REVIEW: Logan

18 02 2017

Does “Logan” feel as good as it does because of its own merits – or because the superhero genre is just that bad these days? I’m tempted to argue for the latter if for no other reason than to cover my own ass. Skeptical reviews tend to hold up better than overzealous ones. (See my 2011 review of “I Am Number Four” for an example.)

Director James Mangold as well as co-writers Michael Green and Scott Frank succeed by avoiding so much of what makes comic book adaptations – including the “X-Men” series – flop. The film boasts a remarkably self-contained story free from a glut of new characters or excessive action sequences. Remarkably little happens over the course of “Logan,” even to the point where the opening sequences of Wolverine’s pensive limousine driving recalls the Matthew McConaughey Lincoln commercials.

This ability to ruminate on character and dwell in the submerged pain of the moment no doubt stems from the circumstances surrounding the film. Hugh Jackman has given a remarkable 17 years to playing Logan, a role that launched him into stardom – but also a character that helped stabilize the franchise throughout its different incarnations. Supposedly “Logan” marks Jackman’s last time sporting the claws, and such finality likely gave Fox and Marvel the confidence to begrudgingly let him go out on his own terms. Those terms include invoking the spirit of the old Western genre, specifically the archetype of the aging and world-weary gunslinger.

Heavy-handed “Shane” allusions aside, “Logan” earns the right to make these comparisons simply through Jackman’s decades-long commitment to the character. At least for now, it’s hard to imagine any other actor in the superhero arena with enough cultural cachet to earn this resolution. Jackman’s haggard expressions and general exasperation more than once gave me flashbacks to his gaunt appearance at the beginning of “Les Misérables.” He appears tired and weary – and as the character, not the actor! (An important distinction to make for many franchise headliners.) Logan has a clear antagonist in the corporation Transigen, although he’s mostly grappling with his own legacy and history.

Yet without eight serviceable “X-Men” films prior, the narrative stakes of “Logan” might not have felt as weighty. As the hero attempts to outrun, but ultimately acquiesces to, the definitive final battle, there’s simply no other way to convey the battle wounds of the past than to have watched them accumulate over time. But even so, Mangold still makes a convincing argument that the superhero genre need not only resemble the western in cultural functionality. It can also take on their form, tone and content for satisfying, incisive cinema. B / 2halfstars


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

REVIEW: Eddie the Eagle

5 03 2016

The inspirational sports movie has certainly seen better days, as most now hew to the same audience-tested formula to equate athletic victory with a larger triumph over adversity. Either screenwriters penning or executives green-lighting these movies seem to regard this widely accepted set of conventions like the recipe for Coca-Cola, as if only one specific combination of ingredients can bottle up happiness.

Films like Dexter Fletcher’s “Eddie the Eagle,” however, prove otherwise. While everything about the actual story might indicate it perfectly fitting the standard mold, the film functions more like a loving nod to the classics rather than a dutiful servant to their legacy. Through protagonist Eddie, the ideals of effort and self-worth receive top billing over achievement and self-satisfaction.  If it has to send a message, at least Fletcher goes for one somewhat different than the norm.

These principles are not just tacked on at the end or through a big motivation speech, either. They begin at the start of “Eddie the Eagle,” when the eponymous character declares he will go to the Olympics and screenwriters Sean Macaulay and Simon Kelton never declare the goal out of reach. Despite some difficulties with his knees as a youngster in working class England, they never milk his physical challenges for easy sympathy. In fact, they get Eddie all grown up by the end of the opening credits!

From there, the film maintains Eddie’s cock-eyed optimism as he sets his sights on the 1988 Winter Olympic Games in Calgary. The question is never if but how, and he find the answer in the sneaky backdoor of ski jumping. Since the U.K. has not sent anyone for the sport in decades, all Eddie (Taron Egerton) needs to do is complete a jump in sanctioned competition to qualify. His quest for bottom of the barrel results recalls the fun of “Silver Linings Playbook” where Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence’s characters dance for literally mediocre marks from the judges.

But more than anything, it recalls “Million Dollar Baby” with its relationship of an eager mentee paired with a jaded coach, a role assumed here by Hugh Jackman. His Bronson Peary, a disgraced former American Olympian, reluctantly helps Eddie reach the lowest common denominator. With a Vangelis-style score behind it, “Eddie the Eagle” takes flight as our jumping friend triumphs over the elite British Olympians who scorned his lack of Oxbridge pedigree. The coke-bottle classes Eddie sports magnify wonder in Egerton’s doe eyes, allowing us a window into the untarnished goodness of his soul. For the hundred or so minute runtime, the film makes a convincing case for the eternal endurance of this endearing, indomitable spirit. B+ / 3stars


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

REVIEW: Prisoners

19 09 2015

Denis Villeneuve’s “Prisoners” possesses a remarkable precision in nearly every aspect of its execution.  It is palpable in the mood, the performances, the script from Aaron Guzikowski, and especially the photography by Roger Deakins.  As the abduction of two children forces a father (Hugh Jackman) to extreme measures of extracting vengeance, the film patiently and methodically follows his descent into an inhumanity on par with his daughter’s abductor.

At times, Villeneuve’s realization of this unraveling feels so airtight that it comes across almost as stifling and constrictive.  Somehow, the film feels like it needs to breathe.  Yet on further inspection, that is not the case.  Villeneuve knows exactly how much oxygen “Prisoners” needs to survive and refuses to dole out any more of it than is necessary to give each scene a pulse.  This makes his film burn not only slowly but also consistently, illuminating the depravity of cruelty to children with its steadfast flame.

His exactitude directly counters the nature of the narrative, a complicated ethical story with neither an easy outlet for sympathy nor a character that lends his or herself to identification.  The closest figure offered for a connection is Jake Gyllenhaal’s Detective Loki, whose adherence to rationality and order makes him the most level-headed presence in “Prisoners.”  He retains a rather detached perspective on the case of the missing girls rather than allowing himself to succumb to the levels of hysteria from the grieving families.  If everyone else in the film yells, Loki speaks in a whisper.

In a way, that soft-spoken approach makes for the only major flaw of “Prisoners” that I could find.  The film’s audio mix is all over the board; the sound goes in and out, then up and down.  I watched it twice at home on two different television sets, but the problem persisted.  I often had to rewind and jack up the volume to catch a line of dialogue muttered under someone’s breath.  This sotto voce technique makes the film chillingly clinical – so make sure you can hear it in all of its complexities.  B+ / 3stars


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

REVIEW: X-Men: Days of Future Past

12 06 2014

Thanks to the patience and planning of Marvel that culminated in “The Avengers,” now every franchise is rushing to super-size their output by converging as many properties into one film as humanly possible.  Among these stuffed tentpoles, “X-Men: Days of Future Past” is probably about as clever as we can expect them to get.  Bryan Singer’s latest entry in the franchise plays to its greatest strength, the strong ensemble cast, to help power what is otherwise a fairly average film.

In 2011, the series essentially rebooted with a cast of rising stars that included James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, and Nicholas Hoult as younger versions of the characters.  Not that the original cast was lacking in talent with Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen, Hugh Jackman, and Halle Berry.

Since their timeline never really ended (not that this stops the studios nowadays), what better way to bridge old and new than with a little bit of time travel?  And who better to be the intermediary than Jackman’s Wolverine, the only character popular enough to inspire spin-offs?  It all makes perfect sense.

“Days of Future Past” also manages to incorporate Jennifer Lawrence’s Raven/Mystique into the proceedings quite a bit more.  That, of course, couldn’t possibly be because she’s the most loved actress in America at the moment.  It just so happens that she’s the key to preventing annihilation of mutants in the bleak future inhabited by the older versions of the characters.  Wolverine must travel back to the ’70s to prevent her from assassinating defense contractor Raymond Trask (Miles Finch himself, Peter Dinklage) and enabling the creation of the mutant-massacring Sentinels.

Read the rest of this entry »


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

Oscar Moment: Final 2012 Predictions, Part 3 (Leading)

7 01 2013

Only three days until Oscar nominations are announced!  It’s so weird to have them this early … I feel like I barely predicted at all this year.  Nonetheless, it’s time to lock in my final picks!  Today, it’s one last glimpse at the leading acting categories.

See my predictions for Best Original Screenplay and Best Adapted Screenplay.

See my predictions for Best Supporting Actor and Best Supporting Actress.

Best Actor

  1. Daniel Day-Lewis, “Lincoln“
  2. Hugh Jackman, “Les Misérables“
  3. Bradley Cooper, “Silver Linings Playbook“
  4. John Hawkes, “The Sessions“
  5. Denzel Washington, “Flight“

I was wrong, this is Daniel Day-Lewis’ race to lose.  My gosh, he is winning everything!  Look at this chart of dominance.  It turns Anne Hathaway’s dream to shame.

DDL Dominance

He’s going to come charging into the Kodak Theatre to get that record-setting third Oscar for Best Actor.  This is like Phillip Seymour Hoffman for “Capote,” Forest Whitaker for “The Last King of Scotland,” and … well, Daniel Day-Lewis for “There Will Be Blood” levels of momentum.

Les Miz

If anyone takes him down, though, it’s going to be Hugh Jackman.  He had many doubters until the film was unveiled, and he’s taken the big three nods from BFCA, SAG, and HFPA.  He will almost certainly win the Golden Globe.  Maybe, just maybe, he can stage an Adrian Brody-esque upset.

The nomination will likely be the win for Bradley Cooper, who has triumphantly exceeded expectations in “Silver Linings Playbook” and likely redefined how the industry sees him.  Well done, sir.  I’m pleased that a clear path to a nomination emerged with Critics’ Choice, SAG, and Golden Globe recognition.  I thought it might be a more uphill climb, but I have been very pleasantly surprised.

Beyond DDL, Jackman, and Cooper, my certainty stops.  I am almost positive the final two nominees will be John Hawkes for “The Sessions” and Denzel Washington in “Flight.”  They were feted by BFCA, SAG, and HFPA.  Joaquin Phoenix, on the other hand, missed with SAG and will likely be left out in the cold (much to my chagrin).

Master

I’m on the record as being nonplussed by Hawkes and Washington, though I greatly admire many other performances by the two actors.  For my money, Phoenix was the best performance of the year.  Several others have seen what I have seen, and he’s picked up a few critics’ groups notices.  He was also nominated by the Golden Globes, albeit in the segregated drama category, and the Critics’ Choice Awards, which had six nominees.

Sadly, it looks like Phoenix will follow the trajectory of Michael Fassbender’s work in “Shame,” my favorite performance of 2011.  Fassbender and Phoenix were both winners of the Volpi Cup for Best Actor at the Venice Film Festival.  Their work was widely acclaimed, and their movies were polarizing.  They won Best Actor from the Los Angeles Film Critics Association among several other prizes.  They picked up key nominations from BFCA and HFPA, but their SAG snub raised some red flags.

FlightPhoenix’s journey will likely end the same way Fassbender’s did.  Repelling the Academy, Fassbender was left on the outside looking in at the Best Actor category.  Phoenix shouldn’t mind being put in the same position, however, because he hates awards season and thinks the Oscars are BS.

So it looks like I’ll be predicting the SAG nominees to repeat five-for-five.  Boring, disappointing, I know.  But there’s nothing screaming to go against conventional wisdom here.

I don’t think Richard Gere for “Arbitrage,” Jack Black for “Bernie,” Denis Lavant for “Holy Motors,” Jean-Louis Trintignant for “Amour,” or Anthony Hopkins for “Hitchcock” really have much of a chance.  Each has a few respective laurels, but the frontrunning five are just too strong for there to be a major surprise.

Then again, last year gave us not only Demian Bichir but an out-of-nowhere nod for Gary Oldman.  So we’ll just have to see.  Maybe the Academy has a few tricks up its sleeve in 2012 that we just have no way to forecast.

Best Actress

  1. Jessica Chastain, “Zero Dark Thirty“
  2. Jennifer Lawrence, “Silver Linings Playbook“
  3. Naomi Watts, “The Impossible”
  4. Marion Cotillard, “Rust and Bone“
  5. Quvenzhané Wallis, “Beasts of the Southern Wild“

Zero Dark Thirty FYCThe dynamics at the top of the race have changed little over the past month.  It’s still a Chastain vs. Lawrence cage match, and I think we won’t really know until the envelope is opened.  They will go head-to-head at the Critics’ Choice Awards and the SAG Awards, but Viola Davis won both of those last year and lost the Oscar.  The Golden Globe will do nothing to clear up the picture as they will compete in separate categories.  I give Chastain the edge now.

But below Chastain and Lawrence, so much is fluctuating.  This is the most fluid acting category of the four in 2012, capable of many unsurprising surprises.  And if any race is suggesting that conventional wisdom and historical precedent simply won’t do, this would be it.

It would seem that Naomi Watts and Marion Cotillard would be assured nominations for “The Impossible” and “Rust and Bone,” respectively.  They’ve scored the BFCA, SAG, and HFPA hat trick of nominations, just about the best safety net you can have.  Both also look to be the only nominations for their respective movies as “The Impossible” missed the cut for visual effects and France chose “The Intouchables” over “Rust and Bone” to compete in the Best Foreign Language Film category.

WattsI’m much more bullish on Watts, a prior nominee for “21 Grams” back in 2003, perhaps because I haven’t seen the movie yet and can visualize her more as a statistic (sorry for the bluntness, but that’s the name of the game).  I’ve read that “The Impossible” has really played the guild circuit, ginning up admiration for Watts and the cast along the way.  She got a high-profile shout-out from a mere acquaintance, Reese Witherspoon, in Entertainment Weekly that a lot of people saw.

For whatever reason, she just seems very strong to me.  The movie seems like the emotional tour de force they look for in leading performances for women.

Having said that, Marion Cotillard shows the same level of emotional devastation, just on a more subtle level.  If she hadn’t won for a French language performance, I’d be hesitant to think she could be nominated for one.  But she has, and I feel a hunch that the Oscars won’t snub her brilliant performance.  Apparently, the Academy voters really responded to “Rust and Bone,” and if that’s the case, why wouldn’t they nominate its star?

So I’ll go ahead and predict that Watts and Cotillard make it, although I could see a foreseeable outcome where one gets knocked out.  I doubt they slap these precursors in the face so hard that both get turned away.

HitchcockSAG’s fifth nominee was Helen Mirren for “Hitchcock,” who also landed a Golden Globe nod.  Mirren has become a recent darling of the Academy.  I got fooled once by not predicting her in 2009 for “The Last Station,” and a part of me thinks I might be making the same mistake again.  Check out how eerily similar these two cases of Helen Mirren in Best Actress contention are:

“Common sense would say it is going to Helen Mirren for ‘The Last Station.’  She has the respect; we know because she won this award three short years ago.  She has been nominated by the SAG and the Golden Globes, two very crucial precursors.  But she has no victories and, more importantly, no passionate supporters.”

Going back and reading this is actually kind of scary because this year, she has SAG and HFPA in her corner … and basically no one else, unless you put a lot of stock in the prognosticating abilities of the Washington DC Area Film Critics Association.  The movies even received the same lukewarm reception: “Hitchcock” got a 66% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes, while “The Last Station” scored a 70% fresh.

I fear that the British contingent, which was a major part in making a Best Actor nomination for Gary Oldman in “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy” a reality, might be muddling our ability to make a prediction here.  Will this sizable portion of the Academy come through and give Mirren a fourth nomination in seven years?  I’m not picking Mirren because a 5-for-5 match with SAG just doesn’t feel right for this field rife with contenders.  (And especially with the men looking likely to perfectly align with SAG.)

RivaPerhaps that same European bloc of voters will be split among several other contenders from across the sea.  The French Cotillard could steal some European love, as could the British-Australian Watts.  Emmanuelle Riva could also make a play for that contingent for her work in “Amour.”

The Critics’ Choice nominee has quite a case to make for her nomination.  At 85, she’s a respected figure from the French New Wave that many recognize and respect.  Sony Pictures Classics has even gotten her to do some press for the film, including an in-depth session with The New York Times that’s well worth a read.  Many critics’ groups have aligned behind her, including such notable groups from Boston, Los Angeles, New York Online, and the National Society of Film Critics.  Perhaps worth noting, she won the European Film Award for Best Actress.

But why did SAG and the Golden Globes overlook Riva?  Neither are particularly xenophobic; the Globes’ dramatic actress category has seen a number of foreign-language nominees, including a rather strange nod for Kristin Scott Thomas in 2008 for “I’ve Loved You So Long.”  And at her age, it would seem that the SAG would want to bow down at her feet, and at the very least nominate her!

Rust and Bone

I can’t predict Riva with these two high-profile misses.  Perhaps she will be the exception, but I think her nomination is a pipe dream of critics.  She’s the Sally Hawkins for “Happy-Go-Lucky” of the year, a nominee that they try to make happen but just doesn’t click with the Academy.

Even less likely is British actress Rachel Weisz, in play for “The Deep Blue Sea” thanks to the New York Film Critics Circle reminding voters that her movie exists.  A March release automatically faces an uphill climb for a nomination since it has to fight to be remembered, and the Golden Globes did reward her performance.  Perhaps she’s the big surprise, but a SAG nomination would have been the more helpful precursor notice to pick up.

Also feted by the Golden Globes was Judi Dench for “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel.”  This wouldn’t really be worth mentioning if it wasn’t … well, Judi Dench.  However, the movie is more likely to see recognition in the Best Supporting Actress category for Maggie Smith.  For that matter, Dench is more likely to see recognition in that category as well for her work in “Skyfall.”

And now, we arrive at our final contender, Quvenzhané Wallis for her extraordinary performance in “Beasts of the Southern Wild.”  Now 9, the pint-sized but spunky Wallis would be the youngest Best Actress nominee ever.  Even more impressive is that she was 6 when the movie was shot.

However, at the moment, she’s going virtually unnoticed.  Could Scott MacDonald have been right in his article on The Atlantic?

“Though she’s nine now, she was a mere six when the film was shot. To put it another way, she was not quite seven, which is the year developmental psychologists like to refer to as the age of reason: when kids start making decisions based on logic and causality. I’m no psych expert, but it seems to me this might be the sensible cut-off point for acting plaudits.

Acting requires some intentionality on the part of the actor, some conscious effort to adopt a persona other than his or her own. Even adult actors who get criticized for “playing themselves” are engaged in a series of more or less conscious decisions about how best to be themselves onscreen. A young child, meanwhile, likely isn’t thinking at all about how to be herself, let alone a character. She’s a kid, and she just ‘is.'”

Beasts

So is that it?  Have most considered her too young and written off her candidacy?  MacDonald did note that 8-year-old Justin Henry was nominated for “Kramer vs. Kramer,” so a nomination wouldn’t be entirely unprecedented.  But all she’s netted is a Critics Choice nod for Best Actress and a handful of breakout performer awards.

We will never know if she had a shot with SAG because the non-union production “Beasts of the Southern Wild” was ruled ineligible to compete.  However, the novelty of her contention should have been enough to attract the Golden Globes, but they totally snubbed the entire film.  I already floated the “too American” rationale for its exclusion, citing “True Grit” as an example, but the snub is really troubling.

The Oscars do love young nominees, though.  There have been plenty of pre-pubescent nominees in Academy history, most recently Abigail Breslin for “Little Miss Sunshine.”  Saiorse Ronan and Hailee Steinfeld, though quite a bit older than Willis, nonetheless were nominees.  And in 2003, lest we forget, 13-year-old Keisha Castle-Hughes’ performance in “Whale Rider” knocked out Nicole Kidman for “Cold Mountain” and Scarlett Johansson for “Lost in Translation.”  The young are often a force to be reckoned with at the Oscars.

I’ll lay out that Wallis would be a shocking Best Actress nominee.  If I was thinking by rules and precedents, the obvious pick would be Mirren.  If I was attempting to focus on just this season, I might have to go with Riva.  Yet I’m going with Wallis on little more than a gut feeling that maybe the Academy’s hearts were taken by a precocious tyke.

Check back tomorrow, January 8, to see my final predictions for Best Director!


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : 2012 - Oscar Moment, Oscar Moment

LISTFUL THINKING: 2012 Superlatives

1 01 2013

New Year’s Day always marks a very interesting balancing act, reflecting on the old while also ringing in the new.  So while people are still thinking about 2012, let me offer up the first annual Superlatives post for the films of 2012.  I’ve already weighed in with the best and worst 10 of 2012, but what about the other 80 movies of the year?  What about the performances?  What about all sorts of other things?  This is the post where I get all sorts of stuff floating in my mind out there.

For the sake of review, I’ll go ahead and re-list my 10 best and worst of 2012.

Top 10 of 2012

10 Best of 2012: “21 Jump Street,” “Argo,” “Hitchcock,” “Killing Them Softly,” “Looper,” “Bernie,” “Zero Dark Thirty,” “Les Misérables,” “The Master,” “The Queen of Versailles”

Prometheus

Honorable Mentions: “Rust and Bone,” “Prometheus,” “Beasts of the Southern Wild,” “Wreck-It Ralph,” “End of Watch,” “Holy Motors”

Worst 10 of 2012

10 Worst of 2012: “The Grey,” “The Bourne Legacy,” “John Carter,” “Gone,” “The Vow,” “Killer Joe,” “The Paperboy,” “The Deep Blue Sea,” “The Watch,” “Casa De Mi Padre”

pitchperfect2

Honorable Mentions: “Pitch Perfect,” “Something From Nothing: The Art of Rap,” “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter,” “First Position,” “Keep the Lights On,” “Being Flynn”

10 More 2012 Releases I Still Need to See: “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey,” “The Impossible,” “Promised Land,” “The Intouchables,” “Seven Psychopaths,” “Hyde Park on Hudson,” “Not Fade Away,” “Smashed,” “The House I Live In,” “Searching for Sugar Man”

Vanellope

5 Most Surprising Movies of 2012: “Wreck-It Ralph,” “Bernie,” “End of Watch,” “Hitchcock,” “21 Jump Street”

Denzel Washington in Flight

5 Most Disappointing Movies of 2012: “The Dark Knight Rises,” “Django Unchained,” “Lincoln,” “Flight,” “The Bourne Legacy”

Bachelorette

10 Most Forgettable Movies of 2012 (in alphabetical order): “Bachelorette,” “Hysteria,” “Jeff, Who Lives at Home,” “Lola Versus,” “Man on a Ledge,” “Men in Black III,” “Salmon Fishing in the Yemen,” “Seeking a Friend for the End of the World,” “Take This Waltz,” “Trouble with the Curve”

Silver Linings Playbook

5 Most Rewatchable Movies of 2012: “21 Jump Street,” “Silver Linings Playbook,” “Wreck-It Ralph,” “Argo,” “Ted”

Lincoln

5 Movies of 2012 I’m Glad I Saw But Will Never Watch Again: “Lincoln,” “Amour,” “The Invisible War,” “Compliance,” “ReGeneration”

Killing Them Softly

5 Most Underrated Movies of 2012: “Killing Them Softly,” “Les Misérables,” “Prometheus,” “Safety Not Guaranteed,” “End of Watch”

The Avengers

5 Most Overrated Movies of 2012: “The Sessions,” “Lincoln,” “Django Unchained,” “Life of Pi,” “The Avengers”

PSH

5 Movies That Got Better with Distance and Time: “Killing Them Softly,” “Zero Dark Thirty,” “The Master,” “Silver Linings Playbook,” “Prometheus”

Brave

5 Movies That Got Worse with Distance and Time: “Brave,” “Lincoln,” “Flight,” “The Sessions,” “The Dark Knight Rises”

Argo

5 Movies That Felt Shorter Than Their Runtime: “Zero Dark Thirty,” “Les Misérables,” “The Dark Knight Rises,” “Argo,” “Django Unchained”

Keira Knightley in "Anna Karenina"

5 Movies That Felt Longer Than Their Runtime: “Lincoln,” “Anna Karenina,” “This Is 40,” “Damsels in Distress,” The Five-Year Engagement“

BOTSW

Breakout Performances: Quvenzhané Wallis in “Beasts of the Southern Wild,”  Eddie Redmayne in “Les Misérables,” Ezra Miller in “The Perks of Being a Wallflower,” Garrett Hedlund in “On the Road,” Scoot McNairy in “Argo”

Silver Linings Playbook

Breakthrough Performances: Bradley Cooper in “Silver Linings Playbook,” Michael Pena in “End of Watch,” Jack Black in “Bernie,” Channing Tatum in “21 Jump Street,” Elizabeth Banks in “People Like Us”

Best Exotic

Breakdown Performances: Anna Kendrick in “Pitch Perfect,” Salma Hayek in “Savages,” Tom Cruise in “Rock of Ages,” Emile Hirsch in “Killer Joe,” Dev Patel in “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel”

frame 01021605R

Best Body of Work in 2012: (tie) Anne Hathaway in “The Dark Knight Rises” and “Les Misérables,” Jennifer Lawrence in “The Hunger Games” and “Silver Linings Playbook”

The Deep Blue Sea

Worst Body of Work in 2012: (tie) Rachel Weisz in “The Bourne Legacy” and “The Deep Blue Sea,” Taylor Kitsch in “John Carter” and “Savages”

Jessica Chastain in Zero Dark Thirty

Best Heroes: Jessica Chastain as Maya in “Zero Dark Thirty,” Mark Ruffalo as The Hulk in “The Avengers,” Hugh Jackman as Jean Valjean in “Les Misérables”

John Carter

Worst Heroes: Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man in “The Amazing Spider-Man,” Taylor Kitsch as John Carter in “John Carter,” Jeremy Renner as Aaron Cross in “The Bourne Legacy”

Catwoman

Best Villains: Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle/Catwoman in “The Dark Knight Rises,” Russell Crowe as Javert in “Les Misérables,” Leonardo DiCaprio as Calvin Candie in “Django Unchained”

Skyfall

Worst Villains: Tom Hardy as Bane in “The Dark Knight Rises,” Javier Bardem as Silva in “Skyfall,” Rhys Ifans as Lizard in “The Amazing Spider-Man”

Joaquin

Best Possessed Performance: Joaquin Phoenix in “The Master”

The Paperboy

Worst Possessed Performance: Nicole Kidman in “The Paperboy”

Bernie

Best Comedic Performance: (tie) Jack Black in “Bernie,” Channing Tatum in “21 Jump Street”

The Watch

Worst Comedic Performance: The cast of “The Watch”

Uggie

Best Cameo: Uggie in “The Campaign”

Ryan Reynolds

Worst Cameo: Ryan Reynolds in “Ted”

Eddie Redmayne

Best Singing: Eddie Redmayne in “Les Misérables”

Alec

Worst Singing: Alec Baldwin in “Rock of Ages”

That’s about all I can come up with for now … may add to this later!  Happy 2013, everyone!


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Features, Listful Thinking

REVIEW: Les Misérables

19 12 2012

Les Miserables“Music expresses that which cannot be put into words and cannot remain silent,” wrote Victor Hugo in his novel “Les Misérables.”  Though his work has found expression in a number of different mediums since its publication in 1862, none has captured the public’s imagination quite like Claude-Michel Schönberg’s musical.  It took the spirit of Hugo’s classic novel and put it on stage to powerful effect with an operatic score and poetic lyrics.

The endearing place “Les Misérables” holds in contemporary musical theatre is due to the supremacy of the music, featuring showstopper after showstopper that tug on the heartstrings and open the floodgates of the tear ducts.  I’ll go ahead and declare my lack of objectivity since I was fortunate enough to be a member of a production of “Les Misérables” in high school.  Watching the show from the audience is an ethereal experience, but living with that show for several weeks and being a part of conveying that show’s magic to an audience made it a truly spiritual experience for me.

However, theater does have its limitations.  Using terminology from cinematic camera proxemics, the audience is locked in perpetual longshot, forced to view the action from a distance.  Though the immediacy of the performer is felt, we see only broad strokes of emotion.  So for “Les Misérables” on stage, the potency must come across through the notes of the music, putting the emphasis on execution of the orchestra and the voices of the performers.

Yet these complex and well-written roles are a goldmine for actors, offering them chances to explore rich internal worlds and manifest them through beautiful song.  On stage, we are overcome by spectacle and score, so much so that we can lose the depth of the characters that build the colossus that is Hugo’s novel.  If the stage actor chooses to build in nuances in facial and body movement into their performance, it would be mainly for them alone as most in the auditorium would only be able to discern larger, grander motions.

Read the rest of this entry »


Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : Movie Reviews

Oscar Moment: Final 2012 Pre-Season Predictions, Part 2

29 11 2012

Best Actor

  1. Hugh Jackman, “Les Miserables”
  2. Daniel Day-Lewis, “Lincoln”
  3. Joaquin Phoenix, “The Master“
  4. Bradley Cooper, “Silver Linings Playbook“
  5. Denzel Washington, “Flight“

The past two years have seen the leading man of the Best Picture winner take home Best Actor.  So I’m going out on a limb for Hugh Jackman.  I know it sounds illogical at the moment.  But the hope is that in a few months, we will all look back at this post and say, “Wow, Marshall!  I can’t believe you had such foresight!”  Although it’s very likely that we also look back and say, “Wow, Marshall, you were really dumb not to see the steamroller of Daniel Day-Lewis coming a mile away.”

And indeed, when Time boldly declares him the greatest living actor (take that, Jack Nicholson!), it’s kind of hard to deny an incredibly palpable sense of momentum of Daniel Day-Lewis for “Lincoln.”  It’s the role of the moment, and he’s gotten tons of press and raves.  It could be 2007 all over again where Day-Lewis leads the conversation from the get-go and never lets up.

Fun tidbit that just popped into my head: Meryl Streep will be presenting Best Actor this year.  Imagine the sight, a three-time winner handing the third Oscar to Daniel Day-Lewis.

I’m still hoping that the critics groups can revive the heat for “The Master,” and Joaquin Phoenix in particular.  His performance is mesmerizing and animalistic, and I think they should recognize that.  He’s also a two-time nominee, so that makes his edginess slightly more pallatable for them.  But if the movie flops on the precursor circuit, he could find himself in danger.  Heck, even if it does do well, it could fall victim to the same prudish mentality that snubbed Michael Fassbender’s incredible work in “Shame.”

Though Bradley Cooper may be best known for “The Hangover” series, he does great work in a fantastic attempt to get people to take him seriously.  An attempt that worked as well as the rest of the movie, I’d argue.  Though many consider him (and the rest of the movie) to be lightweight, I think it will touch the same nerve as “The Fighter” did in 2010.  Granted, Mark Wahlberg was not nominated for Best Actor … but Will Smith was a big marquee star when he went serious in 2001 for his nominated role in “Ali.”

And I know plenty of people fawned over John Hawkes’ committed physical performance in “The Sessions.”  But the film has tanked with audiences.  And Denzel Washington, whose “Flight” has done very well at the box office, is breathing down his neck.  I think it has to be considered advantage Washington at the moment.

But in summary: it’s the two locks, Jackman and Day-Lewis, in a battle royale.  Phoenix, Cooper, Washington, and Hawkes competing for three slots.  (Outside spoilers could include Anthony Hopkins in “Hitchcock,” Richard Gere in “Arbitrage,” and Jack Black in “Bernie.”)

Best Actress

  1. Jennifer Lawrence, “Silver Linings Playbook“
  2. Jessica Chastain, “Zero Dark Thirty”
  3. Quvenzhané Wallis, “Beasts of the Southern Wild“
  4. Marion Cotillard, “Rust and Bone“
  5. Naomi Watts, “The Impossible”

It might be a little too soon, but I’m about ready to call the race for Jennifer Lawrence.

She’s had one heck of a year between heading up the $400 smash “The Hunger Games” – and actually giving a heck of a performance in it as well.  We will forget about “House at the End of the Street” and pretend she went 2-for-2.  She’s shown versatility this year, and that’s going to work big time in her favor.  It also helps that her character in “Silver Linings Playbook,” Tiffany, is a perennial favorite archetype at the Oscars: flawed, messy, but ultimately lovable and embraceable.

It looks like her main competition will be Jessica Chastain’s gritty, steely CIA agent from “Zero Dark Thirty.”  Chastain’s epic 2011 brought her an Oscar nomination for “The Help,” and her grace and cheer really went over well with everyone.  As far as I’m concerned, she’s the new Amy Adams, who was the new Julianne Moore/Cate Blanchett/Kate Winslet.

I think we are set for a battle to rival the Best Actor race.  Especially because at the Globes, Lawrence will compete in comedy and Chastain will compete in drama.  Unless one totally dominates the critics groups, I think the two could essentially be tied until the SAGs when they go head-to-head.  (BFCA will clarify some, but they could always tie like 2008/2009.)  That’s when the momentum shifted to Jean Dujardin last year, although they chose Viola Davis over eventual champion Meryl Streep.

And maybe I’m underestimating young Quvenzhané Wallis, whose spunk powered “Beasts of the Southern Wild” into the indie spotlight over the summer.  Had the Oscars been held after Cannes or at the end of August, she probably would have been the favorite to win.  But after Lawrence and Chastain’s performances were revealed, she’s lost some of her thunder.  Unless the critics groups and early precursors make a strong contribution to her campaign, she should be content with a nomination and all the attention it adds to her career going forward.

Marion Cotillard deserves score a nomination here as well, and given the incredibly weak field, it shouldn’t be a problem.  Upon seeing the film a second time last week, I realized that where “La Vie En Rose” was a total transformation, “Rust and Bone” is a radically different movie for her.  She’s so much subtler and rawer.  It’s enormously affecting.  See it when you get the chance.

I think Cotillard’s contention bodes ill for Emmanuelle Riva, whose work in “Amour” apparently has Academy voters talking.  Two French-language performances nominated for Best Actress in one year?!  That seems a little much.  So I think the few passionate supporters of “The Impossible” will get Naomi Watts to edge out Riva (or Keira Knightley for “Anna Karenina” and Helen Mirren for “Hitchcock”) and sneak into the race in a movie with very little overall buzz.  Just like she did in 2003 with “21 Grams.”

Best Supporting Actor

  1. Robert DeNiro, “Silver Linings Playbook“
  2. Eddie Redmayne, “Les Miserables”
  3. Phillip Seymour Hoffman, “The Master“
  4. Alan Arkin, “Argo“
  5. Tommy Lee Jones, “Lincoln”

I have legitimately no idea how to call this category.  None.  Which is fun.  Last year, Christopher Plummer had the lead from the beginning of the summer and never let up.  And the other four nominees were a mystery until nominations morning.

In 2012, we don’t even have the benefit of a frontrunner.  I’m saying Robert DeNiro has the lead at the moment because it’s the first time in decades he can be taken seriously by the Academy.  He hasn’t been nominated in 20 years and hasn’t won in 30 years.  And hey, guess what – the Oscars can make a Meryl out of him by giving him a third golden man!  It’s a lighter role for DeNiro yet still features plenty of depth in heart.  This category has been all about career achievement awards recently, making DeNiro a perfect fit.

On the other hand, young, upstart Eddie Redmayne is apparently the scene stealer of the supporting cast of “Les Miserables.”  With Russell Crowe apparently polarizing audiences, I think voters will likely rally around Redmayne.  He has a showy number at the end, “Empty Chairs at Empty Tables,” that will stick with viewers as they leave the theater.  If he can build consensus and doesn’t have to deal with vote-splitting, he could emerge a victor.

Philip Seymour Hoffman is just going for his second Oscar, but I think plenty of people would argue he’s an actor headed for the stature of Daniel Day-Lewis and Robert DeNiro.  He will get to two, and maybe “The Master” will get him there.  He won a prize at Venice (a tie with Joaquin Phoenix), and his co-lead status will help.

But I think his strength in the category will be largely determined by how well the movie does.  If it comes on strong (as I anticipate it might), he could be a serious threat to win.  But if it fires blanks, Hoffman will no longer be fighting to win and likely fighting to get nominated.

Alan ArkinAlan Arkin is likely in for “Argo,” but he’s only in the film for a handful of scenes.  He makes them the most funny and entertaining scenes in the film, though.  But I can’t help but wonder if he’s not as much of a shoo-in as some people think.  He’s already earned his lifetime achievement award – I mean, Best Supporting Actor prize in 2006 for “Little Miss Sunshine.”  And “Argo” may not be an actor’s movie.  So we will see.

As for that last slot, my brain says Tommy Lee Jones for “Lincoln” because a rising tide lifts all ships.  But I also wonder if Russell Crowe or Sacha Baron Cohen might make two nominations here for “Les Miserables,” the first time any movie would achieve such a feat in this category in over 20 years.

Or maybe Leonardo DiCaprio gets nominated for “Django Unchained” as so many are predicting.  I just can’t given how down to the wire the editing process is.

Best Supporting Actress

  1. Anne Hathaway, “Les Miserables”
  2. Sally Field, “Lincoln”
  3. Samantha Barks, “Les Miserables”
  4. Helen Hunt, “The Sessions“
  5. Amy Adams, “The Master“

Thanks for coming, everyone.  You did your best, but you weren’t good enough.  Anne Hathaway apparently gives a performance for the ages and makes everyone cry.  She has won.  It’s over before it even began.

So I just hope they don’t waste the other four nominations on people who don’t need them.  Since the other ladies aren’t really in contention to win, the word “Oscar nominee” could do wonders for a young actress’ career.  Like Samantha Barks, whose Eponine has plenty of tears she can jerk from her show-stopping “On My Own.”

And it could do a great deal to make the case for “she’s overdue to win” for Amy Adams, given that this would be her fourth nomination in her seven years since bursting on the scene.  That’s incredible.  At five, an eventual win becomes nearly guaranteed.

I don’t think she would have much of a chance to win, and probably wouldn’t be nominated if it weren’t such a weak year for the field.  “The Master” gives her very little to work with, but she’s fiercely intimidating and steely in what little she has.  I think unless the film totally collapses in the season, she will be able to squeeze in.

I bet Sally Field rides the coattails of “Lincoln” to a nomination, but she has won twice.  Would the Academy really crown two new Meryls in a year?  Past winner Helen Hunt will also probably figure into the race too, but I think her spot is at jeopardy given the film’s dismal box office performance.  She will need to stake a claim fast in the category or she runs the risk of getting forgotten.


Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Categories : 2012 - Oscar Moment, Oscar Moment

Oscar Moment: First 2012 Predictions

5 08 2012

It’s never too early to start guessing, right?  With Cannes yielding little to start Oscar conversation, the pressure is on for the fall to deliver in a big way.  Film festivals in Venice, Toronto, and Telluride will begin to churn out candidates and weed out pretenders in just a few weeks now.  Then a number of big-name films that forewent the festival circuit will have to face the gauntlet of critics and audiences. By the time the year-end lists start rolling off the presses, the game will be predictable and boring.  So let’s speculate now while it’s still fun and actually involves educated guessing!

UPDATE 8/6: I can’t let these picks become dated within hours of them being posted, so I’ve replaced my predictions that included “The Great Gatsby.”

Best Picture:

  1. The Master
  2. Les Miserables
  3. Lincoln
  4. Life of Pi
  5. Django Unchained
  6. Beasts of the Southern Wild
  7. Moonrise Kingdom
  8. Argo
  9. The Great Gatsby Zero Dark Thirty
  10. The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel

“The Master” just seems like the movie of the year to me from this distance.  Tom Cruise has seen the movie and HATES it, that’s enough for me.  If the movie is really going to take on Scientology, it could really be a pop culture centerpiece for the fall.

Starring Joaquin Phoenix returning from his bizarre performance art stunt in “I’m Still Here,” Philip Seymour Hoffman fresh off two major supporting roles in Oscar-nominated films in 2011, and three-time Best Supporting Actress bridesmaid Amy Adams, it could certainly be a force to reckon with in the acting categories.  It’s also a period piece that could register impressively in the technical categories.

Oh, and it’s written and directed by Paul Thomas Anderson.  In the ’90s, his films “Boogie Nights” and “Magnolia” each scored him a Best Original Screenplay nomination.  In 2007, “There Will Be Blood” scored him nominations for writing, directing, and producing since the film was up for Best Picture.  The argument will be made – convincingly by the Weinstein Company, no less – that Anderson’s time has come.

Indeed, it has.  The narrative is in place.  It can easily score over 10 nominations and march towards victory.  The film just needs to not suck.  And according to people at the first public showing on Friday (a surprise screening after a showing of “The Shining” in Los Angeles), it doesn’t suck.  It’s awesome.

Though of course, that path won’t be uncontested.  However, three out of the last five Best Picture winners – “No Country for Old Men,” “Slumdog Millionaire,” and “The Artist” – asserted their dominance from the beginning of the season and never looked back.  So who knows?! As the triumph of “The King’s Speech” showed us in 2010, Oscar bait isn’t dead.  In fact, it’s thriving … and there is still a big portion of the Academy that succumbs to it.

In 2011, “War Horse” and “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close” both cracked the Best Picture field despite facing a number of harsh critics and tepid response from other industry groups.  Nonetheless, the Academy likes what it likes and refuses to apologize for it. So I doubt they will think twice about nominating “Les Miserables” for Best Picture.  The Tony Award-winning musical has everything that could possibly ever appeal to an Academy member: drama, emotion, catharsis, noble prostitutes, solid acting, historical setting, impressive craftwork … and it’s directed by Tom Hooper, the man who made them feel so good they gave him Best Director for a movie that required very little directing.

Granted, everyone thought “Chicago” was going to usher in a new Renaissance for American film adaptations of musical theater.  While the Golden Globes seem to be relishing in all the musicals, the Academy has ignored “The Phantom of the Opera,” “The Producers,” “Dreamgirls,” “Hairspray,” “Sweeney Todd,” “Mamma Mia,” and “Nine” (all of which were Best Picture nominees in the Musical/Comedy field for HFPA).

“Dreamgirls” was even being tipped to win in 2006 and was a surprise snub on nomination morning (“Nine” could also have cracked the field in 2009).  So musicals are still iffy, but “Les Miserables” is in a league of its own.  Those other musicals are nice, but none are based on a Victor Hugo novel.  The story is made to win awards.

Also falling in the bait category is Steven Spielberg’s “Lincoln,” starring Daniel Day-Lewis as one of America’s greatest presidents.  Spielberg’s films since “Schindler’s List” have practically all been presumptive frontrunners, yet “Saving Private Ryan” is his only film afterwards to win an Oscar.  “Munich” and “War Horse” have both slid in on residual respect, but how far does that go?  Do they still owe a man who has won Best Director twice?  Helmed eight Best Picture nominees?

The same questions can be asked of Day-Lewis, who clearly has a ton of respect as shown by his two Best Actor trophies.  However, the Academy felt no shame in shutting him out of the 2009 Best Actor race in favor of first-time nominee Jeremy Renner.  Granted, Renner’s “The Hurt Locker” was worlds better than Day-Lewis’ “Nine,” but it’s still fair to wonder if the Academy is done with him like they are done with Clint Eastwood.  Unless you are Meryl Streep or Jack Nicholson (or John Williams), two is basically the magic number.

People have been raving about Ang Lee’s “Life of Pi” since its presentation of footage at CinemaCon back in the spring, and I think the coupling of a respected, Oscar-winning director tackling 3D will be the “Hugo” of 2012.  It will also probably score no acting nominations and plenty of tech nods like Scorsese’s 5-time winner from last year.

Beyond those four heavy-hitters, it’s anyone’s guess. Perhaps I guessed the overdue writer/director incorrectly, and the Academy will choose to fete Quentin Tarantino for “Django Unchained.”  People counted out “Inglourious Basterds,” and it wound up with eight nominations.

“Beasts of the Southern Wild” has certainly proven to be the art-house hit of the year, winning major prizes at Sundance and Cannes, stealing critics’ hearts, and racking up enough money to where it can’t be dismissed as totally esoteric.  There’s certainly precedent for a summer indie favorite to sneak into the Best Picture field – “Winter’s Bone” in 2010 and “The Tree of Life” in 2011.  It will need the critics groups to come out in favor for it in a big way or the pint-sized star Quvenzhané Wallis to be a unanimous and strong first-choice in the Best Actress race.

Some people think the inclusion of “Beasts” might leave out the other summer indie sleeper hit, “Moonrise Kingdom.”  To that I say, look to last year when “Midnight in Paris,” a funny crowd-pleaser, cracked the same field with “The Tree of Life.”  I think the Academy could decide the time is here to honor Wes Anderson’s peculiar gifts.  If they could accept “Little Miss Sunshine” and “Juno,” I see no reason why “Moonrise Kingdom” couldn’t be a Best Picture nominee.

“Argo” could also be a sleeper to watch in this race.  Ben Affleck’s directorial skills are definitely improving with each movie, and his last film, “The Town,” was definitely just on the outside looking in at the 2010 Best Picture field.  Could getting out of his native country of Boston put him in the race this time?  We’ll know after its Toronto premiere.

Baz Luhrmannn’s singular work “Moulin Rouge” tickled the Academy’s fancy in 2001.  His 2008 “Australia,” a more refined, baity piece, only netted a Best Costume Design nomination.  Which will his adaptation of “The Great Gatsby” be?  My gut says a hit like “Moulin Rouge” because I’m so in love with the source material, but that love could be blinding me.  This will either be a big hit or a big flop.

And who knows if the Academy field will extend to ten this year, but I’ll go ahead and predict ten.  Could lighting strike for the fourth time for Peter Jackson with “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey?”  Will “Hyde Park on Hudson” be more than just a feel-good biopic?  Can Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight Rises” finally get the franchise the recognition it deserves?

These are big “if”s, so I’m just going to choose safe (because my wild-card predictions in years past have spawned picks of “It’s Complicated” and “Never Let Me Go”) and predict Kathryn Bigelow’s “Zero Dark Thirty.”  It could be bold, daring, and thrilling if it succeeds.  The expectations will be high since the production has been so guarded.  But if it works, it could be a major player.

And for the hell of it, why not say that the decidedly middling “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel” becomes the low-brow film that makes the cut and makes me curse the Academy once more. Read the rest of this entry »


Comments : 3 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Categories : 2012 - Oscar Moment, Oscar Moment

REVIEW: Real Steel

26 03 2012

What’s more American than virtually remaking “Rocky,” replacing Sylvester Stallone with a robot, set in the heartlands?  That’s “Real Steel” in a nutshell, a Hugh Jackman vehicle that director Shawn Levy proclaims as a classic expression of Americana.  Well, for starters, America deserves better than this.

Levy is under the delusion that his movie has a place on the American kitchen table next to the apple pie; I’m here to tell you that the only place “Real Steel” belongs with apple pie is when the dessert is stale, rotten, and in a garbage bag.  Its tired, unoriginal story combined with mildly stimulating visuals make for a lackluster watch.  Levy also gets a bit genre-confused, wedding the sports film to the sci-fi with little success.  I still think there’s hope in genre cross-pollination, but I hope no one looks back and thinks that “Real Steel” or “Cowboys & Aliens” were ahead of their time.  Both are feeble, flailing attempts to give a little shimmer to tarnished brands.

However, I suppose it is rather effective at communicating the age-old American myths.  Any deadbeat dad, in this case Hugh Jackman, no matter how estranged, can reconnect with his son, here played by an incredibly hyperactive Dakota Goyo.  Anyone can succeed if they have friends with faith in them, here Evangeline Lilly (who is far from her glory days on “Lost” when she was my huge crush).  But most of all, anyone can beat the odds and be a winner with hard work and faith – even a robot.  That’s the American dream, but it’s been realized before … and better.  C- / 


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

NOLAN REVIEW: The Prestige

13 07 2010

After great critical and commercial success with “Batman Begins,” Nolan went back to the familiar territory of complex storylines and plot twists with “The Prestige.”

Whoever said cinema was magic was clearly foreseeing “The Prestige.”  Christopher Nolan uses his sorcery to conjure up a truly enchanting moviegoing experience, one that draws you in close at the beginning and keeps you gripped for the entire ride.  And it just so happens that the movie is about magic, so the comparison is perfect.

It’s all about the competition as Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman play rival magicians in early 1900s England, both of whom vie for the greatest success.  But they soon realize that the only way to come out on top is to eliminate the other, so their rivalry becomes dangerous as they work to destroy each other.  Stealing tricks as the only the beginning; they make decisions that affects life away from the stage as well, throwing friends and loved ones into the middle.

The beauty of the Nolans’ script (Christopher and brother Jonathan collaborated on the movie) is that it picks no favorite magician.  There is no set hero or villain, and Bale’s Borden does as many despicable deeds as Jackman’s Angier.  Thanks to their impartiality, we really just get to watch the events without worrying about the protagonist pulling through.

The movie’s slogan of “Are you watching closely?” is perfectly fitting as Nolan lures us in as if performing his own magic trick.  And indeed he is, following the traditional setup of a magic trick as Michael Caine’s John Cutter says at the beginning of the film.  The pledge, which in magic consists of showing us a normal object, is very much the film’s first act as we see the developing competition between the two magicians.  And just like the turn in magic, which makes the normal abnormal, the tension escalates.  We are looking for the reason, not wanting to be fooled by Nolan’s wizardry.

Sure enough, in the prestige, we get it.  In typical Nolan fashion, there’s a twist, and what we’ve been watching turns out to be something entirely different.  Yet we are willing to be fooled by a magician, and being fooled by Nolan’s “The Prestige” turns out to be quite thrilling in retrospect.


Comments : 6 Comments »
Tags: , , ,
Categories : Blog Events, Movie Reviews, Nolan Marathon