Category: (random lists)

A History of Violence

This isn’t a great film. The dialogue is stilted, the tone of certain scenes feels forced (particularly in the first half hour), many of the performances are excrutiatingly one-dimensional, and the film is visually flat (lacking the strong compositions and use of shadow and light in Spider and Crash, for example). What exactly did I expect from another graphic novel adaptation? But as a particular kind of American allegory, A History of Violence makes for an extremely potent piece of cinema (and there are scenes and moments that are just about as good as it gets). I can see why this was such a hit at Cannes. As I was watching, however, I wondered what David Lynch could have done with this material, and I guess that’s not such a great endorsement of Cronenberg’s work.

alexander, director’s cut, even

watched this in two instalments at the end of the week. this is appallingly bad. so bad that it isn’t even fun to watch in order to make fun of its badness. whatever his faults as a filmmaker, you could always say of stone that he made compelling films. not anymore. or maybe this is what happens to compelling filmmakers when they get to make their pet projects (see also scorcese and the aviator). interesting and familiar political rhetoric: alexander is out to conquer the world because he wants to unify it, dissolve differences and make everyone free; unlike his generals and soldiers he alone has respect for the asian people (though curiously this does not get in the way of considering their practices and rulers barbaric). everybody deserves to be made free by force so that they can be more like us. the look of the film is equally tired. he seems to have taken many courses of orientalism 101–not the critique of it, but “how to”.

the actors are all staggeringly bad. rosario dawson got good reviews for her performance–i presume this is because she showed her breasts. not even a passing glimpse at his penis redeems farrell. jolie may be under the impression that she is chewing scenery in a fun way–she is not. the only one who is is val kilmer, and he may be the only one who emerges with his dignity intact. anthony hopkins plays anthony hopkins. someone should make a film with him and morgan freeman.

the battle between good and evil

i watched constantine last evening. anyone seen it? keanu reeves as an exorcist/occult ins officer trying to do his bit to maintain the balance between the forces of heaven and hell on earth. not a bad way to pass two hours. actually the first half of the movie is pretty good: you’re mostly kept in the dark about what’s happening, the film doesn’t seem to be going anywhere–just enjoying being atmospheric. it does get very silly towards the end but peter stormare as satan is a hoot, as is tilda swinton as mick hucknall, i mean gabriel. but i don’t really want to say much about the film. if like michael and me you watched all the “prophecy” movies you’ll probably like this one. if not, not. (why is gabriel so often an asshole in these movies?)

i am interested though in movies about this general theme of balance between good and evil/light and dark that don’t rely entirely on catholic mythology/iconography. i remember reading recently about a russian movie called “nightwatch” which seems like it might be one (it apparently outgrossed both “lord of the rings 3” and “spiderman 2” in russia–which may or may not be a big deal; i’m guessing many indian movies outgrossed both of these in india as well). these catholic movies are all so deeply religious they become a little boring. and the world of vampires and werewolves (underworld etc.) are mostly superhero movies masquerading as something else. okay, i’m rambling.

Terrorism movies

OK, so best (and worst) terrorism movies? If ‘Blown Away’ anchors one end of the spectrum, are there good movie treatments? Is it possible to make a good movie on this subject in the current period? I’d certainly put in a plug for ‘Battle of Algiers’ as the simply the best, and probably unrepeatable, because it is impossible to make an intelligent movie on the subject in America today.

But what do people think of ‘The Siege’ which came under sustained attack for its use of stereotypes, but which (I must admit) I found pretty compelling. Fine performances by Denzel Washington, Tony Shalhoub, Annette Bening and even (before his “slide from greatness”) Bruce Willis. And at least some sense of the sources/causes of terrorism and the dangers of Patriot Act-type reaction.

the motorcycle diaries

has this not been discussed here yet? we finally got around to watching it this weekend. our expectations were high–partly based on the recommendations of others, but mostly on just how much we’d both liked central station. however, i found the motorcycle diaries to be curiously uninvolving. perhaps it is a built-in problem with any biopic of an iconic figure, especially of the “early life of” sub-genre that the film’s present can’t help but serve as background material for the spectacular myth–providing a series of aha! moments: “so, that’s when he began to think about oppression” etc.. it is also a problem if the “early life of” doesn’t complicate the myth: it turns out che was always a noble sort. without this narrative tension what you have is a lovely travel advertisement for the andes. and maybe that advertisement looks so much better on the big screen that these other issues pale–i don’t know. central station was also visually stunning, but went over similar political ground far more dialectically (oooh!) and movingly.

but i sense disagreement in the ranks (and i don’t know yet what sunhee thought of it–i’ll try to get her to post).

Palindromes

OK, here’s a truly dangerous work of indie filmmaking. I have very fond memories of Todd Solondz’s Welcome to the Dollhouse, but I absolutely hated Happiness and was mostly indifferent to Storytelling. Palindromes, however, is a wholly original, viscerally discomforting film which incisively interrogates our cultural obsession with childhood and innocence, family and individuality, self and other, normals and deviants, faith and hypocrisy, the grotesque and the sublime. It comes at the pro-life/pro-choice debate from such a skewed angle, but, in the end, I think it to be a deeply human film and worth the effort.

light, frothy fun

keeping the topic title general so that others can add to it as well, but what i really want to plug is a bollywood blockbuster from this summer: bunty aur babli. a wonderful piece of entertainment about a young man and a young woman from two small towns somewhere in north india who decide that they want the kind of exciting life that they read about happening elsewhere in the country. so they run away, meet each other and begin a life of cons and scams. the plot (or the film’s view of the small town/big city divide) doesn’t hold up to much scrutiny but the film is so giddy it doesn’t matter. the actors–abhishek bachchan and rani mukherjee–are perfect, the writing is good (and the subtitles mostly adequate), and the direction and music are also excellent. the movie does sag for the last 25 minutes (it is about 2 hours 40 long) but moves pretty quickly until then. i think it should be pretty accessible to non-indian audiences, though some of the nuances of accent and demeanour (which are codes for issues of class etc.) will probably get lost. netflix has it, so if you’re interested in mostly mindless fun or in seeing what’s big in india these days, rent it. it also features a blockbuster “item” song (featuring aishwarya rai) that’s been all the rage in the country for some months now.

The Constant Gardener

This is a first rate film, directed with assurance and maturity by Fernando Meirelles. Reynolds has mentioned before how I felt great ambivalence about City of God. It was a dazzling piece of filmmaking but it seemed to me that Meirelles foregrounded his skills as a director over the provocative material; the results being a film that makes a commodity spectacle out of poverty and crime. There is some of that in The Constant Gardener, but I still feel as if the filmmakers work very diligently to not get in the way of the story (even if the generic designs of Le Carre’s conspiracy thriller drag things down in its final act). I look forward to our discussion. This is a film worth talking and arguing about.

More Quick Takes

I watched Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior the other night and enjoyed it. Tony Jaa seems to defy gravity and the big set pieces were well constructed and entertaining, and, I think, there was little use of wires to manufacture the illusion (though I may be proved wrong). One chase scene through the Bangkok streets was excellently orchestrated and a Tuk-Tuk chase scene was a lot of fun. Pure genre flick–nothing necessarily original–and though it lacks the audacious high style of Kung Fu Hustle, I would argue this modest tale of rural values overcoming urban corruption has a lot more heart. Continue reading More Quick Takes