We watch a considerable amount of movies. I don't consider it worthwhile to try to cram all of our recent viewings into yonder 'watching' section. This being the case, I care now to--as best I can recall--to produce a list of the movies we have recently consumed complete with a plot outline and my own quick blurb about each. Perhaps it could be of use to you. If not, it will at least force me to further digest.
MurderballA film about quadriplegics who play full-contact rugby in Mad Max-style wheelchairs - overcoming unimaginable obstacles to compete in the Paralympic Games in Athens, Greece. Nicole and I both enjoyed this film. The true conflict of the movie seems to be about how men learn to live as quadriplegics. Plus, the movie did not merely allow but encouraged me to stare at quadriplegics, so now I won't feel the need to do so in public.
True RomanceThis rock'n'roll adventure story tells of two unlikely lovers who accidentally double-cross the Detroit mob by stealing valuable contraband. The newlyweds flee to Los Angeles where they are sought by both gangsters and cops. The screenplay was written by Tarantino and the film feels a lot like a Tarantino flick, although it was directed by Tony Scott (Man on Fire, Enemy of the State, Ladies & Gentlemen: The Best of George Michael). There are many big names on the cast. However, the bigger the name, the smaller the part. Samuel Jackson, Brad Pitt, and Christopher Walken have a combined screen time of about ten minutes--all very minor parts. The stars--Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette--have not been heard from in about ten years. All of this is fitting in that this film has been very much overlooked, but Nicole and I both considered it worthwhile--especially if you are a Tarantino fan.
Natural Born KillersTwo victims of traumatized childhoods become lovers and psychopathic serial murderers irresponsibly glorified by the mass media. I liked it. I am not a 'natural, born' Oliver Stone (JFK, Alexander) fan, but I do like what he did with this film. The cinematography is appropriate and well-done as it mixes in various mass-media styles from Hollywood to studio sit-coms to saturday morning cartoons. The leads--Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis--deliver fine performances. I appreciate the statement stone is making in the film. Plus, Leonard Cohen is all over the soundtrack.
Maria Full of GraceA pregnant Colombian teenager becomes a drug mule to make some desperately needed money for her family. I did not like it. Nicole did not like it. But, there is a lesson to be learned from this flick.
If you want to have a successful movie, write a script that largely takes place in another country (preferably one that can be easily cast in the shadow of the US), so that it appears to have the genuineness of a foreign film. It is okay if you are American, just make sure to have the script written in a native tongue. Your lead must either be a woman or an emaciated child. Place your star in a social situation in which they are oppressed and used by men--directly and indirectly. Have your star committ a 'just' but major transgression to transcend her situation. Don't resolve your story--just have it end arbitrarily.All of what I just listed, for whatever reason, seems to be the ticket in our present cinema culture. It has been become formulaic.
Anyhow, our heroine--oppressed--decides to work for a drug trafficker as a mule--swallowing 'pellets' of cocaine in order to sneak them into the US undetected by customs. Other than deciding to deliver harmful substances, Maria also lies--a lot--to the people that are trying to help her out. I don't recommend it. Nicole and I grudgingly refer to this trash as Maria Full of Shit.
The New WorldA Terrence Malick-scripted drama about explorer John Smith and the clash between Native Americans and English settlers in the 17th century. I am a huge Terrence Malick (The Thin Red Line, Days of Heaven) fan. He is easily my favorite director. The New World is his second film from his return with The Thin Red Line from his 20-some-year hiatus from the industry.
I will first admit that I need to watch The New World again--this is the nature of Malick flicks. However, I have the gut feeling that it is just not up to the standards that Malick has established for himself. While it does sustain his standards of breath-taking cinematography, the story falls short.
Malick has the extremely unique talent of creating stories that keep the viewer engaged but at a distance from the characters and action. While I certainly do not believe that objectivity is possible for scientists or storytellers (especially moviemakers), Malick seems to be able to convey story in a strangely
pure manner--undoubtedly from his adherence to phenomenology--that refrains from allowing the story to be intentionally bent in order to make a statement. With The Thin Red Line, Malick points at not just the horrors of war. He also points out the horrors of human relationships and the horrors of nature in general. If he is making a statement at all, it would be something like, "Look at all of these things. Look at all of these actions. Is it not strange/incredible/confusing that they are even merely existing/happening?" Believe it or not, it actually makes for a decent movie-going experience.
But, it didn't feel like he maintained this trend as much with The New World. Perhaps, since it is heavy on the love story, it is tough to keep your audience at a distance. I'll try it again sooner or later.
The MachinistAn industrial worker who hasn't slept in a year begins to doubt his own sanity. It is an overlooked psychological thriller of pretty high-grade. However, I am just not a big pyscho thriller kinda guy. It is somewhat reminiscent of 21 Grams and Memento. If you liked either of those two, you would probably enjoy The Machinist. I just don't much like flicks where you have absolutely no clue what is going on the entire time--I am certianly okay with not having a number of pieces missing. But, it's difficult for me to watch so much ambiguous content, hoping that (a) the end will tie it all together, and (b) the tying together will be well worth having watched so much ambiguous story. Fortunately, it does tie together, but I don't know if it quite satisfied my standards of the forementioned (b). One of the most notable aspects of the film is how incredibly emaciated Christian Bale is--I am talking Auschwitz, here.
For those who are unfamiliar with Christian Bale,his recent role was that of the hunky hero of Batman Begins.look at what goes on backstage during the last broadcast of America's most celebrated radio show, where singing cowboys Dusty and Lefty, a country music siren, and a host of others hold court. I enjoy APHC--specifically, Garrison Keillor's stories. Upon hearing about this flick about a year back, I remember feeling excitement. However, I was disappointed with the product. As was my wife. It seems like they used the elements of the radio show that would have the hardest time transfering to the film. First and foremost, the movie follows a broadcast of the show--a live radio show. But, it is not the actual show (sharply, in that it is lacking most of the actual shows personalities, but also in that it lacks a lot of the shows content), and it is not at all live. So, if the intent was to capture the essence of the actual show, they failed by excluding such large aspects of the radio show.
They, of course, try to weasel in characters or themes here and there that reference the show. One of the more prominent of these being the slap-stick detective Guy Noir who narrates the (wanna-be) plot. He is played by Kevin Kline and it is simply embarassing to watch this man attempt physical comedy. There are also the guest musicians, all of which are actors playing as musicians. So, you sit watching these entire songs thinking (at best), "Say... this person is very talented at singing--for a Hollywood actor."
There was also the character of an angel in the film. Her performance made those of the 'Touched by an Angel" series seem oscar-worthy. It is that bad.
I guess I would recommend it to someone who is absolutely in love with APHC. I could not imagine watching and enjoying it without knowing anything about APHC. It just all seemed a little too self-reflexive in exclusive ways. If only they would have created movie following several narratives flowing through GK's imaginary Lake Wobegon.
This is Dr. Francis Schaeffer's spectacular series on the rise and decline of Western culture from a Christian perspective. It's the case with almost every adaption in existence: the book is better than the movie. This is certainly no exception, but it is fantastic to watch having read the books. It is a two-disc set that has, if I remember correctly, eight episodes [each 30-minutes long]. The first two or three episodes--covering very early Christianity--are somewhat weak as far as graphic content goes. This is understandable, as there just isn't a lot of cinema-friendly content these ages have left for us. Unfortunately, this leads to a number of cheezy re-enactments. But, come disc two, Schaeffer and son are at the top of both of their games.
# # #
Unless the editor-in-chief finds my slandering and literary bigotry unsuitable for her magazine, keep an eye out for my handiwork as film critic in Boyd Street's future issues.
