Cavalcade is the movie that I blame for stopping the Oscar Project the first time around. The reason has almost nothing to do with the movie itself. It's that it's not easily available. I found a lousy torrent of it, complete with Spanish subtitles and lousy sound. I realized after a few minutes that I had to rely on my sparse Spanish skills to understand some of the sentences. I stopped watching, and the Project found itself unofficially suspended. I threatened to continue a couple times under the assumption that I could find a cleaner version of Cavalcade, or just pass it by. I couldn't do either. Today, I'm forcing myself to sit down and watch the crappy sound/Spanish subtitled version.
It's definitely not the most exciting movie ever. Cavalcade tells the story of an English family over the course of 30+ years. Starting with New Years Eve 1899, the family patriarch is about to go off to Africa to fight in the Boer War. Expectations are that he will return changed or not at all. A few months later, he's back, and it doesn't seem to have changed him at all. I guess I missed the significance of that.
Years later his son falls in love. He and his new wife go on a cruise for their honeymoon. The date on the screen is April 14, 1912. If you know your historical dates (or James Cameron movies), you know it won't end well. Then World War I happens in a Captain America/WWII style montage. And then some other stuff happened that I didn't pay attention to.
Definitely not worth the wait. Even though it's been a couple years since I watched the first movies, I'm pretty sure that Cavalcade is definitely my least favorite movie of The Project so far. You can check the "Oscar Project" labels on the blog posts to find those. I hope I'm back on track with this thing. If I actually do, I'll be watching the Oscar winner from this year in December of 2013. The next movie, It Happened One Night, I've already seen. It's fantastic, so I know I'll enjoy rewatching it.
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
2011 Oscar Roundup
2011 was a rather strange year for movies, and that makes for a strange mix of Best Picture nominees. Perhaps strange isn't the word of choice for many, as by many accounts it was a weak year for movies. But I tend to enjoy the bad movies as much as the good one, as it gives me something to complain about.
I do have to agree to some extent, at least. With the exception of my favorite movie of 2011, I didn't really love any of the movies. The same is true of the Oscar winners. I have some favorites, but none that I'll really be rooting for. I have four that I will be actively rooting against, however. Let's discuss.
Favorites:
Midnight in Paris, The Descendents, and The Artist all made my top 10 list. I honestly believe that the race is between The Descendents and The Artist. I feel like Midnight in Paris came out too soon, so it lost the momentum. However, it's out on DVD/Blu, but it's still showing in some theaters. That's unprecedented for a non-special effects extravaganza. The Descendents is probably the more emotional choice, and maybe the best all around movie. The Artist is the most different of the movies, and being silent and black and white, the best look back at classic movies.
The Middle of the road.
Moneyball and Hugo were good, but definitely not great. My favorite part of Moneyball was reliving the A's win streak, but that's because I followed it closely and went to one of the games. I'm also nerdy enough to enjoy the math conversations between Hill and Pitt. I didn't like the pacing of Hugo. It looks beautiful and is a great nod to film events that should be made a part of our country's remembered history. But, well, meh.
The toilet.
Of the four movies that I really disliked, I would be least offended if the movie I hated the most won. Reread that sentence if necessary to follow it. The Tree of Life was pretentious crap, but it was ambitiously crappy. For that reason alone, it will hurt the least if it gets the award.
War Horse was an over manipulation of emotions. While The Descendents was emotional, it was because of someone dying and felt genuine. We were supposed to be swept away by a horse in War Horse, and one that was spectacular. Looked like just a horse to me. The kid who played the lead was not such a great actor with a strange voice.
The Help. It has many of the notes of a good movie. The acting is good. The subject is interesting. There are parts that I really liked. But there is way too much crap. The most egregious problem to me is that the characters are cartoons, especially Bryce Dallas Howard's villainous white lady - awful. There are MUCH better movies about the civil rights era. And there is a great movie about the help waiting to be told; I've heard that the book is excellent. But tell it from the point of the help. Show their stories - don't having them tell them (creative writing 101, day 1).
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was Extremely Band and Incredibly Wretched. Tom Hanks is strange, and not in a good way.The plot is contrived and ridiculous. I will admit that there is a small twist at the end that brought some things together and made the mother's character, played by Sandra Bullock, make more sense. But it was too late at that point. I have no clue why this movie was nominated or even liked. I'll start my own riot and looting in downtown Concord if this wins.
I do have to agree to some extent, at least. With the exception of my favorite movie of 2011, I didn't really love any of the movies. The same is true of the Oscar winners. I have some favorites, but none that I'll really be rooting for. I have four that I will be actively rooting against, however. Let's discuss.
Favorites:
Midnight in Paris, The Descendents, and The Artist all made my top 10 list. I honestly believe that the race is between The Descendents and The Artist. I feel like Midnight in Paris came out too soon, so it lost the momentum. However, it's out on DVD/Blu, but it's still showing in some theaters. That's unprecedented for a non-special effects extravaganza. The Descendents is probably the more emotional choice, and maybe the best all around movie. The Artist is the most different of the movies, and being silent and black and white, the best look back at classic movies.
The Middle of the road.
Moneyball and Hugo were good, but definitely not great. My favorite part of Moneyball was reliving the A's win streak, but that's because I followed it closely and went to one of the games. I'm also nerdy enough to enjoy the math conversations between Hill and Pitt. I didn't like the pacing of Hugo. It looks beautiful and is a great nod to film events that should be made a part of our country's remembered history. But, well, meh.
The toilet.
Of the four movies that I really disliked, I would be least offended if the movie I hated the most won. Reread that sentence if necessary to follow it. The Tree of Life was pretentious crap, but it was ambitiously crappy. For that reason alone, it will hurt the least if it gets the award.
War Horse was an over manipulation of emotions. While The Descendents was emotional, it was because of someone dying and felt genuine. We were supposed to be swept away by a horse in War Horse, and one that was spectacular. Looked like just a horse to me. The kid who played the lead was not such a great actor with a strange voice.
The Help. It has many of the notes of a good movie. The acting is good. The subject is interesting. There are parts that I really liked. But there is way too much crap. The most egregious problem to me is that the characters are cartoons, especially Bryce Dallas Howard's villainous white lady - awful. There are MUCH better movies about the civil rights era. And there is a great movie about the help waiting to be told; I've heard that the book is excellent. But tell it from the point of the help. Show their stories - don't having them tell them (creative writing 101, day 1).
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was Extremely Band and Incredibly Wretched. Tom Hanks is strange, and not in a good way.The plot is contrived and ridiculous. I will admit that there is a small twist at the end that brought some things together and made the mother's character, played by Sandra Bullock, make more sense. But it was too late at that point. I have no clue why this movie was nominated or even liked. I'll start my own riot and looting in downtown Concord if this wins.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Aristides
Number 1 - 50/50
50/50 is a funny movie about cancer. Good times!
When I wrote about The Descendents, I mentioned that it nicely walked the line between funny and dramatic. 50/50 does it even better.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt came close to making the top of my list before with 500 Days of Summer - it hit number 2. The two movies can sit next to each other in a DVD collection whether grouped by name or by level of awesomeness. I don't think this movie works without him. James McAvoy was originally cast as Adam, and I can't imagine it.
My biggest surprise is how much I enjoyed Seth Rogan as Kyle. He dialed back his performance and took the backseat, yet he never disappears. While 50/50 looks at Adam's relationship with his girlfriend (Bryce Dallas Howard), it's Adam and Kyle who grow closer together in a natural way as a result of Adam's cancer. Considering that was the genesis of the script, and the role he played in real life, it works.
50/50 comes out at home later this month. I think it deserves a MUCH wider audience that it received. It came out at a bad time, and it's probably difficult to market a funny cancer movie. See it.I'm looking forward to seeing it again.
50/50 is a funny movie about cancer. Good times!
When I wrote about The Descendents, I mentioned that it nicely walked the line between funny and dramatic. 50/50 does it even better.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt came close to making the top of my list before with 500 Days of Summer - it hit number 2. The two movies can sit next to each other in a DVD collection whether grouped by name or by level of awesomeness. I don't think this movie works without him. James McAvoy was originally cast as Adam, and I can't imagine it.
My biggest surprise is how much I enjoyed Seth Rogan as Kyle. He dialed back his performance and took the backseat, yet he never disappears. While 50/50 looks at Adam's relationship with his girlfriend (Bryce Dallas Howard), it's Adam and Kyle who grow closer together in a natural way as a result of Adam's cancer. Considering that was the genesis of the script, and the role he played in real life, it works.
50/50 comes out at home later this month. I think it deserves a MUCH wider audience that it received. It came out at a bad time, and it's probably difficult to market a funny cancer movie. See it.I'm looking forward to seeing it again.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Vagrant
Number 2 - Midnight in Paris
This became my favorite Woody Allen movie barely halfway through it. I submit that I haven't seen every one of his, but I've seen my fair share. I've actually enjoyed a few movies that he's done in the past few years, including Vicky Cristina Barcelona and Match Point (which hit number 8 on my 2006 list). Of his older stuff, I appreciate some of them, found no enjoyment at all in some of them.
I think that I like the Woody Allen character, but I want the character to do something other to be the whole movie. And that's one of the first ways that Midnight in Paris succeeds. Owen Wilson plays the Allen character, but there is actually a plot that he follows. Yes, I realize that I have said many times that the character arc is the most important thing in a movie. But it's even better when they do something.
And then we have Owen Wilson's performance. I mentioned that he plays the Allen character. But while you recognize it, it feels more like Owen is playing a homage to Allen instead of trying to be him. He moves in his own direction and gives it a light touch that I really liked. This was a guy that you really would like to hang out with for awhile. As he goes on his midnight adventures, you really understand why all of these people would really like him.
I'm being vague with plot details by using the word "adventures" instead of telling anything. I went into this movie knowing little more than the trailer and that it was getting good reviews, so nothing was spoiled for me. What happens after midnight is the big surprise of the movie, and I don't want to be the one to ruin it for you if you haven't seen it yet. However, in some things I have since read about, it has been spoiled. The closer it gets to Oscar season, it will be spoiled even more.
Luckily, it's out on DVD. Even luckier, it's still showing in some theaters around the Bay Area. Yes, a movie that came out at the beginning of last summer is still there in January. If you haven't seen it yet, check it out. If you are an English teacher and you still haven't seen it, or if you just plain enjoy reading some good literature, you definitely need to see it.
Also, I love that poster. My favorite of the year.
This became my favorite Woody Allen movie barely halfway through it. I submit that I haven't seen every one of his, but I've seen my fair share. I've actually enjoyed a few movies that he's done in the past few years, including Vicky Cristina Barcelona and Match Point (which hit number 8 on my 2006 list). Of his older stuff, I appreciate some of them, found no enjoyment at all in some of them.
I think that I like the Woody Allen character, but I want the character to do something other to be the whole movie. And that's one of the first ways that Midnight in Paris succeeds. Owen Wilson plays the Allen character, but there is actually a plot that he follows. Yes, I realize that I have said many times that the character arc is the most important thing in a movie. But it's even better when they do something.
And then we have Owen Wilson's performance. I mentioned that he plays the Allen character. But while you recognize it, it feels more like Owen is playing a homage to Allen instead of trying to be him. He moves in his own direction and gives it a light touch that I really liked. This was a guy that you really would like to hang out with for awhile. As he goes on his midnight adventures, you really understand why all of these people would really like him.
I'm being vague with plot details by using the word "adventures" instead of telling anything. I went into this movie knowing little more than the trailer and that it was getting good reviews, so nothing was spoiled for me. What happens after midnight is the big surprise of the movie, and I don't want to be the one to ruin it for you if you haven't seen it yet. However, in some things I have since read about, it has been spoiled. The closer it gets to Oscar season, it will be spoiled even more.
Luckily, it's out on DVD. Even luckier, it's still showing in some theaters around the Bay Area. Yes, a movie that came out at the beginning of last summer is still there in January. If you haven't seen it yet, check it out. If you are an English teacher and you still haven't seen it, or if you just plain enjoy reading some good literature, you definitely need to see it.
Also, I love that poster. My favorite of the year.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Baden-Baden
Number 3 - The Descendents
The best script of the year, hands down, belongs to The Descendents. You won't see a movie with more snappy dialogue and smooth lines this year. But the two story lines also weave together nicely.
The first story is of Matt King, played by George Clooney, and his family's attempt to sell their land, which they are required to do for legal reasons. Here's one big reason why this movie and script works. That should be a dull story, and they make it work. It's mostly the backdrop for the second and more import story, but it never gets lost, it never gets forgotten, and it enhances the main story.
The second and main story involves King's wife. She is in a coma, and King finds out that she was having an affair. He, with his daughters, tries to find the guy while they are dealing with the condition of his wife. It's an extremely emotional story that never gets melodramatic. It walks that thin tightrope of trying to be dramatic and funny - and pulls it off effortlessly.
George Clooney always picks great movies. Even him movies that I haven't enjoyed as much, such as Syriana, I appreciate and respect. He's at his best here. And surprisingly, so are the Amara Miller and Shailene Woodley, the girls who play his daughters. I noticed something during the final scene. It's a really simple shot of the family watching TV, with the camera in the place where the TV should be. They didn't feel like they were acting in that shot. None of them. And I recognized that in most movies with little kids (Miller is 10) you tend to notice that their acting is crappy, but they're kids so you often ignore it. Everything felt natural. Woodley plays his 17-year old daughter, thoough she is actually 20. I've read buzz of an Oscar nom for her. She deserves it, and I hope to see Clooney's name as well.
The minor characters are also very nicely written. Early in the movie, you'll meet a character named Sid, who is a friend of King's older daughter. You'll think that you have him figured out in his early scenes. But there's another layer or two revealed, and it works. It makes sense. You'll think he's just there for comic relief, but he also helps to tell the story.
Finally, I have to give a nod to the music. The movie takes place in Hawaii, so you can imagine what you hear, though it's never cheesy or feels like luau.
The best script of the year, hands down, belongs to The Descendents. You won't see a movie with more snappy dialogue and smooth lines this year. But the two story lines also weave together nicely.
The first story is of Matt King, played by George Clooney, and his family's attempt to sell their land, which they are required to do for legal reasons. Here's one big reason why this movie and script works. That should be a dull story, and they make it work. It's mostly the backdrop for the second and more import story, but it never gets lost, it never gets forgotten, and it enhances the main story.
The second and main story involves King's wife. She is in a coma, and King finds out that she was having an affair. He, with his daughters, tries to find the guy while they are dealing with the condition of his wife. It's an extremely emotional story that never gets melodramatic. It walks that thin tightrope of trying to be dramatic and funny - and pulls it off effortlessly.
George Clooney always picks great movies. Even him movies that I haven't enjoyed as much, such as Syriana, I appreciate and respect. He's at his best here. And surprisingly, so are the Amara Miller and Shailene Woodley, the girls who play his daughters. I noticed something during the final scene. It's a really simple shot of the family watching TV, with the camera in the place where the TV should be. They didn't feel like they were acting in that shot. None of them. And I recognized that in most movies with little kids (Miller is 10) you tend to notice that their acting is crappy, but they're kids so you often ignore it. Everything felt natural. Woodley plays his 17-year old daughter, thoough she is actually 20. I've read buzz of an Oscar nom for her. She deserves it, and I hope to see Clooney's name as well.
The minor characters are also very nicely written. Early in the movie, you'll meet a character named Sid, who is a friend of King's older daughter. You'll think that you have him figured out in his early scenes. But there's another layer or two revealed, and it works. It makes sense. You'll think he's just there for comic relief, but he also helps to tell the story.
Finally, I have to give a nod to the music. The movie takes place in Hawaii, so you can imagine what you hear, though it's never cheesy or feels like luau.
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Day Star
Number 4 - The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
I really liked the Swedish version of The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. I *sort of* put it on my top 10 last year, though I chose to group it together with all three movies, as they were released in the US in the same year. When I heard about the US remake so soon, I was quite doubtful. Mostly, I thought that there was no way that they could replace Noomi Rapace as the title character Lisbeth Salander. Noomi made the character cool. However, I rewatched parts of the original after watching this version. Seeing in through new eyes, I noticed that her characterization is more flat. She plays Lisbeth as a tortured, moody soul. But that's about it. I also saw Noomi Rapace in a new light when I saw Sherlock Holmes: A
Game of Shadows. She was pretty bad in that, so I'm afraid she might
just be a one trick pony.
As it turns out, the best reason to like the new David Fincher version is Rooney Mara in the same role. She not only exceeds the coolness, but she does something that makes a huge difference. She makes the character interesting. The new Lisbeth has a range of emotions, yet all are quite subtle. You have to pay attention to notice them. Luckily, she's good enough that you can't help but watch her when she's on screen.
After watching this version, I was finally compelled to read the book. The beginning of the book goes into a lot more detail with the business part of the movie - the more dull parts. I think both movies were quite successful in speeding that up. The new movie, however, changes the ending of the mystery. I'm not sure if it's better or as good, though.
Overall, however, the new version ends up being better than the Swedish. It has a better flow. It tells the story cleaner. It brings the characters into a new life. I understand that since box office numbers haven't been as good as they had been hoping, Sony isn't sure if they are going to go ahead with the next two movies. That would be a shame. As I said in my review last year of all three, they work best as a complete story. I need the next two to come out to inspire me to read the other two.
As it turns out, the best reason to like the new David Fincher version is Rooney Mara in the same role. She not only exceeds the coolness, but she does something that makes a huge difference. She makes the character interesting. The new Lisbeth has a range of emotions, yet all are quite subtle. You have to pay attention to notice them. Luckily, she's good enough that you can't help but watch her when she's on screen.
After watching this version, I was finally compelled to read the book. The beginning of the book goes into a lot more detail with the business part of the movie - the more dull parts. I think both movies were quite successful in speeding that up. The new movie, however, changes the ending of the mystery. I'm not sure if it's better or as good, though.
Overall, however, the new version ends up being better than the Swedish. It has a better flow. It tells the story cleaner. It brings the characters into a new life. I understand that since box office numbers haven't been as good as they had been hoping, Sony isn't sure if they are going to go ahead with the next two movies. That would be a shame. As I said in my review last year of all three, they work best as a complete story. I need the next two to come out to inspire me to read the other two.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Lord Murphy
Number 5 - The Muppets
After watching The Muppets, I spent some time during Winter Break watching lots of Muppets clips. There are plenty of fun songs from the TV show and previous movies. Many of the Jim Henson tributes, especially this one, are really emotional. The movie brought back a lot of great memories.
But it's more than just that. This is definitely the most fun movie of the year. Let's start with Jason Segal. He's just right for this. Did you see Bad Teacher? Not a good movie.The one bright spot was Jason Segal. He delivered the only laughs in that movie. How can you not watch the closing of Forgetting Sarah Marshall and not know that he can excel in a Muppet movie?
In the end, the music has to work. Four words. Flight. Of. The. Conchords. They got Bret McKenzie from FotC. Brilliant. A couple songs, "Party of One" and "Man or Muppet," both feel like they could fit in any episode. And then there's the opening song Life's a Happy Song, which is easy to sing along with. Here's a slightly different (and even more fun) version of the song, featuring Bret and Kermit. Life's a filet o' fish!
After watching The Muppets, I spent some time during Winter Break watching lots of Muppets clips. There are plenty of fun songs from the TV show and previous movies. Many of the Jim Henson tributes, especially this one, are really emotional. The movie brought back a lot of great memories.
But it's more than just that. This is definitely the most fun movie of the year. Let's start with Jason Segal. He's just right for this. Did you see Bad Teacher? Not a good movie.The one bright spot was Jason Segal. He delivered the only laughs in that movie. How can you not watch the closing of Forgetting Sarah Marshall and not know that he can excel in a Muppet movie?
In the end, the music has to work. Four words. Flight. Of. The. Conchords. They got Bret McKenzie from FotC. Brilliant. A couple songs, "Party of One" and "Man or Muppet," both feel like they could fit in any episode. And then there's the opening song Life's a Happy Song, which is easy to sing along with. Here's a slightly different (and even more fun) version of the song, featuring Bret and Kermit. Life's a filet o' fish!
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Fonso
Number 6 - Rise of the Planet of the Apes
This was without a doubt the surprise of the year for me. I'm not a huge Planet of the Apes fan. I watched the original probably around the time that the Tim Burton remake was announced. I remember plenty of cheesy acting from Charlton Heston and a few other things, but it felt really dated. So I was in support of the remake. What I remember most from the remake, other than a severe feeling of being underwhelmed, was Paul Giamatti as one of the apes. And the ending too, I guess.
Had it not been for Rotten Tomatoes, I never would have considered going to see Rise of the Planet of the Apes. The trailer looked a little cool, but I expected all the best to be in there. So after seeing the tomato meter so high (currently at 83%), I decided to check it out.
The character arc of the ape, Caesar, is actually pretty good. I think the special effects have finally hit the point where my mind is mostly convinced that it's real. I'm not constantly noticing - "Oh, there's CGI." The pace of the movie works really nicely. The action is fun and exciting. There are a few nice Easter Eggs that refer to the original movie. Just all around, I really enjoyed the movie. Is it as high on the list as it is because I had low expectations? Absolutely. But I think that if I were a fan of the original, I still would have enjoyed it quite a bit.
This was without a doubt the surprise of the year for me. I'm not a huge Planet of the Apes fan. I watched the original probably around the time that the Tim Burton remake was announced. I remember plenty of cheesy acting from Charlton Heston and a few other things, but it felt really dated. So I was in support of the remake. What I remember most from the remake, other than a severe feeling of being underwhelmed, was Paul Giamatti as one of the apes. And the ending too, I guess.
Had it not been for Rotten Tomatoes, I never would have considered going to see Rise of the Planet of the Apes. The trailer looked a little cool, but I expected all the best to be in there. So after seeing the tomato meter so high (currently at 83%), I decided to check it out.
The character arc of the ape, Caesar, is actually pretty good. I think the special effects have finally hit the point where my mind is mostly convinced that it's real. I'm not constantly noticing - "Oh, there's CGI." The pace of the movie works really nicely. The action is fun and exciting. There are a few nice Easter Eggs that refer to the original movie. Just all around, I really enjoyed the movie. Is it as high on the list as it is because I had low expectations? Absolutely. But I think that if I were a fan of the original, I still would have enjoyed it quite a bit.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Hindoo
Number 7 - Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows
To be clear, I didn't accidentally leave off "Part 2" from the title. I mentioned while making the list last year that Part 1 was naturally unsatisfying. Dividing it into two parts was a good idea to be able to tell more of the story, but you need to have them both. So this entry really is for the entire movie, and really for the entire series.
In previous years, movies in the series have takes regular places on my top 10 list.My favorite of the movies is Prisoner of Azkaban. That one was directed by Alfonso CuarĂ³n, and was the transition from kids movies to darker movies. It's the movie where the main actors finally became the characters. And it's almost a miracle that those three made it through all three movies still looking good enough to be the correct ages and ending up being pretty good actors.
But at the time I watched that one, the books hadn't yet ended. I was still nervous about how the series would play out. There were little hints and subplots, but would J.K. Rowling remember and tie up all of them in a meaningful way? I had my doubts because of how other series ended. In recent memory, the TV series Lost and Battlestar Galactica ended showing the audience that there was, in fact, no plan. Stephen King's Dark Tower series ended the best and only way it could, but it was (as King even mentioned in the book) frustratingly slightly unsatisfying.
(spoiler alert in this paragraph) I thought Rowling nailed the ending. No, not the tagged on ending, but the showdown between Harry and Voldemort. It ended the only way it could and was still satisfying. It was perfect and filmable. Splitting the movie in two allowed for that, so the movie tied up the series just right. The biggest flaw is that the movie didn't explain Harry's resurrection clearly. It had been too long since I had read the books to remember, and I was confused. The book did a nicer and clearer job of explaining it, and I had to refer back to it when I returned from the theaters. And the aged Harry, Hermione, and Ron at the end was cheesy, but just like it was in the book.
It's a series that I'm going to miss. I enjoyed looking forward to the next episode. But I'm sure we'll go through it again when someone remakes the whole thing in 20-30 years. And I wouldn't put a remake or two on my top 10 list, would I?
To be clear, I didn't accidentally leave off "Part 2" from the title. I mentioned while making the list last year that Part 1 was naturally unsatisfying. Dividing it into two parts was a good idea to be able to tell more of the story, but you need to have them both. So this entry really is for the entire movie, and really for the entire series.
In previous years, movies in the series have takes regular places on my top 10 list.My favorite of the movies is Prisoner of Azkaban. That one was directed by Alfonso CuarĂ³n, and was the transition from kids movies to darker movies. It's the movie where the main actors finally became the characters. And it's almost a miracle that those three made it through all three movies still looking good enough to be the correct ages and ending up being pretty good actors.
But at the time I watched that one, the books hadn't yet ended. I was still nervous about how the series would play out. There were little hints and subplots, but would J.K. Rowling remember and tie up all of them in a meaningful way? I had my doubts because of how other series ended. In recent memory, the TV series Lost and Battlestar Galactica ended showing the audience that there was, in fact, no plan. Stephen King's Dark Tower series ended the best and only way it could, but it was (as King even mentioned in the book) frustratingly slightly unsatisfying.
(spoiler alert in this paragraph) I thought Rowling nailed the ending. No, not the tagged on ending, but the showdown between Harry and Voldemort. It ended the only way it could and was still satisfying. It was perfect and filmable. Splitting the movie in two allowed for that, so the movie tied up the series just right. The biggest flaw is that the movie didn't explain Harry's resurrection clearly. It had been too long since I had read the books to remember, and I was confused. The book did a nicer and clearer job of explaining it, and I had to refer back to it when I returned from the theaters. And the aged Harry, Hermione, and Ron at the end was cheesy, but just like it was in the book.
It's a series that I'm going to miss. I enjoyed looking forward to the next episode. But I'm sure we'll go through it again when someone remakes the whole thing in 20-30 years. And I wouldn't put a remake or two on my top 10 list, would I?
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Apollo
Number 8 - Terri
Terri lives with Creed Bratton. If you watch The Office, that's all you really need to know. But Creed has a relatively small role, so there's a lot more to see.
Terri is an oddball kid at school. He's overweight and wears pajamas every day. That should be enough to make him an outcast. This brings him to the attention of the assistant principal, played by John C. Reilly. Reilly plays a slightly more sane Dr. Steve Brule (for your health), and as it turns out, probably the most real school authority figure ever depicted in movies. He wants to do well and has a good heart, but he has no real clue what he's doing. He screws up, Terri calls him on it, and he owns up to it. For me, that's the relationship that works best in this movie.
Terri makes a couple more friends along the way, one a potential odd romance. There's a lot of reality to that as well. Every year, I watch the weird kids find each other. There's one major scene near the end in which the three hang out. It's an uncomfortable scene, and I'm not sure it completely worked, but again, it felt real.
You don't always want a movie to feel real. But being in a school everyday, it's distracting when a movie does something that just doesn't happen in movie. For example, I recently saw something in which a substitute teacher was promoted to full time. Yeah. Not how it works. Or the relationship between kids and teachers or admin just doesn't ring true, I'm pulled out of it. This movie works, but also you really like the characters.
Terri lives with Creed Bratton. If you watch The Office, that's all you really need to know. But Creed has a relatively small role, so there's a lot more to see.
Terri is an oddball kid at school. He's overweight and wears pajamas every day. That should be enough to make him an outcast. This brings him to the attention of the assistant principal, played by John C. Reilly. Reilly plays a slightly more sane Dr. Steve Brule (for your health), and as it turns out, probably the most real school authority figure ever depicted in movies. He wants to do well and has a good heart, but he has no real clue what he's doing. He screws up, Terri calls him on it, and he owns up to it. For me, that's the relationship that works best in this movie.
Terri makes a couple more friends along the way, one a potential odd romance. There's a lot of reality to that as well. Every year, I watch the weird kids find each other. There's one major scene near the end in which the three hang out. It's an uncomfortable scene, and I'm not sure it completely worked, but again, it felt real.
You don't always want a movie to feel real. But being in a school everyday, it's distracting when a movie does something that just doesn't happen in movie. For example, I recently saw something in which a substitute teacher was promoted to full time. Yeah. Not how it works. Or the relationship between kids and teachers or admin just doesn't ring true, I'm pulled out of it. This movie works, but also you really like the characters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)