Trailer: “The Tracey Fragments”

Wanted to quickly link over to this trailer for The Tracey Fragments on Film Drunk, who are not as friendly to the film as I’m inclined to be.

This one’s a weird sight: Ellen Page stars in a dark-as-it-gets drama, apparently filmed before Juno. This is pretty much the opposite of her teen pregnancy star turn in every conceivable way (even more so than the very good Hard Candy,) so this one might be a little odd.

Limited release coming in early May, keep your eyes out.

Click here; redirects to Film Drunk with the trailer. 

Review: “21″

21 directed by Robert Luketic, USA, 2008. Reviewed by James 3/28/08.

Lyn Elliot, a film teacher who taught Julian everything he knows about filmmaking (j/k Julian), came into my documentary film class and showed us a short doc she had made about card counters, people who keep track of the statistical placement of cards in a deck in order to have a better chance of winning at blackjack. Casinos will kick your ass up and down the Vegas strip if they catch you doing it, but with a little strategy and a dependable group of people, one can make quite a bit of money at it. There’s a scene in there where one group is counting a bunch of huge stacks of money, tens of thousands of dollars. She interviewed a number of people for the piece: her parents, who used to do it but quit; a group of people who still do it and do it for a living, and a group of MIT students who did it as a hobby. She even snuck a camera into a casino and got some footage of the people in action. Her documentary was a fascinating inside look into a little known subculture.

And, as you might expect, that is exactly what 21 is not. It’s about some nerd guy, the handsome one out of his group of ugly nerd friends, who joins up with the aforementioned MIT team and wins a whole bunch of money, then loses it, then gets some of it back again. Kevin Spacey is in it too, as a math teacher.

It’s a stupid movie for a number of reasons. For one, they decide insipidly that they need to keep reminding us that the nerd guy (I will not look up the actor’s or character’s name, because I don’t care) is really good at math. A scholarship judge reads off his transcript, perfect marks in math classes, perfect on the SATs. But that’s not enough so there’s a scene where he upstages Spacey’s and lays down all kinds of math skills, in a scene using the classic Monty Hall problem. (Google it). But that’s not enough so there’s a scene where a customer at the clothes store he works at ask him how much the total will be and he just adds up all the prices in his head. But that’s not enough so he follows that by saying to the customer “I’m pretty good with numbers.” But that’s not enough so Spacey just keeps telling him that he’s good, real good, you remind me of me when I was young, you’re real good kid, the best, you’re good.

Goddamnit.

The movie is filled with shit like this. Uninteresting, unbelievable characters. Stupid, unbelievable plot twists. The nerd, this genius math kid, accepted at Harvard Med, you know what he does. He stores his goddamn money inside a drop ceiling and is then shocked when all 300,000 dollars of it is stolen. That was money he needed for Harvard by the way.

Other than the nerd guy, there’s Kate Bosworth as tits, some guy who looks and acts like Jonah Hill as the nerd guy’s nerd friend who looks and acts like Jonah Hill, and Lawrence Fishburne as the casino security guard who beats the shit out of anyone who he catches counting cards. He fills a similar role in this movie as Sam Jackson does in Jumper, which leads me to believe that there is a new stereotypical black character in movies today, that of the buzzkilling negro.

Also, this just in: apparently the nerd guy is based on a MIT student (I neglected to mention that this movie is LOOSELY based on a true story.) who is Asian-American. The guy in this movie is white, so very, very white. So there’s that too. And yes the info I am reading does tell me the name of the character and the actor but no I won’t write it here because I don’t care and neither should you.

Rating: 1 out of 5 screens

Review: “Be Kind Rewind”

Be Kind Rewind directed by Michel Gondry, USA 2008. Review by James on 3/28/08.

Michel Gondry’s tribute to cheap special effects, camera tricks, and amateur filmmaking, Be Kind Rewind tells the story of two New Jersey misfits (Mos Def and Jack Black of all people) who must make their own low-budget remakes of blockbuster movies when Jack Black’s character, while magnetized, accidently erases all the video tapes at the store where Mos Def works. It makes slightly more sense in the movie. It’s a movie with some great moments and some problems, highlighting Gondry’s strength as a director and weakness as a writer.

First the strength. The film is filled with the kind of inventive special effects and camera tricks that Gondry used to great ends in his career as a music video director. But we also get to see behind the scenes, as the duo creates the effects in filming. It stuff like putting wires and a fan in front of a camera to simulate scratching, flickering film or using inverse colored photocopies of the actors’ faces as masks so that when they shoot a scene in inverse their faces appear normal but everything else is flipped. Techniques like that are what make the film worth it in the end, I think.

Now the weaknesses. Gondry is very inventive but he is not much of a writer. The plot is infected with the same kind of whimsy that makes the special effects so impressive, but the result is an absurd story that doesn’t have much at stake. The video store is threatened with closure by the city council because it is old and a copyright infringement suit (served by Sigourney Weaver for some reason), but because the film exists in a strange parallel whimsyverse, the threat never really registers. The plot is a clothesline for the effects. Gondry’s previous movie The Science of Sleep had a similar problem. It’s when he teams up with talented writers (Eternal Sunshine, Dave Chappele’s Block Party) that his films really shine.

The acting. Jack Black is Jack Black as usual. If you don’t like him, you won’t like him here. Mos Def gives another interesting performance. Danny Glover, as the video store owner, does his best, I guess. He is getting too old for this shit. Mia Farrow is in it too, in a very strange role. She’s a regular of the video store and there’s a very strange, unresolved relationship between her and Glover. It seems like they had a past together, but it’s never spelled out. It’s especially strange when Glover plays the driver to Farrow’s old southern lady when they remake Driving Miss Daisy.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 screens

DVD Review: “The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters”

The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters, directed by Seth Gordon, USA, 2007. Review by Sean on 3/27/08.

I know I already (briefly) dealt with this one in my top 10, but I watched it again last night, and it’s just so good that I can’t help but do a full review.

The world of competitive video gaming is, as you might expect, full of fairly bizarre characters. These individuals are socially more than a bit off, all a little bit obsessive-compulsive, and by and large remarkably intelligent in one sense or another; however, the key characteristic binding them is a sort of disappointed vulnerability. Some have succeeded in one line but failed in others, some are disappointed at a perceived lack of recognition, some berate themselves for always coming up short in life, but they all share a tendency to question themselves when they’re not clutching a joystick.

All of them except one. All of them except Billy Mitchell.

Billy Mitchell is convinced of one thing above all: the staggering perfection of Billy Mitchell.

At the beginning of The King of Kong, we are introduced to Billy. Billy is sort of the Barry Bonds of competitive video gaming – he has all the most important records, but also holds the record keepers in his back pocket, sitting above scrutiny or criticism. His closest friends openly describe him as “devious.” His enemies call him insane. He is, in short, the world’s most unlikely supervillain.

Steve Weibe, by contrast, is the flawed hero to Mitchell’s perfect evil. Weibe is remarkably gifted in a number of ways – a brilliant and skilled musician, an accomplished amateur baseball player and high school basketball player, a more than capable artist. But he’s always had some problems with cracking under pressure, and even more problems with obsession. When driven, he’ll sacrifice pretty much anything to compete, even if his family asks him to slow down. Unexpected downsizing at work (the day that Steve bought a home, natch,) left Steve without a job, and now he works twelve-hour days as a high school science teacher.

Billy Mitchell has held the world record in Donkey Kong since 1982. Steve Weibe is better than Billy Mitchell at Donkey Kong.

The King of Kong, then, is the saga of Steve’s attempt to be recognized as a champion, flying alone against the competitive gaming community – a group of people better regarded as the Cult of Billy. Faith in Mitchell from the scorekeepers is blind and instant, even in the face of suspect behavior and underhanded tactics; trust in Steve is non-existent for years, with any small wrinkle used as an excuse to push Weibe back into second place. For months, Billy hides in the shadows, manipulating others to keep Steve at a distance, while Weibe goes broke running around the country to compete, always ending up an inch short and fighting tears.

It’s hard to believe that a documentary about competitive Donkey Kong could have the compelling story and classic conflict that I’ve described, but that’s just what makes this movie so good – it takes a completely benign subject and crafts perhaps the strongest narrative I’ve ever seen in a documentary. The story told here is more or less perfect – you’ll be glaring at Billy and cheering for Steve within fifteen minutes, and be near tears yourself when Steve swings and misses.

As I said in my top ten, this isn’t just the best documentary of the year (maybe of the decade,) it’s one of the best films I’ve seen in a while. You owe it to yourself to see this film. After you finish, you’ll probably call a bunch of friends over and start from the top.

Rating: 4.5 Screens (of 5)

DVD Review: “American Gangster”

What do you get when you combine mediocre leading men, a mediocre screenwriter, and a mediocre major director?  A whole heap of mediocre.

Before you get too pissed off, understand that my ambivalence concerning everyone involved in this film is not unequivocal. I’ll break it down as follows:

Russell Crowe was really good in The Insider, pretty good in L.A. Confidential, sucked as much as anyone can suck in 3:10 to Yuma…and was eh in everything else.

Denzel Washington was probably really good in Philadelphia and might have been pretty good in Malcolm X, but I’ve never actually watched either of them. In everything I’ve ever seen he’s been eh. 

Ridley Scott directed Alien, an amazing film, in 1979, Thelma and Louise, a good film, in 1991,  and Black Hawk Down, a solid film, ten years later. Everything else in the last three decades has been pretty eh.

Steven Zaillian adapted Schindler’s List, which counts for something, and I liked Gangs of New York, but that was in spite of the writing rather than because of it.  He’s eh.

American Gangster isn’t bad. It’s just eh. 

It actually moves pretty quickly for a film that’s over two-and-a-half hours long, with a narrative arc that’s mostly sensical in a way that confirms expectations at every turn. Viewers are led through a rather cliched gangster plot with a firm and comforting hand, the kind that’s more likely to offer a gentle pat than an invigorating slap.  Scott and Zaillian seem more interested in making the audience comfortable than stimulating even the slightest emotion. Sure, there are moments of extreme violence, but they’re executed with such little panache that they fail to linger in the memory or even quicken the pulse. Compare scenes in this film with similar moments of violence in No Country for Old Men or There Will Be Blood and you’ll see why this film was “slighted” (note quotes) come awards time. It’s just eh.

Washington and Crowe walk up to the line of competence, dangle a toe on the far side, and then take a seat, content with performances that are embarassing only in their visible lack of effort. The supporting cast is notable in size and diversity if not quality; film buffs may enjoy picking long-time character actors out of the crowd. And if anyone had any doubt that Ruby Dee’s Oscar nomination was for being old, watch the film: she’s only in it for about ten minutes and doesn’t do anything particularly interesting.

Films like this ultimately annoy me because they’re a waste of time, money, and resources. Why should A-list (I’m using that term to refer to how much they’re paid rather than their respective abilities) talent devote their energy to a film that treads such a worn path?  For the actors, I’m guessing it’s a chance to collect a paycheck, keep their faces in the public eye, and continue to develop a John Wayne-esque body of work–  one in which they play a minor variant on an existing persona rather than inhabiting a character. Sure, it’s lazy acting, but it goes a long way in garnering audience appeal and establishing a solid legacy.  For Zaillian, the film’s just another in a career-long line of bland but respectable pieces of cinema; I really couldn’t care less.

But for Scott, a director who at least once possessed a creative drive, I’m wondering if the film is really a flag of surrender.  It’s a hell of a lot easier to convince a studio to make a film like American Gangster than it is to force an innovative horror film or quasi-feminist revenge flick down executive’s throats. I know I’ll never make it in Hollywood, but I still believe it’s worth the fight.

Rating: 3 out of 5 screens   

Sean’s Interview with Uwe Boll Online

I am very pleased to announce that my one-on-one interview with the nefarious Uwe Boll, that misunderstood maverick of the d-film, is now online, through my long-time journalistic home, Verbicide. Read the whole thing, including the part where he talks about Bryan Singer’s love for hookers, at:

Verbicide Magazine Online

I should also mention that the fine folks over at Film Drunk were kind enough to turn the aforementioned prostitution quote into juicy, juicy celebrity gossip. I’ve just started reading Film Drunk recently, and it’s a good time – definitely check it out.

List: James’ Top 10 Films of 2007

When was the last time that the Coens, Tarantino, and BOTH Andersons all released movies in the same year? The answer is never. That alone makes this one of the better years for movies in recent memory. If only Scorsese had released something and Herzog hadn’t decided to somewhat mediocrely remake one of his best movies in fictional form.

1 . No Country for Old Men – 5

I can’t tell you people how glad I am that the Coens made No Country for Old Men. After a couple of blemishes on their otherwise fantastic body of work, they came back with a vengeance. Basically a perfect movie.

2 . I’m Not There – 4.5

I don’t really know what to say about this movie. It’s a huge pretentious mess, indeed, but it has a number of legitimately amazing moments, most notably the “Going to Alcapulco” section with Richard Gere, and any time Cate Blanchett was on screen. And David Cross as Allen Ginsberg! I cried a little at the end, no joke.

3 . There Will Be Blood – 4.5

Paul Thomas Anderson has finally turned into Stanley Kubrick, hiding in his niche of the film industry and releasing inscrutable masterpieces every half-decade or so.

4 . The Darjeeling Limited – 4

Wes Anderson seems to have settled into his own little groove finally, not really reinventing himself or anything, but hey that cool with me, I still dig his shtick. He should write another one with Owen Wilson though, if only for Owen’s sake. 

5 . The Diving Bell and the Butterfly – 4

A late addition to my top ten. I’ll probably do a proper review of this soon. Suffice it to say that it’s a absolutely beautiful film.

6 . Grindhouse – 4

I don’t feel like breaking this one up. Rodriguez’s section is probably a 2.5, Tarantino’s close to a 5 for an average of 3.7888 or something. Add in the trailers and the overall experience of it all, and you get a solid 4. Looking forward to Inglorious Bastards.

7 . No End in Sight – 4

See Julian’s review.

8 . Zodiac – 3.5

See Julian’s review in his top ten.

9 . The Bourne Ultimatum – 3.5

I didn’t even see the first two. The shakey cam kills these movies for some people, but I don’t know, something about the over the top immediacy of it worked for me. I mean, does the government really have a room full of computers from which they can control any security camera or traffic light in the world and summon sleeper cell hit men with picture message of their hits? Probably not. But I enjoyed the ride. 

10. Michael Clayton 3.5

See Sean’s review. I’ll just add that Wilkinson, Swinton and the last shot with Clooney in a cab for five minutes made this one for me.

Honorable Mention: Hot Fuzz, Rescue Dawn, Sicko, Ratatouille

Missed: The Assassination of Jesse James, Juno, Control, Persepolis, Sweeny Todd, Atonement, Gone Baby Gone, In the Valley of Elah and some others probably

List: Sean’s Top 10 Films of 2007

1. No Country for Old Men – 5

I wasn’t convinced that the Coen’s dark adventure flick was the best film of the year when I walked out of the theater; but part of the effectiveness of this film is it’s tendency to creep into your mind and hang out until it’s a part of your vocabulary. There’s barely anything more that can be said about No Country at this point. Roughly everyone on the internet and in print has weighed in on Bardem’s legitimate claim to be the best villain since Hannibal Lecter, and how the Coens masterful writing and near perfect eye make No Country a near classic. Despite a few close contenders, in the end, this was an easy choice for Best Film of the Year.

2. Death Proof (Full-Length Version) – 4.5

Julian summed things up on this one pretty nicely. While most critics overlooked Death Proof, it’s really a more than solid addition to the Tarantino canon – witty, fun, and with a compelling and irresistably suspenseful plot with the simple pull of Reservoir Dogs. Unlike Julian, however, I’m going to give a slight edge to the full-length, DVD version. While the shortened edition packs a quicker punch, I feel like the DVD release benefits from the opportunity to spend more time with the first set of girls, making the eventual comeuppance more cathartic. Also the full-length has the hottest lapdance scene in the history of time.

3. There Will Be Blood – 4.5

I know plenty of people who would be shocked and appalled to see this one not in the number one spot. And indeed, it is a fantastic film that fires on just about every level, from the obviously unearthly performances from Daniel Day-Lewis and Paul Dano to the obsessive score to the enlightened adaptation by Paul Thomas Anderson. I couldn’t explain why I liked Death Proof and No Country a shade more, but the feeling was definitely there. I was working on a milkshake joke, but nothing’s coming.

4. The Wind That Shakes the Barley - 4.5

If there had been a Cinema Five last year, you would’ve seen lots of impassioned posts from me about how great this one is, and lots of angry rebuttals from Julian knocking it down a peg or two. The Wind hasn’t been seen much ’round these parts, but had a godlike reaction across the pond after it won the 2006 Palme d’Or. Cillian Murphy stars as Loach depicts the full heartbreaking sweep of the struggle for Irish independence. Like all of Irish history, it’s a little bleak, but incredibly moving and honest.

5. The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters - 4.5

I actually had to talk myself out of calling this the best film of the year. Director Seth Gordon chronicles an undeniably innocuous conflict – the battle over the longstanding world record in Donkey Kong – and pulls out the finest narrative I’ve ever seen in a documentary. Steve Weibe is a flawed but lovable underdog, and Billy Mitchell is one of the smarmiest villains you’ll ever find in real life. The topic might not pull you in, but by the conclusion, this film is undeniable.

6. Knocked Up – 4

Julian has a trademark on Cinema Five Apatow commentary, so I’ll just add that this is what comedies should be aping for the next few years, not continuing to produce mediocre clones of Anchorman. Also, far too many people have overlooked Loudon Wainwright’s perfect soundtrack for this one.

7. Lust/Caution – 4

http://cinemafive.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/globetrotting-mini-reviews/

8. American Gangster – 4

One of the rare times when Russell Crowe avoided sucking like the overpaid jackass he is, American Gangster injected some much needed lifeblood into the mafia genre. Denzel proved that he still owns his image, using his charm and appeal for evil to great effect. This one was probably forgotten too quickly.

9. In the Valley of Elah – 4

Tommy Lee Jones is definitely the performer of the year, between this and No Country. Elah ended up sort of collapsing under its own weight, unable to support both the mystery it wanted to be and the high-minded political commentary that it was, but excellent performances from Jones and Theron combined with Paul Haggis’ always phenomenal writing carry this one far enough.

10. Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street - 4

I’ll link to my original review, but a second viewing caused me to inflate my opinion a bit. http://cinemafive.wordpress.com/2008/01/02/review-sweeney-todd-the-demon-barber-of-fleet-street/

Honorable Mentions to Charlie Wilson’s War, Right at Your Door, The Namesake, Sicko, and Persepolis.

I have yet to see I’m Not There, Gone Baby Gone, Away From Home, Paprika, and No End in Sight, among others.

List: Julian’s Top 10 Films of 2007

1. Death Proof (Grindhouse version)-4.5

I’ll make things inflammatory right off the bat and call this my favorite film of 2007. While it may not be the best film of the year, it is the one that came closest to being perfect for the kind of film it was. Tarentino’s dialogue is reliably brilliant, and the fact that he borrows many of his ideas/concepts from extant work frankly doesn’t matter. You can call his films mosaics, collages, bricolages, whatever—art is often comprised of pre-existing materials. The uncut version may be more effective in mirroring the kind of films that inspired it, but the shorter version released in the original double feature (with Robert Rodriguez’s vastly inferior Planet Terror) contains fewer slow spots. Ultimately, no other piece of cinema released in 2007 reflected a greater love of filmmaking.

2. No Country for Old Men-4.5

The Coens won all those awards for a reason. No Country is bleak, witty, and full of surprises. The acting’s great, the dialogue keeps things moving, and the narrative manages to incorporate those trademark bits of pseudo-philosophical rumination that leave audiences scratching their heads and counting down the days until Burn After Reading.

3. There Will Be Blood-4.5

http://cinemafive.wordpress.com/2008/02/22/review-there-will-be-blood/

4. Zodiac-4.0

Largely forgotten, this epic thriller breaks down every imaginable facet of the case surrounding an infamous serial killer. Audiences expecting another Seven from director David Fincher were probably surprised to find that the film was more concerned with copious detail than the production of suspense. The first of my “out of left field” selections for the list, I chalk up my enjoyment of the film to a fascination with the subject. For others, mileage may vary.

5. Hot Fuzz-4.0

And here’s another. I wasn’t a huge fan of Shaun of the Dead, but Edgar Wright’s follow-up is the work of a director who has a clear vision and clearly doesn’t care if you share it with him or not. The narrative zigzags in all kinds of strange directions, and the film is much less of a comedy than one is likely to expect, but the end result consistently entertains.

6. Juno-4.0

http://cinemafive.wordpress.com/2008/01/12/review-juno/

7. Reign Over Me-3.5

This may be an aftershock of my adoration for Punch Drunk Love. Adam Sandler again stretches ever so slightly to take his normally comedic out-of-control craziness in a dramatic direction, this time as a widower whose renewed friendship with an old colleague tests the boundaries of both men’s current lives. It can definitely be called melodramatic, but I like a good melodrama every now and then.

8. Knocked Up-3.5

As a long-time Apatow fan, I’ve enjoyed following the career of Seth Rogen from Freaks and Geeks to Undeclared to this, a major film. While the amiable Canadian doesn’t exactly ooze star quality, he does a more than capable job of holding up his end of this pointed and poignant comedy. I’d like to say that Apatow has a perfect record, but an oozing sore of a movie called Walk Hard will always be around to prove me wrong. 2008 will offer several shots at redemption, but I have a feeling I’ll be better off skipping Drillbit Taylor and just forgetting it ever existed.

9. The Mist-3.5

This snuck in here somehow. I haven’t thought too much of Darabont’s work in the past, but his adaptation of Stephen King’s novella is dark, critical of modern society, and full of evil creatures that look kind of like pterodactyls. Really, how can you argue with that?

10. No End In Sight-3.5

http://cinemafive.wordpress.com/2008/01/26/dvd-review-no-end-in-sight/

Honorable Mentions go out to In the Valley of Elah, Rescue Dawn, The Lives of Others, Superbad, and Bug.

I have yet to see American Gangster, Michael Clayton, Atonement, The Darjeeling Limited, or Gone Baby Gone.

 

 (Quick edit from Sean: thanks to the maybe-a-real-site-site toptencity.com, which linked to us! Amongst many other top tens!)

DVD Review: “Joshua”

Joshua, directed by George Ratliff, USA, 2007. Review by Julian on 3/9/08.

For a movie about an evil kid, Joshua sure spends a lot of time trying to convince the viewer that it’s really something else.  There’s a solid hour of psychological development as an upper class New York family (Sam Rockwell, Vera Farmiga and Jacob Kogan as the titular 9-year-old) adjusts to the birth of a second child. Sleeping patterns are disrupted, in-laws fight over the newborn’s religious orientation, and mother Abby fights a massive bout of postpartum depression.  The build-up is surprisingly tense and engrossing, but one can’t help but feel that the characters are simply circling and waiting for the real drama to unfold.

That drama comes in the form of Joshua, a preternaturally brilliant and perpetually creepy kid who possesses a degree of patience that no one –least of all the audience—can be expected to match.  His “evil” plan –it is evil, and it is a distinct plan—is executed with such subtlely that the film never really gets off its feet. That’s not to say the film is boring; the acting is excellent, the writing sharp enough, and the direction mostly capable. 

The problem lies with the audience’s expectations.  Previous entries into the “evil child” subgenre include such crapfests as The Omen (either version), The Good Son, and Village of the Damned. If someone decides to take in a movie about killer offspring, they’re not anticipating a solid drama: they want to hear the nanny scream “It’s all for you Damien!” or see Macaulay Culkin fall out of a treehouse.  For the record, this film offers neither.

Pretty much the only film with a narrative and approach similar to Joshua is The Bad Seed, an occasionally overlooked film that shares most of this one’s strengths and weaknesses. Seed, however, had the good sense to let the audience in on the fun pretty much from the get-go.  While Joshua’s execution is certainly strong, there’s just not enough behind the curtain to justify keeping it up for quite so long.

 Rating: 3 screens (out of 5)