Date: 12/21/08
Theatre.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0970416/
Warning. Pretty heavy spoilers regarding both versions of the film to follow. I normally try to avoid this, however, it is absolutely necessary in breaking down why this film fails.
The Day the Earth Stood Still.
Alright. Let's start with the good. The cinematography. A few pretty sweet moments. Notably, when the spaceship (if you can really call it that) is descending and beams of light are are showering cathedrals and buildings in downtown NY. Okay, that's pretty much all I've got for this category.
This film is quite simply a failure. Why? The message is completely lost. One can but wonder who is to blame for this. Is it the director? He seemed to have good intentions, however under-realized they may be. The studio? That's where my money is. There hasn't been much conceptual science fiction as of late, so I guess it's cool they at least green lighted this. However, they mistakenly decided to try and "upgrade" the quiet, thoughtful film into a summer OMG CGI blockbuster. One only has to watch the seemingly endless action sequences the film degrades is swimming in to realize this. Okay, so the studio is trying to make money by pushing the action sequences non-stop, fair enough. Unforgivable, however, is the studio's constant product placement. A little bit here and there is expected in today's Hollywood, however, this film sets a new low. McDonalds, LG phones, Citizen Watches, Hyundai, Vista, Worlds of Warcraft, you name it. The absolute worst is the McDonalds moment. Groan-inducing, is too nice of a term for this scene. Keanu Reeves literally drives us to a McDonalds, only to proclaim "we're here." right as the big, glowing, golden arches reflect on the car window. This moment is followed by a tracking shot of a cup of coffee. Is this supposed to be a joke? A film (that once had) such a strong message has been degraded to a McDonalds commercial.
Pretending the film didn't have the aforementioned issues, clearly the film's most major issue is it's plot and message. The original film had a very clear message and a logical ending. For this "re-imagining" only some aspects of the plot are updated while others remained unchanged and the film is worse off because of it. The idea behind the updating is clear enough, and definitely appropriate in today's society. The "alien race" is threatening to eradicate life on Earth, because humans are destroying the planet. Their plan is to remove all of the innocent creatures, wipeout everything the humans once were, and then replace animals who will revive the Earth to it's former state. At the end of the film, Keanu Reeves changes his mind and decides to save the people of the Earth instead of letting them be massacred. The film expects you to ignore the fact that the aliens want to save the planet because it supports intelligent life by wiping out the one species that is arguably intelligent on it. Okay, ignore that. Lets move on to the climax. Keanu is so moved by seeing the love between the mother and her step-son that he decided humans can change and save the planet. Ummm... why, exactly? In the original film, the issue at hand was humans killing each other, so having the Klaatu character moved to save the Earth because of witnessing the true love between people actually makes sense. In this new, updated setting where Keanu Reeves is destroying Humans to prevent humans from destroying the Earth, how does this ending make any sense at all? It doesn't. "Aw, humans can love. They probably won't destroy the Earth, it's cool." is all I can figure went through Keanu's head.
Thankfully, we'll always have the original Day the Earth Stood Still to remind us of a time when a motion picture could be art with higher ambitions than selling french fries and cell phones. The only thing this update to The Day the Earth Stood Still reminds us of is how important films like The Pleasure of Being Robbed are; without them it would be far too easy to argue that the art of cinema has vanished in favor of fancy commercials.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
The Pleasure of Being Robbed (2008)
Date: 12/16/08
screener.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1189259/
The Pleasure of Being Robbed.
America has finally found it's answer to the aspirations of foreign cinema. Moreso than any American film I've seen before it, this film feels like a foreign film. Its very existence signals the dawning of a new age in independent film. This film defies conventional filmmaking in a way few have before; those few clearly being the French New Wave and the work of directors like John Cassavetes in America, among others. I can but dream we have more films of this caliber coming from it's director Josh Safdie and the few this film is sure to inspire.
Mostly beautiful yet often ugly, much at the same time, the film's camerawork is completely evocative of it's main character; this is most obvious in the film's use of focus. Constantly dropping out of focus, many critics have apparently decided that this is definitive proof of the film being "technically deficient". (Laura Kern) What I'm arguing here is in fact the complete opposite: the film is most decidedly enhanced by this aspect of it's cinematography. Yes, much of the film goes out of focus. But what focus does it's protagonist's (Eléonore) life have? She wanders around stealing, not stealing, looking through purses, and on and on. This is clearly a proficient use of technique, just not a conventional one.
-.
I've decidely lost what little writing proficiency I once had, otherwise, I assure you (me), I would write endless amount of my usual bullshit about this remarkable film.
screener.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1189259/
The Pleasure of Being Robbed.
America has finally found it's answer to the aspirations of foreign cinema. Moreso than any American film I've seen before it, this film feels like a foreign film. Its very existence signals the dawning of a new age in independent film. This film defies conventional filmmaking in a way few have before; those few clearly being the French New Wave and the work of directors like John Cassavetes in America, among others. I can but dream we have more films of this caliber coming from it's director Josh Safdie and the few this film is sure to inspire.
Mostly beautiful yet often ugly, much at the same time, the film's camerawork is completely evocative of it's main character; this is most obvious in the film's use of focus. Constantly dropping out of focus, many critics have apparently decided that this is definitive proof of the film being "technically deficient". (Laura Kern) What I'm arguing here is in fact the complete opposite: the film is most decidedly enhanced by this aspect of it's cinematography. Yes, much of the film goes out of focus. But what focus does it's protagonist's (Eléonore) life have? She wanders around stealing, not stealing, looking through purses, and on and on. This is clearly a proficient use of technique, just not a conventional one.
-.
I've decidely lost what little writing proficiency I once had, otherwise, I assure you (me), I would write endless amount of my usual bullshit about this remarkable film.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Noor / Danzak
What an interesting evening.
After watching a handful of thoroughly mediocre shorts, I somehow was lucky enough to stumble on to these two works.
Noor.
In a world without Danzak, Noor would have been the standout of the night. In a world with Danzak, Noor is still a beautiful effort. The relationship defined (and arguably redefined) in the film is held together beautifully. An interesting political message and some beautiful imagery; I also thought the story unfolded very well and stood to represent some of the darker aspects of maturing into an adult and challenging the perceptions of the world around you.
Danzak.
In a world without Noor, Danzak would have kicked my ass significantly harder than it did. In a world with Noor, Danzak still kicked my ass pretty damned hard. I can't believe some of the themes running subtly throughout the course of this film; I see the entire spectrum of humanity in this film. Death, love, birth, the argument between generations, traditions vs a new age, and so on. It seemed awkward at first and I couldn't get the feel for it until about halfway through, but once it clicked it clicked with authority.
After watching a handful of thoroughly mediocre shorts, I somehow was lucky enough to stumble on to these two works.
Noor.
In a world without Danzak, Noor would have been the standout of the night. In a world with Danzak, Noor is still a beautiful effort. The relationship defined (and arguably redefined) in the film is held together beautifully. An interesting political message and some beautiful imagery; I also thought the story unfolded very well and stood to represent some of the darker aspects of maturing into an adult and challenging the perceptions of the world around you.
Danzak.
In a world without Noor, Danzak would have kicked my ass significantly harder than it did. In a world with Noor, Danzak still kicked my ass pretty damned hard. I can't believe some of the themes running subtly throughout the course of this film; I see the entire spectrum of humanity in this film. Death, love, birth, the argument between generations, traditions vs a new age, and so on. It seemed awkward at first and I couldn't get the feel for it until about halfway through, but once it clicked it clicked with authority.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Flight of the Red Balloon (2007)
In the middle of the summer, in the heat of the "Incredible" Hulk, in the hustle and bustle of Kung Fu Panda, a beacon of hope floats through...
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Eric Rohmer's Six Moral Tales
Date: 04/08/08
DVD
And thus, a departure. Two films into the Six Moral Tales. I find myself unresponsive to the format yet highly reacted by the content.
DVD
And thus, a departure. Two films into the Six Moral Tales. I find myself unresponsive to the format yet highly reacted by the content.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Helvetica (2007)
Date: 02/25/08
DVD
http://www.imdb.com/tt0847817/
Helvetica.
For one moment, put yourself into the shoes of Gary Hustwit. You're a graphic designer but you've decided to put together a modern documentary on the one of the most widely used fonts in the world, Helvetica. Where do you start? More importantly, where do you go? Somehow, Gary Hustwit managed to find compelling answers to these questions to present us a documentary that not only gives an overall glimpse of what Helvetica is and represents, but also feelings of inspiration that the world is ours to conquer, even if by type.
The structure of the film is laid out quite nicely; we start with an introduction offering us a glimpse of whats to come from the rest of the film, a glimpse of the interview subjects we'll see later and we move from there into an interview with a designer who loves Helvetica. This is the perfect way to pique our interest in the film and keep us fascinated throughout, even when other world renowned designers start trashing the typeface. Through all of this the audience gets a real glimpse into what Helvetica is, and I think that the film is suggesting that this typeface is what we make of it. The film casually points out that when American Airlines uses Helvetica it's distinguished and American, yet when American Apparel uses Helvetica it's chic and modern. Gary Hustwit's documentary is much like this in it's own right; distinguished with it's presentation of the history of the font and modern in it's analysis of it.
Another aspect of Helvetica that's firing on all cylinders is the aesthetics. The camerawork is beautiful and the music the perfect counterpart to the camerawork and editing. Perfectly put together montages help give us a glimpse into how widespread the usage of Helvetica is while keeping us engaged. The film is most enhanced however, by it's subjects. The film perfectly and quietly transitions from interviews with the masters of graphic design to the students that read about them in their textbooks in school and go so far as to mention them by name. This lends an heir of legitimacy to the film, as well as making all of the opinions stand out even more.
Ultimately Helvetica works as well as it does because it somehow manages to give us hope and inspiration by the time the credits come on screen; the world is ours to design. Helvetica may be the typeface of Socialism or it may be the epitome of graphic design, either way the point is moot, Helvetica is one of sharpest tools we have yet it's ultimate brilliance is in how we employ it.
DVD
http://www.imdb.com/tt0847817/
Helvetica.
For one moment, put yourself into the shoes of Gary Hustwit. You're a graphic designer but you've decided to put together a modern documentary on the one of the most widely used fonts in the world, Helvetica. Where do you start? More importantly, where do you go? Somehow, Gary Hustwit managed to find compelling answers to these questions to present us a documentary that not only gives an overall glimpse of what Helvetica is and represents, but also feelings of inspiration that the world is ours to conquer, even if by type.
The structure of the film is laid out quite nicely; we start with an introduction offering us a glimpse of whats to come from the rest of the film, a glimpse of the interview subjects we'll see later and we move from there into an interview with a designer who loves Helvetica. This is the perfect way to pique our interest in the film and keep us fascinated throughout, even when other world renowned designers start trashing the typeface. Through all of this the audience gets a real glimpse into what Helvetica is, and I think that the film is suggesting that this typeface is what we make of it. The film casually points out that when American Airlines uses Helvetica it's distinguished and American, yet when American Apparel uses Helvetica it's chic and modern. Gary Hustwit's documentary is much like this in it's own right; distinguished with it's presentation of the history of the font and modern in it's analysis of it.
Another aspect of Helvetica that's firing on all cylinders is the aesthetics. The camerawork is beautiful and the music the perfect counterpart to the camerawork and editing. Perfectly put together montages help give us a glimpse into how widespread the usage of Helvetica is while keeping us engaged. The film is most enhanced however, by it's subjects. The film perfectly and quietly transitions from interviews with the masters of graphic design to the students that read about them in their textbooks in school and go so far as to mention them by name. This lends an heir of legitimacy to the film, as well as making all of the opinions stand out even more.
Ultimately Helvetica works as well as it does because it somehow manages to give us hope and inspiration by the time the credits come on screen; the world is ours to design. Helvetica may be the typeface of Socialism or it may be the epitome of graphic design, either way the point is moot, Helvetica is one of sharpest tools we have yet it's ultimate brilliance is in how we employ it.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Stranger than Paradise (1984)
Date: 02/10/08
DVD
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088184/
Stranger than Paradise.
Stranger than Paradise is a remarkable film that belongs in no time that I personally can imagine; the film manages to both be ahead of it's time (as well as today's time, as far as I'm concerned) and yet still behind it in style. The editing, the story, the conclusion are all very modern by today's standards while the black and white cinematography, the soundtrack, and film-making are all very classical. These elements combine to make Stranger than Paradise an incredible experience unlike most others you'll ever have in the cinema.
The characters themselves are interesting in their own rights. We have Willie, who came to America well before the film starts and has done his very best to hide his Hungarian roots; we have Eva, who comes to America for the first time in the film and like Willie is trying to escape from her original roots; and finally we have Eddie, whom is Willie's best friend and seemingly a 'pure' American (which the film interestingly pokes fun at, with Willie proclaiming that he is as much of an American as Eddie is). Having a European background, I was also quite smitten with the Aunt Loddie character, who seemed to embody the stereotypes of European aunts in all the right ways. The ways in which the characters interplay is endlessly fascinating; Eddie very obviously has a crush on Eva, but who knows what Eva's thinking? Does Willie care? Questions like this are left open to the viewer to interpret, as the film abandons any notion of Hollywood structure to let the characters play their story out on the screen in their own ways.
Another aspect of the film that departed from Hollywood conventions was the editing; choosing to forgo any formal editing techniques, Jarmusch instead plays the film in a series of one take shots that fade from black when they begin and fade back to black when they end. This creates a distinct rhythm which at times felt almost like a pulse of sorts. Occasionally, music will transcend the space between scenes but it usually would finish as the scene was starting up. This technique definitely added another layer to the film for me, as did the cinematography. The cinematography was particularly interesting to me because no matter how drab the locations, no matter how dull the subject (Willie's NY apartment for example), every shot was composed well and added something to the scene, which in the end should probably be the goal of all good cinematography.
All of the elements of Stranger than Paradise are firing on full cylinders. The film may at first deceive audiences with its inherent minimalism and its apparent lack of structure, but its from this very minimalism and lack of structure that structure itself is born and the film earns its heart and soul. The minimalism is the perfect counterpart to the characters, whom are the perfect counterpart to the story they play out so wonderfully.
DVD
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088184/
Stranger than Paradise.
Stranger than Paradise is a remarkable film that belongs in no time that I personally can imagine; the film manages to both be ahead of it's time (as well as today's time, as far as I'm concerned) and yet still behind it in style. The editing, the story, the conclusion are all very modern by today's standards while the black and white cinematography, the soundtrack, and film-making are all very classical. These elements combine to make Stranger than Paradise an incredible experience unlike most others you'll ever have in the cinema.
The characters themselves are interesting in their own rights. We have Willie, who came to America well before the film starts and has done his very best to hide his Hungarian roots; we have Eva, who comes to America for the first time in the film and like Willie is trying to escape from her original roots; and finally we have Eddie, whom is Willie's best friend and seemingly a 'pure' American (which the film interestingly pokes fun at, with Willie proclaiming that he is as much of an American as Eddie is). Having a European background, I was also quite smitten with the Aunt Loddie character, who seemed to embody the stereotypes of European aunts in all the right ways. The ways in which the characters interplay is endlessly fascinating; Eddie very obviously has a crush on Eva, but who knows what Eva's thinking? Does Willie care? Questions like this are left open to the viewer to interpret, as the film abandons any notion of Hollywood structure to let the characters play their story out on the screen in their own ways.
Another aspect of the film that departed from Hollywood conventions was the editing; choosing to forgo any formal editing techniques, Jarmusch instead plays the film in a series of one take shots that fade from black when they begin and fade back to black when they end. This creates a distinct rhythm which at times felt almost like a pulse of sorts. Occasionally, music will transcend the space between scenes but it usually would finish as the scene was starting up. This technique definitely added another layer to the film for me, as did the cinematography. The cinematography was particularly interesting to me because no matter how drab the locations, no matter how dull the subject (Willie's NY apartment for example), every shot was composed well and added something to the scene, which in the end should probably be the goal of all good cinematography.
All of the elements of Stranger than Paradise are firing on full cylinders. The film may at first deceive audiences with its inherent minimalism and its apparent lack of structure, but its from this very minimalism and lack of structure that structure itself is born and the film earns its heart and soul. The minimalism is the perfect counterpart to the characters, whom are the perfect counterpart to the story they play out so wonderfully.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Atonement (2007)
Date: 02/02/08
AMC Grapevine Mills
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0783233/
Atonement.
Film of the year?
Atonement was a film I was definitely not expecting; its Academy Award nominations along with it's glowing praise from various circles was the main reason I decided to see the film, which definitely seemed like it was going to be your run-of-the-mill-period-piece-chick-flick. Luckily, my fears were completely unsubstantiated as the film turned out to be one of remarkable clarity, vision, and beauty.
The film first sucks you with it's commendable cinematography. Director Joe Wright and DP Seamus McGarvey beautifully captured some incredible settings in ways that perfectly accentuate the films undertones and themes. This imagery is enhanced significantly by the editing, which also really sucked me into the film. Putting on hold some of the more obvious examples of the editing, one can't help but admire the pacing of the film. The film flows at a consistent pace, one which may not please modern audiences with short attention spans but perfectly serves the film. The film at no point feels boring, slow, or overlong, instead finding that perfect groove films so rarely find anymore between keeping us engrossed in the plot, keeping us entertained, and giving us time to process what we're seeing. Moving past the pacing, the editing also shines with some distinct editing choices that significantly affect the film. Take for example, the scene with Cecilia and Robbie at the fountain that sets the plot into motion. We first see the entire scene silently through the eyes of young Briony, watched through the window. The silence keeps both Briony and the audience guessing as to what's actually happening, but it becomes apparent rather quickly that Briony is extremely hurt by what she's seeing, even though she doesn't fully understand it. Immediately following Briony's viewing of the events, we see the exact same scene (transitioned into wonderfully with a bee and a closing window) again, but from the perspective of Cecilia and Robbie. By showing us the exact same scene again, just from a different perspective, it not only completely changes the scene in the audiences eye but also emphasizes the importance of the scene, which turns out to be one of the most pivotal scenes in the film. Tight editing like this serves to not only enhance viewers understanding of the events in the film but to also add another layer of depth to both the technical aspects of the filmmaking as well as the intricacies of the plot and characters.
Moving past the imagery and editing, one can't help but focus on the rather tragic story that unfolds. I found yet another one of the films greatest strengths to be how well the story defied what we've come to describe as normal conventions to tell the story it wanted to tell, in the way it wanted to tell it. I found the finale to be admirable as well, choosing not to take the story book route that one is expecting to see but instead ending with a meaningful look into the ideas of storytelling, truth, nature, guilt, life, and love. To call the ending beautiful would be a meiotic statement of highest (or lowest, I suppose) order. To me, the ending challenged conventional notions of storytelling by taking a different route to help express its core themes and sentiments. Some may call it a deception, which it is to slight degree, but given the rest of the film I thought the conclusion fell into place beautifully.
With tight editing, beautiful imagery, fairly strong performances, a haunting score, and a tragically beautiful story, Atonement is one of the better films I've seen in sometime. Despite my initial reservations, I walked out of the theatre nothing short of moved and if only for that reason, the cast and crew deserve as much praise as they can garner.
----
So, given the films phenomenal use of technique and story should it win best picture? I think the answer is: who really cares? I mean really? While the title may add some prestige and boost short term box office receipts for the film, it by no means is an indicator of how good or bad a film is. Crash won for best picture in 2004. Raging Bull lost best picture in 1980, I think that says everything you'll ever need to know about the Academy Awards.
AMC Grapevine Mills
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0783233/
Atonement.
Film of the year?
Atonement was a film I was definitely not expecting; its Academy Award nominations along with it's glowing praise from various circles was the main reason I decided to see the film, which definitely seemed like it was going to be your run-of-the-mill-period-piece-chick-flick. Luckily, my fears were completely unsubstantiated as the film turned out to be one of remarkable clarity, vision, and beauty.
The film first sucks you with it's commendable cinematography. Director Joe Wright and DP Seamus McGarvey beautifully captured some incredible settings in ways that perfectly accentuate the films undertones and themes. This imagery is enhanced significantly by the editing, which also really sucked me into the film. Putting on hold some of the more obvious examples of the editing, one can't help but admire the pacing of the film. The film flows at a consistent pace, one which may not please modern audiences with short attention spans but perfectly serves the film. The film at no point feels boring, slow, or overlong, instead finding that perfect groove films so rarely find anymore between keeping us engrossed in the plot, keeping us entertained, and giving us time to process what we're seeing. Moving past the pacing, the editing also shines with some distinct editing choices that significantly affect the film. Take for example, the scene with Cecilia and Robbie at the fountain that sets the plot into motion. We first see the entire scene silently through the eyes of young Briony, watched through the window. The silence keeps both Briony and the audience guessing as to what's actually happening, but it becomes apparent rather quickly that Briony is extremely hurt by what she's seeing, even though she doesn't fully understand it. Immediately following Briony's viewing of the events, we see the exact same scene (transitioned into wonderfully with a bee and a closing window) again, but from the perspective of Cecilia and Robbie. By showing us the exact same scene again, just from a different perspective, it not only completely changes the scene in the audiences eye but also emphasizes the importance of the scene, which turns out to be one of the most pivotal scenes in the film. Tight editing like this serves to not only enhance viewers understanding of the events in the film but to also add another layer of depth to both the technical aspects of the filmmaking as well as the intricacies of the plot and characters.
Moving past the imagery and editing, one can't help but focus on the rather tragic story that unfolds. I found yet another one of the films greatest strengths to be how well the story defied what we've come to describe as normal conventions to tell the story it wanted to tell, in the way it wanted to tell it. I found the finale to be admirable as well, choosing not to take the story book route that one is expecting to see but instead ending with a meaningful look into the ideas of storytelling, truth, nature, guilt, life, and love. To call the ending beautiful would be a meiotic statement of highest (or lowest, I suppose) order. To me, the ending challenged conventional notions of storytelling by taking a different route to help express its core themes and sentiments. Some may call it a deception, which it is to slight degree, but given the rest of the film I thought the conclusion fell into place beautifully.
With tight editing, beautiful imagery, fairly strong performances, a haunting score, and a tragically beautiful story, Atonement is one of the better films I've seen in sometime. Despite my initial reservations, I walked out of the theatre nothing short of moved and if only for that reason, the cast and crew deserve as much praise as they can garner.
----
So, given the films phenomenal use of technique and story should it win best picture? I think the answer is: who really cares? I mean really? While the title may add some prestige and boost short term box office receipts for the film, it by no means is an indicator of how good or bad a film is. Crash won for best picture in 2004. Raging Bull lost best picture in 1980, I think that says everything you'll ever need to know about the Academy Awards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)