planetdan.net movies

Sunday, March 16, 2008 :::

Inland Empire

Rating:

Why I saw it: I've acquired a liking for David Lynch.

What I think about it: For the majority of filmgoers, watching Inland Empire is going to be three solid hours of "WTF?!?"

For people familiar with the previous works of David Lynch, there will still be plenty of that, yet there will also be many nods of recognition and appreciation for this melange of deconstructive surrealistic film experiments that almost plays like a David Lynch highlight reel. There is no useful point in describing the plot and I couldn't even begin to apply meaning to it all, but basically you are either in the mood for this kind of mindf*ck or you are not. I was somewhere in between. I appreciated certain elements of Inland Empire and marveled at many of the unforgettable sights as well as the bravely unhinged performances, but please don't make me sit through it again. And if you see it yourself, go in with the mindset that you will not understand what you are watching, and that this is intentional. Then you won't be disappointed.

I'm infinitely grateful that these types of art movies can still get financed and released, but I think I prefer Mr. Lynch's less abstract work, or at least the films for which some sort of narrative structure can be applied.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 5:17 PM :: #

Gone Baby Gone

Rating:

Why I saw it: Because I wanted to hate Ben Affleck even more than I already do.

What I think about it: Surprisingly, Ben Affleck seems to be a better director than I would have ever imagined. I tend to dislike Ben very much, and I've been known to compare his acting abilities to a number of inanimate objects. But I have to give him credit: Gone Baby Gone is an intriguing mystery/drama with appropriately subtle acting, a brooding tone, and an interesting moral viewpoint. It didn't exactly fool me at all, as its twists and turns were fairly predictable and overly foreshadowed, but it did offer a few exciting surprises and some nicely built tension, and the final denouement was sincerely thought-provoking. On the surface, it's about a kidnapping in a Bostonian town, but underneath all of that it's about how idealism and altruism can create difficult choices that may even be morally suspect. That's an impressive amount of heady material to pack into a modern day thriller if you ask me, so kudos to the man who did it.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 5:05 PM :: #

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

Rating:

Why I saw it: I was on a plane, and I wanted to see the Oscar Nominated performance.

What I think about it: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is long, slow ("deliberately paced" is what they usually call it in the biz) and perhaps overly maudlin, but it still barely held my attention for almost three solid hours. This story about Jesse James and his relationship with his eventual assassin is interesting because it tells the story of the infamous outlaw without any flash or embellishment, and with utter lack of gun powder. I appreciated the direction and most of the acting (Casey Affleck was indeed impressive, but Brad Pitt seemed terribly miscast), and when all was said and done it actually had something interesting to say about the consequences of what it takes to be infamous. I think they could have accomplished the same thing in half the time, though. The editor of this picture gets an F, regardless of the fact that I don't regret my subsequent sore backside from the three hour run time. But to be fair, I was on a plane and had nowhere else to go.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 4:57 PM :: #

Planet Terror

Rating:

Why I saw it: I loved the Tarantino contribution to the Grindhouse double feature, so I wanted to see the other half.

What I think about it: It turns out I'm not that big a fan of Robert Rodriguez movies after all. I think I mistake my admiration for his kinetic shooting style and unbridled enthusiasm for actual appreciation of the resulting film. Because when I think back on it, there's not much in his catalog that I would ever care to see again. I found Desperado and Once Upon a Time in Mexico to be infinitely cool in some aspects, yet infinitely lacking in others. The Spy Kids movies are throwaways. Sin City was a pointless, nihilistic exercise in style. From Dusk Til Dawn was close to being good, but somehow it didn't take itself seriously enough. I think the only thing he ever did that I honestly liked was his "The Misbehaviors" segment from Four Rooms, and that's because it's short length better suited its subject matter. Basically, I've realized he's all flash and little substance.

Planet Terror is the same: juvenile humor, gory action, and an utter lack of logic aimed straight at its core audience - sex and violence obsessed male teenagers. I understand it's supposed to be schlocky, and there are some truly inspired moments (the boy with the gun in the car and the "missing reel" segments come to mind), but when all is said and done it basically collapses under its own lack of weight, and suffers from being more akin to watching a car wreck than watching actual entertainment.

I'd like to see what Rodriguez could do with a serious story, without cartoon characters and cliches. Basically, I'd like to see if he can stop making movies like he's still a hormone-crazy teenager who found his dad's digital camera hidden in the closet. I'd like to see if he could grow up for once.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 4:28 PM :: #

Sunday, January 20, 2008 :::

There Will Be Blood

Rating:

Why I saw it: PT Anderson.

What I think about it: It's really impossible to talk about this astonishing movie without gushing or seeming glib. It truly is an amazingly deep and profound work that creates a character study out of its various personifications of greed. It brutally examines and tries to illuminate just how far different people, in entirely different positions of society, will go in pursuit of meaningless success. Based around a turn-of-the-last-century oil man and his relentless quest for money and success, the movie becomes a brilliantly effective allegory for the madness and uselessness of good old-fashioned American capitalist greed in the twentieth century, regardless of whether that was its intention or not. It's a movie with incredibly lofty aspirations, and surprisingly it succeeds at meeting and exceeding those aspirations on all levels. The relentless plot and bleak foreboding are spellbinding, and the incredible technical feats of the filmmaking itself are too numerous to mention. Even the soundtrack (which seems to steal heavily from Kubrick - especially The Shining) seems revolutionary in how it is used.

It's not exactly fun to watch, though. It's harsh, brutal, and unswerving. The ending, which might confound some people, is inevitable and appropriate, although staggeringly bleak and depressing. I'd give the movie five stars if it didn't make me want to slit my wrists.

Regardless, it's really an incredible movie, but those who like to go to the movies for escapist entertainment best look elsewhere.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 4:32 PM :: #

Ocean's 13

Rating:

Why I saw it: I enjoyed the first one.

What I think about it: I liked Ocean's 11. It was a laid-back and sufficiently fun crime caper with lots of pretty people in it and a snidely clever sense of humor that was very self-aware. I think Ocean's 12 pretty much blew it by taking the "snidely clever" bit into obnoxious territory, and by drowning itself in a boring plot and an uncomfortable setting. The third one is back in Vegas and seemingly back on track. The laid-back attitude has returned and the humor, although less clever this time around, is thankfully less annoying. For some reason though, it just isn't enough anymore. It's all very been-there-done-that, which, although moderately entertaining for an hour and a half, still seems pointless. I think it's time for these fellas, who are admittedly talented and exciting as a team, to start a new franchise.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 4:13 PM :: #

Grindhouse: Death Proof

Rating:

Why I saw it: Why not.

What I think about it: I'd heard that out of the two Grindhouse movies, Death Proof was supposedly the least successful, and my enthusiasm had waned dramatically for this B-movie wannabe. So maybe it was due to the fact that my expectations were so low that I found Death Proof to be so incredibly enjoyable. Sure, this overlong slasher flick about an aging stunt man who uses his death-proofed car as a murder weapon has WAY too much setup, and sure, most of the dialogue was not up to par for a typical Quentin Tarantino movie (which was most likely intentional, considering its B-movie aspirations), but I can't help it: the last 30 minutes of this movie were an absolute blast. The tone was pitch-perfect, the action was packed, and the climax was exhilarating. Some people might find the characterizations in the last half to be a bit annoying, and I can totally understand that, but they fit the tone of the movie perfectly, and in the end I was practically cheering. It's not as re-watchable as most of Quentin's previous movies, but as a singular movie-watching experience, it was one of the most memorable ones I've ever had.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 3:54 PM :: #

The Bourne Ultimatum

Rating:

Why I saw it: the Bourne movies are always above average.

What I think about it: It's pretty much just an extended version of the second movie, and I don't know how much more they can wring out of the amnesiac super-soldier plot device, but the third Bourne movie succeeds in the exact same way the other two did: it delivers action and intrigue at a fast pace and with sympathetic characters. I really like the use of Julia Stiles and Joan Allen in this movie, and Matt Damon is still just as solid as always in the role, but I think the director has a habit of getting a little too close to the action, making it hard to really see what's going on half of the time and inducing motion sickness the other half. Regardless, it's still a fun movie, even if it is beginning to strain credibility. But I guess "far-fetchedness" is no stranger to Hollywood action movies.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 1:05 PM :: #

Friday, January 04, 2008 :::

Juno

Rating:

Why I saw it: For the reviews and for Ellen Paige, who was so unbelievably awesome in Hard Candy.

What I think about it: It's not exactly breaking new ground or redefining cinema as we know it, but somehow Juno - a cute little tale about a rambunctious teen dealing with her teenage pregnancy - avoids all cliches or pandering platitudes or eye-rolling moments as it tells you a story you've heard a thousand times before. More than that, it is so laid-back and easy-going and confident with its warm fuzziness that all you want to do is hug and kiss everyone around you in solidarity. By the time the movie reached its inevitable climax, you couldn't have removed the smile on my face with coarse sandpaper.

Of course, my enjoyment of this little movie might also have to do with the fact that the dialogue sounds like it was lifted straight out of an episode of Gilmore Girls. In fact, given the similarities in the plotting and tone, I couldn't help but fantasize that the incredible Ellen Paige was actually portraying a 16-year-old Lorelie Gilmore. And evoking a Gilmore Girls feeling could never be considered a bad thing.

But seriously, the movie never makes one false step. It's practically perfect.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 7:57 AM :: #

I Am Legend

Rating:

Why I saw it: Honestly, we were bored and wanted to see movie and nothing else was fitting our schedule.

What I think about it: I'm a junkie for post-apocalypse movies, and I'm an even bigger fan of zombie movies, so even though I try to avoid all Will Smith movies made after Six Degrees of Separation, I thought it might have enough going for it to overcome that huge hurdle for me. Will Smith is a competent actor who just chooses bad movies, so his turn here as the "last man on Earth" in New York City after a deadly virus has turned the population into rabid flesh-eaters is pretty enjoyable, but the movie itself lacks consistency and definition, and it wavers from intriguing, to nail-biting, to ridiculous, to banal with way too much ease. But my main problem with the movie was the zombies. They are so clearly computer animated and enhanced that I didn't for a second find them believable. There really was no reason for the use of CG here. An actor in makeup would have been more than sufficient, and infinitely scarier. And cheaper. But I suppose if you want to promote yourself as a big-budget action adventure movie starring Will Smith, then you have to actually BE a big budget action adventure starring Will Smith, so why not pile on the special FX? I'll tell you why not: because they ruin the movie by undercutting the believability. Sometimes bigger isn't better.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 7:45 AM :: #

Hot Fuzz

Rating:

Why I saw it: I loved Shaun of the Dead

What I think about it: Well, it seems the filmmakers certainly have a distinctive style, because Hot Fuzz is pretty much a remake of Shaun of the Dead, only without the zombies, and frankly the charm is beginning to fade a bit. It's a mildly funny tale about a super cop in Ireland who is sent away from the big city to command a small country town because he was making everyone else look bad. Of course, nothing in this quaint little village is what it seems and bullet-riddled chaos ensues. The movie definitely has its moments and the two main characters are every bit as fun to watch as they were in Shaun of the Dead, but honestly I think I was expecting a more biting satire of Action Movie cliches than a movie that actually succumbed to them.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 7:38 AM :: #

Once

Rating:

Why I saw it: Reviews

What I think about it: A lovely little romance/musical about two lonely strangers in Dublin finding a way to communicate through their mutual love for Damian Rice music. Seriously, though, it's cute and effective and the music isn't half bad. It doesn't exactly have a plot and it definitely avoids anything like a climax or a denouement, but it's sweet-natured and laid back and it might even succeed at bringin' a wee tear to your eye.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 7:33 AM :: #

The Host

Rating:

Why I saw it: Good reviews.

What I think about it: The action sequences in this movie about a pollution-fueled mutated sea monster in Korea are breathtakingly staged and the filmmakers are definitely able to sketch some sympathetic characters as they tell the tale of the resulting governmental paranoia run amok, but the movie itself tends to meander a tad, and the resulting lack of focus mixed with the fact that some of the substance has undoubtably been lost in the translation means you're left with little more than a stylish/well-made monster movie that clearly wants to have more meaning and significance than it actually does. Still, it's quite entertaining, although not nearly as scary as I thought it would be.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 7:06 AM :: #

Friday, November 16, 2007 :::

No Country for Old Men

Rating:

Why I saw it: I heart the Coens.

What I think about it: The Coen brothers have been faltering as of late, in my opinion. Their last couple of movies kind of sucked pretty hard. This movie is an obvious return to form and a throwback to their old post-modern-noir thriller days, which can only be considered a good thing, even if it seems to lose its way toward the end. The first two thirds of this movie involve a drug deal gone bad and the subsequent chase between the opportunist who finds the cash and the insane madman on his trail. And it's about as intense as anything you've ever seen in a theater for nearly one and a half solid hours. Then something strange happens: rather than capitalize on all the tension and suspense they have worked so hard to build up, the Coen brothers apparently decided to avoid any sort of tension release or climax and let the air out of the balloon with a whisper rather than a pop. Therefore, I can't decide if the final third of this movie was a disappointment or something a non-conformist like me should applaud. It may serve the story to end the movie without resolution, and it might adhere more properly to the point of Cormac McCarthy's book on which it was based to move into more cerebral territory, but I have to admit that I wanted more out of the climax of No Country for Old Men. I wanted a showdown. I wanted a resolution. I wanted a bang. What I didn't want was some pseudo-intellectual pointless pondering about fate and circumstance and the nature of evil. But I guess it doesn't matter what I want. Regardless, it was hardly a disappointment. Instead, it was a fascinating, brutal, and intense way to spend two hours in a theater.

On a more nerdy film-lover note: the production, direction, and acting in this movie were unarguably brilliant. We'll be hearing a lot more about it come award season.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 5:44 PM :: #

Michael Clayton

Rating:

Why I saw it: Good reviews.

What I think about it: I'm not sure what I was expecting, but this "corporate thriller" about a desperate man who finds himself in the middle of some pretty tame corporate warfare, is more a character study than a thriller. I suppose it builds up a fair amount of tension solely by moving at a glacial pace for the first half, but it never exactly thrills. They obviously tried to cheat a tad and add some much needed excitement to the first couple of reels by shifting time and moving up a dramatic explosion to the opening segment, but this doesn't really serve to add anything to the story that follows. Fortunately, the tale being told was intriguing enough to keep my interest, and the final confrontation felt good in a cathartic release kind of way. And it's always refreshing when a director eschews melodrama and cliche for some straight-forward character examination and a brooding mood. So I'd say this is a worthwhile film to view in the comfort of your own home, especially since it's got the same style and vibe as a really good Law & Order episode (original series, obviously, none of that SVU stuff).

Oh, and I heart Tilda Swinton in ANYTHING.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 5:36 PM :: #

Thursday, October 25, 2007 :::

Sunshine

Rating:

Why I saw it: I was on an airplane, it was playing.

What I think about it: No, I'm not talking about the esoteric period piece starring Ralph Fiennes. I'm talking about the low-budget sci-fi thriller from Danny Boyle starring the forever-intriguing Cillian Murphy. You may not have heard about it because it enjoyed abosolultely zero marketing or promotion from its studio, but it's definitely worth your time. The plot involves a team of scientists on a space ship in the near future who are attempting to jumpstart the sun by shooting a nuke into it, and although the actual plot mechanics are beyond old hat and derivative, the production values and the creepy tone are astoundingly impressive. The story itself eventually devolves into an Alien-style slaughter-in-space horror slasher, which is a little unfortunate, but it still somehow manages to come out feeling fresh, probably mostly due to some inventive production techniques and some well-built tension. All in all, a fun little project that mostly succeeds at drawing you in, even if you've seen it all before.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 10:10 AM :: #

Tuesday, October 02, 2007 :::

Eastern Promises

Rating:

Why I saw it: I like David Cronenberg movies.

What I think about it: A Cronenberg movie is usually characterized by an intense mood and hypnotic pacing, and he seems to take pride in how easily he can make you feel uncomfortable. His movies might not feature the most humanistic or typical stories, but they are always absorbing. And I like that. His latest movie, Eastern Promises, a drama/thriller involving the Russian mob in London, unfolds with some intriguing plot developments, and although some scenes in particular are very unsettling, there seemed to be something amiss with the production. Basically, everything felt unfocused or off-center, with characters that were distant and hard to identify with. This might be typical of Cronenberg's style, but in this instance it didn't suit the subject matter very well. In fact, the plot almost felt like it was being handled as an aside to Viggo Mortensen's performance, as if the story itself was not as important as how it was being told, or more precisely: how Viggo was telling it. The actual production of the movie seemed sloppy in parts, and Naomi Watts' performance was undeniably, and uncharacteristically, terrible. All of these problems seriously undercut the tension, until even the climax, which should have been a real nail-biter, felt like a wash out. I can't help but think that in the hands of an appropriate director this movie would have been better focused and more effective. I just don't think crime dramas are Cronenberg's forte. They require too much character development in order to build the amount of tension required to really hook an audience. His focus seemed to be elsewhere. But still, I have to say it was not difficult to sit through, and some scenes (such as the brutal bath-house brawl) are so well done that it almost made it all worth it in the end.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 9:33 PM :: #

Sunday, September 23, 2007 :::

Year of the Dog

Rating:

Why I saw it: Because the director Mike White and I are best friends, even if he doesn't know it.

What I think about it: Molly Shannon's life goes into a tailspin after her dog, Pencil, accidentally dies. In her grief, she slowly becomes insanely obsessed with animal rights (and the unconditional love of a pet that she's never been able to replicate from a human), until she eventually devolves into an animal herself. Figuratively. Although the plot synopsis and the presence of Molly Shannon might suggest otherwise, this is actually a very subtle movie with nuanced humor and identifiable characters. Laura Dern, in particular, creates one of the most indelible characters of her career. So it's not just about Molly. It's about how her and everyone around her are so obsessed with their own existence that they can't see the forest for the trees (I really hate that idiom, but it fits here). The plot meanders a bit and seems to avoid trying to make an actual point, but as with all Mike White movies, it's really about inventing a specific character with specific traits, putting them in an unusual situation, and then letting that ride itself out to its natural conclusion. The performances and the art direction are pitch perfect, and the subtlety and depth of the humor are revealed only after multiple viewings. It's the kind of movie that might not overly impress you at first, but it manages to stick with you until you eventually and suddenly realize that you NEED to see it again.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 9:18 AM :: #

Thursday, September 13, 2007 :::

The Ten

Rating:

Why I saw it: I learned to love Wet Hot American Summer

What I think about it: The Ten is a scatterbrained absurdist comedy that is loosely (and when I say loosely, I mean barely) based on the Ten Commandments, with each specific commandment getting its own devoted skit. It's funny, profane, vulgar, blasphemous, odd, daring, stupid, and a lot of it falls flat on its face, just like the filmmakers' previous work, Wet Hot American Summer. It's not exactly deep, and I wouldn't call it relevant when it comes to incisive satire about religion or the Bible, but it's still a worthwhile experience to watch those guys take "scatological" to a new level. If you've seen Wet, Hot, American Summer, then you know what to expect, and you probably won't be disappointed. I think my favorite skit features Winona Ryder humping a ventriloquist's dummy in a cheap motel room, if that helps you understand the maturity level of the humor.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 11:45 AM :: #

Sunday, September 09, 2007 :::

Zodiac

Rating:

Why I saw it: why not?

What I think about it: Piecing together the true story of the infamously unsolved Zodiac Killer mystery from case files and personal recollections, Zodiac plays like a detective drama without a car chase, a gun fight, or even a final act denouement. It's all very from-the-book and just-the-facts-ma'am, describing the crimes and the subsequent investigation with clarity of detail and thoughtful reasoning. It was as if I was watching Oliver Stone's JFK only without the sensationalism or the whack-job conspiracy theories. And even though that makes it sound boring, it was actually fairly informative and entertaining. It even managed to create a few moments of well-earned suspense, aided in no small part by its straight-forward style in storytelling. It isn't flashy or in your face like Fincher's previous movies. It's thoughtful, meditative, and well-balanced. The trouble is that thoughtful, meditative, and balanced movies won't exactly blow you away. But it is nonetheless a worthwhile movie to watch, and a fascinating depiction of an intriguing historical period.

Learn more about it.

::: posted by dan at 7:18 PM :: #