The Getaway

August 15, 2008

The Getaway (1972) ****

Directed by Sam Peckinpah

This original version of The Getaway surprised me more than once, and more often than not, I like it when a film surprises me. Considering first of all that this movie was part of Filmspotting’s Classic Heist Marathon and second, that it’s titled The Getaway, I expected a fun heist followed by an entertaining chase of some kind. What I didn’t expect was this film to be off beat, sometimes even delving head first into the bizarre; however, I’ll return to the film’s oddities later.

First of all, it didn’t really sink in until the opening credits that this is a Peckinpah film. The only other film of his I’ve seen is The Wild Bunch, which is an ultra-violent, gritty Western. I challenge you at some point to watch The Wild Bunch and The Getaway back to back. You will no doubt notice how violence is presented similarly in both films. I keep forgetting that there was no PG-13 rating in the early seventies, and the ratings system back then was a little loopy, often allowing movies with nudity to receive a PG rating instead of an R rating. The Thomas Crown Affair was rated R and has virtually no real violence. The Getaway, on the other hand, was rated PG and has considerably brutal violence. Therein lies surprise number one.

Steve McQueen does a truly excellent job playing recently paroled prisoner Doc McCoy whom we learn was found guilty of robbery and assault with a deadly weapon. Though not mentioned explicitly, we are led to believe that he was caught during an attempted heist. His wife, Carol, played by the gorgeous Ali MacGraw who comes off a little too icy in her performance, seems a bit nervous during their first night back together in four years. While in prison, Doc’s lost the ability to truly trust anyone, which is initially quite helpful since he’s always got a plan B in mind in case the people he’s working with aren’t loyal. Yet, the emotional wall that Doc puts up around himself severely strains his marriage as the chase progresses.

Crooked Sheriff Bunyon, played by the great Ben Johnson, desires to use the McCoy’s to pull of a local bank heist. He insists that two of his men assist Doc in its planning and execution. One of the men, named Rudy (Al Lettieri), is as evil as evil can be, which we learn later on in the film. For the most part, the heist is a success, except for the fact that the bank guard was shot and killed in the process. That wasn’t part of the plan. Now, the stakes are raised since everyone involved is wanted for murder. This makes the getaway itself that much harder.

Almost immediately, we learn that Bunyon and his men are planning to kill Doc McCoy and take the money for themselves. Meanwhile, Rudy kills his partner, dumps the body, and heads for the agreed upon location where Doc thinks they are going to split the money. Like I said earlier, Doc’s always prepared for exactly this reason. They both draw their guns on each other, and Rudy’s the one that gets shot. The only problem is that he is wearing a bullet proof vest. He waits for them to leave, and then he begins his pursuit of the money.

McCoy’s next plan is to visit Bunyon’s ranch to deal with him personally. At this point, something happens between Doc and Carol that festers in their relationship throughout the rest of the movie. Once Bunyon is dead, the McCoy’s begin their escape from Rudy, the cops and Bunyon’s brother. At one point, the bag of money is stolen from them by a con-artist, which allows the movie to sidestep a bit by having Doc chase this con-artist up and down a train. Eventually, Doc and Carol make it to El Paso, Texas hoping ultimately to end up in Mexico where they will be safe from the law.

A second surprising element of The Getaway involves a veterinarian named Harold (Jack Dodson) and his wife Fran (Sally Struthers) whom Rudy forces at gunpoint to drive to El Paso. Almost immediately, Fran begins to flirt with Rudy, welcoming his sexual advances. When they stop at a motel, Harold is taped to a chair and presumably forced to watch Rudy and Fran have sex. By the way, during all this, Fran is inexplicably having the time of her life. I suppose there were some real problems in this marriage, though none are mentioned in the film. Ultimately, Harold can’t take any more of this, and he exits the film in a dramatic way. I won’t give away exactly how he exits, but even after he’s gone, Fran’s still infatuated by Rudy’s evil nature. They say that most women like a guy with a dark side.

Struthers is absolutely hilarious, and I’ve got to give her credit for the acting choices she makes. On paper, her character makes no sense at all, and as such, I wonder how she even began to figure out how to play Fran. I’m not kidding when I say that Fran is one of the most unnecessary characters I’ve ever seen in a movie. Yet, she was fun to watch. Every time Fran was on screen, I was absolutely baffled by her truly bizarre inclusion and behavior.

Finally, the third big surprise occurs right at the end of the movie. It involves a good spirited redneck willing and eager to help the outlaws, not caring that they had a gun pointed at his head when they first encountered him. The late addition of this truly strange character is meant to showcase how Doc has grown as a person and as a husband. Still, it’s a peculiar way to end the film, and out of the three surprises I’ve mentioned so far, this last one was least effective. By the way, I can probably even include a fourth surprise, albeit a minor one in comparison. For reasons I won’t get into here, Doc and Carol end up spending the night in a garbage truck, and not in the front part.

There’s some genuine tension in The Getaway, and the violent shootout works brilliantly. From my limited experience with Peckinpah films, I’m impressed with the talent he has for showing violence on screen. The Getaway works very well as a heist movie and as a chase movie. In one sense, it’s quite formulaic, though well executed. In another sense, this movie is quite wacky. Some viewers might not embrace The Getaway’s off the wall elements. I, on the other hand, found them to be refreshing and yes, surprising.

The 100 Greatest Films I've Ever Seen- August 2008

Again, not much is different from last month, but here goes. The numbers in parentheses indicate their positions last month.

1. Ordinary People (1)
2. Citizen Kane (2)
3. Titanic (3)
4. Best Years of Our Lives (4)
5. Casablanca (5)
6. Schindler’s List (6)
7. Gone With the Wind (7)
8. Midnight Cowboy (8)
9. The Truman Show (9)
10. The Seventh Seal (10)
11. Brokeback Mountain (11)
12. Oliver! (12)
13. Sunset Boulevard (13)
14. Fargo (14)
15. Once (15)
16. Singin’ In the Rain (16)
17. Double Indemnity (17)
18. E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (18)
19. Gandhi (19)
20. 8 ½ (20)
21. Life is Beautiful (21)
22. Beauty and the Beast (1946) (22)
23. The Bicycle Thief (23)
24. The Grapes of Wrath (24)
25. Raging Bull (25)
26. About a Boy (26)
27. Being John Malkovich (27)
28. Apocalypse Now (28)
29. The Godfather (29)
30. West Side Story (30)
31. Bonnie and Clyde (31)
32. Taxi Driver (32)
33. Rififi (33)
    
34. Grave of the Fireflies (34)
35. The Graduate (35)
36. Rashomon (36)
37. Bridge on the River Kwai (37)
38. Lord of the Rings: Return of the King (38)
39. North by Northwest (39)
40. The Departed (40)
41. The Maltese Falcon (41)
42. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (new)
43. The Wizard of Oz (42)
    
44. Dances with Wolves (43)
    
45. Star Wars: Episode IV: The New Hope (44)
46. Fanny and Alexander (45)
47. 2001: A Space Odyssey (46)
48. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (47)
49. The Sound of Music (48)
50. Stagecoach (49)
51. They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (50)
    
52. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (51)
53. The Deer Hunter (52)
54. The Shawshank Redemption (53)
55. Broken Blossoms (54)
56. All About Eve (55)
57. Pulp Fiction (56)
58. The Passion of the Christ (57)
59. Rocky (58)
60. Donnie Darko (59)
61. Nashville (60)
62. My Best Friend’s Wedding (61)
63. The Manchurian Candidate (62)
64. Treasure of the Sierra Madre (63)
    
65. Battleship Potemkin (64)
66. Yankee Doodle Dandy (65)
67. Hoop Dreams (66)
68. Terms of Endearment (67)
    
69. Spirited Away (68)
70. The Godfather Part II (69)
71. Jaws (70)
72. Shame (71)
73. Blowup (72)
74. City Lights (73)
75. High Noon (74)
76. Annie Hall (75)
77. Duck Soup (76)
78. The French Connection (77)
79. Born on the Fourth of July (78)
80. Rear Window (79)
81. Bride of Frankenstein (80)
82. Babel (81)
83. To Sir, with Love (82)
    
84. Victor/Victoria (83)
85. Shane (84)
86. The Prince of Egypt (85)
87. 12 Angry Men (86)
88. Simon Birch (87)
89. Harold and Maude (new)
    
90. No Country For Old Men (88)
91. Evita (89)
92. A Few Good Men (90)
93. Everyone Says I Love You (91)
94. Pleasantville (92)
95. Sullivan’s Travels (93)
96. Beauty and the Beast (1991) (94)
97. Forrest Gump (95)
98. Marty (96)
99. The Dark Knight (new)
    
100. The Thin Man (97)

Three new films entered my list this month--4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, Harold and Maude and The Dark Knight. Three films fell off my list--The 400 Blows, Silence of the Lambs and The Apartment.

The Thomas Crown Affair

August 13, 2008

The Thomas Crown Affair (1968) ***

Directed by Norman Jewison

I resent The Thomas Crown affair in the same way people sometimes resent the coolest kids in their high school. The Thomas Crown Affair comes off so darn smug that I almost believe that the film thinks it’s better than I am. Buried in my resentment of course is some deep seated jealousy. Here is a film that at one time was an almost textbook example of “cool.” Of course, what’s cool in 1968 may not be cool in 2008. As such, The Thomas Crown Affair suffers because everything about it screams late sixties. If the most popular kid in a high school from 1968 time traveled to modern times, I bet he’d be made fun of non-stop because of his clothes and his slang. In other words, The Thomas Crown Affair doesn’t hold up after forty years as being the textbook definition of cool anymore.

Thankfully, though, underneath all its retro elements, there’s a pretty entertaining heist film. Unlike the first four movies in the Filmspotting Classic Heist Marathon, The Thomas Crown Affair begins right away with the heist, thus bypassing the meticulous plan leading to an action packed climax. Though three of the four films I’ve seen (Rififi, The Lavender Hill Mob and Le Cercle Rouge) have been truly excellent, it was refreshing to see a heist played out differently. Basically, once the heist is over, The Thomas Crown Affair turns into a romance/psychological thriller rather than an action romp. The heist itself is fun to watch, though it’s nowhere near as interesting as the heists in both Rififi and Le Cercle Rouge.

The film stars Steve McQueen, himself a one-time king of cool, playing Thomas Crown, an extremely wealthy but restless individual who decides to live life in the fast line, thus orchestrating a heist to see if he can in fact pull it off. You know, it’s interesting that McQueen, often ranking somewhere in the thirties on lists of the greatest film actors of all time, was only familiar to me by reputation. He died in 1980 at the age of 50, and looking at his acting resume, I realize that this is the first McQueen film I’ve ever seen. He’s really an amazing on-screen presence, oozing masculinity and charm. I plan to watch McQueen in The Getaway very soon since it’s next on Filmspotting’s Classic Heist Marathon. He’s also in The Magnificent Seven, which is one of my father’s favorite movies, and one I look forward to checking out. Watching McQueen as Thomas Crown has made me a fan.

The police, led by Eddy Malone (Paul Burke), really want to catch the perpetrator of the heist, and so they call in sexy insurance investigator Vicki Anderson. Her price is a share of the stolen two million dollars if/when it’s recovered. Faye Dunaway, always fun to watch on screen, tackles her role with a playful mix between being a lipstick feminist and a sex kitten. At first, she uses her sexuality to win over Crown whom she believes to be the instigator of the heist. She’s so self-confident that she tells Crown straight away who she is and what she thinks he has done. The two become so attracted to each other that we wonder whether or not Vicki will be able to turn him in once the police are ready to make an arrest. Vicki, falling in love hard, clearly wonders the same thing. Are Crown’s feelings for her genuine, or is she just another one of the games he plays to keep life interesting?

The film’s most famous scene consists of what’s meant to be an erotic chess match. I remember seeing this scene on the E! channel’s countdown of the greatest love scenes in movie history. In 1968, I can imagine that this scene alone may have been responsible for many men running to the theaters. Personally, I found it comical. It’s so heavy handed, and watching Dunaway phallically stroke a chess piece made me laugh out loud. Further, you get these close-ups of their faces where both actors overplay what’s supposed to be sexual tension. I can’t imagine many finding this scene as titillating today as they did forty years ago.

The heist was fun, and I enjoyed the way the film ended. It was exactly how I wanted it to end. Yet, the romance in between didn’t win me over. I never grew to like these characters enough individually, and thus, when they get together, I had no reason to root for their relationship to work. Besides, Thomas Crown was a crook, and a big part of me wanted to see him get arrested.

The film’s smugness shows clearly through its psychedelic elements which are featured heavily during the first half and all but disappear during the film’s second half. We see the screen split into fragments, sometimes showing the different characters at the same time, similar to the television show 24, and other times showing the same scene in ways that I assume Norman Jewison believed to be clever. Scenes transition at times by blurring, changing color and refocusing. I bet sixties moviegoers dug these added details, but like I said, what’s cool forty years ago may not be cool anymore.

If Jewison trusted the material enough to let it work on its own, then maybe the film could have held up better over time. Ultimately, though, as long as you prepare yourself for the film’s retro excess and its no longer sexy chess match, I believe that you will enjoy yourself. I’ll admit through my jealousy and resentment that The Thomas Crown Affair is still pretty cool, though not nearly as much as it was in 1968.

Chop Shop

August 13, 2008

Chop Shop (2008) ****1/2

Directed by Ramin Bahrani

Chop Shop offers a story about innocence lost and idealism shattered, while at the same time, it exemplifies forgiveness and familial love. This ultra-independent film by ultra-independent writer/director Ramin Bahrani (Man Push Cart) is quite an achievement. The trust and patience he must have demonstrated with his young actors is really something, considering that there’s maybe thirty minutes of dialogue (at the most) in this eighty-four minute film. By the time I witnessed the film’s breathtaking, brilliant final scene, I was strongly invested in the lives of the two main characters.

Ale (Alejandro Polanco) is a pre-pubescent Latino street kid from the outskirts of Queens, NY who works and lives in an auto-body shop. He’s successfully lived on his own for a long time, but when his sixteen year old sister Isamar (Isamar Gonzales) arrives in Queens, it’s clear that Ale is more than happy to share his life with someone else. In a world like the one Ale lives in, only the strong survive. As such, Ale’s resourcefulness and determination points to a maturity well beyond his years.

Between legal activities, such as working at the auto-body shop, and illegal activities, such as selling pirated DVD’s, swiping hubcaps, snatching purses and assisting in taking apart a stolen car to sell for parts, Ale’s determined to make four thousand five hundred dollars in order to buy a dilapidated ice cream truck which he believes will give him the opportunity to start a business in order to provide his sister and himself with a better life. It’s clear very early on that Isamar is acting much more recklessly than Ale. More and more, she’s out late on the streets of Queens. Both Ale and we figure out that she’s prostituting herself in order to help raise the money. Ale, worried about her safety, often resorts to wandering the dangerous streets at night trying to make sure she’s okay.

Eventually, they do raise enough money and sign the lease to the run down truck. Unfortunately, with something as complicated as buying a car and beginning a business, both Ale and Isamar’s naivety become clear. They are told that there’s no way the truck could ever function as a business involving food. All of the appliances are useless, and there are no vents inside, just holes.

You’d think that something so disappointing would break Ale and Isamar’s spirits completely, and as we watch the final scenes in the film, we see behavior by both of them which makes us think they’re on a serious downward spiral. The question then becomes, “Is there anything or anyone that can save these two children?” It’s clear that society can’t, and neither can the adults in their neighborhood who don’t give a damn about them. So, what’s their saving grace?

As I began watching Chop Shop, which was available for instant viewing on Netflix and is now out on DVD, I was put off by the atrocious line delivery by the young actors. Both Alejandro and Isamar have never acted in anything before, and it’s clear. The way they speak goes beyond amateur. Awful might be a better word. It might have been wiser for Bahrani to allow the actors to improvise so that their dialogue might sound more authentic. On the other hand, the way everyone in the film, especially Alejandro, carries themselves felt real from beginning to end. Take, for example, a scene where an alarm clock wakes Ale and Isamar up. The way Ale acts in that scene completely comes across as if he’s just slept for hours. Every single moment in Chop Shop that doesn’t involve characters speaking works brilliantly. Also, after a while, the flat line delivery bothered me less and less as I got used to it.

No film that I’ve ever seen portrays life in an inner city better than Chop Shop. Also, I can’t think of too many films that deal with difficult childhood more authentically. Screenwriters Bahrani and Bahareh Azimi made a brilliant decision by including Ale’s slightly younger friend (I’m not sure of the character’s name) as a contrast to Ale’s maturity. At one point, his friend begs Ale to go with him to the junkyard so they could push each other in shopping carts down the hills. Ale declines this offer saying he’s got things to do. What’s sad in this scene is the fact that at Ale’s age, he should be out playing with his friends and having fun. As resourceful and determined as Ale is, I wouldn’t be surprised to see him as the CEO of a Fortune 500 company—that is if he had a life with fewer obstacles and more opportunities.

The final scene of Chop Shop is one of the most beautiful final scenes I’ve seen in a while. It takes place the morning after Ale confronts Isamar while she’s in the act of prostituting herself to an older white man. What could Isamar possibly say to Ale and what could Ale possibly say to Isamar after what transpired? Bahrani’s answer—nothing at all. Instead, we see the two of them react to a swarm of pigeons swooping down to eat the seed that Ale just threw on the ground. Look at Ale’s face during this scene. The very last moment of the film has Isamar doing something which can be interpreted in many ways. I see it as a rejection of the scavengers that have been using her since she arrived in Queens.

You can’t go into a film like Chop Shop hoping for an artificial narrative to keep you invested. Instead, the film is a character study of these street children in an environment that’s all too real. It’s filmed completely with a handheld camera giving it a low budget documentary feel. I found myself comparing this film to Truffaut’s French New Wave classic The 400 Blows. In both films, we see young boys struggling to make it in a world that’s determined to break their spirits. While The 400 Blows ends a bit pessimistically, Chop Shop resolves itself with a sense of hope that these resourceful kids will be all right. I believe that Ale and Isamar will come up with another plan which they will execute successfully as well. Hopefully this time, they’ll rely on the lessons learned from that ice cream truck—a lesson that cost them forty five hundred dollars.

La Vie en Rose

August 12, 2008

La Vie en Rose (2007) *1/2

Directed by Olivier Dahan

There’s a fine line between great acting and overacting. At the same time there’s a fine line between great directing and overdirecting. La Vie en Rose crosses both lines, containing what I believe to be one of the worst female performances I’ve ever seen in Marion Cotillard’s impersonation of iconic French singer Edith Piaf. Also, Olivier Dahan doesn’t seem to have the French equivalent of understatement in his vocabulary. Of course, with regards to Cotillard, my opinion is clearly the minority opinion considering that she won the Academy Award for Best Actress. Having such a different opinion than most always confuses me a bit. My ego tells me that if I meet with every single person who voted for Cotillard to win the Oscar and explain scene by scene why I despised her performance, then I’d convince all of them that she’s overacting badly. Of course, in reality, if I did try and do that, I ‘m sure I wouldn’t change many opinions at all. As a matter of fact, I’d love to be told what people enjoyed about her performance because then perhaps I might change my mind. I doubt it, though.

La Vie en Rose contains a number of significant problems. First of all, the film employs a type of nonsensical organization, often putting contrasting scenes together from random points in her life. The film doesn’t start with her birth and end with her death while everything occurs chronologically in between. Roger Ebert, in his four star review, equated this style with Piaf herself, claiming that this woman’s life was so all over the place that a rigid organizational system wouldn’t have done her life justice. Well, that’s an interesting insight, Roger, but was that really the intention of the filmmakers? If I were to guess, I’d say that Olivier Dahan said to someone else, “Wouldn’t it be amazing if we made the film in an artsy disorganized deconstructed way?” Then I bet someone said,”Yes!” I’m guessing Dahan was proud of himself.

Second, from beginning to end, the film contains edits, transitions, montages and camera tricks which came off arrogant, self-important and simply bothersome. If there’s a way to shoot a scene with three cameras, then Dahan probably said, “Let’s use thirty cameras instead!” We get all these far away shots intermingled with extreme close-ups. One of the rules I’ve always heard about acting in front of a camera is that you shouldn’t try and act when the camera is zoomed in tightly on your face. Well, Cotillard obviously rejects that statement, hamming it up big time in close up shots by quivering her mouth, bugging her eyes and moving her head.

That brings me to Cotillard herself. She’s required to play Piaf in every stage of her adult life. I didn’t know anything about Edith Piaf before this film, but to me, the way Cotillard spoke never once felt authentic. Every line she said sounded simply like she was doing an impersonation. Also, listening to that voice felt like I was hearing a mix between nails on a blackboard and a dying cat screeching. However, there’s one scene that works well. Piaf, who died at 47 of jaundice, collapses on stage. Everyone backstage wants to rush her to the hospital, but Piaf insists that she be allowed to finish just one song. Her motivation is that without her ability to sing, she’s nothing. In that moment, Cotillard comes across authentic, hitting the right acting notes perfectly. Unfortunately, she utilizes this same over the top acting in every single scene she is in. Look at her when she’s very sick, and she’s being led to a chair. She’s wobbly and shaky, but almost with too much energy for a woman so sick and fragile. Watch her sing her final song about no regrets. Watch her eyes. Notice something that she doesn’t do at all during this three minute song? When you see an actress obviously giving it her all while most of her performance comes off inauthentic, then you’ve got overacting.

Everyone involved in La Vie en Rose clearly wanted to make a spectacular film. Too bad they went way too far. At two hours and sixteen minutes, I was painfully bored. Yet, at times, I was fascinated by the cinematic equivalent of a car wreck that I was watching on screen. The movie feels like melodrama topped with melodrama with a heaping helping of melodrama on the side! I suppose Edith Piaf deserves a great biopic dedicated to her life. In no way at all did I feel that the filmmakers were making La Vie en Rose for Piaf. I think their motivation was to make as mainstream a film as possible, especially for American audiences. Also, I bet they had Oscar in the front of their minds as well. While a better film about Piaf’s life might do her more justice, at the same time, Marion Cotillard giving back her Oscar would also do the film world a great deal of justice.

No End in Sight

August 10, 2008

No End in Sight (2007) ****

Directed by Charles Ferguson

Note: I do not have a list of all the people that appeared in the film nor do I have their positions so I won’t be able to mention many specific names.

I’m a liberal who is adamantly against the war in Iraq. As such, I appreciated the arguments made in the documentary No End in Sight. The film seems to have been completed sometime in late 2006. Of course, a lot has happened in two years, and it was interesting watching the film at a different point in the war’s chronology. First of all, sentiments in favor of the war have plummeted drastically. Second, there’s a presidential election going on, and the war in Iraq is among the top issues, though the economy is the biggest issue at present. Third, a troop surge was utilized in order to quell the violence on the ground. By all intents and purposes, the surge succeeded in its mission, or at least, the violence and American casualties have both decreased significantly since the surge.

The film focuses mainly on the players making the decisions during the first few years of the war. Republicans and Democrats can both agree that many logistical mistakes were made when the war was in its early stage. No End in Sight, for the most part, was not able to get some of the most powerful key players on camera including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, Lawrence DiRita and Condoleezza Rice. The only “villainous” person who did appear on camera was basically pounded into the ground, looking like a criminal and a slime ball. Yet, since he was the only one to appear, I think the man deserves quite a bit of credit for his bravery.

Still, though, the way the film treats that man makes me think that it was extremely smart for other key players not to agree to go on camera. It’s clear that Ferguson is only presenting one partisan side of the argument. He didn’t even give that man time to explain himself, or if he did, then the film was edited so that the man would simply be confirming the argument that Ferguson desires to make—that the war was grossly mishandled. Therein lies the problem with No End in Sight. There’s no way at all that anyone who wasn’t convinced in the first place is going to change his or her mind. If anything, the film simply succeeds in making liberals that much angrier.

No End in Sight is extremely well organized, and it is refreshing that the film doesn't talk down to its audience. I’m guessing that Ferguson assumed that anyone who chooses to watch this documentary in the first place is either intelligent or familiar enough with the war to understand arguments without needing to have them dumbed down. The most powerful argument, one that I hadn’t realized before, was that the looting that took place after Saddam Hussein lost power directly contributed to the chaos and violence that occurred on the streets of Iraq in the weeks, months and years to follow. Further, the soldiers on the ground did nothing to help police the streets during the looting which probably added to anti-American hatred by the Iraqi people. Considering that this hatred most likely pushed many individuals to fight against U.S. soldiers, it's clear that the decision to be apathetic about the looting may have contributed to our lack of success in Iraq.

I did have a serious problem with many of the sweeping statements made throughout the film. We often hear people explicitly say that a certain person is responsible for all of the violence, or they say that a different decision would have made things much better. First of all, there’s no way to prove either of these statements, and second, hindsight’s vision is 20/20. Therefore, when hyperbolic accusations are made, there's a danger that the film's credibility might diminish if statements are shown to be false, or even if viewers reject inference and speculation.

Overall, though, as a film, No End in Sight is extremely well-made and profoundly interesting. The film’s politics are slanted towards the left, and therefore, I believe that some of the film’s supporting points should be taken with a grain of salt. No End in Sight pretty much portrays the highest decision makers as stubborn liars. Personally, though I believe this war has been a disaster and it was mismanaged from the start, I still hold onto the belief that President Bush and his advisors had the country’s best intentions in mind at all times. I don’t think Bush meant to or ordered anyone to lie. Still, though, I’m voting for Democrats in November because, even if Republicans had good intentions, their judgments more often than not were faulty. As a liberal, I embraced No End in Sight. Conservatives will simply dismiss it; because of the film’s unapologetic bias, I can’t blame conservatives for doing so.

Black Snake Moan

August 10, 2008

Black Snake Moan (2007) ****1/2

Directed by Craig Brewer

Black Snake Moan has to have had one of the worst marketing campaigns in the history of modern film. There were two things emphasized to the public. First, superstar singer Justin Timberlake acts in this film, and second, the plot involves Samuel L. Jackson’s character chaining Christina Ricci’s character to a furnace while she’s wearing nothing but panties and a cut off shirt. Well, the first wasn’t necessarily going to make much money since Timberlake had already appeared in an earlier released film called Alpha Dogs, which went on to become a big box office flop. So, the novelty of seeing Timberlake act wasn’t really much of a novelty at all and he’s proven that he’s not a box office draw, a fact that has been confirmed recently by his latest movie The Love Guru tanking at the box office.

The second campaign, involving Ricci chained up half naked, was probably thought to appeal to either a fetish crowd, which alone can’t make a film successful, or to a younger Quentin Tarantino-like trashy B-movie demographic. Well, Black Snake Moan grossed nearly ten million of its fifteen million dollar budget—in other words, it bombed at the box office. That’s really too bad, because I found Black Snake Moan to be an extremely uplifting, inspirational off-beat movie. Therefore, had it been marketed better, and had Christina Ricci’s two gratuitous topless scenes been cut, the film may have been able to attract an older female crowd which has the potential to turn a film into box office gold, like Sex and the City for instance. Instead, the film was marketed as a testosterone pumping, guys’ movie teeming with blatant, somewhat misogynistic sexuality. To put it another way, Black Snake Moan’s marketing made it look like a dirty soft-core porno.

Instead, we are treated to these two broken characters who bring out the best in the other. Both Jackson’s Lazarus and Ricci’s Rae are living lives neither of them ever wanted to end up living. With Rae especially, she on the fast track to killing herself with the way she sleeps around and abuses drugs. Lazarus, on the other hand, is settling into old age very lonely with a temper that always has the potential to get him into trouble. We learn that Lazarus used to play in a band that would bring crowds into the local bar which has since become pretty run down once the band stopped playing together.

Rae is a clinical nymphomaniac resulting from a great deal of sexual abuse she was the victim of as a child. Her boyfriend Ronnie, played by Timberlake, has just left for basic training in the army. Her relationship with Ronnie has given Rae a feeling of being needed considering that Ronnie has serious anxiety attacks which Rae would always help him deal with. Once he leaves, Rae becomes that much more self-destructive, immediately sleeping with another guy and that night taking a dangerous combination of drugs. She’s beaten up by the best friend of her boyfriend and left on the side of the road to die wearing no pants.

Lazarus, meanwhile, whose brother has just admitted to sleeping with Lazarus’ ex-wife, is similarly in a period of self-hatred when he discovers Rae. She’s still unconscious when he takes her home, cleans her up and attains medicine for her with the help of a friendly pharmacist played by the great S. Epatha Merkerson of Law and Order fame. When he arrives home, he finds that she has tried to escape only to pass out again. After reading his Bible, he decides to chain her to the radiator to keep her from running away. He’s given her enough slack to walk around the entire house and even outside to an extent. She wakes up assuming that he wants sex out of her. When he tells her that he’s there to save her, she screams at the top of her lungs for him to let her go.

The rest of the film involves the two of them sharing their stories and growing in much needed friendship. He realizes that she needs serious help when she sexually assaults a young teenage boy without being able to help it. Eventually Ronnie returns because his anxiety issues deem him unfit to serve. The film resolves the stories of both Ronnie and Rae as well as Lazarus and a certain pharmacist that’s taken a liking to him.

Jackson and Ricci given monumental performances, and especially Ricci must be given credit for the guts necessary to appear on screen in the way that she does. Jackson proves once again that he’s one of our greatest and most unique actors working in film today. Black Snake Moan delves headfirst into the disturbing lives of its characters, and as such, some might find the film unpleasant to sit through.

On the other hand, many may have a similar experience that I had. By the end, I grew to love these characters and their relationships to each other. The film could have gone with a darker ending to match the rest of the film in tone. Had it gone that way, I believe that the film could have been accused of being sadistic and exploiting Ricci as an actress. Instead, the ending is heartwarming and sure to bring a smile to the face of anyone that watches it.

Whatever idiot decided to focus on the film’s fetish elements should be fired and blacklisted from marketing any other films. People that like fetish films don’t want to be inspired by sentimentality, and most people that want to be inspired by sentimentality don’t want to see a fetish film. Unless you’re a pervert, then believe it or not, I think you will feel happier once you’ve seen Black Snake Moan.

In Bruges

August 10, 2008

In Bruges (2008) *****

Directed by Martin McDonagh

In just about all films I’ve seen which involve heroes and villains, the villains have no moral compass at all. They’re either two-dimensionally evil, with no redeeming qualities, or else, they are willing to do horrible things to people, such as murder, without ever feeling guilty about it. Sometimes villains are humanized, often by simply showing why they act in the way they do. Usually, this involves something from their childhood which has psychologically affected them as an adult forcing them to become sociopaths. In Bruges, on the other hand, has no heroes, and the villains, who are the main characters of the film, spend a great deal of time dealing with their own ethical standards in light of the heinous acts they were responsible for in the past.

You’d expect a film about a search for redemption and salvation to be heavy and ultra-serious in tone. Instead, In Bruges relies on dark humor in order to make its action and violence universally entertaining. In no way can someone accurately call this film a downer, though it profoundly explores notions of sin and evil. As such, In Bruges deserves to be called a masterpiece, and an extremely risky one at that. Had the humor been too strong, or had the serious introspection gotten too grim, then the film could easily have been criticized as unfocused. It saddens me that In Bruges was not a box office hit. I believe that too many moviegoers today demand that a film be as stupid as possible. It’s way too uncommon for an intelligent film to make money. Because of this, studios are going to finance good films less and less as dumb movies continue to rake in the dough.

I don’t have much experience with Colin Ferrell films, not being able to really recall any that he’s been in that I’ve seen. He has a reputation in real life of being a man’s man, which in my mind makes him disgusting, classless and stupid. Yet, his performance as Ray in In Bruges has made me a fan. I absolutely believe he deserves an Oscar nomination for Best Actor giving a frantic, funny, and perplexing performance which carries the entire film. Brendan Gleeson also gives an Oscar worthy performance, albeit much more low-key than Ferrell’s, playing Ken, a character much more settled in his life of crime, though obviously caring a great deal about Ray, who is very new to being a hit man. Finally, the always great Ralph Fiennes plays crime boss Harry Waters, a man so unpredictable with his mood swings that every time his character appears on screen, you’re not sure if you should be afraid of him or laugh at his semi-insane banter. At times, he comes across as a gruesome monster, while other times, he seems like a puppy in a basket. Fiennes brilliantly keeps his eccentric character believable, often eliciting many of the film’s biggest laughs.

The plot of In Bruges is simple. Ray has just completed his first job as a hit man, killing a priest in a confessional box. Unfortunately, while shooting him over and over, he accidentally hits and kills a six year old boy. Harry then orders Ray and his more experienced partner Ken to spend some time in Bruges, Belgium. Ken believes that the two of them are ordered there to carry out a murder. Before they await Harry’s call, the they go sightseeing through this gorgeous medieval-like town. Ken’s impressed by the architecture and the museums while Ray’s more interested in sleeping with an actress involved in a local film shoot. Ken finally hears from Harry while Ray is out on the town. Harry wanted Ray to go to Bruges so he could have a great vacation before he dies. Because he killed a little boy, which is unforgivable according to Harry, Ken must shoot him.

Ray, hungover from cocaine and wrought with guilt over killing the boy, puts a shotgun to his head, but luckily Ken, who was planning to shoot him in the back just then, stops Ray from going through with it. Instead, he puts Ray on a train telling him to begin his new life somewhere else. Now Ken is the one that must die because he showed disloyalty to Harry. Harry arrives in Bruges, and because of unlucky circumstances, Ray must return to Bruges. The final scenes involve a chase and shootout between these three characters.

In Bruges is extremely exciting, with scenes of great tension. Still, though, I can’t emphasize enough how wonderfully funny this film is. During the chase scene between Ken and Harry, they agree that Harry will let him escape as long as he doesn’t shoot a pregnant woman. Harry could easily have refused, attempting to kill Ken without harming the woman. Instead, because he’s probably a bit nutty, Harry agrees to let Ken run away at the count of three.

There are side plots that don’t work well except to allow us to see Ray’s frenetic personality in contrast to the times when he’s overcome with guilt and shame. Still, though, In Bruges is one of the smartest thrillers I’ve ever seen, taking its time to explore the human conscience while succeeding in making the audience laugh hard throughout. If there’s justice in the world, In Bruges will find its smart audience on DVD. I hope voters remember this February released film when the time comes to fill in their Oscar ballots.