Monthly Movie Journal: Feb. 2011

Where as last month I kicked things off with the highly entertaining, delightfully odd The Extra Man this month got underway with a complete bust.

I hated this movie. As enchanting and fresh as Julie Delpy was in Before Sunrise and it's sequel, she was nothing if not weary and mundane here. She wrote, directed, edited, and starred in this clunky, dreadful, misfire of a movie that's so intent on its own profundity-- while never approaching anything close-- that it's downright laughable.



The fact that the two leads have zero chemistry together on screen is the least of this movie's problems. Much more alarming is the mean-spiritedness of the whole ordeal, reflected every which way you look, but most offensively in the film's many politically and socially ignorant and shallow assertions. Not a good time and definately not the intellectually enlightened work it tries to poses as.

I didn't take a single note during this film. I simply sat there before the screen, enthralled, fascinated and terrified. Not for me the discussions about the utility of the "pseudo-documentary format," or questions about how the camera happened to be waiting at the bottom of the crevice when Simpson fell in. "Touching the Void" was, for me, more of a horror film than any actual horror film could ever be.--Roger Ebert

I'll add that it is also one of the most intense testimonies about the human will to survive ever caught on film.

Having seen 127 Hours I decided to go back and give this film a look.

This is a stylish horror/thriller/mystery that I meant to see forever ago, but only now caught up with. It satisfies as a horror flick, scrapes by as a mystery, and struggles as everything else. But there's enough 'wierd' going on to partially make up for the handful of truly terrible scenes and lend it some appeal amidst a largely uninspired, unimpressive decade for American Horror.

I'm a huge Tennessee Williams fan, which may have worked both ways for me as I struggled to enjoy this film while simultaneously trying to stifle my disappointment in some of its weaker points. The direction here is a bit stilted and uncertain and the performances never quite lift the film above its built-in faults. Watch Suddenly, Last Summer instead.

Don't worry everyone. The Joker is in this movie. It's okay to watch it.

Easily among the very best teen comedies to come along in years (decades?). Manages to find a balance in tone somewhere between the outragiously funny Superbad and the refreshingly good-hearted Say Anything.

review by lotr23

Salt is neither the shallow, stupefyingly bad Angelina ego-fodder vehicle some claim, nor the stunning and explosively entertaining genre-film gem that Roger Ebert boldly claimed. What it seems most is simply forgettable... at least until the sequel arrives.

Dutch director Anton Corbijn eludes the mistakes that many film-makers would've made here, in that he doesn't attempt to manufacture thrills and suspense out of thin air and special effects. He doesn't tell the story, so much as he reveals it; slowly, deliberately, and with great attention to detail. He understands how suspense works much the same way as seduction works. When met with a patient and appreciative eye, this film is high on both.

A few moments of nice drama but ugh, what a chore.

While a technical marvel is many respects, there's also a number of things going on here that angered me enough to temper my recommendation.

review by The Mighty Celestial

Nearly my every reaction to this film is articulated extremely well here:

review by PvtCaboose91

It's not the film I loved, so much as the story. If this was a short-story I came across in some worn, musty anthology somewhere I'd probably go crazy over it. But as a movie, I thought it had a few problems difficult to ignore.

Still, this is a largely engaging and noble film, bravely and solemly human in material and tone.



Here's a glowing review from Mr. Ebert-- it's the kind of movie that, while I wasn't completly in awe of it, I'm still pleased to see it receive such high praise from such a high profile critic.

Roger Ebert's review

An interesting and rather brave film about human tendancy to exploit everything and everyone for one's own selfish gain. I'm terribly picky about black comedies, but this one surprised me... though the film tight-rope walks between black comedy and traditional drama, and it was really the dramatic aspects that I enjoyed most.



While this film is pretty dark, darker still would've served it better. A bit too much is telegraphed by obtrusive musical montages that keep the viewer from becoming too uncomfortable during some of the tougher, key scenes. Overall I found the movie commendable in many ways, but was also left frustrated by more than a couple missteps.

Gus Van Sant has all of a sudden become a director high on my radar. Last month I watched and greatly enjoyed Drugstore Cowboy, though prior to seeing it I didn't think much about Van Sant other than simply recognizing his name. Now I'm left marvelling at another of his works. Devilishly fun, clever, and sinister this movie grew on me quickly and by the end seemed to strike every note exactly right.



Nicole Kidman delivers a courageous and abandoned performance... one of the more memorable roles you're likely to see any time soon. Very glad I brushed the dust off this mid-nineties gem.

This movie combines sex and violence in a way not often portrayed in cinema... pretty shocking really, so you've been warned.

Strong performances, efficient direction, and a bit of a mind-bender, yet somehow I never felt as riveted as I thought I should have. Something here was just a bit too thin for me to ever truly care a whole lot.

Norwegian horror film about a group of five thrill-seeking 20-somethings that head off on a skiing trip to a remote mountain. While making their run down the back side of the mountain, naturally one of them breaks a leg. The group makes their way to a seemingly abandoned old ski lodge and horror ensues.



What makes this movie a lot of fun can be found in style and performance. The movie never drags, the camera work is definately above average, and all together this movie is pretty well put together. Most surprising is that not one of these 5 people are overly obnoxious...we don't root for a one of them to die. In fact the cast is pretty well likeable and skilled. Add a grimly intense death scene or two, some nice moments of suspense, and a respectful little nod to The Shining and you've got yourself a pretty good little horror flick.

The film's major downfall that can't be ignored is the less than satisfying ending, caused mostly by some lacking back story. But the bulk of this is passable by most any standards, and recommendable to fans of the genre.

Powerful, haunting movie that caused quite a stir when released some 4 years after the Columbine tragedy took place. I somehow missed it back then but, in keeping with my Gus Van Sant kick, I finally caught up with it.

My impressions here are mixed, but lean toward good... I think. The construction of the narrative, deliberate pacing, and long tracking shots are well executed and necessary to achieve the lasting effects of the film. The performances pulled from the many non-actors/non-professional actors are surprisingly strong.



But I can't say I truly liked this movie and I'm almost positive I won't revisit it. I'm also inclined to object to certain moral underpinnings of the entire film, and, while I intitially embraced the idea, I've become conflicted in my opinion about Van Sant's refusal to offer any messages, reasons, or answers. On the one hand, it would be foolish to attempt to offer explanations to such senseless tragedy. On the other, well, there's just something that seems insincere and evasive going on here.

Still, there are questions about some of the writer/director's decisions that I'll be turning over in my mind for quite some time, and a sneaky desire to rationalize a more positive stance toward the film. But as much as part of me wants to, I can't bring myself to praise this as "High Art" or endorse it as a particularly valuable social meditation.

This is a strong candidate for biggest surprise of 2010.

Roger Ebert's Review

Every now and then I encounter a film that pulls my opinion about itself up and down drastically throughout its run-time. Dogtooth is that kind of film.

I began with a small amount of skepticism, which gave way to bemusement, which evolved into guarded enjoyment, which approached true admiration, before plunging into repulsion, disappointment, then back up to horrified dismay, and finally settling on underwhelmed.



The film rolls along nicely through its first half, as a bizarre and unnerving statement about over-controlling parents. I loved the way it was impossible to guess at what I might see happen next, so wierd and quirky are the events and family routines captured in the film. The movie follows its own logic, so as strange as these people and behaviors are, nothing is ever entirely unbelievable-- which it what makes the movie truly frightening.

But there's such a thing as too much of a good thing, and the film has no concept of measurement. Ultimately the movie begins to make a fool out of itself, as it reaches too far and too insistantly for, exactly what audience reaction, I'm no longer sure. By the end I felt that the cleverness behind the movie was too shallow to carry it all the way through it's run time.

There's some truly horrifying stuff going on here, and it's really a valid question whether or not any artistic reward or social insight is large enough to make it all worthwhile.

This movie just didn't hold my attention. The humor was dry and the drama understated, which can work for me, but not here. Combined with what I thought were pretty bland performances, and I just couldn't get into this one. To say that I watched the entire film wouldn't be as strictly accurate as saying that the movie played in my living room through its entire runtime.

Oh well. Maybe I'll revisit it someday.

Richard Linklater directs with a palpable enthusiasm for cinema and storytelling. This energy along with Christian McKay's astonishgly great portrayal of Welles went a very long way in charming me blind to a couple of the film's more ordinary attributes.

Review by Roger Ebert

Like the above still frame, much of this movie is great to look at. (Though much of it is also terribly brutal and discomforting to look at too) It's shot well and I could see that a lot of care went into giving this film the 'look' it has. And Casey Affleck gives a fine performance.

So it's too bad that in the end this film is an otherwise joyless waste of time and a huge waste of talent. The story is poorly constructed, the characters starve for development/motivation/backstory, and the film-makers attitude, or lack of attitude, is curious but ultimately infuriating.

Don't bother with it.

Exactly the kind of movie that I probably wouldn't recommend to anyone, yet feel a certain amount of affection for. It's similar to Dario Argento in style, but doesn't put on as many airs.

Pretty sure I liked this movie better when I was 12 and it starred a city bus and was called Speed.



But this was okay too. Very decent actually, as far as PG-13 action/thrillers go.

Been meaning to catch up with the Three Colors Trilogy for a long time now. For anyone interested this is a great overview of what so far looks/sounds to be an important contribution to film-art.

Salon.com review

This highly stylized documentary is one of my favorite watches so far this year. Everything here is supremely interesting, a helluva lotta fun, and put together in a way that doesn't require a deep appreciation for art in order to enjoy the film. Next time you're browsing Netflix Instant, give this one a look!



Currently streaming on Netflix

Does this frame of film remind anyone of anything?

So many possible readings of this troubling, yet strangely mesmerizing film. Still unsure just what to make of it... gorgeous to look at, fascinating character dynamics, and about as bleak as they come. A number of unaswered questions may frustrate some viewers, but it's consistent with the perspective of the two young boys trying to make sense of their enigmatic, distant, and frightening father.

Not terribly often an 8/10 score is a mark of disappointment, but that's largely how I felt about this film, so high were my expectations.

Some scenes of gripping, emotionally textured genius, a few too many conventional, "because this is how these kinds of stories work" scenes. Still, a very good film, showcasing some top notch talent, with a powerful social message that I'm sure 1954 audiences appreciated more than I really could.

Strong Side:

I didn't want to punch Ashton Kutcher in the face.

Natalie Portman is lovely to look at.

Our two stars surprisingly display a certain amount of chemistry on screen together, if only for fleeting moments.

That girl I liked from House of the Devil shows up in this movie.



Weak Side:

Just about every supporting character is garbage.

20 minutes too long.

Rarely funny.

Rarely insightful.

The plot-structure and direction is boring and predictable.

As good a character study as I've seen in years. Giamatti is brilliant, and should've gotten an Oscar nomination for his work here. Hoffman is better than I've seen him in quite a while too. There's a little for everyone here, and it may be the only 2010 release to bring me to tears.

Let's see...fifth viewing, I think. Still one of my personal favorites, despite my minor problems with the final act. And hey, I'm not the only one that can't say enough about magnifecent Grace Kelly:

review by JxSxPx

My Quick Pick Six:

Good: Exit Through the Gift Shop / Barney's Version

Bad: 2 Days in Paris / The Killer Inside Me

Weird: World's Greatest Dad / Dogtooth

Biggest pleasant surprise of the month has to be

Buried
with
Easy A
close behind.

These are both movies as worthy of your time as a number of the films that appeared on Oscar ballots this month.

Well, I'd already seen nearly all of the Oscar contenders long before this year's joke of an Award Show underwhelmed the nation. Fortunately, I still managed to catch up on a fair amount of quality picks this month. Didn't come without a few bumps along the way of course.

And it should be noted that damn near everything I saw was made in the last 15 years. Guess I exchanged some older films for dodgy horror titles. Old habits die hard.

And 36 movies watched ain't bad for a short month!

Breakdowns for Personal Reference:

Total films watched: 36

Watched for the first time: 34

Among 34 first watches:

1950's: 1
1990's: 6
2000's: 13
2010/11: 14

Total foreign language films: 9

Total Documentaries: 2

My Ratings:

1/10: 0
2/10: 1
3/10: 1
4/10: 1
5/10: 5
6/10: 4
7/10: 7
-------
8/10: 6
9/10: 9
10/10: 0