The Imitation Game (2014)

Nominee

Communication in its most basic form is an interaction between two beings, one conferring an idea and the other, at the very least, perceiving it. However, as we soiree into more complex concepts we must engage in different communicative means to help convey our meaning. Yet, no matter how we encode the information the interaction cannot be deemed successful until it has been processed by the receiving party. In the instance of film with its many modes of story telling it is often difficult to find the right artistic balance to bring together all the parts for an audience. Where should the weight of the message be placed? The narrative structure? The cinematography? In the case of the Imitation Game they beautifully placed the message in the hands of the actors,  while presenting the facts of the story with brilliant simplicity. Which is the prefect way to approach the story of Alan Turing, the man who broke the greatest code ever written but struggled with basic human interaction. 

The story of Alan Turing is an important one that holds an incredible amount of current relevance. His story is told in three time frames: his first experiences with cryptology and love as a young school boy, his code breaking work during World War II, and his brutal conviction for his homosexuality in the 1950's. Each of these plotlines depicts Turing's confusion on how to communicate with his peers although he shows an incomparable aptitude for breaking codes. It was his outsider vantage point that allowed him to believe the impossible: that he could create a machine that could analyze the encrypted words of the Nazis. This story is riddled with thematic elemants from his persecution for his sexual orientation, to the moral dynamics of breaking Engima, the film could have easily been bogged down by overt drama and weighty visuals, but it wasn't. 

The cinematography is classic clean-cut invisible story telling which is much more difficult than most would assume. Leaving the challenge of grappling with the content to the actors and writers. Benedict Cumberbatch has given one of the best performances of the year as Turing. His Turing was emotional but not overstated, a loner but not unsympathetic. While Keira Knightley as Joan Clarke, the only woman on the code breaking team, foils his character well by guiding him through the maze of society. The two have great chemistry and really are the coehesion that holds the whole film together. 

The writing was for the most part engaging, giving life to the characters and weaving the story in a way that made sense. I will say some of the dialogue gets a little cheesy, i.e. "Sometimes it is the people no one imagines anything of who do the things that no one can imagine." It's a lovely sentiment and it's nice when it recurs once...but saying it three times? Whoa down there, Nelly.

Overall: Sometimes it takes the most simplistic approach to successfully convey the most intricate ideas. Some may find this film basic, I find it well executed with the kind of narrative that begs to be told, and needs to be heard. Cumberbatch has given Turing a chance to finally be valued for his work, and he deserves it. You have my attention. Happy Watching! 

Watching the Small Screen

I have been getting requests for quite some time now to do a post on my favorite TV shows. I assure you it has not taken me this long due to some silver screen snobbery, (on the contrary I think the competition between the two media formats push each other to improve. We would not have widescreen and color without it!) What was holding me back was my inability to come up with a definitive ranking  that was truly representative of each program. There were just to many factors. So in no particular order, here are some of my favorite shows!

Breaking Bad (2008-2013)
Alright I lied, I said no particular order and then I put Breaking Bad first on purpose. But, can you blame me? The level of character complexity they achieved here is bar none. It was maddening how perfectly you would love a character and then hate them sometimes within minutes. I consider it a privilege to have watched Bryan Cranston's descent, it was some of the best acting ever witnessed on television, and it was complimented by an incredible team of fellow actors, writers, directors, and producers. Flawless from beginning to end, they told the story of Walter White the chemistry teacher turned kingpin, and to that I say: Look on his works, ye Mighty, and despair.

Arrested Development (2003-2006, 2013)
This dysfunctional, fraudulent and questionably incestuous family just cannot negotiate reality and as a result they are hysterical. The original episodes are built on the best (or perhaps the worst) inside jokes with an extra helping of understated sarcasm which made it an instant cult classic. Perhaps one of the greatest mistakes in TV history was it's preemptive cancellation. I will say the Netflix reboot is not awful, but it is not quite as strong as the first seasons. If anything just watch it so you can say: THERE IS ALWAYS MONEY IN THE BANANA STAND!, and know what you are talking about.

How I Met Your Mother (2005-2014)
The latest of the classic twenty somethings in New York sitcom format what HIMYM brought to the table was a refreshing narrative structure, and it's own glossary of phrases. From the 'Slap Bet' to 'the blitz' these jokes stuck with you because they were relatable, and so were the characters.  I know the ending did not live up to the rest of the show, but overall it was still a breath of fresh air. It was legen-wait for it and I promise I won't put cheesy references in all of these reviews but for this one I can't help it...dary.

The Sopranos (1999-2007)
The original TV anti-hero, Tony Soprano is a psychopath and it is because of this that he raised the standard of television. No one would ever question after the Sopranos if TV could hold it's own against film in quality.  The dialogue between Gandolfini and Falco is some of the best achieved realism on camera. Which is well contrasted by the surrealism they achieve in the exploration of Tony's subconscious. Admittedly I am currently in Season 6, Part 1 so I have not seen the famed and much maligned ending yet. Irregardless Tony paved the road for more dynamic character work, and this Jersey Italian film buff is enjoying the ride.

The Big Bang Theory (2007-)
What this delightful posse of geniuses, and one girl next door provides is a humorous scenario to explore: 1.) an endlessly entertaining subculture, and 2.) our universal struggle for communication. Watching Sheldon Cooper, a theoretical physicist, and his gang of friends attempt to comprehend mainstream society I have to laugh because I have been there. Jim Parsons is a joy to watch, and for all lovers of fantasy and sci-fi the references are killer. I will say the most recent episodes have not been up to par, (some of the humor has been more mean spirited), but on the whole it is certainly worth the watch.

House M.D. (2004-2012)
When I grow up if I am half as cool as Hugh Laurie I will be okay with that. This pill popping narcissistic curmudgeon that he created revitalized the medical genre with every tightly written witticism he uttered. His diagnostic cases were always intriguing and were used to explore greater moral dilemmas. In all honesty, the last season was rather weak, with the character of Lisa Cuddy missing, the original Dean of Medicine at Princeton-Plainsboro Hosptial, the power play is just not as exciting. But we had to have House and Wilson's last hurrah, and Laurie makes it worth your while.

Game Of Thrones (2011-)
There is nothing I appreciate more than full attention to detail, and when undertaking the task of bringing to life George R.R. Martin's Westeros that is no small feat, but HBO has succeeded. With the incredible casting of these truly dimensional characters (special shout out to Peter Dinklage! Impeccable.), the power struggle for the throne is visually brutal and enthralling. Each kingdom has been beautifully developed into reality with unifying aesthetics that rival those of the Lord of the Rings creative teams. So whether you are rooting for Dany and her dragons, or are one of those crazy people who actually like the Lannisters, you simply have to keep watching. P.S. Go read the books, too!! They were first and they are great!

30 Rock (2006-2013)
Tina Fey is another marvel of mankind. Her self-reflexive brainchild about filming a live TV program is creative and unforgiving in it's approach. Nothing is too sacred to joke about and these caricatures of people in the industry are able to run with it. Fey leads the cast through ridiculous antics which will make you laugh outright. Two things: some of the jokes are relevant to the time they were written in so I worry some references will be lost in a while (Aka Watch it now!), and it takes the show a couple of episodes to really find its niche, but after it does you will love it all the more.

American Horror Story (2011-)
This is by far the most graphic and unrelenting program to ever hit television, and for those who are not weak of heart it's a great miniseries to explore. Where I think they succeed beyond a measure of a doubt is creating atmosphere. I am not one who is usually effected by horror, but their imagery and pacing creates a fiction that I can buy into. And because it is a miniseries they are able to explore new venues and characters each season. If anything they do sometimes jump the shark with their all in approach. (i.e. Season 2: They were already in an asylum did they really need to throw in aliens?) Yet, I can forgive them because their version of horror is both sexy and brutal, all of which is mesmerizing.

Gilmore Girls (2000-2007)
Alright, I will confess I am ever so slightly embarrassed by this one so I may sound a tiny bit defensive. I normally would never go for something that is so chick-flicky, but what we have here is not just a mother/daughter duo struggling to find their significant others. What this show truly is is a feminist manifesto. (Too much?) But really now, Lorelai Gilmore is a strong intelligent single mother who has raised a great daughter, Rory, without the help of anyone. Making not one, but two female protagonists that are allowed to be self-sufficient and feminine without apology, which is awesome. Also I must applaud the writers, Lorelai's crack fire wit is what has kept me watching in all those moments of doubt. So haters are going to hate, but I am going to keep watching.

Downton Abbey (2010-)
Downton Abbey is just a great time period story. As the British aristocracy attempts to find its footing in the early 1900's they are met with historical circumstance, in addition to the normal conundrums of love and family. The Crawley's and their household are just as susceptible to change and they must either embrace it or become obsolete. It includes a huge ensemble cast with stand out, Maggie Smith, she is the perfect overly opinionated grandmother who can say anything she wants and will. While the two spheres of existence on the Downton estate, namely the servants vs. the family, provide a stark contrast to explore societal mobility. All the while you get to enjoy the British being, well, wonderfully British.

Modern Family (2009-)
Modern Family has miraculously taken the most classic topic, family, and made it so comical that it somehow resembles reality. Its circumstantial humor coupled with the confessional format gives the watcher an all access pass to the characters that makes them all the more endearing. From Phil Dumphy the classic goofy Dad to Gloria the Colombian bombshell wife who no one should mess with, there is someone for every viewer to relate to. It has won the Emmy for comedy five years in a row, and with it's willingness to explore new content it, quite frankly, deserves it.

House of Cards (2013-)
When attempting to describe Frank Underwood the first word that comes to mind is ruthless. He is a man with a vision of great power, and he knows how to play the game of politics and media to get there. This show is dark, it's dirty, it's provocative and it's so well shot. Watching Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright navigate the intricacies of their political position is a pleasure. Initially, I was not fond of Spacey breaking the fourth wall, it is a film approach that seems better suited for comedy, but because the writing of these moments is so indulgent it has definitely grown on me. Netflix can certainly hang with the big boys.

Orange is the New Black (2013-)
While I am on the topic of Netflix, I would be amiss without mentioning Orange is the New Black. While the show is funny, and the characters are memorable to say the least, it is also able to highlight bureaucratic idiosyncrasies of the prison system, and engage in broader societal topics. I am so glad a show with strong LGBT, and gender equality themes has exploded in popularity. My one great qualm is that I actually cannot stand the main character, Piper Chapman, she is rather needy and entitled. But she is starting to transform, and the rest of the inmates are certainly fun to watch.

Everybody Loves Raymond (1996-2005)
Are you from a rather loud, sometimes demanding family with a lovable and quirky cast of characters? If yes, then here is a sitcom you can sympathize with. The writing on this show was not wildly original, but what made it stand out for me was the comedic timing of the actors, especially Peter Boyle, and Doris Roberts as Raymond's ever present parents. They are both veterans of the screen and it showed. It was also one of the first 'adult' shows I remember being allowed to watch so perhaps that adds to the allure for me, but either way I still enjoy it whenever its on.

Bones (2005-)
This is by far my guiltiest pleasure on this list. I will fully admit that the writing is not great and the main reason I started watching it was that I thought David Boreanaz was hot. I am including it here because I feel like everyone needs that go to show that it doesn't matter how much you have missed, you can just jump back in. So many shows nowadays expect you to have seen all of the episodes, which is extremely time consuming, but that is not a requirement here. I also really enjoy the varied approach Bones takes to the crime genre with its use of forensic anthropology. And I'll take a strong female lead any day! So thanks, Emily Deschanel.

New Girl (2011-)
I am now shamelessly segueing from one Deschanel to the other, but Zooey's New Girl is deliciously quirky and I love it because this kind of weird is my kind of weird. These guys seem to speak to each other in their own  language on their own wavelength, but still attempt to thrive in the real world.  To some it may seem totally out there, but to me it reminds me directly of my college apartment mates. So between the originality of writing and my nostalgia I thoroughly enjoy this show. As a note: even if you haven't seen the show you should definitely play The True American Drinking Game, you throw things, you shout patriot pharses, you climb furniture, and you drink beer. What more could you want?


To Wrap Just a couple Lists!

Some other shows I want to list but got to lazy to talk about at length:

Cheers, I Love Lucy, Happy Days, M*A*S*H, and Lost.

Shows on my to watch list (In case you think I am a moron for missing one of these):

Friends, Boardwalk Empire, Fargo, True Detective, West Wing, The Wire, Masters of Sex, Louie, and Seinfeld

And as always, Happy Watching!

Snapshots 3

The extremely hazardous part of watching all the nominees for Best Picture is you end up watching a lot of losers. And while some are just as good as the winner, others are not. This round up was a little rough to say the least.

Children of a Lesser God (1986)
Nominee
A film that has extreme societal importance because it highlights the lifestyle of a marginalized group, namely, the deaf. It gave Marlee Matlin, the role of a lifetime and she absolutely delivered. However, where the film really suffered was, ironically, the sound. The dialogue in this film was stilted and felt at times illogical.  And in lieu of William Hurt repeating everything Matlin was signing they should have subtitled her. Also, if you ever meet the person that thought synthesizers in movie soundtracks were a good idea, please smack them for me.
2/5 Stars 

Love is a Many-Splendored Thing (1955)
Nominee
This movie tries to do exactly two things, and fails at both. As a love story it fails because Jones and Holden hated each other, and their lack of chemistry is visible on screen. It also tried to be socially progressive by highlighting how Jones character is 'Eurasian', but what was an attempt at cultural commentary now verges on being racial insensitive. Moral of the story: when filming a movie about someone of a particular race, find a person of that race to play the part.
   1/5 Stars

Nicholas and Alexandra (1971)
Nominee
Alas, another movie that had great potential but fell short. The story of the fall of the Romanovs is very dramatic, full of political volatility, strange personal problems, and war. The worst thing they could have done to it was to make these characters flat, and that is exactly what they did...for three hours. But at least they were beautifully costumed while doing so.  Also I think the film struggled because it was filmed at the end of the 'classical epic' period, so the style was going out, and the few artsy moments they threw in to update the film felt disjointed. Yet, there is some credit due for the final scene of the assassination. It is extremely well constructed, and builds incredible suspense.
2/5 Stars

Seven Brides for Seven Brothers (1954)
Nominee
Oddly, my favorite of this group. However, it was completely idiotic. Based on the Roman myth of the Sabine, it takes place in the Colorado mountains, and  tells the story of seven brothers who kidnap women to be their wives  This plot is incredibly objectifying and sexist, but I must say the music was very enjoyable while the dancing was innovative and wonderful to watch. So basically this film is causing me great inner turmoil, my intellectual feminist half votes nay, but my musical theater      appreciating half says yay.
   2.5/5 Stars

Born on the Fourth of July (1989)

Nominee

Perhaps my greatest error was watching this film so soon after The Thin Red Line, because it fell very short by comparison. The predominant issue being a complete lack of subtlety throughout the technical aspects coupled by some of the most egregious over acting I think has ever been displayed. The moral root of this story was not complex enough for the heavy handedness they were wielding and I for one feel like I have been mauled in the face by a self righteous sledgehammer for two and a half hours. 

The story here is straightforward and is based on the real life of Ron Kovic, a Vietnam veteran who initially believes in the cause but ultimately became disenchanted by it. This is, indeed, a story worth telling but the script writing completely missed the mark here. Great films show most of their content visually and leave the interpretation in the hands of the audience, mediocre films do a little too much telling in the dialogue, and in this instance we were told, and told, and told again why we were watching and I was bored. Meanwhile the actual character arc of Kovic was stilted by the time lapses of the plot. The narrative jumped to and from random years and locations and by doing this the audience did not actually get to see Kovic's descent but rather the final product making him a rather unbelievable protagonist. 

However, it is not just the blatancy of the script writing that is at fault because this was flawed as much in the show as it was in the tell.  The cinematography was crippling to the pace of this film, Oliver Stone and company abused the slow motion to no end. The imagery was at times very well constructed but because the nature of the film was already so exposed some of these prolonged images just came off as excessive and cheesy. 

Yet, if I am really handing out the award for excessive cheesiness, Mr. Cruise has won with flying colors. A much better actor might have been able to tone down the dialogue's lack of forbearance, but instead he basically yelled the entire time. Making what I believe should have been some of the emotional climaxes of the film comical (i.e.  The don't shout penis conversation, and his desert fight with Dafoe). Needless to say,  if I wanted to be screamed at by Tom Cruise I would go seek him out in person. 

Overall: The one saving grace of this film was John Williams' soundtrack, at least I could close my eyes and listen to a soaring score when all else failed. (That is if I could hear it over Tom Cruise's bellowing.) Quite frankly I found this film insulting, Vietnam is an extremely dynamic topic but this was dumbed down beyond recognition. Which demonstrates a complete lack of faith in any intelligence of the viewership.  Go watch Apocalypse Now instead. 

Snapshots 2

Quiet Man (1952)
Nominee
This film is 50% Irish charm, and 50% dated misogyny that manifests in domestic violence. The nostalgia for pastoral Ireland I appreciate, the emotional and physical abuse Maureen O'Hara experiences not so much. It was extremely uncomfortable to watch at times. Sorry John Wayne, no dice.
1/5 Stars

Witness for the Prosecution (1957)
Nominee
A really well done trial film! Charles Laughton carries the story as the sharp-witted heavily viced defense attorney. I will say the pacing is rather bizarre with a majority of plot taking place at the very end. However, It made for a good mystery overall.
3/5 Stars

Twelve O'Clock High (1949)
Nominee
The plot is mostly slow air force bureaucracy discussions. Gregory Peck's character arc was just not there cheapening his breakdown. However, the one battle scene with actual war footage was quite good.
2/5 Stars

Elizabeth (1998)
Nominee
Cate Blanchett for the win! Her Elizabeth goes from delicate youth to empowered Queen seamlessly. While the film could be stronger in some plot details, and is at times heavy handed in its religious allegories it was overall a good watch.
3.5/5 Stars 

I am standing on my desk...

I am standing on my desk because I was compelled to by the beauty and joy that Robin Williams saw in this world, and in turn shared with us. A man of rapid fire humor, and incredible emotional access. He felt like a friend because he was one. And he shared every corner of himself with us.

I am standing on my desk because the rhetoric on mental illness needs to change. No one should feel so lost that they suffer in silence. No one should feel so ashamed that they leave us before their time. No one should feel so alone that they are suffocated by the guilt they feel because they can't bring themselves to be happy.

I am standing on my desk, because I know there is enough love in this world to end suicide. We just need to access it. Carpe Diem. 

Thin Red Line (1998)

Nominee

When I first became aware that Terrence Malick had made a war film I was certain that the message would be clear: the ever enduring Man vs. Nature. The viewer was going to be led along through a visually stunning three hour escapade of how war is destroying our humanity, intercut with vibrant images of animal life and landscapes. And besides the visual presence of a number of birds and mountainsides, I could not have been more egregiously mistaken.

I want to make clear that I do not mean that Malick celebrates war, for that would also be a misrepresentation of the film's core. What he achieves instead is the visual implication that war in and of itself is part of our nature, but that is precisely what makes it all the more grotesque. For as one solider states in a very Malickian (I can make up words right? My blog, my rules.) manner: "What's this war in the heart of nature? Why does nature vie with itself? The land contend with the sea? Is there an avenging power in nature? Not one power, but two?" Nature is constantly at war, and it can be both beautiful and savage. 

This violence is at the heart of nature itself, but that does not mean that that truth identically manifests itself in every individual. This is expertly written as well as performed by a truly impressive ensemble cast. Sean Penn, Adrien Brody, John Cusack, Woody Harrelson, and Nick Nolte just to name a few present to us the many faces innate violence forms. Whether it the previously AWOL soldier who is able to suppress this instinct, or the high ranking General who's self worth is tied to it, these actors portray every nuanance in this spectrum. 

Almost needless to say that this film successfully couples the brutality of war with the visually intoxicating syntax that Malick has mastered. Full of light, and animal life he is able to establish an awe inspiring, almost dreamlike state. I will mention that some find Malick's existential musings sometimes repetitive throughout his work, but I find it rather intriguing that he has dedicated his craft to the questioning of humanity, and his skill with a camera wins him that right. For after all, he will keep trying to find an answer, and may never be satisfied.

Overall: A war film unlike any other. Malick dares to question the existence of war with heightened grace, and vitality. His films ebb and flow with their own pulse. You just need to be willing to go for the expressive ride. Happy Watching! 

Snapshots

Summer laziness has ensued...this is the result. 1-2-3-GO!

Quiz Show (1994)
Nominee
A rather typical narrative film with a rather non-compelling moral conundrum at it's core. The film overall does a good job of telling the story, but I am just not sure the story was all that worth telling. I will say perhaps that it will have you dubiously questioning TV trivia shows. (I'm looking at you, Trebek.)
2/5 Stars

Deliverance (1972)
Nominee
When man is submerged in nature the call to survival becomes overwhelming, but rationality, the very thing that usually (hopefully) separates us from animal instinct takes a back seat. This film iterates this notion in a distinctive and direct fashion. A film not soon forgotten, with a cast that lives up to their credentials.
3.5/5 Stars

Jezebel (1938)
Nominee
Bette Davis is certainly one of Hollywood's greatest Divas, and she earns that right because she is compelling in every performance. She carries this film as its leading southern Belle, and although it is, rightfully, outdone by Gone With the Wind the following year. This film is still worth a watch for Davis' performance alone.
3.5/5 Stars

Wuthering Heights (1939)
Nominee, Original AFI Top 100: 73
A classic Gothic Novel well served by the eerie and melodramatic tone of film from the 1930's. In all honesty I thought I was in for it starting this film, but instead I was pleasantly humbled by how much I enjoyed it. Olivier does Heathcliff justice with all the erratic romantic vulnerability he deserves.
4/5 Stars

Life is Beautiful (1998)

Nominee

The courage that is necessary to remain optimistic in the face of adversity is almost unfathomable. But perhaps what is even more scarce are those individuals for whom optimism is not a choice, but rather innate. It is not an option they fight to maintain, it is their reality. It is the lifeline by which they perceive their entire world. I am convinced, after seeing this film, that Roberto Benigni is one of those rare persons who has the ability to infuse joy into everything he does. And in the case of this film, he has the audacity to take the Holocaust as his backdrop, and repossess it to tell a story of unquestionable love. 

Guido Orefice (Benigni) is a sharp witted, charismatic waiter who is so in-tune with his surroundings it seems some greater force is looking out for him at all times. And as he woos a local beauty, Dora, (Nicoletta Braschi) with his unparalleled charm, (Buon Giorno, Principessa!) she is taken and the two create a simple and peaceful life together. Yet when the Nazis rise to power and their family becomes incarcerated in a concentration camp, Guido does everything to shield his son, Joshua (Giorgio Cantarini) from the truth of their situation. He risks everything to make his son still see the best in where they are. 

This film has been at times criticized for being distasteful. Some consider placing humor on such a horrific event as the Holocaust irreverent. I would however argue that the film takes away  hatred and replaces it with beauty, which is precisely the way to combat evil in this world. We must fill the malice and prejudice full of love until they explode into oblivion. 

This film is incredibly written, and so honestly acted with ingenuity. Benigni is nothing short of a triumph, Egbert says he was born to play this part, and he was so very right. While Cantarini shows emotional poise beyond his years, and Braschi demonstrates strength in her femininity.  

Overall: This may be one of the most effecting and poignant films I have ever seen. It is almost a fusion of the brutality of Italian Neo-realism, and the comedy of Classical Hollywood. The film itself has a pulse that you simply cannot ignore, which brings such a vitality to its message.  It may be cheesy to say, but I am going to anyways, it truly shows that life is beautiful. Happy Watching! 

P.S. You can see that Benigini is the real deal. He lives in absolute happiness:

Lilies of the Field (1963)

Nominee

I think one of the most distinguishing factors in any one person's identity is their sense of humor, and try as Hollywood might to discover a universal formula to win over our hearts, and with it our laughs, they cannot seem to get us all to agree. However, there is one thing that almost all comedy shares and it is the celebration of the flaws of the human condition. Now the best way to win me over is to couple this notion with great realist characters, sharp dialogue, and honest moments that are both humorous and poignant. And in the case of Lilies of the Field I found my favorite formula.

This very human story relays the tale of a traveling African American handyman, who happens upon a group of impoverished German nuns who believe that he was sent to help them build a chapel. And as Homer Smith, (Sidney Poitier) becomes more and more involved with the affairs of the sisters, specifically the whims of the highly persuasive and staunch Mother Maria Marthe (Lilia Skala) their two worlds collide with all sorts of humor and joy.

Poitier established himself in this film, and became the first African American to win the Academy Award for  Best Leading Actor, an award he unquestionably earned with this performance. While Skala provides the perfect foil in this rather unlikely friendship.

Overall: A truly heartwarming story that was performed to perfection and that demonstrates the vitality of friendship even in the face of incredible circumstance. These characters are flawed and because of that they are alive. Not to mention it is only 90 minutes! (I'm in love). Happy Watching!

Spellbound (1945)

Nominee

When I think of Alfred Hitchcock I think of Rear Window, Psycho, Vertigo, The Rope, North by Northwest, and any number of other prolific films. So you can imagine my surprise when I pulled this one off the shelf and was blindsided by his name stretching  across the cover, along with those of the beloved Ingrid Bergman and Gregory Peck. Why had I not heard of this film? Does it lack something that gave the others longevity?

Well after viewing the film two things were made very clear to me: 1.) This is truly a hidden gem, and 2.) It is innately flawed in a number of ways that interfere with its status as a Hitchcock great. It is this dichotomy, perhaps, that makes the film so compelling. 

The film tells of a psychoanalyst, (Ingird Bergman), who falls for a man, (Gregory Peck), who is accused of murder and suffering from amnesia. This risky love story unfolds with perfected suspense, and pulsating energy up until the final frame with solid performances from these enduring costars. Yet where the film looses some weight is in its rather heavy handed use of dated psychology, and its blatant sexism. 

The film bases its entire core on the very early work of Freud, and although psychology still acknowledges his dedication to the field, much of what he said no longer holds water. Not to mention there is much conjecture involved in the application of his findings, which ends up undermining some major plot points in this film. In addition, you can only watch Bergman get hit on so many times by various co-workers, and strangers before it grows a little tiresome. 

Yet even taking these things into account, what remains is still worth lauding. It is still shot with Hitchcock's incredible subjectivity. It's still keeps you holding on until the end. And it even has something that none of his other films have: collaboration with Salvador Dali. Because, lets face it, when making a film revolving around dream psychology it if best to bring in the resident surrealist genius, and the result is remarkable.  

Overall: I almost see this film as a rough draft for Psycho, it's not quite as good because it's a little too direct with some of its content, but practice makes perfect. And what Spellbound does have is one of the most memorable artistic collaborations I have ever seen, along with solid performances and great cinematography. Definitely worth a viewing. Happy Watching! 

A Passage to India (1984)

Nominee

Even David Lean, the director who brought such cinematic classics to the screen such as Bridge on the River Kwai and Lawrence of Arabia, is not able to withstand the curse that is eighties cinema. This film based on the E.M. Foster's novel by the same name may attempt to grapple with the some of the socio-political, and racially important topics of a specific era, but fails to truly tell a compelling story based on a number of failed components of the film.

For starters, Miss Quested, the woman who charges a local Indian man for supposedly sexually assaulting her, is a completely baffling character. Perhaps it is my own lack of empathy towards people who are portrayed as wispy and confused, but she was utterly frustrating due to her idiocy throughout. She causes so much trouble for no apparent reason besides that she is 'overwhelmed' by being in a foreign land. 

In addition, the editing of the entire film was stilted and repetitive. It got to the point where I was counting down to the next shot and hitting it exactly every time. This kind of comfortable formula is tiresome, particularly in an almost three hour film. 

The acting was also rather melodramatic, with the exception of Peggy Ashcroft, who was quite compelling as one of few level headed characters in the whole story. And although  I love Alec Guinness, this now dated performance reads as rather insensitive. You cannot tell me they could not find an Indian actor to play Professor Godbole, especially in a story that is about British/Indian tensions.

Overall: I think Lean may have hoped this to be another sweeping exploration of place such as Lawrence of Arabia or Doctor Zhivago, but ultimately it just did not have the story to support the visuals. It was just a rather long, awkward film. We're going to treat this like Godfather III, and pretend this did not happen. So go watch Lean's other work instead! Happy Watching!

Atlantic City (1981)

Nominee

Now here is a film that finds its footing in the exploration of person and place, as opposed to a narrative. We do not descend upon this New Jersey beach city to be told a story, but instead discover the aging gangsters, and young dreamers that make up this city in transition. And as the city struggles to justify the old and the new, so do the characters stumble through their awkward interactions.

Burt Lancaster plays Lou Pascal a former Mob bodyguard who finds himself living with just the memories of times past and regrets that he never achieved anything to make his mark. Living next to him in his apartment complex is Sally Matthews, played by Susan Sarandon, who has come to Atlantic City to get away from her past, but her family and their problems catch up to her. Their two lives become entangled and as their confusing relationship unfolds a basic human fact is discovered: People in transition are in constant motion, and will leave as fast as they come. While those who have remained stationary for so long, become synonymous with place. 

Overall: Both Lancaster, and Sarandon do a solid job in the film. And although it's perhaps not a great film, it is a a rather nice exploration of innately human dynamics. Not a bad watch. 

Towering Inferno (1974)

Nominee

It has been almost a year since I last posted and in that time I successfully completed my undergrad! While I am looking forward to new exciting things I am so very happy to once again have some time to watch films for pure enjoyment.

I think two things I value most in great films are their timelessness and exceptional special effects. However these two forces are constantly at odds with each other, for although the effects may have been extraordinary for their time they later have a tendency to date the film. I mean, even films from a decade ago now look, well, old. Don't get me wrong films can overcome this dating issue by their sheer impact on the industry or cultural scope. (Think King Kong (1933) or Lord of the Rings) However, this particular film does not achieve that, which is unfortunate because it had a lot of potential.

Take for instance the cast: Paul Newman, Steve McQueen, Faye Dunaway, William Holden, and Fred Astaire, just to name a few. I was floored when I saw this line up by the sheer magnitude of what they could accomplish. Not to mention the film is scored by John Williams! Perhaps all this good karma was negated by the suspicious number of wife murders also in the cast (OJ Simpson and Robert Wagner, I am looking at you). But more likely it probably was the horrible script writing, coupled with the a 165 minute run time.

Ultimately, the film turns into a nearly three hour advertisement for what not to do in a fire while in a skyscraper. The dialogue is stilted and underdeveloped making the characters, well, stilted and underdeveloped. And when these flat melodramatic characters haven't garnered your empathy their deaths end up laughable.

I do applaud the film for the spectacle it must have been for the time, but this was the same year as Godfather: Part II, and Chinatown, I expect complexity and intriguing plot lines.

Overall: As my sister said: "This film could probably be used in schools as a prolonged advertisement for fire safety." But, as long as you know to stop, drop and roll, and that you are supposed to leave a building when the fire chief tells you, feel free to skip this one.

The Butler (2013)

                Any medium of expression may be used to provide a venue for catharsis of the collective imagination. Our nation's history, although proud, is also riddled with fading memories of extreme violence and segregation, making it of the utmost importance that these topics are engaged in the mainstream media today so that the necessary discussions are neither lost nor forgotten. Lee Daniel's The Butler takes on the momentous task of grappling with recent black history through the eyes of Cecil Gaines, a man who serves on the White House Staff through many a presidency, and his son Louise, who joins various black empowerment movements against the counsel of his father.

The film accomplishes a number of things worth lauding, but ultimately comes up a little short. The positive aspects can be seen in the acting of this ensemble cast, the reflection of the themes in the editing, and the honest brutality with which it addresses its content. With Oprah reemerging into film, and names like Forest Whitaker, Terrence Howard, Vanessa Redgrave, Cuba Gooding, Jr., Lenny Kravitz, Robin Williams, Alan Rickman, and Jane Fonda,  the viewer expects skillful performances, and they are delivered. Whitaker gives us Cecil with a strength and subtlety that makes him incredibly accessible to the audience, which is precisely what he needs to be. The film rides on our understanding how fragile his circumstances are: he serves his country faithfully, but his country does not serve him. This is echoed visually through crosscutting throughout the film, as the imagery frequently juxtaposes Cecil and his son. In one instance, Cecil sets the table for a White House reception, while his son is abused at a diner for refusing to sit in the section designated for blacks.  This cruelty, particularly when interlaced with the refinement of life in the White House, is quite striking, as is much of the imagery throughout the film of the violence that was instigated against the African American community. Daniels has shown in both this film and his 2009 film, Precious, that he is willing to push the limits of his audience to provoke real emotions in them.

Yet, the film was also not without its shortcomings. For one, it suffers from the classic issues faced by all bio pics. The screenplay was, overall, not exceptional. Relaying just the necessary details, it merely results in predictability and falls quickly into an easily identifiable narrative pattern. In addition, the way the movie depicted the presidencies seemed rather gimmicky. Feeling akin to  Forrest Gump, the presidents are only there to place time period, in essence becoming somewhat superfluous to the actual plot. Which in turn makes the film feel unnecessarily long.

Overall: I applaud the film for attempting to engage an important topic through extraordinary circumstances. However, the writing just did not match the magnitude of the film itself, and the shots  were formulaic to the bio pic genre. This is a film that needed to be made but was not groundbreaking in its approach. This story deserves to transcend into historical importance but this film may not have been the vehicle for it.