Look What's Coming

There is so much you can say about The Coen Brothers' masterpiece "No Country for Old Men". It was so nice to see such a rich, multi-layered, lyrical film that masquerades as a run of the mill suspense yarn. Of course you can say that about any number of the Coens' films, but I think they have never been so blunt on the nature of violence like they have in this picture.

The story is based on the Cormac McCarthy novel of the same name, and follows the plot pretty faithfully but with a few of the Coen's own interpretations thrown into the mix. When Llewelyn Moss (2007's busiest man in Hollywood Josh Brolin) is out hunting, he stumbles upon a bloody aftermath. Dead bodies are scattered around a Texas valley with a truck full of drugs. When Llewelyn investigates further he finds a case full of money that is now left unclaimed. When Llewelyn decides to take the money, we find it leads to even more trouble. Enter Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem) a hired killer with no conscience who would kill someone at the flip of a coin. His sadistic weapon of choice is a cattle gun which is handy when shooting off locks to a door as well as people in the head. Anton has been brought in the capture Lewelyn and get the money, but pretty soon he becomes a loose canon not caring who gets in his way. Another major character is the local Sheriff Ed Tom (Tommy Lee Jones) who's trying to catch up with Llewelyn and trying to make sense of this violent world he now finds him in.

All the usual genre stuff of money and drugs really don't matter much in this film. Much like the Coen's other masterpiece "Fargo", we never get a clear answer as to what happens to the money and by the end of the movie it doesn't really matter. What this film does, I think very successfully is comment on how violence is ongoing, and once it starts it's unstoppable. I have been squeamish in the past about violence in movies, especially ones who claim to be commenting on it but mostly exploiting it for mindless reasons. "No Country for Old Men" gets it right all the way through, in fact as the film's violence becomes more and more senseless, the less of it we see. The two most significant deaths in the film happen off camera and only one of those shows us the aftermath. This makes the deaths even more disturbing and sticks with you.

But what also makes this into a great movie is the Coens' immeasurable craft. These guys may very well be the best filmmakers alive today. The use of how they build suspense and atmosphere is brilliant. There is hardly a note of music through the whole film, but the images are so powerful you don't even notice it. The addition of lighting and sound effects make up some of the best most suspenseful moments in film history. One such scene includes the unscrewing of a light bulb and the sound of a telephone ringing and that is all I'm going to say.

As for the performances, let's just say I don't think they could be better. Bardem is already getting some Oscar buzz as Chigurh and he makes this character frightening each time he's on screen, I almost closed my eyes more than once when he appeared. Brolin has a great everyman quality in the part of Llewelyn and for once, he's not playing a bad guy, but he is someone who is in over his head. Then there is Tommy Lee Jones, some one who already gave a great performance with "In the Valley of Elah", but with Sheriff Tom, Jones has found a kindred spirit, and his performance is really the heart and soul of what this film is about, his final speech in the film leaves you with the kind of disillusionment his character feels.

I can go on and on about this film, it is definitely a great one. I think I'll write more about it later, but until then I'll just leave my four star rating and tell you to go see this movie.

4 stars out of 4

Roger Ebert's Top Ten of 2006

After taking part of the year off due to illness, Roger Ebert has been making up for lost time by reviewing films from last year that he missed. He must've finished though because I'm glad to see that he has his annual top ten list from last year finally available. You can all check out http://rogerebert.com to see his list. There are even a few there I haven't seen yet like "Bubble", and "Perfume". Quickly now to the video store!!!!

Can't Get Enought of Bobby and The Beatles

Two of the greatest artists of all time are getting a resurgence of sorts (As if they needed one) this year on both the big screen and on DVD. If you haven't gone to see Julie Taymor's visually impressive Beatles musical "Across the Universe" which has polarized its audience, I very much recommend it, but if you want the Beatles themselves then you can go to the DVD store and pick up their classic film "Help". Directed by Richard Lester, it's the band's follow up to "A Hard Days Night", and even though I wouldn't say this film is up to par with their earlier one, it's still full of great humour and great music.

Also Todd Haynes experimental biopic "I'm Not There" is yet to open wide so I haven't been able to see it, but it's been getting some great critical response, and if you're aching to see Dylan on film then a new DVD which chronicles his performances at the Newport Folk Festival has just been released. Entitled "The Other Side of the Mirror", this was the famous folk festival where Dylan went electric.

The release of of "Across the Universe" and "I'm Not There", plus these DVDs just goes to show, that good music never fades away.

Tokyo Story: The Simple Tragedy

During the month of November, I am focusing on film maker Yasujiro Ozu. I thought it now time to say a few words about his masterpiece (and one of my absolute favorite films) "Tokyo Story".

I've seen "Tokyo Story" at least four times now, I've even read the screenplay, and still I am in awe of it. Every shot of this film is truth in it's purest form. It does everything the opposite of what you expect. The story centres on an elderly couple who make a trip to Tokyo to visit their children. Since Tokyo is such a far distance, the couple realize that this may be their last chance to see all of them together.

When they arrive, their children are not very hospitable, they seem more put out by their parent's visit than anything else. Nothing is ever said directly on this topic but is instead covered up mostly by polite conversation. The one person who does welcome the couple's visit is their former daughter-in-law Noriko. Noriko lives alone and unmarried since her husband (their son) was killed in the war. The children then find it convenient for them to dump their parents on Noriko who then takes them sight seeing and to visit her apartment.

When the children finally are out of ideas of what to do with them, they decide to spend the money to send them to a bathhouse, but the parents are not happy there since it is full of young people who are up late at night. Their visit is then cut short.

As I said before when I first saw this film I didn't enjoy it as much, I think because I was expecting something else, something a little more conventional. I wasn't used to the performing style of the actors, I found when some of them had to cry after the death of a certain character, it looked forced and not at all realistic. But now that I know a little bit more about Ozu's intent and after viewing many other films by him I think I know the reason for my initial reaction to the film. At no point was I asked to be a participant in the action, this is more of an observation of a family coming apart, but that doesn't mean you are not supposed to feel anything for them, it just means you're kept at a distance. I would almost describe it as looking through a window into someone else's life, we can see what's happening but the glass is keeping us out.

Ozu keeps us at a distance purposefully, and because of that we are able to see the whole picture. The thing I like about Ozu's films the most is how he is able to make us identify with each character, there is no black and white bad guy in his films. We feel for the elderly couple's situation, but on another level we don't blame the children for their decisions, they are all human in Ozu's eyes. The one person who speaks for both generations is Noriko. Near the end of the film, the one person who gave the couple any compassion can't help but feel that some day she will turn selfish, and unkind herself.

As I was reading the screenplay to "Tokyo Story", the introduction by Donald Richie he states that "Ozu restricted himself to elegiac theme: the dissolution of the Japanese family." This is why most of his films are considered to be very similar, he wasn't repeating himself, it was just that the theme remained consistent. The tragedy of "Tokyo Story" is a simple one and that from the beginning of the film we know the happiness this family had has changed through the distance between them, and by the end when another change occurs, their is an even bigger gap separating them. But being the philosophical film maker he is, Ozu looks upon this change as inevitable as the passage of time. Nothing can be changed, it is the way of things, and the fact that we look upon it with sadness is a beautiful thing, and reminds us that we are human.

Two Sides to Every Story

Ever since Edward G. Robinson cried those immortal words "Is this the end of Rico", American movies have been in love with the gangster. But in a genre that has now given us films like "The Godfather", "Goodfellas", and shows like "The Sopranos", how much is there left to tell us. I think "American Gangster" tries to tread new territory but it turns into the same old story we are used to.

Denzel Washington stars as real life gangster Frank Lucas, a man who controlled the criminal underworld of Harlem all through the Vietnam war. His main source of income was from smuggling drugs out of Vietnam and onto the streets of Harlem, how he does that is ingenious and is no wonder he wasn't caught sooner. But the man on Lucas' tail is a tough honest cop named Richie Roberts (Russel Crowe). Richie may be a good cop but we find out he's a screw up with everything else. Throughout the film Richie is shown as someone who can't hold a relationship together, he's constantly having casual sex all the while trying to battle his ex-wife over custody of their son. He is alienated by fellow policemen for not accepting bribes, and is criticized for hanging out with old school friends who have become criminals. What redeems Richie is he's honest.

Meanwhile Frank is a cold-blooded murderer, but he's a man who loves his family, particularly his mother and wife. He's a man who has it all together and has no problem with what he's doing. We see a stark contrast between the two men as Frank is shown having thanksgiving dinner with his family in his large mansion, while Richie is alone in his apartment having a turkey and potato chip sandwich, obviously in this world it doesn't pay to be honest, but it does to be a criminal.

These two characters are very compelling, in fact I think they are too compelling, sometimes I wish they had their own separate movies so we could learn more about them. Richie seems to be the most interesting character simply because he seems to be the one trapped the most by his own flaws. Lucas just seems to be living the "Scarface" high life until (as gangster convention has taught us) his kingdom comes to an end.

Even though I thought Richie's story was more interesting, I felt that this really should've been Frank's show all the way. The life of a black gangster's rise to power is rarely seen in films and it could've stood on its own as a great movie, but some energy is missing in these scenes, I felt I didn't really understand what makes Frank's world different from that of Tony Montana's, but perhaps the point is there isn't much of a difference.

The film itself is very entertaining with two of our greatest leading men showing you why they are so great. We also get great support from Cuba Gooding Jr. as one of Frank's rivals, Josh Brolin as a corrupt cop, and Ruby Dee as Frank's mother. Director Ridley Scott keeps the story going for the most part and gives us a lot of exciting scenes that make us look up and pay attention. Perhaps the one scene that gave me a glimmer of hope that this movie was to be great was when Frank is seen sitting in a cafe with his brothers, then suddenly he sees a man who owes him money on the street. Frank comes out of the cafe and shoots the man point blank in the head in front of dozens of witnesses, and calmly sits back down to eat. It's probably the best example of Frank's power in the city, and I only wish there was more of that.

In the end "American Gangster" never ceases to entertain, but it's really telling us nothing we didn't know before.

3 stars out of 4

What Ozu means to me

There have been a few artists who have had a profound effect on me, profound in the sense that their ideas or their words have helped mold me into the human being I am today. A few of those names include Charles Dickens, Bob Dylan, William Shakespeare, and Groucho Marx. Being a film buff I'm sure I could add many film makers to this list, but Yasujiro Ozu is the one who has impacted me the greatest.

It was about two years ago when I first heard Ozu's name, before then the only other man I associated Japanese cinema with was Kurosawa. I was shuffling through Roger Ebert's Great Movies list as I do on occasion, and on this particular day I came upon the title "Tokyo Story". As I was reading the review, the plot intrigued me (it was later that I found out that plot in an Ozu film is virtually non-existent). It was the story of an elderly couple who travel to Tokyo to visit their children for what will probably be the last time. The idea of it struck me as so simple yet so ingenious. I set out to find "Tokyo Story" and find it I did.

At first viewing I didn't know what to think, it was definitely a movie I was not used to, it was almost as if the whole style put me off guard. I was waiting for a big emotional payoff at the end of the film and it never happened. But the film kept nagging me, I knew there was something more to it, so it wasn't soon later that I watched it again, and then again. What I picked up more and more were the subtle nuances in the film, I payed more attention to the dialogue and started to think about what was not being said rather than what was. I started asking questions about certain shots Ozu made. As many Ozu admirers know, his camera mostly remained stationary and his favorite placement was always three feet off the floor which was the average height of a person sitting on a tatami mat. It was this style I fell in love with, what a beautiful and unique way to shoot a film, this way made it easy to observe the characters without being distracted. We are kept at a distance, always looking in, never interfering with the action going on. When I noticed the moments Ozu did move his camera it was usually to stay with a character, like if they were walking down a street or riding their bicycle down the road, it seemed he was doing it out of necessity so the characters don't go out of frame. However by "Tokyo Twilight", his tracking shots became non-existent.

It became clear to me that the characters were the most important in his films which is probably why I've grown to love them so much. His characters all seem so real, they are never glamorized for the sake of plot or theme, they are motivated by their reality. When I first saw his masterpiece "Tokyo Twilight", I was amazed at how realistic his characters were to me, they were so real that I thought Ozu was taking people out of my own life and putting them in his film, but this couldn't have been since it was made over fifty years ago. I don't remember ever being caught up with every major character in a film and sympathizing or at least empathizing with their situation.

Since first viewing "Tokyo Story" which seemed like another lifetime ago, I have watched nine other Ozu films, all of the ones that are available (I think) in North America (with the exception of "Good Morning), I have read Donald Richie's book "Ozu" which discusses in great detail, the film maker's process from writing the script to the editing of the film. Perhaps it's a bit obsessive of me, but it's all very fascinating. I suppose I could compare it to falling in love for the first time, or falling in love all over again. His style sticks with you, and if you care to get into it, it's a very satisfying feeling one gets after watching his films. Each and every one of them have become personal favorites of mine, and if I'm ever feeling low, I sometimes get the impulse to watch one of his films. They put me at ease, I think it's because his films remind me what it's like being human, and I suddenly don't feel alone in the world, and when you can feel that way every time, that's when you know you're in the hands of a master.

Baby Blues

If you look back at our recent film history, you'll find some of the best crime dramas out there have been set in Boston. Two films that automatically spring to mind are Scorcese's "The Departed" and Eastwood's "Mystic River. There is something very special and seedy in the mean streets of Boston, but I think "Gone Baby Gone", Ben Affleck's directorial debut is the most authentic in showing us just what those streets are like.

"Gone Baby Gone" is based on the book by Dennis Lehane, the same man who penned "Mystic River", it involves a kidnapping case of a young girl. The police are now in the third day of investigation without much to go on. The girl's Aunt (Amy Madigan) decides to find some outside help. Enter our complex hero Patrick Kenzie (Casey Affleck in who is superb) a young private investigator who has connections with the criminal elite in Boston. Patrick along with his significant other (Michelle Monaghan) are brought in to help with the situation. The police chief in charge (Morgan Freeman) is apprehensive about the whole thing, but thanks to Patrick's inside contacts, he's able to get information quicker than the cops. But Patrick has to report back to the police with whatever he finds. The leading investigators are played by Ed Harris and John Ashton. Through the investigation we learn that the girl's mother (Amy Ryan) was not a saint. She was a drug runner for one of the local dealers. When we find out the mother stole from this dealer, he becomes the main suspect.

To give away more about the plot would be a sin, for as with all good crime stories all is not what is seems to be. The film reminded me a lot of "Mystic River" no doubt since they are both Lehane's stories. The theme of child abuse runs deep, and a question is raised near the end of the film that you will no doubt ponder after the credits role by. I couldn't help but think that this movie was good mainly because of the source material.

I don't want to cut Affleck the director short, he also co-wrote the screenplay and reminds us that yes Matt Damon wasn't the only one who wrote "Good Will Hunting". I think the dialogue is the best contribution Ben gives to the film. It's tough and authentic, particularly in an early scene with Casey and Michelle in a bar interviewing witnesses. It stands alone as one of the best acting and dialogue scenes I've seen all year and reminded me of the tough talk between De Niro or Keitel in "Mean Streets". That scene alone is worth the price of admission.

The performances here are all stellar. This is definitely turning into the year of Casey Affleck as he makes his young detective into a tough, honorable, and charming hero. After learning that Dennis Lehane has made a series of books with Patrick Kenzie, I hope Affleck returns in a number of sequels. Other stars like Monaghan, Freeman, and Harris do solid jobs as usual and it was great to see Amy Madigan kicking around as the only family member who seems to really care about the missing child.

But the scene stealer here is Amy Ryan as the completely unsympathetic mother. As soon as we think we can get in her side, Ryan pulls the wool from our eyes to show us she's putting on an act.

All that being said, a slight thing was nagging me that stopped me from really liking this film. Despite the perfections of the dialogue and the performances, Affleck's direction seemed a bit self conscious. There are many scenes that seemed to drag and I wanted Affleck to show us rather than tell us. The narration done by Patrick seemed out of place and was unnecessary. I couldn't help but think that Affleck put it there because he was more confident with the dialogue than with the direction. But a lot of it I think is Affleck trying to find his voice, with as many bad scenes there are just as many good ones, and there are even a couple of spectacular ones, so I am recommending this film, it's a good starting block for someone who I think will have a great career behind the camera.

3 stars out of 4