O Brother, Where Art Thou?, a comedy set in the 1930s that follows the adventures of three escaped convicts, was the last of my weekend movies. This movie definitely fell into the category of a movie I did not anticipate liking very much. The film, however, was truly a pleasant surprise! The film is based loosely on the story The Odyssey by Homer, and I was amazed all these years after reading that book for an AP class in high school, that I recognized as many moments from the book as I did. This film would be a great addition to a class where the book is being taught - a nice lighthearted way to end a classes' study of The Odyssey.
The direction by Joel Coen is snappy and keeps the story moving along nicely. The music, though not my druthers, is surprisingly entertaining. I can understand how the soundtrack enjoyed success on the Billboard charts back in 2001. And, finally, the acting is really good all-around. I was especially impressed with George Clooney, who seemed like he might be an odd fit in a movie of this nature. Instead I found his portrayal of his character, as both a bit of a know-it-all and at the same time someone still searching for what he wants in life, to be very engaging.
This movie shined in just about every aspect. I highly recommend it!
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The Insider
My second movie viewing this weekend was of the film The Insider, starring Russell Crowe and Al Pacino. The Insider, directed by Michael Mann, is the story of Jeffrey Wigand the infamous whistleblower who appeared on 60 Minutes in the early 1990s and outlined tobacco company misdeeds. The struggle to get his story told unfolds over the two and a half-plus hours of the film. Having a background in journalism and communication probably made this film even more interesting for me as a viewer. It was fascinating to see Al Pacino as the crusading journalist/producer (Lowell Bergman) trying to clear the way for Jeffrey's important story. I must admit to not being a huge Al Pacino fan, but he was terrific in this movie. Russell Crowe is also great and, in my opinion, probably should have won his Academy Award for this film rather than for Gladiator. His performance is understated, but powerful. The courage it took for Jeffrey to come forward and the price he paid for doing so (losing his family when his wife left him, etc.) is elegantly portrayed. This film should be played in modern history classes, as it is truly a magnificent representation of this small piece of our history. My one and only complaint regarding the film is its running time. It was a bit longer than it truly needed to be and some trimming would have been beneficial to keep the momentum going. Despite this minor complaint, I would highly recommend this film if you have not yet seen it.
Brazil
I watched quite a few movies again this weekend...boy, this time between school programs has been nice! I actually liked every movie I saw this weekend, despite a couple of them being ones I did not really think I would care for. The first movie I am writing about is one of those I did not anticipate liking much: Brazil. This 1985 film starring Jonathan Pryce and Robert De Niro, was directed by Terry Gilliam, who I know best from his work on 12 Monkeys - a truly out there film. This film, set in an alternate modern day and dealing with government bureaucracy and paranoia, was another strange trip, but I found it much more enjoyable and relatable than 12 Monkeys. The reason for this was probably two-fold: Jonathan Pryce was great in the film. In a movie where much emphasis was placed on the weird sets (retro modern America is the best way to describe them - sort of like Clockwork Orange, which I reviewed a couple weeks ago, actually), he brought real heart to his character. Even when his character, Sam, was acting "crazy' you still felt connected to Sam and wanted things to turn out okay for him. Whether they do in the end is subject to each viewers interpretation of "okay". The second reason I liked the movie as much as I did was that the commentary is very relevant to today's society, probably more so than when the film was made in 1985. The paranoia over terrorists and the extreme measures to prevent terrorist attacks in the form of denying people certain liberties was a true mirror of what we have seen in many instance in this country since 9/11. This movies was made 16 years before that ever happened!! The running commentary about bureaucracy was also entertaining and pertinent to anyone who has ever dealt with the government or any kind of large organization. This movies is very stylized, and probably not for everyone, but I do recommend it.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Lost Season Premiere
I won't write a lot about the Lost season premiere last night, as I could go on forever and I know not everyone who wants to see it has, but I just have to say it was great! It was surprisingly not as confusing as one would think given its new time travel bent. I always have issues with time travel plots (interesting, but the logic is always bit off) on shows and in the movies, but so far this is not too bad. I love that Jack shaved the ugly beard to. :-) Anyhow, two hours of new Lost made me very happy last night and I am really looking forward to the rest of the new season. Bring it on!
The Last Samurai
The final movie from my movie marathon (besides finally watching 24: Redemption, which I will simply say was okay, but did not make me want to watch the next season of 24; good thing I'd already started or they wouldn't have hooked me!), was The Last Samurai.
The Last Samurai is the story of Nathan Algren, a U.S. soldier in the 1800s who is recruited to train the Japanese in the art of modern warfare. Nathan is captured by the samurai and grows to love their traditions and the culture they protect. He then fights alongside them to protect their way of life.
What to say about this movie? It was an entertaining flick, but ultimately not very memorable. Tom Cruise as Nathan is not bad, though he is probably the main reason the film is not overly memorable, as his performance is nothing spectacular. Ken Watanabe is better as Katsumoto. You feel for him and his struggle between his allegiance to the emperor and the old ways.
The sweeping views of Japanese countryside may just be the highlight of the movie however. Breathtaking country - I was left wanting to visit.
My final verdict: if you have the opportunity to view the film, it is worth a go. There is no need to go out of your way to see the movie though, as it will be forgotten soon after you have watched it.
The Last Samurai is the story of Nathan Algren, a U.S. soldier in the 1800s who is recruited to train the Japanese in the art of modern warfare. Nathan is captured by the samurai and grows to love their traditions and the culture they protect. He then fights alongside them to protect their way of life.
What to say about this movie? It was an entertaining flick, but ultimately not very memorable. Tom Cruise as Nathan is not bad, though he is probably the main reason the film is not overly memorable, as his performance is nothing spectacular. Ken Watanabe is better as Katsumoto. You feel for him and his struggle between his allegiance to the emperor and the old ways.
The sweeping views of Japanese countryside may just be the highlight of the movie however. Breathtaking country - I was left wanting to visit.
My final verdict: if you have the opportunity to view the film, it is worth a go. There is no need to go out of your way to see the movie though, as it will be forgotten soon after you have watched it.
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)
Another movie I saw for the first time this weekend was the 1978 version of the Invasion of the Body Snatchers staring Donald Sutherland and Brooke Adams. I had never seen any of the versions of this movie: not this version, or the 1956 original, or the recent remake, Invasion; so, though I knew the basic storyline I came to the movie with no prejudgements or comparisons. The film deals with the slow invasion of the population of New York by duplicates of people. These duplicates are born from pods and are looking to take over the world, replacing those they have duplicated.
The movie felt very 1970s. This was due not only to the 70s costumes and hairstyles (always good for a laugh!), but to a different way of acting that I have noticed in 1970s movies. I am not sure how to describe the difference, but it feels like a lot of the characters in 1970s movies lack a real emotional connection to one another and the audience. I certainly felt this again in this movie. Although I would say that most of the acting was good, it lacked a spark that made it more natural... Brooke Adams, as Elizabeth, was the real weak point in the acting. She seemed especially stiff.
The story itself was a bit slow paced for today's audiences, but the story is still interesting and especially unique for when it was conceived. M. Night Shyamalan owes this film and it predecessor a debt for the concept of his movie The Happening; though I am not sure the film-makers would claim that association (if you have not seen The Happening - don't, it is awful!).
What struck me most about Invasion of the Body Snatchers was its pro-woman attitude. Having just concluded an in-depth study of women in film this was something that I could not help but notice, and I applaud the film for the respect it shows women. A woman is the co-main character, a woman figures out what is going on, the two main women are professionals (one even working in a very traditional male field, as a scientist) and a woman is the sole "survior" at the end of the film. This falls in line with what I discovered in my recent study: the 1970s were the best decade by far for the positive portrayal of women on the movie screen.
Overall, despite some issues that may be attributed greatly to the passage of time and changing of styles, this was an interesting movie and worth a viewing.
The movie felt very 1970s. This was due not only to the 70s costumes and hairstyles (always good for a laugh!), but to a different way of acting that I have noticed in 1970s movies. I am not sure how to describe the difference, but it feels like a lot of the characters in 1970s movies lack a real emotional connection to one another and the audience. I certainly felt this again in this movie. Although I would say that most of the acting was good, it lacked a spark that made it more natural... Brooke Adams, as Elizabeth, was the real weak point in the acting. She seemed especially stiff.
The story itself was a bit slow paced for today's audiences, but the story is still interesting and especially unique for when it was conceived. M. Night Shyamalan owes this film and it predecessor a debt for the concept of his movie The Happening; though I am not sure the film-makers would claim that association (if you have not seen The Happening - don't, it is awful!).
What struck me most about Invasion of the Body Snatchers was its pro-woman attitude. Having just concluded an in-depth study of women in film this was something that I could not help but notice, and I applaud the film for the respect it shows women. A woman is the co-main character, a woman figures out what is going on, the two main women are professionals (one even working in a very traditional male field, as a scientist) and a woman is the sole "survior" at the end of the film. This falls in line with what I discovered in my recent study: the 1970s were the best decade by far for the positive portrayal of women on the movie screen.
Overall, despite some issues that may be attributed greatly to the passage of time and changing of styles, this was an interesting movie and worth a viewing.
Marley & Me
So I had quite the movie marathon over the three-day MLK weekend! Let's see if I can keep them all straight... I'll start with the current theatrical release I saw on Friday night: Marley & Me. Warning: if you don't already know how this movie ends and don't want to know STOP READING prior to the last paragraph!!
I thought Marley & Me was a cute movie. I am a sucker for dog movies though, so my opinion is a bit partial! The dog was by far the highlight of the movie. For those of us who have dogs, there are lots of "yep, my dog does that and it really is hysterical" moments. The scene where Owen Wilson's character takes Marley home the first day was almost an exact re-enactment of me taking my dog Bailey home from the Humane Society our first day... By the end of the ride home the dog is in the lap and the true "owner" has been established. It is these moments that give this movie its heart. With that said, the story has no real momentum - you are simply watching a family go through the years and grow. Not the most compelling plot...and there were times when I found myself wishing "something" would happen.
As indicated earlier, the many dogs who played Marley were amazing. I wish the same could be said about their human counterparts. Owen Wilson is fine as John, playing a typical Owen-Wilson-character. Though I was a big fan of Friends, I must admit that I have never fallen in love with Jennifer Aniston as a movie actress and this film did not change that. She is merely adequate in her role. Eric Dane, as John's friend and colleague, plays a version of his Grey's Anatomy character. The only standouts were Alan Arkin as John's boss - his dry humor was spot-on - and a young Nathan Gamble, who plays the oldest son around the age of 10 and interjects real emotion into his role and his interactions with the aging Marley.
Which brings me to the end of the movie. The last half hour or so is what makes this movie special and absolutely heartbreaking at the same time. As we see Marley truly begin to age, get sick and eventually pass on we are reminded of how precious our time with our furry companions are. I have honestly never cried so much in a movie in my life. Memories of dogs past and thoughts of the inevitable with my pup Bailey haunted me well past the lights going up in the theatre. Although painful to watch, the ending was beautifully done and really paid tribute to all beloved family dogs and the real Marley especially. I am sure he is looking down from above and wagging his tail.
I thought Marley & Me was a cute movie. I am a sucker for dog movies though, so my opinion is a bit partial! The dog was by far the highlight of the movie. For those of us who have dogs, there are lots of "yep, my dog does that and it really is hysterical" moments. The scene where Owen Wilson's character takes Marley home the first day was almost an exact re-enactment of me taking my dog Bailey home from the Humane Society our first day... By the end of the ride home the dog is in the lap and the true "owner" has been established. It is these moments that give this movie its heart. With that said, the story has no real momentum - you are simply watching a family go through the years and grow. Not the most compelling plot...and there were times when I found myself wishing "something" would happen.
As indicated earlier, the many dogs who played Marley were amazing. I wish the same could be said about their human counterparts. Owen Wilson is fine as John, playing a typical Owen-Wilson-character. Though I was a big fan of Friends, I must admit that I have never fallen in love with Jennifer Aniston as a movie actress and this film did not change that. She is merely adequate in her role. Eric Dane, as John's friend and colleague, plays a version of his Grey's Anatomy character. The only standouts were Alan Arkin as John's boss - his dry humor was spot-on - and a young Nathan Gamble, who plays the oldest son around the age of 10 and interjects real emotion into his role and his interactions with the aging Marley.
Which brings me to the end of the movie. The last half hour or so is what makes this movie special and absolutely heartbreaking at the same time. As we see Marley truly begin to age, get sick and eventually pass on we are reminded of how precious our time with our furry companions are. I have honestly never cried so much in a movie in my life. Memories of dogs past and thoughts of the inevitable with my pup Bailey haunted me well past the lights going up in the theatre. Although painful to watch, the ending was beautifully done and really paid tribute to all beloved family dogs and the real Marley especially. I am sure he is looking down from above and wagging his tail.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Clockwork Orange
I watched Clockwork Orange for the first time the other day, having felt guilty for years that as a former film major and avowed movie buff I have never seen this classic movie. All I can really say, is what a bunch of hype! The first half of the movie I felt as if I was watching some kind of snuff film. The second half, though still not really involving, at least felt like it had a story and something to say. I can only assume that it is the second half of the film and its message regarding government control that raised this film to classic status. If the film has reached this status based merely on the first half with its shocking images of violence and sex - usually hand-in-hand - then that is truly a sad commentary on our society!
I also felt like the acting in the movie was not all that great. Emotions seemed to be conveyed mostly by yelling. This struck me more than once during the film and made me cringe as much as any of the violent scenes.
Overall, despite its iconic status, Clockwork Orange is not a movie I would recommend.
I also felt like the acting in the movie was not all that great. Emotions seemed to be conveyed mostly by yelling. This struck me more than once during the film and made me cringe as much as any of the violent scenes.
Overall, despite its iconic status, Clockwork Orange is not a movie I would recommend.
Introduction
I spend a good chunk of my time watching movies and TV shows as research for school, as well as a means of entertainment. With this much media viewing, I have decided I might as well share my thoughts on what I've watched. Thus, the birth of this blog! Check back for reviews of videos, movies, television shows and general entertainment observations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
