Archive for June, 2009

Amarcord

June 14, 2009

A vulgar, crassly funny, tender, always affectionate nostalgia trip, Fellini style. The director recalls his boyhood days growing up in small-town, Fascist-era Italy. Nino Rota’s score is lovely as are Giuseppe Rotunno’s precise, lyrical cinematography and the gracefully paced script by Fellini and Guerra. Funny, lively characterizations flavor the bawdy escapades of horny, mischievous school boys; their family lives are lovingly detailed as are the interrelationships in this community of delightfully unruly, irreverent school kids, harried mothers and fathers, aristocrats, beggars, and grandfathers wistful for life’s lustful prime. At first, this gathering of boorish characters with no redeeming qualities whatsoever may feel off-putting, but their evocation is so heartfelt that we grow to love each of them. Amarcord is an entrancing gem of an experience.

Grade: A

Directed by: Federico Fellini
Written by: Federico Fellini, Tonino Guerra
Cast: Bruno Zanin, Gianfilippo Carcano, Pupella Maggio, Armando Brancia, Magali Noël, Ciccio Ingrassia, Nando Orfei, Luigi Rossi, Josiane Tanzil

All the Real Girls

June 14, 2009

I’m boggled. This is the twenty-something filmmaker who was hailed as a real find? All the Real Girls confirms my suspicion that young, eager-beaver filmmakers should stick to subjects that youngsters can handle, like adventure movies or sci-fi action or the like. But never assume that just because you have poetic sensibilities, that your movie will convey something substantial. More often that not, the products of such filmmakers lack the sense of conveying a coherent theme or idea beyond the nominal or obvious.

All the Real Girls is about young love told by a young filmmaker, and, yet, it’s absolutely unsure of itself. Perhaps, then, movies like this prove that young love is a complex topic, too much so, for someone who hasn’t crossed to the other side of youth and experience. All Gordon Green can manage are wispy, dreamy images, blunt-edged characters and dialogue, splattered like so-much Cheese Wiz over a shapeless mess of a pseudo-poetic narrative. My theory: Get past thirty, read a lot of good literature, master the craft of storytelling and reflect honestly on your personal experience before you start shaping that experience into stories. Irritably bad performances all-around add to the slop: Why do each of the characters in Green’s movies sound retarded or verbally challenged? Except for one sharp scene from Patricia Clarkson, every bit of dialogue is obtuse, rambling and about as compelling as mud. A waste of time, unless you’re of the Sundance crowd.

Grade: C-

Directed by: David Gordon Green
Written by: David Gordon Green
Cast: Paul Schneider, Zooey Deschanel, Danny McBride

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

June 14, 2009

Never mind how you feel about Julian Schnabel the flamboyant bon vivant, as a filmmaker he’s one of the most inventive and captivating artists around. Each of his images is full of fire and feeling, as if the human heart had found its visual equivalent, and Schnabel’s third feature The Diving Bell and the Butterfly finds the artist in brilliant form. Beyond the level of the story, which is itself a stirring adaptation by Ronald Harwood of the best-selling memoir by Jean-Dominique Bouby, one can derive a great deal of the Diving Bell’s emotional power through the nourishing flow of its lovely, powerful imagery.

Bouby was the editor of the French edition of Elle magazine in the mid-90s, living the high life, complete with a covertible sports car, a beautiful girlfriend, and three doting children, when he was struck down by a stroke that left him completely paralyzed save for his left eye. In the movie, Bouby is played by the always-appealing Mathew Amalric. Thankfully, Amalric keeps his performance dialed down, never flying off the handle into needless theatrics, something that, in less talented hands, this role could easily have devolved into. Trapped inside his own body, his senses intact — a phenomenon called “Locked-In Syndrome” — peering out at the world through the porthole of a single eye, it’s no wonder that Bouby likened the experience to being dropped into the ocean depths in the diving suit of the film’s (and Bouby’s book’s) title.

He spends his days in his hospital bed, tended to by neurologists and therapists, feeling hardly more than a vegetable. But here’s the good news (or the bad news depending on how you see it): the women who care for him are all beautiful, and devote their heart and soul to his care. These include his therapist Henriette (Marie-Josèe Croze) who teaches Bouby how to communicate by “blinking out” letters to form words; Céline (Emmanuelle Seigner) with whom he had his children, who still carries a torch for him; and, finally, Claude (Anne Consigny), his scribe who takes down, one letter at a time, the book that Bouby writes in the course of the movie that describes his illness, the often terrifying existential challenges he had to surmount, and the spiritual strength he had to find to survive. The fact that Bouby’s world is populated by women could be read as a juvenile male chauvinist fantasy, but, really, these women represent not only Bouby’s salvation, but his ultimate punishment. Because he can neither act on his amorous feelings, nor, in the case of Céline, fully make amends for his shameful past behavior.

What sets Bouby free, in a sense, is his book, his butterfly. And in the slow, painstaking process of writing it, with Claude’s help, he’s able to rise out of the locked-in chamber of his body and express an entire universe of thoughts, feelings, yearings. These passages provide Schnabel with some of Diving Bell’s flights of fancy as when Bouby imagines lavish fantasies with his women, trips back in time to the corridors of his hospital during the Napoleonic days, and remembers vivid memories of his life pre-illness. It’s consistently engrossing filmmaking, but the most haunting sections are those that keep to Bouby’s optical point-of-view so we see the world, in all the fogginess and restrictiveness of his crippled vision. It’s a tactic that could have severely limited the expressiveness of the film, but not only does it carry the film visually but it delivers its most profound moments. When, in a the murky light of a hospital room, doctors hover over the screen, intently staring at the camera — the viewer now as Bouby — or when others stare with pained expressions directly at you, Schnabel and the eminent cinematographer Janusz Kaminski strikingly convey Bouby’s physical and moral plight. He’s reduced to nothing — just an eye — even though his voiceover tells us just how urgently he wishes to express himself, clawing at the walls of his soul to communicate to his family, friends, doctors. And when, after his book’s publication, Bouby’s mind begins to fail, the camera and soundtrack find ways to express that too, and with startling effectiveness.

Each of Diving Bell’s compositions is rendered with an impassioned sense of craft and texture such that they could’ve sprung only from the mind of a painter (which Schnabel is) or a painterly filmmaker. Perhaps it’s because Schnabel comes from painting that his narration and filmmaking seem so fresh, even audacious in how they try to capture the subject’s inner experience. Out of hand, Schnabel breaks conventional bonds of subjective narration, pulling to a “wider,” more objective view if he can heighten the resonance of any given scene, jumping points-of-view according to the needs of the moment. Is there a pattern to all this, I wondered? Maybe. But it doesn’t matter, because, as a viewer, the style feels utterly organic, totally sure of itself, rigorous yet unforced, always giving the sense that this is not only the best way, but the only way, to tell this particular story. And that’s high praise indeed.

Grade: A

Directed by: Julian Schnabel
Written by: Ronald Harwood
Cast: Mathieu Amalric, Emmanuelle Seigner, Marie-Josèe Croze, Anne Consigny, Jean-Pierre Cassel, Marina Hands, Max von Sydow, Isaach De Bankolé, Emma de Caunes

Juno

June 14, 2009

Probably the quirkiest coming-of-age comedy to come along in recent memory, Jason Reitman’s follow-up to his savagely entertaining Thank You For Smoking (2005) tackles teen pregnancy — a subject heretofore relegated to weepie melodramas, after-school specials, and health science tutorials. But Juno is something unlike any of those august aforementioned genres, proving itself to be many things at once and a stellar success at each. Diablo Cody’s lovely debut screenplay is, for its pure and uncompromising sense of the offbeat, the work of an untainted newcomer. Cody’s dialogue not only bristles with the kind of sarcastic one-liners that would make a John Hughes’ era Molly Ringwald green with envy, but also glows in several passages deeply moving in their human honesty and feeling.

Ellen Page made a striking impression in her high-wattage turn in the molestation thriller Hard Candy (2005) and delivered, I think, an even gutsier performance in Mouth to Mouth, the teenage runaway drama from later that year. Page has a guilelessness about her rare in movie stars — in a single scene, even in the course of a single exchange, Page can turn from sweet and coy to droll and sarcastic without missing a beat. She plays each moment without ego and with total candor, and that’s ultimately the secret to Juno’s success.

Page plays the title teenager, Juno MacGuff, who gets pregnant after she and her not-quite-boyfriend Paulie Bleeker (Michael Cera playing a somewhat sweeter and smarter version of the aw-shucks doofus he perfected in TV’s Arrested Development and this year’s generally super-good Superbad) seal the deal on Paulie’s chair one day. Juno decides to go through with the pregnancy, and, when it arrives, to give it up for adoption. She selects as prospective parents a yuppie couple, the Lorings, who live out in the upscale ‘burbs.

This may be the best thing Jennifer Garner has yet to date — as the nervous Vanessa Loring, anxious to adopt after being unable to conceive, Garner is a force of beautiful, radiant tragicomic energy, as she anxiously tries to support Juno through her pregnancy while trying to keep her marriage with frustrated musician Mark (Jason Bateman) together. The latter seems a rocky proposition from the moment we meet the Lorings: Vanessa seems fully committed to their decision to adopt, while Mark hems and haws. Indeed, Bateman, the star of Arrested Development, plays a character suffering from that very condition as Mark seems utterly incapable of growing out of his nostalgia for his own youth. Mark and the unwitting Juno develop an altogether strange bond over their mutual love of punk music, while Vanessa and Paulie seem both exiled into the outer orbit of their respective lives.

Mark and Juno’s relationship comes back to bite of them, and propels Juno into a closer and more meaningful bond with those she truly loves and needs — Paulie and Vanessa, of course, but her parents as well, played by the dynamite Allison Janney and J.K. Simmons. The reference earlier to John Hughes is apt again here as Simmons’ performance recalls Paul Dooley’s work opposite Ringwald as his heartsick daughter in Sixteen Candles. Like Dooley’s father, Simmons’ Mac MacGuff has a wry, bearish warmth and genuine compassion for his daughter that’s so rare in movies, a relationship without screaming matches and hissy fits, and exuding a pure paternal desire to understand his child. Ditto Janney’s stepmother Bren who’s as testy and dedicated a mom as they come in the movies.

Across the board, Juno boasts terrific work, from Reitman’s on-target direction and Cody’s bulls-eye script, to the performances, especially Page’s (who’s poised now for a legitimate shot at A-list stardom). What I came away admiring in Juno wasn’t necessarily the cleverness of its dialogue, or its silly, witty one-liners, but the heart beating througout, at the movie’s core. Ultimately, Juno is a movie about true love, acceptance, and doing right by the people who’ve stuck their necks out for you: those being family, your closest friends, and, in Juno’s case, your surrogate mother too. All in all, this is a heartfelt, tightly constructed piece of work that washes out the sour taste of another pregnancy themed comedy from earlier this year — the ubiquitous Judd Apatow’s overrated, overhyped, bloated-beyond-comprehension entitled…I’d rather not say.

Grade: A-

Directed by: Jason Reitman
Written by: Diablo Cody
Cast: Ellen Page, Michael Cera, Jennifer Garner, Jason Bateman, Allison Janney, J.K. Simmons, Olivia Thirlby

Starting Out in the Evening

June 14, 2009

It’s not so often that you get a movie about literary people that’s not dumbed down to appease the movie marketplace, whether commercial or arthouse. That’s why director Andrew Wagner’s Starting Out in the Evening, an adaptation of Brian Morton’s novel, is such cause to rejoice — a movie about a writer, and, better yet, unafraid to depict the writer’s life exactingly and sensitively. Indeed, it reaps a great deal of dramatic power from the writer’s quotidian struggles.

This is the kind of unsexy content that would scare the pants off any film promoter or producer: Starting Out in the Evening is about as far removed from the excesses and tragically hip quotient endemic to both commercial and indie cinema these days. The result is one of the year’s most pleasing films, intelligently written and directed, and featuring a veteran actor giving the performance of his career.

As Leonard Schiller, a washed-up writer, and a holdover from the ’60s New York literary scene, Frank Langella is towering and magnificent. While critics and Academy members will most likely remember showier roles by bigger stars, Langella’s work here packs more honesty, grit, and integrity than many of the actors’ destined for Oscar recognition (and, guess what, you’ll forget all of them about by summertime anyway).

Leonard Schiller mainly keeps to himself now, in the twilight of his life and career, his books out of print, and his popularity all but diminished. Still, he plods on, struggling through the manuscript of his latest (and probably last) novel. But he’s has got a major fan in Heather (Lauren Ambrose), a spunky and overzealous graduate student. Heather is determined to resurrect Schiller’s fame by way of her dissertation, for which she requests Schiller’s blessing and cooperation.

Spurned by both his writerly ego and survival instincts, Schiller agrees, thus setting the stage for a strange, mutually dependent and destructive relationship. Ambrose plays Heather the go-getter a bit too on-the-nose, but we do understand that, for her, championing Schiller’s work is an act of celebrating a man whose work was important to her at a critical time in her life. But her connection also makes her fixation on Schiller unhealthily obsessive. We know where Heather’s going and so does Schiller, but he’s too vulnernable and in need of an ego boost to resist her advances.

Played out as affectingly is Schiller’s relationship with his daughter Ariel (Lili Taylor) who’s in the midst of a biological-clock crisis. Ariel wants a baby, but has given up on a committed relationship with a man. Indeed, she’s given up on it such that she prefers unprotected sex with her current boyfriend in hopes she’ll get pregnant rather than pursue a serious relationship with him first. Ariel has lost her groove, and Schiller the father tries desperately to keep her from ruining her life. He’s none-too-happy about Ariel resuming a relationship with old flame Casey (Adrian Lester), the man who led her up the garden path once only to leave her stranded there. But here’s where Wager and co-writer Fred Parnes’ script acquits itself so beautifully. None of these characters — Schiller, Ariel, or Casey — act and react predictably to their circumstances: they fight, abuse, recriminate, manipulate, but in the end they choose to stick around, elevating themselves to a place they as yet had never been.

As their drama intensifies, so do the dynamics between Schiller and Heather, whose inquiries into Schiller’s private life — his rocky past marriage in particular — and whether it compromised his creative work bristles his nerves. As vexing and inappropriate as Heather’s behavior can be, Wagner and Parnes’ script underscores that it’s her youthful gratitude, a desire to revive the halcyon days of her own past (not just the writer’s), when she discovered Schiller’s work, that fuels her crusade, however wrong-headed it may be.

Starting Out features generally fine performances — though as Ariel, Lily Taylor may be too contrived in her flintiness, and Ambrose never gives Heather much emotional nuance — but it’s Langella’s work that stays with you. Some critics have charged that Langella’s role lacks humor, but it’s there in the wry smile and droll delivery, hiding behind the bespectecled eyes, a humor smoky and dry as a vintage wine. But humor is not the point here, this is the story of how a forgotten artist’s life, and his road towards reclaiming it. And Wagner and Langella have served it admirably, and their film is a godsend to those us starving for intelligent character-driven cinema.

Grade: A

Directed by: Andrew Wagner
Written by: Fred Parnes, Andrew Wagner
Cast: Frank Langella, Lauren Ambrose, Lili Taylor, Adrian Lester, Anitha Gandhi, Jessica Hecht, Karl Bury

Up

June 13, 2009

Up_pic

It’s pretty much a given that each new Pixar film is going to blow minds away with its rapturous digital artistry, and Up is no exception. With its clever, gorgeously textured evocations of everything from early American newsreels to misty, sub-tropical vistas, Up is every bit as ambitious and amazing as Pixar’s animation milestones as it spins its fable about retired balloon-seller and curmudgeonly widower, Carl Frederickson (voiced with gravelly gusto by Ed Asner), who looks the spitting image of the latter-day Spencer Tracy (think Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner).

The death of his wife, Ellie, has left Carl a sorrowful and bitter septuagenarian, nursing regret that he was never able to make good on Ellie’s dreams about one day going to Paradise Falls, a mysterious, exotic place somewhere in South America. Refusing to give in to real estate developers coveting his home as well as to the retirement-home orderlies who show up to take him away one morning, Carl takes off — literally — with the aid of a gigantic bouquet of candy-colored balloons and jerry-rigged sails, his sights set on Paradise Falls, vowing finally to honor Ellie’s lifelong wish.

No sooner has Carl soared over treetops and cityscapes — another of Pixar’s trademark vibrant montages — that he discovers he’s got a stowaway, the sweet, comically dim Russell (Jordan Nagai), a rotund boy scout who’d shown up on Carl’s doorstep the previous day and never quite gone away. Eager to win his final merit badge — to be earned after he helps out a senior citizen — Russell offers his services to the surly, petulant Carl.

This sets off a consistently engaging adventure yarn as Carl and Russell arrive at Paradise Falls and encounter a dapper, eccentric coot named Charles Muntz (Christopher Plu bmmer), an explorer-adventurer cut somewhere between Erroll Flynn and Howard Hughes. Carl has idolized Muntz since his boyhood. Indeed, in the wonderfully pitch-perfect mock newsreel that opens the film, we’ve learned how Muntz was the discoverer of the legendary Paradise Falls, from where he’d brought home the skeleton of a fabulous bird. When the authenticity of the skeleton was called into question, the zealous and disgraced Muntz embarked for Paradise Falls again, vowing to bring a live specimen. Ever since, Muntz has been on the hunt for the rare bird, using his spectacular Hindenberg-like airship as his base of operations, and a team of dogs as his assistants.

In perhaps the most obvious concession to the kiddie-movie crowd, Muntz’s dogs are all outfitted with collars that vocalize all their thoughts in a variety of cartoonish voices. It’s here that Up threatens to teeter into the pedestrian pandering of lesser studios’ animated fare (i.e. Paramount’s Ice Age franchise or Dreamworks’ Shrek). That the talking dogs are often so endearingly funny, and the jokes cute and clever without ever feeling derivative or infantile is a testament to Pixar’s high standards relative to its industry peers.

Of course, Carl and Russell promptly encounter the very bird — a dopey hybrid of a dodo and an ostrich — that Muntz has been seeking for decades. As reluctant as Carl is to befriend the creature, he resolves to help Russell save the bird once they catch wind of Muntz’s sinister motives towards it. Hence, Up locks itself inevitably into the groove of a by-the-numbers chase-and-rescue picture, embellished — thankfully! — by the vertiginous imagination and clever plotmaking of Pixar’s storytellers.

As entertaining as Up’s second-half is, it’s a far cry from the cinematic and emotional tour de force that opens this film: A lovely and telling montage of Carl and Ellie’s lifelong romance and married life, alternately tragic and joyous. These vignettes richly and efficiently portray lives of dreaming, togetherness, loss, and disappointment that would make cinema forebears like Griffith and Chaplin proud. Indeed, the first 20 minutes of Up rank as the best thing to roll out of the Pixar factory, perhaps ever.

Up deflates a bit of its early potential once it recognizes itself as a mass market film and, hence, falls into the familiar devices of an action-oriented, beat-by-beat plotline to keep the multiplex audience interested. Paradise Falls, for instance, loses the early sense of awe and wonder that cloaked it to become simply a backdrop to the plot-driven antics that power the bulk of the movie. Luckily, when it’s all said and done, Up lingers in the mind with its tale of an old man’s redemption, his honoring of the love of his life, and the rejuvenation of his own spirit, proving that, where it counts, Pixar’s magic still has sparks to spare.

Grade: B+

Directed by: Pete Docter, Bob Peterson
Written by: Bob Peterson
Cast: Ed Asner, Christopher Plummer, Jordan Nagai, Bob Peterson, Delroy Lindo, Jerome Ranft, John Ratzenberger, David Kaye, Elie Docter, Jeremy Leary

Herb & Dorothy

June 2, 2009

First-time filmmaker Megumi Sasaki’s documentary Herb & Dorothy is as simple and straightforward as the subjects of its title: a sweet, soft-spoken New York City couple that, over a 30-year period beginning in the early ’60s, amassed more than 4,000 works of minimalist and conceptual art whose value is estimated in the millions of dollars. Herb and Dorothy Vogel, now both retired, financed their collection using Herb’s salary as a postal clerk, while Dorothy’s income as a librarian covered their living expenses. Over the decades, their collection grew to fill every square inch of their one-bedroom, hobbit hole-like apartment.
Read it here…


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.