Movies: The Academy Awards

With the small amount of hits my blog gets, I easily noticed a random blip of recent activity around my review of The Departed. I take that as a sign that the Academy Awards will be on tonight.

I have been negligent in sharing my thoughts about several other movies I have watched since seeing The Departed, and maybe I will give them the fuller reviews they deserver at some later date. Also, I have not seen every movie that was nominated for an award this year, but I will try to make public predictions for the first time. I have made correct predictions in private even without seeing any of the pictures nominated. Granted I believe all my predictions are based on an ability to process the "buzz" on the street and the media rather than on any true psychic abilities. :-)

Best Picture: The Departed. A lot of people are hoping that Little Miss Sunshine wins. I loved that movie, and I am rooting for it, but I think it may ultimately fall short. Perhaps the cast should jump on-stage and dance or do something outrageous to get the movie completely disqualified :-) If somehow the popular vote gets split between those two movies, then another excellent movie, The Queen, could just sneak through. How fearless a first public prediction is that? Not.. :-)

Best Director: I think Martin Scorsese will finally get an Oscar. I have heard good things about Letters from Iwo Jima but I think voters may say Clint Eastwood already has two directing Oscars from movies that may have been better.

Best Actress: Helen Mirren. When I saw the opening shot of The Queen, I thought I was watching a documentary rather than a movie. Maybe if I paid attention to the royal family more, I would notice differences between the real queen and an actress, but Mirren just disappeared into her role. In this case, I have to admit that I missed the movies of all the other nominated performers.

Best Actor: Forrest Whitaker. I have to go on buzz alone on that one as I have not watched The Last King of Scotland yet -- though Whitaker looks convincing as Idi Amin in the trailer for the movie. I thought Leonardo DiCaprio performed better in The Departed than in Blood Diamond. But he did an excellent job in both, so maybe he deserves some sort of an award just for that accomplishment.

Best Supporting Actor: Eddie Murphy. I have to go with the buzz once again since Dreamgirls is also still on my "to see" list. Mark Wahlberg stole every scene in The Departed but his role did not allow him to display many emotions other than anger. Alan Arkin was awesome in Little Miss Sunshine as was Djimon Hounsou in Blood Diamond. So it is kind of funny that I am leaning toward a performance I have not seen.

Best Supporting Actress: Jennifer Hudson. But I really think it would be cool if Abigail Breslin wins.

Like most people, I do not pay too much attention to the other categories. I suspect Pan's Labyrinth will get some award related to art. Finally, I think An Inconvenient Truth will win Best Documentary. I never thought a movie about a class lecture delivered by a politician criticized for being stiff would be so compelling. I've heard good things about the other documentaries so it could be a close vote.

Movies: The Departed

I'll start right off and say that The Departed is the best crime movie that I've seen in a long time. V for Vendetta and Inside Man are the only other movies I remember this year that kept me entertained from start to finish.

The story, adapted from a Hong Kong movie called Infernal Affairs, adds an interesting twist to the usual the undercover cop infiltrating a crime gang story by spending equal time on the criminal mole within the police department. The writers did such a great job of opening up so many possibilities about who would get caught first that I gave up trying to guess what would happen next and just enjoyed the ride. It made me recall some of elements I enjoyed about shows like Donnie Brasco, Wiseguy, Face/Off, and No Way Out and still added heaps of other interesting aspects on top of it.

The actors delivered great performances all around. There was only a scene or two (or three...) where Jack Nicholson reminded me he was Jack Nicholson (or worse some actor doing a Jack Nicholson impression), but then he'd turn around and do something that would make me forgive him. So, to say Jack Nicholson was the weakest link of a cast is saying alot. Actually, I'm starting to get fascinated about how different this movie would look if various actors switched roles, in particular Jack Nicholson and Alec Baldwin. Mark Wahlberg steals some scenes and says some of the best lines that cannot be repeated in public (or under most circumstances for that matter). Leonardo DiCaprio's acting skills somehow keep improving. He puts just the right amount of intensity during his close-ups whereas I get bothered by Tom Cruise who sometimes comes across as trying too hard.

This brings us to director Martin Scorsese, who many people argue is overdue to win an Oscar. I haven't seen all of his movies, but the bits and pieces I've seen have been great but slightly uneven, too gritty to watch, or missing something. I imagine though that some of his movies are required study for anybody attending film school. His more recent attempts like The Aviator and Gangs of New York were good but maybe over-ambitious or just not easy stories to work with. I get the sense he reigned himself in with The Departed, and created a movie that had me leaning forward in my seat and not want to turn away from. If another movie comes out this year to leave Scorsese without an Oscar once again, I want to be first in line to see it. A

Movies: X-Men: The Last Stand

The latest X-Men DVD was released this week, but my review is based on what I saw on the big screen this past summer. If I remember correctly, the movie set a box office record for an opening weekend. I think Bryan Singer deserves most of the credit since he did such a great job building expectations with the first two entries of this series. The director and producers of X-Men 3 may have only contributed to the record by keeping the running time under 1:45 long, so theaters could replay it about twice as frequently as Lord of the Rings or Titanic.

The short running time + large cast + pre-requisite comic book action and effects = little room for plot or any major character development. The debate around a cure for mutant powers was kept fairly simple. The Cyclops - Jean Grey - Wolverine love triangle was replaced with a less interesting Rogue - Iceman - Kitty Pryde triangle. There's also a father-son conflict involving Angel. I suppose the producers were trying to target a younger demographic.

Outside of Magneto, Storm, and Wolverine, a bunch of other mutants just make brief appearances bordering on cameos. It reminded me of the final episode of Seinfeld where there was much hype and antipation building up to the air date. Then all they did was parade a long string of memorable characters from past seasons and somehow managed to make the whole show flat and forgettable. Otherwise, the special effects were pretty decent with nice performances by Ian McKellen (who salvaged yet another summer movie) and Rebecca Romijn with a few funny lines uttered by Vinnie Jones as Juggernaut. Maybe others can tell me if the DVD version benefits from showing previously deleted scenes and alternate endings. C+

There will likely be comparisons between X-Men and NBC's new series Heroes. There may even be comparison's to USA's The 4400, a show that I've enjoyed once or twice but not enough to be addicted.

The good news: the writing and acting seems pretty good even though I sort of have to turn off some of my logic circuits to buy into the premise (but that's a given for just about every Sci-Fi series). Seemingly ordinary and mostly well drawn out characters from different walks of life discover that they are developing special powers, and have varied reactions (mostly negative for some reason) to what consequences that might have.

The bad news: compared to the premiere, the second episode seemed to move at a slower pace and lost the humor (especially from the Japanese character who was thrilled that he can bend the space-time continuum).

Heroes may have to don their capes faster for me to keep tuning in. This is funny opinion considering I just complained that X-Men: The Last Stand moved too fast...., but I sort of have my hands full trying to keep up with the mysteries and convoluted plot lines of other TV shows trying to follow the footsteps of Lost. Hopefully it will keep exploring the ice-breaker question, "If you could have a superhero power, what would it be and would you use it for good or evil?" B

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.

Movies: V for Vendetta

For me, there's been a dearth of fun movies to watch between King Kong, which was not perfect but very enjoyable, and this weekend. V for Vendetta may mark an early start to the US "blockbuster" movie season (X-Men 3 coming out in May might be considered more of an official start).
The movie delivers the pre-requisite action and suspense that make action movies fun. These were even more enhanced by experiencing it in an IMAX theater (something I'll install in my mansion as soon as I win the lottery). Natalie Portman did a wonderful job. Some of the content may stir political discussion, though ultimately it is just a comic-book movie.
I imagine the movie is not as intricate as the 1980's graphic novel that it was based upon. Unfortunately I did not read that one even though it was from the same person who created Watchmen, one of my favorite stories from the days when I had more time and energy to read. So I don't know how much to say without giving away plot points. In short, interesting movie, but catch it in IMAX if you do watch it. B-

Movies: Random Short Reviews

The UK newspapers have been reporting on the first actual face transplant in France. It made me wonder how much longer before life imitates the art of Face/Off. I found it far-fetched that you could fool someone's closest friends and family by just switching faces (and swallowing a voice modulator). Eventually the change in accent or body language might give one away. Or you wonder if the spouse would notice other anatomical or body language differences of a different sort. But the ruse just had to be good enough to fool the strangers in the movie-going audience and John Travolta and Nicholas Cage did that pretty well. Add some great action direction from John Woo and the minimum number of summer chases and explosions and you have a fun movie. Grade B-

As a subscriber to the full cable package, I get to watch movies that I didn't feel he were worth even paying matinee prices. One of those was another Nicolas Cage thriller titled National Treasure. It was fun to look at, yet plodding. The only saving graces were Justin Bartha as Riley whose injections of humor were too few and far between and the scene where Ben has to buy the document he just stole -- though I don't recall the actual lobby and the store at the National Archives being as large. Ultimately, the efforts resulted in an overpriced and lame attempt to capitalize on the popularity of The DaVinci Code (replace famous Renaissance Man with American Founding Fathers) while failing to recapture the charm and fun of Raiders of the Lost Ark. It is sort of a tossup as to whether this movie was better than another Indiana Jones ripoff called King Solomon's Mines. National Treasure wins in effects and explosions with a newer technology and a bigger budget, but as lovely as Nick Cage and especially Diane Kruger are to look at, they would lose in a Celebrity Deathmatch - beauty contest to the Richard Chamberlain / Sharon Stone tag team. But that may not stop me from watching the recently announced sequel -- on cable. Grade C+

It was probably more than a rumor that Nick Cage was going to play Superman (I think I even remember seeing a cutout of him in the famous blue costume at a movie theater. He even named his son Kal-el. But more about Superman in a minute. First we talk about the other big hero from DC Comics, Batman. Director Christopher Nolan, who directed the instant classic movie, Memento, and a better than decent American adaptation of Insomnia, saved the whole Batman franchise with Batman Begins. Nolan has injected his signature way of portraying psychological themes (the main one being fear) that has been sorely missing in recent Batman movies, making it the best of modern Batman movies (Batman loses points for casting Prince in a musical cameo, and letting Jack Nicholson as the Joker outshine the hero) and perhaps the best of all Batman movies. The only weak points were letting Liam Neeson remind me too much of his Qui-Gon Jinn character (though it may have been the only decent acting job in the otherwise awful Phantom Menace), and failing to make us fully believe that Katie Holmes could be a tough DA assistant. It will be a challenge to see if an even better sequel can be conceived. I'd instead nominate Nolan to take a crack at the graphic novel classic Watchmen. For now it places just misses beating out 1978's Superman and lands in a close race with the recent Spider-Man 1 and 2, X-Men, and X2 as best movie adapted from a comic book series. Grade A-

So getting back to Superman, WB revealed the trailer for Superman Returns before Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. The sneak peak looked pretty cool, but it gave me the impression that they were just remaking the 1978 version, and maybe introducing come continuity issues with the TV series Smallville (though I've only seen a few episodes). You have to dig around the Internet a bit to find out it will not be the case. Director Bryan Singer has not disappointed me yet with The Usual Suspects, aforementioned X-Men films, and "House, MD", so I hope that his track record continues (even after Superman with Logan's Run).

As for the Goblet of Fire itself, I enjoyed it. It didn't seem as fun and imaginative as The Prisoner of Azkaban, but does achieve the goal of portraying the awkwardness of the transition from childhood to adulthood. Or at least I presume that is what is meant by the tagline "Everything Will Change." Some scenes brought back painful but funny memories of trying to find a date to the Junior Prom. Some of my friends who watched the movie walked away totally disappointed. They believed too much was cut from the book. This is why I've decided not read popular books until after movies are made (if ever). It's rare to find movies that improve over the book much less meet the 'fanboy' expectations. Finally, there is a general consensus of disappointment with the actor playing Dumbledore. But who could possibly fill the robes of a legend like Richard Harris. Grade B