Denzel Washington has wowed audiences by playing both sides of the hero-villain spectrum. Just look at the two performances that earned him Oscars. 1989′s “Glory” saw him as an almost angelic soldier fighting in the first all-black company in the United States Army, while 2001′s “Training Day” had him as a cop so devious and corrupt you wanted to jump through the screen and put a bullet through his head.
In “Flight,” Washington plays in the shades of grey of Whip Whitaker, an alcoholic pilot who becomes a hero after steering his malfunctioning plane to safety with his unconventional wisdom. The catch is that Whitaker was high on cocaine and drunk as a skunk when he did so. Of course, the public blindly adores him in a way reminiscent of Sully, the pilot who landed his vessel in the Hudson River and had a memoir in Barnes & Noble faster than you could say “American Airlines.” But Whitaker has plenty of baggage that he can’t come to grips with and can’t compress into one of the overhead bins. (Sorry, the puns with “Flight” are just endless.)
Because it’s a Denzel Washington performance, it’s fascinating to watch. He owns the screen with a commanding presence rivaled by few in cinema these days. But because Washington has such well-known and well-defined extremes, it’s fairly easy to tell what he thinks of Whitaker.
While he may have the moments of tough, firm leadership that Coach Herman Boone exhibits, Whitaker is clearly more in the model of a Frank Lucas or an Alonzo Harris. It’s impressive that Washington can convey meaning through the mere iconography of his stature; however, in a movie like “Flight” that depends on our shifting judgements of the protagonist, that strength becomes a liability.
I had always been interested in seeing “Boogie Nights.” And for those of you who happen to know the film’s subject matter, no, it’s not because I wanted to see certain things. Released in 1997, the movie features plenty of today’s stars long before they had the luster and prestige their names bear now. Five members of the ensemble have since been nominated for Oscars, and an actor who wasn’t even given top billing has even won an Oscar.
In an effort to see some of Julianne Moore’s finest roles, I decided it was time to watch Paul Thomas Anderson’s Academy Award-nominated second feature. The movie was her breakout, earning her notices from everyone, including the first of her four Oscar nominations. But it’s not just to feature her that “Boogie Nights” is my “F.I.L.M. of the Week;” the entire ensemble shines in a true work of artistry by Anderson.
I can’t dance around the topic any longer – this is a movie about the adult entertainment industry, in Los Angeles during the ’70s and ’80s. Director Jack Horner is looking for an actor to build an empire around, someone who can do more than just look good. He finds just that in Eddie Adams, a young nightclub employee with talents that Horner seeks. Changing his name to Dirk Diggler, Horner’s discovery becomes the star he always dreamed of.
But the bigger Diggler’s star becomes, the closer he moves towards becoming a supernova. His fame has made him violently angry and cocky. He has also spiraled into severe drug abuse and addiction. Soon enough, he finds that his greatest asset for his job doesn’t function the way he wants. Diggler slowly drops towards rock bottom, and thanks to a strong performance by Mark Wahlberg, it’s a gripping journey to watch. See, the stories of fame in the adult film industry are no different than any other entertainment industry.
As I said earlier, there is quite the ensemble at work here, including John C. Reilly, Don Cheadle, and William H. Macy as members of Diggler’s posse. It’s quite fun to see them in their younger years, just getting started in Hollywood. He was leagues away from stardom at the time, but a definite standout is Philip Seymour Hoffman as a crew member infatuated with Diggler. He plays an unsettling character, and it’s nailed with the precision we now regularly associate with Hoffman.
The women are great, too. Heather Graham, who most people don’t take seriously, is seriously brilliant as Rollergirl, an actress who does all her movies wearing rollerskates. Anderson wrote the character with great depth, exploring her insecurities and weaknesses. Graham goes there with him, truly shocking us not only by how good she is but how far she is willing to take her character. And then there’s Julianne Moore, who entered mainstream consciousness for her portrayal of Amber Waves. She acts as a mother figure to Diggler, yet at the same time, she finds herself very attracted to him. Moore can play both objectives well, but she’s at her best when they clash.
In only his second movie, Paul Thomas Anderson handles “Boogie Nights” with the precision of a Martin Scorsese or Quentin Tarantino, sharing the former’s knack for great camerawork and the latter’s ability to select great music. Now that I’ve seen this, I have to wonder why I like his later movies so much less.
“Iron Man 2” may not have all that much to offer us as a movie, but it provides significant fodder for conversation about what it means to cinema in general. In my mind, it marks the first comic book movie of the post-”Dark Knight” era. Filmmakers have seen what made Christopher Nolan’s film such a hit on multiple fronts, and they are trying to strike gold using the same tools: namely, character development and strong plot over explosions and action. Jon Favreau and the other minds behind “Iron Man 2″ had time to adapt their series in an attempt to replicate that success.
One thing this sequel gives us is confirmation of a theory that many have been advocating for almost two years: “The Dark Knight” really does mark a revolution in the way we watch movies and the way they are made. As soon as we saw it, we knew that we would never watch comic book or action movies the same way. We instantly scorned “Transformers 2″ and other movies that only emphasized the visuals. But now, similar movies are trying to shift the focus to plot. That’s a really good thing for the average moviegoer because it means that studios are recognizing our intelligence!
But “Iron Man 2″ also reminds us of an unfortunate reality: some revolutions are only revolutionary once. Some are meant to repeated; the American Revolution, for example, inspired similar uprisings in France, Haiti, and all over Latin America. ”Iron Man 2″ incorporates many elements used in “The Dark Knight,” hoping to continue the pattern of success.
But its inability to recreate what made Nolan’s film so incredible signals the dawning of an era in comic book movies not favorable to anyone. From now on, there will be “The Dark Knight” and every other movie who wishes they were “The Dark Knight.” These movies cannot simply try to concoct their own version as if there is some sort of a formula. Nolan’s movie worked for so many reasons. Now, filmmakers have to find their own way if they want to make a movie that doesn’t play like a cheap ripoff of “The Dark Knight.” A key factor to the success of Nolan’s film was originality. Any movie that tries to use that originality will end up creating banality.
Recent Comments