Showing posts with label 2009. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2009. Show all posts
Thursday, December 17, 2015
Review: Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009)
There is a strange Soderbergh parallel here, more than this movie is an Ocean's 11 clone with impossibly more delightful characters and an actual confrontation with Role and Consequences. It is somewhat of a reawakening for the director after having a rough go of it with production and execution in two different films. I think he decided to finally start yelling at people to get his shit made the way he wanted it. GOOD. Even if Anderson was confined to only using a string of exclamation points, he managed to pull together an excellent, highly unpredictable cauldron of stop-motion delight that incorporates all of that early-career magic with the newer strictly storybook style, every new scene packed tight with world-building set pieces and quickfire zingers. Even the characters are wonderful, despite having Noah Baumbach's name attached to the script. We're back in country western territory, put on your bandit hat.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Review: Moon (2009)

ABRIDGED SCRIPT/REVIEW FORMAT STOLEN FROM ROD HILTON BUT CURSE MY INABILITY TO MAKE IT LOOK AS GOOD
MOON
INT. GROUND STATION ON THE MOON
Sam Rockwell, tired of reading Merriam-Webster's definition of "Unfortunate Misfire" and only seeing the poster for Watchmen there, decides to mine for Moonium on the moon.
SAM ROCKWELL
I'm so glad I can be such an asset to this corporation and for everyone on Earth relying on this life-saving energy source. How prescient. Speaking of which, I think I get to go back soon, right Robot?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Yes, Sam, and it is very exciting. Would you a haircut or some dinner before you go?
SAM ROCKWELL
Sure, pal. Y'know, you seem... very intelligent for an articulated arm and some ball-bearings. We can carry on complex conversations and all. Why can't the company just put you in charge of this operation?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Because, Sam, that would spoil the secret concept operating behind the plot of this movie.
SAM ROCKWELL
Secret concept? I thought this was going to be about me going crazy from loneliness. What else could it be about?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Oh, you'll see...
EXT. OBVIOUS MINIATURE MOON LANDSCAPE
Sam Rockwell does work type-things in a crawler vehicle as his loneliness increases.
SAM ROCKWELL
Strange nightmares about my wife back on Earth, daylight hallucinations... I have to be going crazy. Even the awesome trailer for this movie said so. I- hey, what's that?
SAM is distracted by a THING, crashes his vehicle, and loses consciousness.
CUT TO:
INT. GROUND STATION
Sam Rockwell 2 suddenly wakes up on a hospital gurney.
SAM ROCKWELL 2
Jesus, what the fuck just happened?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
You had an accident, Sam, and you need to rest. Please don't let my repeated insistence make you suspicious or anything.
SAM ROCKWELL 2
Wow, you seem... very sophisticated, enough to be bad at lying. They really should have just let you man the station. Also, how did I get back here?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
STOP PRE-RUINING THE MOVIE. Now go to sleep and don't try to leave or anything.
Kevin Spacey-Bot floats away to do SECRET STUFF. Sam 2 follows and catches a snippet of a conversation between him and some CORPORATE SUITS on a monitor.
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Sam, what a shock to see you out of bed. Did you catch any
of that?
SAM ROCKWELL 2
Just enough to be incriminating, but oddly enough, my only question is why you're using the monitor. If you're connected to the station's systems, you could bypass any interface to send a message. It's just data.
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Very interesting, I will contemplate this-
Sam 2 busts open a valve that spills cheap CGI while Kevin Spacey-Bot is distracted.
SAM ROCKWELL 2
Oh fuckle. Guess this means I have to go outside and fix it.
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Damn the conspirators' inability to make vital systems unavailable to you, thus making it easy to figure out THE SECRET.
CUT TO:
EXT. MINIATURE MOONSCAPE
Sam Rockwell 2 takes a spare spacesuit and a spare crawler (it had some) out to the site of the crawler accident. There he finds... another Sam Rockwell! Uh... the first one to be exact!
CUT TO:
INT. GROUND STATION
Injured SAM ROCKWELL 1 wakes up on a hospital bed with SAM ROCKWELL 2 brooding in the background.
SAM ROCKWELL 1
This is odd... there appears to be two of me. How weird. I will continue to have a nonplussed to reaction to this and only sorta try to figure this situation out, as it is progressing totally unlike what I imagined. Uh... Robot?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
No help from me until you ask again later.
(wheels away clunkily)
SAM ROCKWELL 1
And what about you, Other Me?
SAM ROCKWELL 2
Not really up for it. I mean, I was up for breaking shit a half an hour ago because of the tiniest of reasons, but now that I'm confronted with this huge proof of SOMETHING WRONG, I'm opting to be an insufferable dick for a bit, just to show off my ability to act to myself.
He does that for an incredibly irritating amount of time.
SAM ROCKWELL 1
Okay, then. I wonder... for what reasons would I be having this hallucination? Why would I feel the need to split myself apart? Perhaps this is an id/ego thing, and sooner or later the superego is going to show up and explain it all. Or it has no meaning, other than my psyche creating a conflict to combat the mundane activies on the station. Surely some complex psychological reasons are afoot-
SAM ROCKWELL 2
I got it. We're clones.
SAM ROCKWELL 1
... Clones, did you say?
SAM ROCKWELL 2
Yes.
SAM ROCKWELL 1
... Okay, why?
SAM ROCKWELL 2
Think about it, man. It's cheaper for a company to-
SAM ROCKWELL 1
No no no no! This is one of those movies?! It can't be! You're just jumping to the first available conclusion. It's early yet, something else will develop.
SAM ROCKWELL 2
(long pause)
Help me look for the secret door to the clone facility.
SAM ROCKWELL 1
Jesus H Chist! Robot, this shit isn't true, is it?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Afraid so, Sam. Right on the money.
SAM ROCKWELL 1
But how, how is that right on the money? Even if we are clones, they wouldn't keep the cloning facility here. What if we happened to stumble across it? Besides, Robot has no way of transporting us from the growth tube to the hospital gurney. How-
Sam Rockwell 2 kicks open a hatch and they find the hidden room with a bunch of clones.
SAM ROCKWELL 1
... Well, I'll be damned.
SAM ROCKWELL 2
Convinced?
SAM ROCKWELL 1
Only that this is fucking retarded. Look at the size of this fucking room. Explain to me how this is cheaper.
SAM ROCKWELL 2
I don't have time to explain how it's cheaper. I forgot to mention that I caught Robot ordering a rescue team to our location. Since the company has done nothing but lie to us so far, obviously "Medivac" means "Kill Squad" in corporate lingo.
SAM ROCKWELL 1
Just as much of a leap as your other theory, but that turned out to be true, so this is too I guess. I mean, it's still stupid. We're on the fucking moon. They can deny us any means of communication and therefore any method of exposing THE SECRET, right Robot?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Actually, Sam, you'd be surprised how much is available on this rock. Just enough for everything to go wrong with their operation, actually.
SAM ROCKWELL 2
That means there must be an antennae jamming the signal to Earth! Quickly, let's go find it!
SAM ROCKWELL 1
Goddammit...
Sam Rockwell 2 goes and does that for a bit while Clint Mansell uses ambient noises to produce a score. Sam Rockwell 1 drives around too but gives up because he's bored. And sick and whatnot.
INT. GROUND STATION
SAM ROCKWELL 1
Robot, I'd like more confirmation on this matter. How would I go about getting that?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Easy, Sam.
Robot plays tapes of all the other Sam Rockwell clones getting sick and also getting vaporized in a chamber that is supposed to send them home.
SAM ROCKWELL 1
Well, they're consistently terrible conspirators, at least. Although the smart thing to do would be to vaporize me before I start getting sick.
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
That would eliminate opportunites to be lazily tragic. Speaking of which, Other Sam has found a way through the jamming signal. Would you like to call your wife and daughter on Earth?
SAM ROCKWELL 1
Am I going to say anything useful to them?
KEVIN SPACEY-BOT
Oh heavens no.
Sam 1 does that, then gets sick some more. Sam 2 returns, having found the jamming dish.
SAM ROCKWELL 2
I say we smuggle you into the Moonium capsule and send you home while I stay here and hold off the away team.
SAM ROCKWELL
Nah, why don't you go? I'm too depressed about the way this all turned out to care about going to Earth. But aren't you worried that the Moonium Capsule won't keep you alive?
SAM ROCKWELL 2
I'll bring an air tank.
SAM ROCKWELL
But what about the temperature? And the entry into the Earth's- you know what, fuck it, I'm sure it will be fine.
SAM ROCKWELL 2
One more thing we need to do is have Robot create one more clone, so they think we're both still here for as long as possible.
SAM ROCKWELL
But won't they kill the new clone immediately? Doesn't that go against this entire theme of "Every life, even that of a clone, is precious"?
SAM ROCKWELL 2
(shrugging)
Feh.
Sam Rockwell 2 erases Kevin Spacey-Bot's memory by pressing one button and rockets away in capsule while Sam Rockwell 1 stays behind and is killed by the very mean Medivac team.
INT. MOONIUM CAPSULE
SAM ROCKWELL 2
Hmm. Maybe Sam 1 was making sense... how is this cheaper for a corporation to do? Why couldn't they hire a team of illegal immigrants with no social security numbers? They do dangerous work for practically nothing. Maybe illegal immigration isn't a problem in the future...
The CODA tells us that it is.
THE END
5.4/10
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Review: Inglourious Basterds (2009)

I have a strange relationship with this film. Seeing it in the theatre, I admired it at the time for having dialogue scenes lasting longer than five minutes and portraying historically notorious villains with things like motivations and personality, especially in an era where most films consider it unnecessary. On this day, where the projector failed FOR REAL during an important moment at the climax, I was left unsure about certain misgivings but felt content to say that the above aspects were what saved it.
Finally seeing it again, all the way through... I'm not so sure anymore.
There was a time when Quentin Tarantino's fragmented films could stand up to the highest levels of scrutiny. His scripts for True Romance and Natural Born Killers passed the ultimate test: being placed in chronological order. Jackie Brown, which now seems like a different century altogether, was his worst (unless you count Four Rooms) but remains interesting in repeat viewings; it has strong characters and a strong script, and the worst aspect of it is, dare I say it, the style he chose to do it in.
After a short hiatus, entering this sort of grace period wrought with denial on my part, Kill Bill is released in two "volumes" and carries some problems Tarantino's previous films don't have. Then Death Proof, part of a larger Grindhouse project and a little difficult to hold up to the same level of scrutiny, also has problems that one can forgive only if the rest is deemed worth the effort.
Now to Inglourious Basterds, and it's time to declare the grace period OVER. Tarantino had been talking about this film for awhile, and I don't know what I imagined other than "How is he going to fit a trunk POV shot into the story? Do WWII tanks have trunks?" For awhile, I think Michael Madsen and John Travolta were in it as Vega grandfathers and the title was "Untitled World War Two Epic." What would that film have been like?
Better, maybe. I'm told that, if this is a remake, it shares about as much kinship with the original Bastards as John Carpenter's The Thing does with the 50's version. Here, not even in name! So it's either a complete reimagining of the original with very little sense of loyalty to it, or it's an original screenplay retitled to tie into a 70's zeitgeist, as if his stlye weren't enough. Or he couldn't think of a better title.
Conspiracy theory time: this could be another case of Tarantino being dicked around by the Weinsteins. They used a Hanzo sword to cut Kill Bill into two separate releases, undermarketed the Grindhouse project, and shooting down the 'Once Upon a Time in Nazi-Occupied France' title, they say "Well, you can't put Bastard in a title. Fix it." And I think that same pressure forced Tarantino to make, I'll use his words, a "leaner, more concise film." Let's break it down.
1) Villains are introduced.
2) Title characters are introduced.
3) Third lead introduced/revenge plot formed.
4) Brief scene in Britain introducing a character that will die in the subsequent scene.
We are now halfway through a 2 1/2 hour movie.
5) Title characters appear in their second scene, half of them die.
6) Third lead refines revenge plot/title characters refine assassination plot.
7) Climax with all characters.
With the words 'leaner, more concise' reverberating in the background, I can see where those missing scenes would go. In a perfect world, Inglourious Basterds would be a well-researched but dramatically-deviated action film set during WWII. Brad Pitt would spend over half the film on a Nazi-killing warpath unbound by the Geneva Convention. Meanwhile, paralleling Patton's advance on Europe, the top brass could find ways to channel this into a strategic advantage, eventually happening upon the assassination plot to end the war. While this is going on, and entirely unrelated subplot about a Jewish girl escaping execution and stumbling across an opportunity to wreak vengeance on the man who killed her family is hatched coincidentally at the same time the Basterds' plot is to go down. Will she fuck up the plan? Who will survive? In a perfect world, this film would be 4 hours long.
On Shadow Earth, it's probably fantastic. Here, on Normal Earth (is it called Normal Earth?), we have to settle for the above bullet points. Point 1 is a brilliant way to begin the film, like Sergio Leone's insistence that it takes ten minutes for somebody to walk through a door. The tension rises beautifully, due to the unspoken deceptions going on during the dialogue. Things going on! Imagine!
I'll skip ahead here to Point 5, a scene that equals Point 1 when taken independantly from the rest of the film. A long conversation ends in a too-brief shootout and a lazy-ass killtransition to the next scene, what is basically the climax. Characters that we barely had any time to get to know are killed, setting the stage for a stupid, stupid plan. Its construction, however, is amazing. Tarantino is good at this, which I guess means he is good at fooling me.
Being "lean and concise," without MORE movie, these scenes are padding, set pieces at best. An ample amount of time is spent with Point 3 and her revenge scheme. On Shadow Earth, I would welcome the time spent with open arms. Here, it throws the film incredibly off-balance as it isn't broken apart and it takes too goddamn long.
At Point 7. We've spent two scenes with the title characters and have accelerated very suddenly to this assassination plot which feels in the film exactly as it feels outside of it: rushed, destined to fail. Plotlines don't so much converge as they do end in the same location. Both assassinations succeed anti-climactically (anti-historically) and due mainly to the conscious actions of the FILM'S VILLAIN.
This idea, that the war is ended by the enemy's participation, cannot be grappled with as it makes no statement about anything. There isn't a 'necessary evil' theme until this point, nor is there one about Brad Pitt learning to compromise until now. As it relates to Christoph Waltz, it doesn't even fit his character. He liked hunting Jews for the Reichsland, but now all of a sudden he doesn't. Okay, so what it is, then, is another attempt to fool me. I sure didn't see this ending coming... because it makes no sense!
It's one thing when a filmmaker is eventually crushed spirit-and-all by the weight of his environment, it's another when the machine is chruning slowly and the last functioning neurons are still firing. Great scenes are created in an otherwise frustrating, lazy excuse of a film.
6.5/10
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Review: Extract (2009)
Dear Michael Rotenberg,Every time I go to conventions, nerds won't leave me alone about Office Space. That horrible experience earns me more praise than Beavis and Butthead and King of the Hill combined, and I can't for the life of me figure out why. Usually, it's the broad caricatures that win people over in mass droves, not the accurate, tight-knit commentary on paper-pushers. This, and a weird reverse-marketing phenomenon caused by 20th Century Fox's burial of Idiocracy leads me to believe that my name alone has enough Cult Pull to make a third comedy on a modest budget. I was thinking about something a little quieter, a little easier to do; I want to make an ensemble piece, what would be like Altman's Short Cuts, but funnier or whatever.
I have some scripts for short films, left over from when I went to college. To summarize, they are:
1) A story about a guy who loses his balls in a freak factory accident.
2) A guy who pays somebody to seduce his wife so he can cheat on her guilt-free.
3) A couple lives next to a neighbor who won't leave them alone, and when they finally snap on him, the neighbor dies of a heart attack (this will be funnier when you read the script).
4) A guy tries to get out of smoking weed with his friends because he gets paranoid, but he ends up smoking some anyway. Then he gets punched in the face (this will be funnier when you read the script).
5) A hot girl cons people out of stuff because she's hot.
6) Gene Simmons is a lawyer.
Blending these together in the right way can create a life-is-hell, people-are-dumb theme that has worked so well for me in the past, and the ensemble nature means we don't have to rush anything.
Let me know what you think.
-Mike Judge
-Mike Judge
YO MIKE:
That ensemble thing sounds stupid, and nobody likes those. All the rest sounds great tho! I dont know how you can get all of these elements to work in ONE STORY about ONE GUY, but you can pull it off i'm sure without making it seem like a total clusterfuck of stupid ideas! We can cast the Arrested Development guy to really reel in those Cult suckers, even if you cant make it work Fuck em they'll see anything.
Love Michael Rotenberg
P.S. last night's episode of the Goode Family was great!
4.8/10
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Review: Avatar (2009)
Continuing 2009's trend of movies that don't deserve to make as much money as they do but do so because a large amount of people are very fucking stupid, we have Avatar, James Cameron's first technical theatrical release in over ten years. What did Cameron do before that? Well, he did a student film I have never seen, a terrible low-budget sequel to a barely watchable Joe Dante film, pissed Harlan Ellison off, pissed Ridley Scott off, made an environmentalist-agenda film used as an excuse to show off special effects, the greatest action film of all time (probably), a good action film, the best 3-D film of all time (to this day), a good romantic drama, a what-the-hell-is-this-thing, Dark Angel, ruined Solaris, made an uninteresting documentary, another fucking Titanic documentary jesus shut up already, a weird thing that doesn't appear to be available anywhere, and- oh, we're caught up. Before Avatar, Cameron was also somewhere in my top five directors, but... we'll get to that.
Avatar begins with a barrage of information about this world we are about to enter. PLEASE PUT ON YOUR THREE-DIMENSIONAL SIMULATORS NOW. Apparently important information (i.e. informaton that pertains to nothing plot important, really) is that hypersleep sucks ass, Jake Sully's twin brother is dead and it is very sad, and that he has inherited a high-profile and extremely expensive project without doing all the hard work. He gets an all-expenses-paid trip to dangerous planet Pandora and, hey, because he's a cripple and gots nothing better to do, let's do it, semper fi.
All of this is told through a voice-over that, one would think, would either continue throughout the film or end as soon as they show the reason behind it: his first video log entry. SHUT OFF VIDEO LOG, FADE IN TITLE. But nope, you can expect it to appear sporadically when the storytelling gets lazy.
Information left curiously absent includes details about the Avatar Project that Jake has been thrust into. Instance: If resources are scant then how can this project exist if both military personnel and the corporation funding the operation on Pandora find it useless? Fuck you, you don't get to know. There is absolutely no other way to communicate with the Na'vi or collect plant samples other than using these engineered Blue Things? Fuck you, no. If you die in the Matrix, do you die in the real world? Fuck your mouth shut, stupid, and watch the pretty things that are behind the other pretty things.
And that's one word that is mind-numbingly appropriate for Avatar: pretty. Cameron took great pains to make the movie 1) beautiful, 2) well-designed. Everything about Pandora wildlife looks like it actually exists. For certain, Cameron is finally putting all that underwater study to good use... making a movie that won't take the time to create three-dimensional characters but create three-dimensional special effects. Hollywood, ladies and gentlemen.
It's not early on that the movie falls apart. We have a silent explanation for Jake accepting the Pandora Job: solely so he could drive a Thing with legs. While it's over quick and effectively eliminates any interesting dilemmas developing in the future by making his eventual betrayal an OBVIOUS CHOICE, it alone serves more a purpose than what the film then uses him for: running around with curiously one-dimensional Sigourney Weaver Blue Thing, looking at plants and collecting specimins. Uh... why do they need Jake again? Oh right, shut up, I remember.
Well, what you can do is force the movie to make sense by bringing a bunch of information to it, if that helps. Weaver brings in Jake to fill the Blue Thing body so her budget isn't cut, keeping up a false pretense to keep her position on the planet and satisfy the also-curiously-one-dimensional Giovanni Ribisi. Fine, but imagining that this is the case makes me think of a better movie that just didn't happen, a movie that spends its time giving me pertinent information, rather than wasting it as much as it wastes its talented actors. That's called RATIONALIZING, my psychologist girlfriend tells me.
Sully becomes a valuable member to both sides, to the military for providing strategic information, scientific information to the scientists, and... uh... cute comic distraction to the Blue Things, I guess. All the while we wait for Might-As-Well-Be-A-Racist-Tornado Military Man to do something heinous or shifty-eyed science nerd to betray Jake. The runtime goes up and up and the 3-D glasses hurt more and more as you try in vain to see Zoe Saldana's Blue Tits. By the end, everything has built to this point at the end that makes all the previous two hours an excuse... an excuse to have a large, effects-driven battle between two easily indentifiable sides, the villains being the biggest, easiest targets in any film (besides Nazis): human (American) CEOs, human (American) military. These two groups will always fuck things up and no one will care when their ranks die horribly, because hey, they spend 24/7 being huge dicks.
So... this formulation is obvious because we have seen this story before, haven't we? Yeah... King Kong. Peter Jackson's King Kong. The millions of dollars spend on facial capture technology, fantastical locale created entirely on bluescreen, an unfocused script that goes all over the place, one-dimensional characters, environmentalist message brought to you by a giant hammer that doesn't stop hitting you in the face, and an overwhelming amount of praise by the audience. Good lord, both even have a director that was a whole lot better in the 90's! I'm onto something.
Slightly softening the blow of James Cameron dipping so low after being so high for so long is not revisiting Titanic, considered by some to be one of the most overrated films of the 90's, but revisiting another film of Cameron's that is most similar to Avatar: The Abyss.
Like Avatar, The Abyss showed a conflict between benign scientists, hardened marines acting irrationally, and a third party of unknown lifeforms caught in between. Its third act makes a large case for environmentalism and points a big accussing finger at the human race for being just s'darn destructive. And of course, like Avatar, its final theme-push is a big anti-human statement that says 'you are only best as you are about to die.' Both movies are also overly-long and masturbate to the point of chafing, but what The Abyss does in the details makes it marginally better than Avatar. For one, Michael Biehn's character isn't a racist tornado, meaning he isn't 'just an asshole.' The story thinks up a reason for his sudden irrationality quite nicely, and as the film goes on, it becomes clear that the only way to solve this matter is to ice his ass. GOOD. What's better is that his role is only an obstacle. The story is still all about first contact with an unknown lifeform, and Biehn's insanity is secondary to that goal, and doesn't disappear once he is gone. Overall it's a tighter narrative and a more effective story (except for the ending, which sucks).
I've been convinced recently that Avatar also needed a nuke, somewhere.
It sounds dismissive to bring up all this 'environmentalist agenda' stuff, like that's what is bothering me. It isn't. The best example I can think of is Princess Mononoke, a movie that couldn't be any more anti-industry, pro-nature if it tried. However, Princess Mononoke doesn't preach, it demonstrates a struggle between two sides that have their merits and their failings. Its villain is barely a villain, one whose goal is understandable and, depending on where your values lie, preferable. Mononoke has an environmentalist message, but it's one that I can live with, because it makes its case. Avatar insists that its own message is self-evident.
But try telling all this to someone who loved the movie. They won't listen, or they'll shrug and say something like, "I'm a girl, I like pretty things." The current hysteria is baffling (note: as of writing this, Avatar is #37 on IMDB's 250 highest ranked films; Mononoke is at #120), and is incredibly frustrating that I have to keep talking about this fucking thing, politely. It's all I can do to keep from grabbing people by the throat and yelling "The Emperor doesn't have clothes! LOOK!"
Because he doesn't, y'know.
5.4/10
Friday, June 12, 2009
Review: Duplicity (2009)
I'd like to briefly point out a small phenomenon that only I find interesting.Billy Ray, a screenwriter skilled in writing quickfire military/industry-speak, shot a moderately-budgeted but kickass biopic, proving his ability to direct a film. His second film contained elements that made the first film good, but was mostly a palpable step down.
Tony Gilroy, another screenwriter skilled at writing quickfire military/industry-speak, also hit the streets with a great debut and proved his worth. His second film (not to ruin the forthcoming review) was also a step down, this time a considerable gap in quality to the first one. (Asidenote: weirdly, Gilroy and Ray both wrote the script for State of Play, which is exactly why I am avoiding it).
The above formula does not bode well for Rian Johnson, who parallels closer to Tony Gilroy only in that Johnson's second film is also 1) a con film, and 2) a comedy. But here's hoping the poor kid doesn't somehow reverse the prestige built by Brick, har har
Anyway, enough of that. Duplicity (by Gilroy, remember) begins with a 'years earlier' subtitle and since this is a spy slash con film, that means 'PAY THE FUCK ATTENTION' in my language. Note the location, the attitudes, the background characters, and Clive Owen's broken leg filling the frame. Note especially every word he says to Julia Roberts since this is their first meeting. This technique is taught at the David Mamet school of filmmaking, films that will pull a con on you WITHOUT YOU KNOWING YOU WERE EVEN WATCHING A FILM ABOUT CONS and the like. Hell, watch The Sting and you'll get it: collect the pieces, put them in order before the film does it for you and makes you feel like a mowgli.
The movie builds past the opening scene and wheels into the 'current time' subtitle with Clive Owen following some guy (take notes) and brandishing a small Rubik's cube (take particular note). He finds out that his contact is Julia Roberts, gets upset, and has a slightly-clever-yet-extremely-long verbal throwdown with her. They reluctantly decide to work together. Next, cue long expositional scene of what exactly they are working on: hostile corporate backstabbings over the secret formula to some miracle product (take a fuckload of notes). Clive goes home and the film reveals a not-at-all surprising plot twist and another tedious flashback ensues (take notes, just in case). In 'current time' Clive and Roberts put their plan into motion, attempting to get their hands on the miracle formula and sell it while the two companies sue each other into oblivion. Everything is going according to plan until Clive does something stupid and Julia gets angry, casting a small ineffective seed of doubt into the mix. Bad jokes about baldness. Another tedious flashback. Bad jokes about pizza. (Take notes out of habit). Some time passes and the climax happens, which without any reason to give a shit, resorts to loud music to increase the tension. The con fails... except that it doesn't. And then it does. OR DOES IT? Throw all of your notes away, they apparently don't mean fucking anything.
So... what just happened? Fucking shit happened. Some asshole orchestrated a con offscreen, before the movie began, used two unlikable spies as pawns to make some other asshole look like a mowgli for his own amusement. That's all. And what better way to tell the story than from the perspective of characters who have so little to do with the main action of the story. Like if R2-D2 and 3-PO never left the frame while Luke and Han shot down TIE Fighters nearby.
OR all of this was a metaphor for the inherent anger and mistrust in real-life relationships, that whether you're fucking in a hotel in an idyllic foreign country or spending a bunch of time stealing a secret formula by using the wire-tapped photocopier in an office building when you could have TAKEN A PICTURE OF IT WITH YOUR FUCKING PHONE THE ENTIRE TIME, as long as you're doing it together, that's what matters.
Never mind that Mr. and Mrs. Smith did that exact same shit, but funnier. And with GUNS.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Review: Watchmen (2009)

How exactly does one adapt a complex, densly packed graphic novel from page to film while still retaining the themes that made it an incredible work, and at the same time pushing the limits of the medium in a similar fashion?
Zack Snyder's answer is: "By coldly transposing scenes directly into film form, inexplicably changing other details at random, awkwardly forcing in action scenes and highlighting them with gore that is inconsistent with the rest of the film, hiring a shitty actress to carry the crux of most of the dramatic dialogue scenes, and offering nothing of my own style other than the occassional speed-change and closeup of a broken bone. Did I get it right? Did I?"
Well, mission accomplished; Watchmen finally got made, after numerous failed attempts by more talented filmmakers (and Paul Greengrass). Snyder, still coming off of an exhaustless supply of adernaline from 300's near-constant stabbing and punching and never one to back down from an opportunity for a fistfight, begins the film with just that. An immediate problem occurs after it is over, when the subsequent scene goes over everything that just happened, containing no new information with characters who lack personality and only appear one more time, for two seconds. But who needs a concise film when you have an irrational sense of duty to the work you're stealing from?
There is no doubt in my mind that this is what the core issue is -- faithfulness to Alan Moore overrides the filmmaker's decisions (most, but not the decisions that involve making more action scenes). I understand the pressures of fitting so much into so small a container; almost three hours is the end result, and not much to consider or admire in that amount of time.
Watchmen suffers from a lack of clear focus. An opening credits montage does establish for newcomers that, yes, masked crime fighters did and do exist, and that what follows is a "what-if" scenario, where these heroes have been stripped of their nostalgia and outlawed in a world where their services are obsolete. Coming to this conclusion is work, however, as there is very little to be said about other masked heroes in this world. We know the fates of two. What happened to the rest? The flashbacks only provide a connection to The Comedian; they do not draw a coherent line to Present Day 1985. Too much is left unanswered.
Jackie Earle Haley, lovable psychopath extraordinaire, narrates passages of exposition from his journal, and after a seemingly brief investigation of the murder, disappears for a bit and is replaced by flashbacks of the surviving crime fighters that rarely illuminate much but contain one or two pieces of important information that could come at any time. In addition to being frustrating, it is exhausting to sit through, and coupled with inappropriate moments of slow-motion, the movie's pace grinds to a crawl, making the film less of a philosophical feast and more of an endurance test.
At least intact are Moore's characters, each representing a philosophical-political archetype wrapped in different forms of neurosis. Nite Owl II and Silk Spectre II want normal lives, ones where they don't want or need to police an unstable populace, but cannot help but do so. Dr. Manhattan, like the universe itself, is largely indifferent and follows a path lived moment to moment; he does not understand or agree with human motivations/emotions. The Comedian is similar, but embraces his whims and instincts unquestioningly, finding nature's apparent amorality hilarious. Veidt and Rorschach each have a strict moral code, but differ in that Veidt is willing to sacrifice the few to save many, where common good is equal to how many of us survive. Rorschach's sense of justice extends past a threshold of what he views as evil, and deals with those evils in one manner: execution, on an individual basis.
It is enough that these nuances are visible. In these characters, one is asked to examine policies and how far to run with them, to find someone to agree with, or at the very least, relate to. Snyder and the screenwriters recognized this, I'm sure, but do little to provide a reality for them. The skeleton is visible, the vital organs are there, but there is no life to support. A larger world is implied but not created.
In 2005, there was another Alan Moore adaptation, V for Vendetta. A lot was different, a lot was changed by McTeigue and the Wachowksis, but nothing was missing. The theme is clear and beautifully stated, and like the graphic novel, it challenges the medium it presides in, with a clear, creative vision gleaned from an already creatively-executed work, and extending it far beyond and elimating much of the flaws and making it (crucify me) better than the graphic novel it was based on.
That is the primary reason for any adaptation. The idea that a movie that cannot stand on its own without in-depth knowledge of its source material is a flaw, and a major one, plain and simple. Nothing has been accomplished if what plays is a mirror, a mere companion piece to what one can watch and murmur "Hey, I recognize these scenes," and remember more meaning in them the first time around.
6.3/10
Monday, March 2, 2009
Review: Friday the 13th (2009)

Michael Bay's Creatively Bankrupt Productions* strikes again with another remake/requel/restart/resurefire-way-to-make-money-by-swindling-newcomers-and-old-school-fans-alike, dropping into theatres like a lobbed sack of sweaty assholes.
The premise: teenagers arrive at the camp, Jason Voorhees kills them. That is all that anyone needs for a movie, right? Well, to complicate matters, one could begin by asking: Why do the teenagers go to the camp? They're growing weed there. Why does Jason kill? His mom told him to before she died. Why did she do that? The counselors were negligent and let him drown. Wait, Jason is dead? How did he come back to life? Uh... the mom might have been a witch or something. A witch? You have a prologue explaining their motivations but not the details behind their very existence? If you were a fan of the series, you would know the details. Yet... you created a prologue. Furthermore, you give the same information a second time through dialogue. The characters have to talk about something. Besides weed and fucking? I agree. Look, we wanted to put the title twenty-five minutes into the film. It's funny. If funny is a synonym for stupid. Hey, what's with all the questions, anyhow? I'm just trying to understand the rules of your fucking movie is all. So what happens next? Six weeks later, another group of kids go to the lake by the camp. To do what? Party. In the woods? In a country home. What's with the lulls in Jason's killing spree? If people can build houses and plant seeds for weed and not get killed, what makes the return trips so dangerous? Perhaps... Jason was sleeping sometimes. He's undead. Okay, then, sex is what gets his ire up. But Jason killed that one kid who was by himself, before anyone was even having sex. Then he doesn't have a motivation. He just kills. Whatever. These new kids, six weeks later, they're partying? With marijuana, I imagine... Yeah. And there's another one looking for his missing sister. She was with the previous group. Oh. So, do they help him? No way. Well, one does. But the leader of the group is an asshole, and the rest are so stoned that they don't bother helping. Why? Why what? Why is the guy an asshole? Uh... when they first meet, the one looking for his sister takes a long time at the register at a convenience store. Kind of a thin reason for the other guy to be a douchebag. Does this asshole die first? No. An inbred hick who masturbates, fucks mannequins, and grows weed dies first. That's where Jason gets the hockey mask. Is the douchebag the second one to die? No, his friend is. And then his girlfriend dies after water-skiing. Topless. You do realize that, since Jason kills indiscriminately, any scenes with nudity or sex are now pointless? So? Jesus... okay, they die, and then the douchebag finally dies? No. Good god, man, how long are you going to keep that piece of shit alive?! Almost to the end. We're killing off the comic-relief characters first. It's more dramatic that way. So, including the five kills at the beginning, there are a total of thirteen kills. That's kind of clever. Actually, there are twelve kills. The sister isn't dead. What?! How?! Jason keeps her alive. I'll think of some reason later. It doesn't matter. One more question. Who is the main character of this movie: the guy looking for his sister, or Jason? Hmmm... Don't strain yourself. If it's who I think it is, then there is no reason you need to devote so much time to these characters, most of whom go beyond being unlikable. And how long is this fucking thing? An hour and thirty-seven minutes. Basically, you wanted this film to be like torture. Nobody says anything interesting or intelligent, there is no clear reason for the things that are happening, the kills aren't creative and aren't even effective from a horror standpoint, and as a result of inept writing and filmmaking, there is no suspense and every second I spend watching this garbage is me wishing for Jason to slaughter everyone, and quickly. Welcome to Friday the 13th. You'd be a lot happier if you stopped asking questions. Go fuck yourself, I hate you.
It was god-awful.
2.9/10
*stolen from Kernunrex
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

