My Dreams Are on the Screen

Inception (Christopher Nolan, 2010)

Christopher Nolan has had an interesting career. As hard as it may be to believe, it took a lot of convincing from him and David S. Goyer to get Warner Brothers on board for Batman Begins. Cut to five years later; Nolan is arguably the biggest director in Hollywood, and has basically free reign when it comes to passion projects (provided, as it was with The Dark Knight and will likely be with Batman 3, he always goes back to the well in-between). However, unlike The Prestige (which was based on a Christopher Priest novel), this is Nolan’s first original script since Memento, and his first wholly original story since his debut film, Following. So the question becomes, without previous source material or the history of Batman as a crutch, can Nolan succeed?

The answer is yes. With Inception, Nolan has made his best film since Memento, and with time I may very probably come to think of as his best film ever. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Cobb, a “dream thief” whose job is, in its most BASIC terms, is to break into a subject’s mind and steal a secret once inside. That’s really all the information I want to give regarding the plot, because having the opportunity to see it for the first time, knowing as little as possible, is an experience I don’t want to take from anybody.

With the majority of the film taking place in the world of the dream, obviously the possibilities when it comes to action sequences and set pieces is basically limitless. And Nolan does not disappoint. He does some truly fascinating things with paradoxes, endless mirrors, and gravity-less hallways that rival (and, in fact, surpass) the effects in anything he’s done before. And as far as action sequences go, it’s no contest; he’s never done them better.

The script is top-notch, and manages to keep up with the complexity of the effects completely. I like the fact that Nolan gives quite a bit of information (what I’d call the “rules”) in the beginning, then pretty much leaves a lot open for the viewer to pick-up and interpret in their own way. There’s a few clunky lines, but that’s counter-balanced by a couple speeches I can assure you you will be seeing in Facebook and Twitter status updates for months to come.

Maybe my favorite part of the film is the score by Hans Zimmer. Quiet when it needs to be quiet, LOUD when it needs to be loud, and beautiful when it needs to be beautiful, it really carried me through the film.

With so much greatness in place, you would hope the cast would be up to complete the challenge, and (for the most part) they are. Tom Hardy (known to a lot of cinephiles for his breakout performance in Bronson) is on his way to becoming an ENORMOUS star. Don’t be surprised to see him filling James Bond’s shoes in the future. Marion Cotillard manages to be both strikingly beautiful and terrifyingly scary, often in the same moment. It’s also fitting that Edith Piaf’s “Non Regrette Rien” is the song at the center of the film. DiCaprio and Levitt both hold their own, though they’ve certainly been better (DiCaprio’s been better this year, in fact). The two problems I had in this category were Michael Caine (who is almost completely wasted) and Ellen Page, who I normally love, but is pretty much sleepwalking through the film. Yes, it’s nice to have her there explaining everything, but she could’ve at least ACTED a little more interested.

In the end, however, Inception is incredible. Astounding. Mind-bending. Heartbreaking. And 1,000 more adjectives. It’s probably Nolan’s second masterpiece, and, based on his track record, not his last. He has proved for four straight films now that it is (shockingly) possible to make blockbusters that can both appeal to a wide audience but still actually make you think (I’m talking to you, Seltzer and Friedberg). Now hurry up and get done with Batman 3 so you can focus on your original ideas again, sir.

I’m Not Dead

I know, I know. Shocking, considering it’s been nearly four months since I’ve updated. And I really have no reason for it. It’s not like I’m currently in school, so aside from work, I don’t really have anything else going on. You’d think I’d update this more. That’s the plan from now on. Here’s what I hope to have in the coming weeks:

• New marathon (I’m just going to pretend the last two marathons I’ve started and given up on didn’t exist…or they were by someone else)
• Reviews of Toy Story 3 and other big releases
• An update on my current Criterion/Eclipse status (this should be up sometime today)

We All Go a Little Crazy Sometimes

The Crazies (Breck Eisner, 2010)

synopsis: About the inhabitants of a small Iowa town suddenly plagued by insanity and then death after a mysterious toxin contaminates their water supply.

The mainstream horror genre definitely didn’t make many big strides in the past decade. Yes, every once in awhile the right director, actors, etc. were married together to create something truly special or original (The Hills Have Eyes, 30 Days of Night, Dawn of the Dead), but let’s face it; most recent Hollywood horror films have SUCKED. How intriguing is it, then, that the first real horror film to be released in this young decade happens to be one of the best I’ve seen in nearly five years. I’d like to think this means we’re at the dawn of a new age of great horror, but honestly? When The Crazies 2 inevitably comes out in two years I’ll realize we weren’t. Still, it’s nice to dream.

The basic premise is pretty simple; mysterious government plane crashes in small Iowa town, people slowly start losing it, first zoning out, then committing heinous, brutal acts of violence on the people around them. As the lead and the sheriff of the town, Tim Olyphant continues to show that he’s one of the most under-appreciated actors working today. As the main character, he has to be sympathetic and a little bit vulnerable to connect to the audience, but…he definitely isn’t a pussy. Let’s just say that. The supporting cast is also almost universally solid, with the main standout being Joe Anderson as the town deputy, who may have always been a little nuts.

The thing that will impress, shock, amaze, (insert adjective here) you the most is the competency of the cinematography and overall direction. One thing horror films are not known for is their production values. There are some truly gorgeous shots here, particuarly a wide shot of an enormous farmhouse on fire that brought to mind both There Will Be Blood and Days of Heaven. I believe director Breck Eisner has created the first ever mainstream arthouse horror film.

In creating the first great horror film of this very young decade, I’m interested where Eisner will go next. According to his IMDb, he is scheduled to direct a remake of Flash Gordon, which is ok, but I’m more interested in his project after that; a remake of David Cronenberg’s The Brood. I know the Cronenberg fanboys will be up in arms about this, but I truly think he can bring something original to it. Could we be seeing the next Zack Snyder? I hope so.

Top 10 Films of 2009

#10

Whether you want to look at Blomkamp’s debut as an allegory for the treatment of refugees in South Africa or just as a bad-ass sci-fi film that ignites new life into the genre, there’s no denying one thing; a star is born in Sharlto Copley.

#9

The most quotable film of 2009. The performance of Peter Capaldi made me think of a foul-mouthed, British version of Dr. Cox from Scrubs; just non-stop, brilliant verbal beatings. The scary part is thinking that our governments could actually work like this.

#8

If anyone else calls this “The Movie of the Moment” I will punch them in the face. Yes, the film is timely, but that doesn’t affect it’s lasting power, in my opinion. Clooney and Farmiga are both fantastic, though I really think it’s Kendrick’s performance that anchors the film, and actually makes the other two better. Who would’ve known something good could’ve come out of Twilight?

#7

The best British film of the year also happened to produce the straight-up, in any category, best performance of the year, and that is Carey Mulligan as Jenny. Obviously, she’s getting lots of comparisons to Audrey Hepburn in Roman Holiday (all deserved), but she’s not the only great one here; Alfred Molina and Emma Thompson (though woefully underused) both give fantastic performances. The script by Nick Hornby (if you don’t like to read, you probably won’t like this movie) and the assured direction by Scherfig make this one of the best films of the year.

#6

Anchored by Colin Firth’s heartbreaking performance, Tom Ford’s directorial debut has been called too “cold” or “calculated” by some, but in my opinion, the perfection with which every scene is put together fits the film perfectly. A gorgeous score by Abel Korzeniowski and a stellar supporting cast (particularly Julianne Moore and Matthew Goode) round out the best-looking film of the year.

#5

Greg Mottola’s beautiful coming-of-age DRAMA was easily the most woefully misadvertised film of the year. It was basically billed as Mottola’s followup to Superbad, which in a sense it was, but aside from having the same director, they are two completely different films. While Superbad was an over-the-top but overall sweet comedy in the vein of Knocked Up or The 40 Year-Old Virgin, what was here was a smartly written drama that happened to have some comedy tossed in for good measure, almost in the vein of something from Noah Baumbach or Whit Stillman. Jesse Eisenberg is great as the lead, and Kristen Stewart as the love interest is better than she got credit for (SHE DOES NOT TOUCH HER HAIR THAT MUCH). But the performance of the film comes from Apatow regular Martin Starr as Joel. Not many people could make an atheist Russian literature major sympathetic, but he pulls it off with flying colors. Add in Mottola’s script and the best soundtrack in some time (seriously; Lou Reed, Yo La Tengo, The Cure, BIG STAR? How can you beat that?) and you have 2009’s most underrated film.

#4

In my opinion, A Serious Man just cements in stone the fact that the Coen Brothers are the best living American filmmakers working today. Ignoring a few minor missteps (The Ladykillers and Burn After Reading) the amount of masterpieces they have produced is astounding; The Big Lebowski, Fargo, No Country for Old Men, Raising Arizona, Barton Fink, etc. You can add this film to their list (if not up in the top 5) based on powerful, wryly funny script (based in part on the brothers’ experience growing up Jewish in Minnesota in the late 60s), great performances (Stuhlbarg and Kind are particularly fantastic, as well as Fred “Sy Ableman” Melamed in the most chill performance ever), and fantastic set design and cinematography. I truly think the Coen’s are on a roll that may not be stoppable.

#3

Much like Synecdoche, New York last year, Michael Haneke’s masterpiece is a film that not only rewards repeat viewings, it DEMANDS them. I’ve seen this film twice, and haven’t even begun to scratch the surface of all the themes Haneke is exploring here, be it death, childhood, the evilness of man, etc. Also, I can’t think of a film sinceSchindler’s List that featured more gorgeous black and white cinematography.

#2

What is there to say, really? Anyone who knows me knows what an enormous Tarantino fanboy I am (I have seen Jackie Brown five times; that is my least watched of all his films). And if it wasn’t for two certain performances, this would undoubtedly be my #1 film of the year, and no, Mike Meyers is not one of them. That opening sequence will be studied in film classes for years to come. Roth’s performance is the most subdued terrifying piece of acting since Javier Bardem in No Country. Melanie Laurent is equally fantastic. The abundance of references to other films makes repeat viewings a treat. I admit, I was wary about this right up to the point the opening credits started to roll; six viewings later, I should have known better than to doubt one of the greatest filmmakers of my time.

#1

It’s been a toss up between this and my #2 for awhile now, but after a second (and third with commentary) viewing of Bigelow’s Iraq war masterpiece The Hurt Locker, it was clear it was the best film of the year. As an action director, Bigelow doesn’t waste her time obsessing over the politics and political views of the war; she just focuses on the men in the SHIT. Which has always been (and always will be) the most interesting focus of war movies. While it’s Jeremy Renner’s film, Anthony Mackie and Brian Geraghty are nearly as good in their supporting roles. When are people going to realize how brilliant an actor Mackie is? And finally, to people who were bugged by the ending, two things; one, it works, so just shut up. And two, even if you think the supermarket scene feels out of place, it’s 2 1/2 minutes in a 2 hour movie. If that’s enough to ruin a movie for you, then you have some problems.

Tackling the Oeuvre: Lars von Trier’s “Europa”

“In war, life is so simple. It’s only afterwards that complications arise.”

I’d like to preface this review by pointing out that this is only the second of von Trier’s films that I have seen, the other being his occasionally brilliant, often awful, always interesting Antichrist. However, if these two films are any indication of his overall style, I’ve already picked up several things about him; he knows how to frame a shot, he loves mixing in black humor in the oddest situations, and it seems like he can’t resist a shocking ending. So with that, I give you…Europa.

The story follows Leopold Kessler, an American who goes AWOL and comes to Germany in the months after World War II to become a sleeping car conductor on the Zentropa Rail Lines. Along the way he meets the family that owns the line, falls in love, and gets involved with The Werwolves.

There’s a lot to like about this film. Right off the bat, Max von Sydow’s haunting narration draws you in like a hypnotist. It was brilliant casting on von Trier’s part, although only the second best choice in the film (the first being Lemmy Caution himself Eddie Contsantine as Colonel Harris). I also really enjoyed all the themes he’s exploring here; pacifism, the necessity of evil, religion (or lack-there-of). One of the most interesting things was the irony of Kessler’s pacifism; precisely BECAUSE he was so neutral, everyone was able to manipulate and control him to do whatever they wanted, ultimately making him more evil than them.

Von Trier’s camera is always alive, as well. A large number of shots start right up against a window looking in, then pull back, as if to make the viewer almost a voyeur spying on these conversations. His restraint is very impressive; several scenes would probably work just as well if the camera moved along a bit faster, but he was clearly determined to keep the pacing the entire way through. Look out for a particularly gorgeous shot of an open-air midnight mass near the middle of the film; one of the most gorgeous sequences I’ve seen in awhile. Finally, the cast is uniformly good. Jean-Marc Barr, who plays the pacifist Kessler with just about the blankest slate you’ve ever seen, will seem like horrible casting until about the last ten minutes, when you realize why von Trier made the decision. Stick with it, it pays off.

Honestly, I really enjoyed this film. I only had one qualm with it, although it’s a pretty big one. Very early on in the film, we’re introduced to a device that von Trier ends up using a lot through the course of the film. And that is (as shown above) the choice to film the majority of the film in black and white, but intercutting some scenes with both and others in just straight color. On the surfance, I didn’t really have a problem with it. It’s interesting, and looks kind of cool. The problem I found, after awhile, was that there’s NO REASON FOR IT. Never once did I pick up on it symbolizing certain things in certain scenes. More likely than not, I’m just missing something, but it really bugged me.

After having sat through two entire Lars von Trier films, the biggest conclusion I’ve come to is that the man just isn’t as controversial as critics like to make him out to be. He makes interesting, if sometimes odd or experimental, films, that don’t contain half the controversy they’re said to. And knowing that things like Dancer in the Dark or Dogville weren’t quite as controversial really makes me wonder what all the fuss is about.

Read the rest of the reviews for this month’s project here.

Docs #1 – Manufactured Landscapes

Jennifer Baichwal, 2006

Jennifer Baichwal’s Manufactured Landscapes follows photographer Edward Burtynsky on a trip to China, where he tries to capture the change in the landscape of the country since the onset of intense industrial and manufacturing changes. What starts as a documentary about a photographer eventually expands to include the effects of all this change on the citizens of the country.

While I can’ t say that I ever really enjoyed this film, it was certainly interesting. Burtynsky photographs (which are a large chunk of the film) are often fascinating, and occasionally beautiful. However, after awhile, they become redundant. I began to feel like I wasn’t watching a movie, but a really elaborate PowerPoint presentation, and a rather boring one at that. The ambient score, while effective with the point the director is trying to get across, doesn’t help.

Fortunately, Baichwal is a very talented documentarian, and it’s no surprise that the most interesting shots and points of the film come from her. Every so often, she’ll be conducting an interview, and halfway through realize that something in the background is more interesting, and focus on that. She’s definitely someone to look out for (the shot above is from her, not Burtynsky).

The ideas presented in Manufactured Landscapes aren’t particularly new; the danger of globalization, peak oil, etc. If you’ve seen An Inconvenient Truth, Collapse, etc., you’ve heard all these talking points before. However, Baichwal’s talent at finding the most interesting thing in seemingly every shot, coupled with some truly gorgeous photographs from Burtynsky, make this one worth checking out (that opening shot alone warrants a recommendation).

(see more of edward burtynsky’s work here.)

Marathons – #2: Netflix Instant Documentaries

(the silent film marathon will be updated every few months or so ’til finished)

1. Manufactured Landscapes (Jennifer Baichwal, 2006)
2. Into the Arms of Strangers (Mark Jonathan Harris, 2000)
3. Tarnation (Jonathan Caouette, 2003)
4. Planet B-Boy (Benson Lee, 2007)
5. Brother’s Keeper (Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky, 1992)
6. I Like Killing Flies (Matt Mahurin, 2004)

TCP – #325 – Kind Hearts and Coronets

Robert Hamer, 1949

plot synopsis: A distant poor relative of the Duke of D’Ascoyne plots to inherit the title by murdering the eight other heirs who stand ahead of him in the line of succession.

tcp status: 169/515

A Single Man

Tom Ford, 2009

plot synopsis: A story that centers on an English professor who, after the sudden death of his partner tries to go about his typical day in Los Angeles.

The debut film from fashion designer Tom Ford shows nothing less than the birth of a brilliant new filmmaker, whose every new project will now be right at the top of my to-see list. Being from the world of fashion, Ford’s film (adapted from a 1964 novel by Christopher Isherwood about an English professor (Firth) who contemplates suicide one day following the death of his long-time lover) is filled with gorgeous shots, perfectly planned set decoration, and a gorgeous score. While it has come across to some critics as “overly-calculated” or “cold,” I found it added to my appreciation for George’s situation; without his partner, he no longer feels any real connection to the world. As is demonstrated in the opening scene, every morning he has to do everything in his power just to “put himself together.”

Colin Firth gives, plain and simple, the performance of his career here. I always knew he could act, but I never knew he could ACT. This is the best male performance of the year, right there with Carey Mulligan for best performance of the year, PERIOD. Julianne Moore and Matthew Goode are also fantastic in (small) supporting roles.

Tom Ford’s debut plays like the work of a veteran filmmaker, so knowing it’s just the first in a (hopefully) long line has me extremely excited.

The Headless Woman

Lucrecia Martel, 2008

plot synopsis: After running into something with her car, Vero experiences a particular psychological state. She realizes she might have killed someone.

There’s not much in the way of plot here, nor much development of several important events/characters, but the cinematography is meticulously gorgeous, and the performance of Maria Onetto, as a woman who’s own guilt at something she may or may not have done is creating a minor mental breakdown, is something to marvel, and one of the best performances of the year.