Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close Has Great Appeal, But Check Your Expectations

Posted on January 20, 2012 by admin

Although many will regard Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close as a so-called “911” movie, I think that definition misleads the audience into expecting something completely different than what this film sets out to be. Rather than attempting the monumental task of representing the grand scope of the September 11th tragedy through one perspective, the story here is presented as a personal tale of loss that was a result of that day in 2001. This exceptionally well-crafted production actually uses the 911 event as a backdrop of senseless sudden loss in order to explore the impact of one parent’s effect upon a child even after that parent is gone, and the difficult transition that child must make to a life void of that parent’s guidance.

In the film we learn early on that nine-year old Oskar Schell (Thomas Horn) is an unusual child. He seems to be exceptionally intelligent and well educated for his age. However, this point is a bit exaggerated by acclaimed director, Stephen Daldry (the only director to receive Oscar-nominations for his first three movies Billy Elliot, The Hours, The Reader). Daldry has the inexperienced, but able young actor go a bit overboard in his attempt to demonstrate that Oskar is eccentric.

In fact, his quirky charm sometimes comes off a bit too odd; causing one to suspect Oskar may have some form of Asperger’s Syndrome. This could be an interesting aspect to the character, but it feels that this quality is relied upon to excuse moments that would have been handled with greater agility by a more experienced actor (the scene that involves an outburst at a locksmith company was most annoying). Surely, this is a demanding role, one that is a lot to handle even for the seasoned child actor. Unfortunately, the weight of such a responsibility is an expectation that is seldom fulfilled, and in the case of Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close the results fall short.

And casting Hanks to fill the role of an incredibly attentive parent almost works against itself. His persona precedes itself, and once again presumed personality is relied upon to fill in the gaps that might have been left void by a lesser-known actor. Similarly, an underutilized Sandra Bullock brings with her personal presence a whole lot of understanding of the mom without that character actually having to do very much. Sometimes specialty casting works very well, but in this case I felt cheated out of getting to know the mom for her own merits. There is a watershed of information near the end of the film, but I would have liked to know her a lot earlier if I was going to empathize with her motivations (or seeming lack of) when Oskar first makes some important decisions.

The beginning of the film is well told in flashback where we are shown that Oskar and his father regularly engaged in complex and challenging games. Some were purely mental, while others were designed as outdoors adventures meant to engage Oskar with the outside world (a skill that does not come easily to the socially awkward child). These scenes are full of fun as we watch a particularly attentive father (an almost too endearing Tom Hanks) interacting on all cylinders with his child. Together the two apply Oskar’s intense dedication to creative and structured treasure hunts.

However, life as Oskar knew it came to an abrupt end as a result of his father’s untimely death at The World Trade Center. And now, as the initial effects of the tragedy are still fresh, the boy comes across a key he believes his father meant for him, and him alone to find in order to fulfill one last elaborate adventure, one that compels him to search for the lock that matches the mysterious key. This is when the meat of the story takes shape and all the endearingly charming, feel-good moments championed in reviews takes place. We see just how imaginative Oskar can be when he deduces the scrawling of the name “Black” to mean the name of the possessor of the lock. So, Oskar (unable to relate to his mother the way he did with his dad) secretly sets out to systematically meet everyone in NYC named Black in order to fulfill the quest.

Now, as someone who has lived in NYC the idea of a child going door to door in Manhattan is outrageously scary, and Bullock’s character initially appears to be a little too disinterested in her young son’s unusual comings and goings (however this is explained satisfactorily in the end). But as an adult remembering the thrill of childhood escapades, the prospect is immensely appealing. Although I was distracted by the unrealistic act of everyone accepting this determined child into their homes, it is a lot of fun watching Oskar interact with the many diverse people he would otherwise never have known, even if many of these encounters are portrayed with exaggerated sentiment by bit players who are obviously inexperienced actors.

Of course, the amateur performances would not be as noticeable if they did not bear such stark contrast to the quality of the more substantial roles. Besides the work of Hanks and Bullock, the incomparable Max von Sydow (The Exorcist, Hannah and Her Sisters) provides an Academy Award worthy performance as an elderly mute recluse who aids Oskar along his journey. It is a marvelously nuanced performance created by an experienced actor who says far more with the glance of his eyes than any words could ever hope to convey. The ever-reliable John Goodman also makes an appearance in a throwaway role as Oskar’s doorman, and Viola Davis and Jeffrey Wright have small, but pivotal roles as two of the people Oskar meets.

Towards the end of the film many secrets are explained and it becomes clear that as he searched for answers Oskar was himself a catalyst for healing. For all the people he encountered on his journey he provided an opportunity for them to contribute to the rebuilding of a damaged city. This is why it was necessary to include the events of 911 as a backdrop. It provided a realistic situation for the citizens of a metropolis to not only be open to the idea, but eager to help a stranger, especially one so directly affected by the tragedy.

There are plenty of aspects to like about Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, but with its few shortcomings I wouldn’t set your expectations too high or you’re bound to be disappointed. And although the message of this film is a universal one suitable for all ages, and a boy plays the central character this is not a children’s film by any stretch of the imagination (not that the filmmakers intended it to be). So, please, understand the film is rated PG-13 for emotional thematic material, some disturbing images, and language, and use caution when deciding who in your family should join you for a trip to the movies. Under the right circumstances and with the right audience you’ll be sure to enjoy yourself.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

RetroSpecht.com Top 10 Films of 2011

Posted on December 31, 2011 by admin

Following tradition, I have created a list of my favorite films of the year for 2011. I suspect that there will be some films on the list you have never heard of, let alone seen. In that case I highly encourage you to seek these films out, either through NetFlix, imdb.com, or Google. Some are already available on DVD, while others may not have been released yet in your area. The Forgiveness of Blood, for instance is not due to hit theaters until February, but since I saw it at the 2011 AFI Film Festival I am including it on my list for this year. I welcome your comments. In fact, if this list doesn’t inspire some lively discussion I will be very disappointed. So, bring it on!

1) The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo: I never read the book, or saw the original Swedish film adaptation of the highly acclaimed novel (I know, I know). Which I think gave me an unbiased impression of the American production. It was a wonderfully produced thriller/mystery, executed to perfection in every way. I predict the film will be nominated for an Academy Award for Best Picture (which it may actually win), as will Rooney Mara for Best Actress, and Trent Reznor for the music. If you haven’t seen it yet, I recommend that when you do, just sit back, relax and enjoy. Some fans of the original hesitate to give credence to this remake, but that’s selling short a fine film that deserves praise in its own right.

2) The Artist: Although this film is in danger of being over-hyped, I can’t help but join those who have hailed The Artist as one of the best movies of the year. Yes, it’s actually a silent movie, but don’t let that dissuade you. You really won’t notice that much. It’s used to great advantage to tell the story of an artist who suffers through the challenge of Hollywood’s transition to sound. And it’s in black and white, but you won’t really notice that either as both devices only serve to enhance the atmosphere of the story. And if you know anything about the stars of the era, you’re going to absolutely love the last scene in the movie when the only words of the film are spoken.

3) Brighton Rock: Oddly, I haven’t heard anybody talk about this film at all, let alone include it on a top ten list of the year. Did nobody else see this film besides me? It is an absolutely gorgeously shot film in the style of a classic noir, but in rich saturated colors. Sounds like an oxymoron, but in this adaptation of the Graham Greene novel the noir sensibility is represented in execution and atmosphere. A hard-edged Helen Mirren at the top of her game leads the superlative cast in a role that is not to be missed. Let’s just say that Mirren proves that sexy is not an age, but an attitude. And in Brighton Rock, Mirren is loaded with attitude.

4) The Descendants: Once again, Alexander Payne lives up to his well-deserved reputation. The acclaimed director follows up Election, About Schmidt and Sideways with a delightfully subtle comedy about the difficulties of family, in all its forms. With its popularity it’s likely you’ve discovered the pleasures of this film for yourself. But if you haven’t yet, I recommend it for a New Years outing suitable for the family. After all, it’s always good for people to see the faults in other families in order to accept the oddities of their own. This could be a refreshing way to start the New Year off right.

5) Drive: Yup, I fell in love with this taught heist film as much as the next popcorn munching moviegoer of 2011. And yes, it lives up to the hype. Reminiscent of the flashy, stylized films of the 70s, Drive is a well-crafted suspense story with a strong plot balanced with just enough action. And just like the films in which it aims to pay homage, when things turn violent, they turn very violent. This film should garner some Oscar attention, particularly a well-deserved nomination for Albert Brooks in a role like you’ve never seen him before.

6) Beginners: Although this film came out relatively early in the year, it has remained in the consciousness of many reviews as one of the best of 2011, and for good reason. In addition to being a lovely and touching story about a man coming to terms with his father’s homosexuality, Christopher Plummer gives one of the best performances of the year as that father. If there is any justice in the world, Plummer will finally receive a statue come Oscar time.

7) A Better Life: I’m guessing you’ve never heard of this film, and that’s really too bad. A Better Life is an unusually universal story of family and financial struggles in America, focusing on the very real problems of an immigrant father. I particularly liked the way the teenage son was represented. It was fascinating to see how his Americanization, a thing his father sought, was literally pulling him farther and farther away from his parent and the traditions of family. Truly impressive is Demián Bichir’s performance as the father. It is a loving, and touching representation of a selfless parent unmatched by any other I have ever seen on screen.

8 ) The Forgiveness of Blood: This is another film you haven’t heard of, but I’m betting that by this time next year you will. The Forgiveness of Blood was for me one of the highlights of this year’s AFI Film Festival. Shot entirely in Albania, using local talent, director Joshua Marston once again brings to the screen a story unfamiliar to the lexicon of the average American, but one that will undoubtedly resonate with the viewer long after its inevitable conclusion. I particularly encourage those with teenagers to see this film with their kids, as it will give the parent and child a better appreciation for the simple problems of their own relationship compared to those in this tale.

9) The Tree of Life: I know a lot has been said about The Tree of Life, in praise and otherwise. However, strange dinosaur/evolution footage aside, this is a very good film, and oddly enough another one concerning the complications inherent to family life. Brad Pitt gives his finest performance to date as a complex father full of contradictions. He is wonderfully subtle in his presentation of a man who is just as tenderly loving as he is coldly unapproachable. This is the film of 2011 that will stay with you for a very long time.

10) The Other F Word: Unless you’re a documentary fan it’s likely you missed this gem of a film. All about Punk Rockers and their foray into parenting, the other F word in this case is fatherhood. At times this brilliant exploration into the private world of alternative rock’s iconic front men is as achingly funny as it is tenderly heartbreaking. The Other F Word proves that when it comes to family, the most anti-establishment individual can be just as loving and giving as the average dad down the street. In fact, he just may be the dad down the street, just as active in PTA meetings and daddy/daughter dances as the next guy. He just looks a little different. By far, The Other F Word is one of the best examples of never judging a book by its cover as I have ever seen. Every father, and every one with a father will enjoy this film, and leave with a better understanding of what it means to be a parent.

So there you have it. The RetroSpecht.com Top 10 Films of 2011. As I read through the list once again I see the theme of family returning again and again. Who would have though that in this day and age audiences would still be interested in such a standard theme. Or maybe it’s just me. But I don’t think so, and I am very glad to see the subject used to such wonderful and varied effect.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Guidelines for Being a Good Audience Member

Posted on December 28, 2011 by admin

It’s the holidays! And to paraphrase a popular seasonal song, it’s that time of year when the world falls in love with going to the movies. The kids are home from school, workdays are shortened, and lots of people are on vacation. It’s the ideal situation for catching up on all the films flooding theaters in preparation for Hollywood’s own favorite time of year: the awards season. So with so many people packing the theaters I ask you, as a fellow movie watcher, to remember a few common courtesies that will help keep the season bright for one and all.

I’m sure that you need no reminder of how to behave properly in a movie theater. However, you may find this list handy to share with your friends and family members. Ideally this list would be posted at the entrance of a theater, or handed out with the purchase of a ticket, but until that day comes we shall have to lead by example, and let it be known that some behavior, while perfectly acceptable in the privacy of your own home is best left there and is inexcusable in a public movie theater.

1) Don’t Talk:  This would seem to be an obvious statement to make, but we all know that people do it. I don’t care what the reason is it’s just plain inconsiderate to those around you. This includes talking during the opening titles. It may be no big deal to you, but the opening titles are a time to draw an audience into the mood of the picture. That’s difficult to do if people are talking. Far more annoying are the people who find it necessary to express out loud their thoughts during an important moment in the plot. It’s usually something that everyone in the audience is realizing at the same time. And since the filmmaker didn’t think it was necessary to provide an explanation in voice over, I don’t think anyone else should either.

2) Don’t Eat Like a Cow: I know it’s common to have a big bag of popcorn, some candy, or even a hot dog while watching a movie, but is it necessary to constantly shovel food into your mouth and then proceed to eat in a fashion you wouldn’t normally subject another living soul. We’re all aware of basic table manners. We should do our best to use them whether or not we’re actually at a table. This concept extends to drinks as well. I can forgive the accidental slurp of the straw, but when a drink is done, it’s done. Please remember the concession stand is only a few hundred feet away. You are not in the middle of the desert in danger of dying of thirst, so please don’t act like your life depends on getting that last drop from the bottom of the cup.

3) Don’t Fiddle Around with Wrappers: Just as eating makes a lot of noise, so does unwrapping the food. It’s a simple thing to resolve; just open all wrappers before the movie starts. Worse case scenario, and you’ve forgotten to break open the cellophane ahead of time – unwrap quickly. Nothing appears to be noisier than someone trying to open a wrapper slowly and quietly. It only prolongs the agony. Just like the guillotine; a quick smooth movement is much less painful for all those involved.

4) Don’t Chew Gum: Chewing gum in general is considered to be a rude habit, particularly since these days most people are incapable of chewing with their mouths closed. And unless you are a cow on a farm, there is no excuse for sounding as if you have cud in your mouth. The same goes for chewing the ice from your drink. Both are impossible to do without making noise that is disruptive to others. Remember, you are sitting in close proximity to others, far closer than you normally would to a total stranger. Would you want to listen to them incessantly chewing?

5) Don’t Press Your Feet into the Chair in Front of You: It’s bad enough when people place their feet atop an unoccupied seat as if they were at home in a lazy-boy, stretching out their cramped legs. But it’s unforgivable to press any part of your appendages into the back of another person’s seat. You wouldn’t do it to someone driving a car, would you? You apologize when you knock the back of a seat in an airplane, don’t you? So wouldn’t you think it likely to be very distracting to someone trying to give their undivided attention to a movie? The same can be said to those who switch crossed legs. Not an offense in itself, but please make an effort to avoid knocking the back of the chair in front of you when you do it.

6) Don’t Bring Infant Children to the Movies: Again, this seems like an obvious no-no, but it’s done more and more often, particularly when one considers the cost of a baby sitter added to the growing expense of theater tickets. But everyone else in the theater paid to see a movie. Why should they have to sit through the disruption of a child incapable of controlling their own behavior? I actually think it’s partly the theater’s responsibility to discourage parents from such a practice. Some theaters have special days and times set aside as Mommy/Daddy screenings where a parent can bring a child and the fellow moviegoers are already aware of the likelihood of disruption.

7) Don’t Sit Directly in Front of Someone If Avoidable: Most theaters theses days have raked seating, and stager the rows for optimal viewing for all audience members. To that end it’s up to us to seat ourselves intelligently. It’s understandable if a theater is filled to capacity and there are no other options, but to purposely sit directly in front of another patron when there are plenty of other seats available is just plain inconsiderate. And remember, that if the person you sit in front of is forced to move because you’re too tall, too loud, or otherwise obtrusive, they just might move to sit right in front of you.

8 ) Don’t Spread Your Germs Around: There was a day when everyone carried a handkerchief, and adults always had a cough drop, or a lifesaver. You know, something they could suck on if their throat got dry. But it seems that these days it’s extremely common for someone to sniffle, sneeze and cough their way through a feature film. Meanwhile, not only are they disturbing fellow audience members, but they are exposing the entire audience to whatever bug they brought with them into the theater. If you have to go to the movies when you’re in less than perfect health, please be prepared. Better yet, just stay home until you feel better and we’ll all be better off.

9) Don’t Use Your Cell Phone, Period: It seems that moviegoers have made some progress regarding cell phone use in the past ten years. It’s actually been a very long time since I last heard the ring of a cell phone in a movie theater. However, I can’t remember the last time I made it all the way through a film without seeing the glow of a cell phone screen. Somehow, many people ludicrously believe that checking to see whose call they just missed is acceptable behavior. Let’s make it perfectly clear that it is not. The only screen anyone should be watching in a movie theater is the big screen used to present the movie. And by no means is it ever all right to text! If what you’re doing in life is so important that others must be disturbed by your communication then get up and go outside. You’re not paying attention to the movie any way, so why not be considerate of those who are and come back when you’re done updating your busy life.

10) Don’t Be An Ass: If someone should catch you breaking one of these rules and asks you to stop, please be gracious enough to stop the offensive behavior. I was very impressed with the conduct of a young woman recently. She had been talking to a friend in a very animated conversation, and even though the lights had gone down, and the credits had begun, she continued as if she were not prepared to stop. Someone nearby very succinctly asked her to be quiet. She was noticeably embarrassed and apologized. More importantly, she didn’t talk the rest of the film. This is a far cry from the time when someone responded to my similar request with abject rudeness and a threat of physical violence. Obviously, most reactions are not as militant. But, most people naturally respond negatively to criticism of their personal behavior. It’s not necessary to apologize, but there’s no need to go to the other extreme either.

I don’t think any of the above rules are unreasonable. Although, I do understand it may be a lot to expect from a modern movie going audience. After all, it’s a known fact that the nature of film audiences have changed over the years, and will continue to do so as movies and how we view them expand beyond the scope of today. Home movie watching has had a noticeably adverse effect on the general behavior of audiences, and it seems that online streaming, and a virtually inexhaustible access to media through a plethora of personal devices will inevitably continue to contribute to this phenomenon. The result is the loss of a unique cultural event, and the transformation of what was once an ideal group experience into a battle for personal space. But in the meantime, if we can manage to adhere to some rules of common courtesy, then we can all enjoy a great American pastime without getting on each other’s nerves – at least for 90 minutes or so.

Posted in Commentary | Leave a comment

Outrage, The Latest Yakuza Film From Takeshi Kitano, Is Not To Be Missed By Any True Fan of the Genre

Posted on December 1, 2011 by admin

Anyone who is a yakuza movie fan will love Outrage, the latest US release written and directed by Japan’s legendary Takeshi Kitano (The Blind Swordsman: Zatoichi, Brother, Violent Cop). Besides being a fine example of the ultra violent Japanese mafia genre, Outrage features the director, also acting on screen utilizing his trademarked, stone-faced personae to maximum effect. One only wishes there was more screen time with “Beat” Takeshi’s hardened veteran of the gangland world and less time spent on the many peripheral and less interesting characters. In fact, the one fault of the film is that there are too many other gangsters to keep track of. But in this tale of power struggles and petty vengeances, fans are likely not to notice. The true yakuza movie devotee will revel in the abundant number of revenge killings and inventive deaths as the full blown yakuza war leads to its inevitable end.

True to form of any crime organization, Outrage focuses on the constant struggle for power: who has it, who wants it, and who can get it. As expected, it is a ruthless battle as clan leaders all vie for the favor of the most powerful family in the Japanese underworld. These rival under bosses seek to rise through the ranks by scheming and making sworn allegiances, regardless of the legitimacy of their oaths. Betrayal is constant and vengeance expected, as the never-ending struggle plays on to see who ends up on top. However, in this corrupt world there are no heroes, just a whole bunch of bad guys spiraling out of control until the struggle for power becomes one of mere survival with very few winners.

Rated R for violence, language, and brief sexuality, Outrage is presented in Japanese with English subtitles, but don’t let that dissuade you from seeing this powerhouse piece of cinema. The film has already played to great acclaim at the AFI and Cannes Film Festivals in 2010 and the Palm Springs International Film Festival this year. Along its celebrated run it has caught the attention of such critics as Maggie Lee of the Hollywood Reporter, who exclaimed that Outrage “bursts with direct cinematic power”… with, “humor as mean and dry as a straight-up martini”. And Rob Nelson at Variety called Outrage, “visually stunning. A beautifully staged marvel that confidently reasserts [director] Kitano’s considerable cinematic gifts”. I’d have to go along with those assessments, especially the one about the humor, which at times is so dry you’ll wonder if you really should be laughing or not.

Although the film may be a challenge to those unfamiliar with the yakuza style of movie or the director, I can’t emphasize enough how well Takeshi serves the genre. I first discovered his work when I saw an earlier film of his, Fireworks, at a film festival in 1998. I remember I was blown away with the amount of information Takeshi was able to convey with such straightforward performances and carefully crafted shots, utilizing very little movement from either the camera or the actors. There was clarity of intention present in every frame. After seeing Outrage, I was pleased to see that this ability has not waned over the years and I enjoyed the film for what it is and intended to be – a sold yakuza film. With that in mind, I am sure you will not be disappointed.

Posted in Reviews | 1 Comment

The Other F Word, A Touching Documentary on Punk Rock Fathers, Opens Friday, November 4th

Posted on November 3, 2011 by admin

The Other F Word is an insightful, funny, and often ironic tale of the traditional role of fatherhood seen through the eyes of the modern day icons of anti-authority – punk rock musicians. This very candid look into the every day lives of the punk scene’s living legends and their relationships with their offspring offers more than just a humorous take on the contradictions of play dates and mosh-pits. It gets to the very idea of fatherhood itself as the subjects of the film hold nothing back, revealing some complicated and emotional truths about their own fathers and what it means for the men of Generation X to be fathers themselves, punk or otherwise.

One of the things I like most about this film is that its style does not overshadow the subject. Told in a very traditional documentary manner, The Other F Word does not try to reinvent the genre, but holds fast to the standard tools of the documentary. Vintage footage is used to great effect to indoctrinate the unfamiliar, talking head interviews provide a previously inaccessible intimacy to the punk heroes of yesterday and today, and on-the-road, day-in-the-life concert shots of Jim Lindberg (the lead singer of Pennywise whose most recognized song is “Fuck Authority”) epitomizes the contradicting demands of family life and a world tour.

Most importantly, the filmmakers didn’t just scratch the surface, but reached out to some of the most recognized leading men of punk rock, including Blink-182′s Mark Hoppus, Red Hot Chili Peppers’ Flea, Rise Against’s Tim McIlrath, Art Alexakis (Everclear), Mark Mothersbaugh (Devo), Tony Adolescent (The Adolescents), Fat Mike (NOFX), Lars Frederiksen (Rancid), skater Tony Hawk, and many others. The stories these men tell of heartbreak and sacrifice, obstacles and challenges, and of just plain old everyday life, are as touching and loving as any I’ve heard from the most endearing and scripted Hollywood tale. One particularly poignant aspect running throughout the film is how much these men strive to be better fathers than their fathers were to them. This is a rather telling characteristic of those who have lashed out against authority and now find themselves to be the authority. It shows they were more than just angry young men, they wanted more, and now they are in a position to fulfill that need in their own kids.

To that end, these guys are attempting to be the hands-on fathers their dads either couldn’t, or wouldn’t be. Which is even more of a challenge today than it was for their dads considering the demanding world of music. Traditionally, fathers are gone all day making a living. But musicians obviously work differently, and they work a lot differently today than they use to. The Other F Word does a good job of laying down the facts that music just doesn’t pay like it use to through product sales. The money is in the concert tour. So for musicians, making a living means being on the road. The irony is these guys who want so much to be there for their kids have to be away from home, not just from nine to five, but for months in order to provide for their families. And that’s where the subjects themselves come to a better understanding of their own fathers, if not an all out forgiveness.

Easily my favorite documentary of the year, and likely one of my top ten favorites overall, The Other F Word managed to effect me in a way few other films ever have regardless of the genre. Not only did I leave the theatre with an infused appreciation for the modern day dad, but I also emerged from the experience with a broader tolerance for those with lifestyles different from my own. One particular scene of a hard-core looking guy taking his adorable little tot to the park reminded me of the tough looking men I know. Most are regular guys, but because of their appearance, I wouldn’t want to approach them if I didn’t already know them. But given the chance, tough guys are just as capable as anyone of the unconditional love required of good parenting.

Trust me, whether you’re a father, have a father, or know a father you’re going to enjoy this film, and more than likely walk away with a greater affection for all men who live up to that title.

Opening weekend of The Other F Word starts this Friday, November 4th at the Landmark Nuart, 11272 Santa Monica Boulevard, in Santa Monica right at the edge of the 405 Freeway. Q&A’s are scheduled during the weekend, including Saturday night with Mark Mothersbaugh of Devo, Jim Lindbergh of The Black Pacific (formerly of Pennywise) and Art Alexakis of Everclear. With this kind of a lineup don’t be surprised if there are some unscheduled guests that pop up as well.

To view the trailer just go to http://youtu.be/zZkWHZ3hJtY.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Ryan Gosling is the Ideal Neo-Noir Hero in Drive

Posted on September 16, 2011 by admin

Noir or Neo-Noir, what’s the big difference? Well, a lot more than just color or black and white photography. But the key element of a mysterious, yet sympathetic man caught up in events beyond his control is an essential factor in either case. In Ryan Gosling’s new film, Drive the young actor fulfills the personification of this description and demonstrates a more mature, and nuanced approach to his craft as he takes on his most challenging role to date. I don’t think it’s too much to say that Gosling in Drive can be compared favorably to Robert Mitchum in Out of the Past and Richard Gere in American Gigolo. In short, Gosling is Noir’s latest troubled hero.

I saw Drive at this year’s Los Angeles Film Festival, and I was very impressed. Not only does the film offer an amazing cast in roles as they have never been seen, but it offers a modern spin on a dated genre. I’m not talking about the heist film, but the Noir, or more specifically, the Neo-Noir. Although the previews would have you believe otherwise, the reality is that anyone going into Drive expecting an action packed heist film full of car chases and violence will be woefully disappointed.

Drive does have some pretty exceptional moments of action, and there are scenes of sudden and shocking violence (Christina Hendricks’ bathroom brawl will evoke memories of Patricia Arquette in True Romance). However, the thrust of the film is placed upon Gosling’s relationship with a married young mother and his honorable desire to keep her safe. It is this story full of sexual tension, palpable angst, and unfulfilled desires (physical and otherwise) that you should expect to see when the lights go down. Then your expectations will be satisfied rather than short changed, and you’ll undoubtedly enjoy the bonus of surprise twists (of which there are many) regardless of the level of violence.

The exceptional cast includes Carey Mulligan (An Education, Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps) as the woman of interest. Her demure, yet intense performance of an earnestly conflicted woman is overshadowed only by the powerhouse portrayals provided by the rest of the ensemble. Bryan Cranston (Malcolm in the Middle, Breaking Bad) offers a unique spin on a sidekick who acts as Goslings connection between the life of a stunt driver and the life of a getaway man. Yet even more surprising is comedian Albert Brooks (Modern Romance, Defending Your Life) playing a vicious crime boss bent on retrieving some stolen money and flexing his authority in the process. Brooks’ Bernie Rose is nothing like anything you’ve ever seen him do before, and undoubtedly there will be plenty of Oscar buzz around his bravado performance. The Academy should take notice and give Brooks a well-deserved nomination for Best Supporting Actor.

The film as a whole lives up to the expectations of a modern, or Neo-Noir due in large part to a well-executed story (based on a book by James Sallis) helmed by a bright young voice, (director Nicolas Winding Refn) and Goslings’ pitch perfect performance. I would have never thought that a blonde, blue-eyed man could have pulled it off, but having seen the film I’m definitely a believer. Gosling’s Mitchum-esque mystique combined with his Gere like sexuality ensures him a well-earned place among the memorable men of Noir, neo or otherwise.

To listen to a roundtable discussion with Ryan Gosling just follow this link to the www.dawsbrothers.com/ and scroll down to the bottom of the Drive article. The interview between Gosling and eight others including myself was recorded September 7th at the Four Seasons Hotel. Gosling discusses his latest film and gives a glimpse into what’s coming up next in his busy career.

Posted in Reviews | 1 Comment

Brighton Rock, a British Thriller Revitalizes the Noir

Posted on August 27, 2011 by admin

If you want to experience filmmaking as it used to be at the height of the Golden Age of Hollywood, then you’ve got to see Brighton Rock. With its palpable atmosphere and impeccably nuanced mise-en-cine, Brighton Rock may well be the most authentic Noir since the Big Studios reigned supreme.

There was a time when the Noir held a place of distinction within the film world. However, over the years the moody and atmospheric genre has fallen out of favor. Some could say it’s because audience’s tastes have changed, but I would have to disagree and place the blame on the filmmakers. After all, it has been proven time and again that if a movie is good, regardless of the genre, people will see it.

Such was the case with the Western, Dances with Wolves, and the Musical, Chicago. Both films bore the stigma of genres that were long considered box office poison, and both films went on to win the Academy Award for Best Picture of the Year. And now the Noir receives its well-deserved resurrection care of the gritty and stylish Brighton Rock. Not only is it a damn good film that people will want to see, it rejuvenates the genre long considered beyond reviving.

Brighton Rock’s well-crafted world rings true to the aesthetic required of the genre. The film, an update of a 1946 film based on a Graham Greene novel, is set in a picturesque seaside resort full of shady characters and nefarious activities. The year is now 1964, a time when Britain’s Mods and Rockers were often found rioting in the streets. A young punk named Pinkie (newcomer Sam Riley) is entrenched in the world of organized crime, longing to become top man.

When his mentor is suddenly killed Pinkie’s darkest ambitions rise to the surface. And it is a sad twist of fate when a naïve young woman (Andrea Riseborough) ends up an unknowing witness to his act of violence. Easily seduced by Pinkie’s attentions, she falls in love with the mysterious young man, not realizing his motives are sinister at best. As Pinkie becomes more and more ensnared in his web of deceit, he must avoid the police, calm his disgruntled crew, and contend with the mob’s kingpin, while playing cat and mouse with two local proprietors (Helen Mirren and John Hurt) looking for revenge of their own.

Riley (Control, On the Road) gives a stunning performance as the intense and cunning Pinkie. His brooding good looks bring to mind a young Johnny Depp, but darker and edgier, void of any boyishness (other than the kind you might find in Damien from The Omen). Likewise, Riseborough (Made in Dagenham, Never Let Me Go) is thoroughly convincing as the misguided waif whose sincere devotion will make your heart ache as she withstands degradation after degradation, all in the name of love. And with true female bravado,, Helen Mirren serves up one of the juiciest performances ever devised for a mature woman of the screen. Already designated Body of the Year, the 60-plus diva may very well end up actress of the year, reinforcing her title of “The Queen”.

As impressive as Brighton Rock is, what’s particularly noteworthy is the fact that this is director Rowan Joffe’s first feature film. Faced with the temptation of comparing Joffe’s own exceptional debut with that of Orson Welles’, I refuse to claim that Brighton Rock is akin to Citizen Kane. However, this perfectly realized Noir is certainly one of the best examples of its genre, in this or any decade. Its quality and execution hold up to the high standards established by the two most celebrated masters of the genre, Billy Wilder (Double Indemnity) and the previously mentioned Welles (Touch of Evil). Not only is Brighton Rock the best film I’ve seen all summer, it may be the best I’ll see all year.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments

Battle for Brooklyn: A Fascinating Documentary that Examines the Power of Big Business and the Rights of the Individual

Posted on August 21, 2011 by admin

The documentary Battle for Brooklyn is a true David and Goliath story reshaped for the modern age of capitalism. The David in this case is a young man, Daniel Goldstein who at the beginning of the film has recently purchased an apartment in Brooklyn with the intent of starting a family. The Goliath is a huge development company with plans to build a massive sporting facility and surrounding buildings right where Goldstein’s apartment building (as well as many other buildings and businesses) already exist. With the promise of thousands of jobs for the community and armed with the weapon of “eminent domain” the development company takes advantage of the law and public opinion to push their project through.

However, according to the dictionary “eminent domain” is a law that gives a government or its agent the right to expropriate private property for public use. You know, like for highways or parks and such. Since the project in this case was being developed for private use, by a private company it appeared to Goldstein that the intent of “eminent domain” was being misused, regardless of the supposed benefit to the community. So the young graphic designer spearheads a campaign to oppose the development, and sticks with the fight for more than 7 years!

First of all, I found it compelling that any documentary filmmaker would stick with a subject for seven years. You’d think they’d get bored with it. However, once you’re in this story it’s easy to become engrossed, and the filmmakers were very clever about pulling the audience in as quickly as possible. Using the camera almost like Goldstein’s conjoined twin, empathy is developed virtually instantly as the audience experiences his life, the triumphs and the set backs, first hand. And because Goldstein is constantly talking to the camera, the audience is seamlessly pulled into the narrative as a trusted confidant. Therefore, within a short time it is no longer just Goldstein’s cause, but “our” cause he’s fighting for.

Which is exactly the point the filmmakers are successfully making. If the law can be so easily misused, then this exact same thing could happen to any individual property owner, even you. With that in mind, it’s pretty damn compelling to see how a big corporation can come along and literally procure property it finds desirable for its own needs. To be fair, adequate, if not extravagant, compensation was part of the equation, but the scary part is that no one is given the option to decline. Is that legal in America?

The story of Battle for Brooklyn reminds me of another documentary I saw not too long ago at the Los Angeles Film Festival called Paraiso for Sale. It too focuses on the property and homes of individuals being snatched up by big development companies while the government stands by and does nothing. But Paraiso for Sale was set in Panama! I distinctly remember thinking this could never happen in America. Regardless of the potential benefits to a community, and the limited number of people negatively affected, I believed our government would never stand by and let such unfair practices take place. As evidenced here, I was apparently very wrong.

Holding true to Goldstein’s motto, “Develop… Don’t Destroy”, Battle for Brooklyn stands as a fine example of true documentary filmmaking by presenting the facts (albeit from one perspective) as they appear. There is no overt “demonization” of the corporate entity or the people who represent it. Their actions speak for themselves, and one is left with the sense that the developers and their supporters truly believe that what they are doing is for the greater good. But that does not make the ends justify the means. Perhaps, in future, those purposing to take a same tact in development projects should watch Paraiso for Sale and Battle for Brooklyn back to back, and then remember we are not a third world country, so let’s not behave like one.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Amigo, John Sayles’ First Film in Four Years was Worth the Wait

Posted on August 19, 2011 by admin

John Sayles’ latest film, Amigo, is the tale of a small Filipino village and its struggles during the Philippine-American War. This beautifully realized historical drama is classic Sayles filmmaking at its best. It satisfies the devoted art house fan by remaining socially minded, while providing the commercial audience an extremely satisfying emotional experience.

I don’t want to give too much away since much of the pleasure of Amigo derives from the suspenseful intrigue that unfolds. I will tell you that like many a taut political thriller, Amigo begins with the depiction of an idyllic day in a quiet little community. However, this community is in the middle of a Filipino Island around the turn of the 20th century. The picturesque scene appears to be a paradise until a small contingent of Rough Riders charges into town and seizes command for no apparent reason except the fact that this place stands between two other points of interest. After a small but chaotic scuffle, the foreigners enforce their authority upon the local leader, Rafael, who vehemently pronounces himself as a friend, or “amigo”. Thus the title, and the central conflict are established.

Despite sincere efforts of cooperation by both Rafael and a disenchanted American Lieutenant (a very compassionate Garret Dillahunt), the situation grows beyond their control. In addition to the inhabitants’ desire to self-govern, peaceful coexistence is obstructed by several other factors including a hostile priest deserted by the Spanish, a band of rebels led by Rafael’s brother, and an overly aggressive Colonel bent on dominating, if not destroying, the indigenous people. Amigo stays true to the authenticity of the historical conflict, ending with a viscerally unsettling and harrowing depiction of the casualties of political unrest.

Like many of his past films (Matewan, Men with Guns) Sayles has created a powerhouse of a film that achieves an admirable task, that of conveying a complicated political scenario in a manner that any audience can comprehend. Case in point: me. Going into the movie, I was concerned that I might not understand it, because (to state it bluntly) I don’t know a damn thing about this specific episode in American history. As it turns out, it doesn’t matter, because the story focuses on the immediate conflicts at hand for Rafael, rather than to the grander objectives of a military commander, a society, or a nation. If only more films of a political nature could be expressed in such basic terms, they’d find wider acceptance and a bigger audience.

Rafael’s responsibilities to his fellow villagers don’t change; it’s just that the scope of his decisions graduate from settling petty differences in the beginning of the film to shaping the course of his people by the end of the film. The stakes are higher and the ramifications are significantly more complicated. So, naturally, the numbers of dissenting voices are greater as well. For Rafael and his fellow villagers, life is no longer a simple matter of black and white, but an increasing array of grays. This painful transition is beautifully conveyed through the expressive face of Rafael, played to great effect by the exceedingly likable Joel Torre.

Torre is a very popular Filipino Soap Opera star who is likely to be seen a lot more on the American screen after Amigo. I wouldn’t be surprised if his heartfelt performance earns Torre some serious Oscar consideration. Likewise, the entire cast is worthy of exceeding praise. Whether it’s the always-exceptional Chris Cooper putting a human face on an extremely unlikable Colonel, or a relatively unknown Ronnie Lazaro as Rafael’s brother and leader of the local guerillas who passionately personifies the communal anguish, the actors in Amigo bring a vitality and strength to their roles that is rarely seen in historical films without sliding into melodrama.

With all its political machinations, human rights issues and astute observations on war and its effect upon the human soul, the most lasting impression Amigo will leave you with is its amazing relevance to the modern world. Because even though the story may be set in another time and another place, the same basic conflicts are being played out today. And therein lies John Sayles’ greatest talent – the ability to hold a mirror to the world and present a palatable reflection. Audiences tend to reject entertainment if a lesson is to be learned, and yet many lessons can be learned if they are engaging. John Sayles has mastered this skill and once again manages to entertain regardless of the worthy message. Lesson learned.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Why the Final Harry Potter Film Failed

Posted on August 11, 2011 by admin

I know that current popular opinion holds Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 in high regard. However, I cannot subscribe to that assessment. In fact, I find the final installment to the highly successful fantasy series to be hugely disappointing. And I say that as a loving and devoted fan. One who is utterly shocked that there hasn’t been an abundant outpouring of likeminded reactions from fans everywhere. Have people seen the same film I saw? I suspect that fans and critics alike are being far too forgiving toward a beloved franchise either due to loyalty or fear of displeasing the masses with an opinion that, however different from the standard, may actually reveal some sad truths. Let’s face it folks, Deathly Hallows 2 was not the film it should have been, or could have been and there’s just no reason for the filmmakers to have made that egregious error.

Some people will inevitably say that there’s no pleasing everyone, but that’s too easy an excuse. My argument has little to do with faithfulness to the book and a lot more to do with production value. Admittedly, I may be harder to please than the average moviegoer, as I have spent a lot of time on film sets and have an extensive background in film studies, but so what? In this day and age I don’t think that really matters any more. Today’s film fan has a vast amount of ‘insider” access and practical knowledge available to them through various avenues of the media. Which is why I get so annoyed with films that seem to have been produced with the attitude of “oh well, that’s good enough”.

I blame the director, David Yates for all of the film’s shortcomings. Yates has been the director for the last four Harry Potter films, and the many faults of the latest installment have slowly infiltrated the otherwise well-developed franchise while under his watch. When it comes to today’s multi-million dollar productions you shouldn’t be able to get away with diluted story lines, brushed over plot points, second-rate set designs, truncated performances, uninspired cinematography and the reliance of the fan base to get you through. No, you shouldn’t, but Deathly Hallows did.

I guess my greatest complaint is that I feel cheated. We all know that Harry Potter movies are given the time and money to do things right, and yet it didn’t show on the screen in Deathly Hallows. Too often the sets looked cheap, as if they had been built in segments isolated from one another. Most of the scenes are shot in close up, seldom giving any sense of a place in its entirety. Makes you wonder if the producers had difficulty in getting all of the big name British actors in one place as needed, and had to film coverage hodge-podge as people became available. Either way, the result is that the film has a very stagy feeling, which of course dilutes any illusion to a fantasy world.

Regardless of how the performances were captured they seemed rushed. Again, I place the fault with Yates. After all, these are experienced actors, many of whom are Shakespearian trained. All you need to do is let them go and they’ll be great, if not spectacular. That is, unless you mess up their hard work with insufficient coverage and bad editing, both determined by the director. Academy Award winning actress Maggie Smith is given the best consideration, but even her McGonagall is hardly allowed the screen presence her character deserved (no dénouement moment with Harry after the final battle? Really!). It’s bad enough that many of the pivotal characters we’ve come to cherish have been reduced to hardly more than glorified extras (Remus, Mr. & Mrs. Weasley, Fred & George, Slughorn, Trelawney), but to deny Alan Rickman the opportunity of fully conveying a performance that may very well have been Oscar worthy is an absolute injustice. His Professor Snape always possessed the gravitas necessary to impart what was to be a major revelation in an epic journey, one that has taken a decade to tell. But by clipping a shot here, and not lingering a moment longer there, Yates has literally stolen the well-deserved nomination from Rickman’s hands. I consider this to be gross negligence.

As I said before, I feel cheated. But it’s more than that. There is sadness in knowing that this is it, and there will be no other attempt at getting it right. Harry Potter is not like Tarzan or Sherlock Holmes where various attempts will be made through the ages to create a definitive representation. There will be no re-boots or re-imaginings here. This was it, and when it came down to the finale it fell short of achieving its fullest potential. I know that as the years pass, others will feel the same. Because, regardless of the oft-misused declaration of a film being an “instant” classic, it requires the passage of time to truly evaluate the accomplishments of any given film. In this case I think that’s certainly so. Only time will tell.

Posted in Reviews | Tagged , | 2 Comments