Preamble: Every decade has something associated with it. The 80's was the era of the action hero and synthesizer. The 90's was the era of experimentation. That leaves us the 00's, which we haven't really even bestowed a universal name for yet much less something that really defines it. Besides overtly being a list like so many best-of-the-decade lists that people hastily put together towards the end of a decade, I think of this list as a look back at what happened during the 00's in the public conscience. There are films on here that range from awkward comedies to bleak, post-9/11 dramas from around the globe. However, if you are looking for a look back at the events that shaped the decade, this isn't the list for you.
These are the type lists that give a meaning to the previous decade while illuminating what we considered a good film. We can look back on this time to see how we developed as a society and as a time capsule of what we felt these years. It could also show where we're going. As the years progressed, CGI became more realistic eventually culminating in "Avatar". Film stories began to compete with television and vice versa as each became more advanced. Independent films eventually decayed as their most talented directors got co-opted by Hollywood. Yet it will probably take years to sift through all the films that came out until we can put a real stamp on what the overall aesthetic change to cinema that occurred. Hopefully this list will start to illuminate on common themes and threads that were present in the films of the decade.
75) Man On Wire
"If I die, what a beautiful death!"
A tense documentary on an incredible artist, "Man on Wire" had me on the edge even though you see said man on wire throughout the documentary as an interviewee in the present. It really shows how amazing this film works together.
76) Howl's Moving Castle
"You're wearing that hat? After all the magic I used to make your dress pretty?"
Another beautiful fairy tale from the master, Miyazaki. The man can do no wrong.
77) Gladiator
"My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, loyal servant to the true emperor, Marcus Aurelius. Father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next."
The original creator of the "Bad-ass Greek/Roman historical picture", "Gladiator" may not stand up as well as it did. Nonetheless, the bad-assness remains. Epic and enthralling, it's the perfect film just to watch and turn your brain off.
78) Deliver Us From Evil
Moving from corporations to religious organizations, this documentary is the most damning film about the Catholic priest scandal in the 00's. Seeing how high-level officials moved pedophiliacs from parish to parish without excommunicating them, it's a wonder to see how the Church rebounded from such a publicity nightmare. It's a tough film to watch, especially if you are Catholic, but it is essential for the documentary head.
79) Michael Clayton
"I'm not the guy you kill. I'm the guy you buy! Are you so fucking blind that you don't even see what I am?"
George Clooney is not exactly a great actor. What he is, really, is a great leading man. White-collar crime was a common thread in the 00's. Corrupt corporations knowing that something they are doing is clearly evil while covering the truth was pretty much the archetype. By taking the film inside the corporation itself, it gives a different perspective to the costs of high profits.
80) Letters From Iwo Jima
"We soldiers dig. We dig all day. This is the hole that we will fight and die in. Am I digging my own grave?"
The 00's will forever be Clint Eastwood's best decade. Not because he made a ton of good films (a lot of them were pretty forgettable on hindsight) but because he became the go-to Oscar man. With "Letters From Iwo Jima" the second part of his two-part films based on the Battle of Iwo Jima, Eastwood made a film that actually stood up on multiple viewings. Instead of going for cheap emotional kicks, he really created a genuine portrayal of war.
81) Seabiscuit
"You don't throw away a whole life just 'cause it's banged up a little."
"Seabiscuit" is the reason why "Cinderella Man" sucked so much. "Cinderella Man" was about a man trying to pick himself up from the Great Depression and becomes an uber-hero. However, it all comes off incredibly fake, as if everyone involved was thinking it was destined to win Best Picture. "Seabiscuit" is the somewhat little film that could. It's all about how a nation rallied upon an unexpected winner. And what an unexpected winner this movie was. Truth be told, I have yet to rewatch it since the banking bust, but I bet it's as relevant as ever.
82) Sweeney Todd
"You're in a merry mood today, Mr. Todd."
The 00's were mostly lousy for Tim Burton. To start it off, he had to go and make "Planet of the Apes", which is perhaps the most forgettable and worthless remake ever made. Then he had to remake "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" and make it all creepy. Nevertheless, Burton made a few apologies for these disasters. "Sweeney Todd" just happens to be the best of the lot. You're welcome, Tim Burton. You're welcome.
83) The Lives of Others
"The state office for statistics on Hans-Beimler street counts everything; knows everything: how many pairs of shoes I buy a year: 2.3, how many books I read a year: 3.2 and how many students graduate with perfect marks: 6,347. But there's one statistic that isn't collected there, perhaps because such numbers cause even paper-pushers pain: and that is the suicide rate."
In most film, East Germany and Nazi Germany are synonymous. One can always be exchanged for the other. "The Lives of Others", however, is clearly a film about what East Germany was from the inside. An amusing and, mostly, sad film about the effects of totalitarianism on the individual from the perspectives of the watcher and the watchee, it explores the bizarre connection that both these lives share. It's as if the watcher is merely seeing a television drama, but he becomes so involved that he leaps into the television screen to assist the main characters in the direction he feels the show should take.
84) The Counterfeiters
"I'm myself. Everyone else is everyone else."
Many of the best foreign films of the decade deal with compliance. Would you be able to do something for a country that you know is actively doing something evil? Even if it is to your own people? The main character of "The Counterfeiters" is a curious case. He's mostly looking to save his own skin but, in a way, tries to save more lives with the more people he employs. However, what worth is it if it's aiding the enemy?
85) Paprika
"Don't you think dreams and the Internet are similar? They are both areas where the repressed conscious mind vents."
"Paprika" could've been renamed "Mind-Fuck: The Movie" and it would've still made as much sense. Imagine David Lynch given the chance to direct an anime. Now imagine that film being made. It has something to do with a dream machine or it may not. Who knows? That's what makes the film so dreamlike in how little sense it makes but the meaning still comes together by the end.
86) A Serious Man
"The Uncertainty Principle. It proves we can't ever really know... what's going on. So it shouldn't bother you. Not being able to figure anything out. Although you will be responsible for this on the mid-term."
This film is as if the Coen Bros. read Victor Frankl's "Man's Search For Meaning" closed it and said "No." This is the antithesis to "Dear Zachary." It is a nihilistic film that boldly declares that there is no meaning to the universe and dwells on what we can make about what little meaning our lives can mean. It's a bleak message but it's something only the Coens really know how to juggle without us trying to kill ourselves afterwards.
87) Spider-Man 2
"You have a train to catch."
This is what a Spidey film should be about. It shouldn't be about the super-heroics but the roots to what make the comics special. This is and has always been the story of a man balancing his life as a superhero and all the other things in life. Dating, money, etc. Plus, come on, Doc Ock was pretty awesome.
88) Dear Zachary
If you ever thought "Well, perhaps, I am too happy of a person" this film is for you. Wow. This is one of the films that can break a full grown, steroid laden man to tears. It also is noteworthy because it really shows the value in people. Even if they aren't famous or seem to not have contributed anything great to mankind, they leave behind a legacy for all those that remembered them.
89) The King of Kong
If there was any film to put petty squabbles in perspective, "King of Kong" is the documentary for you. It's the David and Goliath story even if Goliath only thinks he's Goliath but, really, he's pretty much a smaller man in Goliath's clothing. It's also a fascinating look into the human psyche and how far people will go to keep even the smallest thing that gives them meaning. Even if it is just the high score for Donkey Kong Jr.
90) Iron Man
"Yeah. I can fly."
With all the angsty superheroes going around cinemas (I'm looking at you Spider-Man), it was a pleasure to find one with depth, charisma, and just plain fun. It's also fascinating to see how it made a once conservative comic book character (yes, Steve Ditko, one of the creators of Iron Man, was a huge conservative) into an actively liberal one that tries to take on the military-industrial complex single handingly. Of course, Tony Stark has his flaws but they make him one of the most complex main characters to come out of these film adaptations. Also, Robert Downey Jr.=win.
91) Serenity
"Can I make a suggestion that doesn't involve violence, or is this the wrong crowd for that?"
Showing what TV really can do, Joss Whedon made the greatest jump from screen to projector than any TV series really has. Finishing up the loose plot threads from his classic series "Firefly", "Serenity" gives things for fans and newbies really to enjoy. However, if you want to really get the full effect of the film, watch "Firefly" first. You'll thank me later.
91) Downfall
"The war is lost... But if you think that I'll leave Berlin for that, you are sadly mistaken. I'd prefer to put a bullet in my head."
Going back to monsters, this film examines, perhaps, the most monstrous man that ever lived: Hitler. In no ways does the film ever let you sympathize with him. Him and his entire cabinet are portrayed exactly who they were: monsters. However, this film deconstructs them to the point that they aren't the monsters that they themselves wanted to be portrayed as in history. They are miserable, petty, self-destructive people. If the film doesn't hammer that home enough, check out the YouTube spoofs of the scene when Hitler finds out that his army is finished. I highly recommend the Avatar trailer one.
92) Bowling for Columbine
Like von Trier, some may be turned off by Michael Moore's politics but, damn, if he isn't a great filmmaker. The film may be slanted towards his point of view but it doesn't force you to follow him. He allows you to make up your own mind by the end. The film's message isn't simply "guns are bad" but "why is America so fascinated with guns"? When you're finished, it asks more questions than it answers.
93) Chicken Run
"Now, the most important thing is, we have to work as a team, which means: you do everything I tell you."
Aardman may have had to be the best thing about Dreamworks Animation. Who knew that a spoof of "The Great Escape" and "Stalag 17" starring chickens would be so darn entertaining?
94) Manderlay
"You made us."
Some may be turned off by Lars von Trier's anti-American politics or the film's bare minimalist sets but, underneath, is a story really worth telling. Sure, it may be anti-American, but I view it more as a film that's anti-humanity. When the slaves are no worse off than the masters, it really says something about what von Trier thinks of what humanity is capable of.
95) Grindhouse
"I never miss."
Bad-ass. There is no other words really to describe this film. A bomb on its initial release and never re-released in its true 3-hour form, this is a film that was made for theaters. With new competition from better quality TV and the internet, film revenues did decline in the 00's with numerous films trying to find ways to fill the void. Grindhouse tried and spectacularly failed for the mainstream...but for those that actually went to see it, it has to be one of the most priceless theater experiences in years.
96) Monster
"I'm not a bad person. I'm a real good person."
What is a monster? The 00's tried numerous times to answer this question. Some see this film as a sympathetic portrayal of a notorious serial killer. Indeed, it tries to put a human face on it but that would still be too simplistic. The film never allows us to sympathize with her actions. By all accounts, the title is true about her. It only shows that monsters cry too.
97) The 25th Hour
"No. No, fuck you, Montgomery Brogan. You had it all, and you threw it away, you dumb fuck!"
A lot of the 00's can be defined as post-9/11. Indeed, a great swarth of most films aesthetics seemed to have evolved because of it. "The 25th Hour" has been considered by many as the first true post-9/11 film. Well, yes, but that would really simplify a film that works on so many levels. A tale of redemption without the redemption part, "The 25th Hour" is a sad journey of a man doomed to spend years away from the people he loves the most.
98) The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus
"Can you put a price on your dreams?"
Terry Gilliam has to be the unluckiest director in showbiz. With his lead actor dying halfway through the production, many thought this film would end up the way "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote." Nonetheless, from tragedy, came art. Lucky for Gilliam, the film's mirror device allowed numerous actors to fill in for Heath Ledger. Heck, I was even surprise at the amount of material Ledger already completed. Nevertheless, what would've become a piecemeal film became a whole. This might as well be considered the true ending to his Dreams trilogy.
99) V For Vendetta
"Today, however, is a day, sadly, no longer remembered. So, I thought we could mark this November the 5th by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat. Of course, there are those who do not want us to speak. I suspect, even now, orders are being shouted into telephones and men with guns are racing to this station. But regardless of what weapons they try to use to effect silence, words will always retain their power. Words are the means to meaning, and for some, the annunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country."
After 9/11, it was nearly a crime to criticize the president. Even during the Iraq War, a lot of pundits and government officials kept trying to pull this card to shut down the opposition. V for Vendetta was one of the loudest democratic responses. Originally a fantastic graphic novel by Alan Moore about 1984 with a superhero, this film helped patch together the fears of over half of the Americans that didn't vote for Bush into a succient, terrifying, fun film. It's also worth noting that this is probably the only great adaptation of an Alan Moore book. This includes the new Watchman movie.
100) Shrek
"Eat me!"
If the 00's was the beginning of a post-modern trend in traditional film genres and established film series, then Shrek has to be one of the first to shoot. Sure, it also opened the door up to a ton of miserable clones by other studios *cough*Fox*cough* but, for what it was, Shrek was a fantastic critique on Disneyfication. Of course, some of it comes off as none too subtle because of ex-Disney honcho Jeffrey Katzenberg's guiding hand but a lot of those jokes hit home. Some don't but, hey, at least the story is sound.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Friday, December 11, 2009
All Hail The Glorious Return of Disney
To sum up my thoughts on Disney's latest "The Princess and the Frog" in as few words as possible: It's 'bout time. Yes. Classic cell-animated pictures are alive and well again. Gone are the days of "Lilo of Stitch" and hello the brand new day that the new Pixar-infused Disney animation department has brought us. From the beginning where we see Disney Animation's new company logo of the first shot of "Steamboat Willy" to the end, this is classic Disney at its finest. Not racist Disney but the Disney with a song in its heart.
Before I dive in, I want to bring up something that has possibly troubled people from seeing this movie: good old-fashioned Disney racism. It's true that a lot of the film feels more like a mythical version of New Orleans than what it was historically. However, surprisingly, the racism of the era (around the 1920's/30's) in South is brought up albeit passingly. It really doesn't fit in the film's overall feel but it's not washed away from the picture entirely.
It's interesting how the film really doesn't dwell on sadness. The entire film is just one big, giant happy sopository. And it is beautiful. Oh G-d is it beautiful. From the swamps to the city, everything is rendered in such minute detail that it will probably take a few more viewings just to see more of what the animators left around. Sticking around after the end credits, I found it fascinating that the animators on the project were broken up by character. It really shows on the screen. A special kudos is in order for the team that brought Charlotte to life. Charlotte's character in particular wouldn't be as memorable if it weren't for the team behind her. She moves so fast yet so fluid that it would make The Flash do a double take.
Speaking of the animation, the musical sequences in this are some of the most extravagant and mind-blowing pieces of work I have seen in a long while. At the end of every sequence, I just wanted to stand up and applaud. Of course, I didn't, I don't want to look like a crazy person. Some of this applause has to go to Randy Newman, the sometimes unsung hero of Pixar. Returning to the territory of his greatest album "Good Old Boys", Newman brings an energy and wit to the songs and lyrics that really brings all of the latest Disney crap to shame. You know who I'm talking about *cough*HannahMontana*. Heck, it even brings a lot of musicals now out on Broadway to shame *cough*Shrek*cough*.
Look, if I didn't convince you to see this movie after gushing all about it, then do yourself a favor and pay good money for it so it can prove to Disney that cell-animated films aren't dead. They're tanned, rested, and ready for a new wave of golden age goodies that we haven't seen since the beginning of the 90's. The musical animated film is back for better or worse. Hopefully Dreamworks doesn't get their hands on it *shudders*.
Rating: 9/10
Before I dive in, I want to bring up something that has possibly troubled people from seeing this movie: good old-fashioned Disney racism. It's true that a lot of the film feels more like a mythical version of New Orleans than what it was historically. However, surprisingly, the racism of the era (around the 1920's/30's) in South is brought up albeit passingly. It really doesn't fit in the film's overall feel but it's not washed away from the picture entirely.
It's interesting how the film really doesn't dwell on sadness. The entire film is just one big, giant happy sopository. And it is beautiful. Oh G-d is it beautiful. From the swamps to the city, everything is rendered in such minute detail that it will probably take a few more viewings just to see more of what the animators left around. Sticking around after the end credits, I found it fascinating that the animators on the project were broken up by character. It really shows on the screen. A special kudos is in order for the team that brought Charlotte to life. Charlotte's character in particular wouldn't be as memorable if it weren't for the team behind her. She moves so fast yet so fluid that it would make The Flash do a double take.
Speaking of the animation, the musical sequences in this are some of the most extravagant and mind-blowing pieces of work I have seen in a long while. At the end of every sequence, I just wanted to stand up and applaud. Of course, I didn't, I don't want to look like a crazy person. Some of this applause has to go to Randy Newman, the sometimes unsung hero of Pixar. Returning to the territory of his greatest album "Good Old Boys", Newman brings an energy and wit to the songs and lyrics that really brings all of the latest Disney crap to shame. You know who I'm talking about *cough*HannahMontana*. Heck, it even brings a lot of musicals now out on Broadway to shame *cough*Shrek*cough*.
Look, if I didn't convince you to see this movie after gushing all about it, then do yourself a favor and pay good money for it so it can prove to Disney that cell-animated films aren't dead. They're tanned, rested, and ready for a new wave of golden age goodies that we haven't seen since the beginning of the 90's. The musical animated film is back for better or worse. Hopefully Dreamworks doesn't get their hands on it *shudders*.
Rating: 9/10
Sunday, December 6, 2009
List Whoring: Top 20 TV Shows off the 00's
Top 20 Shows of the 00's
Yup. It's that time of the year again. Or, well, decade as it may be. The one thing that really defined the decade in terms of film was something blown off by many a skeptic through the years: TV. When the history books are written about the dead art of TV (which will be replaced by the Super-Internet), it will be noted that the 00's was possibly the greatest decade of television. Yes, even eclipsing the late 1950's and early 60's, the time of such classics as "The Twilight Zone" and "Studio One". To look at the 00's in perspective, the groundwork was laid in the '90s with a lot of serialized dramas on HBO and Fox/WB/UPN basically giving a blank check to a lot of original creations like "The Simpsons" and "Buffy the Vampire Slayer".
Some ground rules first. Actually, just one rule to level the playing field. Sadly, shows that ended their run in the 00's will not be included. Shows like Buffy, Angel, Futurama, Freaks and Geeks, etc. However, these should be especially noted on how these shows really changed the landscape of television. Okay, note over. Now on to the good stuff. A controversial list that everyone can yell at me about later.
Honorable Mentions: Dead Like Me, Dexter, The Office (US), Chappelle's Show, Kitchen Nightmares, How I Met Your Mother, Sealab 2021, Samurai Jack, 24 (pre-Season 6), Extras, Frisky Dingo
20) Spectacular Spider-Man
As I said in a previous column, this is THE Spider-Man show. If you want to know who Spider-Man is and what makes him such an indelible character, look no further than here. It's also a very brave show. It tackles with a lot of difficult issues like drug addiction and, yet, it still plays every Saturday morning for an audience much younger than what the producers of the shows intend. This is truly the mark of a lot of the animated shows that will come up on the list. Not only that, but this show actually puts every Spider-Man reboot to shame. Ultimate Spider-Man, the films, every last one of them.
19) It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia
The theme of most great comedy shows of the 00's is that mean people are awesome. This is no different. In fact, one of the great attributes of this show is that it deals with real, controversial issues like abortion and the mortgage crisis and basically says "Why so fucking serious?"
18) Curb Your Enthusiasm
Again, mean people=awesome. If "It's Always Sunny..." deals with the big issues, Curb deals with the little ones. Those little awkward social fopas that are so common place that, when Larry David puts a magnifying glass to them, they become even more insignificant.
17) Jericho
Great sci-fi comes from social commentary. I'll elaborate more later-on but one of the genres that flourished in the 00's was the post-apocalypse genre. Spearheaded most likely from 9/11, this once niche genre has come into its own with the 00's. Though Jericho ended up failing, it did inspire a helluva fan uprising each time it got canceled. It even gave it a great second season. What starts out as "Battlestar Galactica" on the American frontier really, just like the genre itself, comes into its own as the episodes go on.
16) Dollhouse
Yeah, it kinda started off crappily but we really can't blame Whedon for that (*cough*Fox*cough*). After episode 6, the show really picked up and showed where it could go with its fascinating if frustrating-at-times concept. However, unlike some other shows on this list, even though this show got canceled, at least Fox gave it some time to end things. Here's hoping the series finale cements this show's legacy.
15) Aqua Teen Hunger Force
Adult Swim ushered in a new era of surrealistic comedy. Too long has the fascist chains of the sitcom burdened the televised comedy. With Aqua Teen Hunger Force, it broke those chains...with a glorious chainsaw of the proletariat. Yeah, a bit of a Marxist reading but, what the hell. It's a show so weird that you just have to see it to believe it. It even created an amazing niche genre: the surreal horror comedy. Check out the movie when you have a chance, especially the opening sequence.
14) Harvey Birdman: Attorney At Law
Colbert. Cole. Black. What are all these sublime comedians doing on an Adult Swim show? Because. A show that got better like a fine wine and ended just as well, "Harvey Birdman" is what parodies should do nowadays. Instead of just showing pre-existing characters in a scene like some other shows do (*cough*Family Guy*cough*), it actually expands and skews them so much that it's hard to watch the originals ever again.
13) Veronica Mars
The only detective show on television that has, by far, the best twists I have ever seen on television or film. Though the third season ended up being a bit predictable, Seasons 1 and 2 are the gold standard of what a procedural show can do. It's sad to think that this show got canceled in favor of "Gossip Girl" but it's great to relive the memories on DVD. Hell, sometimes the show still surprises me in how well structured it is.
12) Doctor Who
Maybe it's my love of Brits or maybe it's my love of good TV, but Doctor Who has it all. Adventure. High-Stakes. Characterization. Frankly, it's refreshing to find a series where the protagonist is actually the character you want to see on screen every week. It's so often the case with hour-longs that the protagonist is dull and tries too hard to be the every man. Not so with the Doctor. The only downside to this show has got to be the trailers or it can be an upside. Though they make every episode look boring, it's actually very strategic. None of them giveaway what actually happens in the episode, which makes the more surprising when things do happen. The only real low point of this series would have to be its Daleks in New York episodes. If you just ignore those two, you have one fantastic series.
11) American Dad
Though the final nail in the traditional sitcom coffin will have to wait a little longer (stupid "How I Met Your Mother"), there's at least "American Dad" to parody what has become a rather stale genre. This show goes places where a normal sitcom would say "Wait, wait I think we've gone too far" and it just rolls with it. Not only that, it has become the greatest show on what was once one of the greatest nights on TV: Sunday. It's sad to watch "The Simpsons" and "Family Guy" (though this is somewhat on the rebound as of late) go down the tubes, but at least I know that "American Dad" will be there to consistently bring the funny every week.
10) Avatar
If you judged this show based on its art style, you'll be missing out. Big time. It's faux-anime look presumes that this is just going to be another goofy series much like "Teen Titans" or "The Jackie Chan Adventures." What we have here is an epic three season long series that becomes the television equivalent of "Star Wars" (the original trilogy). Everything in this series feels right and incredibly well planned as if the showrunners planned, specifically, that this will last three seasons and no more. If you don't believe me, watch the second season and tell me that nothing got you.
9) The Venture Bros.
On the surface, the show could be considered a parody of old cartoon shows just like "Harvey Birdman". As the series progressed, it became increasingly clear that these characters are by no means mere caricatures of older creations just for shits and giggles. This is an incredibly astute look into failure. Almost every character has failed in life somehow and it really builds into an incredible tragic comedy about how dreams may never come true. Oh, and the Scooby-Doo parody episode is awesome.
8) The Office (UK)
Speaking of failure, this is possibly the bleakest "sitcom" ever and it's amazing for doing that. Where the American version is mostly smiles and sunshine, the UK version is set in a place where there is no hope. The series finale gives it but the entire series is about how many times it can be dashed away. David Brent has got to be one of the funniest characters ever created for television because of how not funny he is.
7) Firefly
Space-western. No wonder it was canceled in its first season. However, like "Avatar" and "The Venture Bros.", it's all in the details. This show defines "Bad-Ass." I think the show can speak for itself. Not because I'm lazy and I don't want to write a short write-up of it (yeah, also that) but what hasn't been said about this series?
6) Lost
After sputtering around in its second season, the third season cemented this show in #6. Heck, even parts of the second season were just incredible. Taking the best of the minds of Whedon and HBO series, what makes this show isn't the crazy ass island but the characters. The brilliant concoction of the dueling plots in each episode, where the B-plot explains something concerning the A-plot, is what makes this series shoot up so high on the list. It's crazy to think that no one thought of this sooner.
5) Supernatural
The award for this program is: the show that you should be watching but aren't. Bed Edlund, creator of "The Tick" and writer of a couple of episodes of "The Venture Bros.", is a godsend to television. He didn't create the series but, ever since he's been a part of it, it has sent the show flying off the radar. The mythology may not be as deep as "Lost" or "Battlestar Galactica" but every episode has something that shows sometimes forget to include: fun. It doesn't take itself so seriously even if deals with incredibly bleak issues. It looks like everyone is having a blast making these episodes and it shows on the screen.
4) Justice League
Bruce Timm's magnum opus, this show is what all of his previous shows lead up to. It may not be as good as "Batman" but what it lacks in grit it makes up in epic. The second season finale is at times heart-wrenching yet also gigantic. The ongoing Cadmus storyline just ties everything in the Timm-verse in a nice little bow. What's interesting about this series is that Bruce Timm (rightly) thought that each season would be the show's last. So every season ends with the appropriate fireworks.
3) Battlestar Galactica
A lot of people may say they were disappointed in the finale (I was, slightly) but if you take the whole instead of the sum of its parts, "Battlestar Galactica" is THE way to make a post-apocalyptic drama. From the mini-series on, the show feels like a roller-coaster that never lets go. And, like every great sci-fi piece, its social commentary is never laid on thick but hits you right in the gut.
2) Arrested Development
Could there have been a funnier series than "The Simpsons" in its glory days? No, but this show comes pretty darn close. Even with a cast of the most unlikeable characters ever, there is something that makes you want to watch what crazy thing they're going to get into next. Not only is each episode a testament to brilliant episode writing, but the running gags from episode-to-episode only get funnier the more times you watch them.
1) The Wire
When anyone talks about the platinum standard of television, "The Wire" is usually up there. There's a reason for that. HBO was still going strong with its Tiffany line of series well into the 00's but its "The Wire" that really showed what these shows can do. No bones about it, this show is angry. It's angry about how unfair life can be and how a lot of things in society will never be fixed. Like most of the shows on this list, it rewards the viewer for paying attention. However, this show says "Well, maybe you weren't paying close enough attention." From beginning to end, "The Wire" will go down in the history books as a show as grand as many of the classics told today. Think that's hyperbole? Just watch and prove me wrong. I dare ya.
Yup. It's that time of the year again. Or, well, decade as it may be. The one thing that really defined the decade in terms of film was something blown off by many a skeptic through the years: TV. When the history books are written about the dead art of TV (which will be replaced by the Super-Internet), it will be noted that the 00's was possibly the greatest decade of television. Yes, even eclipsing the late 1950's and early 60's, the time of such classics as "The Twilight Zone" and "Studio One". To look at the 00's in perspective, the groundwork was laid in the '90s with a lot of serialized dramas on HBO and Fox/WB/UPN basically giving a blank check to a lot of original creations like "The Simpsons" and "Buffy the Vampire Slayer".
Some ground rules first. Actually, just one rule to level the playing field. Sadly, shows that ended their run in the 00's will not be included. Shows like Buffy, Angel, Futurama, Freaks and Geeks, etc. However, these should be especially noted on how these shows really changed the landscape of television. Okay, note over. Now on to the good stuff. A controversial list that everyone can yell at me about later.
Honorable Mentions: Dead Like Me, Dexter, The Office (US), Chappelle's Show, Kitchen Nightmares, How I Met Your Mother, Sealab 2021, Samurai Jack, 24 (pre-Season 6), Extras, Frisky Dingo
20) Spectacular Spider-Man
As I said in a previous column, this is THE Spider-Man show. If you want to know who Spider-Man is and what makes him such an indelible character, look no further than here. It's also a very brave show. It tackles with a lot of difficult issues like drug addiction and, yet, it still plays every Saturday morning for an audience much younger than what the producers of the shows intend. This is truly the mark of a lot of the animated shows that will come up on the list. Not only that, but this show actually puts every Spider-Man reboot to shame. Ultimate Spider-Man, the films, every last one of them.
19) It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia
The theme of most great comedy shows of the 00's is that mean people are awesome. This is no different. In fact, one of the great attributes of this show is that it deals with real, controversial issues like abortion and the mortgage crisis and basically says "Why so fucking serious?"
18) Curb Your Enthusiasm
Again, mean people=awesome. If "It's Always Sunny..." deals with the big issues, Curb deals with the little ones. Those little awkward social fopas that are so common place that, when Larry David puts a magnifying glass to them, they become even more insignificant.
17) Jericho
Great sci-fi comes from social commentary. I'll elaborate more later-on but one of the genres that flourished in the 00's was the post-apocalypse genre. Spearheaded most likely from 9/11, this once niche genre has come into its own with the 00's. Though Jericho ended up failing, it did inspire a helluva fan uprising each time it got canceled. It even gave it a great second season. What starts out as "Battlestar Galactica" on the American frontier really, just like the genre itself, comes into its own as the episodes go on.
16) Dollhouse
Yeah, it kinda started off crappily but we really can't blame Whedon for that (*cough*Fox*cough*). After episode 6, the show really picked up and showed where it could go with its fascinating if frustrating-at-times concept. However, unlike some other shows on this list, even though this show got canceled, at least Fox gave it some time to end things. Here's hoping the series finale cements this show's legacy.
15) Aqua Teen Hunger Force
Adult Swim ushered in a new era of surrealistic comedy. Too long has the fascist chains of the sitcom burdened the televised comedy. With Aqua Teen Hunger Force, it broke those chains...with a glorious chainsaw of the proletariat. Yeah, a bit of a Marxist reading but, what the hell. It's a show so weird that you just have to see it to believe it. It even created an amazing niche genre: the surreal horror comedy. Check out the movie when you have a chance, especially the opening sequence.
14) Harvey Birdman: Attorney At Law
Colbert. Cole. Black. What are all these sublime comedians doing on an Adult Swim show? Because. A show that got better like a fine wine and ended just as well, "Harvey Birdman" is what parodies should do nowadays. Instead of just showing pre-existing characters in a scene like some other shows do (*cough*Family Guy*cough*), it actually expands and skews them so much that it's hard to watch the originals ever again.
13) Veronica Mars
The only detective show on television that has, by far, the best twists I have ever seen on television or film. Though the third season ended up being a bit predictable, Seasons 1 and 2 are the gold standard of what a procedural show can do. It's sad to think that this show got canceled in favor of "Gossip Girl" but it's great to relive the memories on DVD. Hell, sometimes the show still surprises me in how well structured it is.
12) Doctor Who
Maybe it's my love of Brits or maybe it's my love of good TV, but Doctor Who has it all. Adventure. High-Stakes. Characterization. Frankly, it's refreshing to find a series where the protagonist is actually the character you want to see on screen every week. It's so often the case with hour-longs that the protagonist is dull and tries too hard to be the every man. Not so with the Doctor. The only downside to this show has got to be the trailers or it can be an upside. Though they make every episode look boring, it's actually very strategic. None of them giveaway what actually happens in the episode, which makes the more surprising when things do happen. The only real low point of this series would have to be its Daleks in New York episodes. If you just ignore those two, you have one fantastic series.
11) American Dad
Though the final nail in the traditional sitcom coffin will have to wait a little longer (stupid "How I Met Your Mother"), there's at least "American Dad" to parody what has become a rather stale genre. This show goes places where a normal sitcom would say "Wait, wait I think we've gone too far" and it just rolls with it. Not only that, it has become the greatest show on what was once one of the greatest nights on TV: Sunday. It's sad to watch "The Simpsons" and "Family Guy" (though this is somewhat on the rebound as of late) go down the tubes, but at least I know that "American Dad" will be there to consistently bring the funny every week.
10) Avatar
If you judged this show based on its art style, you'll be missing out. Big time. It's faux-anime look presumes that this is just going to be another goofy series much like "Teen Titans" or "The Jackie Chan Adventures." What we have here is an epic three season long series that becomes the television equivalent of "Star Wars" (the original trilogy). Everything in this series feels right and incredibly well planned as if the showrunners planned, specifically, that this will last three seasons and no more. If you don't believe me, watch the second season and tell me that nothing got you.
9) The Venture Bros.
On the surface, the show could be considered a parody of old cartoon shows just like "Harvey Birdman". As the series progressed, it became increasingly clear that these characters are by no means mere caricatures of older creations just for shits and giggles. This is an incredibly astute look into failure. Almost every character has failed in life somehow and it really builds into an incredible tragic comedy about how dreams may never come true. Oh, and the Scooby-Doo parody episode is awesome.
8) The Office (UK)
Speaking of failure, this is possibly the bleakest "sitcom" ever and it's amazing for doing that. Where the American version is mostly smiles and sunshine, the UK version is set in a place where there is no hope. The series finale gives it but the entire series is about how many times it can be dashed away. David Brent has got to be one of the funniest characters ever created for television because of how not funny he is.
7) Firefly
Space-western. No wonder it was canceled in its first season. However, like "Avatar" and "The Venture Bros.", it's all in the details. This show defines "Bad-Ass." I think the show can speak for itself. Not because I'm lazy and I don't want to write a short write-up of it (yeah, also that) but what hasn't been said about this series?
6) Lost
After sputtering around in its second season, the third season cemented this show in #6. Heck, even parts of the second season were just incredible. Taking the best of the minds of Whedon and HBO series, what makes this show isn't the crazy ass island but the characters. The brilliant concoction of the dueling plots in each episode, where the B-plot explains something concerning the A-plot, is what makes this series shoot up so high on the list. It's crazy to think that no one thought of this sooner.
5) Supernatural
The award for this program is: the show that you should be watching but aren't. Bed Edlund, creator of "The Tick" and writer of a couple of episodes of "The Venture Bros.", is a godsend to television. He didn't create the series but, ever since he's been a part of it, it has sent the show flying off the radar. The mythology may not be as deep as "Lost" or "Battlestar Galactica" but every episode has something that shows sometimes forget to include: fun. It doesn't take itself so seriously even if deals with incredibly bleak issues. It looks like everyone is having a blast making these episodes and it shows on the screen.
4) Justice League
Bruce Timm's magnum opus, this show is what all of his previous shows lead up to. It may not be as good as "Batman" but what it lacks in grit it makes up in epic. The second season finale is at times heart-wrenching yet also gigantic. The ongoing Cadmus storyline just ties everything in the Timm-verse in a nice little bow. What's interesting about this series is that Bruce Timm (rightly) thought that each season would be the show's last. So every season ends with the appropriate fireworks.
3) Battlestar Galactica
A lot of people may say they were disappointed in the finale (I was, slightly) but if you take the whole instead of the sum of its parts, "Battlestar Galactica" is THE way to make a post-apocalyptic drama. From the mini-series on, the show feels like a roller-coaster that never lets go. And, like every great sci-fi piece, its social commentary is never laid on thick but hits you right in the gut.
2) Arrested Development
Could there have been a funnier series than "The Simpsons" in its glory days? No, but this show comes pretty darn close. Even with a cast of the most unlikeable characters ever, there is something that makes you want to watch what crazy thing they're going to get into next. Not only is each episode a testament to brilliant episode writing, but the running gags from episode-to-episode only get funnier the more times you watch them.
1) The Wire
When anyone talks about the platinum standard of television, "The Wire" is usually up there. There's a reason for that. HBO was still going strong with its Tiffany line of series well into the 00's but its "The Wire" that really showed what these shows can do. No bones about it, this show is angry. It's angry about how unfair life can be and how a lot of things in society will never be fixed. Like most of the shows on this list, it rewards the viewer for paying attention. However, this show says "Well, maybe you weren't paying close enough attention." From beginning to end, "The Wire" will go down in the history books as a show as grand as many of the classics told today. Think that's hyperbole? Just watch and prove me wrong. I dare ya.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Click: great concept, ruined by Adam Sandler
As of late, Adam Sandler has decided to flex his acting muscle by delving quite a bit into the drama genre. STOP DOING THIS, ADAM, YOU ARE DESTROYING YOUR CAREER. I mean, Funny People, Spanglish, Punch Drunk Love, Reign Over Me, Bed Time Stories...need I go on? These are the most forgettable films you could ever think of, and in fact, I had to go onto imdb.com and look up the titles because I forgot them! No joke. Yet one of his serious movies stands out to me: Click. I wound up re-watching this film that I haven't thought of in ages since it was on TV (and nothing else was on). I think it's time for me to return to it and do a quick review!
I think this movie has a great concept: a power-hungry, greedy architect (Michael Newman) accidentally encounters some creepy dude (Morty) chilling in the "beyond" section of Bed, Bath, and Beyond who gives him a remote to remain in control of his life. Having been duly warned by Morty of its potential consequences, he disregards his advice and starts using it to avoid all the nuisances of life: fights with his life, traffic, showering in the morning, lectures, even all the hard work he puts in to land his big promotion. I mean, all that matters IS getting that promotion, right? Well, at least to Michael, it is. But Morty, played by the always brilliant Christopher Walken, gives him a chilling analogy about a leprechaun:
Christpher Walken delivers yet another memorable performance. He was absolutely fantastic in this movie. Every scene that he's in I guarantee will haunt you. I can't seem to get over one of his last bone-chilling scenes when Michael suffers a heart attack and the Angel of Death (Morty) appears. He is swaying along with the singers at his son's wedding. As Michael topples over, Morty delivers one remark "It's just cornflakes......". And I can't describe it enough to give this scene justice, but it gives me chills just thinking about it. While you're dying, to hear something like this is just ... well, crushing to say the least. The life Michael COULD have led just vanishes right before him. His current life is awful (it's just cornflakes, if you will), even though he has attained so much. And, with a final kiss of death, Michael collapses.
Click here to see this incredible scene! (I think that the scene in full was a lot better, but at least you got the idea...)
Now, this scene was so effective that it should have ended the entire film. In fact, I was even expecting it to. I mean, how else can the movie resolve itself? Michael has realized his error (all too late) when his daughter Sam calls Bill, Donna's new husband, "Dad." Michael's been replaced as a father figure. He's a prosperous man, achieved all he possibly could have in his career as a CEO, but at the high cost of his family. He estranged himself from his own father in the scene right before he dies, barking at him that he knew the secret of the coin trick all along (a magic trick that he and his father used to bond over). In that fabulous ending scene of him tumbling over from a heart attack, Michael would have died as a lonely, miserable man who knew he made too many mistakes that were irreparable. After all, he's 'fast-forwarded' through almost his entire life and missed tons of milestones that we as human beings all go through, especially watching your children grow up. So why bother ending it in a happy way? Click decides to push itself: oh, it's all a dream! He's still on a bed in Bed, Bath, and Beyond! Great! Hooray! Now he can go back and fix his errors! And live life the way he should! Let's be real here, the only book to effectively use the "dream" tactic was A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens. There, it felt real. Here the dream felt completely inappropriate and forced. The film could have never matched the nightmarish scene before.
So it seems that I've loved the film so far, right? (Well, except for the ending, of course). But, there remains yet another issue in this film: THE MAIN ACTOR! Adam Sandler was completely mis-cast. I think Click could've turned out a lot better without him destroying it. Even in serious scenes, he's too goofy to execute them. He can't portray the proper emotion that is required of him. Things that are intended to be serious come off as a joke. And corny. Ultimately, you need to stick with what you're good at, Mr. Sandler. Bring back some of that Happy Gilmore or Billy Madison humor. And he was trying to bring that cheesy humor (which is funny, don't get me wrong!) to this movie, which didn't befit it in the least. In my opinion, this movie is intended solely as a drama, not for cheap laughs. It really could've been a bit more creditable without him...
Final Score: 7 (if we imagine that Adam Sandler didn't ruin it). I still enjoyed it, and I still can't quite get over Walken's performance! He gets a 10 for sure.
I think this movie has a great concept: a power-hungry, greedy architect (Michael Newman) accidentally encounters some creepy dude (Morty) chilling in the "beyond" section of Bed, Bath, and Beyond who gives him a remote to remain in control of his life. Having been duly warned by Morty of its potential consequences, he disregards his advice and starts using it to avoid all the nuisances of life: fights with his life, traffic, showering in the morning, lectures, even all the hard work he puts in to land his big promotion. I mean, all that matters IS getting that promotion, right? Well, at least to Michael, it is. But Morty, played by the always brilliant Christopher Walken, gives him a chilling analogy about a leprechaun:
He's always chasing the pot of gold, but when he gets there, at the end of the day *dramatic pause* it's just corn flakes.I don't think Michael realizes how much he can identify with that quote (as well as the audience!). It's not the positive end result that we strive to get to that is the best part, but rather, it's how you got there that makes it all worth while, where you can look back on everything you've come from and realize "Wow, look at what I've accomplished!" After all, as joy is a part of life, so is suffering.
Christpher Walken delivers yet another memorable performance. He was absolutely fantastic in this movie. Every scene that he's in I guarantee will haunt you. I can't seem to get over one of his last bone-chilling scenes when Michael suffers a heart attack and the Angel of Death (Morty) appears. He is swaying along with the singers at his son's wedding. As Michael topples over, Morty delivers one remark "It's just cornflakes......". And I can't describe it enough to give this scene justice, but it gives me chills just thinking about it. While you're dying, to hear something like this is just ... well, crushing to say the least. The life Michael COULD have led just vanishes right before him. His current life is awful (it's just cornflakes, if you will), even though he has attained so much. And, with a final kiss of death, Michael collapses.
Click here to see this incredible scene! (I think that the scene in full was a lot better, but at least you got the idea...)
Now, this scene was so effective that it should have ended the entire film. In fact, I was even expecting it to. I mean, how else can the movie resolve itself? Michael has realized his error (all too late) when his daughter Sam calls Bill, Donna's new husband, "Dad." Michael's been replaced as a father figure. He's a prosperous man, achieved all he possibly could have in his career as a CEO, but at the high cost of his family. He estranged himself from his own father in the scene right before he dies, barking at him that he knew the secret of the coin trick all along (a magic trick that he and his father used to bond over). In that fabulous ending scene of him tumbling over from a heart attack, Michael would have died as a lonely, miserable man who knew he made too many mistakes that were irreparable. After all, he's 'fast-forwarded' through almost his entire life and missed tons of milestones that we as human beings all go through, especially watching your children grow up. So why bother ending it in a happy way? Click decides to push itself: oh, it's all a dream! He's still on a bed in Bed, Bath, and Beyond! Great! Hooray! Now he can go back and fix his errors! And live life the way he should! Let's be real here, the only book to effectively use the "dream" tactic was A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens. There, it felt real. Here the dream felt completely inappropriate and forced. The film could have never matched the nightmarish scene before.
So it seems that I've loved the film so far, right? (Well, except for the ending, of course). But, there remains yet another issue in this film: THE MAIN ACTOR! Adam Sandler was completely mis-cast. I think Click could've turned out a lot better without him destroying it. Even in serious scenes, he's too goofy to execute them. He can't portray the proper emotion that is required of him. Things that are intended to be serious come off as a joke. And corny. Ultimately, you need to stick with what you're good at, Mr. Sandler. Bring back some of that Happy Gilmore or Billy Madison humor. And he was trying to bring that cheesy humor (which is funny, don't get me wrong!) to this movie, which didn't befit it in the least. In my opinion, this movie is intended solely as a drama, not for cheap laughs. It really could've been a bit more creditable without him...
Final Score: 7 (if we imagine that Adam Sandler didn't ruin it). I still enjoyed it, and I still can't quite get over Walken's performance! He gets a 10 for sure.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
ROARRRRRRRRRRRRR THIS IS SPARTA
"Easy, son"..."Catch your breath, boy."
No, your grandpa is not instructing you on some life lesson using antiquated 1950's catch phrases; rather, you're amidst the silly and over-the-top, poorly written "300," a film about a Spartan man's (Leonidas) military quest to defend his love for his own country against Persia under King Xerxes.
The first error of this film lies right at the beginning. We start with this ridiculous scene of Leonidas as a young boy and a wolf that he eventually kills. What does his boyhood have to do with the rest of the film, you may ask? Well, nothing, really. It's merely an allegory attesting to his incredible strength and cunning, in addition to showing what young Spartans must endure in growing up.
The film only spirals downhill from there. As many (too many) battle scenes are fought on screen, the director continually insists on using slow motion. For no damn reason! Not for dramatic effect, no. Just randomly thrown in at the most awkward moments. You literally burst into laughter at its excessive usage. This is not "The Matrix," so stop using it so damn much! Slow motion works best when used sparingly, unless it's used in one of the coolest sci-fi (syfy? HAHAHAAHHA just kidding) films ever made.
To add to the over-use of slow motion, the director insists on using a voice over technique throughout, but the audience has no idea what the hell is going on when the voice over starts. Who's talking? Is it someone's thoughts? Oh, I see so-and-so has a close up right now, maybe he's thinking to himself? Eventually (maybe towards the middle of the film), you discover that the anonymous voice refers to Leonidas as "our king," so it must be one of the soldiers there at the campaign and his own thoughts. Right? Well, OK, but which one? At the very end we see the mysterious voice was in fact just an injured soldier who was sent back to the Spartan kingdom to report the fallen Leonidas's valiant campaign. But HOW CAN THIS BE IF WHAT WE JUST SAW WAS ALL IN THE PRESENT WITH NO INDICATION THAT IT WAS HAPPENING IN THE PAST??? THE ACTION WAS UNFOLDING AS WE WATCHED IT. Now, this isn't to say that this can't be done. Obviously many directors use the voice over technique effectively. So if the director wanted to go this route, he had to at least start the film off with this soldier speaking, so we can understand that it's this particular man recounting the story. In fact, the contrast of him with a bandage as opposed to without will make the audience understand that he is in fact injured and time has passed. Forget the wolf and strange allegory, start out with this! Imagine that you're touring a house for sale. Instead of the people taking you around the entire house and leading you through the hallways so you can get a sufficient picture of the entire place you're considering on buying, they blindfold you and just take you into the closet of some random room. Not only are you disoriented and don't know what the hell's going on (and who are these creepy people anyway...), but you haven't seen the hallways and rooms that have led to this one particular room. Exactly! THIS TACTIC MAKES NO SENSE. It doesn't work in real life, nor does it work in story telling. Confusing the audience is the last thing you want to do.
The director fails to capture the audience on a real story. OK, Sparta is at war against Persia...okkkk, that's fine, but what does that mean for the people (and do the soldiers have to perpetually scream throughout the film?)? We have to see the Spartan people panicking (or, even better, discrediting Leonidas for his hostility and war-mongering spirit, not just from the select group of the crooked council). And what about Sparta's honor at stake? This needs to be amplified. All we see is battle after battle and we don't really get to know any of the characters. Just blood and gore all throughout the movie. When we see a supposedly tragic death of a man's son, we feel no empathy towards this man and the loss of his son. I mean, I didn't even remember either of their names! We don't know any character's aspirations or any backstory...nothing! In order to efficiently establish solid characters, the audience needs to know what in the whole wide world they want so they can be believable. Not to mention the other story of Leonidas's wife should have been capitalized upon: when she gets raped by that nasty asshole councilman, we simply don't care. We don't know this woman, so why should we? All we know is that she is a snarky queen. She doesn't even put up a fight against her rape! She just quickly de-robes right in front of him. It's almost like that bitch wanted it. I literally burst out into laughter. This is how the scene went (I'm not even kidding, check out the DVD)...
The movie just sickeningly parades around silliness the entire time. When we first meet King Xerxes, he straight up looks like a tranny. Did they really have to put him all in gold glitter, perfectly plucked eyebrows, full shimmery eye makeup, and earrings? The only thing that they got right was his stature, but the rest is an epic failure. And the Persian army uses dark magic? And are immortal (but not really because they keep getting killed)? Really? And did they really need Ephialtes have his hunchback licked by the Persian whores when he betrays Sparta in order to tempt him to join Xerxes? All of this is completely unnecessary (but entertained me quite a bit because it was so ridiculous).
The ending was just a whole lot of wrong. So, as I said, towards the end we see the soldier talking to the entire army to pump them up for their battle. OK, so I assumed at this point we would see the last triumphant battle filled (of course) with tons of slow motion. But the film ends abruptly as they run off into the distance........um what? So we never know how this entire military campaign ends? So Leonidas just died in vain? Did Sparta win? All unanswered questions. It invalidates having sat through the entire film.
I have nothing more to say because I'm so disgusted by this film. Final Score: 3....only for its (unintentional) comedic effect. I seriously thought it was a parody throughout the first half hour until I realized: oh dear God, they're serious.
No, your grandpa is not instructing you on some life lesson using antiquated 1950's catch phrases; rather, you're amidst the silly and over-the-top, poorly written "300," a film about a Spartan man's (Leonidas) military quest to defend his love for his own country against Persia under King Xerxes.
The first error of this film lies right at the beginning. We start with this ridiculous scene of Leonidas as a young boy and a wolf that he eventually kills. What does his boyhood have to do with the rest of the film, you may ask? Well, nothing, really. It's merely an allegory attesting to his incredible strength and cunning, in addition to showing what young Spartans must endure in growing up.
The film only spirals downhill from there. As many (too many) battle scenes are fought on screen, the director continually insists on using slow motion. For no damn reason! Not for dramatic effect, no. Just randomly thrown in at the most awkward moments. You literally burst into laughter at its excessive usage. This is not "The Matrix," so stop using it so damn much! Slow motion works best when used sparingly, unless it's used in one of the coolest sci-fi (syfy? HAHAHAAHHA just kidding) films ever made.
To add to the over-use of slow motion, the director insists on using a voice over technique throughout, but the audience has no idea what the hell is going on when the voice over starts. Who's talking? Is it someone's thoughts? Oh, I see so-and-so has a close up right now, maybe he's thinking to himself? Eventually (maybe towards the middle of the film), you discover that the anonymous voice refers to Leonidas as "our king," so it must be one of the soldiers there at the campaign and his own thoughts. Right? Well, OK, but which one? At the very end we see the mysterious voice was in fact just an injured soldier who was sent back to the Spartan kingdom to report the fallen Leonidas's valiant campaign. But HOW CAN THIS BE IF WHAT WE JUST SAW WAS ALL IN THE PRESENT WITH NO INDICATION THAT IT WAS HAPPENING IN THE PAST??? THE ACTION WAS UNFOLDING AS WE WATCHED IT. Now, this isn't to say that this can't be done. Obviously many directors use the voice over technique effectively. So if the director wanted to go this route, he had to at least start the film off with this soldier speaking, so we can understand that it's this particular man recounting the story. In fact, the contrast of him with a bandage as opposed to without will make the audience understand that he is in fact injured and time has passed. Forget the wolf and strange allegory, start out with this! Imagine that you're touring a house for sale. Instead of the people taking you around the entire house and leading you through the hallways so you can get a sufficient picture of the entire place you're considering on buying, they blindfold you and just take you into the closet of some random room. Not only are you disoriented and don't know what the hell's going on (and who are these creepy people anyway...), but you haven't seen the hallways and rooms that have led to this one particular room. Exactly! THIS TACTIC MAKES NO SENSE. It doesn't work in real life, nor does it work in story telling. Confusing the audience is the last thing you want to do.
The director fails to capture the audience on a real story. OK, Sparta is at war against Persia...okkkk, that's fine, but what does that mean for the people (and do the soldiers have to perpetually scream throughout the film?)? We have to see the Spartan people panicking (or, even better, discrediting Leonidas for his hostility and war-mongering spirit, not just from the select group of the crooked council). And what about Sparta's honor at stake? This needs to be amplified. All we see is battle after battle and we don't really get to know any of the characters. Just blood and gore all throughout the movie. When we see a supposedly tragic death of a man's son, we feel no empathy towards this man and the loss of his son. I mean, I didn't even remember either of their names! We don't know any character's aspirations or any backstory...nothing! In order to efficiently establish solid characters, the audience needs to know what in the whole wide world they want so they can be believable. Not to mention the other story of Leonidas's wife should have been capitalized upon: when she gets raped by that nasty asshole councilman, we simply don't care. We don't know this woman, so why should we? All we know is that she is a snarky queen. She doesn't even put up a fight against her rape! She just quickly de-robes right in front of him. It's almost like that bitch wanted it. I literally burst out into laughter. This is how the scene went (I'm not even kidding, check out the DVD)...
"...you know what I want," says the councilman
[dumb bitch takes off her dress and gets raped in the ass]
The movie just sickeningly parades around silliness the entire time. When we first meet King Xerxes, he straight up looks like a tranny. Did they really have to put him all in gold glitter, perfectly plucked eyebrows, full shimmery eye makeup, and earrings? The only thing that they got right was his stature, but the rest is an epic failure. And the Persian army uses dark magic? And are immortal (but not really because they keep getting killed)? Really? And did they really need Ephialtes have his hunchback licked by the Persian whores when he betrays Sparta in order to tempt him to join Xerxes? All of this is completely unnecessary (but entertained me quite a bit because it was so ridiculous).
The ending was just a whole lot of wrong. So, as I said, towards the end we see the soldier talking to the entire army to pump them up for their battle. OK, so I assumed at this point we would see the last triumphant battle filled (of course) with tons of slow motion. But the film ends abruptly as they run off into the distance........um what? So we never know how this entire military campaign ends? So Leonidas just died in vain? Did Sparta win? All unanswered questions. It invalidates having sat through the entire film.
I have nothing more to say because I'm so disgusted by this film. Final Score: 3....only for its (unintentional) comedic effect. I seriously thought it was a parody throughout the first half hour until I realized: oh dear God, they're serious.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Genre of Choice: The Post Modern Western
Hello again all! I know what you're thinking. "Two posts in one week, is this guy on amphetamines?" or most likely "Hey, I should really click on that porn right about now." But, yes, I have returned since I'm getting the writing juices flowing for my grad school applications. Yeah, this is pretty much a procrastination measure now but, hey, more posts!
For this column, I'm going to look into a genre that hasn't been getting that much love and what doesn't get enough love as the Western? Who needs cowboys nowadays when you can have cowboys in space? These columns will mostly be about an obscure or an underrated genre and the films that should be your jumping points. The Post-Modern Western is a fascinating case study because you have a genre that, in a way, has really created many innovations later adopted by other films and, well, has effectively taken over the entire Western genre from the early 90's and on.
The Post-Modern Western's origins are dubious. Some say it began with "High Noon," a Western film disguised as a critique of the Hollywood Communist blacklist but most others agree it began with Sam Peckinpah's classic "The Wild Bunch." Up until "The Wild Bunch," there could be no doubt that the genre was all about black and white. "The Wild Bunch" introduced another color to the palate: grey. And lots of it. This is not a film about heroes. In fact, the film focus is on a band of outlaws that will and do kill anyone that gets in their way. Or just for no damn reaosn. It also brought a whole new meaning to the term "film violence." When the opening shoot-out has dozens of innocent people killed in the crossfire between two rival gangs within a matter of minutes, you know you're not seeing "The Sound of Music" (though Peckinpah did make a weird comedy/western/musical later on but that's for another time). If you want to watch some truly breathtaking sequences in modern film history, look no further than the beginning and the end gunfights. There really hasn't been anything made since that can really match the epicness of these gun battles. Okay, maybe "Saving Private Ryan" but, come on, it's bloody Normandy.
Sam Peckinpah continued making violent, violent movies after that (i.e. "Straw Dogs" was rated NC-17 for how realistic the violence was by 1970's standards) but it took Sergio Leone to really define what this genre could do. Honestly, when you need a bunch of gratuitous violence, you got to go with the Italians. Although best known for his "Man with No Name" trilogy starring Clint Eastwood as the namesake character, one of his best works "Once Upon A Time in the West" tends to go a little darker than others.
Leone tended to work with black and white more often than Peckinpah. "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" is a perfect example of this. In most of his Westerns, a mysterious protagonist, at first considered a possible sinister force, turns out to have a heart of gold. Either Clint Eastwood carrying his six shooter with the ease of a truly unrepentant killer or James Coburn hurling nitroglycerin for kicks, they are always feared by those around them. In a way, they end up being windows into the sinister world that surrounds them. "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" it's the Civil War and "Once Upon A Time in the West" is, well, the West. It's a pretty bleak world where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and evil has free reign. Casting Henry Fonda was a coup for this film. At the time, Fonda was considered the nicest guy in Hollywood much like how the Western was considered a shiny, nostalgic look back at the West. The sort of West where men became men and where anyone could get rich by just having enough pluck. By twisting him, Leone's commentary on what the West becomes crystal clear. Nice on the outside, evil on the inside.
One of Leone's main men, Clint Eastwood became the champion of the Western when he began to bridge his career into directing. Though the Western itself started to peter out in the 70's, Eastwood continued to make them in a variety of forms. You could see Leone's influence on the screen with each of his films. Eastwood's "Unforgiven" rejuvinated the genre after it was long thought dead. It's a slow burn of a film, which feels at times a mixture of Leone and Peckinpah, but it reflects on a world that Leone began building with "Once Upon A Time in the West." Here a clearly aged "Man With No Name", after hanging up the towel on his days as a killer and tries to raise a family, has to come face to face with his past as he battles with a slew of notorious ner-do-wells.
The violence in this film, much like post-modern Westerns is not supposed to pretty or glorified. You can feel everyone that dies here. Whenever someone gets shot in this film, you aren't rooting for anyone. You just look on in horror to see the pain violence actually causes. It's something Peckinpah was getting at in "The Wild Bunch" but the violence was so over-the-top that you couldn't look away. Here you want to cover your eyes.
After a brief flirtation with Westerns in the early 90's with films like "Tombstone" and "The Quick and the Dead", the genre essentially became dormant yet again after most of them failed at the box office. Recently, it has come back in the smaller, more manageable indie market with brilliant films like "The Proposition" and "The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford." The genre got its pulse reawakened by "Deadwood," a post modern Western show that lived a very short life on HBO. Nevertheless, it inspired every film in its genre since. The West has become a place where everything is dirty both literally and metaphorically. Or, more precisely, what the West actually was historically.
No doubt inspired by Cormac McCarthy's indelible, incredible, and intensely brutal book "Blood Meridian", "The Proposition" brings the West a little further to the outlands of Australia. As a commentary on civilization and the brutality of man, it isn't a pretty film to watch. Flies buzz around in almost every scene, a cop accidently blow off his toes, etc. The buildings look shoddily built as if "The Road Warrior" traveled back in time to Victorian England. Even a "civilized" dinner scene, is broken up with shots of how disgusting the food is they are about to enjoy. When the actual brutality starts in this film, you can feel your nails claw into the armrests of your chair. By the end, the people are just as ugly inside as the environment they live in.
"The Assassination..." (yeah, the title was way too damn long for its own good) relishes in the beauty of the West in stark contrast with its brutality. Every shot in the film is breathtakingly beautiful. Then the violence happens. As opposed to most other post-modern Westerns, it doesn't relish in violence. It happens and then it's gone. The ending acts as a meta-commentary about the genre in a way as people become fascinated with the murder of Jesse James (no yelling spoilers here people, it's in the bloody title) and Robert Ford puts on shows about it. In a way, we remember the violence the most in these films, but this film tries to bring back the human side to it all.
These films are not about humanity, though. They're about the people that lose it all. It shows how humans try to cling to what little humanity they have left in such a chaotic world that they still end up losing it in the process. With today's fascination with post apocalyptic stories, I'm surprised the post-modern Western hasn't caught on even though they're clearly inspired by much of the imagery and themes of these films. They are possibly the only pre-post-apocalyptic films around.
I am, as always, obediently yours
-Brett
For this column, I'm going to look into a genre that hasn't been getting that much love and what doesn't get enough love as the Western? Who needs cowboys nowadays when you can have cowboys in space? These columns will mostly be about an obscure or an underrated genre and the films that should be your jumping points. The Post-Modern Western is a fascinating case study because you have a genre that, in a way, has really created many innovations later adopted by other films and, well, has effectively taken over the entire Western genre from the early 90's and on.
The Post-Modern Western's origins are dubious. Some say it began with "High Noon," a Western film disguised as a critique of the Hollywood Communist blacklist but most others agree it began with Sam Peckinpah's classic "The Wild Bunch." Up until "The Wild Bunch," there could be no doubt that the genre was all about black and white. "The Wild Bunch" introduced another color to the palate: grey. And lots of it. This is not a film about heroes. In fact, the film focus is on a band of outlaws that will and do kill anyone that gets in their way. Or just for no damn reaosn. It also brought a whole new meaning to the term "film violence." When the opening shoot-out has dozens of innocent people killed in the crossfire between two rival gangs within a matter of minutes, you know you're not seeing "The Sound of Music" (though Peckinpah did make a weird comedy/western/musical later on but that's for another time). If you want to watch some truly breathtaking sequences in modern film history, look no further than the beginning and the end gunfights. There really hasn't been anything made since that can really match the epicness of these gun battles. Okay, maybe "Saving Private Ryan" but, come on, it's bloody Normandy.
Sam Peckinpah continued making violent, violent movies after that (i.e. "Straw Dogs" was rated NC-17 for how realistic the violence was by 1970's standards) but it took Sergio Leone to really define what this genre could do. Honestly, when you need a bunch of gratuitous violence, you got to go with the Italians. Although best known for his "Man with No Name" trilogy starring Clint Eastwood as the namesake character, one of his best works "Once Upon A Time in the West" tends to go a little darker than others.
Leone tended to work with black and white more often than Peckinpah. "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" is a perfect example of this. In most of his Westerns, a mysterious protagonist, at first considered a possible sinister force, turns out to have a heart of gold. Either Clint Eastwood carrying his six shooter with the ease of a truly unrepentant killer or James Coburn hurling nitroglycerin for kicks, they are always feared by those around them. In a way, they end up being windows into the sinister world that surrounds them. "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" it's the Civil War and "Once Upon A Time in the West" is, well, the West. It's a pretty bleak world where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and evil has free reign. Casting Henry Fonda was a coup for this film. At the time, Fonda was considered the nicest guy in Hollywood much like how the Western was considered a shiny, nostalgic look back at the West. The sort of West where men became men and where anyone could get rich by just having enough pluck. By twisting him, Leone's commentary on what the West becomes crystal clear. Nice on the outside, evil on the inside.
One of Leone's main men, Clint Eastwood became the champion of the Western when he began to bridge his career into directing. Though the Western itself started to peter out in the 70's, Eastwood continued to make them in a variety of forms. You could see Leone's influence on the screen with each of his films. Eastwood's "Unforgiven" rejuvinated the genre after it was long thought dead. It's a slow burn of a film, which feels at times a mixture of Leone and Peckinpah, but it reflects on a world that Leone began building with "Once Upon A Time in the West." Here a clearly aged "Man With No Name", after hanging up the towel on his days as a killer and tries to raise a family, has to come face to face with his past as he battles with a slew of notorious ner-do-wells.
The violence in this film, much like post-modern Westerns is not supposed to pretty or glorified. You can feel everyone that dies here. Whenever someone gets shot in this film, you aren't rooting for anyone. You just look on in horror to see the pain violence actually causes. It's something Peckinpah was getting at in "The Wild Bunch" but the violence was so over-the-top that you couldn't look away. Here you want to cover your eyes.
After a brief flirtation with Westerns in the early 90's with films like "Tombstone" and "The Quick and the Dead", the genre essentially became dormant yet again after most of them failed at the box office. Recently, it has come back in the smaller, more manageable indie market with brilliant films like "The Proposition" and "The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford." The genre got its pulse reawakened by "Deadwood," a post modern Western show that lived a very short life on HBO. Nevertheless, it inspired every film in its genre since. The West has become a place where everything is dirty both literally and metaphorically. Or, more precisely, what the West actually was historically.
No doubt inspired by Cormac McCarthy's indelible, incredible, and intensely brutal book "Blood Meridian", "The Proposition" brings the West a little further to the outlands of Australia. As a commentary on civilization and the brutality of man, it isn't a pretty film to watch. Flies buzz around in almost every scene, a cop accidently blow off his toes, etc. The buildings look shoddily built as if "The Road Warrior" traveled back in time to Victorian England. Even a "civilized" dinner scene, is broken up with shots of how disgusting the food is they are about to enjoy. When the actual brutality starts in this film, you can feel your nails claw into the armrests of your chair. By the end, the people are just as ugly inside as the environment they live in.
"The Assassination..." (yeah, the title was way too damn long for its own good) relishes in the beauty of the West in stark contrast with its brutality. Every shot in the film is breathtakingly beautiful. Then the violence happens. As opposed to most other post-modern Westerns, it doesn't relish in violence. It happens and then it's gone. The ending acts as a meta-commentary about the genre in a way as people become fascinated with the murder of Jesse James (no yelling spoilers here people, it's in the bloody title) and Robert Ford puts on shows about it. In a way, we remember the violence the most in these films, but this film tries to bring back the human side to it all.
These films are not about humanity, though. They're about the people that lose it all. It shows how humans try to cling to what little humanity they have left in such a chaotic world that they still end up losing it in the process. With today's fascination with post apocalyptic stories, I'm surprised the post-modern Western hasn't caught on even though they're clearly inspired by much of the imagery and themes of these films. They are possibly the only pre-post-apocalyptic films around.
I am, as always, obediently yours
-Brett
Friday, October 30, 2009
The Marvel of DC: The DC Animated Film Universe
Since Andrea has been updating (and I have so many films backlogged) I thought I might as well start off with something, though not as classy as Momofuku or as great as the Departed, that is near and dear to my heart: the comic book. Ever since I was a kid, I grew up on comics. Sure there were some lulls here and there but after High School it really kicked off again. Within these years, I've read, loved, and memorized the mythologies of dozens of superheroes. Every time I would go into a Barnes & Noble, I would pick up another graphic novel. Either it be Batman, an Alan Moore story, or just about anything really. As long as it wasn't a graphic novel adaptation of a film or a book, I devoured it like a good meal that never ended.
I won't lie and say that I started reading the comics before I saw their screen interpretations. Far from it. Like most people that have gotten into comic books today, it was the film adaptations that inspired me to learn more about these fantastic universes. I ended up catching up on a lot of them far ahead of many recent film adaptations...so I can boast that I've read them before seeing the film adaptations. When I was a kid, after school, I would always manage to watch the new Batman: The Animated Series episodes and, every Saturday, the new Spidey and Tick. Now that I'm an older and wiser man, the stories on Batman: TAS have withstood the test of time. They are marvelously complex, the animation though not consistent in quality from episode to episode was above the standard weekly fare, and the characters are iconic. The same really can't be said about the Marvel shows.
Watching the Marvel shows today, it's a wonder how many kids enjoyed it. The animation was horrible (the lip-synch was always off and the action was incredibly clunky), the dialogue was stilted, and the stories were not as memorable as the ones on Batman. Yeah, Marvel was still the tops with everything but almost everyone can agree that the DC animated shows were by far superior. Today, however, it is a different story. DC suffered with the crummy animated show The Batman for a while and Marvel has been kicking its ass with the new, revamped, and vastly improved Spider-Man show. Where did the DC talent go you may ask? Well, to the animated film division of course.
For six movies so far, the DC animated film division, headed by Bruce Timm the legendary creator of Batman: TAS and all the series that followed until The Batman, has shown how you can make incredible stories with as little time as possible. All of the films clock in less than 75 minutes but they still manage to tell a complete story with surprisingly deep character studies at times. They're also all rated PG-13 so you know you're going to get some hardcore violence and adult situations that couldn't have possibly been shown on Batman back in the day. Sure, the Batman show may have hinted at it, but this medium has allowed Bruce Timm to play with all the colors in the paintset. Overall, the only off-putting thing I will say about these films is the constant shifting around of animation styles and voice actors for the characters. Nevertheless, lets begin our long day's jouney into Dark Knight. I'll start off at the beginning: Superman Doomsday.
Superman Doomsday takes one of the most indelible comic story lines of recent times, the death of Superman, and manages to weed out all of the convoluted plotlines that followed. In the comics, after Superman died, about four different "Supermans" showed up and basically battled it out to be the next Superman until, well, the real Superman showed up and put an end to that mess. In the movie, there's only one Superman clone after Superman dies and it works greatly to the film's advantage. The Superman clone is essentially the dark side of Superman. The "Punisher with the powers of Superman" sort of Superman. Though it does ultimately feel rushed, its flaws can definitely be forgiven since it was the first film they released and they were still playing around with the medium.
Justice League: New Frontier, though not as good as Superman Doomsday, was still a pretty decent film in its own right, though potential future flaws in these films could be seen. Placing the Justice League during the Cold War was a great backdrop for creating a film about the paranoia of the period. It's also interesting how they positioned the characters within this new world. Wonder Woman is a liberator of third world countries, Superman is a pawn of the government, and Batman is a dangerous outlaw. Meanwhile, Hal Jordan becomes the Green Lantern for some reason. It feels like there's so many characters at times that the 75 minute runtime makes the film weigh down under the weight. I have yet to read the source material of this film written by Darwyn Cook. However, I feel like some of the cuts they had to make here would've been even more glaring if I read it beforehand.
A lot of the flaws that I feared would happen in future DC Animated films came true in Batman: Gotham Knight. Yeah, it's got the original voice of Batman in a faux-anime world that may or may not be based off the world Christopher Nolan created for Batman, but it feels off. Mostly I think because it was rushed out to be a tie-in with The Dark Knight so it's comprised of short stories about Batman. The short stories are really hit or miss as the animation on Batman shifts ever so slightly for each installment. Villains that are staples in the Batman universe (Scarecrow, Killer Croc, and Deadshot for starters) all battle with Batman as characters within the film give their wildly different interpretations of Bats. This style has been done before (and better) in the animated series with the episode "Legends of the Dark Knight" except this is slightly darker and bit more gritty (mostly because of the PG-13 rating). However, how fast these stories begin they end just as quickly. It's like a lesser version of the Animatrix but it does have the benefit of, well, not being The Matrix.
After being slightly disappointed with New Frontier and Gotham Knight, popping in Wonder Woman, I felt like the DC Animated Universe had already fallen into a rut so shortly after it had begun. Happily, I was proven wrong. People say the third time's the charm but, seriously, it's the fourth one that really counts. Wonder Woman, though considered one of the big three in the DC Universe, is often given the short shrift when it comes to her own series. She doesn't really have any memorable enemies like Batman or Superman and her own backstory is convoluted and muddled after so many different retellings. When the film began, I feared this would still be the case. Thankfully, this film gives her a definitive origin story, finally. The big bad too, Ares the G-d of War, also stands up on his own as an interesting villain that I could see in the eventual live-action Wonder Woman movie. It's amazing how well the film blended Greek mythology and superheroes so seamlessly. As a feminist, I loved how this film came off at times as the female version of 300. Plus, Nathan Fillion. Come on. You can't beat that.
After seeing Green Lantern's origin in New Frontier, picking up Green Lantern: First Flight, I was expecting a quick cash-in retread. Nope. Not in the least. This is THE definitive DC Animated Universe film that really has set the standard for any film in the future. This film came out of nowhere. I've recently been reading more Green Lantern considering Geoff Johns run on the comic, like his run on the Flash, has completely revolutionized the character. It's sad at times that it's so amazing because no other interpretation can come close to it. This is the closest I've seen so far and if the live-action film is even a quarter good as this, we're going to be in for a helluva ride. I don't want to spoil anything for this film because what makes it is the surprises. Sure, you know Sinestro is the Green Lantern's archnemesis but, in this film, you really get to see how devious he could be. Seeing him and Hal Jordan as green lanterns working together is utterly brilliant. A lot of people have compared this to "Training Day" but I have to say I was reminded sometimes of "The Departed" throughout it...except, well, in space and more epic. In 70 minutes, the film told the perfect origin story of Hal Jordan. A lot of films spindle around 150 minutes and blow it all on big special effect battles and little else (*cough*Spider-Man 3*cough*) This film shows how an economy of time does not necessarily mean dearth of story. By the time it was over, like Wonder Woman, I'm eagerly anticipating more films of this Hal Jordan.
Finally, the latest film, Batman and Superman: Public Enemies. This film fits in an odd place within the DC Animated film totempole. The story isn't as refined as Green Lantern: First Flight or Wonder Woman, but it has the excitement of the latter two titles over the previous three. What makes this film is that it's a reunion of sorts. The original voices of Batman, Superman, and Lex Luthor finally return in a PG-13 movie but with a completely different animation style. Plus, seeing the original voice of Luthor saying "bitch" was pretty mind-blowing. This really feels like the true return of Kevin Conroy (the original voice of Batman) considering Gotham Knight was merely okay. The film is essentially an extended battle as Batman and Superman flee a plethora of a supervillains and superheroes that are trying to collect the billion dollar bounty on Superman's head by President Luthor. The film begins auspiciously with the world plunging into chaos due to a terrible economy (socially relevant much?) and President Luthor comes to power to rectify all of this. Of course, he does, 'cause he's a real smarty but he's also still Lex Luthor. Hilarity and battles ensue. It doesn't have the emotional impact as Green Lantern (I mean, when you're being framed for murdering an android, it doesn't really necessitate the extensive manhunt that ensues) but it's still fun to watch. Something about Batman and Superman fighting an onslaught of all the ice villains in the DC Universe is something endearing.
Well, that was the DC Animated Universe so far. What of the Marvel animated film universe you ask? Well, it sucks mostly. Just like the situation on TV, apparently all of the people working on the 90's Marvel toons ended up on the films. Their quality really reflects the current animated film slate. Seriously, how could they screw up the Avengers movie? Especially after basing it off Mark Millar's incredible run on The Ultimates? It's sad even to think about.
Phew, that was a lot to write in one night. I need to get some sleep though all. The perils of the working world have given me a migraine and the sleeping patterns of a man three times my age. Goodnight one and all! I remain obediently yours, -Brett
Film Scores:
Superman Doomsday: 8 out of 10
Justice League: New Frontier: 7.5 out of 10
Batman: Gotham Knight: 7 out of 10
Wonder Woman: 9 out of 10
Green Lantern: First Flight: 10 out of 10
Superman and Batman: Public Enemies: 8.5 out of 10
I won't lie and say that I started reading the comics before I saw their screen interpretations. Far from it. Like most people that have gotten into comic books today, it was the film adaptations that inspired me to learn more about these fantastic universes. I ended up catching up on a lot of them far ahead of many recent film adaptations...so I can boast that I've read them before seeing the film adaptations. When I was a kid, after school, I would always manage to watch the new Batman: The Animated Series episodes and, every Saturday, the new Spidey and Tick. Now that I'm an older and wiser man, the stories on Batman: TAS have withstood the test of time. They are marvelously complex, the animation though not consistent in quality from episode to episode was above the standard weekly fare, and the characters are iconic. The same really can't be said about the Marvel shows.
Watching the Marvel shows today, it's a wonder how many kids enjoyed it. The animation was horrible (the lip-synch was always off and the action was incredibly clunky), the dialogue was stilted, and the stories were not as memorable as the ones on Batman. Yeah, Marvel was still the tops with everything but almost everyone can agree that the DC animated shows were by far superior. Today, however, it is a different story. DC suffered with the crummy animated show The Batman for a while and Marvel has been kicking its ass with the new, revamped, and vastly improved Spider-Man show. Where did the DC talent go you may ask? Well, to the animated film division of course.
For six movies so far, the DC animated film division, headed by Bruce Timm the legendary creator of Batman: TAS and all the series that followed until The Batman, has shown how you can make incredible stories with as little time as possible. All of the films clock in less than 75 minutes but they still manage to tell a complete story with surprisingly deep character studies at times. They're also all rated PG-13 so you know you're going to get some hardcore violence and adult situations that couldn't have possibly been shown on Batman back in the day. Sure, the Batman show may have hinted at it, but this medium has allowed Bruce Timm to play with all the colors in the paintset. Overall, the only off-putting thing I will say about these films is the constant shifting around of animation styles and voice actors for the characters. Nevertheless, lets begin our long day's jouney into Dark Knight. I'll start off at the beginning: Superman Doomsday.
Superman Doomsday takes one of the most indelible comic story lines of recent times, the death of Superman, and manages to weed out all of the convoluted plotlines that followed. In the comics, after Superman died, about four different "Supermans" showed up and basically battled it out to be the next Superman until, well, the real Superman showed up and put an end to that mess. In the movie, there's only one Superman clone after Superman dies and it works greatly to the film's advantage. The Superman clone is essentially the dark side of Superman. The "Punisher with the powers of Superman" sort of Superman. Though it does ultimately feel rushed, its flaws can definitely be forgiven since it was the first film they released and they were still playing around with the medium.
Justice League: New Frontier, though not as good as Superman Doomsday, was still a pretty decent film in its own right, though potential future flaws in these films could be seen. Placing the Justice League during the Cold War was a great backdrop for creating a film about the paranoia of the period. It's also interesting how they positioned the characters within this new world. Wonder Woman is a liberator of third world countries, Superman is a pawn of the government, and Batman is a dangerous outlaw. Meanwhile, Hal Jordan becomes the Green Lantern for some reason. It feels like there's so many characters at times that the 75 minute runtime makes the film weigh down under the weight. I have yet to read the source material of this film written by Darwyn Cook. However, I feel like some of the cuts they had to make here would've been even more glaring if I read it beforehand.
A lot of the flaws that I feared would happen in future DC Animated films came true in Batman: Gotham Knight. Yeah, it's got the original voice of Batman in a faux-anime world that may or may not be based off the world Christopher Nolan created for Batman, but it feels off. Mostly I think because it was rushed out to be a tie-in with The Dark Knight so it's comprised of short stories about Batman. The short stories are really hit or miss as the animation on Batman shifts ever so slightly for each installment. Villains that are staples in the Batman universe (Scarecrow, Killer Croc, and Deadshot for starters) all battle with Batman as characters within the film give their wildly different interpretations of Bats. This style has been done before (and better) in the animated series with the episode "Legends of the Dark Knight" except this is slightly darker and bit more gritty (mostly because of the PG-13 rating). However, how fast these stories begin they end just as quickly. It's like a lesser version of the Animatrix but it does have the benefit of, well, not being The Matrix.
After being slightly disappointed with New Frontier and Gotham Knight, popping in Wonder Woman, I felt like the DC Animated Universe had already fallen into a rut so shortly after it had begun. Happily, I was proven wrong. People say the third time's the charm but, seriously, it's the fourth one that really counts. Wonder Woman, though considered one of the big three in the DC Universe, is often given the short shrift when it comes to her own series. She doesn't really have any memorable enemies like Batman or Superman and her own backstory is convoluted and muddled after so many different retellings. When the film began, I feared this would still be the case. Thankfully, this film gives her a definitive origin story, finally. The big bad too, Ares the G-d of War, also stands up on his own as an interesting villain that I could see in the eventual live-action Wonder Woman movie. It's amazing how well the film blended Greek mythology and superheroes so seamlessly. As a feminist, I loved how this film came off at times as the female version of 300. Plus, Nathan Fillion. Come on. You can't beat that.
After seeing Green Lantern's origin in New Frontier, picking up Green Lantern: First Flight, I was expecting a quick cash-in retread. Nope. Not in the least. This is THE definitive DC Animated Universe film that really has set the standard for any film in the future. This film came out of nowhere. I've recently been reading more Green Lantern considering Geoff Johns run on the comic, like his run on the Flash, has completely revolutionized the character. It's sad at times that it's so amazing because no other interpretation can come close to it. This is the closest I've seen so far and if the live-action film is even a quarter good as this, we're going to be in for a helluva ride. I don't want to spoil anything for this film because what makes it is the surprises. Sure, you know Sinestro is the Green Lantern's archnemesis but, in this film, you really get to see how devious he could be. Seeing him and Hal Jordan as green lanterns working together is utterly brilliant. A lot of people have compared this to "Training Day" but I have to say I was reminded sometimes of "The Departed" throughout it...except, well, in space and more epic. In 70 minutes, the film told the perfect origin story of Hal Jordan. A lot of films spindle around 150 minutes and blow it all on big special effect battles and little else (*cough*Spider-Man 3*cough*) This film shows how an economy of time does not necessarily mean dearth of story. By the time it was over, like Wonder Woman, I'm eagerly anticipating more films of this Hal Jordan.
Finally, the latest film, Batman and Superman: Public Enemies. This film fits in an odd place within the DC Animated film totempole. The story isn't as refined as Green Lantern: First Flight or Wonder Woman, but it has the excitement of the latter two titles over the previous three. What makes this film is that it's a reunion of sorts. The original voices of Batman, Superman, and Lex Luthor finally return in a PG-13 movie but with a completely different animation style. Plus, seeing the original voice of Luthor saying "bitch" was pretty mind-blowing. This really feels like the true return of Kevin Conroy (the original voice of Batman) considering Gotham Knight was merely okay. The film is essentially an extended battle as Batman and Superman flee a plethora of a supervillains and superheroes that are trying to collect the billion dollar bounty on Superman's head by President Luthor. The film begins auspiciously with the world plunging into chaos due to a terrible economy (socially relevant much?) and President Luthor comes to power to rectify all of this. Of course, he does, 'cause he's a real smarty but he's also still Lex Luthor. Hilarity and battles ensue. It doesn't have the emotional impact as Green Lantern (I mean, when you're being framed for murdering an android, it doesn't really necessitate the extensive manhunt that ensues) but it's still fun to watch. Something about Batman and Superman fighting an onslaught of all the ice villains in the DC Universe is something endearing.
Well, that was the DC Animated Universe so far. What of the Marvel animated film universe you ask? Well, it sucks mostly. Just like the situation on TV, apparently all of the people working on the 90's Marvel toons ended up on the films. Their quality really reflects the current animated film slate. Seriously, how could they screw up the Avengers movie? Especially after basing it off Mark Millar's incredible run on The Ultimates? It's sad even to think about.
Phew, that was a lot to write in one night. I need to get some sleep though all. The perils of the working world have given me a migraine and the sleeping patterns of a man three times my age. Goodnight one and all! I remain obediently yours, -Brett
Film Scores:
Superman Doomsday: 8 out of 10
Justice League: New Frontier: 7.5 out of 10
Batman: Gotham Knight: 7 out of 10
Wonder Woman: 9 out of 10
Green Lantern: First Flight: 10 out of 10
Superman and Batman: Public Enemies: 8.5 out of 10
Our first restaurant review!
Finally I'm able to post a restaurant review! Pretty sweet, yes?
I think it's perfect that right before I saw The Departed I dined at the exclusive and often raved about Momofuku Ko (not to be mistaken with the noodle bar, they are two different entities).
I have to say when I first heard about this place, I had my doubts. It seemed like the typical "one hit wonder" restaurant if you will, where you hear about them for about a good month when they're a hit and then just fade out of popularity.
I felt that it was going to be super presumptuous. There are only twelve seats in the entire place. Can we say snobbily exclusive anyone? Essentially if you want a reservation, you have to create an account on their website and log in at exactly 10 AM the week before you want to go and hope that you can snag a reservation. Take my sister, for instance. She tried for a good two weeks before getting one. Let's also consider the staggering price for a moment: $125 per meal! Granted, you do have ten courses to get through. You can't order a' la carte and pick and choose what you want in order to lower that price. As soon as you walk into the place, bam, $125 is blown and Chang delivers you his customized menu for that day. An extra $90 per person if you want the alcohol pairings. (Just as a note, I don't think its partner restaurant, the noodle bar, works like this--it is much more affordable and easier to get into).
Now the prices vary according to the season and what food is available on what day. That's a definite plus of this place. The owner and main chef, David Chang, goes to local farms and markets to pick up the freshest produce and meats that he can find. You won't find any fresher, since he does this daily. And he refuses to accommodate vegetarians: if you don't eat meat or fish, too bad, you're out of luck. Ouch. Odd to find (FINALLY) a restaurant in New York that won't deal with these wussy vegetarians.
After spending a good ten minutes looking for this cockamamie place, my sister and I realize it's semi-hidden. Its facade looks like a prison, or more realistically, a closed store. It has all bars in front of its door and store front. We had to use my sister's blackberry to find the exact address in order to find it. Then we saw this tiny window (the only way to see inside the restaurant) and realized we were in the right place.
The food can mostly (not all) be described in two words: unique and delicious. Each flavor delicately accompanies each other to create a balance among foods you would never ever picture together. Some stand out items on the menu were the Spanish mackerel (served practically raw, lightly seared), cornbread (sounds simple, but it was out of this world; was served at the beginning of the meal as a mini-appetizer), a poached egg (served with parsley and a special sauce), and his dessert sampling. For dessert, the cottage cheese cake was fantastic, served alongside squash sorbet. Who would ever imagine that squash could be delicious in a frozen form or dessert! And cottage cheese in a cheese cake?? It sounds so odd, but worked quite nicely together.
I have to admit not all of his dishes made me leap out of my chair and scream how great it was. The octopus was nothing to rave about, the mussel we were served wasn't very good (a bit bland), and the meat was nothing special.
My biggest complaint lies with the alcohol pairing. I may actually say that it was downright awful. DO NOT GET IT IF YOU GO THERE. The waiters and waitresses seemed to not care if you liked the wine or not and weren't very knowledgeable about the choices when I had asked some questions about the vintage. They also had sake pairings with particular entrees. My sister and I both hate sake, but we tried it anyway. It didn't seem to be a good match. Chang buys a "once pasteurized" sake, which I questioned the waitress about to which she bullshitted me this ridiculous explanation, only to have another waiter butt in and answer the question properly. If you don't know the answer, just tell me you're not sure and find someone who does know the answer. Seems simple enough.
If you take a place like Per Se, ranked as the third best restaurant in New York City (and well-deserved), their alcohol pairings are exceptional with their trained sommeliers. They gear it towards your tastes (they ask you questions about what kind of wines you like) and allow you to taste it, ensuring that you like it. If you don't like it (which did happen to my table), you simply send it back and get a different one. So it perfectly goes with your meal and you enjoy what you're drinking! Your glass is also never empty there, they're constantly re-filling it to make sure you're happy. Here at Momofuku Ko they did none of this: the choices were already chosen and some of the wines were just terrible. We had to force it down. One was superb, surprisingly a Californian, for which we asked the name of it and the waitress gave it to us on an index card (good job!). They also didn't let you try the wine beforehand, nor did they care if you liked it or not. And our glasses were constantly empty if you weren't eating anything! They only give you a total of 3-4 glasses of wine for ten courses (the wine disappears really fast). We ordered another bottle of wine, only to be met with rude glances and looks and choose a $65 bottle of Tuscan red wine. The waitress commended us on our choice, saying that Chang prides himself on this wine in particular, since he purchased it while he was in Italy. It was just OK. I've spent a year in Florence, Tuscany, and I've definitely had wayyyyy better. Especially for $65! I take a look at the label, and it was a "vino da tavola" aka a "table wine." Hm.
Final Score: 7.5
Yes, it was great, but you need to be really adventurous. Personally I feel that it's a once in a lifetime experience...intended to be done only once. It's sorta like Moulin Rouge in Paris: you go once to have the experience of being there (and just to say that you did it), you enjoy it, you have some fun, but would you do it again? Nah. I think I'll pass. Unless Veronica is up for trying their lunch.... (WITHOUT THE PAIRINGS)
Go take a peek at their restaurant, located at 163 1st Avenue between 10th and 11th Streets.
I think it's perfect that right before I saw The Departed I dined at the exclusive and often raved about Momofuku Ko (not to be mistaken with the noodle bar, they are two different entities).
I have to say when I first heard about this place, I had my doubts. It seemed like the typical "one hit wonder" restaurant if you will, where you hear about them for about a good month when they're a hit and then just fade out of popularity.
I felt that it was going to be super presumptuous. There are only twelve seats in the entire place. Can we say snobbily exclusive anyone? Essentially if you want a reservation, you have to create an account on their website and log in at exactly 10 AM the week before you want to go and hope that you can snag a reservation. Take my sister, for instance. She tried for a good two weeks before getting one. Let's also consider the staggering price for a moment: $125 per meal! Granted, you do have ten courses to get through. You can't order a' la carte and pick and choose what you want in order to lower that price. As soon as you walk into the place, bam, $125 is blown and Chang delivers you his customized menu for that day. An extra $90 per person if you want the alcohol pairings. (Just as a note, I don't think its partner restaurant, the noodle bar, works like this--it is much more affordable and easier to get into).
Now the prices vary according to the season and what food is available on what day. That's a definite plus of this place. The owner and main chef, David Chang, goes to local farms and markets to pick up the freshest produce and meats that he can find. You won't find any fresher, since he does this daily. And he refuses to accommodate vegetarians: if you don't eat meat or fish, too bad, you're out of luck. Ouch. Odd to find (FINALLY) a restaurant in New York that won't deal with these wussy vegetarians.
After spending a good ten minutes looking for this cockamamie place, my sister and I realize it's semi-hidden. Its facade looks like a prison, or more realistically, a closed store. It has all bars in front of its door and store front. We had to use my sister's blackberry to find the exact address in order to find it. Then we saw this tiny window (the only way to see inside the restaurant) and realized we were in the right place.
The food can mostly (not all) be described in two words: unique and delicious. Each flavor delicately accompanies each other to create a balance among foods you would never ever picture together. Some stand out items on the menu were the Spanish mackerel (served practically raw, lightly seared), cornbread (sounds simple, but it was out of this world; was served at the beginning of the meal as a mini-appetizer), a poached egg (served with parsley and a special sauce), and his dessert sampling. For dessert, the cottage cheese cake was fantastic, served alongside squash sorbet. Who would ever imagine that squash could be delicious in a frozen form or dessert! And cottage cheese in a cheese cake?? It sounds so odd, but worked quite nicely together.
I have to admit not all of his dishes made me leap out of my chair and scream how great it was. The octopus was nothing to rave about, the mussel we were served wasn't very good (a bit bland), and the meat was nothing special.
My biggest complaint lies with the alcohol pairing. I may actually say that it was downright awful. DO NOT GET IT IF YOU GO THERE. The waiters and waitresses seemed to not care if you liked the wine or not and weren't very knowledgeable about the choices when I had asked some questions about the vintage. They also had sake pairings with particular entrees. My sister and I both hate sake, but we tried it anyway. It didn't seem to be a good match. Chang buys a "once pasteurized" sake, which I questioned the waitress about to which she bullshitted me this ridiculous explanation, only to have another waiter butt in and answer the question properly. If you don't know the answer, just tell me you're not sure and find someone who does know the answer. Seems simple enough.
If you take a place like Per Se, ranked as the third best restaurant in New York City (and well-deserved), their alcohol pairings are exceptional with their trained sommeliers. They gear it towards your tastes (they ask you questions about what kind of wines you like) and allow you to taste it, ensuring that you like it. If you don't like it (which did happen to my table), you simply send it back and get a different one. So it perfectly goes with your meal and you enjoy what you're drinking! Your glass is also never empty there, they're constantly re-filling it to make sure you're happy. Here at Momofuku Ko they did none of this: the choices were already chosen and some of the wines were just terrible. We had to force it down. One was superb, surprisingly a Californian, for which we asked the name of it and the waitress gave it to us on an index card (good job!). They also didn't let you try the wine beforehand, nor did they care if you liked it or not. And our glasses were constantly empty if you weren't eating anything! They only give you a total of 3-4 glasses of wine for ten courses (the wine disappears really fast). We ordered another bottle of wine, only to be met with rude glances and looks and choose a $65 bottle of Tuscan red wine. The waitress commended us on our choice, saying that Chang prides himself on this wine in particular, since he purchased it while he was in Italy. It was just OK. I've spent a year in Florence, Tuscany, and I've definitely had wayyyyy better. Especially for $65! I take a look at the label, and it was a "vino da tavola" aka a "table wine." Hm.
Final Score: 7.5
Yes, it was great, but you need to be really adventurous. Personally I feel that it's a once in a lifetime experience...intended to be done only once. It's sorta like Moulin Rouge in Paris: you go once to have the experience of being there (and just to say that you did it), you enjoy it, you have some fun, but would you do it again? Nah. I think I'll pass. Unless Veronica is up for trying their lunch.... (WITHOUT THE PAIRINGS)
Go take a peek at their restaurant, located at 163 1st Avenue between 10th and 11th Streets.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Through all the work and all the turmoil, here I am to post an entry! :). Once again Bretty McBretterson has recommended me another great film, The Departed. And I think that nickname for Brett (among the many I give to him) really suits the flavor of the movie, considering we're delving deep into the secret world of the Irish mafia of Boston...so Mr. McBretterson, here we go!
I'm going to start by saying that Martin Scorsese is one of my favorite film directors, if not my all time favorite. He just so brilliantly captures the human experience on film, especially disappointment, sadness (ah, yes, remember my whole fascination with bleak cinema?), betrayal, and especially desperation. And of course, who could forget his memorable masterpieces depicting mob and gang life? No (Italian)American director understands true Italian cinema like he does, nor does any one else capture it as he does, couched within his American-themed movies. I recall there being a remake of the Italian classic Umberto D with an old man and his cat called Harry and Tonto. Though it was a valiant effort, and he was following a brilliant masterpiece, his own version paled in comparison. And though some people may disagree with me, it lost the magic that Umberto D had. It removed all traces of the neorealist experience and any inherent Italian traits that the movie possessed. If anyone should have re-done that movie, it should have been Mr. Scorsese (where is that man when you need him??). Remember Scorsese's Mean Streets? It reads as a re-make of Fellini's I Vitelloni! He wasn't straight up copying it, nor butchering it, but taking some cinematic elements from Fellini and making them his own. Alas, I digress. I just love gushing about Scorsese and mocking other directors who try to walk in his footsteps. My apologies. On to The Departed!!
There is no doubt in my mind that this was a brilliant film: it kept me hanging until the very last second, it was unpredictable, it was edgy. Let's not forget the tension that was persistently built where I couldn't take my eyes off the screen even for a second. I refused to pause the movie and get up to pee HAHAHA, no joke. You hung on every word to see where the story would go. The twists and turns were remarkable!
Clearly the theme of this movie is betrayal. And it's not just betrayal from one person, but it comes at you from different angles from all the main characters. And I'm not just talking about Sullivan, Costigan, Frank, and the other obvious choices, but there are others too. For instance, let's not forget about Madolyn's steamy affair with Costigan. Bet you guys didn't even THINK of that! Here she is as a psychiatrist trying to help mentally unstable people when she has her own tremendous problems. And, really, there is not one virtuous or 100% trustworthy character in this movie. They all betray, lie, cheat, manipulate, and are self-serving. Oh, the joys of a bleak movie! I LOVE IT!
By the end of the film, the police is depicted as being as just as bad as the mafia. They've been reduced to the same tactics. Keep in mind they're using an undercover man to infiltrate the mafia because they consider Costigan as expendable (Dignam emphasizes this, and though Queenan does not directly say it, I'm sure he's thinking it, since he refuses to get Costigan out of that situation even when he beseeches him to). Not only that, but let's keep in mind that fantastic image of the film: where Dignam finally shoots Sullivan. Now instead of showing up at his apartment saying that he will be brought to justice, he turns to sheer violence. Granted, yes, he IS retired from the police force, but that shouldn't stop him from making a citizen's arrest.
You feel torn in the film. And what do I mean by that? Well, you feel as if you can't side with either Sullivan or Costigan. Who do you root for? Who CAN you root for??? Who's the one we want to achieve his goals? You literally remain suspended throughout the movie: you're not hoping that one or the other succeeds, but merely hoping that neither one gets caught! It is a bit reminiscent of Gillo Pontecorvo's The Battle of Algiers where both sides, the native Algerians and their European French counterparts, are committing injustices (if none of you have seen this classic, please go rent it now so you can understand what I'm talking about). There really is no "good" or "bad" guy. Once again, I feel that Scorsese takes this idea from an Italian classic. I'm sure someone out there can write a paper on it...HINT HINT!
Now here I sit praising the hell out of this film. Of course I loved it, but unfortunately, I found some unsightly flaws. I'll start with the biggest blunder of the entire film that almost destroyed it for me: the rat that crawls on the banister at the ending. HATED HATED HATED this ending. That's the ONE flaw I simply can't get past. It was way too much "in your face" symbolism at the wrong time and turned out to be kind of lame, rather than the chilling effect that Scorsese was going for. I mean, here we have this amazing and gruesome homocide. That should be the final image left in our mind, Sullivan's blood spilled in his own apartment, the bag of donuts tossed onto the floor. Think resonance, that ever important cinematic effect, where in a previous scene Madolyn and Sullivan share a doughnut together in their new house.
Now, if Scorsese really wanted to use an actual 'rat' in the film, I would recommend it in one scene only. It would've been more effective if it had jumped out of the sewers and onto the lifeless body of Frank and started eating his flesh. NOW THAT IS BRILLIANCE! (And damn, I should've been a filmmaker). But as a final image, it was highly ineffective and almost cheapens the previous murder that stuck out so much in my mind. I'm being totally honest here: I actually rolled my eyes at that part. COME ON, SCORSESE, YOU'RE BETTER THAN THAT!!!
Naturally when one flaw arises, there will be others to follow. These are minor, I must say, and I'm willing to look past them. I'll list a couple of them. When sullivan just 'deletes' costigan's police profile, I literally said outloud "Um no?" Honestly, that doesn't (and can't!) happen in real life.....but again! I'm choosing to look past it. After all, it IS just a movie. I will suspend my grip on reality and just let it be. And right before that, I highly doubt that Sullivan would keep the "Citizens" envelope right in plain sight that would pinpoint him immediately as Frank's accomplice, especially since he knows there's an undercover amidst the police squad. Though I will admit, these elements worked quite nicely for the story.
I bet some people wouldn't 'buy' Costigan just running out of Sullivan's office after he discovers Sullivan's the rat, but I did! It keeps in line with character development, since Costigan is hopped up on pills. He certainly isn't thinking straight, can't take the pressure, and probably didn't know what to do. He freaked out. I'm sure people were also annoyed by Costigan answering his phone after Queenan's death when it's coming from that same number (and Costigan knows it's from Queenan's phone). Some may say "OH THAT'S STUPID, HE WOULDN'T HAVE ANSWERED IT SINCE COSTIGAN KNOWS HE DIED"...but, once again, he's not of sound mind. It worked for me.
I will say one other thing concerning the acting. The whole cast is brilliant and worked so well together. Now, first off: Jack Nicholson. The man is a legend. This is why I'm obsessed with him. He just pulls off parts so convincingly and you forget that you're even watching a movie sometimes! And to this day I don't get why people say Leonardo Di Caprio is a bad actor. I think movies like this, especially when he pairs with Scorsese as a director, really make him shine. And his unforgettable performance in What's Eating Gilbert Grape is really a stand-out role. The only complaint I have about Leo is when he slips in and out of accents, but it's really no big deal in my opinion. Hey, accents are hard to pull off! And Marky Mark (har har. aka Mark Wahlberg) really shocked me. That was a fabulous performance, arguably even better than Nicholson. I didn't expect that from him at all.
Final Score: 9.0
I would've give it a 10 had it not been for that damn rat in the ending scene. Damn am I still tempted to go ahead and give it that 10! But I will not, despite my obvious bias towards Scorsese's brilliance.
I'm going to start by saying that Martin Scorsese is one of my favorite film directors, if not my all time favorite. He just so brilliantly captures the human experience on film, especially disappointment, sadness (ah, yes, remember my whole fascination with bleak cinema?), betrayal, and especially desperation. And of course, who could forget his memorable masterpieces depicting mob and gang life? No (Italian)American director understands true Italian cinema like he does, nor does any one else capture it as he does, couched within his American-themed movies. I recall there being a remake of the Italian classic Umberto D with an old man and his cat called Harry and Tonto. Though it was a valiant effort, and he was following a brilliant masterpiece, his own version paled in comparison. And though some people may disagree with me, it lost the magic that Umberto D had. It removed all traces of the neorealist experience and any inherent Italian traits that the movie possessed. If anyone should have re-done that movie, it should have been Mr. Scorsese (where is that man when you need him??). Remember Scorsese's Mean Streets? It reads as a re-make of Fellini's I Vitelloni! He wasn't straight up copying it, nor butchering it, but taking some cinematic elements from Fellini and making them his own. Alas, I digress. I just love gushing about Scorsese and mocking other directors who try to walk in his footsteps. My apologies. On to The Departed!!
There is no doubt in my mind that this was a brilliant film: it kept me hanging until the very last second, it was unpredictable, it was edgy. Let's not forget the tension that was persistently built where I couldn't take my eyes off the screen even for a second. I refused to pause the movie and get up to pee HAHAHA, no joke. You hung on every word to see where the story would go. The twists and turns were remarkable!
Clearly the theme of this movie is betrayal. And it's not just betrayal from one person, but it comes at you from different angles from all the main characters. And I'm not just talking about Sullivan, Costigan, Frank, and the other obvious choices, but there are others too. For instance, let's not forget about Madolyn's steamy affair with Costigan. Bet you guys didn't even THINK of that! Here she is as a psychiatrist trying to help mentally unstable people when she has her own tremendous problems. And, really, there is not one virtuous or 100% trustworthy character in this movie. They all betray, lie, cheat, manipulate, and are self-serving. Oh, the joys of a bleak movie! I LOVE IT!
By the end of the film, the police is depicted as being as just as bad as the mafia. They've been reduced to the same tactics. Keep in mind they're using an undercover man to infiltrate the mafia because they consider Costigan as expendable (Dignam emphasizes this, and though Queenan does not directly say it, I'm sure he's thinking it, since he refuses to get Costigan out of that situation even when he beseeches him to). Not only that, but let's keep in mind that fantastic image of the film: where Dignam finally shoots Sullivan. Now instead of showing up at his apartment saying that he will be brought to justice, he turns to sheer violence. Granted, yes, he IS retired from the police force, but that shouldn't stop him from making a citizen's arrest.
You feel torn in the film. And what do I mean by that? Well, you feel as if you can't side with either Sullivan or Costigan. Who do you root for? Who CAN you root for??? Who's the one we want to achieve his goals? You literally remain suspended throughout the movie: you're not hoping that one or the other succeeds, but merely hoping that neither one gets caught! It is a bit reminiscent of Gillo Pontecorvo's The Battle of Algiers where both sides, the native Algerians and their European French counterparts, are committing injustices (if none of you have seen this classic, please go rent it now so you can understand what I'm talking about). There really is no "good" or "bad" guy. Once again, I feel that Scorsese takes this idea from an Italian classic. I'm sure someone out there can write a paper on it...HINT HINT!
Now here I sit praising the hell out of this film. Of course I loved it, but unfortunately, I found some unsightly flaws. I'll start with the biggest blunder of the entire film that almost destroyed it for me: the rat that crawls on the banister at the ending. HATED HATED HATED this ending. That's the ONE flaw I simply can't get past. It was way too much "in your face" symbolism at the wrong time and turned out to be kind of lame, rather than the chilling effect that Scorsese was going for. I mean, here we have this amazing and gruesome homocide. That should be the final image left in our mind, Sullivan's blood spilled in his own apartment, the bag of donuts tossed onto the floor. Think resonance, that ever important cinematic effect, where in a previous scene Madolyn and Sullivan share a doughnut together in their new house.
Now, if Scorsese really wanted to use an actual 'rat' in the film, I would recommend it in one scene only. It would've been more effective if it had jumped out of the sewers and onto the lifeless body of Frank and started eating his flesh. NOW THAT IS BRILLIANCE! (And damn, I should've been a filmmaker). But as a final image, it was highly ineffective and almost cheapens the previous murder that stuck out so much in my mind. I'm being totally honest here: I actually rolled my eyes at that part. COME ON, SCORSESE, YOU'RE BETTER THAN THAT!!!
Naturally when one flaw arises, there will be others to follow. These are minor, I must say, and I'm willing to look past them. I'll list a couple of them. When sullivan just 'deletes' costigan's police profile, I literally said outloud "Um no?" Honestly, that doesn't (and can't!) happen in real life.....but again! I'm choosing to look past it. After all, it IS just a movie. I will suspend my grip on reality and just let it be. And right before that, I highly doubt that Sullivan would keep the "Citizens" envelope right in plain sight that would pinpoint him immediately as Frank's accomplice, especially since he knows there's an undercover amidst the police squad. Though I will admit, these elements worked quite nicely for the story.
I bet some people wouldn't 'buy' Costigan just running out of Sullivan's office after he discovers Sullivan's the rat, but I did! It keeps in line with character development, since Costigan is hopped up on pills. He certainly isn't thinking straight, can't take the pressure, and probably didn't know what to do. He freaked out. I'm sure people were also annoyed by Costigan answering his phone after Queenan's death when it's coming from that same number (and Costigan knows it's from Queenan's phone). Some may say "OH THAT'S STUPID, HE WOULDN'T HAVE ANSWERED IT SINCE COSTIGAN KNOWS HE DIED"...but, once again, he's not of sound mind. It worked for me.
I will say one other thing concerning the acting. The whole cast is brilliant and worked so well together. Now, first off: Jack Nicholson. The man is a legend. This is why I'm obsessed with him. He just pulls off parts so convincingly and you forget that you're even watching a movie sometimes! And to this day I don't get why people say Leonardo Di Caprio is a bad actor. I think movies like this, especially when he pairs with Scorsese as a director, really make him shine. And his unforgettable performance in What's Eating Gilbert Grape is really a stand-out role. The only complaint I have about Leo is when he slips in and out of accents, but it's really no big deal in my opinion. Hey, accents are hard to pull off! And Marky Mark (har har. aka Mark Wahlberg) really shocked me. That was a fabulous performance, arguably even better than Nicholson. I didn't expect that from him at all.
Final Score: 9.0
I would've give it a 10 had it not been for that damn rat in the ending scene. Damn am I still tempted to go ahead and give it that 10! But I will not, despite my obvious bias towards Scorsese's brilliance.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Delays, Delays
Due to various work/life business, blog posts have been a bit delayed. Rest assured, next week we'll be back to business as usual...which really isn't that usual since we've only had two posts on here so far. Next month's selection of movies is quite amazing so look forward to more reviews. I'll also be starting up two new columns. One for watching a new movie a day on Netflix (which I'll hopefully stick to) and a column about vaporware, or better known as "Films That Sound Awesome But Never Really Happened." Until then loyal reader, if you are out there, we'll return shortly.
Obediently yours,
Brett
Obediently yours,
Brett
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Another Welcome and Yet Another Visitor Review
Hello potentially faithful new readers!
To start, I want to address the title of the blog. Yes, it’s a cliché but sometimes the cliché works better than creating a new phrase. It’s comfortable. It’s homely and familiar. It allows you, the new reader, to become more at ease with the blog as we go on a wonderful, wacky journey down the deep trenches of film and food. There may be some things on here that may fly over your heads or things you don’t quite get. However, like a cliché, we’ll keep coming up again and again. So, (as long as we’re using similes) like a great serialized TV show, it’s probably best that you start now before you get totally lost.
Also, yes, there was a show on TBS called Dinner and a Movie a while ago before they decided to put on crappy sitcoms and endless Family Guy repeats. The gist of it was that TBS would play a film with the wraparound segments consisting of this guy and girl (who were always vaguely hitting on each other without it becoming completely uncomfortable between them or the family-oriented audience) making food based on the film that would be on that night. Our blog isn’t about making food and film complimentary to each other. Each one encompasses its own sphere of sensual delight. You can’t watch food and get the same pleasure as eating it. And if you eat a film, you will either A) die or B) get horrible indigestion. There will be no Silence of the Lambs “Fava Beans With Chianti Reduction” or Pulp Fiction “Gimp Casserole Surprise.” Just film and food. Okay, maybe some other stuff too, but that’s pretty much the theme here.
We made this blog because we both share a unique passion for film and food. Personally, whenever I go to the movies, I never get disappointed with anything during the experience. The film may blow but it’s that feeling of going into a cinema that has been so endearing to many others and me for generations. One of my favorite things to do as a kid was to go to the cinema. In fact, some of the happiest moments of my life have been at movie theaters. True, I can always find a terrific film I haven’t seen in the theaters and enjoy it just as much on DVD or television. Nevertheless, I can never remember where I would watch a film if it wasn’t at the theater. It could’ve been on my laptop. It could’ve been on at a friend’s place. When I was younger, I moved around a lot so I can never pinpoint at what home I watched a film I loved. Maybe I’m just a romantic for those sorts of things…but I always feel at home at a movie theater.
The same is true for restaurants but only certain ones have a similar aura of mystique. Some of them are forgettable. Some can linger in your memory for a while. Not just because of the food but also because of the experience. A birthday. A memorable get together. The terrific food. There are restaurants that will always linger in my mind like a good theater going experience. However, like I said earlier, it cannot replicate the feeling of going to the movies as the movies cannot replicate the feeling of going to an amazing restaurant.
So, to sum up: don’t panic, stay awhile, and make yourself at home.
Now to my review of…
THE VISITOR
I think Andrea covered most of the bases with her review but I want to add my two cents. BEWARE! SPOILERS FROM HERE OUT!
When I started watching this movie, the first thought that came into my head was “Oh, great, another dull, pretentious indie flick about how genius is a curse.” Then something magical happened. After the first thirty minutes, Tarek gets arrested. From here out, the film shoots out like a bullet train and never stops chugging.
This film’s brilliance is how it walks the thin line like a trained acrobat into cliché territory but never crosses it. At times, the film could have been a message film about immigration issues in this country. Other times, it could have been a film about troubled genius. Also, it could’ve been like Gran Torino, the tale of bigot that comes to love the people he so ignorantly dislikes. Instead, like all good filmworks, it focuses on making a good story first with real stakes. We see this develop as we follow Richard Jenkins’ character, Walter, as he grows from a withdrawn, down-on-his luck professor to a man of true passion.
Richard Jenkins’ work on this film is something truly marvelous to behold. Like the film, he plays a character that, under a lesser actor’s hands, could just be a figure of pity but, instead, he turns Walter into a multi-dimensional human being that feels love, anger and resentment. Jenkins’ best skill he brings to this film is restraint. The whole film is a slow burn as all these terrible things happen to this man’s life and how he reacts in a soft-spoken way. It makes his final, angry outburst at the immigration officer that much more poignant. Walter has had everything in his life taken away from him. When they take Tarek away, it’s the last straw.
And, yes, Andrea, I will talk about the love story that develops. What’s interesting is that it’s not really a love story as it is a reflection of Walter. The main flaw of Walter is that he can’t let go. Even though he knows he cannot play the piano, he still plays it because his departed wife wanted him too. Tarek, his mom, and his wife are the ones that finally help let go (as seen visually the piano getting sold). What’s an interesting departure from other films is that, even though he learns to let go throughout the film, he becomes exactly like he was in the beginning of the film by the time the film ends.
In a way, it comes full circle at the end as he plays the drums fiercely in the subway. He has found something new that he cannot let go of. He no longer has his girlfriend. He could not save Tarek. He’s back at square one: alone. Nevertheless, he has a drive now, which makes it even more tragic. Playing the piano, he was withdrawn but, with the drums, he shows his burning passion…that has no place now to go. Yes, it’s sad but not all movies are supposed to be happy things. I learned that the first time I saw Arlington Road.
I highly recommend this film but you need to be in the right mood for it. If you’re incredibly depressed, it would probably be better to watch The Naked Gun. If you want a great character study, check this out. It’s currently on Watch Instantly on Netflix so watch it before it gets taken down.
Score: 9
To start, I want to address the title of the blog. Yes, it’s a cliché but sometimes the cliché works better than creating a new phrase. It’s comfortable. It’s homely and familiar. It allows you, the new reader, to become more at ease with the blog as we go on a wonderful, wacky journey down the deep trenches of film and food. There may be some things on here that may fly over your heads or things you don’t quite get. However, like a cliché, we’ll keep coming up again and again. So, (as long as we’re using similes) like a great serialized TV show, it’s probably best that you start now before you get totally lost.
Also, yes, there was a show on TBS called Dinner and a Movie a while ago before they decided to put on crappy sitcoms and endless Family Guy repeats. The gist of it was that TBS would play a film with the wraparound segments consisting of this guy and girl (who were always vaguely hitting on each other without it becoming completely uncomfortable between them or the family-oriented audience) making food based on the film that would be on that night. Our blog isn’t about making food and film complimentary to each other. Each one encompasses its own sphere of sensual delight. You can’t watch food and get the same pleasure as eating it. And if you eat a film, you will either A) die or B) get horrible indigestion. There will be no Silence of the Lambs “Fava Beans With Chianti Reduction” or Pulp Fiction “Gimp Casserole Surprise.” Just film and food. Okay, maybe some other stuff too, but that’s pretty much the theme here.
We made this blog because we both share a unique passion for film and food. Personally, whenever I go to the movies, I never get disappointed with anything during the experience. The film may blow but it’s that feeling of going into a cinema that has been so endearing to many others and me for generations. One of my favorite things to do as a kid was to go to the cinema. In fact, some of the happiest moments of my life have been at movie theaters. True, I can always find a terrific film I haven’t seen in the theaters and enjoy it just as much on DVD or television. Nevertheless, I can never remember where I would watch a film if it wasn’t at the theater. It could’ve been on my laptop. It could’ve been on at a friend’s place. When I was younger, I moved around a lot so I can never pinpoint at what home I watched a film I loved. Maybe I’m just a romantic for those sorts of things…but I always feel at home at a movie theater.
The same is true for restaurants but only certain ones have a similar aura of mystique. Some of them are forgettable. Some can linger in your memory for a while. Not just because of the food but also because of the experience. A birthday. A memorable get together. The terrific food. There are restaurants that will always linger in my mind like a good theater going experience. However, like I said earlier, it cannot replicate the feeling of going to the movies as the movies cannot replicate the feeling of going to an amazing restaurant.
So, to sum up: don’t panic, stay awhile, and make yourself at home.
Now to my review of…
THE VISITOR
I think Andrea covered most of the bases with her review but I want to add my two cents. BEWARE! SPOILERS FROM HERE OUT!
When I started watching this movie, the first thought that came into my head was “Oh, great, another dull, pretentious indie flick about how genius is a curse.” Then something magical happened. After the first thirty minutes, Tarek gets arrested. From here out, the film shoots out like a bullet train and never stops chugging.
This film’s brilliance is how it walks the thin line like a trained acrobat into cliché territory but never crosses it. At times, the film could have been a message film about immigration issues in this country. Other times, it could have been a film about troubled genius. Also, it could’ve been like Gran Torino, the tale of bigot that comes to love the people he so ignorantly dislikes. Instead, like all good filmworks, it focuses on making a good story first with real stakes. We see this develop as we follow Richard Jenkins’ character, Walter, as he grows from a withdrawn, down-on-his luck professor to a man of true passion.
Richard Jenkins’ work on this film is something truly marvelous to behold. Like the film, he plays a character that, under a lesser actor’s hands, could just be a figure of pity but, instead, he turns Walter into a multi-dimensional human being that feels love, anger and resentment. Jenkins’ best skill he brings to this film is restraint. The whole film is a slow burn as all these terrible things happen to this man’s life and how he reacts in a soft-spoken way. It makes his final, angry outburst at the immigration officer that much more poignant. Walter has had everything in his life taken away from him. When they take Tarek away, it’s the last straw.
And, yes, Andrea, I will talk about the love story that develops. What’s interesting is that it’s not really a love story as it is a reflection of Walter. The main flaw of Walter is that he can’t let go. Even though he knows he cannot play the piano, he still plays it because his departed wife wanted him too. Tarek, his mom, and his wife are the ones that finally help let go (as seen visually the piano getting sold). What’s an interesting departure from other films is that, even though he learns to let go throughout the film, he becomes exactly like he was in the beginning of the film by the time the film ends.
In a way, it comes full circle at the end as he plays the drums fiercely in the subway. He has found something new that he cannot let go of. He no longer has his girlfriend. He could not save Tarek. He’s back at square one: alone. Nevertheless, he has a drive now, which makes it even more tragic. Playing the piano, he was withdrawn but, with the drums, he shows his burning passion…that has no place now to go. Yes, it’s sad but not all movies are supposed to be happy things. I learned that the first time I saw Arlington Road.
I highly recommend this film but you need to be in the right mood for it. If you’re incredibly depressed, it would probably be better to watch The Naked Gun. If you want a great character study, check this out. It’s currently on Watch Instantly on Netflix so watch it before it gets taken down.
Score: 9
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
A Welcome Message and "The Visitor" Review
Introduction
Hello everyone! Welcome to the blog of me and my best friend, Bretty. We’re pretty excited to finally get this thing started, considering we’ve been talking about it for about a year and a half already. We both consider ourselves film buffs, Bretty majored in cinema studies at NYU, as did I (albeit unofficially, though I took enough coursework to satisfy the requirements for a film major). Not only that, but we’re hardcore food junkies: I’m Italian and I used to be obese (baby, I know my food!). I’m also interested in communications and journalism (as is Signor Bretty), so we hope to be uploading some videos of our commentary as well. So why call this blog “dinner and a movie”? Well, essentially, both Bretty and I will go out to dinner together and catch a flick (though this first one won’t have a restaurant review included, since I was away in
Being that this is my first entry, I think first and foremost I should clarify what makes a “good” movie for me—since this term is tossed around far too much. Personally, I differentiate this term from an “enjoyable,” “funny,” or even “cute” movie (though not mutually exclusive, let’s be real here). I think there are many components that make a movie “good”—even “great,” such as a great character arc (think of Casablanca where we have the main character, Rick, go from a self-centered and egotistical bastard to selfless in realizing his passionate love for Elsa, only to give her up for a greater good), intriguing plot, flawless acting, good writing, etc.; as you can see, there are many. But what is really going to set one movie apart from the next?
For me the most important part of a “good” movie (or “classic,” if you will) is that it needs to haunt me. I don’t mean in the sense of a horror movie where you’re scared the entire night, thinking something is perpetually watching you. I mean in the sense that you’re constantly thinking about it. The movie has become memorable for you. Maybe it touches you in some way, perhaps you relate it to your life, or maybe you just thought the film itself was brilliant, but for some reason you can’t seem to shake it. You could be eating breakfast and still you’re thinking about so-and-so’s actions or how the film turned out. Maybe the ending just didn’t suit the brilliance the rest of the film showcased. Either way, it stays with you. That, my friends, is genius, and is a daunting task for any filmmaker to reproduce in his/her audience, though in reality it is their ultimate goal.
The Visitor Review
I have to admit The Visitor was a recommendation by Bretty, so I naturally had high hopes for it (since we typically have similar tastes in films)—didn’t think it would actually exceed these expectations!
We start off with a somewhat elderly man (Walter Vale), clearly jaded, attempting to learn the piano. We don’t find out until later why he’s been pursuing this instrument: he’s trying to fill the void in his life from the death of his wife, who used to play beautiful music to the piano. He loves the sounds it produces (hence his passion for classical music), but still cannot seem to get the hang of it, seen by his firing yet another teacher right in the opening scene.
Cut to another scene of Walter’s disinterest trickling down to his profession: he’s a professor. The brilliance of this film is not in the professor outwardly stating “I hate my career” or “I am miserable.” That’s obviously not a very effective writing device. The movie shows us this attitude. While Walter is busy changing an old syllabus from a few years ago to a current one by simply whiting out the older date, a student interrupts him, claiming a family emergency for his paper not being handed in on time. Walter does not even hear the explanation or keep him any further in his office (while the student reminds him about the late syllabus they still have not received), but tells him that he must take a zero on the assignment. The Dean later reminds Walter about a book presentation he must go to at NYU (represent!) since his colleague who assisted in writing will be unable to attend, but Vale confesses his lack of interest and participation in the actual writing and publication of the book, however he reluctantly accepts the time off in New York, since it is imperative that he attends. So, here, right from the very beginning, the film establishes a man who is dissatisfied with his life (the loss of his wife) and his career (being a professor). A bleak film, ah, just what I love! Seriously, it’s one of my favorite genres (it’s obviously not even considered a genre…but it should be, damnit!).
As the film develops, these elements are developed even further, brought out through the meeting of two strangers (a couple, one Muslim named Tarek, the other Zanaib from
Through the interaction between the professor and the ‘visitor’ in his apartment, we see the change that he goes through (a brilliant character arc, may I add). We started off with a mild-mannered, quiet, boring, and jaded professor who goes to a passionate lover of music, a good friend, and selfless man. Tarek and Walter naturally start off just tolerating each other since they are forced roomies. Out of gratitude for letting him and his girlfriend stay in his apartment, Tarek gives the professor a chance by inviting him to his drum concert (to the chagrin of his girlfriend, who finds him relentlessly dull). Walter is enchanted by the sound of Tarek’s drumming and eventually the two bond over the playing of the drums together (though that is simply putting it, you really need to watch the movie to see the progression of this relationship).
I think I should add how grateful I was that the movie didn’t go in one particular direction: a lame love story between Zanaib and Walter. Can we just say all together how many times we’ve seen this happen? Oh, Tarek is off playing his drums at shows and Zanaib is left all alone with Walter. And even though she hates him, eventually they will hit it off and have an affair, fall in love, blah blah blah. It’s so over-done at this point, and I’m incredibly happy the movie went towards the “bromance” instead of an actual romance (though there was another romance developed that was effective). It pleasantly surprised me—I certainly did not see that coming, I must admit.
The most brilliant scene in the film by far is the outcry by Walter in the scene where Tarek gets deported. The officer at the Immigration Center is not concerned about other people’s feelings, just mindlessly and jadedly doing his job, telling Walter nonchalantly that his dear friend has been deported. Wait, this should sound familiar to us…exactly! It’s a direct reminder to the audience of the way the professor used to be! Recall the opening scene where the professor dismisses the student without any compassion? Just mindlessly doing his job? He simply just doesn’t care? Brilliant! (This writing device is called “resonance,” where the viewer either consciously or subconsciously recognizes an element that was established previously in the film that is brought back again). This, for me, is exactly where the film derives part of its power from; it happens in other scenes as well, particularly the ending. Anyway, Walter explodes at the officer as his anger and desperation surge, yelling at him that it’s just not fair, that Tarek was innocent in the first place, he’s a human being, etc. How could we ever have pictured the man we saw at the beginning of the film (the meek professor calmly sitting behind his desk) to deliver such a powerful and emotional speech towards the end? The character development of Walter seen throughout this film was absolutely flawless and should be applauded as one of the best character arcs I have seen in a while.
Final Rating: 9.5
I found it to be an excellent movie, well-thought out, and executed brilliantly! Great acting, perfect character development, and a unique plot. Fantastic resonance in several scenes. Best movie of the year, hands down.
And now I leave Bretty to fill in the rest—because there’s a lot here that makes this film great that I didn’t want to tackle on in one review, especially because this has gotten a bit lengthy. We’ll see his take now on The Visitor, hopefully more about the romance that does develop and the ending…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)