Change Your Image
bjb1939
Reviews
Dexter: This Is the Way the World Ends (2011)
Extreme right wing Republican jihad;-)
Is there a religion without extremists? Or even one with rational advocates? Before watching season 6 of "Dexter," we re-watched seasons 1 through 5 and each of them was better, in my mind, than it had been before. However, with those so fresh in my mind, I'm looking forward to re-watching season 6 next year, because it seemed a bit lame in their shadow and I'm hoping it too will ripen. Only because "Dexter" is a MUST SEE does this last episode count as a cliff hanger. Deb's psychologist inspired notice of a possibly deeper feeling than sisterly toward Dex turns out to be an artifice, a foreseeable escape mechanism for the predicament that would have been a fait accompli just two seasons ago. Knowing that SHO has bought season 7 AND season 8 of "Dexter" mitigates their hoped for dramatic suspense of the final scene. Unless of course the show's name will be changed next year to "Debra!" Hmmmm, or DDK - Dexter and Debra, killers!
No Country for Old Men (2007)
"Relentless pursuit"
Search IMDb for this phrase using Word Search, Plots and among those listed will be "No Country for Old Men." Also listed are "The Fugitive" TV series and "Les Miserables." Surprisingly "The Terminator," "Kill Bill," and "Hard Candy" aren't in the list.
While NCFOM is much simpler in its story line than Les Mis, it's unique among this sub-genre of thriller/suspense films in its skilled direction and lack of Aesopian conclusion.
I've long been a believer in the artistry of direction. The actors, cinematographer, cameramen, grips, script girls, and caterers are managed by the director to produce his/her vision of the story. Every actor, who's appeared in a leading or supporting role in more than a couple of films, has one or more fine performances buried within, to be drawn out by the right director. In NCFOM we see a fine example or three.
Beyond the acting is the supporting imagery, pace, sound, and obviousness of presentation. In NCFOM we're dropped into one of the stark, arid parts of North America. Sitting in an air conditioned theater (be it a cineplex or at home) one knows that this is a harsh piece of country, despite the actors seeming unusually cool for the atmosphere.
Something has taken place, parts of which are obvious - parts not. A man, of whom we learn as the story unfolds that he is self sufficient and of the region, stumbles across this scene of violence and finds what might be his pot-at-the-end-of-the-rainbow. Although he already knows what will happen if he takes the pot, we soon learn that it's someone else's and they want it back. One of the men chosen to recover it is the Terminator - perhaps without a metal exo/endo-skeleton nor a databank brain, but seemingly just as indestructible and relentless in mission - except when he whimsically allows fate, or chance, to be tested.
Sarah Connor's would-be savior this time is a sheriff, who never actually comes in contact with either Sarah or the Terminator but plies us with terse procedural observations, possibly some unpracticed country wisdom, and obscure lessons couched in apocryphal stories.
Along the chase we slowly discover some of the truth behind some of the mysteries but for the most part none is resolved completely nor satisfactorily. This is not a bad thing, it merely points out that the story lacks a moral. It's a conceivable piece of life, it's violent, and difficult to understand the antagonists motivation (if any) and, thankfully, does not have a Hollywood ending. It's clear who the bad guy is but are there any good guys? Yes, if good is a relative term.
It is superb film-making, evoking peak performances on both sides of the lens. By all means see this with someone who likes to talk about film and art.
Was it the best picture of 2007? Was the best picture even nominated? The jury decided differently from the box office? IMDb votes are indecisive. Like NCFOM, we'll never know the answer.
The Merchant of Venice (2004)
Spoiler ONLY relates to those unfamiliar with the work! Has there ever been a better Portia, or a worse director?
Michael Radford decided to populate the almost-devoid-of-color scenes with busyness and ambient chit-chat, while directing Jeremy Irons and Joseph Fiennes to whisper their lines - probably in an attempt to avoid traditional histrionics, though both these men are quite capable of doing so and still revealing emotion. Add to that their few asides, which would have been spoken loudly to the audience from the stage, are barely audible - as if muttering.
Oh! Antonio and Bassanio say their lines smoothly enough but without much, if any, passion. Whereas Ms. Collins lives her Portia. The lines roll off her tongue as if she spoke this way every day to all who could hear and with perfect expression and body language. She must have had her own, uncredited director.
Pacino's Shylock struggles with his clearly memorized lines, like a fifth grader - happy to get the speech over with and not having understood it all. In counterpoint, both Fiennes and Irons at least know how to make the language seem natural (if blandly inaudible;-) Back to the direction and the necessity to deal with changing mores across the centuries - lest we forget, this is one of Shakespeare's comedies! What he might possibly have had in mind when writing, staging, and directing this piece in the Globe, I've no idea. Surely his audience then had a different bias (or were less fearful to express it?) and found humor in this farce, in which all the Christians, save Antonio, are simply goldbricks. And even Shylock's daughter is a common thief and, as such, abandons Judaism for Christianity to be among her own kind. Shylock, a symbol of the biblical money changers, on the threshold of avenging himself is dashed by a female wit (which was supposed to be coyly tongue in cheek, I'd venture) and stripped of his wealth and religion only to be granted a modest clemency by his almost victim. A comedy with tragic relief - who else could have written it, eh? But where did this director go with the material? Not trusting the movie going audience to understand the plot, we're even told in writing why Shylock wears a red hat, bigotry having been commonplace then - whereas its obvious cure in recent times renders us numb to the concept, I suppose ;-)
If you haven't seen Ms. Collins perform, I highly recommend the film. Regardless of the negatives I've mentioned, it's also a wonderful piece to see for a discussion group - it provides hours and hours of debatable material.
BJ