Movie quiz

1) Best Movie of 2010
So far "True Grit"

2) Second-favorite Roman Polanski Movie
"Chinatown", #1 "Repulsion"

3) Jason Statham or Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson
I like The Rock

4) Favorite movie that could be classified as a genre hybrid
"Two-Lane Blacktop" as existential road/minimalist/chase movie

5) How important is foreknowledge of a film’s production history? Should it factor into one’s reaction to a film? The finished product should be all that should matter.

6) William Powell & Myrna Loy or Cary Grant & Irene Dunne
William Powell and Myrna Loy

7) Best Actor of 2010
Matt Damon

8) Most important lesson learned from the past decade of watching movies
Movies have the power to touch on any type of artform

9) Last movie seen (DVD/Blu-ray/theater)
DVD: "El Cid" Theater: "Tron"

10) Most appropriate punishment for director Tom Six
I don't know who that is

11) Best under-the-radar movie almost no one else has had the chance to see
"In Bruges"

12) Sheree North or Angie Dickinson
Angie Dickinson

13) Favorite nakedly autobiographical movie
"Contempt"

14) Movie which best evokes a specific real-life place
Woody Allen's "Manhattan"

15) Best Director of 2010
So far The Coen Brothers

16) Second-favorite Farrelly Brothers Movie
"Fever Pitch"

17) Favorite holiday movie
"It's a Wonderful Life"

18) Best Actress of 2010
Hailee Steinfeld so far

19) Joe Don Baker or Bo Svenson
Joe Don Baker

20) Of those notable figures in the world of the movies who died in 2010, name the one you’ll miss the most
Leslie Nielson

21) Think of a movie with a notable musical score and describe what it might feel like without that accompaniment. "2001" it wouldn't have that extra excitement that the music brings. I can't imagine those ships docking without that classical music.

22) Best Screenplay of 2010
"The Social Network"

23) Movie You Feel Most Evangelistic About Right Now
"True Grit"

24) Worst/funniest movie accent ever
Kevin Costner in Thirteen Days

25) Best Cinematography of 2010
"True Grit"

26) Olivia Wilde or Gemma Arterton
Olivia Wilde

27) Name the three best movies you saw for the first time in 2010 (Thanks, Larry!)
"Summer Hours", "Before Sunset","Eraserhead" I'm probably missing something.

28) Best romantic movie couple of 2010
Not a year for romance in my opinion

29) Favorite shock/surprise ending
Of this year it was probably the end of "Shutter Island", but I couldn't choose overall.

30) Best cinematic reason to have stayed home and read a book in 2010
Summer movies.

31) Movies in 2011 could make me much happier if they’d only _______________
put an arthouse movie theatre closer to where I live.

The Philadelphia Story

Is there a more beloved,sacred genre in the annals of Hollywood cinema than the romantic comedy? Maybe sacred isn't the right word, try exploited. Romantic comedies have taken a beating over the years, lacking any sense of real romance or sincerity in favour of stupid humour and sometimes meanness. Romance was once a reason to go to the movies because they always made it better than it was in real life.

There was a time when romantic comedy was done well, its golden age came in the 1930s and early 40s. Usually slapstick was involved, but there was also a sophistication to it, this was mostly due to the clever screenwriters and directors, along with a charismatic cast.

One of the best examples of romantic comedy done absolutely right is "The Philadelphia Story". The film already boasts a trio of the biggest stars there ever was Cary Grant, Katherine Hepburn, and Jimmy Stewart. Although at the time Grant was really the only true bankable star, Stewart's star was rising after his breakthrough hit "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" the year before. Hepburn was dubbed "box office poison", she had done "The Philadelphia Story" on stage in New York and acquired the rights to it in hoping it would revive her career, it did in spades. Hepburn originally lobbied for Clark Gable and Spencer Tracey to be her co-stars, but how could you argue with Grant and Stewart as unworthy substitutes?

The story involves Hepburn's character Tracey Lords, a high class woman about to be married for the second time. Her last marriage was with Grant's character C.K. Dexter Haven, which ended very badly, and rumours of their violent relationship plays throughout the film.

On the eve of Tracey's wedding, Dexter has concocted a plan in which we think is a way to get back at his ex-bride. He hires reporters from a gossip magazine to do a story on her wedding, something Tracey and her family would frown on. These reporters are played by Stewart and Ruth Hussey. Stewart is Mike Connor, who's a real writer and hates working for the seedy magazine and its publisher. Hussy's Liz is a tough talking photographer in the same boat, yet they do the job anyway in order to eat.

It is soon revealed that Dexter's plans for the reporters is truly noble and he in fact still has strong feelings for Tracey, but in order for there to be happiness, both parties need to be taken down a peg.

"The Philadelphia Story" is a film about growing up a bit,and it's also about class systems. Both Tracey and Dexter come from the upper class, yet there is a certain dignity about them, they never pretend to be who they are, yet they later both admit to have made mistakes. Tracey's fiancee George comes from the lower class but worked his way up, but it is revealed he did it all for the wrong reasons. Then there are Mike and Liz who have known nothing but being in the working class, it seems they might be the most honest and decent all together, Mike and Tracey even share a brief romance and it is then we think she has to end up with him. But really in the end, it's really about who Katherine Hepburn will end up with, Cary Grant or Jimmy Stewart, and of course any cinephile who has an inkling on who these leading men are will know it can only end one way.

"The Philadelphia Story" is a romantic triangle, yet it's clever enough to see past the cliches, I'm not sure back then there was a cliche, since everything seemed so fresh, it must've been the later generations who used up all the ideas till they became dull and boring. Tracey's fiancee George is shown as a phony right off, everyone seems to know it but Tracey herself, the real triangle is between Dexter and Mike, yet neither of them are competitors at any moment, they even share a delightful scene where Mike comes to Dexter's door drunk, they both fall for the same women, but they always act like adults instead of fools.

I might just love "The Philadelphia Story" because of the stars who are in them, all of which show off just why they became stars. Dexter was just the kind of role for Cary Grant, I'm surprised Hepburn didn't want him for the part right away (The two made three other films prior to this). When Grant plays a role like this, it's hard to imagine anyone else filling those shoes, we sense his cheekiness, but also his bitterness and sorrow, Grant never had to grandstand for attention, the way he carried himself spoke volumes.

For Stewart, he never had another part like this, Stewart became America's everyman, which overshadowed his greatness as an actor. As Mike Connor, he's able to walk away with the film, his scenes where he is drunk are absolutely the funniest scenes in the film, and despite Mike's somewhat misguided direction in love, Stewart is still able to make him likable.

Then there is Hepburn, who tailor-made this film for her comeback, for me this is the Katherine Hepburn performance I think of, when I think of a Katherine Hepburn performance. Tracey like Hepburn is quite the modern woman, you can sense the firey nature in both these woman, you could swear they were the same woman. Hepburn made a habit of not feminizing herself too much, she never played a damsel in distress on purpose. Tracey is a woman who must discover that she does need saving by the right man.

Along with the three actors, the heart of the film comes from the sophisticated screenplay by David Ogden Stewart, it's one of those screenplays that can only exist in Hollywood, where the actors get to say such wonderful, romantic, and witty lines to eachother, that kind of spark is hard to come by these days. The film is quite talky, but when the lines are this good, and are being said by actors who can say them well, who can complain.

The film was also directed by George Cukor, a man known for women's films, he also had a long professional relationship with Hepburn. He made the original film "The Women", and made two great musicals "A Star is Born" with Judy Garland, and "My Fair Lady" with Audrey Hepburn. He has a way for sophistication in this film, it never becomes riotous funny, it has a heart, and Cukor knows when to play the humour without it going too far.

"The Philadelphia Story" remains a benchmark in the romantic comedy, it's as well known and loved as "It Happened One Night" or "His Girl Friday" from that same era, it reminds us exactly how well romance could be done in the movies, and how wonderful it could be made if there was great talent behind it.

Up

We're getting to the point where it's safe to say Pixar has made about as many animated masterpieces as the golden age of Disney. There's no doubt in my mind their films will be around long after this generation and the generation after that are long gone. As one critic said about Pixar, they make movies for everyone, they are crowd pleasers on the surface, yet they aren't afraid to tackle real human emotion. Think of their flag ship franchise "Toy Story" which deals with talking toys, yet in the three films they starred in, the one constant theme is a fear of abandonment, something we all must face. Also take "Wall-E", which deals with a romance between two robots, and gets to the same kind of pathos and sentiment usually seen in a Chaplin film.

To me the most powerful film of the Pixar label, and the one that enriches with repeat viewings is "Up". "Up" represents much of what I love seeing in movies, it's sweet, funny, sentimental, and full of adventure and unexpected moments. Pixar is known for all of these elements in their films, but with "Up" I think they reached the peak of that certain kind of storytelling which definitely struck a chord with me.

The heart of the story is about a promise between a couple who grow up as childhood sweethearts, and live a happily married life. The wife is seen as very outgoing, while the husband is the more stable easy going type. They both have a dream to some day go to South America to a place known as Paradise Falls. They try to save up for the trip, but things always come up such as car repairs or house repairs which delay their trip. When the husband tries to surprise his wife with tickets to go, she falls ill and dies. All of this happens within the first ten minutes of the film in a wonderful silent montage of the couple who spend an entire lifetime together.

The beginning of the adventure begins when the now 78 year old husband who's name is Carl decides to make his and his wife's dream come true by attaching a bunch of balloons to his house sailing him to Paradise Falls, it's a way to keep his promise. Carl doesn't see much of a future at home anyway after he is being forced into a retirement home, but what he doesn't expect to find is a young boy named Russel who is trying earn a badge for his wilderness explorer group. Russell comes to Carl's house one day, and mistakenly gets on board when the house flies away.

The two make it to Paradise Falls but on the wrong end of where Carl plans to land his house, so they must walk there. It is here where they run into a tall but lovable endangered bird, who is being hunted by a famous old Adventurer Carl used to admire as a boy. There are also a bunch of talking dogs who try to track the bird. That's right, they talk through a radio transmitter embedded in their collar, the most vocal and lovable is a misfit dog named Doug who isn't as mean as the others and soon joins Carl and Russell on their adventure.

The first thing to notice in "Up" as in all Pixar films is the use of color, when the balloons appear for the first time from Carl's house, it's an extraordinary sequence, "Up" is definitely one of the brightest films made in a long time, in fact the whole film has an irresistible cheery quality to it, even the title evokes the kind of mood you're supposed to get when watching this film.

What sets "Up" apart from other films of its kind is its use of an old man as a protagonist. Carl is the heart of this film and his love for his departed wife grounds it to a type of reality that we can relate to, it's because of this, the film can also incorporate talking dogs, and still be believable. There is also the relationship between Carl and Russell that is very touching. Neither character is a cliche of the usual cartoon canon, Carl is a widower and there is always a kind of sadness that comes with him, his house is a symbol of his past, something he must get behind him. Russel is a kid from a broken home, we learn in a very touching scene he doesn't have a father figure, yet he isn't depressed about it, he has a positive attitude, but we know he's probably hurting as well.

We can sense that where these two characters are coming from motivates their actions in the film which makes it all the more enjoyable. The film was directed and written by Pete Docter and Bob Peterson, who have created a wonderful Hollywood movie, it's ironic that the films made in Hollywood which have the most heart these days seem to be coming from animation departments. Perhaps because animation is able to open up to a world of wonder because it is all make believe, but Pixar seems to understand better than most, there must always be something behind that wonder to add any weight to it.

"Up" is a joyous film, it represents the best Hollywood has to offer these days of entertainment, it's a film that doesn't lose any of its magnificence for me no matter how many times I watch it, I have a feeling it will last long after I'm gone, and more and more people will discover it as they did with films like "Pinocchio" or "Bambi".

The Lady Vanishes

One of the things, movies can do so well is play with our expectations, it's so interesting as a viewer to not know what's going to happen yet. This is one of the reasons why Alfred Hitchcock is considered such a master of cinema, he toys with our emotions, sending a plot in one direction, when we thought it was going another. "The Lady Vanishes", one of Hitchcock's early masterpieces and surely one of his most purely entertaining films is an exercise on playing with our expectations.

"The Lady Vanishes" opens with a very light touch, it takes place in an over crowded hotel in Europe where we get the chance to meet all the major players of the film. At the beginning, we really aren't even sure who the main character is, or who the lady the title refers to is. The most prominent characters in the beginning are two British cricket fans (Nauten Wayne and Basil Radford) who are worried about missing the upcoming tournament. These men in fact are minor, but provide the best comic relief. There is also a man and a woman posing as a married couple but are carrying on a secret affair (Cecil Parker and Linden Travers). Finally we meet the romantic leads, they are Iris (Margaret Lockwood) and Gilbert (Michael Redgrave). Their story starts off as more or less a romantic comedy, he annoys her to no end, yet you realize the first moment they meet that they will fall in love.

There is also Miss Froy (Dame May Whitty) a sweet natured elderly women who Iris meets on the train back to Britain. Miss Froy is indeed the woman eluded to in the title, when she suddenly for no reason she becomes missing with Iris falls asleep. Throughout the majority of the rest of the movie, Iris is convinced Miss Froy is on the train, yet no one seems to have any recollection she is there. Gilbert of course helps her out, even though he is skeptical at first as well.

Other characters are introduced on the train as well, and Hitchcock was a master at casting people with villainous or treacherous faces, throughout Iris' search, we know something isn't quite right, yet it's hard to put our finger on it. Before the train, Miss Froy is seen outside her hotel room listening to a singer from outside her window, but the singer is seen killed, later, before the train, an attempt on her life is made. We are meant to feel what Iris feels while she is searching the train, we the audience have seen Miss Froy, yet everyone else is saying we haven't. Iris is accused by a doctor (Paul Lukas) that she is delusional, and we also feel it with her, Hitchcock plays with this sense of uncertainty for as long as he can, almost until we can't take it anymore, when will he answer this burning question?

"The Lady Vanishes" was made at the height of Hitchcock's success in England, two years after this film, he would go on to Hollywood and make "Rebecca", and the rest as they say is history. People have often argued that Hitchcock lost some of his charm when he left England, and his films were mostly about craft. I can understand what they mean, yet I disagree with them, his British films do have a certain sensibility, at times they are more playful and there is always that kind of wit you don't see in the American films, yet that is something I think Hitchcock always brought with him no matter what nation he worked under. Hitchcock might've grown stale in Britain, and Hollywood seemed to be suited more for his kind of storytelling, and it's a good thing too, since he pretty much changed the way American films were made afterwards.

"The Lady Vanishes" however remains terrific entertainment, it's the type of film Hitchcock made so well, blending genres such as comedy, mystery, and suspense so well, it actually does keep you guessing. "The Lady Vanishes" actually wasn't always the first film I thought of when I thought of Hitchcock, yet when I watch it again and again, it becomes more and more delightful, it depicts a master right before he would conquer the film world.

Universal Horror

Horror and cinema are a match made in heaven. It is said you can tell a good filmmaker if he's able to pull off a good horror film. In horror you have the basic elements of a dark atmospheric look, people screaming, and probably some blood and gore thrown into the mix.

Horror is almost as old as cinema, it's usually credited at the beginning with German expressionism. "The Cabinet a Dr. Caligari" was a benchmark of that era, which is commonly referred to as the first horror film. Then there is F.W. Murnau's "Nosferatu" in 1922, which is still the greatest realization of the "Dracula" legend.

Today, horror movies remains popular with new types of horror monsters invading the multiplexes. Some of these monsters are inspired, others are not. I usually tend to avoid new horror movies today, I sometimes feel like I respond to a different time, I don't like what people refer to as "torture porn", I couldn't sit through the first "Saw" movie, and I've avoided movies like "Hostel" or the remake of "These Hills Have Eyes". Maybe there is artistic merit to these movies, but I know I will live a happy life without seeing either of them.

Halloween is of course upon us , and this is usually the time to reflect on some the greatest horror films of all time, and this is something I'm always interested in, mostly because I love lists. Most movies that make these lists mostly stem from the late 60s-70s era like "The Exorcist", "Rosemary's Baby", "Jaws", or "Alien".

I admire those horror movies very much, but for me, the most fun horror movies come from the early Universal days most prominently the early 30s. These were the films directed by Todd Browning, James Whale, and Karl Freud, and starring people like Bela Lugosi, and Boris Karloff.

Movies like "Dracula" starring Lugosi, and "Frankenstein" starring Karloff remain special to me, I don't really find them scary, like most people of today who have perhaps seen too much, but I love them just the same. Like most early sound pictures, "Dracula" and "Frankenstein" suffer from a creaky and wooden type of look and acting style, yet that's part of their charm. The films themselves remain quite imaginative, and are also exercises in the art of camp.

"Frankenstein" was the first of these films I saw as a kid, I watched it as a double bill in my basement along with another great monster movie "King Kong". I was probably around ten or eleven at the time. I loved the film even back then, I've always had an affinity for classic black and white movies, and these types of films spoke to my imagination as a child.

A few years later I would watch "Dracula", a film I still have my troubles with, it's probably due to the fact that the film was based on the stage play of Bram Stoker's novel and suffers from not being very cinematic, which is why today I still prefer "Nosferatu" as well as the remake by Werner Herzog. Still I am charmed by Lugosi's Dracula, he rises the film above its staged trappings.

There are two films I think are vastly underrated in the Universal monster cannon, which I think are both superior to "Dracula", the first is "The Mummy" from 1932 directed by Karl Freud and starring Boris Karloff. "The Mummy" has a lot in common with "Dracula" story wise, but I found it to be far more interesting, and Karloff relishes in the role as the dead Egyptian Mummy brought back to life.

The second film is "The Invisible Man", directed by "Frankenstein's" James Whale and starring Claude Rains. This film is based on the novel by H.G. Welles, and actually did frighten me as a child, Rains plays a mad scientist who finds the formula to make himself invisible, yet he of course goes mad in the process. I found the story quite chilling, and despite many remakes or rip offs, the original is still the most effective.

Perhaps my least favorite has to be "The Wolf Man", which I find to be overrated, the film stars Lon Chaney Jr. who is fine in the role as a man who is bitten by a werewolf, and the supporting cast is superb as well with the likes of Claude Rains and Ralph Bellamy. However I wasn't impressed by the presence of the Wolf Man, it appears only a handful of times in the original film and he doesn't do much but snarl at the camera. The make up effects are quite astonishing, but his appearance just didn't seem as epic to me as that of Frankenstein or Dracula, or The Mummy.

I often wonder had the Wolf Man not come so late, his first film was ten years after the first appearances of Frankenstein and Dracula. He was limited to the laws of movies after the pre-code era, meaning, you couldn't do anything that was deemed that gruesome or dangerous.

Of course the greatest of all these horror films is the sequel to "Frankenstein", "Bride of Frankenstein" which stands as a masterpiece, and pretty much sums up why I think all these films endure. "Bride" is a gorgeous movie to look at, it's one of those films that belong in the world of black and white, it also is aware of itself like the others weren't before. Director James Whale made a horror comedy, which was obsessed with dark humour regarding life and death. It's wickedly funny, and epically put together. The climactic scene where the Bride becomes alive is probably the greatest of all scenes of its kind, it blends both horror, comedy, and pathos in its shots. I still chuckle with delight whenever I hear the musical score from "Bride of Frankenstein", or hearing Elsa Lanchester shriek when she first touches Karloff's monster, and of course her snake like hisp before she is about to be destroyed. The look and the tone of the film become so perfect, and to me it represents what all of these films strived to be, and almost were.

The Universal films remain fun films for me to revisit, I recognize their weaknesses, yet I still have great pleasure in watching them, they remind me of that first piece of horror I felt as a child watching my first horror film, I love them because they represent a time when film was still new, and still inventing itself, they may be primitive today, but still I'd choose them over torture any day.

Million Dollar Baby

Clint Eastwood has made many great movies throughout his career both as an actor and a director. It could be argued that he has had the most endurable career of anyone in Hollywood. The last film Eastwood starred in was "Gran Torino", which was number one at the box office its opening weekend. Eastwood is now in his 80s, his acting career may be behind him, of course I wouldn't count him out, yet he still manages to average at least one film per year that he has directed. There always seems to be a place for Clint Eastwood, he's carved his only little niche.

The films Eastwood has directed also have its own style, and like the man himself, they aren't fussy, some of them remain laid back and soothing, yet the story remains important. His style has only refined through the years, but perhaps it was perfected with "Million Dollar Baby", which is definitely one of his masterpieces.

"Million Dollar Baby" had a strange birth, Eastwood took the first draft of the script by Paul Haggis, claiming it was perfect just the way it was. Eastwood's instincts were probably right, Haggis' original script stuck to the bare bones, and like the best of Eastwood's pictures didn't have any excess to it.

The story is set up like an old fashioned Hollywood movie, Eastwood plays Frankie an old boxing manager who has been in the business all his life. Frankie owns a gym, and runs it along with his longtime friend Scraps (Morgan Freeman) who is the janitor. At the beginning of the film, Frankie is managing a boxer who gets the chance at a title shot, something Frankie has never had, yet by playing it safe, he loses his boxer to another manager.

Enter Maggie (Hilary Swank) a girl who sees Frankie and wants him to train her to become a champion. Maggie comes from a trailer park upbringing, she feels boxing is the only way for her to attain a future, Frankie on the other hand doesn't want to train her due to the fact that she's a girl. Maggie is determined she's worth it, she continues to come to the gym to practice herself, and soon Frankie can't resist, he decides to take her on.

The relationship that blossoms between Maggie and Frankie is the heart of this film, Eastwood manages to make it into something that plays against cliche. Both Maggie and Frankie are missing something in their lives, we hear Frankie has a daughter he writes every week, yet his letter are always returned to him, it isn't even specified if his daughter is alive. Maggie grew up admiring her father who died when she was young, the rest of her family are lazy trailer trash who are on welfare. There is a deep caring and love that comes in this relationship between Maggie and Frankie, and it only becomes more meaningful in the heartbreaking finale.

"Million Dollar Baby" could've been a film made in the 1940s era, it has that feel of it, of course many of Eastwood's films feel like they come from another time, he always seems to be beating to the sound of his own drum unlike many filmmakers of today who may have forgotten the importance of story over style. Eastwood takes his time telling his stories, and developing his relationships, he's always able to get good performances from his actors because I believe he's willing to give them room to create full bodies characters. It's almost as if Eastwood's style is invisible when he does this, yet it's there only slow and methodical, this is a man who doesn't feel he has to prove anything to anyone. With "Million Dollar Baby", he gets a tremendous performance from Swank who has since this film gone on to play many strong willed women. Morgan Freeman also gets his time to shine in this film, it's become rather a cliche to cast Freeman as a narrator, which is one of his jobs in this film, he's also Frankie's closest friend and conscience. He's the one who knows Frankie the best, and perhaps knows what he should do better than he does.

"Million Dollar Baby" might not have been as special had it not been for Eastwood's reluctance to treat this as a regular Hollywood formula story, it in fact only starts off as that, the tone of the film remains somewhat sombre, Eastwood never forgets he's dealing with bruised characters, all of whom have something to prove, yet there are consequences.

The final act of the movie has caused much controversy, some have considered it manipulative, while others feel Eastwood made a fatal error by reducing Freeman as a narrator, breaking the structure of the whole film. The ending is in fact the key to the whole story, and it works because we have taken a journey with Frankie and Maggie, and it ends on the right note for both characters. Eastwood's films usually have a dark edge to them, and this film is no exception, Eastwood bathes the film in contrasting shadow and light images, and it works well with the tone of the film, yet it's also a story you can get so caught up into. I loved seeing the relationship of Maggie and Frankie grow, it is perhaps one of the best relationships put on screen in modern film.

I returned to "Million Dollar Baby" after a few years of not watching it, the film didn't seem to age, it just felt so familiar, but that could probably be said with most of Eastwood's films. Eastwood has proved himself as an American Auteur, there is a certain feel to all of his films that show his trademark. A film like "Million Dollar Baby", everything clicks so beautifully with the material, the script, and the cast, Eastwood is unstoppable, this story just seemed perfect for his brand of storytelling, and it is truly one of the great classics of the last ten years. Like the man himself, Eastwood's films never seem to get old, just wiser, and more interesting as time goes by.

Movie Review: Hereafter

It takes a bold film to attempt to tackle such universal issues such as the afterlife, let alone one that is a mainstream Hollywood movie. Clint Eastwood's "Hereafter" succeeds beautifully in giving us a human story about life after death in a way that I thought was very life affirming.

"Hereafter" concerns three separate stories of people who in some way are affected by questions of the afterlife. Matt Damon gives one of his most affecting and understated performances as George, psychic who actually seems to have the real gift to communicate with people's loved ones. George however doesn't look as this as a gift but a curse, he seems to be unable to touch a person without seeing a vision. In another story, french actress Cecile De France plays Marie, a newswoman who dies for a moment during a tsunami. She survives, but while she was clinically dead, she has also experiences visions of a possible afterlife. Then there is young actor Frankie McClaren playing Marcus, a boy who recently lost his twin brother Jason (Also played by McClaren). Marcus wants answers and tries to find someone who is able to communicate with Jason.

"Hereafter" follows a formula such as "Crash" or "Babel" where these three stories are in some way linked and by coincidence they intersect at some point. Eastwood however doesn't stress this link, he cuts from one story to another in a very straight forward and simple way, I never felt I was being manipulated.

"Hereafter" is a very gentle film, it's quiet and reflective like much of Eastwood's work. He focuses on these people who are all in their way lonely and trying to make a connection so they don't feel as lonely. Damon in particular does a good job showing his character's struggle to live a normal life, by taking on a job at a construction plant, and doing a cooking class all in an effort to fit in. He has an all too brief encounter with a girl (Bryce Dallas Howard) he really likes, but things change when she discovers he's a psychic.

McClaren is very affective, he gives a sense of not being a professional actor, I'm not sure if he is or not, his face sometimes doesn't seem to change, yet we always seem to know what he's thinking, the scenes with him and Damon are particularly touching.

France's character is perhaps the one who speaks for the majority as someone who ponders the questions we all ask: "What happens to us when we die?" It's such a common question in which we know we won't get an answer until it actually happens, yet it has always fascinated us. Marie becomes so obsessed, it threatens her career and her personal life, yet coming from one who has thought long and hard about this question, I could understand her pursuit.

All this being said, I'm not sure if "Hereafter" is a perfect movie, yet it is probably the film that has affected me the most all year, I am fascinated by the subject, and Eastwood's approach, this is probably his best film since "Letters from Iwo Jima". No matter what the subject he tackles, Eastwood keeps a calm and sober style, like his music score, Eastwood plays his films like jazz, he deals with moments and scenes that on the page might seem cliche, but he understates them in a way that make them seem real and more meaningful. With Damon, he has found a great leading man for these kinds of stories, he brings the same kind of soft and understated approach to these scenes and they work beautifully.

In the end "Hereafter" becomes more a film about living with death in our minds and being able to live our lives happily, afterall life is the only thing we can be sure of, and we might as well make the most of it. This is a film not to be missed.

You Can't Take it With You

It's easy to become reflective in one's life, to weigh our contribution to the world. Perhaps we could say we have lived a life of wealth, or perhaps we have lived a poor one. There are two schools of thought on the subject of wealth; perhaps being literally wealthy with money is what you could mean, but then when all is said and done, what do you have to show for it? The other type of wealth is the more intangible kind, where you are measured by how good of a person you are to your fellow man, and the love and friendship you've received throughout your life. These are the two schools of thought brought up and analyzed in Frank Capra's "You Can't Take it With You."

The story is based on a very popular play of the 30s written by George S Kaufman and Moss Hart, but was radically changed by Capra and his constant screenwriter Robert Riskin to suit more Capra's sensibilities. It's about an eccentric family who are encouraged by their patriarch (Lionel Barrymore)to do what makes them happy. The family therefore can be described as unorthodox but lovable within the community. Barrymore is a widower Martin Vanderhof, who in the past had the chance to be a very rich man, but decided he wasn't happy so he decided to devote his time to collect and appraise stamps. His daughter Penny (Spring Byington) enjoys writing plays, her husband (Samuel S. Hinds) likes working down in the cellar making fireworks. The family clan is rounded out with their youngest daughter Essie (Ann Miller) who loves to bake and do ballet, while her husband accompanies her on the xylophone.

The one member of the family who seems to be living in the real world is the eldest daughter Alice (Jean Arthur). Alice seems to be the only one holding down a job as a secretary, but she doesn't seem to mind, since she has fallen in love with her boss, a young bank executive named Tony (James Stewart). Tony and Alice want to get married, which is great news for Alice's family, yet not so much for Tony's. Tony's father is Anthony Kirby (Edward Arnold) a very wealthy businessman who incidentally trying to buy Vanderhof's house in order to create a large real estate deal. Alice is also deemed too common by Tony's mother (Mary Forbes) and looks down on their marriage. Acting in good faith, Tony takes his parents to the Vanderhof home to show them how they really are, yet things don't go as planned.

"You Can't Take it With You", was another gem in the Frank Capra cannon in the 1930s, it gave him his third Academy Award for Best Director, and the film itself also won for Best Picture. Capra was the messenger of hope in the 1930s, which was why he remained so popular. The country was in the midst of The Great Depression, yet Hollywood was churning out mostly escapist entertainment, movies were the one place where people didn't have to be reminded of the hard times going on in the real world; yet that never stopped Capra from commenting on it.

"You Can't Take it With You" starts off as a lighthearted comedy at first, but it soon turns into a more serious film about the state of the world, and also the state of humanity. Barrymore's Vanderhof, and Arnold's Kirby take centre stage in the film's latter half, as Capra uses them to depict two different ideologies. Kirby is perhaps the most interesting, he isn't a bad guy at all, but Capra shows him as somebody who has lost his way, he's at a crucial moment in his life and mirrors what Vanderhof might've been like before he changed his direction.

Kirby is also a representation of the greed of that time, a banker who never thought of what his actions were doing to the rest of the country (Gee, kinda like today!) There is a powerful scene in fact where Kirby is confronted by a businessman played by H.B. Warner, who is ruined thanks to Kirby's actions, he warns him that if he continues to go down the greedy path, he'll be left with nothing. I couldn't help but think of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol", which parallels this where the Ghost of Jacob Marley warns Scrooge what could become of him if he continues with his greedy ways.

Because of these themes of money vs. happiness, "You Can't Take it With You" becomes very contemporary, much of what is discussed in this film make interesting parallels about the state the world is in today. There is even a scene where Jean Arthur is talking to Jimmy Stewart about men who play on people's fears in order to sell them things they don't need, I could not help but think of people like Bill O'Reilly, or Glenn Beck when she uttered this.

Frank Capra was known as a rank sentimentalist, but he was in fact a radical filmmaker, I can't name another mainstream director of that time who tackled such important issues. The Vanderhof family seem very contemporary today, and Capra seemed to admire their eccentricities. Throughout the film, they remain happy by doing what makes them happy, and of course they are persecuted and even accused of being communists, however Capra, who was surely one of the most American of filmmakers is showing that they represent what America should aspire to be, to Capra, the Vanderhof's resemble "the pursuit of happiness", who are we to stop them from attaining it?

The Circus

"The Circus" is Charlie Chaplin's unsung masterpiece. It isn't as well known as "The Gold Rush", "City Lights","Modern Times", or "The Kid", even though it was quite popular when first released. Chaplin actually won a special Academy Award for it in 1927 for writing, directing, and starring in the film.

However as time went by , "The Circus" has been thought of as a minor Chaplin work, however, it remains poignant, and it has a final image of The Tramp that could rival the ending of "City Lights".

"The Circus" is a story of high comedy but also of unrequited love; we begin with seeing a girl (Merna Kennedy) who works as a horse jumper at the circus, we also find out she is the daughter of the circus owner, a tyrannical man who starves his daughter when she messes up on a trick.

Meanwhile The Tramp wonders into the circus after being mistaken as a pickpocket and is chased by the cops. The police chase him into the center ring and his natural clumsiness is mistaken for a real clown act. The audience love him so the manager hires The Tramp on as a clown.

The Tramp tries to learn several clown routines (All of which Chaplin himself would've know with his years in vaudeville), but despite his best efforts, he is fired soon after. Another incident happens where Chaplin is chased by a donkey into the centre ring and once again the audience love him. The manager decides to keep The Tramp on as a maintenence worker without letting him know he's the star of the show.

The Tramp then connects with the girl giving her some of his food, he is soon smitten and the two become close friends. When The Tramp finally does find out he is the star of the show, he's able to make demands on the manager for a higher salary and no longer harming the girl.

However The Tramp's fairy tale life is threatened with the arrival of a handsome tightrope walker (Harry Crocker) who the girl falls in love with. In the climactic finale, Chaplin tries to prove he's just as brave by taking the tightrope walker's place and risking his life.

I find everything that happens between The Girl and The Tramp all leads down to the final scene in the film. It's a solitary Tramp who is left behind after the circus leaves town. Chaplin was a master of the close-up, and he gives himself one of the greatest in movie history. He is sitting in the middle of where the big top once was, his face is that of sadness and longing, but also hopeful. This shot sums up what Chaplin's whole philosophy of who and what The Tramp is. The Tramp is a character, but he's also an idea, he's a symbol of the little guy, someone who must face hardships, and lonliness, but also someone who is able to walk on in the face of uncertainty. With The Tramp, Chaplin gave audiences someone to root for, very often in his films, The Tramp did get the girl, but in this one he doesn't, despite it though, he's able to put on a brave face anyway and walk away with his dignity in tact.

Chaplin had a sentimental streak about him, which some critics unfairly use to deem him passe in favour of a more contemporary Buster Keaton. However I feel Chaplin will always be around, he was the biggest star of his period, and you can recognize the face of The Tramp just in sillouette. With "The Circus", Chaplin brilliantly combines high comedy and pathos and in all of his films with The Tramp did it better than anyone else.

Heat

It's been a few years since I've sat down and watched Michael Mann's "Heat", arguably the director's best film. It was somewhat overshadowed in its initial release due to the coverage of it being the first film starring both Al Pacino and Robert De Niro and having them share precious moments of screen time.

Indeed the film is a terrific showcase for both great actors, and the one scene they share together in a coffee shop is quite special just seeing the two of them act and react to one another, it's a great treat. However let's not take anything away from the pure craft and technique Michael Mann had to create such a beautifully shot epic crime saga.

On the surface, "Heat" doesn't offer anything new, it's a story about bank robbers and the police who pursue them. This type has been done since the old Warner Brothers days of James Cagney, Humphrey Bogart, and Edward G. Robinson. Even some of today's most popular films like "The Town" follow the same formula. "Heat" however tells its story in a new modern light. In the film Mann is interested not only in the professional lives of the criminals and the law, but also how their lives seem to parallel the others.

The main criminal here is Neil McCauley (De Niro), a career bank robber, a man who has trained himself to walk away from any kind of commitment or normal life if he feels the heat around the corner. Neil is never settled, his house is isolated and solitary. His friend and accomplice Chris (Val Kilmer) asks him "When are you gonna get some furniture?" he says "When I get around to it." Chris then asks him "When are you gonna get a wife?" he says "When I get around to it." For Neil, his life is his work, he remains disciplined even as he finds himself getting involved with someone (Amy Brenneman), he's still willing to walk away.

When Neil and his men rob an armored car, he is now being trailed by ace detective Vincent Hanna (Pacino), a man like Neil dedicated to his work, despite it taking its toll on his personal life. Vincent is now on his third marriage that is disintegrating before his eyes. He's obsessed with the chase and catching his man, he understands he has to stay as sharp and dedicated as the men he's after.

What's interesting about "Heat" is Mann's attention to detail and authenticity, he makes us understand the lives of these two by showing them both as men of honor but also as flawed human beings. "Heat" never remains black and white when it comes to crime, it's too smart for that, these are people finding their own morality in an immoral world, and it's fascinating seeing that it's coming from both sides of the law.

The main color of "Heat" I would say is blue, it sometimes seems to streak the entire frame, particularly in De Niro's house where he can look out on the ocean, which is just as desolate as his character. It's a beautifully shot film and Mann adds to the atmosphere a sense of realism unseen in genre filmmaking before.

The climactic bank robbery stands alone as one of the best ever shot, merely because of Mann's attention to detail. The intense gunfire is loud and pounding, probably sounding like what a real gun would instead of hearing bullets ricochet in the Hollywood manner. All the men playing Pacino's fellow officer's all seem real, they are men doing their job, there isn't one of them who flies of the handle the way you might see in a regular crime movie.

Despite all this authenticity, Mann remains a stylized director, and he throws in some hypothetical scenes to give the movie its weight, the most famous of course being the coffee shop scene with Pacino and De Niro.

The scene couldn't exist outside of movies, it's not often you think of a cop having coffee with the man he's pursuing. Yet the scene is also not just an excuse to get these acting heavyweights in a room together. It actually becomes a philosophical, and existential discussion between these two men who must feel a certain bond between one another. At one moment Pacino talks of a dream he had about all the victims killed by the men he's put away. You leave the scene feeling what these men are all about in relation to the other and it's quite wonderful to see.

"Heat" stands above many of the other modern genre films made today, mainly because Michael Mann has a certain respect for this material. He takes equal time with the criminals and the police to see what makes them tick. Mann of course would come back to this type of film time and again with "Collateral", "Miami Vice", and "Public Enemies". You can sense there is a type of obsession with Mann not unlike Neil and Vincent in this film, and something like that is quite admirable. It takes a very special filmmaker to take a crime movie and make it quite beautiful.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

"The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly" is a great film for many reasons, for me, it's a film that I'm hypnotized to each time I see it on television, it belongs with one of those great action yarns of the 60s with charismatic stars such as "The Great Escape", "Cool Hand Luke", or "The Dirty Dozen". You get sucked into its somewhat simple plot just because it has one of those irresistible stories: three greedy desperate men each know a secret to a buried treasure and will do anything to get to it first.

The idea of this film leads to an inevitable conclusion where these three desperate men must face eachother in perhaps the greatest showdown in cinematic history.

What makes this film stand above all its contemporaries and all its imitators is it's something of pure style, made by the master of the craft Sergio Leone. Leone only made six films, but each of them are visceral exercises of violence, and love of the movies. It's no wonder a filmmaker like Quentin Tarantino chose "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" as one of his favorite films.

The film starts off with a long epilogue to introduce the three main characters; we first meet "The Ugly" Tuco played by Eli Wallach a rat faced killer who is probably the most desperate of them all to get the money. Then there's "The Bad", Angel Eyes played by Lee Van Cleef, he's the usual suspect to show up in westerns wearing the black hat and someone who goes through life without a conscience. Then we meet "The Good" played by Clint Eastwood, he's "The Man with no name" character who appeared in two previous Leone films "A Fistful of Dollars" and "For a Few Dollars More". His name isn't given although Tuco often calls him Blondie. Blondie is by no means the hero with a heart of gold, but in Leone's west, he is the closest to good you come by, he shows evidence of compassion, but he leads his life with a somewhat cynical look at the world, something he has carried with him throughout all three Leone pictures.

At the start of the picture we see Blondie and Tuco working together. Tuco is a wanted man and Blondie is a bounty hunter who turns him in to collect the reward. When Tuco is about the be hanged, Blondie shoots him down and the two ride off and split the money. Each time Tuco escapes, his ransom increases, but once he gets to $3000, Blondie decides to part company and leaves Tuco without any money and a horse, so he exacts revenge.

Tuco soon catches up with Blondie and takes him as a prisoner, his plan is to watch him die a slow painful death in the dessert, but fate takes a hand when they are interrupted by a runaway stagecoach where a dying man tells of a buried treasure hidden in a cemetery. Tuco overhears the name of the cemetery, but when he is distracted, Blondie overhears the name of the grave it's buried in. Without one man trusting the other with his own secret, the two are stuck together until they can find the treasure.

Meanwhile Angel Eyes is conducting his own investigation and he too knows of the treasure, it isn't soon till he catches up with Tuco and Blondie.

"The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly", came at a time when the western genre was at a transition. Leone pretty much revitalized the genre along with Sam Peckinpah. Their image of the west was no longer stuff of legend like the ones of John Ford or Howard Hawks. The lines of who's good and who's bad in these films become blurred. Although, it says in the title, who's supposed to be good, bad, and ugly, Leone doesn't really leave it that black and white. Tuco gets much of our sympathy, although he's a ruthless killer, Leone gives a scene with his brother who became a monk. The idea that one brother became a bandit while another one a man of the cloth was not an original idea, yet Leone along with Wallach's performance (which should've gotten a nomination) give pathos to Tuco, and we are able to realize that he's not all that bad. Leone isn't as sympathetic to Angel Eyes, yet I suppose a film like this needs the usual villain.

The film is also one made by a man who enjoys the movies, Leone obviously loved the American westerns particularly the ones of John Ford with his use of vast open spaces. He was the forerunner for people like Tarantino who's own encyclopedia knowledge of movie history would become part of his cinema. That's not saying Leone was completely unoriginal, on the contrary. Look at the final shoot out which is a perfectly choreographed mini-movie in itself. It starts off slowly where the men get into position, perfectly composed in frame. The camera soon gets tighter into each man's faces, with the editing switching fiercely from their eyes to their guns. Leone knows exactly when the payoff should happen. The sequence is remarkably long, probably longer than it would be in real life, it's one of the great moments in cinema. A sequence like that has been copied before and we think of that as a Leone moment.

Sergio Leone was a supreme master of cinema, unfortunately he only lived to make six films, five of them in the western genre. The sixth one was a gangster saga "Once Upon a Time in America" and was probably his most complex story. With each film, Leone's characters and stories became darker, he was growing as an artist each time, it's a shame his career was cut short, but for a man who only had six films, those are some six.

"The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" was also the last film he made with star and muse Clint Eastwood, a man who's character had few words and who's face stood motionless was is probably what attracted the great director to the actor. Eastwood would come out being a huge star/director in his own right and dedicating his masterpiece "Unforgiven" in part to Leone. It's hard to wonder where the two men would be without the other. "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" is a testament between a star and director who were a match made in heaven.

Movie Review: The Social Network

I wasn't sure if it was just me, but there are two moments in David Fincher's "The Social Network", where the conversation between two people becomes somewhat distorted with noise from the movie's soundtrack. This happens in the two scenes with Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) and his soon to be ex/ex girl friend Erica (Rooney Mara). The conversations take place in large public areas, where many people are talking all at once, and loud music is blasting through. Much is said between these two highly intellectual people from different wave-lengths, yet there isn't any feeling of connection.

In "The Social Network", we are meant to believe that this lack of connection Mark feels for his girlfriend is what sets him off to create Facebook, the social scene in the silicon Valley age.

Mark as played by Eisenberg and written by Aaron Sorkin, is a computer prodigy, he lacks the social skills he so desperately wants, yet as some sort of revenge, creates his own social network in his computer in a way he fully understands.

I was hooked in "The Social Network" right from the get-go, to me it is the most entertaining movie I've seen all year. It has a brisk pace that keeps its rythm all the way through without missing a beat. The dialogue is bright and witty, and the acting is done to perfection.

The film, is of course about the creation of Facebook and rather about the time we live in now, to be more specific, the time America lives in now. Mark Zuckerberg in this film has been compared to Charles Foster Kane in the way he's blinded by ambition, but it doesn't make him a bad guy, in fact I found myself rooting for him at time.

Mark is a brilliant guy, who came up with a brilliant idea, yet to say that the idea was entirely his might not be exactly accurate, the film does a nice job in deconstructing the founding of Facebook, and by doing that we get the sense at the kind of guy Mark Zuckerberg was.

We first meet Mark on that fateful date with his girlfriend, which prompts him to go back to his Harvard dorm room, and write nasty things about her on his blog. As sort of a prank, he and his roommates create a site on their computer that rates the "hotness" of different girls on campus. He gets into trouble, but his actions sets off the idea of Facebook in motion.

Mark meets the Winklevoss twins (both played by Armie Hammer), who give him the idea of creating a social network exclusively for Harvard people. Mark then creates a partnership with his best and only friend Eduardo (Andrew Garfield) and makes him CFO of a new website he calls "The Facebook".

The film goes back and forth in time cross cutting between a lawsuit Mark has between the Winklevoss twins, and with Eduardo who sued him in real life. What the film does get across very well was even if Mark should've shared the credit to these people, he was the one with the ambition to see it go big. He gets some help from Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake), the man behind Nabster who shows him what Facebook could be.

In the middle of it all we get the sense that Mark isn't interested in the money at all, he does feel this was his idea, he wants the credit. The tragedy of the film comes with the fact that in the end, he's still the same guy he was in the beginning, he can't quite connect with people on a personal level. The real Mark Zuckerberg may not be like that at all, how are we to know, the point is, it makes for a very fascinating character study.

"The Social Network" is a film that I think works on all four cylinders, when you have this much talent, it's hard to see how it could fail. The collaboration between Fincher and Sorkin, sometimes reminded me of Howard Hawks and Ben Hecht. That might've had something to do with the pacing, the rapid fire dialogue, if there were more women in the picture you'd swear this were some sort of screwball comedy.

At times, I did long for more of a female voice, particularly because the Rooney Mara character was so compelling the few scenes she was in, yet I understood that she had to stay distant from Mark in order for the film to work.

I would say "The Social Network" is David Fincher's most accomplished film, he actually may not be getting much of the credit here seeing that this is an Aaron Sorkin screenplay, which has been taking most notice. But watch what Fincher does with these heavy dialogue scenes, sometimes they just show two people sitting at the table talking. Take the seen between Timberlake and Eisenberg in a club, and how he shows Timberlake's character almost menacing in the lights flashing on him.

Much should be said of the editing between people. It sometimes becomes a juggling act, but it pays off really well each time. There is a scene where Eduardo is confronting Mark over the phone about freezing his accounts, meanwhile his crazy girlfriend is setting fire to his bed. Not a beat is missed, and it gives for a great comedic payoff in the end.

"The Social Network" to me is a film with a pulse, you know it's there, you can't take your eyes off it, each frame and piece of dialogue is alive, I was lead out of a stupor and taken in to see something vibrant on the screen, I can't wait to see it again.

Mulholland Drive

To me, a film like David Lynch's "Mulholland Drive" is a great film because it does what movies do better than any other art form. It's a film for the sense, not necessarily for the analytical purposes, or for people with literate minds. This is a film that puts you through a maze, I don't think it can be ever figured out, but it rewards with each viewing no matter what.

There is a plot of "Mulholland Drive", and according to Lynch who wrote and directed it, it can be followed. Lynch seems to have fun with his films where he leaves everything open to interpretation.

The history of "Mulholland Drive" has been well documented by Lynchophiles alike; it started out as a television pilot for ABC, but the network dropped it after seeing the final cut. Lynch went back to the drawing board and decided the idea could be made into a feature film. While the pilot was left open-ended, Lynch was able to find a solution that could easily be best described as dreamed up...probably.

The film is a Hollywood story and follows a young wide-eyed girl named Betty (Naomi Watts) who moves to the town from Canada to be an actress. She takes up residence in her Aunts lavish apartment and hoping to land it big. But when Betty gets to the apartment, she's surprised to discover Rita (Laura Harring), a woman who has survived a car accident but has lost her memory. The only evidence to her old identity happens to be a bunch of money that is found in her purse. Betty decides to help Rita find out who she really is.

There are other forces at play here involving a film director (Justin Theroux) who is being intimidated by a group of mystery men to cast an unknown actress for the lead role in an important movie he's making. There is also a hitman (Mark Pellegreno) who discovers a mysterious black book that might be related to Rita; a strange looking cowboy, and a strange looking creature/homeless man living in an alley of a Winkies restaurant, and he might hold the key to the whole mystery, yet what do we know.

About two thirds into the way of "Mulholland Drive", there is a dramatic shift, after Betty and Rita visit a theatre where everything is recorded and we are told by the master of ceremonies what we see is an illusions. Suddenly things change and Watts and Harring become two completely different characters.

You can question the plot of "Mulholland Drive" all you want, I find it interesting that Lynch has opened the door to many different variations, you could come out with a different interpretation each time you view it. For many, the film is an allegory for stardom in Hollywood, and it's Lynch's cynical view of the movie making business. That could be part of the story, seeing how one of Lynch's favorite films is Billy Wilder's "Sunset BLVD." which is also a film about broken dreams in Hollywood, but the film leaves it much more open than just that. Lynch uses cinema as a sensory experience, and while sometimes this leaves the viewer in the dark, it's a radical change of pace to linear storytelling.

Lynch seems to sometimes be working in a stream of consciousness, where he doesn't care if what he is showing makes sense, his images and pure atmosphere usually remain so powerful that it makes for a purely satisfying cinematic experience. One of the problems I had with Christopher Nolan's "Inception" was how it was a film that was trying to remain abstract yet not letting go of audience expectations. Thus, "Inception" became a film about dreams with rules, David Lynch works without rules, he knows that dreams sometimes don't make sense, and sometimes movies don't have to either. I suppose it's a matter of taste with a director like Nolan and a director like Lynch, however I much prefer to be kept in the dark a bit and making up my own mind about what I am seeing.

"Mulholland Drive" is one of David Lynch's cinematic masterpieces, and perhaps his most enjoyable and satisfying. I love returning to it because each time it's like watching a different film, and each time I feel closer to unlocking its secrets, until later, when I realize the secret is part of what makes it great.

The Modern Romance

Romance has taken a beating these past few years at the multiplexes. I admit I'm an old softy, I do like romance, that's because movies make it better than in real life, in my opinion they're the reason people want to fall in love in the first place.

I'm not sure if I want to actually fall in love, because I might just be ultimately disappointed because it doesn't amount to what I see in he movies.

The real good romance movies are ones where we can actually see two people either in love or falling in love. This type of romance was done to perfection by the likes of Frank Capra, Ernst Lubitsch, George Cukor, Max Ophuls, or Douglas Sirk. Sometimes romance came in the comedy form like in Capra's "It's Happened One Night" or Lubitsch's "The Shop Around the Corner", or in the melodrama form like Sirk's "All that Heaven Allows", or that almost mystical form Ophuls' "The Earings of Madame de..."

Directors such as these knew that romance came down to love between two people, no matter how they got together.

There have been modern geniuses of the genre post-golden age, such as Woody Allen, who frankly modernized the romantic comedy with "Annie Hall", a film that broke convention by not having the two leads end up together in the end.

Many have followed Allen's style, and "Annie Hall" has been tried to be remade time and time again, by people who don't quite grasp the same sense of dialogue as the nebbish master.

Romance, has been diluted too much, filmmakers it would seem have relied on the old form and audience approval, the characters no longer seem real, or in love. Romantic comedies seem to be the usual punching bag, I haven't had the ambition to see anyone of the ones coming out (Usually starring Katherine Heigel or Jennifer Aniston but I'm not blaming them).

This may be just another nail in the cynical Hollywood coffin, they seem to think romance is a commodity, something to be exploited just like the lazy horror films that come out as well.

This is not to say romance is dead, it might just mean you have to look harder to find it. The best examples of modern romance I found recently come from Richard Linklater with his films "Before Sunrise" and "Before Sunset".

In "Before Sunrise", Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy meet on a train and spend the film walking around Vienna and falling in love. At the end of the film, they go their separate ways probably knowing they will never see eachother again.

In the "Before Sunset", the couple meet again by chance in Paris nine years later, they pick up the conversation like they never missed a beat, they seem to know they are soul mates, and this time they are older and wiser.

These two films are lovely little snippets of life, perhaps Linklater thought the only way to put romance back in the movies was to strip away all artifice the movies have made you believe in and put the focus back on the people.

This type of idea would work again with John Carney's "Once" made in 2007, which was my choice for best film of the decade, if Linklater's film was about two people falling in love through communication, Carney's film was about two people who fall in love through music.

I love romantic movies, to me it works on a different spectrum from the horror film, yet both seem to be the perfect subject for cinema. Romance is difficult, but if you approach it in an honest in sincere way like you would any genre, chances are you would make people fall in love.

Movie Review: All or Nothing

A film like Mike Leigh's "All or Nothing" (2002) is a film about observation and about character, it's the type of film I love because it isn't so much about something that happens, rather it's about what is happening, it exists in the present and what the characters are going through now.

"All or Nothing" takes us inside the lives of lower middle class British society. Every main character lives in the same apartment complex, although the focus is mostly on one family. This family consists of Phil (Timothy Spall) a taxi driver, his companion Penny (Leslie Manville) and their two children Rachel (Alison Garland), and Rory (James Corden). The family no longer functions properly, everyone seems to be cut off from themselves, Rory spends his time on the couch in front of the tv, Rachel stays quiet but observant as to what goes on. Phil has the face of someone who is disappointed with life, Spall's hangdog expression and sad eyes almost remain constant throughout the film, he no longer seems to make the effort to connect, or maybe he has just forgotten. Penny who works as a cashier at Safeway seems to be the one struggling to stay afloat, she's the realist of the family.

The other characters of the building consist of Penny's friend Maureen (Ruth Sheen) who's a single mother with a daughter who becomes pregnant. There is also another friend of Penny's Carol (Marion Bailey), a drunken housewife with a husband who seems to be completely apathetic, and a daughter (Sally Hawkins) who has no respect for either of them.

At around the midway point, an important event happens in "All or Nothing" which takes the characters out of their stupor and most of them are called into action. Mike Leigh is a filmmaker full of humanity perhaps the most than any other filmmaker working today. Despite his character's flaws, he doesn't give up on them and that's when the film becomes so emotionally real.

The climax of "All or Nothing" takes place in the home of Phil and Penny, where they finally have the courage to connect with one another, and it is probably something they haven't done in awhile, and once it happens, you realize just how invested you are in these characters and their situations, it almost comes as a surprise.

I've just seen "All or Nothing" for the first time, but it was a movie that stuck with me afterwards, I got the kind of feeling from it that I do from my favorite movies. Mike Leigh is a director who has been around a long time, he has a tremendous resume of films including "High Hopes", "Secrets and Lies", and "Topsy Turvy" all of which I haven't seen, I have actually only seen his last two films "Happy-Go-Luck" (Featuring Sally Hawkins again in a memorable comedic role) and "Vera Drake" (with Imelda Staunten as a housewife who moonlights as an abortionist for lower class girls). Of those films, I found "All or Nothing" to be the most emotionally satisfying, I was near tears at the end, but it wasn't depressing, it made me feel happy, and like the people in the film, I once again felt a connection.

Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule Seasonal Quiz, Or I love it when these quizzes come out!!!

1) Classic film you most want to experience that has so far eluded you.
I'll just say the majority of films by Joseph Von Sternberg and "Sunrise"

2) Greatest Criterion DVD/Blu-ray release ever
I have not seen any blue-ray but of the ones I know that are on Blue-ray/DVD at the moment, I would say "The Seven Samurai"

3) The Big Sleep or The Maltese Falcon?
So hard to choose, but "The Big Sleep" has the edge of being funnier, and naughtier.

4) Jason Bateman or Paul Rudd?
For me Bateman might just have the edge for "Arrested Development" alone, but I do love Paul Rudd in "I Love you Man"

5) Best mother/child (male or female) movie star combo
Scream queens Janet Leigh and Jaimie Leigh Curtis

6) Who are the Robert Mitchums and Ida Lupinos among working movie actors? Do modern parallels to such masculine and no-nonsense feminine stars even exist? If not, why not? I can't think of stars who fit the same bill as these two people, that's not me being elitist when I say that. Josh Brolin reminds me much of Mitchum in films like "No Country for Old Men", he seems so natural playing those kind of guys. Ida Lupino is another story, I like to think Holly Hunter is just as no-nonsense when she could be. This is difficult

7) Favorite Preston Sturges movie
"Sullivan's Travels"

8) Odette Yustman or Mary Elizabeth Winstead?
Since Winstead just appeared in one of my favorite movies of the year ("Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World") I will say her.

9) Is there a movie that if you found out a partner or love interest loved (or didn't love) would qualify as a Relationship Deal Breaker?
If she could never at least like "It's a Wonderful Life", we would have a serious talk about our relationship

10) Favorite DVD commentary
I love Roger Ebert's commentary on "Citizen Kane", "Casablanca", and "Floating Weeds", and but also Donald Richie on "Tokyo Story"

11) Movies most recently seen on DVD, Blu-ray and theatrically
On DVD: "A Serious Man"
Theatrically: "Machete"

12) Dirk Bogarde or Alan Bates?
Don't really have a preference

13) Favorite DVD extra
I'm a fan of the "Making of" segments in DVDs as long as they are done well, and usually if they are a classic movie, it makes it more interesting to learn about.

14) Brian De Palma’s Scarface— yes or no?
Yes! Absolutely, everything about it screams excess, I can't get enough of it.

15) Best comic moment from a horror film that is not a horror comedy (Young Frankenstein, Love At First Bite, et al.)When Norman Bates describes the smell of linen (I think if I'm remembering it right) and he refers to it as a "Creepy smell", I just love his delivery, it's something so unexpected said by him, also the re-mentioning of the name "Dr. Pretorious" in "Bride of Frankenstein", although that might also be considered a comedy.

16) Jane Birkin or Edwige Fenech?
I have seen none of their movies, therefore have no opinion

17) Favorite Wong Kar-wai movie
Have seen none of his movies, but I'll get right on that.

18) Best horrific moment from a comedy that is not a horror comedy
Maybe the A-Bombs going off at the end of "Dr. Strangelove" or the phonecall Larry receives at the end of "A Serious Man"

19) From 2010, a specific example of what movies are doing right…
By putting short films like "Plastic Bag" on Youtube for everyone to see, shows that there are more venues opening up for people to see small films.

20) Ryan Reynolds or Chris Evans?
Probably Ryan Reynolds, I like his style.

21) Speculate about the future of online film writing. What’s next?
It'll catch on more and more, with most film critics losing their jobs in newspapers, it will be the forum to go to get good (some bad) film criticism.

22) Roger Livesey or David Farrar?
No opinion

23) Best father/child (male or female) movie star combo
A different end of the spectrum and say Charlie Chaplin and Jackie Coogan in "The Kid"

24) Favorite Freddie Francis movie (as Director)
I've IMDB'd him and haven't seen any of his movies

25) Bringing Up Baby or The Awful Truth?
I have a soft spot for "Bringing up Baby", it's the first film I think of when I think of screwball comedy.

26) Tina Fey or Kristen Wiig?
Tina Fey

27) Name a stylistically important director and the best film that would have never been made without his/her influence.
John Ford/Once Upon a Time in the West

28) Movie you’d most enjoy seeing remade and transplanted to a different culture (i.e. Yimou Zhang’s A Woman, a Gun and a Noodle Shop.)
"Inglorious Basterds" maybe

29) Link to a picture/frame grab of a movie image that for you best illustrates bliss. Elaborate.



Basically because it's of two people who have shared a life together looking out at the ocean, what could be more perfectly blissful than that?

30) With a tip of that hat to Glenn Kenny, think of a just-slightly-inadequate alternate title for a famous movie. (Examples from GK: Fan Fiction; Boudu Relieved From Cramping; The Mild Imprecation of the Cat People)"Fargo, North Dakota"

Movie Review: Machete

"Machete" is a movie made by people who love movies, it's a tribute to classic Grindhouse movies, in fact, its origin comes from the movie experience of the same name. One of the creators of "Grindhouse" was Robert Rodriguez, who's "Planet Terror" was the first of the double feature along with Quentin Tarantino's "Death Proof". If you were lucky enough to see "Grindhouse" in the theatre, you would've seen the fake movie trailer for "Machete".

After seeing the trailer, fans and fans must've wrote in to Rodriguez wondering if he ever was going to make the feature length film; whatever the case may be, it worked.

"Machete" is the title characters named, played here by Danny Trejo, a mainstay in many action movies, often playing the heavy, or the badass, he's got the kind of face that looks like it has been run over, but also one that could just look mean the instant you said something nasty to him.

Machete is a former Mexican Federale, his wife and daughter were brutally killed by Mexican drug kingpin (Steven Seagal). Three years later, Machete is on the streets of Texas trying to get work anyway he can. When a greasy man in a limo (Jeff Fahey) sees him in a street fight one day, he hires him as an assassin to kill a Senator (Robert De Niro) who is a strong advocate for tougher immigration laws.

But Machete is doublecrossed, turns out this was all a ploy for the Senator to win by a sympathy vote, soon Machete plots for revenge to all the men who have wronged him, lucky for him, they all seem to be connected.

Machete has many sidekicks along the way to help him, including Michelle Rodriguez who runs an underground resistance for Mexican immigrants, Jessica Alba as an ICE Agent who falls for Machete's charm, and Cheech Marin as his brother who used to fight with him, but has since become a priest.

"Machete" is full of all out, over the top violence, where people from "Grindhouse" would remember, but it's all tongue and cheek and cartoonish, it's never taken seriously. There is one scene where Machete uses the intestines of a man he just cut open to swing from one level of a building to the next, he gets this idea from a doctor who explains that human intestines can stretch out up to forty feet.

The elements are all there, and Rodriguez captures the spirit of the type these types of movies, which he seems to be making over and over again, when he isn't making his "Spy Kids" movies.

Everyone is in on the fun, and hooray for Lindsay Lohan who shows up and plays a character that may be poking fun at her own image, but she may just be laughing along with everyone else.

"Machete" is a nice schlock entertainment, although the grande finale fails to ignite by perhaps putting away the bad guys a little too nicely and neatly, there doesn't seem to be a payoff, however, Machete is off to fight another day, he even gets the girl in the end, and of course there's promise of not one but two sequels, huzzah!

Movie Review: The American

"The American" is that special kind of film that is thoughtful, meditative, and finely tuned, a film that sits with you and you digest it, and it leaves a pleasing aftertaste.

Yes I'm talking about "The American" as if it were a nice meal you would have at a fine restaurant, and like a fine meal it should be savoured. The film is full of surprises and suspense, but at its core it's about a solitary man, a man who must fight to stay solitary no matter how much he might want to let someone in his life.

The main character in the film played by George Clooney is nothing new to cinema, the solitary loner is as common to see in any classic western, or samurai movie, or in this case a spy film.

Clooney plays a character who is either named Jack or Edward, depending on the situation, it isn't made clear whether either of these names is his real one. When we first meet Clooney's character he is in a snowy mountainside with a woman who he is in love with. Moments later, they are ambushed by sniper's and Jack/Edward disposes of them in an orderly fashion but must also kill his lover, the "why" is rather vague, perhaps because he couldn't have any witnesses, or perhaps she was the one who tried to have him killed.

Clooney's character is in this line of business where it is difficult to trust anyone; he works for a mysterious man named Pavel (Johan Leyson) who hires him to create specialized weapons for assassins. His latest client is a woman named Mathilde (Thekla Reuton) a woman we meet three times, all with a different hair color. Mathilde asks for a sniper rifle to be made for a specific purpose that isn't discussed in any great detail; Jack/Edward just needs to know the specifics, and he sets himself to work in a small Italian village.

His character lives alone, he's isolated from everyone, he spends time in his room making the weapon and keeping himself busy staying in tuned with his surroundings and of course doing push ups. It isn't easy to be him, around every corner, he suspects someone following him, he mistakes a backfire from a scooter to be a gunshot, he lives in complete paranoia.

As solace, Jack takes pleasure in the arms of Clara (Violante Placido), a prostitute who works in a bordello, he tries to keep their relationship above the surface, but she falls for him, and they soon fall in love, but again he begins to question her loyalty.

"The American" is a film about a man looking for peace, he is tired of his life of paranoia, he doesn't know how much longer he can last in his world, he wants desperately to let someone in, it's a film that may take some off guard with its visual poetry rather than a straight forward spy story. There is little dialogue said, much of Clooney's character is revealed in the words he says to Clara and to the local priest who he befriends, everything else he keeps hidden.

The film has a more European sensibility than a western one, even the title "The American" makes Clooney's character sound like the foreigner; it was directed by Anton Corbijn, who's only other film was "Control" about the life of Joy Division lead singer Ian Curtis, which I have not seen. Corbijn keeps the film quiet and unassuming, it reveals itself to us rather than showing its hand right away, it's a film I appreciated by not letting us know all the answers and not knowing exactly where it is going.

Clooney is our guide into this man who is difficult to know, but we follow him, and we sympathize with the sadness in his eyes, Clooney is great for letting us in the burden his characters bring, it's one of his most silent but provocative roles.

"The American" relies very much on atmosphere, and tone, there is very little plot, had this been a more mainstream film, there would be more of a body count, and much more exposition to figure out what everything all means, I'm happy enough to be lead into a mystery of a man who won't let just anybody in, it's a much more satisfying, and tasteful experience.

A Serious Man

I think somewhere down the line, we all seek for meaning, we've all had that moment where something bad happens to us and we have to ask God why is this happening. Even people who don't necessarily believe in God ask this when things go wrong; because when things go wrong and there is no one to blame, who else is there. Is there meaning to this all, or is it just a series of events that don't add up to anything?

This is the question posed in The Coen Brothers' latest masterpiece "A Serious Man". The story centers on Larry Gopnik, a midwestern physics professor living in the 1960s, who's life is unraveling around him for no particular reason. Larry's wife Judith (Sari Lennik) wants a divorce, she has been seeing a family friend Sy Abelman (Fred Melamed) and wants Larry to get a Jewish ritual divorce so she can marry him.

Larry is also having professional problems, a Korean student is threatening to blackmail after he is given a failing grade on his midterm. Larry is also up for tenure at his university, but the board keeps getting anonymous letters from someone trying to discredit him.

Along with this, Larry's brother (Richard Kind) is living on their couch, his daughter is obsessed with going out all the time, and his son is wanting him to fix the tv antena so he can watch "F-Troop".

Soon, Larry comes to the conclusion that all of this is happening for a reason, therefore he must find answers, he decides to go to a series of rabbis to search for meaning behind all this.

"A Serious Man" is a comedy, thank God, because otherwise this would be a hard film to take, The Coen Brothers are known for their black humour, and also for their merciless treatment of their characters. However The Coens sympathize with Larry's situation, even though he's put through a trial. The film is all about the big questions we all ask ourselves, is their meaning behind anything?

Like all of The Coens films, there isn't really an answer, we're sort of left in limbo at the end of the movie, and like life itself, it leaves us uncertain of what will happen next.

"A Serious Man" is about asking these questions, and the human nature of not being able to accept the mystery that is life. As Larry says to one of the rabbis concerning God's absence in the world "Why does he make us feel the question, if he doesn't give us the answer?" You can sense The Coens are struggling with this question as well particularly with the way the line is delivered.

"A Serious Man" has become a modern take on the story of Job, in that story, Job is put through many tragic circumstances, but we find that this is God testing his faith. I'm not sure this is the case in this film, God is nowhere to be found, yet the characters are struggling with his existence in their lives. It reminds me of "No Country for Old Men" where Tommy Lee Jones mentions how at his age he was expecting God to enter his life some how, but he doesn't.

In the world today, God is talked of less and less, The Coens don't make him appear as if Larry were Moses, and that is what is so frustrating for him, as the audience we can feel what Larry is feeling, we've all been there, luckily, this is done with wicked black humour, that makes it go down easier.

At the end of the film, we are left with the same questions about why bad things happen to good people, but it's a cathartic experience seeing Larry's trials and tribulations, we are able to laugh at it, and perhaps that is one way we can accept the mystery.