The Official Review Thread of 2007
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19336
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6383
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
Cast: Tommy Lee Jones, Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin, Kelly MacDonald, Garrett Dillahunt, Tess Harper.
Dirs: Joel Coen and Ethan Coen.
At long last! Although I prefer There Will Be Blood slightly, this is indeed one of the Coen Brothers' masterpieces and their best work in years. This is a beautifully shot and absolutely nerve-wracking thriller that only the Coen Brothers can do. Damn, Javier Bardem truly earned his Oscar. Just him walking in the room can elicit gasps and stunned silence.
Grade: A
Cast: Tommy Lee Jones, Javier Bardem, Josh Brolin, Kelly MacDonald, Garrett Dillahunt, Tess Harper.
Dirs: Joel Coen and Ethan Coen.
At long last! Although I prefer There Will Be Blood slightly, this is indeed one of the Coen Brothers' masterpieces and their best work in years. This is a beautifully shot and absolutely nerve-wracking thriller that only the Coen Brothers can do. Damn, Javier Bardem truly earned his Oscar. Just him walking in the room can elicit gasps and stunned silence.
Grade: A
What did you think of 'There Will Be Blood'? I didn't read what you thought of it? I mean, I guess I just did. You hated it.
Watched 'The Darjeeling Limited' again and I'm forced to accept it as a strong entry in what will be referred to eventually as Wes Anderson's post-'The Royal Tenenbaums' phase. Anderson expanded his cinematic canvas exponentially from 'Bottle Rocket' to 'Rushmore' to 'The Royal Tenenbaums', ultimately saying the same thing about family, surrogate or otherwise, in such a manner that most filmmakers take half their careers to do. What he's doing now that he's crafted his boat show is ship it off to different milieus: the ocean, India, and now animation? And that shouldn't be points against him because it's still very potent.
'The Darjeeling Limited' is a work of genuine emotion and mostly very confident. The opening red herring with Bill Murray leading into Adrien Brody's slo-mo boarding of the titular train set to 'This Time Tomorrow' is as euphoric a beginning as any movie this year. Aboard the train, the film is sure-footed and sleek, and very strongly filmed. This is a high water mark in Robert Yeoman's career. When the journey continues it makes some stumbles along the way, but it's a movie I enjoyed throughout. Adrien Brody gives one of his best performances here, fitting into Wes Anderson's world as easily as any actor he's ever cast. Jason Schwartzman's younger Whitman is a character I wouldn't mind seeing Wes Anderson return to eventually, chronicling his Doinel-esque adventures. Only Owen Wilson hits some rough patches even though he's clearly stretching as an actor here, playing a big brother elitist. I like this movie now quite a bit and even find its missteps charming.
Edited By Sabin on 1206692045
Watched 'The Darjeeling Limited' again and I'm forced to accept it as a strong entry in what will be referred to eventually as Wes Anderson's post-'The Royal Tenenbaums' phase. Anderson expanded his cinematic canvas exponentially from 'Bottle Rocket' to 'Rushmore' to 'The Royal Tenenbaums', ultimately saying the same thing about family, surrogate or otherwise, in such a manner that most filmmakers take half their careers to do. What he's doing now that he's crafted his boat show is ship it off to different milieus: the ocean, India, and now animation? And that shouldn't be points against him because it's still very potent.
'The Darjeeling Limited' is a work of genuine emotion and mostly very confident. The opening red herring with Bill Murray leading into Adrien Brody's slo-mo boarding of the titular train set to 'This Time Tomorrow' is as euphoric a beginning as any movie this year. Aboard the train, the film is sure-footed and sleek, and very strongly filmed. This is a high water mark in Robert Yeoman's career. When the journey continues it makes some stumbles along the way, but it's a movie I enjoyed throughout. Adrien Brody gives one of his best performances here, fitting into Wes Anderson's world as easily as any actor he's ever cast. Jason Schwartzman's younger Whitman is a character I wouldn't mind seeing Wes Anderson return to eventually, chronicling his Doinel-esque adventures. Only Owen Wilson hits some rough patches even though he's clearly stretching as an actor here, playing a big brother elitist. I like this movie now quite a bit and even find its missteps charming.
Edited By Sabin on 1206692045
"How's the despair?"
I thought Day-Lewis was by far the worst of the nominees. A ridiculous performance, although I do give him credit for matching the ridiculousness of his director's "vision." I didn't like Johnny Depp either, but he wasn't aggressively awful like Day-Lewis.The Original BJ wrote:No one felt like total filler like DiCaprio and Smith last year, but I couldn't really get excited about anyone but Day-Lewis. I thought Day-Lewis was by far the worst of the nominees.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
-
The Original BJ
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4312
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm
I thought Hank's other child was named David, though you may be correct. I saw the film opening weekend, so my memory could be faulty.dws1982 wrote:The Original BJ wrote:as if that noxious final shot weren't enough, he had to name Jones's son AND Theron's son after the same Biblical character referenced in the title?
Theron's son was named David, after the character the title story references, while Tommy Lee Jones's son was named Michael.
I thought that this was a rather flat year for the Actor nominees. No one felt like total filler like DiCaprio and Smith last year, but I couldn't really get excited about anyone but Day-Lewis. I'd hardly stump for Depp or Mortensen, but if pressed, I'd say I found their more commanding work slightly more interesting. To be perfectly honest, though, I was quite pleased Jones was recognized because I loved him so much in No Country for Old Men. It was the kind of nomination that took everyone off guard but instantly made perfect sense.
The Original BJ wrote:as if that noxious final shot weren't enough, he had to name Jones's son AND Theron's son after the same Biblical character referenced in the title?
Theron's son was named David, after the character the title story references, while Tommy Lee Jones's son was named Michael.
I can see not thinking Jones should've won, but I don't see how anyone could find Johnny Depp in Sweeney Todd to be better. I have a hard enough time seeing how anyone could've felt that Viggo Mortensen's accent-deep performance was worthy of a nomination over all of those guys who were left off.
Edited By dws1982 on 1206678713
-
The Original BJ
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4312
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm
I'll double-dip with this post:
I hate In the Valley of Elah. Crash is a ridiculous movie, but it's not unwatchable and at least had potential. Elah on the other hand, is a disaster from every angle, beginning with that ungodly title. I'd say the worst episodes of Law & Order feature mysteries that are better constructed than this one. And by now it's cliche to harp on Paul Haggis's shortcomings vis a vis subtlety, but he hits new lows this time out: as if that noxious final shot weren't enough, he had to name Jones's son AND Theron's son after the same Biblical character referenced in the title? (The plot points Tee points out are also unbelievably awkward -- if I received a package from my dead child I'd open it PRONTO.) I do really like Million Dollar Baby and Letters from Iwo Jima, but in a lot of Crash and most of In the Valley of Elah I found myself wondering if Paul Haggis understands how anyone on Planet Earth behaves AT ALL.
And here's where I'll get controversial: I wasn't blown away by Tommy Lee Jones's performance. Oh, it's solid work from a very fine actor, certainly the best thing about the film. But I might go so far as to say he's my least favorite of '07's Best Actor nominees. With acclaimed performances like this, the question I some times find myself asking is when does underplaying become simply vague? I loved the subtle beauty of Jones's great performance in No Country, but here I felt like he was never able to overcome the fact that his character as scripted doesn't even make much sense. (It doesn't help that Haggis totally patronizes the character's conservative political leanings.) By the end of the film, I didn't feel like Jones had really told me enough about Hank, though it bears repeating that it's difficult for any actor to go beyond what's on the page when there's so little there to begin with.
But on to more enjoyable films...
I think My Kid Could Paint That is a total delight, a fun and fascinating film about how we define art, why we create narratives, and the ways in which our culture builds up prodigies only to take them down. I think this is a film in which the less you know about the "plot" elements, the more compelling the experience will be, so I won't go into too much detail. But I will say that these paintings are BEAUTIFUL! Not that I'd pay hundreds of thousands for them, but they're mighty fine aesthetically, in my book. I have no idea who painted these things, but I found the questions that arose, the subtle shifts in opinion among the various players, and the film's exploration of the meaning of art and the creation of art completely engrossing. And the kid's cute, too!
I hate In the Valley of Elah. Crash is a ridiculous movie, but it's not unwatchable and at least had potential. Elah on the other hand, is a disaster from every angle, beginning with that ungodly title. I'd say the worst episodes of Law & Order feature mysteries that are better constructed than this one. And by now it's cliche to harp on Paul Haggis's shortcomings vis a vis subtlety, but he hits new lows this time out: as if that noxious final shot weren't enough, he had to name Jones's son AND Theron's son after the same Biblical character referenced in the title? (The plot points Tee points out are also unbelievably awkward -- if I received a package from my dead child I'd open it PRONTO.) I do really like Million Dollar Baby and Letters from Iwo Jima, but in a lot of Crash and most of In the Valley of Elah I found myself wondering if Paul Haggis understands how anyone on Planet Earth behaves AT ALL.
And here's where I'll get controversial: I wasn't blown away by Tommy Lee Jones's performance. Oh, it's solid work from a very fine actor, certainly the best thing about the film. But I might go so far as to say he's my least favorite of '07's Best Actor nominees. With acclaimed performances like this, the question I some times find myself asking is when does underplaying become simply vague? I loved the subtle beauty of Jones's great performance in No Country, but here I felt like he was never able to overcome the fact that his character as scripted doesn't even make much sense. (It doesn't help that Haggis totally patronizes the character's conservative political leanings.) By the end of the film, I didn't feel like Jones had really told me enough about Hank, though it bears repeating that it's difficult for any actor to go beyond what's on the page when there's so little there to begin with.
But on to more enjoyable films...
I think My Kid Could Paint That is a total delight, a fun and fascinating film about how we define art, why we create narratives, and the ways in which our culture builds up prodigies only to take them down. I think this is a film in which the less you know about the "plot" elements, the more compelling the experience will be, so I won't go into too much detail. But I will say that these paintings are BEAUTIFUL! Not that I'd pay hundreds of thousands for them, but they're mighty fine aesthetically, in my book. I have no idea who painted these things, but I found the questions that arose, the subtle shifts in opinion among the various players, and the film's exploration of the meaning of art and the creation of art completely engrossing. And the kid's cute, too!
-
Mister Tee
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8647
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
On In the Valley of Elah:
I agree the bone-dry Jones performance is the best of it, and, along with his great No Country work, made it the most auspicious year of his career. I'd still vote Daniel Day-Lewis, but, you know, I liked There Will Be Blood.
But I thought Elah as a movie was a shambles -- far worse than Crash, which at least had some effective scenes in the first half before it went to coincidence/symmetry/sentiment hell. Elah wants to marry an investigative procedural with Meaningful Comment on Iraq, and I'd say fails at both. The unravelling of the "mystery" is inferior to that in about 90% of the detective novels I've read -- the withholding devices are coy in the extreme (the tape will download slowly over two hours! don't bother opening the unexpected package from our son!); the imparting of important information is awkward (esp. Frances Fisher's convenient appearance); and the ultimate explanation is so random as to not only seem irrelevant, but to persuade me it was yet another false explanation soon to be replaced by the "real story". (I naively expected the package from the son to supply that; I underestimated Haggis' desire to end on a note of High Symbolism) This unsatisfying wind-up also worked against any statement on Iraq or war in general...beyond "It's bad and makes you do crazy things".
I liked Theron more in this role than I did in North Country (there, I seriously questioned if she could act a lick), but her character's back-story is as hopelessly inane and irrelevant as Russell Crowe's child custody woes in American Gangster. And the intra-office friction with the guys seemed an artifact of an earlier, women-new-to-the-workplace era (say, when the first Prime Suspect dealt with the subject). Oh, and, have I mentioned I LOATHE 50s-style monologues/stories that explain movies' obscure titles?
By happenstance, I was reading Mark Harris' Pictures at a Revolution the same weekend I saw this. The book is, essentially, a full-length expansion of the 1967 chapter of Inside Oscar; it does have a number of interesting stories I'd, at least, never before heard. The relevance here: the book got me thinking about In the Heat of the Night, the film that had, at the time, the luck, and, in hindsight, the misfortune, to be the film that beat The Graduate and Bonnie and Clyde for the Oscar. This historic happenstance has led many (including me, for quite a while) to dismiss In the Heat of the Night as Oscar-grubbing mediocrity. But it's not: it's a very solid, atmosphere-drenched thriller that manages to capture/deal with a certain societal malaise without being heavy-handed about it. Seeing a film like Elah strive and fail at the same makes me feel like offering a 40-years-too-late mild salute to a movie that at least accomplished what it set out to.
Edited By Mister Tee on 1206670045
I agree the bone-dry Jones performance is the best of it, and, along with his great No Country work, made it the most auspicious year of his career. I'd still vote Daniel Day-Lewis, but, you know, I liked There Will Be Blood.
But I thought Elah as a movie was a shambles -- far worse than Crash, which at least had some effective scenes in the first half before it went to coincidence/symmetry/sentiment hell. Elah wants to marry an investigative procedural with Meaningful Comment on Iraq, and I'd say fails at both. The unravelling of the "mystery" is inferior to that in about 90% of the detective novels I've read -- the withholding devices are coy in the extreme (the tape will download slowly over two hours! don't bother opening the unexpected package from our son!); the imparting of important information is awkward (esp. Frances Fisher's convenient appearance); and the ultimate explanation is so random as to not only seem irrelevant, but to persuade me it was yet another false explanation soon to be replaced by the "real story". (I naively expected the package from the son to supply that; I underestimated Haggis' desire to end on a note of High Symbolism) This unsatisfying wind-up also worked against any statement on Iraq or war in general...beyond "It's bad and makes you do crazy things".
I liked Theron more in this role than I did in North Country (there, I seriously questioned if she could act a lick), but her character's back-story is as hopelessly inane and irrelevant as Russell Crowe's child custody woes in American Gangster. And the intra-office friction with the guys seemed an artifact of an earlier, women-new-to-the-workplace era (say, when the first Prime Suspect dealt with the subject). Oh, and, have I mentioned I LOATHE 50s-style monologues/stories that explain movies' obscure titles?
By happenstance, I was reading Mark Harris' Pictures at a Revolution the same weekend I saw this. The book is, essentially, a full-length expansion of the 1967 chapter of Inside Oscar; it does have a number of interesting stories I'd, at least, never before heard. The relevance here: the book got me thinking about In the Heat of the Night, the film that had, at the time, the luck, and, in hindsight, the misfortune, to be the film that beat The Graduate and Bonnie and Clyde for the Oscar. This historic happenstance has led many (including me, for quite a while) to dismiss In the Heat of the Night as Oscar-grubbing mediocrity. But it's not: it's a very solid, atmosphere-drenched thriller that manages to capture/deal with a certain societal malaise without being heavy-handed about it. Seeing a film like Elah strive and fail at the same makes me feel like offering a 40-years-too-late mild salute to a movie that at least accomplished what it set out to.
Edited By Mister Tee on 1206670045
I think 'My Kid Could Paint That' has one disingenuous scene that shifts the film away from being about the nature of story itself and towards a too-overt film about a documentarian's struggle, and that scene is when the documentarian himself uses the camera as a confessional. All it does is implore of the audience what we would already ascertain and to far more interesting, ambiguous effect. What IS Amir Bar-Lev's stake in this documentary and the Olmstead's themselves? When he finally pipes up while talking to the parents, the moment should be revelatory. Instead, he's a whiny filmmaker who's been given, as Laura Olmstead says, "documentary gold" and wishes he was back in a bronze world.
Amir Bar-Lev's slant is evident in the film's epilogue which I won't reveal here. 'My Kid Could Paint That' starts as a joke (4 year old painter, quirky world of abstract art, extended 'Daily Show' bit), then reaches a punch line that is mortifying for the Olmsteads (as it is revealed - DUH! - that Marla might not be the piece's true artist), and becomes a sad little short story (as they quest in futility for Marla to recreate a painting before the camera and prove to investors past and future that she is the real deal), and then...well, what is left for Amir? As newspaper writer Elizabeth herself says, the media needs to make a story and then destroy it to fully reap the benefits and Amir is no different really. That is comes along so unassumingly, so organically is no different.
The difference is that Amir is totally unconvinced of Marla's talent, as would be anybody who watches the movie. She's clearly a talented little kid but my goodness! The world of difference between her dubious and proven work! And the damning moment on film where she reveals that her younger brother Zane did all the painting himself! "Documentary Gold" as Amir Bar-Lev confesses that he is not convinced to the parents themselves, wife Laura who is clearly taken along for the ride and devestated but the implied duplicity on their parts, and father Mark who while may not be a born liar is all-but certainly lying every second that he is on-screen.
This is a story about many things but in the end it becomes an accidental story about the nature of stories and how they evolve. When Elizabeth asks what he is still doing, what he wants to find, it's as if Amir Bar-Lev is himself a part of that unconscious media machine. What is he looking for? The film's epilogue brings us for a moment into another art show. Marla at Six. That crying mother. That gonniving father. That talented little girl. 'My Kid Could Paint That' doesn't just have a slant. It is the slant! And if I find it less astonishingly intimate than 'Capturing the Friedmans' or dizzyingly cerebral than 'Fast, Cheap, and Out of Control', it's the more unassuming and miraculous film and not simply for its accidental nature.
Amir Bar-Lev's slant is evident in the film's epilogue which I won't reveal here. 'My Kid Could Paint That' starts as a joke (4 year old painter, quirky world of abstract art, extended 'Daily Show' bit), then reaches a punch line that is mortifying for the Olmsteads (as it is revealed - DUH! - that Marla might not be the piece's true artist), and becomes a sad little short story (as they quest in futility for Marla to recreate a painting before the camera and prove to investors past and future that she is the real deal), and then...well, what is left for Amir? As newspaper writer Elizabeth herself says, the media needs to make a story and then destroy it to fully reap the benefits and Amir is no different really. That is comes along so unassumingly, so organically is no different.
The difference is that Amir is totally unconvinced of Marla's talent, as would be anybody who watches the movie. She's clearly a talented little kid but my goodness! The world of difference between her dubious and proven work! And the damning moment on film where she reveals that her younger brother Zane did all the painting himself! "Documentary Gold" as Amir Bar-Lev confesses that he is not convinced to the parents themselves, wife Laura who is clearly taken along for the ride and devestated but the implied duplicity on their parts, and father Mark who while may not be a born liar is all-but certainly lying every second that he is on-screen.
This is a story about many things but in the end it becomes an accidental story about the nature of stories and how they evolve. When Elizabeth asks what he is still doing, what he wants to find, it's as if Amir Bar-Lev is himself a part of that unconscious media machine. What is he looking for? The film's epilogue brings us for a moment into another art show. Marla at Six. That crying mother. That gonniving father. That talented little girl. 'My Kid Could Paint That' doesn't just have a slant. It is the slant! And if I find it less astonishingly intimate than 'Capturing the Friedmans' or dizzyingly cerebral than 'Fast, Cheap, and Out of Control', it's the more unassuming and miraculous film and not simply for its accidental nature.
"How's the despair?"
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6383
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
AWAY FROM HER
Cast: Julie Christie, Gordon Pinsent, Olympia Dukakis, Michael Murphy, Wendy Crewson.
Dir: Sarah Polley.
A bittersweet love story between a devoted husband and his beautiful wife suffering from Alzheimer's manages to be emotional without being cloying and sappy. Beautiful, luminous performances from Gordon Pinsent (who was robbed of an Oscar nomination, btw) and of course the marvelous Julie Christie. Great feature debut from Sarah Polley.
Grade: A-
Cast: Julie Christie, Gordon Pinsent, Olympia Dukakis, Michael Murphy, Wendy Crewson.
Dir: Sarah Polley.
A bittersweet love story between a devoted husband and his beautiful wife suffering from Alzheimer's manages to be emotional without being cloying and sappy. Beautiful, luminous performances from Gordon Pinsent (who was robbed of an Oscar nomination, btw) and of course the marvelous Julie Christie. Great feature debut from Sarah Polley.
Grade: A-
-
anonymous1980
- Laureate
- Posts: 6383
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
- Location: Manila
- Contact:
ATONEMENT
Cast: James McAvoy, Keira Knightley, Romola Garai, Saiorse Ronan, Vanessa Redgrave, Brenda Blethyn, Juno Temple.
Dir: Joe Wright.
This is a fine, albeit far from outstanding, motion picture. It is gorgeously shot, well-directed and extremely well-acted (though Knightley could sure use a sandwich or three), the film is a fine, accessible adaptation of a rather tricky book.
Oscar Prospects: Damien, you're right. The best Briony was Romola Garai. Ronan was very good but it was Garai who truly impressed me.
Grade: B+
Cast: James McAvoy, Keira Knightley, Romola Garai, Saiorse Ronan, Vanessa Redgrave, Brenda Blethyn, Juno Temple.
Dir: Joe Wright.
This is a fine, albeit far from outstanding, motion picture. It is gorgeously shot, well-directed and extremely well-acted (though Knightley could sure use a sandwich or three), the film is a fine, accessible adaptation of a rather tricky book.
Oscar Prospects: Damien, you're right. The best Briony was Romola Garai. Ronan was very good but it was Garai who truly impressed me.
Grade: B+
I just watched In the Valley of Elah and Tommy Lee Jones was robbed. His subtle underplaying, through which he completely inhabits his character from the inside is to me what superb film acting is all about. No calling attention to effects; no irrelevant gestures; emotions expressed through the movement of the eyes or the mouth; Jones is mesmerizing. I agree with you, Josh, that the one-two punch of his work here and in No Country (he should have won all those awards that Bardem hauled in) make 2007 a fantastic year for Jones akin to Affleck's.
As for In the Valley of Elah itself, the film is filled with contrivances, obviousness and the overwrought attitude that marks Paul Haggis's work. And Charlize Theron's character is ridiculous, while the sour attitude between the Jones and Sarandon characters seems utterly arbitrary. Still, Haggis knows how to stage scenes pretty well and, even though I should have known better, I did find the movie reasonably compelling. (Another masterful job by Roger Deakins helps immeasurably.) Haggis has bee forcibly outspoken against the War on the Iraqi People (and against Bush) but this film is surprisingly apolitical, more or less settling on the old saw that War is Hell.
As for In the Valley of Elah itself, the film is filled with contrivances, obviousness and the overwrought attitude that marks Paul Haggis's work. And Charlize Theron's character is ridiculous, while the sour attitude between the Jones and Sarandon characters seems utterly arbitrary. Still, Haggis knows how to stage scenes pretty well and, even though I should have known better, I did find the movie reasonably compelling. (Another masterful job by Roger Deakins helps immeasurably.) Haggis has bee forcibly outspoken against the War on the Iraqi People (and against Bush) but this film is surprisingly apolitical, more or less settling on the old saw that War is Hell.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell