An Unknown Unknown

There's a point early in A Complete Unknown where Sylvie (played by Elle Fanning), the girlfriend of Bob Dylan (Timothée Chalamet), is preparing to leave for a semester in Rome, and she says that she doesn't want to think about how much she'll miss him, but that she also doesn't really know anything about him. Which I think speaks for the movie as well.

We do get a story, told in entertaining fashion, of Dylan's arrival in New York, his introduction to the folk scene with the help of Pete Seeger (Ed Norton), his on and off again relationship with Joan Baez (Monica Barbaro), and his eventual turn towards rock music (the film is based on the book Dylan Goes Electric! by Elijah Wald).  The only real insight on Dylan that we get is in response to Sylvie's comment that I mentioned above, where Dylan more or less says that the past doesn't matter, that moving forward is what's important. 

We do get some interesting tidbits that fill out the biography, such as Dylan's friendship with Johnny Cash (Boyd Holbrook) and how he met his long-time road manager, Bob Neuwirth (Will Harrison). The culminating scene at the 1965 Newport Folk Fest, and the reaction to his electric set, is very well done.

For the lack of insight into Dylan, I think the film does a good job giving insight into Seeger, whose devotion to folk music and his peaceful nature are severely tested as Dylan becomes more famous and less interested in folk. I really liked Ed Norton's performance, and was glad to see him get an Oscar nomination for it.

In the end I did like this movie, though I did feel like there was a bit of a hole at the center due to Dylan's basic unknowability (even if that was more of a feature of the movie than a bug).

We got six previews before the movie, some of which seemed more appropriate than others given who you'd expect would turn up for an Oscar-nominated movie about folk music:

Becoming Led Zeppelin was the most appropriate, being a film about a music group that got its start in the 1960s. It's a documentary, the first one about the band made with cooperation of its members. Having the band involved piqued my interest.

Perhaps the least appropriate was Until Dawn, based on the video game of the same name. A group of teens, led by a girl investigating the disappearance of her sister, are murdered, only to be brought back to life a la Groundhog Day to be murdered again by someone (or something) else. The only way to break the cycle is apparently to survive until dawn.

Two other movies focused on the more youthful segment of the audience were Captain America: Brave New World and Thunderbolts, both part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Where I have literally only seen about 80 percent of one MCU film (the original Iron Man) I'll pass judgement.

The more artsy counterpart to Until Dawn is Presence, Steven Soderbergh's film told from the point of view of the poltergeist that haunts the house the Payne family just moved into. I like the idea of this movie, but am not really interested in seeing it.

I had the opposite reaction to The Alto Nights, about mob bosses Vito Genovese and Frank Costello. Both roles are played by Robert DeNiro, which is a little too stunt casty for me. I was surprised to see Barry Levinson as the director, as between the casting and subject matter I assumed it was another Martin Scorsese film. 

Read the full post with comments

Pro-Clave

Our family closed a three movie Thanksgiving weekend (the second movie being Wicked, which my wife loved and the boys tolerated) with Conclave, the story of a papal election focusing primarily on the dean of the College of Cardinals, Thomas Lawrence, played by Ralph Fiennes. He's more or less in charge of the proceedings, and has to promote the candidacy of his friend and American cardinal Aldo Bellini (Stanley Tucci) against those who want the church to return to a more conservative and traditional orientation, whose leading candidate is Venetian cardinal Goffredo Todesco (Sergio Castellitto).  All without overt politicking, which is expressly forbidden.

On top of that, Lawrence has to manage various intrigues involving other cardinals, such as a Nigerian cardinal (Lucian Msamati) with a mysterious relationship to a nun, a Canadian cardinal (John Lithgow) who is angling to get himself elected, and a mysterious Mexican cardinal assigned secretly to Kabul (Carlos Diehz) who arrives just before the conclave starts. He's assisted in handling these issues by the nun in charge of the domestic arrangements, played by Isabella Rossellini, whose appearance brings to mind the brief, show stopping role Judi Dench played in Shakespeare in Love.

The movie is directed by Edward Berger (All Quiet on the Western Front), and he does a great job of getting as much emotional mileage possible out of what could be a fairly dull subject, palace intrigue notwithstanding. It's also beautifully shot, I expect a nod for cinematography once the Oscar nominations come out.

All of which complements the acting, which is at a very high level. Fiennes stands out as the conflicted cardinal, and has picked up a few award nominations so far. Rossellini's role may be too slight to grab an Oscar nod, though she's been nominated elsewhere. I was also impressed with John Lithgow, who showed just the right balance of ambition and (false?) piety, while playing down his usual instinct to make a meal of his role.

There is a surprise at the ending, which is the same as it was in Robert Harris's book (which I also recommend). I think it was done reasonably well, enough so that it elicited an audible gasp from my wife.

I do recommend seeing this, especially if you're someone who like to see all of the Oscar nominated movies. I expect this will be among the 10 Best Picture nods, though I'd be surprised if it won.

We saw this at a local independent theater, so only four previews:

Pan's Labyrinth, which was being shown as part of a late-night screening series

A Complete Unknown, as mentioned previously

Nosferatu, the Robert Eggers version of the classic vampire story. My wife was strangely interested in seeing it (she's not normally a horror person). Can't say it did much for me, but I'm also not much of a horror person.

Mission Impossible - The Final Reckoning, which I am unlikely to see since I don't think I've seen any of these movies since the second one. 

Read the full post with comments

Most Things are Better than Cats

I had no plans to see Cats. I did read a few reviews, which confirmed my disinterest by being uniformly negative, many apocalyptically so.

But when one of your kids has a birthday, and he says he wants to see Cats, you go see Cats.  

It was not great, but it wasn't the sort of generationally awful catastrophe some made it out to be. That being said, it's going to get nominated for a boatful of Razzies and should win all of them.

I think the problems start with the source material. There's not much of a narrative in Cats, and what does exist it not particularly coherent (for having said the word about a hundred times in the first five minutes, I still have no idea what a Jellical cat is).  There are ways around this on stage, based on the songs, dancing, and staging (such as having the cats go through the audience). This only goes so far for a movie, especially one where the dancing gets chopped up as much as it does here.

There's also the way cats show up, sing a song, and then drop out of the film for most of the movie. It's hard to develop any interest in the cats as characters, though I suppose in many cases it would be worse if the cats continued to be in the movie (for example, Rebel Wilson's Jennyanydots, who is forced to make a number of cat-themed puns during her time on screen).

This is probably the time to address the way the cats are depicted. I was less bothered by the humanistic depiction of the cats than many of the reviewers, and in some cases thought it worked OK (Francesca Hayward made a believable kitten, while Judi Dench looked like Judi Dench in an unfortunate cat costume). I'm also pretty sure we got the updated version of the film, which corrected some of the more egregious failures. It did not correct the problem of scale that ran throughout the film, where the cats could at any point in the film be the size of actual cats, of large dogs, or nearly human.

There are a variety of other things I could pick at, none of which of themselves derail the film but as a whole add to the general sense that the film is a mess. Just not enough of a mess to really be notable in that regard.

On the plus side to this foray into the theater, I did see a number of previews, any of which I'd have preferred to Cats:

• Peter Rabbit 2, where Peter goes to the big city and learns some sort of life lessons. James Corden is much better off playing an actual animal.
• My Spy, where David Bautista seeks to become the next pro wrestler to make the jump to movies, playing a CIA operative who learns some sort of life lessons from a nine year old girl who finds him out.
• Dolittle, Robert Downey, Jr.'s latest foray into playing every leading male character from Victorian-era British literature. 
• Sonic the Hedgehog, where the speedy blue video game character teams up with a small town sheriff to avoid capture by a shadowy government agency (led by Jim Carrey). 
• Respect, the Aretha Franklin biopic starring Jennifer Hudson. The short bit of the title song she performs in the trailer is much better than the (expectedly) overwrought version of "Memories" she delivers as Grizabella.
• The Call of the Wild, an adaptation of the Jack London story starring Harrison Ford which looks to have been made a bit more kid-friendly than the book.
• Trolls World Tour, the sequel to Trolls that no one wanted. Apparently there are hard rock trolls that want to make their genre of music the only genre of music, and the trolls from the first movie fight them with the help of trolls who perform other genres of music.
• Scoob!, which looks to reboot Scooby Doo while giving us an origin story as well. Scooby talks way too much in the trailer.

Read the full post with comments

Viewing for the Kids

We've seen a couple of movies over the last month or so at the behest of our two kids (who, at this point, are the sole drivers of what we see in the theater). It was a decidedly split decision.

On the good end was The Secret Life of Pets, which is not particularly original (mismatched buddy comedy, but with dogs) but was at least reasonably entertaining. It was better when focusing on the two dogs, their conflict, and the other pets who live in their building, which is a problem as the plot was really driven by a gang of "flushed" pets who live in the sewer and have an ultimate goal of getting ride of all humans. It's in those scenes where the film's pedigree shows, as I have to think the action was based on some ideas for the Minions that never quite made any of their films (there's also a Minions short before the movie, which did nothing for me). The voice work was OK, tending towards generic (or teetering at going over the top for Kevin Hart's evil bunny character). All in all, it was fine and will probably get a sequel it doesn't really need or deserve.

On the less than good end was Ice Age: Collision Course, which my older son has wanted to see ever since seeing the short that teased it before the Peanuts movie. I'll admit to not being particularly well-versed in the Ice Age series, so my reaction may be mostly borne from not having any existing relationship with the story or characters. But as a stand-alone exercise, this was an incredibly dull film. The basic plot: a meteor is threatening Earth, and to avoid extinction our band of heroes have to use magnetic fragments from a previous meteor strike (shot out of a volcano) to attract the new meteor off course.

Yeah, I don't get it either.

This is apparently the fault of the squirrel character, who is flying around in an acorn-powered spaceship (no, I don't get that either). That being said, I think my son was bored by the Earthbound parts of the movie - or was as confused as the rest of us by the jumping back and forth - as every time the film cut to the squirrel I could hear him say, "meanwhile, back in space." That was easily the most entertaining part of the movie experience.

We also saw plenty of previews, many of which were shared by both movies:

Monster Trucks, where a teenager's truck becomes home to an alien (which then apparently spawns a family in other trucks, or there were other aliens that now live in trucks?). There are conflicts with the government and other, snobbier, non alien-infested truck driving folks. OK then.

Nine Lives, in which Kevin Spacey is nearing the Robert De Niro line of surrender by playing a busy executive who, in buying a cat as a present for his daughter (Jennifer Garner) - or her son? - it turned into a cat by the mysterious pet shop owner (Christopher Walken). House of Cards doesn't pay enough?

Ghostbusters, a quirky independent film based on a French classic of the same name (OK, not really, but if you don't know about this remake why are you even here?).

Trolls, about a pair of trolls (MISMATCHED BUDDY/FUTURE ROMANTIC PAIRING ALERT!) who have to save the rest of trolldom. Looks cute if a little like Shrek without the big Fiona reveal.

Storks, about a stork who helps a human orphan deliver one last baby before the storks go into the flying package deliver in the hopes of beating Amazon's drone to that market. I am less enthused by this film having seen the preview for a second time.

Sing, where a theater owner puts together a singing competition in order to drum up business for his theater. Note: all of the characters are animals (animated, of course).

Moana, the upcoming Disney film that appropriates whatever Polynesian culture they missed when making Lilo & Stitch. It features a girl named Moana and a demigod named Maui (voiced by Dwayne Johnson) doing... something. Details are a little sketchy, I think because they wanted to rush a trailer out that notes Lin-Manuel Miranda is doing the songs.

Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children, based on the book of the same name, about a home for kids with unusual abilities and those who would like to kill them. By look, kind of a Victorian X-Men.

Read the full post with comments

Staaaaaaaaaar Waaaaaaaaaaaaars...

Finally got around to seeing Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens, and it was fine. I like Star Wars, but am not a fanatic, so my expectations were probably more realistic than those of your average fanboy. It did a solid job of introducing the new characters that will drive this trilogy while bringing back some familiar faces and doing reasonable fan service in connecting the film with those that came before it.

The breakout characters are pretty clearly Rey, the scavenger and apparent future Jedi knight played by Daisy Ridley, and BB-8, the droid who fills the R2D2 role in the film. Rey kicks ass in a way that women rarely do in film, and balances it well with her innate flying and engineering skills. Her Jedi skills also manifest quickly, as seen in her lightsaber duel with Kylo Ren, the Vaderish figure who represents a more mysterious side of the First Order, which rose from the ashes of the Empire to be a real threat to the Republic and the rebels they continue to back in the fight against evil. It is criminal how the marketing for the film (notably in the toy and games area) has ignored Rey (though they are apparently rectifying this with a new wave of Rey-focused toys coming out, which makes me wonder if this was done on purpose).

The other notable new character is Finn, a stormtrooper who refuses to participate in the massacre of civilians and eventually joins Rey to find the rebels. We probably see more of the actual life of a stormtrooper through him than we did in the other six movies combined. He's also got a touch of the Force in him, as seen in his own lightsaber battle with a stormtrooper who favors a bludgeon built into his armor.

In fact, if there's something that really sets this movie apart from the rest of the series is the real emotional connection to the characters and the story. The first six movies weren't devoid of this, but it feels like this movie does it better than the films that came before it (laughably so in the case of episodes I through III).

George Lucas was quoted as saying that the movie was too much like the originals, and one level he has a point. Episode VII has some very strong parallels to the first film, from starting on a desert planet to stopping at a dodgy cantina to a key rebel attack on a genocidal enemy installation. But what I think he misses is that the film is well-made enough to do this while also being able to create a clean start to the final trilogy. I shudder to think what Lucas would have come up with had he still been at the helm (if nothing else, I suspect Jar Jar Binks would have been made a general or something).

All in all, I think the film managed to live up to the hype about as well as it could have. It's always nice when a film that's basically critic-proof still manages to be good.

Four previews before the film:

Boy & the World, a Brazilian animated film about a boy searching for his father. It looks great, and was even nominated for Best Animated Feature for this year's Oscars (which it will lose to Inside Out). I would like to see it, but given how rarely we get out to the movies I don't see where I find time to see it during it's brief run at the theater where we saw The Force Awakens.

The Jungle Book, the live(ish) action remake of the cartoon classic. Visually it's pretty impressive, but I can't say I have much interest in seeing it. We are certainly not taking the kids to it, as the trailer suggests it'd going to be violent.

Deadpool, a jokey superhero film starring Ryan Reynolds, who apparently has been forgiven for The Green Lantern. The hero in question used to be a special forces soldier, but an experiment gone awry has made him virtually indestructible. He teams up with some similarly maladjusted partners to fight crime, I guess. I don't really see superhero movies, so I'm not likely to see this. Ever.

Captain America: Civil War, the latest entry in the Avengers franchise that sees Captain America and Iron Man fall out over... something. I'm not sure what, I think it's over some guy who is apparently also a superhero but who has some level of mystery about him. Yeah, not likely seeing this ever, either. Nothing against superhero movies, it's just a genre I've never gotten into (which is also true of the comic books, video games, and whatever other media platforms the Avengers have been in). To me, the Avengers are still John Steed and Emma Peel (and not the ones from the awful 1990s movie).

Read the full post with comments

I saw a movie! In an actual movie theater!

So thanks to my older son's elementary school showing It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown! to the kids the day before Halloween, he decided he would like to see The Peanuts Movie. And based on how good he and his younger brother were when we saw Big Hero 6, we decided to take them. I had read a couple of reviews beforehand, so I knew I wasn't going into a gritty reboot or something that in striving to be contemporary (more on a movie that looks to be doing that in a bit) winds up disconnecting from the original material. But I was worried that it wouldn't live up to the comic strips and TV specials I'd grown up with.

Which, really, was too high a standard, as what were the odds that the movie would ever live up to the original material? But I am happy to say that the film managed to be entertaining and engaging for both the kids and the adults in our party. For the former group, the gags and action were entertaining by and of itself. For the adults, we got to enjoy the fan service, from the main plot line (Charlie Brown's pursuit of the red-headed girl) to various subplots (Snoopy taking on the Red Baron), to passing references (such as the wide shot at a school dance where the kids dance just like they did in the wide dancing shots in A Charlie Brown Christmas).

All of this could have been nostalgia for nostalgia's stake, but the film does a good job of using all of this to support the main conflict of the movie: Charlie Brown's struggle to overcome self-doubt and low self-esteem so he can connect with the read-headed girl. I do think this struggle was softened a bit by the other kids being less hostile to Charlie Brown than in the original material (though there was enough to keep Charlie's doubts realistic, rather than it just being one kid's inability to read a room).

I also thought the ending went a little overboard in wrapping things up. No spoilers, but I do wonder if the ending was created to help the run time (I had a similar feeling about some of the Snoopy-Red Baron story, which really wasn't about the Red Baron and had at least one segment that I thought wasn't necessary). The film clocks in at 1:28, and would probably be more like 1:20 without these scenes.

In any event, I am happy this wasn't the sort of disaster that I thought it might be, and I may even be a little pleased at the potential for a sequel.

There were six trailers before the movie, and that's not including the one for the 25th(!) anniversary re-release of Home Alone. As you might expect for a 10:45 am showing of a G-rated movie, all of the previews were for animated fare:

The Good Dinosaur, from Pixar/Disney, set in a world where dinosaurs are not wiped out in a meteor strike. A young apatosaurus is separated from his family, and he struggles to find them again with the help of a young boy named Spot who, as you might guess from the name, acts more like a dog than a human. Seems decent enough, and I would not be shocked if this is the next film we see in the theater as a family.

Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Road Chip, why? Are these films doing well on Netflix or something? Anyway, Dave is getting married, and the rodents team up with the fiancee's son to try to stop the wedding. Remember when I was talking about a movie that was trying too hard to be contemporary? This may be the one. I'm pretty sure there's a musical number called "Uptown 'munk" in this thing. Ugh.

Kung Fu Panda 3, in which Po meets his dad and moves to a panda village, which is then threatened by some supernatural force that has destroyed his old village. Po has to teach the other pandas kung fu in order to protect their homes, etc.

The Angry Birds Movie, which is about birds. Who are angry for some reason. And then pigs show up. All in a movie that is a good three years too late to ride the wave of popularity from the game.

The Secret Life of Pets, which is about what your dogs, cats, fish, etc. are up to while you're at work. This was my favorite trailer of the group, which is meaningless given how many trailers make bad movies look good, but let's give hope a chance here.

Norm of the North, which combines some previous animated films in a way it hopes you don't notice. Norm is one of the denizens of the Arctic who notice that people are showing up in increasing numbers, and in some cases staying. Norm, with the help of some tough lemmings (who in no way are meant to remind you of the penguins in Madagascar, I'm sure), goes to the big city to spread the word that the Arctic is in danger and needs saving (which in no way is meant to remind you of the environmental message of Happy Feet, I'm sure). There's also an evil developer who plans on turning the Arctic into some sort of mixed-use nightmare. Which, even with climate change, seems like a bad idea. It's not like it still doesn't get cold up there, and I imagine building on what is becoming semi-permafrost isn't cheap. Anyway, seems like garbage.

Also worth noting that the film was preceded by an Ice Age short starring Skrat, which while not an official trailer for Ice Age: Collision Course may as well be one. It's fine, but doesn't exactly fill me with desire for the feature film.

Read the full post with comments

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1

I suppose my biggest criticism of this movie is that it, like the book, spent too much time camping and not enough time doing stuff. That being said, when the movie wasn't camping it did quite a bit, as there were more action sequences in this installment than usual, and these were done pretty well. There were a couple of scenes that seemed off - one on the Hogwarts train seemed included just to get face time for some supporting characters - but all in all it did what it was supposed to in furthering the story to its conclusion.

We only got three previews:

The Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader continues that series, and it looks like it will be similar to the others in terms of effects and no recognizable stars. I've always been at a loss vas to who sees these movies, but the inclusion of group sales info at the end of the trailer suggests church groups.

Yogi Bear, to which I say, why? We are at the point where there are almost no kids- and a shrinking number of parents- who have seen the original cartoon. And based on the trailer, I don't see this film sparking a renaissance for Yogi. The most misleading part of the thing was the rating, which said the film contained mild rude humor. From what I could see, it contained no humor at all.

Red Riding Hood takes the classic fairy tale and gives it the Twilight treatment, becoming the story of one girl's love of overly-billowy head gear and, possibly, werewolves. Seriously, the hood appears to be about eight feet long; if Red ever went riding with it on it would get caught in the horse's legs and she'd get the Isadora Duncan treatment. Anyway, this will score well with tween girls and the Amanda Seyfried as a children's character fetishists.

Read the full post with comments

Half-Blooded

Looking back, I was apparently less critical of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix when I wrote about it than I've grown to be now. I suppose I've had time to reflect on the failings of that film, especially as I reconsidered it in light of going to see Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.

I will say that this latest film manages to pace itself better than the previous one, which I now blame on David Yates' experience coming mostly from TV. But I still think some plot lines are truncated too much compared to the book. A good example of this comes from the title itself, as we're introduced to the concept of the Half-Blood Prince when Harry gets his used potions book, but barely touch on the mystery until the end when we learn who it is. I was also sad to see that the battle in Hogwarts that appears towards the end of the book doesn't happen in the movie, as I think that would have give the movie a dose of action it could have used.

One deviation from the book I did like was seeing Malfoy grapple with the enormity of the task he was given by Voldemort. Even here, though, the movie tips the secret of what he's doing way too early.

Anyway, this is a better film than its predecessor, which hopefully portends continued improvement for the last two films.

On the trailer front, we were treated to six, though four were for the younger crowd (Shorts, The Princess and the Frog, New Moon, and GI Joe, which is aimed for adults but I can only think of as a kid's movie). The two of note for me were Sherlock Holmes, featuring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law as Holmes and Watson. Looks interesting, but I don't recall there being that many explosions in the original stories. As for the other one... I've forgotten what it is. I'll post later if I remember.

UPDATE! The other trailer was for Where the Wild Things Are, and it looks fantastic. Or it at least has a really good trailer.

Read the full post with comments

Found at last!

Here's the original Snack Canyon bit! Thanks, Drive-in Dave!

Read the full post with comments

What Messed Us Up...

Welcome to What Messed Us Up, an ongoing look into...just that.

The Facets Halloween series led me to check YouTube for two film-related things that really scarred me as a kid.

This first one is a TV trailer for a 1977 horror film called Suspiria. I saw this late at night while watching Saturday Night Live. I seem to remember my sister, who would have been 3 at the time, covering her eyes the second this hit the screen -- she'd apparently seen this already. Now the scariest thing about it is the awful singing:



The second one is this trailer, which I saw in the theater. I was about 10 or 11; and my friend Jeremy and I went down to the Uptown with his mom when it was still repertory to see the Bakshi Lord of the Rings movie. We weren't really prepared for this, but of course it became our must-see film of the following year:

Read the full post with comments