Rudderless

Godzilla

This is another movie I took in at the drive-in this summer, and here’s the thing about drive-in movies: it’s never about the movie. You go for the experience. You go because it’s a beautiful night that you don’t want to waste indoors. You go because you can pig out in secret in your car. You go because you can make out with your hunny in the back seat. And you go because it’s a double feature, or a triple feature, so even if the movies are bad (and they often are), at least it’s two bad movies for the price one!

I won’t pretend to have loved this movie. In fact, I was mostly confused by it. From what I understood, 15 years ago, these two pods were found and suddenly they crack open and out come these monsters. At the time, I didn’t fully comprehend there were two, then I failed to adequately distinguish between them, and ultimately I failed to realize that these were NOT Godzilla. Turns out, Godzilla is this whole separate entity that the government has known about and kept secret for years – he lays mostly dormant, but when the world’s really in trouble, like it’s being terrorized by these two MUTOs. Godzilla’s the good guy in this monster movie, and he doesn’t appear until like half way through, which led to my confusion. I weirdly assumed that a movie called Godzilla would be about Godzilla, but it’s kinda not.

I actually felt like I was watching a mash-up of two other drive-in movies, Pacific Rim, and Transformers: Age of Extinction, but when Godzilla finally did appear, I admit I thought, damn, now that’s a beautiful monster. Really nicely rendered. Different, but not alienating to classic Godzilla. And thank goodness he’s purty, because the humans in the movie weren’t nearly as compelling (Aaron Taylor-Johnson of Kick-Ass fame, and Elizabeth Olsen). If this is a reboot, then I say, sure keep the king of the monsters, but replace the humans, or at least let them get eaten.

Boyhood

12 Replies

Boyhood is a really cool concept for a movie. You have to admire the film makers who set out to film a movie over the course of twelve years. Twelve years! That’s a long time to be committed to a project but it really pays off. Ellar Coltrane, who plays the titular boy Mason, was 7 when they started, and 18 when they wrapped. Imagine signing that kind of contract at such a young age. You can’t, because such a thing would be illegal in the US. The producers would have just had to cross their fingers, but everyone kept showing up, year after year. I’ve heard the kids maybe regretted their involvement at times, and who can blame them – hello, awkward years and teenage rebellion!. I’ve never had the same job that long, and few people of my generation ever will. Amazing. Richard Linklater, the director, was known for making movies that took place all in one day. This one, obviously, blows that right up. He even made a pact with Ethan Hawke that if he died during filming, Hawke would take over.

The time lapse is not the only naturlistic aspect of the movie. The family exchanges feel authentic; some of the footage feels almost home-movie-ish, like when the kids are lined up to get the most recent edition of the Harry Potter series. These kids went through everything that normal kids their age did – they experience Britney Spears, the Bush administration, and skinny jeans. Patricia Arquette really elevates her game as a struggling, single mother who raises her son and daughter and works to make better lives for them. Ethan Hawke, aging visibly o camera, plays the deadbeat father with a lot of growing up to do himself. Their lives feel real, like they could be your neighbours. Their cars and their sneakers are not mysteriously above their station. Real life happens to them, they repeat clothing, grow ill-advised mustaches, date the wrong guy, take up and then discard hobbies.

The script must have had to evolve as they filmed because a family is dynamic. It reacts and is influenced by the world around it. Politics and trends are woven deftly and interestingly into the story. Linklater was directing his own daughter for these twelve years and watching her grow in front of his lens. The kid actors are quite good, fortunately; they’re not hammy or too old for their age. I was beginning to think that for whatever reason only British kids could manage not to be annoying on film, but these two may have turned things around for the Americans, and it must have been difficult to cast someone who’s not just right for the part now, but will continue to be for years to come.

So we know the span is quite large (12 years!) but the scope is actually pretty tiny. We just stay focused on this little family, following this kid during those formative years of his life, all those little things that will eventually add up to the man. There’s not a lot happening. Yes, childhood is tumultuous, but these are pretty normal lives. Nobody adopted a pet dragon, or got adopted by a dog, or took home a giant inflatable robot. He just went to school, watched his mom divorce and remarry, learned to tolerate his sister, tried beer, masturbated to the Sears catalogue. Regular kid stuff that’s only interesting when you add it all up and realize that this is it. This is childhood. And at the end, it spits out an adult that we hope will go off and do well. This movie was the scrapbook of his life, and a running time of nearly three hours doesn’t cover more than an episode or two at each age, but even at that, this movie can feel a bit draggy. It’s not an action-packed movie, but I was moved by it. It’s not depressing by any means, but I guess I felt a bit sentimental about it, probably because I truly felt like I was given the chance to really get to know these people. In fact, it was hard to remember that this is fiction, it feels that much like just watching through someone’s window.

This is an experiment of a movie that needs to be seen. I’ve certainly never seen anything like it. Will anyone attempt it again? The door’s open now, but it’s such an undertaking, and such a risk, that I believe this movie is one of a kind.

The Interview

1 Reply

The only thing you need to know about this movie is that it’s profoundly dumb.

We rented this movie from Google Play on Christmas Eve with middling expectations and they were not exceeded. Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg are back at it again, both writing and directing, but not quite pulling off this strange and controversial movie. Had it been released as intended, it would have made some decent coin, maybe cracked the top 5 amid all the stellar Oscar contenders also released on Christmas day, but it would have struggled to find an audience in its second week, or to make much of a lasting impression. So thank you Kim Jong-un for giving this movie a crazy boost and a marketing angle that no other campaign could have touched.

James Franco, doing an impression of his little brother Dave, plays Dave Skylark, celebrity interviewer. His producer, Aaron (Seth Rogen) aspires to more so when they hear that North Korea’s Supreme Leader is a fan of the show, they land an interview with him that they hope will lead to bigger and better fish. Kim Jong-un (Randall Park) intends to use the interview as yet another propaganda piece but the CIA have even loftier ambitions – they draft these two numbskulls to “take out” the tyrant.

Now, why on earth the CIA would entrust such a mission to these buffoons is beyond me. Well, okay, no it isn’t. They just wouldn’t. They couldn’t. So you really have to be willing to overlook the extreme wobbliness of this premise in order to enjoy the movie.

Rogen and Goldberg have proved themselves to be an amazing writing team but The Interview has none of the heart of Superbad or the guile of This is the End. And let’s face it, with the world’s youngest basketball-loving head of state, the jokes should write themselves. I mean, he’s a bad dude with more human rights violations than qualifications to run a country. He’d rather let his peasants resort to cannibalism than alter his hacking budget, but still, he’s a joke.

Rogen and Franco do earn lots of laughs. They’re charismatic guys, they work well together, and off each other, and they’re fun to watch. It’s just that the plot is built loosely around one-liners, and for some reason instead of sticking with what they know (socially awkward teenage boys, and smoking weed), the plot involves the assassination of a reclusive dictator. Weirdly, we’ve seen this before. In fact, I think you could oldkim summarize Zoolander in nearly the same way: celebrities vs despot.

If you’re in the mood for a hilarious take on foreign policy, rewatch Team America: World Police. It’s more continuously funny and more worthy of the label ‘satire.’ But if you’re just a fan of Seth and James, you won’t find another Pineapple Express here, but you’ll find some shit to laugh at (sometimes literally, unfortunately). And in the name of patriotism and free speech and all that hullabaloo, maybe that’s enough.

Home Alone

4 Replies

I thought I was too old to see this movie in the theatre. Now I have probably watched it ten times in my 30s (all by choice). It is somehow a sweet movie despite little Kevin nearly killing poor Harry and Marv (according to some doctor on the internet, they would have died several times over in real life from the injuries Kevin gives them). It is somehow a tale of a mother’s love for her son even though Kevin’s parents are totally neglectful. After all, if they had just sat in coach instead of abandoning their kids there, Kevin’s parents would have clued into the fact that they were missing their son (and as an added bonus they could have prevented their other kids from terrorizing the rest of the passengers on the plane). It is a story of an old man saving the day on Christmas Eve, but also apparently taking great pleasure in scaring the neighbourhood kids the rest of the year. And be sure not to think too hard about how Harry and Marv ever got away with any of their alleged string of burglaries, when every step of the way they get thoroughly out-schemed (as well as savagely beaten) by a ten year old.

So how have I watched this so often and enjoyed it every time? Because this movie just works. It hits all the right crazy notes. It captures the magic of being a kid at Christmas. It doesn’t worry about justifying its ridiculous premise or anything else along the way. It takes pleasure in ramping up the craziness at every opportunity. It is truly joyful, a live action cartoon, a John Hughes caper to end all John Hughes capers. For accuracy’s sake, I checked the back of the DVD case to be sure that the late great Mr. Hughes had, in fact, written this movie but I was sure he had. It has his fingerprints all over it and that’s a wonderful thing.

Hands down, this is my favourite Christmas movie, for what it is and for what it captures. By the way, don’t bother with any of the terrible sequels, just watch this one three or four times and you’ll be far better off.

Ten wet bandits out of ten.

Birdman

17 Replies

Birdman opens with C-list celebrity Riggan (Michael Keaton), a superhero has-been trying to reclaim glory as a serious Broadway actor, meditating and levitating before rehearsal of his play. Wait – levitating? Yes. It seems that Riggan has picked up some super powers along the way.

But this movie is so subtly engrossing, its rhythm unrelenting, that I actually forgot this little nugget of information until the next bit of surrealism came our way, presented just as slyly as the first. Some remnant of his Birdman alterego remains, and narrates Riggan’s present tense in a voice reminiscent of Christian Bale’s Batman, driving home the satirical meta-performance at work here. Director Iñárritu gets right up in his grill, nursing long but very intimate shots that show unflinchingly every wrinkle, every worry line ever earned by these actors.

Set almost entirely behind the scenes at St James theatre and shot in long, loooooooong takes that keep the film moving briskly, there’s a beauty and a mystique that really locked me in. Finally Iñárritu has found his element. Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki floats the camera down corridors and ascends smoothly through the scaffolding and the balconies like an unobserved peeping tom. We take our cues from this camera work. We race to find new action, we catch our breath when travelling down darkened hallways. In this way, the movie feels serene yet is in constant motion. The music helps us keep pace and is sometimes so coolly frenzied that musicians forget they aren’t supposed to be seen!

Riggan, meanwhile, is crippled by all the nay-sayers in his life: the junkie daughter (Emma Stone), the anxious lawyer (Zach Galifianakis), the guilt-tripping ex-wife (Amy Ryan) – but none more so than that voice in his head that slowly cannibalizes him by the end of the film. When one of his actors is put out of commission, he’s forced to bring on board stage actor Mike Shiner (Edward Norton) who immediately threatens to outshine him. With his own superhero baggage (Hulk, anyone?), Norton threatens to casually steal the spotlight from Keaton as well with a brilliant send-up to Method acting, and a nod toward his own reputation for being difficult on set, but Keaton reminds us why he left the Batman franchise in the first place – dude is a first rate actor when he plays crazy.

The movie is ambitiously self-aware and asks smart-aleck questions like, why bother making a $20 million dollar movie when you can go viral for free? This may not be ground-breaking material but as long as Keaton is in on the joke, the monster egos and insecurities, the fraud and the acerbic wit, it’s all part of a complex self-examination that’s fascinating to witness.

Matt and I saw this movie nearly a week ago and it’s taken me this long to even begin unpacking my feelings about it, and this after an all-you-can-eat-sushi session in which we debriefed and compared notes. As Matt will tell you, the movie is also Iñárritu’s excuse to poke back at the critics who have called him out on his self-important, self-conscious work in the past (Babel, Biuitiful) even though this movie actually seems to acknowledge that these criticisms may have been valid.

I really enjoyed this movie. It’s a pleasure to watch, a puzzle to figure out, and a commentary just begging for feedback. Please, give us yours. Assume spoilers in the comments.

Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer

3 Replies

Rudolph is celebrating his 50th year of bringing stop-animation joy into our homes this year. Most of us grew up watching this Christmas classic every year but re-watching it as an adult may leave you with a slightly different interpretation.

Yes, it’s tempting to say that Hermey the elf is gay. He’s got snazzy Justin Bieber hair and a lisp that just won’t quit. So is “dentistry” one of the oldest euphemisms for “raging homosexual”? Possibly. But you can’t really tell someone’s gay until they tell you they are, so if Hermey wants to stay in the closet, or is still exploring his options, we’ll let him. Meanwhile, it seems that some of the lady elves have found him to be an excellent dance partner. Sounds like a win all around.

Santa, however, I have issues with. He’s a dick. Definitely sexist. Pretty racist. I mean, he rejects Rudolph on the basis of the colour of his nose alone. He was totally excited about this guy on paper, but red nose? Deal breaker. And he’s a complete ass about the song the elves perform especially for him. I mean, these little dudes slave away all year long for him, and all he can do is criticize? This is not a nice guy. No wonder kids always cry when you plop them on his lap. I will say though that more mall Santas should aspire to his excellent beard grooming. Man’s got some tidy facial hair. Mall Santas always go for the curly bearded look, and I think it’s a mistake. I also enjoyed Santa’s Sherlock hat – who knew he also rocked the deer stalker?

But the best-dressed award goes to Sam, the snowman narrator. Love the tartan vest, the watch fob, his Colonel Sanders tie, heck, his bowler hat’s accessorized with winter berries! Burl Ives pwnd Christmas, y’all.

Yukon Cornelius is a little more lumbersexual, but you have to hand it to him, he’s an inclusive, forward-thinking guy. His sled dogs include a cocker spaniel, a poodle, a Saint Bernard, a collie, and even a little wiener dog. He’s also a champion for immigrant employment. Who else would think that all this time the Abominable Snowman just wanted to dignified work and a decent wage?

I also felt like the Island of Misfit Toys must have planted the seedling of Toy Story into John Lasseter’s brain. Little Johnny would have been about 7 or 8 when Rudolph first aired and he heard a bunch of talking toys utter the magical words “a toy is never truly happy until it is loved by a child.” There was even a cowboy riding an ostrich. Not much of a stretch to Woody, and a dynasty is born.

It’s still a treat to watch this movie though, it takes you back to simpler times, to wearing your flannel jammies and sharing a big bowl of popcorn with siblings while the Christmas specials air. The animation was done primarily in Japan, but the voice work was recorded in Canada. In fact, the woman (!) who voiced Rudolph lived in the same Ontario retirement residence as the guy who voiced Hermey the elf up until her death a few years ago. For many of us, this movie became a Christmas tradition, one that you can honour during the holidays, or you can do like me and totally desecrate it by buying it on DVD and “accidentally” watching the claymation Destiny’s Child video in the bonus features – or worse yet, the Regis Philbin one.

The Holiday

3 Replies

A quasi-Christmas movie for when you’re feeling in a quasi-holiday mood. It takes place around the holidays but it doesn’t shove them down your throat. It is unabashedly a romcom though. Like, hardcore romcom. If you love Love Actually, this might just be the perfect follow up. Just don’t make your boyfriend watch them back-to-back, or I won’t be responsible for him menstruating all over your micro suede couch.

Kate Winslet plays this woman who’s in love with a jackass who doesn’t love her back, and wouldn’t deserve her even if he did. It’s next to impossible to believe this heavenly creature could ever be in an unrequited situation but she’s lovely and she elevates this stinkin romcom to a very nearly decent little movie. She’s at her office Christmas party when her ex-lover announced his engagement to the woman he cheated on her with (holy god, call the grammar police!) and poor Katie does a not too great job of hiding her tears because her coworker says “I never realized how pathetic you are” to which Kate replies “Really? I’m so aware of it.” And how can you not love a movie like this?

In an effort to avoid another new year’s eve of tears and vallium, she lists her home on a house swap site and connects with Cameron Diaz, a woman in Los Angeles who’s just had a bad breakup with her boyfriend and also needs to get away from life and from men.

But of course they don’t just live in each other’s houses, they inhabit each other’s lives. Kate’s little cottage is cozy and filled with books. Absolute heaven. Cameron’s house is bursting with movies, including, weirdly, Gigli. Sort of reduces her credibility, no? And soon they start me including their men (though thankfully not their exes). Both rom and com ensue.

And keep watching because the best part is right around the corner – an old guy, a writer from show business’ golden age, who just slays with his great advice (“You are a leading lady but for some reason you’re acting like the best friend.”) and his undying loyalty. I was completely charmed by Jack Black (!) and won over by Jude Law (!!). It’s totally predictable and meandering but that doesn’t stop me from wanting to cuddle this movie all night long. Merry Christmas to me.

Unlikely Angel

Into The Storm

2 Replies

This no-star cast makes a movie with a recycled script and boring, unformed characters, but if you’re in it for the storm porn, there’s plenty of that.

Sean and I saw this at the drive-in this summer and even on a peeling outdoor screen that’s older than my grandfather, the visual effects were dazzling. Back before it was forgettably titled Into the Storm, it was known as the “found-footage” tornado movie, and yes, the tornado scenes really are that seemless. When you are taken alllllll the way the funnel of one these suckers, and then come crashing down, you’ll feel like you’re on a roller coaster.

But only a movie this dumb can actually drum up romance between intense bouts of almost-dying. Twice. When the film pits twister vs people, you sometimes wonder if you shouldn’t just root for the damn tornado, especially when two doofuses looking for Youtube fame continually pop up in what I can only assume is a bid for comic relief, just minus the comedy, and the relief. The plot basically consists of “Oh no, here comes another one!” and the second the wind dies down, the film just flops around like a fish out of water.