DOUBT Film Critique

Oh my God -- the dingo ate my rosary!



When it comes to a cinematic ‘permanent record’, John Patrick Shanley probably doesn’t instill tons of confidence on the first perusal of his track record. This is the same guy who wrote and directed “Joe Versus the Volcano”, one of the most confusing and critically loathed films of the 1990’s – the same man who also penned the screenplay for two Frank Marshall films, “Alive” and “Congo”. So, you see, his name is not normally attached to films that would ever be considered for awards potential…until now. The play version of “Doubt” took Broadway by storm in 2005 and won Shanley the Pulitzer Prize for Drama, bringing about this film adaptation. It might wind up being his greatest achievement, but even if he turns out to be a one-hit wonder, he has left up with a riveting piece of drama, translated wonderfully to screen by the man himself. “Doubt” is one of those films you have to see to understand because I cannot adequately describe to you what the film is about; the picture is more about a feeling than an idea. I can’t explain how amazing the performances are – you have to see them and appreciate them yourself. This motion picture was easily the greatest cinematic achievement of the year.

The action here takes place at St. Nicholas School in New York City, a parochial school headed by Sister Aloysius (Meryl Streep), a traditional hard-nosed nun who hates ball point pens and loves exercising her authority over everyone. Amy Adams co-stars as Sister James, an idealistic young nun who exercises compassion and love over hardness and cruelty. One day, Sister James becomes suspicious when Father Flynn (Philip Seymour Hoffman) calls the schools first African-American student to the rectory for a private talk. She explains what happened to Sister Aloysius, also noting that she smelled alcohol on the boys breath when he returned. Though nothing is expressly spoken, we can see by Sister Aloysius’ reaction that she suspects something improper. When she and Sister James confront Father Flynn, he denies everything and comes up with an excuse that would work on a normal person. But Sister Aloysius never relents and makes it her personal mission to see Father Flynn removed from the school. Sister James can’t seem to make up her mind as to whether or not she believes Father Flynn could be capable of something like that. The film is basically a power play between Streep and Hoffman as they do battle with the perceptions they have offered to the other.

What makes this film work so well is that nothing is black and white. You only once here Meryl Streep refer to Father Flynn’s relationship with the boy as ‘inappropriate’ and she only goes so far as to suggest he might have ‘made advances’. The worst ‘molest’ is never brought up, nor is the word ‘pedophile’. In the Catholic Church, there is a protocol and there is a vernacular that exist inside themselves and to cross outside those lines can be very tricky indeed. But there is also some ‘doubt’ as to whether Sister Aloysius really believes in Father Flynn’s corruption with such certainty. Is she simply taking out her dislike for the man in other areas? Is she seeking his ruin because of the way he takes his tea and the way he keeps his fingernails long? The character of Sister Aloysius is certainly not above these kinds of actions, as we find out. The ending of the film can be interpreted in a number of different ways, but I found the meaning rather straightforward. It becomes pretty obvious, by that point, that one character is right and the other is wrong and that justice has been served. When Meryl Streep utters that last line to Sister James, it isn’t so much a confession as a declaration. It shouldn’t make us second guess or question anything else that has happened, because it is oddly unrelated to those matters and more in relation to the approach she had to take to arrive at the truth.

The film is also helped by the most incredible ensemble cast of the year. I can’t imagine these words being delivered any better than they are here. Meryl Streep is insanely good here, her best performance in years, as Sister Aloysius. Her mannerisms – a grunt here and a pause here and an eyebrow raises there – are tailored for maximum potency and you can really appreciate her talents on full display throughout. The audience was literally cheering for her through most of the film. And it was very nice to see her go toe-to-toe with Philip Seymour Hoffman who is just fantastic as Father Flynn. The two of them create more than their share of fireworks, especially in that powerful final scene. Amy Adams is perfectly cast as the naive young nun who wants to see the good in people but gets a crash course in the dark side of human nature. And, Viola Davis will surely find a much deserved Academy Award nomination for her one-scene as the mother of the boy in question. It’s definitely written to be a scene stealer and Davis is breathtaking in a role that people will remember for years to come – it’s just that good. These four actors make up one of the best casts of the year and they all deliver Shanley’s words with such perfection and such finesse. Awards season will likely shine on each of them.

All of that said, I have had very little time to devote to the technical merits of the film. The cinematography of Roger Deakins is pitch-perfect, using sharp angles to exploit the mood of the picture, simple and elegant shots that don’t take attention away from the story. I just loved the opening sequence and how plainly it was shot. The original score from Howard Shore is dark and building and adds so much throughout the picture, kind of like a storm building. “Doubt” just has so much going for it, it’s difficult to mention it all in one review. It was like watching a master class on acting and that was probably because the playwright was allowed to direct the film incarnation. John Patrick Shanley has surely redeemed himself in the eyes of most for “Joe Versus the Volcano”. He has taken his Pulitzer Prize winning play and turned it into what I hope will become an Oscar winning motion picture. Meryl Streep should easily win for Best Actress, Philip Seymour Hoffman a nomination for Best Supporting Actor, Amy Adams a possible nod for Best Supporting Actress and Viola Davis a definite win for Best Supporting Actress. Throw in an original score, cinematography, adapted screenplay, Best Director and Best Picture nomination and you easily have the best film of 2008, without a ‘doubt’.

Meryl Streep (Sister Aloysius Beauvier)
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Father Brendan Flynn)
Amy Adams (Sister James)
Viola Davis (Mrs. Miller)
Alice Drummond (Sister Veronica)

Director: John Patrick Shanley

RATED PG-13

MOVIES MADE EASY AWARDS Nominees!!!

Best Original Score

Jon Brion – Synecdoche, New York
Alexandre Desplat – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
David Hirschfelder - Australia
R.A. Rahman – Slumdog Millionaire
Howard Shore – Doubt
Hans Zimmer – Frost/Nixon

Best Cinematography

Roger Deakins – Doubt
Frederick Elmes – Synecdoche, New York
Claudio Miranda – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Declan Quinn – Rachel Getting Married
Mandy Walker - Australia
Colin Watkinson – The Fall

Best Breakthrough Performance

Rosemarie DeWitt – Rachel Getting Married
Rebecca Hall – Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Taraji P. Henson – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Dev Patel – Slumdog Millionaire
Robert Pattinson – Twilight
Brandon Walters – Australia

Best Comedic Performance

Thomas Haden Church – Smart People
Robert Downey, Jr. – Tropic Thunder
James Franco – Pineapple Express
Richard Jenkins – Step Brothers
Jane Lynch – Role Models
Frances McDormand – Burn After Reading

Best Actress In A Supporting Role

Viola Davis – Doubt
Rosemarie DeWitt – Rachel Getting Married
Taraji P. Henson – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Samantha Morton – Synecdoche, New York
Marisa Tomei – The Wrestler
Debra Winger – Rachel Getting Married

Best Actor In A Supporting Role

Emile Hirsch - Milk
Philip Seymour Hoffman – Doubt
Heath Ledger – The Dark Knight
Tom Noonan – Synecdoche, New York
Michael Sheen – Frost/Nixon
David Thewlis – The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

Best Actress In A Leading Role

Cate Blanchett – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Anne Hathaway – Rachel Getting Married
Nicole Kidman – Australia
Emily Mortimer - Transsiberian
Meryl Streep – Doubt
Kate Winslet – Revolutionary Road

Best Actor In A Leading Role

Brian Cox – Red
Clint Eastwood – Gran Torino
Philip Seymour Hoffman – Synecdoche, New York
Frank Langella – Frost/Nixon
Sean Penn – Milk
Mickey Rourke – The Wrestler

Best Adapted Screenplay

Simon Beaufoy – Slumdog Millionaire
David Hare – The Reader
Peter Morgan – Frost/Nixon
Eric Roth – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
John Patrick Shanley – Doubt
Stephen Susco – Red

Best Original Screenplay

Joel & Ethan Coen – Burn After Reading
Dustin Lance Black – Milk
Garth Jennings – Son of Rambow
Charlie Kaufman – Synecdoche, New York
Jenny Lumet – Rachel Getting Married
Robert Seigel - The Wrestler

Best Director

Darren Aronofsky - The Wrestler
Jonathan Demme – Rachel Getting Married
David Fincher – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Charlie Kaufman – Synecdoche, New York
John Patrick Shanley – Doubt
Gus Van Sant – Milk

Best Documentary Feature

Dear Zachary: Letters to A Son About His Father
Encounters at the End of the World
Glass: A Portrait of Philip in Twelve Parts
Man on Wire
The Order of Myths
Standard Operating Procedure

Best Foreign Language Film

The Class (France)
Gomorrah (Italy)
Let the Right One In (Sweden)
The Song of Sparrows (Iran)
Waltz with Bashir (Israel)
Worlds Apart (Denmark)

Best Animated Feature

$9.99
Bolt
Fear(s) of the Dark
Kung Fu Panda
Wall-E
Waltz with Bashir

Best Film

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Doubt
Frost/Nixon
Milk
Synecdoche, New York
The Wrestler

GRAN TORINO Film Critique

The Preparation-H is on Aisle 13, next to the Metamucil.



In the past six years Clint Eastwood has distinguished himself as one of the finest directors working today and one of the greatest filmmakers of all-time. He seems to be in his prime at such a late stage in life and he keeps churning out hit after hit after hit. I mean, just look at this track record since 2003: “Mystic River”, “Million Dollar Baby”, “Flags of Our Fathers”, “Letters from Iwo Jima”, “Changeling” – and now his latest motion picture, “Gran Torino”. Eastwood hasn’t starred in a film he’s directed since the underrated 2002 thriller “Blood Work”. He has stated this will be his final screen performance. The film has been receiving mixed reviews, with some people calling it one of the best films of the year and others calling it a colossal disappointment. I think I fall somewhere in the middle. “Gran Torino” is not Eastwood’s best directorial achievement of late, that’s for sure – but what the film manages to do is paint a portrait of a real character – a man who finds redemption in the most unlikeliest of places. With this performance, Eastwood demonstrates just how powerful he can be on screen and just how he can dominate a scene with a grunt or the raise of an eyebrow. Eastwood should very much receive an Academy Award nomination for this role, though the film is weak in a few areas. “Gran Torino” is a film I liked more than I think I should have.

We meet Walt Kowalski (Clint Eastwood) after the death of his wife. We immediately see that Walt is a rather unhappy man – old, bitter and more than a little racist. His local priest (Christopher Carley) drops by from time to time to try and get him to go to confessional, though Walk outright refuses. Walt lives in a slum neighborhood and is surrounded by Mung immigrants, a fact that he loathes on a daily basis. After the boy who lives next door, Thao (Bee Vang) attempts to steal Walt’s 1972 Gran Torino, the story really kicks into action. Walt winds up saving Thao from a local gang and becomes the hero of the neighborhood, eventually striking up a friendship with Thao and his sister Sue. Walt doesn’t seem to like anyone, but somehow becomes endeared to the family next door, protecting them as best he can and connecting with a different generation and a different culture. When the conflict between Walt’s neighbors and the gang starts getting more intense, Walt must take a stand and do what he does best – defend others. The ending of the film comes at us in classic Eastwood style, though not in the way we really expect. “Gran Torino” is all about Walt Kowalski and his change of heart. It’s one of Eastwood’s richest and fullest performances to date and a real delight.

What drives this film is Eastwood. No other actor could create this character and no other actor could pull it off. He gruffs and grumbles his way into our hearts, even though he never lets up his racist mentality. Walt doesn’t like people and he doesn’t like that he is losing his street to Asians and Hispanics and African-Americans. We get the sense the only thing keeping him from a rampage was his wife. We see the relationship between he and his grown kids, who don’t understand him and only seem to call when they want something from him. His grandkids can’t relate to him at all. Watching his relationship develop with Thao and Sue is quite enjoyable, as he becomes a surrogate father to Thao and a friend to Sue, with their welcoming him into their lives and he doing the same. I just can’t stress enough how fine Eastwood’s performance is here. He works well with everyone in the film and manages to make us love a very crude character. I can’t think of a film that treats racism so flippantly as this one, yet making us endear to the individual at the helm of that particular ship. That is a credit to Eastwood’s direction and performance. A particularly enjoyable scene comes when Walt and his friend, played by John Carroll Lynch, attempt to show Thao how to talk and act like a man. It’s one of the best scenes in the film and it also showcases Eastwood’s knack for comedy.

The film slips up in the supporting performances. Eastwood has a tendency to cast unknown actors in all of his films, but he did it a little too much here. Bee Vang and Ahney Her, the two Asian kids Walt befriends, are just not strong actors and they can’t handle the emotional levels required for their roles, especially Vang. Eastwood and Vang have several scenes together where Vang’s inexperience really shows. I also had a real problem with the performance from Christopher Carley as the determined priest. I didn’t buy him for a second and it seemed like a second rate performance. Other than Eastwood, the best performance came from John Carroll Lynch as Walt’s barber and he is only in three scenes in the entire film. If the supporting performances had been as strong as Eastwood’s, this could have easily been the best film of the year. That said, I also think Eastwood directs better when he’s not in front of the camera. I would like to see this film starring Eastwood but directed by someone else. “Blood Work” is another example of a film Eastwood directed and starred in that could have been so much better than it was. I think Eastwood does both well, but not necessarily together. He could do it when he was younger, but if age has done anything, it’s limited that skill.

Even with all the problems I had with the film – even with all the flaws and all of the amateur performances, “Gran Torino” is one of my favorite films of the year. Clint Eastwood alone makes this an amazing motion picture. It is one of the best performances of the year and one of the best of his career and if it’s true that this is his final screen performance, he certainly decided to go out with a bang. “Gran Torino” isn’t going to receive the awards consideration as Eastwood’s more recent films but it will definitely be a fine addition to an ever expanding resume. And if you listen real close you can hear Eastwood singing in a song that plays over the end credits. It was a nice treat and it sounded as if the song was entitled “Gran Torino”. Kudos to Eastwood for such a stellar performance and kudos to him for getting better and better and going out on top. My recommendations are Clint Eastwood for Best Actor only, but that performance is enough to put this on my top ten list and make it a must-see for everyone out there.

Clint Eastwood (Walt Kowalski)
Christopher Carley (Father Janovich)
Bee Vang (Thao Vang Lor)
Ahney Her (Sue Lor)
Brian Haley (Mitch Kowalski)
Geraldine Hughes (Karen Kowalski)
John Carroll Lynch (Barber Martin)

Director: Clint Eastwood

RATED R


AND A HALF

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON Film Critique

He looks like a mixture of Russell Crowe and Robert Redford.



Movies come and go; people grow old and die; the seasons change and the tides rise and fall – these are all certainties
of life. Now, you can add one more certainty to that list – Brad Pitt will never look bad. In “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”, Pitt has to play both an 80-year-old and a teenager. With the help of groundbreaking special effects, he is able to pull both off. It’s something that has never before been required of an actor on this particular level. “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” lives and dies by your ability to accept the idea of a man who ages in reverse, being born as an old man and getting younger and younger. Director DavidFincher might not seem like the first choice for a film of this nature, especially when you look at his previous films, but Fincher does have a knack for handling odd material, or turning mainstream product into an odd result. Many people are calling “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” one of the best films of the year and touting it as a possible Best Picture winner. I can see where the high praise is coming from, but I can’t quite agree on all those points. I enjoyed the film, very much so, but had some problems with some of the execution therein. I think the film might have been handled better if more attention had been paid to the inside of Benjamin Button and not the outside. It’s great that we can see this character age, but it would have been nice to have seen a little more of what made the character tick.

In an unusual performance that deserves applause, Brad Pitt stars as Benjamin, who is born as an elderly man, barely alive. His father (JasonFlemyng) thinks he’s a monster and leaves him on the doorstep of an old age home ran by Queenie (Taraji P. Henson). She takes the child and raises him as her own, surrounded by elderly men and women who don’t see anything wrong with Benjamin. The film follows Benjamin as he gets older (though looking younger). He meets Daisy (CateBlanchett ) as a little girl and their relationship spans the length of the film. We follow Benjamin as he leaves home, joins a tugboat crew , fights in the war and sees the world, taking time to have a brief affair with the wife of a politician (TildaSwinton) and learn the ropes of women and drink from the adventurous Captain Mike (Jared Harris). As Benjamin gets older, he watches those around him age and die, finally reconnecting with Daisy when they’ve both reached, basically, the same age. The last part of the film is the strength of the picture, as we see Benjamin and Daisy share a very real love that is torn apart by the reality of what they have always known would happen. The film is the extraordinary story of a very ordinary man, and his condition is notdwelled upon very much at all. The final 30-minutes of the film are absolutely heartbreaking and make this a real treasure to watch.

There is so much to appreciate here. David Fincher knows how to craft an epic and this certainly qualifies. The special effects are nothing short of groundbreaking. We watch Brad Pitt as an old man and as a young man and know it’s not him, but the technology is just so impressive. This will really revolutionize what actors can do with a role and the way in which directors might go about casting, age wise. The cinematography from ClaudioMirando and the original score from Alexandre Desplat are both sure fire Oscar nominees and deservedly so. It was so nice to see the way in which Fincher wrapped the story together, taking time out for humorous bits and bobbles, as with the man who keeps explaining how he has been struck by lightning seven times. His last film, “Zodiac”, also had close to a three-hour run time.Fincher is great at producing lengthy films without
causing his audience to lost interest. This is a great feat these days, believe me. But the technical aspects of the film are not up for debate. It’s pretty obvious that the film is technically proficient in almost every way. I also want to single out two performers in the film. Taraji P. Benson will be nominated for an Academy Award for her role as Queenie and she sure does deserve it. She steals many of the scenes in the film and it was nice to see such a warm performance. Cate Blanchett should also be rewarded with a nomination for the most difficult role in the film. She actually has to play old with the make-up and
prosthetics, unlike Brad Pitt who gets theCGI-aid. Blanchett continues to prove she is one of the greatest actresses of her generation, hands down.

The problem I had with the film was the character of Benjamin Button. I didn’t find much depth in the performance from Pitt and I didn’t get enough information on him. I wanted to know more about the ramifications of his condition internally – how does this affect a human being to know they are aging in reverse? I don’t accept that Pitt’s character was solassez faire about the condition as he was in the film. I also thought Pitt was a little too subdued at times. The character never reaches any emotional heights and is really just a heartthrob for most of the film. Brad Pitt is the perfect choice for a role like that and he handles the early material well too – but, I just didn’t see enough range to be blow away by his performance. Pitt does a good job, just not a great job. His looks alone are nearly enough to carry him solely through the last part of the film. I will also make mention that there is a chunk of about 30-minutes that does drag. It comes almost immediately after the TildaSwinton sequence. It doesn’t bore, per se, and the audience is still interested – it just lacks the charisma of the other material. I can only imagine how difficult it would be to direct a film on the scale of this one, and I’m not slighting DavidFincher at all – I think he just attached to some material more than the other. I also had a huge problem with the number of times they kept cutting
back to the hospital with the elderly CateBlanchett and Hurricane Katrina approaching outside. All of that was just unnecessary and took away from what was the heart of the film.

Doing research I discovered that “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” currently rests at #100 on the IMDB Greatest Films list. This is ‘curious’ to me. I can understand how many people enjoy this film, but to call it one of the greatest films ever made? That is more than a stretch, that is an absurdity. The film really is “ForrestGump ”, with a few alterations. Benjamin Button might not have a mental condition, but he has a physical condition and they both have a plain-spoken simplicity about them. And, at first, the relationship between Benjamin and Daisy is very similar to the relationship between Forrest and Jenny. But, the real power in this film rests in the final act where we see just what this condition is doing to Benjamin as he gets younger and younger. I can’t think of a more heartbreaking ending in recent memory. “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” was a fine film, an entertaining romance and a true achievement in special effects. It was not as incredible as I had hoped and the flaws I mentioned were enough to keep me from placing it on my top ten list, though it might make the bottom ten. And my suggestions for the film are: Best Actress (Blanchett), Best Supporting Actress (Henson), Best Original Score, Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography, Best Adapted Screenplay and maybe even Best Director forFincher, depending. He deserves it.

Brad Pitt (Benjamin Button)
Cate Blanchett (Daisy)
Tilda Swinton (Elizabeth Abbott)
Taraji P. Henson (Queenie)
Julia Ormond (Caroline)
Jared Harris (Captain Mike)
Phyllis Somerville (Grandma Fuller)
Jason Flemyng (Thomas Button)

Director: David Fincher

RATED PG-13

VALKYRIE Film Critique

Guess which one has the least acting experience?



There is something fascinating about the Holocaust. Cinema has always used the tragedy of this unimaginable event to create some of its most prolific benchmarks. In 2008, we have already been given several films dealing with that particular subject matter, from the recent “The Reader” to the emotional “The Boy in the Striped Pajamas”. That said, the film “Valkyrie” doesn’t necessarily revolve around the Holocaust, but a plot to kill the man most responsible for it, Adolf Hitler. Had Hitler been stopped even halfway through his genocidal rampage, who knows how many lives could have been saved? In most films dealing with the Holocaust and Hitler’s Germany, we are only given your traditional Nazis and Nazi loyalists, with very few dissenters. “Valkyrie” is all about dissenters – and German dissenters as that; a group of men who love their country so much that they are willing to risk their lives to see it returned to its former glory. The film comes to us from Bryan Singer, whose last film “Superman Returns” was a colossal piece of comic book garbage. Singer, however, has made some exceptional films and does have a way with a story. Love him or hate him, you have to respect his ability to move the plot along in whatever way it so chooses to do so. “Valkyrie” is easily one of his better films – his best since “Apt Pupil” and a top-notch thriller.

Very few people know this story which is probably what makes it so captivating. Tom Cruise stars as Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, a German soldier who is injured on the front lines, having been sent there in the first place due to his concerns over Hitler and his elimination of the Jewish population. Colonel Stauffenberg is recruited by a group of German loyalists who want to assassinate Hitler and end war with the Allies. This group is comprised of businessmen, heads of state and noted politicians and military. Kenneth Branagh co-stars as Major Tresckow, Terence Stamp as General Beck and Bill Nighy as General Olbricht – the three men leading the military side of the operation. The goal is simple enough – assassinate Hitler and move the country to Operation Valkyrie, which would place control of the government into anti-Nazi hands and see the SS and Nazi chain of command decimated. After much preparation and covert happenings, the plan is carried out, the consequences of which control the last chunk of the film. “Valkyrie” is haunting in that it shows us just how close these men came to changing the course of history as we know it. We all know our world history so we know Hitler’s assassination attempt failed, but the events surrounding it are truly remarkable.

On the positive side of things, the film is a real technical achievement. Director Bryan Singer has crafted an intricate thriller with all the trimmings. The art direction and production design are top notch and the cinematography from Newton Thomas Sigel is aimed and spot-on. It felt like we were seeing one of the most realistic visual portraits of Hitler’s Germany ever captured. The pacing of the film was tight and well-etched out, carrying never a dull moment and keeping us centered on the storyline, which was the real star of the entire picture. Tom Wilkinson turns in a fantastic performance as General Fromm, an on-again/off-again ally to the cause who eventually saves his own skin. He doesn’t get a lot of screen time, but he is so powerful when he’s there. Bill Nighy and Kenneth Branagh also provided excellent support in two very key roles, as do Terence Sramp and a very solid Eddie Izzard. The one performance I want to really single out comes from David Bamber as Adolf Hitler. The man is flawless. He has this cadence to his performance – to his speech and his walk – that just add a whole new dimension of power to the role. You really feel his presence when he’s on screen. I was wondering how much of Hitler would make it into the film since very few films on this subject matter feature Hitler predominantly – but he made it on screen just enough to leave a lasting impression. It was one of the best embodiments of Hitler I have seen.

On the negative side of things, we have Tom Cruise. He seems so out of place here. We learn during the opening narration that Cruise can effectively pull off the German dialect, so it boggles my mind that Singer decided to go with neutral accents. With the exception of Thomas Kretschmann, all principles speak with neutral accents. It is most noticeable with Cruise, who doesn’t even attempt anything other than his American tone. This does not work. Cruise also doesn’t seem to play any level other than determined here. We see no emotional development in the character, no concern for the safety of himself or others and no real exploration of what made that character tick. And, since he’s the one we are supposed to be rooting for, we need something tangible. I don’t think Cruise single handidly ruined the film because I am recommending it, but he definitely turned what could have been a great film into an all right film. Imagine someone like Sean Penn in this role or someone like Philip Seymour Hoffman – just a little acting would have gone a long way. I am normally a Tom Cruise supporter and think he’s underrated as an actor, but he brings absolutely nothing to the table here, other than name power. It was akin to watching a wind-up doll in the role, going through the motions.

But what you want to know is – should I spend my hard earned money on “Valkyrie”, the latest in a long line of films on Nazi Germany? The answer is yes. This storyline is one you’ve likely never heard before and that storyline is carried out effectively in the film. We do get a sense of just how big this missed opportunity was and we can feel the effects of that on the characters in the picture. I wish this would have been treated with kid gloves as an independent project, maybe given a low profile lead actor and ushered out with the same kind of excitement as another awards season indie contender. Tom Cruise might just be too big for this role. It just bewilders me that Singer would choose to go with the neutral accents when he has a cast full of individuals who could easily pull that accent off. If you have the talent, use it. Don’t dumb it down for us art-less American audiences. We can handle a lot more than that. “Valkyrie” is an engaging thriller with a polished productions and a fantastic actor as Adolf Hitler. It’s definitely a must-see for the thriller fans out there and a sturdy recommendation to everyone else. Tom Cruise is the one downside but the story is strong enough to cover his short comings. Had the events in this film succeeded, who knows if I’d even be writing this right now?

Tom Cruise (Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg)
Kenneth Branagh (Major-General Henning von Tresckow)
Bill Nighy (General Friedrich Olbricht)
Tom Wilkinson (General Friedrich Fromm)
Thomas Kretschmann (Major Otto Ernst Remer)
Terence Stamp (General Ludwig Beck)
Eddie Izzard (General Erich Fellgiebel)
David Bamber (Adolf Hitler)
Tom Hollander (Colonel Heinz Brandt)

Director: Bryan Singer

RATED PG-13

SEVEN POUNDS Film Critique

If only they could transplant my two left feet.



What do you do when you’re the biggest movie star on the planet? If your name is Will Smith – whatever the hell you want. And, up until now, it’s a move that has worked for the actor time and time again. The man can do no wrong. Just when you think he’s attached himself to a dud – i.e. “Hancock” or “Hitch” – he knocks another one out of the park and increases his profile even more. Alas, with “Seven Pounds”, Smith might finally have found a way to alienate audiences. Because if you’re the number one movie star on the planet, the last thing audiences want to see is a film dedicated to your causing damage to yourself. “Seven Pounds” is that film, a dark and somewhat depressing look at a man seeking redemption with an act that causes much confusion throughout. The film is directed by Gabriele Muccino, who directed Smith in his Oscar nominated performance last year in “The Pursuit of Happyness”. Muccino seems at home with heavy handed material and he treats this material very loosely, not really searching for any grounded basis on which to plant a foundation. “Seven Pounds” is a little hamfisted but ultimately succeeds thanks to a fine performance from Will Smith.

As mentioned, Will Smith stars as Ben Thomas, an I.R.S. agent on a mission. You see, Ben did something bad, some people died and now he is wanting to give seven people a gift they will never forget. But what is that gift? It’s pretty obvious from the trailer what it is – his organs, for one. Woody Harrelson plays a blind piano player who might be getting Ben’s eyes. Bill Smitrovich plays a hockey coach who is getting Ben’s kidney. And Rosario Dawson co-stars as Emily Posa, a young printer who is in desperate need of a heart or she faces certain death. Most of the film deals with the relationship that develops between Ben and Emily. She doesn’t know what Ben is trying to do – she just knows he is way too accomplished and intelligent to be an I.R.S. agent by choice. We piece together more of the puzzle as Ben and Emily get closer and closer, with Ben’s brother chasing him down every step of the way. When the end of the film comes, we are not surprised and there is no twist because the trailer gives everything away. The final ten minutes of the film are a disaster, churning sap into butter and spreading it all over the film negative. “Seven Pounds” was a solid film until the final seven minutes.

I would be lying if I didn’t say the story was compelling. Despite seeing all of the plot lines coming from a mile away, the story was interesting. The problem is the film didn’t know what position to take tonally. At first, it seems dark and depressing and then it shifts to quirky and upbeat. Is it a love story? A poignant drama? A moody indie? It didn’t know. You can’t have a character like Ben Thomas do everything he does in the first half of the film as a set up for a romantic comedy – you just can’t. And the ending of the film was just bad…plain bad. The whole means by which Smith carries out what he does is ludicrous. The final meeting between Dawson and Harrelson was so steeped in cheese that it might be want a fondue. I have to think this film would have been a much better film with a different ending – maybe one of the better films of the year. The first scene, with Smith talking to Harrelson on the phone, is so promising and really sets the picture up nicely. Unfortunately, it cannot deliver on that terrific set-up.

But don’t blame Will Smith. The man turns in the best performance of his career in this film, which is what redeems it ultimately. Smith is utterly believable in an unbelievable role. He carries the emotional weight of the role well and he acts in the way his character would act 100% of the time – very consistent and loyal to the material. Rosario Dawson also delivers a fine supporting performance – one of the best performances of her career also. Smith and Dawson have nice chemistry together and their story was the highlight of the entire picture. I wanted to see a film about them and nothing else. The rest of the performances are average, especially Woody Harrelson, who does nothing with a role that was written to do nothing; still, that is no excuse. Barry Pepper does a decent enough job, but his role is not given nearly enough attention and is therefore lacking. We know there is a back story, but we’re not given much more information.

On the whole, I guess I shouldn’t be recommending “Seven Pounds”. It’s cheese of the highest form and it piles it on mighty thick at the end. However, Will Smith continues to show his acting strength and that alone is reason enough to see the film. He has this strange charisma about him and it shines through in a dark and moody movie. If I’ve spoiled the film for you, I apologize, but the trailer does that well enough without me. The whole ‘mystery’ behind this film was really no mystery at all, but a failed attempt at releasing a mainstream motion picture without plot spills. I guess they thought we would never assume the obvious. “Seven Pounds” can wait until it hits your local dollar theatre or DVD – don’t worry about catching it before awards season. If it deserves any nomination, it’s Will Smith for Best Actor, but it’s still a stretch.

Will Smith (Ben Thomas)
Rosario Dawson (Emily Posa)
Woody Harrelson (Ezra Turner)
Michael Ealy (Ben’s Brother)
Barry Pepper (Dan)
Elpidia Carrillo (Connie Tepos)

Director: Gabriele Muccino

RATED PG-13

SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE Film Critique

Maybe Regis would have made the difference.



Pick a genre, any genre – chances are, Danny Boyle has mastered it. Since he burst onto the scene with “Trainspotting”, Danny Boyle has been one of the most innovative and groundbreaking filmmakers working in the business. He has found success in virtually every genre and is universally loved by critics and fans alike. In 2002, he re-invented the zombie genre with “28 Days Later”, one of the most visually sound horror films ever made. In 2004, he directed his most exceptional film to date, the wonderful “Millions”, which proved he could also craft an intimate story that was family appropriate. His most recent film, “Sunshine”, was the most creative science fiction film to come around in years and benefitted from Boyle’s incredible sense of low-budget imagery. His latest film is his most hyped film yet, “Slumdog Millionaire”, a direct departure from anything the filmmaker has done in the past and a likely Best Picture nominees at the 2009 Academy Awards – it already has a Golden Globe nomination in the bag. For me, the problem with Danny Boyle is that he has set his own bar too high. We expect amazing things from him and are disappointed when they are not delivered. I enjoyed “Slumdog Millionaire” quite a bit and would go so far as to say it is one of the better films of the year, but it wasn’t the best and I do think it has been overhyped. I enjoyed Danny Boyle’s previous three films far more than this one. “Slumdog Millionaire” has all of the primary triggers for success – it was just missing that little something extra.

The film centers around Jamal Malik (Dev Patel), a young man who has been accepted as a contestant on India’s “Who Wants to Be A Millionaire?” The film opens with Jamal being beaten and interrogated in a police station. We learn he has one millions of rupees and the police and the game show host (Anil Kapoor) think he cheated. As the police inspector (Irrfan Khan) tries to get the truth out of Jamal, we learn that the young man did not cheat, but knew each of the answers for a different reason. Through flashbacks to his youth, we learn how he knew these answers and how his entire life has revolved around his love and fascination with a girl named Latika (Freida Pinto), which whom he believes he is destined to spend the rest of his life. We watch as Jamal and his brother Salim grow up in the slums of Mumbai and then we follow them as the travel around trying to make ends meat, eventually leading them to a seemingly wonderful orphanage, until they realize the sinister goings on underneath the surface. Salim grows up to work for one of the local gangsters in the city, while Jamal serves tea in a call center, always on the look out for a way to get back in touch with the love he left behind. I won’t give away the ending of the film, but don’t expect any Shyamalan twists or anything. In terms of the story, everything is rather cookie-cutter. Don’t expect to be grieving.

A Danny Boyle film lives and dies by its visuals. Luckily, “Slumdog Millionaire” is served in all of those areas. The cinematography by Anthony Dod Mantle is likely to take home gold this year – “Slumdog Millionaire” vividly and energetically captures the look and feel of India, from the slums to the mansions, and the colors and the vibrancy of the location only add to the overall affect of the film. The original score by A.R. Rahman is one of the musical highlights of the year, and Boyle finally managed to find a way to properly use the song “Paper Planes” by M.I.A. But Danny Boyle is the man who deserves most, if not all, of the credit for the technical quality of this film. He has always had a way with younger actors and he proves that once again here, especially when you consider most of the film is revolving around these younger actors. Boyle also inserts some of his signatures into the film, from the fast-shudder techniques that he has always been so fond of to the man’s obvious fascination with men in the rain. “Slumdog Millionaire” deserves all the praise it has been receiving on the technical end and I will be anxious to see how well it does stacked up against others at the Oscars.

Now, to the problems I had with the film. The film lacked an emotional punch. In a film like this, you need something to really grip you – to tug at you. In “Millions”, we were given just that – you were really connected to the characters and you really were rooting for them and the ending leaves you just warmhearted and tear-struck. “Slumdog Millionaire” was missing that component for me. I was rooting for Jamal, of course. But I didn’t feel that tug of urgency. There is something that happens between Jamal and Latika at the end of the film that should have left my heart soaring. Instead, I felt like I had been given all the ingredients for satisfaction, but just not the directions on how to make it. Maybe it had something to do with what I felt was an underdeveloped passion and relationship between Jamal and Latika. We never really understand why their bond is so strong and why they can’t forget one another. Maybe the reasoning for that is in all the scenes we don’t see in the film. I just felt like we could have been given something that would make us fully understand why these two people are destined to be together.

But, those gripes aside, “Slumdog Millionaire” was a good film. Not a great film, but a good one. I think the film is being overhyped and I think that can only serve to harm it in the end. Don’t get me wrong – I’d love to see Danny Boyle win an Academy Award, but I cannot say he deserves it for this film. For “Millions”, yes. For “Sunshine”, yes. Not for “Slumdog Millionaire”. I will recommend, however, that everyone stick around for the credit sequence at the end of the film, which is a real delight. That sequence almost made me forget about the problems I had with the picture. Almost. My suggestions for the film would be Best Cinematography, Best Original Score, Best Costume Design and Simon Beaufoy for best Adapted Screenplay. I would love to be able to give it more, but I just don’t think I can. Danny Boyle is just such an astonishingly good filmmaker that even a good film seems disappointing because you know he typically dabbles in greatness. But, see for yourself – see if it makes a better connection.

Dev Patel (Jamal Malik)
Freida Pinto (Latika)
Anil Kapoor (Prem Kumar)
Madhur Mittal (Salim Malik)
Irrfan Khan (Police Inspector)
Ankur Vikal (Maman)
Saurabh Shukla (Sergeant Srinivas)

Director: Danny Boyle

RATED R

OBITUARY

R.I.P.
ROBERT MULLIGAN
1925 - 2008



FILMOGRAPHY:

1957...Fear Strikes Out
1960...The Rat Race
1961...The Great Impostor
1961...Come September
1962...The Spiral Road
1962...To Kill A Mockingbird
1963...Love with the Proper Stranger
1965...Baby the Rain Must Fall
1965...Inside Daisy Clover
1967...Up the Down Staircase
1968...The Stalking Moon
1971...The Pursuit of Happiness
1971...Summer of '42
1972...The Other
1974...The Nickel Ride
1978...Bloodbrothers
1978...Same Time, Next Year
1982...Kiss Me Goodbye
1988...Clara's Heart
1991...The Man in the Moon

It would not be an exaggeration to call Robert Mulligan a one-hit-wonder with "To Kill A Mockingbird". However, his one-hit happens to be one of the greatest cinematic accomplishments of all-time. Mulligan, however, also directed a couple of films for which I have much affection, especially his final film, "The Man in the Moon", which starred a young Reese Witherspoon in one of the most touching coming-of-age films I have ever seen. Mulligan's career was long and successful in both film and television and he was nominated for an Academy Award. His brother, actor Richard Mulligan, was also prolific in film and television.

OBITUARY

R.I.P.
ROBERT PROSKY
1930 - 2008



FILMOGRAPHY:

1981...Thief
1982...Hanky Panky
1983...Christine
1984...The Natural
1987...Outrageous Fortune
1987...Broadcast News
1988...The Great Outdoors
1990...Loose Cannons
1990...Gremlins 2: The New Batch
1990...Funny About Love
1990...Green Card
1992...Far and Away
1992...Hoffa
1993...Last Action Hero
1993...Rudy
1993...Mrs. Doubtfire
1994...Miracle on 34th Street
1995...The Scarlet Letter
1995...Dead Man Walking
1996...The Chamber
1997...Mad City
1999...Dudley Do-Right
2005...Suits on the Loose

This is a sad day. Robert Prosky was one of the most recognizable character actors of the past three decades -- a kind-hearted, talented and appealing figure who made characters memorable and sympathetic. I will always remember him as Nick, the owner of the magical movie theatre in "Last Action Hero"; as the television mogul who helps Robin Williams win back his kids in "Mrs. Doubtfire"; as the priest who helps Rudy figure out a way to make it to Notre Dame. Prosky was a big part of my childhood and when I read the news this morning, I was deeply saddened. He's one of those actors a lot of people won't know, but definitely should remember.

PUNISHER: WAR ZONE Film Critique

Ray Stevenson? Didn't he sing "Everything Is Beautiful"?



There really hasn’t been a true guilty pleasure for me in 2008. There have been some fantastic films and there have been some terrible films, but there haven’t been any films that were so bad they were good. Until now. “Punisher: War Zone” is a remake of a remake of a comic book adaptation – the whole ‘third times the charm’ scenario for Marvel Comics, with Lionsgate once again on board. The film is directed by former martial arts champion Lexi Alexander whose last film, “Green Street Hooligans”, is one of the most underrated macho films ever made. She was nominated for an Academy Award for her short film, “Johnny Flynton”, a film about boxing. So, the girl knows how to direct action and lots of people are calling her the new Kathryn Bigelow. What she does with “Punisher: War Zone” is admirable. She takes a franchise that has been such a disappointment to comic book fans and injects a little life into it. She threw caution to the wind and decided to make the craziest, bloodiest, most honest-to-god “Punisher” film ever made, and one of the most violent comic book adaptations ever. Alexander knows what this film is and she plays it up, but what helps her is the fact that she has some great actors, some lush set design and art direction and one hell of an eye for action. This is, without a doubt, my guiltiest of guilty pleasures for this year.

Forget the previous “Punisher” films. This picture opens with Frank Castle aka Punisher (Ray Stevenson) unleashing a can of unholy hell on a group of gangsters, including the egomaniacal Billy Russoti (Dominic West), hideously disfiguring him. In the process, The Punisher accidentally kills an FBI agent, which attracts the attention of that agents partner, Budiansky (Colin Salmon). Budiansky joins forces with Detective Soap (Dash Mihok), the head of the Punisher Task Force, to help bring Frank Castle to justice. Castle is ripped apart by guilt over the agent’s death, having killed one of the good guys, and he even contemplates leaving the world of The Punisher behind. Meanwhile, Billy is now referring to himself as Jigsaw, has sprung his batshit insane brother Loony Bin Jim (Doug Hutchison) from the nuthouse and is planning to find his money and do whatever it takes to get his revenge on Frank Castle. The film ends with a showdown between Castle and Jigsaw in an old abandoned hotel, complete with more bullets than a gun supply store and more blood than most Troma films. Wayne Knight co-stars as Micro, The Punisher’s tech guy and arms dealer. You’d think Knight would be serving as the comic relief, but you’d be incorrect – those honors belong to the films two villains.

Let me start off my saying that this film looks like a “Punisher” film should look. The problem with the previous two films was that they both approached the material from the wrong angle. The Dolph Lungren “Punisher” was too over-the-top Stallone-esque and lacked any and all credibility with the comic book legion. The Thomas Jane “Punisher” tried too much for realism and lost all comic book mentality in the translation, except for an insanely Jack Nicholson-esque performance from John Travolta. This “Punisher” meets in the middle. Ray Stevenson is the perfect choice for this role because he has such a mute expression and such subtle displays of emotion. He doesn’t underplay the role and he doesn’t overplay the role. He looks menacing, he feels menacing, but yet you can sympathize with the man for what he’s been through. The landscape and the world Alexander creates is just fantastic – with bright, vivid colors enhancing dark and dreary structures – making a church look more like a Vegas showplace. This is the way a film like this should look. All of the structures look far older than they should and the New York City created is one that rivals Gotham City in terms of Dario Argento-esque collision of color and chrome. The city takes on a life of its own.

The other exciting thing about this “Punisher” film is the choice of villains. Dominic West is fantastic here as Jigsaw and just chews up the scenery throughout. He has so much fun with this role and really creates a multi-dimensional character. This is one of the most complete performances from a villain in a comic book adaptation that I’ve seen. Doug Hutchison is also tons of fun as West’s sadistic brother. Hutchison overdoes the accent, but I think that’s the point. They are both overdoing the accent, but there really are people who talk like that, as ridiculous as it sometimes sounds. These two villains also serve as the comic relief for the film, especially in a sequence when they’re walking around to various neighborhoods, recruiting gangsters and criminals. West has a nice speech in front of a projected American flag that is quite nice. And I should mention that it was nice to see Dash Mihok in an unusual role for him, and Wayne Knight in a role that doesn’t do a whole lot, but shows Wayne Knight might have a career revival ahead. The rest of the performances are solid also – “Punisher: War Zone” benefits from a host of strong performances because everyone understands that is going on and everyone seems to be on the same page as director Lexi Alexander with the material.

What a surprise this was for me. I was expecting “Punisher: War Zone” to be just another lame comic book adaptation, especially considering it is a remake of a remale of a comic book adaptation. “Punisher: War Zone” blew me away with how tongue-in-cheek it handled so much of the material. My favorite scene in the film comes with three rooftop jumpers and the Punisher giving them a little surprise. You’ll know what I’m talking about when you see the film. “Punisher: War Zone” proves that there is hope for this franchise, even though the film made such little money its opening weekend that I doubt we will be seeing a sequel, unless it heads straight to DVD. That is a real shame. Director Lexi Alexander finally gave me a Frank Castle to root for. She finally gave me a villain that didn’t seem like a complete and utter vanity project. She finally have me the Wayne Knight comeback I’ve been waiting for. “Punisher: War Zone” is not a great film. By many standards it’s not even a good film. It’s a guilty pleasure. But I will recommend the hell out of it to each and every one of you.

Ray Stevenson (Frank Castle/The Punisher)
Dominic West (Billy Russoti/Jigsaw)
Doug Hutchison (Loony Bin Jim)
Colin Salmon (Paul Budiansky)
Dash Mihok (Martin Soap)
Wayne Knight (Micro)
Julie Benz (Angela Donatelli)

Director: Lexi Alexander

RATED R


AND A HALF

OBITUARY

R.I.P.
PAUL BENEDICT
1938 - 2009



FILMOGRAPHY:

1972...Jeremiah Johnson
1974...The Front Page
1975..."The Jeffersons"
1977...The Goodbye Girl
1983...The Man with Two Brains
1984...This Is Spinal Tap
1988...Arthur 2: On the Rocks
1989...Cocktail
1990...The Freshman
1991...The Addams Family
1996...Waiting for Guffman
2000...Isn't She Great
2003...A Mighty Wind
2004...After the Sunset
2008...Side By Each

The name likely isn't familiar, but the face is. Paul Benedict was a character actor who helped create some of the most memorable scenes in film history. He is probably best known as Harry Bentley, a role he originated on "All in the Family" and played for several years on "The Jeffersons". He is memorable to younger audiences as the assumed Mr. Guffman in "Waiting for Guffman". I will always remember his brief but memorable role as the judge in "The Addams Family". Benedict was that rare breed of character actor -- and they don't make them like him anymore.

AUSTRALIA Film Critique

Notice how neither one of them is getting wet?



Ever wonder what would happen if “Gone with the Wind” met “Crocodile Dundee”? Besides Mammy getting eaten by a crocodile, the result would be “Australia”, the adventurous and ballsy new epic from director Baz Luhrmann, who last dazzled our senses with his 2001 musical “Moulin Rouge” which did rather well come awards time. He has been slaving over this film for what seems like an eternity, with Russell Crowe originally attached to star before bowing out. There have been so many rumors and delays and production reports about this film, I was starting to wonder if it was ever going to find completion. “Australia” is in the tradition of the best of David Lean epics, with the wide-eyed wonder of the open landscape and the true sense of a film that knows what it wants to be and what it needs to do to get there. Baz Luhrmann did, with this film, what James Cameron wanted to do with “Titanic”. Both succeeded in their own ways. “Australia” is a better film.

The film is set in – you guessed it – Australia. Lady Sarah Ashley (Nicole Kidman) arrives to find her husband, who traveled to Australia to run a cattle farm and make loads of cash. When she arrives, she is shocked to find her husband recently killed in what seems like an accident. A man known as Drover (Hugh Jackman) becomes her love/hate relationship of choice and a small half breed named Nullah (Brandon Walters) her surrogate child. Lady Ashley decides to assist Drover in moving 1500 heads of cattle across Australia and to the city, where they would be collecting a nice sum of money and socking one to the wealthiest man around, King Carney (Bryan Brown). That is the first half of the film. The second half deals with Lady Ashley, Drover and Nullah going back to the ranch and settling down before unforeseen circumstances take over and send them all back to the city for more adventure and intrigue. David Wenham co-stars as Fletcher, the villain of the piece who was very similar to Luhrmann’s villain from “Moulin Rouge”.

The scope of this film is impressive. Luhrmann’s pulled out all the stops for this picture and was determined to craft a film in the grande tradition of “Gone with the Wind” or “Lawrence of Arabia” – and the funny thing is that he succeeds. “Australia” works on all those levels. It has romance, it has drama, it has adventure and it has a satisfying resolution. I guess you could say his approach was more homage than anything else but the film really does stand on its own. I was especially impressed with his attention to details in the film. He didn’t skimp in any area. The art direction is fantastic and maintains Luhrmann’s signature styles. The cinematography is expansive and really captures the beauty of the Australian landscape. And the original score from David Hirschfelder is very likely going to find an Academy Award nomination because it’s that kind of score that really does make an epic adventure film like this. Kudos to Luhrmann and his talented group of artists who brought the beauty and the rambunctious spirit of this film to life.

And let me express how happy I am that Russell Crowe did not do this film. I cannot imagine him in the role of Drover. Hugh Jackman brings a handsome charm and a mischief to the role that Crowe does not possess. Drover would have been brooding all the time. Jackman strikes the right balance between performance and homage and it really works. Nicole Kidman also turns in yet another fantastic performance in a role that requires a wide range of emotions. Say what you will about her but she really is one of the finest actresses working today. The most remarkable performance came from Brandon Walters as Nullah, who really is the star of the film. I have a hard time recalling a better child performance in a film. David Wenham is menacing enough as the villain and Bryan Brown is quite nice in his memorable, but brief role. What Luhrmann did was instill in his cast exactly what he wanted, which is something taken for granted about a lot of other directors working today. They just assume their actors know. They don’t.

What a treat this was. The film runs at 2 hours and 45 minutes, but it felt like it was a two-hour picture. It keeps your undivided attention and it manages not to fall flat in its second act. A film like this could have been an epic disaster for Luhrmann, and I don’t know that it will live up to all financial expectations, but it certainly does deliver the goods. It just had that feeling of a classic and that needs to count for something – recreation is not simple. Baz Luhrmann for Best Director? Maybe. We’ll see how things shape up. David Hirschfelder for Best Original Score? A lock. I would also even consider Nicole Kidman for a Best Actress nomination based on her work here. I think this film will dominate the technical categories but struggle in the others. Regardless, it is a fantastic film, a fine accomplishment and a rousing entertainment.

Hugh Jackman (Drover)
Nicole Kidman (Sarah Ashley)
Brandon Walters (Nullah)
David Wenham (Fletcher)
Bryan Brown (Carney)

Director: Baz Luhrmann

RATED PG-13

MILK Film Critique

Milk -- it does the senses good.



In November, while most of the civilized world was embracing change and the start of a new era in American politics and the eradication of prejudices that have plagued our society for years, one specific community – the homosexual community – was being targeted by the Conservative Force in the United States. Proposition 8 passed in California and various other anti-gay measures around the country passed, signaling that – while many different groups had reason to celebrate – the gay movement was being pushed further and further back. A man named Harvey Milk dealt with this same kind of prejudice in his day. He was the first openly gay man elected to public office, which was a member of the Board of Supervisors in San Francisco. In his short span as a Supervisor in the city, he helped pass the Gay Rights Amendment and defeat the Briggs Initiative, Proposition 6, which prevented homosexuals from working in public schools and could even cause friends of homosexuals to be fired from their jobs. Harvey Milk was one of the most outspoken leaders of the gay rights movement and in 1978 he was assassinated alongside San Francisco Mayor George Moscone by a fellow Supervisor, Dan White. “Milk”, directed by Gus Van Sant, chronicles Milks rise to power, his political career, his legacy and – ultimately – his departure.

We meet Harvey Milk (Sean Penn) in New York City in the early 1970's picking up a trick, Scott Smith (James Franco). It’s Harvey’s birthday and he doesn’t want to spend it alone. Harvey and Scott move to San Francisco where Harvey almost immediately gets involved in public office, even coining his own nickname, The Mayor of Castro Street. He runs for the Board of Supervisors on numerous occasions and is defeated each time, though garnering more and more votes with each subsequent election. When the district lines are redrawn, he takes advantage of it and is elected to the Board of Supervisors. Emile Hirsch co-stars as Cleve Jones, Harvey’s friend and campaign force; Alison Pill co-stars as Anne Kronenberg, his campaign manager. While serving on the Board of Supervisors, Harvey meets Dan White (Josh Brolin), a Conservative family man who doesn’t approve of Harvey’s lifestyle. The two develop an odd relationship that ranges from extreme distrust to a mutual acceptance of one another. Dan invites Harvey to his son’s christening, for example. The film ends with Dan White shooting Harvey Milk and George Moscone multiple times for Moscone’s refusal to reinstate Dan White to the Board of Supervisors after his resignation. These aren’t spoilers – everyone knows the story. It’s just the way things happened.

What director Gus Van Sant has done here is nothing short of miraculous. He has skillfully and perfectly re-captured a time in American politics and society. He has taken the Castro and given it a new life based on an old life. “Milk” is one of the most authentic portraits of a civil rights leader ever made and its especially important in these troubled times of intolerance. Van Sant uses old snapshots of the Castro and merges them with modern day footage that is seamless and really leaves a lasting impression. He takes archival footage – most featured in the Academy Award winning documentary “The Times of Harvey Milk” – and re-creates it. The look and feel of the film is just fantastic – very uplifting and not depressing at all. A tragedy occurs but we are left with this feeling that, though Harvey Milk is dead, his legacy will never die. The score by Danny Elfman is destined for an Academy Award nomination and I would be hard pressed to think of a more deserving director this year than Gus Van Sant who continues to push the boundaries of cinema from film to film. “Milk” is really his most mainstream film in a long while, but it still maintains that indie flourish that was present in films like “Elephant” and “Paranoid Park”. Van Sant is one of the best directors working today and this might be his year to make some cinematic noise.

As for the performances, I was left speechless. You never once think it’s Sean Penn you’re watching in this film. It is total immersion in a character. Watch “Milk” and then watch his performance in “I Am Sam” or “Mystic River”. It’s astonishing. He has the Academy Award all but officially won. James Franco also provides the best performance of his career, meaning this has been his most solid year to date with “Pineapple Express”. Josh Brolin continues his string of flawless performance as Dan White, probably the most complicated character in the story. I also want to single out Emile Hirsch who does what Sean Penn does here, but to a lesser extent. It is so refreshing to see heterosexual actors attack this material with such abandon. My problem with “Brokeback Mountain” was always that I didn’t feel like Ledger and Gyllenhaal just dove in to the content and the material – they did it, but with reservations. Penn, Franco and Hirsch have none of that feel to their performances – they seem real and very likable. If you want proof of how well they did, check out “The Times of Harvey Milk”. Or, stick around for the end of “Milk” where they show photos of the actors in character and the real individuals they played. Some of it, especially Sean Penn and Emile Hirsch, is just uncanny. Perfecting casting all around here.

This is getting to be the time of year where I give so many four and five star reviews, but they do typically save the best for last. “Milk” is my new favorite film of 2008 and I assure you it’s not just because I am a homosexual. I found numerous flaws with “Brokeback Mountain” and I am more critical of gay themed films than any others. “Milk” was a modern day masterpiece from a director who deserves all the accolades he is going to be receiving and more. It’s proof positive than Sean Penn is neck and neck with Philip Seymour Hoffman for being the best actor in modern times. I want to watch “Milk” with friends and I want to watch it once again after that. I want to see it nominated for Best Picture, Van Sant for Best Director, Dustin Lance Black for Best Original Screenplay, Sean Penn for Best Actor and Emile Hirsch for Best Supporting Actor. I want to see this film win everything it deserves and more. It’s a fantastic film – a real delight.

Sean Penn (Harvey Milk)
James Franco (Scott Smith)
Josh Brolin (Dan White)
Emile Hirsch (Cleve Jones)
Diego Luna (Jack Lira)
Alison Pill (Anne Kronenberg)
Victor Garber (George Moscone)
Denis O’Hare (John Briggs)

Director: Gus Van Sant

RATED R

REPO! THE GENETIC OPERA Film Critique

Forget the nurses -- this bitch is DOA.



If you’ve ever wanted to sit through a 98 minute Meatloaf music video, “Repo! The Genetic Opera” might be just what the doctor ordered! Let me confess that I had no desire to see this film. I was literally dragged, kicking and screaming, by friends because they wanted to revel in the awfulness of the film rather than choose a film with more rewarding gifts to offer. The trailer alone looked like “High School Musical” directed by Alex Proyas – “Dark City” for the tweens. Darren Lynn Bousman, the director, doesn’t have a creative bone in his body. If he ever did, it was ripped out in some stunt gone haywire from one of his “Saw” films. “Repo! The Genetic Opera” is the modern day equivalent of “Stayin’ Alive”, minus John Travolta and Spandex. It tries to hard to be the next cult phenomenon – the next “Rocky Horror Picture Show”. However, in order to become a cult classic you have to have one thing – the desire to be great. The best cult films were films that tried to hard to be a masterpiece that they turned into a parody of themselves. “Repo!” doesn’t have the wherewithal to know what the hell it is. It’s not a cult film because it doesn’t strive for greatness. If it is striving for greatness, it becomes even more pathetic and sad. This was not only the worst film of the year but, indeed, the most painful and dreadful musical ever created.

Describing the plot to this film is like sympathizing with a rapist – you might understand where it’s coming from, but it will still fuck you up the ass. Basically, Shilo (Alexa Vega) is being held captive by her doctor father, Nathan (Anthony Stewart Head), who doubles as a Repo Man by night. You see – in this world, organ failures are rampant and a company called GeneCo. (headed by the villainous Paul Sorvino and his “Deliverance” kids) is offering them on credit. But, if you don’t pay, the Repo Man comes and collects. There’s something about Sorvino stealing Head’s woman and wanting revenge. There’s something about Head wanting to keep his daughter safe because she has a blood condition. There’s something about Sorvino dying and not wanting to leave his empire to his three mentally retarded children (Ogre, Bill Moseley, Paris Hilton). And then there some dead bitch named Marni who ties it all together somehow. The story is told through the many, many, many, many songs that litter this barren creative landscape. It’s basically a rock opera, though light on the rock and heavy on the opera. There are so many organs ripped out of bodies that you really start paying attention – “Hey! When did a spine become an organ?” The film ends with a “Rocky Horror Picture Show” performance with Sarah Brightman and a shit load of spine blood.

Shall we start with the music? Wow. What else is there to say? Wow. I could bend over and ass fart out a better tune than anything in this heap o’turds. Alexa Vega sounds like she’s channeling that really bad Britney Spears record – take your pick. Bill Moseley and Ogre are so bad that it’s not even laughable – it’s pathetic and wrong. I felt violated by their vocals. Paul Sorvino has a great, booming operatic voice. How did they land him for this film? Did Darren Lynn Bousman give him a ring and say, “Hey, Paul – remember that time I saved your kid from drowning in the river? Well – time to collect!” Despite his strong vocals, Sorvino takes this material so seriously that he becomes laughable himself. Doesn’t he know how bad this is? Anthony Stewart Head also has some impressive vocals and I have to admit it’s nice to see Giles from “Buffy” find some work, but I have to think a career on Broadway would better suit him. I honestly can’t remember a single song from the production. They are just so dreadful. The choruses feel like punchlines to jokes that Bousman ineptly strung together like a necklace of broken pearls. The relevance of the songs to the story is like bucktoothed, hair-lipped son of “Les Miserables”. I felt bad for each and every person involved with this waste of time. I felt sorry for the audience watching it.

Despite all of this, there seems to be a cult following developing around the picture. They tried midnight screenings with “Showgirls” a few years back and it didn’t work. You can’t become a cult film when that’s what you’re trying to be because that defeats the whole point of being a cult film. Do you think “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” set out to become such a phenomenon and have midnight screenings all across the globe on a weekly basis? No. It just sort of fell into it. “Mommie Dearest” was tackled with all the intensity and earnestness that could be mustered and now we quote lines from that film as if it were the Fabulous Plague. “Repo!” is not a cult film. It’s not a good film. It’s a cinematic abortion. Darren Lynn Bousman and his piss poor production staff should be shot if for no other reason that their decision to dress the Repo Man like the Orkin Man, put chicks in welder masks with red lighting gels and cover virtually every other room in plastic. If this is what the future really looks like, give me “2012". And I won’t even go into the numerous “Blade Runner” rip-offs that are abound. Evidently this show was a stage musical long before it made its way onto cinema screens. Maybe it works better on stage. I can’t imagine this working if you resurrected Jimmy Stewart and cast him as the Repo Man.

So, if you can’t tell – I do not recommend this picture. In fact, I might pay you not to see it. The good thing is that it’s not playing anywhere close to most of you, but you might still want to seek it out on DVD. Don’t! E-Mail me with your mailing address and I will send you $1.00 not to see this film. You can use that dollar however you see fit. Want to purchase that special edition copy of “Ishtar”? You’ve got $1.00 towards it! Want a pack of Goobers before you head into the cineplex! I’ve got $1.00 of that covered! I will do anything it takes to keep you from wasting your time on this monumental, colossal, ridiculous, pathetic and turdolicious piece of cinematic dung. Go ahead and cast your Razzie votes now – “Repo! The Genetic Opera” is the winner. A man and a woman walk into a bar. The bartender says, “What can I get for you?” The woman says, “Whiskey and soda”. The bartender mixes the drink. The man says, “Repo! The Genetic Opera”. The woman throws the drink in the man’s face and the bartender pulls out a shotfun and blasts his brains all over the woman. Some films are lethal. “Repo!” might just kill you.

Alexa Vega (Shilo Thomas)
Anthony Stewart Head (Nathan Thomas)
Paul Sorvino (Rotti Largo)
Sarah Brightman (Blind Mag)
Paris Hilton (Amber Sweet)
Bill Moseley (Luigi Largo)
Nivek Ogre (Pavi Largo)

Director: Darren Lynn Bousman

RATED R