WINTER’S BONE--Directed by Debra Granik/Starring Jennifer Lawrence, Shelley Waggener, Garret Dillahunt/screenplay written by Debra Granik and Anne Rosellini/ from the novel by Daniel Woodrell/1hr40min/R
(B) I just don’t get it. What ever happened to the great romantic comedies like It Happened One Night or drama’s like Casablanca? By the way, what the heck does the title mean? Was I supposed to read the novel before viewing the film? I don’t understand. This doesn’t deserve my effort to review it. The best I can do is give an honorable mention to a seemingly unknown singer, and some backwoods musicians who were in the background. Enough said!
(G) WARNING! Spoiler alert! My next sentence may reveal some facts that you might not want to know, should you decide to see this absolutely stunning, dreadfully depressing film. The “best” thing that happens in this film is that a teenage girl gets to save her family’s home by cutting off her dead father’s hands and delivering them to the Sheriff. Yep, that’s the most uplifting thing in the film, unless you subscribe to the belief that learning to shoot or gut a squirrel at an early age, is an essential survival skill.
Now, I’m a big proponent of judging a film from the “Big Picture” perspective. I know that all parts are important, but I also understand that the “basic story” is the most important factor in the ultimate success or failure of a movie. I also understand that a “happy ending” is not essential to telling a good story, but for goodness sake (besides the fact that I ALSO don’t understand what the title has to do with anything) I just don’t understand what it is that this “story” is trying to say to us. Notice that I say “story” because I want to spread the possibility of blame around, as thinly as possible to be certain that the failure lands, at least partially on the guilty party.
It is also important to note that there are some successes here. The dramatic acting is formidable. Not only did this film earn a nomination for Best Picture, but garnered both a Best Actress and Supporting Actor nod as well. These are well deserved, for honestly, if the portrayals were not top notch, I never would have made it to the finish line on this one.
Let’s take this one aspect of the “story” that I’ve already “leaked,” the fact that a teenage girl must cut off the hands of her father’s corpse with a chainsaw to save her home for her mother and two younger siblings. This big dramatic moment…is completely unnecessary and actually illogical to the storyline or consistent with characterizations that we are being fed throughout this film. In other words, the characters lead us to a conclusion and then they, themselves have to explain “why” they are doing it. Even the characters know there is no reason for us (or the girl) to witness this act! Get it? Even the characters don’t believe it. It doesn’t make sense. Unfortunately, I felt about this film similarly to how I felt about The Hurt Locker when I finished watching it. I kept asking myself, “Why was this movie forced upon me? Why, does the Academy feel the need to nominate so many films? Why doesn’t the Academy understand that ALL PARTS of a movie should be judged when nominating for Best Picture? Don’t people realize that every 5 cent idea that comes along does NOT have to be made into a motion picture?”
Let’s just hope that the same mistake is not made this year as last, and we see a boring, poorly told story with pretty good acting earn the Best Picture Oscar. It wasn’t fair in 2010 and it won’t be fair in 2011.
Gordon & Barbara in Paris
Here's Looking at YOU
Monday, January 31, 2011
Friday, January 28, 2011
Oscar Nominations for 2010
Here are the Oscar nominations for 2011
FOR BEST PICTURE:
'Black Swan'
'The Fighter'
'Inception'
'The Kids Are All Right'
'The King’s Speech'
'127 Hours'
'The Social Network'
'Toy Story 3'
'True Grit'
'Winter’s Bone'
BEST DIRECTOR NOMINATIONS ARE:
'Black Swan'
David O. Russell
'The Fighter'
Tom Hooper
'The King's Speech'
David Fincher
'The Social Network'
Joel and Ethan Coen
'True Grit'
BEST ACTRESS
Annette Bening
'The Kids Are All Right'
Nicole Kidman
'Rabbit Hole'
Jennifer Lawrence
'Winter's Bone'
Natalie Portman
'Black Swan'
Michelle Williams
'Blue Valentine'
BEST ACTOR:
Javier Bardem
'Biutiful'
Jeff Bridges
'True Grit'
Jesse Eisenberg
'The Social Network'
Colin Firth
'The King's Speech'
James Franco
'127 Hours'
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Black Swan
BLACK SWAN--Directed by Darren Aronofsky/Starring Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, Vincent Casse/screenplay written by Mark Heyman, Andres Heinz, John J. McLaughlin/story by Andres Heinz/rate R-1hr.50min
(G) I found this movie confusing—and remember, this is the opening statement from someone who really liked INCEPTION—and lacking in a couple of key areas. Immediately when I finished watching BLACK SWAN, I had the same vague feeling of dissatisfaction that I had days later upon careful reflection. The performances are clearly compelling. I know that many are lauding Kunis’ performance, but Natalie Portman shows a much wider array of emotions, performed with skillful layers of nuance that demonstrate a true shining star. There is no question that this is her movie, and for that reason I felt a little sorry for her that the script and story were not better. Ultimately, she will likely win some awards (this was written a day before the Golden Globes, but was not posted until after she won in the Best Actress category), but the story leaves too many things unresolved for an old-school story teller (like myself) to really appreciate. I have to say that there was just enough special effects, and they were used artfully, which allowed one to see that the line between reality and madness is sometime frighteningly thin. Looking at the movie as a whole, I think it is worth 2 and ½ binoculars. If it was an award simply for acting or even, perhaps “tasteful directing” I might be convinced to go slightly higher.
(B) I found this film to be very disturbing. The workings of the mind are indeed complex, but I found myself trying to separate what was real and what was illusion. Natalie sharpens her acting chops and has convincingly portrayed a disturbed girl in this roll as a ballerina pursuing perfection. I also need to mention how well she danced as an accomplished ballet dancer. You can tell she put a lot of work into this film. Please do not bring anyone under 18 to this movie. It is not only about dancing. Ultimately, I did not like this film. I can give it only one and a half binoculars.
NOTE: By percentage points, this film gets an average rating of two binocs.
(G) I found this movie confusing—and remember, this is the opening statement from someone who really liked INCEPTION—and lacking in a couple of key areas. Immediately when I finished watching BLACK SWAN, I had the same vague feeling of dissatisfaction that I had days later upon careful reflection. The performances are clearly compelling. I know that many are lauding Kunis’ performance, but Natalie Portman shows a much wider array of emotions, performed with skillful layers of nuance that demonstrate a true shining star. There is no question that this is her movie, and for that reason I felt a little sorry for her that the script and story were not better. Ultimately, she will likely win some awards (this was written a day before the Golden Globes, but was not posted until after she won in the Best Actress category), but the story leaves too many things unresolved for an old-school story teller (like myself) to really appreciate. I have to say that there was just enough special effects, and they were used artfully, which allowed one to see that the line between reality and madness is sometime frighteningly thin. Looking at the movie as a whole, I think it is worth 2 and ½ binoculars. If it was an award simply for acting or even, perhaps “tasteful directing” I might be convinced to go slightly higher.
(B) I found this film to be very disturbing. The workings of the mind are indeed complex, but I found myself trying to separate what was real and what was illusion. Natalie sharpens her acting chops and has convincingly portrayed a disturbed girl in this roll as a ballerina pursuing perfection. I also need to mention how well she danced as an accomplished ballet dancer. You can tell she put a lot of work into this film. Please do not bring anyone under 18 to this movie. It is not only about dancing. Ultimately, I did not like this film. I can give it only one and a half binoculars.
NOTE: By percentage points, this film gets an average rating of two binocs.
Frankie and Alice
FRANKIE AND ALICE--Directed by Geoffrey Sax/ Starring Stellan Skarsgård, Halle Berry, Matt Frewer/Screenplay Written by Cheryl Edwards, Marko King, Mary King, Jonathan Watters, Joe Shrapnel, Anna Waterhouse/Story by Oscar Janiger, Philip Goldberg, Cheryl Edwards/101 mins/R
(B)It seemed such a waste of a compelling performance by Halle Berry to be in a film with such a weak story. Certain scenes in this film should have been elaborated on and others scenes could have easily been omitted. I don’t make movies, so I don’t know how a story is actually made into a movie, but somehow the spark of this film was buried and buried deep. However, I view movies and I know what I like. The balance in this movie was off, therefore, I can only give two and a half binoculars. Two for Halle and a half for
the unfulfilled potential of this movie.
(G) Halle Berry is a superb actress and her performance in this film does not belie that statement. However, I came away from viewing Frankie and Alice wishing that there were three or four FEWER writers and that someone had taken the reins and guided this film toward a more compelling story. This is often the case with a film that is based on truth. Yes, there actually is a person who (apparently) is like the schizophrenic, multiple personality wielding character that Berry plays. I have not done much homework, but really, as a MOVIE GOER I shouldn’t have to. Whenever someone tries to “stay true to the actual life” of a character, then problems are inevitable. It really seems like there was no real agreement on which personality or which theme should be showcased here, and then there was that nagging “truth” that continually got in the way. In the end, the story is just not that interesting. At least, it is not interesting enough to make a feature length film about. I give this one two binoculars, and that is only because Halle Berry is just perfect. The girl can act. I can’t wait for her NEXT performance.
(B)It seemed such a waste of a compelling performance by Halle Berry to be in a film with such a weak story. Certain scenes in this film should have been elaborated on and others scenes could have easily been omitted. I don’t make movies, so I don’t know how a story is actually made into a movie, but somehow the spark of this film was buried and buried deep. However, I view movies and I know what I like. The balance in this movie was off, therefore, I can only give two and a half binoculars. Two for Halle and a half for
the unfulfilled potential of this movie.
(G) Halle Berry is a superb actress and her performance in this film does not belie that statement. However, I came away from viewing Frankie and Alice wishing that there were three or four FEWER writers and that someone had taken the reins and guided this film toward a more compelling story. This is often the case with a film that is based on truth. Yes, there actually is a person who (apparently) is like the schizophrenic, multiple personality wielding character that Berry plays. I have not done much homework, but really, as a MOVIE GOER I shouldn’t have to. Whenever someone tries to “stay true to the actual life” of a character, then problems are inevitable. It really seems like there was no real agreement on which personality or which theme should be showcased here, and then there was that nagging “truth” that continually got in the way. In the end, the story is just not that interesting. At least, it is not interesting enough to make a feature length film about. I give this one two binoculars, and that is only because Halle Berry is just perfect. The girl can act. I can’t wait for her NEXT performance.
Monday, January 17, 2011
A Day of Service
(G) Martin Luther King Jr.'s impact on American society makes him arguably the most significant American of all time. Below is a wonderful video message produced by our federal government, tax dollars. I cannot think of a better use of our money, than to bring people together in the cause of helping one another without regard for our own pocketbooks.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Another Year
ANOTHER YEAR--Directed by Mike Leigh/Starring Jim Broadbent, Lesley Manville, Ruth Sheen/Written by Mike Leigh/129 min/PG-13
(B) Royal performances by Jim Broadbent, who plays the husband of Ruth Sheen, who plays a therapist in this film, display the typical family in the English countryside. Ruth Sheen works in the same office with Lesley Manville, a receptionist. Lesley Manville is a single middle-aged woman who plays an old and dear friend of this couple. Their friendship is at the core of this movie. This film is so natural and real, I could almost taste the tea served at the table. For those of you who don’t understand the English accent, you won’t have a problem with this film. Mike Leigh did a great job both directing and writing, and I would also commend the set direction. If I were the Queen I would knight these excellent actors and place a royal crown on the head of Lesley Manville. I give ANOTHER YEAR three solid binoculars.
(G) I regret that Barbara and I had to split up to see all of the Awards Nominated films this year and I missed this one. I hope to catch up with these performances prior to the Oscars. For now, take a look at the trailer below.
(B) Royal performances by Jim Broadbent, who plays the husband of Ruth Sheen, who plays a therapist in this film, display the typical family in the English countryside. Ruth Sheen works in the same office with Lesley Manville, a receptionist. Lesley Manville is a single middle-aged woman who plays an old and dear friend of this couple. Their friendship is at the core of this movie. This film is so natural and real, I could almost taste the tea served at the table. For those of you who don’t understand the English accent, you won’t have a problem with this film. Mike Leigh did a great job both directing and writing, and I would also commend the set direction. If I were the Queen I would knight these excellent actors and place a royal crown on the head of Lesley Manville. I give ANOTHER YEAR three solid binoculars.
(G) I regret that Barbara and I had to split up to see all of the Awards Nominated films this year and I missed this one. I hope to catch up with these performances prior to the Oscars. For now, take a look at the trailer below.
The Social Network
THE SOCIAL NETWORK--Directed by David Fincher. Starring Jesse Eisenberg, Rooney Mara, Bryan Barter/screenplay written by Aaron Sorkin, from the book The Accidental Billionaires by Ben Mezrich/ rated PG-13/2hrs
(G) Well, I just finished viewing this film not five hours ago, and less than one hour ago it won the Golden Globe for Best Drama. Naturally, everything that I have to say at this point should be taken with a grain of salt, for my hindsight has never been keener.
Nonetheless, I came home and immediately told Barbara (who did not view this film with me because she was more interested in watching the Red Carpet pre-show for the Globes) that this well could be the movie to beat in the Best Picture category. Now, of course my feeble prediction seems like genius, but truly I cannot help but analyze to death the fact that I was right. For, on the surface this film did not offer much in the way of action. Let’s face it. Here is a movie largely about college life. For those of you who went to college (and can remember the experience) the important moments of those few years take place inside classrooms, living rooms and on computer screens (if not merely in books). So, a movie that profiles the creation of Facebook, a social network created precisely to recreate the finer points of that experience, will center on studying, partying and scheming in classrooms, living rooms and other uninteresting places. Some people, in fact go to college just for the experience, and to meet members of the opposite (or same, as the case may be) sex. Much of the action either centered around programming, partying or giving depositions. There is only one major action sequence (a couple of guys zip line into a pool and break a chimney in the process). So, why do I give this movie four binoculars? The answer lay mostly in the script. Aaron Sorkin (West Wing fame) can make ANYTHING seem relevant and with this subject matter, it is not anything resembling a stretch. The film makes the audience feel the importance and impact of what Zuckerman created. It also shows us that no matter how much our technological advancements seem to change human interaction and the landscape of the delivery systems for information, we are all basically concerned with the same things that human beings have always been concerned with (love, social status, creativity, power and money). The performances are excellent and once again I have to say, this is the best year in films that I’ve seen in decades. I LOVED several of the films this year, but I am predicting now that this is the year of Social Network. It is SO pertinent in many ways. Keep these great scripts coming. I love the movies for remaining pertinent! There is nothing like them…yet.
P.S. This film also won Best Picture at the Critic's Choice Awards.
(G) Well, I just finished viewing this film not five hours ago, and less than one hour ago it won the Golden Globe for Best Drama. Naturally, everything that I have to say at this point should be taken with a grain of salt, for my hindsight has never been keener.
Nonetheless, I came home and immediately told Barbara (who did not view this film with me because she was more interested in watching the Red Carpet pre-show for the Globes) that this well could be the movie to beat in the Best Picture category. Now, of course my feeble prediction seems like genius, but truly I cannot help but analyze to death the fact that I was right. For, on the surface this film did not offer much in the way of action. Let’s face it. Here is a movie largely about college life. For those of you who went to college (and can remember the experience) the important moments of those few years take place inside classrooms, living rooms and on computer screens (if not merely in books). So, a movie that profiles the creation of Facebook, a social network created precisely to recreate the finer points of that experience, will center on studying, partying and scheming in classrooms, living rooms and other uninteresting places. Some people, in fact go to college just for the experience, and to meet members of the opposite (or same, as the case may be) sex. Much of the action either centered around programming, partying or giving depositions. There is only one major action sequence (a couple of guys zip line into a pool and break a chimney in the process). So, why do I give this movie four binoculars? The answer lay mostly in the script. Aaron Sorkin (West Wing fame) can make ANYTHING seem relevant and with this subject matter, it is not anything resembling a stretch. The film makes the audience feel the importance and impact of what Zuckerman created. It also shows us that no matter how much our technological advancements seem to change human interaction and the landscape of the delivery systems for information, we are all basically concerned with the same things that human beings have always been concerned with (love, social status, creativity, power and money). The performances are excellent and once again I have to say, this is the best year in films that I’ve seen in decades. I LOVED several of the films this year, but I am predicting now that this is the year of Social Network. It is SO pertinent in many ways. Keep these great scripts coming. I love the movies for remaining pertinent! There is nothing like them…yet.
P.S. This film also won Best Picture at the Critic's Choice Awards.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)