Big Trouble In Little China

I was quite pleased to hear that The Cineastes would be reviewing Big Trouble In Little China this month. Not because I had seen it before, because I hadn't. The movie had been on my queue for a while, though. I was happy to review the film because I knew I would like it. I'm a sucker for cheesey, dumb, corny 80's flicks, and this one seemed to have it all.

Kurt Russell stars as Jack Burton, a truck driver caught in the middle of 2,000-year old Chinese black-magic sorcerer's plan to kidnap and marry a girl with green eyes so he can become young again. That girl just so happens to be Jack's buddy's fiancee. So Jack and his friend, along with the lovely Kim Cattrall as lawyer Gracie Law (because why wouldn't that be her name) set out to rescue her.

This leads them to an underground world of ancient Chinese mysticism and monsters. They fight street gangs, wizards, demonic creatures, etc. The point of the film is fun, and Big Trouble succeeds. From the corny dialogue to the B-movie set pieces to the cheesey plot and characters, everything about the film is a barrel of monkeys.Kurt Russell is perfectly over-the-top as Jack Burton. Almost every line he utters is eminently quotable in its cheesiness.

Unfortunatly, though, the film is sometimes too dumb. Unlike some of director John Carpenter's other movies, Big Trouble In Little China doesn't really have any social value. They Live was about the economy at that time. Halloween was about young sexuality. Big Trouble is about...ancient Chinese secrets. The film exists for the purpose of having a good time at the theater.

And there's nothing wrong with that. You just probably won't remember much about it in a few weeks. But that's ok. Enjoy it while it lasts.

BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA : B

This month's CINEASTES review has been hosted by Crap Monster at YGG'noise (http://www.yggnoise.com/)

Che

Last year, one of my most anticipated films was Steven Soderbergh's Che. Being a fan of Soderbergh, I was very interested in seeing what he would do with a biopic. Would he make it unconventional, and turn it in to one of his "stranger" indie flicks (Schizopolis, Bubble)? Or would he turn in a normal film and go for a large distribution (the Ocean's series, although none of his films are really "traditional.")

Considering Che's length (the film clocks in at around 4 hours) the latter seemed somewhat impossible, and the film's audience was shifted to the arthouse when it was picked up by IFC, one of the few distributors with any balls out there (it was, after all, the only one to consider Lars von Trier's Antichrist.)
But now that the film is on DVD, anyone can see it, not just those living in New York or LA. Che lands somewhere in the middle of Soderbergh's "weird" and "normal" films. It's the best film thus far to be made about Che Guavara. The first part of the film, The Argentine, shifts between Che's and Fidel Castro's Cuban revolution and their brief time in America. Part two, Guerilla, documents Che's involvement in the Bolivian Revolution. Both parts are essential to each other, and should be watched and considered as a whole, not two separate films.

Benicio del Toro had some early Oscar buzz for his portrayal of the revolutionary. He's magnificent in the title role, the rare performance that fully embodies such a well-known and polarizing figure. His performance, as well as Soderbergh's direction, are not biased in or out of favor with the man. The film remains neutral, unlike the living Che-boner The Motorcycle Diaries (which is actually a really good film.)

Unfortunately, del Toro's performance went unnoticed by the Academy when Che shot completely under the radar. If you've got 4 hours to spend, give Che a watch. But if not, at least check out The Girlfriend Experience. If you live in New York or LA, that is...

CHE : A-

The Gambler

"You're crazy!" says Axel Freed's girlfriend in one scene of The Gambler. "But I'm blessed," he responds. He is about to make a risky move in a high stakes game of blackjack. The tension builds. Sweat drips down Freed's brow. The dealer lays down the card and... 21. A lucky draw, something Freed isn't used to.

It's this attitude of needing risks to feel alive that has Axel Freed in over his head in debt, $44,000 to be exact. If he can't come up with the money soon, the dangerous loan sharks he's gotten himself entangled with might kill him, or worse go after his family.

James Caan plays Axel Freed, a troubled teacher and gambling addict in Karel Reisz's 1974 drama The Gambler. Caan appears in every scene, every frame almost, of the film. His performance is amazing and made even more so considering the fact that Caan was battling a cocaine addiction during shooting.

The film was one of the many forgotten gems of the New Hollywood era. Soon after the Hayes Code was dissolved, American filmgoers were eager for more raw films with tougher subject matter than they were used to. Films like Easy rider and Bonnie & Clyde satisfied their thirst, while many films, The Gambler included, got pushed aside in the process.

Karel Reisz, who also directed The French Lieutenant's Wife and the excellent Saturday Night and Sunday Morning, keeps a steady eye on Axel Freed. The film is dark and gritty, yet entertaining, and Caan's performance is eminently watchable.

The Gambler is a character study above all else. The battle against gambling Axel Freed deals with on-screen is mirrored by Caan's off-screen personal demons. Another sad case of art imitating life.

The fake character, however, doesn't really want to give up gambling. Although he acknowledges that it's a problem, he loves the risk. He only truly feels alive when his livlihood is at stake. He's not in it for the game. In his eyes, everything in life is a game. He gambles for the rush of it, just to feel something. He's willing to take the risk to get that rush, unfortunatly hurting everyone around him and the ones he loves in the process.

THE GAMBLER : A-

This month's CINEASTES review has been hosted by Josh Wiebe at Octopus Cinema (http://octopuscinema.blogspot.com/)

Wendy & Lucy

Wendy and Lucy is American neo-realist filmmaker Kelly Reichardt’s latest addition to the movement, and her follow up to the acclaimed Old Joy. Wendy and Lucy stars Michelle Williams as Wendy Carroll, a young woman traveling to Alaska in search of work. Her only companion is her dog Lucy. Wendy faces challenges along the way (lack of money, broken car, etc.), but the worst of her setbacks is the loss of Lucy, who disappears somewhere along their journey.

Lucy’s disappearance is the main point of the purposefully simple plot. The film is not plot-driven; it’s a character film that’s really about the infinite search for the American dream.

Michelle Williams is amazing as Wendy. Her performance was one of last year’s best: naturalistic, youthful. She’s an easy actress to fall in love with.

Wendy and Lucy is, like Old Joy, a meditative and thoughtful film. Unlike Old Joy, however, this one never really meanders. There’s always something going on. I think that with time, Wendy and Lucy will be looked back on as a key film in the American Neorealist movement.

WENDY & LUCY : B

Doubt

**SPOILERS**

Last year’s Oscar-nominated film Doubt stars Meryl Streep as a nun who accuses a pastor (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) of molesting a child at their Catholic parish. Quite the taboo topic, and one not spoken about enough in movies. Doubt is one of last year’s most thought-provoking films. It left me thinking about it long after I left the theater.

John Patrick Shanley, the director of the film, adapted it to the screen from his own stage production. The movie, at times, feels like it would be a bit more adept for the stage, but that’s not necessarily a detrimental remark. I just mean that its dialogue drives it. At last year’s Oscars, it was nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay. I think it should’ve won.


The script wouldn’t have worked, however, if it were not for the performances. Oh, the performances. What a glorious cast! Meryl Streep is, as always, brilliant as the suspicious Sister Aloysius. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is, as always, stunning and natural as the accused Father Flynn. Amy Adams is, as always, wonderful as Sister James, the one caught in the middle of the two. All three of them were nominated for Oscars for their performances here, as was Viola Davis for her great but brief role as the boy’s mother.

I don’t only love the film for its script and acting, though. I love it for its ambiguousness. At the end of the film, we are never told whether Father Flynn committed the evil acts he has been accused of or not. We are left with a broken sister Aloysius crying on the shoulder of Sister James, questioning her own suspicions. Was Flynn guilty? Was Aloysius right to accuse him? Was she right to destroy his life and have him removed from the parish? We don’t know. We must decide for ourselves.

DOUBT : A-

Angels & Demons

Ron Howard’s latest flick is an adaptation of the sequel to Dan Brown’s controversial novel The Da Vinci Code. This film, Angels and Demons, introduces us once again to the character of symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks). This time, he must uncover the mystery behind the recent resurgence of the Illuminati, an ancient group of Atheist philosophers and intellectuals who were banished and tortured by the Catholic Church many, many years ago. Now they’re back, and they’ve stolen a bomb capable of destroying Vatican City and everyone in it.

I can’t say I was a fan of the film adaptation of The Da Vinci Code. It was dull, boring and preposterous, but while Angels and Demons is definitely preposterous, it is anything but dull and boring. Ron Howard has replaced the previous film’s long, monotonous talk sequences with action scenes. When Code needed to run, it stood still. That’s not a problem here. Angels and Demons is loaded with some really nifty special effects. It’s not convoluted like its predecessor, and it’s far from boring.

The whole film, however, is supported by its performances. Ewan McGregor is great as a priest who takes over rule of the Catholic Church after the Pope’s death while they find a new, permanent Pope. Israeli actress Ayelet Zurer (who is often considered Israel’s best actress) holds her own against Tom Hanks (who is great here too, and not in enough stuff anymore).

Ron Howard is often considered by cineastes to be a mediocre director, the epitome of a journeyman who always turns in OK work, but never anything great. I’ve always defended his films. While he has had plenty of missteps in the past (like How the Grinch Stole Christmas), he has also directed A Beautiful Mind, Apollo 13 and Cinderella Man, all films that I love. Plus, let’s not forget that this is one of the guys behind the greatest TV show of all-time (you read that right) Arrested Development.

But back to the film. If Angels and Demons is any kind of a sign, this is going to be a good summer for movies.

ANGELS & DEMONS : B+

Star Trek

I’ve been a bit skeptical of J.J. Abrams as of late. Although Lost is probably my favorite show on television right now, and I loved Cloverfield more than most people, J.J. only produces those things. Sure he co-created Lost, but he doesn’t really do much hands-on stuff with the show anymore, and Matt Reeves is the one who directed Cloverfield.

But my doubts have all but vanished with Star Trek, J.J. Abrams second foray into actual director mode. With the film, Abrams proves himself to be a man full of more than just ideas. Star Trek is a bravura piece of blockbuster filmmaking, a phaser blast to the gut of the science fiction genre. Every action scene (and there are plenty) is thrilling, every shot bright and inventive and every line of dialogue delivered with the perfect blend of Shatner-era nostalgia and modern sarcastic wit.

The film looks flashy and bright. Vivid streams of light cross each scene. The special effects are among the best I’ve seen. The Enterprise looks at once sleek and modern, yet instantly recognizable (a great metaphor the film itself). The film is ingeniously cast. Zachary Quinto is especially notable for his performance as Spock. He’s as brash and confident as you could imagine a young Spock would be.

When the Romulan Nero, who killed Kirk’s father, confronts the Enterprise and takes its captain hostage, Kirk, Spock and everyone else go on a mission to rescue him. The film, a prequel to the original series, concerns the assemblage of the crew we all know and love. It describes the manner of how they all became a part of the Enterprise. It’s a very human story. Everyone’s motives are made clear; Kirk wants to avenge his father’s death and Spock wants to prove that a half-Vulcan, half-human like himself is capable of accomplishing all that a full-blooded Vulcan can.

As you’ve probably heard, Star Trek has something to appeal to Trekkies (Trekkers?) and casual fans alike. Don’t miss out on this one.

STAR TREK : A-

JCVD

Jean-Claude Van Damme may be the LAST person in the world you’d expect to be a superlative model of postmodernity, but in JCVD he goes all John Malkovich with a swift kick to his critics and a respectful nod to his fans.

Van Damme plays himself, or at least a bitterer version of himself. He stars in mindless action movies just for the paycheck, acknowledging how bad they are while still depending on the roles for the money. While visiting his hometown of Brussels, Van Damme stumbles into the middle of a bank heist. Confused police officers outside the bank mistake him as one of the robbers and insist he release his hostages. Onlookers outside the bank who still consider Van Damme a hometown hero, however, cheer him on.

Inside the bank, Van Damme appeases the robbers by to showing them roundhouse kicks and signing autographs for them while his fellow hostages expect him to be more like the action star he is in all his movies; a brave martial arts master who can easily dismantle the thieves and save the day. Van Damme is more like them, though. He’s afraid of what the thieves may do to him. They force Van Damme to make phone calls as the real robber to the police with their demands.

Van Damme, however, remains generally calm throughout the robbery. In fact, he doesn’t seem to mind the scenario all that much. With a broken marriage, a downtrodden career, a nasty custody battle and an American reputation overshadowed by Steven Seagal, what does he really have waiting for him outside the bank? At least here the people view him as a hero, and the people outside seem to be on his team. All this is topped off by a self-loathing, self-aware monologue he delivers straight to the camera that makes Charlie Kaufman look like Alain Badiou.

While this final speech seems a bit contrived, the film is overall funny, heartfelt and surprisingly touching, and I don’t think Steven Seagal has ever made anything like that.

JCVD : B

Three Monkeys

Three Monkeys is Turkish auteur Nuri Bilge Ceylan’s latest effort. It has already won numerous awards, including Best Director at last year’s Cannes Film Festival, and made the shortlist at last year’s Oscars for Best Foreign Language Film. I was lucky enough to view the film on theauteurs.com (The Auteurs) shortly before its American theatrical release.

When wealthy businessman Servet accidentally hits someone with his car, he enlists his driver Eyup to take the blame and go to prison in his place. Eyup accepts with the promise of money to take care of his wife, Hacer, and son, Ismail. While he’s away, Hacer has an affair with Servet and ends up falling in love with him, much to the chagrin of Ismail.



Ceylan proves himself to be a master of his craft following his equally stunning films Distant and Climates. Although the plot is a tangled web of regret, hate and betrayal, Ceylan keeps a steady eye on the events at play and things never feel convoluted.

The film is also one of the most visually lush in recent memory. Credit should go to cinematographer Gokhan Tiryaki, who lets the camera breath when it needs to, but keeps the film’s blood flowing all the time.

Three Monkeys is visually beautiful, emotionally challenging and vastly haunting(all in the vain of Ceylan’s previous films), and certainly not a film to be missed.

THREE MONKEYS : B+

Ugetsu

**SPOILERS**

Watching Kenji Mizoguchi’s 1953 masterpiece Ugetsu Monogatari, I was reminded not only of the obviously similar Kurosawa films of the same decade, specifically Rashomon, or of the analogous themes of Onibaba, but of films that came later, like the wonderful Werckmeister Harmonies. I remembered that glorious, artistic four minute shot when Janos, the protagonist, walked through the dark streets of his small town when he knew everything was slowly falling apart within himself and his town. I compared it to the opening of Ugetsu, with Mizoguchi’s signature “scroll” shot revealing the houses and buldings and shops, almost dilapidated from the weather and wear. I remembered Sven Nykvist’s cinematography from Andrei Tarkovsky’s The Sacrifice when the philosophical writer Alexander burns his and his family’s own home in order to save the world. The house burns majestically over the course of about seven minutes.

Ugetsu’s influence is as far reaching as most of Akira Kurosawa’s most influential work.It is among the most important films ever made, its influence felt through cinema across the globe. I consider it one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen; the images in this film linger in my mind even while I write this. The stark black and white cinematography is soft, haunting, and ghost-like.

It is about two poor couples; Genjuro and Miyagi, and Tobei and Ohama. Genjuro and Tobei, the husbands, travel to the city of Omizo to sell the pots Genjuro crafts to make a living. They become successful as it is a time of war and the army needs the pots to carry supplies. Tobei dreams of becoming a samurai but is refused from the army as he doesn’t have armor or a spear.



Once they return home, Miyagi begs them not to travel anymore during wartime, but they decide to go anyway, this time with their families to Nagama. Before they leave, however, their home village of Nakanogo is raided. They decide to escape into the forest, but Tobei decides to stay behind to try and steal some of the soldiers’ armor. Genjuro returns to try and find him, and Miyagi follows. They are able to salvage some pottery, which they try and sell at a town across the river. They meet up with Tobei, who has failed to retrieve any weapons or armor. Miyagi is left behind at the shore with her and Genjuro’s child.

Eventually, however, they escape into the woods, only to be encountered by two hungry soldiers. In an attempt to salvage her food for the child, Miyagi is killed by one of them.

At the town across the lake, Genjuro’s pottery sells very well. Tobei uses his share of the fortune to purchase a suit of samurai armor, which he uses to sneak into a samurai clan. Genjuro, meanwhile, is approached by a noblewoman who tells him to take some of his pottery to Wakasa Manor. There, he is seduced by Lady Wakasa who, along with her servant, is the only survivor in the manor after it was attacked by soldiers. The two are then married.

Ohama, now alienated and traveling by herself, is raped by soldiers who leave her tattered and broken. She curses them and her husband. Tobei, meanwhile, kills a high-ranking enemy officer to show his head to a commander who, although suspicious, gives Tobei the armaments he seeks. Ohama becomes a prostitute and works in a rough brothel. Tobei later learns this and, distraught by the fact, gives up his life as a soldier to return home with his wife.



Genjuro, now afraid after learning the noblewoman who approached him earlier was a ghost and that Wakasa Manor is haunted, asks Lady Wakasa to let him return to his family. She refuses at first, but then admits that she and her servant are spirits, and she only returned to Earth to experience love. Genjuro leaves the manor and sees it as it truly is; destroyed by fire. Genjuro, exhausted and weary, returns home to find his son and, unaware she is deceased, his wife’s spirit. He is woken up the next morning by his neighbor, who reveals to him what happened to his wife.

Ugetsu is a fable about the cost of greed. It is about what one must sacrifice to get what they want, and if personal happiness is truly matters as opposed to love and family.

Another film I was reminded of while watching Ugetsu was Ghost with Patrick Swayze and Demi Moore. The infamous pottery scene in that film was certainly inspired by the closing scene in Ugetsu in which Miyagi’s spirit spins her beau’s pottery wheel for him while he works. “I am always with you,” she says.

UGETSU : A

This month's CINEASTES review has been hosted by Matthias Galvin at Framed (http://matthiasgalvin.blogspot.com/)

Watchmen

In the comic world, Watchmen is considered to be one of the seminal works in defining the medium. The collected 12 issues are highly regarded not only by fans, but also by critics and literary figures. It’s one of the few graphic novels that are considered to have any merit in the literary world.

It becomes clear why when you read the novel. The tale of a group of disbanded superheroes that reunite to solve the murder of one of their own tackles more heavy themes than most actual literary novels.

Politics, for example, play a major part in the plot of the film and the book, as they take place in an alternate 1985 where the U.S. has won the Vietnam War and Richard Nixon is still president. This is all due to the Watchmen, the renegade superhero collective. Their existence has drastically altered the course of the world.

To call them superheroes, though, is inaccurate. They are more like antiheroes, especially the murdered Comedian, a ruthless, right-wing vigilante who cares only for himself, not barring the rest of the Watchmen. His death sets off a string of events that bring the group back together; Nite Owl, a Batman-like hero who utilizes tools in place of powers, Ozymandias, a now successful entrepreneur who is described in the film as the “smartest man in the world,” Silk Spectre, the only female in the group who took over her mother’s position, Doctor Manhattan, the only member of the Watchmen with actual superpowers and Rorschach, a vigilante “justice-bringer” and extremely right-wing thinker who has constantly worked outside the Watchmen to deal brutal justice to criminals.

The film stays very true to the comic, recounting every last detail until the finished product itself has the look and feel of a graphic novel. This is partly due to the direction of Zack Snyder, who previously helmed the inferior 300, another visually stunning comic book movie.

Unlike 300, though, Watchmen is a film that isn’t just pretty to look at. It’s a relevant and substantial masterpiece that looks at the dark side of the superhero world, and asks “What if these ‘superheroes’ were real? What if they actually had to keep the world safe?,” and by seeking out the answers, Alan Moore (the writer of the original graphic novel who wanted nothing to do with the film) creates an amazing parallel to the current state of the American nation. These superheroes, which are normally thought of as indestructible, invincible super humans are, in the face of Armageddon, forced to make human decisions, and stripped bare of anything resembling superhuman.

The comic’s relevance at this time is fascinating, considering the first issue was originally released in 1986. The film, which has been in the works since the late 90’s, could not have come at a better time. It’s uncanny.

WATCHMEN : A-

Tell No One

The critically acclaimed Tell No One is a 2008 French thriller about a widower whose wife was murdered. Originally implemented as a prime suspect, the case resurfaces when two bodies are found at the site of the original murder, and he finds himself a suspect once again. His world is further turned upside down when he receives an e-mail that leads him to believe his wife may still be alive.

It would be hard to describe the plot anymore than that without revealing anything; Tell No One is one of the twistiest films in recent memory. It’s an unpredictable mind game, intricate with each move, yet thrilling every step of the way.

French star Francois Cluzet turns in a taut performance as Alexander Beck, the man out to find his wife’s real killer, all the while evading the police. Cluzet’s performance is natural and heartfelt, and his character a believable hero; kind-hearted and gentle, yet tough and unrelenting when he needs to be. He’s surrounded by a myriad of strong characters, some on his side and some not, but all of who have more information to offer him than it would seem.
With so many characters and such a tangled web of a plot, the film often comes off as convoluted, so much so that it often draws the viewer out of the overall experience the film offers. It’s certainly a film that gets better with repeated viewings, if not just to get every last detail. The final reveal, although gripping, is done a bit lazily with a character literally explaining to

Alexander what happened to his wife.
Still, Tell No One is smart and stylish in ways most thrillers aren’t, and that’s saying something.
Tell No One is now available on DVD.

TELL NO ONE : C+

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

I'll go ahead and say it; David Fincher is one of the best filmmakers working today. The modern epitome of the auteur theory, Fincher is one-of-a-kind. His films are dark, provocative and somewhat quirky (Fight Club was pretty cute), and unlike anything else you're likely to see from recent American cinema.

That's why it pains me so much to say that The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a huge misstep in director's otherwise blemish free filmography. And it stings even more when you realize that TCCBB was probably supposed to be his masterpiece.

This odd tale of a man who ages backwards from an old man into a baby tries hard to be a robust, heart-breaking love story. Overwhelmingly so. It ends up feeling overblown, overlong and at times just plain dull.

This is due in part to Brad Pitt's wooden performance. He mutters his lines off robotically, like a half-awake Forrest Gump (a fine film by any account, but one TCCBB shares too many plot-points with, both having been written by Eric Roth.)

To be honest, I think this film would be more enjoyable were it not for the gapingly obvious plotholes concerning the way Benjamin ages. He starts his life off in a baby-sized body with wrinkled skin and a baby's brain, but ends it in a baby-sized body with baby's skin and brain disorders that only affect the elderly. He goes from tiny to big to tiny again. For the plot to make any sense he would have to be born at adult size. This and his muscles are the only things that truly age backwards.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button received 13 Academy Award nominations, including nods for Best Picture, Director and Actor. While it doesn't deserve these, it certainly deserves its technical nominations. The film is a visual wonder, from the superb special effects right down to the costume design. Not to mention Benjamin's aging effects, which are unlike anything we've seen in movies thus far.

The visuals are really the only element of the film which are worth paying the $9 ticket price to see it in theaters. Otherwise, skip it if you want to view David Fincher as a filmmaker that can do no wrong.

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON : C-

The Wrestler

Myself, I'm not a fan of one Mr. Darren Aronofsky. Requiem For a Dream? Nah. Pi? No thank you sir. The Fountain? Are you kidding me?
But I found myself strangely drawn to his latest film, The Wrestler. Maybe it was the violence. I sure have an insatiable thirst for spilt blood. Aw, who am I kidding. It was probably the super foxy Marisa Tomei. Mmm mmm mmm.

But maybe, just maybe, it was the idea that a film could mean more to an actor than just a paycheck. This was after all, Mickey Rourke's comeback performance. He is, in fact, just basically playing himself in this film; a broken, beaten old bull just trying to get by on his own.

Rourke is Oscar-worthy in his role. He may just win come the 22nd, and for good reason.

Besides him though, the film is not much that we haven't seen before. It truly thinks it's more inspiring than it really is. It is, however, a step-up for the director. You're on your way kid.

THE WRESTLER : C