Change Your Image
filmchaser
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Red Road (2014)
More! More! More!
I was hooked after the first episode because it's what is NOT said that I keep waiting for. Aside from an amazing cast, the characters are holding back so many secrets, some old, some new, and all painfully itching to get out. There weren't enough episodes to fully disclose the depth and complexities of the relationships of all the characters who share a history all the way back to child hood. I was so relieved when Jean finally sought out Phillip to clear the air after he spent the better part of his life being punished as the bad boy he'd been profiled to be by the lies and deceptions of Harold, and by the utter betrayal of his crazy, criminal father. Each episode left me wondering who the bad guys are and who the good guys are. This is the first time I've had opportunity to see Jason Momoa in anything, and he is mesmerizing. His physicality dominates the screen, and is particularly noticeable in the presence of the pale and anxious character played earnestly by Martin Henderson, who is really good at appearing to have everything under control while he is raging under the surface for all his lost opportunities. The two men are so different, yet not so different, when it comes to moral flexibility. And even though Kopus is supposed to play the villain, he's likable. Harold, tortured with ghosts and secrets, is supposed to be the good guy, and is hard to sympathize with because he is devious. Jean is fragile and barely present, while her daughters pretty much raise themselves. Tom Sizemore is so scary it's hard to believe he's acting. I waited each week eagerly to see what was next, and I hope they approve Season 2, because 6 or 7 more episodes may tell the real story, and may give Kopus and Harold opportunities for redemption. Otherwise, all the characters seem so miserable. And we need to know who's responsible for those cancer causing sink holes in the woods. More!
Adoration (2013)
A Story About Common Interests
It all starts with a bond between two little girls, Roz and Lil, that continues well into adulthood, marriage, and motherhood. It appears the two main characters Roz (played by Robin Wright) and Lil (played by Naomi Watts)led similar lives with similar timing and managed to, live next door to each other in an idyllic, isolated beach front community, where each had one child...at the same time...and the child for both was a boy, and the boys grew up to be best friends. The two women work in the same community they live in, and spend a significant amount of time together having dinner, wine, and walking the beach together. Their sons, who look like young gods, spend all day surfing before retiring to dinner, wine, and sometimes living room dancing with their mothers. Within this tightly knit foursome, age, maturity, and boundaries slowly and almost imperceptibly evaporate as the two best friends find themselves doing what they've always done...what the other one does. Ben Mendelsohn plays Harold, the husband of Roz, who treats Harold like an after thought. When Harold announces to Roz that he has been offered the job of his dreams, and that the family will have to move to Sydney for his job, Roz decides she loves where she lives more than she loves her husband of several years and they begin separate lives, leaving the two mothers and two sons together in paradise. This is the perfect (and unrealistic) set up for what follows. Other than the fact that two young men who look like Ian and Tom would be swamped with young girls their own ages, and that these two young men would have normal social lives with their peers, and that boys their ages don't usually hang out and drink with their mothers, it's plausible that an attraction could start between a young, handsome man and his mother's attractive best friend who he has known all his life. But for it to happen once, then happen twice within the same foursome in addition to all the facts that have to line up in the set up of this story, is just too much to ask the viewing audience to believe. Later in the movie when Roz throws her son a birthday party, her house is full of people, and I have to wonder, where did they all come from? and why do none of them know about these secret May-December affairs? or if they do, does it matter at all? Later I find out it does matter, when both boys eventually meet and marry women their own ages and father a daughter each, of the same age. It matters a lot to the wives. So the two best friends, who are now grandmothers, lose access to their grandchildren, which seems to be the only penalty for continuing the sexual relationships with their respective sons. And so they all (4) are left with each other. Wright and Watts are superb, and manage to carry off the characters flawlessly. Mendelsohn has maybe all of 10 minutes of screen time, which is a shame, as he is such a talented actor and is a pleasure to watch in any film he's ever been in. Samuels and Frencheville are certainly handsome, and have their clothing off more than on, so the female viewing audience has some idea of the temptation poor Roz and Lil are up against, and how difficult it must be to resist that temptation. The cinematography is awesome. Life seems very perfect, but for the fact that these two mothers are having sex with each other's sons, and nobody seems too upset about it. In fact, both Roz and Lil are very accepting of it. Harold eventually moves on and has a new family to love and to love him back, and nobody ever tells him what is going on, not even his son. I'm not saying this couldn't happen, but where I'm from, somebody would at least be angry. Somebody eventually does get angry. It's Ian, when Roz says it cannot continue and it's over. Weirdly, she only does that because Tom has cheated on Lil with another girl his own age, and Lil is wounded because it's over for her and Tom. So Roz ends her relationship with Ian. So in the end, the story seems to be about two best friends whose friendship is all consuming and without boundaries, no matter the sacrifices. If that's not what it's about, then I really didn't get it. Great acting, beautiful setting, an enjoyable film to watch...just not very believable.
Red Widow (2013)
Not Much to Work With
If this great cast of actors can't make Red Widow work, then they weren't given much to work with. I watched every episode, and aside from the fact that it's just not believable that the intelligent, involved, loving Marta would not know more about the source of her family's income - it's also not believable that she emerged from her horrific childhood as this confident, balanced, ordinary soccer mom...not to mention her sweet sister. The brother was believable as an egomaniac twisted with anger and a need to prove himself to be the top dog, and make his father proud. Schiller's character never did anything bad, but we were supposed to be afraid...very afraid. After the 3rd episode I only watched the show to see how on earth the actors were going to make the plot twists seem believable because the writing was terrible. With the excellent cast, this show had a chance, but even this cast of great actors couldn't sell this limp biscuit.
Orange Is the New Black (2013)
The Memoir of Piper Kerman
Having watched 13 episodes of Season 1, I found this to be a wonderful story about one woman's experience serving a 15 month sentence in a minimum security women's prison. Based on the memoir of executive consultant, Piper Kerman, this is a story about Piper, a young woman raised in a white, upper middle class family, who completed her education at college, and while looking for a job as a waitress at a local bar, meets and begins a relationship with Alex, played by the statuesque and pretty Laura Prepon. The two young women live an adventurous and romantic life for several years globe trotting and drug trafficking for an international drug cartel until they eventually part ways. Then, after 10 years, Piper is arrested, tried, and found guilty of being an accomplice to drug trafficking and money laundering, right when she's settling down with her boyfriend, Larry, played by Jason Biggs. So, Larry drives his beloved Piper to prison where Piper surrenders herself to begin her 15 month sentence, with the intention of serving her time, and then marrying her fiancé, Larry. But, Piper is a fish out of water in an environment that seeks to teach the hard lesson of conformity. The cast is amazing, and the storyline well written, with good character development through flashbacks. The guards and prison administration are portrayed as corrupt and exploitative in a believable way. The prisoners are multi-dimensional, at times sympathetic, with loyalties that change depending on what is at risk at that moment in time as tribal principles prevail. This story is about adaptation and survival as much as it is about finding love in all the wrong places. And this really happened to someone. I would highly recommend this enjoyable series, and look forward to Season 2.
Attraction (2000)
Who's Stalking Whom?
I was pleasantly surprised by this film. I don't know much about Matthew Settle's work, but he was perfectly cast as the dumped boyfriend that didn't want to accept that things were over with his blond, eye candy ex-girlfriend, Liz, played fetchingly by Gretchen Mol who had me going until the very end when she revealed her true colors. Settle does most of his acting with his eyes, and has that look of being really handsome, yet slightly wounded. I found myself feeling sorry for him, yet afraid of him. Settle played his character just right, struggling to maintain control, but very, very hurt. The character of Garrett had me fooled to the very end as well, with his sincerity in trying to talk to Matthew as a friend, while helping the seemingly fragile Liz with her fears. The only honest character seemed to be Corey, played by Samantha Mathis. Samantha Mathis played her character as very ambivalent, hesitant, and lacking in confidence, and self esteem. But Corey was a loyal person. What I liked most about the film was the subtlety of the acting, which made the chain of events seem to evolve naturally to the point of eventual escalation. Nobody knew what anybody else was actually doing, only what they appeared to be doing. All the characters had secret motivations, with the exception of Corey who just wanted to be liked by all. In the end, Matthew realized he had been too obsessed to see things clearly. Garret's switch flipped. Liz turned out to be a gamer. And Corey found some much needed self respect. Never did figure out who was interviewing Matthew. But I liked what he was saying, because it gave insight into who he was all along...a sensitive, decent guy. And the film left me wondering if he got back together with Liz or Corey? Hmmm. I vote Corey.
Shame (2011)
Fassbender is Fearless - No Shame in That
Had I not had a close relationship with a man who suffered from sexual addiction, I would not have seen this film as anything other than a showcase for Michael Fassbender's rather fine body and a lot of sexually explicit scenes. As I watched Fassbender's character walk through his daily life with such fastidious attention to detail, everything in his apartment so sharp, perfectly placed, and never disturbed as evidence of being lived in I felt like I knew this person very well. And nothing about his behavior surprised me afterward, except the sheer amount of suffering. I hadn't witnessed that kind of suffering first hand, but had only heard the testimony of a recovering sex addict, and the scenes in Shame pretty much fit the bill. Had I not read about sexual addiction, I might have thought the character's obsession with porn and masturbation was overdone, but in fact, from what I've learned, this film was spot on. Even the inability to have sex with someone Fassbender's character is actually attracted to, I'm told that is a very real problem with sex addicts...the inability to find stimulation in anything other than prohibited, shameful sexual behavior because shame is the turn on, and serial anonymous sexual encounters is the acting out...the drug. So this film was eerily accurate in its depiction of the life of this man. Carey Mulligan's role as his sister, from the same family where, as she stated, bad things were done to them that were not their fault, also made perfect sense. The sister alluded to the damaging and unresolved problems both brother and sister suffered from what was likely childhood trauma of an inappropriate sexual nature that the film doesn't go into. I understood why the sister's presence made her brother uncomfortable. He was constantly reminded of their pain when he looked at her, and when he felt her raw neediness, her masochistic need to be used and tossed aside. In fact, it was painful to watch these two otherwise nice people, engage in self destructive behavior without any hope of changing in sight. Sister and brother are so damaged by shame that they can't even have a healthy relationship with each other. I left the theater feeling like I needed a shower.
To Get Her (2011)
Pleasantly Shocked
So this is a film about perceptions and assumptions because I learned in the last 20 minutes of the film that I had made several assumptions and had based my understanding of the story line on those assumptions. Wow. Was I ever shown a thing or two by the clever writing and understated acting. Also, I was fooled by the seeming innocence of the young girls' familiarities and pleasantries, when the subject matter was actually quite horrifying. So congratulations to the cast and the writers because this was an unexpected and pleasant little surprise of a film. Can't say much about it without spoiling it for others who haven't seen it, but I suggest you watch it and that you keep an open mind. The ultra-calm tone of the film made it all the more ominous. I enjoyed the acting, and didn't find it too amateurish or off putting. I felt the loneliness and isolation of the characters through their acting even though they weren't obvious about it.
Bachelorette (2012)
With Friends Like These...
All that potential, and such a bad movie. How can that happen? And talk about the overuse of vulgarity. There's a certain art to cursing that makes it comedy, and that did not happen in this film. So, here's the story. Becky (Rebel Wilson) is a beautiful plus-sized young woman who is getting married to her very handsome fiancé, and her maid of honor Regan (Kirsten Dunst), and 2 best friend bridesmaids Kate (Isla Fischer) and Jenna (Liz Kaplan) are making fun of how large Becky is the night before her wedding by trying to fit 2 of them into her wedding dress so they can take a photo of it and post it all over the internet. What great friends, huh? It's bad enough they hired a male stripper that called her "pig face," her high school moniker, the night before her wedding, but her 3 best friends were total bitches, envious, self absorbed, with enough personal problems to add a psychiatrist and a drug rehab subplot to the movie. The entire film consisted of all 3 being frantic, drunk, drugged, angry, rude, vomiting, bleeding, snorting coke, cursing excessively, and just acting like chickens on crack. It was not entertaining, it was annoying. And, it was a mistake to give Rebel Wilson minimal screen time because she is funny. Adam Scott saved the day with some good acting as the man pledging his undying love for the cynical, wounded, dark, angry, foul mouthed Lizzie Kaplan...as unbelievable as that was. Isla Fisher's character was a stereotype...pretty, stupid, objectified, and destined to overdose. Sad, predictable, boring, and a waste of time. Kirsten Dunst's character was hard to sympathize with. Always playing the over achieving perfectionist, in this film she also admitted to having had a problem with bulimia in the past, so this role was essentially Kirsten playing herself. And, in the end, none of the 3 stood up for Becky at her wedding but skulked over to a park bench and had a smoke while she got married. The film may have been more interesting if Dunst, Kaplan, and/or Fisher would have been cast against type, but they essentially all played the same roles they play in every movie. Don't waste your time watching this movie. It's not pretty or funny to watch women try to emulate men at their worst. Plus, Ed Helms, Bradley Cooper, and Zach Galifanakis have already done this movie and have done it way better. Some posters have called this a "dark comedy," but I'm missing the humor of a story about 3 "best friends" sabotaging the bride they already pitied for being inferior to them because she isn't skinny. The only redemption of the film is that, of the 4 friends, Becky was the happy one.
Surrender, Dorothy (2005)
A Wreck
Who eats ice cream out of a cup with spoon while driving a car, having a conversation, and feeding ice cream to the other passenger? Why not close your eyes and take your hands off the wheel like Diane Keaton chose to do after she learned her only child DIED IN A CAR WRECK? This kind of bad writing insults the audience. Then, the actors, who are supposed to be the deceased Sarah's best friends, continue on with their vacation and the deceased girl's grieving mother joins them so she can get closer to Sarah's private life while she grieves the loss of her only child. Who does that? Before the diary was ever read, I knew it contained the poor dead girl's burdens of feeling like she had to be her mother's universe. And what was the deal with that hideous growth on that poor waitress' chin? What was the point to that? Was there some symbolism there besides she must not have a best friend because if she did, her best friend would tell her to shave her beard? This, coming from a girl who clearly would rather spend all her time with a homosexual man than take a risk of developing a relationship with a man who is not the husband of her best friend. Who is the best friend that tells you she's sleeping with your husband? I had a hard time liking Sarah after that. The plot gets more annoying as it becomes obvious that the deceased girl's mother not only tried to control every minute of her only daughter's life, but also had to invade her private relationships with her friends after she was dead, as if Sarah is her possession, or as if she is still a small child and has no rights to privacy as an adult. And can Diane Keaton over-act or what? This is really a story about how suffocating a mother's love can be even with the purest of intentions, especially for an only child. I found myself watching the clock to see when this nerve wracking mess of a movie would end.
Chatroom (2010)
A Story About the Exploitation of Loneliness
Matthew Beard stole the show from Aaron Johnson with pure kick ass acting. The film did a pretty good job of showing how loneliness and pain can bring lots of emotionally crippled people together, and that sometimes that can be good and sometimes not so much. Aaron Johnson, whom I usually enjoy watching, seemed a bit like a one trick pony in this film. I'd have liked to know more about the characters and how they came to be the way they were. It all starts at home, of course, but all the parents seem trivialized, when in fact, they were central to their children's issues. Perhaps this is reality and I'm naive. I did feel very sad for those poor young people and it occurred to me that the internet has opened up an entire world of opportunity for evil people to exploit people looking for a friend. In that regard the film hit its mark by touching upon the dangers of being too busy to notice that children are turning to those who don't have their best interests at heart, and that, thanks to the internet, they can reach a larger audience of creeps than ever before. Hopefully, the reverse is also true...that they can reach a larger audience of heroes than ever before. Maybe someone should make a film about that.
Rectify (2013)
10/10 All the Way
Well, after the first episode of watching Aden Young embody the character of Daniel Holden, I'm hooked. Daniel Holden was arrested for the rape and murder of his girlfriend at the age of 16, convicted and sent to live on death row at the age of 18, and 20 years later after living on death row in a cell by himself, preparing himself to die and be forever gone from this earth, has survived 5 stays of execution long enough for technology to catch up with forensic science and, unbelievably, Daniel Holden is released to his family because it is determined that his DNA was not found at the scene of the crime. So now the big question is: Will the current prosecutor re-try a 20 year old case? The whole town has an opinion, and while Daniel Holden walks around like a man in his own dream, quietly and painfully processing freedom, relating to a family that is 20 years older, and adjusting to the overwhelming overload of his sensory perceptions, danger is lurking as those involved in the original case begin to realize what is at risk if a new trial takes place. It's too soon for all of us, the audience, to know what is at risk because, wisely, the story is unfolding slowly and painstakingly like a new flower. The actors are all superb as they falter and try to think of how to talk to Daniel. Daniel is unsure, awkward, and quiet...very, very quiet. Aden Young's face can show about 5 emotions all at the same time, and in one scene as he is describing in a perfect soft, southern drawl his prison "initiation" experience for his shallow step-brother, Teddy, Daniel's expression changed from placid, to subdued, to quietly earnest, to a moment of sheer madness, before he snapped back to placid, leaving Teddy speechless and a little bit afraid. Totally alone and silent, this tall man with the haunted eyes drew me in as he walked to a baseball field and just laid down in the grass. How can such a gentle person be guilty of such a heinous crime? Who committed this crime and let this sweet soul suffer 24/7 for 20 years waiting to die, stealing his youth? Is this man guilty, innocent, reformed, or just a stone cold killer with a good con going? I don't know yet. So I will stay tuned.
Green River (2008)
Amateur Drivel
To the two reviewers who wrote positive reviews about this film: You're kidding, right? This has to be the worst movie I've ever seen. I was bored on the ride to the woods. These two actresses were so unconvincing as friends, that I found myself wondering why Charisma (surely this name deserved at least an explanation) and Allison (neurotic, unattractive, annoying, and a really bad actress inspired a new word: "bactress") would even be friends, much less travel into the woods together for what? a vacation? We are never told. No character development, no back story, no story whatsoever, and a predictable plot that has been done to DEATH: what was this director thinking? Low budget was not the problem here. The setting was the most interesting part of the movie. I can't remember when I've seen worst acting. I actually laughed out loud at "Allison's" attempts to act, and that actress had way too much screen time. I was hoping Jack would kill her to relieve my suffering. She was too annoying to be psychotic, and considering that Jack had been hit by a pick up truck, shot, stabbed, smacked around, and deprived of food and water for an entire day...I laughed some more at the ending because it's supposed to be what...eerie? shocking? ironic? surprising? NO, it was NONE OF THOSE because it was HORRIFYINGLY DEVOID of explanation, so much so that it was just confusing and further evidence of bad writing. There was so much opportunity to make a good thriller here, and it appears to be made by someone who didn't even care, someone with A.D.D., or someone who has never done this before. And car alarms don't run down batteries because they shut off after 10 minutes or so, OR, an owner can turn the alarm off with a remote switch from 15 ft. away. Come ON. And "Charisma" is not getting off the hook either. "Wanna take a shortcut? It's not as intimidating as it looks." One second later, she's fallen, and is hanging on by her fingernails begging her "friend" Allison to help her. Did the director look through the lens at that scene and say, "Cut. God job ladies. SO suspenseful. So...scary." I would have smacked Allison around and asked her, "What took you so long, b*tch?" And what kind of numb skull would you have to be to climb all the way to the top of a hill after an arduous hike through the woods only to burn up what's left of the cell phone battery listening to somebody's mother explaining how psychotic and dangerous her daughter is. Wouldn't it make more sense to say:"HEY, call 911 and send them to XYZ location NOW." So I'd say the writing was bad, the acting was very bad, and the directing was very, very bad. I'm so appalled that somebody would waste $5 making this film, that I can't write enough to tell anyone who's wondering: DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME ON THIS DRIVEL. You'll just be mad at yourself later. And to those of you who made this movie: don't give up those day jobs just yet because I watched every minute of your film, and I still don't know if Jack had anything to do with the disappearances of one, much less all, those girls on posters. That's too many women posted in a public place to escape notoriety...so, why would 2 young women see that, know that, and then go deep into the woods in that very same area where one of them lost a sister years earlier? Dumb.
Celeste & Jesse Forever (2012)
Jones and Samberg Forever
This film is pure candy. Rashida Jones wrote a story about a couple who love each other enough to call it quits while they're still in love. Both characters have flaws, but Samberg's character is to blame for the divorce because he's a child who is content to let his upwardly mobile wife carry the couple's financial responsibilities. As a result, Jone's character loses respect for him, and finds it hard to relate to him as a wife, but feels more like a mother. This is a common problem in relationships these days, and this script jumps right into the middle of the subject. The chemistry between Jones and Samberg is very believable, and they have the same quirk factor, so it's heartbreaking to watch their lives move in different directions when Samberg's beautiful one-night-stand-baby-mama shows up. The guy just can't do anything right. Then, he decides to do something right, and suddenly Jones' starts back walking and taking inventory of what's out there versus what she already had. Elijah Wood was a nice touch as Rashida's gay business partner. Ari Gaynor played a peach of a best friend. In fact, all the supporting actors were perfect in this romantic drama comedy that required rapid fire quips, flippancy, and gut wrenching truths, culminating in a tearful confrontation between the two main characters that brought me to tears with its heartbreaking authenticity.
Seems like Miss Jones is more than a pretty face, and Andy Samberg has range. If I had a criticism it would be that the film seemed primarily about Rashida's character, which made her character seem controlling and self absorbed. This made it a little harder to empathize with her character, however, she redeemed herself in the scene where she fell into and out of Samberg's trash can snooping, and got caught doing it. Hilarious. Chris Messina added a nice possibility.
A very enjoyable and entertaining film.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012)
Too Cute to Be a Wallflower
This film is full of attractive young actors portraying high school kids, seemingly from affluent families based on their "secret Santa" gifts. Charlie, played by Logan Lerman, is a freshman with a great deal of sadness in his life because he had a favorite aunt, played by Melanie Lynsky, whose life was a tragedy; and a best friend who committed suicide.
In fact, Charlie, while intelligent and loved by his family, seemed to be oddly normal for a kid with such a long history of mental problems, for example, "seeing people." I was confused as to why Charlie's sister, Candace, snubbed Charlie at school knowing how lonely he was, as compared to how loving and concerned she was at home. Also, the relationship between Sam and Patrick was not believable. How likely is it that two step-siblings would be equally quirky, empathetic, the same age, equally fashionable, compatible, and hang out together? Ezra Miller was amazing, and had too little screen time. In fact, I found myself unsympathetic to any of the characters because, other than Charlie and Patrick, all those kids seemed to have a good time all the time. The character of Mary Elizabeth just seemed like a different version of Sam, because the actresses playing those characters favor each other enough to be related.
The script seemed very dis-jointed, as if the writer didn't want to delve too deeply into any one subject. The flashbacks to Aunt Helen were distracting, and the little boy actor who played little Charlie wasn't as cute as the grown up Charlie. The parents all seemed very uninvolved with their kids, and didn't seem to have a purpose. The film did explore the issue of being a gay male teenager and being betrayed by the poser, but only briefly.
It seems like the theme of misfits finding each other has been done before and has been done better. And one lingering question I have is, if Charlie had been in therapy all those years, why did he only remember repressed memories when he entered his first year of high school? and then, why did he race for a kitchen knife the first time he's left alone at home, and if he's that unstable, why wasn't he locked up? It just seems like the writers thought they would just throw mud at a wall and see what sticks, but nothing too deep. And that whole issue about what song was playing as they drove through the tunnel drove me crazy.
Lightly entertaining. Great performances by Ezra Miller and Logan Lerman. Joan Cusack's 3 minutes of screen time was reassuring.
Gardens of the Night (2008)
Tom, Kevin, Gillian, Jeremy, and John Make a Horror Film
I can't believe I got through this film, first of all, because that little blond angel of an actress that played little Leslie made the evil of the subject matter all the more horrific. Tom Arnold was brilliant, and had me feeling sorry for his character. Kevin Zegers was convincing as Tom's "turned" accomplice, dark and damaged. Jeremy Sisto was so creepy I cannot forget his sleazy grin as he offered a "discount" to Tom.
Gillian's eyes said it all. What a great actress this girl is. Such dead eyes. And John Malkovich as a good guy...just enough to keep me off balance.
All the actors in this film gave stunning performances about a very distasteful subject: broad daylight abductions of children, the business of child pornography, and the murdering of innocent souls.
There was never going to be a happy ending to this movie, and it took courage to make this film knowing that nobody is going to watch it twice, unless they're perverted; or recommend it to their friends. However, everyone needs to recommend it to anyone they know who has children. Because evil is cunning.
I will never be the same.
Girl, Interrupted (1999)
Girls Trying to Tell Us Something
This is my second viewing, having watched this film when it first came out. So...by now, the careers of Ryder, Jolie, Duvall, Moss, and the late Murphy have all processed through the Hollywood machine, and the only ones left standing are: Jolie, Duvall, and Moss. So this time when I watched this film, I saw something different in Ryder and Jolie. And what I saw was that they had been perfectly cast as themselves. Ryder looked overworked, underweight, and tired. Jolie appeared flippant about serious underlying rage, and slipped in and out of extreme emotions as she tore a path of destruction behind her with all those she vented onto.
Somehow, this didn't seem to be a stretch for either of the actors because based on what I've read about Ryder, she was suffering from extreme fatigue and exhaustion; and Jolie spent several years in the tabloids proving how an angry teenager turns into a crazy young adult who likes to do shocking things for attention. Wow. And she received awards for this. Nonetheless, the cast was very good, and the general tone of the movie was captivating and realistic while maintaining its value as ENTERTAINMENT, for all those reviewers who believe art should imitate the true grit of life. No, please. That's why we like films. Because they give us something to look forward to next time; because they allow the viewer to escape for awhile.
It's very difficult to put all the details of one person's descent into mental illness into a one-and-a-half-hour of time, as anyone knows who watched A Beautiful Mind. So good job to the screenwriter and the director. This film is cleverly written, acted, directed, and produced because it slowly, imperceptibly, and progressively makes the mental institution appear safer than the world outside; which is illustrated toward the end of the film when the kind nurse played by Whoopi Goldberg tells Ryder's character not to "drop anchor" there. And while some reviewers have remarked that Ryder's character seemed self-indulgent, spoiled, and simply struggling with non-conformity, Ryder's character articulated the grim reality of her own mental illness when she painfully admitted to Jared Leto's character that she tried to kill herself by taking a bottle of aspirin; which was a complete departure from the character's denial when she was first admitted to the institution. When confronted with the opportunity to be free, Susanna was also confronted with a choice to be honest or stay stuck in denial.
My favorite scene was the scene where Susanna and her parents were having a conference with the doctor played by Jeffrey Tambor, and Susanna's mother couldn't stop crying, while Susanna's father was loudly demanding to know how long his daughter would be in "this place?" Then Susanna asked if her disease was genetic, and both parents halted their self-absorbed behaviors for 1 second to hear the answer before resuming their own brand of insanity. This scene told the viewer everything they needed to know about why Susanna felt depressed. Who would have anything to look forward to at 18 years of age when they had already realized how pretentious the adult world is? And what a kid has to become in order to "fit in?"
Oh yes, these girls were trying to tell us something, and here it is: children like to pretend, and as children grow up they're told by adults to stop pretending and face reality. So whose reality are they supposed to be facing, when they see that all the adults they should be able to trust are pretending? or plain lying? That realization could cause a girl (or a boy) to be interrupted in the transition from child to adult. Thus, the title and the ensuing madness.
Jolie can emote, that's for certain. Ryder can look fragile without effort because she has the physicality for it. That said, she's a talented actress and I miss watching her. Murphy was awesome, bless her little soul. Would've liked to have seen more of Redgrave, but then, Redgrave is so much more interesting than the others, so her screen presence had to be limited. Goldberg played Goldberg. And that's not to diminish the energy that is called Whoopi. No matter the role, Whoopi Goldberg comes across as down to earth, honest, no pretext.
A good film if you want to feel understood.
The Adventures of Sebastian Cole (1998)
Hilarious, Moving, and Pure Entertainment!
I wish there were more films like this one. I've watched this film 3 times and love it. The acting was outstanding. Gabriel Macht was seriously obnoxious as a smirking, leather bound, boyfriend of Sebatian's older sister. Clark Greg was deadpan hilarious even though he wasn't trying to be. Greg was so committed to his role as a transsexual but never gave his role a stereotypical performance, but stayed true to his character's process of transitioning from man to woman. Grenier played an inquisitive, adventurous teenager with subtlety and sincerity. The film was indeed an adventure for all involved. It moved from one adventure to another without dragging, and even though the performance of the actors created a comedic feel to the film, the film explored very serious issues. The ending surprised and affected me for a very long time afterward. This film was very underrated, but is a delightful little sleeper that all involved should be very proud of.
Antichrist (2009)
Did Little Lars Not Get Breastfed or What?
Take two accomplished actors, give them a script that is cryptic and saturated with psycho-babble interspersed with religious references to evil, and create a reason for them to be removed to a naturally cinematic setting so the audience will stay with the film long enough to find out that, once again, they've been sucked into the ego trip of Lars Von Trier working through his depression. I found the positive reviews of this film hilarious, with all the cerebral analysis of what appears to be another exercise in the writer-director's self-indulgences. So here's my interpretation of the messages I was supposed to take away from this film: Mommy is the Anti-Christ because she was mean to Baby Boy, purposely left the window open, purposely distracted Daddy with sex so that nobody noticed a window open during the dead of winter with a gale blowing through the apartment even though both were butt naked making out with their bedroom door ajar. In fact, Baby Boy saw Mommy and Daddy having sex, and evil Mommy looked at Baby Boy during sex, ignoring the toddler, and setting the stage for his untimely and tragic death, all to the background music of a beautiful opera. Then, Daddy doubles as husband and Mommy's grief counselor, patiently explaining and patronizing every tear and whimper coming from Mommy. Well...anyone would've crushed his testicles, drilled a hole in his calf muscle, and anchored a huge weight to his leg...after enduring this condescending answer man for days on end. And Mommy had to be possessed by some demon because then we get a close up of her clitoris being snipped off by a giant pair of shears...oh, and let's not forget the squirting blood from both the amputated clitoris and the penis that grew hard, despite the fact that the owner of the penis was likely in shock and unconscious from having his testicles smashed. Fire the consultants on this film, because then Daddy wakes up and drags his wounded and weighted leg down a trail in the woods, and manages to crawl inside a fox hole, only to encounter a buried black crow that begins to shriek, and of course, Daddy has opportunity to then wreak more violence on the animal over and over again. So there's another message: nature is evil. The blackbird is trying out "out" Daddy so it must be killed because it is evil like Mommy. Dear Lord, I could kick myself for watching this macabre descent into Lars Von Trier's mind. I'm thinking Lars must have walked in on his parents having sex, and maybe he wanted his Mommy to stop paying attention to his Daddy and pay attention to him. Maybe Little Lars felt neglected, like he could die and she wouldn't notice if his father was around...I don't know, only a psychiatrist can help here, but this film is so obviously one-sided in its depiction of a mother who seems fragile, sweet, and helpless really being a demon. And of a man who is clueless as to his wife's true nature until he receives results of an autopsy. What the film does not examine is why Daddy was so uninvolved in the parenting of Baby Boy? Why did Daddy not grieve? Why did Daddy's ass not freeze off while he was jack hammering Mommy in the beginning of the film, with a window open blowing snow drifts into the living room of the couples' apartment? Daddy is depicted as well intentioned, devoted to his wife, and with the sexuality of a stallion. Clearly Lars Von Trier has a bias. I gave it a vote of 2, 1 each for each of the actors. With all the nudity, sex scenes, and bad script they deserve all the credit.
Red State (2011)
Michael Parks is AWESOME
I first saw the smooth talking dude played by Michael Parks in Then Came Bronson when I was a teenager, and kind of lost track of him. I almost didn't recognize him in this film, he so embodied his character as the paternal leader of a religious cult. His acting is so natural, and his southern accent flawless. Michael Parks can ACT. Why hasn't Hollywood recognized this talent before now? I don't want to neglect John Goodman in this film. No matter the role, John Goodman is just a pleasure to watch. I'm never certain what he will do with his character, but have never been disappointed. This film is violent for sure, but it's about fanaticism and insanity, so it's predictable that violence begets violence in this story. I like the fact that the good guys and the bad guys are all mixed up in this movie, and those most committed to their beliefs are the most terrifying. Great acting all around. This film moved quickly.
Liz & Dick (2012)
More Like Lazy & Disappointing Than Like Liz & Dick
I don't want to use this forum to beat up on Lindsay Lohan because she is an easy target, but really y'all? Did somebody actually look at the dailies while this film was being made and say to themselves, "oh yeah, Lindsay nailed it"...Lindsay Lohan was good in the Parent Trap when she was a small child, but it's almost as if she stopped trying after that. This film required acting chops that Ms. Lohan either does not possess, or could not tap into. Either that, or Ms. Lohan simply didn't find the role important enough to bother preparing for it. Even somebody who isn't familiar with the porcelain skinned, exquisitely beautiful Elizabeth Taylor with her precise, breathy, slightly British way of talking, and her expressive eyes could watch her films and at least TRY to embody her smoldering sensuality and physicality. Instead, I found myself looking at Ms. Lohan and thinking, her lips are too puffy, her skin is too rough, too thick, and the makeup just made it worse. The close ups were hideous, showing the thick makeup to cover Lohan's freckles, and her eyelashes are too obviously fake, with wigs that aren't even pretending not to be wigs. But that's all just costume and make up, so I still have hope. Then Lohan speaks, and that's when I know: It was just cruel to cast Lindsay Lohan as Elizabeth Taylor and expect her to pull it off because she has this hoarse voice that sounds like it has spent too much time in smoke-filled bars, or screaming at people; a voice with a flat affect, rushing her lines as if she just wants to wrap the scene so she can go to the mall. Lohan's voice has NO inflection, and her face shows no expression. In fact, Lohan is NOT the exceptionally delicate, quietly fierce, risk taker that Elizabeth Taylor was; nor is she captivating on the screen like Elizabeth Taylor was. I'm sorry to make this statement, but it is what it is: Lindsay Lohan can not act. She can not play anyone other than herself. And she looks terrible. Grant Bowler did a great job of embodying the late Richard Burton, but his wig was terrible and distracted from his performance. Burton never had that much hair. And who did Bowler's make up? because they should have been fired. Richard Burton's screen presence had nothing to do with being handsome, because he wasn't. He was magnetic, and his voice was his best feature, but Grant Bowler is far too handsome to play Richard Burton, and his voice didn't have the richness or the depth of Burton's. There are so many talented actors in Hollywood who could have made this film worth watching, and had somebody gone to the effort to cast a better actress to play Taylor, I feel like Grant Bowler's Burton would have been more believable. Additionally, this film was simply a series of costume changing scenes filled with the couples' childish bickering. I realize the real life couple had a stormy relationship, but this film made them appear ridiculous. To make matters worse, there was ZERO CHEMISTRY between Lohan and Bowler, and I had the feeling Bowler was disgusted with having to carry this film by himself. This film lacks the effort necessary to make a film credible or even entertaining. Lohan should have never been cast as Taylor, and should have been replaced the first day of shooting. Not a kind tribute to Taylor and Burton. I think Burton would call this film bloody awful.
The Odd Life of Timothy Green (2012)
Peter Hedges is a Genius
This movie is a fairy tale for grown ups written by and directed by a grown up that understands the importance of softening serious themes by using symbolism and fantasy to reach a wider audience. I met Peter Hedges several years ago in west Texas, and my impression of Mr. Hedges is that he is a gentle man who grew up feeling different because of what life dealt his family. I appreciate also that the author of the story, Ahmet Zappa likely experienced the same stigma growing up as Frank Zappa's son in a world that idolizes stereotypes, and alienates anyone who doesn't fit the "mold." This film touches upon fantasy without making fantasy the central theme, so that the message of the film is not lost. I was impressed with how smoothly the story flowed, and the acting was amazing. Surely anyone who has every wanted to be a perfect parent can identify with how hard these two parents struggled to nurture this special little boy while fighting the urge to self-actualize through him like so many parents tend to do. The film gave so much credit to the child for teaching the adults, a very important message to all the adults who expect to be good parents. My favorite scene was the scene where the two parents made total fools of themselves dancing around in support of their "musical" son to the tunes of Carlos Santana, with amazed expressions all around. I found myself thinking of the scene in Little Miss Sunshine where the entire family took the stage and danced with Olive. It was heart warming. And the little actor that played Timothy was adorable. I'm so looking forward to more of Mr. Hedges' work in the future. He really knows how to bring sensitivity to the big screen, and that's true genius in film making. We even had a little girl-boy love story to enjoy with the mysterious and exotic Joni. Very sweet. I recommend this beautiful film to everyone.
Small Town Murder Songs (2010)
It's the Quiet Ones You Have to Watch Out For
I can see how some reviewers would find this film lacking because the actors are so gifted, the writing is so efficient, the direction is so on point, that the film is ripe with authenticity and subtlety that lends a bleakness, a starkness, and a stillness that is in such extreme contrast to Walter's need to scream until he can't anymore. I thought the loud volume of the sound track was very clever, because it too was ripe with passion and emotion that was not expressed by the anti-violent Mennonite community, or the culturally stoic Canadian townspeople. I read a couple of reviews that referenced the film's similarity to Fargo, and that thought occurred to me more than once as well while I was enjoying this film. I was impressed with Stormare's total inhabitation of his character Walter and Walter's tormented struggle with his own spiritual turmoil as he lovingly appreciated his new girlfriend's sweetness and goodness, when clearly he was conflicted with remnants of a past relationship that may have been obsessive and dark. The two women are even sharply contrasted as Sandy is blond, like light and goodness, an angel; and Rita is sultry, dark, with hard edges, and a sharp tongue. And Walter's alienation was so palpable throughout the film, as the murder of a young woman is central to the plot, yet with all the sub-plots hinted at, flashbacks to a failed love affair, being outcast from the Mennonite community, and lacking the support from the citizens of the town, yet Walter keeps plodding forward doggedly, duty bound and loyal to doing the right thing while withstanding public criticism, gossip mongering, and a beating. This film has the feel of a movie about small town secrets and prejudices, and how quickly folks take sides, and stack up the opposition against what they fear. I disagree that this film was slow at all, and actually feel like the film was dense with details that I may find in a second viewing. I loved the chapter headings that preceded the rich and pronounced folk music. Looking forward to enjoying the sound track. I would recommend this film to anyone who enjoys good independent film making, and good acting.
Savages (2012)
A Boy and His Bong
I love movies and watch them with an open mind remembering that this is somebody's art. Even the most open of minds can't make sense of this film, and it was just torture to watch for several reasons. First, that narration by Blake Lively was flat, and poorly written, making it a constant annoyance throughout the film, and making her seem replaceable. So why would we care if she is killed by some drug lord? We were hoping for the relief. Second, there was the absence of a back story that would explain to any intelligent and modern audience why these two handsome, rich, guys would waste their time on some average looking, obviously non-monogamous, space cadet, much less share her sexually, much less trust her with all their confidences, much less be in LOVE with her. What was there to love about that character other than her readily accessible vagina? Third, dear, dear Mr. Stone: if you want to make the audience fear for the delicate kidnapped flower's life by showing us gore scene after gore scene of torture, death, and blood-smear everywhere, why then would you create a character like "O" (I think the two guys were just too disinterested to remember her entire name) who, after being kidnapped and roughed up would DEMAND to talk to someone, to have better food, to have a better room from her psycho kidnappers? Lively's character just came off as a shallow, annoying, whore. Could this have been worse? Oh but wait, it does get worse. Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who is arguably one of the best young actors today, is wasted as the laid back guy, while Taylor Kitsch is once again typecast as the heavy. And how many ex-SEAL's are likely to support such an unpatriotic and illegal business when they can make so much legal money as stunt men, consultants, or action figures? Then, out of nowhere, we see Emile Hirsch cast in some nominal role he made the best of, but again, was totally wasted in, and frankly, I wish they had cast him in one of the lead roles because it would've been a much better movie. Benecio Del Toro has now been typecast as the psycho more than once, but at least he didn't mutter or turn into a werewolf. John Travolta was good as the corrupt DEA agent. Salma Hayek was good as the conflicted ruthless widow-cum-cartel-queen-and-loving-mother role, but the woman had a lot of hats to wear in that one character as if the director couldn't decide if she was a heroine or a villain in his very disconnected film. Lastly, I'd like to say, I wish Taylor Kitsch would be given permission to act, because from what I've seen of him in his other films, he's more than eye-candy, and without good direction, it seems like he is being limited in range, not to mention being written into a character that has little credibility. I'd have been impressed if we had been given an explanation of his name: Chon. Is that an acronym for Confused, Handsome, Orphaned, Narcissist? There is no chemistry between him and "O" whatsoever, and typically, the type of man who would qualify to become a SEAL is not a man who would risk rotting away in federal prison for money made by illegal means, and is definitely not the type of guy that would be best friends with the type of guy played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson, or the kind of man who would entrust his heart to a promiscuous surfer-shopping-mall-rat. So Mr. Stone, a little explaining about how these (3) were so irreversibly committed to each other in such a new age kind of no-boundaries-free-love-keep-O-pampered-way, so as to be willing to DIE for each other would have been a favor to the audience, as well as possibly connecting some facts leading to an actual plot a lot more credibly. Where is the story? Do your job. And fire the continuity and editing departments. You're no Guy Ritchie, that's for sure. And people only like Quentin Tarantino because he likes to out-weird himself with every movie, but even gore and torn bodies can get boring if there is no point to the splatter. You had an opportunity to make a love story gone wrong. You first have to convince us that there IS love. What bonds these two men with this vapid and shallow woman? What we DO see is the love between a boy and his bong, between a boy and a posse of smart employees, between a boy and his local DEA agent, between a boy and his money, and between a boy and his "wargasms." Whoever wrote that line should be shot. Whoever made Lively utter that line should be retired from directing.
Paul McCartney Really Is Dead: The Last Testament of George Harrison (2010)
Band on the Run? Is Faul Trying to Tell Us Something?
I was a teenage girl when the Beatles hit the music scene in the U.S. and people went berserk, especially girls. Berserk. I never caught Beatlemania to that degree, but did enjoy their music, both as a group, and later as solo artists. I have to admit, this film got under my skin a little because all my friends had been a-buzz with this theory back when we were kids. And Paul McCartney's songwriting is weak compared to the other band members, so I'm thinking...maybe that's because it isn't Paul, it's FAUL. No wonder John was so angry all the time. He was being hounded by, not one, but two governments at the same time. This explains so much. It's all falling, I mean "Faul-ling" into place. And who cares anyway at this point? It's more entertaining that it offended so many die hard Beatle fans. Lighten up, people, it's entertainment if nothing else. And it isn't disrespectful to anyone, other than Paul McCartney, because the film essentially calls him a poser. And everyone is focused on the quality of the narration because it was recorded onto mini cassettes. I use those voice activated recorders all the time in my job taking recorded statements, and depending on the quality of the recorder and the cassette tapes, they can produce very clear sound quality. But all that aside, this film is very entertaining if the audience allows itself to be entertained. Maybe M15 did it because they hate Faul McCartney's music. But what about William Campbell's real family? I smell a sequel.
Little Buddha (1993)
The Little Sleeper
I don't understand all the haters. This movie was understated and calm because of the subject matter, so what did everyone expect from these actors? Drama? This is an anti-drama film. It's about the birth of Buddhism. And Keanu was delightful as Siddhartha. In fact, from what I read about Keanu Reeves, the person, it is my understanding that he is a lot like this character: polite, soft spoken, sensitive, generous, and highly intelligent, all attributes of an enlightened person. And for those who criticize the acting of Bridget Fonda, having watched most if not all her films, it occurs to me that Ms. Fonda has her own style of acting, which is very understated and natural. She is usually cast in roles that don't showcase her talents, but if anybody ever doubts her abilities, or her versatility, they should watch a film she made where she played an assassin, or an abused wife. In this film, she played a little boy's mother very believably. I do agree Chris Isaak was miscast as her husband. For one thing, Bridget Fonda and Chris Isaak strongly resemble one another and could easily be brother and sister. And Chris Isaak is very wooden in the delivery of his lines, making Ms. Fonda's job more difficult. I found the cinematography beautiful, the music beautiful, and the costumes beautiful. This is my second viewing of the film and I really enjoyed it.