Change Your Image
shinymc_shine
Reviews
The Passion of the Christ (2004)
The Film Of A Latter-day Sinner
"The Passion Of The Christ", Mel Gibson's third output as director, is a mixed blessing. In one hand, there's a thoroughly researched, extremely visual, rich in detail, piece of art. While in the other, there's a clumsy, stereotypical, overemphasized film. This is an excessively bloody, biblical day in the life of Jesus Christ from his capture to crucifixion and resurrection.
One of the pluses is the beautiful cinematography of Caleb Deschanel which resembles classically, iconic, religious paintings, bathed in a golden glow. His solid camera-work's never flashy apart from a few point of view shots through Christ's eyes. Lighting's realistic yet it has an aged look which adds much needed warmth to the film.
Not a lot of directors can pull off mood in a film. There's an air of horror that lingers throughout. Everything from the clothes to the buildings appear lived in. You feel that you're watching a living painting on a larger than life canvas. The team of director Gibson, cinematographer Deschanel, the production and costume designer certainly have worked well together to produce this atmospheric film.
A good example of Gibson's clumsiness is a flashback in which Jesus is at work building a "high" table for a rich client. The scene is extremely laughable in its attempt to convey that Jesus was a man ahead of his time. But couldn't Gibson have achieved this through speech in the same way the Bible uses words to get its message across.
When attempting to capture reality, which seems to be Gibson's aim, it's a mistake to use film trickery such as slow-motion. He tries too hard to emphasize notable incidents in the passion story. There are other choices than slow-motion to bring something to an audiences' attention. The close-up, colour or stillness are better examples. Slow-motion only emphasizes that this is a film and a state of the art, expensive film at that. The authenticity would've been better served had he shot it more simply without modern film techniques at his disposal.
While this was funded by Gibson, the dialogue is in a foreign tongue with English subtitles. As the film progresses, you realize how pedestrian the subtitles are. In a couple of scenes the word "hey" is used to get someone's attention. This is an extremely modern term and stands out immediately. Gibson co-wrote the screenplay but did he write it in English, then translating it, or was it the other way around. Although Martin Scorsese used contemporary American accents to draw middle-class audiences to his period, biblical interpretation, it seems that Gibson was thinking along the same lines with his subtitles. Ultimately, the words are too current and appear dumbed down for the average viewer.
While the wording of the subtitles can be distracting, Gibson doesn't always feel the need to use them. Film's a visual medium and, as the saying goes, actions speak louder than words. He should be commended for not translating every word a character utters. The subtitles are used sparingly, are clear to see and are on screen long enough for a slower cinema goer to read.
Jim Cavisel's the perfect choice to portray Jesus. His youthfulness is a reminder of the tragically short life Christ led. I've never understood how an actor can deliver foreign dialogue convincingly as if it's their first language. We believe every line that's spoken. This Jesus is calm, understanding but this specific time in his life is consumed by pain and the violent beatings becomes repetitive after awhile.
You're constantly staring at Christ's eyes as Gibson's chosen to disregard the iconic, blue irises. The eyes, the say, are the windows of the soul and the story of Christ is filled with symbolism and subtext. Why choose to abandon his blue eyes? Blue's a naturalistic colour. The sky and the sea, two of nature's true mysteries, are blue. Other meanings include purity, liberty and calmness. So why choose red for Christ's eyes? There's too much red due to the bloody nature of the crucifixion and the ritual beatings caused by the Roman centurions.
Another great casting choice was the actor playing the Devil incarnate. This actor appears androgynous, both male and female, though I believe it's a she. Scenes featuring the Devil are truly frightening, inhumanly creepy and grotesquely sickening. One scene in particular has the Devil nursing an adult looking baby that stays with you long after the film has ended. There are a few choice shock moments throughout that are expertly handled.
A major percentage of critics have noted the levels of blood and brutality. But what repulses you most is how repetitive the violence and bloodshed is. Restraint's needed and maybe a more seasoned director would've known this. The Roman centurions who beat, kick, whip and spit on Jesus are depicted as sadistic, moronic Neanderthals. For such a resourceful, intelligent race who invented objects that are still in use today, they've been wrongfully represented. Use of make-up and appliances are realistic, gut wrenching and greatly add to Cavisel's afflicted performance.
Overall, there's a great film here shining through the bad mistakes and poor choices. Gibson wears his heart on his sleeve but the problem is that he's too close to the film to see its flaws. By the way, when making a biblical film it's always a good idea to mention the source material you've adapted it from as it seems a little pretentious not to.
21 Grams (2003)
21 GRAMS OF FAT
"21 Grams" is a puzzle of a film. Your brain works overtime trying to piece disjointed scenes together in your mind. It's difficult to judge a film that infuriates it's audience for no reason other than drawing attention to it's director. If you enjoy brainteasers and jigsaws, then this film's for you. Others beware.
A mathematician (Sean Penn) is given a second chance of life due to a heart transplant. The heart's from a father of two who, with his girls, were the victims of a hit and run. An out of work, convicted felon (Benicio Del Toro), who has found comfort in the lord Jesus Christ while incarcerated, is the driver. When Penn hires a private investigator for information on the donor, he begins to spy on the widow (Naomi Watts) who can no longer cope with her loss. The two strike up a friendship and soon they turn their attention to the man that brought them together (Del Toro).
This confusing film is extremely complex in it's narrative. It jumps around with no rhyme or reason. There are other films with non-linear story lines, eg. Christopher Nolan's "Memento", but they have specific, obvious reasons why they're told in that fashion. I can find no justification in it's order of scenes.
Due to its complexity, the film begins to drag, the audience becomes uncomfortable and we feel that by the film's conclusion that maybe there'll be some little nugget that'll explain its unorthodox storytelling. But there isn't. You have to ask yourself whether the screenplay was written exactly as it is on screen or whether it was the director's choice in post-production.
One explanation that does come to mind is that this dramatic tragedy, due to its complex narrative, becomes a mystery. Within the first quarter of an hour, Penn's walking and talking with no difficulty, in another scene he's breathing with the aid of an oxygen tank and, somehow, in yet another scene he's a near vegetable lying in a hospital bed hooked up to several life support systems. You begin to ask yourself, how does Penn get into these situations? It creates a sense of mystery that wouldn't be there if it wasn't edited in this fashion.
Ultimately, this is a simplistic story. I'm reminded of the Oscar nominated "In The Bedroom", another overrated, overlong film with an extremely ordinary tale. This is an actor's piece, similar to a kitchen sink drama. Why the director would draw attention to himself and not his actors shows that he's more interested in the auteur theory than his oeuvre.
"21 Grams" is gritty in it's production design. Del Toro lives in a cluttered, lower class, suburban home which is more realistic than most American settings. The jail sequence is sickening and it genuinely disgusts you that people can be imprisoned in such squalor. Production designer Brigitte Broch should be commended for this darker more realistic look at America. It also helps to have a non-American director, as foreigners have a fresh and non-patriotic eye which helps capture the reality of their chosen setting.
Another thing that stands out is it's view of religion. Del Toro's character's a little freaky in his total faith in the Bible. He can recite passages verbatim and truly believes that his life is in God's hands. But the film also shows how the Bible can be misinterpreted, leading to a biblical showdown between Del Toro and his local priest.
It's difficult to judge an actor's performance when the film's told in a non-linear way. Most people know that a film is shot out of sequence because of locations, availability or weather. So it's an achievement for an actor to give a measured performance even though their work schedule doesn't follow the script's sequence of events. To then release the film with a jumbled narrative limits our respect and admiration for the actor because their performance hasn't been brought to the forefront. Director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu has, through his egotistical stupidity, taken what is the best thing about this film and subdued it.
From what I can piece together, Penn gives a quite restrained, quiet performance of a man who's been given a new lease on life. Watts plays a kind of damsel in distress, throwing her life away with drugs and alcohol. But her decent into a personal hell is pointless if we don't see her gradual decline. She, more than anyone, is let down by the director's vision. Del Toro is the true saving grace of this film. He's certainly more coherent and audible than most of his past performances. This performance is full of sorrow and regret which seems to be written all over his face. The Academy Award nomination is certainly worthy of his talents.
Overall, this film is neither entertaining nor informative in a good way. It does inform you on what not to do and should be shown to film students as a lesson an how to alienate your audience. With some scenes, I couldn't figure out where they were set? Penn lives in a hovel of an apartment yet his luncheon's set in a well to do house. Is this his girlfriend's house? Where is it? Continuity problems would never be noticed if all films were made this way. This is criminally overlong for such a simple story and will cause arguments among the audience as to the relevance of it's non-linear storytelling. If I was one of the people involved in this production, I would feel betrayed and angry over the finished product.
Big Fish (2003)
Big Leap Forward For Burton.
Tim Burton's "Big Fish" is a dramatic film set in reality with tall tales interspersed throughout the narrative. Director Burton's created a handsome, storybook fantasy that's delightfully pure of heart, thoroughly entertaining and gently humourous. This is perfect subject matter for him and recalls some of his previous movies, especially "Edward Scissorhands".
Billy Crudup's estranged from his father, Albert Finney. They haven't communicated in years, living on separate continents. When Finney falls ill, his son returns home to hopefully patch up their relationship with his main agenda being to find out the truth about his father's fantastical, earlier life. Crudup feels lied to and embarrassed by his father from childhood into adulthood. Spending time with him, searching through his personals, he begins to see his father for the man he is and learns to accept his exaggerated anecdotes.
Ewan McGregor plays the young Finney in the flashback sequences. He's completely believable as Finney's younger self and is optimistic, charming and larger than life, much like his adventures. The bed ridden Finney is also up to par and adds a welcome dose of prestige to the film due to his prescience. His loving wife is adeptly played by the glamourous Jessica Lange and her younger self by the talented Alison Lohman. If you thought McGregor and Finney were perfect casting, Lange and Lohman as the same character is inspired. Crudup has the more serious role rooted more in realism than the other characters. While "Big Fish" is primarily about Finney and his overtly embellished stories, it is Crudup's film, his search for the truth of a man he hardly knows, his own father. Crudup's realism is the grounding force, the one character we identify with. Duel player Helena Bonham Carter, the hard working Steve Buscemi and Burton regular Danny De Vito are swell in support.
Screenwriter John August, who wrote the original comedy Doug Liman's "Go", has been wasting his time of late writing or doctoring the Charlie's Angels movies. It's good to see that his sense of humour is still in check and that his talent of writing intelligent, non-linear screenplays is as sharp as ever.
This has elements of the kind of film that Burton does well. It certainly is an improvement over his last movie, the remake or retelling of "Planet Of The Apes". While the fantasy sequences are expertly handled, this is the first film Burton's done that's been established firmly in reality. He did direct the Edward D. Wood Jr. biopic "Ed Wood", but that film was stylised, shot in black and white with an over the top, caricature portrayal by Johnny Depp. This is Burton's most down-to-earth film and shows that he's capable of making intimate dramas other than the sci-fi/fantasy genre that's become his trademark.
Overall, this is a tried and true Burton fantasy mixed with a parental drama he hasn't tried before. All the performances are right proving that Burton isn't just interested in the weird and the surreal. This is a giant step forward for the director and is a defining moment in his oeuvre.
Underworld (2003)
Gothic Gangster Movie Kills.
"Underworld" culls two races from mythology, vampires and werewolves, and has them co-existing in the same setting. While the two are staples of the horror genre ("Dracula" and "The Wolf Man"), this doesn't play out like a traditional horror movie. This action packed story will please horror fans and convert new ones due to the melding of movie types to create a fresh interpretation to a century old genre.
A male human (Scott Speedman) unwittingly becomes involved in an on going war between vampires and werewolves. When a female vampire (Kate Beckinsale) notices the werewolves following this human, she becomes suspicious and begins to investigate why he is so important, even if it changes everything she has ever known about her life and vampire history.
This monster movie follows the age-old traditions established in the early novels (by Bram Stoker) and movies ("Werewolf Of London") featuring vampires and lycanthropes. Of late, there's been some wanna-be trendy, horror movies that have thrown the standards out the window. Those standards are comforting and we, the audience, expect to see them. Vampires deteriorate in sunlight leading to instant death. Werewolves can only be killed by a silver bullet. "Underworld" takes these traditions, builds on them and makes them their own.
While it reads as a horror, it plays more like a gangster movie. Both races participate in gunplay with specially modified bullets to instantly kill their opponents. The werewolves are brutish goons, wanna-be gangsters with more brawn than brains. On the flip side, the vampires are like a communal family with hierarchy, ancient customs and they're legitimate business owners which funds their criminal endeavours.
Due to the aforementioned gunplay, this is more violent than gory. It's still bloody but there are no scenes that'll make you queasy or nauseous. The violence is another reason why it has a gangster feel about it.
There's a class system subtext that runs through this movie. The lower class werewolves battling the upper class vampires. Working class is possibly a better adjective for the werewolves. They are masculine, unkempt and unsophisticated. On the other hand, the gothic vampires are immaculately dressed with a expensive sense of style. They lounge around looking glamourous as if they're supermodels at a cocktail party. Opulence and high class is the style the production and costume designer has given these blood suckers.
Beckinsale's quite fetching in her erotic, PVC, full body costume. Her bondage like outfit's more interesting than her intentionally emotionless performance. One wonders why she didn't keep her British accent as the cast is made up of international actors with a pot-pourri of different brogues? It's good to see her in a lead role, above the title credit, where she holds her own portraying a strong, forceful character. Of late, she's played the glorified girlfriend part (eg. Michael Bay's "Pearl Harbor"). Here, she's independent, without a partner to justify her significance. While this is the kind of role a man would normally play, she's still feminine and sexy without having to show any flesh.
Bill Nighy has a supporting role as an elder vampire who's resurrected before his time in order to help Beckinsale. Nighy's rightfully become popular in the last few years. He's adept in any part he plays even a centuries-old vampire with superhuman strength. His climatic fight scene never draws unintentional laughs which shows what a convincing actor he is.
The other name star of this movie is Bacardi. Product placement is rife during the opening sequence in an underground train station. This is quite surprising when you watch the entire movie.
Never at any time is there any indication where and when this movie is set. The gothic architecture and vehicle licence plates have you thinking that this could be somewhere in Europe. There are no title cards, characters speak with differing accents and there are no recognizable landmarks used as locations. All we do know is is that where ever they are they have Bacardi. If the moviemakers were trying to create a nondescript world, alien from our own, then why use blatant product placement for Bacardi?
The colour film stock has been manipulated intentionally to give a blue hue to it. This reinforces the gothic style of the movie. Blue isn't just a colour, it's also an emotion. It's constantly raining which adds to the cold look the cinematographer and production designer have created. These races are unemotional people which also strengthens the blue tone.
Computer generated visual effects were used for the movie which is far removed from John Landis' "An American Werewolf In London". While the special effects are impressive, there is no mystery into how they were achieved. Special effects and make up were a real art form before the days of CGI. These technicians are a dying breed due to computers. It's a shame that moviemakers rely heavily on CGI as it's slowly becoming run of the mill.
Overall, "Underworld"'s a good action/horror/gangster movie with a strong female lead. This hybrid is filled with polished set pieces and seamless CGI. There's talk that this is the first of a proposed trilogy and I hope the next two will be as strong as this.
Timeline (2003)
Crichton Lucks Out This Time.
Richard Donner's "Timeline", based on the novel by popular author Michael Crichton, is terribly old fashioned and seems out of place in these current times. This action/adventure movie is mildly entertaining, eventhough it deals with the notion of time travel which has always been an interesting subject for cinema.
A powerful technological corporation creates a machine that can transport physical objects through space from one location to another. Problem is that it doesn't work correctly. They discover that instead of transporting things through space, it's sending it through time. When a Scottish archaeologist (Billy Connolly) is sent back in time to 14th century France, he leaves messages of help for his students in the present to find. So the students and his son (Paul Walker) travel to the Middle Ages to locate him and bring him home. Two major obstacles stand in their way. The archaeologist is captured by the British and the transportation device is blown to pieces, due to a grenade sent forward through time, by accident.
The beginning grabs you almost immediately. A man appears out of thin air, dressed in rags, and collapses on a deserted road where a passer-by (played by Donner regular Steve Kahan) picks him up. During the opening, intercut with the aforementioned scenes on the road, there are beautifully lit shots in a forrest of the same man being chased by a knight on horseback. As the movie progresses you begin to analyze that beginning, realizeing that it doesn't make much sense. Nor does the moviemakers bother to explain the occurance when a character brings it up. Why the man appeared on the road, and not in the transportation machine, is never adequately addressed?
Michael Crichton has successfully made a name for himself in the realm of science fiction. His Jurassic Park novels were adapted for the screen during the 1990s to blockbuster success, thanks in large part to it's director Steven Spielberg. Crichton has been associated with such winners as "Westworld", "Coma" and Robert Wise's "The Andromeda Strain", whether it's in the capacity of director/screenwriter or based on his source material. There has also been disappointments. "Congo" and Barry Levinson's "Sphere" failed to attract audiences. This movie comfortably fits inbetween the hits and the misses.
What stands out about this movie is that Donner has cast actors rather than stars. Walker is probably the most well known of the cast due to his starring roles in The Fast And The Furious movies. David Thewlis and Frances O'Connor have received critical acclaim on previous films. The other cast includes Connolly, Matt Craven and Anna Friel. To some, the real star is Crichton and his novel. The old adage is that the story is the star, the one thing that truely matters. Without a great script, the talent won't be interested.
Problem is, that the story isn't partically that good. While it has an interesting idea, the screenwriters don't explore all the possibilities that the notion of time travel possesses. For an action/adventure, the midsection is slow. Both of the love stories woven into the narrative are so unbelievable that it grinds the movie down to a halt. Only two things could've saved this movie. If a big name star headlined this tale then their appeal would've blinded audiences to the problems in the writing. And why Crichton wasn't hired to adapt his own novel is a mystery?
Suspension of disbelief plays an important part in the majority of movie genres. Science fiction, fantasy, action, comedy. Any type of movie that doesn't necessitate realism falls into this category. But Yank Walker as the son of Scot Connolly, that's truely unbelieveable. I haven't seen a more ludicrous choice of casting since Dustin Hoffman played the son of Sean Connery in Sidney Lumet's "Family Business".
On the plus side, you're never too sure which characters are going to live or die by the conclusion. With some movies, you know instinctively which person's going to be dispensed with. It's like watching the original series of "Star Trek". The crew beams down to an unexplored planet and there's always an extra that beams down with them, someone you've never seen before. Their costume is different, they never speak and in numerous cases they don't even have a name. (The comedy spoof "Galaxy Quest" reinforces this theory.) With this movie, it comes as a surprise when certain players are killed off.
Movies that deal with the notion of time travel have always held the public's interest no matter how sophisticated or Z grade the production is. Majority of the intellectual time travel films bring something new to the table. But "Timeline" plays it safe, useing pre-existing theories and conventional ideas.
The standout is the climatic medieval battle scenes. Donner is well versed in the action department due to his work on the Lethal Weapon series. These scenes, filmed at night, are exciting, breathtaking and well executed. It's a shame that the rest of the movie isn't as good.
It's ironic in post Gulf War II that the villains of the piece are the British and the heroes are the French. I'm sure that this aspect of the movie will make it unpopular in certain world markets. Yet another movie that'll suffer due to being released at the wrong time.
Overall, "Timeline" takes itself way too seriously. What's needed is a self depreciateing sense of humour, characters making fun of the situations that they're in. No one ever questions whether time travel is possible and they take to it as if it's like riding a bike or some other mundane activity. Since the early movies of Terry Gilliam, every movie set in the middle ages seems too hygienic as if all their costumes have just come back from the cleaners. Filth and squalor seems more appropriate. This is an OK movie, best suited for video though the battle scenes will lose its impact on the small screen.
Wonderland (2003)
Shooting Porn Star.
The horrific events covered in "Wonderland" detail a moment in time in the short life of infamous porn star John Holmes. This "Rashomon"-like film deals with what's known about the Wonderland murders and comes across as being more informative than entertaining. The general public loves to hear and see lurid stories about celebrities or, in this case, a quasi-celebrity. Sex, drugs, violence. This some what true story has it all.
In the early 1980s, five people were brutally murdered in an apartment on Wonderland Avenue. The victims were beaten to death, possibly with lead pipes. Only one woman survived the bloodbath. When a friend of the slain (Dylan McDermott), who was crashing at the apartment but wasn't there on the night in question, comes forward to give his testimony to police detectives he mentions Holmes (Val Kilmer) and his possible involvement in the killings. But Holmes' version of the events differs and the detectives must decide whether to believe a bikie felon or a junkie porno actor.
Akira Kurosawa's "Rashomon" is a foreign film classic that details an incident told from four different perspectives. So when someone refers to a film as being "Rashomon"-like, it means that the plot is told from several character's different viewpoints. In the case of this film, there are two different versions of the same event. One told by McDermott, the other from Kilmer. Co-star Lisa Kudrow, as Holmes' wife, reminisces about a memorable night in her life. Perspectives and reminisces are part of the narrative for an all-important reason in this news worthy story.
When a film says it's based on a true story, filmmakers have taken liberties with the events for entertainment purposes. Names and occurrences have been changed for legal reasons. Different people merge to become one character. But in this case, not enough is known about the murders to label this a true story. We only have the police evidence and the accounts of two possible liars. The screenwriters and director have made the right choice in how they told this story. It's up to you, the audience, to make up your own minds about what happened. The facts and the fiction have been re-enacted and never at any point does the two become blurred.
Paul Thomas Anderson's "Boogie Nights" touched on the Wonderland murders in its portrayal of fictious porn star Dirk Diggler. Holmes' life was the blueprint for that film and its version of the events was used for the climax. The difference between the two is that Diggler sees the error of his ways after that point while Holmes continues down a dark path of crime.
Viewers watching the film on video and DVD will have an advantage over cinemagoers as the pre-credits sequence comes off as extremely confusing on first viewing. You wish that the filmmakers could've gone back and explained what we saw earlier as at the time you aren't sure what's happening. But as the film progresses you realize that those scenes were important and you wish that you paid more attention. With video and DVD you can go to the beginning, rewatch it and be able to make a better judgement as to Holmes' guilt or innocence.
Kilmer gives excellent performances as Holmes. That's correct, performances. Throughout we see slightly different versions of Holmes due to character's perspectives of him. We see the perspective of the police detectives, McDermott, Kudrow, Kate Bosworth (who plays Holmes' girlfriend) and even Holmes' image of himself. There was talk years ago of Michael Biehn playing this part. Ultimately Kilmer is the right choice and shows a maturity and sensitivity that Biehn could never have brought to the role.
Kudrow has built a career on playing ditsy, flaky, dumb blondes in movies and television. So it comes as a welcome surprise to see her give a restrained, serious performance. This is like nothing we have seen her do before and hopefully her experience while making this film encourages her to branch out more before she becomes like a more extreme version of Meg Ryan.
The other cast is quite eclectic rangeing from a cameo from Princess Leia herself Carrie Fisher to uncredited heiress Paris Hilton, from sitcom star Christina Applegate to criminally underused comedian Janeane Garofalo and actor/writer Eric Bogosian to the daughter of Natalie Wood, Natasha Gregson Wagner. Apart from Kilmer and Kudrow, McDermott and Bosworth have larger roles than the supporting cast. Ted Levine, who only seems to be cast as serial killers and cops, again plays a police detective investigating the murders.
One of the problems with the film is that it's set in early 1981 yet the filmmakers have gone for a retro 1970's look. Fashion and the production design look out of place and the cinematographer has used hard lighting, a staple of films from that are. Much of the earlier scenes bombard us with dates and history of the times. This is just one year after Paul Schrader's "American Gigolo" with its Armani clothes and strikingly colourful production design. The setting and the design just doesn't seem to mesh.
Overall, this is a good, fascinateing account of an unsolved mass murder that reminds us of what a truely talented actor Kilmer is.
Out of Time (2003)
Washington Worth Our Time
Carl Franklin's "Out Of Time" is the second movie to team the director with star Denzel Washington. They previously worked on the colour film noir "Devil In A Blue Dress". Not colour as in coloured people but a contemporary film noir filmed in colour.
Washington is a small town chief of police who's having an affair with a married woman. He's separated from his wife, played by Eva Mendes, who chose a promotion in the police force, out of town, over her husband. When the married woman and her husband turn up dead, burned in their own home, it appears to be foul play and all the evidence points to Washington.
Washington is the real star of this movie. His likeability and charm is what has you rooting for him throughout, even though he's still legally married and having an affair with a married woman. In some ways this is an old fashioned star vehicle where you take a charismatic lead and put him/her in some form of jeopardy. This type of movie wouldn't work without a big name heroic star.
Mendes unfortunately doesn't really have much to do. She plays second fiddle to Washington even though she heads up the investigation into the double homicide. Apart from being a strikingly beautiful actress she's brimming with, I think, confidence and has a long future ahead of her. You've no trouble believing that Mendes and Washington could be a real life couple.
Comic relief is provided by supporting actor John Billingsley who has a natural acting style. His portrayal is truthful, witty, and extremely laid back. He says out loud what Washington's thinking, providing misleading information to Mendes to help Washington in his investigation, and overall helping his friend, never at any time doubting his innocence. Scene stealer isn't enough of a complement for Billingsley as you feel that he never tries to upstage Washington, that it just happens naturally.
"Out Of Time" is, when you get down to it, a simplistic story, one that we've all seen before. What makes it different from the rest is the way it's told. Take the blockbuster hit "The Fugitive" for example. Harrison Ford is accused of his wife's murder. In order to find the real killer, he goes on the run from the law to locate a one armed man. In this movie, Washington can't run because he's the chief of police. He has all the evidence at his disposal and the thrills come from the fact that he's changing it so it doesn't look like he was involved.
Overall, this is an entertaining thriller, filmed in the beautiful locations of Florida, which is tense, humouress, and extremely straight forward. Don't think too hard about the plot after you've seen it as it's the kind of movie you've watched before. The joy of the piece comes from Washington staying one step ahead of Mendes, compromising the investigation, so he isn't implicated in the murders. This isn't a classic of its kind. The point is to entertain and for all of its running time it succeeds.
The Last Samurai (2003)
Another Civil War Hit For Zwick.
Edward Zwick's "The Last Samurai" is an epic, dramatic, war film set after the American Civil War in which a disillusioned soldier is hired to instruct modern warfare to the Japanese.
The opening sequences perfectly and succinctly introduce Tom Cruise's character, the time and place the film is set and the violence that is to come. Co-screenwriter John Logan is certainly the flavour of the month, or should I say decade, with past credits that include Ridley Scott's "Gladiator", Oliver Stone's "Any Given Sunday" and "Star Trek: Nemesis". Not to take away from Zwick's involvement who has created a beautiful, humouress and gentle film that is punctuated by moments of graphic brutality.
Over the last couple of years we have been introduced to a new Tom Cruise. The pretty boy of the past who inundated us with arrogant, always heroic characters has been replaced with an older but wiser thespian who's not afraid to disfigure his globally known face. Here he plays an alcoholic, emotionally scarred, Civil War veteran. Not your usual Cruise role. He tried to change his image twice before. In 1989 he portrayed Vietnam War veteran/protester Ron Kovic in Oliver Stone's "Born On The Fourth Of July' to much acclaim. Then in 1994 Anne Rice adapted her own novel for Neil Jordan's "Interview With The Vampire" in which Cruise starred as Lestat much to Rice's dismay. After viewing the movie Rice changed her mind and thoroughly endorsed their choice. Now with Cameron Crowe's "Vanilla Sky" and Steven Spielberg's "Minority Report", Cruise has made the leap from movie star to actor. His choices as an actor and producer are quite bold, challenging, even intellectual. He provides a stand out performance as a tortured man ruining his body, losing his will to live but with a never say die attitude on the battle field. This is a complex character and Cruise has obviously paid special attention to crafting a very real, compassionate and moralistic soldier.
The other star of this film is Ken Watanabe. This is his first English language role and he commands attention with a quiet but powerful screen presence. He physically conveys the ideology of the Samurai to an audience that may be clueless as to what Samurai do or stand for. Along side Cruise he stands his own and in some cases steals the scenes they have together.
Scottish comedian Billy Connolly appears in a supporting role as a fellow serviceman of Cruise's. There is something quite pleasing about seeing Connolly in a big budget Hollywood production. He always brings a smile to your face whenever he enters frame. After some strong performances in previous dramas, John Madden's "Mrs Brown" for example, you no longer let out a little giggle when you see Connolly's name up on the big screen. His laid back persona and loud, sometimes controversial stage performances serve him well as an actor. He fits his role perfectly. I only wish that he could've sticked around a little longer.
Also in support is Mike Leigh regular Timothy Spall as an Englishman abroad who fell in love with the Japanese culture. Spall has always been a likeable actor with a natural flair for comedy. He's in some part the comic relief but also a Caucasian teacher of basic Japanese life for Cruise and the audience. Tony Goldwyn and William Atherton also appear.
The special effects are certainly worth noting. It's getting tougher to figure out whether crowd scenes are real extras or computer simulated people. Unfortunately there is one shot that screams it's a blue screen effect. When Cruise is standing on the boat coming into port there is something extremely artificial or cartoonish about the background especially the sunlight shining over the horizon.
This is not the first time that Zwick has tackled the subject of the American Civil War. "Glory" was a brilliant film about the first black regiment in which Denzel Washington won the Academy Award for best supporting actor. That film was a very tragic tale and one of the most horrific aspects was that they seemed to have no knowledge of strategy. So it comes as a surprise in this film when Cruise's character turns out to be a brilliant tactician. Majority of what he knows about tactics comes from Greek history. But with "Glory" in mind you have to ask yourself how intelligent or educated were the soldiers at that time. One film portrays them as unschooled in the art of war while the other has them as genius strategists. What is the truth of the matter?
SPOILER ALERT!
Some critics have complained about the conclusion of the film saying that it becomes too Hollywood, pandering to it's lead actor. Here's a hint. The film's called "The Last Samurai". It's star is Tom Cruise. What did you expect? It's all in the title.
Veronica Guerin (2003)
Irish Crusader. Thankfully Not Caped Crusader
Joel Schumacher's "Veronica Guerin" is a dramatic biographical film about a journalist's attempts to highlight the increasing drug problem in Ireland during the mid-1990s.
I wasn't a fan of Schumacher's oeuvre until recently. This is the man who singlehandedly killed the Batman franchise. (George Clooney for God's sake stop blaming yourself.) The director responsible for the lesser John Grisham adaptations. "Dying Young" anyone? But since then he's had the Vietnam boot camp film "Tigerland", possibly his best work to date. And the long delayed Hitchcockian thriller "Phonebooth". I realize that I left "Bad Company" out but you can't blame him solely for such a routine movie that just so happens to share a plot with a Jean-Claude Van Damme starrer.
Again Schumacher is working for producer Jerry Bruckheimer, only this time around Bruckheimer's fingerprints aren't all over this piece. The majority of Bruckheimer's productions are macho actioners but recently he's dabbled in television and true life dramas. "Remember The Titans", the story of an African-American high school gridiron coach teaching the first interracial team in Virginia, was a blockbuster for him.
But this film is very different. It's not a popcorn, leave your brain at the door, painting by numbers, run of the mill movie. Nor is it a feel good flick that lifts your spirits and puts a smile on your face as you skip up the aisle. This is a courageous move for both men. A tragedy that asks the question, does the end justify the means?
I can't say that I have ever heard of journalist Veronica Guerin before this. One of the minor personalities in the film, Martin Cahill aka The General, has had two different biopics about his life, John Boorman's near faithful "The General" and the loosely based "Ordinary Decent Criminal". Guerin was a small time newspaper reporter who had made a name for herself writing copy about the Irish underworld. With her criminal connections she begins to investigate who's behind the current drug trade. Her original suspect, Cahill, is assassinated allegedly by the I.R.A. who claimed responsibility. The deeper she begins to dig, the more serious the threats on her life become causing her celebrity to rise.
Cate Blanchett is perfect in the title role. She is brash and strong willed one minute, scared and vulnerable the next. This is a very humane and respectful portrayal of a woman who would stop at nothing to find the truth.
The other cast, Brenda Fricker etc., are great including a cameo from Schumacher regular Colin Farrell as a man in the street.
The fact that I'm not Irish may be a hindrance to giving a thorough review. I've no qualms about the American filmmakers and an Australian actress telling a very personal Irish story as long as the end product is good. This true tale changed Irish laws and it's heroine became a national martyr. I could see how some audiences may take offence that foreigners have decided to turn this news item into a multimillion dollar Hollywood production. Irish filmmakers Jim Sheridan and Neil Jordan would've been the first names to come to mind to tell this story. They're deeply interested in relating tales from their homeland and both have dealt with I.R.A. content.
But Schumacher has done a top notch job. He has not shied away from the violence and tragedy of her life. Sometimes biographical stories if they're not done correctly have a made for television feel about them. This informative, David versus Goliath story and the way it's told is cinematic and makes perfect sense for a broad worldwide audience to see it.
Along Came Polly (2004)
Once And Once Only.
Writer John Hamburg's second directorial effort, "Along Came Polly", is a quirky romantic comedy with two likeable leads that are overshadowed by their eccentric supporting players.
To put it simply, an uptight, anal, insurance assessor leaves his bride on their honeymoon, due to her infidelity, and he decides to go on with his life by dating a woman who is the exact opposite of him.
Ben Stiller is the insurance assessor in a role that is not unlike his character in "Meet The Parents". Again he's the straight man to Jennifer Aniston's flaky, bohemian, Polly. Due to the success of "Meet The Parents" his part as Greg Focker has become his signature piece which every performance will be measured up to. This role provides nothing new for Stiller. If he's not careful he could become typecast.
Aniston is delightful and her persona is perfect for romantic comedies. You can't help but think of Lisa Kudrow, her "Friends" co-star, in this role. It's ideal that the casting director didn't go for the obvious choice and decided to go against type.
Philip Seymour Hoffman as Stiller's best friend is the stand out of the movie. He steals every scene that he's in. The character is an unflatteringly obvious piss take of actor Anthony Michael Hall. He's an ex-teenage star with one hit movie under his belt, called Crocodile Tears, who's currently appearing in community theatre. The poster for Crocodile Tears is posed in a similar fashion to the famous record cover style poster for John Hughes' "The Breakfast Club". Use of the Simple Mind's song "Don't You" reinforces the joke.
The talented Hank Azaria is surprisingly toned as a foreign scuba instructor while the glamorous Debra Messing has the more serious role as Stiller's cheating wife. Alec Baldwin is sadly underused as Stiller's boss and Bryan Brown is fine, although identical to other performances he's given, as one of Stiller's clients.
Bob Dishy, Caroline Aaron and producer Michael Shamberg appear in smaller roles.
This is yet another crude American comedy though not as shocking as some. The supporting performers shine brighter than the leads due to writer Hamburg fleshing out the minor characters and director Hamburg giving them room to breathe as though they were the prominent players and not the other way around. This is Stiller's third pairing with Hamburg. Stiller starred in Hamburg's script for the aforementioned "Meet The Parents" and then teamed up to write "Zoolander" together.
This is a funny movie but it's not the kind of comedy that is endlessly watchable. An indication of a excellent piece of absurdity is the repeat factor and memorable dialogue that can be recited. This movie has none of that. Once you've seen it, you'll instantly forget it and probably will never watch it again.
The Rundown (2003)
Not Quite A Touchdown.
"Welcome To The Jungle" aka "The Rundown" is a buddy adventure comedy in the tradition of Martin Brest's "Midnight Run" with shades of the Indiana Jones franchise. It's overall an OK movie that feels as though it's been padded with constant shots of the jungle, some of which we've seen more than once. The pacing is a little sluggish at times but there is much to admire in Peter Berg's sophmore directorial effort.
The Rock plays a chef who is working off an undisclosed debt as muscle for a shady loan shark. He has one last job to do which is to retrieve the loan shark's son, played by Seann William Scott, who is hiding in the Amazon. Scott is searching for a mystical relic in a mining town controlled by a business entrepreneur/dictator played by Christopher Walken. But Walken won't let the two leave unless he is told where the location of the priceless relic is. So the unlikely duo team up with a bar owner/freedom fighter, played by Rosario Dawson, to find the relic in order to sell it on the black market and have enough money to run Walken and his men out of town.
The Rock aka Dwayne Johnson is extremely charismatic and is the obvious forerunner for action star of the noughties. This is his third acting gig and already has proven himself to be a great screen presence. With Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone pushing middle age, The Rock should easily be able to step into their shoes. Due to years of being a wrestler under his belt he is physically strong and has the theatrical sense of a showman.
Scott seems to be playing himself though he's not as crude as his "American Pie" persona. He has a best friend quality about him as though we know him personally. The pairing of The Rock and Scott is alot more successful than, say, the partnership of Scott and Chow Yun-Fat in "Bulletproof Monk". Both of them are likable and seem to be genuine guys.
Walken is his usual flamboyantly evil self. This is the kind of role he could do in his sleep. While I have always been a fan, he is slowly becoming a cliche playing the same character over and over again. What is so interesting and entertaining about him is his delivery and interpretation of the lines. It was so refreshing to see him in Steven Spielberg's "Catch Me If You Can". I just hope that he can do at least one seemingly normal part for every five unemotional violent psychos.
Dawson is adequate in her role but so far hasn't forfilled her promise shown in Larry Clark's "Kids". She has been starring in safe Hollywood product of late and unfortunately some of them have been disappointing, eg Barry Sonnenfeld's "Men In Black II".
Ewen Bremner is slightly unintelligible in a quirky comic relief role as a small aircraft pilot. Arnold Schwarzenegger has a blink and you'd miss him cameo.
This is an impressive second movie for director Berg. His previous outing "Very Bad Things", from his own screenplay, was an extremely black comedy that was slow to begin with but gained momentum and laughs about thirty minutes in. Pacing is still a problem though certainly the comedy is better executed here. The fight scenes are original and technically well handled. The opening sequence is edited with great style and rhythm. It grabs you immediately like the pre-title sequences from the James Bond series. It's unfortunate that for Australian audiences the movie has been retitled "Welcome To The Jungle" because the original title, "The Rundown", certainly explains why the pre-title sequence is shot and edited in a live gridiron telecast way.
The Rock is certainly growing as an actor. No one has taken the place of the muscle bound monosyllabic action stars of the eighties yet. (There has been some pretenders to the throne such as Vin Diesel.) Steven Seagal and Jean-Claude Van Damme are now being subjected to direct to video movies. I hope the same doesn't happen to The Rock who has more personality of all those hulks combined.
Something's Gotta Give (2003)
And Give It Does!
"Something's Gotta Give" from writer/producer/director Nancy Meyers is a romantic comedy for an older generation that is a crowd pleaser no matter what your age is. Meyers has a good track record with this genre. Her last movie, "What Women Want", was about a relationship between a more mature couple in the world of advertising. In this movie, the two leads are a decade or so older than Mel Gibson and Helen Hunt and again Meyers has created a successful movie that proves the old adage that when it comes to love, age doesn't matter. It's refreshing to see a couple of actors in their autumn years play a romantic duo and not suffer the wrath of any ageist jokes. Hands up all those people who are sick to death of these generic, teenage friendly, Freddie Prinze Jr. starring rom coms.
Jack Nicholson, in a part that must have been written especially for him, plays an eternal bachelor who prefers to date younger women under 30. While on a weekend getaway with his current lover he suffers a heart attack and finds himself recuperating at the beach house owned by his girlfriend's mother, played by Diane Keaton. As time goes by these two people, in a confined space, begin to form a friendship. The more time they spend together the more their relationship grows but Nicholson has a rival for Keaton's affection in the form of his doctor played by Keanu Reeves. Reeves knows full well Keaton's work and success as a playwright and is quickly smitten with her at their first meeting. Now Keaton must make the choice between the younger man and the older bachelor.
Nicholson is great as always and never puts a foot wrong. I don't think I could recollect a performance that wasn't award worthy. His choices of late, "Anger Management", Alexander Payne's "About Schmidt" and Sean Penn's "The Pledge", have been spot on and have shown a whole emotional range he wasn't capable of when he was young. He is without any doubt in the top 5 of American living actors and if his last four performances are anything to go by, his next projects will be worth the wait. Even though Nicholson is an anti-hero icon of the '70s, his comic timing is perfect.
While Nicholson was born to play his character, Keaton has been cast against type. She displays no neurotic behavior, her trademark, like she did in her romantic comedies with Woody Allen. Here she is a good lover/rival for Nicholson and this is probably the most strongest character she's ever played. She has been underused in the "Father Of The Bride" franchise and her character in "The First Wives Club" started out timid before she becomes independent. This movie is a huge step up for her.
Reeves plays a character with alot more depth than usual. He has always been a likeable actor even though some of his performances have been questionable.
The cast is rounded out by the always reliable Frances McDormand as Keaton's sister, the charming Amanda Peet as Keaton's daughter and a welcome come back role for ex-"Starsky And Hutch" star Paul Michael Glaser, who has been directing more than acting of late, playing Keaton's ex-husband. Jon Favreau has a nothing little role as Nicholson's best friend.
It's quite alarming in this day and age that characters in romantic comedies still have to be rich and successful, live in huge apartments or houses and dress immaculately. It's a throw back to the American screwball comedies of the '40s and "50s that due to current trends and attitudes is starting to become old fashioned and irrelevant. What about a movie that has two average middle class characters falling in love?
I'd like in know what happened to the scene with Nicholson in the restaurant flaunting his young girlfriend to everyman in the room. It's in the trailer and certainly would've made alot more sense had it been left in the movie. My belief is that it was to be the very first scene and would bookend the last scene set in the same restaurant. I don't want to give the ending away but if you see or remember the trailer keep it in mind when you see the movie.
In summation this is an entertaining laughfest with two good actors showing that age is certainly just a state of mind.
Love Actually (2003)
Laughs Are All Around
"Love Actually" is a crowd pleasing romantic comedy from writer Richard Curtis, making his directorial debut.
The movie takes place in England, five weeks before Christmas, and has multiple storylines about love and sex. The main focus is on three siblings. One is the new Prime Minister, played by Hugh Grant, who has fallen for one of his staff, the new tealady. The other is a long married wife, played by Emma Thompson, who suspects that her husband, Alan Rickman, maybe contemplating having an affair with his secretary. The last is a newly widowed stepfather, played by Liam Neeson, encouraging his stepson who's trying to impress his first crush. There are other characters including Bill Nighy as a fading, old rock star, Laura Linney who holds a flame for someone at work but has a secret which is ruining her love life, and Colin Firth as an author who can't express his love for his foreign housekeeper because she can't speak a word of English. Majority of the characters intertwine at some point in the movie but due to excellent casting and solid writing you're never lost plotwise.
Curtis is possibly the best screenwriter for Grant. Every line roles from his tongue as if he had thought of it. They're the comedy equivalent of writer David Mamet and actor Joe Mantegna. I feel that the sequences with Grant as Prime Minister could've been a movie all by itself. Grant has real competition humor wise from Nighy who always brings a smile to your face the moment he appears on screen. He's perfectly cast and his lanky frame brilliantly conveys his aging, laid back rocker. On the more serious side Neeson has never been better. His scenes with the young boy are the emotional heart of the movie. This strand of the plot is possibly the most successful of all the storylines. Thompson has the more thankless role and is overshadowed by her on-screen husband Rickman. It's been years since we last saw her and I wish she'd had a more meatier part. Rickman over comes the simplistic kitchen sink drama of a man tempted by a younger woman. We feel more for him rather than Thompson even though he's the one thinking about cheating. The pairing of the two as a married couple has a comfortable and true feel to it as if they had played husband and wife before. Linney seems miscast possibly because she is the only American lead in this extremely British movie. She sticks out like a sore thumb and you can't help but think that there must be a good British actress who could've played her part. Her appearance smacks of an advertising ploy to get an American name who could sell the movie in her home country. Firth is good though a little typecast in the more romantic storyline of the movie. His role has you on his side from very early on and you constantly root for him to make the right decision. The other cast are excellent though in the case of the gorgeous Keira Knightley there isn't much for her to do apart from look beautiful. Outstanding cameo from Billy Bob Thornton, the perfect choice to play the American president.
I've always been a fan of Curtis' writing since the TV series "Blackadder II". His writing is the highest calibre of British comedy and it's not often that he makes a mistake. ("The Blackadder", "Blackadder: Back And Forth" and "Bean" are possibly his only work that isn't up to scratch and he can't be solely blamed for those as he was credited as a co-writer.) He has been lucky with other directors, Mel Smith with "The Tall Guy", Mike Newell with "Four Weddings And A Funeral", Roger Michell with "Notting Hill", but it's entirely logical for him to take up directing as most writers want to control the way their work appears on screen. He does a fine job. None of the storylines outstay their welcome and the scenes have a Christmas glow about them. It's also good to see Curtis regular Rowan Atkinson in a glorified cameo as a sales assistant.
Overall this is a great, grown up, inoffensive comedy that doesn't necessarily have to be watched at Christmas time. The negative aspects which I have already discussed are only minute and if it's pure entertainment you want you can't go wrong here. So many romantic comedies of late, "Two Weeks Notice" and "Maid In Manhattan" for example, have been seriously lacking in the comedy department. It's refreshing to find a good date movie that a man can safely enjoy.
Lost in Translation (2003)
Fear and Loathing in Japan
Sofia Coppola's "Lost In Translation" is a gentle dramedy about a friendship formed due to isolation and loneliness.
Bill Murray plays a once hot actor, recently fallen on hard times, who accepts work doing a whiskey commercial in Japan. Scarlett Johansen is a newly wed married to a hard working photographer who spends the majority of her time keeping to herself in her hotel room. They both share a bond based on isolation by their foreign surroundings, suffering from insomnia and separation from their loved ones. In a short period of time they become the best of friends, able to discuss subjects that they couldn't bring up with their spouses. This is a character piece, deliberately slowly paced that at all times feels real even though the events take place in one week.
Murray is flawless in a seriocomic role. His face expresses perfectly his bewilderment with his new environment, the people and their customs. There are brilliantly comic scenes throughout with Murray in top form. I haven't seen him as good as this since Wes Anderson's "Rushmore". Like every heavy metal rock band can produce a romantic ballad so to does every comedian have a serious performance in them. Robin Williams, Jim Carrey and even Steve Martin have shown their serious side in films but Murray is able to blend the painfully real with laugh out loud hilarity.
Johansen is also strong in the less flashy but by no means lesser role. Her performance is the more emotional of the two and there are small hints in her portrayal that their relationship could lead to more than friendship.
Some people have critized the film about the depiction of the Japanese. I personally feel that the accusations of stereotyping are false and believe that Coppola and her cast were playfully mocking Japanese culture rather than the people themselves.
It's good to see a funny comedy of late that didn't have to rely on crude or violent humour. There are moments of great beauty mostly due to the locations chosen by Coppola and her team. The one problem is length or the slow pace of the film. As an audience we understand that both characters are suffering from insomnia but it's a fine line between establishing their affliction and boring the viewers.
Coppola has suffered the wrath of critics due to her writing ability (Francis Ford Coppola's "Life Without Zoe" segment of the anthology film "New York Stories") and her acting (Francis Coppola's "The Godfather Part III"). But with this release, her sophomore effort as director, she has shown her true talent as a filmmaker and is certainly not riding the coat tales of her famous writer/producer/director father Francis nor her husband director Spike Jonze. (There are rumors that the photographer character portrayed by Giovanni Ribisi is loosely based on Jonze.)
Over all this is a quiet, gentle film that successfully mixes realistic comedy with heartwarming drama and for an independent art house film has definite cross over appeal.
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (2003)
Well Worth The Wait For Weir
Peter Weir's "Master And Commander: The Far Side Of The World" is a great adventure epic, beautifully photographed with a fine eye for period detail.The film follows Captain "Lucky" Jack and his crew who have been sent to capture a French Superfrigate during the Napoleonic Wars.
Russell Crowe is perfectly cast in the lead as an arrogant but likeable leader who's both warrior and thinker. Even though Crowe won the Academy Award for Ridley Scott's "Gladiator", in the coming years this performance will be known as his signature piece. Paul Bettany, unrecognizable as always, is Crowe's opposite in a quite, never showy but strong performance. The other cast are as great as the leads especially the younger actors.
Everything about this film looks authentic. It has a documentary feel as though you were watching real people in real situations during those times. There are moments of great humour throughout which helps the film to be more accessible to a modern audience. The cinematography is strikingly beautiful and never at any point can you say for sure what is a model and what is a computer generated visual effect. The scenes filmed at the Galapagos Islands is a little disappointing visually but interesting in a nature special kind of way.
This is an all out man's film filled to the brim with testosterone but it also has a gentle side to it. A man's film does not necessarily mean its just fighting and bloodshed. There are themes of loyalty, honour, comradeship and unfortunately fear. Phobias and superstitions thrived during these times and as shown in the film they sometimes have dire consequences.
Weir should be commended for bringing this story to the screen. It's an old fashioned film with cutting edge visual effects that never overshadows the brilliant cast. It's not yet known whether this will be the first of many to come as this film is based on a series of novels. Personally I would like to see more of these characters and if they're done with the same enthusiasm and perfectionism as this one, then I would whole heartedly stand in line for the next one.
Lost in La Mancha (2002)
This Film Is No More! This is an Ex-Film!
"Lost in LaMancha" is a fascinatingly brilliant documentary about the aborted film project "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" and the problems faced by its writer/director Terry Gilliam. The two documentarians who followed Gilliam's "Twelve Monkeys" to produce "The Hamster Factor And Other Tales Of Twelve Monkeys" have done the same again here only this time there is no film to complement the documentary.
Gilliam is no stranger to controversy. Books, made for dvd documentaries and now this feature have been produced about his troubles in the tv and film industry. He has been labeled as a director who goes over budget though in this case the weather, the noise of overhead fighter planes and an ailing lead actor all come together to halt filming.
Gilliam's "The Fisher King" co-star Jeff Bridges narrates the doco which details pre-production through to its troubled shoot. "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" was to be the most expensive independently produced film in Europe with an international cast including Johnny Depp. Filming only lasted about a week before the insurance company closed down production. The insurance company now own Gilliam and Tony Grisoni's screenplay plus the surviving footage from the shoot.
People believe that the story of "The Man Of LaMancha" is cursed and the documentary mentions in minor detail another troubled genius, Orson Welles, and his unfinished Don Quixote project.
There has been other documentaries of this type such as "Hearts Of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse" about the lengthy production of Francis Ford Coppola's "Apocalypse Now" but in the case of this film there is no happy ending. No cultural masterpiece that rises from a problematic shoot. This film is the cinematic equivalent of a train wreak. You know things are going to get ugly but you can't take your eyes off it. You have to admire Gilliam for signing off on this doco. It's a constant reminder of a time in his life wasted with nothing to show for it. It's terribly depressing but the crew's sense of humor and commitment to the project shine through.
If you're a fan of Gilliam's or interested in film production then this entertaining documentary is for you.
Elf (2003)
Brand New Christmas Staple
"Elf" from actor/director Jon Favreau is a delightful holiday movie which benefits greatly from a strong comedic performance from Will Ferrell in his first solo lead role.
An orphaned baby on Christmas Eve crawls into Santa's sack without his knowledge and is taken to the North Pole. When discovered it is decided that the toddler will stay and be raised as an elf but as the years pass he realizes that he is different from everyone else and sets out to find his biological father who works as a children's book publisher in New York. And then as they say the fun begins.
The humor is not aimed squarely at children which makes it the perfect family comedy and not at any moment does Favreau play down to a younger audience.
Ferrell is the perfect choice for the title role. He's not over the top like Jim Carrey or smug like Mike Myers. He brings a childlike innocence to the movie but never delves into the juvenile.
The production design in the North Pole sequences are quite schizophrenic with differing styles but somehow it all gels together due to familiarity. Familiarity is the key to this movie. It's a completely new story but with characters, settings and situations you know from years of watching Christmas movies and holiday specials.
My bet is that "Elf" will also become a Christmas staple much like "It's A Wonderful Life" and "Home Alone". You'll look forward to seeing it again and again in the future at year's end.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)
Those guys from the movie "Summer School" would hate it.
"The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is a disappointing remake of a classic horror film that strays drasticly from the original in the telling. This is not a frame-for-frame remake like Gus Van Sant's "Psycho" but a so-called retelling or revisioning. (A bullshit term for filmmakers who think that they can improve on the original.)
This version plays like the first "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" meets "Deliverence" meets "The Blair Witch Project" with extremely mixed results. Some parts of this movie is better than the original with more money thrown at it which is a huge plus. On the other hand the scenes that were great in the original have been left out of this version much to my disappointment and disbelief such as the wheelchair bound character who you constantly feel sorry for and frightened for due to the fact that he could be killed at any moment because he was incapable of getting away quickly.
The opening looks like outtakes from "The Blair Witch Project" and is certainly one of many mistakes made by the filmmakers. (Though getting John Larroquette to do the narration is a nice touch.)
What this movie suffers from is over explanation. The original film is simplistic which is one of its virtues and didn't feel the need to have a back story for everyone and everything. Do we really care where these characters have been, why they were there and where there heading? Do we care why Leatherface is the way he is? Of course not. Slicing and dicing, thrills and scares. That's it. No psychoanalying. Just a bunch of young people who are in the wrong place at the wrong time.
While the photography at some points is strangely beautiful, the production design is dirty and grimy and out of touch with the camerawork. The original film had that hand-held, gritty, low-budget look that seemed to make sense and fit in with the tone of the story.
Another question you have to ask yourself is why take perfectly normal actors and make them up to look ugly or deformed? There must be working actors in Hollywood that are disfigured. Why not cast them?
The movie does have great locations such as the gothic house that Leatherface and his family live in. But the scenes in the meat works are largely disappointing. A fantastic addition to the movie wasted because of unimaginitive action.
The suicide in the van and Leatherface chasing one of his victims through clotheslines certainly stand out but they are nothing compared to the very last scene from the original where the clearly delirious herione is being driven away from Leatherface as he angrily dances infront of a perfect sunrise. If only this new version was as perfect as that.
S.W.A.T. (2003)
Cut Ten Minutes Of Character Development And Get Back To Me
"S.W.A.T." is a loud, crowd-pleasing action movie, with good set pieces, which is helped greatly from the presence of Samuel L. Jackson and Colin Farrell.
The movie comes off as a expensive pilot for a non-existent television show. The main plot deals with an international criminal arrested on a minor charge who must be transported to a major correctional facility. On the way he declares that he will pay $100,000,000 to the person that springs him from the protected custody of the s.w.a.t. team. This premise holds alot of promise and it certainly delivers. What is needed is more action and less character development.
Jackson and Farrell are both charismatic performers who bring this type of material up a notch. The rest of the actors are serviceable but you can't help but think that there is a large dose of political correctness injected into the casting of these characters. Nice in-jokes for fans of the t.v. shows "S.W.A.T." and "Homicide: Life On The Street".
Good theatrical directing debut from Clark Johnson who obviously has learnt alot about police officers and their actions (training and procedure) from working as an actor and later director on "Homicide" and not to mention directing the first episode of "The Shield" .
The central idea of anyone and everyone in America being tempted by the idea of earning $100,000,000 to save a criminal from police forces is a great one but the need to show the s.w.a.t. team interacting with each other outside of work is a waste of time. I understand that red herrings need to be sowed into the story to create a sense of mystery but a good 10 minutes could be cut from the movie to make it tighter and more exciting.
Mystic River (2003)
This River Flows.
Clint Eastwood's "Mystic River" is an intelligent mystery with standout performances from the lead players that is solid, grown-up entertainment.
The story is simple enough about a young woman found dead, murdered, in a mainly Catholic community but it's the characters and the decisions that they make that make this a griping tale. At over two hours you're not aware at any point of the running time. Brian Helgeland, who wrote Eastwood's last movie "Blood Work", has greatly adapted the book on which it is based with fleshed out characters and realistic dialogue. His script certainly washes out that awful taste in your mouth due to his previous work "The Postman" and puts him back in the "L.A. Confidential" ranks as a top notch scenerist. Sean Penn, who usually steals the show, fights to be noticed this time around up against such brilliant performances from Tim Robbins and Laurence Fishburne. Kevin Bacon gives a more low key performance than usual but due to that allows his fellow actors to shine. Also nice cameo from Eastwood regular Eli Wallach as a liquor store owner. Everything about this film feels and looks authentic from the neighbourhood to the actor's accents. The only problem is the music which seems a little heavy handed at times. It's hard to believe that this is directed by the same Clint Eastwood, the western icon of the late twentieth century. This is an actor's piece and Eastwood delievers thoughtful and true performances from all of his cast. Not up there with "Unforgiven" but it certainly comes close.
Matchstick Men (2003)
Scott on a smaller scale doesn't disappoint.
While slow to begin with the performances from the three main leads are excellent. The con man film is one genre I always watch out for. This is certainly better than David Mamet's last con man film "Heist". ( Mamet is the king of con man films but "Heist" just left me cold and disappointed. ) Nicolas Cage is never better and Sam Rockwell is always a treat to watch. It's great to see Ridley Scott branch out from his world of epics to work on such a smaller canvas with intimate characters. Well worth watching.
Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)
Waiting for Bill
A disappointing "fourth film" from Quentin Tarantino. Compared to his other films this is possibly his worst. ( Don't get he wrong. I am a Tarantino fan but this one is certainly not up there with Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction.) You basically never fear for The Bride's life as you well now that she returns for Kill Bill Volume 2. The climatic sword fight is pointless as you know in advance that The Bride survives and Lucy Liu does not. Please stop the novel approach because as sure as sh*t it doesn't work here. This film while well shot by Bob Richardson, possibly the best cinematographer around, is terribly slow and feels like your watching Tarantino's original three hours plus cut. This is not the visual masterpiece every claims it is. Requiem For A Dream, made on a smaller budget, looks better and is certainly more graphic than this. I hope Kill Bill Volume 2 is better. And what ever happened to Four Rooms? Shouldn't be fourth and a quarter.
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003)
Genre not cursed at all.
Slightly overlong romp that will put a smile on your face from beginning to end. After the moronic Bad Boys II Jerry Bruckheimer has redeemed himself with this fun, humourous swashbuckler. Johnny Depp never fails to amuse.
Bad Boys II (2003)
Don't you have something better to do.
over long, over directed and the most mean spirited action movie I have seen in years. Why bother to rip off a scene from a Jackie Chan film when everybody knows that he can do action ten times better than any Hollywood director. To be honest I shouldn't be wasting my time commenting on something as bad as this but this movie angers me so much that it is my duty to do so.