Scribe & Green on the BIG screen

There are far too many people out there writing “reviews of movie-films & articles about them with absolutely no clue what the hell they’re talking about." Here are 2 more of them! (Well, one of us knows what the h___ we're talking about, but we'll leave it up to you to decide who that is...) Ultimately, can two people as opposite as Scribe and Green agree on anything?? That's where the fun begins. Won't you join us? (Every now and then we'll add a guest review, just for kicks.)

Sunday, February 22, 2009

No Country for Old Men

We thought it appropriate to review last year's Academy Award winner for Best Picture tonight - Oscar Night. Maybe this will become habit forming; reviewing the previous years Best Picture winner on Oscar night. Who knows.

GREEN'S TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN REVIEW:

This movie could alternatively be called “An Ode to Random Senseless Violence” or perhaps “I’m Gonna Git You Sucka, part XVII”

What would you do if you stumbled on a bloody crime scene in the middle of the Texas wasteland, with no one seemingly around for miles? Would you take the two million dollars if you knew nobody was a lookin’?

I probably would have, and so would you.

First thing I would have done was get a duffel bag or something else to carry the cash in. And I certainly would have made a more thorough inspection for homing devices at the earliest opportunity, to make sure I could make a clean get away. Obviously, with that kind of coin just laying around, someone’s going to come looking for it. And they’re bound to be not very nice if they catch you with what clearly doesn’t belong to you.

That air gun thing that Chigurh used was certainly a neat toy, both to kill people with and to get into locked rooms quickly.

In any case, Javier Bardem was truly creepy from the beginning, as Anton Chigurh, and deservedly won Best Supporting Actor. I don’t think this movie was Best Picture or Best Director worthy though. I thought the screenplay was good, but was it deserving of the Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar? Questionable call there, I think. Tommy Lee Jones, as usual, was excellent but in a understated way. I was annoyed at the whole hotel/pool sequence. Seemed like something was missing, without knowing exactly what. That is extremely annoying. I, unlike Scribe, did not read McCarthy's novel, so did not know exactly what the missing scene should have been, but obviously it was pivotal to how the film ended. Perhaps they'll include this scene on the three disc special edition, due in April.

Still, there was something compelling about the story that kept me watching. Did I want to see Chigurh get caught or did I want to see him get away? Did he kill Llewelyn's wife or did she get the coin flip right, like the storekeeper near the beginning of the movie apparently did, and walk away?

I don't think this will ever be the instant classic that the DVD case proclaims it to be, but it is a must see movie, at least once.


*** out of *****

SCRIBE'S THE COIN BROUGHT ME HERE REVIEW:

Cormac McCarthy’s writing style is an acquired taste. It is at once immediate, vibrant and pretentious. Eschewing normal structure such as quotation marks and italics, he forces his readers to pay attention by making it less clear who is speaking at any given time. Eventually, if one can pick up on the rhythm, one can follow his work.

When the Cohen Brothers decided to adapt his novel, “No Country for Old Men,” it was obvious the right guys had the job. Joel and Ethan Cohen were huge fans of the novel and looking to do something more along the lines of their more serious efforts such as "Miller’s Crossing" and "Blood Simple."

Starring the severely underrated Josh Brolin and a slightly miscast Tommy Lee Jones, this is a marked departure in tone for the Cohen’s more recent films. The mood is stark and desolate, like the American southwest in which the story takes place, and the characters are subtle to the point of nearly vanishing into the sunset.

Except Anton Chigurh, of course. An actor can only be as brilliant as the source material. That’s why, no matter how hard he worked on the role, Heath Ledger’s Joker was just passable. But a writer of McCarthy’s caliber can create an enduring psychopath whose very existence seems elemental, a product of natural selection. He is not a person so much as he is a force to be avoided.

The Cohen Brothers wisely follow the novel as closely as possible. The direction is evokes 1980 Western America very well and the actors inhabit their roles in ways rarely seen in mainstream Hollywood productions.

If anything causes the film to falter, it is the odd decision the filmmakers make in the third act. I read the novel. Like most who have read the novel before seeing a movie, I was following along pretty closely until I had to go to the bathroom. When I came back the film was winding down. I asked my friend what I’d missed and he told me. Baffled, I wondered how much had been omitted and didn’t find out until recently when I watched it on DVD.

An entire important sequence was removed from the film, causing a rather jarring experience toward the end. I won’t go into great detail for those who haven’t read it or seen it, but once Brolin’s character meets up with the girl at the hotel, there’s a whole minor sub-plot that results before the big climax. With that gone, the film takes a bizarre leap from gripping and riveting to disconcerting.

Still, that one point doesn’t prevent this from being a great movie. It’s rare that we complain about a movie needing more of what made it great.


****½ out of *****

Labels: ,

Friday, February 13, 2009

Superman Returns

SCRIBE'S KEEP THE WIG REVIEW:

Although the title of this film says it all, there is an even better one the producers could have used: “The Real Superman III.”

Fifteen years after the second and only other great Superman film of Christopher Reeves’ run as the Man of Steel, something truly wonderful had happened. The horrible and bitter taste of the uneven third film and abysmal fourth one have been rinsed out with a taste of something we haven’t seen since the original: A comic book movie elevated to fine art.

Exhibiting utmost respect for the original films, former X-Men director Bryan Singer has turned his considerable talents on the super-hero prototype with eye-popping results. It’s almost as if original director Richard Donner, later of Lethal Weapon fame, has been reborn while still alive. And what poetic justice that would be.

Although it’s common nowadays, shooting a film and its sequel back-to-back was practically unheard of in the late Seventies. But producers Alexander and Ilya Salkind were so convinced of the impending success of Superman: The Movie that they had Donner start shooting part II of Mario Puzo’s gigantic script which would become Superman II. For years, the Salkinds denied that Donner had shot more than a few scenes of the sequel before throwing a hissy fit and stalking off the set in disgust. It was then, they claimed, that they sought out British director Richard Lester who directed the horrid Help! For the Beatles to take over the helm and who directed the third one.

But the Salkinds were full of shit. It has been revealed that at least 60% of the film was shot by Donner before they canned him for a cheaper director who would move into a more campy direction. Fortunately for us true fans, Donner’s imprint is so firmly established in Superman II that even the goofy small town scenes and the re-shot Eiffel Tower and Niagara Falls sequences don’t detract from a movie almost equal to its predecessor. How this was achieved with a shitty cover band version of the incredible John Williams score and the absence of a protesting Gene Hackman whose scenes were thankfully shot before Donner’s departure is a testament to the magic of movies.

For those who don’t know, remember or care, Superman gave up his powers in part II to get to “know” Lois Lane in the Biblical sense. Unfortunately, he did this right as three formerly imprisoned criminals from his home-world of Krypton arrived to take over our planet. He had no choice but to beg for his powers back, but at least he got laid first.

Singer’s sequel is the next chapter in Superman’s life following the events of that film. Some time after losing Lois in favor of regaining his powers, scientists claimed they’d discovered the location of Krypton in space. Naturally, old Kal-el needed to go see his roots. Five years later, he returns to a world that had learned to live without him. Or has it?

Building on that premise, Singer beautifully renders stunning imagery and weaves it into an actual storyline involving accessible characters we care about.

Yes, Superman has returned, but so has Lex Luthor, this time portrayed by Kevin Spacey, who somehow resembles Hackman without looking anything like him. Spacey’s Luthor is less fun-loving and more evil than the Lex we met in the original films. Sure Hackman’s version had no trouble killing millions of people for real estate, but he never delighted in it like this one does. This Lex has spent five years in prison thanks to Superman, and his desire for revenge can only be sated by world domination and massive destruction, which will come thanks to technology from Krypton.

Meanwhile, Supes is conflicted on every level. He’s returned to a world that doesn’t seem to miss him, where his love interest has given birth to a child who may or may not have some super qualities, and where Lois finally won that Pulitzer for an article on why the world no longer needs Superman.

Newcomer Brandon Routh turns out to be a brilliant choice for the role of the man in tights. Instead of trying to put his own spin on the role the way Reeve did, he gratefully plays it in a similar fashion, at times sounding so much like his predecessor that it is frightening.

Although the scenes of heroism are incredible, it’s the less action-packed imagery that really makes this a work of art. The scene where Superman literally hovers over the entire world, nearly god-like, and listens to all of us until he zeroes in on someone who is in trouble is breathtaking. So is the scene where he takes Lois flying as in the original film, only this time she has no idea she’s doing it until she’s standing over the city. And lest I forget, the respectful nod to Marlon Brando’s defining portrayal of Superman’s father Jor-El as audio drops are sprinkled throughout the film as a way of linking the three movies together.

Also, instead of hammering the fact that this is a direct sequel to the second movie over our heads, Singer adds little touches of subtlety to the dialogue. For instance, when Luthor’s girlfriend comments that he acts like he’s been to the Fortress of Solitude before, the look on his face tells us he has without a single word. Also, when Lois is forced to write a new Superman article, she says, “I’ve already done Superman!” before realizing what she’s saying.

Routh’s portrayal of Clark Kent is a bit different from Reeve’s. For one thing, the nerdy Clark of the pre-80’s is gone both in comic books and on TV, so now we get a slightly clumsy Clark who looks more socially uncomfortable than like a klutz.

As a fan of Superman in all formats, I have been waiting for a film that could make me feel the way the original did. This one surpassed by fondest wishes in every way imaginable.


****½ OUT OF *****

GREEN’S “YOU‘RE NOT SEEING THE BIG PICTURE, MS. LANE” REVIEW:

After disappearing for five years trying to reconnect with his origins, Superman/Clark Kent (Brandon Routh) comes back to Metropolis, The Daily Planet and Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth). Except this time Lois has a fiancee’, a son and has moved on with her life, winning a Pulitzer Prize in the process. She tries to tell herself that she’s over her infatuation for Superman, but it’s obvious she’s lying to herself. Oh, by the way, Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) is out of prison and stirring up trouble again.

When this movie came out in 2006 I stayed away from it purposefully because I’m a traditionalist. I prefer the Christopher Reeve version of Superman from 1979-1982 and I didn’t think that this film could live up to the first two installments. (I only bought it recently because I found the widescreen single disc version in the irresistible $5 DVD bin at Wal-Mart.)

Turns out that’s where I was wrong.

Director Bryan Singer’s vision for this version of Superman takes the story in a new direction while respectably paying homage to its predecessors, Superman I and II (pretending that III an IV do not exist, generally a wise idea.) Superman Returns links itself to the original 1979 film right out of the box, with the same superb original score by John Williams, the cool opening credits and with the use of archival voice tracks of Marlon Brando as Jor-El strategically added at key spots in the film. There are even situations and lines in this film that tie in to the original but they are not obvious if you aren‘t familiar with the earlier movies.

Brandon Routh, who I had never heard of before this, ably fills Superman’s costume and even pays tribute to Christopher Reeve’s Superman/Clark Kent, wearing his hair the same way and emulating his voice and mannerisms, instead of doing it his way. Kevin Spacey pulls off a decent take as Lex Luthor; not quite as good as Gene Hackman was in the role, though. Like the original Superman films, I thought the actress chosen for Lois Lane was the weakest link. I wasn’t thrilled with Margot Kidder, who I thought was too whiney and not nearly attractive enough, and I’m not entirely sold on Kate Bosworth, either. Though she offers way more eye candy than did Kidder. Like it or not, it’s her role now as long as she wants to do it. Frank Langella is strong in the role of Perry White, taking over for Jackie Cooper.

The one part I didn’t like about this movie concerned Lois Lane’s son. I thought it was a questionable add in and really doesn’t seem to fit in with the timeline established in the original films, especially since Superman Returns tries so hard to tie in with the Reeve films in most other respects. Yes, I realize that Superman and Lois had sex in Superman II. However, it seems to me that later, when Lois’ memory of Clark as Superman is erased with the kiss (therefore erasing any memory of being intimate with him or becoming pregnant with his child), and having the no nonsense personality that a star reporter needs, wouldn’t be able to come to grips with a mysterious, out-of-nowhere pregnancy. Plus, we are not told how long it is between the end of Superman II and when the scientists announce that they think they've found Krypton. All we know is that it's five years after that announcement that this film begins.

The end credits do add a nice touch; dedicating the film to Christopher and Dana Reeve. The tragedy here is that Christopher Reeve didn’t live long enough to give his opinion on, or input to, this version of Superman. Certainly they would have asked him. Somehow though, I think Reeve would have heartily approved of the results.

No shame here. Overall this film is a worthy successor in the Superman franchise of films.


**** out of *****

Just for fun, I asked my nephew to add his thoughts on the movie, since this was his first exposure to Superman on film.

RUSTY NAIL'S "I WOULD TRADE 300,000 COCONUTS AND EVERY OUNCE OF YOUR BLOOD FOR A QUART OF GASOLINE" GUEST REVIEW:

Superman (Brandon Routh) has not set foot on Earth once in the past five years. But now he's back! He left to check on his native planet only to find ruins. In the five years of his absence alot has changed. Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth) is married and now has a son. She has written articles for the Daily Planet on why the world doesn't need Superman. But now that he's returned, it appears that the world does need Superman. Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) has a plan to create his own continent, that would wipe out the eastern half of the United States. Can Superman save the day once again? Or will Lex Luthor have a continent under his rule? To find out you must watch the fifth installment in a widely acclaimed series.

First off, I've never even heard of Brandon Routh before. However, I think he played the part of Superman fairly well. He certainly looked the part. Its not easy to look cool flying with your arms outstretched like Superman. Not to mention the size of the shoes he had to fill. I have always been a Kevin Spacey fan. I wouldn't say he was the ultimate bad guy or anything in this role, but I was pleased with his performance. Not much to say about Lois Lane except that she could have been slightly more attractive.

Superb special effects. Now, I, having not seen any of the previous Superman films cannot speak for the first four. But I'm pretty sure these are the best in the series. All in all this was a pretty entertaining movie. A little long, but I hardly noticed. Unfortunately my surround sound was down for this film, so I can't really comment on the sound. Will they make a Superman Six?


***½ out of *****

Labels:

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Somewhere in Time

SCRIBE'S YOU DON'T KNOW ME BUT YOU WILL REVIEW:

Hard to believe, but it’s nearly thirty years since “Somewhere in Time” was released.
So many women love this movie I am often caught off-guard when I meet one who has never heard of it. Still, this not what is so eloquently referred to these days as a “chick flick.”

Featuring a script by master storyteller Richard Matheson who also gave us numerous brilliant Twilight Zone episodes along with the novels upon which I Am Legend, Stir of Echoes and What Dreams May Come were based on, this is as much a novel about people in a universe they wish to control as it is love.

When young playwright Richard Collier (Reeve) premieres his first play in the early 1970’s, a mysterious elderly woman approaches him and hands him a stop watch. “Come back to me,” she says and turns away as tears sting her face. Collier has a moment to wonder at her identity before the congratulations pull him away.

Cut to an older Richard in 1980, now a successful playwright and emotional wreck. His love life is in a shambles and his career isn’t fulfilling. It doesn’t take a shrink to see he has a hole right through his center. After a bad break-up, Richard decides to take a vacation and drives from Chicago to the Grand Hotel on Mackinac (pronounced “Mackinaw”) Island. If you’ve ever been there, you know the island is a huge step backwards in time to somewhere around the turn of the Twentieth century. In real life, no cars are permitted there but the film crew was allowed to place a few in the background and have Reeve drive around.

The film makes it obvious that Collier feels compelled to stay at this hotel and soon we find out why. A photo in a room filled with early Twentieth Century memorabilia (a room that didn’t exist at the hotel until after the film was made and looks exactly like what you see) displays a picture of a young, hot Jane Seymour in 1912 when she was at the grand Hotel as an actress on stage.

Collier’s obsession with this photo is the beginning of what ultimately resulted in his visitation at the premiere 9 years ago but he can’t help himself. Soon he’s researching the actress Elise McKenna and discovering that he may just have met her…in 1912.

"Somewhere in Time" is a film in the tradition of European romances laced with tragic undertones and fatalistic situations. Sadly, it was released during a time when audiences either wanted gritty realism or blockbusters. The subtlety of this film and its performances did not connect with the thrill hungry audiences of 1980. Even some critics weren’t kind. However the rise of cable TV changed all that. Suddenly this little gem was rediscovered and created a whole generation of fans.

"Somewhere in Time" has become something of a phenomenon. The Grand Hotel actually holds an annual formal convention where people come from all over the world to meet the surviving stars of the film. Anywhere you go on the island you can find copies of Matheson’s very different novel and a fan’s sequel to the movie in book form. Some people love the phenomenon; some strive to be different by making sure you know seeing Jane Seymour in bike shorts is no big deal. It has become a cottage industry.

The film itself features wonderful and understated performances by Reeve and Seymour, but Christopher Plummer is the scene-stealer as Elise McKenna’s benefactor who may know more than he lets on. The fact that Mackinac Island hasn’t changed since the 1800’s lends a much-needed authenticity to the film and the characters. The musical score by John Barry is hauntingly beautiful, the perfect companion to a tale that seems to be about true love but hints at tragedy on the horizon.

While female audiences tend to connect to to the love story, there is much more to the film. The time travel theories alone are fascinating enough to sustain the film’s premise.

Be forewarned, however. This is not a cookie cutter happy ending Hollywood production. I don’t advise watching the film if you’re depressed. I’ve made that mistake and was despondent for days. But if you’re in the right frame of mind and looking for something that has several dimensions to it, this film is required viewing. It’s also a film one needs to watch more than once to truly appreciate it. This is coming from someone who absolutely hated it at one time. I was wrong.


**** out of *****

GREEN’S THAT’S NOT IN THE SCRIPT REVIEW:

After the close of his first play, in May 1972, young playwright Richard Collier (Christopher Reeve) is approached by a mysterious old woman who hands him a gold pocket watch and pleads him to “come back to me.” She turns around and walks away, leaving Collier baffled. Flash forward eight years, to 1980...

Scribe does a good job describing the basic story, so I won’t repeat it again.

I had never heard of this movie until about three or four months ago when I noticed on the DVD sale rack at Borders. I know what you’re thinking: 'There was a sale at Borders? Wow!' Anyway, I picked up the DVD to examine it, noticing that Christopher Reeve and Jane Seymour were on the cover. I read the back of the case and the description looked interesting, so I bought it. I’ve since watched the movie twice, including last night as a refresher for writing this review.

Superman and Superman II were great movies in which Reeve did a phenomenal job. Come to find out that this is the project Reeve took up in between donning the red cape and blue tights. Such a shame that Reeve’s career and life were cut short due to complications from his riding accident. I’ve been a fan of Jane Seymour’s acting since I saw her in a bit part in the original Battlestar Galactica television series. Christopher Plummer is indeed a scene stealer as W.F. Robinson, the guardian/manager of young actress Elise McKenna. Both Reeve and Seymour give subtly brilliant performances in contrast to Plummer’s character who reminds me of a bull in a china shop. Seymour, dressed in period attire, reminds me of a china doll. Coincidence? I don’t think so.

When the author of the source material also writes the screenplay, the story itself is usually stronger because of it, since the author knows his story better than anyone. Such is the case here. John Barry's musical score is tasteful and adds depth to the film.

I’ve always had a fondness for movies that deal with the concept of time travel. The premise that you can achieve it by self-hypnosis, with out the aid of any contrived "time machine," is a novel concept that has to be played perfectly or it won’t seem plausible. But it works here - brilliantly. Add to the fact that you’ve got a powerful, timeless, yet tragic love story and you’re looking at a very unique combination of genres.

The collector’s edition DVD I watched has an excellent documentary on the making of the film, which includes interviews from cast and crew.

If you haven’t watched this film in a long time, you should. If you’ve never seen this film at all, you should. This is a wonderful movie, which can be had for less than $10.


****½ out of *****

Labels: