Review: Burn after Reading

Tweet

Genre: Comedy (Farce)

One can almost feel the two Coens exhaling a cathartic sigh of insouciance and relief in their latest project, Burn after Reading, the nearly chaotic farce that follows their pin-straight and somber No Country for Old Men (2007). Equal parts classic comedy, ensemble piece, a-traditional narrative, and tongue-in-cheek establishment-directed ribbery; the new film zips through a series of frenetic and whip-lashing vignettes that tumble and weave a dynamic but somewhat disjointed, somewhat nihilistic, portrait of the scarcely noticed kind of simmering that can and likely does frequently go on in the lives and minds of niche-blocked American citizens. Skipping staccato from the frustrated, slightly alcoholic, and overworked government employee (notably - chuckle - a Princeton grad.) to the constantly awed, thoroughly energetic, and perpetually gum-chewing personal trainer and back again; or even from the icily perfected, sweet yet savage career woman, stuck in the enclave of a frozen marriage, to a consistently unsatisfied, vaguely desperate, and chatteringly superficially assertive aging bachelorette and back again; the piece makes a melancholy but delicious mish-mosh of the jolts rattling around in the collective American psyche, jolts that are, when apparent, frequently repressed - pushed back, inwardly directed, lest their live-wire antics catch wind and collide them with the effective means of others. And, as such a portrait, the film does amply well. The acting is solid, if sometimes a bit caricatured, and the balance of the characters is fair, never alighting upon any long enough for the audience to become truly invested in his or her individual character - for, clearly, individualism is not what the film is about.
However, as a conceit regarding the politics of daily interactions, trust and fidelity, the idealism of partnerships (both romantic and platonic), and the aspirations for a something more, the film definitely does fall flat upon its comically well-rounded ass. There are simply too many puns, ridiculous dalliances, and needle-sharp eccentricities, to balance such a smooth and delicate matter very well. Furthermore, wading deep into the uncertain waters of absurdity that, while at one moment they may bear one up to a marvelous height, can just as handedly bellow out and down, exposing the grimy and empty rock-surface of the floor beneath; the piece regrets its own decisions and tosses too vigorously from moments of comedy to those of drama, for the audience to indeed be comfortable, no less metaphysically engaged. In short, the whole thing seemed like an extended quip, done merely for the rhythmic and tossing jaunt of it - much as one would a dizzying roller-coaster - rather than for the investigatory, question-making effect significant of others of these fine writers'-directors' films - a quality which -- let me be clear -- is fine, if that be what they two intended by it all. I however am not thoroughly convinced that such complete triviality was the case; the Coens, in my mind, cannot write other than in, yes pleasing, but primarily investigatory manner; and for that fact and the bearing that it must have on my review of this, their latest work, I must not commend them.
Highest praise, on the other hand, is neverthless due to Mr. Pitt's thoroughly delightful portrayal of the aforementioned personal trainer, whose reach extends a bit deeper into the mire than he can quite entirely grasp. Bouncy and vibrant as he needed to be, the rôle was the finest he's done in years; and in my book should not go without due course of recognition(: See my now updated right column).
But as for Burn after Reading itself:

Grade: B-, fun but deleteriously discombobulated.

Preview: Taking Woodstock

Tweet

Entertainment Weekly has posted a photo of Ang Lee's traditional, shoot-commencing Big Luck ceremony, held on the set of his new film Taking Woodstock. As I am a huge Ang-Lee fan, this film is already gracing my Eagerly Anticipated 2009 list. Check it out, people. :)

Trailer: Milk

Tweet

Got Milk?

(O. K., I completely admit: that was terrible - but, to my credit, at least let me be the first to dive into that rottingly ripe cliché that will surely be swarmed upon by many a film-blogger or blog-commenter who think himself 'cute' and let that dive be with open arms, the purposeful flop, the bold singe into the Teen-Bop-ular: Foreknowledge of a blunder negates the blunder itself? I'll leave that up to you. Enjoy the trailer.)

Review: Vicky Christina Barcelona

Tweet

Genre: Comedy

O, Woody Allen! How long has it been since we've found happiness together? And that it should come so suddenly, so surprisingly?! How grand!
Truly, not since 1994's divine Bullets over Broadway has Mr. Allen delivered a screenplay so bountiful and jaunty as this, his latest, Vicky Christina Barcelona. Quick, quippy, capriciously sardonic in a way that paints classic self-doubting Allen humor in splashes of color and passion as bright and sensual as any of the many artworks and love-scenes that color the film's screen, the work vibrates with its own unique, Iberian vitality that reinvigorates even the tried and tired-growing "confused waif" character that Ms. Johansson seems so stuck on playing - sorry, Scarlett. Of course, Mr. Bardem and Ms. Cruz made no contestable match for her anyway, with their ferociously bidden duo of lovers, snarling indirected but nevertheless ardently: They two tear up the screen, as they tear at each other, and each is so charging to watch, that one cannot help but wonder why Scarlett could not show up herself a bit more, instead of shrinking back into Scoop (2006), her last collaboration with Mr. Allen. One cannot wish for all miracles, I suppose. Rebecca Hall was handy in her first major-film rôle and Patricia Clarkson is always a delight to see pop up in the pictures; the sex was neither gratuitous nor prudish and the voice-over narration a bold risk that pays off cleverly in many a punchline; & the action consistently moves well over the pulsing strumming of guitar chords that adds a rhythmic movement and depth to the work as a whole, as though it were - as it is - actually straining to achieve something more than just mellifluity out of its waxing and waning, undular efforts. As the tip-toeing high notes dance over the ergonomic works of Gaudí, Vicky and Christina search for their perfect fit - and thankfully, Mr. Allen may be a tailor.

Grade: A solid B.

Review: Brideshead Revisited

Tweet

Genre: Drama

Brideshead Revisited, the canonical tale about the changing British society of the interbellic period in England, receives its second cinematic treatment this year, in this Andrew-Davies--Jeremy-Brock adaptation of the classic Waugh text. Spooling from two such pens, which have previously urged out the charming Mrs. Brown (1997) and The Last King of Scotland (2006) & the quirky but endearing Bridget Jones's Diary (2001), the tale, one would expect, should be nothing less than the equally charming and endearing play as those that have preceded it - and, in truth, the charm evident in its design does shine through the film in the gifts of some few locations - but, somehow, under the mastering hand of director Julian Jarrold, who previously bedraggled the what-may-have-possibly-been-charming-once Becoming Jane (2007), the film slumps and sloughs & erodes its luxe veneer in a way that is all too intolerable in the mindset and the cadence of the message of the tale. A resultant chock-a-block stew of the "high points" of Mr. Waugh's cherished work - due in large part to a "Chopsticks"-style editing job done by Mr. C. Gill - Brideshead Revisted (2007) fails to live up to the graceful magniloquence that so aptly characterized and described its original edition. Short where it should be decadent, shrifty where it should be smooth, the new film clutches Charles Ryder where it should let him train on, not as a prisoner of his circumstances, but rather as a partner to them. Abating those events and characters that contribute so handily to his mise-en-scène confusions, it does little to implicate Charles in his own actions, but makes him seem rather bedazzled instead by them all and by his surroundings, bedazzled as though stunned and then sent tumbling by the impact through the dazy and harrowing situations that befall him. And, though - true - such a languorous recapitulation of the first edition, that would remend such passivity in the story's filmic design, as that which was provided by the eminent BBC in 1981, is not at 13 hours in length well suited for the work's début on the silver screen and though - true - such a recapitulation may verily moreover lie on the other end of the spectrum, as an adaptation in need of a more aggressive editor; more needed to be done to honorably communicate the fullness of Mr. Ryder's story, in not only its highlights, but its bellows as well.
To compliment the film though, there were two unfaltering redemptions of its origin's beauty: (1) Elmer Ni Mhaoldomhnaigh's gorgeous, embellished-period costumes and (2) Matthew Goode's tempering, high-wire, gentleman's performance that manages to depress the prickly jabs of editing around him enough to draw the viewer in and ask him to forgive and forget the all-too-severous hand that jars him.

Grade: C

Trailer: Happy-Go-Lucky

Tweet

Cute: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P97wbtckTEY

and it's by Mike Leigh! Hotness irradiates; I can't wait.

O, YES! Trailer: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Tweet

Yahoo's movie site at movies.yahoo.com has just (finally) released the new, actual trailer for this year's upcoming and much anticipated Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, and from the looks of it, it's going to be one beautiful film. So excited?! Check it out here.

Addendum: Moviefone also has the trailer (in HD formats that will actually play after being downloaded, unlike those Yahoo has to offer me for a bizarre reason).

Secundum Addendum: Anyone else even more excited now by finding out that Jim Broadbent is playing Slughorn?

Tertium Addendum: Anyone else kind of taken with this silly little trailer?
No? Well, trailer me to heaven, because Pixar (is already confident enough to have) released its first (teaser) trailer for its next full-length feature Up here.

Interview: Matthew Goode

Tweet

Matthew Goode, star of Brideshead Revisited and Match Point, talks to the Times in this latest video. Check it out here; it's good.

Addendum to Review: Mamma Mia!

Tweet

Thanks are again to due A. O. Scott for reenlivening, or "rehabilitat[ing]," on a larger scale people's enthusiasm for - or, at the very least, people's awareness of - the great Muriel's Wedding (1994), which I mentioned in one of the post scripta to my review of this year's Mamma Mia!, in order to cite an actually good film based on some of ABBA's defiantly endurant songs. Please, see his video (to which I'm alluding) on the Times' website: here.

Review: The Dark Knight

Tweet

Genre: Action (Superhero) / Drama

Thank you!! THANK YOU!!!

O, I am so pleased to be able to write a positive review for a film this summer! So, truly, I thank Christopher Nolan and all else involved in this latest 'Batman' project for giving me one about which to do so!

Now, into the meat of it: The Dark Knight is quite starkly not your average or typical Action (Superhero) flick: Lacking all sense of purposeful abandon, gratuitous sexuality (usually veering towards near-medieval misogyny), and solitary drive toward the 'cool factor' (e. g., overblown special effects and absurdly 'cutting-edge' technology), the film reads more like an "Intro. to Philosophy", moral debate than a summer smash; but that, my friends and readers, is what makes it o-so-much better - o-so-much more than that menial two-word description. (O, I knew I couldn't be wrong about both estimations of actors in this past week's summer openings! [See my earlier posting regarding Mamma Mia!.]) The screenplay justly and deftly, not only works in and thoroughly around itself the set-up that was created by the film's chronological predecessor Batman Begins, but also envelops and develops a sense of moral purposefulness and only occasionally outright didacticism that elevates and lifts the premise of the 'Superhero et al.' out of its dated Keds and plastic wrappings into the shoes of a much more sophisticated adult who prefers Kant over comic. Pressing into questions of what may stand in preexisting moral quandaries and of what difficulties arise in attempting to create one's own moral universe and also, more generally, of whether elementally good or bad can ever be exclusively imparted or fixed into a person (though I do recognize the "so what?" motion on that last one because almost all other Action [Superhero] films tackle the same topic as a necessity of their collective genre), the film rides out moral experiments that are both actively and academically effective and engaging; quietly alluding to, or encompassing, questions - at least in this filmgoer's mind - brought to the fore earlier by intelligent films, as wide and as varied as WarGames (1983) and Bullets over Broadway (1994). And - not only does it press into such questions but moreover - it attempts to even answer them(!), as best as any of them can be answered, by so riding out its moral experiments to their (idealistic) conclusions, despite the typical 'Superhero' garble that such conclusions in this genre practically insert. (See the Two Ferries experiment of the later part of the film here.) O, what a thrill it was to see such attempts being valorously made and forayed on the screen in a film of this genre! A+, seriously, for this effort and its resultant, still readable(!), intelligent complexity.
But, sadly, the film is not all successive A+s and commendations: about the cinematography I on more than one occasion felt, "O, why, why did they light it this way?"; about the editing I on more than one occasion thought, "O, but what ever happened to [prominent plot part] in the end?"; and about the blocking/direction I on more than one occasion stopped, "Wait, they would never really arrange this way, would they?" No, the film does flaw itself up in these three areas, as well as perhaps it does in its slow slow build toward palpable moral-realization: Shafty unfocused lighting, untied unfinished storytrails, and incongruous potentially awkward configurations are woefully deletrious to any film but especially so to any one like this; but its handy argumentative screenwriting and capable acting, bolstered yes by the 'cool-factor' action-paced sequences, somehow overcome the worst of those deletions, which would likely have otherwise sent this film to the place where its sadder brethren, like 1997's Batman & Robin, have gone to die: Comic-Con retro. Mr. Bale makes for a cocky if gruff and stiff, new-worldly Bruce Wayne/Batman, Ms. Gyllenhaal more than aptly takes over for the abandoning Ms. Holmes Rachel Dawes, and Mr. Freeman as Lucius Fox places his smirks in all the right locations.
And Mr. Ledger - o, Mr. Ledger. Now, this filmgoer and filmreviewer know that there has been much talk and much buzz about the quality of this beloved actor's supporting performance as The Joker, as much as there has been about the possibility of his garnering at least a Supporting Actor Oscar nomination come next year, if not a win, posthumous for his work; now, it is not my place to make a wager similar either for or against such a claim or declaration, as (first) it is probably too early to make such a high-level call, (second) it could be potentially jinxing to that claim or declaration to do so, and (third) the erraticism of the Academy is really these days not something anyone can be said to truly lay significant claim on knowing or predicting; but I will say, it would not in any way be against my estimations for such a claim or declaration to be eventually proved to be the unmitigated case. Mr. Ledger was in a word remarkable in this rôle, as deftly, deeply, and originally invigorating himself into this famous character as well as did Mr. Pacino into that great beacon of a (comic-book-) villainous perfomance, his Big Boy Caprice in 1994's Dick Tracy (for which he himself nearly won the Oscar) - and saying so is really saying something: Any antagonistic performance that recollects the merits of that (Pacino) rôle is meritorious itself indeed. If it mean anything, I beg you, Academy, take notice and do not lose sight and memory in the six-month to come.
And, as for the set-up for the potential sequel to this latest Batman installment, Aaron Eckhart, take notice: slipping into Tommy Lee Jones' former role in this latest array of classic comic villains is a tall order that will likely take more than you had to offer in this preliminary filmline. The Batman, fortunally, will only keep getting better.

Grade: B+/B