Score: 70% (100% for the people in the film, 40% for the director)

Standard Operating Procedure
Score: 78%

Amarcord

Every summer I look forward to going to see films at the Paramount. I ended this summer at the Paramount with Federico Fellini's semi-autobiographical film, Amarcord, a masterpiece that manages both poignancy and bawdiness in a nostalgic and often dreamlike remembrance of his youth in a small seaside town in Fascist-era Italy. The film is populated with a menagerie of larger-than-life characters, characters that, despite the satirical elements in the film, Fellini clearly has a tremendous fondness. There is no central character; Fellini just parades them all before us. If there is a central character, it would have to be the town.

Set over the span of one year, the film is book-ended by the arrival of Spring. There are multiple narrators, some even addressing the camera directly, as Fellini guides the viewer through life in the town of his memory, laced with moments of the fantastical. Fellini's direction is masterful, the film flowing with rhythmic effortlessness of orchestrated chaos, a hypnotic dance to the wonderful Nino Rota music.

On the surface, the mood is mostly up tempo, the residents brimming with life and the film loaded with humor, from the lofty satirical to the lowly fart joke and everything in between. (Yes, there are many a fart joke to be had here.) There are also many moments of wistfulness that Fellini renders with the touch of a poet, such as the scene when the grandfather gets lost in the fog. And magical moments, as when a peacock descends through a curtain of falling snow to land on a frozen fountain in the town square.

Fellini once said: "My films from my past, recount memories that are completely invented." Here, Fellini invented a deliberately artificial universe, one that not only illustrates that memory is not reality, but also stresses that the hopes and dreams Mussolini's Fascist regime offered were illusory.

I know it's an oft repeated phrase, but they really don't make movies like this anymore.

Amarcord
Score: 94%

Show Me Love (1998)

Fucking Amal is the original and far superior title of Lukas Moodysson's debut film, Show Me Love. According to the director, the name was changed because Variety magazine would not run an advertisement for the film with that title. Moodysson chose the new title from the name of the song that plays at the end of the film. I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise to me that the film would lose its original title in the States. I'll leave that rant for another day.

This is a simple and honest movie shot in a grainy, almost documentary style. Teenagers are captured realistically and with non-professional actors. The cinematography is intimate and clumsy, perfectly fitting for a movie about teenagers.

Taking place in the small town of Amal, these teenagers suffer from ennui and the usual dosage of teen angst. It is a movie about identity. It is a movie that explores alienation and loneliness. Ultimately, I find the honest portrayal of these characters--their awkwardness, their inability to communicate emotions, their cruelty--to be an accurate depiction of life as a teen and therefore rewarding in a way most American teen movies never seem to be.

Show Me Love
Score: 72%

District 9 (2009)

Having seen the original short film that would become District 9, Alive in Joburg, I must say the film does not live up to the promise of the short. Of course, this will be perceived as either good or bad, depending on what type of moviegoer one is. The film caters more to the popcorn eating, escapism crowd than the serious-minded sci-fi aficionados. But I guess that should be obvious once the viewer has been made aware of the director's statement that (regarding a deeper social commentary) "the film would become too serious and oppressive and that it 'wouldn't be entertaining on a popcorn level.' " That should go a long way into answering any questions one has about what this filmmaker is trying to accomplish.

As entertainment on a popcorn level, one doesn't have to be concerned with the many plot holes, contrivances and the heavy-handed allegory on racism, nor the confusing mishmash of styles and tones. On this level, it entertains...if you can just shut your brain off and enjoy the ride of humor, gory violence, and action. However, when it is perceived as more than just mindless entertainment, problems arise.

Because it certainly tries to be more than mindless entertainment. Unfortunately, it mostly falls short in its attempt to deliver its themes convincingly, and stylistically and tonally becomes confused and uncertain as to what it wants to be and say. There is the serious documentary-style film attempting to expose the darker side of humanity, and then there is the action film with cool weapons and explosions trying to entertain "on a popcorn level." Mix in copious amounts of gore and humor--scenes of cartoonish violence that seem inspired by Peter Jackson's early films. (Yes, the same Peter Jackson who produced this movie.) The presence of the latter lends a lightheartedness that is incongruous with the harsher, more serious themes of the film. All of these styles and tonal shifts make the film feel disjointed and unsure of itself.

Sure, District 9 is head and shoulders above scrap heap garbage like The Transformers, but does that really say anything? What it says to me is that moviegoers and critics are so inundated with uninspired tripe that when something comes along that offers more, it is hastily declared brilliant. I certainly think the movie succeeds in some ways, but I don't agree with the consensus that this movie is something more than a slightly above average film. It had higher aspirations than the average film, but it didn't meet those aspirations fully.

The hype surrounding this movie has probably done more damage than good, bolstering expectation for a movie that can't match the lauded praise. Despite a lot of problems I have with the film, it is still slightly better than the average movie and a decent flick for the escapism crowd; but for those looking for the next great sci-fi film, this isn't it.

District 9
Score: 58%

Signs of Life on Planet Coen?

For the most part, I hate movie trailers. They pretty much do for movies what Cliff Notes do for novels: ruin them. I just don't want that much information prior to seeing a movie. I want the mystery. I want to be surprised.

So why has the trailer always persisted in this manner, always there to give away the entire plot of a movie, and in some cases ruining key moments of the film? Good question. I don't get it. I try to avoid trailers at all costs. My only exception is teaser trailers. Teaser trailers (done right) give away virtually nothing, but lure you into the magic of what the film might deliver. The best example, in my opinion, is the teaser for Kubrick's The Shining.


Shining (Teaser) by Tower-of-Dark


With that said, I tossed caution to the wind and watched the new trailer for the Coen's, A Serious Man, which has been getting a fair share of buzz on the internet, in the way only the internet can do it. Based on what people were saying, the trailer didn't just boil itself down to a minute and a half version of the film like every other trailer out there. This of course, piqued my interest.



Having now seen it, I do feel like I know more than I wanted to know. Sure, the trailer itself was nicely done, choosing to focus more on capturing the essence of a "Coen Bros. experience" and less on summarizing the plot of the film. But no matter how expertly crafted the trailer, there is the more pressing issue: did it sell me, did it deliver the promise of a great Coen Brother's film? Is this a return to form, or another mediocre effort? In my opinion, their first four films (listed HERE, chronologically) are still their finest work and the standard for which I've held them to with every subsequent film. They have made very good films since, such as Fargo and The Big Lebowski. But they have also had their fair share of less than satisfying efforts. My finger is pointed at you, Intolerable Cruelty and The Ladykillers!

So where does that leave me, exactly? On the fence. I'm as intrigued as I am skeptical. But that's been a common feeling leading up to the release of every Coen Brother's film since The Man Who Wasn't There.

The Ascent (1977)

I finally got around to watching Larisa Shepitko's, The Ascent. Set in Belarus during WWII, The Ascent is a war movie concerned with the psychological toll war inflicts on people, and how extreme situations alter who we are and the decisions we make. The use of Christian allegory narrows the film's themes, and even though the two main characters are defined in an allegorical context, the films' depiction of humanity in crisis is still universal. Shepitko uses lingering close-ups to convey these themes of moral struggle and troubled consciences to great effect.

Shepitko's film has a poetic style and is beautifully shot. The bleak winter landscapes lend symbolic weight and set the mood of the film from the onset.

This is an excellent film that, for me, falters slightly in the second half due to the overt execution of its Christian allegory. It is a harrowing film that will stay with you long after the film concludes.

The Ascent
Score: 81%

The Hurt Locker (2009)

 
The Hurt Locker is not a plot-driven film. I mention this only because I've seen too many moronic posts (on various websites) decrying its lack of a plot, and how terrible this is...apparently only to those persons who cannot wrap their heads around the idea of a character-driven film. And The Hurt Locker is a character-driven film, charting a bomb squad unit's final 38 days of its Company's current deployment. This is also a war movie, but one that leans on suspense over action, one that focuses on individual soldiers and not the politics of war.

People have also complained about the film's use of the shaky camera, and although I am not a proponent of this cinematic technique, I do think it works well in the context of a war movie, especially one that seeks to embed the viewer into the unit as it goes about the nerve-wracking job of defusing bombs. After all, the script comes from a journalist who was embedded in Iraq with a bomb squad unit. It seems only natural that the film be shot this way.

Bigelow does a great job of capturing the environment: the suffocating heat, the arid wind choking with sand and nagging flies. She knows how to ratchet up the tension in the film until it becomes so unrelenting that the viewers are literally holding onto their seats. Despite some cliches and heavy-handed moments, Bigelow delivers a riveting and thoroughly engrossing film.

The Hurt Locker
Score: 79%

Torture of the Artist as a Young Man

Many people have asked me what it is about Ingmar Bergman and his films that I love so much and I never really answer the question. Not for lack of an answer. Not because I'm surprised someone would ask...or am I?

There are few directors who have made as many great films as Ingmar Bergman. (For brevity's sake, I won't be delving into individual films, but have offered a "recommended list" at the end of the post.) Bergman's sustained level of excellence over the course of a long career is also quite remarkable, and puts him in the company of only a few directors with an oeuvre as impressive. As a proponent of the auteur theory, I have a much greater appreciation for directors as artists, and not just hired hands. And Bergman is the paragon of auteurism. I also have an appreciation for literature, and Ingmar Bergman the writer was an exceptional talent. I have read several of his scripts, and they are indeed works of art in their own right.

And personally, I relate to his characters: their humanity, their frailty. I have a shared understanding and connection to the fears and doubts he had, the demons he wrestled with his whole life. I certainly don't pretend that these are not, in most instances, universal fears and doubts. We all struggle at some point in our lives with death and our own mortality. And a lot of people struggle with doubt over whether God exists. Bergman was certainly not the first tortured artist, and certainly not the first to bare his soul through his work. But there are other psychological explorations and themes he delved into where few (if any) directors dared to go. And it's this daring, this unflinching gaze into the depths of the human psyche, and the skill for which he translates them, that I admire most. His films are austere. They are difficult to watch, sure. But think about the greatest literary works. How many classic novels are happy, joyous romps? Are they not filled with tremendous suffering and great tragedy? Bergman was the first great film artist, the first to put film into the same conversation with literature and art. And only a few have joined him.

Yes, I have many reasons why I love his films, and I often wonder...why don't people like Ingmar Bergman?

Recommended films (listed chronologically):


Smiles of a Summer's Night (1955)
Wild Strawberries (1957)
Seventh Seal (1957)
Through a Glass Darkly (1961)
Winter Light (1963)
Persona (1966)
Cries and Whispers (1973)
Scenes from a Marriage (1973)
Autumn Sonata (1978)
Fanny and Alexander (1982)