Two Lovers

TWO LOVERS is a brilliant film: a masterpiece by its director James Gray. Gray's images within the film are so eerie and textile, so evocative and persuasive of his vision, that I was lost within it, clamoring at all sides in order to make sense of it, or understand what I was looking at. Gray's spectral masterpiece stars Joaquin Phoenix in a brilliant role that I can only describe as a man living in our century but with the sentimentality of a cowboy. Phoenix appears as if he's sleeping while he's awake sometimes, and always plans out how he wants things to go. He sees his neighbor he has been interested in at the subway station. He pretends to look at a map while moving closer to her so that she will notice him. He's a strange man, quiet and introspective, but then at a nightclub he shines, and then returns to the vastness of the crowd. His lovable parents (Isabella Rossellini & Moni Moshonov) want him to be happy, and set up a practically arranged marriage with fellow dry cleaner owners. The daughter of the fellow dry cleaner owners is not boring though, which most films assign to the role in order to make us side heavily on one side. But Vinessa Shaw as the girl is extremely pretty, interesting, and pleasant. But Phoenix's character Leonard has been going after his neighbor who is into drugs and involved with a married man. She's played by Gwyneth Paltrow in one of her best roles: not showing us that, 'hey I'm Gwyneth Paltrow and let me show you my action side in IRON MAN 2'. Leonard is possibly suicidal, contradicts his nature at strange times, and plays opera music. Gray's images and subtext immerse Phoenix within the unique role, and the film is a wonder to behold.
Two Lovers: ★★★★

Strangers on a Train

The 1951 film, STRANGERS ON A TRAIN is quite the accomplishment. It features great acting, and Hitchcock's recognizably pleasing direction. It was co-written by Raymond Chandler, and is about two strangers, one a lazy psychopath, the other a tennis player, who meet on a train and plot to kill each other's annoyances. Robert Walker (the psychopath) and Farley Granger (the tennis player) are the two men, who talk of this prospect. It would be perfect. No one would suspect, and neither could be implicated in the other's crime. But when Granger leaves the train for his hometown, the idea leaves his head, as he was never actually serious about it. But the completely serious Walker goes through with the plot, and kills Granger's troublesome wife. This shocks Granger, and now Walker expects Granger to kill his father. Walker plays such a great character, fiddling around with Granger's lighter which could implicate him in the crime, going to tennis matches, and in the midst of the people looking back and forth stares straight ahead. Hitchcock uses his trademark obsession of items, showing us Walker while the camera sits beside the lighter, and obsessing over a certain style of glasses. STRANGERS ON A TRAIN is a damn good Hitchcock film.
Strangers on a Train: ★★★1/2

Rabbit Hole

RABBIT HOLE is a truly awful film. It deals with the aftermath of the death of a child. We learn about halfway through the film that the child ran out into the street after his dog, and was hit by a teenager who served to evade the dog, and hit the oncoming child. Aaron Eckhart and Nicole Kidman play the grieving parents. Eckhart is alright in the role, but Kidman frankly comes off as a bitch: taking out her anger on her family and friends and fellow grievers at group therapy, and then acts really nice to the kid who hit her child. She also sports a slight Boston accent every once in a while, which is so contrary to the mormon-esque poses that misled director John Cameron Mitchell employs. The film is so repetitive in its material, that it serves only as disaster porn. We get it, it's awful. We don't need to immerse ourselves in 90 minutes of pure mawkish depression. I love many depressing films like LEAVING LAS VEGAS to name the best example, but RABBIT HOLE is obnoxious in its approach. It tries to hint that it can be funny at inappropriate times, it sums up everything in a clichéd manner, and those who are supposed to be wise and profound come off as ditzy. The film deals with such a terrible event, its a shame it couldn't have given better credit to that subject. Instead it tries to make that event stylized. After all of these annoying aspects of the film are viewed as a whole, RABBIT HOLE exhibits itself to suck.
Rabbit Hole: ★

Snow Angels

SNOW ANGELS brings together the best of David Gordon Green, its director. Green is often poetic, often sepulchral, has great shots within his films, and stories about small people within vastness. It's probably his best film beside his debut film, GEORGE WASHINGTON. It's music is disturbingly tranquil, playing at all the wrong moments, and Green has every character except one say "I love you" and the person to whom its directed misses it. SNOW ANGELS is a sort of ensemble piece, which is its only weakness as that is too overused, and the film doesn't focus upon those who we want it to focus on. It concerns itself with a teenager (Michael Angarano), his old babysitter (Kate Beckinsale), and her husband (Sam Rockwell). Rockwell and Beckinsale are currently separated, and the only thing that keeps them together is their daughter Tara. The first hour of the film deals with the relationship between the husband and wife, and their various partners in happiness: whether that be sex, booze, or a dog. The story with Angarano is perhaps most fogettable in the first hour, and his presence is strange. But by the time we reach the second hour, and the story takes a horrific turn, the film is filmed with pathos, empathy, and depression. Green here is directing masterfully, allowing his actors to take over their scenes and share their energy, and forcing the camera off its subjects at perfect times. The music is great and reminiscent of FARGO, which was also about small town evils, and mixed with Green's directing, and the acting, the film only grows stronger in retrospect.
Snow Angels: ★★★★

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

The Lord of the Rings is an astounding trilogy. Aesthetically, they're masterpieces, but they also suffer from being self-important. This aspect is best exhibited by their length: no one needs to see a 10 hour long epic about the Lord of the Rings, that's geekdom. I watched the film over three days, and that was thrilling enough. To be overly critical, the films also use the same rocky backdrops too often, and otherwise, the art is pretty damn good. THE RETURN OF THE KING is a pretty thrilling film. It mostly wraps up what has happened before, and allows for hero Frodo (Elijah Wood) to destroy the evil ring of Sauron. However, people are apparently so stupid, that it becomes very hard for mankind to rally against the advancing ork armies of Sauron. So, we get an hour of that building up, and then an extremely good payoff in one of the most satisfying action sequences ever filmed. I especially enjoyed the two hobbits who were goofballs in the earlier films. Here, they bring a needed pathos that isn't as maudelin or grandiose as the rest of the film. THE RETURN OF THE KING is an excellent action/adventure film, filled with great acting, shots, and pace. Despite this, it is still pretty overrated, but that shouldn't take away from how good it is regardless.
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King: ★★★1/2

Bigger, Stronger, Faster*

The documentary BIGGER, STRONGER, FASTER* suffers from the same major faults as many documentaries. 1) The narrator/filmmaker plays dumb, and never sheds any light on his own opinion, making himself seem stupid. 2) The film doesn't show as many not attackable facts as it should. The film deals with the use of steroids within sports, and is narrated/made by a guy who fits into the profile of someone who would have/ should have been using them. We watch as he watches and we see his older brother and his younger brother become vigorous "gym-rats" whose aspirations are ridiculous. They both use steroids, and the middle child Chris Bell, our narrator, is at odds for what to do, and what his stance towards steroids is. We watch as he makes the case that, as children, we are told that a certain body-type is what is okay, and how that was mostly manifested in the 80's movie stars like Hulk Hogan, Sylvester Stalone, and Arnold Schwartzeneger. The film, from that point on, engages in two depressing fashions. The first being that it is naiive about cheating and shows us the revelation that everyone in sports uses drugs, the second that it thinks we are that naiive. It has many nice scenes dealing with a hypocrisy in how we treat drugs, and that makes the film worthwhile. Otherwise, its just the true-life stories of a bunch of sad sacks who never learned that their dreams were unattainable. A decent film.
Bigger, Stronger, Faster*: ★★★

Scre4m

SCRE4M has a great first 15 minutes. You walk in expecting something stupid, it shows you a hint of that, and then turns everything upside down and pleasantly surprises you. You think, "Well, shit, they still got it" and then they wow you again. The first 15 minutes of SCRE4M show you they're self-aware, but not in the fashion of a parent who just learned what LOL means and jumps to his daughters room to joke with her. Rather, these 15 minutes are filled with the old magic that the original SCREAM had. And then everything goes to hell. Past this opening, we watch as Sydney Prescott, the victim of the original trilogy, played so perfectly by Neve Campbell, returns to her hometown of Woodsburrow, where it all began. She has a book out about not playing the victim any longer, but inevitably, her presence in the town causes everything to start over again. The film proceeds to present a plethora of hot teens, and just as they build a background for the character, thus making us "care"--STAB--they're dead. We see this pattern early on in the film, and a bunch of lame and boring stab sequences accentuated with stupid music just shows how filmmaker Wes Craven has decided that everyone watching his movie is a real idiot. Except that, he's made an idiotic film, that can't be helped by the starpower of Neve Campbell, David Arquette, Courteney Cox, Emma Roberts, Anna Paquin, Kristen Bell, Heather Graham, and Hayden Panettiere. (Also, Emma Roberts is an awful actress who is trying to be "badass" in her misccast role). SCRE4M falls so close to horror movie formula its laughable, except its not...and that makes it worse. Truly awful, especially after raising expectations in the wonderful first 15 minutes (which is no where near enough to keep this movie from sucking).
Scre4m: ★1/2

Several Actresses

Actresses come and go in terms of their worth. Sometimes Scarlett Johansson is making wonderful films, and then next she'll be making Iron Man 2. Yet, that does not mean that the presence of a good actresses who just happens to be in a so-so film isn't enjoyable. Profiling ten actresses:

*      *      *

Scarlett Johansson: An actress whose raspy voice and matter-of-fact tone is sometimes taken as bad acting, Johansson is an extremely talented actress. She's so contrary to the idea of a pretty, but dull, face in a film just to be there, instead, Johansson is an actress who elevates material with characters that are real, and not contrived trophies or furnishing. Only 26, she's made six great films, and a number of good ones.
Match Point
Lost in Translation
Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Ghost World
The Man Who Wasn't There
The Prestige

Naomi Watts: Naomi Watts is what Scarlett Johansson might turn into, or is slowly becoming: a great actress who has gone unrecognized for many years, and is not within the public realm of ideas. Watts is best at playing sad-sack, but also worthwhile as a woman who's trying to be tough. From CHILDREN OF THE CORN to J. EDGAR she's been solid.
Mullholand Dr.
21 Grams
The Assassination of Richard Nixon
King Kong
The Painted Veil
Eastern Promises

Kristen Stewart: An actress who will forever be remember for her worst work, TWILIGHT, is one of the best young actresses working. She is a movie star in every sense. She's rude, knows it, and doesn't care. She wears certain objects in different films to tell her audience who she is, and works in mainstream films halfheartedly. Stewart is 21 and shaping up to be one of the better actresses around.
Panic Room
Undertow
Into the Wild
What Just Happened
The Yellow Handkerchief
Welcome to the Riley's

Natalie Portman: Catapulted to fame since BLACK SWAN and her ubiquity in films since. Much better prior to that film than anyone ever acknowledged. A complete profile exists elsewhere.
The Professional
Heat
Star Wars
Garden State
Closer
V for Vendetta
Brothers
Black Swan

Greta Gerwig: The indie-actress of the 00's, whose talents behind and in front of the camera were first exhibited in mumblecore films by Joe Swanberg. Another case of mistaking original characters for bad acting.
Hannah Takes the Stairs
Nights and Weekends
Greenberg

Uma Thurman: Pretty much absent in recent years except for the occasional indie failure, Thurman was so good in the 90's, and so forgotten about now.
Dangerous Liasons
Mad Dog and Glory
Pulp Fiction
Gattaca
Sweet and Lowdown
Tape
Kill Bill, V.1
Kill Bill, V.2

Father of My Children

Mia Hansen-Løve is a wonderful director. She directs her actors and actresses so wonderfully, that performances are elevated all around, and each of them performs close to the vision of the director. The way that everything falls into place in the way its supposed to by Hansen-Løve's standards are wonderful to behold. Her story to tell in FATHER OF MY CHILDREN is of a film producer whose life is supposedly going well. It is, however, not, and we see a heartbreakingly realistic decline. Then, the second half of Hansen-Løve's film deals with the repercussions of actions we commit in our own lives. The entire second half is great for two reasons. 1) That it exhibits grief with intelligence and ease on the part of the director and 2) that it shows how our lives do not belong to us, and that our actions can define the lives of others. As Hansen-Løve shows the myriad troubles of the film producer, she also shows how everything he does affects everyone else like a rippling wave. The film is, however, a little slow, and lingers too long on certain actions. This fault is also to the film's realistic feel, and I for one admire FATHER OF MY CHILDREN more than I like it. It is clear that Mia Hansen-Løve is an excellent director, but perhaps FATHER OF MY CHILDREN was not my specific cup of tea. It's still a good film in my conflicted opinion.
Father of My Children: ★★★

Adventureland

Jesse Eisenberg plays his overused, over-mannered character in ADVENTURELAND. He's set to go to Columbia for grad school to become a journalist, but not before he goes on a trip with rich friends to Europe one summer in 1987. However, once his dad is laid off, his family can't afford it, and without the aid of friends to take him on the trip, he ends up in a job for lazy losers at the local theme park. It's name is Adventureland, and it's a shrewd and weird place where you're either in "Games" or in "Rides". Eisenberg's James is told that he definitely belongs in games by the couple who run the park (played hilariously by Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig, work that ranks high above anything they ever did for Saturday Night Live). At the park, James becomes known for having some really good weed, and having lost big fucking panda that you're never supposed to give out for an award, after being held at knifepoint. James meets a group of strange characters that become slowly endearing. One of these characters is Em, who is played wonderfully by the underrated Kristen Stewart. Em and James might end up becoming something, but they're both slightly bitter people. They're definitely appealing and charming throughout the film, but they each have streaks of cruelty that threatens their relationship. ADVENTURELAND suffers from the same common syndrome that runs throughout director Greg Mottola's films. It's an intrinsic flaw that, whenever it is presented, undermines whatever warmth or realness was exhibited previously. Mottola likes to, at the end of his films, wrap up things how they should not be wrapped up, and incessantly allows for nerdy, losers to get the hottest girl around. This is not realistic or interesting, and is indulgent of Mottola and his frequent counterpart and faux-auteur/genius Judd Apatow. However, ADVENTURELAND's earlier scenes make up for most of this stupidity. It's not bad.
Adventureland: ★★1/2

Abbott & Costello Meet the Invisible Man

I've seen almost all of the Abbott & Costello films. They all follow the same general formula as well, except for a few standouts that serve as exceptions. In most of the films, there's some plot going on that involves a love triangle, or estranged relationships, and the man within the relationship stumbles across Abbott or Costello or the other way around. Then, Abbott and Costello attempt to help in the situation, Costello gets the crap beaten out of him, and Abbott either makes some money, or just gets to sit back and smirk. The duo are extremely appealing, they're not of the "let's be weird to be funny" tradition that came right after them. There's also a sadness within their characters not unlike the pathos evoked by Charlie Chaplin, and their real-life selves were all but content human beings. In ABBOTT & COSTELLO MEET THE INVISIBLE MAN, the duo come across the Invisible Man, who, like in the 1930's film, is going on a rampage despite the wariness of his friends and family. This is more of a purposeful Invisible Man though, and he only really goes crazy when he gets drunk. The gags involved, and the seamless special effects are extremely well done, and the film is still pretty funny. Unlike some of the other A&C films, there aren't just random scenes to allow the duo to be funny, but their comedy is integrated with the theme of an invisible man. It's one of their better films.
Abbott & Costello Meet the Invisible Man: ★★★

Scream

The 1996 film SCREAM is quite an effective horror movie. It's a film so stylized and defined by horror director Wes Craven and his screenwriter Kevin Williamson, that it has, with time, become a defining film of the 90's. It's theme is self-awareness, and how in spite of that feature, people still do the same old shit. SCREAM tells the tale of a bunch of high school students who undergo the usual territories of a horror film, are aware of what comes with that territory, and still act stupid. In the lead as Sydney Prescott is Neve Campbell. Sydney and her group of friends laze about and talk about the "rules to survive a horror film" and callously discuss the newly murdered classmates at their high school. There's a backstory. Sydney's mother was raped and murdered a year ago, and Sydney is still feeling the hurt. But now its the anniversary of the killing, and new murders are taking place. Connection? SCREAM has its faults. It's a little repetitive near the end, and it's perhaps a little less important than it thinks it is, but it's a pretty solid film with an interesting premise that pays off in humorous and even scary ways.
Scream: ★★★

Certified Copy

Reviewing Iranian director Abbas Kiarostami's new film, CERTIFIED COPY, seems a doomed effort. It is a film that in describing plot and events, you risk losing the point. Here are a few things that can be said about it unequivocally and then the rating:
*The film stars two wonderful actors: Juliette Binoche and William Shimell
*The film is awing in its camerawork, visuals, and pacing
*This is the best film of 2011, I doubt anything in the following months can top it, and any film that tops it would be quite the wonder
*One of the general thoughts about the film is that a copy of a work of art is no different from the original, because we perceive it in the same way.
CERTIFIED COPY offered me one of the best times I've ever had watching a film. The way that the two people play with each other verbally, switching between Italian, English, and French with ease, is a wonder, and even more interesting is what they're talking about. This is a film that is not about questioning what is going on within it, or trying to make different pieces of a puzzle fit together, but letting what is within affect you. What is within is seemingly effortless, but what those aspects are is what is so intriguing. This is a film about people, ideas, and life. That may seem silly, but so do many aspects of the film when you're not experiencing them. A great movie.
Certified Copy: ★★★★

Dead Alive

DEAD ALIVE is one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen. By no means is it "brilliant" and by no means is it very good. However, there is a quality to the film that provides as stupid entertainment. For a film that is shoddily shot from low angles, and lacks decent sound editing, for a film that makes itself very self aware in the later parts and is basically a remake of EVIL DEAD II, DEAD ALIVE still manages to be somewhat entertaining. The film concerns a young man still living with his mother. When a girl from the market learns from her clairvoyant grandmother that she is supposed to fall in love with this man, she pushes the issue with him. In no time, the couple is out on a date at the zoo, but the overbearing mother is spying on them. When they go by the monkey exhibit, an insane one from a foreign country bites the mother. She slowly starts to fall apart. Her skin tears off, her ear falls off. Eventually, she dies, but becomes a hungry for blood zombie. In the disgusting and bulbous bad special effects of the late 80's, early 90's, she begins to infect everyone around town. It takes a while for the son to decide that he should destroy these creatures, for he still has some delusion that they're still the people he used to know. But eventually the movie degenerates into some very entertaining splatter-action scenes. One of the funniest, and best, is when the local Priest "fights for divinity" and beats the crap out of the zombies. Now, this film is not without its sadistic side, and it is a little too close to the great EVIL DEAD II to really earn any points for originality. But with what it is it does alright.
Dead Alive: ★★1/2

Undertow

UNDERTOW is the third film from David Gordon Green. His films are recognizable and textile, and the added bits of implanted importance in UNDERTOW make it all the better. The best way I can describe the film is as a mix of the plot of NIGHT OF THE HUNTER, a sultry southern evening, and cautionary tales of family. The film is concerned with the lives of two strange and isolated children living under a demanding father (Dermot Mulroney). One day, their lives are changed when their absent uncle shows up, tells a tale of mexican gold, and begins to chase the frightened children. There really isn't much to UNDERTOW except emotion and appearance. It could be called a slow film, but its nice to revel in moments rather than skip them by. Green creates a poetic and engrossing film that never feels pretentious, and in its awkwardness it is, perhaps, grand. The way that Green creates a romance at the beginning and adds all the tension to be mustered within it is brilliant, as later on we see how a seemingly simple act can doom a character later on. There's a sense of constant renewal and returning in UNDERTOW, as if the boys have returned to a truth, or where they were going to end up inevitably. UNDERTOW is almost as good as Green's great first film, GEORGE WASHINGTON, and has many of the same dark themes.

I Love You Phillip Morris

I LOVE YOU PHILLIP MORRIS is far from a perfect film, but with its faults manages to be quite an entertaining one. In the film, we follow a supposedly dying Steven Russell as he narrates what led him to such a point. Steven Russell is played brilliantly by Jim Carrey (who works so much better in these subtly comic films). As the film starts, Steven is a cop in Texas, until he moves, gets in a car wreck, and proclaims to his Catholic wife that he's gay. Steven then moves out to Florida to make his way as a gay man, but muses that "being gay is awful expensive". So, Steven starts making money any way he possibly can, and this includes being a con man. We follow Steven to prison and out of it numerous times, and in one of his first stints, he meets Phillip Morris (played daringly by Ewan McGregor), falls in love, and supposedly steals and cheats for love. Steven's antics and schemes and brilliant, as was the real man who had an IQ of over 160. The film is endearing as we care for Carrey's Steven, but wince as he steals and lies. I LOVE YOU PHILLIP MORRIS is sort of an entertaining exercise within the mob world, except that Steven is gay and very funny. As reminiscent as the film is of CATCH ME IF YOU CAN, about a con man in the 40's, this one seems textile, well colored, and wonderfully played. This playful parable about devious con men is a hell of a film, and well worth the time.
I Love You Phillip Morris: ★★★1/2

Invaders from Mars

INVADERS FROM MARS perfectly captures the classic alien invasion movie. It has it all, idealistic towns that don't actually exist, goofy looking aliens, insane cosmological logic, men with a lot of silver make-up to make them look like, immediately, aliens, and the right textile feel. As IFM starts and a somewhat corny household is established, everything that has been sure is about to be broken by the invaders. As the young boy of the household peers out of his window in the early morning, he sees a spaceship fall. After alerting his dad, who jollily attributes it to nightmares, he then turns dark and serious as he sets out to investigate. The general premise after this is that by this house, where the aliens from Mars have landed, the aliens lurk underground and suck up whoever comes by with whirpool-like sand. After you've been taken by the aliens, you become a mere slave to them, and do their bidding. There's some plot concerning the motives of the aliens, but this is shrugged off, for all that really matters is for the boy from the opening scene to be reunited with his sane parents. INVADERS FROM MARS employs the use of surrealistic objects like pillars, ominous choral music, changes in color, and creepy landscapes to its benefit. In no way is the film anything but entertaining, and for an alien invasion film, that's all that should be asked.
Invaders from Mars: ★★★

White Material

Claire Denis' WHITE MATERIAL is the most strikingly original film in a long time. It's style feels Scorsese-esque in its necessity to observe violence, but the composure is fully Denises. The film stars Isabelle Huppert as a once-wealthy white woman living in an unnamed African country. We start the film at the end, thus knowing what horrors will befall her, and then we go back to the beginning, where an always frazzled Huppert tends to her coffee crops. She has a son who deals with having no identity (he is a child of Africa, but white, although he feels connected to the rebellion). Like in the stories we hear today of Africa, there is a bloody rebellion going on, and the leader of the rebellion: The Boxer, hides out in Huppert's barn-like fortitudes. As Huppert is urged to leave by pretty much everyone, she continues to fight for her land, although it is painfully clear to the audience that the woman is looking after fucking coffee. We learn that she won't even make a profit out of the coffee, its contaminated by dead animals, she won't be able to transport it, and yet she still looks after it. This is an insanity that is so integral to Huppert's character. Denis shrouds Huppert's eyes in her messy hair to exhibit her blindness, and attires her film as fetishistically as Hitchcock. WHITE MATERIAL is a masterpiece, quiet and then loud like fingernails on a chalkboard waking us up. The way that Denis follows her characters in never condescending but observatory, she's a great director, and this is a great film.
White Material: ★★★★

All The Real Girls

ALL THE REAL GIRLS is the second film from David Gordon Green. Part of it reminds us of romantic poets and the other part does not. Like Green's first film, it is unexpected in the way it implants grand ideas into the minds of unimportant people. Thus, in Green's North Carolina town, a group of people who know each other better than they know themselves, fall into a situation where they each realize love. There is Paul (Paul Schneider) who is known for having sex with everyone he comes across who finally sees a girl he doesn't want to take that road with. His story, and the way he convinces himself not to let that happen is a wonder. There is Bust-Ass (Danny McBride) who looks from afar at love kindling and desires it. And there is Tip (Shea Whigham) who watches Paul fall in love with his sister, and realizes his love for them both, despite inhibitions. Finally, the girl in the film, Noel (Zooey Deschanel), is a presence that has already formulated what love is when she was out at boarding school, now that she is back home, this flows into the boys that move around her. But ALL THE REAL GIRLS isn't as simple as that, for as it employs trenchantly convincing dialogue, realities of mistakes and stupidity fall into place. But everyone holds onto Noel and the idea of love that comes with her, that they hold to her until she must be let go. Paul's mother, Elvira (Patricia Clarkson) embodies the descent these men will make from idealism as she dresses up in a fucking clown costume to go to work. It is this ridiculousness within that which is upheld to importance by the men that creates a slowly realized realism around the characters.
All the Real Girls: ★★★1/2

Source Code

You have to give yourself in to a movie like this one. You actually have to give yourself in to most movies, otherwise it just comes across as a hell of a lot of work put into a massive contrivance. But especially within the genre of sci-fi, you have to believe what you would otherwise deem ridiculous. With the new sci-fi movie, SOURCE CODE, the ridiculous is made plausible and intriguing. The premise is of a soldier who can return to the last eight minutes of a dead man's life, and act as he would in it. He uses this technology (crafted by a scientist played deviously by Jeffery Wright) to return to the last eight minutes of a man on a train that is about to blow up, and find the source of this explosion, and who's behind it. The beginning of SOURCE CODE is quite awkward, and it takes a while for the film to grab you with its idea. The man within the 'source code' is played by Jake Gyllenhaal, who adds a nice humanity to the film. But whenever Gyllenhaal tries to go after the bomb, he is mired down by the thought that everyone on the train is dead and there's nothing he can do about it. After repeating the sequence so many times, he begins to care for the woman sitting next to him (Michelle Monaghan is a perfectly cast role). The film is directed by Duncan Jones, who made the brilliant 2009 sci-fi movie MOON. SOURCE CODE is a step down, but the ideas that Jones brings to the story are as new as the ideas he brought forth in MOON. This elevates the film from just a standard thriller to a frustratingly compelling parable on the soul. SOURCE CODE is a excellently crafted film, and one of the better films of 2011.
Source Code: ★★★1/2

Blow Out

BLOW OUT is a tale of murder, conspiracy, and moviemaking. These three subjects are so overused in films, and yet in this one, it seems fresh and appropriate. The film opens with a campy and shady horror movie set-up: there's talk of a possible stranger outside, and then as a shrouded figure enters the house in the spectral way that all killers in horror films do, he floats to the showers, pulls up a knife, pulls back the shower curtain and a ridiculous and feeble scream comes out of his victim. The film is cut back, and we see a group of filmmakers working on their film and worrying about the feeble scream. The filmmakers send the hero (played by John Travolta) to find a new and better scream because they got the girl in the movie "for her tits not her voice". Travolta is a soundman, and as he's out recording leaves rustling for the film, he witness a car's tire blow out, and then crash into the water. He saves one of the passengers (the other is already dead) and begins to discover that the blow out might not have been so by looking at the recording he got of the accident. As conspiracy plots pile up, director Brian De Palma utilizes textile backgrounds, sarcasm, and minimalism to make for a conspiracy thriller that transcends the genre. As the characters become so immersed within the conspiracy, it becomes clear that that is not so important, and perhaps it is the motivations of the characters that is. As something becomes so important within their lives, the most primal emotions come through. BLOW OUT is a masterpiece.
Blow Out: ★★★★

George Washington

David Gordon Green is one of the new emergences of the 00's. His films, along with those of Ramin Bahrani & Darren Aronofsky marked new indie films that were of a higher quality than past ones, and had clearly defined ambitions within the films. Green's GEORGE WASHINGTON is his first film, and thus his first entry into the new plethora of 00's director/writers. The film is extremely off base for indie films, and it thus breaks away from the self-defined genre of indie films. Like horror, there are two different types of indie films. The first is that which succumbs to the clichés of the genre (and some of those films can still be good) and the other is that which plays with its genre. Green accomplishes this with GEORGE WASHINGTON, which, in its title, would suggest a different kind of story, but when Green illuminates us with lurid green colors and graffiti plastered walls behind twelve year old black children, an unexpectedness immediately captivates. In its languor, the words of laconic children slowly swath over and romp across that which we expect. The children speak about sex and they talk as if they're eighty year olds reminiscing. As horrors develop and we see the reactions of each of the children, a beauty is found within that which we would not have expected. This is art. This is Green showing us his talents as a director. Both aesthetically and modestly, he has shown how in the most dubious of artistically minded places, there is evil and there is unimportance. Even as a terrible event befalls Green's characters, they act in the same languor as the endless summer which envelops them, the film, and ultimately the surveyors.
George Washington: ★★★★

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

This is an inferior movie to the first, and it is obviously a filler between the two more interesting parts of the series. Like the first, the story tells of Frodo Bagins and his group of friends as they attempt to destroy the magical ring of Sauron in a volcano so that the world will not be destroyed. In the first film, the silliness of the idea was overcome by the great production value, intense action sequences, and ubiquitous presence of good to great actors. In The Two Towers the story can't help but feel unimportant. I wonder if the entire 3 hour long film could have been condensed into twenty for the beginning of movie three. The film is entertaining as we see more creatures, awesome battles, and impending doom, but for a three hour long film, it feels as if we never really connect to any of the characters, and that we're leading up to a single battle scene (which ends up lasting around 40 minutes long). As characters attempt to convince different creatures, whether that is tree guardians or reluctant kings, the scenes are brief, and all together nothing is convincing but rather feels inevitable. Long scenes don't even matter anymore after its decided that "all the tree guardians are going to war anyway for the reasons you pointed out 2 hours ago!". But this is also such a thrilling film, that it is quite worth seeing. A filler, but good.
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers: ★★★

The Lincoln Lawyer

The Lincoln Lawyer has two good things going for it, and then a bunch of semi-good fluff stuffed around it. First off it features a Lincoln, which is almost a character in itself as the lawyer in the title uses it as his office and a meeting place when he isn't in the bar. Also, the film features Matthew McConaughey in what is probably his best role since Dazed and Confused. McConaughey placed in such a perfectly pompous role, which is almost deserved considering his intelligence, serves the actor very well, and adding the fact that he's a damn good lawyer sporting his Lincoln makes it all the better. In the film, McConaughey's character, a lawyer named Mickey Haller. Haller's got everything going for him. He's got an ex (Marisa Tomei) who he still occasionally sleeps with, a good friend who's also his investigator (William H. Macy), and a driver who's paying off his debt after Haller got him out of a jam. Haller is so good at his job, he twists the system and makes it work for him. As a defense attorney, he isn't very popular, but he doesn't seem to give a shit. When Haller is approached by a millionaire kid who asked for him specifically, he jumps on the case, even as friends warn him to be wary. Perhaps Haller never thought twice about why the kid approaches him, but as he sinks deeper and deeper into a morally repugnant case with a dubiously charming client, things start to shatter around him. The execution of the courtroom scenes are pretty standard, but the source material is strong (based on a novel by Michael Connelly). What is so appealing about the film is McConaughey and how smoothly he fits into the role. An audience won't question his intelligence because his character won't let you. The Lincoln Lawyer is pretty solid entertainment.

The Lincoln Lawyer: ★★★

The Searchers

The Searchers was one of the most life-changing films I have ever seen. It deals with a mysticism created by John Wayne (the quintessential cowboy) who enters into a journey for a lost girl to indian tribes and brutally searches for her under the worst of landscapes, but the most beautiful from afar and from the camera's lens. Directed by one of the greatest of American directors, John Ford, the film seeps with realism rather than sappiness. There is a hardness and grit to Wayne's character that evokes a languor and an unmatched sadness with a quick hand for a gun. This is a man who is hateful because he has been injured. When Wayne mutilates the body of a dead indian to ensure his block towards the holy land, we see that he does it because of a hatred that has been implanted into his character. Wayne's cowboy lives on the plains outside of politics and rhetoric, and on those plains it is a singular gun that ensures safety or death. The complexities raised by Ford's film seeps into the American landscape of film, it shows a man who literally rides in on a horse to save a community from a dubious problem. It is the beauty of the cowboy western to have the scene where he gives a last, stoic look towards those who needed help, and then rides off, leaving the town desolate and solitary to fight for itself. Perhaps the purpose of Wayne's cowboy is to serve as an example for a community, but to show the imperfection of a figure who is supposedly immersed in goodness. A great film, and more elegiac than the most "serious" of films.

All Good Things

This is a great film about murder. It reminded me of the masterpiece Zodiac about its ability to delve into a million possibilities and never settle on a single one. It proves that it is not the outcome of who did it, but the way we get there and why we would point to different people that is so intriguing. The film tells of young hippie David Marks, who has refused his fathers attempts to get him into the family business, married a middle-class beauty named Katie and opened an organic foods mart named "All Good Things". However, as Katie and David progress in their relationship, and the couple need money, David caves to his father and then everything starts to change. Kirsten Dunst plays Katie superbly as a confused but in love young woman who begins to notice oddities and mystique within the persona of her husband David. The great Ryan Gosling plays David with nuanced force, and Frank Langella adds to the ominous nature of the film as David's father. The entire film is centered around David, and sometimes Katie (and her reactions to the central force). David is strange and violent, but also the kind of person to open a hippie food mart. As we learn things about his character and begin to like him, evils seeps in and shatters everything. Although the film is a work of fiction, it feels textile and probable despite some strange turns. All Good Things is a great film, working with faux emotion to pull and audience into its mysteries.
All Good Things: ★★★★

Kristen Stewart & Her Shoes

Shoes are a stupid device. They are simply what we use to put on our feet to walk from one place to another. There are, however, exceptions, and this one is not so much respective towards the shoes themselves, but their ubiquity. For, in her last 3 or 4 films, Kristen Stewart, who has been proving herself as a very good actress who should not have the Twilight films held against her, has worn gaudily colored Vans. In Yellow Handkerchief, and Welcome to the Rileys especially, they seem to be a device to remind us of the actress. They are a device used in order to show her audience "this is me". It reminds us of the actress and the role, it adds a certain familiarity when Stewart employs either yellow or red with drab shirts and colorful cardigans.

Home Movies in Film

Home movies like to appear in fictional films often. There are of course, exceptions, the best of which being a documentary that utilizes home movies, called Dear Zachary. However, what is their function in a fictional film, where they are obviously contrivances that are supposed to show that "these things used to happen" or "these people are like yourself". And that is perhaps the central problems of this utilization, for it assumes that we all watch home movies, when only some of us do, and that's probably half-heartedly.

Personal Best

Personal Best is a good example of a film aging in material and substance, but not in imagery or tone. It is quite easy and obvious to explain that some of the materials used in early Sci-Fi films like Them!, where giant ants attack look corny because the images of the giant ants don't work well with the background. It is also easy to explain how things that were funny due to the political context of the day don't read as well years later. Those are examples of films that have aged badly, but Personal Best exhibits a third type of aging that is concentrated upon substance. For it is what Personal Best decides is import to accentuate that does not read well. It's a film about two world-class athletes who are preparing for the tryouts for the 1980 Moscow Olympics. It goes without saying in the film that this event is not taking place because of the United States boycott, but that isn't clear to a viewer in 2011. However, the film goes on to develop a relationship between three characters: a coach (Scott Glenn) and his two promising women's team pentathletes: a shy and timid Mariel Hemingway as Chris and a domineering and confident real-life athlete Patrice Donnelly as Tory. Chris and Tory develop a lesbian relationship, and the camera watches the relationship stoically, without having anything to say about what is kinky, sexy, erotic. There are long sequences of nudity that have no life to them, which actually adds to the worth of the film as it shows an observatory camera on interesting lives. The strength of the film lies within the manifestation of complex characters in complex lives with complex choices by damn good actors. It's constantly interesting, and also features wonderful sequences of slowed running, jumping, throwing, etc. Visually, its pretty great, and even in the storyline it has sequences of brilliance. However, in tonality, it is slight and inept (it has aged badly), for scenes feel forced or away from the action. Finally, a portion of the lesbian relationship makes, frankly, no sense. I would not spoil the entrance of another important character later in the film, but it drastically changes how we see both characters. This is, however, a worthwhile film.
Personal Best: ★★★