Popular Sentiment

Oscar talk on CPX

I've been posting up a storm today on the topic of Oscars 2010, over at my movie blog Cineplexus. I've got links to all the movies I've reviewed over the past year that are nominated for Oscars. If you want a list of nominees, check out Oscars.com. If you want a list of my thoughts on the nominated movies that I happen to have seen, there's nowhere to look but Cineplexus. :)

As a side note, I am especially bummed about one movie that missed the Oscar nom cut: 500 Days of Summer. At the very least, I feel it deserved a nomination for Best Original Screenplay. Sigh. At least the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (responsible for Golden Globe noms) saw things my way. Sort of.

In the Loop ★★★★

The latest from my film review blog, Cineplexus.

The past few years have been jam packed with movies showcasing different perspectives on the Middle East, and on war in the Middle East specifically. Babel, Rendition, Grace is Gone…not too many of these movies have been gutbusters. I cannot, nor will I ever, subject myself to Delta Farce, so I can't speak to its comedic value. But British comedy In the Loop manages to offer an original, scathing take on Western government that is both hilarious and timely, even if its references to going to war in the Middle East refer largely to events that have long since passed.

The film focuses on a few mid-level figures in both the English and the American government, and is thus set in London and D.C. The role each government's minor players begin to take on ineach other's worlds builds until it has a major effect on world events. If that sounds pretty serious, that's the beauty of In the Loop. Throughout the film, serious events are unfolding at the hands of especially un-serious people. And the most threatening figures are also the most hilarious – two Scots who can't go more that a few seconds without swearing while screaming are in charge of the English government's public relations.

A constant barrage of accents, sycophants, sarcasm, and cultural-reference jokes keep what could be a dry political "thriller" a fresh, funny, and biting political comedy. Go see it at your local indie house ASAP if you're good with accents (Chicagoans, it's showing at the Landmark Century at least through this weekend). Otherwise, wait for the subtitled DVD so you won't miss a beat.

Up ★★★★½

From Cineplexus…

Raised, as so many of us were, on a rich movie diet of Disney's classic animated films, I am just now realizing how intensely frightening most of them tended to be at points. Sometimes, as with Aladdin, The Little Mermaid, or The Lion King, the terror comes somewhere in the middle.  Then there's that select handful of films where the creepiness shows up right away – think of that eerie opening to Beauty and the Beast, or the sad horror of Finding Nemo and, of course Bambi.

I'm waxing philosophical about these super-dramatic moments less because of my own reaction to Up than that of the little boy who sat behind me in the theater. I'd been warned that the beginning of the film was very sad – boy was it – but the child behind me was definitely scared. About 10 minutes into the film, he whimpered in discomfort, reflecting the heartwrenching nature of what was unfolding onscreen in a way that only an innocent could – palpably feeling the unpleasantness without really understanding it. His mother, a wise filmgoer no doubt, informed him that the film hadn't really started yet. She was pretty much right.

The vast majority of Up is more delightful than heartwrenching (though there's some of that, and some more scary, along the way), but those first few sad,painful minutes were absolutely necessary to set up the motivation for the characters throughout. Such a decision – to maintain the integrity of the story even if it's difficult for much of the audience – not only pays off bigtime in Up, but it also reminds us of what these films can be when they're done with care and class. There may be an extra dimension involved, but Disney and Pixar have restored the dark, complex splendor of those animated classics we loved as children, and appreciate as adults.

Thanks, guys.

2 Movies About…Making Bank: The "Summer's" First 2 Blockbusters

This new review (in the "2 Movies About" Series) was just posted on my film blog, Cineplexus. Enjoy!

X-Men Origins: Wolverine ★★½

Star Trek ★★★★½

In the movie industry, as in so much of retail-based society, seasons start a little early. Christmas season starts at Halloween, Oscar season starts in the Fall, and Summer, the season of the Blockbuster, starts in early May. Summer season 2009 is off to a rollicking start with two hugely anticipated films, each with a very long franchise history to back it up and bring it fans. Wolverine and Star Trek are both examples of mega-budget, sci-fi epics that movie fans love, even those who don't care much about the source material, and they both have already made major bank, thanks in large part to months and months of hype. The films have this in common, and little else. 

Actually, for me, there were some other similarities. I saw both films on the day they opened, at the same theater, where in both cases I had to show the ticket I just paid $10.50 for to a diffident but unyielding usher before entering the theater itself, despite the fact that tickets were already torn on an entirely different floor. Oh, summer blockbusters. We get so excited for you, only to be put through hell for the opportunity to be disappointed by you. At least, this was the case with Wolverine. 

The X-Men franchise has been quite successful at the box office over the years, but scripts and plot development have seen their ups and downs. Wolverine has all the flash and careful art design of previous films, but in terms of editing and storyline, we can mark it in the "downs" column. Ladies and gentlemen, for the first time in the history of Cineplexus, I'd like to issue a SPOILER ALERT.

Now, perhaps you already know that Wolverine (Hugh Jackman, of course) and his ilk (i.e., mutants) are practically immortal. This is made crystal clear to us in an opening montage that finds James Logan (Wolverine-to-be) and his half-brother (the future Sabertooth, played by Liev Schreiber) fight in pretty much every American War ever (nevermind that they're Canadian). But after some funny business in Vietnam, some fun with other mutants (a hit-or-miss bunch that includes some characters that will be familiar to comic book fans, but not to anyone else), and starting a new life as a lumberjack, a man named Stryker offers to make Logan "indestructible."  X2 already introduced Stryker to us as a military madman, and as Wolverine's creator. 

Indestructible. It's not an equicovating kind of word. What's more, the man who uttered it, Stryker, has devoted his life to the study of mutants (and how to take advantage of them). So why, Gavin Hood, why,David Benioff and Skip Woods, why, Nicolas DeToth and Megan Gill, is the entire second half of the movie about Stryker trying to destroy Wolverine? Moments after the newly-minted adamantium-infused Wolverine esapes from the laboratory of his creation, Stryker utters the following words to his #2 man: "Blow his brains out." You JUST coated his skull in unbreakable metal, jackass! Sure, a military higher-up points this out a bit later in the film, but it's too little, too late at that point. No matter how many cool fights, awesome mutants, or fabulous special effects can make up for such a mind-boggling backwards plot "twist." 

I'm not saying I didn't enjoy the film. I'm just saying that I spent several minutues of it yelling at the screen from the audience. Literally. No one heard me. It was loud in there. In a way, I have to thank X-Men Origins: Wolverine for giving me some perspective with which to critique the following week's big blockbuster, Star Trek.

Now, I'm no Star Trek lover; in fact, in my younger years I was one of those Star Wars nerds who's so devoted a fan that she actually stands against the very idea of Star Trek. In college, however, I became close friends with Mary, who I credit with getting me excited about things like comic books and superheroes…and with bestowing upon me a working knowledge of Star Trek: The Next Generation. That said, one hardly needs more than a tenuous grasp on 20th century pop-culture to follow along with this film. After all, it's an origins story – OMG, another similarity to Wolverine! How did I miss that one? – and we're carefully, if quickly, introduced to all the heroes from the original Star Trek throughout the film. While they aren't all fresh out of Starfleet, they are all new to the Enterprise, rocketed into key roles by happenstance and quick thinking, and there's something truly exciting about that.

Come to think of it, what's not exciting about the new Star Trek? I expected some thrilling fight scenes and fast-paced chases. I expected crazy effects and fancy explosions. Check, check, check. super-check. For many, that kind of flash will be enough to brand Star Trek a successful endeavor. But how was I to imagine, based on the fast-paced, hype-tastic trailer pumped through the Web and on to television for the past year, that this film would actually have a carefully developed, extremely complex story? The folks behind Star Trek might have devoted as much care to character development as they did to their Enterprisesets and interstellar motion graphics. Furthermore, they managed to totally rewrite the future of the Star Trek universe; one friend of mine was appalled by this fact, but only one. Personally, I think it's a move of pure brilliance, one that could help this film become a sci-fi classic. And who could forget how super-hot all the main characters are? I, for one, can't stop thinking about it.

Both films obviously spent tons of time and money on development and details, but one of them just gave up when it came time for the script and the editing.  Not so fast, Hollywood; therein lies the difference between a frustrating Pre-Summer Blockbuster and an excellent one. Giving a crap about making your movie good, instead of just about your movie making money.

What's Wrong With Revenge of the Nerds? A pointless list.

I posted this on my film review blog, Cineplexus, yesterday. Enjoy!

•  •  •  •  •  •

Because I am watching it on TV at the moment, for what is probably the fourth or fifth time, and because I love it dearly, despite its flaws, I present to you this Pointless List. There is no way it could possibly be comprehensive:

Problems with Revenge of the Nerds

1) All students at Adams seem to be about 30.

2) Despite being an institution suitable for valedictorians who wish to study computer science (in its early days), the football team and coach rule campus

3) The dean watches Alpha Betas throw students and possessions out the windows of the freshman dorm. No punitive action is taken.

4) Freshman paying for room and board are sent at a moment's notice to bunk in the gymnasium.

5) Two naked men (Louis and Gilbert) wear their glasses in the shower.

6) Gilbert is able to sketch a digital graphic of himself and a girl he just meant using only the keyboard. It's 1984. The graphic can dance.

7) A middle-aged woman is attracted to a 12-year-old boy on sight.

8) The police of the town in which Adams is located have no jurisdiction over what happens on campus.

9) The football team doesn't notice that their jock straps are wet from "liquid heat."

10) Poindexter totally sucks at playing the violin…until the big talent show.

11) Booger is not a nerd. A stoner? Yes. A dork? Maybe. Not a nerd.

I could go on, or I could make a list of the many, many things that are just so right about this movie. Like the soundtrack, which includes Talking Heads, "Daisy" in Japanese, and a choral rendition of "We Are the Champions." But I'll have to save that list for the next time I catch Revenge of the Nerds on TV. So…see you in 2011.

Slumdog Millionaire ★★★★½

The short review below comes from my film review blog, Cineplexus. Enjoy!

For two days after we left the theater, my grandma would not hear mention of the word "India" without adding "awful, awful country!" This, of course, was not the intended message of Slumdog Millionaire, nor was it the message I left the theater with. Though the film is certainly packed with some pretty grim, gross, and dangerous images of life as a "slumdog" orphan criminal, I don't think the entire nation of India can be blamed for the events of this fictional drama (sorry, Grandma).

In fact, Slumdog Millionaire triumphs because of its fantastic juxtaposition of the lows and highs of life – specifically for main characters Jamal, Salim, and Latika, but, indirectly, for everyone. In fact, the film is very clear in its suggestion that all the hardships of Jamal Malik's life can be held responsible for his happy successes. 

This movie has already swept the Golden Globes, and is nominated for 10 Academy Awards. If you know anyone who has seen it (other than my grandmother), chances are they've urged you to check it out as soon as possible. I feel a little silly adding any more to the chorus, so let me just say this: Slumdog Millionaire is a tragic and triumphant story about love, endurance, and the power of kismet. Go as soon as you can, eschewing Paul Blart and Bride Wars though it may mean, and brace yourself for some intense pain and pleasure. Bring Kleenex.