True Grit

Joel and Ethan Coen have been on a hot streak. The filmmaker brothers are among the most original and adept directors, screenwriters, and producers working today. Their films range from dark and cruel to hilarious absurdity, frequently even from scene to scene. The Coens are at their most creative when they are deconstructing the various archetypes of different film genres. The Big Lebowski poked fun at film noir, No Country For Old Men radically reshaped the Western, Burn After Reading is a romp through spy movie stereotypes. In each of these films, the story and dialogue is shaped in such a way to simultaneously pay homage to the genre, while at the same time clearly distinguishing itself as a separate entity. All of this is part of what makes their latest effort so intriguing.

True Grit is a remake of a 1969 John Wayne movie by the same name. Both were adapted from an outstanding Charles Portis novel. While the 1969 version was slightly romanticized, the basic outline remains the same. A 14-year old girl named Mattie Ross embarks on a mission to bring her father's murderer to justice. To that end she hires Rueben "Rooster" Cogburn, a US Marshal. Along the way Cogburn and Ross hook up with a Texas Ranger named LaBoeuf who has been tracking the killer for some time due to earlier crimes.

Jeff Bridges and Hailee Steinfeld

The cast is impressive. Matt Damon takes on the role of LaBoeuf, bringing infinitely more talent and ability to the part than his 1969 counterpart Glen Campbell. Josh Brolin as the killer Chaney and Barry Pepper as the gang leader Chaney falls in with are appropriately ominous as the two leading villains. The supremely talented Jeff Bridges takes over the John Wayne role of Rooster and makes it his own. Bridges and Damon provide much of the levity in their relationship and banter and Bridges deftly maneuvers around any comparisons to Wayne's Oscar winning turn in the original, avoiding the Dude vs. Duke arguments. It is clear that Bridges knows what is expected of him, and his experience with the Coens shines through.

I have left someone out however. The true star of this movie is the 14-year old Mattie Ross. Making her film debut here, Hailee Steinfeld owns the character and is justly receiving the lion's share of the critical praise. Her toughness, intelligence, and yes, grit drive the plot. Steinfeld (who was 13 during shooting), despite being paired for most of the movie with two of the biggest stars, and most talented actors working today in Bridges and Damon, does not give an inch.

Steinfeld and Barry Pepper

As with all Coen Brothers movies, the technical aspects of the film are pitch perfect. Long time collaborator Roger Deakins handles the camera work and creates some starkly beautiful images. The dialogue clearly has the Coen brothers touch, but it is vastly lighter here. This film does not mix and match genre stereotypes, critiquing them as they go. Instead is a straightforward revenge tale, firmly set as a Western. Cogburn is a gruff old drunkard looking for redemption and seems to walk straight out of the pages of the Portis novel. LaBoeuf is the young and inexperienced, and yet brave man trying to play the hero, but unsure of what that entails. Only Ross transcends genre boundaries, and even she only does so to limits.

True Grit is a movie that defies a traditional explanation. It appears to simply be a very well made Western, but considering who made it, there is a unique feel to it all the same. A good Western is a very rare thing these days, and the Coens seem to want to rectify that. For at least one film, they have done so.

26/30

The Blues Brothers

Since my birthday was yesterday, I thought I would give myself a belated birthday gift by reviewing the first DVD I ever bought, and one of my all time favorite comedies. On tap for today is the John Landis, 1980 film, The Blues Brothers.

For a movie that cost $30 million to make (at the time an enormous figure for a comedy), it had fairly minimalist beginnings. It was born out of a series of hilarious Saturday Night Live skits, when Landis and Dan Aykroyd co-wrote a feature-length screenplay that is chock full of jokes and movie references. Elwood and Jake Blues are a pair of bumbling brothers who can really only do one thing right. Play the blues. When they discover their old orphanage is in dire financial straights, the two are determined to do something right for a change. As Elwood classically puts it, "we're on a mission from god." The plot of the movie follows the misfit pair as they attempt to reassemble their old blues band, and then book a big enough show to haul in some cash.

The Blues Brothers is a classic screwball movie filled with iconic performances and set pieces. This film, set in Chicago, has not one, but two of the most memorable car chases in on-screen history. The city is almost a separate character in itself as the brothers travel from Joliet, to Wacker Drive, and hit everything in between. Aykroyd and John Belushi own the lead roles of Elwood and Jake and work off of each other perfectly. Belushi especially stands out in what has come to be one of his career defining roles. Cameos abound as Carrie Fisher, John Candy, Frank Oz, Paul Reubens, Steven Spielberg and Twiggy all make appearances. Supposedly Mr. T is in the background of a scene although I haven't spotted him yet.

Where the film really excels though, are the numerous blues performances by music legends. Aretha Franklin, John Lee Hooker, Ray Charles, Cab Calloway, Chaka Khan and James Brown all help provide one of the greatest soundtracks of all time. Not to mention the talent that makes up the rest of the Blues Brothers band, which by the way, is the same band that played with them as SNL musical guests.

Aykroyd and Belush as the Blues Brothers with Ray Charles

If you enjoy good blues music, this movie is an absolute must see. For all you unsophisticated heathens, don't worry. There is plenty here besides the blues. Loads of great comedy and some really funny and exciting set pieces will keep you interested. One of the best.

27/30

News and Links

Hey everyone, been a while since we did a news column here. Lots of good stuff happening recently so I thought I would clue you in on some of it.

To start out with, two extremely interesting trailers have been released in the past couple of months, both of which I'm dying to see. Here, we have a Coen brothers remake of the John Wayne western, True Grit, which looks appropriately gritty, and as long time followers of this blog know, I'm a sucker for Jeff Bridges. This movie looks awesome and I can't wait. The other trailer I'd like to bring to your attention is The Tourist. This film appears to be your traditional action escape fare, but when a cast of Johnny Depp (yes), Angelina Jolie (YES) and Paul Bettany (umm, thats cool I guess) gets together, there is potential for a great action film there. If you can't tell I really like Angelina Jolie.

Jeff Bridges and Hailee Steinfeld in True Grit

Next up we have some casting news. John C. Reilly has joined an already impressive cast for the new film God of Carnage. Contrary to what you might expect from that name, its actually based on a play about two sets of parents who face off after their kids have an altercation at school. This is already turning heads because its going to be directed by the talented Roman Polanski. I very nearly made a crack about Polanski and kids here, but I showed restraint. I'm proud of myself.

Kate Beckinsale

Also in the casting arena, Deadline.com is reporting that Kate Beckinsale is in talks to sign on for the new crime thriller Contraband. It is a remake of a 2008 scandinavian movie (we seem to be doing that a lot recently), and Mark Wahlberg is already attached. There is also some info about Wahlberg's upcoming boxing film, The Fighter, for those of you who are interested.


Finally we have a fun series at the British online paper, The Guardian. They have created a top 25 list of the greatest action and/or war movies of all time. That is here, plus a pretty funny article by Guardian reporter Joe Queenan on action movie cliches. Click around a bit as there is some other good stuff around their site.

That's all we have time for today readers. To quote Mr. Carrey, that's the way the cookie crumbles.

The Blind Side

Let me start out this post by saying, I have nothing against Sandra Bullock. Ok, well, maybe I do. She has constructed a successful movie career by repeatedly playing her patented character in movies that I have long since dismissed as fluff. To put it harshly, I do not take her seriously as an artist. When I first saw the trailers for the 2009 film The Blind Side I dismissed it as her regular fare and did not bother to see it until now. I simply thought the box office geniuses saw a movie that combined elements of your standard chick-flick tearjerker with a football story, immediately turning it into the perfect date movie. That is why I was so shocked when it not only was nominated for Best Picture, but actually won a Best Actress award for Bullock.

Now, I frequently disagree with many of the nominations and awards handed out by the Academy of Motion Pictures. But, since what constitutes a good movie is so subjective, I can usually stomach the decisions and move on. For some reason John Lee Hancock's The Blind Side gave me a little extra twist. Now having seen it, I think I can explain why.

The Blind Side tells the story of Michael Oher, a young and homeless black boy, who is befriended and eventually adopted by the Tuohy family. Thanks to their love, support, and financial resources, he is able to attend a quality school and blossom into a top collegiate athlete. Honestly, as a sports movie, it works fine. Many of my favorite sports movies are fairly simplistic. There is a good team and a bad team, there is a personal conflict for the main character that mirrors the movie's sporting conflict. Throw in some funny cameos by sports personalities and a hearty catharsis at the end. Check, check, check and check. Even as your standard tearjerker the film makes do with some heartwarming scenes between Mrs. Tuohy and Oher. My problems are of a different nature. Beyond the troubling narrative of rich, white family saves poor, black boy from his black peers (the story is true so it is hard to complain), beyond the thinly veiled conservative viewpoint that is passed off as progressive and even beyond some particularly cheesy Hollywood moments, for me, it is as a character-driven drama where the movie falls short.

Two of the most important features for any drama are the character development and arc. After having watched the film, I can truthfully say I know next to nothing about the supposedly altruistic Tuohys. The Blind Side completely turns a blind eye to any of the difficulties that would be inherent in this situation. Leigh Anne Tuohy, the mother and central character played by Bullock, is not humanized. She is idealized and glorified. We never see any internal struggle or self-doubt from her. Mrs. Tuohy spends very little time questioning whether or not to bring a hulking stranger into her house with her young daughter and son. She spends an equally small amount of time brushing off the racist-tinged clucking of high society, embodied here by a few, peacockish, local women.

Still, Sandra Bullock does have a certain charm. She drives the movie and it misses her when she is off-screen. The climactic scenes of the movie determine whether or not Oher will be accepted to college and they suffer for her absence. They also do not have much of a connection with any of the other themes of the story making them a fairly pointless (and predictable) exercise. Oher himself, played by Quinton Aaron, has little to do for most of the movie besides breath quietly. We are never given a real glimpse inside this young man's head besides a couple of throw away scenes with some of his teachers.

Quinton Aaron and Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side

Mr. Tuohy (Tim McGraw), and the Tuohy kids (Lily Collins and Jae Head) also don't have much to do. They never seem to mind that their already busy mother's time has been usurped by a total stranger and the adjustment period that would be both natural and interesting is glossed over. The only other major character in the film is Michael's explicitly liberal tutor (see, it's balanced!), Miss Sue, who is played by Kathy Bates and possesses a pretty creepy manipulative streak (see, liberals are creepy!). To phrase it bluntly, the film takes a very complex situation and boils it down to platitude level.

John Lee Hancock has some experience directing both sports movies (2002's The Rookie) and black and white/good vs evil films (2004's The Alamo). From a technical standpoint, the movie is decently put together. The direction, cinematography and score are all merely adequate. Bullock continues to play Bullock, so I guess her Oscar is more of a lifetime achievement award. In summary, The Blind Side is a perfectly capable sports movie and a watchable enough family drama. I just expect more from my Oscar nominees and winners.

18/30

La Haine (Hate)

Although the majority of Americans love to idealize Paris, France has unfortunately had a long history of intolerence toward outsiders, especially Black and Maghrebi immigrants. French President Nicolas Sarkozy has himself incited racial hatred. During the 2005 riots, Sarkozy, who was then Minister of the Interior, famously said he would wash the "scum" out of the slums with a street-cleaning hose. The questions of ethnic and religious discrimination as well as the role of immigrants in contemporary French society have become important themes in French cinema. The 1990s gave rise to the notion of banlieue cinema, which takes its name from the "banlieues" (suburbs), the socially disadvantaged urban areas with which minority ethnic groups are mostly identified. Perhaps the most successful banlieue film, La Haine, winner of the Cesar Award as France's best film in 1995, offers a raw and captivating look at urban class and racial struggles in the French capital. In this powerful drama, director Mathieu Kassovitz gives us a portrait of the marginal and excluded in France.

The story, loosely based on actual events, begins with a series of riots in the streets of Paris involving the burning of cars and public buildings. The unrest breaks out after an Arab student, named Abdel, is beaten into a coma by the police. Shot in black and white and told in a one-day period, the film follows a group of three friends: Hubert (Hubert Koundé), who is Black, Saïd (Saïd Taghmaoui), who is Arab, and Vinz (Vincent Cassel), who is Jewish. They are from immigrant families living in a volatile housing project in an outer suburb of Paris. Deprived of a healthy community and alienated by a self-involved society, the young outcasts form a family among themselves. Their ethnic backgrounds is not important to them; they are united against "the system".

Vinz is a hot-tempered guy with a huge authority problem and a deep hatred of the police. He fantasizes about being a gangster, and does impressions of Robert de Niro in Taxi Driver in front of his bathroom mirror. During the riot, Vinz finds a policeman's gun, lost in the chaos. He vows to use the gun to kill a cop, should his friend Abdel die. Saïd, on the other hand, is good-natured, sensible and calm; he seems unwilling to acknowledge the problems of his surroundings. The most mature and most thoughtful of the three is Hubert, an aspiring boxer who wishes to leave this decadent world behind him.

The film uses a repeated metaphor comparing life in urban Paris to someone jumping off a building. With each passing floor, the jumper thinks that up until now, everything is okay. Then he hits bottom. This embodies the ultimate doom that the protagonists face, since there is very little hope of escaping life in the banlieue.

Vinz, Saïd and Hubert are not criminals but because of their appearance, they are treated that way by the police and they are discriminated against continuously by society. During the course of less than 24 hours, they wander the streets filled with rage and find themselves in one troublesome situation after another. In one scene, Hubert and Saïd are interrogated by policemen who intimidate and humiliate them by using choke holds and racial slurs. Later on, the trio gets into a scuffle with a group of racist anti-immigrant skinheads. Vinz shows the skinheads his gun, and all but one, played by the director Mathieu Kassovitz, escape. Vinz is ready to kill but he does not go through with his intention. The young men are able to keep their cool and to not act stupidly, but it is only a matter of time until heartbreak strikes.

Evidently, Kassovitz sees everything in black and white. On one side, there is the bigots and bullies, on the other, defenseless minorities. However, La Haine does not ask us to sympathize with the protagonists. It invites us instead to face up to the social challenges of our time in order to avoid violence and tragedy. It is interesting how this film reflects our own problems of race and class division here in America. Its setting would translate perfectly to any US inner-city.

26/30

The Town

Not every good movie has to be wildly original or terrifically written. Sometimes just a solidly acted, directed and authored formula movie comes along that can be a fun ride. I think this year's The Town falls under that heading. That I was able to write the preceding sentence comes as a bit of a surprise to me since it stars, was co-written, and is directed by the critically reviled Ben Affleck. From the boring Daredevil, to the cheese fest that is Pearl Harbor, to the comically bad Gigli, Affleck has spent much of his career starring in cheaply constructed box office bombs. His recent form has been so bad that people often forget he achieved stardom by co-writing and starring in Good Will Hunting. That is part of why his recent resurgence to artistic respectability is so surprising.

After his directorial debut with the outstanding, but depressing Gone Baby Gone, Affleck moved to far more traditional action fare with The Town. The film tells the story of a crew of bank robbers in a neighborhood of Boston and the FBI agent chasing them. The leader of the crew, played by Affleck, falls for a former hostage, and tries to get out of the game, but his fellow bank robber/best friend, and the local crime boss keep pulling him back in. Meanwhile the FBI agent pursues doggedly and comes ever closer.

The Town is very solidly acted with notable performances from Jeremy Renner and Jon Hamm. Career character actors Chris Cooper and Pete Postlethwaite turn in nice cameos. Affleck and the romantic lead, Rebecca Hall, are merely serviceable. What sets the movie apart from others of its ilk, is actually the direction. Affleck creates a believable atmosphere in Boston, keeps a steady and entertaining pace for the film, and spices it up with a few really terrific action sequences sprinkled in. It is in those sequences where he shines with some exciting bank heists and getaways.

Hamm and Affleck facing off as FBI Agent and thief

As Affleck's directing career progresses I find it fascinating to compare his first two movies. Gone Baby Gone is the superior film, but suffers from some inexperience on the part of its director. Affleck was clearly learning on the go as he overemphasizes certain moments and lets the film drag in other areas. The Town on the other hand, is nowhere near the intellectual equal of Gone Baby Gone, but benefits from far more professional direction.

In summary, The Town is an entertaining thriller that could end up being anything from the high point in an underachieving career, all the way to an important step for the next great American director. Either way its worth a watch.

22/30

In the Loop

Tired of poop jokes in comedies? Want to laugh at a film without having to see male genitalia on the screen? You’re not alone. Much as I love the outrageous antics of Ben Stiller in Zoolander and Will Ferrell in Anchorman, much as I laughed in shock at the daring of some choice shots in the break-up scene of Forgetting Sarah Marshall, these hilarious films have been succeeded by a wave of cheap imitations that dominated the 2000’s, achieving the same level of stupidity or shock value but lacking in genuine humor.

However, if you have been looking for that rare comedy that can make you laugh and still make you think, look no further: last year’s political farce In the Loop was just the sort of intellectually stimulating entertainment that every American should be watching but which few seem to be interested in. Unsurprisingly, this level of sharpness is found in a foreign movie, but for those of you with a phobia of subtitles, never fear, it’s a UK film by a Scottish director, and, barring certain actors’ thick accents, is in intelligible English.

Director Armando Iannucci brings his highly acclaimed BBC show “The Thick of It,” about underhanded maneuvering in British government, both to the Silver Screen and across the pond in this masterpiece of political satire. As the President of the US and the Prime Minister of the UK agree to a war in the Middle East, various officials in both governments scramble into action to either speed up or impede the march to war. Bull-headed but clever US Lieutenant General Miller (James Gandolfini) and gaffe-prone British Secretary of State for International Development Simon Foster (Tom Hollander) do their best, to varying levels of success, to block the movement; oily US Assistant Secretary for Policy Linton Barwick (David Rasche) and foul-mouthed and superbly vicious Malcolm Tucker (Peter Capaldi), the Scottish political finagler, scheme to ensure the conflict’s approval. Said parties clash in DC to hilarious effect: we watch with equal parts glee and disgust as these “public servants” bolster their careers and interests by creating secret committees, bedding interns, leaking and altering documents, harassing subordinates, and attempting alternately to slow down and speed up a UN vote.

In the Loop is nothing short of brilliant. It displays tour de force performances by Capaldi and Gandolfini. The handheld, documentary-style cinematography aids in making the satirical world of vaguely familiar events feel uncomfortably realistic. Nominated for an Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay, the dialogue is quick and biting. And despite being so funny (and how I wish I didn’t have to use the word ‘despite’), it’s one of the most intelligent films of the past several years.

"In the land of truth, my friend, the man with one fact is the king."

— Linton Barwick

26/30

The name is Bond. James Bond

When the legendary Sean Connery announced his first retirement from the role of the world's most famous secret agent, James Bond 007, producers Albert Broccoli and Harry Saltzman faced the daunting task of finding another actor to fill his shoes in the sixth installment of the series On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. A worldwide search settled on the then-29-year-old Australian model George Lazenby. Because Connery and Bond were fused together in the minds of cinemagoers, they were skeptical that anyone else could play 007– just as, for instance, we cannot think of anyone but Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones. For this reason, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service was initially under-valued and neglected. However, time has been kind to this excellent film, and today it is considered, in many circles, the best in the franchise.

After two frustrating years trying to locate the diabolical Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Telly Savalas), leader of the worldwide criminal organization SPECTRE, Bond is relieved of his responsibilities by MI6 chief M (Bernard Lee). While officially off the case, Bond meets the head of a crime syndicate, Marc-Ange Draco (Gabriele Ferzetti), who is aware that Bond saved the life of his daughter Tracy (Diana Rigg), and later spent the night with her. Draco tells Bond of Tracy’s troubled past, offering him one million pounds if he will marry her. Bond refuses, but agrees to continue romancing Tracy under the agreement that Draco reveals the whereabouts of Blofeld. Tracy discovers Bond's deal with her father and insists that he provide Bond with the information he seeks. Draco tells Bond that Blofeld has links with a lawyer in Bern, Switzerland. After a brief argument, Bond and Tracy begin spending time together. They eventually fall in love and tie the knot.

Bond goes to Bern and discovers papers suggesting Blofeld is the director of Piz Gloria, an allergy clinic in the Swiss Alps; and that he is trying to get the Royal College of Arms to recognize him as a count. Bond takes this information to M, who then allows him to go to Piz Gloria posing as genealogist Sir Hilary Bray. Supposedly he is to assess the director’s claim to the title of count, but in fact his mission is to ascertain whether or not the director is Blofeld, and what Blofeld’s plans for the institute are.

The film adopts an interesting narrative strategy for introducing Lazenby as the new 007 and establishing continuity within the series. At the end of the pre-title sequence in which Bond has saved Tracy from drowning herself and has had a vicious fight with two thugs, only for Tracy to run off leaving him alone on the beach, Lazenby looks at the camera and says "This never happened to the other fella" (A reference to Connery). At one point, Bond empties his desk and takes out props from earlier films (Honey Ryder’s knife from Dr. No, Red Grant’s garrote watch from From Russia With Love, and the miniature re-breather from Thunderball), while we hear composer John Barry's themes from those movies. Later on, Bond walks past a man who is sweeping the floor and whistling the theme to Goldfinger.

Ironically, while director Peter Hunt tries to strengthen the connection between On Her Majesty's Secret Service and Connery's Bond films, he moves out completely of the realms of technology fantasy of the previous installments and presents a quite realistic spy thriller. The film downplays the gadgets and focuses on story and characterization. Bond survives by his own physical skill and ingenuity; he uses his only gadget (a combined safecracker and photocopier) in the sequence in which he breaks into the lawyer's office. This has the effect of making Bond a more believable character. He is not a bigger-than-life hero; as a matter of fact, he seems, time and again, defenseless and anxious. This is especially evident in the scene at the skating rink, where Bond hides from his pursuers and is actually scared.

Nevertheless, the action sequences have all the ingredients one has come to expect from a Bond movie. The fight scenes are stylized and extremely physical, employing jump cuts and loud sound effects to accelerate the tempo and make the violence seem more real than it actually is. The ski chase down Piz Gloria is electrifying. Bond launches himself down the slope and heavily armed assassins give chase. What is great about this is the way the chase just will not end. Upon reaching the village, 007 knocks two gunmen out in a brutal fistfight. But the hunt does not stop here, it just turns into a car chase. A break follows, then the pursuit is renewed on skis. The end of this exciting sequence sets up the climax of the film. The explosive final assault on the mountain-top building is equally spectacular - director Christopher Nolan pays homage to the scene in his blockbuster hit Inception and he has acknowledged that On Her Majesty's Secret Service has immensely influenced his work.

As for George Lazenby’s performance, it is fairly adequate considering this is his first film role. His Bond is not as cocky and as suave as Sean Connery's, but he is more physical and more psychologically complete. Unfortunately, Lazenby would not get to grow into the role since this would be his only portrayal of the British spy. But contrary to popular belief, he was not fired by the producers; it was his agent, Ronan O'Rahilly, who talked him into refusing a lucrative seven-film contract on grounds that the series would die out in the 1970s.

All in all, On Her Majesty's Secret Service is truly a great movie which deserves to be held in the highest regard. It is one of the most exciting Bond outings, in standard action terms but also in dramatic substance.

28/30

The Life Aquatic

Directors are a varied bunch. Some just like to tell the story, some try to throw in all sorts of artistic shots and angles, others have distinctive styles that are easily recognizable regardless of the story they are telling. Wes Anderson fits definitively into that third category as one of the true auteurs working today. Starting with his debut film, Bottle Rocket, and working all the way up to last year's Fantastic Mr. Fox, Anderson has continued to hone a unique and inimitable method of storytelling all his own. My favorite example of Mr. Anderson's work is the charming 2004 movie, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou.

The Life Aquatic, spoofing famous French oceanographer Jacques Cousteau, follows a group of documentary filmmakers who create art house pictures on exotic marine wildlife. They are led by the depressed and washed up Steve Zissou, fabulously underplayed by Bill Murray. While on a voyage, Steve's best friend Esteban is killed by a large and mysterious shark. Determined to avenge his fallen comrade, Steve takes of on a revenge crusade in a way only Wes Anderson could visualize.

One of the most memorable and original parts of the film is the marine wildlife. Anderson, working with Henry Selick, the man behind the animation in The Nightmare Before Christmas, decided to use relatively low-tech stop-motion animation. The result is never distracting and at times almost magical. A soundtrack overflowing with David Bowie and Bowie covers on acoustic guitar and in Portuguese only add to the atmosphere.

The dialogue and camera work are overflowing with quirk and sarcasm, yet the script, co-written by Noah Baumbach, still manages to engineer moments of true emotional authenticity between its numerous characters. This helped by a spectacular ensemble cast including, Owen Wilson, Willem Dafoe, Angelica Huston, Jeff Goldblum, and Cate Blanchett. All are terrific, with special praise reserved for Wilson and Dafoe, but it is clearly Bill Murray's show and the movie lives or dies with him.

I like to think that Mr. Murray found a bit of himself in Steve Zissou. Though infamously difficult to work with in real life (Zissou is no peach either), Murray has always been able to collaborate successfully with Anderson. The Life Aquatic was their third movie together, and they have gone on to make two more. While all of their efforts are entertaining, none reach the level of sweetness, humor, tragedy, and whimsy that The Life Aquatic achieves.

27/30

Bande à Part

"There is the cinema before Godard and the cinema after Godard."

- François Truffaut

Arguably the most radical and most prominent of the Nouvelle Vague (French New Wave) filmmakers, Jean-Luc Godard’s greatest talent is undoubtedly for innovation. His unprecedented use of pop culture references, literary and cinematic allusions, eclectic and improvised dialogue, long tracking shots, long takes, jump cuts and other methods of expression revolutionized cinema as we know it. But Godard, who is to receive an honorary Academy Award for lifetime achievement at the next Oscars, is not for every taste. Because he rejects the standard principals of traditional cinema as means to display his originality, his films are sometimes characterized by American cinemagoers as monotonous, infuriating and difficult.

Godard nevertheless clearly illustrates everything there is to know about film theory and cinematic techniques. It is no surprise that he has greatly influenced a number of contemporary directors such as Jonathan Demme, Michel Gondry, Martin Scorsese, Steven Soderbergh and Quentin Tarantino. As a matter of fact, not only did Tarantino name his production company A Band Apart, a play on words of the Godard film Bande à Part (Band of Outsiders), but his first two features, Reservoir Dogs (1992) and Pulp Fiction (1994), are also full with hommages to Bande à Part.

Perhaps one of his "easiest" films, Bande à Part is Godard’s seventh feature, made in 1964. Following up on his groundbreaking classics À bout de souffle (Breathless, 1960), Vivre sa Vie (My Life to Live, 1962) and Le Mépris (Contempt, 1963), Godard pays tribute to the American film noir classics of the 1940s and 1950s in this adaptation of American author Dolores Hitchens’ 1958 novel Fool’s Gold. The film stars Claude Brasseur, Sami Frey, and Godard’s then wife, the beautiful and captivating Anna Karina.

For those who appreciate the director’s unique stylistic approach, Bande à Part is an electrifying caper. It centers on a couple of amateur criminals, Franz (Frey) and Arthur (Brasseur). The two men revere and model themselves on American gangsters. They act out gun battles where Billy the Kid is shot by Sheriff Pat Garrett.

While in English class, Franz meets a young woman, Odile (Karina), who quickly reveals that M. Stolz, her aunt’s mysterious lodger, keeps a large amount of money unlocked in his room. The chance to commit a robbery is too perfect of an opportunity to pass up, so Franz and Arthur plan to steal the money and convince Odile to cooperate. Unfortunately, Arthur's uncle somehow learns of their plot and wants to take over.

The most interesting aspect of Bande à Part is not the story itself but the unpredictability in terms of how the tale is told. Godard pushes the boundaries of what is acceptable in cinema, leading to some surreal moments. The film is not so much about plot or character development, but instead is an expression of the moments in between. The story line is a simple pretext for Godard to demonstrate his cinematographic ingenuity. The characters barely go through any change during the film; the scenes that do not advance the plot are definitely the most appealing and give the film its offbeat charm.

One of these scenes takes place in a diner. Momentarily stuck for words, Odile, Arthur and Franz suggest a minute of silence. “A minute’s silence can be very long,” says Franz. Godard plays a joke on the viewer by eliminating for 36 seconds all the ambient noise, to great comic effect. Shortly after that, the three characters perform a dance routine in the middle of the café (which influenced the dance sequence with Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman) and Vincent Vega (John Travolta) in Pulp Fiction). This time, Godard cuts out the music (but not the background noise) at regular intervals to tell the audience directly what each of them thinks and feels. As the narrator is not one of the characters, this adds a documentary feel to the film.

The dance routine does not push the story forward, it is insignificant to the film as a whole, but it captures a peaceful moment in time. What has happened or will happen is not important; all that matters is the purity of this one perfect instant. By breaking the limitations of realistic structure, Godard effectively reminds us that we are just watching a film, nothing more and nothing less.

Bande à Part is splendid, genuinely brilliant and exceptionally distinct. Its superior artistic quality is as spectacular as it was four decades ago. Godard created a film that has proved to be able to successfully pass the test of time; an influential film to see again and again. A good place to learn how much of a debt modern cinema owes him.

27/30

Old versus New

Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck in Roman Holiday

A while ago I had a long debate with a friend of mine on the importance of old movies. My friend, a terrific movie watcher and all-around good guy, was under the impression that old movies were virtually irrelevant at this point. Obviously special effects and graphics of today blow away the most advanced movies of 20 years ago, let alone the 1940s. My friend, lets call him Joe, went farther than that however, claiming all aspects of movie making were more sophisticated now. Screenwriting, acting, cinematography. Modern directors have learned from their predecessors and are now building on top of if. That is not to say that Joe thinks all new movies are great and all old movies are crap. He just feels that a good new movie tops a good old movie any day, and doesn't understand the fuss about all the classics. I have several other friends, movie lovers even, whose film watching repertoire is nearly complete among the new releases section, but develops giant gaps the farther back in time we go.

I hold a different view point. I love old films. Sometimes, I'll admit the label of classic can be misleading. If Roman Holiday were released today, it would star Julia Roberts or Rachel McAdams instead of Audrey Hepburn, and be rightly lambasted as pure escapism. Many Marilyn Monroe movies are downright sexist, and I even find (gasp) Casablanca to be a bit tedious. Just because they were great at the time does not mean they remain great now. I still enjoy watching these, mainly because I have some historian in me. Even though the original telephone cannot compare to an iphone in terms of utility and elegance, it would still be cool to use one. But I understand that argument does not apply to everyone. I love watching the truly great old movies for a very simple reason. They stood the test of time.

Christopher Nolan's Inception is a terrific movie. It is exciting, subversive, thoughtful, complex, event and character driven, philosophical while still being escapism. Yet as of right now, Inception has appealed to exactly one audience in time. The 2010 movie going audience. In 2040 will people still be wowed by the craftsmanship that went into Inception? I think so, but I also think Avatar, despite being a best picture nominee an the highest grossing film of all-time, will fade into history as at best, nothing more than a landmark for special effects. 

Joseph Gordon-Levitt in Inception

Then you have movies like The African Queen, Adam's Rib, or Citizen Kane. The Orson Welles' masterpiece was created in 1941. It continues to capture the hearts of cinephiles now almost 70 years after it was released. If I had to bet, I would guess that movie watchers will still be wowed by Citizen Kane in 2040 and long after that. For me at least, that is the definition of a classic.

The Seventh Seal

There are a few timeless questions that philosophers have struggled with, regardless of what period of human history they lived in. Is there a God, and why are we here, come up over and over again in the works of the great thinkers. Ingmar Bergman almost certainly falls under the category of "great thinker" and his movies and screenplays reflect that. His most famous film, and maybe his most philosophical, is the 1957 black and white movie, The Seventh Seal.

The basic plot of the movie is very existential. A knight and his squire return to Sweden from the crusades with their faith destroyed by decades of holy war. The film opens on the shoreline of Sweden where the knight learns that Death is coming for him. In a desperate ploy for more time, Antonius Block challenges Death to a literal game of chess for his life. The longer he can hold off Death in the board game, the longer he has to remain among the living. As he travels across the 14th century swedish countryside that has been ravaged by the black plague, Block meets various characters who throw in with him on his journey.

This movie is essentially about a search for God. Block cannot believe that God might not exist, or even that He is absent while humans endure so much suffering. And so, Block relentlessly searches for a sign from Him. The knight's traveling companion, the surly, cynical, squire has no use for God anymore, but Block continues to search without hope, even as Death closes in.

Antonius Block is played by Max von Sydow in a career making performance. The noble and kind knight that is tormented by the lack of a creator. The pain he injects into Block is magnificent. Gunnar Bjornstrand is excellent as the faithful squire. He also provides much of the levity that makes the tremendous austerity of The Seventh Seal bearable. The beautiful Bibi Andersson, Bergman's frequent muse, also appears as an innocent wife and mother of a family that Block meets.

The image of Death playing chess is iconic and frequently parodied, but remains powerful. This movie offers questions, but supplies no real answer. In a tremendous monologue, Block offers the basic dilemma of the both the film, and its creator.

"Is it so terribly inconceivable to comprehend God with one's senses? Why does He hide in a cloud of half-promises and unseen miracles? How can we believe in the faithful when we lack faith? What will happen to us who want to believe but can not? What about those who neither want to nor can believe? Why can't I kill God in me? Why does He live on in me in a humiliating way -- despite my wanting to evict Him from my heart? Why is He, despite all, a mocking reality I can't be rid of."

27/30