Movies: Weekly Recaps

Over the years, it's almost become a ritual for me to visit the movie theater with some friends on a Friday or Saturday night (even though I already subscribe to just about every cable channel available). Last year was an odd exception as I knew it might be hard to enjoy regular movies after watching the Lord of the Rings. Time to play some catch up (though I'll forego the hyperlinks and just recommend going to imdb directly).

King Kong - It would be unfair to expect Peter Jackson to top Lord of the Rings, so I went to the theater trying to keep my expectations low. In a way, Jackson squeezed a trilogy into a single movie. One part portrait of depression era New York City, another part rollicking Jurassic Park sequel, and finale a touching love story of an odd sort. So it was 3 movies for the price of one. Except for a few nitpicks and some weak special effects, it was quite enjoyable. It's possible that some weaknesses were left as is so that the director could keep his childhood visions and passions of how he'd remake this movie intact. His love for this subject did come through the screen for me, plus it was the best excuse to stare at Naomi Watt's angelic face for 3 hours. Evan Parke's performance as Hayes also stood out. B+

Good Night and Good Luck - The events portrayed in the movie happened long before I was born, but I ended up reading much about this era as a side effect of doing research on President Nixon for an elementary school history assignment. David Strathairn seemed to be channeling Edward R Murrow. Other than reminding viewers that those in power could throw around "labels" to distort truth and create an atmosphere in fear, I wasn't sure this movie would be Oscar nominated in most years. However, it was still fascinating to watch. B

Match Point - I've always been a big fan of Woody Allen's earlier movies. His more recent movies have been good at best. This movie falls into the same category as Mystic River for me. Great acting and interesting characters (though nobody I'd actually cheer for) undone by a dull, predictable story . I haven't had a chance to ask any Brits about how accurate some of the portrayals are in this film. C+

Munich - This may be the best movie I saw which was nominated for 2005 (somehow I missed Crash and Brokeback Mountain). I liked Spielberg's Catch Me If You Can a little bit more, but in general, it's difficult to rank all the classic films that have been directed by this one person. From AI onwards, it appears Steven Spielberg has permanently inherited a touch of darkness from Stanley Kubrick (who seems to have done a number on Tom Cruise as well since Eyes Wide Shut). But I won't complain much about that. I was still a very young child when the tragedies of the 1972 Olympics occurred, but many of my memories and feelings of confusion resurfaced as the ABC Sports coverage was shown. The movie was fascinating to watch from beginning to end with some surprising "in your face" violence that seems unavoidable given the subject matter. It raised more questions than it answered about terrorism and vengeance, but again it felt like everything fit and fell into place. I know I'm enjoying a movie when my brain does not struggle to rewrite things on the screen. A

Inside Man - While this movie portrays a very interesting bank heist (somehow the Oceans Eleven remake spawned several copycats recently), I suspect New Yorkers would have the most appreciation of the other things going on inside this movie. I've seen Denzel Washington do better work in other movies but he's still better than most actors even when he's not in his top game (though it may be that he was straddled with a detective character that looked like ones I've seen before like Woody Harrelson's character in Before the Sunset). Chiwetel Ejiofor who did a great job in Serenity shines again as Denzel's partner. Jodie Foster moves around and cat complete with a Cheshire smile, so befitting of her character - amazing. A-

Thank You for Smoking - One commercial claimed this movie was laugh out loud funny and compared it to the Wedding Crashers. I sort of beg to differ but only so people don't watch this with the wrong expectations. I only laughed out loud a couple of times but I think I had a grin or smirk on my face for most of the movie. It was a great tongue in cheek exaggerated commentary on attempts to use "spin" vs. facts to try to influence public opinion. B

V for Vendetta (redux) - I decided to give this movie a rare second viewing last Friday because I had a feeling there was more to the movie than met the eye. This time I sat in a regular theater (not IMAX) and sat further back. Tom Kyte beat me to the punch in commenting on the considerable symbolism and recurring themes in this movie. I also caught some things I missed the first time around (which again I can't say much about without giving away plot) which better plugged some of the holes that I thought were there before. I also forgot to mention Hugo Weaving's achievement of being able to display emotion despite being hidden behind a mask. He couldn't even leverage his lips like Peter Weller in Robocop or Michael Keaton in Batman. All Hugo Weaving could do was tilt his head or position his shoulders and basically let his voice do most of the work.
The Wachowski brothers adapted this screenplay before they wrote the Matrix so it was also fun to analyze how they influenced each other. One of the scenes near the end reminded me of one of Clint Eastwood's early westerns, but its title still escapes my memory. B

Most of the movies I've watched recently have had some common undercurrents. I guess it's true that popular movies and books sometimes say as much or more about the time they were created as the subjects that they were supposed to be about.