Periodic Movie Review

[locke]

Likewise, spoilers below, yar.

like I said it's one of the year's best. Glad you liked it.

I was particularly impressed by the scenes between Debra Winger and Rosemarie DeWitt and how those contrast to Winger's scene's with Hathaway. I think two of the most affecting scenes of the film are the scene when Rachel tries to draw her mother into having a little more involvement in the wedding and she keeps demurring--wanting to stay distant and removed. And the later scene at the end of the wedding as Mom is about to leave, these were so remarkable, and I think they really spoke to the complex bond between Rachel and Kim, and why it was so much more intense, between those two their relationship is parental, estranged and sisterly all at once. And I think this also explains the emasculation of their father as well. It seems both he and Rachel took on more traits that their wife and mother, respectively, couldn't provide any more. And the dishwasher war is one of the best scenes of the year. So awesome.

I teared up during the groom's song as well, that was my favorite moment.

I'd like to see it again because I saw it opening weekend and it was a packed house. I had to sit in the third row and during the last ten minutes I started to get noxious from the increased shaky cam--which has never happened to me before. I listened more than watched much of that final bit.

The cinematography is outstanding. look at that scene when they come home from the rehearsal dinner and the camera follows around Kim through the dark house as the family settles in, roaming through the house turning on lights. Do you have any idea how insanely hard it is to film a shot like that? just running a steadycam through a huge variety of lighting scenarios that dramatically invert as part of the scene. Blew my mind, and most people wouldn't ever even notice it as an impressive sequence of lighting, because it's just 'turning on the lights' in your house. which, btw, is one of those things you almost never see in a movie, lights come on almost immediately in a scene or they are already on. You don't move through a darkened house turning on lights. horror films have you move through darkened houses, but those are all 'lit' scenes meaning you have tons of lights flooding the set but use various gels and devices and camera settings and stocks to make it look like a dark house while everything is still crystal clear and visible. This scene was more documentary esque and realistic. All the more remarkable for it.

[Valentine]

That was one of my favorite scenes - the one right after the rehearsal dinner. It was the first time the tension really felt as though it expxloded. I've done very little camera work, but I've done plenty of lighting in my life, and I definitely can relate to the difficulties of setting the scene. It almost felt symbolic to me - as though the lights came on one by one as the tension escalated, and the true feelings behind the sisters came to the forefront more and more.

I never looked at it as though Kim and her father had to take the traits of Debra Winger's character, because of her distance. That's a good point though. It's easy to understand her detachment due to the extreme circumstances that afflicted their family. I suppose I took it all in at face value, that everyone was so deeply affected by the tragedy that their own roles in the family were blurred.

I loved the diswasher scene as well - both Bill Irwin and Tunde Abebimpe shined in that sequence. Bill Irwin's transition from charisma to subsequent despair was beautifully executed. This was the one scene where he really showed off his talent best.

[locke]

W. isn't a great film but it has some great performances in it. Josh Brolin is terrific as Bush, elizabeth Banks and Richard Dreyfuss are excellent. The film is very thin though, doesn't try to do much or say much with itself, an oppurtunity to present Bush, a bit satirically, but somewhat even handed, it's not a movie that goes for the jugular.

otoh, it's a must see for Thandie Newton's disastrous performance of Condoleeza Rice. One of the worst performances in recent memory and just incredibly bad in every posssible way. The certain winner of worst supporting actress razzie. It really is that bad. It could win worst supporting for the decade. Incredibly funny because of that, but not in a good way.

[locke]

Quantum of Solace may have the most random, stupid and meaningless title of any James Bond film, but it's still one of the better James Bond films. And although it is not as good as Casino Royale, this feels more like a classic Bond should feel. I'd probably rate it below Goldeneye as my third favorite.

Largely the movie makes sense, though the film doesn't spoonfeed you all the information to keep you from going "huh?" through much of the film. But in bold strokes, the organization that Vespa was trying to get close to that had her killed is large and secretive and pushes governments around like a primary school bully. The film opens with an interrogation of one of their leaders, and Bond and M find out just how deeply this organization has their people planted. Bond follows the trail to Haiti where it leads him to the mysterious Matthiau Almaric, leader of a company called Project Greene. Greene's sights are set on Bolivia, particularly Bolivia's resources and they're willing to install a deposed military dictator to get what they want. The race is on.

I like Daniel Craig a lot as James Bond, he's someone you can actually believe most women will quite willingly and happily drop everything to bone at least once. I've never got that vibe off any of the classic bonds, Connery somewhat, but not as much. And Craig gets hurt, isn't superman but is a legitimate badass that bullets just don't want to hit him because they're scared he'll hit them back. I actually heard a couple girls behind me's intake of breath when he emerges in a tux at the opera and an under their breath, "yesssss", which I found both appropriate and amusing. I can't remember the main Bond girl's name, but Fields, the backup Bond girl for the shagging, did an awesome job with a small role. Both were very yummy and unlike Casino Royale, this film definitely had you saying, Bond you lucky bastard which pretty much all Bond films should do.

The action scenes, fights, explosions and chases were all utterly top notch and amongst the best in Bond. gadgets are an afterthought, but still awesome. Those tables are real by the way, word is that within 5-10 years that's how editing is going to happen, much more like an old movieola or flat bed than mouse and clicking on a monitor. Minority Report tech, here we come.



spoilers:





What I didn't like was that the coda tacked on to the end of the movie made no sense. end it in bolivia, or not, don't make things more complicated, I'm certain this is setting up a third film, but it just seemed pointless there. Also the whole water thing, completely a 'huh' thing. If they can afford to buy all that land just for the water rights, why would they then want to simply settle for being a utilities provider. They're expending a hell of a lot of risk for an unequivalent reward. I can understand the writers wanting to misdirect us and not have it be oil, but have it be some other valuable commodity, underground platinum mining, for instance.

[locke]

Viridiana is a Luis Buñuel film from the 1960s. I would set it right around the same level as The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie in terms of lots to admire, not too terribly much to enjoy. As with any Buñuel there's an immense amount of symbolism going on, whether it's the magnificent (Viridiana undressing, going to the 'masquerade' in the wedding gown or the Last Supper of the Paupers) or the dull (the scandalous 'menage a trois' ending), there's a lot of subtext deliberately layered into the film.

The black and white cinematography is utterly stunning, whether tonally or texturally the film is a feast for the eyes, Buñuel's compositions are impeccable and something as simple as shooting the sparse forest outside the manor is just a sumptuous treat to drink in because of the tonal qualities of the exposure and the wide angle lens used, just brilliant.

but the film is also exhibit A for my impatience with modernism, while the film is good, it's also good in a slightly forced way, and that makes me sort of impatient. an odd description, perhaps, but one that makes sense to me. I prefer earlier Buñuel to this, but this is the strongest of the latter Buñuel that I've seen.

Briefly, the film tells the story of Viridiana, a young acolyte who is about to say her vows to become a nun. but first she must return 'home' to visit her patron uncle. Her uncle is an odd, charismatic and fascinating bear of a man. He immediately falls in love with his niece who looks almost identical to his tragically departed wife of long ago (she died of a heart attack in her wedding gown). there are advances and misunderstandings and Viridiana flees but is brought back in an unexpected manner, the film shifts into a second half when her uncle's illegitimate son appears and Viridiana decides to bring all the town's beggers, paupers, prostitutes and homeless miscreants to the estate in the hopes of providing for them out of christian charity. But these are coarse and foul people, not a charming lower class but one most would find repugnant, perhaps more real than many bleeding hearts would like to acknowledge.

quite fascinating but for film buffs only, it's doubtful to appeal to few others. 7 of 10


I also revisited Osaka Elegy, a Kenji Mizoguchi film from the 30s that impressed me very much several years ago. To my disappointment it was not as stunning as I remembered. The film is shocking and bold in it's flagrant depiction of a girl who makes herself her bosses mistress to extort money from them to save her father and brother from ruination, but at the same time it's not as compelling as I once found it. perhaps it is a bit too harsh, or perhaps I've watched too much ozu lately which is more subtle but also much richer than the overwrought film. Still there is much to recommend it and it is very short, a must see for fans of early japanese cinema. 7 of 10

[locke]

Slumdog Millionaire is the best new (as in made recently) film I've seen in five years. Honestly, it's the first 'new' film I've seen since In America that has the potential to make my all time top twenty. Holy s*** what an absolutely amazing, insanely perfect absolute splendiferous fantastical cinematic trip that was. My god. This is going to be my film of the year, and by god I'm going to give one of those little boys the best supporting actor of the year, I think it'll be Youngest Jamal, but it could be Middle Samir. Yeah, even over Heath Ledger's Joker, those little kids were fantastic. Danny Boyle's direction is incredible. the cinematography is mindbogglingly incredible and the editing, jesus christ, what a masterpiece.

For those that don't know, A slumdog is a derogatory term for an indian slum kid. Slumdog Millionaire is about just such a boy who goes on the show and keeps getting questions right, and the film tells us, through flashbacks how it is he knew the answers to each of the questions.

amazing, intense, thrilling and catharticl experience. want to see it again.

[Valentine]

I enjoyed Quantom of Solace a lot. It wasn't amazing like Casino Royale, but it certainly was all that I expected and more from a James Bond movie. Daniel Craig is a brilliant Bond. I also really enjoyed Gemma Artertom as Fields. I think Marc Forster did a great job in further refining this particular series of Bond films, showing us how James Bond became the 007 that we all grew up with.
A lot of my friends complained that the character development wasn't seen in the film; I disagree. Just because some of the developments were inferred and made "off screen" doesn't mean they weren't there. I think a lot more was left to the viewer's discretion.
All in all, the film wasn't as great as Casino Royale; however, it's definitely worth a watch. A solid, entertaining, action-packed Bond film.

*SPOILER* *SPOILER* *SPOILER*
Did anyone else think Camille death by being covered in oil was a complete throwback to Shirley Eaton's death by being covered in gold (A la Goldfinger)?

[Valentine]

Twilight

I didn't expect much, so I wasn't terribly disappointed. I did, however, leave the theatre thinking my time would have been better spend in bed, being rested for my early classes. The writing was awful. I know some of it was directly out of the book, but it was pieced together so sloppily and cheesily that any ammount of effort on the part of the cast could not make the dialouge worthwhile. The movie was rushed, obviously, because it is difficult to fit a book into a film. One day Edward and Isabella meet; the next, they're "in love."
Edward Pattington cannot act. He's robotic and distant, but not in the way that the role calls for. Kristen Stewart actually wasn't bad, but not strong enough to salvage the film. I thought Ashley Greene made a good Alice, despite not really feeling that she physically fit the role.
All in all, though, I felt like I was watching a poorly executed high school play that I was obligated to say I enjoyed to all parties that came with me.

[Petra456]

A high school play, that's exactly what I thought! I mean, I enjoyed it way more then I thought I would (I was just going because my best friend is obsessed, and really didn't think I would enjoy it).

I don't know, it made me want to read the books.

[Wil]

The guys I've talked to...

<_JECKEL_> I just saw "Twilight"
<NotWil> Did you at least get laid afterward?
<_JECKEL_> ya know...I remember a time when vampires were actually pretty cool...
<_JECKEL_> why do the new generations take everything I like and then throw glitter on it?
<_JECKEL_> NotWil, no, I did not.
* _JECKEL_ shrugs
<_JECKEL_> it is seriously a chick-flick vampire thing though....not much fights or violence that you'd expect from "Killers" or "Monsters" as the main character keeps calling himself.
<_JECKEL_> more of the mooshy love story crap. So what I get is <on screen vampire> "You're my life..." <theater seat girlfriend> "ahh..am I your life, baby??" <me> "...ehhhh.."
<_JECKEL_> I also got lots of "You're my Edward, baby" -.-
<_JECKEL_> ya know what
<_JECKEL_> they put glitter on vampires
<_JECKEL_> that means zombies will probably get flowery smells next

[Gravity Defier]

This isn't a review at all; just random thoughts and reactions really.

Twilight:
First, I was laughing and giggling the entire time for one reason or another. I was the person you hate in a theater, which I'm normally not, but I just couldn't help it. It was so darn campy and 80s, and I mean that both as a compliment and an insult.

I would like to be called Spidermonkey as a pet-name. "Hold on tight, Spidermonkey."

I would also like to live in a different state so that I can be called Arizona.

I think two shots of Phoenix were real (Sky Harbor Airport and one of the mountains looked like Camelback to me).

Robert Pattinson did a great job of being awkward, which isn't quite how I remember him being in the book...but when he smiled? *melt* I'm a sucker for smiles.

Bella-actress...she needs to tone the face down.

Charlie was my favorite character, esp. because of his reaction to meeting Edward and his obsession with pepper spray.

[locke]

Four Christmases is somewhat funny but mostly awful.

Sadly it could have very easily been mostly funny and only a little awful--the sort of awful that's acceptable in a christmas movie (see Christmas Vacation, or The Family Stone for different types of awful).

The film is laced with problems from the casting, to a director not in control of his cast, to the misuse of Reese Witherspoon to the bizarre amalgamation of stereotypes (the film is an equal opportunity offender) that each family represents. The script reeks of being overproduced. for example, it feels as though it was obviously meant to take place in NYC and Connecticutt/New England/Penn or Jersey, but someone said, "all the christmas movies take place there let's try the west coast" and it was inexplicably moved to San Francisco where a vicious dose of fog causes the unfortunate airport closure, rather than a massive winter storm. unfortunately they forgot to tell the costume department because vince and reese go around in east coast winter overcoats all the time, only to remove them to reveal a short sleeved shirt underneath. mhm. that and the stereotype families don't make since. The low class family (vince's father) all have southern accents for no particular reason, despite living within an hour of SF. And his father claims to drive a combine for a living despite apparent living situation. right. Reese's cougar middle class/desperate housewives mothers house seems straight out of smily suburban Connecticut hell, and don't sound california at all. Vince's hippy mother could fit anywhere I guess, and is most sanfrancisco of any, still nothing felt right, it all felt programmed. Badly Badly programmed.

The film is also very raunchy, it's about equal to Something About Mary and Meet the Fockers in its constant sex humor. Yes it is sort of funny to have an old grandma talk about pleasuring grandpa with her hands and mouth more for her christmas wish, but only for an incredibly cheap shock value. the joke doesn't go anywhere, it's just there to shock. and shock it does. it shocked the audience into a good five minutes of silence. it took quite a bit of slapstick to get the audience back on track. Definitely not your average family holiday comedy humor, I wasn't particularly bothered by it, but it made me uncomfortable that my family was there watching it as well. Most of them did not like the movie at all, and the only reason was the inappropriate humor that heavily interfered with the ability of the film to tell a coherent story. It's unfortunate to see such bombs scattered so consistently throughout the movie, often derailing the film from its audience completely. It's almost as though the filmmakers wanted to subvert the genre but didn't want to tell anyone they were doing that, so they wind up sabotaging their own film instead of pulling off the mockery they were hoping for.

The second big problem is the casting/writing of the leads and their direction. Vince Vaughn, it seemed, was obviously improvising all the time during his scenes. During the entire film he almost never stops monologuing, and while some of this is funny, it's like a constant machine gun barrage of Vince stopping everything to give a rambling speech of Vaughnian humor. otoh, Reese Witherspoon had incredibly little to do in the script, you get the sense a great deal of her character was cut out to give Vince more screen time to monologue with (I can see these cracking up the editors, and no one being able to bear cutting them, but they really needed some focus to bring it into play, that should be the director's job on set, but he seems to have been as enamored with Vaughn as everyone else. It's a bit of an ugly star party here for him, and he does not come out of it looking good. (odd how his funniest scenes were when he was speechless... hmm)

Additionally the film has a very clear structure, but because there's so little progression to the key core relationship, there's nothing driving the film, so despite having a great conceptual structure, the film rambles and stumbles constantly and the transition from the first christmas to the second christmas is incredibly abrupt and quite offputting.

I found the film frequently funny, but in a mostly forgettable way, the slapstick mostly works, the verbal wordplay mostly doesn't. none of the characters feel remotely real, except perhaps Robert Duvall's character as Vaughn's father. It feels a bit overlong and unedited, and if you're not too prudish you might enjoy it but overall it's a pretty bad movie. and my standards for holiday movies are not high. I enjoyed Christmas with the Kranks (but not Deck the Halls, I draw the line somewhere).

[locke]

Fred Claus - awful, slightly better than Four Christmases only because Paul Giamatti is a convincing Santa.

Casino Royale - watching this again illuminates SOOO much that had me confused in Quantum of Solace. it's really as though the final ten minutes of this film should be the first ten of QoS. It makes the latter film a stronger entry but also more clearly illuminates its shortcomings (in comparison to this film, still an excellent Bond film)

Also Bluray HFS! I am so hopelessly hooked now. hooray playstation 3 and curses upon the movie gods for gifting us with such a lovely medium for filmwatching.

--

Milk
I'm Harvey Milk, and I'm here to recruit you!

I doubt many people have watched The Times of Harvey Milk a thirty minute, mid-eighties documentary on the man that I believe won an oscar. If you have, some of the vintage footage seen in this film should be familiar. If you haven't, and like me (before I saw it) you don't even know who Harvey Milk is, here's a brief primer on a modern day martyr who is scrupulously ignored whenever possible outside of the gay community.

Harvey Milk was the first openly gay man elected to a major public office in history. He was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (like a city council) promoted gay activism and gay rights and was assassinated in 1978 by Dan White.

The film is quite remarkable, Sean Penn's stunning performance overshadows all else (except the director and cinematographer) in the film, and he will be a major force in awards and oscar contention this season. Unless Clint pulls a Rooster Cogburn with Gran Torino, or DiCaprio or Langella gather an undeniable momentum, I think he's probably the frontrunner to win. The performance is simultaneously both intensely loud but also quite subtly modulated, there is passion and drive to Milk, but also turmoil, doubt, and years of pent up frustrations, repressions, fears and anger. In fact it often seems as though he is not acting all that much, despite never seeming anything but completely Harvey, it's an outstanding and complete piece of work making the overwrought screeching of Mystic River all the more flat by comparison. Hellen Mirren in the Queen is an apt comparison for Penn's work, I think, though that is overdoing it with more than a little hyperbole, as he is not that good.

I think my biggest disappointment is that the supporting men, Diego Luna, James Franco, Emile Hirsch and Josh Brolin are all quite overshadowed by Penn-as-Milk. all turn in very good work, Hirsch the most natural and best at being on screen with Milk, Franco is the most strained and Luna is baity and over the top. Brolin is very very subdued in the presence he puts on film, he almost fades into the background even while talking, which makes his final actions, and march, all the more chilling. The one cast member I felt really did stand out, and this is probably mainly simply because of the contrast to an almost 100% male cast, is Alison Pill who turned in an outstanding piece of work that I found more convincing and also (in the end) quite touching.

Gus Van Sant's direction of this film is absolutely outstanding. he navigates the transitions, flow of time, the evolution of Milk into a politician (eventually with a team) seamlessly, the narrative pulses and drives along like a an All the President's Men, and that's a tribute to Van Sant (and his editor's) skill.

The third star of the film is cinematographer Harris Savides. He puts together a fantastic amalgamation of images, matching source footage, shooting with what I presume is different stocks and at times vintage consumer camera equipment and it all works together. At the same time there are some stunning shots made, such as a scene shot in a macro reflection off of a whistle's side. The film is a feast for the eyes which certainly helps the story a great deal.

But there are also some reservations to the film. It's not a deep examination of Milk. It is more about what he did than who he was. On the other hand, the film itself sort of tells us that who he was is what he did. That is to say, what he accomplished and achieved in his years in San Francisco. This would not be so much of a problem if we didn't have a throwaway lines about the suicide attempts of his past lovers. It's an indication of the times Harvey Milk lived in, and not a reflection on him as a person, but it also is an incredibly intriguing element to explore because we do see from his two relationships in the film that he's a career driven person, who likes the companionship and sex that comes with a relationship, but we often get the sense that his name is more important to him than his lovers. I'm not saying this element of ambiguity is a flaw. I sort of like the fact that the film lets us see that Harvey was often quite a conniving a****** in his professional life and for all of his fondness and sweet moments with lovers could also be an a****** to them as well. The flaw, to me, is in that we get glimpses of this conflict but it doesn't seem fully explored. Likewise the relationship with Dan White. It's clear the film is pushing White to be somewhat incidental (while making sure to mention him many times) and I'm glad it's not turned into an American Beauty scenario but I wish there was just a little bit more to fill it out.

It's not quite a perfect movie, but it is a damn fine one, and probably one of the ten best this year. 9 of 10

[locke]

Frost/Nixon is one of Ron Howard's best films. Certainly his best film since Apollo 13 and it captures the same intensity and energy that kept that film so dramatic and personal.

David Frost is a British and Australian talk show host and celebrity--a Ryan Seacrest of the 80s--whose only American show was a failure. And as he watches Nixon's abdication of the throne he sees an opportunity to strike and this time win the American Market (which is the ultimate prize for him).

He boldly outbids the other networks for the first televised interview with Nixon and then has to scramble to put together financing and somehow find a network he's just screwed over to actually air the interview when he's finished. He secures 30 hours of interviews with Nixon, shot on fifteen non consecutive days in two hour segments to be edited into four ninety minute shows. The shows would later be the most watched news program in history, although everyone at the time believed that they would be a colossal failure and that it was an embarrassment to have a British talk show host interviewing the former president rather than a hard hitting respected American news journalist.

Frost fights back against the prejudice, hires two wary investigators to prep his material and brings on his friend and producer to also do research. Meantime, he doesn't participate much in the research and preparation process (or so the movie leads us to believe) as he has other obligations and interests, including an insanely hot jet setter from Monte Carlo he picks up in first class on a plane). Sheen's performance as Frost is flat out superb, topping Eddie Marsan in Happy Go lucky for my favorite supporting performance of the year.

And I say supporting because despite the film being very much about Frost, and his having a lot of screen time and it following primarily his story it is the presence and persona of Nixon that dominates this film. Frank Langella delivers a lights out astonishing performance. He oozes charisma and cleverness, undercut by a tendency to ramble and a political tactic of misdirection to catch someone else off guard and gain the upper hand. Langella also shows us some of Nixon's as intensely guarded and we see his worries and frustrations and boiling rage tamped down under a controlled exterior. It's incredible. And Langella's physicality in the role is excellent. Howard really assists him here, the film is profligate with close-ups, but those are contrasted with cowboy shots (hips up) and full body shots of Nixon. Langella is brilliant in how he uses the movements of his body, his posture, simply how he grips a box, or a cane, and toys with a prop to give us information about his character. It's very Jimmy Stewart style of propwork and physicality, which makes sense considering Howard's Classic Hollywood style of composition and way that he implements those non-verbal, non-close up aspects of Langella's performance. I babble on, but suffice to say that Nixon on screen is absolutely mesmerizing to watch.

And it's essential to point out what generosity and skill Sheen and also Kevin Bacon (as Nixon's chief of staff) display in letting Langella dominate their scenes together so thoroughly. And again Howard uses this to his advantage, because Sheen's underplaying to Langella's scenery chewing allows Sheen's arc to progress and climax at the appropriate moment in their interview when he fights back. Acting is reacting, and look at Nixon's completely one sided phone conversation with Frost, Nixon has all the dialogue, Frost nothing but nonverbal reactions, but those reactions are an essential turning point in the performance and in how Howard will have the character arcs play out to the payoff of the admission of guilt.

Howard also adds some directorial flourishes for those that don't notice the invisible craftsmanship of constructing such a taut and fascinating narrative out of something we already know the result of (like Apollo 13). He uses after-the fact interviews with the characters discussing their thoughts and reactions at the time, it's an interesting way of incorporating what I would presume to be soliloquies in the original play, and it is quite effective because Howard uses them as bridging devices to control the pace of the narrative and transition us through time and provide extra needed information that wouldn't come out in natural dialog via their interviews. And the film opens with a fine montage of source footage that will probably be one of the main reasons the film will earn an editing nomination. The cinematography is consistently excellent, though it doesn't draw attention to itself; it is certainly remarkable in an understated manner.

The script is also very good. All in all one of the year's best, probably my number four behind Slumdog Millionaire, WallE and Dark Knight. 9 of 10

[locke]

unh!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXR-1ZI1 ... hp?t=11457

most amazing imagry since Pan's Labyrinth?

[locke]

As mentioned in Film Club, Love Actually is incredible, and one of the best feel good movies around. 10 of 10

Rocky Balboa is still surprisingly powerful, and the second best of the franchise, it has surprisingly well done cinematography. This time I was not as put off by the modern ESPN style presentation of the fight, though it bothered me a great deal the first time around. The shouting argument between Rocky and his son at the end of the second act remains one of the singular moments of the entire franchise and that scene alone is worth seeking out the movie. 9 of 10

Millions is a surprisingly sophisticated emotional and spiritual journey that outdoes pretty much every movie focusing on kids recently. In some ways it is reminescent of Disney's best movies with kids, like Pollyanna, Parent Trap and Old Yeller, and in other ways it is far beyond those. Danny Boyle has such a superb visual instinct that he imbues the entire film with an energy you expect to find in a film like The Dark Knight rather than one like Millions. And he treats the kids and their relationships, ideas, situation and dialog with complete respect and seriousness. Meaning even when the film is doing something a bit silly or childish it still feels real and of a piece with the world the film creates, rather than just a filmmaker being indulgent of children's inexplicable whimsies or reality. Any aspiring filmmaker could learn an immense amount about directing looking at a film like this, and not just because the style is so front and center but because Boyle steadfastly refuses to be lazy every scene and shot is as well thought out as in a Hitchcock movie and every piece of the movie flows beautifully because of that. it's a pleasure to look at without ever being loud about the fact. A superb effort, better than I remembered and Highly recommended - 10 of 10

[Mich]

As mentioned in Film Club, Love Actually is incredible, and one of the best feel good movies around. 10 of 10

Agreed. I love this movie in such a strong way. It's a great Christmas movie for the whole year around.

[locke]

Doubt
Doubt can be a bond as powerful as certainty

John Patrick Shandley has won an oscar for Moonstruck and only directed one other movie, 1990's, brilliant and overlooked Joe Vs the Volcano with Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan. in the interim between that film and this film he's written a lot, writing primarily for the stage and most recently he's won a pulitizer, for his play, Doubt.

And it's important to mention the play origins because the movie feels like a play in a way it shouldn't--it drags on screen as though it is restrained by the proscenium still. the film has a plodding and trudging feel to it. as though it is weighted down by the gravitas of the subject matter and pedigree of being from a prize winning play. this is especially interesting to note in contrast to Frost/Nixon a play that was much more idiomatically suited to the theatre but through the skill of the director and writer became a vibrant and stunning film you can barely imagine as a play. Pace is Doubt's biggest issue. the only drawback it has is that the editing is not very good. Perhaps this is a directorial problem, or the composer shares responsibility, but I don't especially think so. The direction is sharp and well done throughout the film. it's the stitching it together and keeping the story moving that is the biggest issue. Individual scenes are fantastic, but at some point late in the movie I started to wonder when it would be over even though I hadn't been bored or distracted through a single scene, and I think for the most part that's a failure of the editing, and to a lesser degree of the writing for not building in stronger transitions to help flow the narrative in a filmic manner.

But. Doubt is an absolutely superb film in every other respect. The performances are stellar, amongst the best this year. Meryl Streep is fabulous as Sister Aloysius, both imposing the sensation of cast iron disciplinarian and guardian of her charges well being. but what makes the performance brilliant is the way Streep imbues that character with a more subtle layer of righteousness, with just a tad of reveling in her authority and grating at the structures of the church she must always be subservient to. Philip Seymour Hoffman as Father Flynn is a good priest who gives thoughtful and fascinating sermons. But you also sense from him that he has inner torments wracking his soul, what they are we do not know for certain. Amy Adams is very good as Sister James, but her role is more passive than the two titans mentioned above who clash at each other. rounding out the cast is Viola Davis as the mother of a child, Donald, with a peculiar nature.

The question of Doubt comes in when Sister Aloysius goes looking to find something, and then suspicious evidence of something comes to light and conclusions are leapt to. It is perfectly possible she landed at the right conclusion. But it is also possible that she did not. Is there Doubt, or is there certainty about what she believes to have happened? And the moral delimma arises, better to protect the welfare of a child even if that protection is in theory only and the cost is the reputation of an innocent man or better to follow the path of only what can be proved and verified even if the cost of that path is the welfare of a child?

Doubt wars within us all, and there aren't villains in this piece but it is extremely cleverly structured to make it so that you are never quite sure who is in the right, the characters are written as people trying to do the right thing in a very tough situation, and they come across as incredibly human and real. It's a masterful bit of writing putting together the characters, their motivations, beliefs, perspectives and situations together with pitch perfect dialog. As a play I'm confident this will be one that will remain popular and revived very regularly, because the roles are so rich and the writing is so good that it makes it somewhat irresistible.

I just wish the editing were stronger. 7 of 10.

[Valentine]

Millions
I can't tell you how excited I am for Slumdog Millionaire, especially upon viewing Danny Boyle's Millions for the first time this afternoon. Millions is an amazingly sweet film - a young boy stumbles upon (or rather, is nearly hit by) a $200,000+ pounds only a few weeks before pounds are switched to Euros. He wants nothing more than to use the money to help the poor, but several things - and people - get in the way. I won't go into too much detail on the plot, but the whole movie is absolutely adorable and charming.
Visually, the film is amazing. It has an imaginative and creative feel that makes it absolutely whimsical. It drifts between reality and fantasy in a seamless fashion, but doesn't paint the picture of a perfect world like many children-based films tend to do. The narrative aspects of the script were amazing, and the performances were endearing and brilliant. It's so hard to find talented child actors, it seems, but both of the lead boys (Damien, who finds the money, and his brother Anthony) were fantastic. All in all, I'm so glad I took the time to seek out this movie, and I can't wait to make my family watch it this week.
All in all, I highly recommend it.

[Luet]

Two things:

Joe vs. the Volcano is one of my husband's favorite movies ever. But I don't think that Doubt having the same director will be enough to get him to watch it. It doesn't look like his type of movie at all.

The kid who plays Damien in Millions, Alex Etel, is just about the most adorable little actor ever. He is the main character in Water Horse as well. I just love him.

[Valentine]

Milk was absolutely phenomenal. I'm probably a little too excited right now to write a proper review, but Sean Penn was brilliant beyond belief. I walked out of the theatre ready to hand him the oscar, even without seeing the bulk of the "award season" movies yet. The directing was brilliant, too - Gus Van Sant's best work, in my opinion, since Good Will Hunting. All in all, I am beyond glad I went to see it, and I absolutely LOVED it.

[locke]

Sleeping Beauty is still terrific, the new dvd looks utterly stunning. I like it better this revisit than I did the last revisit. That's odd because the last time was seeing it on film in 70mm, and you'd think that experience would be superior, but actually I kept noticing the lack of detail in the animation when viewing it in 70, whereas it just seems so rich on the new dvd. upgrading this back to a 9 of 10, love the fairies, love maleficent. Philip is a bit of a cypher though.

It was however, fun for my neice to half watch this (she was busy playing during a lot of this), and we got her to turn around when Philip was approaching Aurora and she sat mesmerized as he kissed her and woke her up. She's very into princesses right now and I think this'll be a new favorite of hers, a good christmas present (accompanied by some little golden books of disney princesses that have already all been read four times in the last day).

Evan Almighty is actually not repulsive. It's very goofy, with a lot of old fashioned slapstick, very family friendly, and only some mild animal potty-humor. It's reminescent of Mr. Smith Goes To Washington in some of its plot elements (corrupt politician using land development to make himself rich and his friends even more rich) which I found to be a pleasant surprise.

What's interesting about this film is that it actually has a spiritual journey, Evan undergoes a real crisis of faith and has to make genuine sacrifices choosing between duty to God and to his work and duty to God and to his family (there are actual echoes of Job in this story), unlike Bruce Almighty this isn't at all about a guy having fun with superpowers and learning they have responsibilities. It's a story about having to make hard sacrifices to do the right thing.

The other remarkable thing about the film is that Steve Carrell gives the film a full acting performance. He doesn't phone it in, and while it is more than a little hammy at times he also puts forth the effort to make the other aspects of the film work that most people have and will scoff at. that a film as weak as this works at all is entirely due to him. Without Carrell this would be a 3 or a 4 out of ten, with him, it's a 6 or a 7.

[locke]

forgot to post my thoughts on Gran Torino.

Gran Torino is the most authentic Howard Hawks film made in fifty years. Quentin Tarentino weeps to see Pulp this good put on screen.

Quite unexpectedly the film is hilarious in that old fashioned way of Hawks and Ford, manly, brusque, offensive anti-PC humor that is as blatent as it is charming. Clint Eastwood is terrific as a cranky old man who hasn't managed his family very well, leaving him alone most of the time with his children resenting him. Which addresses the big theme of the film, second chances, maturing, growing up and learning to be a man. Both Clint Eastwood and his protege in this film have to transform themselves and storywise the film's journey along those broad outlines is successful, entertaining and often quite moving. The script is very good about managing this.

But the script also has some significant weaknesses in the dialog department, for Clint this is no trouble, he can sell every awful and awkward line, getting underneath the skin and intent and meanings of the line and making it work for the character and the audience. But most of the rest of the film are non-professionals or non actors and it really shows, in a very bad way as they struggle with even getting basic dialog real, much less more complex scenes. however most of these actors have flashes of brilliance that work as well, so you can understand why they were cast, they have talent, but it's rough and unhoned and the script often exposes them in an unfair way. It's the reverend that is the most egregious offender in this aspect of the film, the script is especially unfair to him as it requires him to be intimidated by Eastwood and a bit amateurish anyway, but that doesn't excuse just how awful his work is here. The older adult Hmong (pronounced Mong) actors are all uniformly solid, though none stand out, but none have roles the size of the younger Hmong actors.

But what makes Gran Torino worth seeing is the powerful (and more than a little symbolic) ending that makes all the highs and lows of such an uneven film more than worth it. combined with Eastwoods fabulous performance and the laser precision filmmaking technique on the craft side it's a very entertaining ride at the movies, likely to entertain mass audiences much more than more demanding cineaste audiences. Rocky Balboa is a decent comparison, though Gran Torino is not nearly that good.

I'm being generous giving this a 7 because overall it is such a pleasing experience.

[locke]

Australia is for the first two hours one of the most charming films of the year, it's a bit of an epic, a bit of a western and a bit of a romance and it all works beautifully. These two hours come complete with a climax, a denouement, and a happy ending.

Then fortyfive more minutes happen. To be completely fair, probably about 2/3 to 3/4 of those fortyfive minutes are worth having, but the parts of this latter half of the film that do not work make having the entirety of this subplot (or additional melodramatic machinations if you prefer) feel completely unnecessary. They were extremely pressed in post on the film, and I feel like they had perfected the first two hours but still hadn't finessed out the final part of the film, thus the film becomes somewhat rambly and more than a little all over the place. the emotions and motivations stop feeling as real or well drawn and the characters make spectacularly huge decisions with little resonance with the audience (or at least with me). The contrast to how well the movie connected at first to how it failed to connect at the last was especially striking to me.

On the other hand my mom and sisters all thought it was terrific and not a bit too long. My mom in particular liked its old fashioned epic aspects.

That said, the film has a hell of a lot going for it. Superb performances, some of the most gorgeous imagery of the year, totally fabulous production design and a very interesting story. it's really well done except for that last part. overall probably a 6 of 10, but the first two hours are a 9 of 10

--

I was not drawn in by Mamma Mia! it didn't work for me from the opening part (well except for "dot, dot, dot!" which was hilarious), then again I missed thirty minutes while I was talking on the phone, oddly I felt like I didn't miss anything when I sat back down and saw the final ten minutes. I feel like there could be a good movie here, but the abrupt way the movie does numbers is disconcerting aurally. because what I was hearing sounded like someone playing a CD on set and everyone flapping their lips mouthing "watermelon" rather than any impression that anyone was actually singing. The crystalline recording studio purity of the musical numbers was totally at odds with the exteriors they were shooting, just not good at all. I thought the girl playing sophie was quite hot, but something about her eyes-propped-open-by-toothpicks expression that is permanently on her face and her creepy as hell I'm-totally-faking-being-happy-in-a-really-big-way smile (also permanent) really put me off the whole movie more than anything else. I sort of feel like the director was constantly telling her, "smile! smile bigger! No bigger! smile bigger if you can" the way a dentist is always telling you to open your mouth wider. ugh

[starlooker]

Philip is a bit of a cypher though.

Pffftt. Sure. Whatever. Phillip is the best Disney Prince by far, not to mention the hottest.

(Otherwise I'm very excited by this review. Sleeping Beauty is on my Christmas list.)

[Jayelle]

So, my mother in law took care of the baby last night and Paul and I went off on a date. We got to the theatre late and decided to just go see Twilight.

We expected it to be bad. We expected it to be cheesy and teenybopper. It was so very much worse then that.

It wasn't "so bad it's good", it was just "so bad".It was a vampire movie without fangs, a romance without affection. The acting was wooden, the chemistry non-existent, the plot completely useless. Even the action scenes were boring!

I haven't read the book- now I kinda want to just to see the difference- so I didn't know that vampires SPARKLED in the sun. They sparkle??? They freaking sparkle?! What kind of horrific crap is that? "I'm a monster, I sparkle." I have not the words.

I seriously laughed through the whole movie. It was like it was written by George Lucas.

[Caspian]

It was like it was written by George Lucas.

Ooooh, ouch.

[Gravity Defier]

I seriously laughed through the whole movie.

Me, too! *points up*

[Valentine]

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Possible spoilers - nothing too bad, but just in case...

In a word, this film was simply magical. The direction was some of the best I've seen by David Fincher, which says a lot in and of itself. The shots leading up to the car accident were absolutely brilliant. The writing is fantastic. Eric Roth did a brilliant adaption from the Fitzgerald short story. I would be surprised if this film does not receive both adapted screenplay and directing nods from the Academy.
Cate Blanchett as Daisy, Benjamin's primary love interest, was absolutely brilliant. Her performance was subdued yet engaging. Brad Pitt, as Benjamin Button, easily holds his own - David Fincher always seems to bring out the best in Pitt. I was slightly disappointed in Tilda Swinton's role - she just simply doesn't shine the way I know that she can. She is such a deeply talented actress, and yet the role was slightly flat. It was well-acted, just nothing special - and I've come to expect the most from her.
The age progession is astonishing - not once did it distract from the film itself, which says a lot about how far technology has come. The film runs for 2 hours and 40 minutes, and yet, I never remotely pondered how long it was - that's how engaging the story line is.
I wasn't a huge fan of the "struck by lightening" sequences, but to each their own - I know people loved that (from those I spoke with), and it didn't really detract from the experience for me. I don't think that Benjamin Button will be winning the Best Picture award this year; however, I think it has the chance to be nominated. All in all, with the movies I've seen thus far this year, it's currently my second favorite after Slumdog Millionaire. I even shed a few tears - a very rare thing for me, during movies.

All in all, I think I'd give this film a 9/10. It was extremely engaging and beautifully told, and I'm really glad I went to see it.

[Gravity Defier]

Cate Blanchett as Daisy...engaging.

I couldn't look away from her when she was on the screen. She was gorgeous, but it was so much more than that somehow...which I think is saying a lot, given how annoying (She needed to be the center of attention to the point where she wouldn't let Benjamin actually converse with her) I found her character at times but still couldn't be entirely bothered.

Also, it felt a bit like Forrest Gump in how it tried to fit the history into the story, only, for me, it didn't do as well as FG. Not bad, though.

I wish it were slightly less predictable, too, though I'm not sure how that would have been done. I didn't cry (this is actually a bit of a miracle) and I wasn't really heartbroken or sad; I was resigned and simply interested in seeing it play itself out exactly how it should.

And the shots of NOLA were beautiful. I'd like to go someday and see it for myself.

Anyway, I did like it and wouldn't have been able to tell how long it was if it weren't for the seats being less than ideal.

(I always feel intimidated giving my opinion on movies with our little experts running around and my general bad taste, but meh to that, I'm posting anyway.)

[locke]

Not yet seen CCoBB, but I will tomorrow *crosses fingers*

21 was surprisingly excellent and very entertaining. the cinematographer worked on Titanic and True Lies so its a beautifully shot film, quite sumptuous and intelligent in that respect. The performances are quite good, Kevin Spacey tears up his part but the chemistry between Sturges and Bosworth is stronger than either of their individual performances. Sturges does have to go through a nice transformation throughout the film, so he does good work.

In all a tight, fun movie, well written and put together. It's got some uneven VO and the final act isn't quite as strong as the first two in terms of the plot (a bit predictable) but it's not a serious issue. Everything ends just about exactly as you expect which is a little disappointing but also somewhat gratifying. It's no Rounders, but it's an excellent Poker movie nonetheless.

---

my temporary first attempt at a top ten for 2008, I've not yet seen a lot of the oscar contenders, and only about 32 films from 2008, but I think I can make a fairly decent stab at one.

1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Wall*E
3. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
4. Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist
5. Vicky Cristina Barcelona
6. The Dark Knight
7. Charlie Bartlett
8. Rachel Getting Married
9. Frost/Nixon
10. Milk

[locke]

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a film about goodbyes. From the moment Benjamin is born he's saying goodbye to people. The quiet tragedy of the film is that as someone who grows younger he must always be saying goodbye to his dearest friends and those he loves most. However, it is with barely a thought, that I realize that is what growing up is for all of us, and that in the reflection of Benjamin's abnormality I see more clearly how much of life is made up of goodbyes. The unexpected and the expected, the ones where you can help and the ones where you weren't there. The ones you screw up and the ones that never happen. and the ones you run away from, or are ran away from by another.

Yet it is those moments that help to landmark what life is for us. that show us what we have lived in life. "the mistakes we make, the hearts we break and the price we pay." And for all the almost magical experiences and voyages Benjamin and Daisy have, it's the simple things that are most special to them, and the simple things that they cannot hold onto.

the film is elegant and lush, it gracefully dances through time in a waltz or as an abstract ballet might. The performances are superb and beautiful, the special effects and makeup are staggering and the score is stunning.

In all one of the finest achievements of the year, and one of the most moving and emotional, I teared up several times and cried twice (postcards to Caroline saying "I wish..." and the ending series of images/goodbyes). The film is not for everyone, but I think it is very fine indeed. - 10

[zeroguy]

I wonder if I'm the only person who didn't think Slumdog Millionaire was anything special. Maybe graphically/cinematographically or something, okay, yes, it looked nice (but I am really really starting to get annoyed seeing dutch angle everywhere, but maybe that's just me). I just could not find myself to care about any of them, and after a certain point (somewhere around that scene where Jamal and the host are in the bathroom during that commercial break), nothing afterwards seemed unexpected, and I was just waiting for stuff to happen.

And knowing very little about it before going in, my first thought about the movie was something like "my god, they make clones of that awful show in other countries?"

Ending sequence was fun; I liked that, with the dancing and all.

[Wil]

The bathroom scene was pretty much the point where the movie became predictable, yeah. I thought it was a good movie though. Yes, the dancing at the end was the best.

[locke]

Penelope is a cute and harmless but quite entertaining movie. Good for families, but not quite a children's movie, though it works fine as a film from that genre - 7 of 10

Tell No One is a superb french thriller that is taut and exciting with excellent performances and terrific editing. It's nicely directed with all sorts of interesting layers going on as you try to unwind this Hitchcockian mystery thrill-ride, though you'll probably only wind up tying yourself into knots with your efforts. It's not perfect (the ending explanation is a bit verbose and complex in and of itself, like a JK Rowling ending) but it's one of the highlights of the year. 9 of 10

might as well update my top ten, since it's changed now


1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Wall*E
3. Man on Wire
4. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
5. The Wrestler
6. Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist
7. The Reader
8. Bolt
9. Vicky Cristina Barcelona
10. The Dark Knight
11. Tell No One
12. Seven Pounds
13. Charlie Bartlett
14. Rachel Getting Married
15. Frost/Nixon
16. Milk