Edge of Darkness

EDGE OF DARKNESS (2010) - Jan. 30, 2010
Mel Gibson's first acting role in ages, this movie finds him as a father who must investigate his own daughter's murder.  The movie wasn't quite the relentlessly-paced revenge thriller that the trailer makes it out to be, but there was still something awfully compelling about Gibson's dogged investigation.  Martin Campbell's direction was good -- definitely better than his last film, the disappointing and overlong Casino Royale. ***

Suddenly

SUDDENLY (1954) - Jan. 29, 2010
An entertaining and well directed film about a group of criminals who plan on killing the president when he comes through town, and who hold a family hostage in their home.  Frank Sinatra was quite good as the determined leader of the gang, as was Sterling Hayden as the town's sheriff who finds himself in the house as it all goes down.  ***

An Affair to Remember

AN AFFAIR TO REMEMBER (1957) - Jan. 27, 2010
If you were to make a list of, say, the top ten Hollywood movie stars of all time, Cary Grant would have to be on top, or very close to it. He just epitomizes the classic Hollywood movie star in so many ways, and along with people like Clark Gable and James Stewart, is one of the benchmarks by which most stars are measured. And with good reason, too — though he essentially played a variation on his established persona in pretty much every movie he made, he was so darn good at it, and so charming, that it really didn’t matter.  So it goes without saying that Grant was quite good in this film; his co-star, Deborah Kerr, was just as good, and the two have palpable on-screen chemistry (which is probably one of the reasons why this movie has endured so strongly over the years).  I definitely liked this movie, though there are a couple of things that irked me about it — the main thing being the absurd amount of time that the couple spends apart (essentially the entire second half of the almost two hour film). Now, I think we’re all aware of the unwritten rule of romantic movies — there will always be a part towards the end of the film in which the couple breaks up, usually due to an unfortunate misunderstanding. We as the audience know that the couple will get back together, but we put up with this because there is something inherently satisfying about seeing two people who love each other overcome the odds and find happiness, and because pretty much every movie (and broadly speaking, every story) must contain some sort of conflict for the characters to overcome. However, there is a reason why this section of the film generally lasts about five or ten minutes — since we know for a fact that the couple is going to get back together, there’s not so much interest in seeing the couple apart; the real interest is in seeing them reunite. So, almost one hour of this? A bit much.  The other thing that bothers me about the latter half of the movie is the flimsy (and downright illogical) reasoning that’s keeping the couple broken up. In the film, Kerr’s character is struck by a car on the way to their six month reunion, rendering her unable to walk. She elects to keep this a secret from Grant because she doesn’t want his pity, and because she doesn’t want him to have to take care of her. In the meantime, Grant simply thinks that she didn’t care enough to show up, and is, of course, heartbroken. I find the fact that anyone would be insensitive enough to make that particular decision (or stupid enough to not realize how insensitive it is) a bit tough to swallow, putting it mildly.  Despite all that, I still enjoyed this film — thanks mostly to Grant and Kerr. The first half was definitely better than the second, but I was never bored, and… well, the ending kind of got to me (uh, I mean, I bit into a pepper).  ***

Legion

LEGION (2010) - Jan. 23, 2010
About an angel who goes rogue after God decides to wipe out humanity, in order to protect a pregnant woman who is carrying mankind's future savior.  This film was decently made, and started out well enough, though I lost interest as it went along.  It didn't help that the tone was kind of all over the place -- the movie is at its best when it doesn't take itself too seriously and embraces its fun, B-movieness (such as a scene featuring a demonic grandma).  **

Akira

AKIRA (1988) - Jan. 22, 2010 (Second Viewing)
 I’m a sucker for films that present a dark, dystopian take on a future society (stuff like Blade Runner and Brazil) and this is one of the best. The film’s vision of Neo-Tokyo in 2019 is always visually stunning. And in fact, this whole movie is a definite visual treat — from the haunting opening moments of Tokyo being decimated in a nuclear blast, to the bizarre, somewhat baffling but still-awesome conclusion, this is a movie that always looks really good. The animation is top notch (plus, it’s kind of refreshing to watch old-school traditional animation with very little computer assistance) as is the visual design of the film.  Of course, there’s the narrative, which is condensed from the 2000+ page comic (which I have not read). It starts out simply enough, with the shenanigans between two rival motorcycle gangs, though as it goes on it becomes somewhat more complex, leading up to a conclusion that probably raises as many questions as it answers. I wouldn’t say that’s a bad thing, though. Did I understand everything about that ending? No. Did I enjoy it? Definitely. As I said in my post for 2001, I think there’s something to be said for an ending that leaves some things ambiguous and invites debate.  ***1/2

All That Jazz

ALL THAT JAZZ (1979) - Jan. 19, 2009
I really did not care for this film. Though it started out decently enough, its meandering plotlessness and its emphasis on long dance numbers that ranged from watchable to downright interminable eventually completely wore me down. By the time Roy Scheider’s character had a heart attack and wound up in the hospital, I was pretty much ready to pack it in, and at that point the film was just barely over the half-way mark. Up to this point the film had featured a smattering of fantasy sequences in which Scheider’s character talks to a woman who is supposed to represent… I dunno, his mother? Or maybe she’s supposed to represent a little bit of all of the women in his life, since his relationship with women is rocky at best. It’s never made entirely clear. And yes, in case you couldn’t tell by now, Bob Fosse clearly took a good deal of inspiration from 8 1/2, which is by far the superior film. Clearly, Bob Fosse — as legendary as he might have been as a choreographer — is no Fellini.  But I was talking about the fantasy sequences, which essentially take over the film once Scheider ends up in the hospital. At this point the film completely lost me, and I was actively bored and just waiting for the thing to end. It was just dance sequence after dance sequence, and the whole thing started feeling a lot like a pretentious excuse to stage elaborate (and yet oddly dull) dance numbers. Boy, I did not like this film. List: you have failed me. But you’ve been pretty good to me so far, so I guess we’re even.  Oh, but I should mention that Roy Scheider was really, really good — far better than the movie deserved, in fact.  *1/2

(500) Days of Summer

(500) DAYS OF SUMMER (2009) - Jan. 17, 2009
A delightful and really well made romantic comedy that actually manages to feel fairly fresh, a tough task given how well-worn the romcom genre is.  The movie is funny, original and highly entertaining throughout.  The superb performances are also a big reason why the film works as well as it does -- Joseph Gordon-Levitt is just as good as usual, and Zooey Deschanel easily keeps up with him.  Plus, Marc Webb's direction and Eric Steelberg's cinematography were definitely top-notch -- this is a surprisingly good-looking film.  ***1/2

The Book of Eli

THE BOOK OF ELI (2010) - Jan. 16, 2009
A really well made film about a lone wanderer in a post-apocalyptic wasteland who is on a mission to bring his bible (the last remaining copy) west until he finds a suitable home for it.  Stylishly directed by the Hughes brothers, this featured a vision of a post-apocalyptic wasteland that was undeniably familiar but still quite striking (I also thought that the score was a really good accompaniment to the visuals).  Denzel Washington was expectedly good, as were the other performances -- in fact the whole movie has more gravitas than you'd expect from what is ostensibly an action film.  ***1/2

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert

THE ADVENTURES OF PRISCILLA, QUEEN OF THE DESERT (1994) - Jan. 15, 2010
So here we are, The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert... did the list steer me wrong? Not really. Though I’m not going to be adding this to my list of favourites anytime soon, I’m definitely glad that I watched it. Weaving, Stamp and Pearce were all really good (not surprisingly), and the film was quite enjoyable throughout, if a bit slow and meandering in parts (though definitely never boring). It pretty much plays out the way you think it will (they have fun, they bond, they occasionally encounter adversity from small-minded bigots, which they overcome) but it was well made and very entertaining. I’m definitely a fan of road movies, and this is more proof that, with very few exceptions, it’s pretty hard to go wrong with that genre.  ***

Stir of Echoes

STIR OF ECHOES (1999) - Jan. 14, 2010
A really well made thriller about a man who, after being hypnotized, starts seeing some strange things, all of which seem to revolve around a missing girl.  David Koepp's direction was really effective, and the whole thing was quite fast-paced and tense in parts.  Kevin Bacon really should act more.  ***1/2

Ultraviolet

ULTRAVIOLET (2005) - Jan. 12, 2010
About resistance fighter in a future society where some kind of disease turns people into vampires, this was a pretty mediocre film.  The movie featured a clunky, disjointed narrative which, for the director's sake, I hope can be attributed to the fact that the studio cut half an hour out of the film.  Because of this it was hard to ever particularly get into the movie or care about the protagonist too much.  The odd, hyper-stylized and seemingly intentionally artificial visual style didn't really help matters -- it made the whole thing seem like a cutscene for a videogame (the style actually reminded me a bit of Mirror's Edge -- only that had to be rendered in an Xbox; you'd expect a bit more from a big-budget film).  The action scenes were all super over-the-top but pretty entertaining, but that's really all the film had going for it.  *1/2

2001: A Space Odyssey

2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (1968) - Jan. 11, 2010 (Third or Fourth Viewing +2)
I love this movie. Absolutely, positively love it. Stanley Kubrick is without a doubt my favourite director of all time, and this is probably my favourite film of his — they’re all stunningly good, particularly the batch of films beginning with this one and ending with Eyes Wide Shut. It was really starting with 2001 that Kubrick became the obsessive perfectionist that we know and love; as great as Kubrick’s earlier films are (such as The Killing and Paths of Glory), there’s a refinement to his later films, a sense that every single shot has been meticulously framed and perfectly selected that I don’t think any other director ever has (or will) match.  There’s so much I love about this film, not the least of which is how beautiful it is to look at. Kubrick was a master of framing and shot composition (among other things), and he is definitely at his best here. Every shot is perfect; from the breathtaking vistas of outer space to the austere whiteness of the spaceship bound to Jupiter, to the claustrophobic interior of of the pods (“Open the pod bay door, Hal”). The special effects have aged remarkably well, with a few small exceptions that aren’t even worth mentioning — in fact, I’d argue that the special effects in this movie look better than the CGI-heavy films of the late ’90s and early aughts (with the Star Wars prequel trilogy being the worst offender in this category). I think it’s a real shame that this type of model-work has been almost entirely replaced by computer-generated imagery (and if you’re skeptical that there is still a place for traditional models, see Duncan Jones’ stunning Moon), but I’ll save that argument for another day.  Another area in which Kubrick is unparalleled is in his ability to match music with visuals, and again, he is at his finest here. His use of classical music during the outer space scenes is pretty much legendary at this point, and the eerie and unsettling music of Gyorgy Ligeti is used to absolute perfection. The use of silence in some scenes, or near silence (ie. just the sound of someone breathing) is just as striking, and just as perfect. I know I’m coming off like a gushing schoolgirl here, but what can I say, I love this film.  A common complaint about this movie is that it’s not exactly fast-paced. This is true, however the pace suits the film absolutely perfectly, and it is never, ever boring in the slightest. Not every film needs to move at the same pace, and in fact a faster pace would be doing this movie a disservice; the film’s pace sets a tone that is amazingly hypnotic and that really draws you in. Some of the later sequences, when Hal starts malfunctioning, are amazingly tense.  Another complaint is that the film doesn’t make much sense, particularly towards the end. This I take issue with — yes, the film is out there and a bit ambiguous in parts, but I like that about it. I like that it’s open to interpretation, and that it doesn’t spell everything out for you. I recently read the novel, which I think does clarify things a bit, but even without that I was perfectly happy with the way the film unfolded, and completely unperturbed at not having the answer to every single question that the movie poses.  ****

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

THE IMAGINARIUM OF DOCTOR PARNASSUS (2009) - January 10, 2010
A slightly disappointing but still entertaining and visually stunning film by Terry Gilliam about a traveling group of performers led by the immortal Doctor Parnasus.  Terry Gilliam's visuals were quite spectacular, though the movie itself wasn't really as compelling as some of Gilliam's classics (the closest comparison would probably be the Fisher King, which was definitely the superior film).  ***

Sherlock Holmes

SHERLOCK HOLMES (2009) - January 8, 2010
A generally well made but somewhat disappointing film about Sherlock Holmes, who must solve the case of a sinister criminal with seemingly supernatural powers.  The main problem with this film is that the case itself just isn't all that interesting.  Guy Ritchie's direction is good, if not exactly his best work (and the grimy, somewhat monotonous visuals did get a bit tiresome after a while).  Robert Downey Jr. is quite good in a more rough-and-tumble but still accurate depiction of Holmes, and Jude Law is equally good as his sidekick Watson.  The film actually gets pretty much everything right, it just isn't all that compelling.  Oh well, the foundation is there, so hopefully the sequel will be better.  **1/2

39 Steps

39 STEPS (1935) - January 7, 2010 (Second Viewing)
This is not my first time watching the 39 Steps, but I was definitely happy to revisit it — Hitchcock is one of the all-time greats, and even relatively early in his career he was already hitting them out of the park. Of course, the “innocent man on the run” theme was a favourite of Hitchcock’s, and many of the elements in this film are ones that he spent the rest of his career honing to perfection.  This film really just reminded me why I like Hitchcock so much — when it comes to thrillers like this, he’s clearly in a league of his own. There are so many great sequences in this film, including a really tense sequence towards the beginning of the film set on a train (which begins with the famous moment in which a woman’s scream is replaced by a train’s whistle). The performances are also quite good, particularly Robert Donat as the man on the run.  ***1/2

12 Angry Men

12 ANGRY MEN (1957) - January 6, 2010
And boy, what a film. Superbly directed by Sidney Lumet (yes, the same Sidney Lumet who just a couple of years ago directed the acclaimed Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead. The man is prolific), this is pretty universally regarded as a classic, and justifiably so. Aside from a couple of brief moments at the beginning and end of the film, we never actually leave the jury room. And yet the film never seems stagey, thanks entirely to Lumet’s assured and breathtakingly cinematic direction. Under a lesser director, the movie may have seemed like a filmed stage play, but Lumet always seems to know exactly where to put the camera in order to accentuate the tension and get the most out of all the great performances.  Those performances... as great as Lumet’s direction is (and it is great), this is definitely a film whose success depends heavily on its actors. All twelve men are equally good, with each creating a distinct and memorable character — an impressive feat, considering there are twelve men and this is only a 96 minute movie. And of course, mention must be made of Reginald Rose’s screenplay. This is just one of those rare cases of every element of a film coming together perfectly, creating a final product guaranteed to become a classic.  So yes, in case you couldn’t tell, I liked this film. Certainly, it deserves its placement on any list of essential films.  Good stuff. ****

An Actor's Revenge

AN ACTOR'S REVENGE (1963) - January 5, 2010
I’ll admit that I had never even heard of this movie prior to flipping through the list, nor had I heard of its director, who was apparently quite prolific in Japan. 1001 Movies  calls this “one of the most outrageously entertaining Japanese films ever produced,” which I can’t really say I agree with. On a technical level I admired it quite a lot — the direction, cinematography and score were all quite striking and certainly memorable. The whole look of the film is extremely stylized, and so on a visual level alone it remained entertaining for a while. However the narrative was exceptionally muddled, and there were parts where I had a hard time figuring out what was going on (though it probably didn’t help that as the film went on my attention was really starting to wane).  What else to say about this film? It’s a movie about revenge, which makes you think it’s going to be much more compelling than it is — however, Ichikawa piles on superfluous side-characters and odd asides which really add very little to the film itself. The review in the book states that “the conventions of kabuki theater are affectionately parodied,” so… maybe I needed to know more about kabuki theater to really appreciate this film? I always knew that my lack of kabuki knowledge would come back to haunt me one day.  All in all I’m not sure if I agree that this is one of the essential films of all time, but the visuals were so impressive I’m almost ready to give it a pass just for that.  *1/2

All About My Mother

ALL ABOUT MY MOTHER (1999) - January 4, 2010
Almodóvar is fairly well known for telling stories with very strong female characters, and that is certainly the case here.  The film is pretty much all women, with only a few men on the absolute periphery, and a couple of transvestites thrown in for good measure.  Though there is one main character (a woman who loses her son and who travels to Barcelona to try to find his father), the movie is more of an ensemble, with some really strong performances all around. The film is pretty much plotless, but when the characters and performances are this strong, the importance of having a well-defined plot is significantly reduced.  One of the things that has really stood out for me in all of the Almodóvar films I’ve seen so far is his beautiful use of the widescreen frame. I also like Almodóvar’s bold use of colour. You have to admire a director who can consistently craft visually interesting shots; there’s something about a really well composed 2.35 frame that’s just irresistible, at least to a nerd such as myself. A director with a clear visual sense who also has a strong command of characters and storytelling is definitely something to be treasured. Almodóvar, at least based on the three films of his that I’ve seen, seems to be one of those directors.  ***1/2

A Perfect Getaway

A PERFECT GETAWAY (2009) - January 3, 2010
A really well-crafted thriller about a young couple in Hawaii who start to suspect that the couple they're spending time with may be killers.  The film features primo direction from the reliable David Twohy, and is really entertaining throughout despite the fact that the thrills are mostly psychological -- there isn't really any action until the third act, but it definitely works.  Plus, the twist ending was kind of ingenious.  ***1/2

Avatar

AVATAR (2009) - January 2, 2010
James Cameron!  Though it's been about twelve years since his last movie, James Cameron proves that he's still got it, and his streak of awesomeness remains unbroken (well, I haven't seen the Abyss, but I'm just going to assume that it's good).  About a soldier who finds himself living among a group of tree-dwelling aliens on a strange planet, the first thing you really have to say about this movie is that it's visually dazzling.  The alien planet is rendered in awe-inspiring detail, and the Na'vi themselves are always convincing; they're not quite photorealistic -- at least not all the time -- but they're not distractingly weird a la Robert Zemeckis' mo-cap fiascos.  In fact, James Cameron proves here that mo-cap can be a worthwhile technology when used appropriately, unlike Zemeckis' creepy zombie-filled boondoggles.  Cameron is at the top of his game here, at least as a director -- aside from how good everything looks, the action is all impeccably directed, with Cameron reminding us why he's regarded as one of the masters of the genre.  The action-heavy third act is one of the most exhilerating things I've seen in a while, and unlike something like this year's Transformers movie, the film actually earns its copious action, and it never feels overwhelming or too action-heavy -- it seems completely organic to the story.  As for the story and the characters, there's absolutely nothing here that we haven't seen many times before, but it's excecuted with such craft and aplomb that the familiarity of the story never feels like a significant detriment.  James Cameron!  ****

The Informant!

THE INFORMANT! (2009) - January 1, 2010
After the disappointing and relentlessly dull Girlfriend Experience, there was really nowhere to go but up for Steven Soderbergh, and this was certainly a step up.  About a executive who turns informant for the FBI, this featured expectedly primo direction and cinematography from Steven Soderbergh.  I'm normally not a particularly big fan of the somewhat overexposed visual style Soderbergh employs here, however he somehow makes it work.  I also quite liked Marvin Hamlisch's quirky score, which I think did a good job of underscoring how out of touch with reality Matt Damon's character tended to be.  The whole movie is sort of quirky and odd, which I liked -- it took a story which otherwise would have made for a generic corporate thriller, and turned it into something unique.  ***1/2