What I’ve Seen

[NOTE: This post was actually written by Alex Stroup.]

I’ve unexpectedly been on the road a lot the last couple weeks so I haven’t been saying much. In the vein of Brian’s Quick Takes here is what I’ve seen recently.

The Hills Have Eyes – I’m not really a fan of gore films and I have never seen the original 1977 version, but I had a couple hours to kill between meetings and this fit into the time slot so I figured I’d give it a try. It actually does a decent job of building and maintaining the tension but I still don’t really understand the appeal of a movie that seems to have goal other than filling the screen with gore.

Pollyanna (1960) - I hadn’t seen this Disney saccharine classic since I was maybe 10 years old. I remember rolling my eyes at it back then but I was surprised to find that up until the super-sweet ending it’s actually a decent family film. Watching it highlights the regrettable fact that much of “family entertainment” made these days is done ironically and I don’t know that this is so good for the kids watching it.

Inside Man – Spike Lee is a mixed bag for me. Some films are brilliant (Do the Right Thing (1989), Clockers (1995)) while others are just a mess (Jungle Fever (1991), Summer of Sam (1999)). But I am very interested in seeing what Lee will do with such an overtly commercial film. I think it was Ebert who noted that the tangents are more interesting than the substance of the film and I would have to agree with that. The heist itself is tight and only once resorts to the “Omniscient Villain” copout that I so despise. But it was also obvious and with insufficient payoff for having sat through two-hours of movie. Also, Jodie Foster’s presence in the film was pointless other than to pad the time. Overall I liked it though.

A History of Violence – This one has been sitting with me and I’m still trying to decide what I think of it. Before I’ll be able to decide for sure I need to come to terms with what I think was going on with the Maria Bello character after she learns the truth. I suspect that the other 90 minutes of the movie is merely the vehicle for delivering to us those 6 minutes of film. I enjoyed the movie while watching and am intrigued by what I’ll find in her and myself in thinking about it further.

Good Luck, and Good Night – My bachelor’s degree is in American History and while my main focus was the antebellum period from Andrew Jackson to the Civil War I also spent a lot of time on the anti-communism immediately following World War II (Russia had only recently fallen and very interesting primary source documentation was starting to come out of there). So perhaps I have too much of an understanding of the events of that time period to place as much importance on Edward R. Murrow’s McCarthian defiance. It was important but it was much more an imprimatur on an existing defiance than the movie depicts. Still very tightly made by Clooney and I love the decision to go black-and-white and use actual McCarthy footage. Also, I think the film mostly sticks to the important lesson of the period. McCarthy was actually right in his general accusations more than the left likes to admit, but that is completely irrelevant since he was wrong in his methods every time. The movie, by focusing on the latter does well.

Thank You For Smoking – I’ve read the book on which this is based and while the satire in that was biting, I felt that it simply tried to carry the joke too long (like a bad SNL skit) and began to fray by the end. I was hopeful that the more time limited nature of a film would help with this but apparently it just made it worse as I felt the joke was played out about halfway through the movie. And worse, the satire, even while it was going strong, wasn’t as sharp as in the book. I try not to review movies in comparison to the source material but in this case I’m failing and was just left disappointed by the movie.

Hair (1979) – Watched about 40 minutes of this musical before turning it off, putting it back in the mailer, and having it on its way back to Netflix 10 minutes later. It was just that bad.

Slither – I saw this one solely because my wife wanted to. And she wanted to see it solely because it stars Nathan Fillion (of Serenity and Firefly) and also because the TV commercial compared it to Tremors (1990), a movie she loves. The comparison to tremors is actually a pretty good one and if you liked that movie you have a fair chance of liking this one (even with more of a focus on the gross-out). On a scale of one to ten, where ten equals Tremors and one equals Eight Legged Freaks (2002), I’d call Slither an 8.

Quick Takes: March 10 – March 30

The Libertine: Very dull and very unpleasant, from Johnny Depp’s undisciplined performance to the very ugly cinematography to a third act that makes one wish man had never acquired the sense of sight. I’ve admired Depp for a long time, but like with a great band, part of being a fan is recognizing when someone’s lost their touch. With this and Charlie released in the last year, and two more Pirates on the way, I really have to wonder about the guy. Oh, and this is yet another nail in the Weinsteins’ coffin, too.

Winter Passing: Another movie that doesn’t quite seem to have a reason for existing, and proof positive that Will Ferrell cannot act. He’s absolutely brutal. And director Adam Rapp never figures out basic things like “mood” and “tone”, making the material seem even more sketchy than it already is (and it’s pretty sketchy).
I find Zooey Deschanel very appealing, though, so it’s not a total loss.

Find Me Guilty: I’ve got to hand it to Vin Diesel, as this is a tricky part and he actually handles it quite well. The movie itself works OK, because Sidney Lumet does know things like “mood” and “tone”. But again, when all is said and done there doesn’t seem to be much of a point. Mobster tells jokes in court for a year, and then … the trial ends, everybody slaps each other on the back, credits roll. Franky, it’s not really all that compelling of a story. Still, great, great acting in supporting roles by many, but especially Peter Dinklage, who should get an Oscar nomination next year (fat chance, though) and Raúl Esparza, as a key informant.

Unknown White Male: Deathly dull documentary about an amnesiac, directed by some schmuck who thinks he’s the next Darren Aronofsky. I’ve never seen a documentary that’s so over-directed. And, I’m sorry, but the premise is lame. A guy can’t remember anything; sucks for him, but the film doesn’t try to make anything of it, aside from some overwritten pop psychology in the prologue and epilogue about identity and what makes us unique and so on. Instead, it mostly consists of him meeting friends, while he says, I don’t remember them. He meets family, and puzzles about being unable to remember. He looks through his stuff, and says he can’t remember. You can see where this is not exciting.

Duck Season: Small, reasonably charming black-and-white Mexican film about a couple of bored teenage kids wasting an afternoon. One of the neighbor girls invites herself into the kitchen to bake a cake, and a delivery man brings them pizza but won’t leave. Hijinks obviously ensue. The film doesn’t really go anywhere, but hey, that’s life.