Moonrise Kingdom (2012)
Grade: B-
Starring: Bruce Willis, Jared Gilman, Kara Hayward, Edward Norton, Frances McDormand, Bill Murray, Tilda Swinton, Jason Schwartzman, Bob Balaban and Harvey Keitel
PREMISE: Two lonely kids with a mutual romantic attraction run away from home, causing the formation of search parties and social chaos while a huge thunderstorm bears down on their small town.
RATED PG-13 for intense emotional content, some strong sexual content, some blood, and language
Back in February, I reviewed a movie called The Beaver, a peculiar dramedy that, despite a very unique key premise, seemed to really be a dissertation on loneliness. The incident that set the plot in motion was a lonely man's adopting of a beaver puppet as an object of attachment, and, eventually, a sort of alter ego, something he infused with a fake voice and fake personality to try to charm his way back into the lives of those he cared about while shielding himself from directly receiving criticism or hurt. In the film, he bumped shoulders with other lonely characters, like his long-suffering wife, his self-mutilating son, and his son's secretly-lonely love interest.
Wes Anderson's Moonrise Kingdom seems to be a once-removed cousin of that film, with a basic plot premise-two lovestruck preteens run away from home together-really being used to examine the loneliness some (maybe all) people feel, and how we deal, or don't deal, with it. It's not at as dark as The Beaver, but it does come with an air of hopelessness. We know people like these characters, who are lonely. They have no one to talk to. They seem "unfixable". They seem hopeless. The movie telling their story might be darker if it weren't told by Wes Anderson, the director of some of the quirkier, more idiosyncratic works of the last decade and a half, including The Life Aquatic, The Fantastic Mr. Fox, and The Royal Tennenbaums. I'm suddenly interested to see those movies after watching Moonrise Kingdom, to see how they're put together, and what sort of morals they have. After all, Moonrise is an intriguing but sometimes-disorienting blend of drama, adventure, romance, comedy, and even fantasy, the likes of which I'm not sure I've ever seen before. This uneven ground seems to negate its effect, yet it leaves you thinking about it long after it's over.
Plot: One summer morning on the New England island of New Penzance, a Boy Scout Master (Edward Norton) discovers that one of his boys has gone AWOL. The boy in question, Sam Shakusky (Jared Gilman) is the least popular boy in his troop, an orphan with a history of self-isolation and possible mental illness. The boy's disappearance seems random, but, after another runaway is reported, the clues start coming together. The other runaway is a girl named Suzy Bishop (Kara Hayward), the perpetually-angry oldest child of a well-to-do but dysfunctional family that lives on the other side of the small island. After the girl's parents (Frances McDormand and Bill Murray) find a box of letters the two kids wrote to each other after meeting the previous summer, the local police captain (Bruce Willis) deduces that they've run away together, that their plan is to never be found. Reporting the case to higher authorities seems to only bring bad news, though, as Sam's foster parents have decided to release him from their care and don't want him back, and the Social Services agent (Tilda Swinton) they contact believes the boy needs time in a corrective penitentiary, or at least some shock therapy. The race is on to find the boy and girl and sort them out-especially with a big storm brewing-but the boy and girl aren't scared. Despite their respective quirks (he's a socially-awkward extrovert and she's a hostile introvert), they've found a mutual kinship in each other, and even begun to take timid steps into the riptides of romance. And just chasing these two lonely kids down gives all the adults in the story (the girl's parents, the scout master, the police captain) cause to re-examine the loneliness in their own lives.
What Works?
The actors are all solid, even though a few of them (like Murray) are shoehorned into tiny roles. Norton, in particular, is superb as a scout master who suddenly realizes his by-the-book approach to leading the kids leaves him unable to identify with them on a personal level. Willis is good as a lonely man who can identify with the rebellious, lonely boy, and McDormand has a few poignant moments as the girl's dissatisfied mother. The kids themselves, in roles that are bold and edgy for such young actors, are effectively embodied by Jared Gilman and Kara Hayward. Neither performance is particularly flashy, but both actors convincingly embody that loneliness and alienation many of us feel, even if we don't admit it.
The themes that I've waxed poetic about (okay, whether or not it was, indeed, 'poetic' is up to you to decide) are, as they were in The Beaver and even in the classic American Beauty, are touching and relevant. The problems are real-life, with no easy solutions, and yet everyone sensible is able to realize that electro-shock therapy is not the answer. The movie also defies logic and cliche at every turn, the intriguing dynamic between these two awkward kids slowly reveals itself, there are a few hearty laughs, and the ending is both happy and, realistically, not perfect. There's still a sense of disquiet, even if things are better than they were.
What Doesn't Work?
Everyone involved with this film might have benefited from a more straight-forward approach to the material. Give everyone (especially the kids) more dialogue, make things a little more realistic, ditch that odd mockumentary-style approach brought on by the occasional presence of a narrator (Bob Balaban) who talks directly to the screen, and make up your mind what genre you're aiming for. A few moments border on absurdist fantasy, a few others are head-scratchers, and the movie often becomes tantalizingly close to really good before veering off. Also, it definitely isn't necessary to show two kids groping each other in the throes of youthful lust.
Like I said, I'm interested to see Wes Anderson's other films, and see if this barely-there quasi-realistic approach is his usual forte (my brother, who saw the film with me, kept saying it reminded him of The Fantastic Mr. Fox, one of Anderson's earlier films). I'd have liked for it to have been more straight forward, just to allow viewers to embrace it a bit more. The theme would have still come through.
Content: Most people are going to be bored and/or turned off by the abounding quirks of the script and style, and I wouldn't recommend it to just about anybody. However, other than the one edgy scene of the kids in their undergarments touching each other, there's nothing kids can't see. I just don't know that they'd want to see this movie.
Bottom Line (I Promise): Given a quirky (some might say artsy) touch by director Wes Anderson, Moonrise Kingdom trips over itself despite featuring an intriguing premise and some poignant, relevant themes, yet it's still a work that will stay with you. It may even make you want to reach out to some lonely person you know. Most of the characters in this film would appreciate that.
Moonrise Kingdom (2012)
Directed by Wes Anderson
Written by Wes Anderson and Roman Coppola
Rated PG-13
Length: 94 minutes
Saturday, July 28, 2012
Friday, July 20, 2012
THE DARK KNIGHT RISES
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Grade: B+
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Starring: Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Anne Hathaway, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Marion Cotillard and Morgan Freeman
PREMISE: Terrorist leader Bane launches a full-out war on Gotham City, attempting to humiliate Batman and complete the League of Shadows' wish to bring western civilization to its knees.
RATED PG-13 for violence and intense emotional content
The first thing I must do in writing this review is ask for your prayers. You've probably heard, but a lunatic gunman entered a midnight showing in Aurora, Colorado, and opened fire with a civilian assault rifle, killing 12 and injuring a reported 59. Please pray for the families of those who were killed, and for the physical and emotional healing of those who were injured. Christopher Nolan, the director of the Dark Knight trilogy that began with 2005's Batman Begins, has issued a statement professing his deep sorrow for the incident. This is one of those appalling tragedies, and to imagine that it happened at a place where people go to view art, to experience entertainment, is unthinkable. Please pray.
It's a little difficult to move from such a sobering statement into something so cheap as a movie review, but the movie at the center of this difficult story, The Dark Knight Rises, is a heck of a film. Long, thunderous, and, like its predecessors, redefining what a "superhero movie" can look, sound, and feel like, Rises puts a capper on what has been a truly unforgettable movie saga. For my money, it doesn't quite match the level of sheer gripping power of 2008's legendary Dark Knight, might be a little long and have a few too many loose ends (as the last films of such series are wont to do), but it's still quite a piece of entertainment. After exploring the depths of depraved evil with studies of The Joker and Two-Face in Knight, Nolan and his titular Caped Crusader (Academy-Award Winner Christian Bale, solid as ever) take a look at single-minded, old-world mania in this third film, as Batman struggles to thwart the plans of an ancient organization that considers destroying Gotham its duty. With an A-list cast (the movie boasts four Academy Award winners), a brilliant soundtrack, some stunning visuals and spectacular action, it's a spectacle that is fitting as a last hurrah but, naturally, leaves you wishing for more.
Plot: It's been eight years since Batman disappeared after taking the heat for Harvey "Two-Face" Dent's crimes (at the conclusion of The Dark Knight), and those tied to the Caped Crusader have never quite recovered. Oh, the media loves to continue to portray the Batman as a murderer and a psycho, but Police Commissioner Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) can't forget the very personal service the Batman rendered him, and the gut-punch he gave to organized crime. Nor can kids who idolized "the batman" forget all that he did. Wayne Enterprises has gone under, largely because the face of the company--an older, wearier Bruce Wayne (Bale)--has become a recluse, hiding in his rebuilt mansion with no one but his faithful friend and butler, Alfred Pennyworth (Michael Caine), for company. Still hurt that Gotham rejected his attempts to do good, still grieving his parents' death, still crushed by the death of his one true friend and love, Rachel Dawes, Bruce has sunk into monotonous despair.
What gets him going again is his being robbed by the notorious Cat Thief, Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway), who makes off with his late mother's prized necklace. After running into her at a party, Bruce learns that she's been working for a local crime boss to try and frame him, but now she wants out, and is desperate to clear her record. Her stirring up of the local gangbangers actually gives Bruce an excuse to get the old batsuit out and ruffle some feathers. However, one of those whose feathers he ruffles is the new crime boss, a vicious, muscular criminal named Bane (a massive, masked Tom Hardy), who has recently taken control of the local crime scene and is determined to unleash some old-school wrath on 12 million Gothamites. Remember the mission of Raz-Al-Gul (Liam Neeson) in the original--to burn Gotham to the ground? Well, that's an objective shared by Bane, a former member of Raz's League of Shadows: to send Gotham back to the stone age with a tactical nuke disguised as an energy fusion reactor that Wayne Enterprises just unknowingly helped a local environmental magnate (Marion Cotillard) purchase.
Well, Bruce is able to get Kyle out of a tight spot, and gain her trust. He's also able to re-inspire Jim Gordon and an intrepid young detective, John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), to try and crucify the newly-thriving criminal underground. But, it has also landed him squarely in the crosshairs of Bane, who, like Raz and The Joker before him, loves to terrorize the garden-variety citizens of Gotham but also really wants to put a hurtin' on "the batman".
What Doesn't Work?
As you may be able to tell, the plot is thick. So thick, in fact, that I have difficult adequately explaining the first thirty minutes. Both the previous films were slow getting off the ground, and Rises, too, struggles to kick things into high gear. A lot of it is business-type jargon from Wayne Corporate that just doesn't quite make sense (or matter). Then there's the sorting out of the different characters, where, as in Dark Knight, Bruce Wayne/Batman is just one of a cluster of major players, who all have motivations and friends and storylines. Also, at 164 minutes, the film is long, definitely longer than it needs to be, and it has a hard time collecting all the character/plot strands, and presenting an ending that is acceptable without being overly sentimental.
What Works?
That said, if you are a fan of the Batman type or of Nolan's previous Dark Knight films, it's hard to not feel a great sense of satisfaction just watching a new installment. I cheered upon the Caped Crusader's first suited appearance and there are many other pleasures (almost in-Batman product placements) and inside jokes that will give the knowledgeable viewer quite the satisfactory experience. There's also a late, almost throwaway line by Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character that got the audience I saw the film with stirring with excitement and glee.
The actors are tremendous. The returners, Bale, Oldman, Caine and Morgan Freeman-as Lucius Fox, supersmart Wayne Enterprises weapons designer-all do some of their best work, with Bale in particular really owning the Batman role and the film (the previous movie, The Dark Knight, was completely stolen by the late Heath Ledger). The series newcomers light it up as well. Marion Cotillard (Leo DiCaprio's doomed wife in Nolan's Inception) flits in and out of a few scenes with conviction as a woman who might be able to breath life back into Wayne Enterprises (and Wayne himself), Anne Hathaway provides a much-needed burst of energy as the mysterious, super-tough Kyle, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt keeps his star ascending quickly with a terrific portrayal of an earnest, more everyday type of hero.
The critical role of this movie's main villain (read: the person saddled with unenviable task of playing a Batman villain after Ledger won as Oscar for doing that very thing the last time out) fell to muscular Brit Tom Hardy, another breakout star from Nolan's 2010 hit, Inception. I was first alarmed and disbelieving when I heard of Hardy's recruitment to play Bane (primarily because of the required physique), but his performance as a hulking but emotionally-unstable MMA fighter in last year's Warrior made a believer out of me. Needless to say, he delivers. It's a little hard to rate his 'performance' given that three-quarters of his face is hidden by a robotic mask for the entire film, and that not all of his dialogue is intelligible for the same reason, but, like Ledger before him, he makes his villain loom large; his presence is felt even in scenes he's not in. Bane's truly frightening, with his gigantic frame, merciless impulses, physical savagery and (worst of all) flaky 'terrorist movement leader' entitlement. He's a great adversary, as he proves not just with some verbal barbs but in some bravura fisticuffs with Batman that are, alone, worth the price of admission.
Like its predecessors (and like Nolan's other films, Inception and The Prestige), Rises isn't lacking in spectacle. The rumored $250 million budget was put to good use, as attested to by some enormous action sequences, a few exotic locales, and some eye-popping stunts. Yet, despite the shock and awe of the film's bread-and-butter action sequences, the emotion is palpable, both in watching characters make life or death decisions (often for the benefit of others) and in understanding some of the real-world significance of what they're facing. Rises' best moments are its more down-to-earth ones, which include tears, fears, and one of the sexiest movie kisses I can remember seeing.
Content: You won't find much blood here, nor do I remember any standout profanity, and parents don't need to worry about suggestive material, but the action, as exhibited by the previous two films, can be rough and tumble. Our hero takes at least one truly nasty beating, and people do die in some gruesome ways. Just remember: this is a grown-up superhero, in a very Real world. This isn't a cartoon.
Bottom Line (I Promise):
Well, there you have it: the 2012 movie I most anticipated seeing. I wasn't blown away (like I said, I think Dark Knight was better), but it still has moments that will take your breath away, that will keep you on the edge of your seat, that will make you bemoan the fact that this is the end. But is it really? I mean, there was that scene.....Regardless, Dark Knight Rises is a tremendous entertainment.
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Written for the screen by Christopher Nolan and Jonathan Nolan, from a story by Christopher Nolan and David S. Goyer
Based on Batman characters created by Bob Kane
Rated PG-13
Length: 164 minutes
Grade: B+
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Starring: Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Anne Hathaway, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Marion Cotillard and Morgan Freeman
PREMISE: Terrorist leader Bane launches a full-out war on Gotham City, attempting to humiliate Batman and complete the League of Shadows' wish to bring western civilization to its knees.
RATED PG-13 for violence and intense emotional content
The first thing I must do in writing this review is ask for your prayers. You've probably heard, but a lunatic gunman entered a midnight showing in Aurora, Colorado, and opened fire with a civilian assault rifle, killing 12 and injuring a reported 59. Please pray for the families of those who were killed, and for the physical and emotional healing of those who were injured. Christopher Nolan, the director of the Dark Knight trilogy that began with 2005's Batman Begins, has issued a statement professing his deep sorrow for the incident. This is one of those appalling tragedies, and to imagine that it happened at a place where people go to view art, to experience entertainment, is unthinkable. Please pray.
It's a little difficult to move from such a sobering statement into something so cheap as a movie review, but the movie at the center of this difficult story, The Dark Knight Rises, is a heck of a film. Long, thunderous, and, like its predecessors, redefining what a "superhero movie" can look, sound, and feel like, Rises puts a capper on what has been a truly unforgettable movie saga. For my money, it doesn't quite match the level of sheer gripping power of 2008's legendary Dark Knight, might be a little long and have a few too many loose ends (as the last films of such series are wont to do), but it's still quite a piece of entertainment. After exploring the depths of depraved evil with studies of The Joker and Two-Face in Knight, Nolan and his titular Caped Crusader (Academy-Award Winner Christian Bale, solid as ever) take a look at single-minded, old-world mania in this third film, as Batman struggles to thwart the plans of an ancient organization that considers destroying Gotham its duty. With an A-list cast (the movie boasts four Academy Award winners), a brilliant soundtrack, some stunning visuals and spectacular action, it's a spectacle that is fitting as a last hurrah but, naturally, leaves you wishing for more.
Plot: It's been eight years since Batman disappeared after taking the heat for Harvey "Two-Face" Dent's crimes (at the conclusion of The Dark Knight), and those tied to the Caped Crusader have never quite recovered. Oh, the media loves to continue to portray the Batman as a murderer and a psycho, but Police Commissioner Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) can't forget the very personal service the Batman rendered him, and the gut-punch he gave to organized crime. Nor can kids who idolized "the batman" forget all that he did. Wayne Enterprises has gone under, largely because the face of the company--an older, wearier Bruce Wayne (Bale)--has become a recluse, hiding in his rebuilt mansion with no one but his faithful friend and butler, Alfred Pennyworth (Michael Caine), for company. Still hurt that Gotham rejected his attempts to do good, still grieving his parents' death, still crushed by the death of his one true friend and love, Rachel Dawes, Bruce has sunk into monotonous despair.
What gets him going again is his being robbed by the notorious Cat Thief, Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway), who makes off with his late mother's prized necklace. After running into her at a party, Bruce learns that she's been working for a local crime boss to try and frame him, but now she wants out, and is desperate to clear her record. Her stirring up of the local gangbangers actually gives Bruce an excuse to get the old batsuit out and ruffle some feathers. However, one of those whose feathers he ruffles is the new crime boss, a vicious, muscular criminal named Bane (a massive, masked Tom Hardy), who has recently taken control of the local crime scene and is determined to unleash some old-school wrath on 12 million Gothamites. Remember the mission of Raz-Al-Gul (Liam Neeson) in the original--to burn Gotham to the ground? Well, that's an objective shared by Bane, a former member of Raz's League of Shadows: to send Gotham back to the stone age with a tactical nuke disguised as an energy fusion reactor that Wayne Enterprises just unknowingly helped a local environmental magnate (Marion Cotillard) purchase.
Well, Bruce is able to get Kyle out of a tight spot, and gain her trust. He's also able to re-inspire Jim Gordon and an intrepid young detective, John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), to try and crucify the newly-thriving criminal underground. But, it has also landed him squarely in the crosshairs of Bane, who, like Raz and The Joker before him, loves to terrorize the garden-variety citizens of Gotham but also really wants to put a hurtin' on "the batman".
What Doesn't Work?
As you may be able to tell, the plot is thick. So thick, in fact, that I have difficult adequately explaining the first thirty minutes. Both the previous films were slow getting off the ground, and Rises, too, struggles to kick things into high gear. A lot of it is business-type jargon from Wayne Corporate that just doesn't quite make sense (or matter). Then there's the sorting out of the different characters, where, as in Dark Knight, Bruce Wayne/Batman is just one of a cluster of major players, who all have motivations and friends and storylines. Also, at 164 minutes, the film is long, definitely longer than it needs to be, and it has a hard time collecting all the character/plot strands, and presenting an ending that is acceptable without being overly sentimental.
What Works?
That said, if you are a fan of the Batman type or of Nolan's previous Dark Knight films, it's hard to not feel a great sense of satisfaction just watching a new installment. I cheered upon the Caped Crusader's first suited appearance and there are many other pleasures (almost in-Batman product placements) and inside jokes that will give the knowledgeable viewer quite the satisfactory experience. There's also a late, almost throwaway line by Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character that got the audience I saw the film with stirring with excitement and glee.
The actors are tremendous. The returners, Bale, Oldman, Caine and Morgan Freeman-as Lucius Fox, supersmart Wayne Enterprises weapons designer-all do some of their best work, with Bale in particular really owning the Batman role and the film (the previous movie, The Dark Knight, was completely stolen by the late Heath Ledger). The series newcomers light it up as well. Marion Cotillard (Leo DiCaprio's doomed wife in Nolan's Inception) flits in and out of a few scenes with conviction as a woman who might be able to breath life back into Wayne Enterprises (and Wayne himself), Anne Hathaway provides a much-needed burst of energy as the mysterious, super-tough Kyle, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt keeps his star ascending quickly with a terrific portrayal of an earnest, more everyday type of hero.
The critical role of this movie's main villain (read: the person saddled with unenviable task of playing a Batman villain after Ledger won as Oscar for doing that very thing the last time out) fell to muscular Brit Tom Hardy, another breakout star from Nolan's 2010 hit, Inception. I was first alarmed and disbelieving when I heard of Hardy's recruitment to play Bane (primarily because of the required physique), but his performance as a hulking but emotionally-unstable MMA fighter in last year's Warrior made a believer out of me. Needless to say, he delivers. It's a little hard to rate his 'performance' given that three-quarters of his face is hidden by a robotic mask for the entire film, and that not all of his dialogue is intelligible for the same reason, but, like Ledger before him, he makes his villain loom large; his presence is felt even in scenes he's not in. Bane's truly frightening, with his gigantic frame, merciless impulses, physical savagery and (worst of all) flaky 'terrorist movement leader' entitlement. He's a great adversary, as he proves not just with some verbal barbs but in some bravura fisticuffs with Batman that are, alone, worth the price of admission.
Like its predecessors (and like Nolan's other films, Inception and The Prestige), Rises isn't lacking in spectacle. The rumored $250 million budget was put to good use, as attested to by some enormous action sequences, a few exotic locales, and some eye-popping stunts. Yet, despite the shock and awe of the film's bread-and-butter action sequences, the emotion is palpable, both in watching characters make life or death decisions (often for the benefit of others) and in understanding some of the real-world significance of what they're facing. Rises' best moments are its more down-to-earth ones, which include tears, fears, and one of the sexiest movie kisses I can remember seeing.
Content: You won't find much blood here, nor do I remember any standout profanity, and parents don't need to worry about suggestive material, but the action, as exhibited by the previous two films, can be rough and tumble. Our hero takes at least one truly nasty beating, and people do die in some gruesome ways. Just remember: this is a grown-up superhero, in a very Real world. This isn't a cartoon.
Bottom Line (I Promise):
Well, there you have it: the 2012 movie I most anticipated seeing. I wasn't blown away (like I said, I think Dark Knight was better), but it still has moments that will take your breath away, that will keep you on the edge of your seat, that will make you bemoan the fact that this is the end. But is it really? I mean, there was that scene.....Regardless, Dark Knight Rises is a tremendous entertainment.
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Directed by Christopher Nolan
Written for the screen by Christopher Nolan and Jonathan Nolan, from a story by Christopher Nolan and David S. Goyer
Based on Batman characters created by Bob Kane
Rated PG-13
Length: 164 minutes
Thursday, July 12, 2012
SHERLOCK HOLMES: A GAME OF SHADOWS
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011)
Grade: C
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Jared Harris, Noomi Rapace, Stephen Fry, Kelly Reilly, Paul Anderson and Rachel McAdams
PREMISE: Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson race against time to stop a terrorist mastermind from discreetly forcing Europe into war.
RATED PG-13 for action, sensuality, some language and rude humor and a brief scene of torture
As one of the few movie critic types who actually enjoyed and recommended the first Sherlock Holmes movie, I was extremely disappointed, upon finally getting to see the sequel, that it's a step back in every way. Oh, the like-an-old-married-couple banter still exists between Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock and Jude Law's Watson, there's some cool action, some neat-o special effects and a few big laughs, but this movie, even more than Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted, is merely recycling what made the first movie intriguing, and then cranking up the volume and the mayhem. This results in a film with too many gimmicks, too many loose ends, and a frustrating air of self-indulgence.
Plot: Poor Dr. Watson! The man can't even get married and go on his honeymoon with his bride (Kelly Reilly) without his friend/partner/other half Holmes making things difficult! Is it technically Holmes' fault the doctor is now a target of super-smart superterrorist Professor James Moriarty (a solid Jared Harris)? No. But Holmes and Watson have put enough heat on Moriarty-a distinguished bilingual Cambridge professor-that he's forced to send men after them to keep them from ruining his master plan: to make a quick fortune by producing wartime supplies (everything from bombs to bandages) and then pulling a few strings (or triggers) in order to incite a "world war" amongst the European countries. Holmes and Watson's tracking of Moriarty soon has them crossing paths with a French gypsy (Noomi Rapace), whose brother was taken captive and brainwashed by the terrorist. Dodging assassins and booby traps at every turn, Holmes, Watson, and their new friend--with help from Sherlock's equally-smart brother Mycroft (Stephen Fry)--hurry to stop Moriarty from forcing the French and German governments' hands by staging an assassination at an international peace summit.
What Works?
As has been the case ever since Iron Man (2008) revived his career, Downey Jr. is effortlessly watchable. His character's rapport with the equally-solid Law seemingly can't fail to be at least a little entertaining. Some of the gags are lame and the lines cheesy, but the two make a great action-comedy pair, in the tradition of Gibson-Glover (Lethal Weapon), Tucker-Chan (Rush Hour), and Smith-Jones (Men in Black). As their nemesis, Jared Harris is not only impressively sinister but under-used; he's almost too-legitimate of a villain for a silly popcorn movie like this. A lot of the action scenes are also involving, and some of the "big reveals" Holmes uncovers throughout the movie have a refreshing "ah-ha!" effect, which was the key ingredient of success for the original.
What Doesn't Work?
First, wasting talented actors like Stephen Fry and Noomi Rapace in pointless roles--especially Rapace, who has a big-enough part that she gets third billing in this film behind Downey Jr. and Law. Also taking every inventive stunt or engaging action scene and making it three times as long as it needs to be. And there are unfortunately too many of those "ah-ha" moments, so many that it becomes distracting and the movie develops an annoyingly-repetitive feel. Finally, the film seems to have bitten off more than it could chew, as the multiple storylines and character arcs fail to be resolved at the film's end, leaving some characters and developments out to dry as if they were never there. Ultimately, the film is a little hard to follow and a little bit of a bore, never a good thing for an action blockbuster.
Content: Cussing is minimal, as is suggestive material, and, for the amount of guns-blazing, knives-flying mayhem depicted onscreen, there's little actual sinister material. With the exception of one brief scene, you're never worried that the good guys are going to make it. Really, the most problematic issue for this film is that it can be difficult to follow, and viewers of all ages might need to help understanding what's going on.
Bottom Line (I Promise): Overblown and a little self-indulgent, A Game of Shadows is a big step down from the 2009 original. Downey Jr. and Law are still good, and Harris makes an effective villain, but Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's faithful followers are going to have heart attacks, and people who like movies might just join them.
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011)
Directed by Guy Ritchie
Written by Michele Mulroney and Keiran Mulroney; based on characters created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Rated PG-13
Length: 129 minutes
Grade: C
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Jared Harris, Noomi Rapace, Stephen Fry, Kelly Reilly, Paul Anderson and Rachel McAdams
PREMISE: Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson race against time to stop a terrorist mastermind from discreetly forcing Europe into war.
RATED PG-13 for action, sensuality, some language and rude humor and a brief scene of torture
As one of the few movie critic types who actually enjoyed and recommended the first Sherlock Holmes movie, I was extremely disappointed, upon finally getting to see the sequel, that it's a step back in every way. Oh, the like-an-old-married-couple banter still exists between Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock and Jude Law's Watson, there's some cool action, some neat-o special effects and a few big laughs, but this movie, even more than Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted, is merely recycling what made the first movie intriguing, and then cranking up the volume and the mayhem. This results in a film with too many gimmicks, too many loose ends, and a frustrating air of self-indulgence.
Plot: Poor Dr. Watson! The man can't even get married and go on his honeymoon with his bride (Kelly Reilly) without his friend/partner/other half Holmes making things difficult! Is it technically Holmes' fault the doctor is now a target of super-smart superterrorist Professor James Moriarty (a solid Jared Harris)? No. But Holmes and Watson have put enough heat on Moriarty-a distinguished bilingual Cambridge professor-that he's forced to send men after them to keep them from ruining his master plan: to make a quick fortune by producing wartime supplies (everything from bombs to bandages) and then pulling a few strings (or triggers) in order to incite a "world war" amongst the European countries. Holmes and Watson's tracking of Moriarty soon has them crossing paths with a French gypsy (Noomi Rapace), whose brother was taken captive and brainwashed by the terrorist. Dodging assassins and booby traps at every turn, Holmes, Watson, and their new friend--with help from Sherlock's equally-smart brother Mycroft (Stephen Fry)--hurry to stop Moriarty from forcing the French and German governments' hands by staging an assassination at an international peace summit.
What Works?
As has been the case ever since Iron Man (2008) revived his career, Downey Jr. is effortlessly watchable. His character's rapport with the equally-solid Law seemingly can't fail to be at least a little entertaining. Some of the gags are lame and the lines cheesy, but the two make a great action-comedy pair, in the tradition of Gibson-Glover (Lethal Weapon), Tucker-Chan (Rush Hour), and Smith-Jones (Men in Black). As their nemesis, Jared Harris is not only impressively sinister but under-used; he's almost too-legitimate of a villain for a silly popcorn movie like this. A lot of the action scenes are also involving, and some of the "big reveals" Holmes uncovers throughout the movie have a refreshing "ah-ha!" effect, which was the key ingredient of success for the original.
What Doesn't Work?
First, wasting talented actors like Stephen Fry and Noomi Rapace in pointless roles--especially Rapace, who has a big-enough part that she gets third billing in this film behind Downey Jr. and Law. Also taking every inventive stunt or engaging action scene and making it three times as long as it needs to be. And there are unfortunately too many of those "ah-ha" moments, so many that it becomes distracting and the movie develops an annoyingly-repetitive feel. Finally, the film seems to have bitten off more than it could chew, as the multiple storylines and character arcs fail to be resolved at the film's end, leaving some characters and developments out to dry as if they were never there. Ultimately, the film is a little hard to follow and a little bit of a bore, never a good thing for an action blockbuster.
Content: Cussing is minimal, as is suggestive material, and, for the amount of guns-blazing, knives-flying mayhem depicted onscreen, there's little actual sinister material. With the exception of one brief scene, you're never worried that the good guys are going to make it. Really, the most problematic issue for this film is that it can be difficult to follow, and viewers of all ages might need to help understanding what's going on.
Bottom Line (I Promise): Overblown and a little self-indulgent, A Game of Shadows is a big step down from the 2009 original. Downey Jr. and Law are still good, and Harris makes an effective villain, but Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's faithful followers are going to have heart attacks, and people who like movies might just join them.
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011)
Directed by Guy Ritchie
Written by Michele Mulroney and Keiran Mulroney; based on characters created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Rated PG-13
Length: 129 minutes
Saturday, July 7, 2012
THE AMAZING SPIDERMAN
The Amazing Spiderman (2012)
Grade: A
Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Denis Leary, Martin Sheen, Campbell Scott and Sally Field
PREMISE: Peter Parker's investigation of his parents' mysterious disappearance leads him to Dr. Curt Connors, a pioneer in cross-species genetics.
RATED PG-13 for violence, blood and gory content, some scary moments and sensuality
I was, for the longest time, loathe to see The Amazing Spiderman. After all, it's only been ten years since the original Spiderman (2002) came out, starring Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst, and became one of the milestone movies of my generation. While no Oscar winner, that movie is nonetheless cemented forever into my brain--the scenes of Peter Parker discovering his powers and beginning to use them are suffused with an energy and delight that you'd be hard-pressed to forget. Then again, that series spectacularly crashed and burned five years ago with its overstuffed sad sack of a third movie, 2007's Spiderman 3, a movie most people only remember because of the infamous scenes of Maguire dancing up and down the street in emo-kid garb.
So, here's The Amazing Spiderman, with a new director, new actors, new characters, and a new spin on the Spidey legend. And I can tell you now it's far superior. Going the same route as the Batman and James Bond franchises and giving its look and happenings a darker, more realistic look (a reboot, in other words), Amazing pays some homage to the old film while giving everything a fresh feel. The actors are solid across the board, the action is electrifying, the funny moments are cuttingly funny, and the emotion, in many scenes, is palpable. With Peter Parker less a computer nerd than a loner, and less a happy, go-lucky guy than a young man who lives every minute of every day burdened by a sense of betrayal he feels at his parents' absence, it pulls you in, and, in two fast and furious hours, proves a remarkable entertainment.
Plot: All Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield, terrific) can remember of his parents' disappearance is that his dad (Campbell Scott), a super-smart, super-secretive scientist, appeared to have had something important stolen from his home office. As soon the theft was discovered, Peter's parents put him in the car, drove him to his aunt and uncle's house, and, within an hour, left him there. They haven't been seen or heard from since. Peter was four. As a teen, he has a happy-enough life with his Aunt Mae (Sally Field) and Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen), but his family history hangs over him like a cloud. One day, he finds an old shoulder bag of his father's, and, inside, a picture of his father and a colleague. The colleague, Peter finds, is Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans) of Oscorp, an amiable scientist whose desire to re-gain the right arm he lost years ago has led him to spend a lifetime pursuing cross-species genetics, specifically the possibility of using DNA from regenerative creatures like lizards (which can regrow lost tails or limbs) to give humans the possibility to self-heal. On a trip to Oscorp's laboratories to meet with Connors, Peter stumbles into a room containing mutated spiders, where (guess WHAT!?!?!) he's bitten. Almost immediately, he discovers his new powers, including uncanny reflexes, greater strength, greater agility, and the ability to climb walls. And then there's the web-slinging.
But Peter's life turns upside down when his uncle is killed in a freak encounter with a street thug. Vowing to avenge his uncle's death, Peter launches a city-wide search into back alleys and seedy clubs, stopping multiple petty crimes while determinedly seeking that particular thug, who had an identifying wrist tattoo. The actions of this new "spiderman" catch the attention of both the press and the city police, led by Captain Stacy (Denis Leary), father of Peter's classmate crush, Gwen (Emma Stone). But then Spiderman gets an adversary, a monstrous creature called The Lizard, which is the result of a desperate Connors using his cross-species serum on himself after being told he's fired. Peter, who, in a few visits to Connors' office helped him perfect the formula, feels a responsibility to stop The Lizard, but his every excursion is now tracked closely by police. And the clock is ticking, because the vengeful Connors is ready to fit in--to make everybody like him--and he's hatching a diabolical plan to do just that.
What Works?
That was a long plot synopsis, and it really only captures about half of what occurs, but, despite the 2 hours-plus running time, The Amazing Spiderman flies by, and you, as the viewer, understand it perfectly. Yes, some of this is a result of familiarity with the universe via the original Spiderman, but Amazing, in its own way, delivers the goods. Garfield is a great actor, and a worthy lead for the series, and Stone (who has a much bigger part than my plot synopsis implies), is effortlessly likeable as his romantic foil. Ifans, in the all-important role of the super-villain, is superb, and the other veterans like Denis Leary, Sally Field, and Martin Sheen give solid, memorable contributions. The action is almost ridiculously entertaining at times (a fight between Spidey and The Lizard in a high school is spectacular), the tempo is quick, and the sparks fly between Garfield and Stone. I think the word for The Amazing Spiderman is entertaining, because that's what it is, be it via action, humor, romance or drama--it's a great movie experience, and, in my opinion, far superior to the much-ballyhooed, but much more formulaic, Avengers.
What Doesn't Work?
It's a tad too long (perhaps one too many concluding scenes) and some of the romantic moments are dragged out a little, but most of the movie works, easily trouncing the original Spiderman in all departments.
Content: The action is fast and furious, and there are some gory details involved with Connors' transforming into The Lizard and back, but the main thing that might intimidate younger viewers about The Amazing Spiderman is the air of menace. People we care about are often in harm's way, dramatic moments leap out of the woodwork, and it's not a given that Spiderman will succeed. Otherwise, minus one brief shot of a woman in a bra, it's as clean as summer blockbusters get, and I can't remember any profanity. Fail-safe for most teenagers.
*3-D Note: Thinking something like The Amazing Spiderman had to make for a great 3-D spectacle, I went against my normal impulse and saw it in 3-D. I wouldn't say 3-D is necessary. It adds a little bit of zing to some of the scenes of Spidey swinging between buildings and over cranes and through small spaces, but, for the most part, I'm sure the movie would be as good in 2-D. You don't have to spend the extra $5.
Bottom Line (I Promise):
An electric mix of action, humor and character development, The Amazing Spiderman is an immediate improvement over the original Spidey movie and even a superior big-screen spectacle to The Avengers. One of the year's best movies!
The Amazing Spiderman (2012)
Directed by Marc Webb
Written by James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent, and Steve Kloves; based on the comic series by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko
Rated PG-13
Length: 136 minutes
Grade: A
Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Denis Leary, Martin Sheen, Campbell Scott and Sally Field
PREMISE: Peter Parker's investigation of his parents' mysterious disappearance leads him to Dr. Curt Connors, a pioneer in cross-species genetics.
RATED PG-13 for violence, blood and gory content, some scary moments and sensuality
I was, for the longest time, loathe to see The Amazing Spiderman. After all, it's only been ten years since the original Spiderman (2002) came out, starring Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst, and became one of the milestone movies of my generation. While no Oscar winner, that movie is nonetheless cemented forever into my brain--the scenes of Peter Parker discovering his powers and beginning to use them are suffused with an energy and delight that you'd be hard-pressed to forget. Then again, that series spectacularly crashed and burned five years ago with its overstuffed sad sack of a third movie, 2007's Spiderman 3, a movie most people only remember because of the infamous scenes of Maguire dancing up and down the street in emo-kid garb.
So, here's The Amazing Spiderman, with a new director, new actors, new characters, and a new spin on the Spidey legend. And I can tell you now it's far superior. Going the same route as the Batman and James Bond franchises and giving its look and happenings a darker, more realistic look (a reboot, in other words), Amazing pays some homage to the old film while giving everything a fresh feel. The actors are solid across the board, the action is electrifying, the funny moments are cuttingly funny, and the emotion, in many scenes, is palpable. With Peter Parker less a computer nerd than a loner, and less a happy, go-lucky guy than a young man who lives every minute of every day burdened by a sense of betrayal he feels at his parents' absence, it pulls you in, and, in two fast and furious hours, proves a remarkable entertainment.
Plot: All Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield, terrific) can remember of his parents' disappearance is that his dad (Campbell Scott), a super-smart, super-secretive scientist, appeared to have had something important stolen from his home office. As soon the theft was discovered, Peter's parents put him in the car, drove him to his aunt and uncle's house, and, within an hour, left him there. They haven't been seen or heard from since. Peter was four. As a teen, he has a happy-enough life with his Aunt Mae (Sally Field) and Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen), but his family history hangs over him like a cloud. One day, he finds an old shoulder bag of his father's, and, inside, a picture of his father and a colleague. The colleague, Peter finds, is Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans) of Oscorp, an amiable scientist whose desire to re-gain the right arm he lost years ago has led him to spend a lifetime pursuing cross-species genetics, specifically the possibility of using DNA from regenerative creatures like lizards (which can regrow lost tails or limbs) to give humans the possibility to self-heal. On a trip to Oscorp's laboratories to meet with Connors, Peter stumbles into a room containing mutated spiders, where (guess WHAT!?!?!) he's bitten. Almost immediately, he discovers his new powers, including uncanny reflexes, greater strength, greater agility, and the ability to climb walls. And then there's the web-slinging.
But Peter's life turns upside down when his uncle is killed in a freak encounter with a street thug. Vowing to avenge his uncle's death, Peter launches a city-wide search into back alleys and seedy clubs, stopping multiple petty crimes while determinedly seeking that particular thug, who had an identifying wrist tattoo. The actions of this new "spiderman" catch the attention of both the press and the city police, led by Captain Stacy (Denis Leary), father of Peter's classmate crush, Gwen (Emma Stone). But then Spiderman gets an adversary, a monstrous creature called The Lizard, which is the result of a desperate Connors using his cross-species serum on himself after being told he's fired. Peter, who, in a few visits to Connors' office helped him perfect the formula, feels a responsibility to stop The Lizard, but his every excursion is now tracked closely by police. And the clock is ticking, because the vengeful Connors is ready to fit in--to make everybody like him--and he's hatching a diabolical plan to do just that.
What Works?
That was a long plot synopsis, and it really only captures about half of what occurs, but, despite the 2 hours-plus running time, The Amazing Spiderman flies by, and you, as the viewer, understand it perfectly. Yes, some of this is a result of familiarity with the universe via the original Spiderman, but Amazing, in its own way, delivers the goods. Garfield is a great actor, and a worthy lead for the series, and Stone (who has a much bigger part than my plot synopsis implies), is effortlessly likeable as his romantic foil. Ifans, in the all-important role of the super-villain, is superb, and the other veterans like Denis Leary, Sally Field, and Martin Sheen give solid, memorable contributions. The action is almost ridiculously entertaining at times (a fight between Spidey and The Lizard in a high school is spectacular), the tempo is quick, and the sparks fly between Garfield and Stone. I think the word for The Amazing Spiderman is entertaining, because that's what it is, be it via action, humor, romance or drama--it's a great movie experience, and, in my opinion, far superior to the much-ballyhooed, but much more formulaic, Avengers.
What Doesn't Work?
It's a tad too long (perhaps one too many concluding scenes) and some of the romantic moments are dragged out a little, but most of the movie works, easily trouncing the original Spiderman in all departments.
Content: The action is fast and furious, and there are some gory details involved with Connors' transforming into The Lizard and back, but the main thing that might intimidate younger viewers about The Amazing Spiderman is the air of menace. People we care about are often in harm's way, dramatic moments leap out of the woodwork, and it's not a given that Spiderman will succeed. Otherwise, minus one brief shot of a woman in a bra, it's as clean as summer blockbusters get, and I can't remember any profanity. Fail-safe for most teenagers.
*3-D Note: Thinking something like The Amazing Spiderman had to make for a great 3-D spectacle, I went against my normal impulse and saw it in 3-D. I wouldn't say 3-D is necessary. It adds a little bit of zing to some of the scenes of Spidey swinging between buildings and over cranes and through small spaces, but, for the most part, I'm sure the movie would be as good in 2-D. You don't have to spend the extra $5.
Bottom Line (I Promise):
An electric mix of action, humor and character development, The Amazing Spiderman is an immediate improvement over the original Spidey movie and even a superior big-screen spectacle to The Avengers. One of the year's best movies!
The Amazing Spiderman (2012)
Directed by Marc Webb
Written by James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent, and Steve Kloves; based on the comic series by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko
Rated PG-13
Length: 136 minutes
Thursday, July 5, 2012
THE ARTIST
The Artist (2011)
Grade: A+
Written and Directed by Michael Hazanavicius*
STARRING: Jean Dujardin, Berenice Bejo, John Goodman, James Cromwell, and Penelope Ann Miller
Premise: A silent movie superstar's career and life hit rock bottom after he refuses to accept talking pictures as the new norm.
*Won Academy Award for Best Director, 2011
Rated PG-13 for intense emotional content, adult themes, and drinking
Spectacular. Delightful. Amazing. All these words and more describe The Artist, the little movie made with good-old-fashioned flair that rode into last year's movie awards season and promptly elbowed The Help, Hugo, The Descendants and Moneyball out of the way to claim all the biggest prizes (including Oscars for Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor). At that time bewildered that a full-length silent film was getting such accolades, I didn't see it, but, upon getting a chance to rent and watch The Movie of last year, I decided to give it a shot.
Boy, am I glad I did.
Though the story it tells is nothing new (a man made of pride and stubbornness makes all the wrong choices and chases everyone away, only to be saved by the love of a good woman), it's the new-age (or is it old-age?) characteristics that make The Artist great. The Artist takes you back to a time when movies were truly and utterly adored, where movie stars were superb and transcendant and yet somehow more personal. It begs you to be more open, to humble yourself, to not let That One get away, and even while containing less than a half-page of audible dialogue, it does so with real pizzazz. Anyone who doesn't know much about the early years of movies might learn a thing or two, and real movie lovers will be in heaven. Like Martin Scorcese's delightful Hugo, The Artist is a movie that celebrates movies--doing so while giving you plenty of reminders why you go to movies in the first place.
Plot: It's 1927, and movies are all the rage. Theaters everywhere are packed, especially when they're showing the films of George Valentin (a tremendous Jean Dujardin), a looker who's made bank repeatedly in swashbuckling romantic roles. Beloved by moviegoers, pampered by the press and adored by throngs of squealing girls, it's easy for George to laugh off whispers that talkies might be the next Big Thing in movies. But the star himself is unexpectedly caught up in a moment at his latest premier when a young woman (Berenice Bejo, wonderful) stumbles onto the red carpet and bumps into George in front of the crowds and press. She smiles and plays for the cameras and makes for some good pictures and headlines, so George is unconcerned and soaks up the moment. But it inspires the young woman, who heads to an audition at Kinograph Studios and wins a bit part in George's new movie, A German Affair. The two have fantastic chemistry, on and off-camera, and the movie is a hit, but within months George is blindsided by the news that his studio-Kinograph-is ceasing all production of non-talkies. Enraged, he storms into his boss's (John Goodman) office and quits, but not before realizing that the young woman, Peppy Miller, is being touted as one of the new faces of Kinograph. Soon, George's career is dead and his life is falling apart, while Peppy is a superstar in talkies. Yet Peppy hasn't forgotten about George, about the big break he gave her or the tender moments they had making A German Affair, and she knows he could come back if he would only humble himself.
What Works?
That's a long plot synopsis, but in some ways it's too short. Basically, it's about a proud man who won't humble himself, to the point that he starts destroying himself, one bad decision after another. Introducing the audience to the character and then living in him, Jean Dujardin is masterful, depicting George as a man of towering pride and almost pathetic selfishness. But, somehow, you want him to turn it around. He may arrogantly quit his job, fire his chauffer and only real friend (James Cromwell, solid), ignore his beautiful wife (Penelope Ann Miller) and repeatedly reject Peppy's friendly/helpful advances, but you care about him, because you can see how easy it would be for him to right the ship. All he has to do is let go of his pride. It's a tremendous performance, but one that is nearly matched by the effort of Berenice Bejo. Adorable, charming and soulful, Bejo (in my opinion) steals the show. You can't take your eyes off her, and you're humbled by her selfless care for someone like George, who seems hell-bent on hurting himself and everyone around him, the kind of person many would give up on. Bejo was nominated for an Oscar (Supporting Actress), but, unlike her co-star, did not win--she'd have deserved it if she did.
What else works in The Artist? Hmm...let's see...The score (practically the third main character here because of its importance in silent-film format) is superb (it scored composer Ludovic Bource an Oscar), the drama is enveloping, and the moments of reconciliation and second chances just transport you with delight. Like I said, the majority of The Artist is nothing you haven't seen before, but, maybe it's because it's in black-and-white, because it's silent, or because it feels like an original work from cinema's good old days, it affects you more deeply, and you're all the more eager to appreciate it. Oh, and the dancing scenes are great, too.
It's also important to note that though The Artist is a silent film, that doesn't take away from its worthiness as an entertainment. The lack of words is soon forgotten-rather like the subtitles in foreign films-mostly because the situations and themes Hazanavicius's film explores are so familiar. All the most important bits of dialogue and exposition are shown on title cards, though, true to the silent-film formula, including a memorable "BANG!"
What Doesn't Work?
My only quibble is the movie's length. George's downward spiral is depicted in full--cutting one or two scenes wouldn't have been amiss, as you understand the point well in advance of the end of the movie's running time. However, none of those scenes are less well-made than any of the others.
Content: Probably the only time in the modern age you'll ever say this about a PG-13 movie, but there's no cussing to speak of. None at all. What? That's because there's almost no dialogue? Oh... There are some intense instances, including the near-death of one of the main characters, but there's nothing kids can't see. I just don't know if kids (or many adults) in today's instant-gratification, fast-paced world have the patience or attention span for a silent film like this.
Bottom Line (I Promise):Well, whatta ya know? It deserved all those Oscars it won (like Best Picture of the Year, 2011). Chronicling the redemption of an unbelievably selfish character with good-old-fashioned flair, The Artist is a heartfelt celebration of movies at their best. Recommended for the ambitious movie-goer.
The Artist (2011)
Directed (and written for the screen) by Michael Hazanavicius
Length: 100 minutes
Rated PG-13
Grade: A+
Written and Directed by Michael Hazanavicius*
STARRING: Jean Dujardin, Berenice Bejo, John Goodman, James Cromwell, and Penelope Ann Miller
Premise: A silent movie superstar's career and life hit rock bottom after he refuses to accept talking pictures as the new norm.
*Won Academy Award for Best Director, 2011
Rated PG-13 for intense emotional content, adult themes, and drinking
Spectacular. Delightful. Amazing. All these words and more describe The Artist, the little movie made with good-old-fashioned flair that rode into last year's movie awards season and promptly elbowed The Help, Hugo, The Descendants and Moneyball out of the way to claim all the biggest prizes (including Oscars for Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor). At that time bewildered that a full-length silent film was getting such accolades, I didn't see it, but, upon getting a chance to rent and watch The Movie of last year, I decided to give it a shot.
Boy, am I glad I did.
Though the story it tells is nothing new (a man made of pride and stubbornness makes all the wrong choices and chases everyone away, only to be saved by the love of a good woman), it's the new-age (or is it old-age?) characteristics that make The Artist great. The Artist takes you back to a time when movies were truly and utterly adored, where movie stars were superb and transcendant and yet somehow more personal. It begs you to be more open, to humble yourself, to not let That One get away, and even while containing less than a half-page of audible dialogue, it does so with real pizzazz. Anyone who doesn't know much about the early years of movies might learn a thing or two, and real movie lovers will be in heaven. Like Martin Scorcese's delightful Hugo, The Artist is a movie that celebrates movies--doing so while giving you plenty of reminders why you go to movies in the first place.
Plot: It's 1927, and movies are all the rage. Theaters everywhere are packed, especially when they're showing the films of George Valentin (a tremendous Jean Dujardin), a looker who's made bank repeatedly in swashbuckling romantic roles. Beloved by moviegoers, pampered by the press and adored by throngs of squealing girls, it's easy for George to laugh off whispers that talkies might be the next Big Thing in movies. But the star himself is unexpectedly caught up in a moment at his latest premier when a young woman (Berenice Bejo, wonderful) stumbles onto the red carpet and bumps into George in front of the crowds and press. She smiles and plays for the cameras and makes for some good pictures and headlines, so George is unconcerned and soaks up the moment. But it inspires the young woman, who heads to an audition at Kinograph Studios and wins a bit part in George's new movie, A German Affair. The two have fantastic chemistry, on and off-camera, and the movie is a hit, but within months George is blindsided by the news that his studio-Kinograph-is ceasing all production of non-talkies. Enraged, he storms into his boss's (John Goodman) office and quits, but not before realizing that the young woman, Peppy Miller, is being touted as one of the new faces of Kinograph. Soon, George's career is dead and his life is falling apart, while Peppy is a superstar in talkies. Yet Peppy hasn't forgotten about George, about the big break he gave her or the tender moments they had making A German Affair, and she knows he could come back if he would only humble himself.
What Works?
That's a long plot synopsis, but in some ways it's too short. Basically, it's about a proud man who won't humble himself, to the point that he starts destroying himself, one bad decision after another. Introducing the audience to the character and then living in him, Jean Dujardin is masterful, depicting George as a man of towering pride and almost pathetic selfishness. But, somehow, you want him to turn it around. He may arrogantly quit his job, fire his chauffer and only real friend (James Cromwell, solid), ignore his beautiful wife (Penelope Ann Miller) and repeatedly reject Peppy's friendly/helpful advances, but you care about him, because you can see how easy it would be for him to right the ship. All he has to do is let go of his pride. It's a tremendous performance, but one that is nearly matched by the effort of Berenice Bejo. Adorable, charming and soulful, Bejo (in my opinion) steals the show. You can't take your eyes off her, and you're humbled by her selfless care for someone like George, who seems hell-bent on hurting himself and everyone around him, the kind of person many would give up on. Bejo was nominated for an Oscar (Supporting Actress), but, unlike her co-star, did not win--she'd have deserved it if she did.
What else works in The Artist? Hmm...let's see...The score (practically the third main character here because of its importance in silent-film format) is superb (it scored composer Ludovic Bource an Oscar), the drama is enveloping, and the moments of reconciliation and second chances just transport you with delight. Like I said, the majority of The Artist is nothing you haven't seen before, but, maybe it's because it's in black-and-white, because it's silent, or because it feels like an original work from cinema's good old days, it affects you more deeply, and you're all the more eager to appreciate it. Oh, and the dancing scenes are great, too.
It's also important to note that though The Artist is a silent film, that doesn't take away from its worthiness as an entertainment. The lack of words is soon forgotten-rather like the subtitles in foreign films-mostly because the situations and themes Hazanavicius's film explores are so familiar. All the most important bits of dialogue and exposition are shown on title cards, though, true to the silent-film formula, including a memorable "BANG!"
What Doesn't Work?
My only quibble is the movie's length. George's downward spiral is depicted in full--cutting one or two scenes wouldn't have been amiss, as you understand the point well in advance of the end of the movie's running time. However, none of those scenes are less well-made than any of the others.
Content: Probably the only time in the modern age you'll ever say this about a PG-13 movie, but there's no cussing to speak of. None at all. What? That's because there's almost no dialogue? Oh... There are some intense instances, including the near-death of one of the main characters, but there's nothing kids can't see. I just don't know if kids (or many adults) in today's instant-gratification, fast-paced world have the patience or attention span for a silent film like this.
Bottom Line (I Promise):Well, whatta ya know? It deserved all those Oscars it won (like Best Picture of the Year, 2011). Chronicling the redemption of an unbelievably selfish character with good-old-fashioned flair, The Artist is a heartfelt celebration of movies at their best. Recommended for the ambitious movie-goer.
The Artist (2011)
Directed (and written for the screen) by Michael Hazanavicius
Length: 100 minutes
Rated PG-13
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)