Wednesday, March 28, 2012

To Live and Die in L.A.



To Live and Die in L.A.
(1985) [Trailer]
Director: William Friedkin (IMDB)

I'm not sure which one of my friends recommended this movie to me or if I heard about it on the movie podcast I listen to, but whoever it was...THANK YOU! This movie was the shit and I'll tell you why right now.

A federal agent in L.A. gets more than he bargained for when he starts hunting down a counterfeiter who's responsible for killing his partner.

Log into amazon.com, check.
Search 'To Live and Die in L.A.', check.
Click on blu-ray of said movie, check.
Add to wishlist, check.
Those were the steps made by me after viewing William Friedkin's To Live and Die in L.A. tonight.

This movie is very gritty and has a certain feel to it that I can't really match to another film. Maybe if Drive, Beverly Hills Cop, Lethal Weapon, Donnie Brasco, and Miami Vice all had an orgy together, but even those titles aren't really too similar to this film. There's so many cool scenes in this, especially the money counterfeiting montage and after watching it you'll be able to starting printing your own $20's. The car chase scene is pretty incredible as well and I'd say probably the best one I've ever witnessed in cinema. William Dafoe's villainous role is perfect and John Turturro is rad, but there are some flaws occasionally with some of the other actors, nothing to earth shattering though. The score was done by Wang Chung and is definitely dated, but part of me actually kind of liked it. I'm very glad I got to peep this bad boy out and you stop sleeping on it and do the same.

Edit: (6/24 - Rewatch. This movie is a solid 5 star in my book. Just watched it in glorious blu and it's even better.)

Beauty and the Beast



Beauty and the Beast
(1991) [Trailer]
Directors: Gary Trousdale (IMDB), Kirk Wise (IMDB)

My wife just ordered this on blu-ray and obviously I had to sit down and watch it with her... pay back for Commando. I've seen this movie before and honestly I didn't mind rewatching it, I love Disney films, especially on blu-ray... crisp.

A rich and handsome prince is cursed because he didn't want to give hand outs to a poor witch.... take that 1%. The only way to remove the curse is to fall in love by the time he turns 21. The task at hand will be a feat because he's ugly and would have to get a girl drunk in order to achieve this, which will be difficult because he's not yet at the legal drinking age. Catch 22.

As with all Disney films, the animation is awesome, and still holds up nicely. The story is pretty straight forward and predictable, but still fun for a fairytale. It would be easy to pick this apart but I honestly didn't mind it. This title wouldn't rank high on my list of Disney favorites, but I don't hate it... Nothin' but love fo ya Beauty and the Beast!

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Hugo


Hugo
(2011) [Trailer]
Director: Martin Scorsese (IMDB)

After my initial viewing of Hugo last year it secured a seat at number 5 in my top ten of 2011. I will tell you now, I love (sorry Justin) this film and after my second viewing, that outlook has only been solidified. Hugo's like a fine Bordeaux or fine ass honey! However you wanna look at it.

Hugo is as orphan living in the Montparnasse Rail Station in Paris. He stays behind the walls and keeps the clocks of the station in working order. He's a secretive little bastard and gets into a bit of trouble. I don't wanna spoil too much, so I'll leave it at that.

This film is visually perfect in my opinion. The cinematography is stunning and there are shots in this that I can't even begin to wrap my head around. I read that the opening long tracking shot into the station took a year to shoot and was put together with over 1000 computers... craziness. The special effects, set pieces, costumes, and score are all fantastic as well. I have heard a lot of people say this movie showcases Martin Scorsese's love of cinema, and I would say that would be accurate, but it also does a great job telling an interesting mystery while serving tribute. Sorry... I can't think of anything I don't like about this movie.

It just came out on blu-ray and honestly, that's the only way I would recommend watching this. Peep the trailer HERE.

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Like Crazy

Like Crazy
2011 [Trailer]
Director: Drake Doremus (IMDB)

The power of words and the decline of meaning in contemporary culture  [Oh yeah…I wrote a sentence or two about film ratings and I fleetingly mentioned the movie somewhere in there.]
(2011)

What follows is way too long and I don’t expect anyone to read it. It started as a film review but got rather personal and grew to the equivalent of 18 pages in length. I cut it down to 3 pages and pasted a few segments below.

What is love? It’s a word that we all think we understand but do we really? People use words differently and that is the source of so much pain and misunderstanding. I am someone who is very careful about the terms that I use. I am not prone to superlatives. I rarely use words such as brilliant, best, awesome, great, genius, amazing, breathtaking, love, etc.  I shy away from bestowing the moniker “friends” upon people who are not. I happen to revere the true meaning of words and I will do all that I can in my own life to preserve the potency of my expressions.

This is a slight digression from an already discursive blog post but I would like to comment upon the use of the word “perfect” which is a rather different matter. I think that “perfect” is one of the more damaging words in the English lexicon. It creates impossible expectations and leads to a great deal of disappointment and lack of fulfillment. It is a term that I never use because nothing is perfect and that’s not a bad thing. There is so much in life that is immensely beautiful, moving, and special…none of which is even remotely perfect. For those of you out there who have children, please steer them away from the word “perfect". By espousing that as an expectation or something to be pursued, you are setting them up for so much unnecessary self-flagellation and unhappiness. Now, back to my quasi review...

Love is a profound concept. When I say that I love someone, it is a promise: it is a commitment to always care deeply and to do everything in my power to make sure that person experiences the greatest happiness and fulfillment that life has to offer. I have only ever told one girlfriend in my life that I loved her; our lives took separate paths but I will always have a place for her in my heart. Words and articulated ideas are powerful: that is why I can’t just casually utter them. The more that you use a word with different people/apply a superlative to different things, in my estimation, the less it means. That’s why I virtually never give films a 5 star review. I don’t begrudge people who do. I just prefer to preserve such accolades for a very small number of films that are exceptionally special to me. Maybe my standards are too harsh. Maybe those who are more generous in their praise ultimately live better lives. If I were like those individuals, maybe I would be happier…maybe life would be all the sweeter…food would taste better…the stars would twinkle brighter … my days would be suffused with light and optimism…I would go forth each morning with an unshakable confidence that the best things are yet to come.   Terms like “great” and “amazing” flow forth from people with unquestionable ease on a daily basis. I know it’s how people talk but I just can’t do it. I’m not built that way. I don’t love food; I don’t love pieces of music; I don’t love works of art; I don’t love articles of clothing; I don’t love TV shows. I may thoroughly enjoy things; I may be deeply touched by things; I may be inspired my things; I may cherish things…but I do not "love things". Love, in my life, is reserved for people and a select few at that.  I love only that which has the capacity to love me back.

I know someone who calls almost 20 people her best friend. I once tried to point out the odd way that she uses the word “best” but she starred at me blankly and saw no contradiction. She stated that she has a number of best friends, none better than the other, and that’s just the way it is. How could she so glibly throw around the term “best friend”? I could never wrap my mind around what she meant.  We are two very different people.

Given that word selection means so much to me, it makes life tricky. I date someone and she tells me that she loves me but what does she mean? She may think that she loves me or she may really love me. I have no idea. It’s all about trust. If you don’t trust, you lead a very sad and lonely life. If you trust unwisely, you may find yourself devastated.  I am very careful about to whom I open my heart. When someone cares for me and I, at that point in the relationship, don’t feel as strongly, I am worried that this imbalance will persist and I may hurt them: not intentionally but rather by not feeling as deeply as they do. When I really begin to care for someone, I am terrified that they will ultimately hurt me and that the connection will not endure. I have only loved once and my heart was broken…I still carry that pain with me. I loved someone who made me believe that she loved me every bit as much as I loved her but it wasn’t true. She was the first person I loved; I was ostensibly the first person she had ever loved. I thought we felt the same. I don’t think she lied. I think that she thought that she loved me. I think that we simply cared for each other differently. We had different understandings about the meaning and implications of saying that you love someone. I loved her in the only way that I know how; her “love” was ultimately not as enduring. She made choices that were best for her in her life and I sincerely hope that she is happy. I hope that she has a better life without me. I still care for her a great deal, as silly and fruitless as that may be, and I think that I always will.

Like Crazy is a story of young something (I hasten to call it love).  The female lead begins a relationship with the male lead. Did they ever really love each other? Do they love each other in the end? I have no idea. Based on my definition of love, I don’t feel that they ever really did and, by the end, I am convinced that they don’t. Others may view things far differently. I think that there was an imbalance of caring at the beginning which was overcome/swept away by the deluge of emotion that comes with a budding, young romance. She liked him and was the initial pursuer. As the relationship developed, there seemed to be equal caring which was ultimately strained by external circumstances.  There were ups and downs in their relationship: fueled by lack of communication, distance, and the realities of a connection in which the initial spark of love dimmed. How do we distinguish that initial flood of emotion from love? How do we know that what we feel is true? Their behaviors, when separated by geography, don’t seem like the actions of people in love…at least not any “love” that I ever want to be a part of.  Some might say that they both justifiably find solace in the arms of others. A lot of people understand what that's like...feeling lonely and engaging someone just because they desire you and they are available. 

To me, consorting with someone else in even a remotely intimate way while you are still in love just doesn’t make sense.  If you really love someone, how could you be with someone else (especially while you are still in a relationship)? From my own experience, the mere thought of being with someone else other than the one that I loved was stomach-churning. Even after we broke up, for at least a couple of years, the prospect of sleeping with someone who wasn’t her was nauseating. Some may say it’s just a physical act and it may be for some. For me, physical intimacy is inextricably intertwined with deep feelings. I can’t separate the two; I wouldn’t want one without the other. If it was just the bodily act of sex, then what’s the point? I don’t mean to condemn those who can compartmentalize the physical and the emotional…I just don’t ever want to be in a relationship with someone who can.

I felt very conflicted throughout this film. I both felt sorry for, and was troubled by, the main characters. I think that they betray each other in ways both subtle and explicit. I don’t know who is responsible for the way things unfold. All I know is that, from my perspective, they both undermine the love that they profess. To make matters worse, they harm other people in the process. They allowed others to develop strong feelings for them when they didn’t feel as intensely. Imbalance/difference rearing its head again. Neither of their hearts were free yet they went through the motions of loving: a cruel practice indeed. What is to come of these people in the end? Will they recapture the intensity of their initial romance? Will they grow to love each other? Do they have the capacity? Are they deluded enough to think that they know what love is and that they understand it in the same way? Unfortunately, all too many relationships crumble. There are, of course, those who stay together for the long-haul but endurance does not exactly equate with love. It is certainly a necessary, but not at all a sufficient, component. There are innumerable reasons why people maintain their relationships: obligation, fear, guilt, familial/social pressure, financial constraints, children, respect, appreciation, fondness, etc. Some people convince themselves that they love and come to believe it. The fortunate amongst us love unceasingly/unquestionably/purely and are loved equally by an other until the day they die.

I don’t know if the things that I thought about upon seeing this movie are a reflection of the film itself or simply what I brought to the table. This is not a typical tale of romance and, for that, it deserves praise. It presents relationships as they often are and not as we wish them to be. This film provoked a response in me and that is something that I value in a movie. It’s certainly not a feel good story but the truths hinted at are important. I hope that the elements of the story that I found interesting were intentional and not the product of a screenwriter who created these characters without any sense of irony. Initially, I had problems with this movie but I realized that I was responding more to how I eventually felt about the characters.  I think that I responded negatively because I started off really liking these people and came away feeling very conflicted. Any movie that can play with my perceptions and emotions like that is doing something right.  Ultimately, I came to appreciate the film for what it conjured in me...for the way in which it was disquieting...for its take on the realities and vicissitudes of romance. This isn't so much a story about actual love as it is about the inertia of the idea of love...about the sometimes life-changing, irrevocable choices we make when we think we are in love.

The Hunger Games




The Hunger Games
(2012) [Trailer]
Director: Gary Ross (IMDB)

This movie is like Ryan Gosling, it's so hot right now. It had the fifth best opening day ever in movie history, which I think is pretty crazy. Seems like I just heard about the book last month for the first time ever and now it's a huge block buster movie. Now I will tell you whether it lived up to the hype it's created.

In some weird dystopian future, the government selects a boy and girl from different districts to compete in a battle to the death. I'm not really sure why they do this... I think it's because there used to be wars, and now the world is at peace, so these games are a reminder of war...or some tribute...I don't know it's very strange to me.

I found this movie's main flaw is that it's extremely predictable. I honestly guessed about 80% of what was going to happen throughout it. I would also note: I have not read the book, and why would I when there's a movie now... right? Fuck reading!

I did enjoy Jennifer Lawrence in this and Josh Hutcherson was solid as well. Their chemistry on screen seemed pretty believable I guess, not in terms of being in love, but just working together and making the most of a bad situation. There are some nice sci-fi elements interspersed throughout the film and the costume designs are very elaborate as well. I wasn't a fan of the dogs at the end, they looked a little too CG for my taste. Lastly... there needs to be a moratorium on the following: when explosions happen in a movie and the sound cuts out, as if the characters in the film lost their hearing temporarily because they were next to the blast. This is the second movie in a row I've seen do this (The Raid being the other) and it's been done numerous times in other films...dear filmmakers... stop.

Check this out if you're so inclined to do so, it opened this weekend in theaters everywhere.

The Raid: Counterpoint (A second take on an overrated movie)


The Raid: Redemption 
(2012) [Trailer]
Director: Gareth Evans (IMDB)

I was talking with someone a few months ago about how tired I was of seeing villains in films and on television nonchalantly eating while simultaneously talking to someone that they were trying to intimidate or while performing a horrific act. I presume that this juxtaposition of the mundane and the violent is intended to be disturbing. Maybe it was the first 3-4 times I saw it, but now it has become a cliché. Over the past couple of years noodles have been more the food of choice— second only to the old standby, fruit, which is either chomped on with relish or sliced menacingly. I was watching Justified a few weeks ago and a villain ate noodles seemingly without a care in the world only to highlight what a cold sociopathic person he was. The actor pulled it off well but I was kind of turned-off by yet another bad guy eating. I began to fear for the quality of the movie when, just a few minutes after it began, there was an introductory scene with the main villain eating noodles. What the hell! I guess the evil antagonist eating is the new walking coolly away from an explosion without looking back. To make matters worse, much later in the movie we have another scene with the main villain and he is eating again. What, you may ask, was he eating? Of course, he was slicing a piece of fruit. I have never seen a movie use the trope twice. This was certainly a microcosm of the movie: it didn’t have any new ideas and so it copied those of others. It was a mindless, wholly unengaging exercise in something hardly worth creating.

The plot was minimal. The dialogue was scant. The character development was non-existent. I have a real problem with movies that don’t deem it necessary to create three dimensional, or even compelling, characters. As a filmmaker, if you don’t give me a reason to care for (or at least be interested in) the characters, then I have no investment in the movie. I don’t care what happens; I don’t care who lives or dies; I don’t want to watch your movie. Even the iconic thoughtless action movies of the 80’s gave us leads with charisma or a reason to root for the hero. As for the protagonist of this film, we know little about him: he’s a rookie, he’s a cop, he has a wife, he has a brother, and there is nothing distinct about his personality. He could have died and been replaced with any of the 18 or so police officers in the movie and absolutely nothing would have changed.

There was a fleeting scene at the outset of the movie in which we see him waking up for work and observe that he is married…I don’t think we were even afforded a clear view of the wife’s face. I guess the presence of his significant other is short-hand for the fact that he is a good guy: he’s married after all and nobody who is married is anything less than a person with honor and moral fortitude. I am sure that none of those bodies that piled up over the course of the movie had spouses…they were single…fuck those guys…now let's get back to cheering on our romantically committed hero. I guess that the existence of the wife also ups the stakes because we want them to return to each others' loving embrace: ala a war hero who, upon returning from the front, will be reunited with his best girl. However, we don’t have any sense of their relationship. We are given no glimpse into the profundity of their connection; we don’t even get to see what kind of rapport that they have with one another. Their relationship is a vague construct and we are expected to project onto these blank slates. No thanks. Later in the movie, the filmmaker wants to further up the ante so we see via a few out of context celluloid frames that the hero’s wife is pregnant. I guess we are supposed to be even more invested because, should he die, his unborn child will be fatherless. Thanks moviemaker for so subtly telling me why I should care. The problem, though, is that I didn’t. As such, for me, there was no interest in the outcome of this movie. Accordingly, I started to pick it apart. I noticed some mediocre directing, several continuity errors, poor staging, intermittently amateurish cinematography, and unconvincing, unimaginative, repetitive foley work. Every punch that landed sounded like a hammer hitting some drywall. I was also disappointed with the use of space and the sense of place. The movie has as its primary set piece a large building but you never have a good sense of the layout of building or why it’s so difficult to escape. I won’t go into my other complaints as this movie doesn’t deserve that much consideration. All this being said, much of the action was well choreographed and there was some topnotch movie martial arts on display. Sure, the bad guys came one after the other and there were levels (very videogame-like) but some of the one-on-one fights were interesting…others not so much.

As an aside, I was eventually so uninvested in the movie that I became distracted every time the highest ranking police officer who set up the raid was on screen. I thought he bore a striking resemblance to Mr. Kruger from Seinfeld. Further, both had thoughts of shuffling off this mortal coil at their own hands. For those of you who don’t know, the actor who played Mr. Kruger tried to kill himself about a month ago. Coincidence…I think not.

I wanted to like this movie…I really did. I didn’t see it amongst a museum crowd, as did Mr. Williams. My audience was 99% male and thoroughly engaged in the movie. It was an ideal setting to get caught up in some ass kicking, adrenaline pumping action but, alas, I was not carried away by the torrent of testosterone in the room. The theater was packed and there were only two women in attendance. People in the theater exclaimed and giggled like schoolboys whenever something particularly violent happened. Some members of the crowd were so boisterous that they were more entertaining than the movie. [I would like to take a moment to thank the African American gentleman in the crowd…your vocalized enthusiasm for cinema was splendid and I only wish that I could be so uninhibited and joyous.] Another guy would occasionally laugh maniacally a acts of violence and his girlfriend eventually yelled at him saying that he was “sick” and that “there was something wrong” with him. The audience was so much more entertaining than the movie.

The plot elements, what little there was, were strikingly similar to other movies. The clichés were innumerable. Did I mention that there are brothers? One is an officer of the law and the other is a member of the criminal organization that the police are trying to take down. Brother versus brother on the opposite sides of a brutal struggle. Where does one’s loyalty lie? This film offered nothing new and, in my estimation, has been way over-hyped. I am not philosophically opposed to shallow action movies. When done well, they can be enjoyable for what they are. This, however, was not a movie that fully lived up to the potential of its genre.