Movie Review: Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow

I have this best friend, see, and he's a writer to. Damn good one at that. I trust his prose and poetry more than my own. He's got a wry wit and his opinion I trust. A few years ago, we decided to do something stupidly fun. We both wrote down our top ten movies.That's like asking a parent to pick which child should live.We elected to go the other route-picking movies that we personally felt connected to, regardless of the quality. That way, we didn't have the usual textbook answers of Citizen Kane and Streetcar Name Desire ad nauseum. The list became more a inkblot, showing the person who did the viewing.I'm not going to go write that list down right now.For there's been a change.I think I have a new movie to add to my list.Sky Captain is our current decade's Indy movie. But without the purely for profit sequels. This is a what going to the big screen is all about. It is a tale that can only exist on a big screen. I mean, giant robots meancing New York City? No HDTV is going to get you with that. You need to see their size, their heat beam eyes as the height they were meant to shown at.In a movie theatre.In this movie, lovingly shot in experimental sephia tones, you have the usual intrepid reporter, seen a thousand times prior, doing the annoying usual storyline. She's investigating missing scientists--another standard--and then has to be rescued by the dashing hero, the mercernary Sky Captain. Seems there's Evil Afoot, trying to Take Over the World.Yes, we've heard it all before. Heck, we felt this way with Raiders et al.But I didn't mind this time. For some reason, it all made sense. It was as if the ultimate B movie was put up there on the screen. Worlds apart are only a short flight/drive away, clothing stays oddly unwrinkled after harrowing experiences.Yeap, only in the movies.I think the reason I don't mind is that it had all the usual greats tied up into a neat bundle. This was a freshman script, so I suppose my expectations couldn't have been that high. But the film collides with a bit of Tim Burton. In others, if it didn't look this good, you would have lost a large segment of the movie. The costumes are smooth; the photography is this side of having scratches movies. There are no sharp edges. All you needed was the occasionaly accidental string hanging from an airplane and you think you would have been in the 30's. I kept waiting for placard to announce "Tune in next week!"So much praise, I'll have to add it to my list. The drawback? The lead, I'm afraid to say. Luckily, hottie Jude Law is not required to do much. But he's too passive for an action hero. He's got the style and excellence of a Royal--and tends to come off as reflective because of it. Him in an action role? He's not angry enough; his decisions seems to be flown in from somewhere else because of it.But this gripe is small. I mean, it's JUDE LAW, for crissakes. He's like an Abercrombie ad envisioned in real time.The other problem? Why release this now, in the limbo prior to Christmas season and Oscar? Did they really not know how the public would react to such a stylish actioner? That's unfortunate, I really think this could have been a summer blockbuster. We had an excellent cinema summer. It could have been part. Still, it's a nice way to know that sometimes good movies come out in the fall.
A very, very well constructed piece of work. I feel back for the newbie creator. If you start at the top of the heap, where will you go next?
And as for my friend? I’m probably going to have see this movie again with him. I think he might have to revise a list or two himself.

Movie Review: Prick Up Your Ears

Oh gee, everyone, look another dead gay man movie. I am beginning to think that the only way gay men die is via violent reaction.

Oh wait, this is from the eighties. I suppose that has something to do with it. You would have thought better...I mean, look at the pedigree--Stephen Frears from Dangerous Laisons, Gary Oldman actually being nice and good-looking (I usually recall him from Dracula, back in 92, a personal fave) and our current Spiderman 2 villian, Doctor Octopus himself, Alfred Molina. You would think they could have ended the movie without violence.

Still, I had heard about the title from some friends and decided to take a look at it.

I have to say, as I watched this movie, even tho the gay guy bites it, I kept thinking--it's not out of spite. It's not because the society at large wants him to die--something modern Hollywood still attests to. In the end of this movie, it's because the act of murder was a natural outpouring of the conflict of the tale. You see, this was a true story of the very bizarre relationship between famed playwright Joe Morton and his frequent collaborator. I dare not say lover, even tho they were. Their relationship was as unique as this drama. They were together, yes, but it was different from monogomous, but apart from swingers. Their relationship was borderline a muse and his artist, but even that would put boundaries on something that defied description.

I began to become impressed with the title as the movie, like so many English flicks, played too long. The uniqueness of their relationship drew me in and kept me wondering what was exactly happening. I already knew one was going to die in the end..but who and why eluded me. Especially that why part.

I applaud the audacity of the movie-it is far from humourous and also distanced by the time period (the 80's) that is was released in. But still, I felt it was expertly constructed and the actor's didn't shy away from their flings and loves. Straight actors tend to come off as being straight playing gay. Here, it was not a factor.

Surely, above average and the reason I have netflix. To see movies with enough polish that they should not be forgotten.

Movie Review: Yossi and Jagger

I have come down on American remakes of overseas titles. They rarely get the images correct, choosing the fast route and quickest money moments to make the picture. Here? I find myself hoping some American takes up a remake for the first time of my life.

This is the love story to two men in the military. Plain and simple. They love and no one knows, for it would be frowned upon.

But there's the thing. THAT'S IT. I have no idea how they met or how they came together. There was no outward antigay sentiment, so where was the threat of being out?

Don't get me wrong, I did like this movie, but my partner hated it, and I could fully see why. There was no build up of their relationship, so when hardship befalls one of them, it's hard to guage the impact. It needed to be explored more in such a short movie.

Hence, could someone remake this? Make it a bit fuller? You might have something, then.

Movie Review: City of God

I heard about this title at the Oscars and watching a few second snippet there, I was hooked. If a picture is that visually tantalizing, I want to see the rest--besides, it's not everyday that a movie is merely nominated for direction. Something must have happened on that screen.

Since coming to Netflix so many months ago, I have been privledged to see movies from around the world. Many good, many bad, but it has opened my eyes to how different filmmakers and cultures view things. It's been fantastic.

Here is an example. This movie is South American, Brazilian. The storyline is pure American, in that it is non-linear, like Citizen Kane and Pulp Fiction. It bounces around, through flashbacks and reviews. It tells the tale about a young photographer growing up in a ghetto is Rio-the title's City of God. And through his history we meet various gang lords who rise and fall about as much as a Dallas family gathering.

It should be titled "Politics of the Gun," because guns proliferate here and there is much violence. But not that happy, action movie, bad guys die kinda way--as in someone has a gun, when is he going to use it--kinda way. It's riveting that something I've seen before being used creatively.

Yes, this movie is highly creative. I found myself at a loss at how it was going to come out, half expecting the protagonist to die several times (I learned from Sunset Blvd, many moons ago, protagonists can die and still narrate their story) and wondered where the story would take me next. The acting is a bit stilted, not creating much for compassion for any of the characters, but otherwise, this is a piece of filmmaking that should have found a much larger audience. It didn't play at any art house I knew of. It's a good movie.

Movie Review: To Kill A Mockingbird

I feel I can't write a review for this movie. I know I've seen it multiple times, and, as the cliche goes, it means something different each time. I feel not unlike a journalist trying to explain colors to a blind person. I have the skills, but not the point of reference.

The format of this story has been copied so many times. A young girl (a borderline proto-homo, I noticed this time) lives in the rural south during the depression. Her brother and her are given much of an education by the mere fact of exploration by their single father. They learn about racism and it's horrid impact and about the meaning of caring.

As for the movie, well, it is very, very good. What I have noticed when I watch classics like Gone with the Wind, Streetcar Named Desire and the like, is that time flies when you are watching them. Today's movies, made to keep the MTV generation filling their pockets, are edited to different camera angles every three seconds or so. Here, the camera picks a target and holds it until the words are spoken, the image is taken in. It knows we're smart and doesn't toy with song-and-dance.

The movie rolls along, probably moved faster by previous experience watching it during school and I also see Gregory Peck in the role that defined the rest of his career. I looked back at my review of Streetcar a few weeks ago and realized what these actors had that many today do not.

Confidence. Without the infrindgement of the press, these actors could do what they set out to do. Peck is relaxed on the screen, comfortable in this own skin. He isn't appearing to ACT. Tom in Collateral? He's practically screaming, "look at me, I'm doing something different then my last movie! Thank you, Academy!"

But Peck doesn't have that. And he becomes the moral compass, like a father should, both with his own kids and us in the audience. A very good movie from an excellent book. One of those books you really should read.

Movie Review: Hero

Ahh, to return to the world of vices. You should know by now my love for Asian movies-especially the ones with lots of fighting. Yes, I'm admitting bias. Of course, this vice really only nails me out of money--and even then, if I didn't see it, I wouldn't have a myocardic infarction.

Don't you just love that word? In-FARC-tion? It's so,I don't know, given to middle school giggles.

I say that, because, well, there were several giggles during this magnum opus, Hero, Jet Li's new flick. I even saw it on it's opening night, which says volumes. If I'm willing to forego my Friday night nap, well, there's something to be had, I tell you. I knew I wanted to see this movie when I read about it two years ago.

Yes, Miramax was sitting on this movie for two years. I'm sure they had no idea what to do with it--the audience was proof of that. It was filled with young men, filled with testosterone, from the nearby bases. They had no idea. Not one of them had read a word about it.

All they saw were the words, 'Jet Li' and thought this was the place to come.

This movie was not what they expected--hence the middle school giggles. And why Miramax wondered how to market it.

The story concerns a young man (Li) who comes to show the Emperor his loyality by bringing the swords of the 3 assissins who were bent on keeping him from power. Such was the threat that no one has ever come in 100 steps of the emperor--but this young man is invited to do so as he elaborates the tale.

The setup is much like many martial arts movies, with flashback after flashback. Only this time, the same story is elaborated, with different emphasis each time. It's wonderfully complex and visually adept. It's a true movie, a world that only exists on the screen.

And the fighting? Excellent, but that's where the giggles surmounted. You see, many people aren't used to the Hong Kong martial arts forms put onto the movies outside of Jackie Chan and Li. Here, the fights take on a form of higher art-giving the feeling of a ballet or dance ensemble. It asks for the audience to be sophistacted when they normally wouldn't be. There's one escapade, shot beautifully, in a forest during fall. One woman doesn't wish to kill the mistress of her ex, so she uses the falling leaves as cover.

It's an elaborate dance that is breathtakign on the big screen.

It's a giggle fest of screaming women and wind for small minds.

Hence, the giggles from the hundreds of young males.

And people worry about the future.

I, for one, liked the movie. I hate having to compare it to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,( or Rashomon, if you've heard of it) but it's the only film out there audiences might have experienced with the same ascetics. It's slightly less then that movie, going more for the intricaties of politics--always a mood killer. It's why you never see a baby boom in an election year.

So yes, I liked it, but I don't think anyone else will. Which is too bad, because it's a really good entry into Asian cinema as it stands right now.