In this week's episode, Ben, Tyler, and Pat discuss a pair of Tony Scott films, both of which star Tom Cruise: Top Gun and Days of Thunder.
Monday, September 20, 2010
The NJNM Podcast: Ep. 10 - Top Gun and Days of Thunder
In this week's episode, Ben, Tyler, and Pat discuss a pair of Tony Scott films, both of which star Tom Cruise: Top Gun and Days of Thunder.
Friday, September 17, 2010
The Town
Ben Affleck's second directorial feature is a solid piece of work. It probably won't change anyone's life, and it's certainly not as good as some of its Boston-set contemporaries, but The Town further establishes Affleck's credibility both behind and in front of the camera. Comparisons to Clint Eastwood will surely pop up across the web (indeed, they already have), and - as much as I love Eastwood - I actually don't think those comparisons are unwarranted.
The Town
Co-Writer/Director: Ben Affleck
Starring: Ben Affleck, Jeremy Renner, Jon Hamm, Rebecca Hall, Blake Lively
Following 2007's Gone Baby Gone, Affleck returns to the city in which he grew up to tell this story, adapted from Chuck Hogan's novel "Prince of Thieves." He plays Doug MacRay, a thief who orchestrates the robberies. One thing he didn't count on was meeting Claire Keesey (Hall), the manager at the latest bank he and his boys rob. After they take Claire hostage and eventually release her, Doug checks in to see if Claire can identify them, falling for her in the process. MacRay's number two guy is James "Jem" Coughlin (Renner), a thug with a thirst for violence and a rampant criminal history. FBI Agent Adam Frawley (Hamm) is tracking their every move, waiting for one mistake so he can take these guys down.
The movie doesn't break new ground in any aspect; we've seen this all before. But like the 2008 police thriller Pride and Glory with Colin Farrell and Edward Norton, sometimes it doesn't matter if you've seen the elements before - the fun comes with watching these specific actors pull it off. And pull it off they do - Affleck himself does some good work as the conflicted robber with a conscience, and Renner stands out as the wild-eyed ex-con who will do whatever it takes to avoid returning to prison. (His intensity recalled Ben Foster's character in 2007's 3:10 to Yuma.) Jon Hamm eschews his Don Draper persona in favor of a foul-mouthed agent (sorry bro, Wahlberg did it better in '06), and Hall was excellent in more of a leading role than she's used to playing. I didn't quite understand the reason for all of the buzz behind Blake Lively's performance as a drug-addled hooker; she was passable, but this was far from a star-building turn for the young actress.
Multiple bank robberies and car chases are definite highlights of the film, showing flashes of Grand Theft Auto and The Dark Knight. Affleck infuses these scenes with a sense of kinetic immediacy that allows us to feel the repercussions of each shot fired, channeling Michael Mann from both Heat and Public Enemies. There are also shades of Kathrine Bigelow's Point Break, with the gang donning various masks and costumes to pull their bank jobs.
It's hard to write extensively about this film since it doesn't really contribute anything new or especially interesting to the genre. But don't hold that against it - The Town is entertaining, exciting, filled with solid performances, funny at some points, and charming at others. In an age where "marketing" has become a dirty word and is seemingly used more often than not to trick audiences into seeing a movie, this film steps up and delivers exactly what you'd expect after seeing its trailer - and that's not a bad thing at all. Until next time...
The Town
Co-Writer/Director: Ben Affleck
Starring: Ben Affleck, Jeremy Renner, Jon Hamm, Rebecca Hall, Blake Lively
Following 2007's Gone Baby Gone, Affleck returns to the city in which he grew up to tell this story, adapted from Chuck Hogan's novel "Prince of Thieves." He plays Doug MacRay, a thief who orchestrates the robberies. One thing he didn't count on was meeting Claire Keesey (Hall), the manager at the latest bank he and his boys rob. After they take Claire hostage and eventually release her, Doug checks in to see if Claire can identify them, falling for her in the process. MacRay's number two guy is James "Jem" Coughlin (Renner), a thug with a thirst for violence and a rampant criminal history. FBI Agent Adam Frawley (Hamm) is tracking their every move, waiting for one mistake so he can take these guys down.
The movie doesn't break new ground in any aspect; we've seen this all before. But like the 2008 police thriller Pride and Glory with Colin Farrell and Edward Norton, sometimes it doesn't matter if you've seen the elements before - the fun comes with watching these specific actors pull it off. And pull it off they do - Affleck himself does some good work as the conflicted robber with a conscience, and Renner stands out as the wild-eyed ex-con who will do whatever it takes to avoid returning to prison. (His intensity recalled Ben Foster's character in 2007's 3:10 to Yuma.) Jon Hamm eschews his Don Draper persona in favor of a foul-mouthed agent (sorry bro, Wahlberg did it better in '06), and Hall was excellent in more of a leading role than she's used to playing. I didn't quite understand the reason for all of the buzz behind Blake Lively's performance as a drug-addled hooker; she was passable, but this was far from a star-building turn for the young actress.
Multiple bank robberies and car chases are definite highlights of the film, showing flashes of Grand Theft Auto and The Dark Knight. Affleck infuses these scenes with a sense of kinetic immediacy that allows us to feel the repercussions of each shot fired, channeling Michael Mann from both Heat and Public Enemies. There are also shades of Kathrine Bigelow's Point Break, with the gang donning various masks and costumes to pull their bank jobs.
It's hard to write extensively about this film since it doesn't really contribute anything new or especially interesting to the genre. But don't hold that against it - The Town is entertaining, exciting, filled with solid performances, funny at some points, and charming at others. In an age where "marketing" has become a dirty word and is seemingly used more often than not to trick audiences into seeing a movie, this film steps up and delivers exactly what you'd expect after seeing its trailer - and that's not a bad thing at all. Until next time...
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Catfish
I'll start by saying that I recommend this film to everyone. But believe the hype: Catfish is more than a movie; it's a true cinematic experience that shouldn't be tarnished by knowing any information about it before you embark on the film's journey. I knew nothing about it going in (no actors, no genre, nada), and I can guarantee that's the best approach to take here. Avoid the trailers, don't read a plot synopsis, and certainly don't read this review - go see the movie and then come back. Take your time - I'll wait.
Catfish
Directors: Ariel Schulman and Henry Joost
Starring: Yaniv "Nev" Schulman
[Seriously - if you haven't seen the movie, don't read this. You'll only ruin it for yourself. So, assuming you've seen the movie, consider the rest of the review spoiler-heavy.]
The most important question this film poses is not "were those events fabricated?" but rather "does it matter if they were fabricated?" There are doubts all across the internet about the credibility of Catfish as a straightforward documentary - I must admit, one of the first things I questioned after leaving the theater was how much of it was real - but after taking a step back, I think the film stands on its own regardless of its veracity.
The film took me on an emotional ride like very few movies have, and I'm grateful for the experience. Rel and Henry, the documentarians, do a fantastic job of providing a sense of intimacy with the audience, and Nev's affable nature and willingness to interact with the camera really helps to build a comfortable relationship with us. He's such a likable protagonist; it's nearly impossible not to feel for him as he undergoes this incredible discovery. The scene in which he reads a text exchange between him and Megan is so genuinely funny (and seemingly real) that it instantly puts us even further in Nev's camp. And I was genuinely worried for him during a scene in which they visit her barn at night. I don't remember if there was a subtle music change during that sequence or if they cut the music out of that scene altogether; either way, it was very effective and had me clenching the armrests in the theater, preparing for the worst.
It's interesting that Catfish nearly coincides with the release of David Fincher's The Social Network, a movie detailing the rise of Facebook. I'm wondering if Catfish will actually be more about Facebook than The Social Network; if early trailers are any indication, it would appear the latter might revolve more around betrayals and behind-the-scenes dealings of one of the world's biggest companies, leaving the site in the periphery. But Catfish is undoubtedly about Facebook itself, showcasing the site, and all manner of today's technology - Google, YouTube, etc. - throughout the film: first, as a platform for a budding relationship; second, as an investigative tool used primarily for putting pieces together; and finally, as a tragic playground for empty avatars and shattered promises.
It's the second depiction that's the best part of the movie. When Nev, Rel, and Henry begin to uncover the truth, they utilize technology around them and the pace really picks up. Catfish shifts to a modern day mystery, swapping magnifying glasses and fingerprint dusters for Google Street Views and YouTube searches. As the trio add up more and more details, a suspenseful anxiety washes over the film.
And when the truth is revealed, it hits like a sledgehammer.
Perhaps the most interesting trick Catfish plays is the stylistic choice of using Facebook for identification. Profiles, pictures, comments, hovering mouse arrows revealing people's names - all of these notions are not only called into question but outright negated by the final reveal. If nothing else, this film serves as a time capsule into a generation: a reminder for future societies of how we used connectivity for good and bad, for romance and boredom, for pleasure and escape. It's also a very clear warning to those of us entrenched in this era of tech right now: don't believe everything you read on the internet, and for the love of God - be careful out there.
For the record, I don't think the whole movie was real. I think the filmmakers exploited Angela and her handicapped step-children to a degree, using them (and the rising unease the last act generates) to "prove" to the audience that what we've been seeing all along has been legitimate. There's a great piece at Movieline that details a lot of their doubts, and I agree with most of them. A sequence at the end involving flashbacks to Nev saying certain things - about how Angela's kids are awesome, "at least on Facebook," etc. - struck me as a bit too perfectly orchestrated. Keep in mind, the filmmakers insist that everything is legitimate. My cynical outlook comes from a background working in reality television, where shows portrayed as "real" are most certainly not. I'd be interested to see where you come down on this, but like I said - it honestly doesn't matter if it's real or not because the movie is incredibly effective any way you look at it.
Please don't equate my doubt of the film's ultimate truth with a dislike for the movie. Catfish is a phenomenal experience and provides a piercing look into our generation, calling into question our blind acceptance of social media and allowing us a unique look at some of the people behind the profile pictures. Until next time...
Catfish
Directors: Ariel Schulman and Henry Joost
Starring: Yaniv "Nev" Schulman
[Seriously - if you haven't seen the movie, don't read this. You'll only ruin it for yourself. So, assuming you've seen the movie, consider the rest of the review spoiler-heavy.]
The most important question this film poses is not "were those events fabricated?" but rather "does it matter if they were fabricated?" There are doubts all across the internet about the credibility of Catfish as a straightforward documentary - I must admit, one of the first things I questioned after leaving the theater was how much of it was real - but after taking a step back, I think the film stands on its own regardless of its veracity.
The film took me on an emotional ride like very few movies have, and I'm grateful for the experience. Rel and Henry, the documentarians, do a fantastic job of providing a sense of intimacy with the audience, and Nev's affable nature and willingness to interact with the camera really helps to build a comfortable relationship with us. He's such a likable protagonist; it's nearly impossible not to feel for him as he undergoes this incredible discovery. The scene in which he reads a text exchange between him and Megan is so genuinely funny (and seemingly real) that it instantly puts us even further in Nev's camp. And I was genuinely worried for him during a scene in which they visit her barn at night. I don't remember if there was a subtle music change during that sequence or if they cut the music out of that scene altogether; either way, it was very effective and had me clenching the armrests in the theater, preparing for the worst.
It's interesting that Catfish nearly coincides with the release of David Fincher's The Social Network, a movie detailing the rise of Facebook. I'm wondering if Catfish will actually be more about Facebook than The Social Network; if early trailers are any indication, it would appear the latter might revolve more around betrayals and behind-the-scenes dealings of one of the world's biggest companies, leaving the site in the periphery. But Catfish is undoubtedly about Facebook itself, showcasing the site, and all manner of today's technology - Google, YouTube, etc. - throughout the film: first, as a platform for a budding relationship; second, as an investigative tool used primarily for putting pieces together; and finally, as a tragic playground for empty avatars and shattered promises.
It's the second depiction that's the best part of the movie. When Nev, Rel, and Henry begin to uncover the truth, they utilize technology around them and the pace really picks up. Catfish shifts to a modern day mystery, swapping magnifying glasses and fingerprint dusters for Google Street Views and YouTube searches. As the trio add up more and more details, a suspenseful anxiety washes over the film.
And when the truth is revealed, it hits like a sledgehammer.
Perhaps the most interesting trick Catfish plays is the stylistic choice of using Facebook for identification. Profiles, pictures, comments, hovering mouse arrows revealing people's names - all of these notions are not only called into question but outright negated by the final reveal. If nothing else, this film serves as a time capsule into a generation: a reminder for future societies of how we used connectivity for good and bad, for romance and boredom, for pleasure and escape. It's also a very clear warning to those of us entrenched in this era of tech right now: don't believe everything you read on the internet, and for the love of God - be careful out there.
For the record, I don't think the whole movie was real. I think the filmmakers exploited Angela and her handicapped step-children to a degree, using them (and the rising unease the last act generates) to "prove" to the audience that what we've been seeing all along has been legitimate. There's a great piece at Movieline that details a lot of their doubts, and I agree with most of them. A sequence at the end involving flashbacks to Nev saying certain things - about how Angela's kids are awesome, "at least on Facebook," etc. - struck me as a bit too perfectly orchestrated. Keep in mind, the filmmakers insist that everything is legitimate. My cynical outlook comes from a background working in reality television, where shows portrayed as "real" are most certainly not. I'd be interested to see where you come down on this, but like I said - it honestly doesn't matter if it's real or not because the movie is incredibly effective any way you look at it.
Please don't equate my doubt of the film's ultimate truth with a dislike for the movie. Catfish is a phenomenal experience and provides a piercing look into our generation, calling into question our blind acceptance of social media and allowing us a unique look at some of the people behind the profile pictures. Until next time...
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Never Let Me Go
Never Let Me Go has been getting rave reviews on the festival circuit; interested to see what all the fuss was about, I jumped at the chance to see an early screening of the movie before its nationwide release on October 8th. While the film showcased some excellent performances from up-and-coming actors, and was a wonderfully well-shot piece of work, I don't think it's something I'll watch again.
Never Let Me Go
Director: Mark Romanek
Starring: Carey Mulligan, Andrew Garfield, Keira Knightley
The film is based on Kazuo Ishiguro's highly acclaimed novel of the same name, which I haven't read. (I'll judge this movie based solely on what I saw on screen, but if you've seen the movie and read the book, feel free to sound off in the comments and let us know about the differences.) Romanek has only directed one feature before this one - the 2002 Robin Williams movie One Hour Photo - but I almost guarantee you've seen his work: he directed Michael and Janet Jackson's "Scream" music video, The Red Hot Chili Peppers' "Can't Stop" video, and Jay-Z's "99 Problems" video, among many others.
The movie basically chronicles a love triangle between three children from an idyllic English boarding school to a college-age work placement community to eventual adulthood. Kathy (Mulligan) is clearly a great match for Tommy (Garfield), but her jealous best friend Ruth (Knightley) steps in and steals him away - leaving Kathy as the third wheel in their trio and forcing her to endure the pain of watching the love of her life spend it with someone else.
(Spoilers in the next paragraph only.)
Never Let Me Go is definitely Oscar bait, a deliberate and slow-moving film that deals with issues of humanity, life, and love that will undoubtedly secure awards nominations in the coming months. The screenplay, by Alex Garland (28 Days Later, Sunshine), is essentially an "indie" version of Michael Bay's 2005 film The Island. Both films feature characters created with the sole purpose of being harvested for their internal organs, and thematically explores some of the same territory. A huge difference between the films, however - style, acting, and basically all elements except plot aside - is how the characters in each film react to the truth when it is finally revealed. In The Island, the characters quickly decide to make a break for it, tearing through the facade of their existence on a quest to find their sponsors and send the system into upheaval. In Romanek's film, the characters blindly accept their fate and don't try to escape from the system at all; instead, they seem content with merely delaying the inevitable.
If there are aspects deserving of praise in this movie, they are the acting of the three leads and their younger counterparts. Carey Mulligan delivers a quietly compelling performance as Kathy H., the protagonist and vehicle which the audience rides through the film. Future Spider-Man Andrew Garfield does some fine work here as well, crafting one of the most tragic characters and - even though he has a "freak-out moment" that seemed particularly desperate for Oscar attention - pushed through that one eye-rolling sequence to a satisfying conclusion. Even Keira Knightley - an actress I'm not particularly fond of - was effective, coming off as especially menacing in "The Cottages" flashback scenes. But I was honestly more impressed with the work of the younger actors who played those characters, most notably the feature film debut of Isobel Meikle-Small, who bears an incredible resemblance to Mulligan and perfectly captured the innocence (and heartbreak) of young love.
I think I would have enjoyed the film more if the story had been more compelling, even on a basic gut level. There just isn't much going on in the narrative - and when another reveal comes late in the third act, the audience has already figured out what's going on and we're waiting for the characters to play catch-up. Sure, the concept of the love triangle between the three leads is interesting to a degree, but at the same time, we've seen that story played out countless times and nothing markedly original is presented in those specific scenes.
Romanek's direction should be praised for cultivating solid portrayals from his entire cast. The world of Never Let Me Go is a futuristic alternate dystopia, but without many drastic alterations or heavy sci-fi elements (hence the Academy's nearly guaranteed approval). I wish Romanek would have gone into a bit more detail exploring the differences between our world and the one depicted on screen, but again - the more this looks like an English boarding-school drama, the better chances it has to win awards. (Yes, that's incredibly cynical, but sadly true.) Some praise him for the atmosphere here, but I'll attribute most of that to Rachel Portman's string-heavy musical score (which, like the camera work in this film, was gorgeous).
There are some comedic moments (which I won't spoil), and some suspenseful ones as well, but overall, the tone of the film is akin to a leisurely walk through a park: non-threatening, occasionally brisk, but mostly just nice to look at. Never Let Me Go is a movie I'm glad I've seen but not one I plan on returning to in the future; the bleak and dreary England portrayed here combined with the depressing story aspects don't make it easy material to love, but rather to appreciate. Until next time...
Never Let Me Go
Director: Mark Romanek
Starring: Carey Mulligan, Andrew Garfield, Keira Knightley
The film is based on Kazuo Ishiguro's highly acclaimed novel of the same name, which I haven't read. (I'll judge this movie based solely on what I saw on screen, but if you've seen the movie and read the book, feel free to sound off in the comments and let us know about the differences.) Romanek has only directed one feature before this one - the 2002 Robin Williams movie One Hour Photo - but I almost guarantee you've seen his work: he directed Michael and Janet Jackson's "Scream" music video, The Red Hot Chili Peppers' "Can't Stop" video, and Jay-Z's "99 Problems" video, among many others.
The movie basically chronicles a love triangle between three children from an idyllic English boarding school to a college-age work placement community to eventual adulthood. Kathy (Mulligan) is clearly a great match for Tommy (Garfield), but her jealous best friend Ruth (Knightley) steps in and steals him away - leaving Kathy as the third wheel in their trio and forcing her to endure the pain of watching the love of her life spend it with someone else.
(Spoilers in the next paragraph only.)
Never Let Me Go is definitely Oscar bait, a deliberate and slow-moving film that deals with issues of humanity, life, and love that will undoubtedly secure awards nominations in the coming months. The screenplay, by Alex Garland (28 Days Later, Sunshine), is essentially an "indie" version of Michael Bay's 2005 film The Island. Both films feature characters created with the sole purpose of being harvested for their internal organs, and thematically explores some of the same territory. A huge difference between the films, however - style, acting, and basically all elements except plot aside - is how the characters in each film react to the truth when it is finally revealed. In The Island, the characters quickly decide to make a break for it, tearing through the facade of their existence on a quest to find their sponsors and send the system into upheaval. In Romanek's film, the characters blindly accept their fate and don't try to escape from the system at all; instead, they seem content with merely delaying the inevitable.
If there are aspects deserving of praise in this movie, they are the acting of the three leads and their younger counterparts. Carey Mulligan delivers a quietly compelling performance as Kathy H., the protagonist and vehicle which the audience rides through the film. Future Spider-Man Andrew Garfield does some fine work here as well, crafting one of the most tragic characters and - even though he has a "freak-out moment" that seemed particularly desperate for Oscar attention - pushed through that one eye-rolling sequence to a satisfying conclusion. Even Keira Knightley - an actress I'm not particularly fond of - was effective, coming off as especially menacing in "The Cottages" flashback scenes. But I was honestly more impressed with the work of the younger actors who played those characters, most notably the feature film debut of Isobel Meikle-Small, who bears an incredible resemblance to Mulligan and perfectly captured the innocence (and heartbreak) of young love.
I think I would have enjoyed the film more if the story had been more compelling, even on a basic gut level. There just isn't much going on in the narrative - and when another reveal comes late in the third act, the audience has already figured out what's going on and we're waiting for the characters to play catch-up. Sure, the concept of the love triangle between the three leads is interesting to a degree, but at the same time, we've seen that story played out countless times and nothing markedly original is presented in those specific scenes.
Romanek's direction should be praised for cultivating solid portrayals from his entire cast. The world of Never Let Me Go is a futuristic alternate dystopia, but without many drastic alterations or heavy sci-fi elements (hence the Academy's nearly guaranteed approval). I wish Romanek would have gone into a bit more detail exploring the differences between our world and the one depicted on screen, but again - the more this looks like an English boarding-school drama, the better chances it has to win awards. (Yes, that's incredibly cynical, but sadly true.) Some praise him for the atmosphere here, but I'll attribute most of that to Rachel Portman's string-heavy musical score (which, like the camera work in this film, was gorgeous).
There are some comedic moments (which I won't spoil), and some suspenseful ones as well, but overall, the tone of the film is akin to a leisurely walk through a park: non-threatening, occasionally brisk, but mostly just nice to look at. Never Let Me Go is a movie I'm glad I've seen but not one I plan on returning to in the future; the bleak and dreary England portrayed here combined with the depressing story aspects don't make it easy material to love, but rather to appreciate. Until next time...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)