Not much to say, but just sheer, delirious fun. Clocking in at only 80 minutes, the movie is played entirely for laughs, with Woody Harrelson and Jesse Eisenberg playing off each other well. The zombie-killing action never gets old, culminating in a giddy finale in an old amusement park. And Bill Murray. What to say? He should have a cameo in every movie. Zombieland was made all the better by being preceded by a trailer for a ponderous, self-important vampire movie starring Ethan Hawke.
Spot on! Hilarious movie.
I’m keen to see his role in The Messenger, and I most likely will never see his many hemp-related projects (nor–is this a different category or the same?–the film he did with Matthew McConaughey about surfing hempsters), but damn if Woody Harrelson isn’t GREAT in this and the best thing about a number of other more forgettable films. Management had some interesting, unexpected moves for a romantic comedy, and I always like Steve Zahn, but I also always yawn at Jennifer Aniston, and when Woody pops up the movie perks up. And if only every actor in 2012 had sat and shared a pipe and a few script interpretation sessions with the Woodster, that flick would have rocked.
His line-readings, his attitude — they’re surprising. He seems like he’s all bluster and familiar macho silliness, but there’s an eccentricity to him, some crazy mash-up of deep insanity and sincere emotional vulnerability.
He’s excellent in The Messenger playing a lonely, stoic, steely-eyed, recovering alcoholic who holds on to some semblance of sanity through his fervent commitment to military decorum. His masterful performance is bound up in the tiny details (the line-readings, the attitude, the abrupt shifts in tone, the barely concealed rage, the pathos and sadness that emerges out of nowhere only to be quickly erased with a sharp, comically restorative, verbal jab at the world). It is a small movie, visually flat, and its narrative moves into some easily recognizable directions, but damn if it isn’t well-written and expertly acted (the filmmaker tends to favor long takes to give the actors plenty of room to embody their characters). Ben Foster (who’s even better than Harrelson) and Samantha Morton round out the cast. Good film.
he’s also surprisingly believable as a goofy church-going, good-doing man in transsiberian. it’s not a bad way to spend an hour and a half, but there’s not really as much tension in it as there should be and the central relationship between harrelson’s character and emily mortimer’s (and she’s surprisingly persuasive as a seeming naif with a dark side) just isn’t believable. still, sir ben kingsley (he threatened to sue us if we drop the “sir”) and others chew some tasty scenery.
Well, I like Zombieland a lot. I know there’s much love for Hurt Locker, and we may have to clear the room for the Mr. Creosote-of-a-film, Avatar, but this was not only good moviemaking, but it was great fun, too. The film is only 80 minutes, and it’s got about 2 hours worth of plot in it. That’s pretty amazing. Sure, the voice-over does much of the narrative work, but it’s quite clever (the list of dos and don’ts).
Think about it. At 80 minutes, it still manages not only to give us a pretty decent zombie flick, but do things like develop a credible romance, indulge in a totally anarchic (and beautiful, Hollywood musical-like) smash-up-the-trading post sequence, and deliver an extended cameo. In 80 minutes. Of course, the zombie genre allows one to do away with a lot of story (a virus…’nuff said). I don’t want to say that pulling this off is as impressive as whatever Cameron or Bigelow pulled off, but it’s damn close.
All in all, the 2009 movie year can be summed up this way: simple, generic overindulgence = good. Basterds and Zombieland are the two best films of 2009.
If you add in District 9, another movie that engages in generic overindulgence, I agree that those three movies are the pick of the litter.
I think The Hurt Locker fits into your schema as well.
people, people, i enjoyed zombieland a lot but let’s not get carried away.
I forgot that we aren’t allowed to like a film more than Arnab does.
you are allowed to like films more than me but not to the point of folly.
I’m quite a few miles from Folly. But I wish I was there, right now.
I certainly enjoyed The Messenger, especially for the performances. But, perhaps because of unrealistic expectations, I was disappointed that the movie did not focus in more on the task of delivering the notification of death. The second half of the movie gets away from that entirely and plows the familiar terrain of the post-traumatic attempts of military personnel to return home and come to terms with their experience at war. That is well done, but hardly earth-shattering.
The first half of the movie, though, organized around five notifications, is superb. We get this range of different reactions, with magnificent rage from Steve Buscemi, complete collapse from an elderly couple, and this astonishing scene when the young widow repeatedly thanks and shakes the hands of the military notifiers. She desperately wants them to leave and they just freeze up, as Woody Harrelson keeps asking her if there is anything they can do. There is also a lovely moment when a father berates his daughter for marrying a solider without telling him, and then pivots to comfort her on hearing that he is dead.
To me, that was what made this movie different and important: the impact of war on the families of the soldiers. But it rapidly because a movie about trying to move beyond anger, injury and trauma.
I too liked all those scenes (and you are right, they should be the heart of the movie but they really serve as an introduction), though I felt Buscemi chewed the scenery a bit too much in his cameo. That extremely awkward scene in the kitchen between with Morton and Foster is so, so good (and gets at some of what interested you most, bridging one woman’s lingering grief and confusion with another man’s stab at redemption and renewal).
sorry guys i missed this conversation (i did a search but maybe misspelled messenger — i don’t know) and opened a new thread. it seems we agree on pretty much everything, down to the scenes. good goin.
yup, if i type “the messenger” into the search box all i come up with is my review. explanations?
the explanation is that you are stupid: when i search for “messenger” or “the messenger” i get loads of hits, including one for this thread.
the recourse of the weak is insult. way to go, ‘nab.
Arnab….
look how quickly i spring from tears to a look of surprised joy!
gio, who needs to have explained to them the act of typing a search term into the search box and hitting the enter key? that’s right, an idiot.
arnab, there are things that are too difficult for you to understand. let us just say that i’m glad you life is relatively uncomplicated.