Podcast: Play in new window | Download (49.3MB)
I know everybody is filled with fingernail-biting anticipation to hear me and Drew’s favorite films of 2011, so I have placed two pics here on the page as a sort of podcast teaser. One represents a top five film for me, and one represents a top five film for Drew. I don’t want to give away which is which, so I supposed you will just have to listen in…
Directed by: Armando Iannucci
Starring: Tom Hollander,Peter Capaldi, James Gandolfini
As the United States has ended its involvement in Iraq, a film about the international political machinations behind war seems an appropriate choice. In the Loop starts with a verbal gaffe by British Minister for International Development Simon Foster (Tom Hollander) during a radio interview. When asked about the likelihood of military involvement in the Middle East, he replies war is ‘unforeseeable’ rather than regurgitating a slightly more equivocating party line. Despite the acquisition of a new aide, Toby (Chris Addision) and heavily profane warnings from communications manager Malcom (Peter Capaldi) to keep his mouth shut unless he can stick to the party script, things go from bad to worse.
Simon’s clumsy attempts to seem more important than the minor career politician he is and to correct his previous mis-statement with vague metaphors actually thrust him into the spotlight as a war hawk. Unwittingly, Simon has become tangled up in a bit of a power struggle between two US Assistant Secretaries.
Rather than figuring out how to extract Simon from international dilemmas and local constituents making a laughingstock of him in the press, Toby stirs the political pot behind the scenes with information leaks. The layers of maneuvering on all fronts – among the aides, between the pro- and anti-war groups, within the party – are ultimately like a multi-tiered concoction of cake and filling: sickening overall, though some parts are highly enjoyable.
Perhaps if it would have been more A Modest Proposal and less plausible, I would have enjoyed this movie more overall. Also, I didn’t really like any of the characters. Regardless of their motives and stance on the war, they were all a bunch of manipulative, self-centered turds in one way or another. Plus, it was too long I did not find the ending satisfactory at all. I like my movies idealistic and have to say I far more enjoyed the ending of She’s The Man (which I inadvertently started watching on TBS and was inexplicably compelled to sit through the whole thing).
If you:
Put it in the queue!
However, if you:
Don’t put it in the queue.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (4.7MB)
In an attemp at not wasting so much time during the regular show, I decided to start recording shows that just run a few minutes about one movie. Senna was the first movie I watched for this little experiment. I know that a documentary about F1 racer may not seem like your thing, but just give me 5 minutes to try and change your mind.
Directed by: Woody Allen
Starring: Owen Wilson, Rachel McAdams
Even before I read The Great Gatsby, I wanted to live in the 1920s. Beads, jazz, bobs, long cigarette holders, the Charleston, speakeasies…it all sounded like great fun. Then once I found out about all the American expats living it up in Paris…the artistic/intellectual community of that era is the Elysian Fields for any wannabe author of the next Great America Novel.
Judging by Midnight in Paris, I am not alone in that regard. Gil (Owen Wilson) is a successful screenwriter longing for a more ‘authentic’ writing career. In Paris with his fiancée Inez (Rachel McAdams) and her parents, he longs to ramble around the city in the rain with very romantic notions of what it was like in the golden age of the 1920s where authors and artists partied and mingled in a French mecca of creativity. Inez is definitely not on the same wavelength, preferring wine tasting, gallery tours and late nights of dancing with her pseudo-intellectual American friend Paul (Martin Sheen) and his lady friend Carol (Nina Arianda).
One night Gil is off on a late-night walk, resting on some stone steps when an old-time car pulls up. The jovial passengers offer him a lift, and Gil is spirited off to a fine party where the women are dressed like flappers, Cole Porter is playing the piano, and Zelda and Scott Fitzgerald invite him to pal around for the evening, ultimately leaving him at a café to chat with Hemingway (Corey Stoll). Amidst talk of courage, grace and war, Hemingway refuses to read and comment on the gobsmacked Gil’s novel in progress but suggests Gertrude Stein could provide a more fair opinion on it. Hurrying off to get his manuscript, Gil wanders back into his world.
Determined to get back to the roaring twenties again, Gil is in a hurried daze, tolerating Paul’s blathering and Inez’s putdowns only because he is whiling away the hours until the evening. Paul particularly mocks Gil’s infatuation with 1920s Paris as he says living in the past and nostalgia is all a big romantic fallacy. Gil tries to share this fantastic journey with Inez, but she refuses to wait with him for the car, and Gil again travels into the partied past alone to take his manuscript to Gertrude Stein (Kathy Bates). While there, he meets Picasso’s beguiling young mistress Adriana (Marion Cotillard) and she loves the first sentence of his novel. Gil is charmed, particularly because this woman who has been the mistress of many famous artists is willing to engage in idle chatter with him.
Over the next few days, Gil rewrites the first few chapters based on Stein’s feedback, evaluates the gulf between his ideals and Inez’s, and attempts to woo Adriana in the 1920s (despite competition from Hemingway). I won’t spoil the unfolding of the plot, but it does end with Gil taking an evening stroll in the rain with a lovely young woman.
Overall, this movie is absolute paradise for anyone who revels in literary/artistic references (there is even a nod to a film I previously reviewed, Luis Buñuel’s The Exterminating Angel). I also found the film even more fantastic after I had a few glasses of wine (everyone in the movie was drinking; I felt silly not joining in). And with a Hemingway-ian sentiment, I should have disliked this movie because I didn’t think of it first.
If you:
Put it in the queue!
However, if you:
Don’t put it in the queue!
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (5.6MB)
I am thrilled that Midnight in Paris is at least getting nominated for Oscars, even if it won’t win. I also think Adrien Brody should have been nominated for his short, but fantastic portrayal of Salvador Dali, but I don’t get to make those decisions. Just press play to enjoy this little review.
Directed by: Asif Kapadia
I can appreciate fast cars, great driving, and a story well told. So I’m not sure why I waited for Daniel Ferreiro to recommend Senna twice before I watched it.
Primarily comprised of footage from the 1980s and early 90s, this documentary introduced me to one of the Formula One greats – a driver named Ayrton Senna. Footage from Senna’s early days competing in karting races, in-car cameras from F1 races and telecasts give the viewer a taste of the excitement surrounding this young driver.
I have seen a fair amount of documentaries, and this by far was one of the most compelling I’ve seen. The way the audio and video segments were carefully chosen and seamlessly woven together allow Senna to tell his own story. You see his competitive drive on the track, his frustration at FIA politics and the ease he feels at home in Brazil enjoying boating and waterskiing when not racing. The voices of friends, family, teammates, team owners, reporters work as narration, not as disruptive and boring ‘talking heads.’
The film winds you up during the races with the buzz of the cars circling the track, spitting sparks and whizzing by at ridiculous speed, the announcers’ shouts as Senna pulls into the lead with a risky yet rewarding move, the elation the win from a cockpit view. It shows you the boyishly mischevious side of Senna, flirting with female reporters and celebrities who flirt right back with this handsome F1 world champion. You feel the tension of Senna’s rivalry with Alain Proust and his incredible drive to win as well as the stress of situations surrounding his last Grand Prix.
Senna gives so many insights into the true personality of this man – more than just a phenomenal driver, a hero to the Brazilian people, a compassionate person, a religious man, a heartthrob, an outspoken advocate for safety and fairness in F1, a son, a brother, but also a person with hopes and dreams beyond his racing career. All these pieces make the conclusion even more poignant.
I enjoyed this film so much that I barely realized there are some segments with subtitles. So highly recommended that I’m going to give you ample reasons to put this one in the queue and move it up to #1.
If you:
Put it in the queue!
However if you,
Don’t put it in the queue.
Starring: Evan Glodell, Jessie Wiseman, Tyler Dawson
Directed by: Evan Glodell
Every synopsis I have read of Bellflower misrepresents the film. I know I started a recent review with a similar device, the review of “Survival Wilderness for Girls,” but it is true for both films. Maybe this is just becoming more prevalent in an era where a short online synopsis might convince you to order a movie through a number of readily available online streaming options (Cinema Now, Vudu, Netflix, PPV, Amazon, etc.), but I can’t remember a time when more films where misrepresented through synopsis and trailers than in the last few years.
IMDB’s synopsis reads like this:
Two friends spend all their free time building flame-throwers and weapons of mass destruction in hopes that a global apocalypse will occur and clear the runway for their imaginary gang “Mother Medusa”.
While this is true, it is a pretty small portion of the film. Heck, when I sat down to watch the film I thought it was going to take place in a future poised on the brink of annihilation. However, Bellflower actually takes place in modern day California. And is actually a love story. Or a bromance. Or a mixture of both. And, yeah, there is a flamethrower thrown in for good measure.
Woodrow (Evan Glodell) and Aiden (Tyler Dawson) are two friends who are building a flamethrower together. This isn’t to illustrate how weird they are, or mentally unstable. It’s just something to pass the time.
At a bar one night Woodrow is taken with Milly (Jessie Wiseman), who hands him a beat-down in a particularly voracious cricket-eating competition. They make plans for a date, deciding spontaneously to drive to small hole-in-the-wall diner in Texas, where Woodrow is punched in the nose, and also trades his car (whose dashboard is rigged to tap whisky from somewhere in the motor block) for a motorcycle.
These scenes take up about the first 40-45 minutes of the film, and they are dull. None of the actors cast in the film are adept at acting, although some might garner themselves a “passable” critique. Particularly problematic is Glodell, the writer and director of the film, who is also cast as the lead. Many lines are delivered in a stiff manner, and his awkward , self-aware giggle will have you pulling out your hair by minute 20.
There was a point during this time period I considered turning the film off. The one saving grace was its approach stylistically. I was aware the supposed budget of the film was $17,000 which, when translated to film budget, is almost literally nothing. I have seen films with four times the budget with four times less style (like this piece of festering feces: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0469683/, which, even at 75 minutes long, was probably the greatest waste of time in my life).
So I continued to watch. And at about minute 50, give or take, an event occurs which causes a fist fight, possible brain damage, arson and self-deprecation.
And the rest of the film is captivating. It is finished in abruptly edited scenes and fevered, intoxicating visuals. I’m not sure it excuses Glodell’s first half exercise in acting futility, but as the film is finished in an explosion of carnage and outrage, it is obvious he chose the overt “aw-gee-shucks” nature of the first half of the film to juxtapose the anger in the second half.
There is an ending monologue from Aiden which finishes the film perfectly. It ties together everything in the film, from the violence perpetrated throughout, to relationships gone wrong, to the ramifications of poor decisions, and to the emotions associated therein, all with a “Road Warrior”-like apocalypse metaphor. I really feel with a little tightening-up, this could have been a great film. As-is, it’s set to be a piece of faulted cult cinema by a promising talent in the field.
Written by Ryan Venson
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (54.1MB)
This should have been up sooner, but you know how it is this time of year. Every free minute has to be spent catching up on nominated Oscar films. Plus if you think these shows are already too long, you should hear them before I edit out that random chatter and beer breaks. Just wait until we do the best/worst of 2011 episode…it might be 5 hours long. I will probably spend at least 2 hours talking about how much I hated Bridesmaids. For now, you will just have to enjoy this show.
Starring: Bradley Cooper, Abbie Cornish, Robert De Niro
Directed by: Neil Burger
Continuous improvement seems to be pretty much the only thing important to what we perceive as success: more profits, more efficiency, more productivity. It is easy for the average person to get frustrated and perhaps somewhat disheartened by this manifesto. Should we have already done more by now? Shouldn’t we be doing more? Surely using this planner, that app, multitasking, delegating better, working smarter…something should unlock our ability to do more, right?
If you are a typical adult and you haven’t ever gone through this inner monologue, you must be:
Limitless speaks to our (or at least my) desire to see what’s really inside the mind and understand what we could truly be capable of doing if nothing held us back. Eddie Mora (Bradley Cooper) has a book contract and serious writer’s block. His crappy apartment is a mess, his girlfriend is fed up with him, and he looks like a bum.
On top of being unceremoniously dumped and past his authorial deadline with nothing to show for it, he runs into Vernon (Johnny Whitworth), his shady ex-brother-in-law. Vernon buys him a drink, listens to his troubles, then slips him a tablet in a little plastic bag, “on the house.” Skeptical at first of this experimental drug that will allegedly unlock all his brain’s power (not just that standard 20 percent), Eddie hesitates considerably before taking it.
But when it kicks in, the results are amazing. The subconscious serves up long-buried facts, his mental facilities go into overdrive, and he completes more than enough of his novel to placate and energize his editor.
One brush with this type of power isn’t enough – of course Eddie wants more, which requires more of the drug. So he goes to see Vernon again, and Vernon promptly sends him out to run a couple errands. When Eddie gets back, Vernon has been murdered and his apartment tossed. Fortunately the baddies did not find the stash, but Eddie does.
What does he do with this seemingly limitless energy and intelligence? Finish his novel? Learn a bunch of foreign languages? Figure out an algorithm that allows him to make millions in a couple days of stock trading? Realize you know kung fu via all those Bruce Lee movies you watched in days of yore? Party with a bunch of gorgeous Italian women? Go cliff diving? Race around in a purple Maserati?
All this and more, friends, all this and more.
Of course, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Though Newton’s Third Law doesn’t completely describe the rest of the film, and I was not able to conjure up the name of this law with just the power of Diet Coke or my 20 percent brain alone (I had to use Google Search), the binds Eddie finds himself in as he struggles with the drug’s side effects kept me on the edge of my seat. I highly enjoyed this movie, even though watching it made me feel like an underperforming buffoon.
If you:
Put it in the queue!
However, if you:
Don’t put it in the queue.
Written by Jennifer Venson
Starring: David Hyde Pierce, Clayne Crawford
Directed by: Nick Tomnay
John (Clayne Crawford) finds himself in a serious pickle after he ends up injured and identified after a robbing a bank. Ditching his car – which has been described on the radio – he ends up wandering through a semi-ritzy neighborhood looking to weasel his way into shelter for the night. After one foiled attempt, he finds a postcard from Julia in Australia to Warwick (David Hyde Pierce). Posing as a recent friend of Julia’s just in from Australia with a sob story about losing his luggage, he wrangles entry into the house, where Warwick is preparing for a dinner party.
While John is sitting in Warwick’s house, sipping red wine and stringing together lies about his acquaintance with Julia, he hears another radio broadcast about his crime and the search for his whereabouts. Fear making him belligerent, John grabs a knife and gets belligerent, revealing the truth about his identity and willingness to kill. Warwick acts frightened and calls one of the guests to cancel the party. And then John blacks out. When he wakes up, he is the prisoner and four other dinner guests have joined Warwick’s party.
What follows is an extremely strange – yet carefully structured – evening at Warwick’s house. There are even some flashbacks of John’s bank robbery woven in to add context and set up the ending. Throw in a nosy neighbor whose interference in the festivities is only avoided by quick thinking and the use of a rubber swamp creature mask, and you have a very weird yet completely enjoyable film. The only ‘meh’ I have about the film is the flashback sequences aren’t integrated well. They really don’t work as either clues or character insights until very late in the movie.
If you:
Put it in the queue!
If you:
Don’t put it in the queue.
Written by Jennifer Venson
