The Artist

Deb 7 Me 7

This is a classic entertainment movie about classic entertainment and it’s evolution. The film pays tribute to the great movies and actors of the past, with many visual and story references to movies like Sunset Boulevard and Citizen Kane but mostly Singing in the Rain. It looked to me like the film was shot in color and then converted to black and white, I say this because the scenes seemed to be washed in light, much the way you shoot for color. Typically, classically, you light more dramatically for b/w because all you have is dark and light, so they made the most of light and shadows. Not so here, where many of the scenes were sort of clinically white. Actors were asked to be over-the-top a lot of the time, much the way acting was done in the old days, but everyone was likeable and did a swell job. I didn’t recognize a lot the players, Malcolm MacDowell was on screen for thirty seconds but made the poster billing and a new slimmer version of John Goodman did his usual superb job in a major role here. In keeping with the old days the music score played a huge part of telling the story and it made a real contribution here too, I really liked the music’s role. It was a good story, dramatic with lots of comic relief and good attention to detail. Seeing this movie was a fine way to spend the evening.

Melancholia

Deb 5 Me 3

First off, look up the word melancholy; if the idea of watching melancholy for two hours is your idea of a good time, this might be for you. But probably not. Sure there is enough melancholy to fill a ward, but there’s boredom too. Think about that before plopping down your hard earned pay.

All this is disguised by some beautiful and fascinating imagery, but it leads to nothing. And the score, it plays a huge role in the film, from the long Wagnerian slo-mo opening montage to the swells of orchestration throughout the film, punctuated with popular songs, you’re still left in a drab emotional vacuum.

It was rated R for graphic nudity and sexual content and you can dismiss that right away. Sexual content was incidental and distant, and the nudity (I don’t know about it’s being graphic) was there for a few minutes, but it was cold and joyless skin shots. So if you like big music and lots of effects, this might whet your appetite, but if you like some sort of a story with maybe an occasional smile, go somewhere else.

The Descendants

Deb 5 Me 8

I’ve seen a couple film with Clooney, Perfect Storm and the Goats movie, and liked them both. I really liked this one too and he was a big part of the appeal, but again, it’s the kids. Where are they getting these child actors these days? There must be a Tiger Woods type camp or camps worldwide that are turning out these amazing creatures.

So we have a good story, set in a great location with a nice subplot. Overall a dramatic theme with a surprising amount of comic relief, almost enough that you forget it’s a drama. It also looks like it was shot on film. If it was shot in digital, and I think a few scenes were, then digital has arrived.

Deb sometimes has a problem with time compression, that players evolve or grow or transform from one state to another much too quickly; and she felt like that occurred here. I was okay with it, everybody was believable and it was easy to follow. A nice way to spend the evening.

Anonymous

Deb 6 Me 2

Here’s a big disappointment. The premise is that Shakespeare was more of a ghostwriter than genius and the first few minutes provided clear and interesting information about this issue. Then it went into the void of confusing characters, weird time shifts, people who look the same speaking with olde English accents all contribute to a real waste of time. I was completely lost. Talking about with friends later found that I was not alone, but I didn’t even get that there was a bad guy in it. One friend who really liked it and knows quite a bit about those times was apparently in the dark about much of the story too. Now there were a couple people who I could identify on a regular basis, but for every success there were twenty mysterious folks doing things that were beyond explanation. I can’t think of any reason anyone would come away from this movie happy about the time they’d invested.

J. Edgar

Deb 2 Me 0

When will I learn? Mainstream movies just flatline. This movie was as flat as they come. We saw it opening Friday night. There were four other couples. One walked out after twenty minutes, another after forty. We sat it out. At the end, another couple started laughing, “have you ever seen a worse movie?” Yes, I have, but this was pretty dismal.

There were four of us who talked about the movie for a while afterwards. The make-up was a big part of the films failure. The actors were done by someone from Madame Tussauds; they may have looked authentic, but stiff as boards. No one recalled shots where the actors could go from a smile to a frown; they had to be shot in one mode, re-made up and shot again with the next expression. This didn’t allow for a lot of emotional involvement with the story.

Here is an interesting part of history, about a guy who played a big part in our successes and fiascos in investigation, from Lindberg to Lennon. It was a real opportunity to tell an exciting story that covered generations. Instead it was clinical and drab, it might have been correct in many details, but as dull and listless as you could make a film.

The Way

Deb 8 Me 7

This was a surprise out of left field, never heard of it, had zero expectations and sat down in a crowded theater to see The Way. First thing I see I see is that it is produced, directed and written for the screen by Emilio Esteves. This is followed by the cast list where Martin Sheen is the only name I recognize. In the film Sheen plays Esteves father, amazing casting. So from the git-go my antennae is up and I’m thinking this is going to be a “cause” movie, something to promote something on Sheen’s political agenda and will not be very appealing. This feeling haunted me all the way through and sure enough there was the obligatory pro-catholic and pro-life diatribe, slyly played out by other actors, but what the hell, its their movie, they can say what they want. It was indeed about something near to the Sheen/Esteves family heart, but something with a wider and historically significant appeal and generally remarkable.

Without giving too much away it is about the Camino de Santiago and the thousands who make the pilgrimage to the place where St. James’ remains are reputed to be interred. The film focuses on only a few trekkers who were all ably acted, they were rough equivalents of the tin man, scarecrow and lion on the way to Oz, and the off-hand reference to this made it a light coincidence rather than a worn-out formula. It is a long trip through villages scattered along beautiful countrysides. My namesake is Basque and they pay homage to the Basque region in a way that interested me; in fact almost everything they touched on was interesting to me. It was a good movie, a bit overplayed, but they avoided obvious clichés and made some good choices. A not so good choice was shooting in digital rather than film, which left the gorgeous panoramas a bit weak. The biggest issue was the several holes in the story and a lot of un-answered questions (some of them I considered to be key) that left me a bit hollow in an otherwise filling tale.

The Help

Deb 8 Me 8

This one came recommended. I looked at the trailer and it looked to be a horrible movie, filled with giggly southerners and maids making cutesy commentary. Ignore the trailers. This was a pretty darn good movie that dealt with genuine issues in a realistic way. It takes place in Jackson, Mississippi in the days of the civil rights movement. I can’t pretend to know anything about how deeply rooted the southern problem is/was, but the movie shows it with a pretty even hand. Like anyplace, some folks are kind but misguided, others mean and rueful.

Points against the movie are its slow pace, slow as a southern summer. And the main player just wasn’t believable, she didn’t look right to me and her motivations were never quite convincing. It’s a long movie at 137 minutes, the result of the slow pace and just a little too much ground covered.

But in its favor is that it’s a good story. It’s a big story that needs to be remembered all the time. It’s a movie that reminds me of our social shortcomings and wants to make things better. It opens the door for me to rant. The black slaves were freed in the 1860s and it takes a full 100 years for them to get legal equal rights. That was 50 years ago and still our most depressed communities, our worst schools and our jails are filled with black Americans. Sure there are great strides for a few blacks, but this works as a distraction to the thousands who still remain in squalor. This is a story of a few who courageously take the first tentative steps toward resolution of a powerful and deeply entrenched American crisis.

Moneyball

Deb 10 Me 9

This one wasn’t on the list of things to see, but the timing was right and, after all, it’s a baseball movie. Actually it’s a big movie about individual people that uses baseball as a vehicle. It’s written by Aaron Sorkin who always does a lot of homework for his scripts. There are three main people, Brad Pitt, Jonah Hill and Philip Seymour Hoffman and a handful of support people who move the story along. Hoffman is a reliable actor and this Jonah Hill guy seems to have gone to the same school of getting a lot across with the least amount of outward effort. Pitt did a great job. You could almost forget he’s Brad Pitt, but he’s kinda like Clark Gable in that no matter how well he acts you never overlook that he’s a famous actor, and it keeps you (me) from being totally immersed in the film. There are all the ingredients I like, trying to be a better person, trying to improve situations against all odds and a solid human interest story. Add to this some baseball and you got yourself a pretty neat movie. The only real slight against the movie was too much involvement with the ex and the kid. I felt like they were included to create a wider appeal and get a little music in there.

And then there’s baseball. This beautiful game is a perfect allegory for so many facets of life and they give us a bunch of them here, some subtle, some overt, but all on target. Deb is not a baseball fan and she loved it. I am a fan and loved it. I guess it’s just a loveable movie.

Circumstance (Sharayet)

Deb 1 Me 1

This is an over ambitious film that proves to be very boring. As is often the case, there weren’t a lot of people in the theater, but each of them indulged in yawns and fidgeting distractions after the first hour of eternity. It’s an Iranian film, sub-titled poorly and punctuated with indigenous music. We follow the adventures of two young ladies through events that are seldom revisited and somewhat pointless. In their adolescent quest for liberation from the strict cultural confines of Iran they encounter a never ending series of deviants, ignorant authorities, despicable spies and generally un-likeable people.

I was able to identify with some of the girls methods of “breaking out” but it wasn’t enough to justify watching the whole movie. Another thing I came away with was why so many eastern cultures hate America. The whole society, with its primitive roots, has taken the worst of western culture and tried to assimilate it into their lives. The clothes and cars of opulence, the films and music that glorify indulgence are celebrated in nightclubs and backrooms throughout the land. These decadent social ingredients are all interpreted by people who have few social rights and no historical training in self-indulgence. So many elements were presented in the movie that it was hard to digest. After thinking about it for a couple days, parts of it seem palpable, but the fact is that this was WAY too boring and not really worth a second thought.

Hedgehog

Deb 9 Dave 9

Here’s a delightful little French number with sub-titles. There’s not an overwhelming amount of dialog here, so keeping up isn’t an issue. The movie is just so interesting to watch that a lot of yakking isn’t necessary. There’s a little girl and her family and the janitor lady who keeps up the upper crust apartment building in Paris. There’s a trend in movies of having some sort of vehicle for moving from plot to plot, or just recurring and used as a symbol of some sort or another. Think of the paper blowing around in American Beauty or the Feather in Forrest Gump. This one has a good one but is ultimately unresolved and left me a bit hollow.

It’s a slow movie, but it’s the right pace here. The people in it, especially the main lady, are just good to watch, the stuff in the rooms is good to look at and there’s enough story to keep you going throughout. We both really liked the movie and caught some friends on the way out who REALLY liked it. It’s just good old fashioned human interest with a bit of a moral to the story and was a valid chunk of film making.

Gainsbourg: A Heroic Life

Deb 7 Me 3

This is a biopic of a fellow called Serge Gainsbourg. We follow him from pretentious youth through his adulthood rise to prominence as a songwriter and performer of controversial French pop tunes. We are introduced to him as a young man in the pre-war period. At this point in the movie we are introduced to some recurring thematic vehicles that are quite interesting. The parts about his youth are the best parts of the movie because there is a story progression you can follow. From there on out it is merely a list of reenactments of this guys life, which may be well presented and true to form, but without any context or story. It’s like reading random notes in a stranger’s diary. All the ingredients for a good movie are here, but they need to be defrosted before putting them together as this film left me cold.

After the movie Deb “Googled” him and found that he had indeed done a lot of neat things with some prominent people over a long span of time. These interesting things weren’t in the movie. Nor was there a time reference, didn’t know if we were in the 60s, 80s, current or what. And really didn’t care after a point, it is just heartless.

Senna

Deb 10 Me 10

This is a movie about auto racing’s Formula One champion Ayrton Senna. The movie is largely compiled from ESPN television footage, some professional film and some home movies. The movie follows the career of charismatic Senna from his early days in kart racing to his rise to world champion. It is a great look at the men and the politics of the world’s richest and most technically advanced motor sport.

I am an avid F1 fan and have been for a long time. I remember this period of racing in the late 80s through 90s with clarity. Deb knows little to nothing about it and Senna is a new name to her. We both loved the movie. That says enough for me, but I’ll add a little more anyway. The only place I felt it lacked was in some F1 101. Some introduction to the basics of the sport, what F1 is, a bit of history, that there are team owners who hire drivers, this is stuff I thought it could use. But apparently I’m not right on target here because without any of that background Deb really liked the movie. For her it wasn’t a story driven movie but a character driven movie. The film’s success was carried more on the personalities involved than what they were up to. Senna is a good looking guy and we see him evolve from a kid with broken English to a fully conversant champion. It's as good a human interest story as you're likely to find.
And the theater was packed! A buddy went to see it on a Thursday afternoon and he said there 50 people in there! I definitely think you ought to see this one.

Crazy Stupid Love

Deb 7 Me 7

So this was a movie on convenience, the time worked into our schedule. This was my first Steve Carrell movie, I’ve avoided them thinking they would all be silly (and perhaps they are). I usually avoid movies with TV stars in them, the crossover is seldom rewarding. Travolta, Hanks and Depp have all gained credibility on the big screen, and maybe Steve will too, and this might help. I do watch The Office due in large part to his character, which is pretty much the same guy as in this movie. What surprised me was this was an actual movie, I expected a list of running gags and simple minded one liners. My own prejudice shows again.

But I gotta tell you, this was a pretty nice movie and explored a part of puppy love and teen angst and it’s aftermath in a way I don’t remember seeing before. I actually like the movie and hesitated to rate it all, having to admit I saw it being the central issue. I saw it, liked it and don’t think you’d go too far wrong seeing it either. As long as it fits in your schedule.

Magic Trip Movie Review

Deb 10 Me 10

So now I’ve seen this thing three times. I really like it. I’m sure there were some incredible obstacles for the filmmakers; if it comes out on DVD I hope they explore some of that. There are a few very well done recreations, which aren’t true to a documentarian’s spirit, but for entertainment value, they were welcome.

Everyone I’ve talked to who has seen the movie has really liked it too; even those who weren’t around in the 50s and 60s and know nothing about the scene or its role in modern history. For a lot of viewers it’s an interesting period travelogue. It offers human interest, some drama, some comedy and a bit of education all in a colorful entertaining package.

I just love seeing the footage. It’s something I’ve felt vicariously “part of” for decades and cherished every frame in this thing like it was my own history being relived. I’ve been told that people learn a lot more about me than movies by reading these “reviews” and this is a good example. There’s not a lot I can say about the movie without talking about myself or my experiences or lessons from my own explorations. I will say the film pretty much limits itself to the buttered side of the toast, there are a few gaffs presented here, but everybody smelled to high heaven and Neal had to drive you crazy after a while. This sort of romanticizes the expedition and that's fine with me. Magellan’s crew stank and had a few misfits too, but it doesn't diminish their accomplishments. Look for it. Watch it. Get on the bus.

The Future

Deb 7, Me 7

Lately I’ve been taken with the thought that we’re all just a house of cards and the slightest ill wind or shock can send us tumbling. Sometimes we try to improve our odds by adding tape or glue to the equation in an attempt to shore things up. Usually trying to strengthen it disturbs the balance and it all comes down anyway. That’s the feeling I got from this odd little movie. Fragile people trying to enhance a fragile relationship. There’s also a talking cat, and it’s just as obnoxious as it sounds, but is a valid part of the story. Seemingly filled with symbols and metaphors its quirks are redeeming but not totally rewarding. We both liked it and it initiated a lot of conversation.

Tabloid

Deb 7 Me 8

I knew nothing about this movie going in and that’s a good thing. That meant the director had to guide me through the experience, and with no expectations, he could provide turns and dead ends and new horizons as he saw fit. This is a pretty straight-forward documentary, mostly talking heads on film. But then the editor got creative and some art director got involved and punched it up with totally cool graphics. Now it’s fun to watch the story unfold.

A word about the editing. I did a video interview with a guy in the 80s who was brilliant in his thinking, but unorganized in his speech. A typical sentence might go like “So we went to the store, it’s on 3^rd and Elm, a big blue building where there was a helicopter crash way back when, and we drove in an old truck so we could carry the keg back and I don’t know who was working there when those kids set the fire.” So in editing I had to stick to the point and eventually ended up with “So we went to the store in an old truck so we could carry the keg.” It looked pretty chopped up on the screen so I did cutaways where I could so it looked cohesive. I wasn’t trying to change what he was saying, just make it on-point. They did a lot of this in the movie, maybe why the graphics guy got to contribute so much, but I felt like the integrity of the story remained in-tact even though the on screen interviews were severely cut up.

Back to the movie, I liked it! It was a crack up, stretched credibility at points, but constantly reassured us that this is the real thing. It was creative, compelling and a real roller coaster of a ride.

Terri

Deb 8 Me 7

Another quiet coming of age kind ‘o movie, this one was endearing. The movie pushes you to accept the situations they provide no resolutions or explanations of their origin or results and I liked that aspect of it. It’s just a bunch of people trying to get along and, for the most part, doing the best they can. John C. Reilly is a bit of a caricature and the guyitar player from the Grass Roots is a capable addition, but the star is a big kid named Jacob Wysocki who really was engaging. There’s a bunch of young actors who are pretty phenomenal these days, I’m curious to see where he goes from here. But the movie was just pleasant to watch, not too deep, not too trite.

Page One: Inside the New York Times

Deb 4 Me 4

This is a look at a few folks and some of the things they face getting the New York Times out. I was struck by how movie star-ish the publisher and war correspondent were. The other main guy was very caricature-ish. The Times faces pressure from new media and they didn’t do a very good job of describing those new media or the pressures they apply to me. I get how the internet can make cutting trees down obsolete and how credibility is diminishing, but they didn’t talk about that a lot. They did talk about how print ads are falling off and how things like Twitter are a threat, but I don’t see how from what was provided in the movie.

I heard them talk about the news delivery system (web v. print) changing, but I didn’t hear them say anything about the news gathering (finding and checking sources) structure changes or remains. They did mention some of their huge guffaws, the guy who made up Pulitzer Prize winning stories and the gal who basically started the war by publishing unsubstantiated stories about enemy weapons build up. Sure these people got fired, and the boss too, but the fact that thousands of people have lost their lives and billions of domestic dollars have been spent on the basis of lies was pretty well shrugged off. Everybody makes mistakes, but they’re still the model for all newspapers.

The movie was lacking, and it got a low score. The Times, and most all news organization fail miserably. Maybe some documentaries that aren’t as self serving as this one might expose some of the inherent problems with the process and bring about some meaningful change.

Tree of Life

Deb 10 Me 9

We’d been seeing the previews for this for quite a while and it looked like it would be interesting just from the visual and musical point of view. It was. It also looked like it might be some heavy handed attempt at finding the meaning of life or an “art film” that was pretty but about as deep as a birdbath. It might be all those things but it’s also a good movie. I didn’t think the printed synopsis painted a very accurate picture of the movie and based on that, it doesn’t sound very good. It is. For me it was sort of Santini meets 2001 with a bit of City of Angels added in.

From the beginning I liked the tempo and level they created. It was whisper quiet at the beginning and it compelled you to listen carefully, look carefully, and get sucked right into the story. They indicated information rather than spell everything out and it worked well. Most of the story was about kids in the late 1950s, and the kids they got for actors were really amazing. But their direction was really noteworthy. The way they moved, got off their bikes, played and hollered was really authentic. The look of the movie had you thinking you were there or at least watching home movies of being there. Clothes, furniture, cars, all the “stuff” was period correct (except for a couple Tonka pieces) and really thoroughly researched. This level of detail added to the credibility of the story.

The 2001 parts worked well and felt like part of the movie. These were the ethereal and imaginative scenes we saw in the previews. I can imagine a lesser filmmaker trying to pull this off and not getting the cohesive qualities this guy achieved. I liked these elements.

The City of Angels element was the least developed and therefore the most confusing, but there were only a couple issues there and not enough to distract from the overall story.

When we left (the last ones out of the theater), the usher asked us what we thought. He had seen it four times and was interested in what old people thought of it. He told that it was the most visually exciting film that has been made in his 24 years of living and he wanted us to love it too. I thought about it, and I can’t remember anything since 1987 that beats it, so hats off to the usher, and to the filmmaker who has made a neat movie for young and … us.

Submarine

Deb 10 Me 9

This one came out of the blue and the lobby poster looked interesting so we checked it out. It is set in Wales so there were some accent issues, but happily everything was intelligible. It’s a coming of age story about a delightfully wry kid and his coping with the world around him. He was sort of a cross between Harold (in Harold and Maude) and you. The characters were distinct and amusing, the situations all viable and the story telling was interesting and thorough. They did some stop action tricks in editing that would normally be a distraction, but here they were effectively used and added some visual interest. There were allegories and symbols used throughout that were really welcome additions, not just thrown in. It was just a genuine little movie, not one to break any box office records, but interesting, enjoyable and worth an evening out.

Midnight in Paris

Deb 10 Me 10

As always, this review is more about me than the movie. First off, I gotta tell you how tired I am of Woody Alllen’s whining. He heard this criticism from others too, so he cast other people to play him in his movies and their whining was obnoxious too; the insecure neurotic that dominates many of his movies just wears me out. I really enjoyed Woody’s movies from the ‘70s, the slapstick shtick, moving into new themes with Annie Hall, and maybe a touch of Manhattan. In the ‘80s he fell of a cinematic cliff and took my appreciation with him. There were occasions I’d go see his movies, he’s obviously very bright and talented, just so wimpy. Time after time I was bored with the same neurotic characters or the blatant attempts to counter them, that I gave up.

Well, he’s back. I sat down ready to hate it. The opening montage was way too long, then we meet the players, and they’re the same assholes that appear in the other movies. Owen Wilson is the Woody Allen substitute, but he has a likeable sincerity, and you feel like there’s hope for him (when Larry David played Woody, you just hoped it would end). It’s set in Paris, as the title might suggest, and that was refreshing too. After a bit, the same tired characters started to appear as old familiar faces you hadn’t seen in a spell and could put up with for a while.

Then, out of the blue, the real movie began. New players were introduced and a story line that was smart, compelling and entertaining as hell. My anti-Allen bias was being erased and replaced with genuine affection for this movie. It was beautifully shot, well researched and full of pleasant surprises. There was even a moral to the story.

There was nothing in the synopsis or the movie trailers that would indicate what this movie is really about, and I’m not about to tell you here. It was a risky marketing move that means positive word of mouth is the only way people will go see this movie. This thing turned me all the way around from a negative number to a legitimate 9 or 10.

I can see this movie starting a trend in films.

Water for Elephants

Deb 8 Me 8

As you know, I try to avoid too many mainstream movies. They’re cinema’s version of the best-seller list, which is the McDonald’s of literature. That is, appealing to the masses and not necessarily nutritious. Of course there are exceptions.

Water for Elephants is one of those books that has been read and enjoyed by every girl I know. Me going to see it is as inevitable as doing the laundry. But I heard it’s a circus movie and one of those hasn’t come to town in quite a while.

I liked it. It’s a good story and though you know certain things are inevitable from the start, the road to their resolution is interesting and entertaining. There’s a villain who is very credible, a nice guy hero who is a little flat and the heroine who is not flat at all. And then there’s the circus, a circus in the 30s, during the depression, which adds to the gala atmosphere. And the animals and their acts, the people and their escapades are all neat to see; the movie doesn’t dwell on them but provides us with a neat human-interest story set in a circus environment. It’s a neat story, a big story, and a story that would’ve made a great movie in the 30s or 40s and even makes for a good movie today. Speaking of the date, there was some confusion over the timeline presented in the film, dates would be better left out than inconsistent. The violence in the movie was handled very well, that is, it was left out, only implied. We saw the aftermath but didn’t have to watch it happen. I liked that very much, especially appropriate for a movie rated PG.

I didn’t read the book, but Deb did. She said the material they covered from the book was very well done, but they left about a third of the book out completely, only making slight suggestions about the things they edited out in the screenplay. But I didn’t miss any of it, ignorance is bliss. It was pretty tight, not too Hollywood (if that could apply to a circus movie) and I’m pleased to have spent my (senior) theater dollar on this one.

Cave of Forgotten Dreams

Deb 5 Me 5

Herzog is a famous dude and he comes up with some great movie titles. This one not so much, but he has a long distinguished career. Here he is tackling the cave paintings in France, thirty two thousand year old cave paintings perfectly preserved for us to see. And hear speculation about.

I was VERY excited about seeing this movie because the paintings really intrigued me. The movie was a let-down, but the paintings carried the day. There was some good background to the discovery of the cave, although the footage shot on the cave’s approach was terrible, better shots came from the untrained pranksters in Magic Trip. We were introduced to a gaggle of professionals whose work was never shown to us and soon they were abandoned altogether. The music was horrible. Werner played the part of Huell Howser, talking to us as if we were children throughout. Questions were posed and discarded all the time, partial facts and innuendo were provided that never satisfied these viewers.

But the paintings. Turn off your hearing aid and look at the paintings. It is incredible to think that man created these, regardless of the time or tools available to him. These are sophisticated creations beyond credibility. But they are credible artifacts of early cro-magnon dipping his fingers in soot and juices and rendering the most amazing art. Don’t let the low rating of this movie stop you from enjoying some really amazing visuals.

Magic Trip

Me 10

This was the one feature from the Newport Film Festival that was a must see for me. Sadly Deb had scheduling problems and I saw it alone. I’m excited for her to see it... and for you too.

I’m a big fan of Kesey and the gang, been to the farm, seen the bus, the whole shot. Somewhere I have some footage of Kesey in his fields on VHS. So, like a lot of folks, I was fully aware of the origins and destiny of this footage. What I didn’t know was that the whole shootin’, match was turned over to a couple capable individuals (Alex Gibney and Alison Ellwood) who turned all that raw color into a delightful movie.

It was exactly the movie it should be. It started by establishing who’s who, where they are, how they got there and where they’re heading, why and how. Then you leave. This is a fabulous trip across America, filled with sincere protagonists and onlookers. Just seeing (and remembering) how we all looked back then (1964), the cars, buildings and roads had a different feel to them back then, a little more organic, less corporate look. It was before designer labels on everything, before the paranoia of drugs and those who use them, back when we all had a little longer leashes.

Anyone who has an interest in the Beat Generation, the Hippie Movement or just the general origin of the species will be delighted buy this. General audiences will too. I mean, I’m biased, but this look at our country by a handful of intrepid explorers is fascinating. The protagonists of the time are revealed with an intimacy I never experienced from reading. Everything I’ve ever read on or by these folks (which is pretty comprehensive) now has a clarity that escaped me before. I mean, I know what frenetic is, but now I know what it looks like too. I can’t say enough good about seeing this film and recommend you find a way to see it too.

Win Win

Deb 10 Me 10

I don’t know why my shortest reviews seem to be reserved for the best movies. I had no idea what to expect with this thing. Thought it might be one of those feel good sports movies or something, the trailers weren’t really that inviting. It was sort of a throw your hands up in the air and say, “Let’s just go see it”.

I liked the characters, their lot in life was effectively revealed and the story unfolded in a graceful way. Soon I really liked the people and was interested in what would happen next. This is where a lot of movies fail, the next thing that happens is often predictable. Here we had a few Hollywood coincidences but for the most part the story took an unseen path without looking like it was trying to be unpredictable. It was just good storytelling.

This was enhanced by some great acting, there’s a kid who is the central focus who really wins you over, and there’s some great comic moments that were sincere and just plain funny. We both dug this one and felt like it was time well spent.

The Conspirator

Deb 8 Me 7

This is a docudrama about the trial following the Lincoln assassination. Filled with interesting people, stories and information. Not sure how much is true, but I’m guessing the overview, the general facts are in place. Like a lot of these I feel I’d like it more if I’d read the book. There were things introduced and abandoned, alluded to and ignored throughout the movie, as if they were letting us know they were aware of these facts so they put ‘em in, but didn’t develop them because they weren’t pertinent to the story. I say if that’s the case, leave ‘em out, they only confuse things and leave me wanting more from the film.

It’s a story with assassination, but I still don’t see why death has to be so graphically and explicitly expressed. Gore does nothing to move the story along. It can be argued that the horror of the act has to driven home to the audience so we’ll felt something like people felt back then. Of course they didn’t see these murder(s) in such detail, but they faced ultimate terrors daily as the Civil war raged on.

It’s interesting how little some things have changed in our system of government and jurisprudence, and contrarily, how much things have changed.
The acting seemed a bit flat, probably the result of the director, not the actors. We both have seen better from Alexis Bledel who seemed to be patched in; and the main dude, James McAvoy (who is a ringer for Broc Smith) was okay, but not inspiring. The 'look' of the movie was distinctive, quite dark a lot of the time, most interiors were lit by candle or a bit of streaming sun, made for some nice lighting direction. We came away from the whole experience sort of vacuous, with little alarms going off about our society past and present. But as we talked it seemed there were a lot of unanswered historical questions posed in the film but unresolved by it.

Jane Eyre

Deb 8 Me 5

Jane Eyre was published in 1847 and interpreted in film around sixteen times beginning in 1915 only a few years after the medium took hold. There were also nine TV versions and half a dozen musicals, a radio show two ballets and a symphony that share the title. So it stands to reason that this is a pretty popular classic that has been rehashed in film alone for almost a hundred years. Pretty neat. Of course not all the versions are heralded as classics themselves. The great Orson Wells did his take on it in 1944 with Joan Fontaine and Elizabeth Taylor acting to a screenplay by John Houseman and Aldous Huxley. Pretty big names; but the people who love the book don’t love the movie, or apparently, any of the movies.

This one has its deficiencies too, but as a movie it’s okay. There is a lot left out, particularly the motivations that are fully formed in the book. This is a classic story told with modern storytelling techniques, time shifts and rearrangements that contemporary people seem to be comfortable with, but not true to classic writer’s desires.

I liked that I didn’t recognize the actors, they were fine. The film had a cold look to it, even when you were looking at a fireplace you felt cold, hard to do and very nice effect. The environment was cold and remote feeling, everything was made of stone and it was a good looking flick. But not completely engaging. I was pretty well glued to the screen, it was interesting to watch but I never got any emotional involvement with the players. I got more out of the story by talking about it later with Deb (who read it) than I got from watching this or the Wells version. Both of them skated over what sounds like some essential plot points that left me as cold as the old English countyside.

Of Gods and Men

Deb 4 Me 4

Another monastery movie… This came highly recommended and I just can’t get enough of monks on screen. It’s a great title, anything that begins with Of is automatically interesting. This is a docudrama of events that took place in Algeria in the 1990s. It is in French and subtitled in English; I’m always amazed how similar the two languages are. I actually knew nothing about the movie; but it was rated PG so I figured I couldn’t go wrong (wrong).

Again my problem isn’t so much with the movie as the rating system. How many murder mutilations are kids invited to see before a movie is rated R? I really didn’t expect to see any and I found my eyes being diverted not only from the certain scenes, but actually avoiding reading the subtitles when describing atrocities that happen off screen. Whatta wuss.

The movie was really hard for me to rate. Parts were brilliant, sucking me in and keeping me there until another scene, which sent me off to distraction. There was a huge transition from pastoral to grinding tension, which was done quite well. Eventually the tension took over, on purpose, and you just follow along like a puppy.

If an average movie is 5, I guess I liked it a bit less. I do not recommend you see it.

Bill Cunningham New York

Deb 10 Me 10

We see a lot of movies at South Coast Village in Santa Ana. Frequently the owner of the theater comes out before the movie and welcomes you, offers some trivia and introduces the film. Very cool. He tells us that this film is playing in New York where the lines to get in are around the block. He’s surprised there are only a few of us were here to see Bill Cunningham New York on opening night.

I’d never heard of Bill Cunningham. Bill is an odd, sort of eccentric old guy who has been doing what he loves since the 1940s. Today he is still going strong and shows no signs of slowing down.

Early in his life he was captivated by fashion and began documenting fashion in the streets. Stuff people wear. Weird stuff that people wear. Funny stuff, strange, new or unusual stuff. He takes really good snapshots of everyday people whose attire is a step above the rest, and these are assembled into a popular weekly feature in the New York Times.

Late in life we find the real fashion people, the runway folks, they love his work too. He is an embraceable character who does his work with dignity, humor and extreme dedication, a real throwback to a time of personal integrity. He’s pretty boss.

This is a straightforward documentary and the subject is fully aware that he is the subject, allowing for some neat little interactions. It is well done; sound, lighting, camera placement and creative editing make for a delightful movie. I can’t say enough good things about this little gem.

I Am

Deb 10 Me 10

Here’s a cool little movie whose topic has been in recent conversations around the house. It’s a film by Tom Shadyak, a guy famous for making movies I’d never see like the Nutty Professor and Bruce Almighty. He’s obviously good at what he does, it’s just something outside my range of interest. The film opens with a brief look at his career and the reason for deviating from his accepted genre and making this movie. He poses the question “What’s wrong with the world today and how do we fix it?” to a pretty distinguished panel including Desmond Tutu, Noam Chomsky and various writers and scientists.

Eventually the question finds a deeper root and the topic sort of shifts to the many ways we are connected to everything around us.

This is when it gets familiar and fun for me. The idea of everything being connected in deep but unseen ways is not new, but I find that people who take acid and alchemists seem to have the most conviction in its apparent truth. I didn’t know most of the experts in the film, but they were clearly identified and their credits given. And I’m not sure about some of the science they quoted, but it didn’t matter since I already agreed with their conclusions and didn’t need to have it clouded with facts.

I thought it was a pretty happening flick, the product of having a bijillion dollars so you can have guys like Tutu spout their smiling opinions and I’ll watch it again, might even get a (heaven forbid) DVD of it.

True Grit

Deb 7 Me 4

Here’s another piece of garbage. Maybe that’s a little harsh. The stars did a fine job, the beginning was more reminiscent of The Sting than True Grit, and that’s not all bad; at least it was a remake of something. I'll tell you what pissed me off, and its really not the fault of the movie, but it was rated PG. They hang people, shoot people, some point-blank after torturing and dismembering them, some from a distance. The King's Speech got rated R because they use the "F" word. What are we telling young people? I have a very low tolerance for this industry, probably the main reason I try to patronize films made outside the system. This is just pornography.

The Company Men

Deb 6 Me 2

So I went to see a mainstream movie. Good looking cast doing their job well in a predicable excuse for a story. Two hours I'll never get back.

Blue Valentine

Deb 9 Me 3 (+)

This is all my fault. I read the synopsis and it said skin, language, blah blah blah and a beating. So I love the skin part and hate the beating part. But I’m thinking a little skin might override the beating so I reluctantly go see the movie. The first twenty minutes or so I’m ready to leave. From the first scene I’m thinking is this person gonna get beat up, that person, will they be the beater or the beaten? I’m totally fixating on the pending pounding that someone is going to get or give and I’m not really watching the movie, just anticipating the thrashing. So the stuff that’s going on may or may not have been worth watching, I don’t know, I’m just waiting for the beating. Eventually there is a pugilistic exercise, but I’m thinking, “that’s pretty light, there must be a beating coming up soon”. So the rest of the film I’m still distracted thinking the real beating is yet to come. So I never really saw the movie. Sitting right there for 114 minutes and didn’t see much of anything. There was skin, but I gotta tell you, I’ve seldom seen such joyless skin in a movie.

I have a feeling this was a pretty good movie, not a light-hearted romp through these people’s relationship, but probably heartfelt. I’m not sure why they felt they had to have a beating in the movie. It wasn’t a huge plot point and didn’t really offer any more insight to the player’s motivations. I’m glad the synopsis mentioned there was a beating, it’s my fault that I couldn’t look past that one element and see the rest of the movie. So I think it sucked, but it probably didn’t.

Somewhere

Deb 2 Me 6

Okay, let’s look at Sophia’s track record. The Virgin Suicides was pretty good. I went to see Lost in Translation but ended up in the first row so the film got lost in the pixilation and I really didn’t see a thing. But Bill Murray was in it so I’ll say it was good. Then came the Marie Antionette film; the most boring coffee table book of a movie I have ever seen. So this one comes along and I figure it’s a shot at redemption… not sure she hit the target here.

The key to the movie was subtle. The main guy drives a Ferrari 360 with paddle shift. The paddle shift transmission is a very aggressive high-performance feature that most everyone sees as one of the car’s main virtues. It also has an automatic mode, for passively cruising around town. This guy drives the entire movie in the automatic mode. And that is an effective allegory for the entire movie.

She uses the old Jim Jarmusch technique of letting a scene play out for longer than what feels natural and it works well in the scenes with the Ferrari, but nowhere else. Where Jarmusch used this tool effectively, she only made film longer. As it is, it’s only a tick over an hour and a half, could easily fit in a half hour TV slot.

But one of the themes was drudgery, the inert time between glamorous assignments, and the viewer felt the boredom. It was driven home, not in a Ferrari, but in scene after scene of wealthy good looking people being drug from one place to another, then vacantly waiting for the next thing to happen to the star. Nice looking people who are about as deep as a birdbath with little shot at redemption. I kinda liked it.

The Illusionist

Deb 6 Me 9

We saw French movie The Triplets of Bellville whenever it came out and liked it, I don’t remember what I liked but it was fun. The same folks did The Illusionist so I was looking forward to it. While the previews were going on my mind wandered to Jacque Tati, the French funny man from the 50s & 60s. So the film begins and there in the screenplay credits is TATI! I mean the cat has been dead for thirty years and here he is cranking out an animated movie. Cool.

As a painter, I appreciate what goes into animation, classic animation; or what appears to be classic animation. This film has that classic look in spades. Man, it is a good-looking movie. There’s a watercolor/gouache and ink look to it that just jumps out at you. The big washes of color, the tiny inked details, wow, a real looker. Every scene had me staring, marveling at the draftsmanship, color and composition choices, I really liked that part of it.

Then there was the sound. The Foley crew was amazing! Every sound was perfectly rendered and distinct. Whatever it was, rain in the background or a relay theater lighting switch, everything was right on. Music was also right on the mark.

Not until after seeing the movie did I read the synopsis. I would have lost enthusiasm for going to see it based on that information. I saw a different movie than what they described and really enjoyed the version I saw.

In animation you can exaggerate characters, make them caricatures of themselves. Everybody in this movie was well defined and the people in the backgrounds were just as interesting, maybe more interesting than if they used real people as extras.

I was totally absorbed in the movie from beginning to end. But it was all sensory stimulation, the story had some confusing elements. But the story I got from it was a great story, not Hollywood, and I really had a good time with it.

Deb didn’t think as much of it as I did and the couple we were with didn’t remark on the movie at all (in a later conversation declared they liked it). So I’m the exception here, Deb’s 6 is probably a more realistic reflection of the movie going public, mine is biased by the fact that it sucked me in from the first scene and kept me wondering, amazed and amused all the way through.