REVIEW: How Do You Know

23 12 2010

I sure wish “How Do You Know” knew what it wanted from the beginning.  James L. Brooks’ latest comedy is a study of three people uncertain of what they want for their futures.  Nervous, frantic, and anxious, they each search for the answer to the questions they pose about their lives.  But no one ever seems to find an answer, just a new question to occupy their thoughts.  This makes for dynamic and neurotic characters, all portrayed with gusto by the sensational cast, but the movie feels like it’s running  in circles around the same issues.

Lisa (Reese Witherspoon) is looking for a new life direction after her softball career is abruptly ended.  George (Paul Rudd) is unsure of the next step in his life after being served an unexpected indictment.  Serving more as comic relief, Matty (Owen Wilson) is an organized womanizer trying to figure out whether he loves Lisa enough to change his ways.  “How Do You Know” is really the story of Lisa and George, though, as they actively seek conviction in their life choices and wind up finding each other.

The two are incredibly vulnerable and emotional train-wrecks, never certain of where they are headed even when they begin a sentence.  It starts out with George, caught between a rock and a hard place with pressure from his dad (Jack Nicholson) mounting as his head is about to be served on a platter to the prosecutors.  But when the two meet on a blind date, all the neuroses transfer over to Lisa, who becomes increasingly unsure of her decision to move in with Matty and unable to remain committed to anything.  While George’s options become more black and white, he is still just as lost as Lisa, and the two manage to find comfort in their mutual wandering.

Read the rest of this entry »


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : Movie Reviews

10 for ’10 – Blogging Moments

22 12 2010

Catch up with the idea behind this series here.

2010 was my first full calendar year of blogging, and I sure have enjoyed every post of it.  However, there were those that I enjoyed a little bit more than the rest.  Here were my highlights of 2010 (in no particular order):

Milestones

1,000+ comments and 20,000+ views

I find plenty of satisfaction in just the craft of writing; I don’t really need quantifiable markers of success to bring me happiness.  But I will admit, it sure is nice to look at my dashboard in the morning and see an extra digit in the comments/views.  These were both reached in July, and I’m happy to say that since then, this blog has logged a cumulative total of 1,740 comments and 34,500 views to date.  So thanks for visiting and commenting … don’t be afraid to do it some more!

(500) Random Factoids

I’ve been logging a factoid every day since day (1).  When I started to blog, I was in a pretty major “(500) Days of Summer” phase, so I decided then that I would have to watch the movie on my (500)th day of blogging.  So, needless to say, I was very happy to have my celebration (500) days in the making.

1,000 posts

Hard to believe I’ve been blogging so long that I’ve logged 1,000 posts.  Factoids help, but I had 489 “serious” posts too.  That’s a whole lot of keyboarding.

Honors

LAMB Casting Winner

… and twice, nonetheless!  Thanks to all the voters of the LAMB who think I could cut it as a casting director in Hollywood!  It sure made me beam to win – and then to pick the subsequent movie to be recast.

Events

Nolan Marathon / Fincherfest

I got a little excited for the releases of “Inception” and “The Social Network” – so much so that I spent the entire week before revisiting and reviewing all the directors, Nolan and Fincher, respectively, and their past works.  The result was a renewed appreciation for their movies and an enhanced perspective when seeing their latest movies.  It worked so well that now I just have to plan ahead my weeks for 2011.

Marshall & Julie

The event that scared most of you all away because it looked like chapters of a book, largely because they were, was one of the most personally rewarding experiences for me this year.  Looking back on a year’s worth of blogging by reading “Julie & Julia,” the book that inspired the movie that inspired this blog, led to some pretty interesting insights.  If you have some time on your hands this holiday season, why not go revisit the series?

The Origins Project

The project that brought a little corner of the movie blogosphere together may rank among my proudest achievements this year.  I loved seeing the community come together to answer a few simple questions about what got us started blogging and what keeps us going.  Everyone gave such interesting and unique answers, and I was always fascinated by what I posted each day for a month.  It’s still worth a read – go seek out your favorite blogger in the project’s annals!

New Features

Save Yourself!

When it comes to stirring up good discussion, it’s hard to beat something that goes totally against popular opinion.  Writing a review that goes along with every point that all the critics make does little to engage readers.  The “Save Yourself” pieces I wrote this year got some of the best discussion on this site.  People either rallied behind my hatred, saying they felt oppressed in feeling the same way, or went crazy in defense of the movie they loved.  I didn’t care who thought what; I was just happy to have them comment!

Classics Corner

I sometimes doubted my own cinematic expertise, being so poorly versed in classic cinema.  So, with the establishment of the “Classics Corner” series, I renewed my commitment to being a better cinephile by requiring myself to watch at least one classic movie a month.  So far, I’ve seen some very interesting ones, and they’ve illuminated fascinating things about what I watch now.

A Facebook fan page!

I took a big step this year and created a Facebook fan page for my blog!  I’ve been experimenting with various ways to make it work, although I will admit that all these attempts have been pretty half-hearted.  The building blocks are there from 2010, but in 2011, I intend to build mountains.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : 10 for '10, Blog Events

Random Factoid #512

22 12 2010

Prepare yourself for “Little Fockers.”

Currently sitting at an impressive 9% fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes (50% better than better than “The Last Airbender,” if you’re looking for a comparison), the movie still looks to drain the most money out of the pockets of holiday moviegoers.  This isn’t going to drive them away, or me away, for that matter.  I accept the fact that it could be horrific with open arms in the hopes of sharing a fun, laughter-filled evening with an auditorium full of total strangers.

But that 9% doesn’t exactly reassure me.  Does it ultimately affect me?  No, but it makes an impact, especially for movies that I’m on the fence about seeing.  Case in point: “Burlesque,” which made a really poor critical showing.  I skipped it as a result.

So, what about you? Is there a point that a movie becomes too poorly-reviewed to see?  Are their certain movies you consider to be “critic-proof?”


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

REVIEW: The Fighter

22 12 2010

As Mena Suvari’s teenage temptress Angela Hayes told us in “American Beauty,” there’s nothing worse than being ordinary.  In the ring of boxing movies, it’s all too easy to become ordinary.  While the latest contender to take a punch at the reigning champions, David O. Russell’s “The Fighter” is a little too lightweight to compete, it’s got some nice heart.  And as practically all movies about the sport have taught us, soul is all that really matters, right?

However, this isn’t really a boxing movie so much as a movie involving boxing.  It’s mainly a story of brotherhood, family, and pride that’s made all the more fascinating because it’s true.  As many cinematic boxers preceding him have, Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg) works a low-paying, labor-intensive job to make a living since his boxing career won’t exactly pay the bills.  In his corner, he has his brother, former prize fighter Dickie Ecklund (Christian Bale) who became the pride of their hometown of Lowell, Massachusetts after triumphing over Sugar Ray Leonard.  Now, he’s an unreliable mess so addicted to crack that HBO is doing a documentary on him.

Micky is in many ways inexorably tied to his family with Dickie as his trainer and his tenacious mother (Melissa Leo) as his manager.  She performed the same role back when Dickie was in the ring and often still acts like his manager as opposed to Micky’s.  She puts an emphasis on family unity, which is tough for Micky to swallow as his many trashy half-sisters are often very overbearing.  Micky’s familial concerns lie with his young daughter being raised by his bitter ex-wife and her husband, neither of which want him to have any part in her life because of his lifestyle.

Read the rest of this entry »


Comments : 4 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : Movie Reviews

“True Grit” Poll Results

22 12 2010

“True Grit” opens today in theaters nationwide to what looks like strong box office prospects and a strong critical support, clocking in at an impressive 97% fresh over at Rotten Tomatoes.  But the Oscars are an entirely different game; how will it fare there?

If you read my latest set of predictions that I issued on Friday (which you probably didn’t, so GO READ THEM NOW PLEASE), you would have seen that the movie occupies the ninth slot on my ten Best Picture nominees.  I wrote about it and “127 Hours” this:

Slipping this week are “True Grit” and “127 Hours,” neither of which found much love from the Golden Globes.  The former was completely shut out while the latter received three nominations but not for Best Picture or Director.  The one-man show was unlikely to score a SAG nomination apart from Franco, but “True Grit” missed big by not receiving a Best Ensemble nomination given its star-studded cast.  They did manage to score with the BFCA, both receiving a nomination for Best Picture.  ”True Grit” received 11 total nominations from the group while “127 Hours” scored an impressive 8.  Neither look very strong at this stage, and if there are going to be any surprises on nomination morning, it could come at the expense of these two movies.

Nonetheless, that didn’t dismay any of the voters in my poll on the Oscar chances of “True Grit” that I attached to my Oscar Moment featuring the film.  When asked whether the movie would be nominated for Bet Picture, very single voter replied “Yes, this will make a big run at Best Picture.”  Other options included “Yes, but just because it’s the Coen Brothers,” “No, it might squeak out a couple of nominations,” and “No, this will be a nonentity.”

My pick at the moment would be “Yes, but just because it’s the Coen Brothers.”  While there is some love out there for the movie, it just doesn’t have the buzz for a big run at Best Picture.  Thanks to the 10, it seems safe.  But that’s the funny thing about the Oscars – as soon as we think something is safe, often the biggest surprises come.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags:
Categories : Marshall and the Movies, Polls

10 for ’10 – Most Forgettable

21 12 2010

It’s that time of the year when it’s time to put on the retrospective lens and look back on 2010 for what it was, the good and the bad, for better or for worse. To commemorate my first full calendar year of blogging, I decided to write a series I am calling “10 for ’10”, ten top 10 lists celebrating all things 2010. Half will be devoted to the movies, and half will be devoted to the blogging. Obviously, it will culminate on December 31 with my top 10 movies of the year.

To kick off, I’d like to feature a list that’s not your typical year-end top 10 list. Rather than celebrating the best or the worst, this list celebrates mediocrity. There were plenty of movies released this year that were just middling, not earth-shatteringly great yet not horrifically bad. These movies are often left to dry by the end of the year, but it’s time that they get their recognition.

So, without further ado, I present the most forgettable movies of 2010.

“The American”

Did anything even happen in this movie at all? Thanks to the RunPee app, I missed the big sex scene that was apparently so racy. As for any sort of plot, I’m pretty sure I had forgotten it before I left the theater.

“The A-Team“

Congratulations, you made a bunch of stuff blow up and freed yourselves from death and imprisonment multiple times.  Too bad you didn’t make this movie back in the ’80s, A-Team, because then it would have been exciting.  Now, it’s standard.  Next…

“Conviction”

Who knew that DNA evidence could clear someone wrongly convicted of murder? Try everyone who has looked at the front page of a newspaper in the past two decades. Like every single newspaper headline boasting the triumph of the truth, this movie heads for the back of my mind.

“The Disappearance of Alice Creed”

Not even the movie’s out of nowhere gay lovers twist could save this boring, minimalist kidnapping story from dissolving in my mind almost instantly.

“Just Wright”

Formulaic romantic comedy. Need I say more?

“Leap Year”

See above.

“Morning Glory”

I liked this movie a lot better when it was called “The Devil Wears Prada” and had Meryl Streep instead of crotchety old Harrison Ford.

“The Other Guys”

This Will Ferrell/Mark Wahlberg collaboration had nothing to make it stand out in either star’s catalog. Neither has a strong or memorable character spouting any quotable lines. Perhaps it’s best that we can forget this movie because I certainly know Farrell is hoping we forget the movies he made before this.  We’ve seen plenty of buddy cop movies done right, and there’s no reason to ever watch it done to mediocrity as it is here.

“Secretariat”

I have a well-documented distaste for inspirational sports dramas, mainly because they all come down to “this person shouldn’t have won but they worked hard and they were good people so they did win, and we should all learn a lesson.” This horse racing drama diverts a little bit, but it’s so packed with corny lines that I’ll forever group it with those that follow the template.

“She’s Out of My League”

“Knocked Up” dealt with everything this Jay Baruchel failed star-launching vehicle tried to tackle, only better and with much more humor. I’ll forever consider this a lame rip-off.


Comments : 4 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : 10 for '10, Blog Events

Random Factoid #511

21 12 2010

This is a big post.  A huge post.  So big it had to involve “Avatar.”

IT’S MY THOUSANDTH POST!!!

It’s been a fun 489 serious posts and 511 days blogging for/with you, so let’s keep the good times rolling.

Now, for those of you not looking to read about a milestone, here’s the “Avatar” part of the factoid.  The Hollywood Reporter released a list of 2010’s most pirated movies, and by far and away the winner was James Cameron’s “Avatar.”  It was downloaded a whopping 16.5 million times.  If each of those pirates saw the movie in 3D, the highest grossing movie ever would have added another $190 million to its $2.7 billion dollar worldwide haul.

While I understand that since it was such a massive hit, it makes sense that it would be the most pirated.  But “Avatar” was such a true cinematic experience so enhanced by theatrical viewing that it seems strange all those people would pirate it.  I’m not into the whole pirated movie gig because I respect filmmakers’ right to earn money off their creative products, but I just don’t think that “Avatar” is a movie worth watching on a small screen.

I’ve probably talked about the value of the theatrical experience too many times to count, yet I find myself with a renewed vigor to defend it after hearing this report.  Theaters are where movies were born, and it’s the community that makes them feel exciting.  I’m sorry that technology has brought us to this point where it becomes so individual.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: ,
Categories : Random Factoids

Oscar Moment: “Easy A”

21 12 2010

In honor of “Easy A” hitting video today, I’m writing this Oscar Moment specifically in regards to Emma Stone’s performance.  As Olive Penderghast, the 2010 model of Hester Prynne from “The Scarlet Letter,” she got some very deserved attention for her breakout role.  Here’s what I wrote back in September:

“Emma Stone is hardly a new sight for anyone that’s been seeing good movies recently; she has been scene-stealing as the heartbreaking Jules in ‘Superbad’ and the zombie-killing Wichita in ‘Zombieland.’  This, however, is the movie that will bring her into the mainstream consciousness.  ‘Easy A’ gives her all the material for a breakout role, and Stone seizes every moment to create a character that will shoot her into stardom.”

The movie was very well received by critics upon release (an 88% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes) yet still somehow managed to miss a Best Picture (Musical/Comedy) nomination from the Golden Globes.  In its place: “Alice in Wonderland.”  Big mistake.  Huge.  However, Stone did get her recognition in the form of a Best Actress nomination.  There’s hardly a chance for a win against the two “The Kids Are All Right” actresses and an even further shot at an Oscar nomination thanks to an impressive dramatic faction headlined by Natalie Portman.  But what’s with our bias against comedic actresses?  Why does the Academy only feel the need to honor actors dealing strictly in serious fare, perhaps dabbling in comedy but keeping their heart in drama?

A lot of Stone’s fans have raised this concern for months now.  Why not Emma Stone?  She’s as deserving as most of the actresses in the predicted five at the moment.  While she may not have an illustrious career under her belt or have undergone a massive physical transformation, Stone goes above and beyond what a movie like “Easy A” requires from its leading lady.

Castor over at Anomalous Material elaborated on Guy Lodge’s article at In Contention making a case for Stone, listing five reasons he came up with that might be the reason why comedy is so constantly overlooked by the Academy.

  1. Western audiences are conditioned to enjoy flashy and bombastic dramatic performances, such as Daniel Day Lewis’ in There Will Be Blood, over more subtle or seemingly “effortless” portrayals.
  2. Giving a good performance in a great movie is harder and hence more deserving of recognition than shining in a mediocre/good movie.
  3. Comedic actors are generally less talented than dramatic actors.
  4. Comedies are generally not as good, serious and important as dramas.
  5. Drama is harder than comedy.

As an actor myself, I’ll argue that comedy is every bit as hard as drama – there are just those for whom comedy comes naturally.  You can’t fake comedy because it takes total commitment.  Drama can be passably done with half a heart, and a well-liked actor can often do this to great acclaim.

For my money, Emma Stone gave one of the best performances of the year.  But according to Academy standards, her Golden Globe nomination is her highest reward.  Is this right?  Should comedic actresses get their due?  Is a performance like Stone’s deserving to stand next to Natalie Portman’s come Oscar night?

BEST BET FOR NOMINATION: Best Actress


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , ,
Categories : 2010 - Oscar Moment, Oscar Moment

“Alice in Wonderland” Poll Results

21 12 2010

Best Picture nominee “Alice in Wonderland.” Only at the Golden Globes, right?  But could it happen at the Oscars?

As a major dark horse, it could happen. I think the nomination for “The Blind Side” last year was just a perfect storm of events – the money, the publicity, the truth, and the heart. But what if it was just the money after all? What if Academy voters slipped in “The Blind Side” just to balance out a movie like “An Education” which hadn’t made $10 million?

It’s likely that “127 Hours” will barely clear that same mark, and what better than the second-highest grossing movie of the year to cancel it out? (I’m only playing devil’s advocate, of course).

I don’t think this will actually happen, and judging by the poll, you don’t either. 3 out of the 4 voters in the poll said they didn’t think “Alice in Wonderland” had a shot at a Best Picture nomination.  One brave voter dared to say it would. Good luck with that prediction, and I pray to a high power that you are wrong at the sake of the Academy’s credibility as a voting organization.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: ,
Categories : Marshall and the Movies, Polls

Random Factoid #510

20 12 2010

Shocked by the Golden Globe nominations?  Most people were by the comedy category, which included double-dip Best Actor nominee Johnny Depp and Best Picture nominees “Alice in Wonderland,” “Burlesque,” and “The Tourist” – all of which were widely panned by critics.

A lot of people didn’t look much into it, knowing that the HFPA (the voting body) loves a good flashy musical, celebrities, and box office money.  Basically, have a musical number in your movie and you have a Best Picture nomination – “Nine,” “Mamma Mia,” “Sweeney Todd,” “Across the Universe,” and many more stand as a testament.

But what you might not know is how the group can almost literally be bought.  Here’s a report from Cinematical that could very well have your jaw on the floor:

“Sony Pictures flew members of the HFPA to Las Vegas for a last minute pitch for ‘Burlesque’ (put out by their Screen Gems division). The package included ‘luxury hotel accommodations, free meals and a private concert performed by the film’s star, Cher.’ The film then went on to receive three Golden Globe nominations including the aforementioned Best Picture nod and two for Best Original Song, one of them performed in the film by … Cher.”

For those keeping score at home, that’s as many nominations as “127 Hours” and three more than “True Grit.”  I don’t know how qualified I am to make a judgment call on this because for all I know, this could be standard in the industry during awards season.  But out of any sort of context, it seems a sort of cruel bribery that enough money and glitter can buy a Best Picture nomination, bringing more people to the theater.

So, does this make you trust the Globes less?  Bemoan them all the more?  Clap louder when “The Kids Are All Right” inevitably triumphs?


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

REVIEW: The Tourist

20 12 2010

There could be worse things to watch for an hour and 45 minutes than a cinematic worshipping and idolization of the physique of Angelina Jolie.  As if “Salt” wasn’t enough for 2010, Sony takes her out of action figure mode and gives us “The Tourist,” a whole movie of Jolie in red carpet mode.  She elegantly struts across the scene in beautiful gown after dazzling dress, all accentuating her best features: her eyes, her lips, and her figure.  If you aren’t floored by her beauty by the end of the movie, go get your eyes checked.

But as your mom taught you in middle school, looks aren’t all that matter; you have to have a good personality to be truly attractive.  Inspect anything other than Jolie in “The Tourist” and you will find one snooze of a movie.  Half-heartedly a romantic comedy and half-heartedly an action thriller, it fails to satisfy as anything more than eye candy.

As the lover of con man Alexander Pearce, Elise (Jolie) finds herself tracked heavily by the police and the mob.  He tells her to find a man of similar build to him and masquerade around Venice as if he were the elusive Pearce.  On a train, she nabs Frank Tupelo (Johnny Depp), a math teacher at a Wisconsin community college headed to Italy on vacation.  She entices him by a tease act and then manages to rope him into following her around by money and luxury.

From there, it’s a game of mismatched expectations as she sees him as expendable while he thinks she is romantically interested in him.  In his mind, the movie is a classic romance in Italy, and he proceeds as such.  Yet in her mind, it’s like a James Bond movie where he’s a pawn.  The two visions clumsily intermingle, resulting in one very uncomfortable blend to digest.  Jolie and Depp have zero chemistry, and even though it’s not necessarily required for the movie, neither have any sort of a game face for it.  The action sequences are slow and boring, failing to breath any sort of life into “The Tourist” which flails for its duration in desperate need of a respirator.

Director/writer Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck strangely follows up the sublime German thriller “The Lives of Others” with this confused, uninteresting popcorn flick.  Even with a few fairly predictable plot twists to keep us mildly engaged, nothing can save this awkwardly comedic and dully action-packed movie from being one of the least exciting movies to grace the silver screen this year.  Sure, thanks to Angelina Jolie, it’s easy to watch.  But as a movie, it’s hard to bear.  C / 


Comments : 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , ,
Categories : Movie Reviews

“The Fighter” Poll Results

20 12 2010

“The Fighter” opened nationwide this past weekend to a pretty nice $12 million from 2,500 theaters, even ousting the per-theater average of “Yogi Bear.”  It’s also been receiving some very nice reviews, compiling a very nice 87% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes.  The awards attention has also shone bright on the movie, particularly on Christian Bale and Melissa Leo, but also on the picture as a whole; it received recognition in the Best Picture category from the Golden Globes and the BFCA this past week.

But can it get a Best Picture nomination at the Academy Awards?  I’ve had a poll running since November on this very topic, and it appears that my readers predicted wrong.

All three voters said that they did NOT think “The Fighter” would be nominated for the Oscar for Best Picture.  At the moment, these folks are looking very wrong indeed as the movie has made a surge at the perfect time.  My review is coming on Wednesday, so check out my raves for the movie.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags:
Categories : Marshall and the Movies, Polls

REVIEW: Mother and Child

19 12 2010

 

Most movies that we eagerly anticipate, we run out to see in theaters in the first few weeks of release.  Those that we leave for video are ones that we expect to be trash or those which we had no real desire to see in the first place.  Why do we have these low expectations?  Because, for the most part, Hollywood perpetuates them.  What we save to see on video is rarely any good.

But then again, with these low expectations, it’s just that much easier for a movie to sneak up and floor us.  Such is the case of “Mother and Child,” Rodrigo Garcia’s hyperlink drama intertwining three different stories of maternity.  As the style becomes slowly hackneyed by the system, it’s a nice ray of hope that someone can still get it right with a story built around three strong female characters and hard-hitting situations.

As Karen (Annette Bening) prepares herself for the imminent death of her mother, she can’t help but wonder what has become of the daughter she gave up for adoption when she was 14.  As she and her mother were never particularly close, she finds herself overcome by guilt and wistfulness, wishing she could have the time back to repair the mother-daughter relationship.  It doesn’t help things that Karen discovers post mortem her mother found the daughter of their Hispanic maid to be more like her child.

Then, there’s Elizabeth (Naomi Watts), whose hard-knock childhood has led her to be a family-spiting woman driven only by rationalism and furthering her career.  Her life is exactly as she wants it to be: unsentimental and free of unnecessary relationships.  But love finds a way into her life in the form of her boss, Paul (Samuel L. Jackson), and she soon finds that what she avoided for so long arrives on her doorstep.

Dead-set on adopting a child, infertile Lucy (Kerry Washington) has her mind on nothing else but becoming a mother.  Desperate to feel that maternal bond, she lets her marriage fall by the wayside in the mere hope that Ray (Shareeka Epps) will give her the child inside her womb.  The need to be a mother ultimately drives her to emotional extremes that alarm her friends and family.

Bening, Watts, and Washington all turn in performances so emotionally charged that it stings.  They bring so much passion and feeling to the project, and it exudes from the screen like a bright beam of light.  But it’s Garcia’s script, so thoughtful, beautiful, and heartbreaking that “Mother and Child” makes for one emotionally wrenching watch.  Providing three distinct takes on what it means to be a mother, it’s a deeply moving moviewatching experience – even sitting on a couch. A- / 


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : Movie Reviews

Random Factoid #509

19 12 2010

We’re getting to that point of 2010 where we can look back in retrospect at things.  Most critics are issuing their top 10 lists (or call them “The Social Network” and others given the unanimity this year), but Cinematical made a very different list this week: the most boring titles of 2010.

I had never really thought of it, but a good title really does make a difference.  If “Inception” had been called “The World of the Dream,” I probably wouldn’t be nearly as excited about it as I was.  If “How to Train Your Dragon” had been called “Vikings and Dragons,” I would have easily written it off.  Those are some of the best of 2010, but what about the worst?

The bland and the irrelevant usually make the worst titles.  For example, as much as I loved “Michael Clayton,” that title told me NOTHING about the movie.  As for 2010, we had plenty of culprits: “I’m Still Here,” the Joaquin Phoenix documentary, would have sent up no flags for the average moviegoer.  “The Lost Year of Joaquin Phoenix” would have been a significantly better choice.  “The Bounty Hunter” sounds like an action movie, not a revolting Jennifer Aniston rom-com.  “The Joneses” is a family name, not the title for a very perceptive social commentary.

There are many more of 2010 (see a much more complete list at the link above), but that’s just a sampling of how a movie’s title can have a significant impact on moviewatching.  Did it make a difference for you at all this year?


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , ,
Categories : Random Factoids

REVIEW: Waking Sleeping Beauty

18 12 2010

As part of the generation who grew up loving the second wave of Disney animated classics such as “The Little Mermaid,” “Beauty and the Beast,” “Aladdin,” and “The Lion King,” it’s interesting to see a full-length documentary about the creative team that made it all possible.  Enter “Waking Sleeping Beauty,” a chronicle of the second Golden Age of Disney animation from 1984 to 1994.  It covers all the struggles of ushering in the new era and all the fantastic successes of the finished products they put on screens before a sea of exciting moviegoers – and then all the struggles that success created.

It’s a little different than most documentaries in that all interviews are done through audio; we never see any ex post facto commentary from the people who brought us these classics.  There’s so much footage of the animators themselves that perhaps Hahn thought viewers would best be served by seeing the process take place (since that is, after all, what most people want when they sit down to watch the movie).  But without their faces, it’s hard to establish characters outside the main narrative, which makes it feel more like a narrated sequence of events than a documentary.

While the power struggles between CEO Michael Eisner, Board Chairman Roy Disney, and studio head Jeffrey Katzenberg are fascinating, they lack some perspective that could have taken “Waking Sleeping Beauty” to the next level.  I love these Disney movies and I love seeing the creative process that got them made, but I still wonder what distinguishes this documentary from any other bonus feature on the DVDs for these animated movies apart from its length.  It feels like something Disney would show at the 25th reunion for “The Little Mermaid” animators – fun for everyone, but only truly pertinent to the people involved in it.  B / 


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,
Categories : Movie Reviews

« Previous Entries Next Entries »