Actors: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ben Kingsley
Director: Robert Zemeckis
Note: Spoilers for Man On Wire, The Walk
The Walk tells the story already told in Man On Wire of Phillippe Petit's tightrope journey between the towers of the World Trade Center in 1974. Man On Wire would easily go into my top 5 documentaries of all time - it's just a fantastic story, well-told, and one I knew almost nothing about when I watched the documentary. Unfortuantely The Walk exists in a world where Man On Wire exists and thus it's somewhat of a failure - the one advantage it has is that it's able to film a CGI simulation of Petit's walk. Here the issue I have with the film is that the 'walk' is meant to evoke fear and anxiety in an audience, and although they stick an audience surrogate on top of the building with Petit, the whole point of Petit's journey is that he's not afraid to do this - he does it for exhilaration. The film is unable to convey Petit's mental journey from 'possibly afraid of falling' to 'not at all afraid of falling'.
I rated this 3 stars because even though it is a narrative failure and Man On Wire is a much better re-telling of this story, I was still terrified during that walk - that's what the film is trying to achieve, and it worked.
Monday, February 15, 2016
Hail, Caesar! - 2015 - 3½ Stars
Actors: Josh Brolin, George Clooney
Director: Joel Coen
The Coen Brothers have made homage movies before - The Hudsucker Proxy is a melange of old Hollywood tropes mixed with the bizarre Coen sensibility. That movie flopped. Miller's Crossing is a period noir film mixed with the bizarre Coen sensibility. That movie flopped. Enter Hail, Caesar!, a film which appears to have been concocted with the sole purpose of getting to stage old Hollywood-style scenes in a madcap Coen brothers type film. And it works. It probably won't make anyone's list of the most profound Coen brothers films, but it's quite funny and its plot moves right along until the end without a bad scene in the bunch. It's entirely possible that upon rewatch this film will go up in my estimation, and I do intend to rewatch it.
Director: Joel Coen
The Coen Brothers have made homage movies before - The Hudsucker Proxy is a melange of old Hollywood tropes mixed with the bizarre Coen sensibility. That movie flopped. Miller's Crossing is a period noir film mixed with the bizarre Coen sensibility. That movie flopped. Enter Hail, Caesar!, a film which appears to have been concocted with the sole purpose of getting to stage old Hollywood-style scenes in a madcap Coen brothers type film. And it works. It probably won't make anyone's list of the most profound Coen brothers films, but it's quite funny and its plot moves right along until the end without a bad scene in the bunch. It's entirely possible that upon rewatch this film will go up in my estimation, and I do intend to rewatch it.
Friday, December 25, 2015
Los Angeles Plays Itself - 2003 - 3½ Stars
Subject: How Los Angeles is portrayed in movies
Director: Thom Andersen
Los Angeles Plays Itself is a remarkable chronicling of Los Angeles's history through the films that are set there. What do directors focus on about the LA landscape? What do they tend to leave out? What landmarks are often shooting locations? What kind of sociopolitical commentary can we gin up from their choices?
Los Angeles Plays Itself has the difficulty of overcoming its idiosyncratic narrator - it's unclear exactly what his thesis is or how much of his documentary's opinions we should attribute to mere taste. There's a lot of interesting points made about life in LA through film - the fact that there are several locations around town that appear from the outside to be regular businesses but that function only as film sets is certainly an unnerving commitment to unreality. With his final conclusion built around the greatness of Los Angeles set Neorealistic films - a genre I certainly enjoy, but I recognize its fundamental boringness - it's clear that this person wants something different out of film than most of us.
Director: Thom Andersen
Los Angeles Plays Itself is a remarkable chronicling of Los Angeles's history through the films that are set there. What do directors focus on about the LA landscape? What do they tend to leave out? What landmarks are often shooting locations? What kind of sociopolitical commentary can we gin up from their choices?
Los Angeles Plays Itself has the difficulty of overcoming its idiosyncratic narrator - it's unclear exactly what his thesis is or how much of his documentary's opinions we should attribute to mere taste. There's a lot of interesting points made about life in LA through film - the fact that there are several locations around town that appear from the outside to be regular businesses but that function only as film sets is certainly an unnerving commitment to unreality. With his final conclusion built around the greatness of Los Angeles set Neorealistic films - a genre I certainly enjoy, but I recognize its fundamental boringness - it's clear that this person wants something different out of film than most of us.
Django Unchained - 2012 - 3 Stars
Actors: Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz
Director: Quentin Tarantino
It's neat to see a film where you think 'Only one person could have made this movie.' Django Unchained is a singular vision, a whirlwind of constant motion and violence. Beyond that, Tarantino is still a master of creating tension through dialogue and dramatic irony. He is also not a master of reining himself in - 150 minutes of this near-mythical story hung on characters who are barely 2 dimensional is certainly a nod to Leone and Peckinpah, but not a good one. The film loses all tension in the final 20 minutes as the film glories in its own ethos some more.
Part of me finds Quentin Tarantino the person so amusing that when I see a really creative setpiece in one of his films, I just imagine him excitedly explaining it to whoever's around him.
Director: Quentin Tarantino
It's neat to see a film where you think 'Only one person could have made this movie.' Django Unchained is a singular vision, a whirlwind of constant motion and violence. Beyond that, Tarantino is still a master of creating tension through dialogue and dramatic irony. He is also not a master of reining himself in - 150 minutes of this near-mythical story hung on characters who are barely 2 dimensional is certainly a nod to Leone and Peckinpah, but not a good one. The film loses all tension in the final 20 minutes as the film glories in its own ethos some more.
Part of me finds Quentin Tarantino the person so amusing that when I see a really creative setpiece in one of his films, I just imagine him excitedly explaining it to whoever's around him.
The Kid Stays In The Picture - 2002 - No Rating
Subject: The life of producer Robert Evans
Director: Nanette Burstein, Brett Morgen
Is the Robert Evans documentary good? You betcha. Does it rely too much on Robert Evans ridiculous narration style? Oh yeah. Is it still fascinating because it covers a rise to prominence that is probably impossible in today's corporate, dollars-first cinema world? Can't say that it doesn't.
The Kid Stays In The Picture assembles a impressive amount of photos, newspaper headlines, and archival footage to build around Robert Evans' absurd narration of his own life. Some of the stories are both amazing and amazingly told - if you want to hear about film in the 1970s, this is a good place to start. Are some of the stories here clearly false? You know it. Do you enjoy hearing them anyway? You betcha.
Director: Nanette Burstein, Brett Morgen
Is the Robert Evans documentary good? You betcha. Does it rely too much on Robert Evans ridiculous narration style? Oh yeah. Is it still fascinating because it covers a rise to prominence that is probably impossible in today's corporate, dollars-first cinema world? Can't say that it doesn't.
The Kid Stays In The Picture assembles a impressive amount of photos, newspaper headlines, and archival footage to build around Robert Evans' absurd narration of his own life. Some of the stories are both amazing and amazingly told - if you want to hear about film in the 1970s, this is a good place to start. Are some of the stories here clearly false? You know it. Do you enjoy hearing them anyway? You betcha.
Monday, November 9, 2015
Spectre - 2015 - 3 Stars
Actors: Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz
Director: Sam Mendes
Surveillance culture has a huge problem with the spy film. When your location is known at all times by various shadowy organizations, the notion of sneaking around is gone. A spy such as James Bond is only allowed to pry inasmuch as those seeking him allow. Rather than try to evade this 21st century reality, the film steers into this particular skid. I'm not sure I like the results.
There's some excellent action setpieces in this film - a great opener, as all Bond films should have, a car chase, some fun bits with a helicopter. There's also a disquieting amount of backstory - Bond's past, always something best left to the viewer's imagination, is used once again to support the film's present. There's some very hoaky plot jiggering going on in this movie beyond that as well. The James Bond film franchise is a franchise for a reason - people like seeing a spy do cool spy stuff, have sex with a woman he barely knows, and beat up who needs beating up. They don't want to know who James Bond was as a child.
This is the last film with Daniel Craig, and I'm hoping very much that they abandon this form of light serialization and go back to the old formula - sure, Bond plots are both dumb and forgettable, but that's the point. You remember a villain, maybe a setpiece, the girl, and a joke. All these plot details I'm remembering now did not make my theatergoing experience a better one.
Director: Sam Mendes
Surveillance culture has a huge problem with the spy film. When your location is known at all times by various shadowy organizations, the notion of sneaking around is gone. A spy such as James Bond is only allowed to pry inasmuch as those seeking him allow. Rather than try to evade this 21st century reality, the film steers into this particular skid. I'm not sure I like the results.
There's some excellent action setpieces in this film - a great opener, as all Bond films should have, a car chase, some fun bits with a helicopter. There's also a disquieting amount of backstory - Bond's past, always something best left to the viewer's imagination, is used once again to support the film's present. There's some very hoaky plot jiggering going on in this movie beyond that as well. The James Bond film franchise is a franchise for a reason - people like seeing a spy do cool spy stuff, have sex with a woman he barely knows, and beat up who needs beating up. They don't want to know who James Bond was as a child.
This is the last film with Daniel Craig, and I'm hoping very much that they abandon this form of light serialization and go back to the old formula - sure, Bond plots are both dumb and forgettable, but that's the point. You remember a villain, maybe a setpiece, the girl, and a joke. All these plot details I'm remembering now did not make my theatergoing experience a better one.
Friday, October 2, 2015
The Warriors - 1979 - 3½ Stars
Actors: Michael Beck, James Remar
Director: Walter Hill
In a lot of my recent reviews, I've mentioned my teenage self as the ideal viewer for films. I think perhaps that's why I haven't watched a lot of movies lately - I feel disengaged from them in some way. Few people I know seem to watch many movies anymore. Netflix's selection of movies is quite dismal. Regardless, they've got The Warriors, and I wondered again about how my teenage self would engage with this, especially since I know it's a favorite of people born between, say, 1965 and 1975. I don't think he'd like it very much.
The Warriors is a lot about notions of masculinity and adherence to codes; even within violent groups of men, there are codes. There's also a threadbare plot and threadheavy costuming - seriously, the costumes in this movie are ridiculous. I cannot tell if this film was attempting campiness or a very strange form of seriousness - I think given the times, director, and location of this movie that it was doing the latter. It grows tiresome in its latter third but does not overstay its welcome. Like so few films I've seen from recent years, it suggests a world outside the movie that the viewer can wonder about - why is there a disc jockey who cares about gang wars? How do these gangs form? But who cares about all that, it's just a well-directed action film - it's just a little too ridiculous and movie-ish for me to love.
Director: Walter Hill
In a lot of my recent reviews, I've mentioned my teenage self as the ideal viewer for films. I think perhaps that's why I haven't watched a lot of movies lately - I feel disengaged from them in some way. Few people I know seem to watch many movies anymore. Netflix's selection of movies is quite dismal. Regardless, they've got The Warriors, and I wondered again about how my teenage self would engage with this, especially since I know it's a favorite of people born between, say, 1965 and 1975. I don't think he'd like it very much.
The Warriors is a lot about notions of masculinity and adherence to codes; even within violent groups of men, there are codes. There's also a threadbare plot and threadheavy costuming - seriously, the costumes in this movie are ridiculous. I cannot tell if this film was attempting campiness or a very strange form of seriousness - I think given the times, director, and location of this movie that it was doing the latter. It grows tiresome in its latter third but does not overstay its welcome. Like so few films I've seen from recent years, it suggests a world outside the movie that the viewer can wonder about - why is there a disc jockey who cares about gang wars? How do these gangs form? But who cares about all that, it's just a well-directed action film - it's just a little too ridiculous and movie-ish for me to love.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)