I’ll write up my predictions about who I think will win the Oscars closer to the ceremony, but now I’m more interested in who deserves the awards. Every day for the next several days I’ll take a few hundred words to discuss those fine folks. First up, let’s talk about the nominees for Best Supporting Actress.
Were Kate Winslet nominated for “The Reader,” as many industry insiders predicted and The Weinstein Company (stupidly) pushed for, I would have eagerly supported her as the winner of the category for her searing yet calculated work. But her performance was rightfully nominated in the Best Actress category, and now I am left with five actresses, all quite good, but none so overwhelmingly good that my heart immediately sides with one over the others. It’s not exactly a weak category—but I have a sinking feeling that the Academy members decided to show their support for the films they didn’t intend to nominate for Best Picture (with the exception of “Benjamin Button”) by giving the supporting actors a nod and pat on the head. Only two of the roles were included in my earlier “If I Could Choose The Oscars” post, which included Sophie Okonedo and Allison Pill.
The easiest nominee to eliminate would be Amy Adams, not because her performance wasn’t good, but because her material was weak and her character overwhelmed by every other actor in “Doubt.” Her big “moment,” where she called out Meryl Streep for not liking Frosty the Snowman, might seem powerful for a few seconds—until Streep immediately dismisses it and reasserts her authority in the situation. It is bittersweet that Adams was nominated for “Doubt” when she was overlooked twice in the past two years for her much-more-memorable work in “Miss Pettigrew Lives For A Day” and “Enchanted.”
Taraji P. Henson is going to be a huge star—I have no qualms about that. The fact that she got a nomination for this role in “Benjamin Button” is a testament to her talent, especially since the film seems to be working against her. Henson’s character gets nary a scene where she can just show off her excellent skills—she is always in the background of every sequence she inhabits. She doesn’t get an emotional death scene. She doesn’t get a prolonged monologue. But she illuminated the screen nonetheless, and her nomination was enough. I cannot wait, however, to see what she does next—I have a feeling I’ll be writing about her much more in coming years.
I like Marisa Tomei. A lot. She has that easy likeability. You want to be friends with her. Hug her when she cries. That said, her role in “The Wrestler” is a good performance—but did not make her stretch her talents much and she succeeds in engaging us just because she is so darn interesting and likeable in general.
This leaves me Viola Davis and Penelope Cruz to choose from.
Cruz’s performance is both understated and fiery. She is a complex woman in a more complex relationship with her ex-husband, and while she is a supporting actress, like Davis’ performance, you remember her long after some of the other performances in “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” have disappeared from your memory.
It seems you can’t get through any conversation about “Doubt” without waxing lyrical at length about Davis’ searing ten-minute sequence that leaves Streep flabbergasted and audiences collectively in awe. And yeah, Davis is great. Her nose runs, her eyes leak and she manages to stare down Streep and not end up running away while peeing herself. I wonder where the hell she has been hiding and what the heck she is going to do next.
However, I’m choosing Cruz. Her performance works in the context of “Vicky Cristina Barcelona”—it doesn’t overwhelm and compliments it. Davis’ shining moments take place in their own universe almost completely removed from the small contained universe of the church and school in “Doubt,” and if she wasn’t so good in the role I have a feeling an editor could have cut her role out entirely and the movie would have still worked as well as it does. Davis deserves much credit for pulling off such multifaceted work in such little time, but Cruz is indispensable in her film and unforgettable throughout her screentime.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
If I Could Choose The Oscars...
BEST PICTURE
“Changeling”
“The Dark Knight”
“Iron Man”
“Milk”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
BEST ACTRESS
Cate Blanchett “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Anne Hathaway “Rachel Getting Married”
Angelina Jolie “Changeling”
Emma Thompson “Last Chance Harvey”
Kate Winslet “The Reader” (this is not a supporting performance, despite what the Weinsteins want you to think)
BEST ACTOR
Robert Downey Jr. “Iron Man”
Clint Eastwood “Gran Torino”
Frank Langella “Frost/Nixon”
Sean Penn “Milk”
Mickey Rourke “The Wrestler”
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Amy Adams “Ms. Pettigrew Lives For A Day”
Viola Davis “Doubt”
Taraji P. Henson “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Sophie Okonedo “The Secret Life of Bees”
Allison Pill “Milk”
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Josh Brolin “Milk”
Aaron Eckhart “The Dark Knight”
Heath Ledger “The Dark Knight”
Dev Patel “Slumdog Millionaire”
Brandon Walters “Australia”
BEST DIRECTOR
Clint Eastwood “Changeling”
David Fincher “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Christopher Nolan “The Dark Knight”
Andrew Stanton “Wall-E”
Gus Van Sant “Milk”
BEST SCREENPLAY- ADAPTED
“The Dark Knight”
“Frost/Nixon”
“Iron Man”
“Ms. Pettigrew Lives For A Day”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
BEST SCREENPLAY-ORIGINAL
“Changeling”
“Last Chance Harvey”
“Milk”
“Transsiberian”
“Wall-E”
“Changeling”
“The Dark Knight”
“Iron Man”
“Milk”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
BEST ACTRESS
Cate Blanchett “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Anne Hathaway “Rachel Getting Married”
Angelina Jolie “Changeling”
Emma Thompson “Last Chance Harvey”
Kate Winslet “The Reader” (this is not a supporting performance, despite what the Weinsteins want you to think)
BEST ACTOR
Robert Downey Jr. “Iron Man”
Clint Eastwood “Gran Torino”
Frank Langella “Frost/Nixon”
Sean Penn “Milk”
Mickey Rourke “The Wrestler”
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Amy Adams “Ms. Pettigrew Lives For A Day”
Viola Davis “Doubt”
Taraji P. Henson “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Sophie Okonedo “The Secret Life of Bees”
Allison Pill “Milk”
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Josh Brolin “Milk”
Aaron Eckhart “The Dark Knight”
Heath Ledger “The Dark Knight”
Dev Patel “Slumdog Millionaire”
Brandon Walters “Australia”
BEST DIRECTOR
Clint Eastwood “Changeling”
David Fincher “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Christopher Nolan “The Dark Knight”
Andrew Stanton “Wall-E”
Gus Van Sant “Milk”
BEST SCREENPLAY- ADAPTED
“The Dark Knight”
“Frost/Nixon”
“Iron Man”
“Ms. Pettigrew Lives For A Day”
“Slumdog Millionaire”
BEST SCREENPLAY-ORIGINAL
“Changeling”
“Last Chance Harvey”
“Milk”
“Transsiberian”
“Wall-E”
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
When You Realize You've Become Part of the Problem
When You Realize You’ve Become Part of the Problem…
Recently I was attending a film at the multiplex with a friend. I have been to movies before with this friend. My friend has a tendency to talk to me during movies in volumes anywhere between your outside voice and a foghorn. And sing. But mostly talk. I attempt to shush him/her every time, but my continuous begging doesn’t really deter her/him. I’ve become used to it and have drastically cut down the amount of movies we see together, and when we do go I attempt to seat us as far away from the other patrons.
I thought I had it under control.
But then my friend said something that made me realize I can never take him/her to a movie again, because I just can’t imagine making other patrons, however smelly or annoying they may be, go through the experience of having her/him in the theater again.
Here is the exchange that brought reality crashing down:
ME: Now (person’s name), please Please PLEASE don’t talk during this movie. I’m begging you.
PERSON: But Bob, it’s a comedy! We are allowed to talk.
ME: Excuse me?
PERSON: What?
ME: Did you just say that it is okay to talk in the theater because we are seeing a comedy?
PERSON: Why wouldn’t we?
ME: Because it bothers other people.
PERSON: So?
I apologize for subjecting any of you to two hours in a dark theater with me and this friend. It will never happen again.
Recently I was attending a film at the multiplex with a friend. I have been to movies before with this friend. My friend has a tendency to talk to me during movies in volumes anywhere between your outside voice and a foghorn. And sing. But mostly talk. I attempt to shush him/her every time, but my continuous begging doesn’t really deter her/him. I’ve become used to it and have drastically cut down the amount of movies we see together, and when we do go I attempt to seat us as far away from the other patrons.
I thought I had it under control.
But then my friend said something that made me realize I can never take him/her to a movie again, because I just can’t imagine making other patrons, however smelly or annoying they may be, go through the experience of having her/him in the theater again.
Here is the exchange that brought reality crashing down:
ME: Now (person’s name), please Please PLEASE don’t talk during this movie. I’m begging you.
PERSON: But Bob, it’s a comedy! We are allowed to talk.
ME: Excuse me?
PERSON: What?
ME: Did you just say that it is okay to talk in the theater because we are seeing a comedy?
PERSON: Why wouldn’t we?
ME: Because it bothers other people.
PERSON: So?
I apologize for subjecting any of you to two hours in a dark theater with me and this friend. It will never happen again.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Bob's Top 10 Films of the Year!
Well, 2008 was a mediocre year for films. Whereas in previous years I had a huge surplus of phenomenal films that could be included in my top 10 films of the year, this year there were only a few. The excellent films were still excellent, and I’m sure a few (well, five) of the films that came out this year will remain in the public consciousness for decades to come—but most of the films that hit the theater this year were either mediocre or just plain terrible.
If you read my latest note, you’ll be familiar with my anger at the studio system and the Academy for refusing the allow the general public access to the “Oscar” “artsy” “important” films, moreso this year than ever before. Not one of the dramas nominated for a Golden Globe has been given a wide release. During my trip to New York City last week I made a point of seeking out the small theaters showcasing those movies, and I found all of them utterly underwhelming. Well, the ones that are at least in one theater in NYC. “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” and “Revolutionary Road” have not been released anywhere, and I am writing this ten days before the new year.
So while you will not see “Doubt,” “The Reader,” “Frost/Nixon,” or “Gran Torino” on this list, it is not because I have not seen them, it is because they just weren’t that good. No wonder the studios are hiding them from everyone but a select few catered-to critics—if this is the best my studio could offer I would hide them too. “Gran Torino” was formulaic, dull and tepid. The first hour of “The Reader” was soft-core porn, then Kate Winslet turned into a Nazi with a secret, then everyone stopped talking and exchanged long stares that were either meaningful or signified that someone had just passed gas. And once Winslet’s secret is revealed, the movie never says why she hid it instead of admitting it and saving her own life. “Doubt” was just trying way too hard, did not focus at all on the most interesting character (the child who may or may not have been sexually abused), featured way-too-obvious metaphors and an ending that was meant to be poignant but instead comes off laughable. Of the films, the best is “Frost/Nixon,” which is fine, not extraordinary. The one thing the above films have in common are excellent performances: Eastwood in “Torino,” Winslet in “Reader,” Viola Davis and Amy Adams in “Doubt,” and Frank Langella in “Frost/Nixon.” But as movies they do not hold up. At all.
That said, let’s plunge in, shall we?
1) “American Teen”
The best movie of 2008 is your story. And my story. It’s everyone’s story, as real and honest as any film I have ever seen, and the fact that it is a documentary is just a bonus.
For those of you who have never heard of this film, and I know that many of you haven’t, “American Teen” documents the senior year of five students attending Warsaw Community High School in Indiana. Each of these five students fits, one way or another, in one high school clique or another: we’ve got the loner, the jock, the queen bee, the heartthrob and the nerd.
Our society has become more and more enthralled with watching “reality” shows that document the lives and personalities of characters (because, when it comes down to it, they are just that) paid to create drama and tension when none should rightfully exist. We don’t identify with these characters, we mock them. In “American Teen,” we identify with people. We love them. Because, as I said earlier, we ARE them to some degree or another. As much as we might hate labels and loathe being placed in boxes, that does not change the fact that we were one cliché or another at some point in our lives.
The documentary garnered much buzz and anticipation, winning the Best Director award at Sundance, but did not receive the distribution it deserved and did not even gross a million dollars domestically. So why was this little masterpiece mishandled and shunned by the general public? Perhaps it’s because we don’t want to think about those awkward years. We all suffered greatly in high school, shedding skin after skin while trying to decide just who the hell we were while still attempting to fit in and be measured against some imaginary stick that no one can quite reach the top of, popular or not.
And what a damn shame, because “American Teen” is, as stated earlier, nothing short of a masterpiece, and one of the best documentaries I have ever seen. There are no wars being viewed, no explosions in the background and certainly no violence (though maybe a little sex) to be seen. All you have is people. Acting like people. Living out those moments that define your lifetime in ways that make you smile and ways that make you cringe.
Who was I, you might as? Believe it or not, I was the loner in high school. I had plenty of friends, but no real good friends, and therefore I latched onto Hannah (the film’s “loner”) and took the journey with her, cheering for her when she decided to follow her dreams to San Francisco, crying with her when the boy she lost her virginity to broke up with her immediately after, and wanting to hug her when she received a text-message break-up later in the year.
This is a movie that needs to be seen. You learn as much about yourself in watching it as you learn about the people being watched, and I am happy to call it the best movie of 2008. It’s on DVD. Rent it. Buy it. Cherish it. Live it.
2) “Milk”
How odd that this movie instills the viewer with such hope. It chronicles a time when gay rights were nonexistent, police in San Francisco would rather beat people of the GLBT movement and ends in a manner most tragic. And the film is being released a few months after Prop 8 passed. And yet the movie is so very hopeful, not just about the plight of gays, but of humanity in general.
This is because none of the characters (all real people to interacted with Milk, none created for dramatic purposes) are characters—they are something more. Sean Penn, Emile Hirsch, James Franco, Allison Pill all embody their respective characters in such a way that they transcend acting and embody the people they reflect. Even Josh Brolin, as Milk’s assassin Dan White and one of the de facto villains of the piece, never falls into cliché. To the bitter end he is a character we care about, and though his actions infuriate, we still understand them—and him.
Gus Van Sant, who so often falls beneath the weight of his own ambition, here delivers something that mixes real footage of Milk’s era with new footage seamlessly, cutting to old footage at perfect times in scenes to make the moment all the more powerful. The results are ingenious. When Van Sant shows us his version of a vigil for Milk, we are touched, but when he cuts to real footage of the seemingly-endless line of lit candles, we weep.
Of course, none of this would matter at all if we didn’t care about Harvey Milk or didn’t buy Penn’s performance. But Penn does a flawless job of anchoring the movie and eliciting our love for this man so few knew about.
There were so many ways this film could have gone wrong and so many other ways it could have devolved into sappy sweetness or cliché. But it does not. It’s a great movie about a great man who did great things.
3) “Iron Man”
Aside from Christopher Reeve as Superman, superhero movies have always tended to be more enraptured with the villain than the hero. Sure, the heroes have gadgets and gimmicks, but those creepy villains have personality to spare and are just darn fun. The heroes can’t be that fun since they are, after all, heroes and have to be all righteous and stuff. Great films have resulted from this formula (“Batman Returns,” the “Spider-Man” films and another movie on this list), but “Iron Man” just might be the first film in decades where the hero is more interesting, layered and fun than the villain.
Robert Downey Jr. plays Tony Stark as a man of many flaws with an actual (gasp!) character arc. He tries desperately to become a better person and the viewer watches him change, rooting for him the entire movie partially because of Downey’s charisma and partially because the script never sacrifices depth for special effects shows.
And while I’ve focused mostly on Downey Jr. thus far, the movie he inhabits is phenomenal as well. Jeff Bridges is a great villain, oozing charisma and (gasp!) underplaying the role of Obadiah Shane, and Gwyneth Paltrow is wonderful as Stark’s romantic foil. Even the smaller roles are made memorable by perfect casting; Shaun Tobb wows in his brief role as Stark’s prison cellmate and Leslie Bibb brings the right amount of pluck to her reporter role.
And then there is the direction by John Favreau, which is never too showy but always stunning. He lets the actors create their characters and learn to inhabit the world of superheroes and supervillains they live in, so by the time the pyrotechnics go off in the final half hour of the film, we almost entirely forget that we are watching special effects because we are so darn invested in the inner battles of the respective characters.
4) “The Dark Knight”
In the underwhelming “Batman Begins” it was painfully obvious that Christopher Nolan was either uninterested or uncomfortable in telling a classic superhero story, and while the results were interesting they were far from enjoyable. Luckily, for “The Dark Knight,” not only has Nolan become unapologetic about embracing the superhero world, but he also has brought the kind of depth and emotional uncertainty he uses in his best work. If the film was simply Batman vs. The Joker and Two-Face, it would have been a good film, but “The Dark Knight” embraces so much more than just good vs. evil.
While “The Dark Knight” is an excellent film on its first time around, repeated viewings only serve to see how many layers Nolan gave the movie and how interested he is in making all of the characters fascinating to viewers. Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman all fit seamlessly together as pieces of Nolan’s epic two-and-a-half-hour puzzle.
There are so many great scenes and moments in the movie, from the opening bank heist to the Joker’s chase through the streets of Gotham and subsequent prison scenes, and the morally complex and engaging boat sequence. So why was it not higher on my list? Because in a sea of deep characters, the title character is bland and forgettable.
Quibbles. With this film and “Iron Man,” a new standard has been set for what summer blockbusters can aspire to become. What a damn shame neither will be nominated for Best Picture.
5) “Changeling”
Clint Eastwood’s period drama has perhaps the best premise of the year: Angelina Jolie plays Christine Collins, whose son disappears without a trace one day, and is returned a different child by the police. But the magical thing about “Changeling”, which is based closely upon a true story, is that it follows up a crackerjack beginning by becoming more and more fascinating with each twist and turn. A serial killer becomes involved, and the corruption of the Los Angeles police department deepens with each subsequent reel. Jolie is shattering as the wronged mother, and an able supporting case shines. Though Eastwood’s streamlined and predictable “Gran Torino” is getting more attention from critics, this film deserves ranking with his very best films.
6) “Australia”
I have thought of every possible complaint one could make against Australia, and I can quickly dismiss them with a wave of my hand. “Australia” is Baz Luhrmann’s masterpiece, and he accomplished everything he set out to do when he decided to create Australia’s version of “Gone With the Wind.” It’s achingly romantic, sweeping and stunning, words that critics find synonymous with “syrupy,” “overwrought” and “cheesy.” But it is none of those things. I’ve seen many movies that are those critical words, and this isn’t one of them. The emotions it stirs are real, and the climax is a stirring poignant rollercoaster. While it’s doing mid-level business domestically, I have a feeling it will flourish once it hits DVD, and will one day be rightfully called classic.
7) “Wall-E”
This is the most chancy film Pixar has ever created; its entire first act is basically a silent movie and its main character cannot emote in the same way other cartoon characters can, and yet it is the best film Pixar has offered since “The Incredibles.” Visionary, touching and shockingly affecting despite the fact that the main characters are robots, “Wall-E” isn’t just a great animated film, it’s a great movie. Period.
8) “The Fall”
There will never be another film like this. A stuntman (Lee Pace) has been crippled and tells a fanciful story to a girl at his hospital in order to get her to steal pills for him. This fairy tale was shot over four years and has no CGI. Nope, not the endless maze. Not the man emerging from a burning tree. Not the elephants swimming from coral reef to coral reef. The story is timeless and endlessly inventive—this is a film that must be seen to be believed. And once you do you’ll never forget it.
9) Transsiberian
A crackerjack thriller that builds slowly over the course of its first hour and then repeatedly blows the audience out of its seat. Emily Mortimer and Woody Harrelson star as a married couple taking the longest train ride in the world. They encounter another seemingly normal couple who has way too many Russian nesting dolls, and then the twists begin. Hitchcock would be proud.
10) “Ms. Pettigrew Lives For a Day”
The funniest film of the year, “Pettigrew” focuses on an almost-homeless governess (Frances McDormand) being taken in by a flighty singing star (a beaming Amy Adams) who has to choose between three suitors. It’s an ageless tale told precisely with the same wit and wonder as the great MGM comedies, and will leave you grinning from beginning to end.
I also treasured most of “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull,” all of “The Secret Lives of Bees,” the underrated “X-Files: I Want To Believe,” “4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days,” “In Brudges” “Lakeview Terrace” and “Vicky Cristina Barcelona.”
If you read my latest note, you’ll be familiar with my anger at the studio system and the Academy for refusing the allow the general public access to the “Oscar” “artsy” “important” films, moreso this year than ever before. Not one of the dramas nominated for a Golden Globe has been given a wide release. During my trip to New York City last week I made a point of seeking out the small theaters showcasing those movies, and I found all of them utterly underwhelming. Well, the ones that are at least in one theater in NYC. “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” and “Revolutionary Road” have not been released anywhere, and I am writing this ten days before the new year.
So while you will not see “Doubt,” “The Reader,” “Frost/Nixon,” or “Gran Torino” on this list, it is not because I have not seen them, it is because they just weren’t that good. No wonder the studios are hiding them from everyone but a select few catered-to critics—if this is the best my studio could offer I would hide them too. “Gran Torino” was formulaic, dull and tepid. The first hour of “The Reader” was soft-core porn, then Kate Winslet turned into a Nazi with a secret, then everyone stopped talking and exchanged long stares that were either meaningful or signified that someone had just passed gas. And once Winslet’s secret is revealed, the movie never says why she hid it instead of admitting it and saving her own life. “Doubt” was just trying way too hard, did not focus at all on the most interesting character (the child who may or may not have been sexually abused), featured way-too-obvious metaphors and an ending that was meant to be poignant but instead comes off laughable. Of the films, the best is “Frost/Nixon,” which is fine, not extraordinary. The one thing the above films have in common are excellent performances: Eastwood in “Torino,” Winslet in “Reader,” Viola Davis and Amy Adams in “Doubt,” and Frank Langella in “Frost/Nixon.” But as movies they do not hold up. At all.
That said, let’s plunge in, shall we?
1) “American Teen”
The best movie of 2008 is your story. And my story. It’s everyone’s story, as real and honest as any film I have ever seen, and the fact that it is a documentary is just a bonus.
For those of you who have never heard of this film, and I know that many of you haven’t, “American Teen” documents the senior year of five students attending Warsaw Community High School in Indiana. Each of these five students fits, one way or another, in one high school clique or another: we’ve got the loner, the jock, the queen bee, the heartthrob and the nerd.
Our society has become more and more enthralled with watching “reality” shows that document the lives and personalities of characters (because, when it comes down to it, they are just that) paid to create drama and tension when none should rightfully exist. We don’t identify with these characters, we mock them. In “American Teen,” we identify with people. We love them. Because, as I said earlier, we ARE them to some degree or another. As much as we might hate labels and loathe being placed in boxes, that does not change the fact that we were one cliché or another at some point in our lives.
The documentary garnered much buzz and anticipation, winning the Best Director award at Sundance, but did not receive the distribution it deserved and did not even gross a million dollars domestically. So why was this little masterpiece mishandled and shunned by the general public? Perhaps it’s because we don’t want to think about those awkward years. We all suffered greatly in high school, shedding skin after skin while trying to decide just who the hell we were while still attempting to fit in and be measured against some imaginary stick that no one can quite reach the top of, popular or not.
And what a damn shame, because “American Teen” is, as stated earlier, nothing short of a masterpiece, and one of the best documentaries I have ever seen. There are no wars being viewed, no explosions in the background and certainly no violence (though maybe a little sex) to be seen. All you have is people. Acting like people. Living out those moments that define your lifetime in ways that make you smile and ways that make you cringe.
Who was I, you might as? Believe it or not, I was the loner in high school. I had plenty of friends, but no real good friends, and therefore I latched onto Hannah (the film’s “loner”) and took the journey with her, cheering for her when she decided to follow her dreams to San Francisco, crying with her when the boy she lost her virginity to broke up with her immediately after, and wanting to hug her when she received a text-message break-up later in the year.
This is a movie that needs to be seen. You learn as much about yourself in watching it as you learn about the people being watched, and I am happy to call it the best movie of 2008. It’s on DVD. Rent it. Buy it. Cherish it. Live it.
2) “Milk”
How odd that this movie instills the viewer with such hope. It chronicles a time when gay rights were nonexistent, police in San Francisco would rather beat people of the GLBT movement and ends in a manner most tragic. And the film is being released a few months after Prop 8 passed. And yet the movie is so very hopeful, not just about the plight of gays, but of humanity in general.
This is because none of the characters (all real people to interacted with Milk, none created for dramatic purposes) are characters—they are something more. Sean Penn, Emile Hirsch, James Franco, Allison Pill all embody their respective characters in such a way that they transcend acting and embody the people they reflect. Even Josh Brolin, as Milk’s assassin Dan White and one of the de facto villains of the piece, never falls into cliché. To the bitter end he is a character we care about, and though his actions infuriate, we still understand them—and him.
Gus Van Sant, who so often falls beneath the weight of his own ambition, here delivers something that mixes real footage of Milk’s era with new footage seamlessly, cutting to old footage at perfect times in scenes to make the moment all the more powerful. The results are ingenious. When Van Sant shows us his version of a vigil for Milk, we are touched, but when he cuts to real footage of the seemingly-endless line of lit candles, we weep.
Of course, none of this would matter at all if we didn’t care about Harvey Milk or didn’t buy Penn’s performance. But Penn does a flawless job of anchoring the movie and eliciting our love for this man so few knew about.
There were so many ways this film could have gone wrong and so many other ways it could have devolved into sappy sweetness or cliché. But it does not. It’s a great movie about a great man who did great things.
3) “Iron Man”
Aside from Christopher Reeve as Superman, superhero movies have always tended to be more enraptured with the villain than the hero. Sure, the heroes have gadgets and gimmicks, but those creepy villains have personality to spare and are just darn fun. The heroes can’t be that fun since they are, after all, heroes and have to be all righteous and stuff. Great films have resulted from this formula (“Batman Returns,” the “Spider-Man” films and another movie on this list), but “Iron Man” just might be the first film in decades where the hero is more interesting, layered and fun than the villain.
Robert Downey Jr. plays Tony Stark as a man of many flaws with an actual (gasp!) character arc. He tries desperately to become a better person and the viewer watches him change, rooting for him the entire movie partially because of Downey’s charisma and partially because the script never sacrifices depth for special effects shows.
And while I’ve focused mostly on Downey Jr. thus far, the movie he inhabits is phenomenal as well. Jeff Bridges is a great villain, oozing charisma and (gasp!) underplaying the role of Obadiah Shane, and Gwyneth Paltrow is wonderful as Stark’s romantic foil. Even the smaller roles are made memorable by perfect casting; Shaun Tobb wows in his brief role as Stark’s prison cellmate and Leslie Bibb brings the right amount of pluck to her reporter role.
And then there is the direction by John Favreau, which is never too showy but always stunning. He lets the actors create their characters and learn to inhabit the world of superheroes and supervillains they live in, so by the time the pyrotechnics go off in the final half hour of the film, we almost entirely forget that we are watching special effects because we are so darn invested in the inner battles of the respective characters.
4) “The Dark Knight”
In the underwhelming “Batman Begins” it was painfully obvious that Christopher Nolan was either uninterested or uncomfortable in telling a classic superhero story, and while the results were interesting they were far from enjoyable. Luckily, for “The Dark Knight,” not only has Nolan become unapologetic about embracing the superhero world, but he also has brought the kind of depth and emotional uncertainty he uses in his best work. If the film was simply Batman vs. The Joker and Two-Face, it would have been a good film, but “The Dark Knight” embraces so much more than just good vs. evil.
While “The Dark Knight” is an excellent film on its first time around, repeated viewings only serve to see how many layers Nolan gave the movie and how interested he is in making all of the characters fascinating to viewers. Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman all fit seamlessly together as pieces of Nolan’s epic two-and-a-half-hour puzzle.
There are so many great scenes and moments in the movie, from the opening bank heist to the Joker’s chase through the streets of Gotham and subsequent prison scenes, and the morally complex and engaging boat sequence. So why was it not higher on my list? Because in a sea of deep characters, the title character is bland and forgettable.
Quibbles. With this film and “Iron Man,” a new standard has been set for what summer blockbusters can aspire to become. What a damn shame neither will be nominated for Best Picture.
5) “Changeling”
Clint Eastwood’s period drama has perhaps the best premise of the year: Angelina Jolie plays Christine Collins, whose son disappears without a trace one day, and is returned a different child by the police. But the magical thing about “Changeling”, which is based closely upon a true story, is that it follows up a crackerjack beginning by becoming more and more fascinating with each twist and turn. A serial killer becomes involved, and the corruption of the Los Angeles police department deepens with each subsequent reel. Jolie is shattering as the wronged mother, and an able supporting case shines. Though Eastwood’s streamlined and predictable “Gran Torino” is getting more attention from critics, this film deserves ranking with his very best films.
6) “Australia”
I have thought of every possible complaint one could make against Australia, and I can quickly dismiss them with a wave of my hand. “Australia” is Baz Luhrmann’s masterpiece, and he accomplished everything he set out to do when he decided to create Australia’s version of “Gone With the Wind.” It’s achingly romantic, sweeping and stunning, words that critics find synonymous with “syrupy,” “overwrought” and “cheesy.” But it is none of those things. I’ve seen many movies that are those critical words, and this isn’t one of them. The emotions it stirs are real, and the climax is a stirring poignant rollercoaster. While it’s doing mid-level business domestically, I have a feeling it will flourish once it hits DVD, and will one day be rightfully called classic.
7) “Wall-E”
This is the most chancy film Pixar has ever created; its entire first act is basically a silent movie and its main character cannot emote in the same way other cartoon characters can, and yet it is the best film Pixar has offered since “The Incredibles.” Visionary, touching and shockingly affecting despite the fact that the main characters are robots, “Wall-E” isn’t just a great animated film, it’s a great movie. Period.
8) “The Fall”
There will never be another film like this. A stuntman (Lee Pace) has been crippled and tells a fanciful story to a girl at his hospital in order to get her to steal pills for him. This fairy tale was shot over four years and has no CGI. Nope, not the endless maze. Not the man emerging from a burning tree. Not the elephants swimming from coral reef to coral reef. The story is timeless and endlessly inventive—this is a film that must be seen to be believed. And once you do you’ll never forget it.
9) Transsiberian
A crackerjack thriller that builds slowly over the course of its first hour and then repeatedly blows the audience out of its seat. Emily Mortimer and Woody Harrelson star as a married couple taking the longest train ride in the world. They encounter another seemingly normal couple who has way too many Russian nesting dolls, and then the twists begin. Hitchcock would be proud.
10) “Ms. Pettigrew Lives For a Day”
The funniest film of the year, “Pettigrew” focuses on an almost-homeless governess (Frances McDormand) being taken in by a flighty singing star (a beaming Amy Adams) who has to choose between three suitors. It’s an ageless tale told precisely with the same wit and wonder as the great MGM comedies, and will leave you grinning from beginning to end.
I also treasured most of “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull,” all of “The Secret Lives of Bees,” the underrated “X-Files: I Want To Believe,” “4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days,” “In Brudges” “Lakeview Terrace” and “Vicky Cristina Barcelona.”
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Why The Golden Globes Sicken Me
With today’s announcement of the Golden Globe nominees the award season has officially started in kind and I am sickened. Disgusted. Not to mention plenty of other synonyms. Because finally, after years of bringing us to this momentous occasion, film studios, critics, “journalists” and those voting for these nominations and awards have finally succeeded in taking us out of the picture. Congratulations to them.
Yep, that’s right. The general public no longer has any say in whether or not a film is good or not. “Oscar” films aren’t even made for public consumption any more: they come off of assembly lines with staffs of publicists seeking to do nothing but cause buzz and cater to a minute group of elitist film critics (who are getting smaller and more obsolete with each passing month) so they can continue to feel self-important. Those films aren’t made for us, the normal people who spend billions of dollars every year supporting an industry that is nothing but full of himself.
I’d love to write this opinion piece about all of the nominees, but I cannot. Not because I’ve chosen not to see the nominated films, but I cannot. None of the films nominated for Best Drama are available for consumers to view anywhere near Akron, Ohio. Not one. And I’ve seen less than 30 percent of the nominated performances. Me, the guy with 2,000 films in his room and all the knowledge on the industry one can get. I’m disgusted.
Excellent films that were released to the general public have been systematically cut down by critics for daring to allow us to have a say. Though audiences loved “Changeling” and “Australia,” both receiving “A” averages from viewers in post-movie polls, critics attacked them, perhaps not because they were mediocre but because their producers dared to release them for * gasp * us to watch. And for those who would like to argue that there is no place for “art” in the multiplexes, please remember that “Crash,” “Brokeback Mountain,” “Juno” “Little Miss Sunshine” and “Pan’s Labyrinth” did just fine for being small “art-house” films.
Of the five nominated dramas, the only one I’ll be able to see before the new year will be “Benjamin Button,” and that’s only if it is not placed in limited release on Christmas. The rest will be seen in early to late January 2009 and, pardon me for asking, but shouldn’t movies released generally in 2009 not be eligible for 2008 awards?
Oh wait, I forgot, they are in release. Let’s investigate. Best Drama nominee “Frost/Nixon” is available in a whopping three theaters across the country right now, which might seem pathetic until you see that “The Reader” is only playing in one theater. And there’s no sign of “Revolutionary Road” or “Benjamin Button” now or at any point in the near future. It makes the 78 theaters showing “Slumdog Millionaire” seem hugely extravagant. And as for those other “Oscar” contenders “Doubt,” “The Wrestler,” “Gran Torino” and “Last Chance Harvey,” I’d love to comment but, whoops, no sign of them anywhere.
No wonder The Oscars’ ratings have been going downhill over the past decade: How are we supposed to bring ourselves to care about films and performances, let alone choose which ones to root for, when WE CANNOT SEE THEM. We can only be told what to love and how much to love it so long before we rebel, after all. The general public should not be opening newspapers tomorrow and wondering “What the hell are these movies!?”
But then again, maybe we should be cut out of the process. Maybe the critics and HFPA and the Academy does know better than us. Then again, when was the last time you thought about “Babel”? Or “Letters From Iwo Jima”? Or “Bobby”? Or “The Queen”? Or “The Constant Gardener”? Or “Closer”? How about “Sideways”? “Kinsey”? “Cold Mountain”? “About Schmidt”? Anyone?
Yep, that’s right. The general public no longer has any say in whether or not a film is good or not. “Oscar” films aren’t even made for public consumption any more: they come off of assembly lines with staffs of publicists seeking to do nothing but cause buzz and cater to a minute group of elitist film critics (who are getting smaller and more obsolete with each passing month) so they can continue to feel self-important. Those films aren’t made for us, the normal people who spend billions of dollars every year supporting an industry that is nothing but full of himself.
I’d love to write this opinion piece about all of the nominees, but I cannot. Not because I’ve chosen not to see the nominated films, but I cannot. None of the films nominated for Best Drama are available for consumers to view anywhere near Akron, Ohio. Not one. And I’ve seen less than 30 percent of the nominated performances. Me, the guy with 2,000 films in his room and all the knowledge on the industry one can get. I’m disgusted.
Excellent films that were released to the general public have been systematically cut down by critics for daring to allow us to have a say. Though audiences loved “Changeling” and “Australia,” both receiving “A” averages from viewers in post-movie polls, critics attacked them, perhaps not because they were mediocre but because their producers dared to release them for * gasp * us to watch. And for those who would like to argue that there is no place for “art” in the multiplexes, please remember that “Crash,” “Brokeback Mountain,” “Juno” “Little Miss Sunshine” and “Pan’s Labyrinth” did just fine for being small “art-house” films.
Of the five nominated dramas, the only one I’ll be able to see before the new year will be “Benjamin Button,” and that’s only if it is not placed in limited release on Christmas. The rest will be seen in early to late January 2009 and, pardon me for asking, but shouldn’t movies released generally in 2009 not be eligible for 2008 awards?
Oh wait, I forgot, they are in release. Let’s investigate. Best Drama nominee “Frost/Nixon” is available in a whopping three theaters across the country right now, which might seem pathetic until you see that “The Reader” is only playing in one theater. And there’s no sign of “Revolutionary Road” or “Benjamin Button” now or at any point in the near future. It makes the 78 theaters showing “Slumdog Millionaire” seem hugely extravagant. And as for those other “Oscar” contenders “Doubt,” “The Wrestler,” “Gran Torino” and “Last Chance Harvey,” I’d love to comment but, whoops, no sign of them anywhere.
No wonder The Oscars’ ratings have been going downhill over the past decade: How are we supposed to bring ourselves to care about films and performances, let alone choose which ones to root for, when WE CANNOT SEE THEM. We can only be told what to love and how much to love it so long before we rebel, after all. The general public should not be opening newspapers tomorrow and wondering “What the hell are these movies!?”
But then again, maybe we should be cut out of the process. Maybe the critics and HFPA and the Academy does know better than us. Then again, when was the last time you thought about “Babel”? Or “Letters From Iwo Jima”? Or “Bobby”? Or “The Queen”? Or “The Constant Gardener”? Or “Closer”? How about “Sideways”? “Kinsey”? “Cold Mountain”? “About Schmidt”? Anyone?
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Buy "Adrift" at a great discount now!
Hey y'all!
First off, if you haven't bought my book yet, shame on you!
Second of all, if you still haven't, now is the time to get GREAT savings on the hardcover!Suggested retail price on the "Adrift" hardcover is twenty-six bucks and change (and p.s., how bad is it that hardcovers regularly sell for that or more now?), but the friendly folks over at Barnes and Noble have given you an incredible discount, and lowered the price to TWENTY BUCKS. That's right, a first-run hardcover for twenty bucks!
Who wants a link? You? Then by all means follow this one and buy away!http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Adrift/Robert-Taylor/e/9781434319845
First off, if you haven't bought my book yet, shame on you!
Second of all, if you still haven't, now is the time to get GREAT savings on the hardcover!Suggested retail price on the "Adrift" hardcover is twenty-six bucks and change (and p.s., how bad is it that hardcovers regularly sell for that or more now?), but the friendly folks over at Barnes and Noble have given you an incredible discount, and lowered the price to TWENTY BUCKS. That's right, a first-run hardcover for twenty bucks!
Who wants a link? You? Then by all means follow this one and buy away!http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Adrift/Robert-Taylor/e/9781434319845
I'm in Writer's Digest!
Hey guys, amazing news!
If you happen to be near a newsstand or are a subscriber to Writer's Digest, make sure to take a gander at page 53 of the newest issue, the one with Brad Thor on the cover. On it, you will find my name listed as the first place winner of the "Stage Play" section of the 77th Annual Writer's Digest Writing Competition!
I'm extremely blessed and excited for the honor (there were over 17,000 entrants), which was judged by New York Times Bestseller Aury Wallington, who also wrote some great episodes of "Sex and the City" and "Veronica Mars." The first twenty pages of the play are apparently supposed to appear in an upcoming issue as well, so be on the lookout for that!
And I really do need to thank those of you who have been so supportive of me from the start. I really do appreciate it more than you know, and hope that I can share all this with you sometime soon!
If you happen to be near a newsstand or are a subscriber to Writer's Digest, make sure to take a gander at page 53 of the newest issue, the one with Brad Thor on the cover. On it, you will find my name listed as the first place winner of the "Stage Play" section of the 77th Annual Writer's Digest Writing Competition!
I'm extremely blessed and excited for the honor (there were over 17,000 entrants), which was judged by New York Times Bestseller Aury Wallington, who also wrote some great episodes of "Sex and the City" and "Veronica Mars." The first twenty pages of the play are apparently supposed to appear in an upcoming issue as well, so be on the lookout for that!
And I really do need to thank those of you who have been so supportive of me from the start. I really do appreciate it more than you know, and hope that I can share all this with you sometime soon!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)