2009 in 2010- July 10th

July 10, 2010

Ballast (2009) *****
Directed by Lance Hammer

My tweet:

Ballast (2009)- I'll keep embracing these poverty line neo-realist films as long as they hold onto their intimacy and humility. ***** of 5

Other thoughts:

Ballast is slightly better than Wendy and Lucy, but it's not as good as Chop Shop. All three films are spectacular examples of the neo-realism movement in film which hires non-actors and has them act as naturally as possible in situations that are attempting to capture a glimpse of a reality to which many moviegoers aren't accustomed. Ballast tells the story of a young African-American boy in the poorest part of the Mississippi delta and his uncle who unsuccessfully attempts suicide. The boy's mother, a former addict, is trying to get her life back on track by working hard, but the challenges of society are working against her which forces her and her son to make a dramatic life change that involves the boy's uncle. There are many questions left unanswered, and the ending comes right in the middle of a scene that doesn't forecast itself as the conclusion, which will undoubtedly prove jarring for those who don't like to think after a movie is over. The ending, though, is just right since the main conflicts within the film are resolved in that moment, and the resolution is nothing overly dramatic or even cinematic. The story ends when all the pieces are in place, and from there, it's up to the audience to fill in the blanks. I absolutely love films that respect the viewers as well as its own characters, and Ballast is a singularly excellent achievement because of its undying respect.

Everlasting Moments (2009) ***1/2
Directed by Jan Troell

My tweet:

Everlasting Moments (2009)- Heiskanen is amazing as Maria in a compelling yet somewhat flimsily textured feminist tale. ***1/2 out of 5

Other thoughts:

Everlasting Moments tells the sweeping tale, based on true events as told through her daughter's memoirs, of Maria Larsson, a seemingly ordinary poor housewife and mother with a natural gift of capturing beauty through photography though she's bound to a life with a brutally abusive husband and seven children which doesn't easily allow her the luxury to pursue her passion. Maria Heiskanen gives one of the performances of the year as the main character, imbuing the woman with such strength of character even when she's being harmed by her monster of a husband, played with gravitas by Mikael Persbrandt. Considering that this is a film about photography, it's understandable that Troell's direction and the film's cinematography is breathtaking. The world within almost feels other-worldly, connecting with the transcendence of Maria's often stifled gift. Unfortunately, the story is not as tight as Everlasting Moments' visual splendor. Considering that this was based on real life, the filmmakers presumably didn't think they could take liberties with the woman's ultimate fate. If in real life, Maria had seven children, one of whom has polio, then Maria in the film is going to have seven children, one of whom will have polio. Yet, there's no cinematic reason whatsoever to include a ten minute subplot about one of the kids having polio. At one point, the oldest daughter is caught kissing a boy. This barely registers within the story, and the narration by this same daughter comes off a bit too distracting and literal. Just because the story comes from someone's memoirs doesn't mean narration by this person is going to make the film better. Narration can be utilized well, but it's not here. There's a picture of Maria and her husband at the end which seems painfully out of place based on the way Maria is abused throughout. Everlasting Moments seems a bit tethered to a memoir, which stifles its final product as a film. Still, though, you won't see many films more beautiful and the main performance is truly astounding. This is a very good film with elements of triumphant greatness.

Defamation/ American Radical: The Trials of Norman Finkelstein

July 9, 2010

Defamation (2009) ***1/2
Directed by Yoav Shamir

American Radical: The Trials of Norman Finkelstein (2010) ****
Directed by David Ridgen & Nicolas Rossier

My tweets:

Defamation (2009)- Well-judged, brave exploration into modern anti-Semitism and what's provoking it. ***1/2 out of 5

American Radical: The Trials of Norman Finkelstein (2010)- Taut look at how a relevant voice can devolve into radicalism. **** out of 5

Other thoughts:

Both documentaries feature Norman Finkelstein prominently, and I'll get back to Dr. Finkelstein in a second. Both documentaries also aren't afraid to show experts articulating their strong, unapologetic viewpoints regarding one of the most controversial issues around--namely, the (lack of) virtue of the state of Israel. Both documentaries focus a bit more on the ultra-liberal Jewish argument that believes radical Zionism to be detrimental to the stature of Jews everywhere. Shamir himself ultimately reaches the conclusion in Defamation that overemphasizing the Holocaust might not be the best way for Israelis to comport themselves in this modern world where any anti-Semitism which exists does so in what ought to be described as a new anti-Semitism. According to many that he interviews, including Finkelstein, the anti-Semitism that caused the Holocaust no longer exists. Anti-Semitism has become an artificial construct by many who blindly promote the power of the state of Israel and the Israeli lobby in the United States.

The filmmakers behind American Radical don't push any agenda themselves, but they are willing to present Finkelstein's extreme views in all their hyperbolic glory. Finkelstein, who has been banned from entering Israel for national security reasons, has been fired for his rhetoric which involves accusing the Prime Minister of Israel of being a terrorist, and has been forced to move to Chicago because of New York's Jewish pride, knows what he's talking about. It's impossible to use emotional pleas of historic injustice when debating Finkelstein since he will have none of it considering that he believes that Israel exists for no other reason than to oppress, torture and kill Palestinians. What makes his stance even more surprising is that his mother was a Holocaust survivor.

The benefit of both documentaries is that they explore a topic that many think ought not to be examined in any sophisticated way. Many Jews are pro-Israel and there's nothing else that ought to be said against it. Many Palestinians are completely anti-Israel in the exact same way. Considering the violence and conflict in the Middle East, keeping one's mouth shut won't help make things better. At the same time, Finkelstein goes to the extreme, which is ironically shown more clearly in Defamation where he jokingly does a Nazi salute. He's a malcontent who has become so stuck in his own crusade that his voice almost becomes too abrasive to be taken seriously even if many of his arguments have merit. Defamation shows the power and borderline hypocrisy of the American Defamation League which spends its time fighting anti-Semitism around the world. Shamir successfully posits that the ADL is fighting against a classical definition of anti-Semitism that's irrelevant in today's society.

Israel is a hot button topic that runs the risk of alienating those who disagree. Considering the fact that Israel recently ambushed a cargo ship in a way that caused worldwide criticism and considering the fact that journalist Helen Thomas had to resign after saying that Israeli Jews ought to get out, this is an issue that's far from being resolved. The first step to resolution and peace is informed dialogue and debate. Both documentaries showcase different voices over the subject, and some actually prove more destructive than constructive. That being said, at least these filmmakers and the people within their films have the guts to take a stand.

Floating Weeds

July 8, 2010

Floating Weeds (1959) *****
Directed by Yasujiro Ozu

My tweet:

Floating Weeds (1959)- Beautiful, simple story of tradition vs. modernization and what it means to belong to a family. ***** out of 5

Other thoughts:

So it turns out that Japanese cinema is more than just Kurosawa and anime... who knew? Filmspotting included Ozu along with Sam Fuller and Tarkovsky in their Overlooked Auteurs marathon, and Roger Ebert recently wrote an article bemoaning the fact that he went into a film school classroom and no one had seen any of Ozu's filmography. Ebert has really championed Floating Weeds especially considering that it's one of the few films in which he contributed a DVD commentary. They Shoot Pictures Don't They had the film on their 1000 greatest list in past years, but this year, it's nowhere to be found. Ozu has seven films on the list, with Tokyo Story at number 11. This week, Criterion releases two of his early talking films from the 1930s on DVD. Ozu died in 1963, and his work didn't even begin to receive serious acclaim from the scholarly film community until the 1970s. Nowadays, he's not known at all by mainstream audiences, and he's not well watched even by film connoisseurs.

All of this leads up to my finally being able to say that I've no longer overlooked Yasujiro Ozu, and I couldn't be happier that I finally caught up with one of his films. Floating Weeds is a lovely little morsel about a traveling kabuki acting troupe led by a fundamentally decent man who specifically sought out this little town so that he could revisit his mistress and son, both of whom he abandoned years ago. The boy, now a teenager, wants to go to college which puts him in a different social class than actors. As such, his mother and the master both tell the boy that the master is actually his mother's brother.

The acting troupe is an artifact of the past, and the boy is striving to make a difference in the future. These two divergent worlds collide when jealousies abound and romantic relationships form. The master, always with the best of intentions, runs the risk of ruining the lives of everyone around him because he's stuck in these artificial, outdated societal constructs about what it means to be a father. He must come face to face with the fact that he's not a good father, and the choices he's made in the past do in fact have consequences in the present.

The entire film takes place during a hot, sweltering summer a few decades after the end of World War 2. Everyone's dressed in kimonos except the teenage boy. The actors, like a bunch of panting dogs, seek out women and sake in a way that brings no respect to themselves or those with whom they ultimately connect.

Ozu frames the movie often by having the camera shoot the characters directly head on so that they can look into our eyes and we can look back as they dialogue with each other. Often, there's a stiff, forced smile painted on their faces as if every single word and mannerism follows some kind of unspoken rule book of etiquette. In Floating Weeds, with the exception of the boy and the actors when they're alone together, we rarely get to see these people as they really are, considering that they almost become shells of their true selves in order to fulfill expectations of tradition and class which ought to have been left in the past. It's hard not to like the people we're presented, but it's easy to see how their naivety will ultimately bring them to the brink of total destruction.

Floating Weeds is a sad film, but it's humble in scope which allows it not to become an epic tragedy. This is a movie about veiled emotions that boil over and cause harm in ways that easily could have been prevented if everyone was just a little more honest with each other. Generations clash and good people act in bad ways. Apparently, this is a common theme in Ozu's work. Floating Weeds is such a completely satisfying cinematic experience that I can't wait to delve into more of his work. Hopefully, more people will come to appreciate one of the great overlooked auteurs, and in my opinion, Floating Weeds seems like the perfect door with which one can enter Ozu's impressive world.

Best Worst Movie

July 7, 2010

Best Worst Movie (2010) ***
Directed by Michael Stephenson

My tweet:

Best Worst Movie (2010)- Surprisingly sweet, if a bit meandering, look at a modern cult classic. *** out of 5

Other thoughts:

Best Worst Movie does a lot of things right--too much in fact. If someone was to ask me what it's about, it would be difficult to choose what to mention as its primary focus. Despite its title, this is not ultimately a documentary about the 1992 film Troll 2. That movie could have been made thereby giving us a significant insight into (bad) movie making. We're presented with all the actors, the director and writer of the film, but very little time is dedicated to what the actual process of making Troll 2 was like.

This is not a movie about the midnight phenomenon of movies that are so bad they become enjoyable when surrounded by a group of like-minded fans. There's a twenty minute stretch dedicated to the hard core Troll 2 fans talking about what makes it truly the worst movie ever made, but then it abandons this exploration and it doesn't really do much to compare and contrast Troll 2 with other films like Manos Hands of Fate, Plan 9 from Outer Space and even The Rocky Horror Picture Show.

This is not a movie about a delusional Italian director. This is not a movie about the cast members as a whole. This is not a movie about a Utah dentist, though I think if I had to, I'd explain this as its primary identity. George Hardy, for the most part, kind of holds the film together, which makes sense considering that he's the sweetest, most sane individual of the group. His toothy smile, his infectious niceness and his genuinely good-natured bafflement over the fact that he's in a film that revered for its sincere awfulness allows us to view this phenomenon through his eyes. We join Hardy as he goes from screening to screening to the applause of midnight audiences, and then later, we start to see his elation begin to unravel as Hardy and others overestimate the appeal of the film. It's heartbreaking to see him at a question and answer session at a memorabilia convention in London, England with less than ten people in the audience.

Yet, Stephenson ultimately betrays and possibly even exploits Hardy's good nature when he takes a few missteps that almost single-handedly undermine the sweet, fun nature of this tongue-in-cheek documentary. He asks Hardy and another actor from the film to track down Margo Prey who played the mother and wife in Troll 2. She's such a sad woman who's so afraid of the world that she shut herself in with her elderly mother hoping in her own words to escape to a place where no one will ever find her again. One wonders whether Troll 2 might have had something to do with the pitiable woman she has become. There's no reason why Stephenson couldn't have cut her scenes out of the film altogether. Best Worst Movie is not trying to be comprehensive in any way whatsoever. It's trying to make the audience laugh and smile along with those who are enjoying this nostalgic trip back to a quirky part of their past. Stephenson should have spent more time making fun of the director since he truly deserves to be laughed at considering that he's a total jerk and left Margo in peace.

The moments with Margo along with a few others spotlighting some strange and sad cast members can be forgiven as mistakes especially considering how ninety percent of the film truly does capture the joy of the Troll 2 wave of success as truly the worst movie ever made. It doesn't give any comprehensive insights into anything, but it certainly captures some truths about what makes truly bad movies, even though these truths aren't explored with any depth. Over and over again, people say that one can't go out and try to make a bad movie. Troll 2 is truly awful because everyone involved took this film seriously, which made the sincere final product open to genuine criticism. If those involved in Troll 2 wink at the camera, even every once in a while, it would not have caught on the way that it did. Best Worst Movie never once gives us any indication that anyone was in on any kind of joke back in 1992.

Troll 2 may just be the best worst movie ever made. This documentary is (for the most part) sweet and fun, and it will undoubtedly make audiences laugh, even if the experience as a whole is a bit brainless and unfocused.

Some Like It Hot

July 5, 2010

Some Like It Hot (1959) *****
Directed by Billy Wilder

My tweet:

Some Like It Hot (1959)- (second viewing) Even better than I remember. So tightly constructed, well-acted and hilarious. ***** out of 5

Other thoughts:

Having seen Some Like It Hot before and having been a bit disappointed by it the first time I watched, I was all ready to call it one of the most overrated movies in history in this review. After all, the American Film Institute named it the best American comedy ever made, and They Shoot Pictures, Don't They calls it the 22nd best movie of all time.

Originally, I found the film very funny, but the final act involving the gang meeting at the hotel felt a bit too much like a dumb Bugs Bunny cartoon, which left me cold. This viewing of Some Like It Hot really solidified in my mind how important it is for me to go back and watch the most revered films more than once because this time I did absolutely fall in love with this brilliantly silly comedy of errors.

The plot of course centers around two bumbling male musicians in 1929 who witness the St. Valentine's Day massacre only to escape to Florida as members of an all female jazz band led by the self-proclaimed dumb Sugar Cane, played by the indomitable Marilyn Monroe. Her performance is one for the film history books. Her sexiness is thrust front and center, especially in her musical performances, but considering that she was notoriously drunk on set and extremely difficult to work with, there's an almost other-worldly ethereal aura to her presence on screen which adds a profound element of heartbreak. Without a doubt, it's obvious why these men fell all over themselves in such comically aggressive ways because of her sex appeal.

Tony Curtis is often overshadowed in discussions about Some Like It Hot considering the brilliance of his two main co-stars, but let's not forget that he's the only one who actually plays three different characters. He's quite good overall, though maybe the best compliment I can give him is that he's able to keep up with those around him. This time around, I found his scene with Monroe on the yacht as Junior much funnier than I remember. Also of note is one of the great supporting comic performances by Joe E. Brown who delivers perhaps the greatest closing line in film history.

Then there's Jack Lemmon giving what I think is the greatest comic performance in film history. His neurotic delivery and his physicality give his alter-ego Daphne a true depth and significance, allowing her to exist almost completely apart from Lemmon's performance as the submissive Jerry. One of the greatest and most famous scenes involves Lemmon as Daphne shaking maracas in bed radiating with total joy as he tells Curtis' Joe that he's engaged to be married. "Who's the lucky woman," Joe asks. "I am!" responds Daphne in a way that shows that Jerry has truly discovered a part of himself as Daphne.

The sequence with the thugs that first bothered me came across passable this viewing. The cake scene is painted with such broad strokes that it's likely that a comparison to a Bugs Bunny cartoon is what Wilder was going for. The setting takes place in an almost stereotypical 1929 with its backdrop of prohibition and organized crime. Bugs Bunny also derives his influence from these same stereotypes, thus permitting me to sit back, relax and enjoy the stupid fun of the action plot.

Some Like It Hot is a masterpiece, and I'm kind of ashamed that it took a second viewing for me to truly come to realize it. I still wouldn't call it the 22nd best movie I've seen or the funniest ever, but I will call it an unqualified cinematic treasure.