Underworld

One of Von Sternberg’s earliest films shows few moments of his later greatness and the performances are not very good, but it moves along swiftly and is fairly entertaining.  As a gangster flick it perhaps set the template for the genre… unfortunately, it’s a genre I never cared for that much.  I just wasn’t that into it, which is a disappointment because the other two movies in Criterion’s box set are among my favorites by JVS.  Oh well.  Rating: 6

IMDb

A Cottage on Dartmoor

I love Asquith’s marvelously executed stage adaptations, which are highlighted by sublime performances but aren’t terribly exciting visually.  So it was a complete surprise to see that this silent had such dynamic style.  A psychosexual thriller that may well have influenced Hitchcock (the sudden splash of red is echoed in Spellbound), it’s beautifully photographed and shows an impressive range of camera and editing technique.  Startling flashbacks, whirlwind-edited sequences, clever insertions of newsreel footage, and poetic use of mirrors, focus, and visual metaphor.  The downside is the film seems rather draggy.  There’s about an hour of build-up that could be whittled down by half.  But it’s not a bad story at all, and the visual aspects alone make it worthwhile.  Rating: 8

IMDb

127 Hours

I’m sure for some people the genius of this movie is Danny Boyle’s use of flashback and fantasy/hallucination to provide a deeper psychological element to Aron Ralston’s struggle.  But I found them annoying more often than not, and was often thinking “Touching the Void didn’t need all these tricks.”  But perhaps that’s because that story has a sufficiently intense beginning, middle and end… whereas this story is pretty much all prelude to the grisly end.  I don’t mean to belittle Ralston’s experience in any way, the guy was obviously a tough sonofabitch, and in this particular “would you or wouldn’t you?” scenario, I’m pretty sure my answer is a firm I Wouldn’t.  But if you need a bunch of loud music and trippy sequences to spice it up, either there’s not enough to that story or you’re doing it wrong.  Before I sound like too much of a negative Nellie, I was pretty engaged throughout, and thought Franco did a decent job.  It’s watchable, but with flaws.  Rating: 7

IMDb

GasLand

It’s a sad state of affairs when a documentary about evil motherfuckers like Dick Cheney and soulless corporations out-and-out lying to people and government agencies that turn a blind eye feels like “Oh, another one.”  I’m not sure how much more liberal outrage I have left in me, but this is definitely a subject worthy of some outrage.  Josh Fox takes a personal approach that’s effective without stooping to the grandstanding of a Michael Moore.  Some of it is a bit repetitive, though.  Rating: 8

IMDb

True Grit

I haven’t read the book, and seeing as I hate John Wayne, I’ve never seen the original movie either.  So I had no expectations, except a general expectation for the usual level of craftsmanship from the Coens.  And they deliver.  It’s hard for me to find any particular faults with this movie.  The slurring speech that Bridges employs is occasionally hard to understand (off-kilter speech patterns being a Coen staple) but otherwise it’s an excellent yarn, a Western/anti-Western that’s memorable, entertaining and humorous in the right places.  Hailee Steinfeld is a revelation, a powerhouse who easily outdoes both Bridges and Damon.  It called to my attention the fact that we’ve seen a slew of talented young actors in recent years.  Perhaps the days of godawful child performances are behind us (then again, I steer clear of the usual family fare, so maybe I’m missing out on the stinkers).  The Night of the Hunter tie-in at the end was a nice touch, too.  However… the film, despite a few quirky moments, lacks the idiosyncratic flair that marks the highlights of the Coens’ output.  This kind of take on the Western feels a little old hat by now, and I would have liked to see something a bit more unique.  Still, it’s a mighty fine film and I may even buy it.  Rating: 8

IMDb

Easy Living

I think this was the last of the Jean Arthur movies I was interested in.  And it’s the least of them.  Although the plot is amusing and has plenty of entertaining developments, the execution is off.  Far too many goofy pratfalls, and scenes tend to go on way too long.  The worst example of this is the torturous Automat scene, which had me groaning.  It’s a common problem with 30′s comedies… the timing is designed to leave room for big laughs, which might work with an uproarious audience, but not so much on the living room couch.  It just feels awkward and uncomfortable.  I’ve been a bit underwhelmed by Preston Sturges in the past, but he only wrote the screenplay… the blame may lie with director Mitchell Leisen.  However, Arthur is great and the film makes some fun commentary on social status, gossip-mongering, and the world of high finance.  It’s a shame it isn’t funnier.  Rating: 6

IMDb

The King’s Speech

As a cross between the royalty picture (and a period one, at that) and the unconventional but effective teacher/shrink picture, this does have the aura of “Oscar bait” all over it, but it rises above the stigma.  The end result is a pretty good movie.  Director Tom Hooper relies too heavily on solemn music and the use of fisheye lenses gets tiresome, and let’s face it, this is pretty formulaic stuff with no surprises to be had.  But I must admit I was charmed by Firth, Rush, and Carter.  They craft excellent performances, and their roles are well-written with punchy dialogue.  If the beats are familiar, at least they’re hit quite well, and I especially enjoyed the lighter moments.  Pleasantly surprised by this one.  Rating: 8

IMDb

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (rewatch)

Been a while since I’ve watched this, the new Blu-Ray gives me an excuse.  I was worried the lustre might have worn off, but I’m actually bumping my score back up.  I seem to have gotten over my problems with Jim Carrey.  I still don’t LOVE him, but he plays this character well.  In my last two reviews, I noted that the weak point of the movie was that I didn’t buy Clementine wanting to be with Joel.  But now I’m on board with it.  Opposites attract, right?  I suppose she’s just the type who is drawn to “fixer-upper” guys, or more accurately, guys who are a bit intimidated by her.  Regardless, it’s a goddamn brilliant piece of work, so intricately structured (to a degree that puts, ohhhhh let’s say Inception, to shame) and funny and honest and touching… and clever in a way that is entirely appropriate.  I think what really puts it over the top for me is how the Elijah Wood and Kirsten Dunst characters are woven into it.  Someone with less imagination would have been happy with just the Joel/Clementine story, but these additional subplots really flesh out the concept.  A wonderful film, as in filled with wonder.  Rating: 10

IMDb

Toy Story 3

I liked the first two movies in the series, but over the years I’ve grown more and more tired of Pixar’s method of anthropomorphization.  This film really drove it home for me.  The beats are all worn-out Hollywood clichés, simply paid tribute to with toys, with nothing very interesting being done to shake up the formula.  The bottom line is I just didn’t give a damn about the stupid toys.  I enjoyed the last few minutes, where we see Andy’s connection to them and his passing them on to another child.  It was the only time in the film when I felt emotionally invested.  For the rest of it, I admired the impeccable craftsmanship but grew restless as it careened from one familiar scene to another (speaking of familiar, the line “Did anyone notice the transom?” is directly from Drugstore Cowboy, which is either blind coincidence or the weirdest homage ever in a children’s movie).  A few witty moments and twists here and there, but not enough to overcome the empty insincerity of it all.  Even as a non-Pixar-fan, this was a disappointment.  There are also unsettling consumerist undertones to this franchise, which are probably best left to someone more eloquent than myself.  Rating: 6

IMDb

Dogtooth

I’ve seen some names thrown around in connection with this film.  Haneke, Noe, Von Trier, Korine.  All apt, because Lanthimos is something of a provocateur as well, and this is probably the most disturbing movie I’ve seen since Antichrist.  I gasped more than once.  Some scenes are absolutely harrowing, some have a humor that’s almost TOO dark, and all of them have a fascination to them.  I’ve always been intrigued (and seriously alarmed) by similar real-life stories, and although I don’t think it would ever function quite like this, it definitely makes for gripping material.  The main problem here is that Lanthimos really isn’t raising or answering any questions here, except for possible vague allegories.  I don’t think he’s just out there pushing buttons, but in the end it feels kind of empty, perhaps by dint of being so far removed from everyday reality.  I’d like to let it kick around my brain for a while, but on the other hand, I kind of don’t want it in there.  Powerful stuff.  Rating: 8

IMDb