Antarctica .. 1982 .. Winter .. (well .. Winter is pretty much all the time around there, even if it's called Summer once in a while). Near a Norwegian exploration station a discovery is made: a structure burred under the ice which looks like an alien shio. Not far away, frozen in a block of is found also .. the pilot (or how the title of the movie says - "The Thing"). Guess what happens next ?
Besides the invariable answer of "obviously, something bad", the biggest spoiler (that's so big that it doesn't make much sense for me to ignore it) is that the movie is not a remake for the 1982 John Carpenter's classic. It's a prequel. Well, that shouldn't tell much to somebody who didn't see the '82 movie. I've seen it long ago and I don't remember much, but still the fact that I've found out this is a prequel made pretty clear how it's gonna end. Well, surprise, it's not exactly like that. Anyway, going back to Carpenter's original, that's considered as one of the best horrors ever made. And you have to admit, that all the above context offers a perfect support for something like this. Imagine "Alien" (since it's not much until a prequel for this one too) set in an isolated research station in Antarctica. Besides that, about the creature, there is also probably the most important element, to quote a tagline from the original: "man is the warmest place to hide". Anyway from this start also the bad parts, to say it so ...
As I mentioned, it's been a while since I've seen the original, but I remember that I liked it. What I don't remember is if it had something that's basically granted by the context, but not to much exploited in the new version compared to the movie length at least. I'm talking about the lack of trust, which might go up to paranoid behavior, between the group members, given that it's not known "who is human and who is not". The movie could be 15 minutes longer, which 15 minutes should be dedicated to something like this. The psychological thrill provided by this context is barely exploited by the movie, maybe besides a scene or two (well, central to the movie, it's right). Besides that, as other points to criticize there are a bunch of scenes that don't add up, smth like (small spoilers below):
- "we must go and search for survivors where the chopper crashed" - "not possible, that place can't be reached, we need another helicopter to go there" (later in the evening, the two "survivors" are coming back on their own feet at the basecamp - and, well, "the thing" doesn't have wings if that's supposed somehow to explain)
or ...
- "and now what we're gonna do ?" - "the closest station is a Russian one, at something like 80 km from here" (the second day, a helicopter is tailing a dog that runs from the Norwegian base to an American one - or at least that should be the continuity with the movie from '82 even if it's not completely shown .. so .. to understand from this, that the dog ran more than 80 km with a chopper behind it)
And there are others too. To these, negatively speaking, you can add also the quality of the VFX which might be better than the '82 one but still far from the 2011 standards on a movie that has the Universal logo in the beginning. Anyway, long story short, I can't say that I lost my time with it. With all its issues, in the end what I wanted to see was a decent horror, not some Oscar material, and for that it was way better than, let's say .. the remakes from the last years of the initial versions of slasher series like "Friday the 13th" or "Nightmare on the Elm Street".
Since I only have something like four hours of sleep in the last 24 and I'm writing in a work break, I'll get straight to the point. "Anonymous" is a movie that handles a somehow delicate subject = who actually wrote Shakespeare's plays ? And obviously the answer to the question is not Shakespeare but an earl from the respective time, Edward de Vere, the reason behind this being to stay anonymous, considering that such creative activities weren't seen very well by the "politic class" of the age.
The movie is made by Roland Emmerich, who confirms me a hunch that he still has some chances to save his soul from "the movie directors Hell" after catastrophes, more or less figuratively speaking, as "Godzilla", "10000 BC" or even "Independence Day". There were at some point anyway "Stargate" (the movie), "The Patriot" (even with all the cliches in it) and now "Anonymous". And this last one is also probably his best movie up to date.
You don't have to expect here something similar to the previous titles. The movie is quite slow, compared to any of the above. It could be compared actually with the more politically correct version historically speaking = "Shakespeare in Love". Still, in this case the action becomes a bit soapy on the final taking the speculations to a level which is a bit too far I guess (reason to gain the right to be considered by some a complete blasphemy not only regarding the literature history of England, but history itself). Despite all that is a movie deserving to be seen, at least for the role made by Rhys Ifans as lead character (first time when I see this guy in this position in a movie). And after all, if there is something like "The DaVinci Code" that can be watched in a relaxed note without taking it too seriously ( if you don't want that, obviously ;) ), why not ? It's just a movie :)
Rating: subjectively - 3 out of 5 (because to be honest I'm not very interested by the subject) objectively - 4 out of 5 (because if you do a harsh evaluation is better than "The Patriot")
Beware ... I'm gonna have a loooong intro :) so have patience with me this time, this movie deserves it ... I've chosen it due to lots of reasons (well .. three) 1. I didn't get to see anything this week, and I don't know if I will so I had to search my memory for something older. And I remembered I mentioned this when I was writing not so long ago about the Oscar nominees for cinematography, which leads to ... 2. Normally, I'm not doing this, and I might actually be sorry that I'm doing it = I'm not spending time analyzing after February what "resulted" from the Oscar related entries. But ... Since I blew it again with the cinematography prediction, for the third consecutive year, I said myself to compensate (sort to speak ...) with something that's absolutely delightful for this part. That would be the second reason for this entry. However, to cool off after the failure of the mentioned prediction, I have to get a bit off topic first: after I watched, live, how "Hugo" grabbed the Oscar for cinematography, I said that I'll give up on predictions .. after which I decided to do a small statistical study and IMDb says something like: Emmanuel Lubezki - "Tree of Life" - 16 wins ; Robert Richardson - "Hugo" - 1 win (the Oscar). One! - a sole award - until this date, worldwide (well, according to what's on IMDb) ... and like this I remembered (again ..) that what I'm doing year by year in February is less important regarding what finally the Academy says, and more .. I repeat myself in order that I'll also get what I'm saying .. and more because it gives the opportunity to write about some movies that usually worth seeing .. And now back on topic, sorry for the unfulfilled Nostradamus frustrations thrown away in public: 3. Finally, the last reason on the list is that "The Man Who Wasn't There" fits perfectly with my current state of spirit. No details, in case it's not yet obvious, because this intro already gets chances to get longer than what follows ...
The movie is probably one of the titles having less impact made by the Coen brothers. But it features the same dark humor, dry and sometimes harsh, brought to a level that's quite rarely achieved these days. The result is a film-noir having an intrigue which is apparently simple at least through the perspective of the characters and of the location. Somewhere, in a small town, in the '60s in US, a barber has a life that appears to be the definition of monotony. During the day he's doing haircuts at the workplace, in the evenings has dinner with his wife and occasionally having invited the couple of owners of the shop where his wife is an accountant. This, despite the fact that the husband from that couple is obviously our's barber's wife secret lover. So .. this goes on day-by-day .. Until one of them, when a client disturbs the normal schedule of the barbershop with a haircut request exactly at the closing time. Fact that breaks into the daily monotonous activity, especially that the client is not a local one but apparently an entrepreneur looking for an investment. 10000$ for a dry cleaners - the last invention on the market - a guaranteed success. What happens next ... it's in the movie :)
I come back with a couple of words about the cinematography. The movie tries to be a noir one for this purpose being switched to black-and-white as main release version. The original is however in color, this is how I've seen it and this is how I recommend it. It is I guess the best cinematography that I've seen in the last 12 months at least. And if some time ago (= "No Country for Old Men" ca sa fiu mai exact) Roger Deakins seemed overrated to me as photography director, during the last year I've started to appreciate him a lot. If the visuals of a movie mean enough to you (= not only the subject is the most important) I recommend from all my heart to see this one. It's not to be missed.
Let me not be misunderstood .. you also have a subject, and it's as tangled and unpredictable apparently as other titles made by Coen brothers. Billy Bob Thornton has an extraordinary role - but the part that lifts it is the script. I'm not always on the same vibe with the Coen brothers, especially when the get into crappy philosophy (see the hugely overrated title above), but in this case the story is said through a monologue .. which monologue, has a series of parts sufficiently deep or if not deep, extremely well placed, to worth some appreciation. I had only one issue with the movie .. the ending .. I would have liked something different - and for this I can say that the rating below is subjectively lower. But risking a sort of spoiler (which I'll try to make as cryptic as possible :) ), I assume that other ending would have contradict the basis idea which is emphasized from beginning to the end in the movie. I like anyway to believe, that it could have been forced a slightly different context ;) keeping exactly the same monologue I was saying, almost unmodified up to the end ...
It's like pulling away from the maze. While you're in the maze, you go through willy nilly, turning where you think you have to turn; banging into the dead ends. One thing after another. But you get some distance on it, and all those twists and turns, why, they're the shape of your life. It's hard to explain. But seeing it whole gives you some peace.
Finally we got this year too at the last entry in the Oscar series, and I hope I'll finish to write in fast enough to still have sense to read it before the awards :) (I'm gettin' slow with this "live" writing lately ... even if I usually do it on the run). Considering the expectations had regarding my available time and the 8 postings on 9 categories I made (including the current one) I can declare myself pleased at least with the quantity (anyway smaller than last year with 10, respectively 12). But probably counting this doesn't interest anybody, so let's get to the movies:
"The Artist" - the small French production that ended up a big success is quite predictable also the winning option we have here ( statistically until last year I didn't screwed up with this prevision since "Chicago", maybe I won't do it twice in a row :) ). About the story, which for me is a bit too simplistic, I'll let the clip below to say some stuff. About the rest, as an impression I'll risk saying that we have something like the "Avatar effect" no matter how weird this sounds :) Meaning ... the movie managed to catch the audience especially due to the difference on what you can usually see in the cinemas. Silent, black-and-white, frame dimensions and visual filters to look like in the 20s, etc. In other words, keeping the proportions, it was something as "new" as "Avatar". The difference is a major one in what's left besides the technical part though = if "Avatar" has a script targeted for an IQ of 60, "The Artist" although quite simple as said, still it's much better, and you also have the actors who though not speaking they do play and they do it extremely well (what makes me wonder if "Avatar" wouldn't have been better if it was silent). Still, the fact that "The Artist" is (probably, didn't check) the favorite on bets, comes mostly due to the lack of competition. If the last year was the best in the latest 10 considering the nominees value, if you do an average this year you come up with exactly the opposite. What would be interesting is to take some silent movies from the beginning of last century, hypothetically remade these days, and compare. And I believe (still hypothetically :) ) that we'll get the chance to reach the conclusion that you should send the Oscar back in time ;)
"The Descendants" - is the movie that I'd like to break my previous prediction. I wrote enough on other occasions to get as long as I did above (you can check the blog entry from January). Shortly, the movie is the one that had the most powerful impact as feeling for me, in a positive way (because there is a title somewhere below that's slightly in a different register). I kept telling about the location and about how well is used the Hawaii setting. What I don't remember is if I wrote about the fact that it gives some chance at some point to build a sort of relation between the comic of the issues there with what problems you might have in your own life ( especially if these come close to the level of weirdness of the ones in the movie :) ), stuff that at least temporarily has the chance to make you feel better. And that's because the movie is warm enough (and that's not about Hawaii :) although this helps) to draw you out from a chilly state (and that's not about the winter :) although it happened to be like this).
"Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close" - is I guess statistically speaking the lowest-rated film nominated here since '95 (and that's because my memory doesn't help me beyond that date). Fact that confirms the level of this year. I wonder why they set nine nominees instead of ten ? ... although to be fair there are movies that could fill the spot. Well, getting back to EL & IC, I was expecting, due to the critics, to be much worse than it was. That doesn't make it the opposite. The story has a sort of potential - shortly, we have a boy, apparently suffering from Asperger, who passes through the trauma of losing his father on the 9/11. The part with the potential comes from a "quest" that the kid builds to find out the lock for a key, apparently left by the one who passed away. Well, I don't know how clear that was, but the movie will bring you more info. The first issue comes from the tragedy style that's a bit exaggerated, starting with the script, following with the acting and others. The second issue comes from action threads that are left hanging, situations that are not very credible although this is wanted, and other stuff like that ... Conclusion: it's probably the safest bet for something like: who do you think that won't get an Oscar this year ?
"The Help" - it's another movie that, with the risk to sound insensitive, is a bit too "tear-jerking" especially towards the end, but at the same time is at a completely different level from the one above. I think it's the production that I liked the most (as far as I remember) from any movie I've ever seen centered around racial segregation & stuff like that. The action is set in the '60s in Jackson, Mississippi where a young journalist woman more open (and normal) minded than the white community of which she's part of, decides to write a book about the black maids condition. Despite the subject the movie is really fun to watch, you don't feel at all the almost two and a half hours it has, and for the acting (since I've skipped the categorie) is I guess pretty much the only title that gets to the same level with the cast in "The Artist".
"Hugo" - is the movie having the most nominations this year, and that makes it somehow the main pretender to the Oscar after "The Artist". On the other hand if we consider for example "True Grit" from last year having also 10 nominations and getting 0 awards the things look different (well, I should count anyway, that last year's nominees looked different too). If I should compare it, the story from "Hugo" is not much more complex than the one in "The Artist". But, as I was saying, even if here we have the 3D - "the Avatar effect" moved in the other direction towards something more original at this moment. Since due to the number of nominations, I ended up writing every time this year about "Hugo", I'm gonna short it now and leave the trailer to do the summary of the story which is after all mostly about Georges Melies (I'm just realizing .. it's funny that the movie + the book have a name + even the trailer it's a bit missing it and finally the main point is the life of somebody else).
"Midnight in Paris" - is the I don't know which episode from the "Woody Allen reloaded" series. What to say more than what I already said when I wrote about directing and art direction ... I really don't know. I'll do a "reload" too :) : it's the story of an aspiring writer who went to Paris where he discovers a "teleporter" in the shape of an old car that each midnight transports him somewhere at the beginning of the XX-th century in the middle of the American literature classics, and not only them. Everything in a pure Woody Allen style = the same type of dialogues and social comic about which seemingly the critic never has enough since 20 years ago (even the fonts on the credits are the same ... I've recently watched "Hannah & her Sisters" from .. '86 ! no change). Anyway .. the result is still something decent to watch before you go to sleep ...
"Moneyball" - we had to have a sports related movie, and if it's not boxing is baseball. I don't know if I haven't said it already but the main thing to note here is Brad Pitt's performance, which I'm gonna risk saying is the best of what I've seen (a bit on top of "Army of the 12 Monkeys"). I have no idea how is really the team manager, who accepted to to introduce the statistic theory as instrument for creating the teams in the American Baseball (this is the subject of the movie - more or less) but Pitt carries on an exceptional part. Probably he won't get the Oscarul (there's still "The Artist" around, with Jean Dujardin in great form), but anyway he did rise at least in my eyes as acting talent. The rest is in the trailer ...
"The Tree of Life" - is probably the most "deep" movie from what we got nominated here, and actually it's not probably, I think it is the only one (with "The Descendants" having a slight tendency of hidden philosophy behind what you can directly get, just a slight one). I won't try to analyze "The Tree of Life" now. It's the type of movie that deserves left to each viewer to "chew" on it how he/she is able to. There isn't much of a subject - bits'n pieces from the life of a boy having an authoritarian father (again Brad Pitt, but not really at the same level as above). What keeps you near the screen is the way it's made, and once again a plus for Malick as director and one even bigger for Lubecki as cinematographer. It's a movie that took Palme d'Or at Cannes and was completely ignored at BAFTA. Two reasons for which I didn't expect much - I always found Cannes more like a "critic snobbery" than real value + even now I can't really say that I like Malick as director - I'm waiting to get confirmed this wasn't an accident. If I were to judge objectively after what I've seen among the nominees, this is probably the most entitled film to get here. I'm still keeping my preference for "Descendants" but I can't ignore the superiority this one has in some areas where there you have almost nothing, like the cinematography for example which matters a lot. And because of this I can include "The Tree of Life" besides the one above and "Hugo" on the list of possible surprise this year on the final announcement of "And the Oscar goes to ...".
"War Horse" - wraps alphabetically the list of this year. Too much to say besides what I've commented on other categories I don't have. In other years (as other titles here) this movie wouldn't have got with the nominees that far. To be short, it competes with "Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close" for the exaggerated tear-jerking style and in Spielberg's list of directed movies is probably on the bottom quarter (it seems the first World War doesn't fit him as well as the second). Still, and I think I've actually said it before ... it's a movie that as a story is watchable = sufficiently wide as temporal space so it won't seem artificially stretched and with enough in-depth content too so it won't seem too simple. But is definitely not to "deep" either ...
So .. since it seems we have a French domination at the Oscars de this year, I can say a "c'est fini" :) up until the next February. About the awards stuff of cours, next week back to the usual movie entries ;)
Like I was saying, I don't have the time to spend on other categories (and actually not to fill the list of unseen movies to get an opinion about all the nominees), so I'll jump straight to the directing.
"Midnight in Paris" - Woody Allen - I'll be franc (no pun intended): zero chances. The movie is ok, we have some bits of originality as idea with the integrated time traveling, but that's more story & script. Script which has anyway still the dialogues and the types of characters specific to Woody Allen, and the directing closes any doubt on this. I think that considering the style is the most constant well-known director nowadays. If I wouldn't know who made the movie I don't think I would need more than 10 minutes to guess. And even if the result is not bad, actually watchable, for me starts to look from one movie to another more and more like a reheated soup.
"The Artist" - Michel Hazanavicius - is on the favorites list this year, and to give a more exact prevision I would risk saying that he has the biggest chances on directing (where the competition is more or less between three of the five nominees). From all my impression is that this guy was the most involved effectively in the production (and that without considering his nomination also for editing). But, if I should characterize as synthetically as possible an appreciation for directing, generally speaking, I would skip the activity itself and regard it from a different perspective: it's about how you finally get as spectator to feel what was transmitted to you - from how original the movie looked like in all its aspects up to how hard did it hit you as emotion (and to sum it up more: "the feeling you get"). If for the last part I would have other preference, I have to admit the overall merits (and as said in the beginning the consequent big chances).
"The Tree of Life" - Terrence Malick - is probably the main threat on directing for "The Artist". Malick is a guy who up 'til soon did something like a movie in I don't know how many years (5 since the '70s if I'm not messing up, now having apparently the intention to double his CV in the next period). Probably that's some reason for which he got to get an image (keeping the proportion) comparable to Kubrick in his last part of the life. And risking to sound mean, by this I mostly refer to the idea of something a bit snobbish - in the sense that the critics (and not only them) wait his movies as a rare delight with the praising lines prepared before seeing the first minute. Not to be extremely mean, this is however supported by the value of the production, which a bit overrated I would say, are not anyway to be thrown away. From what I've seen by him - "Badlands" which I barely remember, the beginning of "The Thin Red Line" (something like 3 times and I gave up), "The New World" (on which I was falling asleep) and "The Tree of Life" - I can say that the last deserves indeed its notes of appreciation. I'll postpone a more detailed discussion for the next time, but as directing - expect something a bit different (in regard to the rest and partially his older stuff). It's still a bit to chaotic - looks too much like an experiment/improvisation as way of doing it that transposes from the movie to make me believe that it can steal the Oscar from "The Artist". But the nominee is well deserved.
"The Descendants" - Alexander Payne - is the second near the bottom as probability to get the Oscar I would say, but I'd really really like to be wrong. When I wrote about "The Descendants" I made a comparison for Alexander Payne as something like "a better Woody Allen" without thinking that both of them will get a nomination here. I'm keeping my opinion. Maybe it's subjective, but what this guy succeeds as a comic-drama mix results in a very strong impression as feeling created at least for me (if I would make a top of comedies, "Sideways" has chances to get in the first 3, with "The Descendants" a bit lower). And as I remember I wrote already, and as he declares below, he's probably one of the few directors who exploits the location at maximum - you can "feel" the place (I don't know how close it is to the truth ... but after 15-20 minutes it becomes familiar, what I can't say about the Paris in the first entry). And this contributes a lot to what I consider to be the most important thing in a movie = to get you out for a couple of hours from "your daily life".
"Hugo" - Martin Scorsese - is somewhere in the middle this year, but I wouldn't be surprised to seii it win (not as much as seeing the one above :) which I wish). If I would make a personal top I would put "Hugo" at the bottom. For me it's one of the flawed movies Scorsese did (acting, script, and others) and in the same time also the most "Hollywoodish" (I wonder why I'm not surprised by the tons of appreciations received from James Cameron). Fortunately for the result the flaws are compensated on the technical side. If you remove for instance the production design & the set decoration (which I keep praising but this is the main stuff in there, I can't help it), think what you have left... So ...
Posts
