Guess what I got for Christmas?
Guess.
Just guess.
$150 in gift cards to movie theaters. I’m so glad my friends and family get me.
Guess what I got for Christmas?
Guess.
Just guess.
$150 in gift cards to movie theaters. I’m so glad my friends and family get me.
2009 has been a great year for animation, particularly in the advances that were made in leaps and bounds this year. Wes Anderson used stop-motion animation to bring “Fantastic Mr. Fox” to life. Although they hesitate to call it animation, James Cameron and Robert Zemeckis continued to perfect the motion capture technology, the former practically reinventing it. To top it all off, our good friend Pixar, faithfully churning out magnificent movies year after year, had perhaps their finest moment yet with “Up,” and the Academy may just reward it with only the second Best Picture nomination for an animated film.
But what about old-fashioned, hand-drawn animation?
“The Princess and the Frog” is one of the best movies of the year not because it sets out to revolutionize its craft or because it tries to impress us with its bravura; in fact, it’s such a joy because it does just the opposite. It sticks rather simply to the way animation was done in the good old days, and it has the beautiful charm to make you feel like you did as a child watching the Disney animated classics.
“The Princess and the Frog” is able to channel the rapture of the golden age of animation while combining it with a more contemporary ethic. It doesn’t entirely belittle the power of wishes and dreams, which movies like “Cinderella” and “Snow White” trained us to believe was all you needed. But the movie’s main lesson is to teach the value of working hard to achieve your dreams, which is just what Tiana (voice of Anika Noni Rose, “Dreamgirls”) does. She works two jobs in New Orleans so she can open the restaurant that she and her father (Terrence Howard) dreamed about when she was a child. He is the main voice echoing in her head, always saying that you cannot rely on the cosmos to give you what you want. However, in a moment of desperation, she kisses a frog who claims to be a prince in hopes that she will get the fairy tale ending of “The Frog Prince.” But the frog doesn’t become a prince; Tiana becomes a frog thanks to a voodoo priest (Keith David) that is creepy on a level I reserve for villains like Jafar and Scar. The two must travel through the bayou to reach Mama Odie, a voodoo priestess that can set things back to the way they are. To navigate the perilous terrain, they enlist a trumpet-tooting alligator named Louis (Michael-Leon Wooley) and a thickly accented, love-struck firefly named Ray (Jim Cummings). The journey is filled with plenty of spirited musical numbers and enough fun to make your smile as wide as the Mississippi.
MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!
As I write this factoid at 8:53 P.M., I will admit to being completely and utterly exhausted. My, what a day can do to you!
My family has two “traditions” on Christmas Day. The first is eating enchiladas from our favorite Mexican restaurant on our fine china (although today we were tired and just ate them on paper plates).
And, with a few exceptions, we join almost every family in America at the movies. Keeping with the spirit of being with your family for the holiday, the choice is usually something that everyone will enjoy together. This year’s selection was “The Princess and the Frog;” in previous years, we have attended “Marley & Me” and “Cheaper by the Dozen.” By far the most memorable Christmas at the movies was “Dreamgirls” in 2006, the only time I have ever heard an audience applaud in the middle of a movie.
As you are hopefully enjoying Christmas day with your family, watch the “F.I.L.M.” of the week, Wes Anderson’s “The Darjeeling Limited,” and be thankful that you are not like this family. Distant and dysfunctional, the movie follows three brothers (Owen Wilson, Adrien Brody, Jason Schwartzman) on a spiritual journey across India. However, the trip becomes about more than religion; it brings to the surface many feelings of dissent simmering between the brothers. But this isn’t an unnerving family drama. It is a Wes Anderson movie, and he manages to delve into our deepest feelings using humor and panache. ”The Darjeeling Limited” is easily his most uproarious and poignant.
Anderson’s characters are always a little quirky and off-beat, but here they are much less bizarre than his other movies (such as “The Royal Tenenbaums”) and hence more relatable. Each brother is stricken by some sort of painful feeling. The eldest, Francis (Wilson), has been in a terrible motorcycle accident, forcing him to don an arsenal of bandages. The middle, Peter (Brody) is still struggling to get over his grief from the death of his father. The youngest, Jack (Schwartzman), is reeling from a break-up with his girlfriend, obsessively calling her just to listen to the answering machine. After a year separated from each other, they unite at Francis’ request on a train called the Darjeeling Limited that runs through India. He hopes that some sort of grand spiritual experience will unite them again, but factionalism begins to develop among the brothers. Francis and Jack are angry that Peter can’t seem to let go of his father; Francis and Peter are reviled by Jack’s pathetic handling of his break-up; Peter and Jack are constantly questioning the true motives of Francis and the trip. Ultimately, it is really the lingering agony at their father’s death and their disgust with the absence and neglect of their mother (Anjelica Huston) that brings them back together.
“The Darjeeling Limited” stands out from Anderson’s other movies not only because it is notably funnier, but also because it is a story told with a great deal of compassion and introspection. In less than 90 minutes, Anderson unravels the three main characters completely, getting to the core of what brings families together and tear them apart. The movie’s success is not a solely a triumph of Anderson’s direction and writing (technically speaking, the script was a collaboration with Schwartzman and Roman Coppola). Its success is due largely in part to the three leading men, constantly adjusting their emotions to fit the overall tone of the movie. These incredibly aware performances are at times comical, at others somber, and often both. Wilson, Brody, and Schwartzman are completely believable as brothers, and they are the perfect people to lead us on Anderson’s journey.
Merry Christmas Eve, everyone! I hope everyone is able to spend some time with family or loved ones and really catch the spirit of the season.
In my family, Christmas Eve follows a pretty set routine.
In the morning, we usually do some hard-core baking. At 2:00, we go to the Christmas Eve service at church. Before we go to a Christmas Eve party that we plan with three other families around dusk, we all gather around and watch a Christmas movie. This year, we watched “The Polar Express.” Previous years’ selections have included “Elf” and “The Santa Clause 2.”
I’m kind of alarmed that not a single person has told me what they are anticipating the most in January. I know it is a fairly slim month, but there has to be something you want to see – even if it is on video or on HBO in a year.
I don’t want my shameless advertisement for the month of January to feature absolutely nothing. So please take it.
I equate watching Nancy Meyers’ movies to taking a leisurely Sunday saunter through a beautiful park. Warm and delightful with plenty of laughs thrown in, her movies are always enjoyable to watch. But just because a filmmaker does one thing very well does not mean that they should do that and only that. With “It’s Complicated,” Meyers tries her hand at a different kind of movie. While most of her previous projects were relatively sweet, her latest piles on the raunch. Accompanying this vulgarity is a noticeable surge of laughter, although this comes at the cost of the charm her movies usually possess.
The title refers to the affairs of the characters and not at all to the story, which is actually quite simple. Jane (Meryl Streep) and Jake (Alec Baldwin) were married for many years, had three kids, and are now divorced. Jake moves on quickly, marrying the much younger Agnes. Jane, on the other hand, tries to “learn how to be divorced,” something she cannot seem to master even after 10 years. But after an inebriated evening leads to some ribald shenanigans with her ex-husband, she begins to wonder whether there might be some lingering feelings left for Jake. Jane tries to fight it and chastens herself severely for even thinking of having an affair with him, but the attraction becomes undeniable. However, this comes inopportunely as she is falling for her lovably dorky architect, Adam (Steve Martin). He reminds her of all the joy that a lively personality can bring, and Jane begins to recall all the reasons why her marriage with Jake failed. Sound too complicated? It really isn’t on screen, where the story unravels quite predictably and every plot twist can be called with relative ease. Read the rest of this entry »
I was faced with a tough decision regarding my ticket collection on Monday. I attended an advanced film screening at the Angelika Film Center, as the last two factoids have informed you. To gain entrance to these screenings, I usually have to present a piece of paper which they confiscate upon entry.
However, they did things a little differently. We had to exchange our pass for a real ticket that didn’t have the name of the movie on it, only “SPECIAL EVENT.”
What was I to do? None of these other advanced screenings had real tickets.
In the end, I decided to leave it out. But I didn’t make the decision haphazardly; I thought long and hard, weighing my options thoroughly.
It takes more than just gumption and chutzpa to get up on one of the world’s biggest stages and declare yourself king of the world; it takes conviction. When James Cameron did just this at the Academy Awards in 1997 after “Titanic,” it was shocking to many and bombastic to me. What had he really done to gain the title “king of the world?” What separates him from the dozens of directors who stood in the exact same place as he had? What is the legacy of “Titanic” other than a firm position in the highest echelon of box office performance and a hefty loot on Oscar night? According to IMDb, it is now the lowest rated of the five Best Picture nominees that year. It was like the election of a demagogue – it electrified the people and it was too popular to ignore.
Fast forward 12 years to today where James Cameron has just released “Avatar.” If he got up on national television and screamed, “I’M KING OF THE WORLD,” I just might buy it. His latest project is one fifteen years in the making, and he may have just sparked a revolution in cinema. ”Avatar” is breathtaking moviemaking at its finest, with astonishing visuals that are designed to do more than just floor you. They engulf you and transport you to Pandora, a land of untold beauty complete with its own indigenous people, language, and wildlife, for an exhilarating ride and fascinating experience.
I knew the effects would be a slam dunk victory for Cameron, but I had my doubts about his ability to craft a story after “Titanic,” whose melodramatic plot I can usually summarize in one sentence (Leo and Kate have a lot of fun and the boat sinks). Much to my surprise, Cameron actually constructs a very engaging story with undertones about the dangers of imperialism. Cynics might call it the Smurf County production of “Pocahontas,” but the story still feels fresh even though it is a bit recycled. Jake Sully (Sam Worthington of “Terminator Salvation” fame) is a paraplegic Marine who is torn between the two competing human forces on Pandora after he develops a special bond with the native Na’vi. The scientists, led by the sassy cigarette-smoking Grace (Sigourney Weaver), want to discover how the Na’vi think in order to live in harmony with them. The military operation, commanded by the hulking Colonel Quatritch (Stephen Lang), works in tandem with the financial side of the project, run by a thundering businessman doing his best Ari Gold impersonation (Giovanni Ribisi), to figure out the best way to get their hands on the bonanza underneath the sacred tree of the Na’vi. They would prefer relocation but are not afraid to resort to subjugation if the natives prove to be a handful. While Jake tries to serve two distinctly different agendas, he becomes quite taken by the Na’vi and the way they live in cooperation with nature – and not to mention quite smitten by the Amazonian Neytiri (Zoë Saldana). Soon, the two forces tugging for Jake becomes not scientists vs. military but Na’vi vs. humans. Read the rest of this entry »
I sat for over an hour at a screening yesterday watching a trivia reel on a loop. I complain about the pre-show entertainment and the endless advertising, but having to sit through the same trivia questions dozens of times could drive Gandhi mad.
However, once, I managed to make trivia entertaining.
At the 8:10 opening night show of “Bruno,” the projector broke (I think I called it a “mercy killing” in my review). While the AMC staff slowly worked to fix the projector, they flipped on the trivia reel.
The first time, my friends and I offered our guesses at who said what quote. But by about the third time around, it was getting reaaaaaaaally boring, so we had to spice it up some. It was fun for a little while by yelling out BS answers to the quotes, yet even that got old.
We walked out.
They Commented...SO SHOULD YOU!