Just in time for the Oscars, all the movies I saw in 2008 (Part III)
Speed Racer, The Visitor, Burn After Reading, etc.
Ooops, used up another 30 minutes.
SPEED RACER (**1/2 out of ****)
Almost good. With its complete lack of pretense, “Speed Racer” is almost better than the “Matrix” movies, in fact. I liked all the candy-colored noise and insanity and the simplicity of the storytelling. I like that the end of the big race, with all its noise and color, suddenly reduces to simple geometric shapes. I also really like how the mechanic wishes the hero luck before the big race, and the mechanic’s unspoken gay crush on the hero is more poignant than anything in the two hours of “Milk.” But are “Speed Racer’s” failings the result of too much faith in the source material, or not enough? First of all, a little of the kid and his monkey goes a long way. Edit them down and I’d like “Speed Racer” just fine. More importantly is that the emotional climax between the hero (young racecar driver Speed Racer) and his girl is interrupted by the stupid kid and his stupid monkey and we wonder, is that because it was like that in the comic? Or is that because the filmmakers don’t have faith in their simple story, and so think to “enhance” it with a joke? Similarly, “Speed Racer” is decried for its visual madness, but its dialogue scenes are handled in simple, TV-style shot/reverse shot. Is this because the filmmakers want to stay true to “Speed Racer’s” TV roots, or because they know “Speed’s” ultimate destination is the Blu-ray player and they’re too gutless to make an actual movie?
THE VISITOR (**1/2 out of ****)
Charming, but overstays its welcome. A withdrawn middle-aged professor (Richard Jenkins) slowly creeps out of his shell when he finds an immigrant couple mistakenly living in his apartment. This part’s good, but then the man in the couple gets picked up by the INS and “The Visitor” becomes not-quite-a-slog through speechifying about the sorry state of US immigration policy. There’s a lot of “telling” - at least one person says “I didn’t do anything!” - but not a lot of showing and an emphasis on the white professor making the right decision; we never actually SEE what’s going on inside the deportation center.
BURN AFTER READING (***1/2 out of ****)
Best Actor nominees Brad Pitt and Richard Jenkins both appear in the new flick from the Coen Brothers. If a comedy about morons trying to play the espionage game seems an unlikely follow-up to their deathly serious movie about death “No Country for Old Men,” think about it this way: “Burn After Reading” is about middle age and it’s no coincidence that the only young character leaves the movie about halfway through. Physical fitness workers obsessed with plastic surgery, an aging civil servant obsessed with “getting in a run” every day, a forcibly retired CIA analyst who’s never done anything of not trying to write a memoir convincing himself he has, and more - I can’t quite put my finger on it, but the whole thing bespeaks of middle-aged desperation, of disappointed, shrunken lives, looking for something of substance, and stumbling across a CD-ROM of “spy shit” as a way. Brad Pitt’s doofus bicyclist is perhaps his finest hour; George Clooney does some great little eye twitches to let us know how the wheels are turning; and Frances McDormand reminds us that she’s one of the most interesting actresses in America.
THE FALL (*** out of ****)
Beautiful but maybe a little underwhelming from director Tarsem Singh, who directed “The Cell,” which was equally beautiful but perhaps whose beauty existed separately from all subject matter. A injured stuntman circa WWI tells a story to a little Eastern European immigrant in a hospital, but she argues with him about points, the story changes, and we see the story from her point of view. For instance, he tells a story of an Indian and his squaw, but since she’s never seen a Native American she pictures a turbaned Hindu. The story he tells is a coded, abstracted version of a love triangle that led to his suicide attempt. Director Tarsem shot the movie on multiple continents using no sets, only some of the most remarkable locations in the world. I always find a real castle, decayed and gloomy, better than a bright shiny CG castle.
HAROLD & KUMAR ESCAPE FROM GUANTANAMO BAY (*** out of ****)
Not as funny as “Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle” and not as clean visually, either. Director Danny Leiner is replaced by the co-screenwriters, and while Leiner is no De Palma, he could at least order things in a cohesive manner, whereas the new directors are, while not incompetent, at least sloppy. Anyway, if “White Castle” was mostly Harold learning to relax, “Guantanamo Bay” is more of Kumar learning to take things a bit more seriously, and the vehicle for it is their ridiculous crosscountry trek to stop Kumar’s beloved from marrying the douchebag who sent them up the river. “I’m awesome!” the cackling villain intones after having them arrested.
INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL (**1/2 out of ****)
It’s good to see Indy again and, for about the first half of “Crystal Skull,” things are pretty good. I especially like that Indy survives a nuclear bomb by hiding in a fridge. But by the second half the movie starts looking more like an Indy knock-off like “National Treasure,” in which our heroes go from one jittery CG lair to another without much rhyme or reason. Still, Harrison Ford is as good as ever and, as the Soviet villainess, an otherwise utterly evil Cate Blanchett creates sympathy from us just by being a little more scared of things than a villain normally should, and by looking like she’s about to cry when things go wrong.
IRON MAN (**1/2 out of ****)
Well-acted, especially by Robert Downey Jr., but otherwise unremarkable superhero fare. Oscar nominee for both Sound awards and Visual Effects.
QUANTUM OF SOLACE (**1/2 out of ****)
One of the things I love about my wife is that she finds attractive men that she almost finds disgusting. Toad-like French actor Mathieu Amalric, unfortunately, falls just shy of being attractive, and so makes a great Bond villain. There’s a bit in “Quantum of Solace” where he stares at someone out his car window as he’s driven away, and it’s priceless. Still, something’s missing from “Quantum of Solace” and I can’t quite put my finger on it. Maybe it doesn’t weave Bond’s character arc in with the plot well enough or something. Certainly some of the action sequences are hyper-edited until they’re no fun anymore; a rooftop chase would be great if it were just slowed down a bit. The opening car chase is fine; it’s incomprehensible, sure, but it’s more like the avant-garde “idea” of a car chase, and not the car chase itself. But a whole movie of that doesn’t work. I saw “Quantum” only a few months ago and the fact that I can’t remember speaks a lot against it.
REVOLUTIONARY ROAD (** out of ****)
I like “what” this movie is about but not “how” it goes about it. It makes me think I’d enjoy the book. A young married couple living in the suburbs begins to drift apart. She wants them to move to Paris and lead a daring, exciting life, while he might actually enjoy the 9-to-5 at the ad firm, because he’s good at it. But it’s mostly yelling and too many on-the-nose conversations and lectures (courtesy of Kathy Bates), although there is a great bit of the couple just walking down a hallway that speaks volumes more than any of their yelling matches. If “Benjamin Button” is a knock-off of “Forrest Gump,” then “Revolutionary Road” is a knock-off of Sam Mendes’s first film, “American Beauty.” Oscar nominee for Costume Design and, like, maybe Art Direction or something.
VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA (*** out of ****)
The latest from Woody Allen and Scarlett Johansson. I’m not sure what Woody’s point is with this sun-dappled tale of a love quadrangle involving a painter, his wild ex-wife, and two American ingénues (I had to ask my wife to see if I was using that word right). But it’s interesting to watch. One girl is uptight, one girl puts on the act of the free thing, and the painter asks to lay both of them. Their different sets of values lead them to different places, in a typically Woody hour-and-a-half. Has a good chance of grabbing Best Supporting Actress.
.
Ooops, used up another 30 minutes.
SPEED RACER (**1/2 out of ****)
Almost good. With its complete lack of pretense, “Speed Racer” is almost better than the “Matrix” movies, in fact. I liked all the candy-colored noise and insanity and the simplicity of the storytelling. I like that the end of the big race, with all its noise and color, suddenly reduces to simple geometric shapes. I also really like how the mechanic wishes the hero luck before the big race, and the mechanic’s unspoken gay crush on the hero is more poignant than anything in the two hours of “Milk.” But are “Speed Racer’s” failings the result of too much faith in the source material, or not enough? First of all, a little of the kid and his monkey goes a long way. Edit them down and I’d like “Speed Racer” just fine. More importantly is that the emotional climax between the hero (young racecar driver Speed Racer) and his girl is interrupted by the stupid kid and his stupid monkey and we wonder, is that because it was like that in the comic? Or is that because the filmmakers don’t have faith in their simple story, and so think to “enhance” it with a joke? Similarly, “Speed Racer” is decried for its visual madness, but its dialogue scenes are handled in simple, TV-style shot/reverse shot. Is this because the filmmakers want to stay true to “Speed Racer’s” TV roots, or because they know “Speed’s” ultimate destination is the Blu-ray player and they’re too gutless to make an actual movie?
THE VISITOR (**1/2 out of ****)
Charming, but overstays its welcome. A withdrawn middle-aged professor (Richard Jenkins) slowly creeps out of his shell when he finds an immigrant couple mistakenly living in his apartment. This part’s good, but then the man in the couple gets picked up by the INS and “The Visitor” becomes not-quite-a-slog through speechifying about the sorry state of US immigration policy. There’s a lot of “telling” - at least one person says “I didn’t do anything!” - but not a lot of showing and an emphasis on the white professor making the right decision; we never actually SEE what’s going on inside the deportation center.
BURN AFTER READING (***1/2 out of ****)
Best Actor nominees Brad Pitt and Richard Jenkins both appear in the new flick from the Coen Brothers. If a comedy about morons trying to play the espionage game seems an unlikely follow-up to their deathly serious movie about death “No Country for Old Men,” think about it this way: “Burn After Reading” is about middle age and it’s no coincidence that the only young character leaves the movie about halfway through. Physical fitness workers obsessed with plastic surgery, an aging civil servant obsessed with “getting in a run” every day, a forcibly retired CIA analyst who’s never done anything of not trying to write a memoir convincing himself he has, and more - I can’t quite put my finger on it, but the whole thing bespeaks of middle-aged desperation, of disappointed, shrunken lives, looking for something of substance, and stumbling across a CD-ROM of “spy shit” as a way. Brad Pitt’s doofus bicyclist is perhaps his finest hour; George Clooney does some great little eye twitches to let us know how the wheels are turning; and Frances McDormand reminds us that she’s one of the most interesting actresses in America.
THE FALL (*** out of ****)
Beautiful but maybe a little underwhelming from director Tarsem Singh, who directed “The Cell,” which was equally beautiful but perhaps whose beauty existed separately from all subject matter. A injured stuntman circa WWI tells a story to a little Eastern European immigrant in a hospital, but she argues with him about points, the story changes, and we see the story from her point of view. For instance, he tells a story of an Indian and his squaw, but since she’s never seen a Native American she pictures a turbaned Hindu. The story he tells is a coded, abstracted version of a love triangle that led to his suicide attempt. Director Tarsem shot the movie on multiple continents using no sets, only some of the most remarkable locations in the world. I always find a real castle, decayed and gloomy, better than a bright shiny CG castle.
HAROLD & KUMAR ESCAPE FROM GUANTANAMO BAY (*** out of ****)
Not as funny as “Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle” and not as clean visually, either. Director Danny Leiner is replaced by the co-screenwriters, and while Leiner is no De Palma, he could at least order things in a cohesive manner, whereas the new directors are, while not incompetent, at least sloppy. Anyway, if “White Castle” was mostly Harold learning to relax, “Guantanamo Bay” is more of Kumar learning to take things a bit more seriously, and the vehicle for it is their ridiculous crosscountry trek to stop Kumar’s beloved from marrying the douchebag who sent them up the river. “I’m awesome!” the cackling villain intones after having them arrested.
INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL (**1/2 out of ****)
It’s good to see Indy again and, for about the first half of “Crystal Skull,” things are pretty good. I especially like that Indy survives a nuclear bomb by hiding in a fridge. But by the second half the movie starts looking more like an Indy knock-off like “National Treasure,” in which our heroes go from one jittery CG lair to another without much rhyme or reason. Still, Harrison Ford is as good as ever and, as the Soviet villainess, an otherwise utterly evil Cate Blanchett creates sympathy from us just by being a little more scared of things than a villain normally should, and by looking like she’s about to cry when things go wrong.
IRON MAN (**1/2 out of ****)
Well-acted, especially by Robert Downey Jr., but otherwise unremarkable superhero fare. Oscar nominee for both Sound awards and Visual Effects.
QUANTUM OF SOLACE (**1/2 out of ****)
One of the things I love about my wife is that she finds attractive men that she almost finds disgusting. Toad-like French actor Mathieu Amalric, unfortunately, falls just shy of being attractive, and so makes a great Bond villain. There’s a bit in “Quantum of Solace” where he stares at someone out his car window as he’s driven away, and it’s priceless. Still, something’s missing from “Quantum of Solace” and I can’t quite put my finger on it. Maybe it doesn’t weave Bond’s character arc in with the plot well enough or something. Certainly some of the action sequences are hyper-edited until they’re no fun anymore; a rooftop chase would be great if it were just slowed down a bit. The opening car chase is fine; it’s incomprehensible, sure, but it’s more like the avant-garde “idea” of a car chase, and not the car chase itself. But a whole movie of that doesn’t work. I saw “Quantum” only a few months ago and the fact that I can’t remember speaks a lot against it.
REVOLUTIONARY ROAD (** out of ****)
I like “what” this movie is about but not “how” it goes about it. It makes me think I’d enjoy the book. A young married couple living in the suburbs begins to drift apart. She wants them to move to Paris and lead a daring, exciting life, while he might actually enjoy the 9-to-5 at the ad firm, because he’s good at it. But it’s mostly yelling and too many on-the-nose conversations and lectures (courtesy of Kathy Bates), although there is a great bit of the couple just walking down a hallway that speaks volumes more than any of their yelling matches. If “Benjamin Button” is a knock-off of “Forrest Gump,” then “Revolutionary Road” is a knock-off of Sam Mendes’s first film, “American Beauty.” Oscar nominee for Costume Design and, like, maybe Art Direction or something.
VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA (*** out of ****)
The latest from Woody Allen and Scarlett Johansson. I’m not sure what Woody’s point is with this sun-dappled tale of a love quadrangle involving a painter, his wild ex-wife, and two American ingénues (I had to ask my wife to see if I was using that word right). But it’s interesting to watch. One girl is uptight, one girl puts on the act of the free thing, and the painter asks to lay both of them. Their different sets of values lead them to different places, in a typically Woody hour-and-a-half. Has a good chance of grabbing Best Supporting Actress.
.