"Tell No One" is one of the best movies I've seen in a while. It's pretty rare that you get to watch a murder mystery story that is not predictable, for one thing. The feeling of really wanting to know What happened? Who did it? reminds me of when I was a kid and enjoyed Agatha Christie books. I don't know the last time I got that feeling from a movie! Plus, this was an adventure story, where you're following the hero as he gets himself into one suspenseful situation after another. What will happen with the secret meeting in the park? Can he escape capture? Yet, it's not cliche-driven like so many typical suspense films. There are characters you just have to love and you don't see it coming. For example, the hero, Alex, is a pediatrician. And when he gets in trouble he has to recruit some muscle to come save him. The muscle he recruits is a guy who looks like a tough guy and who has connections to the street, but who is really a sensitive father who once took his son to the pediatrician's office. Yup! That conversation about "I owe this guy a favor"? -- So not typical for it to be followed by "He helped me out when I took my kid to the doctor."
And, of course, what else would I want but a good love story? Also included, free of charge. Just a bonus.
Showing posts with label Escapes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Escapes. Show all posts
Friday, May 1, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
Shooter
Hopefully when you watch Shooter with Mark Wahlberg, you have clear expectations. You know what kind of movie it is. A movie where a really hot guy performs stunning physical feats and defies the odds to outwit an awful lot of smart people in the government. There's no need for it to make sense or for the plot details to be clear -- right?
Good. Because they're not. I had an interesting experience watching this movie. I watched the first 45 minutes a couple weeks ago. The DVD started to go bad -- it was freezing up on me. I had to return it to Netflix. Then of course wait for another copy. When I finally got around to the second copy, and picked up where I'd left off, I felt like I was watching a different movie. Because the first 45 minutes of this were really good, really promising. An emotionally complex character, a former Marine, whose mistrust of the government conflicts with his profound sense of patriotism. He's recruited to provide detailed descriptions of long-range sniper fire in intriguingly twisted city highrise conditions. It's a beautiful set up and a beautiful premise.
Then, sometime after he goes on the run, or about 50 minutes into the movie, the plot becomes impossibly convoluted. I just watched it, and already I can't remember what they said about Ethiopia, but I think it had something to do with someone having knowledge of a grave there. What this has to do with the senator and his secret agency within the FBI, I don't really know. Did it matter?
No. I had so much fun watching the action. You should see Mark Wahlberg single-handedly defeating an army of 28 men -- under fire and with the grace of a cat. Gorgeous.
Good. Because they're not. I had an interesting experience watching this movie. I watched the first 45 minutes a couple weeks ago. The DVD started to go bad -- it was freezing up on me. I had to return it to Netflix. Then of course wait for another copy. When I finally got around to the second copy, and picked up where I'd left off, I felt like I was watching a different movie. Because the first 45 minutes of this were really good, really promising. An emotionally complex character, a former Marine, whose mistrust of the government conflicts with his profound sense of patriotism. He's recruited to provide detailed descriptions of long-range sniper fire in intriguingly twisted city highrise conditions. It's a beautiful set up and a beautiful premise.
Then, sometime after he goes on the run, or about 50 minutes into the movie, the plot becomes impossibly convoluted. I just watched it, and already I can't remember what they said about Ethiopia, but I think it had something to do with someone having knowledge of a grave there. What this has to do with the senator and his secret agency within the FBI, I don't really know. Did it matter?
No. I had so much fun watching the action. You should see Mark Wahlberg single-handedly defeating an army of 28 men -- under fire and with the grace of a cat. Gorgeous.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Youth Without Youth (and Funny Games, briefly)
Francis Ford Coppola is a name we all respect. Why? Because of "The Godfather. "
Last night I watched "Youth Without Youth" which was billed as Coppola's comeback film. I didn't say it; some high-falutin' film critic did. Or more accurately, several high-falutin' critics. You know, the professionals. They build 'em up, they knock 'em down. That's what they did in this case. Told us he was a master, told us this was the master's comeback, then told us the master's comeback was crap. What happened to the respect? the adulation? Hmmmm?
What I want to know is, why didn't they like the film? I suspect it's because they raised their collective expectations too high. Waaaaay too high.
Anyway, I liked the film. Sure, it has some extraneous and confusing stuff in it. But on the whole, it was a beauty. Here you have two characters. One is an old man, who represents age [read: time passing] and wisdom [read: benefit of time passing]. One is a young woman, who represents beauty and youth [the opposite of age, of time, of wisdom]. Yes, they are symbolic characters.
The old man (Tim Roth) participates in a miracle. His youth is restored to him. He is able to gain time, in other words. When you're 70 you don't think you have that much time left. If you were suddenly made 35 again, you've gained exactly 35 years (wow, I can do math). Why would this happen?
The reason he gains the time is because he's overly ambitious. He wants to learn the whole of human knowledge. He's writing a book that can never be finished. He's a student of languages but hasn't got time to learn all the languages of all the periods of history. Until!
Enter the second character, Young-Girl-Youth-and-Beauty. She participates in a miracle too. She is able to channel the languages of all time, and hopefully can take Old-Man back far enough in time so that he can discover all of human knowledge. Problem is, while he remains young, she enters into a rapid aging process because of channeling all that ancient history. He had to get younger to have more time to write the book. She had to get older to feel the weight of ancient time. It's all very beautiful and poetic, magical and metaphorical. You must see this coming: Old-Man falls in love with Young-Girl and he has a choice to make.
Let her turn into a 25-year-old with wrinkles? Let her descend into death long before her time, for the sake of knowledge? Or... leave her and restore her youth and beauty. Abandon knowledge and wisdom (and love! which is evidently the fruit of wisdom). Abandon the value of expanding time, embrace the value of the finite, accept that life is short for a reason.
I found it beautiful. We didn't need Hitler's goons chasing Old-Man down with a gun. That part was a little ridiculous and quite unnecessary. There were some other tossed-in scenes that may have added to the confusion some of the critics apparently felt. (Even Almighty Ebert used the word "confusing!" It's less confusing than "Inland Empire," man.) But it was still very powerful. I can forgive Coppola these little mistakes. He's only human, after all.
Tim Roth, coincidentally, has been on my screen a lot recently. I also watched "Funny Games" the other day. It's a thriller - no one would dispute the label in this case - and a dark one. Ask yourself: Do you want to watch Tim Roth and Naomi Watts be tortured? That's all it is. The end was surprising, but not in a good way. All I can say is, this was a ride I really wanted off of. But I am starting to understand Tim Roth. I used to think of him as simply a Tarantino man, for obvious reasons ("Pulp Fiction," "Reservoir Dogs"). Now I'm understanding that Roth'll take anything that might be unnerving -- he's simply confrontational, as an actor. He must be a very interesting person to talk to.
Last night I watched "Youth Without Youth" which was billed as Coppola's comeback film. I didn't say it; some high-falutin' film critic did. Or more accurately, several high-falutin' critics. You know, the professionals. They build 'em up, they knock 'em down. That's what they did in this case. Told us he was a master, told us this was the master's comeback, then told us the master's comeback was crap. What happened to the respect? the adulation? Hmmmm?
What I want to know is, why didn't they like the film? I suspect it's because they raised their collective expectations too high. Waaaaay too high.
Anyway, I liked the film. Sure, it has some extraneous and confusing stuff in it. But on the whole, it was a beauty. Here you have two characters. One is an old man, who represents age [read: time passing] and wisdom [read: benefit of time passing]. One is a young woman, who represents beauty and youth [the opposite of age, of time, of wisdom]. Yes, they are symbolic characters.
The old man (Tim Roth) participates in a miracle. His youth is restored to him. He is able to gain time, in other words. When you're 70 you don't think you have that much time left. If you were suddenly made 35 again, you've gained exactly 35 years (wow, I can do math). Why would this happen?
The reason he gains the time is because he's overly ambitious. He wants to learn the whole of human knowledge. He's writing a book that can never be finished. He's a student of languages but hasn't got time to learn all the languages of all the periods of history. Until!
Enter the second character, Young-Girl-Youth-and-Beauty. She participates in a miracle too. She is able to channel the languages of all time, and hopefully can take Old-Man back far enough in time so that he can discover all of human knowledge. Problem is, while he remains young, she enters into a rapid aging process because of channeling all that ancient history. He had to get younger to have more time to write the book. She had to get older to feel the weight of ancient time. It's all very beautiful and poetic, magical and metaphorical. You must see this coming: Old-Man falls in love with Young-Girl and he has a choice to make.
Let her turn into a 25-year-old with wrinkles? Let her descend into death long before her time, for the sake of knowledge? Or... leave her and restore her youth and beauty. Abandon knowledge and wisdom (and love! which is evidently the fruit of wisdom). Abandon the value of expanding time, embrace the value of the finite, accept that life is short for a reason.
I found it beautiful. We didn't need Hitler's goons chasing Old-Man down with a gun. That part was a little ridiculous and quite unnecessary. There were some other tossed-in scenes that may have added to the confusion some of the critics apparently felt. (Even Almighty Ebert used the word "confusing!" It's less confusing than "Inland Empire," man.) But it was still very powerful. I can forgive Coppola these little mistakes. He's only human, after all.
Tim Roth, coincidentally, has been on my screen a lot recently. I also watched "Funny Games" the other day. It's a thriller - no one would dispute the label in this case - and a dark one. Ask yourself: Do you want to watch Tim Roth and Naomi Watts be tortured? That's all it is. The end was surprising, but not in a good way. All I can say is, this was a ride I really wanted off of. But I am starting to understand Tim Roth. I used to think of him as simply a Tarantino man, for obvious reasons ("Pulp Fiction," "Reservoir Dogs"). Now I'm understanding that Roth'll take anything that might be unnerving -- he's simply confrontational, as an actor. He must be a very interesting person to talk to.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Eyes of Laura Mars
What a hoot! Watch this and tell me how long it takes *you* to recognize Tommy Lee Jones. Seriously. This is a classic 1970s thriller which puts all the fun back into thrillers - for those of us who have grown weary of seeing Jodie Foster or anyone else trapped on an airplane.
Faye Dunaway, once again. I'm becoming a fan of hers. In this movie she's so convincing as a photographer whose vision is interrupted constantly - even when she's behind the camera! - by the vision of murder, seen through the eyes of the murderer! Hold on models, stop posing! Stop the shoot! It's also great when Laura's fumbling around in her apartment, trying to feel her way to the telephone, as if blind! Meanwhile, with her eyes open, she's actually watching her friends be killed - one by one, and she can do nothing about it!
Mostly, this was just pure fun to watch. Fun to play "who's that actor" with some recognizable but much-younger faces. (It's like a reverse version of "where are they now?") Fun to get swept away by the pounding, overly melodramatic music score. Fun to watch Tommy Lee Jones running down the street in a typical 1970s chase scene. Really fun to laugh your head off at the close-up shots of Faye Dunaway's eyes. Yep. Get this one from Netflix. It's a joy.
Faye Dunaway, once again. I'm becoming a fan of hers. In this movie she's so convincing as a photographer whose vision is interrupted constantly - even when she's behind the camera! - by the vision of murder, seen through the eyes of the murderer! Hold on models, stop posing! Stop the shoot! It's also great when Laura's fumbling around in her apartment, trying to feel her way to the telephone, as if blind! Meanwhile, with her eyes open, she's actually watching her friends be killed - one by one, and she can do nothing about it!
Mostly, this was just pure fun to watch. Fun to play "who's that actor" with some recognizable but much-younger faces. (It's like a reverse version of "where are they now?") Fun to get swept away by the pounding, overly melodramatic music score. Fun to watch Tommy Lee Jones running down the street in a typical 1970s chase scene. Really fun to laugh your head off at the close-up shots of Faye Dunaway's eyes. Yep. Get this one from Netflix. It's a joy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
