tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34603396367705389912024-03-05T18:53:42.700-08:00Hollywood Bohljohnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.comBlogger55125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-46698926849625223892022-12-13T15:05:00.002-08:002022-12-13T15:05:30.141-08:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Unstoppable” (2010)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">I have to admit that if “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477080/">Unstoppable</a>”
had been directed by anyone other than <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001716/">Tony Scott</a>, I probably never
would have seen it. That seems a shame, but still probably justified,
because nobody could have directed this movie as well as he did.
Audiences (whether familiar with Scott's work or not) weren't sold on
the premise, either. It wasn't an out and out failure, but it didn't
make a profit until being released internationally. Probably the
reason people skipped it is because of the absurdly simple premise:
An unmanned runaway train has to be stopped. It didn't help that
“<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072562/">Saturday Night Live</a>” did a ruthlessly cynical (funny, but
ruthlessly cynical) <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SsYqFDmLR8">spoof trailer</a> that positioned the film as
deserving to be ridiculed.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The truth is (and this is the most
impressive part of the movie), the simplicity of the story – in
other words, its purity – is what makes it so great. One, present
the problem. Two, try solutions. Three, eventual success. It's
actually a perfect model for story telling. How creative could a
story about a runaway train be while remaining realistic?
“Unstoppable” is as good as a movie like gets. This is not a dumb
movie, just simple. Keep in mind, the number one movie of the same
year was “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/">Avatar</a>,” which was complex, but stupid.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">As usual, it's the performances that
give it gravitas. Tony Scott's favorite leading man <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000243/">Denzel Washington</a>
returns as the earnest blue-collar hero and newcomer <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1517976/">Chris Pine</a> is
the promising sidekick. As the SNL sketch plays up, the major rift
between our protagonists is their age/experience, but the movie
doesn't rely on that after initially addressing it. In fact, somewhat
refreshingly, these two get along pretty quickly (even before facing
their challenge together) with occasional friction peppered
throughout. You know, like a <i>real</i> working relationship.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The standout performance is <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0206257/">Rosario Dawson</a>. Always great in everything she does, her character as the
yardmaster is well realized as the woman who's clearly not taken
seriously in such a male-dominated industry. She's tough, she's
smart, and she gets stuff done. You can see her trying to maintain a
sense of decorum to compensate for the built-in bias against her
while pushing back against the status quo due to what's at stake.
Performances like this are the real reason why it's unfortunate that
a movie like this is overlooked.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">But, of course, the saddest part of
“Unstoppable” is that it's Tony Scott's final film. What an
irony, given the title. With the possible exception of Scott's family
(who have kept details of his final written words private), nobody
know the reason for his suicide. There were a handful of projects he
had in process and it's doubly tragic we'll never see them. We did
eventually get to see the <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1745960/">“Top Gun” sequel</a> helmed by another
director and, not only beautifully executed, but dedicated to Tony
Scott's memory. Scott had eyes on a remake of “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080120/">The Warriors</a>,”
which we all know would have been incredible. Another was an
ambitious adaptation of the <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22929.Emma_s_War">true story of Emma McCune</a>, a British
foreign aid worker who married a war lord. The one I think I would
have most like to have seen though was a translation of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0410247/">Clifford Irving</a>'s historical fiction epic “<a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22085564-tom-mix-and-pancho-villa">Tom Mix & Pancho Villa</a>,”
which Scott himself described as a combination of “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056172/">Lawrence of Arabia</a>” meets “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065214/">The Wild Bunch</a>.”</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Alas, these will have to be left to our
imagination as they were left to his. In conclusion of this year-long
chronological reacquaintance with Tony Scott's repertoire, right now
at this very moment, here is the list of all of his feature films in
my order of preference:</p>
<ol><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660/">Enemy of the State</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108399/">True Romance</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092644/">Beverly Hills Cop II</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102266/">The Last Boy Scout</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112740/">Crimson Tide</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421054/">Domino</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266987/">Spy Game</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0328107/">Man on Fire</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477080/">Unstoppable</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0453467/">Deja Vu</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092099/">Top Gun</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100485/">Revenge</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099371/">Days of Thunder</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085701/">The Hunger</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1111422/">The Taking of Pelham 123</a></p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116277/">The Fan</a></p>
</li></ol>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Thank you, Tony Scott. I'm sad that
you're gone, but I'm happy your movies live on.</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-82797530695983013312022-11-29T20:20:00.004-08:002022-11-29T20:20:59.013-08:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “The Taking of Pelham 123” (2009)<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001716/">Tony Scott</a> has directed remakes of two
films: “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093489/">Man on Fire</a>” and “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072251/">The Taking of Pelham 123</a>.” Both
films are based on novels. Tony Scott's “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0328107/">Man on Fire</a>” seems more
like it's based on the book than the previous film. His “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1111422/">Pelham 123</a>” seems more based on the original movie than the book. That's
too bad because the original “Pelham” film is a near perfect
thriller and uniquely so. In fact, it's literally my favorite film
from 1974. Ironically, the <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1102337.The_Taking_of_Pelham_One_Two_Three">book</a> itself is a bit lackluster. It's not
bad, but there are such a wide array of characters, that there's no
true “hero” since the protagonists are a collective. It feels
more like an academic case study of how the New York subway system
works and how law enforcement is woven into it. Regardless, it's a
good blueprint for a great movie.
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The original movie did a fantastic job
of streamlining the story into an almost mano-a-mano showdown without
sacrificing any supporting characters, who indeed are much more
vividly realized and rotate throughout the film very effectively with
their eclectic personalities. Scott's remake attempts the same thing,
but we never really get to know many of the characters and, the ones
we do, we don't really get invested in. That's a pretty crucial
aspect for a film about hostages. Even the supporting terrorists are
kind of anonymous gunmen in the new version.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Let's be fair about this, though, and
take the original out of the equation to eliminate any unfair
comparisons and judge Scott's remake as a stand alone piece. One may
be more sympathetic to its shortcomings if they're unaware it had
been done before (and successfully). This is not a shot-for-shot
remake and there are a tremendous amount of changes, but they hinder
the film more than they help it.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">One example is <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000237/">John Travolta</a>'s role as
the lead villain. It's very oddly written and even more oddly
performed. He's clearly a psychopath, but he (the character, I mean)
is performing for the sake of misdirection. The hijacking scheme is a
smokescreen for manipulating the market. So, “Ryder” (as he's
called in the film) is not only conning law enforcement, he's also
conning his cohorts. Consequently, the audience is uncertain as to
what kind of bad guy this really is. He seems to really delight in
killing his hostages, but he blames their deaths on everyone other
than him. He goes from laughing and treating the matter very
nonchalantly to flying into fits of rage like a child throwing a
tantrum. Also, he's an investment banker who kills people. I'm sure
that's not outside of the realm of possibility, but it feels odd
here, because with his handlebar mustache, neck tattoos, and scrappy
clothes, he looks and acts more like a violent criminal than a white
collar one. You don't have to compare his character to <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001727/">Robert Shaw</a>'s
in order to spot the flaws.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">These, of course, are mostly complaints
about the writing, not the directing. So, how does Tony Scott do in
the telling this (flawed) story? It's certainly watchable. And, even
though it's largely forgettable, it is still entertaining for the
most part. I think the biggest criticism I have about Scott's
direction here is that it feels a bit like a paycheck project that he
just phoned in. Not much of his usual nuance or, for that matter, joy
comes across. Consider “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102266/">The Last Boy Scout</a>.” That was a film that
it's rumored made everyone involved with it miserable throughout its
production. Yet, for whatever reason, it transcends its difficulties
and feels like a joyride. For all I know, “The Taking of Pelham 123”
was great fun to make. It doesn't feel like it, though. In fact,
this is possibly Tony Scott's weakest film. Unfortunately, it's not
just because it's a remake.</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-22418918534003830912022-11-03T16:52:00.000-07:002022-11-03T16:52:15.822-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Deja Vu” (2006)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0453467/">Deja Vu</a>” walks a precarious
tightrope. The first three quarters of the film require the viewer to
think and pay close attention as the characters not only gradually
uncover the mystery they're trying to solve, but how the method by
which they're trying to solve it works. It's not too difficult to
keep up with, but the playing field does have a detailed and unique
set of “rules” that the viewer has to keep in mind to understand
what's going on. Then, in the last half hour, the story shifts and
the audience inadvertently has to disengage the scrutinous part of
their brain in order to accept all that happens in the final act.
It's like reading a dissertation about writing and overlooking all
the spelling and grammatical errors in order to enjoy the final
summation. In short, to appreciate “Deja Vu” the viewer has to
pay attention to the details in the set-up and then just accept
everything at face value for the pay-off. Another way to put it is:
one's enjoyment of “Deja Vu” is in direct proportion to one's
suspension of disbelief.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This is not necessarily a bad thing.
I've always been the type of filmgoer that can appreciate a profound
complex thoughtful arthouse piece every bit as much as a mindless
goofy nonsensical special effects exhibition piece so long as they
both succeed admirably in what they're trying to accomplish. That
distinction comes in handy when watching a movie like “Deja Vu”
because I can switch gears whenever I need to. In all honesty,
though, I have seen plenty of movies that have had similar
dichotomies that I found completely unforgivable. Not so with “Deja
Vu” and I think that has to be because of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001716/">Tony Scott</a>.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Not to say I'm biased (although I
probably am), but he just makes the film so damn watchable. For one
thing, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000243/">Denzel Washington</a> (working with Scott for the third time here)
can make an audience swallow just about anything with his charm and
determination. Second, the aesthetics of the film are so compelling.
The plot's sales pitch relies on the technology being presented and
the surveillance workspace with its suspended translucent monitors,
wheeled joysticks, and sexy sound effects really seal the deal. Best
of all, the technology allows the film to indulge in one of the most
clever car chases in film history as one car in the present pursues
another car in the past, but time is ticking in both timelines and if
the pursuer loses the suspect, all is lost. It's a nail-biting action
sequence because of what's at stake, not merely because of the high
speeds and close calls.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Rumor has it the screenwriters
originally composed a more airtight script that accounted for a
variety of time travel paradoxes. If that's true, I'd like to read it
some day. Tony Scott (with a history of sacrificing realism for the
sake of spectacle) made changes to the story that created plotholes
big enough to drive a Humvee through (which Denzel literally does).
This is probably why the film went largely unseen and was forgotten
quickly after its release. However, the film does have a lot more
character development, humanity, and pathos than necessary to tell
the story. And if Tony Scott could only effectively inject those
things into the story at the cost of the screenwriters' original
vision, then it was worth it.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">So, while you do have to be in the
specific mindset of a “cerebral no-brainer” in order to fully
appreciate “Deja Vu,” the film accomplishes what Tony Scott does
best: Entertain. Think of it as getting into a Humvee with somebody
chasing somebody in the past and driver simply tells you, “Don't
ask questions, just enjoy the ride.”
</p>johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-50884408198699317102022-10-09T13:55:00.001-07:002022-10-09T13:55:42.799-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Domino” (2005)
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This is probably last “Great” movie
Tony Scott made. Not to say his remaining films are bad, because
they're not. By “Great” I mean big, bold, loud, and outrageous in
the way only Tony Scott could do it (which is why I put “Great”
in quotes and capitalized it). In fact, one could say that his
style's evolution as a filmmaker was building to this and peaked with
“<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421054/">Domino</a>.” Anything more full-throttle would be tremendous
overkill. He really gets right to the brink where it's almost
unwatchable, but the film can't help to be equal parts charming and
mesmerizing in the midst of its grit, bite, and decadence.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The quick cuts, flashes, blurs, and
pacing are meant to give the impression of a cocaine binge. To
approach telling this story any other way would probably be
ineffective. The casting is also very crucial to the film's success
and this ensemble is impeccable. It must've been a tough challenge
since these characters are so vividly realized and exceptionally
unique. On top of that, they need to have the right chemistry to make
it work. I'm not just talking about the three principle leads,
either. The supporting characters have to fit perfectly into the
puzzle as well. Impressively, every actor in every role meets this
challenging criteria perfectly.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This must have been a fun movie to
make, too. Everybody really shines onscreen, even in the smallest
role. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001761/">Jerry Springer</a> (yes, <i>that</i> <a href="https://jerryspringertv.com/">Jerry Springer</a>) looks like
he's trying to stifle a smile in his brief scene. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000686/">Christopher Walken</a>
seems to be poking fun at himself by pretty much just doing an
impression of Christopher Walken. Even more so, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005575/">Ian Ziering</a> and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004977/">Brian Austin Green</a> (<i>literally</i> playing themselves) are tremendous
good sports in emulating every cynical prejudice the public might
have of them. It's also great to see <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001056/">Dabney Coleman</a> back in the type
of role his played so perfectly throughout the 80's. And leave to
<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000302/">Jacqueline Bisset</a> to provide the anomaly of elegance and class by
playing it cool and haughty. Then, just when you thought it couldn't
get any crazier, here comes <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001823/">Tom Waits</a>.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Put all this together and it's a recipe
for disaster. But, in a good way. It's safe to say no other director
could have handled all these ingredients so perfectly. The only
drawback is that one has to be in the right mood to watch “Domino,”
but that's just because one has to keep up. Otherwise, it will leave
the viewer in the dust wondering what happened. Tony Scott's best
movies feel like rides and this is by far Mr. Tone's Wildest Ride.</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-27487340952212865592022-09-16T19:23:00.001-07:002022-09-16T19:23:27.614-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Man on Fire” (2004)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001716/">Tony Scott</a> returns to <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000243/">Denzel Washington</a>
as his leading man, who will remain his leading man in three out of his four remaining films. I've always wondered about their connection and if
it was just a professional one or if their relationship was deeply
personal as well. Either way, you can see why Tony Scott was
metaphorically married to Mr. Washington after this film. “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0328107/">Man on Fire</a>” is Scott's most complex character study (with the possible
exception of “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421054/">Domino</a>,” yet to come) and he doesn't hold back on
the dark places he goes with Denzel's character.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">You can see Scott employ some of the
visual tactics began in “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116277/">The Fan</a>” with <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000134/">Robert DeNiro</a>'s
character's descent into madness. Washington's Creasy is of equally
scorched-earth caliber, but with a motive driven by love. Perhaps
casting Denzel Washington as Creasy was the best way to make the
character not only sympathetic, but likable. A great deal is spent on
developing the relationship between Creasy and Pita, the young girl
he's hired to protect. For the first 45 minutes of the movie, that
story arc itself makes for a sufficiently entertaining film. That's what makes Pita's kidnapping so devastating and why Creasy's
unrelenting quest for revenge has us fully on board.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The camera twitches and flashes in the
moments Creasy's rage is inflamed, making scenes already unsettling
even more so. As Creasy works his way up the chain of bad guys, his
tactics of torture, humiliation, and execution escalate as well. The
tension is a mixture of urgency for Creasy to have his vengeance seen
to completion as well as our borderline sympathy for the villains he
zealously exterminates. In some cases, this style of filmmaking
overwhelms the viewer's experience, but I think that may actually be
the point. This film is not meant to be endured comfortably.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Tony Scott's somewhat superfluous use
of subtitles can be distracting at times (particularly when it's
dictation of English dialogue versus a translation of Spanish). Since
the film has a lot of Spanish in it, he didn't want all of that
conversation merely superimposed over the bottom of the screen, so he
made it flow through the shots as it's spoken. I suppose he liked it
so much, he didn't want the English-speaking scenes to feel
neglected. I didn't care for it the first time I saw the film, but
I've gotten used to it in subsequent viewings and have just accepted
it as appropriate emphasis in the scenes it appears. Scott uses a
similar tactic in the aforementioned “Domino” with much better
effect, so it's good he had this movie to experiment with. Much like
he had the love-fueled rampage set in Mexico “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100485/">Revenge</a>” to
experiment with before making this amped-up version of a similar
formula.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Tony Scott had originally wanted this
to be the follow-up piece to his debut film “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085701/">The Hunger</a>” and it's
interesting he had such perseverance to the project to see it through
some 20 years later. Maybe that's what makes Creasy's fixation on his
mission so believable. In that context, the scene where Creasy
attempts suicide is all the more haunting given Tony Scott killed
himself less than 10 years later. Perhaps Creasy's demons are not too
far off from Tony Scott's and as such, it could be said Tony Scott effectively lives on
in this film. I don't think Tony Scott would mind being remembered
for “Man on Fire” given how honest it is.</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-72753805337538811422022-08-27T10:27:00.000-07:002022-08-27T10:27:12.306-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Spy Game” (2001)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266987/">Spy Game</a>” is Tony Scott's first
grown-up movie. That's not to say his previous flicks can only be
appreciated by the young or the immature, but those films are mostly
entertainment for its own sake. “Spy Game” has its share of car
chases and shoot outs, but it stands apart from Scott's other work
for the reason <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000602/">Robert Redford</a> was drawn to the project in the first
place: “It's a thinking man's action picture.”</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Like any good spy story, it's a puzzle
the audience slowly puts together, but not so convoluted that it's a
challenge to follow. There's a lot going on here that has to be
organized and disseminated without being dull or tedious. Tony Scott
shines in how he makes scenes where people are talking on the phone
or looking through files feel like action set pieces. It's also his
first demonstration of using suspense and tension with subtleties
because the characters have to play it cool as they simultaneously
try to find things out while keeping their own secrets. Tony Scott
said he tried to make the scenes in the CIA conference room feel like
a high-stakes poker game.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Also, because the film is so
dialogue-heavy, Scott really flexes his muscles in directing actors
to act. The performances in his other films are all sound, so he
clearly knows how to extract great acting. In a film like “Spy
Game,” though, it's a bit more delicate because the characters have
to be, not just convincing, but intriguing. The complexity of the
players has to really show through particularly because, as I said
before, they're trying to reveal as little as possible.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Scott also plays around a lot with
cameras and cinematography in this one. In probably <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zrr-9gpQnJY">the most pivotal scene</a> in the movie, Robert Redford and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000093/">Brad Pitt</a> have a tense
exchange on a circular rooftop. They verbally spar, not knowing if
they can rely on each other as the camera rotates the perimeter of
their arena. The scene was so expensive to shoot, Scott paid
for the helicopter rental out of his own pocket to do it right.
Totally worth it.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">With the exception of “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085701/">The Hunger</a>”
(and possibly “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116277/">The Fan</a>”), every one of Tony Scott's films could
predominantly be labeled as an action flick. “Spy Game” fits into
that category as well, but it exhibits a real adept filmmaker
executing a mature, thoughtful, and nuanced movie that would be lost
on the frivolous and the mundane. It's ambitious for Scott to pick
material that doesn't necessarily appeal to the masses. Don't get me
wrong, I love his more mindless, over-the-top, rollercoaster
pictures, but “Spy Game” makes me wish he would've tried his hand
at a few more this smart.</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-85200459868371815562022-08-06T13:47:00.000-07:002022-08-06T13:47:05.938-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Enemy of the State” (1998)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">With the exception of “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477080/">Unstoppable</a>,”
Tony Scott's remaining films all have a bit of a “spy” slant to
them, starting with this one. I like to think it's because Scott
really found his calling with “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660/">Enemy of the State</a>.” By that I
mean this is the type of film his style and atmosphere (and possibly
personal tastes) really suit best. This is a near perfect film in the
sense of achieving the goals it sets for itself. It's exciting, it's
funny, it's clever, it's unpredictable, it's well-acted (which is no
surprise with its <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660/fullcredits">extensive top-level cast</a> all at their best), and
feels original (which is especially impressive given it pays homage
to many other films that inspired it).</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“Enemy of the State” also shows
that, despite being pigeon-holed as an action director (especially
due to his frequent collaborating with Producer <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000988/">Jerry Bruckheimer</a>),
he will not settle for recycling the same old stuff. For instance,
this film has some of the most superlative food chases I've ever
seen. Foot chases are hard to do well and, I lost count, but there
have to be about five of them here and they're heart-pounding as
hell. Also, with that much running around, you'd think the audience
would get as tired of it as the characters, but that's not the case.
They're running down alleyways, up staircases, upon rooftops, in the
middle of the street, and even across the sides of balconies and
through tunnels under the city. Whew! Yet each one feels, not only
fresh, but essential to the story.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Even with all that, Tony Scott still
fits in a couple car chases that are unique in their own right. One
takes place between two moving trains and another contains a pivotal
interrogation scene at high speeds. Wow! The latter of those actually
serves as one of the greatest red herrings in motion picture history.
If you haven't seen “Enemy of the State,” skip the next
paragraph, because I don't want to ruin it for you.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Early on, the audience is informed of a
mysterious private investigator by the name of Brill. It's obvious we
will eventually meet this character and that he will probably be
Dean, the lead character's, savior. When the time comes for Brill to
make an entrance, in walks <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000321/">Gabriel Byrne</a>. Awesome! I love Gabriel
Byrne and he's perfect as this character we've heard so much about.
In literally less than three minutes, we find out Gabriel Byrne is
not Brill, but in fact somebody sent to pose as Brill in order to
entrap Dean. We find this out from the real Brill, played by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000432/">Gene Hackman</a>, who is an even better choice to play the character. I was
blown away by this misdirection because when an actor of Byrne's
caliber shows up, you expect them to play a major role. Whatever
disappointment I felt that Byrne was not actually Brill was
completely eradicated by how impressed I was by that trick on the
audience. Well done, Mr. Scott. That could very well be your finest
moment.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">There's almost too much to unpack here
as to how satisfying this movie is and on how many levels. The mark
of any good movie is how well it holds up after multiple viewings and
that's especially true of comedy and horror because the effectiveness
of those genres often rely upon the element of surprise. That's also
true for thrillers, particularly ones like this with twists and turns
and tricks and double-crosses. But, I can never watch this movie
enough. Even though it's quite familiar to me, it never loses its
edge because I'm always in awe of its craftsmanship and presentation.
Can't say that this is Tony Scott's best movie, but I <i>can</i> say
it's my own personal favorite.
</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-63823159912626511922022-07-14T21:06:00.008-07:002023-09-13T15:45:52.954-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “The Fan” (1996)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This movie is a bit perplexing. Even
the details behind it getting made are befuddling. It's based on a
novel and I've read the novel. It's decent. Not bad, held my
attention, entertaining enough, but not by any means innovative,
original, profound, nor (for that matter) memorable. As far as I
know, it wasn't a best-seller, either. None of that in itself is
unusual, but what is unusual is there seemed to be a lot of weight
behind getting it made. Apparently, all kinds of actors were fighting
to play the title role. Brad Pitt, Al Pacino, Jack Nicholson, and
even Wesley Snipes all were reportedly vying for it. None other than
Robert DeNiro won the role. Not surprising, given his clout (not to
mention his extended resume of playing intimidating psychopaths). I'm
curious what it was about the script (or novel) that drew him to the
project. As I said, he'd played plenty of psychopaths before, so this
role wasn't neither new for him, nor was it challenging. And the
source material wasn't by any means a built-in money-maker, but
nonetheless, enough Hollywood heavies wanted it to get made and so it
did.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">In any case, DeNiro's attachment to the
project was what brought Tony Scott to it. Scott always wanted to
work with DeNiro and this was his chance. He even turned down the
opportunity to direct “The Rock” to do “The Fan,” which is
funny because I've always considered Michael Bay (who ended up
directing “The Rock”) a Tony Scott wannabe. Ironically, “The
Rock” turned out to be a much more satisfying flick (at least by
the standards that Tony Scott's usually measured by). That's probably
because Tony Scott's interest in the project seemed to extend only as
far as DeNiro's involvement.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Scott didn't have much interest in
baseball in general, in many cases ignoring the input of technical
adviser Cal Ripken while making the film. Nevertheless, the baseball
stuff comes across as convincingly authentic. The psychotic stuff,
not as much. That's neither Scott's fault nor DeNiro's, it's partly
the script's and partly the editor's. The movie opens with an odd
poem recited by the star, which is unnecessary and kinda awkward.
After that, the first half of the film actually has a good rhythm
with DeNiro's character's life gradually falling apart alongside
Snipes' character's career falling apart. But some parts are
confusing because they're neither explained nor developed. For
instance, there are many lines of dialogue that are ambiguous because
we're not sure if DeNiro is lying, telling the truth, or just plain
crazy.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">It's a shame, because there are many
elements of the film that work perfectly. The notion of parents
overreacting at little league games escalating to domestic scuffles has been
done before, but I don't believe I've ever seen it as unsettling and
disturbing as in this movie. The villain's first murder is grisly,
but in an effectively understated way. Hans Zimmer's score blends
perfectly with remixes of Nine Inch Nails, creating a volatile
atmosphere even in scenes where little is happening. Generally
speaking, the film maintains okay until DeNiro kidnaps Snipes' son.
Ironically, that's when it should get more intense, but it oddly
boils down to Snipes literally having to hit a home run to save his
son. Many baseball movies climax with our hero having to hit a home
run, but not many psychological thrillers do. Probably the worst
oversight, though, is there are lots of opportunities to explore the
perils of fame, wealth, sportsmanship, family, and personal passions
further, but they only merely touch on them.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Criticisms aside, this film does still
hold a special place in my heart. One main takeaway for me is that
Wesley Snipes is a much better actor than most people give him credit
for. Watch how he plays the scene when his character first starts to
realize DeNiro may actually be a threat instead of a fan. Another is
my own realization that any Tony Scott movie is worth watching.
There's an insightful line by Snipes about sports fans where he
observes, “They don't understand that you're the same person when
you're hitting or not.” This movie shows that even when Tony
Scott's not at his best, he's still pretty good.
</p>johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-13452647810213603292022-06-22T19:52:00.002-07:002022-06-22T19:52:28.051-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Crimson Tide” (1995)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">An early scene in “Crimson Tide”
features supporting characters quizzing each other on submarine
movies just before boarding their own submarine. It's interesting how
the submarine movie seems to be its own genre. Sure, it tends to be a
subcategory of war movies (usually World War II), but still – you
don't often hear “plane movies” or “tank movies” as
classifications of their own under the subject of war or military
flicks. I suppose that's because a submarine is a unique setting
(claustrophobic and unscenic, without even any windows) and thus a
tougher film to make. As an action movie (like most war movies are),
setting it in a submarine relies on dialogue and tension and most of
the literal “action” is basically in slow-motion with metallic
behemoths trying to dodge each other's torpedoes.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Tony Scott's “Crimson Tide,” of
course, has its share of scenes like that (and done well), but the
real action of the picture has to do with the exchange of words and
more the threat of violence than the actual act. It's more
philosophical than most submarine movies and a great deal of its
appeal is based on the powerhouse performances of Gene Hackman and
Denzel Washington (in his first of five leading roles in Tony Scott's
remaining nine feature films) playing their parts like a tennis match
that gradually escalates from friendly to cataclysmic. It's a smarter
film than one would expect and challenges the audience to a certain
extent in regards to questions of morality, duty, and even existentialism.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Tony Scott employs his usual tactics of
sweat, smoke, and combining hot and cold lighting, but it doesn't
feel redundant or derivative here. I don't know if the set actually
moved or the camera work makes it seem like its moving, but the
viewer never doubts the characters are in a working submarine and,
when they're in trouble, you really feel it. When they're sinking,
you feel the pressure. When they're evading, you feel the tension.
When they're cut off, you feel the isolation. This is another case of
the talent of the director being integral to the final product and,
indeed, the film was nominated for an Academy Award for “Best
Editing” (and rightfully so). It was beaten by “Apollo 13,”
which is interesting considering a space capsule movie is not too far
removed from a submarine movie, conceptually.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Ironically, I think the only reason
“Crimson Tide” didn't receive higher accolades is because it was
made after the Cold War was over. Not only were the Russians not
scary adversaries in 1995, but nuclear war was a very unrealistic
threat. Thus “Crimson Tide” felt about as escapist as Science
Fiction. Had this film been made 30 years earlier (and made the way
it is by Mr. Scott), it would've terrified audiences, gotten under
their skin, and been a must-see for anyone who could stomach it. In
other words, “Crimson Tide” would've been the kind of classic
submarine film mentioned alongside the films the supporting
characters reference in it.
</p>johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-20980639334524057182022-05-31T17:00:00.001-07:002022-05-31T17:05:14.832-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “True Romance” (1993)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108399/">True Romance</a>” was the first
screenplay Quentin Tarantino ever wrote (well, to completion, anyway)
and, if things had gone his way, it would have been the first movie
he ever directed. Cruel as Hollywood is, he couldn't raise the money
to direct it, so he sold the script in order to fund what would be
his “next” first movie. It was sold to some production company
that specialized in B-movies and was set to be directed by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0527350/">William Lustig</a>. Through a fateful set of circumstances, Tarantino was friends
with a woman who was working for Tony Scott on “The Last Boy Scout”
and she got him onto the set to meet Tony Scott. Tony was interested
in what Quentin was working on (at that time, the screenplay for
“Reservoir Dogs”) and QT gave TS the scripts for both “Reservoir
Dogs” and “True Romance,” both of which Tony read on the plane
ride home after completing photography on “The Last Boy Scout.”</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRN954t7WpCwALZZrCa7Gw3uauQ8pYG8MKl9LEBLUGooeoIdzE0WG_79M1MnZ8WXvLEid8zUzM_AkeM9_Db3yqDyy0HWJvtKVKkG9PEr9Hn1g_sgUDirxbQnrpYB5DIerY2mPXwMJwFM-zQGwglsJWvllzLIt-Loe4ysgJsOfNUsOEWe5p8u5iwB61/s648/TrueRomance.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="648" data-original-width="432" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRN954t7WpCwALZZrCa7Gw3uauQ8pYG8MKl9LEBLUGooeoIdzE0WG_79M1MnZ8WXvLEid8zUzM_AkeM9_Db3yqDyy0HWJvtKVKkG9PEr9Hn1g_sgUDirxbQnrpYB5DIerY2mPXwMJwFM-zQGwglsJWvllzLIt-Loe4ysgJsOfNUsOEWe5p8u5iwB61/s320/TrueRomance.jpg" width="213" /></a></div>Scott fell in love. He called Tarantino
and said he wanted to shoot <i>both</i> scripts. Tarantino gave him the bad
news that “Reservoir Dogs” was off-limits because it was going to
be his own directorial debut and “True Romance” had already been
sold. Undeterred, Tony Scott took it upon himself to commandeer the
rights to “True Romance” and, I don't know if it was difficult or easy
(either way, it probably wasn't cheap), but he obviously succeeded.
Whatever the effort, it must have been worth it, because Tony Scott's
enthusiasm for this project really shows in the final results.
Tarantino himself remarked, “Tony had the love and the passion for
it that it needed.”<p></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Tarantino's script was pretty over the
top to begin with and Tony Scott did stay pretty loyal to it in
general (not so much the ending, but more on that later), but
wherever Scott had artistic license, he really went overboard. For
instance, in the scene where Clarence confronts Drexl and they fight
it out, it was originally set at Drexl's apartment. It's just Drexl
and Marty and three stoned hookers hanging out eating Chinese food
and watching “The Mack.” In the film, it still may technically be
Drexl's apartment, but it more closely resembles a night club.
There's techno music blaring, colored lighting, dancing girls, a pool
table and, for some reason, fish tanks on shelves from floor to
ceiling. No reason to have any of that in there other than pure spectacle.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Another outrageous scene that
originally was just there to further the plot: In the original
script, when Clarence calls Dick Ritchie to inform him he's coming to
L.A. with his new wife, they call from a hotel room. In the film,
they're at a roadside phonebooth and decide to have sex in it while a
confused Dick Ritchie sits on a toilet.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">In L.A., when our heroes meet with
Elliot Blitzer to discuss the cocaine deal, Tarantino originally set
it at a zoo. Tony Scott decided to hold the discussion on a roller
coaster because he thought it fit in better with the intensity of the
story. It definitely did.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">To read the famous “Sicilian scene”
in Tarantino's script, it comes across as dead serious. Tony Scott
was not only brave, but counter-intuitive to have Christopher Walken
and Dennis Hopper laugh in each other's faces as the scene escalates,
making it the superlative scene in a film full of great scenes.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Tony Scott decided to have Alabama's
confession to Clarence set on the walkway of a billboard outside of
his apartment to make the characters seem more vulnerable and
exposed. He had Clifford Woorley's trailer set right next to train
tracks to create additional tension in the two scenes that occur at
his homestead. Instead of a red Mustang, Clarence drives a purple
Cadillac (because what else would a die hard Elvis fan drive). Scott
thought it better to have the ruthless enforcer Virgil flirt with
Alabama before beating her senseless. He inserted the scene where our
lovebirds get matching tattoos. Elliot getting a blow job in the
speeding Porsche was his idea, as was the honeybear bong for Brad
Pitt's stoner character, and – of course – Tony Scott decided,
after all this, that his lead characters had to live.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Tarantino was not involved in the
production of “True Romance,” but he'd heard Scott wanted to
change the ending and he challenged Scott on it. The director assured
the screenwriter of two things: Number one, he would shoot both
endings and decide which worked better. Number two, if he did decide
to have Clarence and Alabama survive, it wouldn't be for the
audience's sake, it would be for the characters' sake. Ultimately,
Scott did opt to have Clarence and Alabama not only live, but get
away with it. Tarantino wasn't happy with the final decision, but
when he saw Tony Scott's version of his own vision, he changed his
mind. “I think Tony's ending is better for the movie Tony made,”
he said. “He did what a director's supposed to do: He made the
material his own.” If that's not true love, what is?</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-8699016727227341422022-05-10T11:18:00.001-07:002022-05-10T11:20:38.481-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “The Last Boy Scout” (1991)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This movie is a small miracle. It
wouldn't appear so at first glance, but by all accounts, it was a
nightmare to make and yet it somehow rises above itself. <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-last-boy-scout-1991">Roger
Ebert's review</a> of it is particularly insightful in that he points out
how cynical, vicious, crude, and misogynistic the film is yet manages
to still succeed as a well-crafted piece of entertainment.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">For starters, the film was a war of
egos. Tony Scott was a hot director and probably just starting to
realize studios weren't going to rein him in or question his
decisions since he'd demonstrated time and again he could rake in the
millions. <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001834/">Damon Wayans</a> was an up-and-coming star, just beginning to
break through from his audience-pleasing characters on the TV show
“<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0098830/">In Living Color</a>.” <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000246/">Bruce Willis</a> had proven himself as a bankable
action hero with the one-two punch of the first two “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095016/">Die Hard</a>”
movies and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000948/">Shane Black</a> had proven the same as a writer with the
first two “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093409/">Lethal Weapon</a>” movies. On top of all that, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005428/">Joel Silver</a>
had produced both of those franchises and was primed to produce “The
Last Boy Scout” as well. At the time, the script had sold for a
record-breaking amount, so a lot was riding on this.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Needless to say, all of these men at
the top of their game felt pretty powerful and had different ideas
and none of them agreed on anything. Usually, that's a recipe for
disaster because, even if morale is merely low on a film set, the
results tend to come across in the finished product. In this case,
morale wasn't simply low, the writers, directors, producers, and
co-stars were at each other's throats. Yet, they all managed to pull
it off. As Roger Ebert points out in his aforementioned review, “It
is some kind of tribute to Tony Scott...that this material survives
its own complete cynicism and somehow actually works.”
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">It's true. They really made magic out
of the mess. Even though the overall theme is grim and defeatist,
there are some great laughs. The plot is clever enough to be
unpredictable. Although no one got along, the performances are strong
and the chemistry is great. There are two back-to-back car chases
that are both crucial to the plot as well as surprisingly unique (the
first car chase literally has both cars drive side-by-side down a
cliff). There are no less than four scenes where you wonder how the
hell our heroes are gonna get outta this, but they do - and without
“cheating” or relying on deus ex machina. Under all those
circumstances, this film is exceptional.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">While it was undoubtedly a miserable
experience for Tony Scott, it definitely made him a better filmmaker.
If nothing else, he met his wife <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0779072/">Donna</a> on this movie. Plus, his
follow-up film was “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108399/">True Romance</a>,” which Scott - for a while, at
least - considered his best work. His contempt for “The Last Boy
Scout” shows through in “True Romance” in certain places. For
one, the character of fictional film producer Lee Donowitz was
modeled (quite obviously, shamelessly, and unkindly) after Joel
Silver. Tony remarked, “Joel didn't talk to me for a long time
after that.” In any case, “The Last Boy Scout” demonstrates
what Chili Palmer said in the film “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113161/quotes/">Get Shorty</a>” about directors:
“Sometimes you do your best work when you got a gun to your head.”
</p>johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-21485606491433711092022-04-17T10:37:00.000-07:002022-04-17T10:37:05.256-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Days of Thunder” (1990)There are very few things I care less
about than NASCAR racing. That's not to say I hate it or I think it's
stupid, it's just something that doesn't matter to me at all. If all
traces of NASCAR were obliterated instantaneously, I doubt it would
have any affect on my life one way or the other (unless its absence
somehow effected the economy or something). It is a great testament
to the directing prowess of Tony Scott that this movie could actually
get me to care (at least for 107 minutes).
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">A lot of that credit, of course, has to
go towards the screenplay. The film is a very effective introductory
primer to racing. The story begins with the construction of the race
car itself. Like, literally the empty frame of the car in a garage
with Robert Duvall talking to it like a soon-to-be father talking to
his wife's pregnant belly. The relationship between Robert Duvall's
mechanic and Tom Cruise's driver is brilliantly set up in that the
two of them, both good at what they do, don't fully understand what
the other one does. They start off butting heads, of course, which
leads to some relatively philosophical debates you wouldn't expect to
find in a racing movie. For instance, which is most crucial in a
race? The performance of the driver or the performance of the
vehicle? The answer, of course, is: Neither, it's the connection
between the two. Explanations like this are what get us invested in
the story.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Midway through the film, after a
serious wreck, Nicole Kidman is introduced as a doctor (and the voice
of reason) who bluntly delivers the moral of the story to a
heretofore confident Cruise: “Control is an illusion.” This, of
course, rattles Tom Cruise's character and he has to integrate these
new realizations into his racing without it (literally) slowing him
down. If all this sounds familiar, it's because it's the basically
the same formula as Tony Scott's “Top Gun.”
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Like “Top Gun,” the footage and
editing of the action sequences are amazing in their ability to
present chaos in a way that definitely feels chaotic, but not
confusing. That's hard to do. I don't know if they had dozens of
cameras in a variety of places (including the participating race
cars) filming at the same time or if they just shot the same race
over and over and somehow managed to maintain continuity. Neither
would surprise me and both are equally impressive.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Impressive as the racing scenes are,
though, Tony Scott shows again he's not merely an action director.
Rather than simply trying to impress us with the spectacle of fast
cars going fast (like the films “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067334/">Le Mans</a>” and “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060472/">Grand Prix</a>”
did), we're gently sucked into a story about the addictiveness of
competition and self-preservation vs. glory. These characters aren't
very complicated or, for that matter, interesting outside of their
familiarity as caricatures, but we care what happens nonetheless
because we've gone with them on this journey. From the construction
of the car to its crossing of the finish line and all the speedbumps
in between. You don't hafta care about NASCAR to care about this
story because that's not just racing. That's life.
</p>johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-53385955963977962262022-03-26T11:54:00.000-07:002022-03-26T11:54:04.404-07:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Revenge” (1990)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Tony Scott was a hot commodity in
Hollywood after his one-two punch of “Top Gun” and “Beverly
Hills Cop II” and “Revenge” was an interesting follow-up film
for him. He must have been delighted at being able to flex his
directing muscles in a single film that transcends so many genres.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“Revenge” opens up as almost an
epilogue to “Top Gun” with an F-14 stunt flying over the desert.
Instead of a regular action picture, after that, the film turns into
a light drama, then a bit of a gangster flick, romance, erotic
thriller, western, film noir, addiction struggle, tragedy, and, of
course, vengeance. The amazing thing is all of these elements not
only work, but blend together seamlessly without coming across as a
film with an identity crisis.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">A great deal of the film's success
comes from the performances of the supporting characters. They come
in and out of the picture as needed and adjust the atmosphere
accordingly. We start off with Jesse Corti as the protagonist's best
friend, who offers him sound advice at a time he needs it and is
literally hung up on. Replacing him in the story is Joaquin Martinez,
who literally saves J's life and brings him back from the dead. When
they part ways, instead of giving our hero advice, he gives him a
knife. Literally in the same scene, we meet the cowboy played by
James Gammon, who serves mostly as a chauffeur for the leading man,
but even more effectively as an enabler and, eventually and
unknowingly, a benefactor.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Conveniently, this is when Miguel
Ferrer shows up, probably in the movie's biggest standout role.
Assisted by John Leguizamo (in a nearly mute, but nevertheless,
strong performance), the three of them effectively try to keep order
in the chaos of a spree of vengeance along the Mexican border.
Ferrer's character treats this mission as an amusing game rather than
matters of life and death. He's great fun to watch. All the while,
Madeleine Stowe languishes away in a brothel, doped up on forced
heroin doses given, almost sympathetically, by an androgynous
guardian angel played by Luis de Icaza. Peppered throughout the film
are the villain's henchmen, at varying degrees of sliminess, many of
whom Kevin Costner kills off one by one with increasing indifference.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Anthony Quinn embraces his role as the
main bad guy with his usual zeal. He imperceptibly flips between
charming and lovable to cold and frightening moment by moment. All
throughout the film, his character remains strangely sympathetic and
almost justified. By the end of the story, we're not sure we want him
to lose. This is punctuated by what he says to Costner when they
finally face off at the end: “Perhaps we both deserve to die.”
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This may be Tony Scott's most
picturesque film in that he really chews up the scenery of Mexico,
digging into the dark and dirty underbelly of that country's
subculture. Dirt sticks to sweat, rooms are lit by an excessive
amount of candles, a feeling of distrust and uncertainty permeates
the film, and anyone could die at any time (and many do). It's easy
to see why Quentin Tarantino called this Tony Scott's “masterpiece.”
I wouldn't say it's Tony Scott's best film, but it's definitely his
most passionate.</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-69759258897951603552022-03-04T18:37:00.007-08:002022-03-04T19:00:50.189-08:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Beverly Hills Cop II” (1987)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The first “Beverly Hills Cop” was
originally conceived as an action piece for Sylvester Stallone. A
renegade cop from Detroit teaches a bunch of cushy California cops
hung up on rules how to be tough. It's the perfect formula for an
action picture, really. However, Stallone's outrageous demands and
constant rewrites eventually had him drop out. Paramount decided to
take a chance on their exponentially rising star Eddie Murphy in what
would be his first leading role in a motion picture. When Murphy
signed on (turning down a supporting role in “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087332/">Ghostbusters</a>” for
this opportunity), the film immediately pivoted to more of a comedy.
The crucial action aspects remained and there were dramatic moments,
but for all intents and purposes, “Beverly Hills Cop” was a
comedy. It was also a huge hit, so a sequel was inevitable. Critics
assumed it would be even more of a comedy than the first.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Eddie Murphy was at the height of his
popularity in 1987 (his concert film “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092948/">Raw</a>” came out the same
year) and “Beverly Hills Cop II” was the first film he had a hand
in writing. Maybe it was <i>his</i> idea to up the action or maybe it
was the studio's. Paramount just enjoyed the success from “Top Gun”
the year before, so it's reasonable to assume producers Don Simpson
and Jerry Bruckheimer felt they were onto something and thus brought
their “Top Gun” director on to helm “Beverly Hills Cop II”
and go with the vision of it being more of an action flick.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhk0Bkuh4WcHZdGLE6LVLOGX6PeHwh8h19JtNGKWBZULPDfX-JjLUEZMeeHbBnhZWpSDYZkhb19b0-XzxDE7xo9iwLxzR7MLgQ-qdV7-j_2ZOaOsW39uvxlBOD3pV7U7_7jj_rOq3EZCM4_6d5zuhZZ9WiX0F6sn08PvnM0Z7s-Mnm9wp6aMNdf2z-n=s648" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="648" data-original-width="432" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhk0Bkuh4WcHZdGLE6LVLOGX6PeHwh8h19JtNGKWBZULPDfX-JjLUEZMeeHbBnhZWpSDYZkhb19b0-XzxDE7xo9iwLxzR7MLgQ-qdV7-j_2ZOaOsW39uvxlBOD3pV7U7_7jj_rOq3EZCM4_6d5zuhZZ9WiX0F6sn08PvnM0Z7s-Mnm9wp6aMNdf2z-n=s320" width="213" /></a></div>To be fair, “Beverly Hills Cop II”
is probably the closest thing to a comedy Tony Scott ever made, but
it's definitely heavier on the action and lighter on the comedy than
its predecessor. Critics didn't generally care for it, but audiences
sure did. It not only had the biggest opening weekend of the year,
but it was also the top-grossing film in 1987. Impressive for an
R-rated film at that time. Every top-grossing film in the 80's before
that was rated PG (including “Top Gun” the year before). Tony Scott demonstrated he was no mere
one-hit wonder.
<p></p>The brilliance of “Cop II” is it repeats a number
of elements that worked well in the first one without coming across
as a retread. Both films begin with Axel Foley undercover as a
fast-talking huckster. When a close friend of his is shot, he invites
himself into the Beverly Hills investigation where he is not wanted,
but sorely needed. He cons his way in and out of sticky situations by
creating (hysterically funny) characters on the fly and flashing his
badge so people can't get a good look at it, but conveniently accept
him as an authority figure. Rosewood and Taggart sit in a parked car
and pass the time with pithy conversation akin to an old married
couple. Our heroes gratuitously visit a strip club, there's a car
chase with a big rig destroying cars while a toe-tapping Pointer
Sisters song plays in the background, and there's a big shoot out at
the end where the protagonists are out-manned and out-gunned but
nevertheless prevail. Yet somehow, all these reoccurrences feel fresh
rather than recycled. I put the credit almost solely with Tony
Scott's direction. This is the only sequel he directed, but I often
wonder what other franchises he might have improved upon if given the
chance.
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">It's a great tragedy that “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109254/">Beverly Hills Cop III</a>” failed to even come close, but let's not get into
that. The first two are great companion pieces and that's good enough
for me. Incidentally, Stallone took his ideas for the original
“Beverly Hills Cop” and made the schlocky action pic “<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090859/">Cobra</a>.”
Midway through “Beverly Hills Cop II,” Axel Foley ogles a “<a href="https://imgix.ranker.com/user_node_img/29/576829/original/576829-photo-u24">Cobra</a>”
poster with slightly bemused contempt. I often wonder if this was a
personal dig at Stallone from Tony Scott. It's entirely possible,
given that Stallone's wife at the time, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092644/mediaviewer/rm1998762240/">Brigitte Nielsen</a>, not only
starred in “Beverly Hills Cop II,” but allegedly had an affair
with Tony Scott during filming. Man, if Tony Scott wasn't a bad ass
before, he certainly was by then.</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-66153481956846763342022-02-09T15:22:00.003-08:002022-02-09T15:40:25.696-08:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “Top Gun” (1986)<p>
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Whenever my dad would upgrade his
entertainment system, the movie he would test drive it with was
always “Top Gun.” Starting with the gentle pitter-patter of
Harold Faltermeyer's synthesized drum machine over the Paramount
Pictures logo, it segues into the golden dawn on the deck of an
aircraft carrier. Amidst the smoke and the flight deck crew's
communication with hand signals, the music crescendos in sync with
the warming up engines of the F-14's. Upon the firing of the jet's
afterburners and takeoff, the soundtrack jolts into Kenny Loggins'
“<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siwpn14IE7E">Danger Zone</a>.” This combination of sights and sounds puts
anyone's home movie-watching experience to the ultimate test. There
is perhaps no more apropos introduction for a movie you're about to
see than the opening credits of “Top Gun.”</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjR0hgR9qXjcr_-4AOor-3MK6pY1AMtmYJDI8oJS5p-YME7MM4PwGIe8KuoK8yBMEzLyzEzDnsfKD3O8w4dnaW6foVeVTNMEl8Jcp_18RQyBL_5WNRYi8HPVq-axpcexdlcysuM909jG6IjOlhE2Jt4eLxEM7Fj_ees1_tsGYk9ajxxh1Id0re9Gv8-=s648" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="648" data-original-width="432" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjR0hgR9qXjcr_-4AOor-3MK6pY1AMtmYJDI8oJS5p-YME7MM4PwGIe8KuoK8yBMEzLyzEzDnsfKD3O8w4dnaW6foVeVTNMEl8Jcp_18RQyBL_5WNRYi8HPVq-axpcexdlcysuM909jG6IjOlhE2Jt4eLxEM7Fj_ees1_tsGYk9ajxxh1Id0re9Gv8-=s320" width="213" /></a></div>There is probably also no greater
U-turn in subject matter between a director's debut film and their
subsequent sophomore opus than Tony Scott's pivot from “<a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2022/01/tony-scott-retrospective-hunger-1983.html">The Hunger</a>”
to “Top Gun.” Ironically, what the two films have most in common
are the less-than-subtle homoerotic overtones. It's also interesting
that “Top Gun” was Tony Scott's only PG-rated film in his entire
career. He definitely was shooting for an R-rating, though. When you
watch the backlit silhouetted <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvYwvtPvRr0">love scene</a>, it very obviously cuts away
from when Kelly McGillis is just about to drop her top, as if we're
watching a network television edit.
<p></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Perhaps that was either Tony Scott's
joke on the audience, or an attempt to get the love scene axed
altogether. Apparently, when the original cut was shown to test
audiences, there was strong feedback that the film needed a sex
scene. The reason the post-production footage was so dimly lit was a
matter of necessity. Since both Tom Cruise and Kelly McGillis had
moved onto other projects when it came time to film, they no longer
looked like their characters from “Top Gun” anymore. Whatever the
reason and regardless of how Scott felt about having to do it, this
became the look of most of his subsequent love scenes in his future
work (particularly in “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccExv81k9so">True Romance</a>”).</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Despite this campy scene with its
superfluous tongue probing and all, the film in general holds up
pretty well, I'm always surprised by that when I revisit it. It does
indeed ooze the 80's (especially with its music), but not to the
point of being distracting or embarrassing. Also, credit is due for
how influential this movie was. Not only did the Navy see a 500%
increase in recruitment after its release (yikes), but this was the movie
that paved the way for owning films on home video. Up until this
time, VHS tapes were very expensive to own (literally like $100)
because they were manufactured to be sold wholesale and thus most
everyone was limited to renting any movies they wanted to watch. In
the earlier years of VCR's, it was unexplored territory as to whether
people wanted to watch any one movie often enough to justify owning
it. The popularity of “Top Gun” caught Pepsi's attention and they
said, “Hey, if you let us put a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri5msDcS_DI">specially made commercial</a> at the
beginning of the video, we'll make them priced to own immediately
upon release.” It was wildly successful and the rest is history.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“Top Gun” was the film that set the
standard for Tony Scott's style (smoky sets and inexplicable
sweating, for example) and was the one all his other movies were
compared to. It was some time before people and advertisements
stopped referring to Tony Scott as “the director of 'Top Gun.'”
Regardless of Scott's additional great work, “Top Gun” will
probably still be the movie for which he is most remembered 100 years
from now. However, as a testament to just how huge this movie was,
the same will probably also be said for Tom Cruise. That's one
helluva movie. One that people will probably still be using to test
their home theaters.
</p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-86192790687005651432022-01-18T15:00:00.001-08:002022-01-18T15:00:45.520-08:00Tony Scott Retrospective: “The Hunger” (1983)<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">During my teenage years, when I was
beginning to move from merely watching movies to actually <i>seeing</i>
them, I started noticing directors and their particular signatures on
the films they made. One of the first directors to stand out to me
was Tony Scott. By the time I got to college, he had become one of
the few directors whose films I would watch no matter what. Didn't
need to see a trailer, didn't care what they were about, just wanted
to see artist's craftsmanship. Needless to say, I was devastated when
Tony Scott took his own life in 2012. As this year marks a decade
since his untimely passing, I decided to take it upon myself to watch
his entire feature library throughout the year and give my reactions
to each accordingly.</p><p>Tony never did meet the critical
success or audience reverence of his older brother Ridley, who
actually got him into the business. Like most directors, Tony started
off doing television commercials. As his talent, experience, and
aspirations grew, obviously the next logical step was to move onto
feature films. Always thinking big, Tony had his sights set on
directing an adaptation of Anne Rice's hugely successful novel
“Interview with the Vampire.” While that was not in production
yet (and likely tied up with securing the rights), Whitley Strieber's
vampire novel “The Hunger” was optioned by MGM and seeking a
director. The producers originally wanted Alan Parker (having just
directed Pink Floyd's “The Wall”), but Parker recommended Tony
Scott, being a fan of his work in commercials.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Long story short: Tony Scott's “The
Hunger” received a lukewarm (if not totally indifferent) reception
from critics and audiences and vanished into obscurity. I would argue
the film was ahead of its time and largely misunderstood. It did
indeed eventually become a cult favorite amongst the “Emo” crowd.
It is nothing if not an ambitious film and a bold debut.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Even for a vampire film, it is quite
unconventional. Scott's visual style is something that has always
made him stand out from other directors and you see a lot of the
foundations here. He plays heavily with light, particularly the
contrast of bright whites with shadows, usually coming from the side
rather than above or straight on. We see a lot of dim rooms lit by
the surrounding windows and often obscured by blinds, leaving a
horizontal stripe configuration on the characters and backgrounds.
This is, of course, emphasized by Scott's industrious use of smoke.
In every scene, the light cuts through the haze, giving each scene a
very ethereal quality. We also see Scott's use of color as a means of
storytelling. The film has a predominantly cool palette of grays and
blues, which makes the blood, when it flows, all the more stark and
shocking. This film comes across more gory than it actually is
because the blood clashes with the cold elegance of the film and,
when the otherwise subdued and dignified vampires leap upon it like
addicts seeking their lifeforce, the title of the film rings true.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">As Tony Scott undoubtedly put a great
deal of himself into this film, it's no wonder that the lackluster
response led him back to the world of advertising. Luckily, producers
Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer were both fans of “The Hunger”
and, upon seeing Tony Scott's <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM3woO0AbCw">SAAB commercial</a> featuring a jet
fighter, took a chance and optioned Tony Scott to direct “Top Gun.”
That's for next time, though.
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">After the disappointed response from
“The Hunger,” Scott vowed to never read any of his own press ever
again. In that regard, “The Hunger” <i>was</i> a success because,
while it's true Scott enjoyed a significant success in the 80's
producing flashy, expensive, and loud blockbusters for studios, he
still did things his own way. He did not pander to audiences or
trends. He may have created a few, though, by always experimenting
and pushing the boundaries. We have “The Hunger” to thank for
that.
</p>johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-37580937769281471162020-11-08T16:09:00.001-08:002020-11-08T16:09:37.954-08:00Half a Fascist Nation<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span lang="en">Over the past four
years, I've fantasized about how I would feel at this moment. How I
would react once realizing the Trump presidency was coming to an end.
I imagined being unable to contain my elation, literally running and
screaming and dancing like Gene Kelly. I thought for sure that was
how it would be. Instead, I feel relief. And not the comforting
relief, like when you pass a test you didn't study for or when you
make it to the restroom just before you're about to soil yourself.
I'm talking about the kind of relief like being pulled from a car
wreck before the vehicle explodes.</span></p><span lang="en"></span><span lang="en"></span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span lang="en">And, like a horrible
car wreck, this is where we are at: We just got pulled from the
wreck. The past four years have been the car rolling and flying and
smashing and breaking and all we've done so far is survive it. What's
to come is the trip to the hospital, the surgery, the recuperation,
the body cast, the pain medications, the physical therapy, the
x-rays, the medical bills. We're just getting started with the hard
part. I saw some people posting on social media the final shot from <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086190/"><i>Return of the Jedi</i></a> where the protagonists, having finally
defeated the Empire, embrace each other, smiling amongst the Ewok
jubilee. I didn't have the heart to tell them that, if the trajectory
this country has been on lately is the STAR WARS trilogy, we're only
at the part where R2-D2 & C-3PO flee the Blockade Runner in the
escape pod.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br /><span lang="en"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqdnl0Mp6gk3oZwl-0-wUevNl0BgbFZqLreHg9FMAxGmGNmJEB7_Kfb2L-Qsk4LK5AMnReXZiWUZRGzoqhuTkN4SJ1S-7JJabq1kWrmm9Qpyl872UEBHD5uFqIAACJD7LFAhFpEa0yWcM/s750/1984_large.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="460" data-original-width="750" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqdnl0Mp6gk3oZwl-0-wUevNl0BgbFZqLreHg9FMAxGmGNmJEB7_Kfb2L-Qsk4LK5AMnReXZiWUZRGzoqhuTkN4SJ1S-7JJabq1kWrmm9Qpyl872UEBHD5uFqIAACJD7LFAhFpEa0yWcM/s320/1984_large.png" width="320" /></a></div>I'm not just referring
to reparations of all the destruction Trump has wrought, either. I'm
talking about the soul of this country. One only needs to look at the
election results to see how much work has to been done. Check out
this map. This is how the Presidential Election of 1984 turned out.
As you can see, Reagan absolutely trounced Mondale. And Reagan, while
popular, certainly wasn't a dream candidate. Neither was Mondale an
offensive maniac nor a colossal screw up. How could an election
during such an optimistic time be so one-sided, while an election of
literally Democracy vs. Fascism be as close as this one was? People
could feign ignorance in 2016 because Donald Trump, despite
shamelessly behaving like the morally-bankrupt insane idiot he is
throughout his entire campaign, had not illustrated how truly unfit
he was for office until he <span lang="en"><i>was</i></span><span lang="en">
in office. But close to half the country wanted to do it all over
again. That's a huge problem.</span><p></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span lang="en">It's not just a huge
problem because such a large percentage of the population liked
tyranny and enthusiastically wanted more. It's a huge problem because
Donald Trump has laid the groundwork for a smart fascist who knows
what they're doing to step right in and pick up where Trump left off.
And this candidate will be welcomed with open arms. I promise you the
GOP is working on that right now at this moment and will continue to
for the next four years. </span><span lang="en"><b>PLEASE</b></span><span lang="en">
read <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/trump-proved-authoritarians-can-get-elected-america/617023/">this article by Zeynep Tufekci at The Atlantic</a> for a detailed
summation of this concept.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span lang="en">It was clear that Trump
was always nothing more than a battering ram for the Republican
Party. A blunt instrument to see what they could get away with. And
easily discarded once his usefulness was spent. Turns out they could
get away with a lot. Probably more than they suspected. I must say
that I'm pleased my paranoid doomsday predictions turned out to be on
a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2000_problem">Y2K bug</a> level of inaccuracy. I'm surprised, too. I figured given
the indifference shown after <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormy_Daniels%E2%80%93Donald_Trump_scandal">Stormy Daniels</a>, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mueller_report">Mueller Report</a>, and
actual <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Donald_Trump">Impeachment</a>, there's </span><span lang="en"><i>nothing</i></span><span lang="en">
the GOP wouldn't do to keep Trump in power, including contesting the
results of a clear cut election to the point where the Supreme Court
decided in his favor. “Screw the voters and the whole concept of
Democracy.” Guess we finally found the line that Trump enablers
were unwilling to cross. I've never in my life been so happy to be
wrong.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span lang="en">Although, I suppose
it's worth pointing out, the Trump Administration is not over yet. In
keeping with my car wreck analogy: If the election results are us
being pulled from the wreckage, Inauguration Day will be us having
made it to the hospital safely. At the very least, don't be surprised
if there's a lot of self-sabotage between now and January 20</span><sup><span lang="en">th</span></sup><span lang="en">.
Ever since the Clinton years, Republicans have been more adamant
about the failure of Democrats than their own successes, even to
their own detriment. Remember a few years ago when some Conservative
judges were voted out and they responded by commuting the sentences
of several criminals and just letting them loose purely out of sour
grapes? Yeah, expect a lot of that. Even just petty stuff like Trump
pissing on the Oval Office carpet is not outside the realm of
plausibility.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span lang="en">So, where do we go from
here? That's a long and complicated conversation that probably has no
end. All I can say is I hope intelligent, pragmatic, honorable people
make the decisions from here on out and and never give up. One way to
start is to give the election process a complete overhaul: Abolish
the Electoral College, enact automatic voter registration, make
Election Day a national holiday, and have nationwide mail-in ballots.</span></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span lang="en">Whatever happens, this
much is true: We can't rely on the government to take care of us. We
can't even rely on the police to protect us. So, we'll have to look
after each other. Don't let small things slide. Don't let ignorant
declarations go unchallenged. Don't accommodate hate as just a
“difference of opinion.” Don't normalize absurd madness. Hold
people accountable. Maintain integrity. Demand integrity from others.
And never, ever give up. Because the bad guys sure won't. We haven't
won. We've merely pivoted.</span></p>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-32488109455255080882020-06-01T14:39:00.002-07:002020-06-01T14:39:44.251-07:00The Art of Killing Children You're Supposed to be Taking Care Of
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Imagine this:</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Imagine you have a young child of about
3 or 4 years of age. Imagine putting that child in daycare. Most of
you are probably identifying with this easily because you've actually
done it.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Now imagine coming to pick your child
up from daycare after a full workday and finding them tied to a chair
with visible bruises, bloody snot running down their face, excrement
in their pants seeping down their legs, and bawling and wailing that
they're hungry. You ask the
caregiver there what happened and this is their response:</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
“I told your kid it was nap time and
they refused to go to sleep. So, I yelled at them and demanded they
lay down and, when they wouldn't, I threw them to the floor. Then,
they started crying and I told them to shut up and they wouldn't. So,
I stuffed a dirty handkerchief into their mouth to shut them up. They
pulled the gag out and started calling me names. I didn't like that,
so I slapped your kid around. Then they got <i>really</i> nasty and started
throwing stuff at me, so I tied them to the chair and revoked their
privileges of food and bathroom breaks and told them they could just
sit there until they learned to behave. Then I slapped them around
some more while they were tied up just to teach them a lesson.”</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Remember, your child is 3 or 4 years old. </div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
You express your outrage and they reply
with “Hey, it's <i>their</i> fault. They brought this on themselves.”</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
You're so angry, you demand to speak to
their boss. The administrator of the facility hears what was
discussed and says, “I don't believe our caregiver behaved
inappropriately based on what I've been told and I see no need for
termination or disciplinary action. Bad things happen to bad kids.”</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Defeated, you contact the Better
Business Bureau with a complaint and they throw up their hands and
say, “Without any evidence, there's nothing we can do about it.
Perhaps you should just take your child to another daycare center
because it sounds like they were causing trouble at the last one.”</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Left with no other options, that's what
you do. Then, one day, you come to pick up your child again after work and the
child is handcuffed and locked in a closet. The caregiver says, “Your
kid wouldn't come inside when it was time to fingerpaint. When we
dragged them in, they threw a tantrum, so we beat them with sticks.
They kept making it worse, so we locked 'em in the closet, bound and
gagged. Your child totally deserved it.”</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Imagine that happening no matter what
daycare center you took them to. Imagine it happening time and time
again and being met with the same response every time. Imagine
talking to other parents and hearing they had the exact same
experiences nationwide. Imagine there was a group of people (like rich families or something) whose kids acted out similarly but
weren't punished with anywhere near the same severity and, in some cases, not punished at all.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Imagine these are your kids. How enraged would
you be?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
No matter what a child does, no matter
how mad, loud, destructive, violent, or unruly a child gets, it is
the caregiver's responsibility to remain professional, deescalate the situation,
and – most importantly – maintain the safety of the child and
other children.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The police swear an OATH to protect and
serve everyone. I imagine the oaths vary from state to state, but the
general gist of it is <b>“On my honor, I will never betray my badge,
my integrity, my character, or the public trust. I will always have
the courage to hold myself and others accountable for our actions. I
will always uphold the Constitution, my community, and the agency I
serve.”</b> I know you just read it, but read it again.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFvxF1i_g7ohZghtE4kGzapB_TNiqKH4-N3FOXzwSqsTu6PRLUBFQgRklSXcAtS4likdn_Vm7yc0JZqy7osPzMAyZgXP0GnC7fxIzh7fWG9Q5n3wDG8yEmBLEa7cjC3xDg6A8hqDjNWR8/s1600/BLM.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="960" data-original-width="640" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFvxF1i_g7ohZghtE4kGzapB_TNiqKH4-N3FOXzwSqsTu6PRLUBFQgRklSXcAtS4likdn_Vm7yc0JZqy7osPzMAyZgXP0GnC7fxIzh7fWG9Q5n3wDG8yEmBLEa7cjC3xDg6A8hqDjNWR8/s320/BLM.JPG" width="213" /></a>It is not the public's responsibility
to be on their best behavior. It is not the public's responsibility
to be respectful of the police officer's sensibility. It is not the
public's responsibility to keep their feelings and emotions in check.
The police do not get to choose who is worthy of help and who is not.
The police do not get to be vindictive because they feel
disrespected. The police do not get to play judge, jury, and
executioner. Like the teacher, parent, or babysitter dealing with an
out of control child, they must remain, calm, focused, compassionate,
and committed to doing what's best for those they are beholden to
look out for.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
A friend of mine who is an attorney
put it perfectly by saying, “Police should NEVER, EVER be allowed
to respond to provocation or violence in the same way as you or I
might if we were provoked. Police have extra-ordinary training,
resources, skills, organization and weapons that ordinary citizens do
not. In a functioning society, this extraordinary might must be
accompanied by extraordinary responsibility. Police MUST exercise
even more restraint and discipline precisely because they are police.
They are not allowed to react emotionally and to lash out with their
superior force. If they do, they are not fit for their job. If the
system that sustains their jobs encourages or allows them to lash out
with their superior force, then the system has failed and must be
changed.”</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
It's not enough to demand the police
stop murdering suspects, brutalizing protesters, and abusing power.
We must demand that ALL police officers (from incoming cadets to
longstanding veterans) be psychologically evaluated on a regular
basis to ensure they are fit for duty. Anybody with ties to or
exhibiting the behavior of white supremacist groups needs to be
removed from the police force entirely. And that's just for starters.
They need to be held to the highest scrutiny because they can
literally kill anyone at any time, whether intentionally or by
accident and whether they have just cause or not.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
People are dying at the hands of those
sworn to protect them. And even if they're not <i>your</i> children, they're
somebody's <b>child</b>.</div>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-87866510317178221572015-08-01T14:37:00.001-07:002015-08-01T14:38:04.649-07:00Aborting Abortion?There’s been a lot of talk about defunding Planned
Parenthood lately. It seems like there always is, but it’s certainly in the
forefront of public discussion at the moment. Apparently, some enterprising
self-appointed vigilantes went undercover to record (and, subsequently,
strategically edit) incriminating footage of Planned Parenthood. Regardless of
the content of evidence and whether or not it’s authentic, here’s something
they (and you) should consider: If you want to prevent people from having
abortions, shutting down Planned Parenthood is a completely backwards and
self-defeating way to go about it.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwxmNYHrsU9t3hkmDCPoCrkPpCiv-gcAYFnU-Cv9MMVY9-FXLGS0dS-Q568bUTNcXkHIJ2PuMABdDp3wPTzPx_8_Pd9WijxHS2nLq0j7o05XV0zTKPrdM3bbn2IvM6JD2EhH1hx-c4LxI/s1600/prolife.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwxmNYHrsU9t3hkmDCPoCrkPpCiv-gcAYFnU-Cv9MMVY9-FXLGS0dS-Q568bUTNcXkHIJ2PuMABdDp3wPTzPx_8_Pd9WijxHS2nLq0j7o05XV0zTKPrdM3bbn2IvM6JD2EhH1hx-c4LxI/s200/prolife.jpeg" width="200" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The vast majority of what Planned Parenthood does is provide
birth control and other preventative measures to cut down on unwanted
pregnancies (and thus cut down on abortions). For crying out loud, that’s what
the words “planned parenthood” mean. If you eliminate the resources provided by
Planned Parenthood from people with limited means, unwanted pregnancies will rise and, proportionally, the number of abortions will skyrocket (as will the number
of dangerous unlicensed “back-alley” abortions). To look at the even bigger
picture, an increase in unwanted pregnancies means poverty will also go up, as
will welfare, crime, unemployment, child abuse/neglect, and countless other
social ills. You want that?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another thing that perplexes me about such vocal opponents
of abortion is how almost none of them back their beliefs up with action. The
next time somebody spouts off about how evil abortion is and how it must be stopped
at all costs, ask them how many children they’ve adopted (or even fostered).
Ask them how much time they’ve spent volunteering at crisis pregnancy centers
or shelters for unwed mothers (There’s a list of them state-to-state <a href="http://www.lifecall.org/cpc.html">here</a>).
Ask them what they’ve done to help victims of rape or incest. Ask them what they’re doing to educate people (especially
teenagers) about birth control. From my experience, most of them seem to find
it perfectly adequate to say “I pray for them.” Gee, thanks. How very noble and
self-sacrificing of you. Pray in one hand and piss in the other and see which
fills up faster.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you’d rather curse the
dark than light a candle, that’s your prerogative. If you wanna complain about
pollution without even bothering to pick up the litter in your own
neighborhood, you have that right. However, you don’t get to act all righteous
and superior when all you’re doing is bitching. You also don’t get to say you
care about the unborn or that you care about single mothers or that you care
about orphaned children because you don’t. You just hate abortion. Hate never
helps.</div>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-71611769018044019232015-01-05T14:15:00.000-08:002015-01-05T14:25:14.737-08:00The 10 Most Under-Rated Films of the 90'sFive years ago, in January of 2010, I started this blog as a
New Year’s resolution of sorts. Since then, it’s been largely neglected
(although, I was pleased with myself for reporting on the <a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2014/03/cinetopia-golden-ticket-febuary-2014.html">year of the Golden Ticket</a> in its entirety without missing a single installment), but I suppose
it’s better to have written a little and been pleased with it rather than
written a lot and felt like I was overdoing it. Looking back at the first
article I posted, entitled “<a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2010/01/10-most-under-rated-films-of-past.html">The 10 Most Under-Rated Films of the Past Decade</a>,”
I still feel it was a pretty strong start. So, I thought at this half-decade
mark, I’d write something similar.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Since we’re only five years into the “’teens,” a recap of contemporary
underrated gems seems premature, so I thought I’d leap back an extra decade and
revisit the overlooked masterpieces of the 90’s. Compiling the list was a bit
of a chore since I had to think back on some of my favorites from 20 years ago
that strike me as unappreciated by the masses. It’s an imperfect list, but a
fair and just one all the same and I had a great time revisiting these nostalgic treasures. I’ve arranged them alphabetically so as not to show
favoritism (not to mention ranking them in order of personal preference is a
virtual impossibility). If you haven’t seen ’em, do yourself a favor and check
out these modest underdogs from the decade that gave us grunge, the internet,
and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000233/reference">Quentin Tarantino</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4Tawxcg6n83ykiW1dz0RA4lokKgRbdht6Ooi5fv3D4pQWdkFIEgzzZAGmq47uv5FwJboKCmktTF5xyDZbmKGw6xzz8cJ4yY9jJojbAqqTEa45gYikT9GZx-OkcnnBUtdlu8_7x0oGvGc/s1600/criticalcare.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4Tawxcg6n83ykiW1dz0RA4lokKgRbdht6Ooi5fv3D4pQWdkFIEgzzZAGmq47uv5FwJboKCmktTF5xyDZbmKGw6xzz8cJ4yY9jJojbAqqTEa45gYikT9GZx-OkcnnBUtdlu8_7x0oGvGc/s1600/criticalcare.jpg" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118901/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Critical Care</i></a> (1997):</b> When <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001486/reference">Sidney Lumet</a> died in 2011, eulogists
had a bevy of incredible motion pictures spanning several decades to remember
him by. From <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Angry Men</i></a> to <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0292963/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead</i></a>, Mr.
Lumet delivered some uncompromised masterpieces. I think this film is probably my
second favorite from his superior repertoire (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072890/combined">Dog Day Afternoon</a> </i>being the first). It’s too bad (but not
surprising) that it didn’t catch on like so many of his other works. In classic
form of Lumet-style satire, this film skewers the seemingly irreversible contamination
of the medical profession by law firms and insurance companies in a way that is
both hilarious and insightful. With an under-stated “non-all-star” cast, the
quirky characters are brought to life in a way that lends disturbing
credibility to an absurd scenario making it frighteningly realistic. The
story’s relevance even today makes it all the more unsettling.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyc3v4r-hjxE0G_6mqCTYEoWRoU4TmJ0vNkSSdTJ1mGVGAocEJ1b49mA7U5ZfzbBOI3zP2VeRHzm42DgppQiJKZe2nG5-vfN_ljEAKaLcHRyZfehGLCn_SiIEKwuYPR7a2wwUURa4IL3E/s1600/darkbackward.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyc3v4r-hjxE0G_6mqCTYEoWRoU4TmJ0vNkSSdTJ1mGVGAocEJ1b49mA7U5ZfzbBOI3zP2VeRHzm42DgppQiJKZe2nG5-vfN_ljEAKaLcHRyZfehGLCn_SiIEKwuYPR7a2wwUURa4IL3E/s1600/darkbackward.jpg" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101660/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Dark Backward</i></a> (1991):</b> Imagine if <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000186/reference">David Lynch</a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0002545/reference">Preston Sturges</a> collaborated on a film (and maybe used <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000416/reference">Terry Gilliam</a> as a consultant)
and you begin to get the idea of what this bizarre freakshow entails. This is truly
a dark comedy in both visuals and content making it a bit of a trainwreck you
can’t look away from. That’s not necessarily bad, but it is most definitely
sick. Perhaps the sickest thing about it is how compelling it is. A description
would sound like I was just making it up on the spot (and high on something),
so I won’t even try. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0726472/reference">Adam Rifkin</a> wrote and directed this early on in his career
showcasing some genuine talent, yet he never made anything even remotely like
it again. It seems like a waste to have this film remain such an anomaly by the
guy who made it, but I suppose that’s a testament to its originality. I doubt
if I could come up with something as odd as this a second time.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxv8wyqxR9-5NJ_POWHozDR72LbE5-20I8wQVZ8CZlaHS5UVW_fVh0tRSOuniGeOSrwVioW_XSltZ8uolS2Vga4C_WvH2XjTZWRz3NajpjzndvrVckaHyYk7Q7m9ETzKzZfomF_cs5J-k/s1600/gridlockd.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxv8wyqxR9-5NJ_POWHozDR72LbE5-20I8wQVZ8CZlaHS5UVW_fVh0tRSOuniGeOSrwVioW_XSltZ8uolS2Vga4C_WvH2XjTZWRz3NajpjzndvrVckaHyYk7Q7m9ETzKzZfomF_cs5J-k/s1600/gridlockd.jpg" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119225/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Gridlock’d</i></a> (1997):</b> I remember, at the time this came out, a
critic described it as <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000619/reference">Tim Roth</a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000637/reference">Tupac Shukar</a> as the <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001507/reference">Cheech</a> & <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001045/reference">Chong</a> of
heroin. That sounds about right, but don’t let it fool you. It is indeed a very
funny film, but, like <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Critical Care</i>,
its message is a powerful indictment of this country’s health system. A year
earlier, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117951/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Trainspotting</i></a> brought the
subject of heroin addiction to the big screen using comedy to illustrate the
horrors of overdose and withdrawal. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Gridlock’d</i>
looks at it from another point of view showing the futility of trying to get
clean in a society that has essentially shunned addicts altogether regardless
of their earnest attempts at rehabilitation. This message is underlined by a
particularly ominous scene where Tupac’s character laments that he feels his
“luck is running out.” The film was released about four months after Shakur’s
death and is subsequently dedicated to him. I was never really into his music,
but this film showed a genuine talent for acting that made me sad his full
potential as a thespian would never be fully realized.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhP_ICNSJp1ScEpxWKMBoYoY6uyo1Pl3hAoSecVUvhIEN8vtKop2inB4GUNbZLZhg6qeJc4scvf2I528Ymt_CzvtqjxCGwBhKOtP_owQlA7eitvl20DwIf97GHFdHsH2_4-wwZ9Kf6EJAs/s1600/insider.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhP_ICNSJp1ScEpxWKMBoYoY6uyo1Pl3hAoSecVUvhIEN8vtKop2inB4GUNbZLZhg6qeJc4scvf2I528Ymt_CzvtqjxCGwBhKOtP_owQlA7eitvl20DwIf97GHFdHsH2_4-wwZ9Kf6EJAs/s1600/insider.jpg" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0140352/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Insider</i></a> (1999):</b> This film may not seem underrated since it
was (rightfully) <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0140352/awards">nominated for seven Academy Awards</a> (including best picture,
director, actor, and screenplay), but unlike <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111161/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Shawshank Redemption</i></a>, which bombed at the box office, but got
nominated for several Oscars and eventually found a huge success through word
of mouth after being released on video, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The
Insider</i> never really found its staying power. I remember seeing the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wwJp8VDGzE">trailer</a>
in the theater and thinking it looked like a movie my dad would probably watch but
would bore me to tears. A friend insisted I watch it, though, and lent me his
copy to emphasize the point. After I watched it, I immediately went out and
bought my own copy. This film is almost entirely comprised of talking, but it
is endlessly riveting and wonderfully exciting, like an action movie with no
violence. It’s hard to pick a favorite scene because every bit of it is so
thoroughly satisfying. Furthermore, I think it contains the best performance of
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000128/reference">Russell Crowe</a>’s career and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000199/reference">Al Pacino</a>’s greatest <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peiMq3_Xv0Q">onscreen rant</a> ever (which is
really saying something).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSsEZD8uy-bkzwCNuaNNTfqSnLfV90m94zZh2wC1ZO0yKekFAVCade2fjdNUuBc2UmVrTgfWileFZ6UQYKSq8JbwBokVKEDw1oxAP2u_XfL7IOUeTMs_9y-kkKWqkd5uuJ2YHRAImIrNk/s1600/nothingtolose.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiSsEZD8uy-bkzwCNuaNNTfqSnLfV90m94zZh2wC1ZO0yKekFAVCade2fjdNUuBc2UmVrTgfWileFZ6UQYKSq8JbwBokVKEDw1oxAP2u_XfL7IOUeTMs_9y-kkKWqkd5uuJ2YHRAImIrNk/s1600/nothingtolose.jpg" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119807/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Nothing to Lose</i></a> (1997):</b> Everybody I know who saw this movie
said they were surprised by how funny it was. I’d say that’s probably because
it stars <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001454/reference">Martin Lawrence</a>, who (like <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001705/reference">Rob Schneider</a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0176981/reference">Dane Cook</a>) seems to have
set a precedent that any movie he’s in must be embarrassingly horrible. The
truth is there’s a very short list of films that have made me laugh until I was
brought to tears and this is one of them. In fact, I’ve seen this movie many, many
times and it still makes me laugh hysterically despite knowing exactly what’s
coming. Most impressive, though, is how it seems to do so much with so little.
It’s an unassuming film with a simple premise: Desperate Martin Lawrence
carjacks a despondent <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000209/reference">Tim Robbins</a> who in turn kidnaps Lawrence and the two of
them pull a heist together. Dopey as that may sound, there are some clever
subplots, lots of unexpected gags, and a surprising amount of character depth
for a film of such modest aspirations, but it all works and it holds up well
after multiple viewings. Best of all, the filmmakers showed enough tactful
restraint to not make a series of sequels. I have a tremendous amount of
respect for a film willing to allow itself to be a silly comedy, do it well, and
be fine with leaving it at that.</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcHZKJxr7iz95IQZrbhCHtgZgmuvmjkugbOprqdGRRtb_LzenNW7vHbvaUcFGvayujyIPrfurbnbIrDksp_k8MEHrb2isStc-DBGGS8XNUtQ9FcR5T9lHdckj8iVWvWujqOvny0S6fgSU/s1600/robocop2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgcHZKJxr7iz95IQZrbhCHtgZgmuvmjkugbOprqdGRRtb_LzenNW7vHbvaUcFGvayujyIPrfurbnbIrDksp_k8MEHrb2isStc-DBGGS8XNUtQ9FcR5T9lHdckj8iVWvWujqOvny0S6fgSU/s1600/robocop2.jpg" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100502/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop 2</i></a> (1990):</b> Here’s where I might lose a number of you,
but hear me out. As this is a list of underrated films, I thought it
appropriate to include a movie I felt was unfairly chided by critics and
audiences alike. I’ll admit, I didn’t think much of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop 2</i> when I saw it in theaters. And, no – it’s not a <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">great</i> movie by any means. But, as far as
sequels go, it’s not that bad. In fact, the more I watch it, the more I like
it. First of all, I give the filmmakers props for not just basically re-making <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093870/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop</i></a>.* That would have been really
easy for them to do and they probably would have made even more money. However,
instead of amping up the violence and gore, they instead amped up the political
and economic commentary thus making it a more socially relevant film rather than
settling for a mind-numbing action flick. That may be why audiences rejected
it. Of course, action, violence, gore, and mayhem are all in there too and,
while it may not be as shocking or clever as the original, the spirit is still
intact. Apparently, this film was a production nightmare fraught with re-writes
and re-shoots and re-edits (which is kind of funny since RoboCop himself goes
through similar changes and upgrades throughout the film – art imitates life
and vice versa) and, while the film seems a bit patchy at times, it’s pretty
well put together, considering. That in itself is a small miracle. Too many
cooks in the kitchen is never a good thing, but it’s nice to recognize when
things don’t turn out nearly as bad as they could have.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
*Incidentally, the <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1234721/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop</i></a>
remake that came out last year was way worse than <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop 2</i>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS9mY8HXn1Zgkx3a8vUCIEhVs6auzHBLq5cmdQ7Adp_iAgy3aXtqHe2q8wHk8wXjWv7vnCYtbyofABU8_gwpwJ7lHcVlI3J_mLebXJVwLY8sMR3VGf530eKB4G9V6BTjsZOYowjaYT3uo/s1600/swimmingwithsharks.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS9mY8HXn1Zgkx3a8vUCIEhVs6auzHBLq5cmdQ7Adp_iAgy3aXtqHe2q8wHk8wXjWv7vnCYtbyofABU8_gwpwJ7lHcVlI3J_mLebXJVwLY8sMR3VGf530eKB4G9V6BTjsZOYowjaYT3uo/s1600/swimmingwithsharks.jpg" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114594/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Swimming with Sharks</i></a> (1994):</b> When <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000228/reference">Kevin Spacey</a> received an
Academy Award for <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114814/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Usual Suspects</i></a>,
some say his performances in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114369/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Se7en</i></a>
and this film (all released within the same year) likely helped influence his
win. I agree. Although, out of those three films, I think <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Swimming with Sharks</i> contains his best work. Spacey plays the
relentlessly abusive Machiavellian producer Buddy Ackerman with such immoral
glee, it’s clear the character not only <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">knows</i>
he’s evil, but revels in it. Spacey’s talents really shine through in the
scenes where the story makes some particularly dark twists. He shifts from
comedy to drama seamlessly and without altering the integrity of the character.
Supposedly based on real-life producer <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005428/reference">Joel Silver</a>, this film comes across as a
very personal and passionate open letter to Hollywood
exposing the dark underbelly that everybody knows about but few people acknowledge
openly. The overall mantra of the film is “What do you really want?” but more
specifically, it’s asking “How much of your soul are you willing to sell?” With
that, the film feels a bit like a warning, not just to people contemplating a
career in Hollywood, but to the people already there.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_cnoeKIZPZ2b3mfK8SjfCIqsuIAGAohTVLJ8qEhKx9pY4fgC2mi8X7ZrAjPiF31DrRpnOW1OtYr2WU3MJ3YrQ30p8JqhOSlbHuVCLXWUNcCnQm6k4QE0QiJvE_8tfz9yIthvM1JBd78U/s1600/thingstodoindenver.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_cnoeKIZPZ2b3mfK8SjfCIqsuIAGAohTVLJ8qEhKx9pY4fgC2mi8X7ZrAjPiF31DrRpnOW1OtYr2WU3MJ3YrQ30p8JqhOSlbHuVCLXWUNcCnQm6k4QE0QiJvE_8tfz9yIthvM1JBd78U/s1600/thingstodoindenver.jpg" /></a><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114660/combined"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Things to Do in </i></b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Denver</i></b></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114660/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> When You’re Dead</i></a> (1995):</b> Apparently, this script was written long before <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105236/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Reservoir Dogs</i></a> ever saw the light of
day, but wasn’t greenlit until <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110912/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Pulp Fiction</i></a> paved the way for a variety of wannabees. The film’s a bit
heavy-handed with its “too cool for school” catch phrases and the characters
are clichéd to the point of almost being cartoons, but this movie is wickedly
entertaining and quite satisfying. It helps that the cast is populated by a
who’s-who of character actors from independent film lending it instant
credibility. A group of semi-retired criminals are brought together for a job
they end up botching and then given a grace period of 48 hours before the
kingpin who hired them (played by the always reliably creepy <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000686/reference">Christopher Walken</a>) rubs them out. Things become a bit existential when each of them choose
a different path. One tries to run, one tries to hide, one tries to fight back,
one accepts his fate and does nothing, and so on. It’s an interesting mix of
what-ifs and has some truly inspired moments. Inevitably lost in the morass of
the fallout of Tarantino plagiarists, this film deserved better.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPx1UTYi88xeBjavTVn41-u1Zenj0QSAWOe9vkdW5wRprJUbM8BMYUNiy98O87Y5i9HuN5Bj9aTH2hwMsRu9dvC9kUGvz78YHV3czi0WSWGozg4V6uAzXF7zceNF9BhdRgfJmYfHQdgn8/s1600/twentybucks.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPx1UTYi88xeBjavTVn41-u1Zenj0QSAWOe9vkdW5wRprJUbM8BMYUNiy98O87Y5i9HuN5Bj9aTH2hwMsRu9dvC9kUGvz78YHV3czi0WSWGozg4V6uAzXF7zceNF9BhdRgfJmYfHQdgn8/s1600/twentybucks.jpg" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108410/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Twenty Bucks</i></a> (1993):</b> The story behind this film is as charming
as the film itself. The script was originally written in 1935, but wasn’t
discovered until after the <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0092015/reference">screenwriter</a>’s death in 1990. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0092018/reference">His son</a> updated the
script for the 90’s and the combined result was this movie – a movie told from
the point of view of a twenty dollar bill illustrating the subtle yet
significant impact petty cash has on our lives. The story is pretty thorough in
contemplating its options and the bill in question sees about as much action as
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0029626/">Wile E. Coyote</a>. A great ensemble cast (most of whom were unknown at the time
but are very recognizable now) of characters walk in and out of seemingly
unrelated scenes playing major parts in some vignettes and minor ones in
others. If you pay close attention to the relationships of the characters, this
film will make you think (and wonder) about the peripheral people in your own
life and how they affect you. It’s actually quite romantic in that sense.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqaiI-xJc3Qe_PP1TO9jJAyE_dubp3P7pybwYHLVnQNl7A1ZyR95MgtLgCpwl54rNNIflka_6b6tddijcA_ZwqtCpyLxwjQRDQJCcL-WYCShmAKnER2nontUAMDQS9fvmN9fIb_5Mccw8/s1600/zeroeffect.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhqaiI-xJc3Qe_PP1TO9jJAyE_dubp3P7pybwYHLVnQNl7A1ZyR95MgtLgCpwl54rNNIflka_6b6tddijcA_ZwqtCpyLxwjQRDQJCcL-WYCShmAKnER2nontUAMDQS9fvmN9fIb_5Mccw8/s1600/zeroeffect.jpg" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120906/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Zero Effect</i></a> (1998):</b> This is a brilliant contemplation of how a
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0026631/">Sherlock Holmes</a> type would behave in the modern world. The criminally underused
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000597/reference">Bill Pullman</a> plays Daryl Zero, a private investigator so ingenious, he can
solve mysteries almost instantaneously. Unfortunately, he’s also a shut-in with
severe obsessive compulsive disorder who is so socially inept, he must pretend
he’s other people to function in public. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001774/reference">Ben Stiller</a> is the <a href="http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0026702/">Watson</a> to his
Holmes, serving as a liaison to clients and general errand boy. The movie is
pretty funny, but its real strength comes from the mystery itself (which I will
not reveal here). Like Adam Rifkin (writer/director of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Dark Backward</i>), for some reason, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0440458/reference">Jake Kasdan</a> (writer/director
of this film) went in a completely different direction with all of his
subsequent films, sadly settling for low-brow, gross-out comedies instead of
smart, thoughtful ones like this. I guess you gotta go where the money is, but <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Zero Effect</i> is so inspired, it’s
disappointing that it didn’t do well enough to justify more like it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I fear that, immediately after posting this, I’ll be plagued
with thoughts of “Oh, yeah! That was a good one, too,” but, as I said before, I
think this is a nice representation of flicks that have become unfairly
forgotten. I’d invite readers to enlighten me as to what some of your favorites
from the 90’s were that may have slipped through the cracks as well. After all,
if I’ve never heard of them, how would I know how good they are?</div>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-69155134507150231832014-03-16T21:28:00.000-07:002014-03-16T21:35:34.765-07:00Lucky Number 2013I usually wait until March to “finalize” my top ten list of
favorite movies from the previous year for two reasons: One, to wait and see
what the <a href="http://www.oscars.org/">Academy Awards</a> do first. Two, I need the first few months of the new
year to see whatever films I missed before ranking the final tally. This year,
with my Golden Ticket, was certainly an exception. I saw so many movies already
that there was no need to catch up on missed ones, but I had to take the extra
time just to recap them all. In the average year, I see what amounts to about
one movie a week, so the grand total is usually about 52 by March. I also keep
track of films I’m interested in seeing, but haven’t yet, and my “surplus”
averages anywhere from 30 to 50. This year, I saw 84 films and have less than
10 on my unseen list. Definitely a record and one that will probably stand
indefinitely (unless I win another year of free movies or there’s a nuclear war
and I’m stuck in a bomb shelter containing every film made that year).
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="230" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/YU8CvjIwAlY" width="410"></iframe></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Obviously, with that much of an overflow, it was a nearly
impossible task to rank the movies in order of preference. Luckily, my main
favorites stood out pretty clearly, but it was still pretty tough to narrow it
down. Since this was such a unique year, I considered doing a top twenty list
instead, but it just didn’t seem to have the same level of reverence, I suppose
for the same reason I resent the Oscars’ new 10-nominee policy. So, I’m
sticking with ten favorites. And here they are:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_FUIMBy9NdGKZZKbHtll4Ya1B4GH3kLNFsLCgwVA8bZYz2EBKaGAKAnbpjngmMfyPJivdn-N9YQOyyUcYmMQHyltYN_PuWBqp5jhqr6MH5rnSJ1Ke_TS3Stc0Q3JouHQhvqZJQ2ZRFcQ/s1600/FruitvaleStation.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_FUIMBy9NdGKZZKbHtll4Ya1B4GH3kLNFsLCgwVA8bZYz2EBKaGAKAnbpjngmMfyPJivdn-N9YQOyyUcYmMQHyltYN_PuWBqp5jhqr6MH5rnSJ1Ke_TS3Stc0Q3JouHQhvqZJQ2ZRFcQ/s1600/FruitvaleStation.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#10: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334649/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i></a> </b>– Every year
there’s at least one major Oscar snub and this year it seemed to fall squarely
on <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i> (although
overlooking <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1453405/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Monsters University</i></a> for
best animated feature is a pretty big oversight as well). As I said in my
<a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2014/01/for-their-consideration.html">pre-Oscars post</a>, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i> is
so convincingly re-created, it plays almost like a documentary. Every aspect of
it is superb: Writing, acting, directing, cinematography, editing, everything.
This film deserved nominations in all of those categories and more. What’s most
insulting is that only nine films were nominated for best picture this year,
meaning the Academy thought it was better for there to remain a vacant slot
rather give <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i> a shot
at the title. Disgraceful. I’m especially perplexed because it was not only a
fantastic film, but it was (a) based on a true story (over half of this year’s
nominations for best picture were based on true stories), and (b) was relevant
to current events (in the wake of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin">Trayvon Martin shooting</a>) making it a
strong social parable. Oh, well. Great films being unappreciated by award
committees is nothing new, but it’s a shame when the result is less people
seeing it. So, do yourself a favor and see <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale
Station</i>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2gU6-tU9BlqEFP_PbyzFEvRl3qUHc2JGhYPB57VhGxC9JTEjedbBN5E7FWkEdVogywJPdcTmS1oRKwcJoFRJkYP5L66Mw29VNgOkl_vLC1KQfEIuuDBBfwDWygwPNsXnyaD8RbzujdM0/s1600/Philomena.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2gU6-tU9BlqEFP_PbyzFEvRl3qUHc2JGhYPB57VhGxC9JTEjedbBN5E7FWkEdVogywJPdcTmS1oRKwcJoFRJkYP5L66Mw29VNgOkl_vLC1KQfEIuuDBBfwDWygwPNsXnyaD8RbzujdM0/s1600/Philomena.jpg" height="200" width="134" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#9: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2431286/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Philomena</i></a></b> – Here’s a true story that
actually <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">was</i> given credit where
credit was due. I didn’t know too much about it going in and may not have
bothered with it had I been told that it was about a woman looking for her long
lost son given up for adoption. My sister-in-law said she was real interested
in seeing it and it was playing at the <a href="http://hollywoodtheatre.org/">theater</a> I volunteer at, so I checked it
out to let her know how it was. I loved it, so it was as good an outcome as one
can hope for going into a movie cold. Speaking personally, I’m a big fan of
anything that shines a light on the hypocrisy and corruption of organized
religion and skewers it effectively, but that wasn’t what made this movie
great. It’s definitely a character story and the characters are very
interesting and sympathetic. In hindsight, I was surprised at how funny the
film was, given the melancholy subject matter. It was roundly entertaining and
actually made me want to read the <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6791212-the-lost-child-of-philomena-lee">book</a>. I probably won’t get around to it, but
I would like to watch the film again.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRe77oYvEwxRNCdqnSeE6XzVSbyPO_K_FVBWw3EjAPqmxFjb_qxAFFHo1JtsQoONae5MbrjMvSEbN4XSt0-_FDAUZXbvo9AaLphPi4x5NnYybzpY9ZXlEtCYz34X2KhFYYBqOIITZPvdk/s1600/ZeroCharisma.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRe77oYvEwxRNCdqnSeE6XzVSbyPO_K_FVBWw3EjAPqmxFjb_qxAFFHo1JtsQoONae5MbrjMvSEbN4XSt0-_FDAUZXbvo9AaLphPi4x5NnYybzpY9ZXlEtCYz34X2KhFYYBqOIITZPvdk/s1600/ZeroCharisma.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#8: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2294965/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Zero Charisma</i></a></b> – I played <a href="http://www.wizards.com/dnd/">Dungeons & Dragons</a> once when I was in grade school. I lost interest in it real fast,
though, because the “Dungeonmaster” (or is it “<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Dragon</i>master?”) had a bit of a god complex and seemed to enjoy
toying with the rest of us. At one point, I accused him of just making it up as
he went along and creating a game that couldn’t be won purely for the sake of
his own amusement. He got really pissed and I stopped playing. This is a movie
about him in adult form. It’s a tough sell for a movie to have a protagonist
that the audience really doesn’t like, but it works here, because that’s the
whole point. I’m not sure why I liked it so much (certainly not because I’m
into RPG’s, because I’m not), but I think maybe because it was so honest. All
too often in movies, when the hero is an outcast, they paint it as though they
are simply misunderstood victims. In real life, they’re usually outcasts
because they are downright unlikeable people who consequently alienate <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">themselves</i>. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0374900/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Napoleon Dynamite</i></a> was like this. So was <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0494222/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Eagle vs. Shark</i></a>. These characters were people who created their own
misery, made other people miserable, and yet were audacious enough to blame
their misfortune on external circumstances. I have tremendous respect for any
movie that plays fair by not whitewashing the truth and remains entertaining
while doing it. It’s even better when the movie is funny, and I thought <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Zero Charisma</i> was hilarious.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvN_K6YHHRTDcgKX4Mw0doczWgBz4c8e1ntu_aIIh_-q9LuE99iVilwiPqZLo6KUtIsau_k2_OyC_-sgJE1FqzIBDj-TJ_6qA12iD-Xts7o19v8l3_CxaWxrpCtlg0oMIwkORJFRJ_3r0/s1600/CaptainPhillips.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvN_K6YHHRTDcgKX4Mw0doczWgBz4c8e1ntu_aIIh_-q9LuE99iVilwiPqZLo6KUtIsau_k2_OyC_-sgJE1FqzIBDj-TJ_6qA12iD-Xts7o19v8l3_CxaWxrpCtlg0oMIwkORJFRJ_3r0/s1600/CaptainPhillips.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#7: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535109/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Captain Phillips</i></a></b> – I feel like I’ve
written too much about this movie already (since I saw it at <a href="http://cinetopia.com/">Cinetopia</a> twice
and included it in my Oscar essay in January), so I hope I don’t repeat myself
too much in talking about it again. In a nutshell, I suppose this is as close
as any of us will (hopefully) get to knowing what it is like to be kidnapped by
Somali pirates. It’s a tense film that escalates to the point where the ending
feels almost like an act of mercy. The end is a bit of a surprise, too. The
surprise isn’t in what happens (if you know anything about the story, you
already know Captain Phillips survives), but how it makes you feel. I’ve heard
a number of people remark that they weren’t expecting to cry at the finale
because action films rarely bring about that kind of reaction. But whatever
tears you may experience are not because there’s a heartfelt reunion with the
captain’s wife or because beloved characters get killed or anything as simple
as that. It’s because what we’ve seen is so traumatizing, they are tears of
compassion and perhaps even some pity. Tears for living in a world where things
like this can (and do) happen. That’s powerful stuff. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXMsPagKm5tvBIU7DFmcm9QkbIw-WaY0Nn-ZMaJxyNFy09ikoi4dsYp3VvkwcSvLCu6Nq2Q7wM3ftrx05MCq538IX1Hecz_ReKodA95W5fMRH4STK7f3AWBARny7bVRjRPXB-x4W9B3GY/s1600/WolfOfWallStreet.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXMsPagKm5tvBIU7DFmcm9QkbIw-WaY0Nn-ZMaJxyNFy09ikoi4dsYp3VvkwcSvLCu6Nq2Q7wM3ftrx05MCq538IX1Hecz_ReKodA95W5fMRH4STK7f3AWBARny7bVRjRPXB-x4W9B3GY/s1600/WolfOfWallStreet.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#6: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993846/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Wolf of Wall Street</i></a></b> – This is
film is classic <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000217/reference">Scorsese</a> cranked up to eleven. One could even consider it the
third part of a Scorsese trilogy about the inevitable downfall of a criminally
Machiavellian rise to power (<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099685/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">GoodFellas</i></a>
being the trilogy’s first entry and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112641/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Casino</i></a>
being the second). A fellow movie fan labeled this one as “<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080491/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Caligula</i></a> on cocaine” and that’s pretty much right on the money. I
don’t believe I’ve ever seen such a hedonistic film in my life and it’s pretty
exhilarating in the same “guilty pleasure” way <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0322802/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Jackass</i></a> was. The film has gotten a lot of flack saying it glorifies
this kind of lifestyle, but I don’t believe it condoned the things it showed
anymore than <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Captain Phillips</i>
condoned piracy. In fact, I think suggesting this film glorifies such reprehensible
behavior says more about the accusers than it does about the filmmakers. It
certainly didn’t make me want to go out and become a stockbroker and screw
innocent people out of money and then spend it on drugs and prostitutes and
wreck cars and get divorced and find myself arrested and nothing to show for it
in the end. I had fun watching it happen to someone else, though.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCnEz9A8dvZMpuZAXBXDF7mZoNGijOXJzGwiM5Rk7xleeRyik3c-0Tv4lk7DNnLyoSKu1r3hljVp2ydz6GWmBCR0QsvP5sqH9bXnt8Wzlap5DWH33hyphenhyphenpz38Rf-u4uiwav2RciD3dhYfZw/s1600/2Guns.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCnEz9A8dvZMpuZAXBXDF7mZoNGijOXJzGwiM5Rk7xleeRyik3c-0Tv4lk7DNnLyoSKu1r3hljVp2ydz6GWmBCR0QsvP5sqH9bXnt8Wzlap5DWH33hyphenhyphenpz38Rf-u4uiwav2RciD3dhYfZw/s1600/2Guns.jpg" height="200" width="132" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#5: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1272878/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">2 Guns</i></a></b> – Now that we’re in the top
half of my list of favorite films from 2013, we graduate from award-worthy
empirically “good” films to the “fun” stuff. As I said in my <a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2013/09/cinetopia-golden-ticket-august-2013.html">original review</a> of
the film, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">2 Guns</i> harkens back to the
days of the mid-80’s when action films were fun and silly and felt more like
amusement park rides than actual movies, when there was as much humor as
violence and, even when they didn’t particularly make sense and defied all
reasonable plausibility, you didn’t care because you were having way too much
of a good time. In <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">2 Guns</i>, we’ve got
people walking away from explosions in slow-motion, arguments manifested as car
chases, a stampede of cattle during a shoot-out, and even a scene where <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000242/reference">Mark Wahlberg</a> literally farts on one of the badguys. If this doesn’t sound like a
movie you’d enjoy… well, I was gonna say “Don’t see it,” but I’m more inclined
to say “Lighten up.” I saw it on my birthday and I couldn’t have picked a
better film to celebrate being alive.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhT5G2dnz69KiR1H_PJoDD3oqvwazxcjvcDTJL8vYECu_Tj2fwE1SP3KSbU-NT3InxhNSk8XfHoJBHa3HWOjIU9UTzgm-HFB63iMDwV_ENZgJeiXchUAT9xd8UkP8osHSItigr23jpflQI/s1600/Elysium.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhT5G2dnz69KiR1H_PJoDD3oqvwazxcjvcDTJL8vYECu_Tj2fwE1SP3KSbU-NT3InxhNSk8XfHoJBHa3HWOjIU9UTzgm-HFB63iMDwV_ENZgJeiXchUAT9xd8UkP8osHSItigr23jpflQI/s1600/Elysium.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#4: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535108/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Elysium</i></a></b> – This film got a mixed
reception from critics and audiences and I can only assume it’s because <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1136608/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">District 9</i></a> came first and some people
thought <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0088955/reference">Neill Blomkamp</a>’s sophomore opus didn’t measure up. I enjoyed <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">District 9</i>, but I liked <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Elysium</i> even more. I remember some
friends saying other friends of theirs didn’t care for it (one of them calling
it “<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Elysi-dumb</i>” and probably patting
himself on the back for being so witty), but I implored my friends to see it
anyway. Most of them liked it, too. So, I’m not sure where the disconnect is.
Just a question of apples and oranges, I guess. With that in mind, I find it
difficult to think of ways to talk you into checking this out, if you haven’t
already. Ranking it as number 4 out of 84 movies I saw last year is enough of
an endorsement, I suppose. But, for the sake of comparison, I liked it more
than <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1663662/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Pacific Rim</i></a>
and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1483013/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Oblivion</i></a> and even <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1300854/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Iron Man 3</i></a> (all of which were pretty
decent sci-fi films as well). The action was good, the story was interesting,
the special effects were absolutely incredible, and it kept me guessing. Maybe
there’s not as much of an audience for science fiction as there used to be, but
for my money, this is about as good as it gets.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUKF088DipMJC6tFHIAi7-HPncSbbVrxgW_6J7o1CU7joLFxXCKhj3XUIf0BAPc5rBQlPe-CG_Nn_7o5AT_-yyozhrUTIqbKjfvbO9mKpBXsnc9ENeztaAhDonmLaMKMrzUs6rjEZ6LSQ/s1600/TheHeat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUKF088DipMJC6tFHIAi7-HPncSbbVrxgW_6J7o1CU7joLFxXCKhj3XUIf0BAPc5rBQlPe-CG_Nn_7o5AT_-yyozhrUTIqbKjfvbO9mKpBXsnc9ENeztaAhDonmLaMKMrzUs6rjEZ6LSQ/s1600/TheHeat.jpg" height="200" width="139" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#3: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2404463/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Heat</i></a></b> – Like <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Philomena</i>, I sort of stumbled into seeing <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Heat</i>. Although, unlike <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Philomena</i>,
I knew what <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Heat</i> was about and
wasn’t particularly interested in seeing it to begin with. Not because it came
across as a chick flick, but because the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST16k80bDYE">trailers</a> didn’t strike me as
particularly funny. Even the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5m7Ml76zoA">red-band trailer</a> (which pretty much just showed
the same jokes with more swear words), didn’t have much to offer. That’s a bad
sign for a comedy. Somehow, though, this film managed to be almost the funniest
one of the year (second only to my #1 pick). Most impressively, it’s not the
kind of comedy that’s only funny in places where the successful gags compensate
for the weak ones. This movie is consistently funny from start to finish and
it’s hard to pick a favorite part. A great deal of it has to do with casting.
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000113/reference">Sandra Bullock</a> is one of the most thoroughly likable actresses today (and, as
such, it was a stroke of genius for <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0190859/reference">Alfonso Cuarón</a> to cast her in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1454468/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Gravity</i></a>, given it was essentially a
one-woman show) and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0565250/reference">Melissa McCarthy</a>’s been on a hot streak lately. The
combination of these two absolutely kill it and it doesn’t hurt that the script
is strong to begin with. The film did well when it came out, but you don’t hear
people talking about it now as they did when <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1478338/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Bridesmaids</i></a> came out on DVD. There were two other comedies this
year that made a lot of noise and featured almost entirely male casts (<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1245492/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">This Is the End</i></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1229340/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Anchorman 2</i></a>) and I frankly thought they both kinda sucked. The
arrogant, self-indulgent comedy of those two films could learn a thing or two
from <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Heat</i> and the women in it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjh6fpqKZwI-aUP-BTJoSQeqgrm2GB3nMyaOH3GFm5txMm3yknTIJXxR1hRswCjqvkNo7pY5ioU6pCjTH_sx-VxLLLwCOeLFVVJNmuRDGKIWXb-RrX-eq6mIxY_3ZJ6pMhzuQTgQtVcZZQ/s1600/StarTrekIntoDarkness.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjh6fpqKZwI-aUP-BTJoSQeqgrm2GB3nMyaOH3GFm5txMm3yknTIJXxR1hRswCjqvkNo7pY5ioU6pCjTH_sx-VxLLLwCOeLFVVJNmuRDGKIWXb-RrX-eq6mIxY_3ZJ6pMhzuQTgQtVcZZQ/s1600/StarTrekIntoDarkness.jpg" height="200" width="134" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#2: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1408101/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Star Trek Into Darkness</i></a></b> – As far as
sci-fi films go, this one might have been chided even more than <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Elysium</i> was. For starters, <a href="http://www.startrek.com/">Star Trek</a>
fans are almost impossible to please (as are all hardcore fans of any geek
subculture) because they have their own “rules” of what’s allowed and what’s possible.
I don’t really care what they think, though. This movie was a blast. It was a
bit heavy-handed with the massive destruction (a point of contention I had with
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0770828/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Man of Steel</i></a>) and there were a great
deal of “camera-winking” references peppered throughout, but I ultimately felt
like those were part of the fun. I got the same enjoyment out of it that I got
from <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">2 Guns</i>, making it one of the
best times I had at the movies last year. I loved the previous <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Star Trek</i></a> and I liked this one even more
and I’m eagerly anticipating the next one. Anybody who disagrees with me can go
sulk in their own misery for all I care.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiP-Ml2sMusGK1s2ZsvbHaGN9MjcOtqnJzvmU56k4SgtTJxcgOgpXgqcuJHLoKOiTo54S_RZV4vUDuJl9w34U5n0SGMGBCpo8rVoAaw64N5NolDDHVDQeRSn7KWXV92P0IMBNbyH9ng9CM/s1600/WorldsEnd.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiP-Ml2sMusGK1s2ZsvbHaGN9MjcOtqnJzvmU56k4SgtTJxcgOgpXgqcuJHLoKOiTo54S_RZV4vUDuJl9w34U5n0SGMGBCpo8rVoAaw64N5NolDDHVDQeRSn7KWXV92P0IMBNbyH9ng9CM/s1600/WorldsEnd.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">#1: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1213663/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The World’s End</i></a></b> – I saw this film
three times in the theater and I would’ve watched even more. Half an hour in,
it was already my favorite movie of the year. Immediately after seeing it, I
must have texted a dozen people telling them they had to see it, too. And,
indeed, most of them texted me back after they <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">did</i> see it saying something to the effect of “You weren’t kidding,
that was amazing.” It’s somewhat of a movie miracle since it succeeds so
effectively as a comedy and an action spectacular and a science-fiction
thriller and a kung-fu movie and a post-apocalyptic adventure and a drinking
game. I’m pleased that, in a year when I saw every movie that was conceivably
worth seeing, the best one seemed almost as though it had taken what worked so
well from all the other ones and combined it into one masterful cyclone of
awesomeness. I don’t know what else to say, except thank you <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0942367/reference">Edgar Wright</a> and company!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, that was my 2013 as far as the best of the best. Since
this was such a unique year, I thought (in lieu of a top twenty) I’d mention a
few other movies that stood out for one reason or another. I’ll probably never
see this many movies in a single year ever again, so I might as well make my annual
report as thorough as I can:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Worst movie of the
year (by far): <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2084989/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Upstream Color</i></a></b> – I
hated this movie so much, I actually felt violent afterwards.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Most underrated: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1321511/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Oldboy</i></a></b> – This did not deserve to
flop anywhere near as badly as it did. In fact, as far as remakes go, it’s
actually pretty good.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Biggest
disappointment: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1606378/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">A Good Day to Die Hard</i></a></b>
– I actually liked <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0337978/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Die Hard 4</i></a> and was
impressed by how earnest they were in remaining loyal to the franchise, but this
one didn’t even try.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Nicest surprise: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2184339/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Purge</i></a></b> – Wasn’t expecting much,
but this turned out to be the best horror film of the year.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Most squandered
potential: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1204975/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Last Vegas</i></a></b> – <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000134/reference">Robert DeNiro</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000140/reference">Michael Douglas</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000151/reference">Morgan Freeman</a>, and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000177/reference">Kevin Kline</a> in the same movie and
this was the best they could do?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Most mixed-feelings: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Her</i></a></b> – Brilliant in places, lame in
others. What did <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">you</i> think?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Most impressive
technical feat: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1454468/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Gravity</i></a></b> – If
there’s one movie that deserves to be seen in IMAX 3-D, it’s this one.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Best kids’ movie for
adults: </b><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1453405/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Monsters</b></i><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i></b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">University</i></b></a>
– Leave it to <a href="http://www.pixar.com/">PIXAR</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Most original story
from a tired genre: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1588173/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Warm Bodies</i></a></b> –
If you’re gonna make a zombie movie, you’d better do something new and
interesting with it and this one’s pretty clever.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The only movie I’ve ever
been to where I was the only person in the entire theater: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2387559/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Delivery Man</i></a></b> – Ironically, the movie wasn’t that bad (but it
wasn’t that good, either).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And, finally: Even though it wasn’t in my top ten (as far as
personal favorites go), I can honestly say with a clear conscience that <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Years a Slave</i></a> did indeed deserve to
win the Oscar for Best Picture of the year. So, in that instance, justice
prevailed.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, in closing, I should say if there’s a movie in 2013
you’re curious about and want to know what I thought of it, just ask. Chances
are I saw it.</div>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-18681847948543639972014-03-01T15:25:00.000-08:002014-03-04T12:28:51.550-08:00Cinetopia Golden Ticket: February 2014<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPmtr6ayw9NremgbCwHd_2IoZfa9kHkL-CY3iK0ryLs6QXMSd-46ny7h9Z7LEbHn3KzB6E00Yo0ObnIGgIiNFO9UUSbkBkfV0QZaRZ995dGhI-SG01awSz7jwUzqOjoikZDUWYqW1GgbU/s1600/GoldenTicket.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPmtr6ayw9NremgbCwHd_2IoZfa9kHkL-CY3iK0ryLs6QXMSd-46ny7h9Z7LEbHn3KzB6E00Yo0ObnIGgIiNFO9UUSbkBkfV0QZaRZ995dGhI-SG01awSz7jwUzqOjoikZDUWYqW1GgbU/s1600/GoldenTicket.jpg" height="127" width="200" /></a></div>
As all good things must come to an end, so endeth my year of
the Golden Ticket. It kind of ended with a whimper, but it <a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2013/04/cinetopia-golden-ticket-march-2013.html">started</a> with one
too, so I guess that’s fitting. My thanks to everyone who read my little
diatribes about the movies I got to see for free over these past 12 months. I
hope it was worth your time. I know <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">I</i>
enjoyed it. I have some reflections and statistics (because I’m a huge dork) I
wanna go over, but first, let’s recap my final month of movies:<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9VuCw3Z2REVjNtoTArKOaUSgzDJV1FlNTSfm6eHfWetOzq_8NVJ4-vmi1TGw0fPWB4ff4eJzjaQpXBhZTkE3poQyxQlinKsX_KqIzteG6LDcuL_27v6uidTb5eoxRnCQLFYjNxUF-SU4/s1600/ThatAwkwardMoment.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9VuCw3Z2REVjNtoTArKOaUSgzDJV1FlNTSfm6eHfWetOzq_8NVJ4-vmi1TGw0fPWB4ff4eJzjaQpXBhZTkE3poQyxQlinKsX_KqIzteG6LDcuL_27v6uidTb5eoxRnCQLFYjNxUF-SU4/s1600/ThatAwkwardMoment.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy-three: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1800246/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">That Awkward Moment</i></a></b> – I have never
watched an episode of “<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0159206/combined">Sex & the City</a>” (why would I?), but <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">That Awkward Moment</i> struck me as its
single-male twenty-something counterpart. Or, at least, it’s aspiring to be.
It’s a cute film and surprisingly funny in some parts, but it’s phony as all
hell. I’m not suggesting that every guy’s dating exploits are similar to mine,
but this was such a remote departure, it might as well have been a science
fiction film. Here’s a scenario to illustrate exactly what I mean: (A) I don’t
know any guys that use “self-tanner” lotion, (B) but if I did, I seriously
doubt any of them would use it to jerk off, (C) but if they did, they certainly
wouldn’t admit it to their friends, (D) but if they did, they certainly
wouldn’t show their friends their orange dick, (E) and if they did, their
friends wouldn’t sit there looking at it and making jokes for 30 seconds, (F)
but if they did, the guy with orange dick wouldn’t just stand their naked and
let them. This movie is fraught with bizarrely improbable scenarios like that.
But, I’ll admit, sometimes they’re funny. On a side note, I find it interesting
that <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1886602/reference">Miles Teller</a> has been a sort of measuring point in my Cinetopia
movie-watching for the past year. The <a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2013/04/cinetopia-golden-ticket-march-2013.html">first movie</a> I watched with my Golden
Ticket was <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1711425/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">21 & Over</i></a>. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714206/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Spectacular Now</i></a> was <a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2013/09/cinetopia-golden-ticket-august-2013.html">#40</a>, marking the
halfway point. And now, at the end of my year, there’s <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">That Awkward Moment</i>. Funny thing is, he’s played the exact same
character in all three movies.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggGoXcJTmBMOQNXkuTojKoUTs-s1urrbNdmjfM8yJKNmXaLYL7AQpQCa4Q5SoxyzcBPChPW3BH73hymOBELERUP-P2iLWryx3S7RQDwybIWndYkM-jFol7CFVf7JwtY6kzuOgEv1mZDHo/s1600/LaborDay.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggGoXcJTmBMOQNXkuTojKoUTs-s1urrbNdmjfM8yJKNmXaLYL7AQpQCa4Q5SoxyzcBPChPW3BH73hymOBELERUP-P2iLWryx3S7RQDwybIWndYkM-jFol7CFVf7JwtY6kzuOgEv1mZDHo/s1600/LaborDay.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy-four: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1967545/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Labor Day</i></a></b> – On the subject of
unrealistic scenarios, here’s another one that didn’t seem very likely. An
escaped fugitive hides out in the home of a single mother and they fall in
love. The convict, in turn, becomes somewhat of a father figure to the teenage
boy. This all happens over four days. Right. Believe it or not, I was willing
to forgive the plot’s lack of credibility, because it works pretty well for the
most part. There were certain sequences that felt pretty ambiguous and often
unnecessary, but, all in all, by the end of the movie, with time running out
and the climax approaching, I found myself rooting for the characters. Not
so much because I cared about them, but because I was invested in the scenario.
I knew very little about this film going in, but I was willing to watch it because
there weren’t many movies worth seeing at the time and I’ve appreciated <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0718646/reference">Jason Reitman</a>’s previous work. Honestly, I’m kinda unsure of how I really felt about
this film. If pressed to make a decision, I’d say I liked it. I don’t know if
I’d watch it again, though, because I doubt it would stand up to the scrutiny.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicE8WhyphenhyphenKvUvkWGRepNmYinL-6HaqklpDpdUuA5xJxjW-SnXctjUs5B67v9wNJayBIFVnSfHRukB2hao8w9ESrsK5eIx15T4v1v9TubVTrddsjllOB9ViItVnKN3nqGkPPMjFEWDIcWRwc/s1600/LegoMovie.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicE8WhyphenhyphenKvUvkWGRepNmYinL-6HaqklpDpdUuA5xJxjW-SnXctjUs5B67v9wNJayBIFVnSfHRukB2hao8w9ESrsK5eIx15T4v1v9TubVTrddsjllOB9ViItVnKN3nqGkPPMjFEWDIcWRwc/s1600/LegoMovie.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy-five: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1490017/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The LEGO Movie</i></a></b> – There are some
things that shouldn’t be made into movies. Chief among these are such pop
culture entertainment sources as board games, video games, toys, and most <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072562/combined">Saturday Night Live</a> sketches. So, naturally I groaned and rolled my eyes when I heard
they were making <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The LEGO Movie</i>
(another rule of thumb is that any film where the last word in the title is
actually “Movie” should probably be steered clear of – <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079588/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Muppet Movie</i></a> being the exception that proves the rule). Then,
when I saw the <a href="http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/thelegomovie/">trailer</a>, it immediately gained my respect by going with stop
motion animation of actual LEGOs instead of the CGI-animated sequences seen in
the LEGO video games that make the minifigs look like they’re made of tofu. Not
only that, the trailer was actually funny, smart, charming and – I can hardly
believe it – felt like anything but a shameless extended advertisement for
LEGOs. It becomes immediately clear that this film was done as a profound labor
of love and the filmmakers are so giddy about the very concept of LEGOs
(particularly in how conducive they are to boundless imagination) that one
can’t help but be swept away by it. I was also amazed by their ability to gain
permission to use such a wide spectrum of trademarked icons. Everything from <a href="http://www.dccomics.com/">DC Comics</a> to <a href="http://starwars.com/">STAR WARS</a>, from <a href="http://www.thesimpsons.com/">The Simpsons</a> to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teenage_Mutant_Ninja_Turtles">Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles</a>, from
<a href="http://shaq.com/">Shaquille O’Neal</a> to <a href="http://mcphee.com/shop/crazy-cat-lady-action-figure.html">Crazy Cat Lady</a>, from <a href="http://www.lordoftherings.net/">Lord of the Rings</a> to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter">Harry Potter</a>
(indeed, there’s a charming moment where Gandalf and Dumbledore stand next to
each other lamenting about how people often confuse them). This movie is a pop
culture fan’s wet dream. On acid. It’s an unbelievable and relentlessly
unfettered feast for the eyes combining so many elements that it’s almost
exhausting. It’s <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114709/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Toy Story</i> </a>meets “<a href="http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes">Calvin & Hobbes</a>” meets <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0063823/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Yellow Submarine</i></a>
meets <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5470.1984"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">1984</i></a> meets <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0121955/combined">South Park</a>’s “<a href="http://www.southparkstudios.com/guide/episodes/s11e10-imaginationland">Imaginationland</a>”
and something else meets something else entirely and so on and so forth. There
really is no way to describe it except to say that it’s <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The LEGO Movie</i>. And <b>EVERYTHING IS AWESOME!</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjo2Be1_W5Aun9bas6Cls_aGpmQ0NMnI2L4dmJ8LEDonPd_oOtxdHlsXDD1ClDzCFS3M5cJTRw7lZYByUgEkORu0fg6RdCrOkaM2dLiWcS4utpjN1UC9wOGVkHD4rLk81jf-AYkuoswo2M/s1600/RoboCop.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjo2Be1_W5Aun9bas6Cls_aGpmQ0NMnI2L4dmJ8LEDonPd_oOtxdHlsXDD1ClDzCFS3M5cJTRw7lZYByUgEkORu0fg6RdCrOkaM2dLiWcS4utpjN1UC9wOGVkHD4rLk81jf-AYkuoswo2M/s1600/RoboCop.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy-six: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1234721/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop</i></a></b> – I remember when the first <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093870/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop</i></a> came out back in 1987, I was
less than a month away from turning 13 years old. Even then, despite being a
pre-adolescent boy who was a big fan of both <a href="http://starwars.com/">STAR WARS</a> and <a href="http://marvel.com/">Marvel Comics</a>, I
thought the movie looked dumb. However, it quickly became one of those R-rated
films from the 80’s that was so overwrought with jaw-dropping violence and
gore, that kids would brag about having seen it to the point where finally
getting to watch it was like a rite of passage. And, once I saw it, I loved it.
Not so much because it was about a cyborg cop or because stuff blowed up real
good. It was the satire, the dark humor, and the cynical audacity of the whole
thing that sold me on it. I loved it as a 13-year-old and I love it now. I even
love <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100502/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop 2</i></a> (which I think is
unfairly scorned and widely misunderstood). Since this new <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop</i> has essentially excised pretty much everything that made
the original so great (even the violence and gore are scaled back to a pathetic
PG-13 caliber), my first impressions from the age of 12 are now right on the
money. I do, however, feel obliged to point out that this remake is not the
train wreck I was anticipating. It starts pretty weak, but does improve as it
goes along. Plus, I admired the filmmakers’ efforts to not simply rehash the
original, but try something different with the same basic concept. In fact, I
almost wonder if they originally conceived a film meant to be its own entity
but then realized it was similar enough to the original <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop</i>, that they figured they might as well just call it <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop</i> and hope people wouldn’t hate
them for it. </div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqVvf2rDEQboRkFogGoGw0y8djRy5ug-QSTCkWPZCKmx29XCYU9S0Sv4Eze3fHX_MEofC3B81MHib5pnzWrsgWJrEqTogI47ubXhv17AQVlO2tyWt1QMrbK2ovlNuk-_UDJWyWaRBzbBw/s1600/MonumentsMen.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqVvf2rDEQboRkFogGoGw0y8djRy5ug-QSTCkWPZCKmx29XCYU9S0Sv4Eze3fHX_MEofC3B81MHib5pnzWrsgWJrEqTogI47ubXhv17AQVlO2tyWt1QMrbK2ovlNuk-_UDJWyWaRBzbBw/s1600/MonumentsMen.jpg" height="200" width="133" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy-seven: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2177771/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Monuments Men</i></a></b> – <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000123/reference">George Clooney</a>
has directed five films so far, all of which are based on true stories and, in
some cases, have a historical context. You’d think he’d be better at this by
now. There’s nothing wrong with <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The
Monuments Men,</i> but it’s such an interesting story, one would think the
movie would be much more compelling than it actually is. The best thing it has
to offer is seeing an eclectic mix of great actors playing off each other, but
even that kind of leaves the viewer wanting. He could have cast the characters
with virtual unknowns and the film wouldn’t have suffered much. In fact, it
might’ve even been improved. The best performance probably comes from <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000837/reference">Bob Balaban</a> who is especially good in a scene where, with beautifully understated
finesse, he wrangles a confession out of a Nazi almost too easily. Too bad the
rest of the film is unable to deliver many moments as great as that. It’s still
pretty decent and there are most definitely worse films out there this time of
year. But frankly, I’d rather watch a <a href="http://www.history.com/">History Channel</a> documentary about the
Monuments Men than this movie.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNLXyWbpAltmCRRiM0SMYWzgZe5RkXQHvf1B1hwfH3FI-80332QeK5hb77Fai2_jLjc_yVHRGBFGZilLdjB8ER1NCFbx4HcolKfkgydtj-w5elBPTnUWNx8k6S9hd-re8mLIJjsNAGfs0/s1600/RaisingArizona.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNLXyWbpAltmCRRiM0SMYWzgZe5RkXQHvf1B1hwfH3FI-80332QeK5hb77Fai2_jLjc_yVHRGBFGZilLdjB8ER1NCFbx4HcolKfkgydtj-w5elBPTnUWNx8k6S9hd-re8mLIJjsNAGfs0/s1600/RaisingArizona.jpg" height="200" width="132" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy-eight:</b>
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093822/combined"><i><b>Raising Arizona</b></i></a> – At this point, Cinetopia started to feel like my own viewing room. Having
watched <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118715/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Big Lebowski</i></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0137523/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fight Club</i></a> the <a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2014/02/cinetopia-golden-ticket-january-2014.html">previous month</a> and the
first two <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078748/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Alien</i></a> movies <a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2013/11/cinetopia-golden-ticket-october-2013.html">months before</a>
that, the Golden Ticket allowed me the luxury of watching movies I’ve owned for
years on the big screen for a change. It’s been a good time. It’s sad to have
to give all that up (particularly because they’re showing <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089218/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Goonies</i></a> less than a week after my year is over). Anyway, it was
interesting to see <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Raising Arizona</i>
(the Coen brothers’ second film) so soon after having watched <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2042568/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Inside Llewyn Davis</i></a> (their latest film).
It seems slightly amateurish in comparison with their newer stuff, but it’s
still wonderfully constructed and endlessly entertaining. Probably their
goofiest movie, too (which is impressive considering they also made <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110074/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Hudsucker Proxy</i></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0887883/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Burn After Reading</i></a>). This is my favorite
film from 1987 (year of the original <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">RoboCop</i>). It’s hard
to believe this movie’s 27 years old. I may be wrong, but isn’t it also the
first film to have <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000115/reference">Nicolas Cage</a> acting batshit crazy (what has now become his
calling card)?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNxrM2HXklBegnwmYueenyDVITMiPgQkyF9AdCJJ7Gw2blVS3ug8N_GKdK5MKnOWEk44KkJoYAvxtvuHQeVDHAf9cmQCyPoFwVr5_nAz7szWeVgwUyJopm8C9FRTetoRy7DTIQk16sUZU/s1600/ThreeDaysToKill.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNxrM2HXklBegnwmYueenyDVITMiPgQkyF9AdCJJ7Gw2blVS3ug8N_GKdK5MKnOWEk44KkJoYAvxtvuHQeVDHAf9cmQCyPoFwVr5_nAz7szWeVgwUyJopm8C9FRTetoRy7DTIQk16sUZU/s1600/ThreeDaysToKill.jpg" height="200" width="134" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy-nine: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2172934/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">3 Days to Kill</i></a></b> – Having a remaining
three days to kill on my Golden Ticket, I was in search of movies to squeeze in
that I normally wouldn’t pay for and just hope they were worth watching. I
found myself trying to decide between <i><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1921064/combined">Pompeii 3-D</a></i> or <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2172934/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">3 Days to Kill</i></a>. The former
was directed by <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0027271/reference">Paul W.S. Anderson</a> who made the amazingly bad <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0370263/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Alien vs. Predator</i></a>, but also made <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119081/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Event Horizon</i></a>, which was at least
entertaining enough to sit through and had its moments. The latter was directed
by <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0629334/reference">McG</a> who made the amazingly bad <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0160127/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Charlie’s Angels</i></a> movies, but also made <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0438488/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Terminator 4</i></a>, which was at least entertaining enough to sit through and had its
moments, too. To decide which film to watch, I simply resorted to a battle of
the trailers. Whichever ad sold me, that’d be the one I’d go see. Based on that
flimsy litmus test, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">3 Days to Kill</i>
seemed more accessible, personally. Now I wish I’d seen <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Pompeii</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> 3-D</i>. Although, it has definitely
occurred to me that if I did, I’d in all likelihood be saying I wish I’d seen
McG’s flick instead, because the grass is always greener, isn’t it? <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">3 Days to Kill</i> is absolutely ridiculous,
but not in the ways it should be. It actually starts off showing great
potential. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1720028/reference">Amber Heard</a> (seemingly sans make-up and acting coldly professional and
convincingly agent-like) gets an assignment from her superiors and thus very succinctly
establishes exposition. Then, the first time we see <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000126/reference">Kevin Costner</a>’s character,
he’s standing in room full of men he just killed. Sometimes it’s even more
bad-ass to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i> show action scenes,
know what I mean? An action scene follows soon after, though, which is fairly
well-executed and shows us some cool stuff. I liked particularly how, when a
bomb goes off unexpectedly, we hear muffled voices and a high-pitched ring
illustrating Costner’s shell-shock. Anyway, after this sequence, the film
increasingly makes less and less sense. Outside of the opening scene,
everything about Amber Heard’s character is completely absurd. For some reason,
every time she shows up, <a href="http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/01/30/exclusive-photos-of-amber-heard-in-3-days-to-kill">she’s wearing less clothes and more make-up with a different wig</a>. I assume this is meant to keep her character in disguise, but if
she’s not supposed to stand out, why is she wearing black “<a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=%22wet+look%22&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=UTUWU9GFCYj1oATzmILYCw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAw&biw=1280&bih=661">wet look</a>” dresses
that painfully push her cleavage almost up to her chin? I haven’t even gotten
to the dopey subplot about Costner trying to make amends with his daughter and
several other completely irrelevant additions stuck in here and there. Frankly,
I don’t want to. Bad enough I saw this movie, why should I talk about it, too?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdPFA06iAKxzU7nPsPzF6wnDNMWa41r4CGVIsz1BRMiaeQJ9PLhXPV325q9Su8HGDWQozxopTiYG_JVqRyjvCcbsC9NEF4DG1xXYRvJtDdjAijusiMaR6oEE04mSwItFLWMLJkwE1L1Z8/s1600/NonStop.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdPFA06iAKxzU7nPsPzF6wnDNMWa41r4CGVIsz1BRMiaeQJ9PLhXPV325q9Su8HGDWQozxopTiYG_JVqRyjvCcbsC9NEF4DG1xXYRvJtDdjAijusiMaR6oEE04mSwItFLWMLJkwE1L1Z8/s1600/NonStop.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Eighty: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024469/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Non-Stop</i></a></b> – Oh, what delicious irony
that the last movie I watched with my Golden Ticket was entitled <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Non-Stop</i>. Like <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">3 Days to Kill</i>, here is a movie that defies all logic, but this one
does it right. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000553/reference">Liam Neeson</a> plays a haunted air marshal who is tormented via
text messages by a serial killer who threatens to murder a passenger every 20
minutes unless a ransom is paid. Unbelievable as this scenario is, the
filmmakers manage to keep it interesting (there’s a great fist-fight in the
airplane lavatory, for example) and, best of all, they don’t cheat. After a while,
I was expecting (and dreading) a deus ex machina like the killer isn’t actually
on the plane or that it was Liam Neeson’s split personality doing the killing
or maybe even the whole thing was a training exercise. But, no. None of those
things happen, and when they reveal who’s behind the whole thing, I was
genuinely surprised without feeling duped. Indeed, I was kinda climbing the
walls trying to figure out who it was. Also, when they reveal the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">why</i> soon after the who, I thought it was
a really compelling motive. This is a fun, non-ambitious suspense thriller that
won’t force you to think too hard, but doesn’t assume you’re stupid, either. If
nothing else, the film makes a pretty good case that having air marshals on
flights is a really bad idea. Yes, the film has its holes and it’s not
brilliant by any means, but it serves its purpose well and I had a really good
time. If you can overlook that Liam Neeson’s character is pretty gullible,
unreasonably hot-headed, and decides to give an impassioned speech when he
knows a bomb is about to go off, you’ll probably have a good time, too.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, my year at Cinetopia totaled eighty movies altogether. A
nice round number (which is probably the only good thing that came out of seeing <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">3 Days to Kill</i>). I’m a little sad it’s
over, but not necessarily because they were free movies at a high-end theater;
I actually got to know the place and the staff quite well. I’m saying goodbye
to familiarity. Before my penultimate movie, the waiter came in to check and
see if I wanted any food or drinks. I never learned this guy’s name (something
I am now ashamed of), but I probably saw him more than any other Cinetopia
employee. It was interesting this time because, for no discernable reason, he
said, “Are you good, as usual?” I hope he didn’t think of me as a skinflint,
but I rarely ordered food there. Not because it was kinda expensive (although
it was), but because I don’t care to eat while watching movies. Not even
popcorn.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Anyway, this was the first time he acknowledged that I was a
familiar regular. He took it even further by asking me, “You’re that Golden
Ticket winner, aren’t you?” I told him I was and he said he can remember me
coming the theater back when I was clean-shaven (I currently have a very bushy
beard for the winter, so that was a clear indicator to him as to how long I’d
been coming to Cinetopia). At some point – maybe that very day – he must have
gone back to the kitchen or box office and asked, “What’s with that guy who’s
here a couple times a week to watch movies by himself in the 21+ section
without ordering anything?” Funny to think of myself as some kind of Cinetopia
pseudo-celebrity, like their analogous “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_the_Opera">Phantom of the Opera</a>” or something.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I remember another waitperson I got to know a bit before that
guy (and actually did get her name: Kayla). She was a bit more gregarious and
actually asked me straight out fairly early on as to why I was there so often.
After her I told her about being the Golden Ticket winner, she reacted as
though I had just confirmed something she previously thought was just an urban
legend. Every time since then, she’d always ask me what I’d seen lately and
what I would recommend. I should have told her about this blog. The last time I
saw her was in <a href="http://hollywoodbohl.blogspot.com/2013/12/cinetopia-golden-ticket-november-2013.html">November</a> when I went to see <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Years a Slave</i></a>. She was visibly pregnant then, which is probably why I never
saw her after that. Too bad. I would like to have said goodbye.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-M_k8Gu-gxpkk1IxEBOYQpfF4IwtjAifDqo7OVepdehb3AGx24_2kr5mv2fIx78MzQJXQn2XTKj5zoIqQcD5BTbzOePDZiBrZcUXDLkjWMV-hdsL8Ow5YMe1n_7mLAX7idXg-K6TZMTk/s1600/stubs.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-M_k8Gu-gxpkk1IxEBOYQpfF4IwtjAifDqo7OVepdehb3AGx24_2kr5mv2fIx78MzQJXQn2XTKj5zoIqQcD5BTbzOePDZiBrZcUXDLkjWMV-hdsL8Ow5YMe1n_7mLAX7idXg-K6TZMTk/s1600/stubs.jpg" height="140" width="200" /></a>Looking back on a year of free movies (and looking ahead
to it being over), there’s actually a certain sense of relief. Like a kid in a
candy store, I might have overdone it. The luxury of being able to see whatever
I want, whenever I want has resulted in me being an even more scrutinous
film-goer than I was before. I’m currently reading <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001170/reference">Roger Ebert</a>’s <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13528509-life-itself">autobiography</a>
and, referring to <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001348/reference">Werner Herzog</a>, he ends one chapter by saying, “Artists like
them bring meaning to my life, which has been devoted in such large part to
films of worthlessness.” It’s true that great films are rare finds in a sea of
bad films, but that just makes the good ones all the more worthwhile.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I shouldn’t lament that I swam through a sea of crap to find
the exceptionally rare masterpiece, because that’s not true. I didn’t see every
movie that came out (as Roger Ebert would have, if he was still alive). I was still
able to scrutinize and I suppose it’s a great insult to the filmmakers whose
films I declined to watch even for free. Quality of film notwithstanding, the
truth is, a great many movies just didn’t appeal to me. There were, of course,
the obvious stinkers I wasn’t even going to give the benefit of the doubt (like
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0795461/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Scary Movie 5</i></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1418377/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">I, Frankenstein</i></a>), but there were also a
good many kids’ films I didn’t bother with either (like <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1985966/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2</i></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1860353/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Turbo</i></a>) even though they might have been perfectly good flicks (for kids). There
were even some big-budget blockbusters I passed on (like <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1731141/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Ender’s Game</i></a> and the second <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1170358/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Hobbit</i></a>
film) just because I wasn’t into them.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On the flipside, there were lots of movies I expected to
suck that were actually quite well done (like <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2184339/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Purge</i></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0882977/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Snitch</i></a>) and
I found myself really liking despite my cynical prejudices. Along those same
lines were a few movies I knew almost nothing about going into and turned out
to be very pleasant surprises as well (like <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1817273/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Place Beyond the Pines</i></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2053463/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Side Effects</i></a>). Making the list of my top ten favorite films of 2013 is gonna be
super hard.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With a nice round number of 80 films, it was easy to break
it down statistically. I figure movies (like pretty much anything) generally
can be separated into four categories of evaluation: What I loved, what I
liked, what was so-so, and what I hated. In reviewing everything I saw at
Cinetopia, 22.5% I loved, 37.5% I liked, 32.5% were so-so, and 7.5% I hated.
Combining those figures into the thumbs-up/thumbs-down dichotomy means exactly
60% were good movies and 40% were bad, in my opinion. That’s a pretty decent
ratio, especially given the movies I found reprehensible were such a small
percentage of the total. Incidentally, if you wanna know which six movies made
up that 7.5% so you can avoid such suckfests, they were <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1457767/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Conjuring</i></a>, the <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1288558/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Evil Dead</i></a>
remake, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2302755/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Olympus Has Fallen</i></a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1980209/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Pain & Gain</i></a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334879/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">White House Down</i></a>, and the recently-seen <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2172934/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">3 Days to Kill</i></a>. Fuck those movies.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As for the best movies, that will be the subject of my next blog post, keeping up the annual tradition of compiling my favorites from each
year. As I said, this will be a tough one to narrow down, but it will also
probably be the most comprehensive list I’ve ever done. For now, though, I
lower my head in solemn gratitude for <a href="http://cinetopia.com/">Cinetopia</a> allowing me to indulge their
patronage for a year of free movies. Thank you. It was an experience.</div>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-22749901625022665632014-02-01T12:19:00.004-08:002014-02-01T12:20:04.969-08:00Cinetopia Golden Ticket: January 2014January is often the last breath of decent movies from the
previous year since most studios want to get their films out early enough to be
consider for Oscars, but late enough to stay fresh in the minds of movie-goers.
Once the Academy Award nominations are announced, though (as they were in
mid-January), the studios resort to house-cleaning. In other words, they’re
dumping out all the crummy movies they don’t really have any faith in to the
theaters in the hopes they can bleed so money out of audiences that are either
gullible, bored, or have low expectations from films they’re willing to see.
So, that means I had a good two weeks where I saw some good movies whereas the
second half of January was dominated by films that weren’t even worth the drive
to the theater. Thankfully, <a href="http://www.cinetopia.com/">Cinetopia</a> showed some decent retro flicks that
helped fill in the gaps.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4VhQcek6eWuaeVNIywh-owRmWNwhCTD2JMt-lVLr_5gtYM1peZXOfeMAJTIGYNBHVi2x-42PbSMzKLAMDn4WcDgBKdLxtzl1u4L1rNjpb1JFWrSciWiDAdy2CsjIb7GaaoFToI5fahCI/s1600/biglebowski.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4VhQcek6eWuaeVNIywh-owRmWNwhCTD2JMt-lVLr_5gtYM1peZXOfeMAJTIGYNBHVi2x-42PbSMzKLAMDn4WcDgBKdLxtzl1u4L1rNjpb1JFWrSciWiDAdy2CsjIb7GaaoFToI5fahCI/s1600/biglebowski.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Sixty-seven: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118715/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Big Lebowski</i></a></b> – Back in October,
Cinetopia did a “Sci-Fi Classics” series. I remarked that it was a bit of a
misnomer in some cases, but for the most part, they showed good stuff and there
were some bona fide classics in there (like <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078748/combined">Alien</a>
</i>and<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090605/combined">Aliens</a></i>, both of which I went
to go see). Now they’re doing a “Cult Fiction” series and, again, they’ve kinda
misinterpreted the true meaning of a cult classic. A literalist would think
they’d show flicks like <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087995/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Repo Man</i></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092991/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Evil Dead 2</i></a>, but you can’t fault a
mainstream theater like Cinetopia for going with mainstream material. Frankly,
I think I’d rather see most of the movies they selected over some quintessential
cult films (for instance, they’re showing <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111161/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Shawshank Redemption</i></a>, which is a masterpiece, but a more exemplary cult prison
film would be <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071266/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Caged Heat</i></a>), so I can’t
complain. Anyway, they started with <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The
Big Lebowski</i>, which skirts both territories in that it’s a cult film that’s
generally appreciated by the masses. It was good to see it on the big screen
again. I’m not sure when I last saw it, but it had to have been within the past
few years and I’ve certainly seen it enough times to quote it pretty
accurately. Man, it’s still just as funny as ever, though. That’s another
calling card of a cult film: Its ability to withstand the test of time. Well
done, Cinetopia. Now, if only you had enough sense to show <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Blade Runner</i></a> instead of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120201/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Starship Troopers</i></a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTqQ9fdgxFSUt7FlO6DFKFWqll9NK9GJVxFlGG9fSIN6g6Sqz5ccRkwwvIpYcnpClL24JOH72AmsaawTNBwxs8r3iVQ-1hJPfGGzVuefBx_OGJcYVyYf-j3xi2fycE1CXC0E-yjqOCrYc/s1600/augustosagecounty.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTqQ9fdgxFSUt7FlO6DFKFWqll9NK9GJVxFlGG9fSIN6g6Sqz5ccRkwwvIpYcnpClL24JOH72AmsaawTNBwxs8r3iVQ-1hJPfGGzVuefBx_OGJcYVyYf-j3xi2fycE1CXC0E-yjqOCrYc/s1600/augustosagecounty.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Sixty-eight: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1322269/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">August: </i></a></b><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1322269/combined"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Osage</i></b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i></b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">County</i></b></a>
– When making a dramedy, the subject matter that yields the best potential is
dysfunctional family. If you can get <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000658/reference">Meryl Streep</a> to play the matriarch, so
much the better. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">August: Osage County</i>
is based on a play and it feels like it, but not in a bad way. All the usual
elements are in place: Bitter mother, absent father, resentful daughter(s),
two-faced sister, her henpecked husband, their idiot son, cynical teenage
grandkid, and the quiet but wise housekeeper. Mixed in, are doses of
infidelity, chemical dependency, devastating secrets, ambiguous suicide and, of
course, good ol’ reliable cancer. This all may sound quite derivative, but it
is, in fact, a really good movie and never really feels recycled or tired. It’s
only nominated for two Oscars, but deserves more. It’s appropriate, though,
that the two nominations it did get were for acting. Actors must love being in
movies like this with such heavy roles and juicy dialogue that they can really
dive into. It’s a pleasure just watching them work. The movie ends, as most
stories like this do, without any real revelation, but that’s how life is,
isn’t it? The final scene shows <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000210/reference">Julia Roberts</a> driving away with a quizzical
look on her face that is never explained. My interpretation is that she comes
to a realization that she’s going to eventually end up as bitter and cruel as
her mother, despite her vehement intentions not to. If you think I just gave
away the ending, you’re wrong. It’s up to you to decipher your own meaning.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirSqy5XreYHxsYoaqnGaU9bxci7KIW-uVqOGMmZUlC5FnxjKZS5g1j1Bg7S_z-rJ0j0oBz_N5PFMievo2vU0880VZOiV2zrEzqrhYBbbvNcj_4pAYgJYIFw12eC2o7VzzwJC-zz-ucjKE/s1600/her.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirSqy5XreYHxsYoaqnGaU9bxci7KIW-uVqOGMmZUlC5FnxjKZS5g1j1Bg7S_z-rJ0j0oBz_N5PFMievo2vU0880VZOiV2zrEzqrhYBbbvNcj_4pAYgJYIFw12eC2o7VzzwJC-zz-ucjKE/s1600/her.jpg" height="200" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Sixty-nine: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Her</i></a></b> – This is a very realistic and
likely future, I think. We already live in an age where, if you start up a
conversation with a stranger on a bus or an elevator, you are the weirdo and
the people on their smart phones or iPads are the norm. It won’t be long
before, anytime you see somebody talking, it’s to a computer. I’ve certainly
reached that grumpy old man stage of my life where I refuse to indulge in
certain technological advances (like Twitter) because I think they’re pointless
and dehumanizing (like Twitter). But, on the other hand, I am on Facebook, I do
have an iPhone, and here I am writing on a blog at this very moment. Where is
the line? That’s what <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Her</i> seems to be
asking. It’s got some pretty insightful things to say and interesting areas it
explores. I was surprised and impressed by some of the directions it took and
disappointed in other areas it neglected, but overall, this is a pretty
intriguing scenario to consider. I suppose its main point is the one <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091949/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Short Circuit</i></a> brought up (much more lightly) in the 80’s:
What makes something “alive?” Is it its capacity for love? What got me thinking
was that so much of who we are is physical. Our personalities (and maybe even
our souls) are shaped by things that happen to us and, quite often, those
things are physical. Sexual abuse, chemical imbalances, drug addiction,
debilitating illnesses, being born blind or deaf: All of these are things a
computer can’t experience. They can learn about them, sure, but they can’t live
them, particularly because most of them happen by pure chance. Even on a
smaller and more common scale, I can remember times when I got into an argument
with a girlfriend simply because I was hungry or she was tired. Could a
computer even be in a bad mood just because? It’s interesting that human
foibles, not strengths, are what keep us separate from technology. I’m going
off on a philosophical tangent, but that’s the power of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Her</i>. It’s not the best film of the year, but it might be the most
thought-provoking.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeOdqGTFCEoDFcv8dmtFnDHF6lE4b_8R6FRqu1HiAieMBFKArKjNw0mf8liaGpxhTGR5a-awqlGZ4gAwWBvqiu2_Qr8emwqbyimfG8pywUmg9FZsdhNqM1x2hsy89Fm6vZWIX8klFkqzk/s1600/insidellewyndavis.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjeOdqGTFCEoDFcv8dmtFnDHF6lE4b_8R6FRqu1HiAieMBFKArKjNw0mf8liaGpxhTGR5a-awqlGZ4gAwWBvqiu2_Qr8emwqbyimfG8pywUmg9FZsdhNqM1x2hsy89Fm6vZWIX8klFkqzk/s1600/insidellewyndavis.jpg" height="200" width="136" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2042568/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Inside Llewyn Davis</i></a></b> – The Coen
brothers are on a short list of directors whose movies I will always watch no
matter what. Some of the directors on that list are there because they’re
consistent and I love their work, others are eclectic and often surprise me in
delightful ways. The Coens are the latter. For the most part, they write their
own material. So, for them to have such a diverse body of work is something of
a miracle. And rarely do they disappoint. I have such faith in these filmmaking
brothers that, outside of watching the trailer, I don’t even bother to read
reviews or look into what their latest film is about. I just go see it. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Inside Llewyn Davis</i> is a peculiar entry
into their repertoire. It feels like somewhat of a mixture between <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000095/reference">Woody Allen</a>
and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000464/reference">Jim Jarmusch</a> with the cinematography of vintage <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000080/reference">Orson Welles</a>. It has the
same sort of aimless and seemingly random story arc as <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1019452/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">A Serious Man</i></a> with the same kind of somber, dry humor of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0243133/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Man Who Wasn’t There</i></a>. When it was
over, I wasn’t sure exactly what I had just watched, but I liked it all the
same. And I <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">loved</i> the music. I can
wholeheartedly and unreservedly recommend this film to anyone else who’s a Coen
brothers fan. For the rest of you: See it at your own risk.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUZtMuphqXTbqikaSdC8zXH-e_B4b3WcOrWwU-o7sa7p3owbKxNc7XJfn0JjUyOX8P34QQpiL8f62cYq9FYaMNKjnpk3Wykcin9UuavOH4K5E8sMSp7CKKd3XzGVLFIWLhxWA8gSNfVkM/s1600/lonesurvivor.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhUZtMuphqXTbqikaSdC8zXH-e_B4b3WcOrWwU-o7sa7p3owbKxNc7XJfn0JjUyOX8P34QQpiL8f62cYq9FYaMNKjnpk3Wykcin9UuavOH4K5E8sMSp7CKKd3XzGVLFIWLhxWA8gSNfVkM/s1600/lonesurvivor.jpg" height="200" width="132" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy-one: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1091191/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Lone Survivor</i></a></b> – This plays like <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0265086/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Black Hawk Down</i></a> on a smaller and fairly
simpler scale. I wasn’t familiar with the incident to begin with, outside of it
being a true story. I figured, as such, a number of liberties would be taken.
Indeed, while watching the film, I thought several times <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">There’s no way somebody could survive that</i>. While I’m sure the film
isn’t 100% accurate, after having seen it and learned more about it, I think a
great deal of it was, in fact, very accurate. For starters, one of the
characters gets shot multiple times and still manages to carry on (rather
implausibly, I thought), but, in real life, the autopsy showed he had 11 bullet
wounds. So, yeah: I think they got <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">that</i>
part right, at least. There are also several scenes where the titular lone survivor comes extraordinarily close to death and is miraculously saved one way
or another. Given the film was based on the book written by the <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2877226/reference">survivor</a>, I
have no reason to believe he would lie, especially under the circumstances in
which his fellow soldiers were killed. The movie begins with a grueling montage
of what appears to be actual soldiers in actual training and then ends with
heartbreaking photos and footage of the deceased. Everything in between is hard
to watch, too. But, it’s good for the rest of us to watch it. If soldiers
actually experience such things, it seems fair the rest of us be made aware of
what they experienced.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVoOmCCLdfFDpSCvrjgqGiMJJwv2ZuRQqORMyzM63xo1_oFa2frMyN8PFlJ93cDnvnDILXe1XIg7vR6jhuUteDZ9WUQN5_FlMKTYyoOGexk9K418gG70YMke8UMVfO-XayfAoNT3pzL8Q/s1600/fightclub.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVoOmCCLdfFDpSCvrjgqGiMJJwv2ZuRQqORMyzM63xo1_oFa2frMyN8PFlJ93cDnvnDILXe1XIg7vR6jhuUteDZ9WUQN5_FlMKTYyoOGexk9K418gG70YMke8UMVfO-XayfAoNT3pzL8Q/s1600/fightclub.jpg" height="200" width="134" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Seventy-two: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0137523/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fight Club</i></a></b> – Remember how I said the
Coen brothers are among the few directors of whom I will watch any and all
movies they do without hesitation? Well, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000399/reference">David Fincher</a>’s on that list, too. I,
of course, had seen <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fight Club</i>
before, but I was happy to see it again in the theater as part of Cinetopia’s
aforementioned Cult Fiction series. The first time I saw <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fight Club</i>, I didn’t care for it. I think I was expecting a
mindless action flick and, when it turned out to be much more cerebral than
just dudes punching each other, my mind wasn’t ready for it and I found it too
much to take. I thought about it for some time, though, and, after seeing it a
second time, I loved it. Like <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Big
Lebowski</i>, I can’t remember for sure how long it’d been since I last saw it
(even though I own it), but I’d forgotten just how good it really is. I can’t
believe it’s 15 years old now, but it holds up remarkably well. I suppose the
themes it explores are as relevant today as they were back in the late 90’s, if
not more so. I wonder if the younger generation identifies with it as much now
as I did then. In any case, it was a joy to watch on an 80 foot screen with
surround sound after all this time. Especially since David Fincher is one of my
favorite directors and this is his best film.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, all-in-all, with two old favorites book-ending a few
Oscar-nominees, I’d say it was a pretty good month. It’s a shame the final
month of my Golden Ticket will be most likely be predominantly populated with
humdrum films, but I had a good year. If there are enough worth seeing, I might
break eighty, which is a pretty impressive haul for a year’s worth of free
movies. After that, I may just hibernate for the rest of the winter.</div>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-30339623608632980032014-01-15T14:32:00.000-08:002014-01-16T00:07:55.564-08:00For Their Consideration:<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_1ZF9xmn7icfDUx6TA8BiWad2-djSSiyQ8ziaLOjuxlO6TUaNbLcbBl7EGwxNwKpdOhRYjqKL7t75Aka4i-uGH3RdcRq0nfRjxhLwnwXyfJImqbKAokmxZr9mutt2n5NRS4mgorwa1eo/s1600/oscarsmall.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_1ZF9xmn7icfDUx6TA8BiWad2-djSSiyQ8ziaLOjuxlO6TUaNbLcbBl7EGwxNwKpdOhRYjqKL7t75Aka4i-uGH3RdcRq0nfRjxhLwnwXyfJImqbKAokmxZr9mutt2n5NRS4mgorwa1eo/s1600/oscarsmall.jpg" height="320" width="132" /></a>Once a year, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090523/combined">Siskel & Ebert</a> used to do a show entitled
“Memo to the Academy” in which they would give their recommendations for worthy
recipients of Oscar nominations. They were usually pretty insightful, often
very fair, and almost always completely ignored. It made for an interesting
discussion, in any case. Now that they’re both dead, nobody does as good a job
of offering up hypothetical honorees. I don’t presume I’m anywhere near the
caliber of critic that <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0803021/reference">Siskel</a> or <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001170/reference">Ebert</a> were, but I feel more qualified to offer
up my suggestions this year over any previous year. My <a href="http://cinetopia.com/">Cinetopia</a> Golden Ticket
combined with my regular visits to the <a href="http://hollywoodtheatre.org/">Hollywood Theatre</a> means I’ve seen pretty
much every movie worth seeing in 2013. Since the 86<sup>th</sup> annual <a href="http://oscar.go.com/nominees">Academy Award nominations</a> will be announced tomorrow, I thought I’d submit my own
today.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The thing that infuriates me about the Oscar nominations
ever year is how political they are. They’ll often nominate somebody reputable
who’s coming to the end of their career just because they never won before. Or,
they’ll nominate somebody who should have won last year because the person who
actually <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">did</i> win last year should
have won the year <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">before</i>. Then, of
course, there’s favoritism shown to films with a combined box office and
critical success when lesser-known (but equally good, if not better) smaller
films go ignored. They often confuse good writing with good acting and vice
versa. And, this may sound paranoid, but I think they snub certain people that
they think might give an inflammatory acceptance speech in the event that they
win.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In my fantasy world (which you are about to get a glimpse of), I have
tried to select nominations (of the major awards) as fairly and objectively as
I am capable of. That means, even if I didn’t care for a particular movie or
the performances therein, I still tried to recognize it as fine work and give
credit where credit is due. That also means that, just because I love a
particular film immensely, doesn’t mean it deserves top prize. Another
disclaimer: In the spirit of fairness, I have only selected motion pictures I
have seen personally. No speculation here or decisions based on reputation or
internet buzz, only films I can personally vouch for. In cross-referencing my choices
with the nominations (and recent winners) of the <a href="http://www.imdb.com/oscars/nominations/golden-globes">Golden Globes</a>, I don’t believe
I’ve left anybody out, either. Also, just for fun, I have offered up
“alternates” or “runners-up,” if you will, just to show who barely got edged
out. In other words, people and movies I wouldn’t mind seeing nominated in
place of one of my original five choices. Narrowing down the nominations to
five in some categories was incredibly tough (especially in the director
category), but I’m only submitting five nominations for best picture because I
think the ten nomination concept is total bullshit. So, if you’re willing to
indulge me, here’s what should in all fairness be nominated for the upcoming 86<sup>th</sup>
annual Academy Awards:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Best Picture:</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535109/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Captain Phillips</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334649/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2431286/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Philomena</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Years a Slave</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993846/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Wolf of Wall Street</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alternate: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1322269/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">August: </i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Osage</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">County</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_VVGFAt8_5t5tFPfSXMW6__p0g9Kz2de4Pi0xuxTVE1WT_AA8rTamj66cTLm_KSgvvgSYkh74X_q4PHjM5UL3mN-A4OJKUT69N9xHTvgazczCSyUkLIanrYosQpHoN5eaRFCWACD1S1o/s1600/picture.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_VVGFAt8_5t5tFPfSXMW6__p0g9Kz2de4Pi0xuxTVE1WT_AA8rTamj66cTLm_KSgvvgSYkh74X_q4PHjM5UL3mN-A4OJKUT69N9xHTvgazczCSyUkLIanrYosQpHoN5eaRFCWACD1S1o/s1600/picture.jpg" /></a> <u>Best Director:</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3363032/reference">Ryan Coogler</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334649/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0190859/reference"><i><span style="font-style: normal; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">Alfonso Cuarón</span></i></a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1454468/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Gravity</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0339030/reference">Paul Greengrass</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535109/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Captain Phillips</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005069/reference">Spike Jonze</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Her</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2588606/reference">Steve McQueen</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Years a Slave</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alternate: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000217/reference">Martin Scorsese</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993846/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Wolf of Wall Street</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgj309zzWGo7zfE7bYZLBX9aODvkaZAJdxgez_hCJuaMinzCBXCjRgWabK97cjwyRVLZvd_Xs6LOHw-6QhsDiZnjwhhMqYzRtJVwPm0JrhtRc260VrETOvU1w8eWbKYVZPjlOQgJL1lyzM/s1600/actors.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgj309zzWGo7zfE7bYZLBX9aODvkaZAJdxgez_hCJuaMinzCBXCjRgWabK97cjwyRVLZvd_Xs6LOHw-6QhsDiZnjwhhMqYzRtJVwPm0JrhtRc260VrETOvU1w8eWbKYVZPjlOQgJL1lyzM/s1600/actors.jpg" /></a><u> Best Actor:</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001136/reference">Bruce Dern</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1821549/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Nebraska</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0252230/reference">Chiwetel Ejiofor</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Years a Slave</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000158/reference">Tom Hanks</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535109/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Captain Phillips</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000190/reference">Matthew McConaughey</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0790636/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Dallas</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> Buyers Club</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0430107/reference">Michael B. Jordan</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334649/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alternate: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000288/reference">Christian Bale</a>,<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1800241/combined">American Hustle</a></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizetC1aucWnNr8pBi32SiHfsL5vWtkUQ5D7VCYw_Vmj6uPktd2owb9RRxzAPk75xSktUE9-JEhxFjpJy-0Ob4gBielpLj24P2XHHGF16hyphenhyphenwQ3jLzSVMl9ZPxxq18BNraHCRtI2TUL2_-g/s1600/actresses.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizetC1aucWnNr8pBi32SiHfsL5vWtkUQ5D7VCYw_Vmj6uPktd2owb9RRxzAPk75xSktUE9-JEhxFjpJy-0Ob4gBielpLj24P2XHHGF16hyphenhyphenwQ3jLzSVMl9ZPxxq18BNraHCRtI2TUL2_-g/s1600/actresses.jpg" /></a> <u>Best Actress:</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000949/reference">Cate Blanchette</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334873/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Blue Jasmine</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001132/reference">Judi Dench</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2431286/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Philomena</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1913734/reference">Rooney Mara</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2053463/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Side Effects</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000658/reference">Meryl Streep</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1322269/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">August: </i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Osage</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">County</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0940362/reference">Shailene Woodley</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714206/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Spectacular Now</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alternate: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000668/reference">Emma Thompson</a>,<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2140373/combined">Saving Mr. Banks</a></i></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiGs3xvMc_RKjzp2odcV_DTjJO467RJCFh6RI8B-X_zX7MZ8amX56nA7n2_63TiAy7xNHbTJvRoW9uQ10U2Wsz52iNPLg4_VsRTxsQn97XmsK3rkk3f6arWrBjZH7zhCc6fqBcHIvPYbA/s1600/supportingactors.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiGs3xvMc_RKjzp2odcV_DTjJO467RJCFh6RI8B-X_zX7MZ8amX56nA7n2_63TiAy7xNHbTJvRoW9uQ10U2Wsz52iNPLg4_VsRTxsQn97XmsK3rkk3f6arWrBjZH7zhCc6fqBcHIvPYbA/s1600/supportingactors.jpg" /></a><u> Best Supporting Actor:</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm5831542/reference">Barkhad Abdi</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535109/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Captain Phillips</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1055413/reference">Michael Fassbender</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Years a Slave</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001467/reference">Jared Leto</a>, <i><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0790636/combined">Dallas Buyers Club</a></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0765597/reference">Peter Sarsgaard</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1426329/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Lovelace</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4446467/reference">Tye Sheridan</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1935179/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Mud</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alternate:<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i><a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1343331/reference">Tequan Richmond</a>,<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2027064/combined">Blue Caprice</a></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqitT0gdn0iwagZCFkyapsbshWcchXS-DRpZ-_bDuNNPbPDNTDWt40HOXjuFhPVizAvtyTbTfMMUGiiKQ1OQS00SxfrJAlQ3ZJVfYbQK1PD0M1x8km5zG_jQ9PRjlHAHO7AOJFvAaGd54/s1600/supportingactresses.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqitT0gdn0iwagZCFkyapsbshWcchXS-DRpZ-_bDuNNPbPDNTDWt40HOXjuFhPVizAvtyTbTfMMUGiiKQ1OQS00SxfrJAlQ3ZJVfYbQK1PD0M1x8km5zG_jQ9PRjlHAHO7AOJFvAaGd54/s1600/supportingactresses.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Best Supporting Actress:</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0246686/reference">Melonie Diaz</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334649/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2225369/reference">Jennifer Lawrence</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1800241/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">American Hustle</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000210/reference">Julia Roberts</a>, <i><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1322269/combined">August: Osage County</a></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1020089/reference">Sally Hawkins</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334873/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Blue Jasmine</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2143282/reference">Lupita Nyong’o</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Years a Slave</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alternate: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0820053/reference">June Squibb</a>,<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">
</i><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1821549/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Nebraska</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMxFMqxYriD8xML5uG2de4K9kMXsRK0R3t6KHhI3AlFpY6iunKD9MXHH8kKn0BMpGYg_RrRemrr1u5jSgwyr8jbTNiVhQwQI_GZZ5Om-Xast0rT2vyKAkGthvBddxf-RWjdgQRJUxHyYg/s1600/screenplaynew.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMxFMqxYriD8xML5uG2de4K9kMXsRK0R3t6KHhI3AlFpY6iunKD9MXHH8kKn0BMpGYg_RrRemrr1u5jSgwyr8jbTNiVhQwQI_GZZ5Om-Xast0rT2vyKAkGthvBddxf-RWjdgQRJUxHyYg/s1600/screenplaynew.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Best Original Screenplay:</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1800241/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">American Hustle</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0790636/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Dallas</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> Buyers Club</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2334649/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2053463/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Side Effects</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1213663/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The World’s End</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alternate: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Her</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhx1OEwS8DM8fKjCQT0WHo8RhngDTYL4LmjkR-oHiCN2KDGxaVVacPW5z6Sx7w8p6CTsGR5HxG825WFqsqWoKEmT9L1By1OTaVMdjCr5GPK6ehG_Tv7NDBocN511mHHLACa2Qa2IS5g_RE/s1600/screenplayold.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhx1OEwS8DM8fKjCQT0WHo8RhngDTYL4LmjkR-oHiCN2KDGxaVVacPW5z6Sx7w8p6CTsGR5HxG825WFqsqWoKEmT9L1By1OTaVMdjCr5GPK6ehG_Tv7NDBocN511mHHLACa2Qa2IS5g_RE/s1600/screenplayold.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Best Adapted Screenplay:</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1322269/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">August: </i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Osage</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">County</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2431286/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Philomena</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714206/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Spectacular Now</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Years a Slave</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993846/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Wolf of Wall Street</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Alternate:<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1817273/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Place Beyond the Pines</i></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There might be some discrepancies in the screenplay
categories because I’m not 100% as to whether some the titles I selected are
adapted or original scripts. For instance, I’m pretty sure that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Dallas Buyers Club</i> and <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i> are original
screenplays, but they are based on true stories, so maybe technically they
should be considered “adapted?” Not sure.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some other notes on my selections:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I know it’s a tremendous cliché to include Meryl Streep in
the nominees for best actress to the point where it almost feels automatically
obligatory, but she really truly deserves it for <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">August: </i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Osage</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">County</i>. I
wouldn’t say she necessarily deserves to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">win</i>,
but she certainly deserves the nomination. Shailene Woodley, in the same
category, is probably the least likely to get nominated and that breaks my
heart. She brings so much depth and authenticity to her role as a teenager
struggling with her first love and yet does it in such an understated and
naturalistic way that I can only assume the reason she’s likely to be
overlooked is because she’s so real in the part. Likewise Tye Sheridan’s
performance in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Mud</i>. Peter Sarsgaard
in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Lovelace</i> is a perfect example of a
movie that’s not so great but a performance that is. So, don’t count on seeing
him on the ballot, either. Rooney Mara will probably be passed over as well
since <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Side Effects</i> came out so early
in the year. I hate it when that happens.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tom Hanks is another actor whose nominations often come
across as nothing more than “Yeah, we like him,” but – like Meryl Streep in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">August: Osage County</i> – he deserves this
nod. The last five minutes alone of his performance in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Captain Phillips</i> are enough to justify the nomination.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Fruitvale Station</i>
is this year’s Cinderella underdog, as far as I’m concerned. It’s a simple,
modest film, but so flawlessly crafted and injected with such realism that one
feels like they’re watching a documentary. The fact it’s a true story makes it
all the more haunting. I’m sure it won’t win much (because <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">12 Years a Slave</i> deserves to dominate), but I hope it at least gets
recognized.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There are few nominees in there from movies you’ve probably
never seen and people you’ve probably never heard of, but that’s the point of
the Oscars – to honor the worthy, not the famous. So, when the nominations are
announced tomorrow, you’ll know why some of them suck: It’s because they didn’t
check with me first.</div>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3460339636770538991.post-23649697015448111062014-01-01T13:40:00.000-08:002014-01-01T13:40:20.591-08:00Cinetopia Golden Ticket: December 2013<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->I received my Golden Ticket in February of 2013 and so it
was officially valid starting in March of that year. So, I’ve got another
couple months before it’s all used up. Now that 2013 is all over and done,
though, the final count of movies I’ve seen (so far) made in the last year is 76
(all but 10 of those seen at <a href="http://cinetopia.com/">Cinetopia</a>, it seems). In a usual year, I average
about one a week and – given that there are still movies that were released in
2013 that I intend to see while they’re still in theaters – I suppose I could
conceivably double my average this year. I dunno, we’ll see. In the meantime,
these are the ones I closed out my calendar year with:
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigQvk7PaJe-ZwLCGhG6Wm2uxis3doyKccs4jRLYhfIyi6MkVGzTg2DaxDOkwgbTSWxDPeclwjW9zKWxbNKYk51W5PYzpmXcx4KbcD2WZhcVyOnZ7bBYWY1v2deP4fr01OOErH98M91OIY/s1600/oldboy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigQvk7PaJe-ZwLCGhG6Wm2uxis3doyKccs4jRLYhfIyi6MkVGzTg2DaxDOkwgbTSWxDPeclwjW9zKWxbNKYk51W5PYzpmXcx4KbcD2WZhcVyOnZ7bBYWY1v2deP4fr01OOErH98M91OIY/s200/oldboy.jpg" width="129" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Sixty-one: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1321511/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Oldboy</i></a> </b>– Apparently, this movie was
a total flop. Somehow, I’m both totally surprised and not surprised at all. On
one hand, this is a remake of a pretty dark Korean film that I could see American
audiences not really embracing. But, on the other hand, there have been plenty
of foreign remakes that I would’ve expected to do worse but ended up being
fairly well-received. The original <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0364569/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Oldboy</i></a>
is certainly not a film that needed to be remade (it’s pretty impressive on a
number of levels), but <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000490/reference">Spike Lee</a> did a pretty decent job, I thought. His
re-creation of scenes from the Korean version are faithful to the original, but
done differently enough to not feel redundant. He also changed just enough of
the story in general to, not only make it feel fresh, but to make it more
plausible in some aspects. He wisely toned down the brutality (although it’s
still quite disturbingly violent by American standards) and tweaked the ending
just enough to make it slightly less grim (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Slightly</i>).
These were all wise decisions and serve the remake well so it’s a pity people
have turned their noses up at it. It really perplexes me when a decent remake
like <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Oldboy</i> completely tanks while a
big, steaming pile-of-shit remake like this year’s <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1288558/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Evil Dead</i></a> rakes it in. As far as American translations of foreign
films go, this is about as well done as one can hope for. It’s not an
improvement, but I’d say anybody interested in seeing the Korean version should
see this one first. You’ll probably end up appreciating them both more.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtFU9vWganIkxALH5kJGQS7BVvaFmfethQQdJZVRqcRitBh67greulVR5CDPLssKRulm440HPyD2okzGt5gYFyu1BabXC8poDu5v79ekoR3sqRIqxY_VGeq_u7KoHQhJAMlMZvLViKtmk/s1600/anchorman2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtFU9vWganIkxALH5kJGQS7BVvaFmfethQQdJZVRqcRitBh67greulVR5CDPLssKRulm440HPyD2okzGt5gYFyu1BabXC8poDu5v79ekoR3sqRIqxY_VGeq_u7KoHQhJAMlMZvLViKtmk/s200/anchorman2.jpg" width="132" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Sixty-two: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1229340/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues</i></a></b> – It’s
a rare kind of comedy that transcends into legendary cult status. These films
don’t seem to have much in common other than having a high laugh-per-minute
quotient and being endlessly quotable. Examples of such movies are <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071230/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Blazing Saddles</i></a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071853/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Holy Grail</i></a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080487/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Caddyshack</i></a>,
and – more recently – <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118715/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Big Lebowski</i></a>
and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0151804/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Office Space</i></a>. The original <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0357413/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Anchorman</i></a> was one such movie. Given that
these films are essentially freak occurrences with no real perceivable recipe,
making a sequel (especially a decade later) is bold move. So, it’s no surprise
that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Anchorman 2</i> is kind of a
befuddling mess. The most pathetic thing about it is that the whole film is
basically squandered potential. They bring back a lot of the original cast and
repeat a fair portion of jokes (souped-up for the second time around) and there
are celebrity cameos galore, but they don’t seem to know what to do with all
this stuff once they have it. I suppose this was due to arrogance on the
filmmakers’ part. The thinking seemed to be “Hey, we’ve got all the elements
from the original intact, this movie’ll pretty much make itself! What can go
wrong?” That’s like throwing a bunch of tasty ingredients into a blender and
expecting it to taste as good as if it were properly cooked. It’s true the
movie is funny at times, but a lot of the laughs are in response to things
being so bizarre, the viewer doesn’t know how else to react. The perfect point
of comparison is in the end credits of this film and the first one. The
original <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Anchorman</i> concluded with
alternate takes and bloopers that were hysterically funny. This one has one
clip at the very end that makes absolutely no sense and actually made me sorry
that I stuck around ’til the very end. I was frankly kinda embarrassed for all
these A-list comedians when it was all over. Luckily for them, twenty years
from now, people will still be quoting <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Anchorman</i>
and all but forgotten about its sequel. Don’t believe me? Compare the legacy of
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087332/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Ghostbusters</i></a> to that of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097428/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Ghostbusters 2</i></a>. In fact, did you even
know there <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">was</i> a <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Ghostbusters 2</i>?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEil3pkQUwye234WsjlATgduJSAQCc9flDxtpjFfIzZRsuKY8Pp9KaXivAmljNTDsF3-ZT1LRIo_hRa3HxHkUnfqwEp1R8HTC2hZBh-VCJeP_lF8COqJ5nUEz7m7Sa0yViG9I8251CmaecA/s1600/americanhustle.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEil3pkQUwye234WsjlATgduJSAQCc9flDxtpjFfIzZRsuKY8Pp9KaXivAmljNTDsF3-ZT1LRIo_hRa3HxHkUnfqwEp1R8HTC2hZBh-VCJeP_lF8COqJ5nUEz7m7Sa0yViG9I8251CmaecA/s200/americanhustle.jpg" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Sixty-three: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1800241/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">American Hustle</i></a></b> – There’s been a lot
of pre-emptive Oscar buzz surrounding this film and - why not? It’s a retro
piece containing several previous Oscar-nominees (and winners) in roles where
they yell at each other and cry a lot. Most of all, it the whole movie screams
classic <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000217/reference">Scorsese</a> right down to <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000288/reference">Christian Bale</a>’s performance which screams
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000134/reference">DeNiro</a> (not just because of his thick Bronx accent, but also because he put on
tons of weight for the role). Oh, and the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">actual</i>
DeNiro is in it too, just to be sure. I personally didn’t see what the big deal
is, though. Story-wise, it’s similar in a lot of ways to <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000631/reference">Ridley Scott</a>’s <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2193215/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Counselor</i></a> (although not nearly as
grim) and no one seemed to give much of a damn about that film (which I
actually thought was better). I guess timing is everything and that’s why
studios tend to release films like this at the end of the year. It’s
entertaining and the performances are good, but I wouldn’t bother seeing it a
second time. More than anything else, I was distracted by the hideous
hairstyles and constantly waiting for one of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0010736/reference">Amy Adams</a>’ nipples to slip out.
All of that notwithstanding, the film probably will get a nomination for Best
Picture, but more because the Academy allows ten films in that category, not because
it actually deserves it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6baeWqQQWeqxypWjShM3xCpEt_JEdzba3PdeB1Og8AelPUOM24pO5wI5O-HCPdFSNiW60Xd-lj8ilRSmYtyy-P7B2WoFKopQWamZbVfjRassUn5NccG5cc5M134z9OnC4s-lgdw12nHE/s1600/savingmisterbanks.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6baeWqQQWeqxypWjShM3xCpEt_JEdzba3PdeB1Og8AelPUOM24pO5wI5O-HCPdFSNiW60Xd-lj8ilRSmYtyy-P7B2WoFKopQWamZbVfjRassUn5NccG5cc5M134z9OnC4s-lgdw12nHE/s200/savingmisterbanks.jpg" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Sixty-four: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2140373/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Saving Mr. Banks</i></a></b> – It’s not often I
see a film that jumps back and forth between two separate stories being told in
parallel. That’s good because, almost always, one story is more interesting
than the other and I get frustrated when the film breaks away from the superior
one to continue with the inferior one. It doesn’t even matter if both stories
are quite good because I will always prefer to stick with the better one no
matter how almost-as-good the other one is. The perfect example of this is <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071562/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Godfather Part II</i></a>. A superb film,
but it would be even better if I could watch the Vito Corleone prequel
completely separate from the Michael Corleone sequel. I suppose I have a
one-track mind. Anyway, that’s the problem with <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Saving Mr. Banks</i>. The scenes with <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000668/reference">Emma Thompson</a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000158/reference">Tom Hanks</a> are
so delightfully amusing that when we cut back to P.L. Travers’ childhood I
found myself reacting the same way I do when I’m unable to fast forward through
television commercials. They interrupt the tone and momentum of the story
disallowing the viewer to fully experience the emotions of one story arc before
switching back to the other. I suppose the flashbacks help serve the story in
the long run, but are they absolutely necessary? It doesn’t seem like it. I’m
sure they could have trimmed down the backstory to one sequence midway through
the film and accomplished the same revelations. This is a good movie – <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">two</i> good movies, actually – but they
compete with each other in a way that makes them both suffer. Maybe they’ll
release a special edition DVD that has the different stories on separate discs.
If they do, watch it that way.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHWDVZzmqibcDv9QjsAFLDnPM2yxd4Er9ti6yDEcQZW_61SrsymskDaTxzB1b9UVi6Nk8xoKV4BNsuq7AKKqtjsM8zcp5nQffUI5dXzYwWELUVLA0-Q8c4G5YLqWmDy8Vh61V_IAaeT8M/s1600/thesecretlifeofwaltermitty.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHWDVZzmqibcDv9QjsAFLDnPM2yxd4Er9ti6yDEcQZW_61SrsymskDaTxzB1b9UVi6Nk8xoKV4BNsuq7AKKqtjsM8zcp5nQffUI5dXzYwWELUVLA0-Q8c4G5YLqWmDy8Vh61V_IAaeT8M/s200/thesecretlifeofwaltermitty.jpg" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Sixty-five: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0359950/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Secret Life of Walter Mitty</i></a></b> –
This movie is a bit of a conundrum. It has some really incredible moments and a
number of beautifully executed scenes. That’s probably how it was able to
produce one of the most compelling <a href="http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/fox/thesecretlifeofwaltermitty/">trailer</a>s of the year. As you may have heard
from other reviewers, though, it’s not anywhere near the epic it presents
itself to be. There’s no point in comparing it to the <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0039808/combined">original 1947 version</a>
with <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001414/reference">Danny Kaye</a> because it is completely different. Nor is it a literal
adaptation of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0862122/reference">James Thurber</a>’s short story but rather simply inspired by the
concept of a grand daydreamer. I give it props for going out on its own,
actually. So, it doesn’t suffer by comparison, but it does suffer. Don’t get
the wrong idea, I did like this movie. It’s largely due to the ambitious
direction by <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001774/reference">Ben Stiller</a>, who I found quite likeable in the title role. And
<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1325419/reference">Kristen Wiig</a>, as the obligatory love interest, is even more likeable to point
of being downright adorable. The movie is beautiful to look at and the fantasy
sequences are great fun (as are the real-life adventures Walter eventually
undertakes), but there’s something lacking in the script that I can’t quite put
my finger on. Some kind of imperceptible “glue” that’s necessary to keep a
story like this together and really make it sing. I was entertained, but my
disappointment was that the film didn’t deliver on a potential that was so
clearly there waiting to spring forth. It’s like seeing a talented person who would
be a brilliant fine artist settling for designing logos and letterheads (and,
believe me, as a person who went to art school, I’ve seen plenty of those). In
other words, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Secret Life of Walter
Mitty</i> is a good movie that should have been outstanding. As far as
criticisms go, that’s not so bad, but it is a little sad.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgr41jBilQf05tK8Uq-pvvTdoYUyX6B8ucBkQtljj_FXtjlRT6CYCLpiU1cTJosyleUEqIoG4U8_I91OZe7pj0bxRFtuwj3ygFfkM3UtBZ6ICeR-q4Cu9Tk9uLjbxJkJaDBxv6_WAw0_1Y/s1600/grudgematch.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgr41jBilQf05tK8Uq-pvvTdoYUyX6B8ucBkQtljj_FXtjlRT6CYCLpiU1cTJosyleUEqIoG4U8_I91OZe7pj0bxRFtuwj3ygFfkM3UtBZ6ICeR-q4Cu9Tk9uLjbxJkJaDBxv6_WAw0_1Y/s200/grudgematch.jpg" width="135" /></a><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">Movie Sixty-six: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1661382/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Grudge Match</i></a></b> – <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0781842/reference">Peter Segal</a> is one of
those directors who, if you know his work, you know exactly what to expect. His
films are harmless, mildly amusing and make no effort to impress you, make you
think, or take chances. To give you an idea of his caliber of filmmaking, his
best movie is <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114694/combined"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Tommy Boy</i></a>. I love <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Tommy Boy</i>, but I don’t love it because
it’s brilliant. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Grudge Match</i> is
another dopey (but not entirely unlovable) comedy from Peter Segal with the
usual paper-thin archetypes you would expect. In one corner, we’ve got <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000134/reference">DeNiro</a>
as the dirty old man who starts out wanting to make a quick buck and then
decides his main priority is making things right with the son he never knew he
had. In the other corner, we’ve got <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000230/reference">Stallone</a> as a blue-collar guy who wants to
leave boxing behind but steps up in tribute to his former trainer and an
attempt to win back the love of his life. On the sidelines, we’ve got <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000273/reference">Alan Arkin</a> playing the politically-incorrect curmudgeon with the blunt pearls of
wisdom and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0366389/reference">Kevin Hart</a> as the sassy fast-talking black man who laments about how
lame white people are. There’s also <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000107/reference">Kim Basinger</a> (who’s as good as she ever
was, actually) as Stallone’s object of affection and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1256532/reference">Jon Bernthal</a> as her (and
DeNiro’s) son. I suppose everybody’s good in their respective performances, but
only as good as they can be in such shallow roles. When it came to the big
fight at the end of the movie, I didn’t really care who won, but maybe you’re
not supposed to since the film essentially has two protagonists. Y’know, now
that I think about it, it might have been a more interesting movie if they
never revealed who actually won the fight. Unfortunately, with a movie this
mindless, their target audience would never stand for that.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Okay, 2014: What’cha got for me?</div>
johnbohlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17214666476896184563noreply@blogger.com0