jmiller-15 Reviews

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)

Eternal nightmare

[8 May 2004]

(contains spoilers)

I expected this movie to be a romantic comedy where two people get their memories of a love affair turned sour erased and then re-discover each other. While this movie had some elements of that in it, the majority of the movie was taken up in the nightmarish world of Jim Carrey's unconscious mind as his memories of his lover were being erased.

The premise of the movie was good, but the setting served to alienate in a way that I'm not sure was intended. The cold, wet, drab New York-area citiescape and a seedy medical clinic staffed by negligent techies who would get stoned while treating an unconscious patient gave a disturbing overtone that the viewer had to wrestle with.

Too much time was spent in the dreamland sequences where Carrey's memory was being eradicated, as he was re-living the events with his lover while the conversations of the techies and the memory erasing preparations were simulataneously going on, both in separate scenes and blended with the memories being re-lived and erased. In that sense it was an interesting cinemegraphic storytelling technique, although it took a while to realize this is what was happening and not just some nightmare of the unconscious patient. Those scenes took up too much of the movie.

That sci-fi kind of premise was interesting and had a little surprise or two. But before this movie was over I was thinking how it could have been done differently, for example in a groundhog-day re-living of events and having Carrey stand up for himself against the impulsive and abusive girlfriend (which begged to be done throughout the movie), or some other variation that one could imagine with memory-erasing technology such as one partner having control over what was erased in the other partner, selective memory erasure, or other variations that might be more interesting.

Paradoxically Carrey and his girlfriend, in the space of his mind during the all-night erasure session, decide to evade the erasure by 'hiding' in various memories, which provides some entertaining sequences. But in the end they apparently go back together, at least in dreamland, which gives the lesson that it's better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.

Still, the scenes were confusing, nightmarish and there never was much light at the end of the storeytelling tunnel. There seemed to be alternate versions of lives that were revisited in the memory erasure process that never made sense. The 'normal' scenes, the believable workaday life of the clinic, etc. were well-done, technically believable, realistically and well-acted, but this movie had a never-ending darkness to it. I'm not sure there was one sunny day in the movie (which is how the northeast is, admittedly) but it could have been cheered up or had the nightmare of the memory evasion contrasted with a cleaner, brighter 'real' world, or given a more understandable and happy ending, or made you think more about the possibilities of the technology like Star Trek would have done for example. There was nothing happy in this movie--in the characters, events, setting or the ending. An interesting acting sidetrack for Carrey as a 'nice guy' but the movie itself was just too interminably unpleasant for no good reason. 3 out of 10.

Metropolitan (1989)

Glad to have seen it (may contain spoiler)

[4 May 2004]

I saw this movie about ten years ago now and it is still on my mind. The quiet cinematography places it somewhere between film noir and a movie like 'Hanna and her Sisters,' and maybe even with a subdued atmosphere version of "The Game" (Michael Douglas).

Most people who've lived in a bigger city and went to college and aspired to do more with their lives when young adults will be absorbed by this film. One can relate to one (or more) of the characters, but for me it was removed just enough from my past that I could look at it historically, like a version of what I had been through. It is open to interpretation by the viewer as it goes along, or should I say open to identification with the situation and characters. I was the poor guy in the movie. This is really a psychological drama, with a cruel twist at the end.

The movie was strangely captivating and yet the viewer doesn't know where it's going to go next. This is not because of the setting---it's not some high-adventure action movie---but because of the situational and psychological build-up. The harsh reality scene at the end told it like it is and made what happened in the body of the movie so tragic.

This is a story of youth that has been told in other ways, with very different details but similar psychological plot of deception, friendships, and dealing with the world and one's place in it, a plot here that is tragically quite real to many young men in America today and is under-recognized in movies. In fact this movie is one-of-a-kind as far as I know. It is more of a tragic version of the coming-of-adulthood story in this particular slice of Americana.

I find myself recommending this film to young men who I know as a lesson in life when they appear to be undergoing the same kind of difficulties with relationships and their social life. It provides a needed perspective but not until the end, which drives the point home even more realistically after a lengthy set-up. A quietly stunning film.

Ella Enchanted (2004)

Enchanting but with a political agenda

[18 April 2004]

Contains spoilers (sort of)

Ella Enchanted was overall a charming, fun movie. It drew me in from the very beginning with the birds-eye view of flying over and into a fairy-tale kingdom. The special effects were put to good use as it portrayed 'modern' developments (malls, taxis with advertizing placards) but frozen in medeival technology. That element was fun and I wish they had done more of it.

The story itself was somewhat of a Cinderella legend. Costumes were beautiful (I wish they made clothes like that nowadays). This atmosphere and the sets were were vaguely similar to The Santa Clause or The Grinch in that regard-engrossing, charming, `believable' in the way fairy tales are, lovely kingdoms (where even poor people owned their own house) and without the special effects becoming ridiculous and amateurish like they are in so many movies where they take over.

This movie had interludes of musical song-and-dance. I'm not a musical fan but this was actually well-done and was as good a cinemegraphic technique as any to express what was going on with the characters and situations.

The movie did tread along the lines of `political correctness'. While it was almost possible to ignore this and simply enjoy the movie, it made it unrealistic in ways. You may think it's unnecessary to review that element, but the writers and directors deliberately crafted this theme into the movie to feed the viewers their political agenda. And the movie is partially targeted at young audiences who are more impressionable, so it deserves comment. The starlet of the movie had an obedience `curse' but was otherwise irritatingly independent and fiesty. By accident she bumps into the prince (several times) and her behavior to him is so rude that I don't see how this girl could model successful relationship-building, although I must say this trait was not overly-done. Women who wanted men were seen as shallow and wicked, or neurotic. Her pro-`ogre' political stance---championing these brutes of the forest in the political arena---continued even after being attacked and almost eaten by them. A realistic allegory no doubt, but the nexus of evil was portrayed as being in the royal household and the only way to salvation and social justice was shown as being through whiney lawyers, women doing what they want to do, if and when they want to, and the `pc' surrender of male prerogative. The last scene speaks it all: she is the one wearing a crown, not the new king, as he declares a kingdom of `equality.'

In that sense the movie is indeed a fairy tale and not a realistic model for successful relationships for young girls, or aspiring statesmen for that matter. Still, it wasn't rammed down the throat too much and I'm sure half the audience simply doesn't care about that. The film could have included more psychological elements, for example exploring the psychodynamics of her relationship with her father or showing the `curse' intertwined with a fear of abandonment. Then it would have been a more psychological drama and less of a politically correct agenda movie.

The costumes, music, and scenery were delightful and uplifting. There were puns (visual and otherwise) and if you can stomach the tired pc part of it and the perversion of the traditional story (the Grimm brothers were openly bashed) then it was actually entertaining and well-paced. It did not have the overly-sweet, formulaic Disney-esque quality that it would have had as a Disney movie. 6.5/10

Rain Man (1988)

Painful to watch

[16 October 2003]

(Contains spoilers) It was hard to tell who was more retarded in this movie--the character played to Dustin Hoffman or the one played by Tom Cruise. Hoffman did his job as an actor, believably playing the non-verbal features of this difficult disorder especially well. But the Tom Cruise "pretty boy" character, with his constant pasted-on smile and incongruous, arrogant, volatile temperament, made me cringe. That's because I've worked for people just like that and I know how impossible (and impossibly stupid) they are. His inability to pick up on the fact that his brother had savant qualities, for example the ability to instantly count and remember numbers, was just too glaring.

How dumb can the guy be? Events like this just dragged the movie on like an episode of Crocodile Dundee XII. Of course they're on their way to Las Vegas as Hoffman's card-counting (oops, savant) abilities become clearer (at least to everyone except Cruise) and, let's see, could this be leading to an "aha!" experience that Hoffman could be put to use in a Casino to rescue his idiot brother from the debt of his hairbrained car-importing scheme? If these were live actors people would be throwing garbage at Cruise on stage -- if they even remained in the theatre. Or better yet, throw garbage at the writer and director.

A suitable movie for Cruise, but he's a B-grade actor who can only do B-grade movies. Hoffman, well, he's versatile and tries new roles; you win some, you lose some. The movie was very low-brow, stupid, and simplistic, with over-done plot set-ups where you could see everything coming. Cruise's character was offensive but the movie didn't redeem that situation by having him be the 'bad guy' who gets it in the end because of his stupidity and arrogance. It's as if the movie was aimed at people who are themselves mentally retarded. Maybe under totally different direction and a re-worked plot it could have been a better story, but it you're looking for an uplifting or even a sad human interest movie, this one definitely rains on the audience.

Le divorce (2003)

Better than advertised; excellent acting

[31 August 2003]

I lined up for this movie and bought the very last ticket for a showing--the theater was completely full. Despite it apparently being billed as a romantic comedy with dippy-looking blonde stars, it turned out to be quite good. I was relieved to find it was a more serious movie whose plot was woven around a divorce allright, but in some unexpected ways.

I believe it portrayed French culture realistically. The plot drew me in and although it was serious, there were comedic moments. By the end of the movie I found myself, perhaps much like the French, as seeing the situation as a "comedy" but in a philosophical way. It WAS a "romantic comedy" in that sense, but don't expect slapstick or sitcom-level humor, or even many funny moments. There's no more or less humor than one would find in real life. The occasional humor is subtle and entwined with the tragedy and realism of all the events that were happening. One eventually sees these events in the context of the French culture.

And the "dippy" blondes were a deliberate part of the character roles which were played with very good acting. The stereotypic, affluent American family characters were played very true to form, from appearance to personality to world-view. (Does the rest of the world really see us that way?) The movie was a nice escape and by the end it took some of the heaviness out of what is usually an emotionally burdensome, tragic life event, by showing how it can happen in France. Sex and love do make the world go around. Nice ending wrap-ups to the situations too, which again lightened the heart--although I wouldn't call this movie a light-hearted comedy by any means. It's a drama, with nice cinematography too. Good movie--9 out of 10!

By the way, I agree there is far too much good-movie-bashing with some of these reviews. If you only enjoy special effects, shoot-em-up movies, then don't go see one like this! It's subtle, more sophisticated, and you should be able to appreciate experiences like romance and other cultures to enjoy this film.

American Splendor (2003)

Weird

[31 August 2003]

Not a 'bad' movie, but having lived in Pittsburgh, the images reminded me of that and were quite depressing. The poverty, bleakness, deranged people all around, were all too real. If you have any doubts about how realistic that was portrayed, please don't.

Kind of an oddball film both in cinemagraphic style and content. It showed an under-told story of part of Americana, the underground comic scene. Or in this case, what motivates those comicbook writers. They say artistic expression is sometimes borne from misery and that seemed to be true in Harvey's life. (Or as Letterman put it, "If misery loves company, then this man must have a house full of people!"). The trouble is, his life never got much better! It will appeal to some, although it was depressing to the end for me.

Swimming Pool (2003)

Alluring film; great imagery

[10 August 2003]

[Warning: Contains Spoilers]. I saw this movie and thought it was a very good psychosexual drama. I really don't see what all the confusion is about from some other reviewers about what was real and what wasn't. A change of scene is often used to indicate a daydream, nightdream or fantasy which is then shown to be just that when the character wakes up, or from some other jolt back to reality. That is what happens here several times. Although it's sometimes not obvious that a daydream is unfolding until it's over (which I presume is deliberate and makes the movie more hypnotic), reality always 'comes around' again and I was never once left confused as to what was a dream sequence and what was not. I don't see how anyone could have been left lost and confused by those episodes.

And (SPOILER FOLLOWS), the sequence at the end was likewise not confusing whatsoever. The girl with the braces was a hybrid between John's two daughters, a wishful-thinking happy ending for Sarah; a nice way for her to remember the French daughter that "could have been."

The film was well-done with beautiful imagery and French-style casual nudity. This was a very refreshing change from the typical Hollywood Beevis and Butthead approach to sexuality. I agree with another reviewer that it was an experience as much as a story. You could feel the sunshine on their faces. The story itself, i.e., the major plot twist near the end, was Hitchcockian. It gave a focus to the events that occurred up to that point, including Julie's felt abandonment when Sarah danced with the waiter. Superb acting throughout.

I'm surprised this movie hasn't gained cult status in the United States with feminists because of the man-killing theme. This may be because the story is told more realistically, showing a woman (Julie) pathologically misusing sex to try to reclaim her lost father at some psychic level, yet being unable to enter into a romantic relationship even when one unfolds for her (her recounting of falling in love to Sarah). C'est la vie; this movie lets you get into the heads of two women pretty well. Car chases and robots from the future are fun adventure, but movies can portray really good life drama too and this one does. Definitely worth seeing.

Lara Croft: Tomb Raider - The Cradle of Life (2003)

Better than the first, with more character

[27 July 2003]

I thought this movie was great! In the first Lara Croft movie, she was intriguing and sexy and I loved the adventure, but the sets (and the premise) were a little hokey and overdone and the characters a bit shallow. That was corrected with this second movie. It achieves a nice balance between globetrotting adventure, a plot whose flavors unfold at different speeds, gadgets, and some interpersonal intrigue. Just like a good wine!

I especially liked the interpersonal intrigue which was new here with Lara. Granted, some of it is not soap-opera quality drama, and perhaps the viewer sees what they want to see when close-ups of Lara's face are shown as she thinks and reacts. But hey, she's supposed to be British and the Brits are not exactly the most emotionally expressive people around. This movie did have the emotional glue to hold it together that the first movie was lacking.

As far as her skin being "too perfect?" Browner-skinned people are like that in real life! Pretty girl, which made the character behind the face all the more inviting to observe. There is still potential to see more of Lara's character, which makes me anticipate the third movie.

The tragic scene near the end (I won't spoil it) was somewhat gripping. But again if the viewer is not emotionally attuned (or doesn't understand the British!) they might not get it. I got it fine. They could have worked in more psychoanalytic symbolism though.

The pounding music was a little loud. The special effects were well-done and seamless except for the demon-monsters or whatever they were, which was hokey and untrue to the movie's otherwise good realism. (I guess the special effects geeks in the studio had to have their day). This sequel is definitely better than the first. Great movie; go see it!

About Schmidt (2002)

Good depiction of events from central character's perspective

[4 February 2003]

Warning: contains spoilers!

I appreciate the unique style of Jack Nicholson but I'm not an automatic fan who pre-judges all his movies to be good just because he's in the movie. This film was pretty good, a depiction of changes in the life of a sixty-something man. What was striking after a while was that the events and his reactions were portrayed entirely from the character's (Nicholson's) world, his view, his private space. Other movies may do this psychologically but not cinemagraphically. Every scene was focused on his experience or interaction with the events at hand. In that sense it was almost documentary-like from a fly-on-the-wall's perspective. There was a slight incongruity between his character being portrayed as the precise, ritual-oriented insurance executive (waiting until exactly 5:00 pm on his last day of work before turning out the lights and leaving his office) and the angry, devil-may-care slob he felt like being (and did be) much of the time. At times it was hard to read his emotion, as again the style of the movie focused only on him and not, for example, other scenes or characters talking about him (or anything else) when he wasn't there. This made it hard to get a grasp on how to perceive this movie at first--was it a tragedy, a comedy, a classic Nicholson anger role, or what. But then that was part of the "reality" aura of the movie--the character was developing new feelings, having new experiences from milestones in life, going where the buttoned-down insurance executive had never gone before. Older people in real life don't show as much direct emotion either, and so the role was played well.

Acting out his spontaneous affection for the neighbor in the camping park, which was a credible reaction to another person finally recognizing and accepting his anger within, was also met with a a jolt of reality that was again portrayed very realistically and was not your typical Hollywood scene. Several little themes like this in the movie were handled quite realistically and will give many people, especially perhaps an older audience, something to identify with. An entertaining little theme, and sub-plot of its own to me, was his daughter Jeannie's life. It was refreshing to see someone fallen from the usual movie character yuppie role and the sometimes ugly unresolved tensions between adult children and their aging parents told like it privately is. Not since the movie "Baby, it's You" have I seen this kind of parent-offspring realism portrayed. Being in Jeannie's generation I have known people like her and wondered about their parents; this showed it from the parents' point of view wondering about THEM. It was touching to see his attempt to rescue her, albeit from the island he himself was on and needed to rescue himself from. It was also comedic in an almost Woody Allen-esque way. These scenes never did quite gel into a full-blown comedy (although in a more crowded theater if laughter took hold it might be contagious and could have been different--that's how on the verge it was). And the surprise finale to that situation was magnificent in its quiet way-- the empathetic viewer will certainly identify with the surrender and forgiveness despite the misgivings. Again not your typical Hollywood ending. This movie is great for adult children or their parents. Nicholson fans will be pleased but the movie is much more than just his inimitable personality. A little slow at times (for an audience used to helicopter chases) but a well-told story that stays on my mind.