16 May 12
There are Wes Anderson haters, Wes Anderson apologists and then there are those people who are correct in thinking that Anderson was at one time one of the most exciting and unique filmmakers working but these days he seems to be as much of a parody as he is an director. Sadly, his latest “Moonrise Kingdom,” shows he has no interest in proving otherwise. (Please keep in mind this is coming from somebody who willing wrote up a 2200+ word essay on the trailer.) Set in 1965 - though one puzzles to imagine why, since it doesn’t seem any more period specific than his other features - the story concerns two 12 year old’s: Sam Shakusky (Jared Gilman) and Suzy (Kara Hayward) who run away to be together on a small island off the coast of New England. The film opens with the camera panning all throughout the Bishop household, laying out a geography that would basically prove to be useless later in the film. The opening of “Panic Room” does the same thing except it does it for the express purpose of establishing the spatial relation of the rooms which becomes important later in the story. This camerawork just wants to draw attention to itself.
After an introduction that establishes all of the major townspeople - Scout Master Ward (Edward Norton), Police Captain Sharp (Bruce Willis) and Suzy’s parents Laura (Frances McDormand) and Walt (Bill Murray) - we’re finally introduced to our young lovers. After a brief flashback (the “What kind of bird are you?” shown in the trailers) the two set off on their adventure. There are fleeting moments that capture the awkwardness of adolescence and infatuation of young love but for the most part those emotions are buried. Anderson has lost his grip on character, story and sadly even humor. The adults are all posturing and the kids do their best line readings delivering dialogue that is neither realistic for that age nor as clever as it had ought to be to justify the stylization. To steal a page from the Red Letter Media critique of the “Star Wars” prequels, it would be difficult to describe the personality of one of the characters in “Moonrise Kingdom” without describing what they look like or what their profession is. They’re all window dressing.
We’re told that Willis’ sheriff is dumb but we’re never shown anything in his character that leads us to this conclusion other than the dialogue. And because the characterizations are so thin, there’s no real catharsis here or scene that packs the emotional punch of Ritchie’s attempted suicide in ‘Tenenbaums’ or Max’s rejection in ‘Rushmore.’ Despite all the stylistic trappings of the earlier films, there was still real emotion there and moments that cut through the arch humor. Anderson proves to be his own worst enemy here, undercutting the intended emotions by not allowing anything to play realistically. And he also indulges some of his worst tendencies: Bob Balaban’s onscreen narrator (no doubt cribbed from some French New Wave film or old TV commercial) is probably the most egregious. Despite the 60s setting Anderson has opted to stay mostly away from the pop music from the era that he’s used in all his other films, opting instead for some classical music and score by Alexandre Desplat that has traces of (a less sinister) “Suspiria.”
Future generations look back at the downward arc of Anderson’s film career and ask, ‘What happened?’ The answer is a simple one: he’s surrounded himself with Yes People, who confirm that everything he’s doing is great and that has allowed him to block out any criticism, even when it may be true or for his own benefit. This unchecked ego led to many of the great filmmakers of the ’70s to start making lesser films as because they started believing their own hype and it has ossified Anderson as a storyteller. Unfortunately as long as his fans continue to support him, it doesn’t look like any kind of wake up call is on the horizon for him. His idea of growing is simply changing the setting of his films (New York, Italy, India, the 60’s). And while you have to admire him for completely ignoring his detractors, one would have hoped that somewhere along the way he would have found his own way to evolve as so many others of his generation did. If it sounds like I’m being harsh, maybe I am. The movie is pleasant, certainly not a chore to get through, but for someone who has invested so much faith in a filmmaker who showed such promise, it’s an incredibly frustrating thing to watch idly.
film
review
moonrise kingdom
wes anderson
7 May 12
I can’t help but give some movies credit for having their heart in the right place because I’ll take an admirable failure any day of the week over a bland safe bet. “The Five-Year Engagement” marks yet another collaboration between co-writer/star Jason Segel and co-writer/director Nicholas Stoller who had previously scripted “The Muppets” and “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” together. The latter film struck me as a very promising debut, straddling the line between your standard broad rom-com (with a cavalcade of wacky supporting characters each vying for attention) and the more interesting dramatic territory being pursued by producer Judd Apatow with his own directorial efforts. While the semi-sequel/spinoff “Get Him To The Greek” was maybe a step backwards for Stoller (who wrote and directed) - except for every scene featuring Elizabeth Moss, who was great - I had high hopes that their latest endeavor would deliver on their earlier promise.
The film features Segel as Tom, a San Francisco chef who meets and falls in love with Violet (Emily Blunt) at a Halloween party. Within a year the couple are engaged but what follows is an unforeseen set of obstacles that impede their trip to the altar. On the sidelines are Violet’s sister Suzie (Alison Brie, always wonderful) and Tom’s best man Alex (“Parks And Rec” scene-stealer Chris Pratt) who have a shotgun wedding after a one-night stand turns into an unexpected pregnancy. This couple’s unplanned and inexplicable happiness makes it more apparent for Tom and Violet that they may not know each other quite as well as they had hoped. Overcoming issues like relocating to freezing Michigan and putting your own career aside to support your partner begins to tear them apart as do temptations like professor Winton (Rhys Ifans). The story five years as plans change, beards are grown (and shaved) and the couple’s once rock-solid romance starts to deteriorate.
The supporting cast is large, filled with many funny men and women sometimes showing up for just a scene or two including Mindy Kaling, Kevin Hart, Kumail Nanjiani, Tim Heidecker, Molly Shannon, Chris Parnell and Brian Posehn among others. Unfortunately these sidebars combined with the loose shambling structure lead to an unfocused bloated midsection that I thought the film would never recover from. Somehow impossibly, they manage to bring things together for an ending that ties things up nicely (if improbably). While I have no doubt that Stoller and Segel were inspired by films like “Annie Hall” and “When Harry Met Sally,” both stories about complicated romances told over a long period of time, “The Five-Year Engagement” fails to reach those impossible heights. With just too many storylines/sidelines/side characters going on the film loses its focus and misses the mark on what I had hoped would be a step up for the duo. Enjoyable but a bit of a mess.
film
review
the five year engagement
25 Apr 12
Compared to other mega-selling bands like say, The Beatles, the story behind Queen is not quite as widely known. Formed in London in the early ‘70s, the band was responsible for a slew of hits over the two decades or so, traversing genres from rock to opera to disco sometimes within the same song, before singer Freddie Mercury died of AIDS in the early ‘90s. Told through archival footage and interviews with two of the band’s principal members guitarist Brian May and drummer Roger Taylor (bassist John Deacon has quietly refused to participate in any of the band’s recent activities since retiring a few years ago), “Queen: Days Of Our Lives” is a compelling overview of the classic band’s career.
Check out my review at The Playlist/Indiewire
film
review
queen
tribeca film fest
22 Apr 12
Set on a particularly dreary wedding day at an estate in the English countryside this 30’s set romance stars “Like Crazy“‘s Felicity Jones and “Attack The Block“‘s Luke Treadaway as Dolly and Joseph, star crossed lovers on the day of Dolly’s wedding to another man. “Cheerful Weather For The Wedding” should appeal to those “Downtown Abbey” fanatics who just can’t get enough of the period but didn’t do much for me.
Check out my review at The Playlist/Indiewire
film
review
tribeca film fest
cheerful weather for the wedding
21 Apr 12
t’s a pretty remarkable feat for a movie to be not very good but still entirely watchable. The opening minutes of “The Girl,” an overwrought and familiar drama, had me preparing myself for a much worse movie than it ended up being so maybe it’s just a case of lowered expectations. Abbie Cornish stars as Ashley, a single mother and screwup in Austin TX who is not allowed to visit her 5 year old son for an earlier incident involving drinking and driving with him in the backseat. She’s working off her debt to society at a big box store but as we’re told in the opening scene, has “a bad attitude” and won’t be getting a promotion. She’s not an alcoholic per se but likes drinking and in her situation - living in a trailer park, shitty job, can’t see her son - probably deserves a drink. She’s visited one night by her father (Will Patton), also a screwup, who says he’s been doing well these days and offers to take her out for a night on the town just South of the Mexico border. We soon learn that daddy’s doing well because he’s been transporting Mexican immigrants across the border for $500 a pop in his truck.
Ashely scolds him for this initially but quickly decides to make some money of her own by offering a family passage across the border. But complications ensue and soon she’s stranded with a young girl while her parents have disappeared. Now Ashley must learn to be a mother through this surrogate daughter of sorts as she searches for her family. Cornish is an actress I like a lot (she’s fantastic in Jane Campion’s “Bright Star”) but she’s not especially good here. A Southern accent is ill-suited to the Australian-born actress and some of the on-the-nose dialogue she’s forced to deliver doesn’t help make her performance any more convincing. Still, she’s very watchable and you ease into her performance as the film goes along. (Though it’s a bit brutal in the opening scenes.) I’d also like to propose a moratorium on the “not-ready-to-be-a-good-parent learning to love surrogate child” narrative. It’s effective even when it’s not particularly well done.
the girl
film
review
tribeca film fest
20 Apr 12
Don’t believe everything you read. That’s especially good advice when it comes to festival buzz where there’s often bragging rights for being among the first to champion a little-known film. Such was the case for French action thriller “Sleepless Night” which received a wave of good reviews at TIFF last Fall - which is where it first came onto my radar - with some calling it one of the best of its kind. I’m not sure what movie everybody else saw but both myself and a colleague found it to be fairly stupid. The basic premise is that corrupt cop Vincent (Tomer Sisley) and his partner Manuel (Laurent Stocker) manage to steal a whole lot of cocaine from crime lord Jose (Serge Riaboukine), who - surprise! - kidnaps Vincent’s son until he returns the drugs. But Vincent manages to misplace his duffle bag of drugs in Jose’s cavernous nightclub and must think on his feet during run-in’s with other drug dealers and undercover cops, both on the trail. If it sounds like I’m being harsh on the film, I am. After a stylish opening credits sequence the film was pretty much all downhill from there laying on one stupid contrivance after another.
A brief breakfast scene establishes a relationship between contentious teen and absent divorced dad so that presumably they’ll learn how much they care for each other during this whole ordeal. But since we’re not sure if we like either of them or care what happens to them, the stakes are pretty low. A contained thriller is a great way for a lower budget film to use its limitations to the film’s advantage - see also: “The Raid” - and the nightclub where the bulk of the film is set is impressively ridiculous. There is a club dancefloor area, a lounge/bar, pool hall, fancy restaurant and more than enough corridors, back offices and kitchens to keep the characters busy for 90 minutes. It’s like the Dave & Buster’s of nightclub-entertainment-plexes. The template for many of these films is “Die Hard” and this is a long way from “Die Hard.” Admittedly, it probably didn’t help that this was the first action film I’d seen since “The Raid,” which was not only one of the best action films I’ve seen in a long while but probably the best film I’ve seen this year, period. So I really had to drag myself through this film, managing to stay engaged only to point out the numerous plot holes and stupid decisions going on in the film. Skip “Sleepless Night,” see “The Raid.”
film
review
sleepless night
tribeca film fest
19 Apr 12
A decade ago the idea that digital would replace film was still pretty unthinkable. But today it is not only inevitable but the end of film is upon us. Film camera manufacturers have stopped producing and developing new cameras and Kodak recently filed for bankruptcy. Shooting on film will probably not even be an option for filmmakers in the very near future. So, how did this happen? And should we mourn the (impending) death of film when digital has so many practical advantages? The terrific new documentary “Side By Side” explores the subject in depth by explaining the history of film and charting the rise of digital through extensive interviews with filmmakers, cinematographers and craftspeople. Moderated (for some reason) by Keanu Reeves, the doc features interviews with directors Martin Scorsese, Christopher Nolan, David Fincher, George Lucas, James Cameron, Robert Rodriguez, Richard Linklater, The Wachowski Bros, David Lynch, Steven Soderbergh and Lars Von Trier and cinematographers including Vittorio Storaro (“Apocalypse Now”), Vilmos Zsigmond (“Close Encounters of the Third Kind”), Wally Pfister (“Inception”), Michael Ballhaus (“Goodfellas”), Ellen Kuras (“Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind”), Anthony Dod Mantle (“Slumdog Millionaire”).
The film tracks the digital revolution which started with the Dogme ‘95 movement in the late 90’s. During this time a group of Danish filmmakers started using consumer grade video cameras to make their films using a strict set of guidelines which stated (among other rules) that filming would be done on location, with handheld cameras and natural lighting. Indie filmmakers across the world started experimenting with the format and soon Sundance and beyond was opened up to a new generation of voices who may have never had access to proper film cameras. Early films to be shot digitally used the grainy low-quality aesthetic to their advantage, creating a handheld immediacy you couldn’t get with heavy film equipment. Some of the first major digital efforts to infiltrate the mainstream included Danny Boyle’s “28 Days Later” and Michael Mann’s “Collateral,” but it was George Lucas who worked with the manufacturer to build a higher resolution digital camera for “Star Wars Episode II: Attack Of The Clones” that ushered it into commonplace for effects heavy films. Instead of transferring the film into the computer to add digital effects and then transferring it back to film - losing slight quality each time - the process is now entirely digital so there is no loss of resolution.
Since that breakthrough cameras have only gotten better and better so that today’s digital films are almost indistinguishable. Most moviegoers would never know the difference or think twice about whether the film had been shot digitally or not. The doc does a great job of breaking it down into layman’s terms, using infographics to show just how great each jump in technology affects picture resolution. The doc stays impartial, arguing for both film preservation and greater measures to ensure digital will be preserved (currently the most fail safe method is to transfer it to film because the hard drives will crash if you don’t turn them on regularly). But the interviews are what makes this a true treat for cinephiles as some of the world’s most renowned directors come down on both sides of the debate. Some (like Scorsese and Nolan) are staunch advocates for film, indicating that digital still has a long way to go to match the picture quality while others (Fincher, Soderbergh, et al.) have jumped ship indicating that digital offers them a freedom they never had with film and the quality will only continue to get better. A highly educational and entertaining doc, “Side By Side” should be a must-see for film lovers that should help continue the debate.
film
side by side
tribeca film fest
review
17 Apr 12
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: a hit at last year’s Sundance Film Festival, this film about a creepy cult featured a breakout female performance and was swiftly picked up by Fox Searchlight. If you said “Martha Marcy May Marlene” you’re half right, which is likely why the studio decided to hold onto their similarly themed acquisition, “Sound Of My Voice” until this year. Not only was it one of two films about cults to play the fest last year but it was also one of two films starring and co-written by Brit Marling (along with “Another Earth”), but rest assured that they delay doesn’t have any bearing on the film’s quality. Peter (Christopher Denham) and Lorna (Nicole Vicius) are a couple are in their twenties - he’s a substitute teacher, her job is unclear - who have begun to infiltrate a cult for a proposed documentary. The pair agreed they want to do something with their lives before they get too old to be motivated and Peter has decided this documentary is it.
The film opens with the pair willingly submitting themselves to a shower, change of clothes and blindfold to be transported to the basement of a nondescript suburban house. Upon entrance Peter greets a cult member with a complicated handshake that makes it unclear just how long they’ve been going there. Soon we meet Maggie (Brit Marling), the cult’s charismatic leader: a beautiful blonde woman who claims that she is from the future. Maggie apparently suffers from some kind of sickness that has her hooked up to an oxygen tank and prevents her from leaving the basement so her food is grown in the garage. She puts her subjects through rigorous trials of faith, though later says she doesn’t care if they believe or not. Peter is initially skeptical (as anyone in their right mind would be) but the line starts to blur between just how committed he’s making himself to the cult.
Peter and Lorna keep reiterating how dangerous this cult might be so while the film isn’t explicitly violent, it’s filled with tension. The acting is pretty solid across the board and it’s easy to see why Marling was a breakout star here. She’s not what you would expect from a cult leader but she is fascinating and that keeps you guessing. Directed and co-written by Zal Batmanglij, it’s an impressive debut especially considering its limited scope. Never boring, the film still suffers from a “but what does it all mean” ambiguity. The filmmaker does a good job for stringing you along for 90 minutes but when it’s over you’re not sure if you’ve really gotten much closer to understanding the appeal of the cult or exactly where Maggie comes from. There is a crucial difference in obscuring the truth strategically and doing so because you’re not sure how else to tell the story. But ambiguities notwithstanding, the film is a small scale success.
film
review
sound of my voice
14 Apr 12
This morning I woke up at 6:45am to go see an advance screening of “The Avengers.” I arrived at the AMC 42nd Street just after 7:30am for a 10am screening and there were already 160 people in line ahead of me. (I counted.) God only knows what time they got there. There were a fair share of superhero shirts (but no costumes) and when the film began, the crowd pretty much went nuts. Every time one of their favorite characters first made an appearance the entire audience broke out into wild applause and cheers. These 500 people fricking adored these characters. No matter that Jeremy Renner’s Hawkeye had only been featured in about 3 minutes of previous screentime during “Thor,” he received equal acclaim here. Because the audience wasn’t just bringing those previous films into this, they were bringing their entire lifetime of reading and loving these characters. Whether this level of passionate devotion will be as palpable when the film opens on May 4, I can only imagine.
Marvel Studios deserves a lot of credit for even getting this far. With the rights to their two most popular titles (“Spider-Man,” and “X-Men”) currently tied up at other studios, the company had only their second string characters to adapt into films and outside of the comic-book reading set, expectations have been low for each. Skeptics may have looked at these films as just a necessary precursor to the eventual team-up, but had any one of them failed, it would have put a major creative speedbump in that plan. But with “Iron Man,” (2008) “Thor,” (2011) “Captain America” (2011) and to a lesser extent “The Incredible Hulk” (2008), the studio has exceeded expectations and introduced these characters in films that were far more satisfying than most people expected them to be. Now, finally comes “The Avengers,” the long awaited team-up of Marvel’s mightiest heroes. But can Marvel possibly pull off the balancing act of joining 4 previously established characters (and 2 lesser established ones) without the story seeming overstuffed or the characters underwritten? The short answer is: yes. And it’s practically a damn miracle.
Writer/director Joss Whedon takes the reigns on the superproject and manages to mostly deliver on a lifetime of promises to fanboys and girls. The basic story is that mankind is being threatened by Loki (Tom Hiddleston), a demigod who wants to harness a great source of unlimited power to bring about Earth’s destruction. Secret government agency S.H.E.I.L.D. led by Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) hopes to assemble an elite fighting force - Captain America (Chris Evans), Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), The Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), Black Widow, (Scarlett Johansson) and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) - to stop them. Having 6 major characters from completely different universes - usually tonally, sometimes actually - suddenly share the screen together could make for a disastrously overstuffed mismash of tones. How to balance Captain America’s earnestness, Iron Man’s snarkiness, Thor’s otherworldly-ness and distribute their screentime equally? Instead of using this as an obstacle, Whedon exploits their differences to the film’s advantage.
The filmmaker takes the fact that these heroes really don’t belong together and uses the conflicts to drive the first 2/3rds of the film. At some point nearly everyone clashes with everyone and never does it feel out of place or like a betrayal to their respective histories. And those worried that this might be weighted towards Downey Jr.’s mega-popular Iron Man shouldn’t. Each character gets his or her own share of big moments - even Johansson’s Black Widow who was basically unnecessary in “Iron Man 2” is given plenty to do here and The Hulk who’s never gotten a satisfying film steals the show - and introductions are doled out carefully. One major character doesn’t make an appearance until the 45 minute mark, another at 90 minutes, so by the time the team takes shape, it feels exciting and earned. The film’s biggest achievement is that it gets the characters right and that goes a long way but doesn’t quite erase its shortcomings. First of all, it’s very, very comic-booky, meaning that it embraces its silliness wholeheartedly though Marvel has always been aimed at a younger set.
For such a relatively simple premise - bad guy wants a macguffin to destroy the world, good guys have to stop him - there is a hell of a lot of exposition. Explaining the doomsday device and why everyone wants it takes up a lot more screentime than it has to. The villains here are also kind of a let down. In “Thor” Hiddleston brought an unusual edge to Loki but here is reduced to more of a sneering one-note baddie. The script also makes a tension deflating choice to have our heroes meet him early on so that the midsection leaves the characters without much to do. The action sequences are mostly thrilling (Hulk SMASH!) but the abundance of CGI means these sequences will date quickly. It’s hard to tell how much a passive audience member who hasn’t been schooled on the preceding films would enjoy “The Avengers.” I just know that - according to the room I saw it with this morning - for better and worse, it was built for the fans. While I may not have been quite as high on the film as my fellow geeks, there were a handful of moments that made me feel like a kid again playing with these action figures, reading the comics, watching the cartoons, wishing for a movie just like this.
film
review
the avengers
8 Apr 12
Every so often I find myself eagerly anticipating the latest from a filmmaker I haven’t previously been a huge fan of. Whit Stillman is a director who rose to indie-stardom in the 90s with a trio of hyper-literate comedies “Metropolitan,” “Barcelona” and “The Last Days of Disco.” Each featured well-to-do protagonists usually talking at length about relationships, politics and their roles in society at large. I had my first experience with Stillman in high school where I saw his 80s set third feature probably expecting some of the visceral rush of “Boogie Nights” or cheesy excess of “54,” neither of which the film had any interest in. At the time I wasn’t entirely impressed but soldiered on to his previous films in college and felt about the same about them. Impressive for their scale and featuring some sharp dialogue but with such limited filmmaking, each might’ve worked better as a play than a film. Despite my indifference towards his earlier work I still found myself incredibly curious about “Damsels In Distress,” his first film in 14 years. I figured maybe I’d feel differently about his work now that I’m 30 and this might be the film that firmly wins me over. Well, I was right and wrong about that.
Upon revisiting “The Last Days of Disco” last week at BAM I found myself really enjoying the film, however I find myself still puzzled by ‘Damsels.’ Set in an East Coast University, a group of girls strive to make their campus a better place. Led by alpha-female Violet (Greta Gerwig), the girls’ activities include volunteering at a suicide prevention center, dating boneheads as a form of charity and taking in troubled underclassmen Lily (Analeigh Tipton) to teach her the ropes. The first thing that came to mind while watching the film was that it was (intentionally or otherwise) a riff on “Clueless” (which itself was a riff on Jane Austen’s “Emma”) with Gerwig in the Silverstone role. Like Cher, Violet means well but can’t take her own advice and isn’t quite as smart as she is well spoken. Though the dialogue is pure Stillman, the film bounces from “Animal House”-inspired frat comedy to 40’s musical (complete with tap dancing sequences). I admire the filmmaker for taking risks, going alternately broad or exuberant, but it doesn’t entirely work. As Violet deals with her own heartbreak she’s forced to reexamine herself but the emotions are all filmed from an arch remove which would be acceptable if it were uproariously funny, instead of only intermittently. Pleasant but forgettable, hopefully we’re in store for better things for Mr. Stillman.
film
review
damsels in distress
30 Mar 12
Featuring HBO’s signature mix of sex, violence and morally suspect characters, the first season of “Game Of Thrones” was a surprise hit that inspired fans far outside the Dungeons & Dragons set to pick up the books. (It also picked up an Emmy Nomination for Best Drama in the process.) The first season had a lot of heavy lifting to do introducing its enormous cast of characters and setting up the world of Westeros, and may have taken a few episodes to find its groove. But as the season went along it picked up quite a bit of momentum and a later episode featured the one of the ballsiest moves in television history and was a defining moment for the series.
Staying true to the books, the series unjustly killed off Eddard Stark (Sean Bean) who had essentially been the lead of the show. Can you even imagine if Tony Soprano had gotten whacked during season 1? Luckily they’ve set up such an expansive cast of interesting characters that we’re more than happy to follow the show into season 2, even with its head cut off, literally and figuratively. Anticipation is running high for the new season, which begins airing this Sunday night, and judging from the first four episodes, fans shouldn’t be disappointed.
Check out my review at The Playlist/Indiewire
game of thrones
hbo
review
tv
the playlist
25 Mar 12
Even with its large pre-existing fanbase, I think few people expected just how huge “The Hunger Games” would be this weekend. Based on the young adult novels by Suzanne Collins, the film has long been positioned as “the next ‘Twilight’” and while the prophecy may have come true at the box office, thankfully the source material is anything but. Funny enough, even the fanbases don’t have as much overlap as you might expect. A “Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 2” trailer played before the film and instead of “oohs” and “aahs” the crowd was unexpectedly silent with a few scattered laughs towards the end. (I booed.) Take that, sparkling vampires. Set in a dystopian future, each of 12 districts are forced by the Capitol to send 2 tributes - a boy and a girl between the ages of 12 and 18 - to battle to the death in a tournament on live TV until only one remains. The annual spectacle is called ‘The Hunger Games’ and was put in place after a rebellion by the now destroyed 13th District to discourage the other Districts from rising up against the government.
We experience the games through the eyes of 16 year old Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), a headstrong young girl from a poor mining colony who volunteers for the tournament after her young sister Prim is chosen. Katniss is sent to the Capitol with fellow tribute Peeta Melark (Josh Hutcherson) to prepare for the games. The Capitol is a garish city with extravagantly dressed citizens sporting even more ridiculously elaborate facial hair which includes support team Haymitch (Woody Harrelson), Effie (Elizabeth Banks) and Cinna (Lenny Kravitz). The trio train Katniss and Peeta not only how to stay alive but also how to win over the audience whose support could mean the difference between life and death. On the battlefield Katniss must use her resourcefulness to survive in the wild as an alliance forms between the other tributes who seek to hunt her down. Behind the scenes, all the elements are under the control of gamemaster Seneca Crane (Wes Bentley) under the advisement of President Snow (Donald Sutherland), who are looking to make good TV out of this, whether it be a manufactured love story or brutal death.
Pegged as “The Running Man” for the younger set, “The Hunger Games” the film is mostly a success and compared to a certain other megafranchise it’s a goddamned triumph. First, the good. This was not the film I had expected to see. Where most sci-fi films would have loaded up the opening with dense exposition, the first act here is sparse and emotional, dropping you into a world that feels lived in. Featuring mostly handheld camerawork and almost no music, I found myself quickly invested in Katniss’ story, which is actually quite rare. I wasn’t just going through the motions, I cared. This is in large part to Jennifer Lawrence, who is perfect as Katniss, despite whatever images had been conjured up by fans of the series. Not many actresses could have pulled off the strength of this character so convincingly without ever coming off macho or cold, Katniss has a focused strength and vulnerability that makes her a fascinating lead. The cast does a pretty good job across the board with a special shoutout to Stanley Tucci for his hilarious portrayal of TV host/nightmare Caesar Flickerman. Now, the could-have-been-better.
I was happily surprised at the restraint paid to the love-triangle particularly in the first half but the thing that isn’t as clear in the film is how much Katniss and Peeta are performing for the cameras and how much is genuine so any subtlety there is lost. And for all the visceral terror in the opening of the games, the tension doesn’t mount as they go along and the climax is underwhelming. The special effects are not always the best and maybe this is just a matter of expectations but if I see Katniss wielding a bow and arrow like a badass during the training I had expected her to be using it a little more during the actual games. I guess that gets into the tricky moral territory of having your lead heroine murdering other children. Which leads me to the other issue: despite what a great character she is, Katniss doesn’t seem to have any arc in the film. She’s a strong, resourceful girl at the beginning and still has those qualities at the end. If she’s supposed to undergo any kind of transformation or learn a valuable lesson, I missed it. Even the idea of finding a way to not play by the Capitol’s rules comes from Peeta and not something deep inside of her.
Though some of the elements appear to have been lost in the translation, being actually invested in the material helps you overlook some of the other elements. Who would have thought something so unconventional would come “from the director of ‘Seabiscuit’ and ‘Pleasantville’”? Credit director Gary Ross for mostly getting it right and making a blockbuster that doesn’t feel like one.
film
review
the hunger games
21 Mar 12
Mindless and watchable without ever really being anything approaching good, “Project X” is what would happen if 3 nerds were allowed into Last Night’s Party. Featuring scores of extras that look like more like American Apparel models than high school kids, the film follows unpopular trio Thomas (Thomas Mann), Costa (Oliver Cooper) and JB (Jonathan Daniel Brown) as they throw the most epic party of all time. Oh, and it follows this party through “found footage” recorded by classmate Dax (Dax Flame), who is their (mostly) unseen videographer. And that’s really about as far as the story goes. They piss off a drug dealer by stealing his garden gnome filled with, you guessed it, drugs, which results in a fire-laden finale. And your standard love interest storyline is given a cursory few minutes of screentime but really the bulk of the film is really just about glamorizing how awesome and crazy this party is. DJ’s, skinny dipping in the pool, drug taking, cops being outsmarted by kids, midgets punching dudes in the balls and all manner of hellraising is on display here. Basically if you liked what you saw in the trailers, this is that film. Produced by Todd Phillips (“The Hangover”), it’s a total wish fulfillment movie which has already inspired a rash of real-life imitators.
It’s also the least convincing and laziest attempt at found footage I’ve ever seen. Music plays over top of slickly edited montages, everyone appears to be miked including drug dealers inside of their homes who do not know they’re being filmed and the camera frequently cuts between one character and the next in dialogue together which would be impossible coming from one camera. It was actually extremely annoying thinking of all the ridiculous inconsistencies in the filmmaking and I kept wondering why they bothered making a found footage film at all? After several more creative uses of the technique, including the very clever teen superhero drama “Chronicle,” this film proved that the format can also be used to make a sometimes cheap looking music video film without regard for the intelligence of its audience. “Project X” is fun enough if you can turn your brain off for 85 minutes but sad to think that today’s teenagers might have this instead of “Superbad” or “Sixteen Candles” to look up to. Without characters or story, the film is a quick buzz but with no lasting effects.
film
review
project x
20 Mar 12
In a few short years the Duplass brothers have gone from filmmaking on the fringes of the indie scene to being embraced by indie Hollywood. The Duplass’ were on the ground floor of the mumblecore movement which involved a group of filmmakers and actors making heavily improvised, no budget films with loose narratives including titles like “The Puffy Chair,” “Hannah Takes The Stairs” and many, many more. But after several years of making these features, a few members of this group were rescued from their miniscule budgets for bigger things. Mark Duplass appeared alongside Ben Stiller in “Greenberg,” with Aubrey Plaza in the upcoming “Safety Not Guaranteed” and on the FX series “The League.” Along with his brother Jay, he’s co-written and directed “Cyrus” with Jonah Hill and John C. Reilly and now “Jeff, Who Lives At Home” with Jason Segel and Ed Helms. The story follows Jeff (Segel), an amiable slacker obsessed with the M. Night Shyamalan film “Signs.” He believes that the world may be trying to tell him something when a wrong-number dials him looking for Kevin and since no Kevin lives there, he sets off on a journey towards his destiny following Kevin-related signs along the way.
Across town he runs into his brother Pat (Ed Helms), a false bravado-spouting idiot who ignores his suffering wife Linda (Judy Greer) and buys a Porsche despite not having nearly enough money to afford one. The two suspect Pat’s wife Linda may be having an affair and set out like amateur PI’s to investigate her whereabouts. A B-storyline involves their mother Sharon (Susan Sarandon) who is pursued by a mysterious crush at work. The film sets out to prove that daydream believer Jeff isn’t foolish after all and is mostly harmless but not especially hilarious. The script makes easy targets of its characters- giving Pat a pathetic employee uniform and an affection for Hooters - and the camerawork is obnoxious at times. Full of random zooms that actually pull you out of the film, nearly every time I had to wonder why that particular moment needed to be punctuated? The cast does a fine job with the material and particularly Segel, who is good at playing characters that have seemingly no filter for their emotions. Hopefully he can find a more worthy showcase of his dramatic chops in the near future.
film
review
jeff who lives at home
19 Mar 12
After a killer lineup of films last year which included “Bridesmaids,” “Attack The Block,” “Kill List,” “Beginners” and “Conan O’Brien Can’t Stop” (all of which ended up on my Top 20), I decided I could no longer afford not to go to SXSW. So as promised, I trekked down to Texas for 4 days of film, beer and BBQ. I had such a great time in Austin - biblical rains notwithstanding - that I ended up skipping out on a handful of films I had planned to see just to meet up with friends and enjoy the city. (About half my active foursquare feed was in Austin last weekend, it was really pretty remarkable.) All in all, I saw 8 films and 3 episodes of a brilliant new HBO series, sat in on a few panels, interviewed the cast of “Killer Joe” and finally made my pilgrimage to the legendary Alamo Drafthouse. Barring horrific incident, I will definitely be back next year. Here, in descending order are my favorites from SXSW 2012.
1. Girls (dir: Lena Dunham) The aforementioned brilliant new HBO series about twentysomethings in NYC from “Tiny Furniture” writer/director/star Dunham and producer Judd Apatow shares more in common with Apatow’s “Freaks & Geeks” than it does with “Sex And The City.” I can’t wait for more. Read My Full Review | Read My Panel Recap
2. The Raid: Redemption (dir: Gareth Evans) Balls-to-the-wall action from Indonesia plays like an old school NES game and puts most modern action films to shame. Thrilling, spare, a perfect SXSW movie and probably my favorite film so far this year. Read My Full Review
3. Shut Up And Play The Hits (dir: Will Lovelace, Dylan Southern) Concert doc chronicles the final days of LCD Soundsystem & their epic last show at Madison Square Garden. If you’re not a fan before watching this, after witnessing their organ-rattling live set, you will be. God I miss them. Read My Full Review
4. Cabin In The Woods (dir: Drew Goddard) A smart, playful stab at horror films made by and for those that love them with a last act that is every horror nerd’s wet dream. A ton of fun, if not quite as transgressive as some critics might have you believe.Read My Full Review
5. Compliance (dir: Craig Zobel) Incredibly upsetting true-crime tale of manipulation and obedience at a fast food joint in Ohio. If it wasn’t true, I’d never believe it. Read My Full Review
6. 21 Jump Street (dir: Phil Lord, Chris Miller) Consistently hilarious and far better than a reboot of a 25 year old TV show has any right to be. Channing Tatum’s hilarious, scene-stealing peformance absolves him of any past cinematic sins. Read My Full Review
7. John Dies At The End (dir: Don Coscarelli) Horror/sci-fi/comedy about a psychedelic drug that enables the users to travel across dimensions is so confident in its utter weirdness, I’m almost inclined to think its my fault I could barely follow it. Possibly a midnight movie classic. Read My Full Review
8. Killer Joe (dir: William Friedkin) Southern fried noir with Matthew McConaughey as a sadistic cop cum contract killer. Mix of soap opera melodramatics and darker undertones plays like a Texas-set “Twin Peaks” if not quite as interesting. Read My Full Review | Read My Roundtable Interview
9. V/H/S (dir: David Bruckner, Glenn McQuaid, Radio Silence, Joe Swanberg, Ti West, Adam Wingard) Disappointing found footage anthology from 6 up-and-coming horror directors spotlights the limitations of the format with this mixed bag of spooky tales. Read My Full Review
10. Nature Calls (dir: Todd Rohal) Painfully unfunny boy scout comedy with Patton Oswalt and Johnny Knoxville as feuding brothers. Oswalt deserves better than this. Read My Full Review
film
review
sxsw
listomania
hbo
girls
the raid
cabin in the woods
shut up and play the hits
compliance
21 jump street
john dies at the end
killer joe
vhs
nature calls
