Godzilla vs. Gigan

GODZILLA VS. GIGAN is one of the weaker entries in the late '60s - early '70s Godzilla ouvre (Yes, I just used the word ouvre in a review of a Godzilla movie. Sue me.). The monster costumes look worn, the story is boring, and even King Ghidorah can't bring a sense of fun or adventure to the proceedings.

How weak is it? I repeatedly checked my watch during the climactic battle, which seemed like it went on forever. If there's one thing a Godzilla movie is supposed to be about, it's the climactic battle. If a picture can't even sell this one crucial element, it is well and truly lost.

What's the story? I saw this picture a couple of days ago, and already I can barely remember it. Something about aliens taking over the world using Gigan and King Ghidorah, and Godzilla getting in there and saving the day. But the movie just doesn't sell it. The acting is ghastly, the production values low, and the whole thing a general embarrassment.

If you're a Godzilla completist, go ahead and knock yourself out with GODZILLA VS. GIGAN. Otherwise, steer well clear. This thing is a monstrous failure.

Stardust

I just plain adored STARDUST.

It's a Maguffin chase / coming of age story in the world of faerie, but with a twist. The Maguffin is a fallen star; but in this world, fallen stars walk, talk, and look an awful lot like Claire Danes. Where do I sign? The comer of age is a young man (Charlie Cox), who crosses into Faerie to retrieve said star as a token of his love for one Sienna Miller, the prettiest girl in town. But he's not the only one who wants her. There's Michelle Pfeiffer as a refreshingly old-school, ruthless witch who wants to cut out her heart and eat it. And there's Mark Strong as a son of the king: he wants to cut out Claire's heart [i]and[/i] steal her jewelry. And what about the pirate with the familiar-looking mole on his cheek? What's he up to, anyway?

So here's a movie that gives us a number of different threads, managing lightly to skip among them without getting tangled in them. Its villains are menacing without being terrifying, its love interests are well and truly lovable, and it manages to gain and maintain and sweet, lighthearted, wonderful tone from beginning to end.

It's no secret that I'm a sucker for writer Neil Gaiman's artistic viewpoint, and he doesn't disappoint with STARDUST. In a week in which I've been hammered with two dreary movies masquerading as adventures, what a delight to find an adventure as joyful, as imaginative, as lovely as STARDUST. What a winner.

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END (POTC 3, henceforth) isn't very good. It wants to be an exciting, family-friendly adventure, but it begins with the hanging of a child. Now, I now that to somebody in Studio City, nothing says "entertainment" like the twitching feet of a dying juvenile. But I hate to break it to you, buddy: you hamstrung yourself very early on. The stakes are too high here, the villains too villainous, the deaths too real for POTC 3 to be fun. Yet this is a POTC movie, not NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, so it's not like you were going to sell it as a drama.

Early pall aside, POTC 3 makes no sense. It would have us believe that Pax Brittania was a bad thing, that the world is much better off with pirates disrupting the global economy than with trading vessels being able to ply the seas, and that the life of a felon is somehow noble. The earlier POTC movies at least kept the pirates morally ambiguous - here, they're good guys who do a little raping and pillaging in their spare time.

And yet, POTC 3 does have some things to recommend it. The performances are great fun, with Geoffrey Rush and Bill Nighy chewing the scenery with gusto comparable to Johnny Depp. The special effects are magnificent, and the set design is out of this world.

If only the movie hadn't gone so dark so early, it might have swept me away. Alas.

Local Hero

In his review of LOCAL HERO, Roger Ebert writes, "Nothing is more absorbing than human personalities, developed with love and humor." Mr. Ebert is absolutely right, and LOCAL HERO delivers this with just the right mixture of wisdom and generosity.

LOCAL HERO is the sweet, almost whimsical tale of a young oil company negotiator, the seaside Scottish village he's sent to buy, and the love affair between them. I went in half dreading an anti-industrialization screed, but LOCAL HERO knows what it's about far too well to fall into such a simple and obvious trap. Instead, the film uses its running time to create a sense of people and place, allowing us to observe them and it as the negotiator (Peter Riegert, in a role that makes me wonder whatever happened to Peter Riegert) falls in with the village's rhythms. It's a comedy, but not of the knee slapping variety. It seeks to share a smile with us as we cluck over the people we love, and it seeks to make us feel at home in a place we've never been.

There's nothing in LOCAL HERO for my inner adolescent, but my inner adolescent is in time out after leading me into RUSH HOUR 3. LOCAL HERO is the perfect antidote to that inanity: a charming, thoughtful, observant picture about human personalities, developed with love and humor. As Mr. Ebert says, nothing is more absorbing.

Rush Hour 3

Move over, EVAN ALMIGHTY. You have competition for the title of "Worst film of 2007."

At least EVAN ALMIGHTY cared enough about its viewership to condescend to it. It's the filmic equivalent of Meryl Streep telling us to think about the children. By comparison, RUSH HOUR 3 is a three card monte dealer. It's bilking the suckers and moving on, never looking back. I saw it at 3:00 am on an intercontinental flight (Side note: Gulf Air flight attendants wear "I Dream of Jeannie" veils. It's adorable!), so at least it didn't take my money. It did cheat me out of viewing LARS AND THE REAL GIRL, however, so I can at least hate it for that. I think.

Here's the hook: Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker team up once again. This time, they're fighting -- aww, who the hell cares? They're fighting Standard Villain #4, telling lousy jokes, and sleepwalking through the entire film. There are no funny jokes. There are no interesting stunts. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to see this film, and this is coming from a die hard Jackie Chan fan.

What a disappointment.

Michael Clayton

MICHAEL CLAYTON's biggest sin is that it's just plain boring. The film gives us no reason to root for George Clooney, Tilda Swinton, or anyone else in the film. I didn't care about this guy's life or his problems, and I wound up shutting off the movie right around the beginning of the third act.

Will someone tell my why this is getting critical acclaim (says the only guy on Earth who doesn't hate ZARDOZ)?

Gone Baby Gone

Since I'm unfamiliar with South Boston, I can't comment on the veracity Ben Affleck's vision of that locale and the people who live there. I can, however, say that his portrayal felt sufficiently true that it almost made me forget that I was looking at actors, as opposed to real Dorchester residents.

I say "almost" because right there, in the middle of the movie, there pops up the perfect complement to "The Wire" veteran Amy Ryan: Omar himself, one Mister Michael K. Williams. Here, Williams plays a straight-shooting cop and deliverer of inside dope to hero Casey Affleck. One can hope that, should GONE BABY GONE inspire sequels, Williams's role will grow.

But that's neither here nor there. What matters is that, with GONE BABY GONE, Ben Affleck has gone and crafted a genuinely excellent film. Here's a movie that I thought was finished around halfway through, then took me into completely unexpected territory. Maybe I'm a sucker, but I didn't see any of the later developments coming, and I appreciated the ride and the director's faith in that ride.

GONE BABY GONE looks great, or as great as I suppose South Boston can look. It's well written, well shot, and well performed. Good on you, Mr. Affleck.

The 3 Worlds of Gulliver

THE 3 WORLDS OF GULLIVER is a bright, colorful, child-friendly telling of the Lilliput and Brobdingnag portions of [u]Gulliver's Travels[/u]. Ray Harryhausen handled the special effects far and Kerwyn Matthews offers yeoman's service in this rendition, and it works for its intended audience.

I've managed to get my boy into silent comedy, [i]kaiju[/i], and classic monster movies, but I've been having trouble with those films from what I think of as the "technicolor era." Those riotously colorful pictures from the late '50s and early '60s have a lot to offer, but something about them has been putting him off. Not so with THE 3 WORLDS OF GULLIVER. The bright palette complements the broadly drawn characters, and the broadly drawn characters entertain and (God forbid!) teach.

Is there much there for mom and dad? Not really. If, however, you consider providing introductions to Jonathan Swift and Ray Harryhausen part of your parental duties, this picture kills two birds with one stone.

You could do worse.

The Apple

I’m having trouble getting a handle on THE APPLE.

It’s a rock opera telling of the end time story of the Book of Revelations. It was produced by Yorum Globus and Menachem Goldman (who later made a great deal of money producing cheesy ‘80s action films under their Cannon shingle) and directed by Goldman, with George Clinton helping out with musical duties. It equates David Bowie’s classic glam rock, gender-bending schtick with the Devil, and makes hippies the 144,000 (The same actor plays both the hippie leader and God, who manifests himself to the flower children as the driver of a pimped out Cadillac.). I can only assume that nearly everyone involved with the film was coked out of their minds during the entire production cycle.

Here’s your synopsis: a couple of really sappy ‘70s balladeers (basically The Carpenters, but with less talent. A lot less talent.), get noticed by the Devil, who owns a music company so powerful that it actually controls the government. Mr. Boogaloo (who would later go on to electrify the world of break dancing) tries to seduce the wholesome songsters into the evil world of glam rock, but only one of them bites the (literal and figurative) apple. You can guess which one. From there, it’s a short hop to everyone but the hippies wearing the Mark of the Beast, the fallen seeking forgiveness, God rolling in in that ghastly, tacky Cadillac.

That’s your story, but this is a rock opera. How are the songs? They’re horrible. Unlistenable. Ghastly. Um, really, really bad. The folkies suck. The glammers embarrass themselves. There isn’t a single hummable tune in the whole thing. In fact, the production numbers are so bad that even though they’re the reason for the film’s existence, they feel like interruptions.

But what is THE APPLE trying to tell us? Here’s a movie about Revelation, made by a couple of Jewish guys, that feels like an unholy alliance between the Christian Coalition and the Chicago Seven. It’s the product of a metropolitan film and music industry that feels more at home in Early-‘70s Middle American sexual discomfiture than the free love ethos of the hippies it sanctifies. It stands for nothing that I can see, leaving it a weird mishmash of messages, images, and bad music.

THE APPLE has absolutely nothing to recommend it, whatsoever. Nevertheless, I respect a movie like this more than EVAN ALMIGHTY, my current example of the archetypical mass market product. Golan and Globus failed, but they failed greatly.
There’s some honor in that, at least.

Eastern Promises

What a pleasure to watch a great artist at the top of his game.

David Cronenberg is one of the filmmakers who showed me that the medium could be used for more than assembly-line product. From VIDEODROME to THE FLY to DEAD RINGERS to NAKED LUNCH, here was a guy who was willing to tackle uncomfortable and difficult subjects through characters who felt like real people. Cronenberg made honest, artful but not artsy, films of which anyone could be proud.

He didn’t always connect with popular audiences, however, and it seems that he tried to appeal to mainstream adults with his last two films, the brilliant A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE and his most recent, EASTERN PROMISES. Thing is, for a guy as skilled as Cronenberg, appealing to a mainstream adult audience and selling out are not the same thing. Rather, he has figured out how to make challenging, adult fare with broad appeal. These last two movies are as serious, as legitimate, as anything he’s done. They also pop, keeping the viewer engaged and enrapt from beginning to end.

With EASTERN PROMISES, he kept this viewer engaged and enrapt even after the end. Though this film tells a complete story, that story is one of a chapter in the lives of its characters. But these characters, played by a stellar cast including Viggo Mortensen, Naomi Watts, Armin Mueller-Stahl, and Vincent Cassel, are so compelling that I’ve been spending much of the last 18 hours thinking about how they came to the beginning of the film, and where they went after the ending.

Here’s the hook: Watts is a midwife in a London hospital. When a young Russian prostitute dies on the birthing table, Watts finds the diary in the prostitute’s handbag. Hoping to find the girl’s relatives and place the newborn infant, she has the diary translated. But young Russian prostitutes are not independent, and soon Watts has the attention of the Russian mob. Enter Mortensen, a low-level driver in the organization, and we’re off.

Watts gave a masterful performance. I completely bought her as a lower-middle class Londoner, just as I completely bought Mortensen (also brilliant in HISTORY) as the Russian driver. Speaking of performances, both Armin Mueller-Stahl and Vincent Cassel, both cast against type, absolutely shine in this film. If you’re going to perform on this stage, you’d better bring your A game. They do, and the doubt and unpredictability created by going against the viewer’s expectations of these actors pays off wonderfully well.

I started these comments with my closer, so I can only reiterate it. I would, however, like to add a small explanation of my choice of words. Mr. Cronenberg has worked with the same people for years. The same crew, the same costume designer, the same composer. As far as I’m concerned, they’re all great. There are so many talented people involved in creating a film, however, that it’s easier to anthropomorphize the entire process in the form of one individual, the director, than to detail the individual contributions of all those involved.

Perhaps I should have written that it’s a pleasure to watch great artists at the top of their game. It’s just as true. EASTERN PROMISES is well worth seeing.

Zardoz

Remember that old Star Trek episode where hippies took over the Enterprise? ZARDOZ is the kind of movie those hippies might have made.

It’s a psychedelic science fiction morality tale that’s both deeply grounded in the Western liberal arts tradition and deeply distrustful of it. In the film, the world has gone to hell. Zed, played by Sean Connery, is a horseman and a raider who follows the warrior god Zardoz, who appears to be a giant flying granite head. When Zardoz takes him to an enclave of civilization (as defined by the Western liberal arts tradition), he’s horrified to see beautiful people engaged in intellectual pursuits while, on the outside, barbarians fight, starve, and die in the cold. Kind of like how a Darfur refugee might feel if a giant flying granite head transported him to Saint John’s College.

The Eloi, for lack of a better term, are better than Johnnies, however. First, their women dress like those hippies from Star Trek, but without television’s costume restrictions. That’s right – nearly all the exposition and philosophy in this movie issues from the mouths of partially clad young women. There’s your entertainment value, right there. Second, they’re functionally immortal. Third, their revelry in the western intellectual heritage appears to be confined to works taught in nearly every college prep curriculum in the English-speaking world, so the reasonably educated viewer can indulge in the fantasy that he or she is an Eloi, too.

That’s plenty of fun, and there’s a certain amount of ironic entertainment to be had with the film’s hippie vibe, but there’s something else happening here, too. John Boorman, who wrote and directed this film, is trying to make an art movie with ZARDOZ. The film opens with a Shakespeare-style prologue, given by a Feste-like character who, we later discover, has a deep love for drama. With this prologue, Boorman tells us that ZARDOZ is not supposed to be just another sci-fi romp, but a meditation on the nature of belief, the duality of man, the class system, and the dangers of shutting oneself off from the world. Sure, this is all stuff that H.G. Wells, Fritz Lang, and even Gene Roddenberry hit time and time again, but one can’t deny a certain something about Boorman’s psychedelic take on the material. By the time the Fool commits his last foolish act, we find that we’ve actually bought into the trippy world of ZARDOZ, we actually care about what happens to Zed, and we’re actually thinking about the place of higher learning in a world beset by tragedy.

All this and gratuitous nudity, to boot. Color me surprised: ZARDOZ is actually a good time at the movies. Who knew?

Underdog

UNDERDOG is poorly written, poorly performed, and so incredibly clichéd that no adult could possibly embrace it.

That’s ok. Adults aren’t UNDERDOG’s target audience. My 7-yr-old, on the other hand, thinks it’s terrific. I’ve lost track of the number of times he’s spun it up.

UNDERDOG follows the adventures of a beagle who has gained a variety of superpowers, the ability to speak English, and a psychology remarkably similar to that of a 13-yr-old boy. He’s adopted by Jim Belushi and his son, an unremarkable actor whose name I can’t recall at the moment. Belushi and the boy never click, and they’re unable to sell the idea that they’re related. There are love interests for dog and boy, I couldn’t buy them, either. In fact, I couldn’t buy any of the relationships or characters this film offered.

But at least Peter Dinklage and Patrick Warburton, who play the villains, realize that they’re in a movie that isn’t trying to sell actual human relationships or concerns. They tear into the scenery with gusto, creating such fun (and evil but ultimately nonthreatening) villains, that they alone make this film bearable for mom and dad.

Yes, UNDERDOG has bodily-function jokes. Yes, UNDERDOG has silly sight gags. Yes, UNDERDOG has a giant bundle of dynamite with one of those red digital countdown timers. And yes, UNDERDOG is a shameless product designed to entertain kids while allowing their parents to indulge in a bit of nostalgia. But who am I to condemn it? I loved THE SHAGGY D.A. when I was my son’s age, and he’ll have to sit through similar pap when he has kids of his own.

So, UNDERDOG. There it is. If your kid’s a dog person, he or she will love it. You’d do well to bring a book and peek over the top when the villains are onscreen. Mom and dad, sometimes you’ve got to take your victories where you can find them.

No, really - I still watch movies

Well, not that many right now, actually. I'm doing a great deal of travelling for work, and I just can't get to the computer as often as I'd like. Come back in a few more weeks, and I'll be up and running again.

Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed

Some time back, I wrote this about SCOOBY-DOO: "Perhaps the greatest mystery is how this certain trainwreck turned out to be a fun, enjoyable picture."

SD2, while not a trainwreck, is bigger, louder, and not nearly as much fun. It falls victim to the sequel's standard pitfall: it gives us more and more and more of the same, but it doesn't give us much to hook our imaginations.

Bummer.

PS My child laughed all the way through it, so YSMMV. (Your Spawn's Mileage May Vary.)

Capote

Hi gang,

The blog has been running in fits and starts lately. I'm too busy to see many films, much less write about them, but hang in there: I expect to have more time for film in the next few weeks. For now, here are some thoughts on CAPOTE.

The more I think about CAPOTE, the less I like it.

The film utterly absorbed me as it unspooled, but in retrospect it
seems like a fabulous confection. It looks great and it tastes
wonderful on first bite, but once I start chewing, there's nothing
there. So Capote is just like Perry. I get it. What else have you
got?

The Kid

The new year is barely two weeks old, and I already have a movie memory for the ages.

There's a scene in THE KID during which the '20s equivalent of Child Protective Services shows up to deliver young Jackie Coogan from the loving squalor of life with tramp Charlie Chaplin. It's heart-rending stuff, as the kid screams for the only father he's ever known and the tramp tries everything he can think of to save his son. I was into it, as I always am, but I took a moment to glance over and see how it was working for my seven-year-old.

He was horrified and heartsick and totally, completely captivated. I won't forget the look on his face as he whispered, "Go, go!" for a long time.

Later, there was laughter, and the ending sewed everything up nicely. But what a delight to see THE KID capture the imagination of my kid, as it has mine for so many viewings. Surely, this film deserves its place in the canon.

What I Thought About What I Saw: 2007

Since I rarely see movies in the theater, I haven’t had a chance to catch up on the year-end Oscar bait. That said, here are my top and bottom ten for 2007. The competition for “worse” was fierce this year, but “best” was easy, as one film far outpaced the rest.


1. RATATOUILLE
In a year as good for movies as any I can remember, RATATOUILLE shines as a lovely, multilayered story, a compelling argument for criticism, and a remarkable technical achievement. I thought this film was doomed from the first promo reel – who cares about a rat that cooks? Boy, was I wrong. RATATOUILLE does everything right, and it’s a film that with genuine, earnest appeal for every member of its audience. In short, it’s a masterpiece.

2. SUPERBAD
I started laughing about thirty seconds into SUPERBAD, and I didn’t stop until the end credits rolled. Then I went out and discussed the film with friends, and I laughed for another two hours. SUPERBAD’s comedy does not derive from silly costumes or outrageous gags. Rather, it derives from its characters; people who, while comic, still feel authentic. I enjoyed the hell out of my ride with them, and I look forward to taking it again.

3. 1408
In a genre filled with slashers who are no more terrifying than anything else we might read about on the front page of the Washington Post, what a pleasure to find a well-executed ghost story. Not only did 1408 genuinely scare me, but it delivered delicious residual scares on my next hotel stay. I went into this movie with zero expectations. What a pleasant surprise.

4. BLACK BOOK
Say what you will about the moral codes of its characters, BLACK BOOK excels at first creating tension, then ratcheting and ratcheting until our hearts are in our throats. BLACK BOOK works as a thriller, as a study of people under duress, and as an astonishing U.S. debut for Dutch star Carice van Houten. I’d gladly see it again.

5. SURF’S UP
I expected SURF’S UP to be a moderately entertaining kids’ movie about talking penguins. I was surprised and delighted to find that it’s a genuinely funny and creative kids’ movie that had three generations of my family laughing out loud. SURF’S UP is smart, fun, and funny. Combine those qualities with beautiful CGI, and you’ve got yourself a first-class film.

6. ZODIAC
I’ve had it with serial killer movies and police procedurals. I’m not into the fetishization of murder, and there’s no glamour in police work that I can see. It would seem that David Fincher, director of ZODIAC, feels the same. He takes a film that could be serial killer movie, or a simple procedural, and turns it into an examination of the obsession, influence, and the thin, thin margin between historic success and devastating personal failure. ZODIAC captures its time and its people and, though long, races by and never lets go of our imaginations. This is a film that’s well worth seeing.

7. SERAPHIM FALLS
SERAPHIM FALLS is a western that takes westerns seriously. It nails the small details of the Mountain West, and its unique take on pursuit and revenge engages the mind and heart. I believed in Brosnan and Neeson’s characters, I believed in their world, and I couldn’t believe my eyes or ears when John Huston’s daughter showed up and actually said, “A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do.” This film did not deserve to vanish.

8. BLACK SNAKE MOAN
Here’s another film that disappeared unjustly. I think the whole “Samuel L. Jackson keeps that girl from THE ADDAMS FAMILY chained up in his house” angle didn’t attract the dating crowd, and that was a real shame. BLACK SNAKE MOAN, from the director of HUSTLE & FLOW, represents an authentic voice from the American South telling a story about his people and his world. This film made me reevaluate Christina Ricci and supporting actor Justin Timberlake, and it confirmed Samuel L. Jackson’s status as one of the best American actors (in films where he’s actually paying attention).

9. 300
300 takes “over the top” and goes over its top, giddily piling visual on top of visual as it tells the story of Sparta’s defense of the Hot Gates, a strategic chokepoint, from assault by the vast armies of Persia. 300 loves the movies: it loves lighting, and music, and digital manipulation of image and sound to mine the most effect from every moment of its screen time. Further, it’s educational: before watching this movie, I had no idea that Spartan warriors took regular injections of vitamin B-12.

10. Vitus
VITUS tells the story of a boy so brilliant, not even the film is certain how brilliant he is. With the help of his grandfather, Bruno Ganz, Vitus must find his place in a world not designed for those as remarkable as he. While this movie started like a Swiss rehash of SEARCHING FOR BOBBY FISCHER, it went in a different direction that both surprised and delighted me. Of all the film I’ve seen this year, I’ve made people sit down for only two of them: VITUS and RATATOUILLE. That ain’t bad company.


10. BLADES OF GLORY
An intermittently funny riff on the world of figure skating, BLADES OF GLORY’s premise got stale in the first act. Everything it tries to do, SOUTH PARK: BIGGER, LONGER, UNCUT did better with just one song.

9. SMOKIN’ ACES
SMOKIN’ ACES wants to be loud, frenetic, and dazzling. It’s just loud. I didn’t care about any of the characters onscreen, so I didn’t care about the action the film was designed around. SMOKIN’ ACES promises guns, ‘splosions, and plenty of gratuitous nudity. But without characters worth investing in, what’s the point?

8. FANTASTIC FOUR 2: RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER
Both this film and the next suffer from the handicap of having been viewed while sitting in Coach on a long transpacific flight: surely not the intended venue for these large-scale, summer blockbusters. Fantastic Four 2 is ok enough, I suppose. It has a few amusing moments, and the world is duly saved, but I just couldn’t bring myself to care about these people.

7. HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX
Not only did I see this one on a plane, but I made the mistake of reading the book just a couple of weeks prior. ORDER OF THE PHOENIX left me focusing mostly on what was left out from the dour, troubling book. Unfortunately, it seems that what was left out was levity. This movie felt like drudgery, not my idea of a good time.

6. THE HOST
THE HOST is a Korean take on the monster movie, and it features a wonderfully realized, legitimately scary monster. Unfortunately, that monster upstages the hero of the movie, a ne’er do well dad frantically searching for his daughter (last seen in the clutches of the beast). Beyond the sympathy of paternity, THE HOST gave me no way to identify with the father, and thus no way to fully engage with the story.

5. SHOOT ‘EM UP
I may be the only guy on Earth who still doesn’t “get” Clive Owen. Sure, I liked him in those BMW shorts, but he has left me cold in every single role in which I’ve seen him since. SHOOT ‘EM UP, a nihilistic thrill ride with a treacly and intellectually dishonest twist-premise, gives us Mr. Owen as a modern gunslinger on an adventure with a body count to rival that of any video game. Here’s another premise that sounds like fun, but the movie’s such an unrelenting downer that it’s more like an hour and a half of bitterness. One bright spot is Paul Giamatti in the villain role to end all villain roles, but one actor cannot save an entire production. What a shame.

4. TMNT
TMNT, apparently entitled for people who can’t yet read the words “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” gives us a bunch of cartoon characters on an adventure. Unfortunately, the move assumes that we already know who these characters are and why we should have a rooting interest in their success. Further, the movie assumes that we should root against the bad guy because he’s, well, the bad guy, without giving us any sense of what makes him so much worse than other conquerors before him. Hey, my kid enjoyed TMNT, but the kids’ movies have something to offer parents, as well. TMNT didn’t bother.

3. BALLS OF FURY
Thanks to BALLS OF FURY, my wife need no longer be jealous of Maggie Q, an actress so overexposed in this movie that she comes out as thin as tissue paper. But that’s a minor quibble. The worst thing about BALLS OF FURY is that it’s a comedy without a single laugh. It sets up ridiculous situations, costumes, and characters, then expects us to laugh because of all the trouble it has gone to. Problem is (and I’m beginning to sense a theme in this post), BALLS OF FURY gives us no one to believe in, no character who seems real enough to invite us to suspend our disbelief and follow him or her on a journey. And when we don’t believe in the characters, even in a broadly comic way, we’ve got nothing. I saw this one for a buck-fifty at a military theater, and I felt that I’d been cheated.

2. EVAN ALMIGHTY
EVAN ALMIGHTY was neck-and-neck with HOT ROD for last place honors, but it takes second place because at least it made me care enough to hate it. EVAN ALMIGHTY is the worst kind of activism-lite bullshit for the masses, a comedy that feels more like a civics lesson given by a really lousy and self-satisfied teacher. It has an utterly predictable, insultingly bland by-the-numbers story, an insulting subtext, and a knowing, superior smirk that makes me want to slap it across the face. Not even the charisma trifecta of Morgan Freeman, John Goodman, and Steve Carell can save this ghastly film. When my kid laughed at it, it made me wonder if he was really my son.

1. HOT ROD
When I was a teenager, I attended a high school production of “Oklahoma!” that starred a girl I wanted to date. After the show, she asked me what I thought. I gave her my honest opinion.

Having learned from that mistake, I now stick to comments like, “I’ve never seen anything like it,” and “Wow! You’ve given me a night to remember!”

But I’m not trying to date anyone associated with HOT ROD. If I had been, I would have stopped after sitting through this woeful waste of time, energy, and resources. HOT ROD isn’t even hateful, like EVAN ALMIGHTY. It’s just painfully dull, like an amateur’s first shot at putting comedy sketches on film. Its jokes fall flat, its lead actors can’t act, and nothing about this film is remotely interesting. Do not see this film.

And that’s it, folks. I can’t wait ‘til the end-of-the-year stuff hits DVD so I can see all the prestige pictures. Even so, I had a hard time whittling all the good 2007 films I’ve seen to just a top ten. Its been a great year for movies, and I look forward to 2008.

Ninotchka

NINOTCHKA demands that the viewer fall in love with Greta Garbo. I did not, and the film never rose above the level of amusing diversion because of it.

Here's the setup: Ninotchka's a mid-level Soviet apparatchik sent to Paris to complete the sale of a set of royal jewels. But hey, it's Paris. Who can't fall in love in, and with, Paris? Will Ninotchka loosen up and live a little? Will she accomplish her mission? Will capitalism defeat the tyranny of communism? Aw, hell - you know the answers to all those questions, so the only real question is whether you want to go along for the ride.

Problem is, Ninotchka is distant, brittle, and unwise. While watching her adventure, we get the sense that the actress playing her is smarter than she is, is perhaps smarter than us, and is merely shovelling it out for mass consumption. There is no spell, there is no magic, and there's barely even Paris.

What a drag.

The Last Starfighter

THE LAST STARFIGHTER is better than STAR WARS. It's as much better than STAR WARS as Robert "A pool table! Dontcha understand?" Preston is than Alec "Man, there's nothin' I love more than buildin' bridges!" Guinness.

The movie opens with a young Lance Guest, trailer park teen, defeating a video game called "Starfighter." Wouldn'tcha know it, the thing's actually a recruiting tool for some interstellar navy, and guess who's doing the recruiting? That's right, Robert Preston: a guy who could sell sand to Arabs, sell salt water to Tahitians, sell a woman as a male female impersonator to French club-goers! We're talking about an alien emissary and mentor-figure with more charisma in his hairpiece than the entire cast and crew of STAR WARS has en toto. When Robert Preston tells you to go man up a spaceship and save the galaxy, buddy, you go.

Pay no attention to the fact that the film's special effects make Season One of "Babylon 5" look like the new "Battlestar Galactica." Pay no attention to the fact that Villain #1 is just plain silly. Instead, groove on the excellent prosthetic work, the sense of goofy fun, the awesome closing line of Villain #2, and the fact that, unlike Luke Skywalker, Lance Guest's Alex Rogan is actually going to close the deal with the romantic lead. Oh, and groove on Robert Preston in his final Big Screen role, hamming it up, having a great time, and, yes, saving the galaxy.

THE LAST STARFIGHTER is a success. It does all the things it sets out to do, and it hits all the right notes in so doing. This is a neat movie.

Letter From An Unknown Woman

Some time ago, I read a glowing review of LETTER FROM AN UNKNOWN WOMAN, starring Joan Fontaine, and Netflixed it right away. I then forgot all about it and, when LETTER FROM AN UNKOWN WOMAN arrived in my mailbox, I was mildly perplexed. "I thought this was Joan Fontaine movie," I, er, thought. "I must be mixed up. I'm sure I'll like this Chinese movie just fine."

I'm here to tell you that I did not like the 2004 Chinese remake of LETTER FROM AN UNKNOWN WOMAN. While director and lead actress Xu Jinglei sells her character's aging and emotional development, she fails to capture the imagination or the heart with her maudlin, ponderous retelling of the story.

LETTER FROM AN UNKNOWN WOMAN opens with a rich guy reading his mail. One of the letters begins, "Now that my son is dead, I can tell you the truth: that I've always loved you. If you're reading this, I'm dead, too, so fear not: I ask nothing of you, for the dead have no needs." The movie lost me right there, as I rolled my eyes at the kind of "doomed romantic" bs that even the most callow of schoolgirls would find ridiculous. The movie takes us through the author of that letter's life as, yes, a callow schoolgirl, a slightly older callow schoolgirl, and, well, some other things, too. As I said, I bought the character's life transitions, but I couldn't get past the sickly-sweet nature of the story, the celebration of the ultimate in passive aggressiveness: bringing the guilt from beyond the grave.

Reviewer, now that the movie is over, I can tell you the truth: that I spent an hour and a half wondering what got into you. If you're reading this, fear not: there must be DVD of the other, better LETTER FROM AN UNKOWN WOMAN out there. After I wash the taste of this one out of my mouth, I just might give it a try.

Evan Almighty

Oh, how I loathed EVAN ALMIGHTY. Here's a movie that takes the most banal platitudes:
((1) Dad needs to make more time for the kids.
(2) McMansions are bad.
(3) SUVs, and particularly Hummers, are bad.
(4) Development is bad. (5) Realtors are bad (ok, that was a new one).
(6) Animals are good.
(7) That "random acts of kindness" meme is the height of Divine truth.
(7) Wanda Sykes is funny.),

combines them with stunning ignorance:
((1) Small-time TV news co-anchors and congressmen can afford giant houses and fabulous cars.
(2) House committee chairmen are just slightly less powerful than the President.
(3) Congressional chiefs of staff and legislative aids are basically the same thing.
(4) A committee chairman can fire a congressman.
(5) The Blue Ridge Mountains are short commute to DC.
(6) God is a moron.
(7) Anyone would choose to live in Buffalo instead of anywhere else in the world, including Port au Prince.),

and creates a lazy, preachy, treacly, unfunny mess of a film that amused my 7-yr-old, but made my wife and me want to stick forks in our eyes.

EVAN ALMIGHTY's jokes are lame. Its characterizations are lame. Its politics are lame. Its religion is lame. Its dialogue, its CGI, its direction, its music, its buildup, its climax, its ending, even its closing credits are lame (Ok, its ending and closing credits are more desperate than lame, but still...). Morgan Freeman makes for an agreeable King of Kings and Steve Carrell makes for an agreeable prophet, but that's about all this movie has to offer. Avoid, avoid, avoid this movie. It's not worth seeing.

Brief Hiatus

To my regular reader (Hi, Mom!):

I'm totally clobbered right now, so I don't even have time to watch movies on the Metro in to work. I expect things to loosen up in a few weeks, and then we'll be right back at it. 'Til then, browse the archives - you might see something you like!

Happy holidays,
FC

Cars

CARS isn't wildly funny or illuminating or anything else. It just sorta rocks along pleasantly for an hour and a half, content to be content in the journey.

Here's the setup: Lightning McQueen is *this close* to winning the coveted Piston Cup and making all his dreams come true. He's just gotta get to LA in time for the race and the meeting with the big sponsor and the fame and the fans and so on and so forth. But then he gets sidetracked, DOC HOLLYWOOD style, in a litte town on Route 66. Surprisingly, he learns some life lessons about community and selflessness, and he finds out that maybe what he wanted isn't what he wanted, at all. It's a fine chassis for a kids' story, and it works as advertised, with some particularly clever touches in the realization of an all-autos world. This is a Pixar production, so it looks fabulous and has all the marks of a precision machine. It hits its marks and, while not a masterpiece, it answers the mail.

What's more interesting is the trend to focus on the importance of sportsmanship and fair play in kids' movies that I've been noticing. It's a delightful change from the "2nd place is first loser" mentality that I see permeating much of popular culture and a message that's worth getting out there. There's nothing trite about class, and it's good to see that reinforced in popular entertainment.

Surf's Up

SURF'S UP is the funniest movie I've seen since SUPERBAD.

Here's the setup: Cody Maverick (Great name!) is an Antarctic penguin who has just plain gotta surf. Will he win the big surf-off? Will he win the respect of the Big Kahuna? Will he win the heart of the cute lifeguard girl? Ok, sounds pretty standard so far - I get it. But have no fear. SURF'S UP is done in a witty, surfer-doc style that feels like half Warren Miller and half Bruce Brown, and it succeeds in being both visually exciting (actually, no small feat for a CGI movie about surfing penguins) and laugh-out-loud funny. Shia LaBeouf voices Cody, The Once and Future Dude voices the Big Kahuna, the unbearably cute Zooey Deschanel plays the lifeguard, and even Jon Heder manages to entertain as the stoner chicken buddy who'll pass as merely goofy in front of the youngsters at whom this film is ostensibly targeted. Yes, that's right: I just wrote the words "stoner chicken buddy." Roll with it.

The gags come at just the right pace, with different aspects of the same bit targeted for different ages. One more than one occasion, this film had my whole family laughing at the same time, but for different reasons. The story clips right along, the thing looks great, and I suspect there's more to find on subsequent viewings, of which I predict there will be many.

Though SURF'S UP does have a downside in that it made me seriously question my decision to move away from San Diego and its perfect slow rollers, I recommend this film without reservation. Who'd have thought I'd love an animated movie about surfing penguins? But there it is.

Vitus

Thanks, Roger Ebert!

I'd never have heard of VITUS if Ebert hadn't reviewed it. It didn't pop on CHUD, which is where I go for movie news, and it didn't pop here, which is where I go for movie conversation. If Ebert hadn't given it a few hundred words, it would have disappeared.

But he did give it a couple of hundred words, and he had me sold at "Bruno Ganz," and I'm glad I sat down for it. VITUS is a Swiss film about a kid named Vitus who is so incredibly brilliant that his parents can't even comprehend how brilliant he is. I thought it was going to be a piano-oriented rehash of SEARCHING FOR BOBBY FISCHER but, when the film went on to show my that I couldn't comprehend how brilliant this kid is, it took me in a new direction, one I thoroughly enjoyed.

The light in this kid's life is his grandfather, played by the incredible Bruno Ganz. Ganz is one of those everyman-type actors whose comforting onscreen presence belies a sharpness that gives him the ability to act in films in a variety of languages. So far, I've seen him do German (in multiple dialects), Italian, and Greek, all while sounding like a native speaker. Here, he assays Swiss German, and it's extraordinary. As the kindly grandfather and font of vitally important folk wisdom, he gives Vitus the two things he needs: unconditional love and the chance to act like a kid, or act like a grownup, or act however he needs to act. And it's wonderful.

The conflict, well, it's not a "kid against the world" kind of thing so much as it is a story about "kid finding his way in the world." It's sweet, but not overly so, and it holds some pleasant surprises. I liked VITUS enough to re-screen it for my wife. I think she's going to like it, too. I had her sold at "Bruno Ganz."

Meet The Robinsons

MEET THE ROBINSONS is your standard kids' fare, hot off the assembly line. It has bright and adorable orphans, a fun villain right out of "Dudley Do-Right," and a moral that we can't help but get behind, even if we may object to being bludgeoned with it so mercilessly.

Here's the setup: Orphan Boy is a super genius who turns off every potential set of adoptive parents at the fantasy orphanage in which he lives. One day, Marty McFly -er, some kid- shows up, gets involved in his life, and puts him on track to happiness. And that's it, really. Beyond that, all I can say is, hey, it entertained my 7-yr-old while teaching a mantra "Keep moving forward" that's a great thing for people to carry around. It was bright, it was shiny, and it did what it was supposed to do. Yeah, it was no RATATOUILLE, but not everything can be. I'll take it.

Paris, je t'aime

PARIS, JE T'AIME isn't a film so much as it is a mini film festival. Imagine, if you will, two hours worth of five-minute short films set in Paris, directed by a veritable Who's Who of directors and performed by a veritable Who's Who of French, English, and American actors. These films share a love of Paris, a love so thorough that it may freeze out those who have never been to nor dreamt of the city.

Fortunately for me, my wife and I took a marvelous vacation to Paris some years back and, yes, we fell in love with it. So I was in. But how was the festival? Well, like all festivals, this one offered some memorable and some forgettable films, and it's a good idea to take breaks between blocks of viewing. That said, there's one short with Elijah Wood and Olga Kurylenko that's hypnotic, audacious and absolutely memorable. In fact, it's so good that it makes the disc worth renting on its strength alone.

So, there it is. If you're a francophile, I think you'll surely enjoy this movie. If not, your mileage may vary.

But I liked it.

Rescue Dawn

In RESCUE DAWN, Christian Bale gives another one of those performances that reminds that he's a quality, quality actor who happens to lack that certain something that makes us connect with him on a visceral level.

In the film, Bale plays Dieter Dengler, a real-life Navy pilot who has the misfortune of getting shot down over Laos on his very first mission. His story, from capture to rescue, feels believable on both technical and personal levels. The movie gets the Navy stuff right. It gets the aviation stuff right. It gets the personal interactions between Dengler and his squadronmates, captors, and fellow captives right. It's shot magnificently. The music is excellent. Even the supporting work by Steve Zahn and Jeremy Davies is absolutely (and career-enhancingly) first class.

But there's something about Bale. I never didn't buy him as Dengler, just as I accept him in all his roles. I never particularly liked him, either. Sure, I sympathised with him. I respected him. But if he were in my squadron, he isn't one of the guys I'd go out of my way to go on detachment with (but neither would I go out of my way to prevent it). And while that didn't take away from the character or the journey of that character, it detracted from my investment in Dieter Dengler. When he finally got rescued and I was supposed to feel relieved, or happy, or something, I felt nothing at all.

I can see them screening RESCUE DAWN at Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape School. But though I respect the film, I can't say that I like it. But I'll keep watching Bale because I respect his craft and his dedication. Perhaps I'll connect with him in his next role.

Now, Voyager

From Netflix: Bridled by an autocratic mother, Charlotte Vale (Bette Davis) borders on a nervous breakdown. But when a psychiatrist (Claude Rains) persuades her to drastically change her life, she blossoms into a self-possessed woman. The newly confident Charlotte takes a voyage, where she falls in love with the unhappily married Jerry (Paul Henreid). Though their romance is doomed, Charlotte finds solace in helping Jerry's emotionally unhinged daughter.
===
That synopsis makes NOW, VOYAGER seem like a three-hanky estrogenfest that'd require at least three viewings of ALIENS to wash the smell of perfume out of your clothes.

I loved it.

To me, Bette Davis has always been the scary lady from RETURN FROM WITCH MOUNTAIN. Something about those eyes creeped me out, man, and I never went looking for her work. NOW, VOYAGER leads me to see that she was much more than a kids' movie villain and that those eyes, far from creepy, offer a range of expression that make her a pleasure to see onscreen.

The thing about this movie is that it could have been simple melodrama, but the execution makes it so much more. Claude Rains is brilliant, Paul Henreid is wonderfully conflicted, and Gladys Cooper brings a spectral spookiness to the cardboard role of the oppressive mother. And as for Bette Davis, well, she's luminous. I bought every single step of her journey. I laughed when she laughed; I cried when she cried. What a wonderful, magnificent performance she gives, anchoring the whole enterprise in believability and humanity.

NOW, VOYAGER is a big, big winner. I give it five hankies out of five.

Trouble in Paradise

TROUBLE IN PARADISE, an Ernst Lubitsch film from 1932, is ostensibly about two thieves and a mark. But it's really about class - about style, and cool, and knowing just the thing to say and just when to say it. I know this because it gives the magnificent Edward Everett Horton a brilliant role as the least cool guy in the room. When you cast Horton, you're casting the kind of class that makes real class look like the halls of Olympus.

And who walks the Olympian corridors? Herbert Marshall and Miriam Hopkins as the thieves, and Kay Francis as the mark. And they're so witty, so smooth, so self-aware, that you can't help but love them, can't help but want to be like them, feel sad that your time with them is over when the film draws to a close. They're funny, but in a knowing smile kind of way. They're thoughtful, but they know where the exits are. In short, they're wonderfully idealized aspirational figures, and following them through the grace and eye of Lubitsch, we're happy to be in their company.

Yes, there's a story. And turnabouts, and great dialogue, and all of that. But TROUBLE IN PARADISE is really about intangibles, and it delivers them with gusto. This is an enormously pleasurable film.

I'm Not Scared

What a great movie!

10-year-old Michele has a problem. There's a boy chained up in a hole in the ground out in the country, and his parents may be the kidnappers. I'M NOT SCARED has an excellent premise, but it really excels in what it does with that premise. Michele isn't an adult in a child's body, and he isn't superhuman. He's a normal kid with an extraordinary problem, and he handles it in plausible ways.

The movie draws its tension from the questions of who knows what, and when, and it gathers its power from our natural sympathy for the young and culturally reliable resonance of Christian themes in the rural farms of Italy.

The aptly named Giuseppe Cristiano delivers an eye-opening performance, and he's supported by naturalistic performances, photography, editing, and music. I'M NOT SCARED is nail-baiting, tear-jerking, and altogether successful.

I say again, what a great movie!

Battlestar Galactica: Razor

Ok, this didn't get a theatrical release, and it didn't go right straight to video, but I hope you don't mind if I geek out over a made for TV movie.

I had low hopes for BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: RAZOR. the movie tells the story of the Pegasus, a starship whose fate I, as a regular "Batlestar Galactica" viewer, already know. How interesting is it, really, to learn about how a terrible commanding officer became a terrible commanding officer? How a ship went wrong?

Not very, sad to say. Early in RAZOR, the commanding officer of Pegasus shoots her XO right there on the bridge, thus committing the tyrant's mistake: when you strike fear into your advisors, you will get no good advice. And without good advice, you can't make good decisions. And then things go to hell. And that's it, really. There's plenty more story, lots of nuggets for fans of the program, and some nifty space battles, but it simply isn't fun to watch the character arc of someone who makes such remarkably poor decisions. And our window into the story, the young officer who's intimidated, then awed, by said CO, well, she isn't very interesting, either. Her emotional range seems to go from sullen to angry to sullen, and it's hard to grow attached to her.

Hopefully, the next Battlestar Galactica movie will be two hours of Admiral Adam and President Rosslyn chatting over coffee. Frankly, I'd find that more interesting.

Monsters, Inc.

I have kids, so I've seen MONSTERS, INC. enough times now that I know its every beat. I've looked in every corner of every frame to spot all the little details. There just doesn't seem to be anything new there for me any more - I'm practically a MONSTERS, INC. -ologist.

And you know what I've learned? I've learned that MONSTERS, INC. is a well-crafted, beautifully realized, heartfelt, and funny movie. It does everything right, from the jaunty opening number that tells its juvenile audience not to get too scared by the opening scene to the absolutely perfect, absolutely heartbreaking closing shot to the fun outtakes that run with the closing credits. From the perfectly realized monsters that manage to stay just on the funny side of scary to the terrific voiceover work by Goodman, Crystal, Coburn, Buscemi, and the rest of the cast, the movie just plain nails it.

Bring on the next 25 viewings.

Vampyr

Carl Theodore Dreyer's VAMPYR is a moody, creepy horror film that seeks to unsettle and disturb us. It succeeds, and it does so through a combination of compelling story and wonderfully creepy atmosphere.

The story is the stuff of great horror. An inquisitive young man takes a room in a creepy European village. Late at night, someone enters his room and leaves a box with a note that reads, "To be opened in the event of my death." That box gets opened pretty darn quickly, and we're off to a different kind of vampire story. Why different? Well, Dreyer's idea of a vampire is neither ratlike creature nor hunka hunka burnin love. Rather, he gives us something more mysterious, perhaps more creepy, than we're used to in a vampire film. And he does it while using all the cinematic tricks available to him to create a pervasive sense of unease. VAMPYR is the kind of movie that sneaks up on you, and it's a delicious feeling. I'd gladly see it again.

Benji

BENJI (1974) is the mashed potatoes of movies. It's warm and comforting and nice and does all the things you expect it to do.

Here's the deal: Benji's the town stray, and he has a good little deal working for himself. He lives in a creepy old house that the locals think is haunted, so no one bothers him. He scores his chow from some local kids who've taken him to heart, as well as at least one local restaurateur who can always find a few scraps. He has friends throughout the town, and the film enjoys taking its time as it follows the loveable pooch on his rounds. Heck, he even goes on a date. How cute is that?

But it wouldn't be a movie without drama. Soon enough, the kids are in danger and Benji has a problem Lassie never had to handle. Who's going to listen to a stray? It's a good problem, and it's resolved well, and BENJI wraps everything up with a great big comforting bow. BENJI is a wonderful movie.

Hot Rod

HOT ROD is horrible, terrible movie. Even by the low, low standards of in-flight movies, this picture has the opposite of its intended effect: it makes time drag. When Isla Fisher and Will Arnett are in your movie and you don't know how to make (or let) them be funny, you have failed.

Here's the pitch: Rod is a pathetic loser who wants to (a) be a stuntman, (b) earn the love and respect of his stepfather, and (c) land the girl next door, but without too much sloppy kissing. First off, I've had it with "pathetic loser" quasi-retro-style teen comedies. Movie industry, accept that you will never, ever top SUPERBAD (I hear they've added more hops!) and move on. Second, I've had it with "comedies" that are just about people acting ridiculous, instead of people acting like people. Third, how is it possible that Fisher and Arnett have been reduced to dull, lifeless ciphers? I wouldn't have believed if I hadn't seen it. I'd have preferred not to believe it.

If you happen to be stuck on an airplane sometime in the next few weeks and this comes on, read SkyMall instead. It will be funnier.

Beowulf

The motion-capture version of BEOWULF, written by Neil Gaiman and directed by Robert Zemeckis, is a great time at the movies.

Since BEOWULF puts its technology front and center, I think it’s fair to comment on that technology. In deciding to go with motion capture animation for this film, Zemeckis made a conscious decision to trade Uncanny Valley drawbacks for the freedom of vision afforded by computer graphics. His choice pays off in riveting battle sequences, impossible camera movements and viewpoints, and the realization of a complete world. The price he paid shows in sight lines that are sometimes confusing and a certain deadness to the eyes that no computer animator has yet been able to overcome. In some cities, BEOWULF is available in IMAX 3-D, but such was not the case in Salt Lake City, where I happened to see this film. Watching it in 2-D, I noticed “payoff 3-D” shots that were more of a distraction than an entertainment. Overall, however, the presentation looked sharp and interesting.

Now, on to the movie. Neil Gaiman has long been among my favorite writers. He combines a love for and knowledge of folklore and literature with sensitivity to the human condition and remarkable storytelling talent. With BEOWULF, Gaiman wrote a screenplay whose deviations from the source text served to further the story, provide multiple viewpoints on the action, and stay true to the heroic tradition of which Beowulf is a part. It’s terrific, moving stuff that lends immediacy to both character and action sequences, not to mention serving up a few surprises.

As for the performances, they’re fine. Anthony Hopkins was bearable, for a change, and no one dropped the ball. Having said that, nothing stood out as being particularly noteworthy. It’s hard to act past those dead, dead eyes, no matter how much you try.

Taken together, the animation, story, and performances craft a two-hour film that made me lose track of time, that got my heart racing in all the right places, and that even managed to make Angelina Jolie look attractive. BEOWULF is fine entertainment, technologically marvelous, and, as I said, an all-around great time at the movies.

Now, if I only could see it in IMAX 3-D.

Ace in the Hole

Billy Wilder's ACE IN THE HOLE is so nasty that I couldn't find a way in to the movie. Watching ACE IN THE HOLE, I felt like I was stuck on a long trip with an insufferable companion. As the third act slowly hove into view, I couldn't wait for it to end.

ACE IN THE HOLE begins with Kirk Douglas, all braggadocio and desperate self-assurance, hustling for work in a smalltime Albuquerque newspaper. He lands the job and settles in to wait for the Big Story that'll get him back to the big time, where he think he belongs. The problem is, I didn't buy him as a newspaperman. I didn't buy him as the kind of guy who'd have the patience to gut it out in the minor leagues. Frankly, I didn't buy him as a human being. When I saw him, I saw only Kirk Douglas hamming it up.

But Douglas gets his break in the form of Richard Benedict, a poor sap who gets stuck in a cave-in while scavenging for Indian relics. Douglas milks the story for all its worth, and the resulting media circus is the real heart of this movie. Problem is, I didn't buy Benedict, either. He plays his character, Leo Mimosa, as too pious, too loving, too simple, too everything. It's as if the movie is part of the circus, building an image of a man who can't exist.

ACE IN THE HOLE may have much to say about human nature, the news media, and life in general. But it clangs its bell so loudly that all I wanted to do was plug my ears. I never thought I'd see a Billy Wilder movie I didn't like. ACE IN THE HOLE proves that there's a first time for everything.

The Godfather

You know you married the right woman when she says to you, "Let's stay up. I feel like watching a movie together." And she selects THE GODFATHER.
I hadn't seen THE GODFATHER since 1985, and I'd remembered it as an interminably long slog. But then "The Sopranos" came and went, and somewhere along the line we both raced through Puzo's novel, and this time, I was ready.

And this time, THE GODFATHER bowled me over. From the Swiss-watch screenplay to the career-making (or cementing) performances to the lighting to the music, this film puts down one sure foot after another. It breathes, it gives us time to learn about its people and place, and it fully invests us in the journey of Michael, a character who falls as he rises. The look in his eyes when, during the baptism scene, he announces, "I reject Satan and all his promises," is so thoroughly heartbreaking that the entire film is worth it for that moment alone.

THE GODFATHER is one of those films that's so well known it has become akin to cultural wallpaper. What happiness it gives me that it stands in its own right as a brilliant, captivating picture. Wow, my wife has great taste. What the heck is she doing with me?

Black Book

In 1977, a Dutch filmmaker named Paul Verhoeven garnered international acclaim for SOLDIER OF ORANGE, a brilliant film about WWII's Dutch Resistance. Like Rutger Hauer, the star of SOLDIER OF ORANGE, he moved to Hollywood. And like Hauer, he started strong in American science fiction, then tailed off into near oblivion. Unlike Hauer, who has accepted an American career of supporting roles as a reliable villain, Verhoeven finally moved back to Holland and returned to the setting of his greatest triumph: WWII's Dutch Resistance. And a wise decision it turned out to be. BLACK BOOK (or ZWARTBOEK) is a gripping, moving, surprising film that stands as its director's best work in decades.

BLACK BOOK stars Carice van Houten as Rachel, the perfect woman. She's smart, courageous, quick-witted, decisive, sexy, and man, can she sing! As the film begins in 1944, she's hiding out on a farm in the occupied Netherlands - a place where the farmer forces her, as a Jew, to recite from the New Testament before allowing her a meal of gruel. When circumstances force her off the farm and into the arms of a Resistance cell in The Hague, she adapts and survives. When duty requires her to seduce a mid-grade SS officer, she adapts and, well, that's when things get tricky. The officer, played by Sebastian Koch of THE LIVES OF OTHERS, isn't such a bad guy once you get to know him. Before she knows it, and rather to the amusement of her happily amoral friend Ronnie, our heroine is -gulp- involved. (Side note, there's a moment in the film that leads us to reevaluate Ronnie and realize that she's in an equally interesting movie of her own. I'd love to see Verhoeven do an _Ender's Shadow_ type of movie about her.) Moving at breakneck pace, the movie brings us to a thrilling climax involving the rescue of Resistance prisoners, a fancy-dress, and the possible redemption of the SS officer. And then it keeps going, and it keeps getting better and better, as twist piles upon twist until we're left, breathless, as the credits roll.

I attribute much of the film's success to van Houten, who delivers an extraordinary, virtuoso performance that leaves me utterly mystified regarding her lack of a Best Actress nomination. She's in nearly every scene, and she plays the layers of deception behind her eyes with masterful skill, letting us and us alone see the real woman underneath. When she experiences emotional crises, they feel earned because she's demonstrated how strong she is, how much it takes to get to her. Combine this performance with that of the reliable and likeable Koch, and you get two hours that fairly race by.

Apparently, BLACK BOOK got a mixed critical reception. Not from me. I loved every minute of it. BLACK BOOK is a winner. Now c'mon, Rutger. Catch a flight to The Hague. There must be a few more good Dutch scripts laying around.

Wet Hot American Summer

WET HOT AMERICAN SUMMER, a summer camp comedy, is a bad, bad movie. It's stupid. It's poorly acted. It's badly shot. It makes MEATBALLS look like THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS. And this is coming from a guy who worked four summers at a camp on Catalina Island, a guy who still nurtures fond memories of the time the Newport Beach High School Girl's Swim Team camped out at the next bay over.

And yet, ghastly as this film undoubtedly is, I can't quite bring myself to outright hate it. This is where the world of context comes into play. This film, released in 2001, was cowritten by and features Michael Showalter, who went on to give us THE BAXTER. Its stars include Michael Ian Black, who was also in THE BAXTER; Paul Rudd, who killed in THE BAXTER, THE 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN, and KNOCKED UP; Christopher Meloni, who blew everyone away with his roles in "Oz" and "Law and Order: SVU"; and (most importantly) Elizabeth Banks, who has helped to give us SPIDER-MAN, SEABISCUIT, THE BAXTER, THE 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN, the incomparable SLITHER, and INVINCIBLE, plus a great turn in "Scrubs." And she kisses a girl. Janeane Garofalo and David Hyde Pierce play the grownups, and they get a pass on general principle. Had I seen this movie in 2001, I'm sure I would have hated it outright. Seeing it in 2007, I see a bunch of talented people figuring out how a third act transition works, how to hit a mark, how to act onscreen. I see people who are still unsure of themselves and going for easy, parodic schtick, and I know they'll mature and go on deliver clever, character-based work.

Still, I can't recommend WET HOT AMERICAN SUMMER. Not even for Paul Rudd completists or Elizabeth Banks fetishists. The movie made me laugh all of once, and that was more a dismayed bark than actual amusement. Just move right along to THE BAXTER, where the training wheels come off. You'll be glad you did.

The Corporation

THE CORPORATION is, indeed, a film by true believers for true believers. The problem is, I'm not entirely sure what these true believers believe in.

THE CORPORATION asks the question, "If a corporation is a legal person, what kind of person would it be?" The answer: "A psychopath." And, y'know, that's fine. State your thesis, make your argument, and have at you. But the movie's all over the place. One moment it's on about corporations in particular, then capitalism in general, then American consumer culture, then environmentalism, et cetera ad infitum. For authorities, the film gives us people like Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky, which sends a very clear message to the observer: if you don't trust these guys, this film isn't even trying to talk to you.

As a film, THE CORPORATION is basically a power point presentation with moving slides. The problem is, these visuals add nothing to the presentation, instead merely giving us something to look at while people read to us. If the purpose of this documentary is to inform or persuade, it succeeds only in boring the skeptical audience and leaving that audiencee unmoved. While watching THE CORPORATION, I felt like turning it off and just finding the bulletized summary somewhere on the Internet. It would have served the same purpose and saved me some time (But hey, I saw it on the Metro, and it's not like I had anything else to do.).

Had I done so, however, I'm still not sure I would have reaped a clear picture of where THE CORPORATION is coming from. What does it want? A global economy run by the same people who run the DMV? A transition to the pastoral existence of urban fantasy? Just to hit all the right talking points so maybe it can score with that cute hippie chick?

I don't know and, frankly, I don't care. THE CORPORATION fails as an invective, it fails as an entertainment, it fails as a film. This one is for punch-drinkers only.

The Italian Job

Oh, how I love 2003's THE ITALIAN JOB.

This is a movie that looks great, that sounds great, that's packed with charismatic and interesting stars, and that is both complex enough to reward careful viewing and broad enough to play in the background at a get-together. It's not the greatest heist movie ever (That's RIFIFI. If you haven't seen it, your life has no meaning.), but it does everything it needs to do, and it does it with style.

THE ITALIAN JOB begins with a job in, well, Italy. Venice (top city on my 'to visit' list), to be precise, and the job is a clockwork masterpiece of timing, guts, and skill. From there, we're on to a world of doublecrosses, revenge, Charlize Theron looking impossibly beautiful, fun dialogue, neat car chases, exciting practical stunts, and did I mention Charlize Theron looking impossibly beautiful?

The last time I saw this movie, it played in the background during an impromptu get-together. It was easy to settle into during lulls in the conversation, and it had lots of pretty pictures to display when the talk picked back up again. What a fun movie.

Ice Age: The Meltdown

Will you enjoy ICE AGE: THE MELTDOWN? Only if you enjoyed ICE AGE. This sequel brings nothing new to the table.

That's ok, really. ICE AGE was a pleasant enough way to spend an hour and a half, and THE MELTDOWN is, as well. It gives us the same characters, led by the likeable Ray Romano. It gives us another story of a journey, and it gives us another lesson about loyalty and family. Like I said, not a bad way to spend a little time, and lifted by the extraordinary animation done by 20th Century Fox.

I'm sorry, that's all I've got. This movie is already fading in memory.

The Passion of Joan of Arc

Carl Theodore Dreyer's THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC (1928) is a compelling, thought-provoking, and aesthetically rewarding film.

THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC is a passion play that draws clear parallels between Joan and Jesus. Like Jesus, Joan is hauled before a politically loaded court, asked questions designed to trip her, and ultimately meets her fate. In this telling, drawn from court documents, Joan may be insane, she may be enlightened (to use a term from another religious tradition), or she may simply be a scared kid who's in way over her head. Maybe she's all three. Maria Falconetti, in her only film role, plays Joan almost as a blank slate, allowing us to project our interpretations of her predicament and her reactions to it onto her sometimes impassive, sometimes ecstatic, sometimes terrified face.

While the film wraps us in fascination, it prods us to thought. How different were Joan's ecclesiastical courts from Christ's? Why the fascination with styles of dress and the religious implications of gender-normed clothing? To what extent did Joan's ecclesiastical judges belive in what they were doing, and to what extent were they either saving their own necks or expanding their power with the dominant political forces of the day?

These considerations alone would make for a commendable film, but Dreyer compounds and magnifies them with his choices in the creation of the film's look and feel. The architecture of the fortress in which the action proceeds is unsettling and off kilter in a way that alludes to German expressionism without becoming overwhelmed by it. His harsh, unforgiven lighting and camera work lends the production a documentary feel that adds to its immediacy. And his direction of the actors themselves feels spot on. These felt like real people undergoing real tests, not early film actors hamming it up.

Criterion, as usual, does commendable work with this film. I love that a company can build a business model around the public good, and Criterion consistently does that by restoring and presenting the very finest of cinema. THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC is as crisp as we could want, and it's a pleasure to view.

I loved this movie.

Ocean's 13

OCEAN’S 13 is like bubblegum. It’s unpretentious, it’s essentially kid stuff, and it’s fun. What more do you need?

Here’s the setup: George Clooney and his gang go after yet another Vegas Casino. How these guys’ faces aren’t on every wanted poster in the city is beyond me, but there you have it. And really, that’s all you need to know. Their motivation is irrelevant.

What really matters here is the film’s style, and OCEAN’S 13 has style to spare. The locations are fabulous, the wardrobe is fabulous, and the dialogue is just plain fun. C’mon – it even has Eddie Izzard in a small yet crucial role. And if Eddie Izzard isn’t enough to get you queue up a movie, well, why do you even bother?

Ellen Barkin and Al Pacino both model the latest in age-defying technologies, everyone appears to be having a good time, the heist is sufficiently intricate, and I enjoyed the heck out of OCEAN’S 13. What more could a guy ask for?