Don’t worry, I’m not shunning materialism and moving to Alaska like Christopher McCandless (for those if you all who have read the book or seen the movie). I just wanted to let everyone know that I will be on a hiking trip in Colorado with my Young Life group for a week starting today. That means I’ll be away from my phone and thus away from my blog.
Fear not, the blog is not dying. I have a post and a factoid scheduled for every day I’m gone. I just won’t be able to respond to and/or moderate comments. So don’t panic if I don’t approve your comment or you are desperately awaiting my reply. It’s not that I don’t care. I’m just away.
I’ll be back again in a week – remember that the commenting contest starts on Thursday, July 1st!
Back during the Winter Olympics (Random Factoid #209), I talked about my good ear for picking up familiar sounds even when they aren’t where I normally recognize them.
A little while ago, I was watching “Shrek 2” just for comparison’s sake with “Shrek Forever After.” Finally, the climactic end came about and the clock rang.
Suddenly, I realized that the clock ring sounded very familiar. It’s the exact same noise that I wake up to every morning. It’s the “Bell Tower” ring from the iPhone.
“The Karate Kid” is a remake of questionable necessity – after all, the original is barely a quarter of a century old. Don’t worry, Pat Morita won’t be rolling over in his grave when he gets wind of the update. It’s not awful, and no harm or foul is done; except maybe to kung fu, which is the actual martial art taught in the movie but doesn’t get the honor of being mentioned in the title.
The movie is Jaden Smith’s vehicle, who really needs it because he didn’t get enough exposure in “The Pursuit of Happyness.” I’m not expecting some fantastic performance from someone who obviously only got the job because his dad is Will Smith. And it’s wrong to expect him to give us all the charisma and swagger that his old man has spent decades developing. As Dre, Jaden Smith brings to the table two assets that will serve him well if he chooses to keep acting: confidence and presence, which is pretty good for 11.
Dre is making the strange and unexplained move from Detroit to China with little sympathy from his mother (Taraji P. Henson). After catching the eye of a dedicated young violinist, he is unexpectedly launched into a mismatched rivalry with a savage band of ruffians. It doesn’t help matters that these kids have been taught a brand of “no mercy” kung fu (not karate!) by a brutal master. The first half of the movie plays out like an anti-bullying PSA as Dre attempts to avoid his tormentors. All the while, we can’t help but think, “Hey! If only you knew his dad was Will Smith, then I’d like to see you try to beat up this kid!”
And then, as if by some misplaced stage direction, enter Mr. Han, the hermit-like maintenance man of Dre’s building who helps turn the tide in his fight against the bullies by pulling out some unexpected moves. While offering that assistance, he also manages to get a then untrained Dre into a kung-fu tournament against the same people that would love nothing more than to give him a black eye and a bruised rib.
I kinda sorta caved into Netflix. Only kinda. Back in Random Factoid #260, I said that I hadn’t used Netflix because I don’t have any sort of consistency in my moviewatching rhythm.
My dad recently got an iPad for his birthday, and he managed to get a free trial of Netflix through the iPad app. He told me about the offer, so I started fidgeting around and discovered a whole heaping lot of movies available to stream straight to the iPad. So I watched “Memento” for the first time, and I loved it. Not just the movie, but the fact that I was streaming it!
Then I started scrolling through the other movies available to stream – and it had me at “The Pianist.” I haven’t had time to watch it, but I certainly hope the free trial doesn’t expire any time soon! I’m dying to watch that and “Letters from Iwo Jima,” one of the two Best Picture nominees from the last decade I still haven’t seen.
And then, while still experimenting with the technology, I wound up ordering the discs of “Road to Perdition” and “Hustle and Flow.” Now, they are sitting on my desk. What my dad wants to do with them is up to him – the trial expires in a few days. Soon enough, they’ll start charging.
Find me a more disarming movie than “Amelie,” this week’s “F.I.L.M.” Try to name a movie that can match it in charm. Try to name a movie that is capable of delivering such a warm feeling. Well, I’m waiting.
While those of you who have seen the movie ponder, allow me to sell “Amelie” to all those who have not seen it. The movie features the star-making turn of Audrey Tautou as the titular character, an incurable optimist and do-gooder in France. She has the kind of circumstances that breed the neurotic protagonists of Woody Allen films – misdiagnosed with a heart condition by her father, Amelie is homeschooled. Unable to have friendships with other kids, her only friend is her pet fish, which unfortunately turns suicidal. Her mother dies after someone committing suicide falls on top of her.
Yet despite all the unfortunate circumstances, Amelie emerges smiling. She finds pleasure in the little things in life, such as breaking creme brulee with a teaspoon. And after a surprising find in her apartment allows her to bring a giddy rush of joy to an old man, she commits herself to spreading the feeling to everyone she knows. This includes her morose father, her solitary neighbor, a sullen co-worker, and a young man with a few quirks of his own. Through her adventures, Amelie becomes the benevolent guardian angel we all want looking over our shoulder.
And it’s not just Amelie’s personality that lights up this movie like a Christmas tree. The movie’s visual style feels like a warm hug, beginning with the film’s colors. Every frame seems dipped in sepia, which surprisingly turns out to be like sugar-coating an already sweet treat. The cinematography is magical, always a little odd and unexpected. Every minute is like unwrapping a mystery-flavored lollipop – you know that you’ll devour whatever lies in store no matter what you get. To top it off, there’s a whimsical score beneath it all to really make the movie float like a balloon.
So, do you have that movie that can be – dare I say it – as cute as “Amelie?” I can’t stand using that word, mainly because I’m a guy, but the word just seems so appropriate to describe the movie. Once you see it, I guarantee it will quickly shoot to the top of your “instant feel-good” movies list. In fact, it’s more than a feel-good movie. “Amelie” is a feel-great movie.
After 17 months, my wait is over. Back in February 2009, I cracked my four-month-old iPhone. I’ve been living with my flawed screen ever since, waiting for a model worthy of my money to be released. A few weeks ago, that phone was announced.
I waited two hours in line today outside the Apple Store in the Houston Galleria this morning to get my hands on the iPhone 4.
What’s the first thing I did – that is, after I slapped the only available case on it? Added 4 movies to it – “Knocked Up,” “The Hangover,” “Superbad,” and “Inglourious Basterds.” Finally, I will be able to watch movies on my phone again!
In case you were curious, here’s what my old phone looked like. I can almost guarantee you’ll be as shocked at the Geniuses at the Apple Store.
“Action is character. If we didn’t do anything, we wouldn’t be anyone.”
– Carey Mulligan as Jenny in “An Education”
Yesterday, I celebrated Tom Cruise by discussing the roles he didn’t take. It’s certainly an honor to be considered for so many incredible parts as he has been, and it does show a lot about him. However, like Jenny suggests in the quote above, we are defined by what we do, not by what we don’t.
So, to top off my look at Tom Cruise, I will offer up what I’ve taken from the movies that he has been in. As you will probably notice, I have seen very little of his work prior to this decade. So the portrait I can paint of Cruise with what I have seen is very limited. It’s definitely not the prime of his career; most will agree that his celebrity has waned this decade, particularly in the past five years. But nonetheless, he’s still a big draw – or at least a talking point.
I can hardly believe I’m saying this, but around this time next month, I will be celebrating my first anniversary as a member of the blogosphere. That’s right, about 11 months ago, “Marshall and the Movies” breathed its first.
So in honor of the big day, I want to throw a LAVISH, OVER-THE-TOP, BLOGGING EXTRAVAGANZA OF AN ANNIVERSARY MONTH PARTY. Yes, bold was completely necessary.
Here’s what you can look forward to in July, which will hereby be known as “Anniversary Month” on “Marshall and the Movies.”
A new monthly series called “The Classics Corner,” where I will discuss a movie considered a classic, share my thoughts, and postulate what has made it such an endearing movie.
A giant week of posts to celebrate Christopher Nolan in honor of the release of “Inception,” beginning July 9.
Another commenting contest, although this time it will not be random. The person who comments the most will get their choice of a poster of a movie directed by Christopher Nolan. The second highest commenter will receive a $10 Amazon.com gift card. I’m working on getting something to keep tally in the sidebar, but in the meantime, just comment often!
An ambitious series I’m calling “The Origins Project.” I will need the help of other bloggers to get this series off the ground, but I think it will be a rewarding endeavor for all who choose to participate. We spend most of our time celebrating what we blog and occasionally celebrate the fact that we blog. What I want to do is celebrate why we blog. “The Origins Project” will be a small questionnaire sent to some of my consistent companions in the blogosphere. The questions will try to get at what got these bloggers started and why they have chosen to keep going.
On the big day, July 28, I will be launching a series that is, in a sense, an in-depth look at my own origins. As you may or may not know, I started blogging after I saw the movie “Julie & Julia” and was inspired by Julie Powell’s quest to find a more purposeful life by writing a blog. The project consist of my journey through the book “Julie & Julia,” the Bible of blogging, and my responses to the reading. I hope it provides entertainment and insight into myself because it has certainly proved very worthwhile for me.
And all of these festivities are just the gravy on top of the normal reviews, factoids, Oscar Moments, and other posts.
So who’s ready for an awesome month?! (And fellow bloggers, I’m going to need at least two sites that can quickly turn around the questionnaire – sorry for the ultra-late notice!)
In a surge of patriotic pride for the U S of A, today’s factoid celebrates the unlikely American victory in extra time in this morning’s World Cup game! WE ARE ADVANCING TO THE NEXT ROUND!
I’m not a huge soccer fan, but I certainly am a fan of my country! I love these big sporting events like the Olympics – they provide real, human drama and competition that really brings you to the edge of your seat. As much as I love movies, I have to recognize that nothing brings the world together better than a big sporting event. Even “Avatar,” which made nearly $3 billion worldwide didn’t foster a bond between nations.
Of course, Hollywood tries to bring that same jolt of energy that fierce competition brings to the silver screen. In my lifetime, the big surge began with the success of “Remember the Titans.” Ever since then, the genre has been pretty hit or miss. If you happen to catch a sports movie with a big crowd, there’s always a chance that the theater will get really into the action and cheer.
I can only recall that happening once in my moviegoing career. It was February 6, 2004 – the opening night of Disney’s “Miracle,” a movie celebrating the United States’ unlikely victory in hockey over the USSR in the 1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics amidst tensions between the two nations. The United States went on to win the gold medal, but no game provided more drama or excitement than the semi-final against Russia.
The entire movie builds up to the big game, and it absolutely delivers. My entire theater was so into the movie, cheering at the U.S.’ shining moments and jeering when the Russians did something right. The crowd erupted into applause at the Americans’ goals, and by the end of the movie, everyone was chanting, “USA! USA! USA! USA!” It’s pretty rare to get that kind of enthusiasm while at a movie, and it’s an experience I won’t soon forget.
So who knows, maybe in a few decades we will be watching a movie about the unlikely success of the United States at the 2010 World Cup. We’ve got to keep cheering, and they’ve got to keep playing at the top of their game.
Tying into the release of “Knight & Day” today and the LAMB Acting School on Tom Cruise on Saturday, I thought I would offer up some thoughts on the star. I haven’t reviewed any of his movies in depth, but I wanted to have something to contribute because I definitely have something to say.
When I was born in 1992, Tom Cruise was one of the biggest stars in the world. He rose from obscurity in the early ’80s to superstardom by the end of the decade. People seem to malign Cruise now, claiming he’s a ham and a pompous action star. But we can’t forget that Cruise has been nominated for three Academy Awards and seven Golden Globes (including three wins). He has starred in four Best Picture nominees and worked with acclaimed directors such as Rob Reiner, Stanley Kubrick, Michael Mann, and Oscar winners Sydney Pollack, Oliver Stone, Barry Levinson, Francis Ford Coppola, Martin Scorsese, and Steven Spielberg. His films have grossed nearly $3 billion combined. So to belittle Tom Cruise’s talent or appeal is, at least in my view, practically pointless.
His popularity has dropped off in recent years amidst the couch-jumping incident with Oprah and his outspoken support of Scientology, but those are hits that the celebrity of Tom Cruise has taken. The actor that is Tom Cruise is still in good shape. So to celebrate his career, I’ll offer up a double-edged approach to writing about Tom Cruise.
First, I’m going to talk about the actor Tom Cruise could have been by exploring some of the roles he was considered for and turned down. Second, I’ll walk through his career, offering little capsule reviews of some of his movies that I have seen.
Some people saw it as a possibility, like Dan the Man, who said, “I can see this, but yet, it was released early on in the year, and Oscars tend to look past that, but you may have something going here.” Dreher Bear added, “It’s the Oscars, anything is possible.”
Others, ultimately the majority, disagreed. Dave Diggler took the strongest pose against it, saying, “Shutter Island has no chance either at the Oscars or the BAFTAS.” The Pompous Film Snob, Frank Mengarelli, added, “…no way near best picture, director, or actor – and to be honest, I don’t think it deserves it.”
But apparently, I wasn’t too crazy. Five people thought it had no chance, and four people didn’t discount it as a possibility. So you never know. Just saying.
Everyone loves a summer indie comedy, even the Oscars. “Little Miss Sunshine” charmed audiences at the Sundance Film Festival, then slowly won over an audience, expanded that audience on video, and then received four Oscar nominations including Best Picture as well as wins for Best Original Screenplay and Best Supporting Actor.
“The Kids Are All Right” seems to have the first part of the “Little Miss Sunshine” formula in place after it became the anointed indie comedy at Sundance. Written and directed by Lisa Cholodenko, the movie follows Nic and Jules (Annette Bening and Julianne Moore) and their children Joni and Laser (Mia Wasikowska and Josh Hutcherson), living comfortably in Los Angeles. That is, until the kids decided to introduce Paul (Mark Ruffalo), the sperm donor that made them possible, into their lives.
The film appears to depoliticize a lesbian couple to a certain degree, normally a subject to cause a pretty big stir, and opens the movie up to a newer crowd. We are still awaiting release, but from what I’ve gathered, Focus is going to push the movie very mainstream. I’m anticipating the usual extremist backlash, but I don’t think this is a propaganda piece designed to shove homosexuality down anyone’s throat. It may very well be like any comedy where kids meet their long lost biological father; there’s just one more mother in the mix.
I think the movie’s surest bet for a nomination – and maybe even a win – is Best Original Screenplay. The category is one of very few that is friendly to comedies; in fact, six of the ten winners of the past decades have been comedic scripts (although I’ll argue with you that “Lost in Translation” isn’t really a comedy). If the movie proves to be original and funny with a beating heart inside, it’s going to be a formidable foe in the category.
But the actors are going to be another big Academy selling point for the movie. The two leading ladies, Annette Bening and Julianne Moore, are incredibly overdue for the big prize. Bening has three nominations, and she really should have won for “American Beauty.” Her turn as Carolyn Burnham is absolutely one of my favorite roles ever, and she absolutely nailed it. At the time, it appears that Focus will push her as the film’s leading actress where she could end up facing Hilary Swank again. It’s been since 1998 that an actress won the category for a comedic role, but Bening is the kind of actress they might reverse a trend for.
Julianne Moore has even more nominations than Bening at a whopping four, and she is coming fresh off a snub for “A Single Man.” She’s one of the few actors who have pulled off dual nominations in a single year, and that’s a feat in itself. It appears that she will be competing in the Best Supporting Actress category, which doesn’t seem to feature any big names right now (save maybe Keira Knightley and Dianne Wiest). We saw how the Academy bent over backwards to give Kate Winslet an Oscar after five missed opportunities; it could be Moore’s time.
Mark Ruffalo is on the hunt for his first nomination with “The Kids Are All Right,” and it’s about time he got one. He deserved a nomination for “You Can Count on Me” a decade ago, but he hasn’t exactly amassed an Academy-friendly resume since. He has a spotty track record with some corny romantic comedies littered among a few smaller indies. Overdue for a nomination may be a bit of a stretch to say, yet few can argue that Ruffalo is a great actor. Perhaps an Oscar nomination might steer him away from the rom-coms and back to good, solid movies.
If the Academy really goes gaga for this movie, Wasikowska and Hutcherson may find themselves in the mix for a nomination. But a nomination is the best case scenario for them because Moore and Ruffalo have much more respect and longer careers. The need is much less pressing to anoint these young stars as Hollywood royalty.
In Contention, Kris Tapley’s highly regarded Oscars site, has “The Kids Are All Right” getting a whole lot of nominations. Five, to be specific – acting nominations for Bening, Moore, and Ruffalo plus Best Original Screenplay and Best Picture. Let’s face it, we all need a comedy in the Best Picture mix, so I’m going to agree with Tapley at least until the movie is released. But a nomination for each one of the main actors is a little more suspect.
The poll for this Oscar Moment will be a little different. Rather than asking a simple “pick one out of these answers,” I’m going to give you the option of picking multiple answers. The question: “What Oscar nominations will ‘The Kids Are All Right’ receive?” Pick the ones you think will.
BEST BETS FOR NOMINATIONS: Best Picture, Best Actress (Bening), Best Supporting Actress (Moore), Best Supporting Actor (Ruffalo), Best Original Screenplay
OTHER POTENTIAL NOMINATIONS: Best Director, Best Supporting Actress (Wasikowska), Best Supporting Actor (Hutcherson)
Today, I went to the San Diego Zoo. I saw all sorts of pandas, koalas, and polar bears. But what I really couldn’t get off my mind was “Anchorman.”
Anyone who has seen Will Ferrell’s comedic gem knows that the climactic moments take place at the San Diego Zoo. Ron Burgundy has relapsed into drunkenness until the love of his life, Veronica Corningstone is in danger at the zoo. She is doing a report and winds up in the bear cages.
So naturally, when we passed the bear cages, I couldn’t help but wonder if Will Ferrell, Christina Applegate, Paul Rudd, and Steve Carell had filmed in them. I’m sure they probably used some sound stage for the trained bears, but I can imagine, can’t I?
Back in in November 2009, I partook in several events at the inaugural Houston Cinematic Arts Festival. As part of the festivities, they brought in Academy Award winner Tilda Swinton to screen her latest movie. It was so secretive that they only told us the movie’s name in the minutes before they rolled film. I sat in the front row, even making eye contact once with Swinton and a few times (rather uncomfortably) with the movie’s director, Luca Guadagnino, who also came along for the ride.
Unfortunately, what was to follow this rush of euphoria from being inches away from an illustrious Oscar winner and all of her glory had a completely different feel – the feel of intense disappointment. Since they didn’t give us any inkling of a clue what the movie would be like, I didn’t know what to expect. I guess I was anticipating something similar to “Michael Clayton,” the movie that won her Hollywood’s biggest prize. Usually actors tend to stray towards the roles that win them the most recogntion, but “I Am Love,” the movie that I saw, was about as far away from Hollywood values as humanly possible. Gone are her days as a “Hollywood spy,” she claims; it’s back to her European roots.
In the discussion session that followed the movie, Swinton took a quote from Hitchcock to describe the style and feel of the movie: “Let the dialogue set the mood and let the pictures tell the story.” This philosophy of filmmaking is the polar opposite of those that drive “Iron Man 2” and “Sex and the City 2” into the 30-screen theaters. It’s what brings that niche, art-house crowd to the small theaters that show independent films. In essence, Swinton’s philosophy is against the basic principles that most Americans hold dear when they go to the movies. They want to be engaged by the story, not by watching bees pollinate flowers (an image Guadagnino seems to particularly love).
I’m not claiming “I Am Love” to be bringing about some sort of cinematic apocalypse, nor am I claiming it to be as anti-American as hating apple pie and Uncle Sam. It’s not threatening our country like terrorism or the swine flu. It’s not going to have any lasting impact because it’s simply not good enough to do anything meaningful, so fear not all of you who were preparing for some sort of an assault on American values.
I went with a friend of mine who is very well-versed in all things film (if you don’t believe me, I’ll flash his acceptance to NYU’s film school as credentials), and by the first hour, he grabbed a piece of paper and began scribbling. A minute later, he thrust it in my face and I read: “QUESTIONS FOR TILDA: Wait, remind me why I give a s**t about these characters again?” He summed up “I Am Love” better than I ever could with that one sentence. It’s a prolonged exercise of boring futility, akin to watching a dying animal slowly breathe its last … for two hours.
I’m currently on vacation in San Diego at the La Costa Resort, and this morning I took a Chopra Yoga class.
What significance does this have in terms of cinema? Basically, none.
Except to tell you that I only knew who Deepak Chopra, the Chopra of “Chopra Yoga,” was because of Mike Meyers’ comedic bomb of 2008 “The Love Guru.” So I guess that makes one good thing that movie gave us.
Let’s just say all the chanting and vague spirituality of the class didn’t really allow me to relax all that much. I’ll put it at that and leave it at that.
Recent Comments