Change Your Image
chiudennis
Reviews
Catch Me If You Can (2002)
My Favorite Movie of 2002
"Catch Me If You Can" caught me. It is story of the life and times of Frank Abignale Jr., played deliciously by Leonardo DiCaprio. The film floats effortlessly on a cloud imagined by director Steven Spielberg. Walking out of "Catch Me If You Can", I was giddy with excitement, because I had seen my favorite film of the year.
The look and feel of the film is flawless. Mr. Spielberg has become so at ease in his medium that his movies feel natural like sitting in your favorite chair. The bygone era when commercial aviation was glamorous and Pan Am inspired exotic dreams of travel to far off lands has given way to bankruptcy and no-frills airlines. However, the golden era of glamor lives again through Mr. Spielberg's loving representation. Sinatra sings, and John Williams reminisces the pop jazz era in a sparkling score that has a Mancini "Pink Panther" flair. The energy of possibilities courses through the veins of every scene and I was swept away by the joy on screen.
The story itself is fascinating. We wonder how can a 16 year old runaway get away with writing $4 million in bad checks, fake being an airline pilot, doctor and a lawyer. We find that with style, class, confidence and belief, anything is possible. Mr. DiCaprio is perfectly cast as a boy with a genius for fraud and such a winning personality that we want to be fooled to partake in the fantasy.
Mr. Speilberg also succeeds in creating a realistic psychological portrait of Abignale Jr. by carefully showing Abignale Jr.'s parents before and after divorce.
After Abignale Jr. runs away from home when he is told that his parents are getting a divorce, his life of crime brings a new friend and father figure in his life; ironically it is the FBI agent seeking to arrest him, played by the dependable Tom Hanks. The characters create an interesting relationship of friendly adversaries. Abignale Jr. needs the Hank's character and vice versa. Their relationship is facinating.
I have seen 50 movies this year, and I had not found one film that made me excited, until "Catch Me If You Can" -- my favorite film of 2002.
Tadpole (2002)
"Tadpole" grew into a frog and then became a prince.
Once you accept "Tadpole"'s pond and swim with its rib-tickling currents and eddies, you are set for a hillarious time.
"Tadpole" is the story of Oscar (played by newcoming Aaron Stanford) and his Oedipus complex for his stepmother, Eve, (played by Sigourney Weaver). Oscar comes back from boarding school for Thanksgiving on a mission to express his romantic affections for Eve. However, it takes him time to find the right moment for this to happen, and one evening, Oscar is diverted by one of his stepmother's friends, Diane (played by Bebe Neuwerth) who seduces him. Diane and Oscar have sex and it begins a hillarious farce, where Oscar attempts to hide their one-night encounter from his stepmother, whom he loves.
The inspiration for "Tadpole" seems clearly to be Woody Allen. The look and feel of New York, the witty and punchy dialogue, the kind of New Yorkers that they characterize, and of course the Allen-stepdaughter relationship, all scream out that this is a homage to Woody Allen. Even the handheld camera movements and the Manhatten party scenes have a Woody Allen flair.
The ability of the film to enter this Woody Allen-esqe world was crucial for me, because I gave the same leeway to this film as I do for Woody Allen's films. I don't expect minority actors, nor do I expect to see moderate or low-income people. And, above all, I don't expect to see reality; only a slightly warped reality.
Another crucial aspect of the film is the performance of young Aaron Stanford. Stanford's preparation for his portrayal of this character is outstanding. Stanford's Oscar finds the perfect tone of a boy who believes his is much older than his physical age. He adopts debonair mannerisms that remind you of how Cary Grant and Humphrey Bogart used to establish their presence on screen; like the slight cocky turn of the head and shoulders and the winning grin. He also does well, intellectualizing Voltaire and other classical writers. Stanford carries a large part of the film and I was glad to watch him.
Sigourney Weaver, Bebe Neuwirth and John Ritter turn in good performances. However, the film does not give them a great deal of time to explore their characters. At one hour and eighteen minutes, the film moves quite expeditiously. The film could have found a bit more depth with such a strong cast.
Overall, I enjoyed "Tadpole" and recommend it. My rating is *** (3 stars) out of **** / or 7.5 out of 10.
Lovely & Amazing (2001)
A rare honest portrayal of women.
"Lovely & Amazing" is one of those rare films about women that does the gender justice.
I must admit to a pet peeve about the portrayal of women in movies. I find far too often that women are used as the mechanism for the downfall of men. It has been this way since Eve allegedly tempted Adam to taste the forbidden fruit, or Samson entrusted his hair to Delilah and so on. A shining example is Martin Scorcese's "Casino" where drugged-out Ginger, portrayed by Sharon Stone, leads Sam, portrayed by Robert DeNiro, into ruin. I hate that. I think it's misogynistic.
More recent depictions of groups of women have taken on a "Sex in the City" flair, case in point is the "Secrets of the Ya Ya Sisterhood". I find these depictions uninteresting popular fantasies that attempt to empower women by shooting them full of testosterone, creating in them the lasciviousness of men. Yes, it empowers women by tearing down traditional sexual roles, but ignores a serious multi-dimensional look of women's lives in total.
"Lovely & Amazing" portrayed women in total. It is the story of a Mother and her two daughters at a time of growth and change in their lives.
One important symbolic scene depicts one of the daughters, Elizabeth (portrayed by Emily Mortimer), naked asking to be told the truth about her body. She hears that one breast is slightly larger than the other, that her pubic hair needs to be trimmed, that one eye is larger than the other, that her upper arms are a little flabby, and her teeth are a little yellow. She also hears that her breast look beautifully natural, that her hips are wonderful and that she is well proportioned. Through this scene we realize that Elizabeth is beautiful because of her imperfections. We remember why the statue of the "Venus De Milo" with her missing arms and legs is so beautiful. This one scene is the essence of the film and what I seek in these types of films.
The entire film reaches for truth and honesty in the depiction of the main characters. The mother, Jane Marks (portrayed by Brendy Blethyn), daughter Michelle (portrayed by Catherien Keener) and Elizabeth genuinely depict the lives of these women and their inner turmoil.
Jake Gyllinhaal and Dermot Mulroney turn in some fine work as the love interests that truly appreciated the Keener and Mortimer characters.
My one small problem with the film was that watching it made me feel a little like listening to Samuel Barber's "Adagio for Strings" (used often, most famously perhaps at JFK's funeral and in Oliver Stone's village burning scene in "Platoon") where the music reaches mournfully higher and higher, never consumating the notes or the emotions until the very end. I love that music and this film, but it would have been nice if the film provided some resting points along the way.
My score is 9 out of 10 or ***3/4* out of ****.
Blood Work (2002)
Recommended with One Reservation
(This review discusses contains a basic discussion of the plot
and characters which may be considered spoilers. )
Director Clint Eastwood is a master of minimalist filmmaking. In a
Hollywood of bigger, more violent, more prurient, more explosive,
more everything, Eastwood stands like the yeoman silent cowboy
on a windswept western plain that he so often played in his
career. Eastwood resolutely makes his films the old-fashioned
way with smart weather-beaten characters, set in a story that is
told with workmanlike precision, devoid of fast edits, CGI or other
modern Hollywood conventions. This is why Clint Eastwood is a
great director and this is why I go to see his movies.
`Blood Work' lives up to my expectations of Eastwood's work
three-quarters of the way, and disappoints in the last quarter.
`Blood Work' centers on aging-FBI serial killer profiler Terry
McCaleb, played by Eastwood himself. In a chase with a killer,
McCaleb collapses from a heart attack. After retiring from the FBI,
he spends two years waiting for a heart transplant and eventually
receives one. However, he finds that his new heart came from a
murder victim. The victim's sister Graciella Rivers, played by the
Wanda De Jesus, asks him for a favor that he cannot refuse, to
track down the murderer of her sister. Still weak from the heart
transplant, McCaleb goes on the hunt. He is frail, vulnerable, old
and sick and we hear every breath he takes, see each of his fevers
that indicate possible transplant rejection, and go with him on this
journey to find justice for the woman that gave him life.
Eastwood's courage to show himself in a diminished capacity is
intimate and speaks to the truth that he seeks in his mature
directorial works. The brilliance of his Academy Award winning
`Unforgiven' is that he took the essence of the Westerns that
made him famous and stripped it down. He tore away the
glamour and bravado, the high-minded honor, and revealed a truth
about gunslingers, sheriff's and regular men of the time that was
dark, gritty and pure. For most of `Blood Work' Eastwood again
attempts to strip down the `Dirty Harry' icon that he created for a
more humanistic truth where no one is invincible and no one can
avoid death forever. This is yet the next progression for the Secret
Service agent that he portrayed in Wolfgang Peterson's `In the
Line of Fire' (a movie that showed him panting to keep up with a
motorcade).
When Eastwood sticks to his unconventional portrayal of an ailing
law enforcement agent, I appreciated `Blood Work'. This was
because, now, all bets were off. Dirty Harry could never die, but
Terry McCaleb could. The situations were more vulnerable, less
predictable and the sense of danger was heightened. As
McCaleb tracked the clues, we feared for his safety and his health.
Unfortunately, the Dirty Harry of old resurfaces at the end for a
forgettable conclusion. It is a cheat for Eastwood to place himself
openly in a crucible that has fired down the old conventions of his
superman cop icon, only to then bring them back for a conventional conclusion. Better for him was to obey the rules he
set up for himself in the film, recognize the limitations of his age,
and ask younger and fitter police officers to help him track down
the killer at the end, rather than do it alone, as he did in his prime.
Still it was a treat to watch most of the movie and to remember
when movies did not have excessive violence, frenetic pacing and
hi-tech wizardry. For this I recommend Eastwood's `Blood Work'
with only one reservation that prevented this from being a bookend
to his greatest film `Unforgiven'. I do hope that he makes one final
police film that fully strips down the police-thriller genre like he did
the western. With luck, someone will bring him such a script.
My score is 7 out of 10 / *** out of ****.
Xing fu shi guang (2000)
`Happy Times' is one of those movies that have good moments, but in the end does not amount to much.
(This review will discuss plot, characters and themes which may be considered SPOILERS. Please do not read this review if you do not wish to receive this information.)
Score: 5.5 out of 10
"Happy Times" is one of those movies that have good moments, but in the end does not amount to much. It begins as Zhao, played by Zhao Benshan, proposes to a portly woman, played by Dong Lihua. The woman requires $50,000 for a wedding. Zhao is broke and unemployed but deceives the woman into believing that he has the money to satisfy this condition.
Zhao schemes to come up with the money by renovating a dilapidated and abandoned bus into a love shack for romantic couples to share their physical affections. He and his friend dub the bus the `Happy Times Hotel'.
At this point, it appears that the film by Zhang Yimou will be a light-hearted romp of strange stories of romantic visitors to the hotel. However, like a splash of ice-water on a cold day, Yimou morphs the movie into a sentimental Cinderella tale of a blind 18-year old girl, Wu Ying, and her abuse by the portly betrothed of Zhao, who is Wu Ying's stepmother. Yes, there is an "evil stepmother". The portly woman abandons her unwanted blind stepdaughter into Zhao's care, and Zhao is left to see to the girl's living arrangements and employment.
Zhao reluctantly becomes Wu Ying's prince and fairy godmother in one. Zhao sets Ying up to stay in his apartment and builds an imaginary massage parlor in an abandoned factory for Ying to work. This is in essence, Zhan Yimou's attempt to turn a pumpkin into a magic coach to take Cinderella to the ball. Zhao even buys Ying a dress, as any good fairy godmother would do for a girl on her way to the ball, or in this case a fake massage parlor.
The film continues with its fairy tale only until the jarring and stark real world conclusion that left me completed unsatisfied.
The main problem with the story construction is that "Happy Times" tries to have its cake and eat it too. It attempts to stick to its apparent fairy tale roots by failing to introduce the real world dangers of a blind girl who is abandoned into the care of a stranger and placed into service as a massage girl. There is no lewd or lascivious edge as may be suggested by the situation. Yet, through the treatment of the girl and the jarring conclusion, the screenplay violates our trust in this fairy tale world by abruptly reneging on the fairy tale.
I think Zhang Yimou would have done better at the script level if he had dove straight into the material, as opposed to basically dipping one toe in. Yimou abandons the promising premise of the Happy Times Hotel and the marriage storyline in favor of the massage parlor/blind girl storyline. Why didn't he simply go with the hotel, the odd romantic couples and the comedic situations that could have followed? Why didn't Yimou go with the planning of the wedding with the over-weight evil stepmother and the comedic possibilities that were available there? Yimou introduces the material, dips his toe in and gives up. What remains at the end is an uneven story of a blind girl and her reluctant savior.
`Happy Times' is not a bad movie by any means, but it has the sad fate of so many movies of never realizing its potential and being average.
Pleasantville (1998)
One Of My Favorite Films of All-Time
(The following discusses and analyzes plot, characters and themes in detail. Those not wanting to receive spoilers should not read this review.)
Very rarely do I fall in love with a movie and want to watch it over and over again. "Casablanca" is one such film for me and another is "Pleasantville". Watching "Pleasantville" was one of the most magical film experiences of my life.
The idea behind the story is simple. Take modern teenagers and transport them into the candy-coated 1950s world of a "Leave-It-To Beaver" television show. However, producer-writer-director Gary Ross transcends the "Jetsons Meet the Flintstones" story idea and uses it as a starting point to create a modern fable of shockingly refreshing wisdom.
The movie begins in modern day where High School students sit bored as their teachers educate them as to the plagues of modern times -- global warming, sexually transmitted diseases, and other horrors. It is at this point we meet nerdy David, played by the amazing Tobey Maguire. David and his sister Jennifer, played by the irrepressible Reese Witherspoon, are children of divorce. David has a passion for an old 1950s show named "Pleasantville" where at all times things are pleasant. His passion for the show is that of a zealous Star Trek fan who knows every line of every episode. There is poignancy to David's obsession, because the viewer understands that "Pleasantville" is an escape to a more stable family environment than the one fate has provided for him.
However, fantasies often come crashing down when attempted in real life. In a surprising magical leap through the television (supplied by the lovable Don Knotts), David and Jennifer are transported into the "Pleasantville" black-and-white TV world. Until they can figure out how to return home, they live the lives of characters Bud and Mary Sue Parker.
For Jennifer, a sexually liberated teen, "Pleasantville" is a drag, so she attempts to introduce modern sexual liberation into the "Pleasantville" world. Instantly color is introduced on to the screen. A rose is shown as true, brilliant red. When word spreads that love can be expressed in physical form, many younger and older couples begin to have sex. Some who have sex become "colored" while others remain black-and-white". There is a mystery as to why some become "colored" while others do not.
Bud and Jennifer begin talking to students and citizens of "Pleasantville" about the greatest works in English literature and the greatest paintings in the world, and lines form at the library while impressionist, cubist and modern art begins to appear on the Soda Shop front window. The people engaging in these passionate ventures are turned from black-and-white to color.
It is at this point that we understand the logic. It is not the act of sex or the mere act of reading a book that turns the characters "colored". It is the passion for creativity, imagination and love that makes the change when ignited in each individual's soul.
While change occurs, some in "Pleasantville" fear change. The Chamber of Commerce, led by the town's mayor "Big Bob" (in the last towering performance of J.T. Walsh) takes action to quash the sexually suggestive paintings and books. They are blind to the imagination and passion going on all around them. All they see is dirty filthy smut. They organize a book burning, and create rules of conduct that forces all residents of "Pleasantville" to act as they did before David and Jennifer entered their world, including the requirement that the only colors allowed are black, white and gray and all citizens must remain pleasant at all times. I won't give away the end here.
When one finishes viewing this masterpiece, one remembers it started out from a simple story idea and ends in book burnings, mob violence, and a defense of creativity and brilliance. It debunks and criticizes those in public life that would keep our minds small and our ambition to be different even smaller.
When this movie came out, it received a lot of criticism from the religious right and radio-talk show hosts like, Dr. Laura Schlesinger, who like the Chamber of Commerce, only saw dirty filthy smut. They complained that this movie encouraged promiscuity. It goes without saying that these groups and individuals entirely missed the point. The movie was explicit that having sex did not change a character from black-and-white to color. Only true passion and love for something new would do that. These criticisms remind us that people like the Chamber of Commerce characters do actually exist. They are the ones that ban books, enforce rigid codes of conduct, and protest art that pushes the limit of what a narrow conservative few expect.
"Pleasantville" is one of the most beautifully filmed, thoughtful, and mesmerizing films that I have ever watched in my life.
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982)
20th Anniversary of One of the Greatest Sci-Fi Films of the last 20 years
(Caution: This review will discuss in detail themes, plot and characters that may be considered spoilers. Do not read this review if you do not desire such information about this film.)
"Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" is one of the best science fiction films of the past 20 years. At its core, it is a story of vengeance, rebirth and sacrifice. Even more admirable is the script's sophistication in combining literary themes found in Charles Dickens' "A Tale of Two Cities" and Melville's "Moby Dick".
The film opens with the administration of the Kobayashi Maru test at Starfleet Academy; the test is known to cadets and Starfleet officers as the "no-win scenario". In the test, an impossibly challenging situation is encountered, where the cadets tested must demonstrate their reaction to their own mortality. As Admiral Kirk notes to Lt. Savik, after Savik questions the purpose of the test, "Well, how we deal with death, is at least as important as how we deal with life, wouldn't you say."
As part of the test, the instructors who are the former senior staff of the Starship Enterprise fake their own deaths. This is the first hint in the film that symbolically Admiral Kirk and his crew are dead. He and his crew accepted promotion to teach at Starfleet Academy, and stopped being the explorers in command of a starship facing the unknown.
For his birthday, Spock gives Kirk Dicken's "A Tale of Two Cities" and Kirk reads the first line, "It was the best of times; it was the worst of times." This begins Kirk's journey in the film that parallels the themes of the book. In Dicken's story, Dr. Manette is imprisoned and symbolically dies until word arrives that his daughter, Lucy with brilliant gold hair, resurrects him into the outside world of France, which is disintegrating to social unrest under ruthlessness of the monarchy and royalty.
At the same time that Kirk sits in the prison of his own promotion, Khan is buried alive on a barren windy desert planet where Kirk had placed him decades ago. Khan is resurrected from his "death" by the chance landing of Genesis Project terra-formers who are working with Starfleet and the chance to revenge himself upon Kirk. The Genesis Project is a missile that when detonated will take all matter in an area and recreates it into a planet livable for human life.
Similarly to Dickens' story, Kirk is contacted by one of the terra-formers who is the mother of his son, because they face imminent attack from Khan who had taken control of a Starfleet research vessel. Kirk is given permission to respond with the Enterprise and the trainee crew and to rescue his son.
In addition to Kirk's rescue of his son, vengeance at this point becomes the catalytic event that resurrects Kirk and Khan from their symbolic deaths. Khan takes on the obsession of Melville's Captain Ahab in "Moby Dick" and relentlessly pursues Kirk for revenge, despite protestations that he could do so much more with his new found freedom.
The price of vengeance is death. After Khan's first devastating attack, a young engineering crewman dies. Kirk stands at his bedside and as the crewman reaches out for Kirk's tunic, blood smears on Kirk's white bib just before the crewman dies. In "A Tale of Two Cities" red wine or blood foreshadowed death for an aristocrat who killed a baby with his horse drawn coach.
Kirk and Khan at the end of the film engage in a battle to the death. However, just prior to Khan's death, Khan engages the Genesis device that will devastate all life and matter in the area, in its effort to reformulate the matter to make it a planet fit for human life. It appears that Kirk will die in the end as well. Spock makes the supreme sacrifice and repairs the ship at the cost of his own life, which allows the ship and Kirk to escape the Genesis explosion.
Spock's sacrifice mirrors Charles Darnay's and Sidney Carton's sacrifice at the end of "A Tale of Two Cities" where one person is hanged in place of the other.
Just as the film began with the first line of "A Tale of Two Cities", the film ends with the last line of "A Tale of Two Cities". "It is a far better thing I do, than I have ever done before. It is a better resting place, than I have ever known."
To study "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" is to delve into some of the most important human themes in English literature. It is a "Star Trek" film that aspired to be more than the mindless action films that come out every year. It is a study of characters' death and rebirth that one rarely finds in any film. Each of the characters are well acted and the direction and cinematography are outstanding. If one studies "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan", understands all that it attempted and succeeded in doing, I think without a doubt it will be considered one of the towering cinematic achievements in science fiction film history.