Movie Reviews Archive

Get Me Away From Here, I’m Dying

synecdoche_new_york12

“These men were high priests who gave their lives to serve the only god they knew and worshipped – art. Their reward was to produce great works that, at the time I knew them, went largely unappreciated and unnoticed. The price they paid to produce such art was inordinately high; they sacrificed any chance at ordinary happiness and love. No doubt, their anguish was part of what fueled their art. But the depths of their passion, pain, and poverty terrified me.”
–Elliot Tiber, Taking Woodstock

This is the story Charlie Kaufman wants to tell in Synecdoche, New York: an artist living the artist’s life. Needless to say, it’s a tough movie to sit through. Some people may have an anthropological interest in such a story; I don’t.

I’ve seen it twice – absolutely loathed it the first time. When the egghead crowd started gushing over it, I felt compelled to watch it again. My impression the second time was that it’s a movie of moments. It captures what Elliot Tiber describes above: instances of staggering beauty, situated between long stretches of miserable nothingness that make you wonder if it’s all worth it.

Here’s what I love about Synecdoche, New York (warning: some spoilers); the rest I’ll leave to the masochists.

1) Early on, Caden Cotard (Philip Seymour Hoffman) puts on a production of Death of a Salesman, in which Willy and Linda Loman are played by actors in their 20s.

2) When Adele Lack (Catherine Keener) tells Caden that she’s leaving him, she says: “Everyone is disappointing – the more you know someone.”

3) Caden inexplicably appears in one of his daughter Olive’s cartoons.

4) Caden’s would-be girlfriend, Hazel (Samantha Morton), lives in a house that’s always on fire.

5) On the phone from Berlin, Adele blurts out: “I’m famous!”

6) When Caden goes to Berlin to visit Olive, Adele’s friend, Maria (Jennifer Jason Leigh) shows up speaking in a ridiculous German accent.

7) Caden’s therapist, Madeleine Gravis (Hope Davis), tells him a hilarious story about a 5-year-old literary genius “and his ultimate degradation at the hands of a black ex-convict named Eric Washington Jackson Jones Johnson. Jefferson.”

8 ) On her deathbed, one of Olive’s tattoos wilts.

9) Madeleine pays Caden a surprise visit on an airplane.

10) After Sammy (Tom Noonan) joins the cast of Caden’s epic production, Sammy and Caden are hanging out on Caden’s balcony, and a zeppelin passes overhead.

11) In the epic production, Emily Watson plays Samantha Morton’s character – two actresses frequently mistaken for one another in real life.

12) Emily Watson gets naked – which, happily enough, causes Caden to stop crying.

13) Sammy’s suicide speech.

14) Everything that happens in the last 10 minutes of the movie after Caden puts in the earpiece.

15) The minister’s speech, which I think is worth reprinting here in its entirety: “Everything is more complicated than you think. You only see a tenth of what is true. There are a million little strings attached to every choice you make; you can destroy your life every time you choose. But maybe you won’t know for twenty years. And you may never ever trace it to its source. And you only get one chance to play it out. Just try and figure out your own divorce. And they say there is no fate, but there is: it’s what you create. And even though the world goes on for eons and eons, you are only here for a fraction of a fraction of a second. Most of your time is spent being dead or not yet born. But while alive, you wait in vain, wasting years, for a phone call or a letter or a look from someone or something to make it all right. And it never comes or it seems to but it doesn’t really. And so you spend your time in vague regret or vaguer hope that something good will come along. Something to make you feel connected, something to make you feel whole, something to make you feel loved. And the truth is I feel so angry, and the truth is I feel so fucking sad, and the truth is I’ve felt so fucking hurt for so fucking long and for just as long I’ve been pretending I’m OK, just to get along, just for, I don’t know why, maybe because no one wants to hear about my misery, because they have their own. Well, fuck everybody. Amen.”

The Feel-Bad Movie of the Year

larsvontrierantichristposter

Much of the controversy surrounding the upcoming release of Lars von Trier’s outrageously provocative Antichrist has to do with two extremely graphic scenes of sexual violence. I was able to endure the first one – mostly because it caught me off guard, and I had no choice but to sit there watching it like a deer in headlights. But the second one – involving a rusty pair of scissors and a certain sexual organ (I’ll leave it to you to guess which one) – I saw coming a mile off, so I spent that scene studying my knees.

What I did watch I liked. Not in the “enjoy” sense of the word, but I appreciated what von Trier was doing. He takes the movie’s religious themes very seriously. Some audiences might think they’re being punk’d, but I don’t think so. In terms of Catholic imagery and iconography, he’s every bit as sincere as Mel Gibson – and perhaps twice as crazy.

The movie begins in devastation, and then spirals downward from there. He (Willem Dafoe) and She (Charlotte Gainsbourg) – we never learn what their names are – are making passionate love in bed. (For no apparent reason, the scene includes one of von Trier’s patented insert shots of unsimulated sex.) While this is going on, their young son climbs out of his crib, crawls up to a ledge, and falls out of a window.

The mother is inconsolable and has to be hospitalized. Using his expertise as a psychoanalyst, he attempts to talk her down from her depression. At least, I think that’s what he’s doing. In the way he delivers his lines, Dafoe kinda makes you wonder about the guy’s motives. We think, “If I had that voice in my head, I’d probably go crazy too.”

He suggests they drive out to their cabin in the woods, which is named Eden. But nature is the last thing these people need; nature is Satan’s playground. How do I know this? Because the fox with the exposed entrails told me so.

What actually happens in Antichrist is loopy and over-the top; what matters is HOW it happens. The dream sequences are unlike anything I’ve ever seen. Von Trier and his cinematographer, Oscar winner Anthony Dod Mantle (Slumdog Millionaire), overcrank the camera and shoot from way overhead. The effect is like stepping into a waking nightmare. When Stanley Kubrick was filming The Shining, Stephen King accused the legendary auteur of making a movie that would “hurt people.” Sometimes I wondered if von Trier was trying to do the same thing.

At the Cannes Film Festival, Antichrist was named “the most misogynist movie from the self-proclaimed biggest director in the world.” I honestly don’t understand this charge. The women in Breaking the Waves, Dancer in the Dark, Dogville and Manderlay are all victims of degradation. He’s saying women are sometimes victims of violence – especially sexual violence; how does that make him a misogynist? (If he was saying they DESERVED it, then that would be something else.) I don’t see how Antichrist is any more or less misogynistic than von Trier’s previous work.

More than a religious allegory or a battle of the sexes, the film works best as an all-out shocker – thanks in no small part to two of the most extraordinary performances in horror-movie history. It’s not a masterpiece, but it is a genuine experience – an almost unprecedentedly wrenching one. I recommend seeing it in theaters. You don’t want to miss seeing all those people covering their eyes and running for the exits.

Cosmic Journey at 1080p

contact_detail2

When I got my first DVD player, back in The Year 2000!, it came with several free movie offers. The first disc I got was Contact, the 1997 big screen adaptation of Carl Sagan’s novel, directed by Robert Zemeckis. It’s one of my favorite films. Last week, it was re-released on Blu-ray and one couldn’t ask for a better package.

The transfer of the movie itself is absolutely pristine, preserving the 1.85 theatrical aspect ratio and crisp detail of the original theatrical release. This is especially apparent in the majestic opening shot that takes us through the entire universe, as well as in the many sequences where the film switches between video-textured broadcasts and actual film.

Thankfully, the BD retains all of the bonus features from the original DVD. These include multiple feature-length audio commentaries by Jodie Foster, Robert Zemeckis & Steve Starkey, and Ken Ralston with another visual effects supervisor. There are also a number of featurettes that overview key visual effects shots. What’s great is that these features are now clearly presented whereas they were inconveniently buried in the original DVD’s awkward menu. Unique to the BD edition is a music-only audio track. (I am a huge fan of composer Alan Silvestri’s work and fully intend to sit through the whole movie, listening to this track.)

Another detail which I personally like is that the movie begins playing directly upon loading the disc. It does not start with a menu. This is a forgotten attribute of early DVDs that I find very convenient.

It’s a superb Blu-ray disc of a film that deserves to be presented in this way. I highly recommend, nay, demand that you go out and purchase it right now.

Keeling Brothers Score High Points with ‘I.Q.’

iq

I.Q. is a high school horror movie made by people in high school. If that sounds awful, get ready for a surprise: This is a wildly precocious piece of work.

It was made by the Keeling brothers, Aaron and Austin, who grew up in Lansing, Kansas. They started tinkering with their parents’ camera in junior high, making silly short films. By the time they got to high school, their work had evolved considerably. Influenced by the surreal, nightmarish films of David Lynch (as well as his scrupulous approach to sound design), the Keelings’ Playtime with Schlompkins and Pop Spoon are about as professionally made as anything you’re likely to see by teenage moviemakers.

I.Q. is their first feature. Aaron wrote, directed and shot it, while Austin edited, directed and co-starred in it.  (They also performed numerous other tasks – too many to name here.) It took 344 days to complete, and the finished product runs 79 minutes. It’s a testament to their skills (and the Keelings have got MAD SKILLS) that about an hour of it is fun to watch; you often forget you’re watching a high school production. The best thing about it is that, perhaps for the first time, the Keelings have something to say.

It’s set in a high school where all the students are being left behind. The principal, Mr. Thompson (Bobby Parsons), is under enormous pressure to boost the school’s standardized test scores. He’s desperate when the devil shows up in his office in the form of a salesman (Brian Snodgrass), who pitches him on the idea of distributing a miracle drug called NCLB-240. All the students have to do is pop a little green pill every 30 minutes, and their intelligence levels are guaranteed to rise.

Five students – Amy (Jenny Curatola), Mike (Andrew Shafer), Caitlyn (Katie Cook), David (Austin Keeling) and Rachel (Amanda Pina) – are chosen to test the drug based on their lousy grades. Their scores improve dramatically, but pretty soon they’re all going cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.

There’s some playful social satire going on here. The five unlucky students are assigned to a class taught by Mrs. Robinson (Bianca Elliot), who kindly urges them to “come take your pills, kids.” The Keelings are making a subversive statement about standardized testing, which became such a central aspect of the public education system in this country under Bush II. They may be the first filmmakers who grew up in the Bush years to actually make a feature-length movie about growing up in the Bush years.

The opening sequence is a real grabber, hinting at the terror to come, but after that there’s a lot of exposition to get through. I’m not sure what to make of the subplot dealing with Amy’s boyfriend breaking up with her. Aaron Keeling’s script never quite sells us on the idea that the parents would be left completely out of the loop when it comes to the drug experiments. Of the younger performers, Austin Keeling is the best at delivering his brother’s dialogue, but the other actors have their moments. Pina is especially moving in the scenes where Rachel falls behind the rest of the class and starts taking more pills.

Just when you think the film is about to test your patience, the side effects of the drug start to kick in, and the Keelings unleash a tidal wave of imaginative horror imagery.

The most terrifying things happen inside an operating tent, which the students visit in their dreams. (I love the Wizard of Oz touch of casting Parsons in the role of a mad doctor conducting gruesome experiments.) I won’t soon forget seeing the guy with the dripping head wound, or the other guy with the birthday candles sticking out of his chest. In one of the most unsettling scenes, the students have their mouths sewn shut and buttons sewn into their eyes. I bet the Keelings were pissed when they saw Coraline had beaten them to the punch!

I should single out Elizabeth Decker for her spectacular makeup FX work. The original score (by Chase Horseman) and sound design also contribute to the film’s overall air of professionalism. As do the cinematography and editing, from first scene to last.

The Keelings go out on a high point, finding an ingenious way to encapsulate some of the ideas rolling around in their heads. It’s a stunning finale, one that hints at great things to come, and I expect nothing less from these talented young filmmakers.

I.Q. is available on DVD. It has full-length commentary, deleted scenes and bloopers. You can buy it here. The trailer for the film is on YouTube.

The Movie You Weren’t Meant to See

superstar

While reading a review of a new book about Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story, I discovered that Todd Haynes’s infamous short film is available to watch online. I’d been dying to see this thing for years, so I quickly downloaded it as a QuickTime movie off of illegal-art.org. You can also buy a DVD copy, and you can watch the whole film in parts on YouTube. It runs 43 minutes.

Haynes made Superstar in 1987 as a grad student at Bard College. (Cynthia Schneider co-wrote and co-produced the film.) It quickly became a cult classic, but was removed from circulation in 1990 when Richard Carpenter won a copyright infringement lawsuit. Haynes had used 10 of the Carpenters’ songs without permission.

Part thesis statement, part horror film, Superstar is no ordinary musical biopic. It chronicles the battle Karen Carpenter fought and lost with anorexia nervosa. The entire cast is made up of Barbie dolls, and if that sounds like a joke, it’s not. It’s impossible to imagine this story being told in a more powerful and affecting way.

The Carpenters - Richard and his kid sister, Karen - were responsible for such squeaky-clean ’70s hits as “Rainy Days and Mondays” and “(They Long to Be) Close to You.” They were embraced by the right as a response to the more revolutionary sounds of the ’60s, and were even invited to sing at the White House by President Nixon. But, as Haynes points out, there was more to the Carpenters than their wholesome public persona. The film - with its shock cuts and ’80s slasher-movie score - is like a veil being ripped away from America’s idyllic self-image.

The film identifies several possible culprits in Karen’s demise, including a music critic who referred to the impressionable singer as “chubby” in a magazine article. Haynes is unapologetic in his depiction of her family. Karen’s parents and her brother are shown treating her more like a mental patient than a member of the family. It’s these scenes, more than the use of the Carpenters’ music, that most likely led to the film’s suppression. Haynes insinuates that Richard was gay by having Karen say: “I’ll tell them about your private life.” Evidently, that didn’t sit too well with Richard.

Superstar is by no means for everyone. The title cards seem deliberately hard to read, and the film’s use of Holocaust footage is upsetting to say the least. It’s clearly a thesis project; at one point, Haynes gives us an overview of food production in the U.S. after World War II. But it’s also a stunning work of art. The director’s choices - obsessive close-ups of Ex-Lax pills, the bizarre sight of Karen being spanked by her father as an adult - go right to the core. And the Barbie dolls are a masterstroke. They get at the root of the problem: society’s unrealistic expectations for girls. Superstar ranks alongside Safe and I’m Not There as the most radical and profound thing Haynes has ever done.

It’s Funny! It’s Witty! It’s ‘The Informant!’

the_informant01

“Four white guys getting together on a weekday - that’s not a business meeting, it’s a crime scene.”
-The Informant!

On the surface, The Informant! shouldn’t be a fun movie to watch. It’s about one of the 21st century’s most reliable bad actors: corporate greedheads who think they’re above the law. (In most cases, they’re probably right.) Its story takes place in the 1990s, when business transactions were still conducted face-to-face in conference rooms and executive suites. The characters are forever trudging through airports and whispering conspiratorially in telephones. This is the drabbest world imaginable to set a movie in.

And yet it’s a terrific entertainment. It features Matt Damon’s most chameleon-like performance since The Talented Mr. Ripley, and it zips along thanks to some very funny writing and some very amusing casting choices.

Director Steven Soderbergh, delivering his first good movie since 2005’s Bubble, is working in the deadpan style of a Coen Brothers comedy, like Intolerable Cruelty and Burn After Reading. Unlike a straight corporate thriller like, say, Michael Clayton, the outrage is just below the surface. Soderbergh appears to be following the old adage that if you want to drive out the devil, the best way is to mock him.

The hero (of sorts) is Mark Whitacre, who in the mid-1990s became known as the highest-level American executive ever to turn whistleblower. He worked for Archer Daniels Midland, and started cooperating with the FBI when it was investigating a price-fixing scheme. There’s more to this story, but to reveal exactly what Whitacre was up to would be to spoil the fun. It’s one of those stories that’s only believable because it has the virtue of being true.

Soderbergh tells this story in a witty, tongue-in-cheek way, using an ironically bubbly score and a seemingly random collection of thoughts delivered in voiceover. (Later we learn that Whitacre had bipolar disorder.) Damon gives the man a wide-eyed innocence. He packed on weight for the role, and his jaw always seems to be dropped. His outlook is so imbued with wonder that you almost expect a bluebird to fly in and land on his shoulder. But like Tom Ripley, his sunny disposition masks a cold and calculating personality. This is a very complex character and a great performance.

The dialogue (written by Bourne Ultimatum scribe Scott Z. Burns) sparkles, and it’s delivered by some of today’s most prominent comedians: Patton Oswalt, Joel McHale and Paul F. Tomkins, among others. Quentin Tarantino did something similar in Inglourious Basterds, hiring comedic actors for essentially non-comedic roles. But this strategy is even more effective in The Informant! It’s Soderbergh’s way of letting us in on the joke. And the story of Mark Whitacre is nothing if not a joke, one you’re not sure whether to laugh or cry at.

‘District 9′ Rocks

district20920movie20image20sharlto20copley

Already at #44 on the IMDb list of the top 250 movies ever made, District 9 is the debut feature of a major filmmaking talent: South African director/co-writer Neill Blomkamp. Earlier this decade, the 29-year-old wunderkind was handpicked by Peter Jackson to direct a mega-budgeted adaptation of the videogame Halo. When the project fell through, the team decided to expand a short film Blomkamp had made about alien visitors in Johannesburg. The result is a groundbreaking science-fiction dazzler.

It’s a very serious-minded, concise piece of work – the anti-Transformers. The movie swiftly lays out a backstory that rewrites recent history in some fascinating ways. In 1982, an alien ship stopped in midair over Johannesburg. The passengers were quickly rounded up and sent to live in a restricted area known as District 9. The present-day action concerns the efforts of Wikus Van De Merwe, a field hand for a major defense contractor, to relocate the aliens to another camp.

The film’s visual design is completely inspired, combining elements of a documentary with traditional cinematography. Matt Reeves did something similar last year with Cloverfield, but his monster movie had a more herky-jerky, Blair Witch-style, make-you-throw-up aesthetic. The images in District 9 are cleaner and sturdier. The “documentary” footage is on the same professional level as network news, so it’s astonishing when Blomkamp introduces unnatural elements into the mix. He avoids the self-conscious FX of Cloverfield, and in doing so he makes you feel as though you really are seeing aliens here on Earth.

These sure are some disgusting-looking aliens. If Predator and the arachnids from Starship Troopers made babies, they might look something like this. Blomkamp wants you to sympathize with their plight, but he doesn’t shy away from how repulsive they are. They live in squalor, and they clearly don’t know their table manners. (They eat cat food.) The scenes in the alien slum are so raw and real-looking that they might alienate (pun intended) some viewers. This is an uncompromising and unapologetic science-fiction horror movie, one whose brutal style is appropriate for a story that’s essentially a metaphor for South African apartheid.

The first 30 minutes are difficult to watch (in a good way). After that, the narrative turns into a thrilling chase, at which point District 9 becomes the most unlikely of buddy movies. The film is grounded in the astonishing, wonderfully self-effacing performance by Sharlto Copley as Wikus, a man who means well but clearly isn’t up to the task set before him. Wikus’s character arc, going from a bumbling idiot to a reluctant action hero, is unusually vivid for a genre movie. Forced into hiding, Wikus joins forces with an intelligent alien single dad named Christopher Johnson. Given that Copley was probably talking to himself on the set, the scenes between Wikus and Christopher are remarkably engaging and believable.

Note: The film is a complete triumph for the Vancouver Film School. In addition to the director and his co-writer, 25 members of the visual effects crew went to VFS. Special-effects driven movies are the best argument I can think of for the existence of film schools; to work on something like District 9, you need the training. This movie could be used as a recruitment tool not just for VFS, but for film schools in general.

Tarantino’s Glorious ‘Basterds’

inglourious_basterds_-1024x6821

Wild, eclectic and way cool, Inglourious Basterds may be the quintessential Quentin Tarantino movie. That’s not to say I like it as much as Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill, Vol. 2 – at least, not yet. But with this 2 ½ hour WWII epic, Tarantino’s obsessions as a filmmaker seem to have been given their fullest artistic expression.

Two of those obsessions – language and cinema – are at the heart of Inglourious Basterds. Cinema helps defeat fascism, and language is pivotal – when used precisely or imprecisely, it can get people killed.

Like all of Tarantino’s films, Inglourious Basterds is broken up into chapters. The first chapter is called “Once Upon a Time in Nazi-Occupied France” (a reference to Sergio Leone’s magnificent spaghetti western Once Upon a Time in the West). Col. Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz), a high-ranking Nazi, visits the secluded home of a dairy farmer. Landa is a master interrogator, switching between German, French, English and Italian to give him the full advantage in any given situation. He suspects the farmer of hiding a Jewish family named the Dreyfuses. The interrogation that follows is one of the most thrilling intellectual exercises I’ve ever seen in a movie.

The scene is also thrilling in cinematic terms. One shot in particular, which reveals the Dreyfuses are indeed hiding at the farmhouse, etches itself into your memory. This is important because what the scene is really doing is setting up the film’s main revenge plot. “Once Upon a Time in Nazi-Occupied France” closely resembles the “Origin of O-Ren” sequence in Kill Bill, Vol. 1. Both feature a massacre that alters the life of a young girl, and both use the music of Ennio Morricone to give the tragedies an operatic quality. I think the Kill Bill sequence – with little animated O-Ren cupping her mouth before the word “whimper” can escape – is more powerful. But Inglourious Basterds is on the same level. Another bravura shot, framed by a doorway, recalls the famous ending of John Ford’s The Searchers. It’s through this doorway that we see the massacre’s only survivor escape.

The second chapter introduces us to the “basterds,” a team of mostly Jewish-American soldiers who are so brutal they spread fear throughout the Nazi ranks. They’re led by Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt), a Tennessee hick who claims to be the direct descendent of the mountain man Jim Bridger (1804-1881). These scenes demonstrate the director’s flair for comic timing and his tendency to switch moods without warning. The violence is often played for laughs, which (as is usually the case with Tarantino) will make some people uncomfortable. (For a critique of Tarantino’s style, I dare you to watch Michael Haneke’s Funny Games.) But it’s hard to feel guilty about giggling when the people being killed are Nazis. In a wildly violent flashback, a German badass named Hugo Stiglitz (Til Schweiger) kills more than a dozen of his comrades before joining up with the basterds. In this sequence and others, Tarantino’s mix of irony, comedy and bloodshed feels just right.

Besides Hugo, a few other basterds make strong impressions. Tarantino’s protégé, Eli Roth (he made the hysterical “Thanksgiving” trailer in Grindhouse), has some nice moments as Donny Donowitz, nicknamed The Bear Jew for his talent for beating Nazis to death with a baseball bat. And B.J. Novak’s line readings are so hilarious he’s convinced me to start watching The Office. But Pitt’s the main draw. My only complaint is that he never laughs; nothing compares to hearing that crazy laugh of his (e.g., the scene in Fight Club where Tyler gets beaten senseless by Lou the club owner).

The film’s three remaining chapters are devoted to a plot to blow up Hitler (ridiculously played by Martin Wuttke). We’re reintroduced to Shoshanna Dreyfus (Melanie Laurent), the lone survivor of that opening farmhouse massacre, who’s hiding out in Paris and running a cinema. We’re also introduced to Joseph Goebbels (Sylvester Groth), who’s in Paris to show his new film, Nation’s Pride, starring a German war hero named Fredrick Zoller (Daniel Bruhl). As luck would have it, Fredrick meets Shoshanna and develops a crush on her. Shoshanna uses this to her advantage. At Fredrick’s insistence, the premiere for Nation’s Pride is moved to her cinema – all the better for her to blow it up using the theater’s large supply of highly flammable nitrate film prints.

Fredrick is one of the film’s most deceptive characters. He’s played by the fresh-faced young star of Goodbye Lenin!, and he seems like a nice enough guy as he and Shoshanna talk about 1940s European cinema and he pesters her about going out with him. It’s shocking when we hear him say “Heil Hitler!” for the first time or when he refers to Goebbels as “Joseph.” While Landa is more of an individualist, Fredrick is the true face of fascism – his personality has been swallowed whole by the Nazis.

The basterds also plan to blow up the theater, though Shoshanna doesn’t know this; it’s one of Tarantino’s most original touches that the two sets of plotters never find out about each other. The second plot, named Operation Kino, leads to an extraordinary 20-minute scene in a basement, where a German spy named Bridget von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger) is waiting to lead the basterds to the theater. The suspense hinges on a strange accent used by a British Army lieutenant named Archie Hicox (Michael Fassbender). There are at least four great performances in this scene. My favorite is August Diehl’s charismatic turn as Major Hellstrom, a Nazi poster boy who becomes suspicious of Archie’s accent. Major Hellstrom’s evilly gloating face mirrors a phantasmagoric image we see later inside Shoshanna’s theater.

The climax (featuring a lot of dead Nazis, David Bowie’s “Cat People” and the sexiest red dress in all of Paris) rivals “Showdown at House of Blue Leaves” as the most entertaining and feverishly alive sequence of Tarantino’s career. Waltz has given us the most electrifying movie villain since Heath Ledger’s The Joker. And I haven’t even mentioned David Wasco’s period-perfect production design or Mike Myers’s amusing cameo as a British Army general. Inglourious Basterds is that rarest of things: an artistically pleasing crowd-pleaser.

Die Hard: With a ‘Vengeance’

sympathy-for-mr-vengeance

Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance is clearly the work of Park Chan-Wook, one of the most exciting filmmakers behind the Korean New Wave movement. It isn’t as much fun to watch as Oldboy, which follows Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance in Park’s Vengeance Trilogy (Lady Vengeance is the final installment). But the same could be said for just about any movie ever made.

Written in less than 20 hours(!), Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance is about a deaf-mute guy named Ryu (Ha-kyun Shin). Ryu goes to extraordinary lengths to pay for an organ transplant for his sister. First he sells one of his kidneys on the black market. Then he kidnaps a little girl and holds her for ransom. Of course, everything goes horribly (horribly) wrong.

Viewers will gawk at Park’s widescreen compositions – especially the scenes filmed along the Seomjin River. The film never quite reaches the mind-blowing levels of Oldboy, where the hero pummels 12 guys with a hammer while he has a knife stuck in his back. But Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance has some genuinely shocking moments. The acts of vengeance (electroshock torture, sliced-open ankles, geysers of blood) have a disquieting sense of inevitability about them; the point is that they have no point. This is quite different from Oldboy, where the mechanics of the manga-inspired plot reveal layer upon layer of secrets.

Just as its characters defy the law, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance sometimes defies logic. (After 20 hours of nonstop writing, I say sleep on it and polish it in the morning.) The little girl’s father (played by Kang-ho Song, the star of Park’s new vampire pic, Thirst) walks into a radio station via a gigantic plot hole. Still, there’s something satisfying about the way Park refuses to soften the blow, either with comic relief or with easy thrills. If revenge is a dish best served cold, then Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance is the ice-cold sushi of revenge movies.

Calling All Movie Critics

jay_sherman_it_stinks

As one of the behind-the-scenes people at FilmNet, I get to see how the site is shaping up as we fast approach our launch date. And I have to say, I’m getting really excited! This is going to be the ultimate site for film lovers - THE place for news, reviews, and the best of online movies.

I’ve been busy writing reviews and working hard to awesomify our review section before we pull back the curtain in September. This has been a decidedly mixed summer at the movies. (Harry: You’re still a wizard. Michael Bay: Could you tone it down just a wee bit?) On FilmNet, you’ll find reviews of movies playing at a theater near you, as well as critiques of the latest DVD releases and an extensive catalog of what are essentially nostalgia pieces - movies that came out a long time ago but we’ve decided to revisit. And, of course, reviews of your short films!

But I can’t do this all by myself, people, and for two reasons: 1) I am only one man; and 2) That’s not what FilmNet’s all about. This is about building a community of film fanatics, and we want our review section to have the same diversity of opinion as any other great user-driven Web site.

So if you like writing about movies, please send us your reviews! On the site, each review will have its own page, with your byline, stills from the movie and ratings on a five-star scale. The review page will link to a profile page, where you can pimp just about anything you want: social networking sites, other places where users can read your work, whatever! Please include a star rating along with the name you want your reviews to be published under. You can e-mail me at sbshupe@filmnet.com.

  • Translator
  • Recent Comments