American Hustle (2013) dir. David O. Russell

David O. Russell
So if any of you guys read my first review, you'll remember how I was surprised that I had seen every film by Alfonso Cuaron when reviewing Gravity (2013). I had the opposite experience with this movie. I have never seen a film by David O. Russell and yet he has a great track record and a string of hit films. He's come into the spotlight recently for writing and directing the majorly successful Silver Linings Playbook (2012) and The Fighter (2010). Both were major financial and critical successes. He has recycled the leads from those two films as well for this film (Christian Bale and Amy Adams from The Fighter and Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence from Silver Linings Playbook) to form a really powerful ensemble cast that not only has the chops to play the characters but will surely draw in a lot of box office. 

About the Movie
I liked the movie, and I'd recommend it. If you're hoping to catch up on the better films of this year I'd say for sure watch this, Inside Llewyn Davis, Blackfish (2013), and any other films I've given positive reviews for. I'd say go watch The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) or 12 Years a Slave (2013) but I haven't seen them yet.

However, if you were just looking to see one film for the hell of it, I'd recommend something else. Probably The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013), not because it's the best (not by a longshot) but because everyone else is seeing it. Do you want to be out of the loop?

By the way, am I the only one who thinks "desolation of smaug" sounds kinda dirty? 

But as I way saying, American Hustle is pretty solid, and good enough to make me want to watch O. Russell's other work. 

It's something thrown out there over and over again, but the movie is really worth it due to the performances. I've been on that Jennifer Lawrence bandwagon ever since The Hunger Games (2012), and I didn't even particularly like that movie. She's just fun and charming like everyone says, and she's a legitimately good actress. It's one of those performances that made me reflect on myself. Like, wow, I haven't cried in like two years, and yet she can just make herself cry for a scene. How do people do that? Amy Adams is equally as good, Actually going back and thinking about it, she had some pretty intense and emotional scenes that made me forget about Rosalyn entirely. But at the risk of sounding sexist, I have to say that my highest praise has to go to the men on this one.

Christan Bale, as always, does a really good job. Well, he actually does too good of a job to the point that I am concerned about him. His method of constantly gaining and losing weight for roles is going to be the death of him (literally). Apparently all the weight he put on combined with the intentionally bad posture he adopted to play the greasy con-man Irving Rosenfeldt gave him permanent back damage. 

But can I just say one thing? I might get heavily persecuted for this, but I just don't think Christian Bale is a chameleon. He's a terrific performer with impeccable instincts, It's just that I'm always aware that I'm watching him play a character. He's sort of like Kevin Spacey or John Malkovich. Still extremely watchable and skilled, but I just know it's them under all the makeup. 

Same sort of goes for Bradley Cooper, but he actually sold his character pretty well in this film. He started out as a sort of straight man, but then he actually became spectacular right as the film started wrapping things up. Jeremy Renner gave a similarly intriguing performance. He actually pulled off his character (whose name I can't recall, we'll call him goofy New York Mayor) really nicely. 

Aside from the acting the film had good camera work. It had style, panache, and all that- but the kind of movie that despite it being well made and stylish it still doesn't quite hold up on its own. Luckily it had the ensemble (and really fun cameos from Louis C.K. and Robert DeNiro) to save it.

If you're looking for something to dazzle your eyes, this movie will do it for you. It's got a 70's, camera style. It's very Scorsese. There are excellent slow motion sequences, long takes, snap zooms, etc. Only problem is that it just doesn't ascend to something really great. It isn't ripping anyone off, it's just that the homage seems a little shallow sometimes, the scenes seem strung along the same level so it's hard to tell where the film is going, and then when it doesn't end up going anywhere after a few scenes you start to get frustrated.

Overall, though, still pretty good. Worth the admission. 

Movies I Also Saw This Week

Blackfish, Brazil (1985), The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Saint Louis International Film Festival

This is going to be a bit late, but I think it's important to point out that this week has been a troubling, existential emotional roller coaster where both time, money, and other important grips on reality began slipping through my fingers. When you spend multiple days sitting in your car either eating or just staring up, waiting for the next thing to happen, you start questioning your worth.

Yesterday I ate almost a whole bag of Snickers unwrapped, and that was not the only candy I had that night. I then went to Burger King in an irrational attempt to "even things out" in my stomach.

I saw some movies, too, at SLIFF. This was a part of my strange week, but not all of it. It mostly had to do with being in the Loop all the time, smelling lots of garbage, being approached by homeless people, and seeing some very interesting but not all too amazing movies (bar a few).

The first thing I saw (after the tragic events described in my last post) was Computer Chess (2013).

 This is the latest work from Andrew Buljaski, who has been dubbed "godfather of mumblecore". Mumblecore is a fairly recent sub-genre of independent movies that is known for "naturalistic dialogue" "amateur actors" and "low key production design". I put quotes on these phrases, because I think mumblecore would be more appropriately described as overly quirky and peculiar for the purpose of being quirky and peculiar, and stupid dickhat crap. 

Luckily, this movie didn't have that problem. Andrew Bujalski doesn't endorse his nickname, and is right not to, because he can obviously make a movie with substance, like Computer Chess. 

That isn't to say I loved Computer Chess. There were several scenes that I found hilarious and brilliant. Overall, the film was shot really well in terms of composition, yet also intentionally shot terribly on a glitchy and archaic video camcorder from the 80's. It's a dry humor, absurdo-surrealist (I made that term up) period movie about computer nerds, but it's really about weird people who are weirdly passionate about weird things, and the mixture of deadpan, absurdism, and avante garde styles makes the movie something both grotesque and beautiful. Still not sure what think. Definitely want to see it again.

Then I saw The Blue Tiger (2013)

And...Oh whatever. It had a blue tiger in it and it was from the Czech Republic. That's all you need to know.

Things started to get better after that. I attended a screening of Alfred Hitchcock's Blackmail (1929). It's one of his early silent features, only this time it was accompanied by live music from the Rats and the People Motion Picture Orchestra.

They do these crazy amazing and beautiful scores for older movies and it is one of the coolest things ever. 

If you ever get a chance to see a silent film with live music, do it. It's fascinating.
I also saw Eric Von Stroheim's Greed (1924) accompanied by a RATP score. In this case, the movie often out shined the music.

Unfortunately, there was yet another shitty theater experience. I went to see a former professor's newly finished documentary, and thought if I sat in the back row, in the corner, I would be alone. I thought wrong.

Four hefty men filled out the rest of the row, trapping me. My professor (the producer, writer, director, and editor of the film) was right at the end. I couldn't even move or I would be spotted. Nevertheless, I thought if I just accepted that I couldn't move, and got comfortable, things would be okay. I thought wrong. It was at that moment that Lou Ferigno decided to sit right in front of me.

The documentary was in Spanish.

So for the majority of the movie, I just looked at pictures and was able to read the first and last few words of dialogue. This was my experience for the next 90 minutes, and that's all I want to say about that. I'm just gonna wrap things up.

Movies I Also Saw This Week
His Girl Friday (1940), Stagecoach (1939)  

Lamentations

Yesterday, I experienced something that almost everyone can relate to, almost everyone has experienced- and yet, it was such a shocking blow that I felt it down to my very core. It seemed to suck the life and joy out of me. When this thing happened, I heard those words that still cry and scream in my ears, and my stomach fell a thousand feet and collided with the hot and bubbling Earth's core, igniting a tide of despair that has yet to subside in me.

The movie I wanted to see was sold out.

SLIFF (Saint Louis International Film Festival) started this week, so I was super pumped to see one of the starting films, Nebraska (2013) by Alexander Payne. It's by an award winning director who has never made a negatively recieved film (I've had the pleasure of seeing Sideways [2004] and The Descendants [2011]). It has an intriguing cast, the typical comedy actor Will Forte in a dramatic role and the award winning Bruce Dern, who won the best actor award at Cannes for this. Even the poster looks pretty dope. 

I think the worst part was the guys face when he said it was sold out. Completely cold and emotionless. I hate that guy. He's the one who gave me a weird look when I asked if Blue Is the Warmest Color was full.

I had driven thirty minutes in the shittiest traffic and had a pretty lackluster day beforehand. I was in a rush, desperate, a little hungry, my head hurt a little, and I badly had to urinate. Finding a spot was a nightmare, the walk from the Fitz's parking lot to the Tivoli was like being in an action movie. Each passing moment standing in line was like watching a lepers arm slowly detach from his wretched torso. And the guy's face. Like stone, like Mount Rushmore telling you to fuck off. He looked like Anton Chigur.

Sold out.

 I should be working there. At my job, when I have to let a customer down, I always apologize for their inconvenience and let them know I understand their situation.

I decided maybe I should just go see 12 Years a Slave (2013) at another theater, but I just couldn't bring myself to.

So there's pretty much no review for this week. I did see a few movies, but they were all older.

But since I don't want to skimp on you guys, I did see something I want to talk about, but it wasn't a movie. It was a musical by Stephen Sondheim.

This musical was something else. I guess its something you guys should know about me. I love musicals. My favorite is actually another by Sondheim, Sweeney Todd. I also like Into the Woods, Cabaret, Little Shop of Horrors, Annie, some of Disney's stuff, and what have you. *

I was bored yesterday and decided to check out the televised version of Passion on YouTube. It's kind of considered Sondheim's last great work. He's still alive and all, but he's only done one musical after Passion and it flopped pretty hard.

I try not to talk too much about music and theater, because I don't think I'm as adept to analyze that kind of stuff. I'll take a crack at this one in the most humble way I can. It had a really romantic score and a very operatic story, but underneath all of that was something very newly dark and unsettling. The antagonism and vices seen in this musical seem more complex and subtle than what you see in a large scale opera. Sometimes the music was (probably intentionally) saccharine, other times really sinister, and not in a scary movie way. I mean in a deep and disturbing, psychologically unsound way.

It's about a soldier named Giorgio in a relationship with the beautiful Clara in 19th century Italy. The play begins with them in a loving embrace, which is soon ended when he reveals he is being transferred to another military outpost. In this outpost is a group of obnoxious and petty soldiers, a dignified major, and a stern doctor. The major's deranged cousin, Fosca, resides there too. She screams at night, goes into convulsions, and is terribly sickly and unattractive, and she grows obsessed with Giorgio during his stay, testing his patience and, ultimately, his devotions.

The play is extremely sad and also kind of creepy. It's unnerving. It kind of makes you squirm, because Giorgio is a really good guy, actually, and Fosca is terribly unhinged and manipulative, but there are many times when you just feel bad for her and completely understand why Giorgio keeps leading her on despite how crazy that sounds.

I don't want to spoil it, but it has the most intense and expressive endings I've seen in musical theater. It was very calm, it ended in a whisper, but it's so brutal.

If you're into musicals, you've got a glowing recommendation from me.   

Movies I Saw This Week
Monty Python's the Meaning of Life (1983)**, Gone With the Wind (1939)

*I would like to stress that I like the stage versions of these musicals. I don't think stage musicals translate into film at all, and I prefer to keep the two genres separate. The film version of Sweeney Todd was especially disappointing to me. I don't fucking understand why people are putting Helena Bonham Carter in musicals now. It needs to stop, her voice is pathetic.

**rewatch. I find Monty Python pretty hit and miss. Holy Grail is the best thing they ever did, I think. 

Blue Is the Warmest Colour (2013) dir. Abdellatif Kechiche

I recently watched a movie called Hard Eight (1996), that had a strangely balding yet still young Samuel L. Jackson. 

If you look hard enough in Hollywood, you can find pieces of Samuel's sheddings

This movie suffered from pretty bad projecting. They placed it on the bottom third of the screen. What the fuck? 

It seemed that this was the beginning of a pattern in shitty projection practices, as the movie I saw the very next day was too low on the screen, and it was a foreign film with subtitles, effectively obscuring everything everyone was saying in the black bar below where the actual screen was.

Thankfully, the good people at the Tivoli fixed the error after a couple of minutes, and I was able to forget about it and start watching the movie without distraction.

It was, what one might call, a quality film.

Since it's a critically acclaimed, Palme D'or  and FIPRESCI winning, three hour long epic romance (don't know if that's the right term), I should probably say "sublime" or "magnificent". 

But I was very excited to see that it was playing near me, because it's well known, new, and leads to so much discussion. I was gonna be a real badass and watch 12 Years a Slave and The Butler and then compare them in this review, but I thought this was a better choice.

And with SLIFF (Saint Louis International Film Festival) rearing its head, I need to save my money...

More On the Director
Abdellatif Kechiche is just as hard to work with as it is to pronounce his name (allegedly). Normally I'd start by going over some of his previous work, but I thought I'd zing you guys first. 

It's probably the most important thing (and by that I mean interesting) I can say about him to provide background to this movie. You don't need to look hard at all to see that the film went through a very troubled production and that most of the crew hated Kechiche, accusing him of harassment and labor law violations. Even the two main actresses said they would never work with him again. Ouch.

This reminds me a lot of Last Tango in Paris (1972). It too, went through a tense production, and people involved with the film, notably Maria Schneider, have spoken out against its director, Bernardo Bertolucci. The difference here is you can totally see that reflected in the film. 

It's a much, much darker film than Blue Is the Warmest Colour, and far more unsettling. It's interesting that Kechiche's film is garnering controversy for its nudity and graphic sex scenes in the same way that Last Tango In Paris did, which had sex scenes that approached rape. And by interesting, I mean fucking stupid. 

So to badly segue from that, Abdellatif has directed a few other films before this, his first being La Faute à Voltaire (2000) and another, The Secret of the Grain (2007) which also won the FIPRESCI. For those wondering, the FIPRESCI is an award given out at many film festivals like the one in Venice as well as Cannes. 

The Movie
Like I said, I thought this movie was amazing. I think the first thing I want to mention is that there is a beloved movie-going practice that I believe is starting to fade away and it shouldn't. Remember how at the end of a movie, instead of going straight into what to do next, we asked each other what our favorite parts were? Let's do that now. 

One of my favorite parts of the movie was near the beginning. It's probably best to do a little premise summary here. 

The movie is about a young girl named Adele (as evidenced from its french title, La Vie D'Adele - Chapitres 1 & 2). She's a junior in high school, just approaching the time when many girls her age discover their sexuality, and it is at this time that she starts feeling attraction to the same sex. She has many experiences with both sexes as both friends and lovers, particularly with a blue-haired girl named Emma who she gets into a lesbian relationship with, and all the while desperately tries to find herself. In that description, I kind of made it sound like a feel-good, teen coming-of-age movie. This isn't really true, the film is too heavy and dramatic to be a feel good movie and transcends the coming of age genre.

But back to my favorite part.

There's a scene near the beginning, where after being led on by a classmate, she tries coming on to her in the bathroom. She is let down very nicely and thoughtfully by her friend, and yet the scene is so heartbreaking. It's the first girl she's made an attempt at romance with, having struggled so hard with coming to terms with her feelings for women, and when she accepts it  and goes for a girl who shows interest in her, she is painfully rejected. It's a really sad moment, but in some ways it's kind of sweet. On one level it's light, a rejection scene we can all identify with; but on a deeper level it's really traumatic, because it's one more thing adding to Adele's insecurity. 

These scenes of disappointment and insecurity are something we see a lot in the movie, especially in the first half, and it flows well into the latter half of the movie. A lot of the themes of this movie change in their presentation and nature as Adele grows as a character. One of the big symbols in the movie seems to constantly be re-evaluated. As evidenced by the title, blue is a huge thing in the movie. That sounded pretty rough. Blue is a strong, reoccurring visual motif and symbol in the film. How's that? 

It's not just about Adele's love interest, Emma, having blue hair, it's about blue having an overwhelming presence in the color palette. It can be difficult in a movie to try to discern the meaning of repeated images, colors, or symbols. The role of blue here is less of "blue is a symbol for x" but more that blue attaches itself to people, places, or things that represent the desires of Adele (that's a really rough explanation). The color blue places itself wherever Adele goes to look for comfort, reinforcement, love, security, etc. So what's really happening is that blue is a tangible, visual means to make an emotion or concept physical. It makes for a physically beautiful and stunning film and an intriguing and well developed message.

There were better examples, but I didn't want to spoil one of the best images in the film

Another thing I wanted to talk about was controversy surrounding the amount of sex scenes in the film. Some people are questioning the merit of the lesbian sex sequences, which are admittedly graphic, not simulated, and long. Some people are even throwing the word "pornography" around. Let me just say that, regardless of whether the sex scenes were necessary or not, it's fucking dumb to call it pornography. Pornography, by definition, appeals mainly to prurient interests and has no explicitly artistic merit*. The sex scenes certainly are drawn out, and to a certain audiences, can even be titillating. But it has astouding relevance to the story. The length and explicitness depicted in them is simply a directorial choice on a scene that definitely has a place in the film. I think it's important to note that the 3 or 4 sex scenes in this three hour film amount to about 20% or less of the total run time, while a 90 minute, low budget horror film today can have up to 50% sexual or nude scenes  (which have less relevance to the story). 

Looking at you

So let's be a little more lax on the p-word when we see a scene in a movie that might, god forbid, give us a boner. The story around the sex scenes was more interesting anyway. 

Some more things the film draws on is the transition from childhood to adulthood, the shock that is felt when you're suddenly an adult, and many decisions you make can have serious repercussions. 

There's a lot of discussion between characters over how to view and understand art. There's a really great scene with Adele and a boy trying to date her where they talk about books, and whether it's better to analyze and dissect the fine details and purposes of an authors work, or let it be up to your imagination. There's some sneaky hints to the director's opinion on this debate in the film as well.

There's also a lot of questions posed in the movie about destiny and finding one's life purpose. The latter concept is actually examined frequently in the film. There are so many themes and ideas that it's hardly just a love story about lesbians like the posters would have you believe. 

It's got a little something something for everyone. 

And by a little I mean a lot. 

Movies I Also Saw This Week
Hard Eight (1996)**, King Kong*** (1933), Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937)

*I tried being as vague as possible in this. I think the person shooting, directing, or editing that porno considers it his or her art. It wouldn't be fair to say it has no merit at all, just like it isn't fair to say a movie is pornographic for having sex scenes. 

**First film by Paul Thomas Anderson, last one I got around to seeing. It was...okay.

***re-watch



 

Earth (1930) dir. Alexander Dovzhenko, Baby Face (1933) dir. Alfred E. Green, Duck Soup (1933) dir. Leo McCarey

This week I watched a lot of movies. Thing is, none of them were new and few them I enjoyed. I don't have a lot to say about them, so I have decided to do three little mini reviews on some of the movies I saw this week. Funny thing is, none of them were made after 1935. 

I think I'll start off with the film I liked the most. 

Earth

 

Earth is one of the big classics from the Soviet propaganda/formalist film era. When this film is mentioned, it's usually along with the film Battleship Potemkin (1925) directed by the hugely famous and significant filmmaker/theorist Sergei Eisenstein. Dovzhenko, Eisenstein, and Vsevelod Pudovkin are the three pioneers of soviet montage, the movement that pretty much elevated editing beyond just putting the movie together to the intricate and invisible art form that it is today. Although I'd say Alexander Dovzhenko is the underdog in this trio. His films, Earth in particular, aren't as heavy handed with the propaganda, although the agenda is still present in this one.

Alexander Dovzhenko

Dovzhenko, along with his contemporaries, were often accused of formalism (placing the style of the film over the communist content) by the Soviet Government, but his movie was one of the few to actually be considered treason. From what I can gather from watching the film, the guys upstairs didn't take too kindly to the fact that the movie was about the Ukrainian Farmers, the people they were conquering at the time, and the fact that the "rich famers" who represented the bourgeoisie were slightly sympathetic. It makes sense, because Dovzhenko was Ukrainian born. Another big difference between this film and the other formalists works, is that it goes much farther than simply prioritizing the craft of the film. He goes as far as neglecting the communist agenda for large parts of the film to explore themes of life and death, emotion, and resilience.


 The  movie is about the confrontation with independent, landowning famers (kulaks) and the communist minded groups who get a new tractor and wish to take over the farm. A young man, Basil, leads this group of revolutionaries but is killed by an unknown kulak. His father, at first unsure of which side to take, joins his son's friends and marches on the land. 

The climactic march scene

 I will admit that this was a difficult movie. It was slow paced and could even be quite cerebral. There are a few striking and dramatic shots, but overall the movie is really compelling because of the editing, which not only elevates the content tonally but creates symbolic relationships. It's very interesting, and the most poetic story I've seen from the Russian formalists (and I've seen all of three, mind you!)

Now onto a movie I had mixed feelings about...

Baby Face

Baby Face is either really misogynistic or really feminist. I can't tell which. It's about a rough around the edges girl named Lily who realizes she can use her womanly power over men to her greatest advantage. And she does, several times, in offices, bathrooms, sketchy apartments, railroad cars, etc. 

It was directed by Alfred E. Green, a very prolific but not very notable director. This is probably his most recognizable work because of how controversial it was at the time for all of its sexual content, albeit implied. 

The movie was perfectly entertaining and enjoyable to watch. Barbara Stanwyck was not only drop dead gorgeous, but an amazing actress with the power to draw us into any character. 

Hummina hummina hummina

Where the movie starts to lose me is the overall point. Are we supposed to sympathize with Lily? She was a pretty terrible person until literally the last five minutes of the movie. If she's just a terrible person, then isn't that saying something bad about women and their sexuality? Or was it a positive image of the power a woman can have over a man, while still being a good person by learning the error or her ways? 

Here's what would have saved it.

Lily goes through her whole journey alongside her friend and maid, Chico, played by Theresa Harris. 

Like I said, this movie was really controversial and racy for its time. But even so, there is a limit. It's disappointing, because I swear to god, the whole movie, I wanted them to end up together.

A woman using her sexuality to succeed, to empower herself and control men, instead of ending up with the handsome everyman (which happens at the end of the movie), ends up with her maid in a homosexual, interracial relationship. How cool would that have been? 

And here is where I drop the bomb...

Duck Soup

Duck Soup is arguably the most famous and beloved of the Marx Brothers films. Concerning the unstable and fictional country of Freedonia and it's fast talking, smartass president (Groucho), this film is held as a staple of classic, slapstick comedy that has inspired comedians ever since. 


And I hated it.

Yeah. Pretty much despised the entire thing. And I feel bad for hating it, believe me. 

I watched it in my film class and my professor said we were in for a treat. I was looking forward to it because of its status as a masterpiece. About 15 minutes in I wanted it to be over. The movie came off to me as an incoherent mess and I began to slump further and further into my seat in misery with each passing moment. 

Unlike with previous comedy classics I have watched, such as City Lights (1931) or The General (1926), directed by Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton, repectively, I didn't laugh, scoff, chuckle, or even grin approvingly the entire movie. 

I did, however, like the famous mirror sequence, and the musical number towards the end, but I'm a sucker for showtunes. 

Boy oh boy. I need to go to the theater. 

Movies I Also Saw This Week
Welcome to the Dollhouse (1996)*, The Stepford Wives (1975) The Jazz Singer (1927), Dracula (1931)**

*After mentioning it in my previous review, I just had to watch it again. Still just as good as before. I highly recommend it. It not only perfectly and convincingly writes the most pitiful and sad character ever, but takes the common coming-of-age setting of high school and moves it to a place even more sick and hellish- middle school.

**The only actual Halloween movie I watched in October. I've lost all my childlike wonder.

Bullhead (2011) dir. Michaël R. Roskam

This week I finally got around to watching a movie that's been on my list for a while.

What's my list, you ask? Here it is:

Stalker

Le Samourai

Bliss

Heart of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse

Saving Private Ryan

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

Through a Glass Darkly

Persona

Three Colors: Blue

Three Colors: White

Three Colors: Red

Wings of Desire

Safe

Werckmeister Harmonies

Millenium Actress

The Player

Human Nature

Bulitt

Brazil

Breathless

Stranger than Paradise

Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

Solaris (1972)

Farenheit 9/11

The Magdalene Sisters

Fat Girl

Being There

Mind Game

A Simple Plan

2001: A Space Oddessy

Amadeus

Hard Eight

Naked Lunch

Lost Highway

He Who Gets Slapped

Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives

Pierrot le Fou

5 Centimeters per Second

The Girl Who Lept Through Time

5 Easy Pieces

Wild Strawberries

Amelie

Cries and Whispers

Ikiru

City of God (rewatch)

Raise the Red Lantern

Crimson Gold

Benny's Video

The Cremator

The Exterminating Angel

The Idiots

Crimes and Misdemeanors

Black Moon

Berbarian Sound Studio

Black Pond

What's Up Tiger Lily?

Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Sex (But Were Too Afraid to Ask)

The Spirit of the Beehive

The Double Life of Veronique

The Quiet Family

The Holy Mountain

MASH

Tokyo Story

The Rules of the Game

The Adventures of Baron Munchausen

Funky Forest: The First Contact

Daisies

Come and See

Little Otik

That Obsure Object of Desire

Collateral

Chungking Express

Taxi to the Dark Side

Twist of Faith

Pixote

Stroszek

Arrietty

Taste of Cherry

Delicatessen

Mouchette

Kwaidan

In the House

The Element of Crime

Walkabout

La Haine

Bad Day at Black Rock

The Third Man

The Illusionist

Playtime

The Lives of Others

Capturing the Friedmans

Populaire

Vivre sa vie

Pauline at the Beach

L'avventura

The Virgin Spring

Women On the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown

A Sunday in Hell

The Passion of Anna

Shoeshine

The Garden of the Finzi Continis

Repulsion

White Dog

My Sassy Girl

Days of Wine and Roses

Pather Panchali

Taxidermia

Hamlet

Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter...and Spring...

2046

Fantastic Planet

Eyes Without a Face

Onibaba

The Face of Another

The Hourglass Sanitorium

Possession

Sweet Movie

House

Valerie and Her Week of Wonders

El Topo

Election

Shaitan

Goodbye Lenin

That Girl In the Yellow Boots

The Andromeda Strain (netflix)

Forbidden Planet

Seconds

Soylent Green

Shark Skin Man and Peach Hip Girl

Babel

Welcome Back Mr. Mcdonald

We Are What We Are

Jean de Florette & Manon des Sources

The Station Agent

The Snowball Effect

Day for Night

The Stepford Wives

Heavenly Creatures

The Limey

Cure

Les Diaboliques

Cat People

Deep Red

La Ronde

The Earrings of Madame de...

Le Plaisir

The Conqueror

The Lost Weekend

Schlock

It's my insanely long list of movies that I want to see. Some of them are pretty obscure and some of them are so well known that it's surprising that I haven't seen them when I claim to be such a devoted film lover. I saw Saving Private Ryan (1998) for the first time less than a month ago. The only Karate Kid movie I ever saw all the way through was The Next Karate Kid (1994). It's the least successful and most critically panned of the series, but it did provide the breakout role for Hilary Swank. Incidentally, this movie is what put me in the "hot" camp of the eternal debate over whether Hillary Swank is hot or not.

I had trouble finding a flattering picture, I must admit

But I digress...

I finally got around to seeing a movie that's been sitting on my list for a while, which is the fairly recent Belgian drama, Bullhead by Michaël R. Roskam.

More On the Director

Roskam is pretty much brand new. There's not a lot to say about him because this is his only feature film to be released so far. He's got a new movie, Animal Rescue, coming up, and interestingly, it is the late James Gandolfini's last screen appearance. So far he's been working in the crime drama genre, but that is no trifling statement. From the looks of Bullhead, he's got a lot of talent and insight. It was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Picture, but lost to the Iranian film, A Separation (2011).

Uhhhh...yeah. That's pretty much all there is too say. There isn't a whole lot of background on this movie or the director, which is a shame because the movie was pretty good. Prett-ay, prett-ay, prett-ay...pretty good.

The Movie

I only really had one major problem with the movie, so I'll just get it out of the way now. The major flaw of the movie, for me, is that it was way too dark. I don't mean mature and solemn themes, dark. I mean like I couldn't see anything. Maybe it was my TV, maybe Netflix was having a problem, but it appeared, or rather didn't appear (ha), that nearly 80% of the movie was underexposed. 

What am I looking at?

 I feel like a really old man even complaining about it. It's a little baffling because it's a € 2 million film done by a professional director and screenwriter. It has a major star (for Belgium) and there's nothing amateur about it. I mean, I get why they wanted a darker aesthetic, it just didn't need to be so dark that you couldn't see anything. I spent most of the movie looking like Jaden Smith.

Some more minor complaints were that sometimes the film got needlessly technical and complex in the story. They included a few subplots and dialogue heavy scenes that were hard to follow. The movie overall wasn't confusing, though.

A third thing I should mention is that the movie had a very de-saturated aesthetic when it came to color, and it's something I notice a lot in European films. I put this last because I'm not sure that it's a complaint. I should point out that the  entire film isn't like this, just most of it. I find it really interesting. We have that kind of look in films in the US, too, but not as often. It's pretty big in movies like Road to Perdition (2002) or No Country for Old Men (2007). It's just an interesting pattern I've picked up on, but I might just be making that up in my head.

An example of the low-intensity color pallet

 The film revolves around several characters but one character in particular, Jacky Vanmarsenille, is in the middle of it all. What drives the story is this deal he gets into with the Belgian mob to sell illegal cow hormones and the consequences that arise from that. What the film is really about,  though, is Jackie as a character. Jacky is one of the most irredeemably sad and broken characters ever written. He reminded me of Dawn Wiener from one of my favorite movies, Welcome to the Dollhouse (1995). The two have nothing in common, of course, but what links the two in my head is how completely terrible their lives are and how little hope we as an audience have for them.

Quick shout out to Todd Solondz, one of my favorite filmmakers

 Due to a childhood tragedy (which is shown through a series of flashbacks, and contains one of the most disturbing scenes I've seen in a long time), he has become mentally scarred and fallen into a debilitating addiction to steroids and hormones. He has huge muscles, a caveman like walk, and stone face. Behind it all is an incredibly insecure and shameful man. To give credit where credit is due, Matthias Schoenaerts does an incredible job of maintaining a character that is constantly aggressive, abusive, and reactionary, but still remains sympathetic because he is so insecure and traumatized from the abuse he suffered as a child.

The movie does a really great job at showing the far reaching consequences of abuse and child trauma as well as the things we don't see behind people. Jacky is essentially a completely unlikeable character, but because of how he is written, performed, and conceived he becomes tragic. His aggression and hot temper is the result of his suffering as a child that still plagues him in the present. Needless to say, things don't turn out great for him.

The movie is valuable because of the way it presents its themes and the struggles of its characters. Technically, it's very well made, aside from the complaint I had earlier. The story and structure is good enough, but I wouldn't expect everyone to agree with me on that. Jackie's backstory is introduced a little late in the film, so his actions start out as very hard to understand. This didn't really bother me too much, but I can see it bothering others.

Now that I've watched it, though, I'm curious what the Academy Award competition had over it. Looks like I've got more movies to add to my list.

Movies I Also Saw This Week

Lincoln (2012)*, Movie 43**

*My second time watching. I think I liked it better the first time. Daniel Day-Lewis really holds it together. Otherwise it's a little schmaltzy. Still good, though. I like the scenes with James Spader.

**I finished it. That's all I have to say about that