Tanghi argentini (2007) ***
Directed by Guy Thys
Short Film (14 min.)
Note: This is from a DVD I rented at Blockbuster containing all of the live action and animated short film Academy Award nominees from 2007. You can rent the DVD on Netflix or at your local Blockbuster. I found it among the S films on the New Releases wall.
Tanghi argentini obviously began with a gimmick, which made the end product feel, well, gimmicky. This short film from
The Mozart of Pickpockets (2007) ****
Directed by Philippe Pollet-Villard
Short Film (31 min.)
Note: This is from a DVD I rented at Blockbuster containing all of the live action and animated short film Academy Award nominees from 2007. You can rent the DVD on Netflix or at your local Blockbuster. I found it among the S films on the New Releases wall.
The Mozart of Pickpockets is the first short film out of the three I have watched so far this evening that I would love to see as a feature film! As a matter of fact, I think its length actually hurts the narrative, which is disappointing since the characters and the plot are just terrific. This movie won the Oscar for Best Short Film at the 2007 Academy Awards, and you can see why Academy voters embraced it. It’s really a wonderful little film.
We begin with a group of pickpockets carrying out an elaborate scam in order to separate people from their wallets. At first, we think there’s only one pickpocket, but we learn quickly that there are actually five. They return to some kind of hotel or hostel staffed by a cautious front desk clerk. All the men gather in the room and count their new fortunes. It’s obvious that three are in charge when they only give IDs to the remaining two men, Philippe and Richard. We quickly learn that these two are simple men who commit crimes because that’s all they know how to do. Richard, especially, is not very masculine and quite sensitive. The next morning, all of the members of the pickpocket gang are caught by the police except for Philippe and Richard. When the cops walk near them, a little beggar boy clutches onto Richard’s hand. He follows them around and eventually they decide to take him in. He doesn’t speak—perhaps because he is deaf or not fluent in French or maybe just manipulating them. The boy turns out to be a master pickpocket as if in some ironic way God gave him this gift. Mozart’s dad used to cart him all around
The film never does tell us why this kid doesn’t talk. The end is abrupt and odd, which is my one criticism of the film. At first, I felt like the end left the story open, but as I thought about it, there really is only one way to interpret the ending, and it’s kind of heartbreaking considering how much I came to care about the three main characters. The downer of an ending doesn’t fit well within the dark humor and beautiful photography of everything that precedes it. Pollet-Villard has wonderful skill as a movie maker, and the performances are all strong. Overall, this film really was a delight to watch and I’m glad that the Academy gave The Mozart of Pickpockets some much deserved love!
Il Supplente (The Substitute) (2007) *
Directed by Andrea Jublin
Short Film (15 min.)
Note: This is from a DVD I rented at Blockbuster containing all of the live action and animated short film Academy Award nominees from 2007. You can rent the DVD on Netflix or at your local Blockbuster. I found it among the S films on the New Releases wall.
Ummmm… okay. Why does this film exist and why is it available in the
Directed by Christian E. Christiansen
Short Film (39 min.)
Note: This is from a DVD I rented at Blockbuster containing all of the live action and animated short film Academy Award nominees from 2007. You can rent the DVD on Netflix or at your local Blockbuster. I found it among the S films on the New Releases wall.
This Danish short film had quite a lot going for it regarding whether or not viewers might emotionally invest themselves into the movie. If you want to make a film whose purpose is to make people cry, you might as well make it about three young female characters suffering from cancer. You might also want to set the film primarily at night in a hospital when visiting hours are over and their loneliness sets in with the oppression of a life sentence in prison. Next, have these girls rely only on each other, and have two of them die by the end of the film. Throw in a suicide attempt, have one of the girls ultimately give her life in order to save another, and you’ve got the plot for Om natten.
I don’t mean to be glib about the unimaginable suffering, fear and loneliness people with cancer go through. My issue with this movie is that it’s trying to tug on our heartstrings, and it doesn’t have to try very hard to do so. Some people are going to cry watching the movie, and that’s fine… I was choked up at times too. Simply, I don’t think the film had to do much to reach its goal once the details of the plot are set in motion.
Yet, the film does work, and not because of the screenwriter and director Christiansen, but because of the performances of the three young actresses, Laura Christensen, Neel Renholt, and especially Julie Olgaard as the deeply pained Stephanie who believes that her parents hate her and wouldn’t want to be burdened by her illness. We get the feeling that she believes they will come running if she calls, but she doesn’t feel worthy enough of their love after she disappointed them in the past. Her performance was worthy of Oscar consideration. I wonder if anyone anywhere ever considered performers in short films as contenders for acting Oscars.
Om natten sets our emotions up very early on to be manipulated. Though the end was very predictable, and though this film did not win Best Live-Action Short Film at last year’s Oscars, thirty-nine minutes of mine were ultimately well-spent watching three excellent performances.
The Birth of a Nation (1915) *
Directed by D.W. Griffith
Yes, The Birth of a Nation is an important movie and yes, it’s exceptionally well made. Personally, I cannot get past how ugly and hateful
The movie is three hours long, and while overall a chore to sit through in one viewing, a patient filmgoer can stay with the plotline, even when scenes just go on way too long and even when characters are mouthing words to each other that don’t always make sense. The plot involves two families—Stoneman and Cameron—whose sons must fight on opposite sides of the Civil War. It is through this lens that the film presents historical events such as the Lincoln Assassination, Reconstruction and the birth of the Ku Klux Klan. The first hour and a half ends at the assassination and the unforgivable second half deals with reconstruction and the Ku Klux Klan.
If the film stopped right after
Also, his battle scenes during the Civil War work very well and the enormity to which he staged the war itself clearly paved the way for future innovative war films like All Quiet on the Western Front. Also, the film looks amazing on DVD. The blue and yellow shades used to show different conflicts and different ideologies absolutely glow on screen. Here is an extremely old film that will no doubt last forever in an extremely cared for manner.
While I praise its cinematic achievement, I still hate the movie. Had the racism been less blatant, I might have been able to like the film more. Watching a film so ensconced with the belief that negros have no dignity at all made me mad!
Some of the dialogue cards made me want to scream out loud at the screen. At one point, the screen reads that the Ku Klux Klan succeeded in uniting the North and the South in a common noble goal. Right… yeah… we really owe so much to the KKK for UNITING this country! I’m glad that
And yes D.W. is to blame. I saw 1916’s Intolerance a few months ago and I praised its vision and ambition. Before this review, I had it on my 100 Greatest Films list.
Patton (1970) **1/2
Directed by Franklin J. Schaffner
For a number of summers during and right after college, I worked at a summer camp. I started off teaching a program area, then moved up to counselor and finally became one of the administrators. Since the camp hired many international staff for one summer and there was a big turnover rate each year, there weren’t always obvious choices to fill the positions in administration. Eventually, it became an unspoken rule that the best returning counselor or program area teacher would be made an administrator. Sometimes this worked well, but more often than not, the great counselor or teacher made for a lousy administrator.
General George S. Patton, played by George C. Scott who won an Oscar for the role, made for a disastrous high commander, and yet, no one can touch his skill leading soldiers on the battlefield. It’s not that Patton isn’t smart enough to deal with the complicated strategic duties of being a commander. On the contrary, he is extremely well versed in war history and tactics as well as poetry and the Bible. His deep flaw is that he’s kind of nutty. He thirsts for the thrill and the challenge of battle. After his troops massacre German soldiers in a battle, he surveys the carnage and states that this is what he loves! How twisted is that?
His eccentric ways are more subdued at the beginning of the film when he is asked to command soldiers in
His success gives him the opportunity to lead the American troops in
The Allied Military try to use this controversy in order to fool the enemy into thinking that Patton is going to lead the troops in
Therein lies the history of this man as seen through Schaffner’s 1970 Academy Award Best Picture winner. The story itself is fascinating on paper, but I’ve got to say that this is easily the most boring war film I’ve ever seen. The entire movie felt frigid and kept me completely at an emotional disconnect from anything on screen. From the very beginning, I didn’t like Patton as a character. When the American public cried out regarding the mistreatment of the private in the army hospital, I was thinking to myself that I’d be crying out along with them. He’s a bully and a creep. Not once did I root for him, and not once was I emotionally invested in the war depicted in this film. It’s not that I don’t care about World War II—quite the contrary. This film simply doesn’t capture World War II in any way that allowed me to ideologically connect with this film’s depiction of it.
In any war film, you’d think that there ought to be impressive battle sequences. It seems especially likely in a film about a man always yearning for the glories of battle. Yet, the combat scenes here don’t work one bit. I can’t even call them a letdown because they weren’t even successful in building up any kind of viewer investment. There’s very little blood and real violence. Most of the battles involve explosions which cause what are obviously stunt men to jump forward and hit the ground. I remember going to Disney World and seeing the Indiana Jones show in an outdoor pavilion. Things blew up in that show. Things blow up in Patton and that’s pretty much how one might go about explaining the battle scenes.
The direction often works well, but every once in a while, we get such overtly ambitious camera shots which scream, “Look how impressive this shot is!” Yet, they come randomly and add nothing at all to the plot. Further, there seemed to also be something going on with the cinematography that subtly bent the sides of the film slightly upward. Was this meant to subconsciously illicit mental instability? Well if so, then I argue that it comes across too heavy handed.
George C. Scott is terrific. Granted, he obviously wanted to win some awards for this role because he gives it his all. The film also clearly wanted praise and recognition. While both the performance and the film won Oscars, Scott’s performance deserved it, but the film didn’t, contrary to what Schaffner himself would have you believe. I don’t deny that it’s well made, but I couldn’t wait for it to end.
Gone Baby Gone (2007) ****
Directed by Ben Affleck
Gone Baby Gone suffers from what I will call Juno Syndrome. At the very beginning, we are aggressively presented with heavy
As the plot unfolded, I began to think that this would be a light crime thriller since the investigation into a little girl’s kidnapping treaded familiar cinematic waters. Therefore, I might have to judge this film based on how much fun I had with it. Little did I know that one of the film’s missions was to catch the viewer off guard with plot twist after plot twist. At around the one hour mark, the case is closed and we hear voice-over narration that feels right out of the final scene of countless other films. Casey Affleck’s character reflects on the lessons learned and the personal growth experienced by the people involved in this concluded investigation. I think this manipulation and deception was done deliberately by Affleck in order to put the first investigation completely behind us and start anew with a second kidnapping. It worked brilliantly on me at least.
Hour number two presents a new and much darker investigation, which made me stop judging the film’s success based on my enjoyment. Gone Baby Gone becomes exceptionally suspenseful, frightening and truly disturbing. Casey Affleck’s private investigator Patrick Kenzie enters the house of two hardened criminals and a convicted pedophile alone at night. The tension during this scene becomes almost unbearable and its conclusion leaves the viewer feeling deeply unsettled. The final act of the film goes somewhere else, concluding with a plot twist that I didn’t see coming and found extremely effective. Once all is revealed, Patrick must make an extremely important but unimaginably difficult decision. He does make a choice, and yet, had the film decided to go the other way, it probably would have been just as satisfying, though surely the final scene would be very different than the one we get to see here.
I think Casey Affleck gives an Oscar caliber performance as Patrick. He was nominated for Best Supporting Actor this past year for his work in The Assassination of Jesse James, which I have not seen. I’d like to believe that he would have been nominated for this film had he not appeared in The Assassination. He has the face of a fourteen year old, which is pointed out often by characters in the film, and yet, he has the acting chops and screen presence that leaves his older brother Ben in the dust. My prediction is that he will become a superstar sometime in the next five years. He may quite possibly be the next Johnny Depp.
The film also gives us some great and complicated supporting performances by Ed Harris, Morgan Freeman, Michelle Monaghan and Amy Ryan.
Ben Affleck, without a doubt, deserves to be taken seriously as a great screenwriter. His collaboration with Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting proved to the world and the Academy voters that these two aren’t just pretty faces. Affleck steps it up here by offering this as his directing debut. In Gone Baby Gone, there are moments of inspired filmmaking and direction. The only suggestion I would offer Affleck would be to reign it in just a little bit with both future screenplays and future directorial projects. Sometimes the dialogue and the camera tricks go a bit too far, taking us out of the movie for a moment or two. Without a doubt, Affleck’s got the potential for an amazing career behind the camera. There’s intelligence to the story in this film which is quite refreshing, and the way the film ends works great! Both Afflecks deserve high praise for Gone Baby Gone! It was darker and more powerful than I expected, yet the real surprise for me was how well made and well executed the film turned out to be!
Afterthoughts Post 2
The Birds- Suzanne Pleshette wanted to have her character’s ear hanging from her head when they discover her corpse. Hitchcock approved and had her go through extensive makeup to make it look realistic. Then when he shot the scene, he filmed her in a way that you couldn’t see the ear at all.
Rebecca- The opening shot of Manderlay is actually a miniature. You really can notice this when you look through its windows. Apparently, the burning at the end is also a miniature. I noticed it at the beginning, but I didn’t notice it at the end.
Body Heat- William Hurt and Kathleen Turner were not famous at all before this film. Also, they introduced themselves to every member of the cast completely nude so the awkwardness of having to film their love scenes wouldn’t be a problem.
Once- Cillian Murphy was originally slated to play the guy role. Glen Hansard was brought on board when Murphy dropped out. Since the songs really make the film truly great, any other actor in his role would have made this a completely different movie.
All Quiet on the
Soylent Green- This was the last film for two cinematic giants. It was the last movie to be filmed in MGM Studios and this was Edward G. Robinson’s last film. He’s almost unrecognizable since he was dying of cancer. He succumbed to his illness nine days after shooting wrapped on this film. The final line of the film which reveals what Soylent Green is was ranked as the 77th greatest movie quote of all time by the American Film Institute.
Soylent Green (1973) ****
Directed by Richard Fleischer
Soylent Green is… well I suppose I won’t give it away, but the last line of the film has become one the iconic movie quotes of all time. This is the first time I watched Soylent Green, but I already knew the surprising revelation at the very end. Whenever I know how a movie ends before seeing it for the first time, I always wonder how I would have reacted had I been ignorant of the outcome. For example, I knew what Rosebud was in Citizen Kane.
Even though I was disappointed that I knew what everything in Soylent Green was leading up to, ultimately I was pleasantly surprised to see that the film isn’t just fodder in order to reach the surprise ending. Though this should be considered a B-movie, I found it to be smart and entertaining. The journey to get to the final twist stands on its own as solid filmmaking.
The plot hit a nerve with me. Soylent Green is set in 2020 in a dismal reality where natural resources are on the verge of disappearing. Therefore, everyone must live off of rations. Going to the store to buy beef and strawberries is a thing of the distant past since everyone is poor and a jar of strawberries costs 150 dollars! Charlton Heston plays Detective Robert Horn, a tough as nails and cool as ice cop who discovers something truly awful while investigating the murder of a rich man (played by Joseph Cotton). The clues lead back to the Soylent Company which is responsible for eighty percent of the world’s resources. During his investigation, he has an affair with a “piece of furniture” named Shirl. Women called furniture cohabitate with a man so they can have a roof over their head and food to eat. Of course, these men expect quite a bit in return. Horn finds out that the victim went to confession, so he confronts the priest who is on the verge of insanity because his vocation requires him to provide for those in need. The problem, which is a universal problem in the film, is that everyone is in need and the city is too crowded (40 million people living in NYC).
Horn shares his apartment with a former professor named Sol (Edward G. Robinson—yes that Edward G. Robinson) who constantly talks about the good old days where people could get whatever food they wanted and electricity never ran out. Whenever Horn must leave his second floor apartment, he has to step around a huge number of people that sleep on every inch of the stairs. When Horn gets closer to the truth, he is followed and hunted by some thugs trying to take him off the trail permanently. Sol decides that he wants to voluntarily end his life, so he goes to some sort of suicide theater which allows a person to die while surrounded by scenes of natural beauty. Horn, despite the corruption of his higher ups in the police department, makes it his mission to reveal the truth about Soylent Green after promising this to Sol before he dies.
Edward G. Robinson is fantastic as Sol, and I’m extremely happy to say that I’ve finally found a Charlton Heston performance I enjoyed! He’s still got his Heston-isms, but he’s more restrained and much more likeable than in any other Heston film I’ve seen. Unlike The Omega Man, the dialogue in Soylent Green never goes over the top into camp territory. Actually, the screenplay should be applauded. One scene, unfortunately, betrays the film’s low budget. A man hunting Heston in the middle of a mob situation gets crushed by a bulldozer’s crane. Boy, that was executed pathetically, which is too bad because just about everything else works great in Soylent Green.
The movie’s pessimistic argument reads as a warning to consider carefully how each of us uses our resources. We take so many things for granted, and a film like Soylent Green forces us to think about a world without basic necessities. That’s a great point, and I applaud the film for having some real integrity. Sure, the message is good, but Soylent Green, at its most fundamental level, only aims to entertain the audience despite its gloomy cautionary tale. After the movie ended, I got to thinking whether hot dogs and Soylent Green have something in common. I wouldn’t be surprised.
All Quiet on the Western Front (1930) ****1/2
Directed by Lewis Milestone
All Quiet on the Western Front plays like a smorgasbord of standard war scenes all jumbled together in a two hour plus black and white film. Though I am not well versed on its backstory, I feel confident stating that All Quiet on the Western Front paved the way for the war film genre. It is so old that it comes across as primitive when compared to movies like Swing Time and Bride of Frankenstein. While watching the DVD, I could see imperfections in the film including scratches, decay, dirt and dimness. It seemed to me that maybe whole sections of the film may have been lost and edited in order to keep the story going. Possibly, some scenes eroded or became irreparable. If any film is in desperate need of a frame by frame restoration process, it’s this one.
All Quiet was one of the first films to win the Academy Award for Best Picture. On imdb.com, a user commented that this was the first truly great movie ever produced. Granted, I wouldn’t go that far (Intolerance and
I just searched YouTube to see if anyone posted a scene from this film in order to make fun of it. A quick search only showed trailers and entire sections of the film. Yet, if one were to take many scenes from the movie and watch them alone, they might read as comical since the acting is so over the top. Granted, here is a time where
Yet, by the last third of the film, I stopped noticing the dreadful acting and really became immersed in the plot. The movie, based on the classic book, involves young German boys going off with stars in their eyes to fight in World War I. Immediately, they learn that it’s not going to be a party. Then they learn that the entire experience of fighting has the real potential to end them. We follow the second brigade through hunger, madness, suffering and loss. By the end of the film, almost no one from that division is left, replaced instead by even younger boys than they were when first enlisting.
The film can be seen as eight or nine separate sequences, which when viewed as a whole, pretty accurately describe what Martin Sheen will say in Apocalypse Now—the horror, the horror! I want to point out exactly how some later films used some of the scenes from the father of them all—All Quiet on the Western Front.
Saving Private Ryan: the extended battle scenes meant to show the ugliness of war.
Best Years of Our Lives: the difficult transition from war to home life
Letters from
Born on the Fourth of July: the ugliness of a wartime hospital and the unimaginable damage that can be done to a person that has just become crippled
Bridge on the River Kwai: the emphasis at first on duty to one’s country followed by the realization that duty isn’t enough to make sense of the injustices which result from war
Apocalypse Now: the madness, insanity and yes, the horror of combat
From Here to Eternity: the difficulty of romance during wartime
I’m sure there are many, many more that owe quite a bit to this movie. While the film does go on too long and feels a bit fragmented, it is still an extremely insightful accomplishment, especially considering how early it was made. War is indeed hell, and All Quiet on the Western Front cinematically gave birth to that sentiment. I would guess that walking out of the theater in 1930, audience members were probably grateful that the World War was long behind them. Unfortunately, their world would not stay peaceful for long—twelve years later brought about the Second World War. Even without this later war as a source of inspiration, All Quiet on the Western front still holds up in its unflinchingly brutal and accurate condemnation of the worst human invention in the history of the world.
Once (2007) *****
Directed by John Carney
Note: This will be an extended review of Once. Therefore, I will talk about the entire film piece by piece. If you haven’t seen it yet, first of all watch it right now because it’s amazing, and second, you might not want to read my review until after you’ve seen it.
Richard Roeper and Michael Phillips absolutely raved about Once. The guys from Filmspotting were gushing over it too. Therefore, I was absolutely looking forward to see what all the hype was about. Michael Phillips, who called this the best film of 2007, spoke about the feeling of pure joy that he had walking out of the theater. I was hoping to have that same experience as well after watching it.
After viewing Once almost exactly one year ago in the theaters, my friend and I walked out loving the fact that we just watched an absolutely marvelous little treasure. Months later, when I made my 100 Greatest Movies I’ve Ever Seen list, I began by first naming the hundred deserving films. Then, I started with the least of the films and worked my way up. Whenever I considered placing Once on a number, it just didn’t feel right. I kept looking at the movies and thinking that Once is better—for sure I loved it more! I finally settled on calling it the ninth best film I’ve ever seen. At this moment, it’s at number 11, but I think I’m going to move it down to number 16. On a second viewing, I kept experiencing again the elation that this film provides. The only little difference is that I am not quite as giddy this time around, though I still have butterflies in my stomach. It again affected me on that physical level that only the best films can. Yet, when I look at a film like
Since I have the soundtrack, which is spectacular, I was familiar with all the songs this time around. Therefore, for this viewing, I concentrated more on the plot, characters and dialogue. There are a lot of really smart touches in the writing and the direction, both of which were done by John Carney. Even minus the songs it’s brilliant. Add the songs, though, and it becomes euphoric.
The hilarious opening sequence begins with Glen Hansard playing guitar on the street looking for loose change. At first, he’s really not all that special or worthy of many people stopping to listen. A strange man engages him in conversation who is obviously trying to steal Hansard’s money, which he of course realizes. He tells the guy not to touch his money. The man is offended that he would think such a thing. Of course, in an absolutely believable way, the guy grabs the money and runs away. Hansard runs after him at full speed and finally catches him. I suspect the viewer is meant to assume that he’s going to kick the crap out of the guy. Instead, he yells at him and then almost immediately accepts the guy’s apology. Hansard’s character, we now know, is kind-hearted at his core.
At night, Hansard plays his own music, which he doesn’t do during the day because people will pay more if he plays songs they know. Marketa Irglova full on watches him play a song. By the way, neither of these characters have a name, so I will continue referring to them as Hansard and Irglova. He’s a little creeped out by her earnest gazing and strange banter—strange at least for a first meeting. One aspect that justifies his thinking her strange lies in her blunt conversation style. She asks him what the song’s about. He says that it’s about his ex-girlfriend, and she inquires more about his ex, which obviously makes him uncomfortable. She also finds out that he’s a vacuum repairman and fortunately for both of them, she has a broken vacuum. They agree to meet again tomorrow when she will bring the vac to be fixed. He dismisses her as a nut.
She returns the next day walking her vacuum like it’s a dog on a leash. That particular image just cracked me up when I first saw it and filled me with joy this time around. This woman marches to the beat of her own drum, that’s for sure. He’s not too happy to see her and doesn’t want to fix her vacuum at that moment because he’s about to go get some lunch. She invites herself along, and then we see a conversation in a diner that begins awkwardly but completely comes alive when the topic turns to music. She’s a piano player, which intrigues him. They enter a music store and she shows him her exceptionally impressive skill. Just watch Hansard’s face as he watches her play. He’s mesmerized and in awe.
She asks him to play one of his songs, and he agrees if she will play with him. Quickly, he explains what she should do to follow him. I wouldn’t be surprised if people found that interchange inauthentic. As someone that’s been surrounded by music my whole life, the scene rang completely true. Some people out there have both the training and the instinct to master songs almost immediately. Musicians improvise all the time together. They use their skills to sync completely. You see this only in the best of musicians, and after she plays Mendelssohn, we know that she’s definitely in that same league.
They play Falling Slowly, which won an Oscar. The song is gorgeous, but the focus of that scene is their interaction rather than the music itself. We see two people that are absolutely meant to play music together. Afterwards, they ride on a bus and she again bluntly asks him questions about his ex, all while keeping a smile on her face. Pay attention to that scene carefully. You’ll notice that he doesn’t talk about his ex unless he’s either singing a goofy song or at least strumming the guitar while giving one word answers to her questions. The only way he can deal with his ex is through song, which becomes apparent when he sings a new song he wrote all about lies while watching old clips of his ex and him happy together.
He fixes her vacuum, and his father, who owns the vacuum shop, responds to her mention that his son has talent by saying, “He should. I taught him everything he knows.” Of course his father is referring to fixing vacuums, but we see the minor point that his father doesn’t take his son’s musical ambitions seriously. What’s great is that he’s still a good guy, not like the dad in Billy Elliot that’s ashamed of his son’s ballet dancing. Hansard shows her his room and almost sweetly invites her to spend the night. She curses and storms out.
The next day, he tracks her down and she does accept his apology. Why would she do that? Because he came back to her. Sure, he would have enjoyed having sex with her, but he’s still interested in her knowing that being with her in that way is not an option. His motives with her are genuine. He walks her to her flat in a lower class neighborhood only to find she has a daughter. Okay, so now we know that she’s not a virgin or a prude. But why then did she dismiss his sexual advance? We find that out a bit later. In a similar fashion to her, Hansard asks about the baby’s father, but she really closes down. I’m sure an argument can be made that she should be able to take it if she dishes it out. Yet, these lives are too complicated for that kind of logic. Besides, she was impressed with his ex because she was impressed with the song about his ex. It’s all about the music with these two, which is why his questioning of her can be seen as prying. We see her kind heart when neighbors come over to watch television. She mentions that it’s the only one in the building, so they all watch a show together. He’s pretty special and now we know that she’s really special too. Seems like they’re made for each other—well, to play music with each other at least.
She listens to one of his songs which has no lyrics yet. He offers to let her write the lyrics which she eagerly accepts. Songwriting, like poetry, can be a very personal process, which is why this invitation is so flattering to her. Right before he leaves for the night, he says something beautiful. “Thanks for the company. I really needed it.” I’d feel kind of pathetic admitting my loneliness like that, but this shows once again that he’s a genuine guy.
We next see her finishing the lyrics that night when the batteries die on her portable CD player. She walks to the convenience store to buy new batteries. Once is a musical in every sense except the film doesn’t stop for song. The songs all have reasons to be sung. Either someone or some people are practicing, in a studio, in a music store, listening to a CD or in this scene where she sings his song with her lyrics for the first time while walking home.
He decides, after watching those old clips with his ex, that he is going to move to
In a very funny scene, they go together to a bank to get a loan to pay for the studio. The banker gladly accepts when he listens to a grainy cassette of one of Hansard’s songs. Of course, then he pulls out his guitar and plays him something. Though the scene is funny, it does feel a little out of place with the rest of the movie. Ultimately, I like this scene because it once again shows how music can really connect people almost immediately.
They encounter a local street band and invite them to record with him and her. They agree, and invite Hansard and Irglova over for a singing party, which obviously is a party where everyone has to sing. I loved this scene because it opens up their relationship to others. Once isn’t just about these two loveable people. Had the entire movie just involved these two and no one else, undoubtedly Hansard and Irglova’s characters would seem self-absorbed. While at the party, the street band and Hansard collaborate on a gorgeous Irish ballad. We see now the magic they have the potential to make together.
The next day, he drives his dad’s motorcycle to meet her. At one point he mentions that if his father finds out, then he’s dead. At this point, I realized that in many ways, he’s still a little boy with an idealized view of the world, living at home with his dad. She on the other hand is a mother with a steady job, taking care of her mother as well. Though she is free-spirited and often goofy, she is still a fully fledged adult.
I was shocked by the next scene which has Hansard learn that she is married! I didn’t see that coming. She ran away from her Czech husband, not because he was abusive, but because they couldn’t connect. Another contrast between the two lies in the fact that he is trying to run away from there to
The rep for the recording studio at first dismisses the band as a bunch of weirdos. But, then they start playing! The very best song in the movie is When Your Mind’s Made Up, which involves a very quiet beginning, ultimately building until an explosively heartbreaking ending. By the conclusion of this performance, the studio rep is amazed, and so are we!
All of the songs they sing in the recording studio are on the soundtrack completely from the recording session we see on screen. All songs not in the recording studio were obviously recorded after the film. Therefore, when we watch them sing in the studio, we are actually watching the process of many songs being performed for the film’s soundtrack. This little touch of simplicity endears the film to me even more.
At
Later that morning, when the studio recording is finished, the rep mentions that they need to hear how it sounds on a regular car stereo, so they all take a drive. When Your Mind’s Made Up repeats again, but plays as they all enjoy each other’s company together that morning. Earlier, the song was simply performed in a studio. Now, the song works along with the fact that these are among their last moments together before he leaves for
That previous night, he asked her to go with him to
The next morning, he plays the demo for his dad, and asks for his reaction once it’s over. He pauses and then says, “It’s fucking brilliant.” The way the father says this absolutely brought tears to my eyes. His music has the power to reach people in such a strong way. A line like that wouldn’t be as effective had the songs in Once not been brilliant. They’re just amazing—I can’t say enough about the songs themselves!
He does go to her flat on the way to the airport but she is working and not there. He decides to take a detour to the music store where they first made music together. He buys the piano for her, which is an appropriate and beautiful gesture. Had he not done this, I believe her character would have been under the impression, similar to Bergman and Bogart in
I chose to do this extended review of the film because this is really one of those special films that I feel a personal attachment to. Focusing on each scene from beginning to end allowed me to explain exactly what I love about Once. Two days ago, I saw a dreadful musical called Across the Universe which showcases Beatles’ songs by fitting them into a vapid plotline and applying them only on the lowest literal level. Once is the anti-Across the Universe. Across… reeks of pretension and navel gazing. Once is humble, which makes its greatness all that much more appreciated. Thank God for this film!
Doctor Zhivago (1965) *****
Directed by David Lean
Personally, I think Doctor Zhivago would have been much better had it been an hour or two longer. No, just kidding. Seeing Doctor Zhivago makes me feel like I have really accomplished something significant. All my life I’ve heard about this wonderful long movie. I’ve watched all of the films on AFI’s 100 Greatest Movies list from 2007 so now I am finishing off the last few films that were on the 100 Greatest Movies list from 1997 which did not make the cut ten years later.
Out of all the movies that were cut from the list, Doctor Zhivago had the biggest decline. In 1997 it was considered the 39th greatest. Maybe it would have been 101 in 2007 had the list been extended. Even so, going from 39 to below number 100 maybe says something really profound about the film. It’s probably one of those movies that people are happy to say they’ve seen but not quite so eager to watch over and over again. I was extremely satisfied by all three hours and twenty minutes of Doctor Zhivago and yet, I really don’t want to watch this movie again for a very very long time.
It’s simply too long, complicated and bleak to be truly enjoyable. Yet, solely from an intellectual standpoint, Doctor Zhivago works almost perfectly. The characters are extremely well developed, the performances are all solid, especially Omar Sharif who gives one of the best performances I’ve ever seen as the title character, the direction is among Lean’s very best work and the visual style is haunting and beautiful.
Some of the specifically stylized camera shots are breathtaking, including many that involve windows. My favorite sequence involves a shot of two characters through a window that distorts the characters very slightly. For many, it may be missed on a conscious level, but I believe that the subtle alteration adds to the sorrow of the scene we are witnessing. The only time I really emotionally responded to the film occurred right before the intermission where the identity of a communist general is revealed with a twist that I never saw coming.
The plot is complicated, so I may just have to oversimplify. Yuri Zhivago, a young doctor, must deal with the Soviet Revolution in an especially hard way when he falls in love with Lara, a girl with a very difficult past whom he knows from childhood. Their relationship is doubly complicated because first of all, Yuri is already married and has a son and Lara is also married to her estranged husband. An aspect of one of the marriages causes a conflict of epic proportions. When Yuri and Lara’s lives are in serious danger, they are faced with decisions that involve Lara’s past that no human being should ever have to deal with.
If I read a book like James Joyce’s Ulysees, I’d brag about it to anyone. That’s the way I feel about Doctor Zhivago. Not only am I proud, but I’m happy to say it’s an amazing film. I’d imagine it’s rare to find many people that read Ulysses over and over again. Similarly, I would be shocked if I ever find myself wanting to revisit Doctor Zhivago on a regular basis.
Across the Universe (2007) *1/2
Directed by Julie Taymor
The Beatles are cultural icons, praised as the greatest rock band in history—by far! As such, they deserve to be immortalized as much as possible. Personally, I think any project that pays tribute to the Fab Four must be careful to really respect their brilliant songs. Across the Universe contains some of the very best songs ever written including my favorite song of all time—Hey Jude. I applaud Julie Taymor’s desire to pay tribute to their wonderful music. Unfortunately, though, Across the Universe is an absolute disaster--damaging their songs for today's young viewer. Yet, one good thing may come from the film, no matter how bad it is. Possibly, some people may go out and buy a Beatles album after seeing the movie. What’s more likely, though, is that viewers will simply buy Across the Universe’s soundtrack and put it on their CD cabinet right next to their Hannah Montana and Ashlee Simpson CDs.
Across the Universe is definitely aimed at teenage girls, possibly trying to duplicate the success of the High School Musical franchise. As cheesy as they are, both High School Musical films are much better than Across the Universe because High School Musical is simply trying to be fun. Across the Universe strives to be meaningful and profound.
Is the movie profound? Not at all. Across the Universe has all the depth of a plastic wading pool. A complete dud of a story fills in the gaps between the performances of the Beatles’ songs. Every single song is taken literally. In Strawberry Fields Forever, we actually see strawberries—lots of them. If you want to see a Beatles song absolutely ruined, watch the scene where Prudence sings I Wanna Hold Your Hand like her dog just got hit by a car. Characters in the movie are named Jude, Lucy and Prudence so that we can have the following songs—Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, Hey Jude and Dear Prudence. During Revolution, Jude sings about an actual revolution that Lucy is a part of. During I Want You, we see Max at a recruiting station with Uncle Sam posters singing to him. A Little Help From My Friends is performed on such a surface level that even Joe Cocker should be offended, even though he did make a cameo in the film.
Scenes involving songs from the Beatles’ drug days come into the movie when the kids take drugs. Bono strangely enters the film and sings I Am the Walrus while all the characters transport into what looks like a Grateful Dead album cover. Literally, if I asked Julie Taymor to storyboard the most clichéd and obvious vision for a reality on acid, you would get exactly what you see in Across the Universe.
The film seems to want to show us the turmoil of the sixties. Not once did I believe for a second that any of these characters exist in the sixties. All these young actors look like they raided a consignment shop and played a nice game of sixties dress up. There’s not a single new insight we get into that decade that we don’t get in both Forrest Gump and Billy Joel’s We Didn’t Start the Fire--neither of which are known for their deep insights. None of the actors have any soul or depth which makes the turmoil they are supposed to experience completely moot. Further, most of the performances of these songs come off simply as adequate Karaoke.
Many of the scenes involve CGI effects and animation. These were not impressive at all. Instead they came across as pretentious. The movie wasn’t sexy or interesting or fun or insightful or plausible or funny or inspiring or well, you get the point. Some song performances are satisfactory, and one really worked for me—Let It Be. Though the way they incorporated the song into the plot was heavy handed, it was sung with such soul and passion that I was really choked up.
Across the Universe can be enjoyable for someone really looking to be entertained on the most shallow of levels. The Beatles deserve better movies than this. Nice try, Julie Taymor. She had to know going into this project that a difficult task lay ahead—to contemporize and make relevant these iconic songs in a plot that felt coherent. I’ll give an E for effort but an F for the final product.
Body Heat (1981) ***
Directed by
How exactly should one go about judging the quality of a love scene? Should concepts like originality, mood or camera angles take predominance? Or should the enticement and eroticism be primary? My answer tends more towards the prior rather than the latter. One might say that the purpose of a love scene is to titillate the viewer. My problem with judging on that basis is the obvious fact that everyone has their own criteria for what gets them going. No one scene can satisfy everyone. Therefore, I think it is unwise for a review to praise a love scene because it worked on the reviewer.
Therefore, I think it best to judge a love scene based whether or not the filmmaking itself is effective. In general, I’m not a huge fan of sex in film. Almost always, the sex shown takes on a completely different tone and style than the rest of the movie, which tends to remove me from the story itself.
Also, I’m getting a little tired of the cliché camera shot that is in just about every love scene in every movie. Body Heat contains a perfect example. We begin at the feet and slowly pan the camera up the body until we see the face. There’s another tired cliché that is seen in this film as well. After the act is over, the two main characters are sitting together in a tub and talking. How many times has that been done in movies? The English Patient, Live Flesh, The Pillow Book and Pretty Woman all immediately popped in my head as films containing post-sex bathtub banter.
Body Heat’s sex scenes are explicit and very passionate. Minus the clichés mentioned above, they also work well cinematically. Yet, with the exception of hands going to places not usually seen in most
Interestingly enough, there is no sex at all in the second hour of the film. After an explicit first act, the film takes a cold shower and goes back to the plot. An homage to one of my favorite films of all time, Double Indemnity, Body Heat is about a lawyer named Max (William Hurt) and a sexy, mysterious, married woman named Matty (Kathleen Turner). They have a passionate affair and become seemingly sexually addicted to each other. Lines like, “I need you right now. I need you so bad. I cannot wait,” permeate their relationship throughout. All I’ve got to say is that if either of these two are taking a pill, they should lower the dose!
Eventually, they formulate a plan to kill Matty’s husband Edmund (Richard Crenna) and then share in the half of the will that Matty is set to receive. The deed is done. Then, in a meeting with an estate lawyer and Edmund’s sister Roz (Lanna Saunders), Max is surprised to find out that, on a technicality, Matty actually receives all of the inheritance. This strikes Max’s officer friends as odd and they begrudgingly begin to investigate their buddy. Max also finds Maddy’s fortune curious when he finds out some information about this woman’s past. Scandal and intrigue ensue.
Of course, minus the explicit sex and a few other details, this is the exact plot for Double Indemnity. Body Heat seems to play off the complete tension of those old film-noirs. They talk seductively to each other, which must have been quite erotic in the 1940s. I remember Roger Ebert mentioning that we can imply that Fred MacMurray and Barbara Stanwyck made love right after they committed the crime. Those implied touches of old become explicit here.
Often throughout the film, the characters speak in dialogue right out the film-noir era except now with the inclusion of curse words and sexual dialogue. Herein lies the problem with Body Heat. These actors do not know how to deliver these lines. They seem to only slightly lower the volume on their method acting in order to try and perform in that old school stylized manner of reciting lines. Unfortunately, we still feel that the actors are trying to make this dialogue believable. Throw believability out the window in film-noir and instead replace it with coolness and intensity. Neither Hurt, not Turner, nor any of the supporting cast know how to effectively deliver this dialogue.
The story twists were fun, but again, we’ve seen this plot before in Double Indemnity. I appreciate what Body Heat was trying to do, but rather than recommending this film to people, I’d tell them to watch Double Indemnity instead. If a viewer were looking to see sex in a film, then I’d recommend watching Double Indemnity and then turn on Cinemax at two in the morning.
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) ***
Directed by Steven Spielberg
My Sunday afternoon was spent eating lunch and watching Close Encounters of the Third Kind at a friend’s house. After the film was over, my friend’s husband went online to learn more about the film. I’m grateful he did, because he gave me some really enlightening information behind Spielberg’s early classic. Both my friend and her husband saw the film when it first came out and did not remember whole scenes and sequences from this latest viewing. The reason for this lies with the fact that there have actually been three different edits of the movie. The first edit was the original 1977 release. Three years later, Spielberg followed the advice of the studios and added a few scenes, including a closing shot of Richard Dreyfuss inside of the spaceship. Then, Spielberg wanted to edit the film his way, adding more back story with the arguing family and the inclusion of more aliens. This last edit seems to be the one we all watched.
In my opinion, Spielberg should have left the film alone. Obviously, since this is such an iconic hit with a huge and fervent following, Spielberg’s decisions about what to include probably had to in some ways play to the film’s established fan base. For those of us who may be seeing the film for the first time, we might not need any dessert since we have yet to taste the main course. Close Encounters is too long and contains frustrating elements that take away from the film’s amazing special effects.
Teri Garr plays Ronnie Neary, the wife of the film’s main character, electrician Roy (Dreyfuss). Garr’s performance is so unpleasantly over the top that I was relieved when she took the three miserable kids and drove off, never to be seen in the film again. Every minute I spent with this family made me dislike them more and more. Dreyfuss does a fine job, but his character acts in ways that make absolutely no sense at all. For example, why is he in the bathtub? Why does he act like a psychotic on caffeine when he is collecting materials to make his indoor mountain?
Another plot line involves Gillian Guiler and her three year old son Barry. The very best sequence in the film involves Barry waking up because all of his toys have suddenly turned on. He wanders downstairs, opens the door, and sees the sky fiery red with the lights from what we later learn is a spaceship. The buildup and execution of the scene work brilliantly, showing us that as far as special effects go, this movie is going to deliver the goods.
In the middle of the night,
The final half hour of the film meanders very slowly, and yet, looking back on these scenes, they are pretty impressive. I simply wish we weren’t expected to constantly see the “awesomeness” of the special effects over and over again. They were impressive, but eventually, I simply felt like I was just staring at bright multi-colored lights. There really weren’t enough new things going on to feel novel. One scene, which I bet Spielberg was proud of, involves a musical interchange between the aliens and the people. Personally, I did not find this interchange interesting at all. I mean, I’ve heard music played well before! I haven’t seen aliens before, so why try and use complicated music to impress?
All this being said, the film looks amazing and the scope of the special effects must not only be applauded but revered! I’ve been following the Filmspotting 70s Sci-Fi marathon. Close Encounters, while not on the marathon, is 70s Sci-Fi. When looking at films like The Omega Man, The Andromeda Strain and Silent Running next to Close Encounters of the Third Kind, those former films don’t hold a candle to the ambition and innovation of Spielberg’s vision. Here’s a film I can respect as long as I don’t have to watch it again anytime soon.
