5/27/13, All Quiet on the Western Front, Best Production, Best Director, 1930
On Memorial Day this year it seemed appropriate to watch a war movie that in its essence is an anti-war movie. All Quiet on the Western Front was based on the book of the same name by Erich Maria Remarque. The movie was made twelve years after the 'war to end all wars' and is told from the German point of view, although aside from occasional bits of German songs, the soldiers could be from either side, which I think lends to its universal tone. The movie begins in a high school classroom with the teacher exalting the virtues and glory of joining the army to fight for the Fatherland. As often happens, the promised glory and triumph prove to be elusive and mostly fantasy. But that's for later. A few of the classmates join up together and start on their adventure, going through drills with a ghastly drill sergeant, eventually being sent to France. The shine starts to come off the penny when they get to their company and there is no food. The story follows the boys as they fight in the trenches, watch their friends get wounded and killed. One of the soldiers, Paul Baumer, goes home on leave after being wounded, and feels like a stranger. His father and his father's friends (who possibly saw military service but no war action) are busy trying to plan out the next moves for the army, take Paris, take Flanders, etc., like they were playing a game of Risk, while Paul sits there, incredulous, that they are so excited about more war. In the film, Paul does not share his wounds or what he has seen with his family. He revisits his old school and his former teacher who welcomes him back like a hero; this same teacher influenced Paul and his friends to join the war and he continues to espouse his pro-war feelings to his students. He asks Paul to tell them how wonderful it is, but Paul cannot. For his honesty, he is looked on as a coward; he decides to end his leave early and return to his brothers in arms. Paul returns to his company to find new, green recruits who have nothing to eat but sawdust. Based on the timeline I could put together from some of the things said, it's around 1917/1918, the war is almost at its end in the film (it's mentioned that Paul has served four years and enlisted in the early days).
The movie was made 83 years ago, but I think it holds up pretty well, sure sometimes the acting is a little wooden, and if it was made today, it probably would have been a lot more bloody and explicit, but it conveys a pretty timeless message through the eyes and experience of Paul Baumer. It won for Best Production (pre-Best Picture) and Best Director, and it was before many of the current categories existed (supporting actor, editing, effects, etc.), but I was surprised that Lew Ayres who played Baumer and Louis Wolheim who played Paul's mentor and friend, Katczinsky, weren't nominated; I thought Wolheim really deserved to be considered.
World War I, with its trench warfare tactics, gassing (although not shown in this movie) and the new technology known as the airplane, and the millions of soldiers (not to mention civilians) who were killed, influenced everything from literature, medicine and societal norms.
Two winners from 2012 - Silver Linings Playbook and Les Miserables
5/25/13, Silver Linings Playbook, Best Actress, 2012
I had heard such good things about Silver Linings Playbook I was really looking forward to it. I was not disappointed. It doesn't fit neatly into any normal categories, although it's classified as a romantic drama-comedy (that pretty much covers everything, doesn't it?). Patrick Solitano, Jr. (Bradley Cooper) struggles with bi-polar disorder, his broken marriage, his superstitious, the new woman in his life, and his compulsive, sports-obsessed father. Tiffany Maxwell (Jennifer Lawrence) who is dealing with her own issues, including her guilt over the recent death of her husband. Tiffany seems to get Patrick in a way that nobody else does or can and tries to get him to think about things other than his estranged wife. She asks him to participate in a competitive dance competition that she has always wanted to do. Reluctantly, and mainly because she is bribing him with the hope of delivering letters to his wife, he acquiesces. I think that when movies look at mental illness, they run the risk of oversimplifying it, being too maudlin, or poking fun at those suffering from it. I liked the way the Cooper and Lawrence portrayed their characters' anxieties, ticks, compulsions and insecurities. Robert DeNiro played Patrick Solitano, Sr. and his relationship with his son was fairly believable, and the irony of his own superstitious behaviors (verging on obsessive) seems to be lost on him. Jackie Weaver is Patrick Jr.'s mother, who doesn't always do what is technically/medically the right thing, but she tries to do the best for her son. I enjoyed the film, with its quirky and tender sensibilities. All four major cast members were nominated for Academy Awards, with Lawrence winning for Best Actress. There is a moment in the film where Tiffany takes Patrick Sr. head on, challenging his 'theory' that Pat needed to be in the room for their beloved Philadelphia Eagles to win; Tiffany doesn't back down and recites the results of every game that has been played where Pat was with her, or should have been with her. I would think that must have been a little intimidating as an actress to go toe to toe with Robert DeNiro, but she didn't back down at all. The Best Actress category was a full slate of talent, and I really thought it would be between Jessica Chastain in Zero Dark Thirty (who was my favorite), Lawrence and Emmanuelle Riva in Amour (I have not seen that yet). I was happy Lawrence won and I think she will continue to do really good roles (sorry, I have not seen The Hunger Games). If you have not seen Winter's Bone, you should, she was nominated that year for Best Actress as well, it was very different from what you might expect.
5/25/13, Les Miserables, Best Supporting Actress, Best Sound Mixing, Best Makeup and Hairstyling, 2012
I may be one of the last souls on earth not to have seen Les Mis, and I only watched Les Miserables because it was on my damn list. I will say it was a belatedly recognized Chanukah present to myself that I didn't go see this in the theater because I would have been Une Miserable. I love Victor Hugo's story and have seen a couple of the dramatic (i.e. NO SINGING) versions and enjoyed Anthony Perkins as the single-minded Javert. It was long, about 45 minutes longer than it needed to be. There were times when I thought the singing was really good, powerful, evocative, even soul stirring. There were just as many times where it sounded strained and pained, and I don't just mean Russell Crowe. Anne Hathaway won the Best Supporting Actress as Fantine, and I'm still holding with my pick of Sally Fields as Mary Todd Lincoln in Lincoln. Helen Hunt was nominated for her role as sex surrogate Cheryl Cohen-Greene in The Sessions, and I think for the sheer riskiness of the role, I mean, a sex surrogate for an almost totally paralyzed man, come on, who takes that job? She did an incredible job, but the movie was not as big and splashy as Lincoln and Les Miserables, so she probably didn't have a chance in hell. It's a good movie, and you should check it out. Jackie Weaver, from the above-described Silver Linings Playbook was good, but I don't think it was on the same plane as the other nominees. Anyway, back to the movie, see it if you must (you probably already have), but I think you will be fine if you don't. See Tom Hooper's The King's Speech instead (Helena Bonham Carter is great).
I had heard such good things about Silver Linings Playbook I was really looking forward to it. I was not disappointed. It doesn't fit neatly into any normal categories, although it's classified as a romantic drama-comedy (that pretty much covers everything, doesn't it?). Patrick Solitano, Jr. (Bradley Cooper) struggles with bi-polar disorder, his broken marriage, his superstitious, the new woman in his life, and his compulsive, sports-obsessed father. Tiffany Maxwell (Jennifer Lawrence) who is dealing with her own issues, including her guilt over the recent death of her husband. Tiffany seems to get Patrick in a way that nobody else does or can and tries to get him to think about things other than his estranged wife. She asks him to participate in a competitive dance competition that she has always wanted to do. Reluctantly, and mainly because she is bribing him with the hope of delivering letters to his wife, he acquiesces. I think that when movies look at mental illness, they run the risk of oversimplifying it, being too maudlin, or poking fun at those suffering from it. I liked the way the Cooper and Lawrence portrayed their characters' anxieties, ticks, compulsions and insecurities. Robert DeNiro played Patrick Solitano, Sr. and his relationship with his son was fairly believable, and the irony of his own superstitious behaviors (verging on obsessive) seems to be lost on him. Jackie Weaver is Patrick Jr.'s mother, who doesn't always do what is technically/medically the right thing, but she tries to do the best for her son. I enjoyed the film, with its quirky and tender sensibilities. All four major cast members were nominated for Academy Awards, with Lawrence winning for Best Actress. There is a moment in the film where Tiffany takes Patrick Sr. head on, challenging his 'theory' that Pat needed to be in the room for their beloved Philadelphia Eagles to win; Tiffany doesn't back down and recites the results of every game that has been played where Pat was with her, or should have been with her. I would think that must have been a little intimidating as an actress to go toe to toe with Robert DeNiro, but she didn't back down at all. The Best Actress category was a full slate of talent, and I really thought it would be between Jessica Chastain in Zero Dark Thirty (who was my favorite), Lawrence and Emmanuelle Riva in Amour (I have not seen that yet). I was happy Lawrence won and I think she will continue to do really good roles (sorry, I have not seen The Hunger Games). If you have not seen Winter's Bone, you should, she was nominated that year for Best Actress as well, it was very different from what you might expect.
5/25/13, Les Miserables, Best Supporting Actress, Best Sound Mixing, Best Makeup and Hairstyling, 2012
I may be one of the last souls on earth not to have seen Les Mis, and I only watched Les Miserables because it was on my damn list. I will say it was a belatedly recognized Chanukah present to myself that I didn't go see this in the theater because I would have been Une Miserable. I love Victor Hugo's story and have seen a couple of the dramatic (i.e. NO SINGING) versions and enjoyed Anthony Perkins as the single-minded Javert. It was long, about 45 minutes longer than it needed to be. There were times when I thought the singing was really good, powerful, evocative, even soul stirring. There were just as many times where it sounded strained and pained, and I don't just mean Russell Crowe. Anne Hathaway won the Best Supporting Actress as Fantine, and I'm still holding with my pick of Sally Fields as Mary Todd Lincoln in Lincoln. Helen Hunt was nominated for her role as sex surrogate Cheryl Cohen-Greene in The Sessions, and I think for the sheer riskiness of the role, I mean, a sex surrogate for an almost totally paralyzed man, come on, who takes that job? She did an incredible job, but the movie was not as big and splashy as Lincoln and Les Miserables, so she probably didn't have a chance in hell. It's a good movie, and you should check it out. Jackie Weaver, from the above-described Silver Linings Playbook was good, but I don't think it was on the same plane as the other nominees. Anyway, back to the movie, see it if you must (you probably already have), but I think you will be fine if you don't. See Tom Hooper's The King's Speech instead (Helena Bonham Carter is great).
A Day of Stars - Grant, Hepburn (times 2), Gable, Stewart
I have to say that when I usually have a whole slew of movies to watch (8 this weekend), the odds of me getting through them all are usually slim because of a) the weather is too nice b) I pick the longest movies in history and get retina burnout c) I run into a stinker and lose all motivation d) or (and this is a long shot) my social calendar fills up. Lucky for me (and you) a) the weather here in L'Etoile du Nord continues to stink as bad as the Minnesota Twins pitching staff b) none of the movies rivaled Cleopatra in terms of length and fit nicely into my cleaning schedule c) so far, I am four for for in terms of movie quality d) and this weekend, I am safely ensconced in seclusion. As I alluded to above, I have been really lucky to watch some great classic movies this weekend, filled with some of my all-time favorite actors, including James Stewart, Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant (my newest favorite), Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck. I didn't get my hopes up because 'classic' does not always mean great. But, you can judge for yourself.
5/24/13 The Philadelphia Story, Best Actor and Best Writing - Screenplay, 1940
Take James Stewart, Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant plus a couple of great supporting characters, good dialogue, mix them together and what do you get? The Philadelphia Story, that's what. Hepburn plays Philadelphia socialite, Tracy Lord, who is getting ready to enter into her second marriage to George Kittredge, after her first marriage failed to C.K. Dexter Haven (Cary Grant). The movie opens in what seemed to me as an homage to silent movies, with just the musical score playing and Hepburn and Grant engaging in a silent pantomime as she throws him out, breaks his golf club and he 'socks' her in the nose (it's actually not that violent, it's a push, but funny physical comedy). James Stewart, who won for Best Actor, plays Macaulay Connor a report for Spy magazine and Ruth Hussey as Liz Imbrie, staff photographer, are sent to cover the wedding. They both accept the assignment reluctantly because they are sneaking in, and that really isn't the story they are interested in covering. There are some behind the scenes shenanigans that set this assignment in motion, mainly being driven by C.K. Dexter Haven's continued feelings for Tracy Lord. Ruth Hussey was nominated as Best Supporting Actress for her role (she was a pleasant surprise, pulling off her lines ease and suitable sarcasm and humor), but she lost to Jane Darwell in The Grapes of Wrath. Connor and Imbrie visit the Lord home under the pretext of being friends of Tracy's brother, but they are put onto the ruse, and set out to beat the reporters at their own game. The plot uses the device of hidden identities/mistaken identities to great affect. The story is moved forward by great dialogue, sharp and pointed at times, and funny and insightful at others. The good stuff isn't limited to the stars, the writing is generous, giving Hussey the room to make Liz Imbrie more than set decoration, and Dinah, Tracy Lord's younger sister, has some scene-stealing moments. James Stewart won Best Actor over Henry Fonda in Grapes of Wrath, Laurence Olivier in Rebecca, Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator and Raymond Massey in Abe Lincoln in Illinois (I have not seen the last two yet), so it was definitely a competitive category. Stewart is wonderful, but so were Fonda and Olivier. I find it interesting to see movies from sixty or seventy years ago and find that sometimes the premise is still valid today, the press or paparazzi trying to bust in on a socialites' wedding (except maybe there is a difference, today they would film it and show it on Bravo as reality television). This was the second Cary Grant movie I saw this weekend (total serendipity), and I can see why he was so popular. He carried off the role as C.K. Dexter Haven like he was C.K. Dexter Haven, almost like he wasn't acting. He used body language and facial expressions to make C.K. come alive. I haven't really mentioned Hepburn. She was a force to be reckoned with in real life and no shrinking violet on the screen either; comfortable doing comedy with Spencer Tracy (my sentimental favorite is Desk Set, which was required viewing in library school and very prescient in terms of technology) and drama, The African Queen, On Golden Pond, etc. As Tracy Lord, she verbally spars with all of the male characters, Haven, Kittredge, Connor and her father. She doesn't actually always win these tete a tetes, but she sure makes them interesting. This movie got Saturday off to a great start for me. Movies - 1 Chores - 0
5/25/13 Mutiny on the Bounty, Best Picture 1935
If you're a follower of these musings, then you may remember one of my earlier reviews of The Private Lives of Henry the VIII and my thoughts on Charles Laughton's performance. I stand by that, but as Captain Bligh, Laughton was wonderful and convincing as the sadistic and driven captain of the HMS Bounty. In The Private Lives of Henry the VIII, I thought he overacted, but in Mutiny on the Bounty, I didn't think he overacted at all, he was restrained, even in his vitriolic outbursts.The only thing that kept niggling at me were his eyebrows. They were so prominent they should have had separate billing. Laughton may have not felt compelled to ham it up because Clark Gable as Fletcher Christian and Franchot Tone as Roger Byam (last seen by me in The Lives of a Bengal Lancer, for which I did not care at all) were fairly restrained; I don't know, that's total supposition on my part, but whatever it was, it worked. All three were nominated as Best Actor, although none of them won. The movie was released in 1935, way before CGI or any of the great advances in special effects with which we are all familiar, so that makes the stormy seas scenes all that much more impressive to me. Gable (an Ohio native, which is good for 10 bonus points) was a great foil to Laughton, playing the officer bound by naval rules, but eventually pushed over his limits by his empathy and real fondness for his men, leading him to mutiny. Franchot Tone as Byam had to grow on me, I found him annoying and too earnest for his own good (perhaps that was the acting part?), but his character showed a fortitude that surprised me. I am very interested in British naval history and loved the Horatio Hornblower series that was on A&E years ago (before it became a reality TV channel) and have visited Portsmouth and been on the HMS Victory. There are many reasons to watch this movie, and I hope you do. Movies - 2 Chores - 0.
5/24/13 The Philadelphia Story, Best Actor and Best Writing - Screenplay, 1940
Take James Stewart, Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant plus a couple of great supporting characters, good dialogue, mix them together and what do you get? The Philadelphia Story, that's what. Hepburn plays Philadelphia socialite, Tracy Lord, who is getting ready to enter into her second marriage to George Kittredge, after her first marriage failed to C.K. Dexter Haven (Cary Grant). The movie opens in what seemed to me as an homage to silent movies, with just the musical score playing and Hepburn and Grant engaging in a silent pantomime as she throws him out, breaks his golf club and he 'socks' her in the nose (it's actually not that violent, it's a push, but funny physical comedy). James Stewart, who won for Best Actor, plays Macaulay Connor a report for Spy magazine and Ruth Hussey as Liz Imbrie, staff photographer, are sent to cover the wedding. They both accept the assignment reluctantly because they are sneaking in, and that really isn't the story they are interested in covering. There are some behind the scenes shenanigans that set this assignment in motion, mainly being driven by C.K. Dexter Haven's continued feelings for Tracy Lord. Ruth Hussey was nominated as Best Supporting Actress for her role (she was a pleasant surprise, pulling off her lines ease and suitable sarcasm and humor), but she lost to Jane Darwell in The Grapes of Wrath. Connor and Imbrie visit the Lord home under the pretext of being friends of Tracy's brother, but they are put onto the ruse, and set out to beat the reporters at their own game. The plot uses the device of hidden identities/mistaken identities to great affect. The story is moved forward by great dialogue, sharp and pointed at times, and funny and insightful at others. The good stuff isn't limited to the stars, the writing is generous, giving Hussey the room to make Liz Imbrie more than set decoration, and Dinah, Tracy Lord's younger sister, has some scene-stealing moments. James Stewart won Best Actor over Henry Fonda in Grapes of Wrath, Laurence Olivier in Rebecca, Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator and Raymond Massey in Abe Lincoln in Illinois (I have not seen the last two yet), so it was definitely a competitive category. Stewart is wonderful, but so were Fonda and Olivier. I find it interesting to see movies from sixty or seventy years ago and find that sometimes the premise is still valid today, the press or paparazzi trying to bust in on a socialites' wedding (except maybe there is a difference, today they would film it and show it on Bravo as reality television). This was the second Cary Grant movie I saw this weekend (total serendipity), and I can see why he was so popular. He carried off the role as C.K. Dexter Haven like he was C.K. Dexter Haven, almost like he wasn't acting. He used body language and facial expressions to make C.K. come alive. I haven't really mentioned Hepburn. She was a force to be reckoned with in real life and no shrinking violet on the screen either; comfortable doing comedy with Spencer Tracy (my sentimental favorite is Desk Set, which was required viewing in library school and very prescient in terms of technology) and drama, The African Queen, On Golden Pond, etc. As Tracy Lord, she verbally spars with all of the male characters, Haven, Kittredge, Connor and her father. She doesn't actually always win these tete a tetes, but she sure makes them interesting. This movie got Saturday off to a great start for me. Movies - 1 Chores - 0
5/25/13 Mutiny on the Bounty, Best Picture 1935
If you're a follower of these musings, then you may remember one of my earlier reviews of The Private Lives of Henry the VIII and my thoughts on Charles Laughton's performance. I stand by that, but as Captain Bligh, Laughton was wonderful and convincing as the sadistic and driven captain of the HMS Bounty. In The Private Lives of Henry the VIII, I thought he overacted, but in Mutiny on the Bounty, I didn't think he overacted at all, he was restrained, even in his vitriolic outbursts.The only thing that kept niggling at me were his eyebrows. They were so prominent they should have had separate billing. Laughton may have not felt compelled to ham it up because Clark Gable as Fletcher Christian and Franchot Tone as Roger Byam (last seen by me in The Lives of a Bengal Lancer, for which I did not care at all) were fairly restrained; I don't know, that's total supposition on my part, but whatever it was, it worked. All three were nominated as Best Actor, although none of them won. The movie was released in 1935, way before CGI or any of the great advances in special effects with which we are all familiar, so that makes the stormy seas scenes all that much more impressive to me. Gable (an Ohio native, which is good for 10 bonus points) was a great foil to Laughton, playing the officer bound by naval rules, but eventually pushed over his limits by his empathy and real fondness for his men, leading him to mutiny. Franchot Tone as Byam had to grow on me, I found him annoying and too earnest for his own good (perhaps that was the acting part?), but his character showed a fortitude that surprised me. I am very interested in British naval history and loved the Horatio Hornblower series that was on A&E years ago (before it became a reality TV channel) and have visited Portsmouth and been on the HMS Victory. There are many reasons to watch this movie, and I hope you do. Movies - 2 Chores - 0.
 |
| Nelson - Portsmouth, 2002, tbacker |
5/25/13 Roman Holiday, Best Actress, Best Costume Design - B&W, Best Story, 1953
Roman Holiday was released sixty years ago, and it still holds up today. It was major motion picture debut of the pixie-like Audrey Hepburn, and she knocked it out of the park by winning the Best Actress. Hepburn plays Princess Anne, who is in Rome on a European tour and decides she is fed up with the over-scheduling of her life and stages a breakout. Gregory Peck plays Joe Bradley, an American journalist who realizes the Princess is not just a regular tourist and embarks to help her enjoy all kinds of adventures. Eddie Albert plays Bradley's rascally friend and photographer, Irving Radovich; Irving captures all kinds of candid photos, with the hopes of cashing in with Joe on an exclusive. The movie was filmed on location in Italy and it serves as a travelogue with scenes around the Colosseum, the Trevi Fountain and Castel Sant'Angelo. Hepburn is one of my favorite actresses, not only for her acting (My Fair Lady, Breakfast at Tiffany's, Children's Hour to name just a few), but for her humanitarian work. She was a class act. I have mentioned my fondness for Gregory Peck, especially as Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird, and he was terrific here, very comfortable in the role, not as wooden as he was (or I thought he was in Spellbound where it was painful to watch him). He and Hepburn seemed like they had been acting together forever, and his physical comedy with Eddie Albert's character was funny and well-timed. The movie's costume designed, Edith Head, won an Academy Award for Best Costume Design in a B&W movie. I forgot to mention that Edith Head also did the costume design for To Catch a Thief and was responsible for the incredible white gown that Grace Kelly wore. The other award was for Best Story, which was won by Dalton Trumbo, except it wasn't. Trumbo is part of a chapter in Hollywood that most people would like to forget, the blacklisting of the 1950s and appearances by many writers, directors and actors in front of the House Un-American Activities Committee. Trumbo wrote many great screenplays, several under pseudonyms or 'fronted' by other people so he could still make money to support his family. There is a documentary (I think I saw it on PBS?) called Trumbo which tells his story through narration done by Donald Sutherland, Liam Neeson and others; it's well worth viewing if you're interested in Hollywood of that period. If this movie (or The Philadelphia Story) was made to today, or 'updated. since there are no new ideas, it would have been filled with sex and profanity (I don't object to either, only when they are used to substitute for actual substance); Peck would have slept with Hepburn (Stewart would have slept with Katharine Hepburn); when Joe Bradley spills wine on Irving, f-bombs would have been flying all over the place. Movies like the four I have watched so far used witty dialogue, innuendo (only), gorgeous scenery and costumes and actual acting talent to make timeless classics. They may take twenty minutes or so to get the story rolling, so you may have to exercise a little more patience than in a big action flick or modern romantic comedy, but it will be well worth it. And the best thing is, because the movies lack all of the features of 21st century action/comedy/dramas, you can actually watch these as a family. Movies 3, Chores - 0, oh well, there's always Monday.
 |
| Colosseum 2006 tbacker |
 |
| trevi fountain 2006 tbacker |
Dashing and Debonair - Cary Grant and Grace Kelly
5/24/13 To Catch a Thief, Best Cinematography - Color, 1955
To Catch a Thief is set in the south of France and Monte Carlo. John Robie (Cary Grant) is a reformed/retired jewel thief living in France and Francie Stevens (Grace Kelly) is a wealthy American woman traveling in Europe with her mother; Francie is looking for a husband. There have been a string of jewel robberies and Robie is the prime suspect. As he sets out to prove his innocence, he meets the Stevens women under the guise of being a lumberman from Portland, Oregon. Kelly and Grant are wonderful; I had never seen a movie with either one of them before (I don't think the Flintstones episode where a Cary Grant-like character appears counts). They were both great, the dialog seemed to roll right off their tongues, very natural and they were fun to watch. Grace Kelly was just captivating; she goes on the offensive with Grant in their little flirtation, an example of a strong Hitchcock female character (Doris Day in The Man Who Knew Too Much to name one). Oh, did I mention this is an Alfred Hitchcock movie? Before I started this project, I always associated Hitchcock with really scary movies (I blame that on The Birds), but now in my later years, I see they are more about the suspense factor. I didn't think there was a lot of suspense in this, not like edge of your seat suspense, like Rebecca, but there is a little mystery. It's much more about the interplay between Grant and Kelly, and the setting of the south of France, which is beautiful. Francie's mother provides some comedic moments, and I am surprised that Jessie Royce Landie did not get a nomination for Best Supporting Actress. Both Grant and Kelly appeared in other Hitchcock movies and I am looking forward to watching. The movie did win the Oscar for Best Cinematography - Color, and I thought it was fine, but nothing that really blew me away with mood-setting techniques or anything. I totally recommend this if for nothing else than to watch Grace Kelly. She only made two more films after this and then retired to be the Princess of Monaco. The DVD had special features, including commentary about the cast from Hitchcock's daughter and granddaughter and it was interesting to learn about the affection he had for the actors (he worked several times with the main cast members).
To Catch a Thief is set in the south of France and Monte Carlo. John Robie (Cary Grant) is a reformed/retired jewel thief living in France and Francie Stevens (Grace Kelly) is a wealthy American woman traveling in Europe with her mother; Francie is looking for a husband. There have been a string of jewel robberies and Robie is the prime suspect. As he sets out to prove his innocence, he meets the Stevens women under the guise of being a lumberman from Portland, Oregon. Kelly and Grant are wonderful; I had never seen a movie with either one of them before (I don't think the Flintstones episode where a Cary Grant-like character appears counts). They were both great, the dialog seemed to roll right off their tongues, very natural and they were fun to watch. Grace Kelly was just captivating; she goes on the offensive with Grant in their little flirtation, an example of a strong Hitchcock female character (Doris Day in The Man Who Knew Too Much to name one). Oh, did I mention this is an Alfred Hitchcock movie? Before I started this project, I always associated Hitchcock with really scary movies (I blame that on The Birds), but now in my later years, I see they are more about the suspense factor. I didn't think there was a lot of suspense in this, not like edge of your seat suspense, like Rebecca, but there is a little mystery. It's much more about the interplay between Grant and Kelly, and the setting of the south of France, which is beautiful. Francie's mother provides some comedic moments, and I am surprised that Jessie Royce Landie did not get a nomination for Best Supporting Actress. Both Grant and Kelly appeared in other Hitchcock movies and I am looking forward to watching. The movie did win the Oscar for Best Cinematography - Color, and I thought it was fine, but nothing that really blew me away with mood-setting techniques or anything. I totally recommend this if for nothing else than to watch Grace Kelly. She only made two more films after this and then retired to be the Princess of Monaco. The DVD had special features, including commentary about the cast from Hitchcock's daughter and granddaughter and it was interesting to learn about the affection he had for the actors (he worked several times with the main cast members).
Judy Holliday - NOT a dumb blonde
5/19/13, Born Yesterday, Best Actress, 1950
After watching Born Yesterday, my biggest regret was that I was not more familiar with Judy Holliday's work, but I can safely say that will change. She plays a dumb blonde, a former chorus girl, who has taken up with a brutish troglodyte, played by Broderick Crawford (All the King's Men). The irony in her portrayal is that according to Wikipedia , Holliday had an IQ of 172, so she was no dummy. Billie Dawn (Holliday) and Harry Brock (Crawford) come to Washington, D.C. to try and buy a Congressman and his vote (in another bit of irony, William Holden's character gives an impassioned speech about the honesty of people in Congress...I laughed out loud). Harry is boorish and aggressive and really not very likable at all; Billie is very rough around the edges and not the brightest bulb on the tree, but there is something about her that I did like. The movie was filmed in the 1950s and there were moral standards to uphold, Billie and Harry are not married, so they do not sleep together; they have separate suites in the wing Harry has booked at the hotel. William Holden plays Paul Verrall, a writer who starts out interviewing Harry, but after Billie embarrasses Harry in a meeting with the Congressman and his wife, Harry decides Billie needs some tutoring, and Paul becomes Henry Higgins to Billie's Eliza Doolittle. Paul and Billie visit all the sites in Washington, and Paul shares with Billie information on the Founding Fathers, music, literature, art, and she is enjoying the experience...mostly. Knowledge is power, but it also shows Billie how much she didn't know and that Harry really wasn't any kind of great guy. The story itself isn't so unique or special, Harry is very clearly bad and Paul is very clearly good, but Holliday was a joy to watch, ditzy, yet insightful. Her comedic timing was spot on, and she did more with 'WHAT?" than some actors due with a whole soliloquy. She had some good dramatic moments as well. Judy Holliday won for Best Actress, and it was big year with two nominees from All About Eve and Gloria Swanson from Sunset Boulevard (also starring William Holden, nominated for Best Actor). Definitely go with Holliday on this one. She made the movie. It was also nice to see William Holden do something different than in The Bridge on the River Kwai or Stalag 17; he was very versatile actor. I totally recommend this movie, I don't think you'll regret it.
After watching Born Yesterday, my biggest regret was that I was not more familiar with Judy Holliday's work, but I can safely say that will change. She plays a dumb blonde, a former chorus girl, who has taken up with a brutish troglodyte, played by Broderick Crawford (All the King's Men). The irony in her portrayal is that according to Wikipedia , Holliday had an IQ of 172, so she was no dummy. Billie Dawn (Holliday) and Harry Brock (Crawford) come to Washington, D.C. to try and buy a Congressman and his vote (in another bit of irony, William Holden's character gives an impassioned speech about the honesty of people in Congress...I laughed out loud). Harry is boorish and aggressive and really not very likable at all; Billie is very rough around the edges and not the brightest bulb on the tree, but there is something about her that I did like. The movie was filmed in the 1950s and there were moral standards to uphold, Billie and Harry are not married, so they do not sleep together; they have separate suites in the wing Harry has booked at the hotel. William Holden plays Paul Verrall, a writer who starts out interviewing Harry, but after Billie embarrasses Harry in a meeting with the Congressman and his wife, Harry decides Billie needs some tutoring, and Paul becomes Henry Higgins to Billie's Eliza Doolittle. Paul and Billie visit all the sites in Washington, and Paul shares with Billie information on the Founding Fathers, music, literature, art, and she is enjoying the experience...mostly. Knowledge is power, but it also shows Billie how much she didn't know and that Harry really wasn't any kind of great guy. The story itself isn't so unique or special, Harry is very clearly bad and Paul is very clearly good, but Holliday was a joy to watch, ditzy, yet insightful. Her comedic timing was spot on, and she did more with 'WHAT?" than some actors due with a whole soliloquy. She had some good dramatic moments as well. Judy Holliday won for Best Actress, and it was big year with two nominees from All About Eve and Gloria Swanson from Sunset Boulevard (also starring William Holden, nominated for Best Actor). Definitely go with Holliday on this one. She made the movie. It was also nice to see William Holden do something different than in The Bridge on the River Kwai or Stalag 17; he was very versatile actor. I totally recommend this movie, I don't think you'll regret it.
An anachronistic piece of twaddle
5/12/13, Shampoo, Best Supporting Actress, 1975
I wanted time to percolate before I wrote anything about Shampoo, thinking perhaps I would change my mind or feel differently. I would have to wait a long time, because it's been three days and I'm not feeling any different. I may also be carrying over my bitterness from seeing The Great Gatsby Monday night and losing two and a half hours of my life and getting to bed too late. Or, I put on my crabby pants today. Oh hell, it's probably all three. Some movies translate well over the decades, you might notice they don't have cell phones or they smoke in every scene in every restaurant (a big no-no these days), and maybe the clothes seem strange, but you still buy the premise and the characters. Worst case scenario, you get a cinematic history lesson. I don't know what it was, but I didn't like anything about the movie, not the characters (someone will have to explain the fascination people have with Warren Beatty because I do not get it), not the storyline, which was really how this oversexed hairdresser was hooking up with three women in the span of a couple of days (Wikipedia says 24 hours, but that must be Hollywood time, it didn't make sense to me). And by the way, for what it's worth coming from me, the hairstyles were awful, even for 1968 (but filmed in 1975). I had Barbie dolls with better hair. It was set on the eve of the 1968 presidential election (Nixon won) and there is a political dinner, but that really has very little to do with it. It's hedonism in its worst form, and perhaps that is the heart of my issue. I've never been accused of hedonism in any form, and that 'free love' of the late 1960s runs counter to the last thirty years which have seen the AIDS/HIV epidemic and subsequent fight to find a cure. I think if that would have been a smaller part of the movie instead of the whole plot, I might be writing a different review. Lee Grant won for Best Supporting Actress, and I don't get that one either. Nothing stood out about her performance, and I kind of think Julie Christie should have been nominated, if just for having to wear one of the above-mentioned bad hairstyles. This is Laura from Dr. Zhivago for crying out loud. She deserves better. Omar Sharif would have fought for her dignity, at least.
It's off my list. I don't have to watch it again.I think I have a comedy coming from the library this weekend. Perhaps that will improve my disposition. Oh, and as for Gatsby, read the book and use your imagination.
I wanted time to percolate before I wrote anything about Shampoo, thinking perhaps I would change my mind or feel differently. I would have to wait a long time, because it's been three days and I'm not feeling any different. I may also be carrying over my bitterness from seeing The Great Gatsby Monday night and losing two and a half hours of my life and getting to bed too late. Or, I put on my crabby pants today. Oh hell, it's probably all three. Some movies translate well over the decades, you might notice they don't have cell phones or they smoke in every scene in every restaurant (a big no-no these days), and maybe the clothes seem strange, but you still buy the premise and the characters. Worst case scenario, you get a cinematic history lesson. I don't know what it was, but I didn't like anything about the movie, not the characters (someone will have to explain the fascination people have with Warren Beatty because I do not get it), not the storyline, which was really how this oversexed hairdresser was hooking up with three women in the span of a couple of days (Wikipedia says 24 hours, but that must be Hollywood time, it didn't make sense to me). And by the way, for what it's worth coming from me, the hairstyles were awful, even for 1968 (but filmed in 1975). I had Barbie dolls with better hair. It was set on the eve of the 1968 presidential election (Nixon won) and there is a political dinner, but that really has very little to do with it. It's hedonism in its worst form, and perhaps that is the heart of my issue. I've never been accused of hedonism in any form, and that 'free love' of the late 1960s runs counter to the last thirty years which have seen the AIDS/HIV epidemic and subsequent fight to find a cure. I think if that would have been a smaller part of the movie instead of the whole plot, I might be writing a different review. Lee Grant won for Best Supporting Actress, and I don't get that one either. Nothing stood out about her performance, and I kind of think Julie Christie should have been nominated, if just for having to wear one of the above-mentioned bad hairstyles. This is Laura from Dr. Zhivago for crying out loud. She deserves better. Omar Sharif would have fought for her dignity, at least.
It's off my list. I don't have to watch it again.I think I have a comedy coming from the library this weekend. Perhaps that will improve my disposition. Oh, and as for Gatsby, read the book and use your imagination.
Animated Shorts Nominees 2012
2012 Nominees for Best Animated Shorts
The winner of the Best Animated Short for 2012 was Paperman which I really enjoyed. I had the opportunity to find and watch the other nominees (courtesy of YouTube) and I think I am glad I did not have to cast a vote because it would have been tough.
I had two other favorites that I thought would have been worthy of the Oscar. Head over Heels used claymation (think the California Raisins) and told the story of a couple that has been together a very long time. You can tell this by the way they seem to tolerate each other, they who their weariness in the actions and expressions. Adding a level of complexity is the upside down living situation they have, one lives on the ceiling and the other lives on the floor (head over heels, get it?), so there are frequent disagreements about how pictures should hang and how furniture should be placed. The husband makes a peace offering, but due to the whole gravity thing and a misunderstanding, it gets rebuffed. The ending is very sweet and hopeful. I thought it was a great story (again no dialog) and I really liked the animation, the tones are kind of muddy, more earth tones, not a lot of bright colors, but I think it worked.
The other one that I watched (twice actually) was Fresh Guacamole which used stop-motion animation. It basically demonstrates how to make guacamole, except instead of real vegetables, household objects are used (toy grenade instead of an avocado, tomato-shaped pin cushion instead of a real tomato). It sounds bizarre and it is, but I was compelled to watch, and then I watched another short by the same artist (PES) and then I signed up for his YouTube channel. It probably didn't win because it was not provocative enough or 'deep' enough, but it's worth watching, and bonus, it's less than two minutes long.
Maggie Simpson in The Longest Daycare was as you might gather from the name, a Simpsons short. I don't usually watch The Simpsons but from what I have watched, the animation style was pretty much the same. The big difference, I think, was there was no dialog, plenty of ambient and natural sounds, but no speaking (I don't think Maggie speaks anyway, but Marge drops her off and picks up from daycare and doesn't utter a sound). It was pretty fast paced (especially compared to the next short I'll review which seemed endless) and I found myself trying to follow all of the jokes found in the signage and there was lot. The soundtrack was also used to great effect. Maggie matches wits with a kid who gets sick pleasure from smashing butterflies. Maggie sets out to protect a caterpillar soon to be butterfly. There's a chase and a narrow escape, anything else would give it away. It was clever and fun to watch, but could not compete with Paperman or Head Over Heels.
This last short was my least favorite short that I have seen in a while. Adam and Dog stylistically reminded me of old school Disney animation (in fact there were former Disney animators who worked on it), but the story? I don't know where that came from. It's long and ponderous (which should tell you everything you want to know because it was really less than 30 minutes) and I did not find anything to recommend it. It is set in some prehistoric or perhaps biblical time (I would not have used biblical, except I found that information on Wikipedia). The dog rambles around, exploring the vast forest/jungle and then finds 'Adam'. They hang out a little and then go their separate ways, but the dog finds his friend again. At this point I will note that Adam is sans clothes, as in wearing nothing but what the good lord gave him. The drawings are not explicitly detailed, but if you have young kids who notice those things, and you don't want to have to explain anything, you may just want to skip it since it's not very good anyway. Well, Adam and the dog get along just swell, until Adam meets a woman (Eve? I say with some certainty but not completely). Adam and his new girl have other things on their minds besides playing fetch with Rover. After what I could only infer as having carnal relations, Adam and the woman appear changed, disfigured, malformed almost. Quite frankly, I stopped caring at this point and was just looking at the timer for how many hours, I mean minutes, I had left. No question I thought the animation was well done, a complex use of 'light' in the settings, but the story/message? Eh.
I did find all of these on YouTube, so you can check them out for yourself.
The winner of the Best Animated Short for 2012 was Paperman which I really enjoyed. I had the opportunity to find and watch the other nominees (courtesy of YouTube) and I think I am glad I did not have to cast a vote because it would have been tough.
I had two other favorites that I thought would have been worthy of the Oscar. Head over Heels used claymation (think the California Raisins) and told the story of a couple that has been together a very long time. You can tell this by the way they seem to tolerate each other, they who their weariness in the actions and expressions. Adding a level of complexity is the upside down living situation they have, one lives on the ceiling and the other lives on the floor (head over heels, get it?), so there are frequent disagreements about how pictures should hang and how furniture should be placed. The husband makes a peace offering, but due to the whole gravity thing and a misunderstanding, it gets rebuffed. The ending is very sweet and hopeful. I thought it was a great story (again no dialog) and I really liked the animation, the tones are kind of muddy, more earth tones, not a lot of bright colors, but I think it worked.
The other one that I watched (twice actually) was Fresh Guacamole which used stop-motion animation. It basically demonstrates how to make guacamole, except instead of real vegetables, household objects are used (toy grenade instead of an avocado, tomato-shaped pin cushion instead of a real tomato). It sounds bizarre and it is, but I was compelled to watch, and then I watched another short by the same artist (PES) and then I signed up for his YouTube channel. It probably didn't win because it was not provocative enough or 'deep' enough, but it's worth watching, and bonus, it's less than two minutes long.
Maggie Simpson in The Longest Daycare was as you might gather from the name, a Simpsons short. I don't usually watch The Simpsons but from what I have watched, the animation style was pretty much the same. The big difference, I think, was there was no dialog, plenty of ambient and natural sounds, but no speaking (I don't think Maggie speaks anyway, but Marge drops her off and picks up from daycare and doesn't utter a sound). It was pretty fast paced (especially compared to the next short I'll review which seemed endless) and I found myself trying to follow all of the jokes found in the signage and there was lot. The soundtrack was also used to great effect. Maggie matches wits with a kid who gets sick pleasure from smashing butterflies. Maggie sets out to protect a caterpillar soon to be butterfly. There's a chase and a narrow escape, anything else would give it away. It was clever and fun to watch, but could not compete with Paperman or Head Over Heels.
This last short was my least favorite short that I have seen in a while. Adam and Dog stylistically reminded me of old school Disney animation (in fact there were former Disney animators who worked on it), but the story? I don't know where that came from. It's long and ponderous (which should tell you everything you want to know because it was really less than 30 minutes) and I did not find anything to recommend it. It is set in some prehistoric or perhaps biblical time (I would not have used biblical, except I found that information on Wikipedia). The dog rambles around, exploring the vast forest/jungle and then finds 'Adam'. They hang out a little and then go their separate ways, but the dog finds his friend again. At this point I will note that Adam is sans clothes, as in wearing nothing but what the good lord gave him. The drawings are not explicitly detailed, but if you have young kids who notice those things, and you don't want to have to explain anything, you may just want to skip it since it's not very good anyway. Well, Adam and the dog get along just swell, until Adam meets a woman (Eve? I say with some certainty but not completely). Adam and his new girl have other things on their minds besides playing fetch with Rover. After what I could only infer as having carnal relations, Adam and the woman appear changed, disfigured, malformed almost. Quite frankly, I stopped caring at this point and was just looking at the timer for how many hours, I mean minutes, I had left. No question I thought the animation was well done, a complex use of 'light' in the settings, but the story/message? Eh.
I did find all of these on YouTube, so you can check them out for yourself.
The Winner and Nominees for Best Animated Short - 2011
5/11/13, The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore, Best Animated Short, 2011
I like books. That's why I went to library school. Mr. Morris Lessmore likes books too, in fact, he loves them. Like many shorts, the spoken word is not important at all, and doesn't exist here at all. It doesn't matter, you can follow what is going on through the action and the great use of music (for some reason Peter and the Wolf came to mind). The animation was incredible, and I loved the use of black and white coloring versus color, I don't want to spoil it if you watch, but pay attention. In this story, books have their own personalities and also restorative powers. It's whimsical and lovely and for book lovers, I think it will resonate and make you smile, and I think it was a deserving winner. I found it on YouTube, I have not been able to find it elsewhere. I found most of the nominees on YouTube (I'm a little embarrassed I did not think of it sooner; I did not find Wild Life, but I will keep trying).
Dimanche/Sunday is a film told from the perspective of a young boy in the countryside of Canada who likes to put coins on train tracks so they get smushed (not the technical term). It's Sunday (as in the title) and shows him at church with his parents and then they go to his grandparents' where more adults come to visit. He's the only child and appears to be a little bored. It's a nicely done piece, with animation that seems 'old school', and I don't mean that in a pejorative way. I liked it, and again, there was no discernible dialog, just vocal sounds, which makes it universal. I think it could appeal to kids because I think most kids can relate to being alone in a crowd of grown ups with nothing to do but use your imagination.
La Luna is another piece of whimsy that can be enjoyed by grown-ups and kids, and would probably be fun to watch with a little kid, to see their reactions. It's the story of a son, father and grandfather who take their boat to the middle of the ocean and set up a ladder to take them to the moon (if it were only that easy) where they sweep up fallen stars from the moon's surface. It's from Pixar, so you know it is visually appealing. I wish I could remember where I saw it, I think it was a special feature on a DVD, but I cannot remember which one. It is available on YouTube for $1.99 (because Pixar doesn't have enough money).
A Morning Stroll takes place over 100 years, from 1959 to 2059 and follows a chicken on its morning stroll (just accept the premise, don't ask any silly questions). The animation follows the theme of its different decades, so the 1959 animation is black and white and pretty simple, the 2009 animation is like that of a video game and 2059 is a little more advanced and the humans from the previous time segments have been replaced by zombies. It may distress you to find out that the chicken outsmarts the zombie (or perhaps this cheers your spirits). The ending has a clever twist which made me smile. I think this was a close second to the winner and is worth a watch.
All of these were less than 15 minutes and a nice way to spend a windy, blustery day in Minnesota (seriously, if the weather stays like this, I may get through the remaining 746 movies sooner than I expected).
I like books. That's why I went to library school. Mr. Morris Lessmore likes books too, in fact, he loves them. Like many shorts, the spoken word is not important at all, and doesn't exist here at all. It doesn't matter, you can follow what is going on through the action and the great use of music (for some reason Peter and the Wolf came to mind). The animation was incredible, and I loved the use of black and white coloring versus color, I don't want to spoil it if you watch, but pay attention. In this story, books have their own personalities and also restorative powers. It's whimsical and lovely and for book lovers, I think it will resonate and make you smile, and I think it was a deserving winner. I found it on YouTube, I have not been able to find it elsewhere. I found most of the nominees on YouTube (I'm a little embarrassed I did not think of it sooner; I did not find Wild Life, but I will keep trying).
Dimanche/Sunday is a film told from the perspective of a young boy in the countryside of Canada who likes to put coins on train tracks so they get smushed (not the technical term). It's Sunday (as in the title) and shows him at church with his parents and then they go to his grandparents' where more adults come to visit. He's the only child and appears to be a little bored. It's a nicely done piece, with animation that seems 'old school', and I don't mean that in a pejorative way. I liked it, and again, there was no discernible dialog, just vocal sounds, which makes it universal. I think it could appeal to kids because I think most kids can relate to being alone in a crowd of grown ups with nothing to do but use your imagination.
La Luna is another piece of whimsy that can be enjoyed by grown-ups and kids, and would probably be fun to watch with a little kid, to see their reactions. It's the story of a son, father and grandfather who take their boat to the middle of the ocean and set up a ladder to take them to the moon (if it were only that easy) where they sweep up fallen stars from the moon's surface. It's from Pixar, so you know it is visually appealing. I wish I could remember where I saw it, I think it was a special feature on a DVD, but I cannot remember which one. It is available on YouTube for $1.99 (because Pixar doesn't have enough money).
A Morning Stroll takes place over 100 years, from 1959 to 2059 and follows a chicken on its morning stroll (just accept the premise, don't ask any silly questions). The animation follows the theme of its different decades, so the 1959 animation is black and white and pretty simple, the 2009 animation is like that of a video game and 2059 is a little more advanced and the humans from the previous time segments have been replaced by zombies. It may distress you to find out that the chicken outsmarts the zombie (or perhaps this cheers your spirits). The ending has a clever twist which made me smile. I think this was a close second to the winner and is worth a watch.
All of these were less than 15 minutes and a nice way to spend a windy, blustery day in Minnesota (seriously, if the weather stays like this, I may get through the remaining 746 movies sooner than I expected).
Oliver Stone will never be accused of being too subtle
5/9/13, Platoon - Best Picture, Best Director, Best Sound Mixing, Best Film Editing 1986
I would not say I was a fan or an expert on war movies, but it seems like I have seen quite a few, and definitely have some thoughts. I think if people who make the decision to go to war (civil war, insurgence, invasion) watched any good war movie, they might opt for something less destructive. Okay, I realize that is probably the most naive thing I have ever written, but one can hope. There has been an evolution in war movies, from people being shot, but very little blood ever being shown, or bullet holes, people dying from imaginary wounds, relying on their acting skills to convey the extent of their wounds to incredibly graphic depictions of the hell that is war, limbs being blown up and mangled, blood pooling out from wounds. The realism or neo-realism (I couldn't tell you the difference, but I think they both apply) has made watching war movies a visceral experience. Platoon is in this latter category; plenty of realistic injuries and language to go around. Oliver Stone and Charlie Sheen team up for the first time here (the second time was in Wall Street). Charlie plays Chris Taylor, a newbie to Vietnam; he's unusual because he voluntarily enlisted. The movie is mainly told from his perspective and experience. Taylor and his platoon are torn between the rivalry of Sergeant Bob Barnes (played maniacally by Tom Berenger in an Oscar-nominated performance) and Sergeant Elias (played by Willem Dafoe also in an Oscar-nominated performance, one might be able to make the observation that his portrayal of Elias presaged his role as Jesus Christ in The Last Temptation of Christ). Barnes and Elias have served in Vietnam longer than the others and have different ways of dealing with the men. I think it would be too simplistic to say Barnes was evil and Elias was good, but there is no question that the two men are antagonists and that their conflicted relationship is critical to the plot. Vietnam was a war unlike previous wars in that it was often very hard to tell who the enemy really was, was it a 12 year old villager, an old farmer or the young man taking care of his grandmother. This uncertainty, the lack of full support of the American public, and the overbearing tropical conditions helped create the chaos and almost Lord of the Flies atmosphere. The battle that takes place at the end of the movie was incredibly powerful and had me wondering who was going to survive. Platoon won for Best Picture in 1986, and when you look at the other nominees (Hannah and Her Sisters, The Mission, Children of a Lesser God, A Room with a View), I think Platoon is so different in its base, tone, characters, I'm not sure how you compare. Oliver Stone also won for Best Director. The nominees for Best Director were almost a one to one match for Best Picture. Stone also inserted himself into the movie as a commander barking orders. Again, if you're the director and writer, you can probably do that, but really, please don't (unless you're Woody Allen). It was nice to see Charlie Sheen acting, although he will never be confused for Christian Bale.
I would not say I was a fan or an expert on war movies, but it seems like I have seen quite a few, and definitely have some thoughts. I think if people who make the decision to go to war (civil war, insurgence, invasion) watched any good war movie, they might opt for something less destructive. Okay, I realize that is probably the most naive thing I have ever written, but one can hope. There has been an evolution in war movies, from people being shot, but very little blood ever being shown, or bullet holes, people dying from imaginary wounds, relying on their acting skills to convey the extent of their wounds to incredibly graphic depictions of the hell that is war, limbs being blown up and mangled, blood pooling out from wounds. The realism or neo-realism (I couldn't tell you the difference, but I think they both apply) has made watching war movies a visceral experience. Platoon is in this latter category; plenty of realistic injuries and language to go around. Oliver Stone and Charlie Sheen team up for the first time here (the second time was in Wall Street). Charlie plays Chris Taylor, a newbie to Vietnam; he's unusual because he voluntarily enlisted. The movie is mainly told from his perspective and experience. Taylor and his platoon are torn between the rivalry of Sergeant Bob Barnes (played maniacally by Tom Berenger in an Oscar-nominated performance) and Sergeant Elias (played by Willem Dafoe also in an Oscar-nominated performance, one might be able to make the observation that his portrayal of Elias presaged his role as Jesus Christ in The Last Temptation of Christ). Barnes and Elias have served in Vietnam longer than the others and have different ways of dealing with the men. I think it would be too simplistic to say Barnes was evil and Elias was good, but there is no question that the two men are antagonists and that their conflicted relationship is critical to the plot. Vietnam was a war unlike previous wars in that it was often very hard to tell who the enemy really was, was it a 12 year old villager, an old farmer or the young man taking care of his grandmother. This uncertainty, the lack of full support of the American public, and the overbearing tropical conditions helped create the chaos and almost Lord of the Flies atmosphere. The battle that takes place at the end of the movie was incredibly powerful and had me wondering who was going to survive. Platoon won for Best Picture in 1986, and when you look at the other nominees (Hannah and Her Sisters, The Mission, Children of a Lesser God, A Room with a View), I think Platoon is so different in its base, tone, characters, I'm not sure how you compare. Oliver Stone also won for Best Director. The nominees for Best Director were almost a one to one match for Best Picture. Stone also inserted himself into the movie as a commander barking orders. Again, if you're the director and writer, you can probably do that, but really, please don't (unless you're Woody Allen). It was nice to see Charlie Sheen acting, although he will never be confused for Christian Bale.
The Invisible War - Documentary Feature Nominee 2012 - recap
I have so many movies to watch (748), that I would not normally go back to a movie that I have already reviewed, and not that long ago, but this movie was special. The Invisible War impacted me so much that I talk about it to people whenever I can and it is one of the few things I pay attention to on Facebook. The Invisible War tells the shocking stories of women and men sexually assaulted in the military, and the incredible fight they have within the military to tell their stories and see any kind of justice. Currently in Washington, D.C. there are hearings in Congress trying to change the way assaults are reported and handled. This has been an issue that crosses gender and party lines, with Sen. Kirsten Gillebrand, D-NY leading the charge, but there are many others. The reason for this brief recap is PBS, the American public television channel, is broadcasting The Invisible War on Monday, May 13, 2013, and if you can watch it, DVR it or use your old-fashioned VHS, please do. There have been a lot of changes within Washington and some within the military because of the impact of this movie, and I really believe more can and should happen. The women and men in the military (yes, Rush Limbaugh, you toad, it happens to men, too) sacrifice enough to defend our country and to help others, they should not have to worry about being sexually assaulted and watching their attackers go free, or heaven forbid, get promoted. These women and men deserve to have their stories heard by as many people as possible.
Django Unchained - not your father's Western
5/5/13, Django Unchained, Best Supporting Actor, Best Original Screenplay, 2012
I think I am going to figure out who makes the fake blood used in movies and buy stock in it before Quentin Tarantino makes his next movie, because that is my retirement fund right there, baby. Holy guacamole. I've watched enough of his movies to feel ambivalent prior to watching, some I could not even finish (sorry, I know for some this is blasphemy, but what was the point of Pulp Fiction or Kill Bill?), then I watch something like Inglorious Basterds or Django Unchained, and think fabulous movie. Go figure. This was my second movie over the weekend that featured Jamie Foxx aand Kerry Washington (Ray) as a married couple. There was a lot of controversy surrounding the movie because of the language and the violence; for a Tarantino movie, I don't think you expect anything else. I could have used a little less of each, but Tarantino keeps the pedal to the metal for the whole movie (2 hours and 48 minutes, but it really didn't seem that long). Foxx plays Django with this tension and anger that are just beneath the surface, but you can feel it. He has to, though, because his life and the life of his 'partner' in the bounty business, Dr. Schulz (Christoph Walz), depend on it. Dr. Schulz is a German immigrant who used to be a dentist but is now a bounty hunter and takes the 'dead or alive' very literally, preferring the dead option; Dr. Schulz frees Django with the hope that Django can help locate some bounty targets; Django is looking for revenge, but also hopes to find his wife, Broomhilda (Kerry Washington). That's all you need to get started, I would hate to give anything else away. Walz picked up his second Best Supporting Actor in two tries, both in Tarantino movies (Inglorious Basterds). I was skeptical because my sentimental favorite this year was Tommy Lee Jones in Lincoln, but after watching Walz's performance of the erudite, smooth talking stone cold killer, I think he deserved it. Leonardo DiCaprio is the chief villain, Calvin Candie, who in Tarantino's twisted screenplay, is a francophile, but cannot speak French and is insulted if someone speaks it (correctly) to him. Candie is evil or vile, whichever anagram you prefer, and even when he performs a 'kindness' you cannot let your guard down. He has a bizarre relationship with his slave, Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), it's almost like they are an old married couple, bickering with each other, but the only one who can disagree with the other. QT (tired of typing his name) also won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay, and I can get behind that decision. He has a great appreciation of language (the plethora of profanities notwithstanding), word play, painting great pictures as the words roll of the tongues of his cast. My big gripe with him - he is a crap actor, or at least really bad at Australian accents. QT had a small role toward the end of the movie, and I suppose when you direct, you can put yourself in the movie if you want to, he just should not have done it. I couldn't understand a word he said. There are a lot of cameos in the movie: Don Johnson (Miami Vice), Tom Wopat (Dukes of Hazzard) Lee Horsley (Matt Houston) and a many more; see if you can catch them all, I could not.
I'm still not in a hurry to see his older movies (again or for the first time), but I do recommend Django Unchained.
Also, a disclosure, or apology, if you prefer: many of my friends know I am huge fan of comic book movies, regularly counting down the days until a movie is released. That being said, I have let some people down by not reviewing the recently released Iron Man 3. That's only because it has not been nominated or won an Oscar....yet. So, filing this under the category of 'Wishful thinking' - I enjoyed it. I did not see it in 3D because very few things are worth 3D and I'm cheap. I thought the effects were great, the dialog was fun and had elements of dialog you would find in a comic book; Robert Downey Jr. IS Tony Stark/Iron Man. There are references to the first Avengers movie (partially filmed in my hometown of Cleveland, Ohio; side note: this is the 75th birthday of Superman, who was created by two young Cleveland boys, Jerry Siegal and Joe Shuster and the reboot of Superman is coming out this summer too). I think that Ben Kingsley should be nominated for Best Supporting Actor as the Mandarin. Feel free to disagree, but I thought he was strangely brilliant.
I think I am going to figure out who makes the fake blood used in movies and buy stock in it before Quentin Tarantino makes his next movie, because that is my retirement fund right there, baby. Holy guacamole. I've watched enough of his movies to feel ambivalent prior to watching, some I could not even finish (sorry, I know for some this is blasphemy, but what was the point of Pulp Fiction or Kill Bill?), then I watch something like Inglorious Basterds or Django Unchained, and think fabulous movie. Go figure. This was my second movie over the weekend that featured Jamie Foxx aand Kerry Washington (Ray) as a married couple. There was a lot of controversy surrounding the movie because of the language and the violence; for a Tarantino movie, I don't think you expect anything else. I could have used a little less of each, but Tarantino keeps the pedal to the metal for the whole movie (2 hours and 48 minutes, but it really didn't seem that long). Foxx plays Django with this tension and anger that are just beneath the surface, but you can feel it. He has to, though, because his life and the life of his 'partner' in the bounty business, Dr. Schulz (Christoph Walz), depend on it. Dr. Schulz is a German immigrant who used to be a dentist but is now a bounty hunter and takes the 'dead or alive' very literally, preferring the dead option; Dr. Schulz frees Django with the hope that Django can help locate some bounty targets; Django is looking for revenge, but also hopes to find his wife, Broomhilda (Kerry Washington). That's all you need to get started, I would hate to give anything else away. Walz picked up his second Best Supporting Actor in two tries, both in Tarantino movies (Inglorious Basterds). I was skeptical because my sentimental favorite this year was Tommy Lee Jones in Lincoln, but after watching Walz's performance of the erudite, smooth talking stone cold killer, I think he deserved it. Leonardo DiCaprio is the chief villain, Calvin Candie, who in Tarantino's twisted screenplay, is a francophile, but cannot speak French and is insulted if someone speaks it (correctly) to him. Candie is evil or vile, whichever anagram you prefer, and even when he performs a 'kindness' you cannot let your guard down. He has a bizarre relationship with his slave, Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson), it's almost like they are an old married couple, bickering with each other, but the only one who can disagree with the other. QT (tired of typing his name) also won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay, and I can get behind that decision. He has a great appreciation of language (the plethora of profanities notwithstanding), word play, painting great pictures as the words roll of the tongues of his cast. My big gripe with him - he is a crap actor, or at least really bad at Australian accents. QT had a small role toward the end of the movie, and I suppose when you direct, you can put yourself in the movie if you want to, he just should not have done it. I couldn't understand a word he said. There are a lot of cameos in the movie: Don Johnson (Miami Vice), Tom Wopat (Dukes of Hazzard) Lee Horsley (Matt Houston) and a many more; see if you can catch them all, I could not.
I'm still not in a hurry to see his older movies (again or for the first time), but I do recommend Django Unchained.
Also, a disclosure, or apology, if you prefer: many of my friends know I am huge fan of comic book movies, regularly counting down the days until a movie is released. That being said, I have let some people down by not reviewing the recently released Iron Man 3. That's only because it has not been nominated or won an Oscar....yet. So, filing this under the category of 'Wishful thinking' - I enjoyed it. I did not see it in 3D because very few things are worth 3D and I'm cheap. I thought the effects were great, the dialog was fun and had elements of dialog you would find in a comic book; Robert Downey Jr. IS Tony Stark/Iron Man. There are references to the first Avengers movie (partially filmed in my hometown of Cleveland, Ohio; side note: this is the 75th birthday of Superman, who was created by two young Cleveland boys, Jerry Siegal and Joe Shuster and the reboot of Superman is coming out this summer too). I think that Ben Kingsley should be nominated for Best Supporting Actor as the Mandarin. Feel free to disagree, but I thought he was strangely brilliant.
Georgia on my mind
5/4/13, Ray, Best Actor, Best Sound Mixing, 2004
Two Taylor Hackford movies in a month....well, I liked this one a ton better than the other one (White Nights). Ray is a bio-pic of Ray Charles, showing scenes from his childhood in Florida and the strong influence his mother had on him, especially when he became blind as a child. The movie doesn't paint Charles as a saint, and he frequently demonstrates jerk tendencies, but there is no denying the talent that he had for music. Jamie Foxx won the Best Actor Oscar and he was amazing, there were times he really seemed like he was Ray Charles. Charles' story reminded me a little of Buddy Holly's in that he had to fight to get the music he wanted to play heard, but he also developed a strong business sense over time. I bet they would have made some good music together. Hackford shows Charles warts and all: infidelities and heroin addiction. Kerry Washington is Della Bea Robinson, Charles' wife, and Regina King as one of his mistresses, Margie Hendricks. Ray Charles is one of America's music icons and this movie gives the viewer a great taste of the music he recorded and little peek inside the music business in the early part of the century (a look at a young Atlantic Records when it was 'independent' and the genius that was Ahmet Ertegun and Jerry Wexler).
Two Taylor Hackford movies in a month....well, I liked this one a ton better than the other one (White Nights). Ray is a bio-pic of Ray Charles, showing scenes from his childhood in Florida and the strong influence his mother had on him, especially when he became blind as a child. The movie doesn't paint Charles as a saint, and he frequently demonstrates jerk tendencies, but there is no denying the talent that he had for music. Jamie Foxx won the Best Actor Oscar and he was amazing, there were times he really seemed like he was Ray Charles. Charles' story reminded me a little of Buddy Holly's in that he had to fight to get the music he wanted to play heard, but he also developed a strong business sense over time. I bet they would have made some good music together. Hackford shows Charles warts and all: infidelities and heroin addiction. Kerry Washington is Della Bea Robinson, Charles' wife, and Regina King as one of his mistresses, Margie Hendricks. Ray Charles is one of America's music icons and this movie gives the viewer a great taste of the music he recorded and little peek inside the music business in the early part of the century (a look at a young Atlantic Records when it was 'independent' and the genius that was Ahmet Ertegun and Jerry Wexler).
Shelley Winters is a big old meanie, and proud of it
5/3/13, A Patch of Blue, Best Supporting Actress, 1965
I really wish the supposed 'classic' movie channels would actually play more classic movies, or at least movies pre-1990 with great actors and a good story. Maybe I should just start my own channel.
I have heard of A Patch of Blue and knew the basic story, but have never seen it before. The movie stars Elizabeth Hartman as Selina D'Arcey as a blind girl living with her crazy, mean mother, Rose-Ann, played by the one and only Shelley Winters, who won the Best Supporting Actress for being a big ol' biach. You would never guess they were mother and daughter because Selina always calls her mother by her first name. It reminded me of the mother-daughter relationship in Precious, which is so hard to conceive, and yet it happens. The whole family is one big dysfunction junction, with Rose-Ann's father 'Ol' Pa' living with them as well, and he is a drunk; and he and Rose-Ann take turns yelling at each other and calling names. Ol' Pa does have a soft spot for his granddaughter, but is pretty inept at really helping her. Selina is forced to do all the chores and bead work for extra money. She is very sheltered, and doesn't go to school, or outside at all for that matter. She convinces her bead salesman to take her to the park, which she loves. On her second visit, she meets Gordon Ralfe, played by America's treasure, Sidney Poitier, a friendly stranger who slowly teaches Selina about life in the outside world. The elephant in the room is that Selina is white and Gordon is black, this is 1960s America and it turns out that Rose-Ann is a flaming racist (amongst other things). Gordon eventually gets Selina away from the wicked witch and into a school for the blind. Is this the best movie ever? Nope. Do I care about that? Nope. It's a good movie with some really good performances by a cast that includes Sidney Poitier and Shelley Winters for goodness sake. Shelley Winters was really good, I did want to punch her in the nose (kind of like Mo'Nique in Precious, another great movie with great performances). Shelley Winters also won for her supporting role in The Diary of Anne Frank; no question she does hysterical better than anyone else. Poitier has been in so many great movies, To Sir, With Love (great song by Lulu); In the Heat of the Night ('they call me Mister Tibbs'), The Defiant Ones, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn), and the list goes on. He's just awesome. I think he would have made a great Jedi instructor (think about it, wouldn't that have been cool?). And Elizabeth Hartman as Selina; she was a young actress from Youngstown, Ohio. I first heard of her as the lead voice in The Secret of N.I.M.H as Mrs. Brisby, a field mouse (this is one of my favorite animated films).
As an aside, but apropos to the blindness of Selina, one of my history professors in college was blind. She earned her PhD, specializing in the French Revolution, which means she had to understand French, she may have read French in Braille (I don't know for sure). I was always impressed at what she was able to accomplish. I worked as her assistant one summer on research she was doing on the pacifist movement in the early 20th century. Having a disability certainly did not let that stop Dr. Howard.
I really wish the supposed 'classic' movie channels would actually play more classic movies, or at least movies pre-1990 with great actors and a good story. Maybe I should just start my own channel.
I have heard of A Patch of Blue and knew the basic story, but have never seen it before. The movie stars Elizabeth Hartman as Selina D'Arcey as a blind girl living with her crazy, mean mother, Rose-Ann, played by the one and only Shelley Winters, who won the Best Supporting Actress for being a big ol' biach. You would never guess they were mother and daughter because Selina always calls her mother by her first name. It reminded me of the mother-daughter relationship in Precious, which is so hard to conceive, and yet it happens. The whole family is one big dysfunction junction, with Rose-Ann's father 'Ol' Pa' living with them as well, and he is a drunk; and he and Rose-Ann take turns yelling at each other and calling names. Ol' Pa does have a soft spot for his granddaughter, but is pretty inept at really helping her. Selina is forced to do all the chores and bead work for extra money. She is very sheltered, and doesn't go to school, or outside at all for that matter. She convinces her bead salesman to take her to the park, which she loves. On her second visit, she meets Gordon Ralfe, played by America's treasure, Sidney Poitier, a friendly stranger who slowly teaches Selina about life in the outside world. The elephant in the room is that Selina is white and Gordon is black, this is 1960s America and it turns out that Rose-Ann is a flaming racist (amongst other things). Gordon eventually gets Selina away from the wicked witch and into a school for the blind. Is this the best movie ever? Nope. Do I care about that? Nope. It's a good movie with some really good performances by a cast that includes Sidney Poitier and Shelley Winters for goodness sake. Shelley Winters was really good, I did want to punch her in the nose (kind of like Mo'Nique in Precious, another great movie with great performances). Shelley Winters also won for her supporting role in The Diary of Anne Frank; no question she does hysterical better than anyone else. Poitier has been in so many great movies, To Sir, With Love (great song by Lulu); In the Heat of the Night ('they call me Mister Tibbs'), The Defiant Ones, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn), and the list goes on. He's just awesome. I think he would have made a great Jedi instructor (think about it, wouldn't that have been cool?). And Elizabeth Hartman as Selina; she was a young actress from Youngstown, Ohio. I first heard of her as the lead voice in The Secret of N.I.M.H as Mrs. Brisby, a field mouse (this is one of my favorite animated films).
As an aside, but apropos to the blindness of Selina, one of my history professors in college was blind. She earned her PhD, specializing in the French Revolution, which means she had to understand French, she may have read French in Braille (I don't know for sure). I was always impressed at what she was able to accomplish. I worked as her assistant one summer on research she was doing on the pacifist movement in the early 20th century. Having a disability certainly did not let that stop Dr. Howard.
2011 Documentary Nominees
2011 Best Documentary Feature Nominees
Just a weather update since my last post - the weather has not improved and parts of the greater metropolitan Twin Cities have seen up to 12" of snow - in MAY. So, that gives me one last good excuse to stay inside and watch more movies.
Anyway, back on the movie watching wagon. Last month I posted my thoughts (actually, my feelings) about the 2011 winner of Best Documentary Feature, Undefeated. I hope you have added this to your watch list. Here are the rest of the nominees for 2011. It's quite a variety and they all elicited different reactions.
Hell and Back Again follows Nathan Harris and his wife, Ashley, as he returns from the war in Afghanistan with severe physical injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder. It's not pretty and at times hard to watch, but I think it's important, especially as the dialogue continues in this country about how to help the men and women who serve our country when they return home. Nathan is very determined, but I was also struck by his wife's strength and her support of him.
If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front mostly made me angry. Angry at what is happening to our forests and natural resources, and angry at people who think that destroying property is an okay way to stage a protest, and angrier that they seemed to think they shouldn't be punished when they got caught. Talk about going through the looking glass. The movie focuses on Daniel McGowan, his evolution into an environmental zealot, and his fellow members in the world of eco-terrorism. There is some discussion around the use of the word terrorism in the film, so it is not my word, but what the government called it. I don't think you can dispute that there is some very serious destruction of our forests, mountain ranges and other natural resources; I think you'd have to be very naive or in denial. The members of the Earth Liberation Front did not think that peaceful protests or any other non-violent, non-destructive protest methods were working, or were too slow, so they took to vandalism, arson and sabotage. The means justify the ends. After I watched this movie, I watched How to Survive a Plague, about the fight to find a cure for AIDS, and was amazed at the fact that people were dying, but the activists stuck to protests (some very loud and aggressive) and trying to crash the government's party, and had some success.They didn't commit arson. Perhaps times changes, perhaps the 21st century would not be as friendly to the AIDS activists. You may not agree with everything in the movie, maybe you'll get upset as well, but it tells a story that is not often told, and it is pretty fair-handed, I think, in that it tells both sides of the story, and you can make up your own mind about ELF and its goals and the logging industry.
Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory is the third (most likely final) installment in a compelling story of murder, prejudices and the legal system. I strongly recommend watching the first two movies (Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills and Paradise Lost 2: Revelations) to get the full picture, although this film does a good job of recapping the case. This film follows up with Jessie Misskelley, Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin as they are in the 18th year of imprisonment after being convicted of the murder of three young boys in West Memphis in 1994. Echols was sentenced to death. There are a lot of twists and turns. There were accusations of Satanism; the stepfather of one of the murdered boys was at one time the most aggressive accuser, certain of their guilt, but as time passed, and other evidence was found, he became one of their most vocal supporters (it was very cool to see that transformation), actors (Johnny Depp) and musicians (Eddie Vedder, Dixie Chicks) put their support behind the 'West Memphis Three'. There are interviews with Misskelley, Echols and Baldwin, as well as contemporary footage from the trials and news coverage. This is a real-life mystery, which is not quite solved, but it will keep your attention.
Pina made me wish for that hour and forty-three minutes back, at about 10 minutes into the movie. I probably wouldn't have been so ticked off if this was in the Foreign Film category (it was also nominated there) instead of the Documentary category. If you like dance, this may be for you, becasue it was certainly not for me. I like Riverdance, not people putting pieces of veal in their toe shoes and dancing around, or shoveling dirt on other dancers. To me, that's like putting urine in a jar and calling it art. Pina of the title was a dancer and choreographer, who apparently inspired the members of her company to do amazing things. I would have liked to know more about her, and that might have helped me to appreciate the dance and the film more. I just felt it was self-indulgent of the director, Wim Wenders.
Just a weather update since my last post - the weather has not improved and parts of the greater metropolitan Twin Cities have seen up to 12" of snow - in MAY. So, that gives me one last good excuse to stay inside and watch more movies.
Anyway, back on the movie watching wagon. Last month I posted my thoughts (actually, my feelings) about the 2011 winner of Best Documentary Feature, Undefeated. I hope you have added this to your watch list. Here are the rest of the nominees for 2011. It's quite a variety and they all elicited different reactions.
Hell and Back Again follows Nathan Harris and his wife, Ashley, as he returns from the war in Afghanistan with severe physical injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder. It's not pretty and at times hard to watch, but I think it's important, especially as the dialogue continues in this country about how to help the men and women who serve our country when they return home. Nathan is very determined, but I was also struck by his wife's strength and her support of him.
If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front mostly made me angry. Angry at what is happening to our forests and natural resources, and angry at people who think that destroying property is an okay way to stage a protest, and angrier that they seemed to think they shouldn't be punished when they got caught. Talk about going through the looking glass. The movie focuses on Daniel McGowan, his evolution into an environmental zealot, and his fellow members in the world of eco-terrorism. There is some discussion around the use of the word terrorism in the film, so it is not my word, but what the government called it. I don't think you can dispute that there is some very serious destruction of our forests, mountain ranges and other natural resources; I think you'd have to be very naive or in denial. The members of the Earth Liberation Front did not think that peaceful protests or any other non-violent, non-destructive protest methods were working, or were too slow, so they took to vandalism, arson and sabotage. The means justify the ends. After I watched this movie, I watched How to Survive a Plague, about the fight to find a cure for AIDS, and was amazed at the fact that people were dying, but the activists stuck to protests (some very loud and aggressive) and trying to crash the government's party, and had some success.They didn't commit arson. Perhaps times changes, perhaps the 21st century would not be as friendly to the AIDS activists. You may not agree with everything in the movie, maybe you'll get upset as well, but it tells a story that is not often told, and it is pretty fair-handed, I think, in that it tells both sides of the story, and you can make up your own mind about ELF and its goals and the logging industry.
Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory is the third (most likely final) installment in a compelling story of murder, prejudices and the legal system. I strongly recommend watching the first two movies (Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills and Paradise Lost 2: Revelations) to get the full picture, although this film does a good job of recapping the case. This film follows up with Jessie Misskelley, Damien Echols and Jason Baldwin as they are in the 18th year of imprisonment after being convicted of the murder of three young boys in West Memphis in 1994. Echols was sentenced to death. There are a lot of twists and turns. There were accusations of Satanism; the stepfather of one of the murdered boys was at one time the most aggressive accuser, certain of their guilt, but as time passed, and other evidence was found, he became one of their most vocal supporters (it was very cool to see that transformation), actors (Johnny Depp) and musicians (Eddie Vedder, Dixie Chicks) put their support behind the 'West Memphis Three'. There are interviews with Misskelley, Echols and Baldwin, as well as contemporary footage from the trials and news coverage. This is a real-life mystery, which is not quite solved, but it will keep your attention.
Pina made me wish for that hour and forty-three minutes back, at about 10 minutes into the movie. I probably wouldn't have been so ticked off if this was in the Foreign Film category (it was also nominated there) instead of the Documentary category. If you like dance, this may be for you, becasue it was certainly not for me. I like Riverdance, not people putting pieces of veal in their toe shoes and dancing around, or shoveling dirt on other dancers. To me, that's like putting urine in a jar and calling it art. Pina of the title was a dancer and choreographer, who apparently inspired the members of her company to do amazing things. I would have liked to know more about her, and that might have helped me to appreciate the dance and the film more. I just felt it was self-indulgent of the director, Wim Wenders.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Whiling away the time while staying at home
There is no denying that these are very strange and tumultuous we're living in. Obviously I haven't been blogging too much lately, i...
-
10/5/2013 Oliver! Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adaptation Score, Best Art Direction, Best Sound, Special Academy Award for Choreography...
-
Sometimes the selection of movies does not lend itself to rave reviews or in depth analysis. I'm afraid this is one of those times. My a...
-
From Section 309 at the United Center - the friendly skies If you've been following along, you will recall that this was m...