You are currently browsing the monthly archive for February, 2008.
The Grouches have plowed their way through all of the films nominated for the big eight awards. Now we make the case for which film or performance we WANT to win. Doesn’t mean we think it will win or even have a shot at winning. But if we had a vote on the nominees, here’s who we would pick, and why:
BEST PICTURE NOMINEES: Atonement, Juno, Michael Clayton, No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood
Why are all these posts concentrating on little categories like “Best Actor” and “Best Director” when what we all really care about is Art Direction and Costumes? In the course of seeing all of the films nominated for the big eight I ended up seeing most of the films nominated for all those other categories they hand out awards to in the middle 2 hours of the Oscar telecast. Since you obviously care about my make-up preferences, please, read on!
Best Song
“Falling Slowly” Once, “Raise it Up” August Rush, “Happy Working Song” Enchanted, “So Close” Enchanted, “That’s How You Know” Enchanted
For some reason I feel like I already covered this category. But since the Academy stupidly ignored my recommendations, let’s take a look at these inferior choices.
The clear winner for me is “Falling Slowly.” It’s the central song in the wonderful musical Once that embodies the heartbreak and loneliness of the main characters. “Raise it Up” is actually fairly offbeat and I imagine it works well in the film, schmaltzy as it surely is. Nothing against Enchated, but if one of its triumvirate wins it better be “That’s How You Know,” a clever take on the Disney fairy tale tune set in modern times. “Happy Working Song” is a cute but uninspiring ditty while “So Close” is a toothless and unmemorable love song.
Snubs: See my breakdown of the eligible songs to find about a dozen songs I liked better than all the non-Once songs. Read the rest of this entry »
The Grouches have plowed their way through all of the films nominated for the big eight awards. Now we make the case for which film or performance we WANT to win. Doesn’t mean we think it will win or even have a shot at winning. But if we had a vote on the nominees, here’s who we would pick, and why:
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR NOMINEES: Casey Affleck (The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford), Javier Bardem (No Country for Old Men), Philip Seymour Hoffman (Charlie Wilson’s War), Hal Holbrook (Into the Wild), Tom Wilkinson (Michael Clayton)
The Grouches have plowed their way through all of the films nominated for the big eight awards. Now we make the case for which film or performance we WANT to win. Doesn’t mean we think it will win or even have a shot at winning. But if we had a vote on the nominees, here’s who we would pick, and why:
BEST DIRECTOR NOMINEES: Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood), Joel and Ethan Coen (No Country for Old Men), Tony Gilroy (Michael Clayton), Jason Reitman, (Juno), Julian Schnabel (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly)
The Grouches have plowed their way through all of the films nominated for the big eight awards. Now we make the case for which film or performance we WANT to win. Doesn’t mean we think it will win or even have a shot at winning. But if we had a vote on the nominees, here’s who we would pick, and why:
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY NOMINEES: Away from Her, Atonement, The Diving Bell and The Butterfly, No Country For Old Men, There Will Be Blood
The Grouches have plowed their way through all of the films nominated for the big eight awards. Now we make the case for which film or performance we WANT to win. Doesn’t mean we think it will win or even have a shot at winning. But if we had a vote on the nominees, here’s who we would pick, and why:
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY NOMINEES: Juno, Lars and the Real Girl, Michael Clayton, Ratatouille, The Savages
The Grouches have plowed their way through all of the films nominated for the big eight awards. Now we make the case for which film or performance we WANT to win. Doesn’t mean we think it will win or even have a shot at winning. But if we had a vote on the nominees, here’s who we would pick, and why:
BEST ACTOR NOMINEES: George Clooney (Michael Clayton), Daniel Day-Lewis (There Will Be Blood), Johnny Depp (Sweeney Todd), Viggo Mortensen (Eastern Promises), Tommy Lee Jones (In The Valley Of Elah)
Read the rest of this entry »
The Grouches have plowed their way through all of the films nominated for the big eight awards. Now we make the case for which film or performance we WANT to win. Doesn’t mean we think it will win or even have a shot at winning. But if we had a vote on the nominees, here’s who we would pick, and why:
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS NOMINEES: Cate Blanchett (I’m Not There), Ruby Dee (American Gangster), Saorise Ronan (Atonement), Amy Ryan (Gone Baby Gone), Tilda Swinton (Michael Clayton)
The Grouches have plowed their way through all of the films nominated for the big eight awards. Now we make the case for which film or performance we WANT to win. Doesn’t mean we think it will win or even have a shot at winning. But if we had a vote on the nominees, here’s who we would pick, and why:
BEST ACTRESS NOMINEES: Cate Blanchett (Elizabeth: The Golden Age), Julie Christie (Away from Her), Marion Cotillard (La Vie En Rose), Laura Linney (The Savages), Ellen Page (Juno)
There Will Be Blood tells the story of…well…what, exactly? It isn’t really the story of an oil well/reserve, or the town in which it resides. Though both certainly figure prominently. The easy argument is that it is the story of Daniel Plainview and his relationship to the wells and town. Maybe, but the tacked-on feeling of the ending aside, I’m not quite sure that relationship is ever adequately described. TWBB is a sprawling effort of a movie, and if not for the magnetic performances of Paul Dano and Daniel Day-Lewis, its meaning would have been much more pronounced.
I loved the style of Sweeney Todd but little else. It looks stunning, as Tim Burton flicks are wont to do. The sets are gorgeous in their dingy and gloomy splendor. The colors are vibrant, mostly dark but sprayed with red. Some of the scenes are so stylishly gruesome that they made me groan. The score is great. The Oscar nominations for Art Direction and Costumes are well-deserved.
And merely looking at all of this was enough for a while, but not entirely. The major problem is that Sweeney Todd is a musical but the songs just aren’t good. They have no melody, nothing to hum as you leave the theater. The music should be a style to tell the story but it’s just inaccessible.
I also didn’t really care about the story. It mostly just made me hungry for a meat pie. And to top it off, Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter aren’t very good singers. This would be fine if they merely had to compete with Alan Rickman, but all the children in the film can actually sing! It doesn’t serve the movie well that the supporting cast members blow the stars out of the water when given their chance to sing. Depp’s Best Actor is a pretty weak nomination. Except for the singing voice I liked him fine, but I wasn’t blown away.
So I’m glad I saw it because I’m a big fan of Burton’s style but I doubt I’ll go back for a second helping.
The post title is a question Laura Linney’s Wendy Savage asks someone who read her play. A similar question can be asked about The Savages. Yes, it is a bunch of middle class whining, but it isn’t just that. It’s a comment on modern, distant families. It’s a look at the class of the medicated, over-educated, and self-involved. And it’s absolutely terrific.
Of course that shouldn’t be surprising since it starts Laura Linney and Philip Seymour Hoffman, two of the best actors in the business today. They play self-absorbed siblings Wendy and Jon who live in New York City and Buffalo, respectively. Both are struggling with their art: she on a semi-autobiographical play and he on a book about playwright Bertolt Brecht. Their distant lives are reunited when their father’s health begins to decline at a retirement community in Arizona. From there they must work together to get him back east and secure him the care he needs.
The magic of The Savages comes through the characters, who are realistic and complex but quite flawed. Jon is a pretty selfish guy who slogs away at his book and teaching theater of the absurd but won’t marry his long-time girlfriend to prevent her from being deported. Wendy is needy for attention, which manifests itself in lying and outbursts of emotion, and is in a relationship with a married man. Both are prone to easing their distress pharmaceutically and both feel stuck in their lives. But these aren’t the type of lost characters-of-a-certain-age we’re used to seeing in the movies. They don’t fit into easy types and they certainly don’t stare out windows forlornly.
So we have these interesting, flawed characters and put them into a heart-wrenching plot. They struggle with what to do with their father as he slides into dementia: they fight each other, they fight the guilt of sending him away, and they fight their demons over helping a man who was rarely a positive influence in their lives. And they also fight because they are very competitive, selfish, stubborn siblings who are in the same general academic field. The film, more than anything, centers on their relationship and it’s one I found to ring very true. They absolutely love each other but their interactions are often combative and both are quick to fling a barb at the other. Read the rest of this entry »
Atonement is a sweeping epic that actually works a lot better before it becomes sweeping or an epic. It’s a melodrama about love torn asunder by a false accusation, an offense that will reverberate through the lives of all involved for a long, long time.
It all begins at a country manor where Keira Knightley’s Cecilia lounges in the garden and James McAvoy’s Robbie is the Oxford-educated gardener’s son. The two are long-time friends who grew apart at university but come back together one fateful day. Cecilia’s sister Briony, a precocious girl of about 12 played by Saoirse Ronan, is a budding writer who stumbles across certain glimpses of Cecilia and Robbie’s lustful relationship: a dirty letter, a teasing incident in a fountain, a tryst in the library. Briony’s imagination runs wild and she begins to think Robbie is a sex-crazed maniac. Later, when something horrific does happen, Briony misidentifies the perpetrator and Robbie is arrested.
I go into detail here because this part of the film, roughly the first third, is very good. In a long, sweeping epic it’s when the story stays focused on a country manor that it really works. Most of it is fairly undramatic, but the film ratchets up the tension by showing us multiple scenes from different perspectives. What looks sinister from Briony’s perspective looks flirtatious from Cecilia’s. The time-shifts and piercing score complement this very compelling segment.
Alas, as the scope expands the film loses its punch. Read the rest of this entry »
The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford has a heck of a climax. You’ll never guess who kills who.
It’s a deliberately-paced, long, slow, film with little action. And I really liked it, perhaps even loved it. It’s not at all a traditional Western despite traditional Western subjects and characters, but much more a study of obsession and idolatry.
It’s late in the career of the James brothers, Frank and Jesse. The gang that rose to fame with them is long dispersed and they have been running with a loose gang of Missouri locals. One last big train heist will signal retirement for Frank and a downshift into a slower life for Jesse. Part of the gang are brothers Charley and Robert Ford. Charley is a full-fledged member of the gang while Bob is more of a support player, hanging back and watching with adoration.
Bob’s the kind of guy who has idolized Jesse James since he was a child. He has a box full of James memorabilia under his bed and can reel of a list of statistics of how he and his idol are alike. Bob’s Jesse James is a larger-than-life hero, the stuff of dime store novels and kids playing in the schoolyard. He’s somewhat dismayed to find the real Jesse doesn’t match the man he thinks he knows so well.
An invitation to Bob from Jesse to hang around at his home after the robbery plasters a smile on his face, even though he’s used for nothing but hard labor. His mind starts cranking, even imagining himself as a surrogate member of the family- until Jesse sends him on his way.
And so the hero image begins to fade. Subsequent interactions with Jesse further erode that image. He’s something of a bully and gets on Bob’s case for idolizing him so much. “Do you want to be like me,” Jesse asks him pointedly, “Or be me?” Over time Bob’s adoration fades, but the obsession does not. If he cannot be Jesse’s sidekick, he can at least be the man to bring him down. Read the rest of this entry »
John ended his post on the movie with:
“Pray that Blanchett doesn’t get nominated so the rest of you don’t have to watch I’m Not There.”
It appears we did not pray hard enough, as Blanchett got nominated, forcing the rest of us to watch I’m Not There. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge Bob Dylan fan. I own Nashville Skyline on vinyl and love it to pieces. I listen to Theme Time Radio Hour on XM (the show he hosts). I’ve probably built a case, at some point in my life, that The Traveling Wilburys are one of the 20 greatest bands ever. Heck, I’ve seen Masked and Anonymous. You know what, let’s start there. Masked and Anonymous was written by Bob Dylan and Larry Charles, starred Bob Dylan and all sorts of cool actors (No, seriously, go look and see who was in it.), and was totally bleeping incomprehensible. I watched it with my family, and I think my parents fell asleep, and my brother went off to go screw around on the computer. Twenty minutes into the movie. So, in a way, I can see how I’m Not There would be the biopic Bob Dylan always wanted: full of fun actors, insanely incomprehensible, seemingly pointless, a biopic only the vaguest sense of the term, and something of a morality play. Thus, one could probably argue, like a Bob Dylan song. Except that Dylan songs are, you know, enjoyable.
A third of the way through Atonement, I was figuring out how I was going to make room for it in my top five. But as Robbie went, so went the movie. And instead of praising one of the year’s best movies, I’m here to try and figure out what went wrong. I’m not a fan at all of how the movie was broken into three distinct parts, jumping years into the future each time (as a side note, I’ll mention it later, but I felt There Will Be Blood suffered similarly). I appreciate how it gave a jarring feel to the movie, but those gains were more than offset by the storytelling problems it created.
“Jarring” is a good word to describe several aspects of the movie, it is some sort of motif, if you will. Not really sure anyone could watch the first ten minutes of the movie and see the rape of a girl in the future. Briony peeling back the bandages of that one soldier only to find a good chunk of his head missing. The jumps in time, as I mentioned. And the ending, especially. I haven’t read the book, and I’m going to assume the ending is the same there, but that doesn’t mean the filmmakers had to keep it. And (spoiler warning, as always) that Robbie and Cecilia both die, and we don’t find out after the fact, is incredibly jarring. That’s an incredibly unsatisfying ending, in my mind, in terms of how these movies usually end, but one that I thought suited the movie perfectly. I wouldn’t have changed a thing about that. Also, as a brief response to Brian, I didn’t have any problem buying the love between Robbie and Cecilia. Methinks Brian’s just not a romantic.
Part of me wonders if the reason I’m not higher on this movie is because I’m such a sucker for a love story or mystery set on a British manor, and thus bitter the movie had to move on to a broader scope. Still, the disjointed feel of the movie was a bold choice, but one that ultimately was a mistake. It makes the movie feel more distant. Read the rest of this entry »
By now you’ve heard how Away From Her is classic Oscar bait: mental illness, old people, former Oscar winners, old people having sex. Which is fine, Oscar may be silly for only considering a small subset of movies, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that subset is silly. And indeed, Away From Her is a perfectly decent movie. But, I found it surprisingly emotionless. I think that’s why Gordon Pinsent touched off some discussion here. For the most part, his is the only character allowed to show emotion. Even then, there are very few scenes where we get to see anything other than him refusing to accept the inevitable, resigned frustration, and resigned acceptance. Brian remarks that since we didn’t really get to see Grant and Fiona before Fiona’s slide, we can’t really be emotionally invested in them. I’d agree with the lack of emotional investment, but I’d argue that director and screenwriter Sarah Polley had more options at her disposal than only showing earlier parts of their relationship. It is therefore somewhat interesting to watch the events of the movie, but hard to “care” about them, in the sense of caring about the characters. Anecdotal evidence (a phrase that generally translates to: “I’m too lazy to do actual research, but this sounds plausible”) suggests that adapting a movie from a short story can lead to poorly fleshed out, too-sparse movies.
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is one of those films whose technical mastery I can admire but failed to really grab me.
Julian Schnabel has created and interesting, unique, and innovative film exploring the experience of a man locked into his own mind, able to communicate with only an eyelid. For roughly the first half of the film, we see only what Jean-Dominique Bauby, the unfortunate cripple, sees. This means a limited, often unfocused and confusing view from one eye. It’s a very neat concept and we can really feel Bauby’s initial bewilderment. These are paired with some beautifully-shot fantasy sequences. Janusz Kaminski scored a well-deserved Best Cinematography Oscar nomination for his work. The view from the one eye was probably my favorite part of the movie and I think it lost some punch when eventually the view pulls away and we see Bauby as an outside observer. Read the rest of this entry »
According to this film, the people of northern Wisconsin are either the most tolerant and kind-hearted people on Earth or are really, really bored.
Lars is the type of film that had to tread a thin line to be successful. It’s a film about a man who orders a sex doll to be his girlfriend; for most of Hollywood the urge for crassness would be too hard to ignore. But it also needed to stay away from being too heavy, too schmaltzy, too gimmicky. I think it succeeded fairly well.
Ryan Gosling did not get an Oscar nomination for his work here, but he did get a Golden Globe nod. He was a contender though, and he truly makes this film. His performance is restrained, true, and compelling. The character of Lars has to spot on for this film to work well and Gosling nails it. It’s too bad Oscar eluded him this year but he must have been one of the last one or two contenders cut. I loved him here.
When we first meet Lars he’s utterly socially incompetent, unable to make normal conversation with his co-workers, fellow churchgoers, or even his brother and sister-in-law. So Lars does what any normal social deviant would do and orders a sex doll off the internet, names it Bianca, and treats it like his girlfriend. The neat thing is that the film doesn’t treat this as a move of desperation for a pitiful figure but it instead comes off as a proactive and even promising step for the sheltered man, like he’s making a gutsy move to improve his life. Lars may be a messed up guy but the film never mocks him or wallows in his problems. Read the rest of this entry »
I pulled double duty on this one. I felt obligated, writing for a site that every week gets dozens of readers people searching for Outkast lyrics and misspellings of Edith Piaf, to give Elizabeth: The Golden Age due process by first watching its predecessor, Elizabeth.
What a long and baffling prospect that turned out to be. Elizabeth is unfocused, cluttered, and confusing. The Golden Age is a bit tighter but then adds in heaps of silliness. There’s a love triangle! And a rousing speech to the troops in full armor! And a convenient war hero swinging from a mast! And cat fights! And playful but pointed ruminations about love! My eyes hurt from rolling so much.
I probably went into these films at a disadvantage since I haven’t paid any attention to the era since European History in 10th grade, but frankly I should have been able to decipher a bit more. There’s plenty of room for offering tidbits to the Tudor-obsessed, but not by forsaking those of us with barely a passing knowledge. There are too many characters to get to know many of them so all their political and religious motivations get glossed over. The result is their actions often don’t feel justified or well-developed. Read the rest of this entry »
Oscar bait much? Let’s see. French movie? Check. Debilitating illness? Check. A guy who blinks out an entire book, for crying out loud? Check. A totally engrossing movie? Check. Wait, what?
Well, first and foremost, let’s skip right to the important part. Mathieu Almaric. Villain in Quantum of Solace. The most important movie since…well…Casino Royale. There are few things that matter more than the next Bond movie. So while the Bond producers made an unforgivable decision on the screenwriter, I’m happy to report they continue to do well with choosing actors. I’m very much looking forward to Almaric playing a baddie.
Once represents everything I like and dislike about the singer/songwriter cult. The music was great, at times moving, at other times catchy, and frequently a little bit of both. Both Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova, especially Irglova, are charming in their own rights. But none of this makes Once an especially good movie or film experience.
I found Once to be slow and plodding whenever music wasn’t a part of the action. The first 20 minutes or so took too long to get going, although once Irglova came into the picture, the film’s prospects brightened. She had a certain glow about her, kind of like Amanda Bynes’ inexplicable appeal, that was engaging.
But even then, I interpreted Once as a series of cool music videos about the interplay between writer and artist. Any movie that plays better in two or three YouTube clips can’t be a very good movie, and Once is a good example of that. This scene, in the recording studio, captures the magic of the creative process that so few films have failed at doing (Ratatouille comes to mind). But without a strong narrative structure to bind all these great clips together, Once falters as a cohesive movie.
Well, this is the Golden Grouches, so I guess it’s about time that I got grouchy. I went in with low expectations, and they were basically met. Away from Her was a boring drama with no real plot; it lacked tension, exposition, and in general…anything interesting. To top it off, Julie Christie’s role wasn’t even the leading part. The film was about Grant Anderson, played by Gordon “One Look” Pinsent, and how he coped with watching his wife fall apart.
For a change, I won’t write much about Away From Her, and that’s mostly because it was so uninteresting. The only scenes that had any buzz to them were when Olympia Dukakis, in a well-done bitch role, and Pinsent played off each other. Otherwise, I was bored silly. Like Adam said, the play-by-play patient in the nursing home was the only time I even cracked a smile during the film. Read the rest of this entry »
I wouldn’t usually consider myself a fan of musicals. Some I like, some I don’t, but there’s no special affection. Hairspray had me hooked from its first infectious beat. That great opening scene where Tracy walks to school, singing the praises of her city completely drew me in. From there it was a non-stop 2 hour love affair.
Hairspray is just infused with such exuberance and positive energy that it’s impossible to keep the smile off your face. It’s the epitome of a feel-good movie but it’s not schmaltzy or cheesy: it earns its goodwill. It has a simple but well-executed message of tolerance and following your dreams and that music and dancing is toe-tapping and dazzling.
The performances are pretty good and where lacking at least the actors really threw themselves into their roles. John Travolta picked up a Golden Globe Supporting Actor nod, but I didn’t think he was that strong. I did very much appreciate how much fun he had in his cross-dressing role- there was no holding back there. The Baltimore accent sort of faded in and out but I just about fell out of my chair laughing when his first line was, “Would you keep that racket down? I’m tryin to arn in here!” Nikki Blonsky also got the Globes love though again I only found her decent. I’m certainly hoping to see her in more films in the future though. Read the rest of this entry »
Our penultimate lists find a little change from last time around. It cracks me up a little bit that the three other Grouches all have The Savages, yet Adam has savagely ridiculed John for having Hairspray on there, Brian for having A Mighty Heart. That’s why I pick movies Adam hasn’t seen. Other than that, I think the Grouches have still tended to find the relatively less weighty movies more appealing, at least in terms of the best of the crop. There’s a decent amount of overlap, with Superbad being in all four of lists, The Savages in three, Juno in three, Knocked Up in two, and No Country for Old Men in two. We’ll have a final roundup in a few weeks.
John:
Knocked Up
Juno
Superbad
Hairspray
The Savages
Adam:
Juno
Mr. Brooks
Superbad
The Savages
No Country for Old Men
Brian:
Superbad
The Savages
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood
A Mighty Heart
Jared:
Juno
Knocked Up
Superbad
Lars and the Real Girl
Starter for Ten
(NOTE: Adam wishes to designate Sweeney Todd and Michael Clayton as Honorable Mentions. For me, Knocked Up was the last to make the list, I’ve graded it the same as Charlie Wilson’s War and The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, so on a different night, after a different 20 minutes of deliberation, my list could have been slightly different.)
I like characters. I like characters more when they actually do something. I like nuance. I like nuance more when it isn’t just for the sake of nuance. I actually think John just about nailed it with his original thoughts - a review I believe he’d now like to recant. Adam must have gotten to him or something.
I’m just struggling to understand why a drama with little to no discernible drama, thrills, or suspense has garnered so much acclaim. Sure, it is an exaggeration to say the plot was entirely linear, there were maybe three kinks in there. Of course, if one of those Kinks isn’t Ray Davies, what’s the point? Ah, British Invasion humor! Read the rest of this entry »
For those of you who aren’t Pixar or movie nerds, the subtitle of my post is from The Incredibles, still my favorite film from the studio, and probably one of my top films of the decade. Yeah, it was that good. And after the underwhelming Cars, a movie did little to defy convention or predictability, I thought Ratatouille would be a great rebound movie. The overwhelmingly positive reviews and fantastic word-of-mouth raised my expectations that this was the return of the brilliant Pixar story. Hell, it was even directed by Brad Bird, the genius behind The Incredibles.
But, I sadly learned…to steal another line and apply it to the Pixar brand: “If everbody’s super, then no one is.” And I couldn’t agree more. Read the rest of this entry »
Recent Comments