Valentine on Film

2006-11-05T23:57:00.000-05:00

VALENTINE ON FILM is under reconstruction and soon moving to www.valentineonfilm.com.

Click here to check out the new site!!!

**Valentine on Film can also be viewed at:
http://blogcritics.org/

http://www.imdb.com/.**

Main Menu: Archives (A-Z)

2006-11-05T23:56:00.000-05:00

Agnes of God
Amelie
Amityville Horror, The (2005)
Apostle, The
Babette's Feast
Basic
Batman Begins
Benchwarmers, The
Big Fish
Big Night
Blade: Trinity
Blue Velvet
Boondock Saints, The
Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
Bridges of Madison County, The
Brokeback Mountain
Broken Flowers
Bruce Almighty
Capote
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Chicago
Chocolat (2000)
Choose Your Own Adventure: The Abominable Snowman
Christmas with the Kranks
Cinema Paradiso
City of God
Civil Action, A
Closer
Contact
Copper Mountain (A Club Med Experience)
Crash
Da Vinci Code, The
Dave Chappelle's Block Party
Day After Tomorrow, The
Departed, The
Derailed
Diner
Dirty Pretty Things
Dogma
Donnie Darko
Eat Drink Man Woman
Eating
Eight Below
11:14
Eloise: Little Miss Christmas (DVD)
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Famine Within, The
Fever Pitch
Finding Neverland
Fisher King, The
Flightplan
Flight 93
Forgotten, The
40-Year-Old Virgin, The
Freddy vs. Jason
Gattaca
Girl Next Door, The
Godfather, The
Godfather Part II, The
Grudge, The
Guess Who
Happenstance
Happy Elf, The
He Loves Me, He Loves Me Not
Hide and Seek
High Tension
Hitch
Hostage
Incredibles, The
Inherit the Wind
Jack Frost (1997)
Jack Frost 2: Revenge of the Mutant Killer Snowman
Kicking and Screaming
King Kong (2005)
Kundun
Last Temptation of Christ, The
Leaving Las Vegas
Life of David Gale, The
Like Water for Chocolate
Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels
Lost in Translation
Maria Full of Grace
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein
Matchstick Men
Matrix Reloaded, The
Matrix Revolutions, The
Me, Eloise (DVD)
Meet the Fockers
Metropolis
Milagro Beanfield War, The
Million Dollar Baby
Mindwalk
Mulholland Drive
My Dinner with Andre
North by Northwest
Omen, The
Panic Room
Passion of the Christ, The
Phantom of the Opera, The (1925)
Phantom of the Opera, The (2004)
Pi
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest
Princess Bride, The
Prophecy, The
Raging Bull
Rapture, The
Rear Window
Red Eye
Rent
Reservoir Dogs
Rocky Horror Picture Show, The
Saw
Saw II
Saw III
Say Amen, Somebody
Seabiscuit
Secretary
Serendipity
Sideways
Sin City
Spider-Man
Super Size Me
S.W.A.T.
Surviving Christmas
Talladega Nights
Tampopo
Terminator 3: The Rise of the Machines
13 Going On 30
This Divided State
This Is Spinal Tap
12 Monkeys
25th Hour
2001: A Space Odyssey
United 93
Upside of Anger, The
Village, The
Wages of Fear
Walk the Line
War of the Worlds
Warriors, The
Wedding Crashers
When We Were Kings
White Noise
World Trade Center
X-Men: The Last Stand

Main Menu: Archives (Star Rating)

2006-11-05T23:55:00.000-05:00

Below is a list of every film that I have ranked in terms of star rating. Within each category the films are listed in alphabetical order. This will serve as my "core carte du jour". Use this to click on the links to my full length film commentaries considering the list on the left is a little restricting. Also, this main archive page should provide you with a quick and easy means of viewing which films I revere and respect, and which ones I dislike and despise.

Four Star Films (****)

Adaptation
American Beauty
Back to the Future
Before Sunrise
Blue Velvet
Bonnie and Clyde
Boogie Nights
Braveheart
Cinema Paradiso
Citizen Kane
City of God
Clockwork Orange, A
Contact
Crash
Dead Man Walking
Deer Hunter, The
Die Hard
Donnie Darko
Finding Nemo
Finding Neverland
Forrest Gump
Godfather, The
Godfather Part II, The
Goodfellas
Groundhog Day
He Loves Me, He Loves Me Not
In the Bedroom
It's A Wonderful Life
Jaws
Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
Lost in Translation
Magnolia
Matrix, The
Memento
Metropolis
Million Dollar Baby
Minority Report
Monster
Mulholland Drive
North by Northwest
Passion of the Christ, The
Pianist, The
Platoon
**NEW** Princess Bride, The
Pulp Fiction
Raging Bull
Rear Window
Requiem for a Dream
Reservoir Dogs
Shawshank Redemption, The
Signs
Sin City
Stand By Me
Sting, The
Sweet Hereafter, The
Taxi Driver
This Is Spinal Tap
Titanic
21 Grams
2001: A Space Odyssey
Usual Suspects, The
Wages of Fear
West Side Story
When Harry Met Sally
Wild Bunch, The
Wizard of Oz, The

Three-and-One-Half Star Films (***1/2)

Airplane
Amelie
American Splendor
Apostle, The
Babette's Feast
Bad(der) Santa
Batman Begins
Being John Malkovich
Big Fish
Big Lebowski, The
Big Night
Blow
Blow Out
Blues Brothers, The
**NEW** Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
Breakfast Club, The
Bridges of Madison County, The
Butterfly Effect, The
Capote
Christmas Story, A
Closer
Collateral
Die Hard 2: Die Harder
Dirty Pretty Things
Dreamers, The
Elephant
11:14
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Evil Dead, The
Exorcism of Emily Rose, The
Exotica
Fargo
Frankenstein (1931)
Friday Night Lights
Gattaca
Girl Next Door, The
Happenstance
Identity
Jerry Maguire
Jurassic Park
King Kong (2005)
Last of the Mohicans, The
Last Temptation of Christ, The
**NEW** Leaving Las Vegas
Legends of the Fall
Like Water for Chocolate
Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels
Maria Full of Grace
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
Matchstick Men
Matrix Reloaded, The
Mean Creek
Mindwalk
Monster's Inc.
Mystic River
Napoleon Dynamite
Nightmare on Elm Street, A
Notebook, The
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Panic Room
Phantom of the Opera, The (1925)
Pi
Polar Express, The
Ray
Rock, The
Seven
Shrek
Sideways
Sixth Sense, The
Sliding Doors
Sound of Music, The
Speed
Spiderman 2
Tampopo
Terminator, The
Terminator 2: Judgement Day
Training Day
12 Monkeys
United 93
Vanilla Sky
Walk the Line
Warriors, The
What About Bob?
Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
World Trade Center
X2: X-Men United

Three Star Films (***)

American History X
American Psycho
Analyze This
Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy
Back to the Future II
Backdraft
Birdcage, The
Black Hawk Down
Blade
Blade II
Boondock Saints, The
Bottle Rocket
Bourne Identity, The
Bridget Jones's Diary
Brokeback Mountain
Catch Me If You Can
Center Stage
Chicago
Chronicles of Narnia, The: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
Civil Action, A
Cold Mountain
Constant Gardener, The
Cooler, The
Da Vinci Code, The
Dave Chappelle's Block Party
Diner
Dogma
Drumline
Duel
Eat Drink Man Woman
Emperor's New Groove, The
Enemy at the Gates
Escape From Alcatraz
Fahrenheit 9/11
Fever Pitch
Finding Forrester
Fisher King, The
Flight 93
40-Year-Old Virgin, The
Galaxy Quest
Gangs of New York
Good Girl, The
Goonies, The
Gorillas in the Mist
Grease
Great Escape, The
Grumpy Old Men
Happy Gilmore
**NEW** Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone
Hitch
Hope Floats
Hostage
**NEW** House of 1000 Corpses
House of Wax (2005)
How to Lose a Guy In 10 Days
I, Robot
In Good Company
In the Line of Fire
Incredibles, The
Inherit the Wind
Inside Man
Italian Job, The
Jacket, The
Kill Bill: Volume 1
Kingpin
Kinsey
Kundun
Life of David Gale, The
Magnificent Seven, The
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein
Match Point
Matrix Revolutions, The
Maverick
Meet the Parents
Narc
Novacaine
O' Brother, Where Art Thou?
Omen, The
Open Range
Out of Towners, The (1970)
Phone Booth
Pink Panther Strikes Again, The
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest
Poltergeist
Poseidon Adventure, The
Raising Arizona
Red Eye
Remember the Titans
Ring, The
River Runs Through It, A
Rocky Horror Picture Show, The
Rudy
Saw II
**NEW** Saw III
Say Amen, Somebody
School of Rock
Seabiscuit
See No Evil, Hear No Evil
Serendipity
Shrek 2
Sixteen Candles
Snatch
Spanglish
Still, We Believe: The Boston Red Sox Movie
Small Soldiers
Super Size Me
Swingers
Tears of the Sun
Teen Wolf
Terminal, The
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
13 Going On 30
This Divided State
Tombstone
Tootsie
28 Days Later
Unbreakable
Upside of Anger, The
Vera Drake
Virgin Suicides, The
War of the Worlds
Wedding Crashers
**NEW** When We Were Kings
White Christmas
Windtalkers
Witness
X-Men

Two-and-One-Half Star Films (**1/2)

About Schmidt
American Wedding
Analyze That
Bad Boys
Bad News Bears (2005)
Brewster's Millions (1945)
Broken Flowers
Cellular
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Chocolat (2000)
Christmas Vacation
Crow, The
Day After Tomorrow, The
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
Dodgeball
8 Mile
Elf
Famine Within, The
Fan, The
Fatal Attraction
Firm, The
Flightplan
Frequency
Garden State
Great Outdoors, The
Houdini (1953)
Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle
High Tension
In the Cut
Island, The
Jerk, The
Just Married
Ladder 49
Lady and the Tramp
Life Aquatic, The
Longest Yard, The (2005)
Man on Fire
Mean Girls
Meet the Fockers
Milagro Beanfield War, The
Missing, The
Mona Lisa Smile
My Dinner with Andre
Ocean's Twelve
Old School
Open Water
Pay It Forward
Phantom of the Opera, The (2004)
Saw
Secret Lives of Dentists, The
Secretary
Spiderman
Starsky and Hutch
Swimming Pool
Taking Lives
Talladega Nights
Urban Cowboy
Weird Science
White Oleander
X-Men: The Last Stand

Two Star Films (**)

Amityville Horror, The (2005)
Anger Management
Blade: Trinity
Bringing Down the House
Bruce Almighty
Cheaper By the Dozen
Choose Your Own Adventure: The Abominable Snowman (DVD)
Derailed
Eight Below
Eloise: Little Miss Christmas (DVD)
Freddy vs. Jason
Fun with Dick and Jane
Ghosts of the Abyss
Grudge, The
Guess Who
Hunted, The
Indecent Proposal
Kicking and Screaming
Kissing Jessica Stein
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Mr. Deeds
My Big Fat Greek Wedding
Rapture, The
Rent
Robin Hood Men in Tights
**NEW** Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The (2006)
25th Hour
Village, The

One-and-One-Half Star Films (*1/2)

Agnes of God
Bad Boys II
Children of the Corn
Comedian
Daddy Day Care
Darkness Falls
Eating
Eulogy
Forgotten, The
Half Light
Hide and Seek
Major League II
**NEW** Me, Eloise
S.W.A.T.
Tuxedo, The

One Star Films (*)

Basic
The Benchwarmers
Blue Thunder
Boogeyman
Dreamcatcher
Happy Elf, The
Porky's
Prime
Prophecy, The
Showtime
Soldier
Surviving Christmas
White Noise

One-Half Star Films (1/2)
Christmas With the Kranks
Jack Frost (1997)
Master of Disguise, The
Rollerball (2000)

Zero Star Films (zero stars)
Jack Frost 2: Revenge of the Mutant Killer Snowman
Copper Mountain (A Club Med Experience)

Movie Review: When We Were Kings

2006-11-05T10:06:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 10/25/96
Running Time: 1:29
Rated: PG (Images of violence, brief nudity, some language)
Cast: Muhammad Ali, George Foreman, Don King, James Brown, B.B. King, Spike Lee, Norman Mailer, and George Plimpton

Director: Leon Gast
Producer: Leon Gast, Taylor Hackford & David Sonenberg
Studio: Gramercy Pictures

When We Were Kings is a meaningful documentary that depicts the monumental bout, “The Rumble in the Jungle,” between Muhammad Ali and George Foreman. This historic match was held on October 30, 1974 in Zaire, Africa, and not only did it hold great significance in the history of the sport, but it also served as the basis for a compelling and recommendable documentary.

In the fall of ’74, Don King, who initially coordinated the fight, promised Ali and Foreman each a gross sum of $5 million. After continually searching for a country to come forth and forfeit the $10 million fee, Zaire finally stepped up to the place. Despite the investment being a huge blow to Zaire’s economic income, the men and women of Zaire figured that housing the fight would help bring publicity to their African country. Thus, the fight was organized.

Both contenders were eager to prove themselves and earn the title of the "Heavyweight Champion of the World." The fighters, their trainers, the press, and a series of famous African American musicians (a.k.a. “The Assembly of the American Black Men”), were all flown to Zaire in order to promote the fight. From that point on, it was the experience and ego of Ali, versus the strength and youth of Foreman, that helped to etch this sports saga into the history books forever.

Second to the bout, it was the music that united and influenced the people (fighters included). The musical performances, from James Brown’s wild, screaming, soul singing and dancing, to B.B. King’s sweat dripping while he ever-so smoothly strummed on Lucille, heavily inspired both the African people and the Americans who had traveled there. Black, white, or otherwise, the beats and tunes provided feel-good music. Specifically, the sounds of the drum provided a sense of communication, and the rhythm and blues was heartfelt in not only the land of Zaire, but also everywhere else it was televised. The energy that was transported from the dancing and the percussive elements to the people was, without a doubt, the driving force that fed the fighters and the country.

In the film, Ali is depicted from his beginnings in the boxing world at age 18 (a cocky, talkative, but yet funny and charismatic fighting machine), to his post rumble days as an influential and almost political leader. Furthermore, George Foreman is illustrated as the heavy money favorite of the bout, and not only as a fierce, angry, and powerful contender, but also as the enemy.

Throughout the picture, it is obvious that the Africans wanted Muhammad Ali to win the fight—for he was a kind and typical man who wanted to emerge victorious for all of the right reasons. Ali was a hero to the Africans; he knew in his heart that he had to beat Forman for the people, not for himself.

When We Were Kings is a wonderful documentary filled with forceful information. It is a selection of cinema that everyone should watch. Its coverage of the bout, its result, and its effects are nearly as powerful as the two spirited sparrers. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan

2006-11-04T20:07:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 11/3/06
Running Time: 1:24
Rated: R (pervasive strong crude and sexual content including graphic nudity, and language.)
Cast: Sacha Baron Cohen, Ken Davitian, Luenell, Pamela Anderson

Director: Larry Charles
Producer: Monica Levinson, Dan Mazer
Screenplay: Sacha Baron Cohen, Anthony Hines, Peter Baynham, Dan Mazer
Music: Erran Baron Cohen
Studio: 20th Century Fox

Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan is quite possibly one of the most outrageously offensive and consistently hilarious films in recent years. In the spirit of a Christopher Guest “mockumentary,” Borat agitates, shocks, and places your funny bone in the palm of its hand. It is crude to the hilt, quick to the edge, and filled to the brim with humor. As long as you can stomach gratuitous male nudity, Borat is a highly recommended cinematic comedy.

British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen plays the part of Borat Sagdiyev, a Kazakhstani TV journalist. Set to explore the United States of America, Borat leaves his wife, neighbor, and village behind him to film a documentary about his American experience. With his director and sidekick, Azamat Bagatov (Ken Davitian), in toe, Borat ventures to New York City—only to catch an episode of “Baywatch” and fall in love with Pamela Anderson. From then on, Borat’s documentary for his fellow Kazaks is more of a quest for the big-breasted blonde than anything else.

Unlike Don’t Be a Menace to South Central While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood, Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan is deserving of the long explanative title and funnier because of it. Surprisingly, Borat is packed with sophisticated humor and immensely immature pranks simultaneously. The film is anything but political correct; additionally, it is everything that shares a synonym with unique.

Borat’s most praiseworthy facet is the fact that it places every American stereotype on display and proves that somewhere, in some shape or form, there is a closet bigot in every America citizen. From a rodeo cowboy who comments on hanging homosexuals, to an anti-Semite who refuses to take food from Jews, Borat showcases the “cultural learnings” and the cultural fears of America. Virtually every American persona – including a frat boy, a prostitute, a feminist and an evangelist – comes in contact with Borat and expounds on his/her viewpoint.

The rationale behind Borat’s sense of humor is simply cultural ignorance. As a foreigner to the States, the Kazakhstani journalist is completely out of his element. Thereby, his misunderstandings, cultural clashes, and pure unawareness results in knee-slapping humor and shockingly hilarious absurdity.

The best way to describe Borat is like a crud-covered charm. On the outside, the film is dirty and in need of washing, but under the filth, there is something more: an objective, a message, and a memorable character with a great big misguided heart. Borat is one of the most ribbing and riotous films ever to appear on the silver screen. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Saw III

2006-10-31T09:21:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 10/27/06
Running Time: 1:47
Rated: R (strong grisly violence and gore, sequences of terror and torture, nudity and language)
Cast: Tobin Bell, Shawnee Smith, Angus Macfadyen, Bahar Soomekh, Dina Meyer, Donnie Wahlberg

Director: Darren Lynn Bousman
Producer: Leigh Whannel, James Wan
Screenplay: Leigh Whannel & James Wan
Music: Charlie Clouser
Studio: Lions Gate Films

One advertisement for Saw III declared, “If it’s Halloween, it has to be Saw!” This self-proclaimed statement from Lions Gate Films and Twisted Pictures is difficult to refute.

For the third time in three years, a film from the Saw series has been released to the public pre-All Souls Eve. With a taste for blood and bone during this scary season, horror fans have come to count on more and more graphic gore and clever twists. Considering this assumption, Saw III delivers in the vein of I and II and them some.

Saw III picks up right where Saw II left off. Eric Matthews (Donnie Wahlberg) is left for dead, and Amanda (Shawnee Smith) continues to serve John “Jigsaw” Kramer (Tobin Bell) as his apprentice. However, Jigsaw is on his deathbed. The brain tumor in his frontal lobe is expanding, and his time is limited.

To keep Jigsaw alive, Amanda kidnaps Dr. Lynn (Bahar Soomekh). Dr. Lynn must keep Jigsaw alive so he can watch the game of his latest victim, Jeff (Angus Macfadyen), unfold. Otherwise, the mechanical collar that Lynn wears will detonate when Jigsaw’s heart rate reaches zero beats per minute.

Given its hurried production time (from Halloween of ’05 to Halloween of ’06), Saw III results in a surprisingly well-played horror with pin-point precision and gruesome ingenuity. All of its pieces fit together like a challenging jigsaw; all of its vividly torturous acts make you writhe in your chair like a helpless victim.

From chains that rip flesh, to contortionist machinery that shatters bones, Saw III is, in a word, brutal. Not one single detail is left off-camera and for the imagination. Viewers are forced to watch bones crack, skin deteriorate, faces freeze, and bodies explode. In simpler terms, Saw fans will be pleased by its bloodshed; others will be squeamish and might lose their lunch. Though, the same could be rightfully said for the inverse as well.

All-in-all, Saw III lives up to the hype. James Wan and Leigh Whannel have written an all-encompassing treat that, yet again, initially tricks the mind. This third chapter is most praiseworthy for its intermingled flashbacks and its airtight interconnections. On the other hand, its faults are present in consistently jerky camera motions and a lengthy rehashing that overly forces the not-so-revelatory ending.

Nevertheless, Saw III achieves its goals of being a fitting third installment, a nail-biting suspense with more than one twist, and an exercise in edge-of-your-seat queasiness beyond all get-out. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Eloise: Little Miss Christmas (DVD)

2006-10-28T11:09:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 10/10/06 (DVD)
Running Time: 1:06
Rated: NR
Cast: Mary Matilyn Mouser, Tim Curry, Lynn Redgrave, Kathleen Gati, Rob Paulsen, Matthew Lilliard

Director: Wes Archer
Producers: Scott D. Greenberg, Sidney Clifton, Ted Green, Ken Lipman
Screenplay: Steven Goldman and Ken Lipman, based on Kay Thompson’s “Eloise”
Music: Megan Cavallari
Studio: Anchor Bay Entertainment

Based on the 1950’s “Eloise at the Plaza” children’s book by Kay Thompson, the Eloise: Little Miss Christmas animated DVD attempts to outshine its 2003 live-action predecessor, entitled Eloise at Christmastime. With its slight variation in name, Eloise: Little Miss Christmas strives to appeal to a younger, more cartoon-oriented crowd. However, the film barely moves with its minimal holiday spirit, and similar to Me, Eloise, Little Miss Christmas still annoys more than it enthuses.

One week before Christmas, excitement begins to mount in the eyes of the children who reside at the Plaza Hotel on Fifth Avenue in New York City. Margarita, Tyler, Bruce, Bobby, Yuko, and most importantly Eloise (Mary Matilyn Mouser) all plot to partake in a Christmas Extravaganza. This Extravaganza will be performed by the kids and for the entertainment and cultural education of the adults.

However, Christmas is a busy time of year in the hotel industry. While Mr. Salamone (Tim Curry) barks orders to his bellhops and cooks, he informs them that on Christmas Eve, Mr. DuCat (Matthew Lilliard), a hotel inspector, will arrive to examine the Plaza down to the tiniest detail. For the children, this means: no Extravaganza in the main ballroom. Simultaneously, Salamone’s nephew Edwin plans to spoil the fun.

With names like Lynn Redgrave and Tim Curry, as opposed to Julie Andrews and Jeffrey Tambor (from the 2003 version), Little Miss Christmas cuts its budget and its quality. Furthermore, can’t Anchor Bay Entertainment find another voice besides Rob Paulsen? After Yakko, Eubie, and Bill, his voice is too recognizable and overused. Conversely, the quality of the voices is the least of the film’s flaws.

Again, the difficult aspect is accepting Eloise as a legitimate six-year-old protagonist. Eloise is smart enough to place the words “Holiday Show” in hand quotes to be politically correct, yet smug enough to believe that toys overshadow peace on Earth and goodwill at Christmastime. She is apparently responsible enough to walk herself and her dog around downtown New York City to purchase to her own gifts, yet reckless enough to have a balanced naughty and nice list. Moreover, age six is no age to allow children to perform magic tricks with a box and a real saw!

Most annoyingly, Eloise: Little Miss Christmas makes cheap attempts to rhyme in its narrations. By no means, is Little Miss Christmas on par with The Night before Christmas or any other classic Christmas story for that matter.

In addition, with a mother who shows up late to her daughter’s prized play just to stop by, supply a hug, and say hello, Little Miss Christmas does a poor job of depicting its characters as model, providing family members. What’s more, although they do find a hint of hope come the closing, the kids fall victim to envy, jealousy, and greed faster than you can say, “I absolutely love the Plaza.”

Even though the film’s inspector, Mr. Ducat, was duped by the holiday spirit to graciously hand out a “five out of five” hotel star rating, to do the same for this DVD would be a grave injustice. Underneath its ooey gooey Christmas overtone, Eloise is still largely rotten. Sadly, it’s the same old façade, just dressed up for the season. (** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Me, Eloise (DVD)

2006-10-16T23:34:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 10/10/06 (DVD)
Running Time: 0:45
Rated: NR
Cast: Mary Matilyn Mouser, Tim Curry, Curtis Armstrong, Lynn Redgrave, Kathleen Gati

Director: Wes Archer
Producers: Stephen Brown, Morris Berger, John W. Hyde, Patrick Meehan, Thomas D. Adelman, Ken Lipman
Screenplay: Steven Goldman and Ken Lipman, based on Kay Thompson’s “Eloise”
Music: Megan Cavallari
Studio: Anchor Bay Entertainment

Combine the animated expression of Amelia Bedelia and the juvenile silliness of Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, and you arrive at the Kay Thompson-inspired effort entitled Me, Eloise. Bearing an especially striking resemblance to the Home Alone sequel, Me, Eloise possesses a main character who resides in the Plaza Hotel. What’s more, is that Me, Eloise’s hotel manager is voiced by Tim Curry—the very same man who condoned Kevin McAllister for committing credit card fraud. After viewing Me, Eloise, one can naturally suppose that the Tim Curry actually mans the Plaza Hotel. Additionally, it is entirely logical to assume that a film like Me, Eloise is a leading example of what is primarily wrong with the upbringings of the youth of America.

Eloise (Mary Matilyn Mouser) is, simply put, a brat who lacks parental guidance. She is an adolescent aristocrat and a self-defined “city child,” who soaks up every ounce of attention like a dehydrated sponge. Her mother frequents Paris on business, and more often than not, her “Nanny (Lynn Redgrave)” is her lone guardian. Much to her Nanny’s dismay, Eloise is a basket-case adventurer and a snooty youngster. As one young male points out, “Eloise thinks she’s the most ‘specialest’ girl in the hotel.” The average viewer will repeat this phrase and most likely replace the last word with “universe.”

On the day before her sixth birthday, Eloise hands out invitations to her birthday bash. As Eloise’s excitement mounts, an eight-year-old named Yuko arrives at the Plaza and steals Eloise’s thunder. Yuko is a Japanese violin prodigy, who is constantly under the strict control of her rich parents and her “grouchy butt” aid named Mr. Zanger (Curtis Armstrong – better known as...Booger from Revenge of the Nerds). Zanger forces Yuko to practice, practice, and practice— leaving it up to the soon-to-be six-year-old to liberate Yuko and show her what the word “fun” really means.

With a main character that is loud, disrespectful, and overly selfish, Me, Eloise presents its lead as far from the role model she should be. Likewise, the screenplay has enough spurts of entertainment to count on less than one half of one hand.

The most irritating aspect of Me, Eloise is the stuck-up temperament of Eloise’s sophisticated word choice. With phrases like, “absolutely exquisite,” “rather unusual,” “quite fabulous,” “amazingly huge,” and “very enormously well,” Eloise goes above and beyond the typical six-year-old girl’s vocabulary and crosses the line of excessive adverb usage. In addition, when she asks the question, “Whatever are we waiting for?” and describes a bird as being “grisly,” the audience balks at the idea of accepting her as a cute and genuine young protagonist. Furthermore, with notions of spoiling family dinners, pulling fire alarms, crashing weddings, and causing innocent people to fall, Eloise borders on bully – not sweetheart – stature.

If you are a parent seeking to buy an educational and inspiring DVD for your child, Me, Eloise will not fulfill your wishes. Unless you want your daughter to add a side of snob to her personality, beg for lavish gifts, and strive to be the center of attention, avoid Me, Eloise. It’s basically devoid of a lasting lesson and a much-needed sense of familial love. While the DVD case for Me, Eloise may look bright, attractive, and fitting for a young princess, its insides are spoiled. (*1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Leaving Las Vegas

2006-09-18T13:30:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 10/1/95
Running Time: 1:52
Rated: R (Profanity, violence, sex, nudity)
Cast: Nicolas Cage, Elisabeth Shue, Julian Sands

Director: Mike Figgis
Producers: Lila Cazes and Annie Stewart
Screenplay: Mike Figgis, based on the novel by John O'Brien
Music: Mike Figgis
Studio: United Artists

Leaving Las Vegas is an unconventional love story to say the least. It isn’t your everyday romance—sprinkled with humor, flirtatious smiles, and dreamy kisses where the camera pans around the magical couple in question. This love story tells the tale of two torn souls, and although these characters are sometimes ugly, repellent, and beyond rehabilitation, the film still manages to absorb the viewer and invite serious wonder.

Benjamin Sanderson (Nicolas Cage) is a drunk. To paraphrase his words, he drinks because his wife left him, and his wife left him because he drinks. After Ben is fired and handed a compensation check from his boss, he heads straight for Las Vegas to drink himself to death, literally.

Once in the city of sin, Ben meets Sera (Elizabeth Shue); that’s “Sara with an ‘e,’ not with an ‘h’.” Between drinks, Ben is intrigued by Sera and her innate ability to walk into a room and become a person’s most desirable fantasy. Sera quickly realizes that Ben is a full-fledged alcoholic, and Ben soon learns that Sera is a hooker working for a dangerous Latvian pimp named Yuri (Julian Sands). Even so, the two find a deep solace in one another. Their faults are not criticized; their personalities are not dissected; and, their weaknesses are accepted.

In adapting the blatantly sexual, vulgar, and lamenting novel by John O’Brien (who committed suicide just as the film went into production), Mike Figgis does a phenomenal job. Likewise, behind the camera, Figgis simultaneously shows the breadth of a veteran director and the originality of an up-and-coming sensation. His use of blackouts, side-bar testimonies, and more make Leaving Las Vegas a highly-recommended, reflective selection of cinema. However, every rose has its thorn.

With Figgis also in charge of the music, Leaving Las Vegas loses its “masterpiece” quality. This is the prime example of how music can either accentuate a script or overcompensate. It this case, the repetitive tunes overcook the beauty of the film and cause more of a distraction rather than an enhancement of what’s already on screen. More specifically, it is evident that Figgis is a fan of Sting, Don Henley, and Michael McDonald, but to use the very same songs by these artists on multiple occasions is inappropriate. Yes, it is possible that Figgis was striving for the anthem/reprise feel, but for future reference, it is always wiser to vary your soundtrack and invest in augmenting an otherwise perfect screenplay.

The acting is in itself...flawless. As versatile as he is, Nicolas Cage is on the top of his game as Ben. Similarly, Elizabeth Shue throws her “babysitter” inhibitions to the wind and is able to emit a cloud of impurity and a world of beauty concurrently —much like how Julia Roberts did in Pretty Woman. Both deserved every accolade they received.

Again, Leaving Las Vegas is an unconventional love story. There is no happy ending—no closing slow-motion embrace. Instead, the film is dark, pessimistic, and yet so profoundly poetic. It can be described as the final binge of a divorcee or even read as the dark pages of a deprived prostitute’s diary. It is a brutally honest depiction of the dregs of Las Vegas and a film that is ugly in the foreground, yet gorgeous underneath. The best words to describe Leaving Las Vegas are: unremittingly bleak and exceptionally elegiac. See it. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: The Princess Bride

2006-09-02T12:36:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 9/25/87
Running Time: 1:38
Rated: PG (Violence)
Cast: Cary Elwes, Mandy Patinkin, Robin Wright, Chris Sarandon, Christopher Guest, Wallace Shawn, Andre the Giant, Peter Falk, Fred Savage, Mel Smith, Billy Crystal, Carol Kane

Director: Rob Reiner
Producers: Rob Reiner, Andrew Scheinman
Screenplay: William Goldman, based on his book
Music: Mark Knopfler
Studio: 20th Century Fox

- commentary coming soon -

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: The Benchwarmers

2006-08-20T13:03:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date:
Running Time: 1:20
Rated: PG-13 (Crude humor, Language)
Cast: Rob Schneider, David Spade, Jon Heder, Jon Lovitz, Craig Kilborn, Molly Sims, Tim Meadows, Nick Swardson

Director: Dennis Dugan
Producers: Adam Sandler, Jack Giarraputo
Screenplay: Allen Covert, Nick Swardson
Music: Ian Grushka, Waddy Wachtel
Studio: Sony Pictures, Revolution Studios

To use any words like “hilarious,” “comical,” and “side-splitting,” in critiquing The Benchwarmers would be an utter overstatement. More appropriate vocabulary would be: “below-average,” “immature,” and “ho-hum.” Adam Sandler’s production company’s latest attempt to combine comedic actors and throw them into an open-field of unfunny sketches and sports clichés is not worth your investment—be it 80 minutes or 80 cents.

Landscaper and husband of a beautiful blonde (Molly Sims), Gus (Rob Schneider), suddenly gets the idea to teach his nerdy friends to play America’s pastime. His pals are video-store clerk Richie (David Spade) and paperboy Clarke (Jon Heder). Considering Richie and Clarke never stepped foot on a baseball diamond, Gus has a lot of coaching to do. But, Gus’s time is limited when their three-man team is challenged by a full squad of Little Leaguers.

After achieving victory and beating a bundle of twelve-year-old jocks, former nerd and current billionaire, Mel (Jon Lovitz), organizes a tournament in which the three “Benchwarmers” will play a wide variety of Little League teams to win a new stadium. Then again, the other coaches are willing to do anything to win.

Any film whose strongest secondary characters consist of a little person who builds sculptures made of peanut-butter, a kid who incessantly gleets computer-generated spit, and an agoraphobic brother who screams at the sight of the sun and eats sun-block, can’t be taken seriously. In addition, when the plot is sprinkled with scenes like a projectile baseball bat killing three squirrels, a goat’s turd smeared on the face of a kid, and a dog being ran over with a lawnmower, your bad-movie radar begins to beep. Furthermore, familiar sports faces like Bill Romanowski, Sean Salisbury, Craig Kilborn, Reggie Jackson, and Dan Patrick further lower the already unsatisfactory acting level of the production.

It is understood – even before watching the film – that The Benchwarmers is one of those movies that require you to leave your brain at the door. Nonetheless, bearing in mind the nonstop juvenilia you are forced to endure, your brain feels used rather than amused. Packed with outright crude, stupid humor, The Benchwarmers is far from being a standout Happy Madison production and close to being the “goat’s turd” it so eloquently speaks of.

Unless words like “poop” and “dingleberry” make you immediately roll with laughter, The Benchwarmers supplies nothing more than a few mild chuckles. It’s a pathetic rehashing of Bad News Bears dusted with character hints of Napoleon Dynamite, Deuce Bigalow, and Dickie Roberts. Enough said. (* out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Talladega Nights

2006-08-17T19:48:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 8/4/06
Running Time: 1:44
Rated: PG-13 (Profanity, sexual situations)
Cast: Will Ferrell, John C. Reilly, Leslie Bibb, Amy Adams, Michael Clarke Duncan, Sacha Baron Cohen, Greg Germann, Gary Cole

Director: Adam McKay
Producers: Judd Apatow, Jimmy Miller
Screenplay: Will Ferrell & Adam McKay
Music: Alex Wurman
Studio: Columbia Pictures

Stuffed with sponsorships and advertising agendas, Talladega Nights pulls off one of the most ingenious conceptual marketing projects to hit the silver-screen. Too bad the same can’t be said concerning the quality.

Be that as it may, Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby is a great title, and the standalone concept of Will Ferrell playing a NASCAR driver is golden in theory. However, Talladega Nights is not on par with Ferrell’s prior effort, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy. While both films possess similar titles in structure, in The Ballad of Ricky Robby, the laughs aren’t quite as frequent. Hands down, Talladega Nights is a comedy with more bark than bite.

The film depicts the rise, fall, and rise of NASCAR driver Ricky Bobby (Will Ferrell). Between his best pal, Cal Naughton Jr. (John C. Reilly), and his trashy gold-digging wife, Carley (Leslie Bibb), Ricky thinks he has it made both in life on the NASCAR circuit. He is the father of two foul-mouthed boys named Walker (Houston Tumlin) and Texas Ranger (Grayson Russell) and his pit-crew is managed by a fine manager in Lucius Washington (Michael Clarke Duncan). In every aspect, Ricky Bobby feels as if he is headed down the track to superstardom.

Conversely, when a French Formula One racecar driver named Jean Girrard (Sacha Baron Cohen) tries his hand at NASCAR, Ricky’s patience and stature are tried. With the help of his returning father (Gary Cole), Ricky Bobby strives to regain #1 and – above all – drive fast.

For the Ferrell faithful, Talladega Nights will definitely account for multiple viewings; this way, fans can receive the most joy in reciting the funniest of quotes again and again. However, considering nothing is too memorable this time around, excluding the “shake and bake” fist pound, Talladega Nights is not as consistently funny as Anchorman. Like always, the fun only arises in the cheesy soundtrack, the overacting, and the inflated ego of its lead. Only this time, the one-liners aren’t as big of zingers as they were in The Legend of Ron Burgundy.

Even though the overall NASCAR experience is not non-stop, drop-dead hilarity, it is most certainly precisely what Ferrell and McKay intended it to be. While all of those involved in the production are able to sheepishly laugh their way straight to the bank, Ferrell-humored audiences will feel content in receiving an ample helping of cursing children, Applebee’s commercials, and talk on Baby Jesus. On the other hand, those who have come to dislike the former S.N.L. star will only see Talladega Nights as yet another vehicle for Ferrell’s unfunny antics. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Choose Your Own Adventure: The Abominable Snowman (DVD)

2006-08-06T13:39:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 7/25/06 (DVD)
Running Time: 1:25
Rated: NR (Family Approved)
Cast: William H. Macy, Frankie Muniz, Lacey Chabert, Daryl Sabara, Felicity Huffman

Director: Bob Doucette
Producers: Michelle Crames, Jeff Norton
Screenplay: Shawn Tanaka, Douglas Wood (based on the book by R.A. Montgomery)
Studio: Goldhil Entertainment

The words “Choose Your Own Adventure” recall an array of childhood memories.

After pacing down the aisles of the musty school library and looking over the titles, it was always easy to be drawn to an R.A. Montgomery novel. Why? Well, for starters, those cheesy-sounding titles and creepy-looking illustrations were nearly enough, but the ability to choose your own path of reading was always the determining factor.

Within the realm of juvenile entertainment, the “Choose Your Own Adventure” series is legendary; and, in today’s free society, choice is paramount. By granting this generation’s pre-teens the capacity to pick their own cinematic plots via DVD remote, the C.Y.O.A. publishers are certainly doing their part in keeping up with the times. The result is an entertaining DVD that is notable in its structure, yet flat and childish in its content.

The three North kids (Ben [Frankie Muniz], Crista [Lacey Chabert], and Marco [Daryl Sabara]) venture to Kathmandu, Nepal to save their exploring Uncle Rudy (William H. Macy). Uncle Rudy’s obsession with the abominable snowman has placed him in quite a pickle and in need of rescue.

The first interactive decision arrives when the kids’ plane experiences turbulence. At this point, you must choose to parachute from the diving aircraft or attempt to land the plane safely. From here, a web of choices must be decided upon—leading up to one of 13 different endings. The best of which explain the origins of the yeti, while the worst of which end abruptly in ill fate (or even depict a despicable sponsorship by Life cereal).

To say that Choose Your Own Adventure: The Abominable Snowman is suitable for all ages would be a boldfaced lie. The DVD appeals far more to the kiddy crowd than that of the adventure-thirsty grown-up segment. It’s well enough for the young, but too full of immature puns and wisecracks for the average movie veteran.

Furthermore, the film’s option of choice is its only real asset. Place this cinematic freewill in the palms of a viewer of a live-action film, and you may have something; give the children the privilege to create their own cartoon, and the only fun achieved is in the hokey humor and the power of pre-pubescent autonomy. While this may be the future of take-home entertainment, this time around, it’s not done right. Don’t get me wrong: choosing your own interactive adventure is a fresh concept; yet, The Abominable Snowman is only a glimmer of the potential that this type of media can muster.

While this may be recommended fun for any pre-teen, The Abominable Snowman is nothing more than a substandard cartoon escapade that is too afraid of scaring its audience with a fierce villain. Much like the yeti that this film depicts, this groundbreaking DVD will either be a “ginourmous” gimmick (rarely visible to the human eye) or merely an overly-publicized story spread by word-of-mouth. (** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: World Trade Center

2006-08-02T18:18:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 8/9/06
Running Time: 2:09
Rated: PG-13 (intense and emotional content, some disturbing images and language)

Cast: Nicolas Cage, Michael Pena, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Maria Bello, Stephen Dorff, Jay Hernandez, Michael Shannon
Director: Olive Stone
Producer: Donald J. Lee Jr., Norm Golightly
Screenplay: Andrea Berloff
Music: Craig Armstrong
Studio: Paramount Pictures

No review of World Trade Center would be inclusive without first comparing Oliver Stone’s production to that of United 93 and/or Flight 93. While both the big-screen and the made-for-TV accounts of United Airlines Flight 93 are predominantly focused on the in-air terrorism of 9/11, World Trade Center recounts the story of that same second Tuesday of September from ground zero. The result is a film that is harrowing, emotional, yet surprisingly hopeful. However, the question for most is, “Is it too early?”

Is it too early to sit and watch a retelling of a day so tragic? Is Stone’s depiction of the World Trade Center attacks just a commercial glorification of something so recent and so altogether personal? Initially, this may appear to be the case. On the other hand, perceptions can be deceiving.

As Sergeant John McLoughlin (Nicolas Cage) and rookie Officer Will Jimeno (Michael Pena) begin their everyday watch over the Port Authority bus terminal on 42nd Street in Manhattan, the shadow of a plane suddenly washes over them. The impact is only heard, and the damage is only imagined.

Once the Port Authority officers arrive at the base of the World Trade Center, they view the destruction and the horror. The officers have no choice but to enter and help to evacuate the towers.

When the North Tower collapses like a thunderous tornado, Sergeant McLoughlin and Officer Jimeno become trapped in the freight elevator 5 region of the concourse level, between Towers 1 and 2. Pinned by and buried under 20 feet of rubble, McLaughlin and Jimeno are forced to endure (as one reporter called it) “complete chaos and utter hell.” Banged up, bleeding, and burned, the two courageous men strive to survive and unite with both their wives (played by Maria Bello and Maggie Gyllenhaal respectively) and children.

Despite the film emitting an overall silent and cold aura, the audience is inevitably lifted up come the closing. While the opening credits inform that the film is based on the “actual accounts of the surviving participants,” it is a true story that is calculable, yet so emotionally striking simultaneously. Only 20 people were pulled from the wreckage alive; McLaughlin and Jimeno were numbers 18 and 19.

The film’s only negative is that it may be a tad too “Hollywood” for a reenactment of a disastrous event that is only five years removed. Nonetheless, World Trade Center is still a film that all should see. It is the story of a paramedic redefined; an ex-marine determined to avenge his country; and both a memento and a requiem to the courageous men and women of the NYPD and the PAPD (among others) who lost their lives on that fateful day.

Underneath its shell of 9/11 terrorism, World Trade Center is a powerful story about love, hope, and the clout of perseverance. It makes you want to latch onto those you care about and never let them go. Additionally, it reminds us all to never take our lives or our loved ones for granted, and it leaves us all feeling proud of the country we live in and simultaneously grateful for who we are and what we have. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

2006-07-17T22:34:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 7/7/06
Running Time: 2:35
Rated: PG-13 (Violence)
Cast: Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom, Keira Knightley, Bill Nighy, Stellan Skarsgård, Jack Davenport, Kevin McNally, Naomie Harris, Jonathan Pryce, Tom Hollander

Director: Gore Verbinski
Producer: Jerry Bruckheimer
Screenplay: Ted Elliott & Terry Rossio
Music: Hans Zimmer
Studio: Walt Disney Pictures

- commentary coming soon -

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Eight Below

2006-07-17T17:00:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: //06
Running Time: 2:00
Rated: PG (Brief peril and mild language)
Cast: Paul Walker, Bruce Greenwood, Moon Bloodgood, Jason Biggs

Director: Frank Marshall
Producer:
Screenplay: David DiGilio
Music: Mark Isham
Studio:

Eight Below functions on a similar level as Disney’s Homeward Bound—only this time, the dogs don’t talk; there is no cat accompaniment; and the canines have no one to return to other than their musher. Similarly, Eight Below compares to March of the Penguins, with its documentary filmmaking style, which depicts the dogs enduring the weather and the ways of the land. In every sense, the dogs are the stars of the show; the rest of the cast merely serves as a slumbering shadow behind the eight precious and powerful pups.

Gerry Shepherd (Paul Walker) is an Antarctic guide who also serves as the primary caretaker of eight sled dogs. However, when Gerry leads geologist Dr. McLaren (Bruce Greenwood) on an adventure to find a specific rock, the cold nearly claims both of their lives. With the dogs pulling the weight, the humans barely make it back to the base—only to be flown to the nearest hospital.

Once Gerry recuperates, he attempts to journey back to Antarctica to save his sled dogs from the upcoming winter. Nevertheless, the weather has worsened making travel impossible. As Gerry struggles to make it back to Antarctica, the dogs are left to fend for themselves—with all odds against them.

Walker is for the most part flat and inconsistent. Meanwhile, Jason Biggs and Moon Bloodgood play the parts of the unnecessary wisecrack and the pointless love interest respectively. Biggs is erratic, and Bloodgood is as excessive as the number of o’s in her first and last name. On the other hand, Greenwood maintains his pride. Yet, instead of taking the time to praise the human actors for their work, the most praise can be assigned to the dog trainers for their commendable accomplishments.

For any dog-lover, Eight Below is a depressing tale of Darwinism; it’s survival of the fittest—Disney style. For the younger crowd, guidance is necessary to talk them through the death sequences and help them get over the fact that the animals are chained up – outside – in a climate that reaches as low as thirty below zero. For the adults, it’s an emotive “based on a true story” production about a cluster of courageous dogs that really deserve more screen time than their human counterparts.

To parallel the film and the Iditarod, it is obvious that it is the dogs that do the work, pull the sled, and lead the way. In the same breath, it is the musher who shouts, steers, and applies the breaks. The bottom-line is: it is the human hindrance that slows the pooches’ potential to shine. If those in charge of Eight Below could have ran the race all over again, they should have kicked the musher off the sled and lost the excessive weight. (** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels

2006-07-01T14:35:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 3/5/99
Running Time: 1:43
Rated: R (Violence, profanity, drugs, brief nudity)
Cast: Jason Flemyng, Dexter Fletcher, Nick Moran, Jason Statham, Steven Mackintosh, Vinnie Jones, Sting, Lenny McLean, P.H. Moriarty, Steve Sweeney, Frank Harper, Stephen Marcus, Peter McNicholl, Vas Blackwood

Director: Guy Ritchie
Producer: Matthew Vaughn
Screenplay: Guy Ritchie
Music: David A. Hughes and John Murphy
Studio: Gramercy Pictures

Guy Richie’s freshman affair is in a word: ingenious. With shades of Tarantino’s grit, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels is an imaginative mix of violence, drugs, originality, and ingenuity. Although a trouble initially surfaces in following who’s who and what’s what, this uncertainty quickly subsides as the plot thickens and the threads begin to expertly intertwine.

To simplify the plot: Eddie (Nick Moran) gets involved in a high-stakes game of poker with his friends’ money, only to loose his £100,000 buy-in and leave £500,000 in debt. He and his pals, Tom (Jason Flemyng), Soap (Dexter Fletcher), and Bacon (Jason Statham), then decide to team together and devise a plan to pay back their debt.

In the process, the four purchase two double-barrel shotguns – from a couple of small-time thieves – to pull off a heist. The friends need cash quick to avoid having their fingers sliced off one by one. Meanwhile, several other players look to get in on the game simultaneously.

When Richie wrote this script with a sardonic and confident fountain pen, his certainty and inventiveness were stamped into the soul of his screenplay. In return, Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels turned out to be a big-time success. Despite only grossing just under $4 million at the American box-office, Lock, Stock became one of the largest grossing movies in the history of the English box-office.

Lock Stock’s main strength is in watching each piece of the puzzle end in violence and play out in the main characters’ favor. With this style of fashioning his script in favor of the “good guys” and depicting the unfortunate luck of the “bad guys,” Richie sculpts an unpretentious and intelligent caper. In addition, while this intriguing structure most certainly defines the phrase, “being in the right place at the right time,” it also converts the film’s violence from macabre to comedic.

In a genre full of ho-hum, how could you refuse a film so fresh and absorbing? Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels is jam-packed with unique characters, interesting twists, and tongue-in-cheek humor. And, with scenes like the story of the flaming man and the semi-conscious Gloria revived, you can’t go wrong.

According to the Cockney Rhyming Slang Dictionary in which the characters draw from: Twist and twirl or Rob Roy, you’d be a Joe Rook if you robbed yourself of taking a butcher’s hook at this lemon-squeezy-to-praise picture that’s worth every pound of your bees and honey. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: The Da Vinci Code

2006-05-31T18:05:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 5/19/06
Running Time: 2:29
Rated: PG-13 (Violence, profanity, brief nudity)
Cast: Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Ian McKellan, Jean Reno, Paul Bettany, Alfred Molina

Director: Ron Howard
Producers: Dan Brown, Todd Hallowell
Screenplay: Akiva Goldsman, based on the novel by Dan Brown
Music: Hans Zimmer
Studio: Columbia Pictures

For anyone who has not read Dan Brown’s popularized work of fiction, "The Da Vinci Code," the wild goosechase/Grail quest can be quite confusing and disorienting on screen. Yet, for anyone who has read the novel, the film will most likely play out as a second viewing of the already imagined initial reading. That is to say that, for the most part, all of the players – actors and director alike – succeed in producing a picture that does justice to the text which many have called a “nonstop page-turner.”

On the night that Jacques Sauniere (Jean-Pierre Marielle), curator of the famous Louvre Museum, is murdered, he leaves a string of ritualized clues behind. These clues are intended for his granddaughter, Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou) and religious symbologist, Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks). However, French police Captain Bezu Fache (Jean Reno) suspects Robert Langdon as Sauniere’s killer.

Meanwhile, the actual murderer – an albino named Silas (Paul Bettany), who serves Bishop Aringarosa (Alfred Molina) of the conservative sect Opus Dei – is on the prowl and longing for the very thing that Langdon is striving to reveal. Similarly, once Langdon turns to Holy Grail enthusiast, Lee Teabing (Sir Ian McKellan), more problems seem to arise. With every effort focused on evading the law and cracking the code, Langdon and Neveu are well on their way to uncovering what could be one of Christianity’s most shattering secrets.

Bettany, Molina, Reno, Tautou, Hanks, and most of all McKellan all gel as one of the most impressive ensemble casts of 2006 thus far. Moreover, when you tack on a high-caliber name like Ron Howard as director, you receive a film that is destined to reap the rewards and overcome its substantial budget and high expectations.

As a consequence of the majority’s predisposition to the plot, the story’s twists (if you could call them that) will surely not leave as strong of an impression as hoped for. Likewise, the film may appear to overstay its welcome, in terms of running-time—even though the movie is already an abridged version of the book.

Be that as it may, screenwriter Akiva Goldsman wisely places all of the necessities of the storyline into play and even adds a nice tidbit (about a well accident) that initially impairs, and then later renews, the protagonist.

The bottom line is: knowing what to expect from this “controversial” film is the ticket to appreciation. Then again, for some, any preconceived anticipation could result in an unfavorable opinion. Of course, this could be said for any book-to-motion-picture adaptation, but considering "The Da Vinci Code" is now the second best-selling book right behind "The Bible," more oomph can be applied to this statement.

Nonetheless, The Da Vinci Code fares well under the monikers of: thriller and summer blockbuster. Only the offended and the unaware possess the remote possibility of exiting the theater unsatisfied. In brief, The Da Vinci Code is as exhilarating and entertaining of an adaptation as anyone could ask for out of Dan Brown’s best-selling novel. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: X-Men: The Last Stand

2006-05-28T18:00:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 5/26/06
Running Time: 1:44
Rated: PG-13 (Violence, language, some sexual content)
Cast: Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart, Famke Janssen, Anna Paquin, Shawn Ashmore, Kelsey Grammer, Rebecca Romijn, James Marsden, Aaron Stanford, Cameron Bright, Vinnie Jones, Ben Foster, Ellen Page, Josef Sommer

Director: Brett Ratner
Producer: Kevin Feige, Stan Lee, John Palermo
Screenplay: Simon Kinberg & Zak Penn
Music: John Powell
Studio: 20th Century Fox

The third installment of the X-Men series is honorable, yet middling. When the film needs to be, it is heavy on action. Simultaneously, it is unnecessarily superfluous on storyline; too much time is allotted to debating the cure and exterminating key players, and not enough time is devoted to delving into each character’s backdrop. While X2 overshadowed the original, The Last Stand seems to be a sign (in both title and content) that the series is sputtering out.

Human scientists have discovered a breakthrough means to free the members of the mutant race, by suppressing their mutant genes. This then presents an ethical dilemma—therein, is the suppression a “cure,” or simply a way of eliminating the different? Both the X-Men and those who fall in line under the command of Magneto (Ian McKellen) consider the “cure” to be a threat to their powers and their individuality. Thus, a war is waged between the anti-cure activist mutants and humankind. Likewise, a battle of epic proportions begins between good and evil.

Meanwhile, in an attempt to depict the “Dark Phoenix” storyline, Jean Grey (Famke Janssen) is resurrected only to change hands and use her unparalleled powers to side with Magneto. In an attempt to save her from harm, Wolverine (Hugh Jackman), Storm (Halle Berry), and Beast (Kelsey Grammer) lead the charge to save the day and search for a glimmer of the old Dr. Jean Grey within the Phoenix.

Unlike in X-Men and X2: X-Men United, this time Wolverine isn’t the standout center of attention, and oddly enough, Rogue (Anna Paquin) gets less screen time than the seemingly-inconsequential characters like Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page), Colossus (Daniel Cudmore), and Angel (Warren Worthington III). Then again, with such a cumbersome star-studded cast, it is pretty difficult to divvy up the screen time equally. In fact, out of all the X-Men, it is Storm who seems to get the most face time. Berry’s portrayal of Storm is undoubtedly her best take on the character; her powers, personality, and emotions all surface like never before.

Overall, X-Men: The Last Stand is a pure popcorn flick that will keep comic-book fans satisfied. At the same time, the film feels unwisely all-inclusive and a tad too hurried in nature. Nonetheless, the highly-anticipated third chapter in the X-Men saga is a standard summer blockbuster—big on fun, action, and entertainment. Fans can only hope for X4 to soon follow—especially considering what is revealed after the credits roll. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Serendipity

2006-05-26T11:45:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 10/5/01
Running Time: 1:31
Rated: PG-13 (Profanity, sexual situations)
Cast: John Cusack, Kate Beckinsale, Jeremy Piven, Molly Shannon, Eugene Levy, John Corbett, Bridget Moynahan

Director: Peter Chelsom
Producers: Peter Abrams, Robert L. Levy, Simon Fields
Screenplay: Marc Klein
Music: Alan Silvestri
Studio: Miramax Films

“Fate sends us little signs, and it’s how we read the signs that determines whether we are happy or not.”

Serendipity: a word that can be defined as, “good luck in making unexpected and fortunate discoveries,” or as the film’s fine female lead calls them, “fortunate accidents.” Serendipity, the film version of this noun, is a delightful romantic-comedy that dually possesses a well-written script and enchants the hopeless romantic in us all. With its two charismatic leads and its charming, dreamy, and surprisingly hysterical fluff, Serendipity is a rom-com for the ages. Yet, with all of its spontaneous energy, it doesn’t quite measure up to the stature of When Harry Met Sally and its prime inspiration and synonym, Happenstance.

After stumbling upon one another while Christmas shopping for black cashmere gloves at Bloomingdale’s, Jonathan (John Cusack) and Sara (Kate Beckinsale) exchange interested glances and words. Both have a significant other, yet both are still longing for love and a soul mate. They share a drink, a skate in Rockefeller Center, and an incredible night together that is then left to chance.

A few years later, Jon is set to marry Haley (Bridget Moynahan), while Sara has accepted an engagement from Lars (John Corbett), an eccentric musician. Jon’s friend Dean (Jeremy Piven) and Sara’s friend Eve (Molly Shannon) attempt to convince Jon and Sara respectively that maybe – just maybe – once in a lifetime can happen twice.

Hats off to the casting crew for selecting Kate Beckinsale; she is an absolute pleasure to watch. Her charming smile, breathy exhales, and vivacious accent make her irresistible on-screen and the sweetest brunette to grace the big screen since Audrey Tautou in Amelie. Likewise, John Cusack plays the role of Jon with unexpected appeal. Much like Billy Crystal’s surprisingly effective turn in When Harry Met Sally, Cusack is able to convince the thirsty-for-romance audience that he can indeed play the part of a white knight.

In addition to its stellar leads, Serendipity packs a comedic punch that induces several quality belly laughs. The run-in with Eugene Levy, the fitting analogy to The Godfather Part II, and the inclusion of kid dressed in Satan garb all provide for entertaining comic releases in-between the sugary bits. Yet, with its euphoric climax – swirling snowflakes, superlative soundtrack, and all – Serendipity never falls short of possessing a tender heart specifically designed to unite its two star-crossed lovers. The film is flattering, delicate, and – for one who indulges in the romantic formula – it’s simpatico. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: United 93

2006-05-12T11:59:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 4/28/06
Running Time: 1:48
Rated: R (Violence, profanity)
Cast: Cheyenne Jackson, David Alan Basche, Christian Clemenson, JJ Johnson, Polly Adams, Khalid Abdalla, Lewis Alsamari, Omar Berdouni, Jamie Harding, Ben Sliney

Director: Paul Greengrass
Screenplay: Paul Greengrass
Producer: Liza Chasin, Debra Hayward
Music: John Powell
Studio: Universal Pictures

September 11th: a day when the citizens of the United States of America learned to fear for the worst. As the first plane hit the World Trade Center, feelings of bewilderment and accident washed over the country. Conversely, when the world watched the second plane slam into the South Tower on live television, emotions of alarm, apprehension, and terrorism swept the nation.

United 93 is a powerful film that rekindles all of these emotions in the deepest of ways. It gives you, the viewer, a firsthand retelling of the hijackings that occurred on that fateful day. In addition, it depicts how one set of passengers – aboard United Airlines Flight 93 – banded together in bravery, in an attempt to regain control and save not only their own lives, but also the lives of other innocent Americans.

The film takes place in real time—chronicling the two attacks on the WTC, the one on the Pentagon, and finally the crash of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. It is presented from three main point-of-views: Air Traffic Control’s, the military’s, and the passengers’ of Flight 93.

To say that United 93 packs more of an emotional wallop than its TV counterpart (Flight 93) would be an inaccurate statement; both portray the events in an equally honorable and gripping manner. It’s just that United 93 does it more professionally and personally. While Flight 93 shows all of the ground contacts (friends, family, and 911) and their strife with talking to their loved ones for the last time, United 93 keeps you in the air, within the walls of the aircraft. It intensifies the urgency, increases the tension, and makes you feel like one of the passengers, and for that, it is all-the-more harrowing, emotional, and civil.

Director Paul Greengrass takes a documentary approach to the making of the film; in doing so, he creatively captures faith from both sides of the spectrum. In the film’s final sequence, as the passengers rush the cockpit, the prayers that were previously extended (to God/Allah) unite the victims and the terrorists (albeit the terrorists possess different mindsets) in struggle. With unflinching honesty, Greengrass is able to portray the tragic events in the most logical and authentic of manners.

United 93 is a valiant requiem to those who lost their lives on September 11th, most specifically those who were onboard United Flight 93. It is a testimony to the power of terrorist prevention and to the hearts of the deceased. Three planes hit their targets, but because of courage, Flight 93 fell short of its intended target—the U.S. Capitol. By no means, does United 93 fall short; it is dishearteningly sharp filmmaking that digs deep. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Flight 93

2006-04-27T11:47:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 1/30/06 (TV)
Running Time: 1:30
Rated: PG (Violence, emotional depiction of hijack situation)
Cast: Brennan Elliott, Kendall Cross, Ty Olsson, Monnae Michaell, April Telek, Laura Mennell, Jerry Wasserman, Gwynyth Walsh, Jacqueline Ann Steuart, Karen Holness, Marilyn Norry, Kirsten Williamson

Director: Peter Markle
Producer: Delia Fine, David Gerber
Screenplay: Nevin Schreiner
Music: Velton Ray Bunch
Studio: Fox Television Studios

9/11/01 will most definitely be “a day [along with 12/7/41] that will live in infamy.” The events of this tragic day have deeply scarred every American citizen. However, amidst the catastrophic occurrences of September 11th, an unbounded sense of hope emerged and strengthened the U.S. as a country united. In particular, this hope was found in the heroic actions of the 45 passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93.

On that fateful day, 45 people climbed aboard United Airlines Flight 93 unbeknownst that it would soon become a terrorist weapon. These courageous souls were high-jacked, and as they learned of the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon, they quickly attempted to regain control of the plane in order to prevent another terrorist attack on the nation’s Capital. Prior to crashing in Somerset County, PA, nearly every passenger made a connection with a loved one—expressing their love and saying, “Goodbye” for the last time.

In particular, two connections are emotionally arresting—with one being when Deena Burnett (Kendall Cross) tries to call the authorities once she learns of the turmoil that her husband, Tom (Jeffrey Nordling), is enduring. The other is when Todd Beamer (Brennan Elliott) recites the Lord’s Prayer with a Verizon 911 employee.

As a made for TV movie, Flight 93 is a diamond in the rough. As a tribute to the plane’s passengers, crew, and their families, it is a venerable motion-picture. However, as a gut-wrenching, suspenseful, and dramatic motion-picture, Flight 93 comes up a bit short in measuring up to its Universal counterpart (United 93)—mainly due to its choppy closing and its lackluster special effects.

Instead of issuing a climax saturated with a dramatic sense of enlightenment, Flight 93’s conclusion drops the majority of the intensity that came before. Its point-of-view shot from an on-looking farmer, followed by a puff of black smoke and an obvious CGI crater, comes off as a weak cop-out compared to the brilliance of the conclusion of Universal Picture Studios’ United 93. Plus, the mere fact that the stewardess’ food cart – that the passengers used to rush the cockpit – is pictured as withstanding the impact of the crash, yet the body of the plane is completely destroyed, is borderline preposterous.

Nonetheless, with its faults, the A&E TV special, Flight 93, is an unforgettable ride and a powerful journey that is both respectful and tactful towards the brave it represents. All-in-all, Flight 93 is recommended viewing (in cohesion with the theatrical release, United 93) for every American; it’s worth every dime and the time invested. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Rear Window (1954)

2006-04-17T10:52:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 1954
Running Time: 1:53
Rated: PG (Mature themes, violence)
Cast: James Stewart, Grace Kelley, Wendell Corey, Thelma Ritter, Raymond Burr

Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Producer: Alfred Hitchcock
Screenplay: John Michael Hayes, based on a short story by Cornell Woolrich
Music: Franz Waxman
Studio: Universal Pictures

For some, Rear Window is Hitchcock’s leading legacy. For others, it is merely one of his better films. Regardless, Rear Window is an intense exercise in suspense and an ardent observation of Hitchcock’s sterling talent. With a jam-packed plot and enough moments of voyeurism to muster up concentrated feelings of privacy violation, Rear Window calls for the title of a “must-experience” rather than a “must-see.”

L.B. Jeffries (James Stewart) is a magazine photographer who has been confined to a wheelchair to allow for his broken leg to recuperate. With a set of large windows and a telephoto lens, Jeffries is inclined to watch over his neighborhood’s happenings. Several apartments are visible, yet one specific tenant catches Jeffries’ eye.

Once Lars Thorwald (Raymond Burr), a traveling jewelry salesman, begins to engage in suspicious behavior, Jeffries becomes convinced that this man murdered and then dismembered his wife. As the clues continue to pile, Jeffries’ love interest, Lisa Fremont (Grace Kelley), who at first is a skeptic, quickly becomes a partnered sleuth. From there, the mystery and the romance simultaneously fuse in a memorable twenty-minute climax.

The surprising thing about Rear Window is that, more than anything, the seemingly-minute details remain vivid—for instance, a glowing cigar from afar and the playful meanderings of the ivory-tickling neighbor. Likewise, the film’s idiosyncratic characters stand out just as much as the stellar leads. Every character in the script finds a way to nudge their persona into the back of your mind and force you to recall them at a later date.

Even so, Grace Kelley plays her part with grace and charm. She is a strikingly beautiful, insanely seductive, and an immensely talented actress. Meanwhile, James Stewart proves why he is one of the finest actors to emerge from the thirties. Between this performance and his work in Vertigo, Hitchcock was arguably capable of bringing out his best.

For any viewer who wants to dip into the mystery and majesty of Hitchcock’s work, Rear Window presents an obvious option. It puts Hitchcock’s capability behind a camera on full display. Among the lighting, score, camera angles, and the psychology of drawing a fine line between being a voyeur and a Good Samaritan, all facets of the film are absolutely flawless.

Whether you have previously viewed this masterpiece or not is immaterial; you will never leave your seat disappointed. When Burr’s character approaches Stewart’s, it will surely send a shiver down your spine—time and time again. Furthermore, the handicap of the main character inhibits your facility to remain calm and adds to the urgent claustrophobia.

Single-handedly, Rear Window fulfills the fantasies of the voyeur in us all. It champions on subtlety, peculiarity, and mystery, and at the same time, it is an elixir designed to combat any ounce of ennui. It is suspenseful, masterful, and artful. Above all, it encompasses the unreserved virtuosity of Hitchcock in one efficient feeding. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: North by Northwest

2006-04-09T16:39:00.000-04:00

U.S. Release Date: 7/17/59
Running Time: 2:16
Rated: PG (Mild profanity, mild violence)
Cast: Cary Grant, Eva Marie Saint, James Mason, Jessie Royce Landis, Leo G. Carroll, Philip Ober, Martin Landau

Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Producer: Alfred Hitchcock
Screenplay: Ernest Lehman
Music: Bernard Herrmann
Studio: MGM

With the release of films like Psycho, Vertigo, and Rear Window, Hitchcock quickly earned the title, “The Master of Suspense.” North by Northwest furthers the notion behind this moniker and unravels a thread comprised of not only suspense, but also romance, comedy, and action. While most would agree that North by Northwest is not Hitchcock’s most mind-boggling effort, it is one of his most complete. Expansive in plot and broad in breadth, North by Northwest is a genre-bending, stylized journey that travels steady like a train—definite in its direction and confident in its destination.

Mr. Roger Thornhill (Cary Grant) is a busy Manhattan advertising executive, whose chiseled jaw and polished look perfectly compliment his frenzied, yet sarcastic, demeanor. After stealing a cab from a “Good Samaritan” and ordering his secretary to buy an expensive box of chocolates for his heartbroken ex, Roger attends a sit-down business dinner. However, when he leaves the table to send a telegram, two thugs hold him at gunpoint, force him into the back of a car, and take him meet a man named Lester Townsend (James Mason). Lester, and all else, mistake Thornhill to be a man named George Kaplan. Thornhill informs the mend that they are mistaken, but they persist. Soon, Thornhill tries the identity switch on for size, but he receives far more than he had bargained for—including his face on every paper – wanted for murder – and an amorous blonde named Eve Candle (Eva Marie Saint).

In viewing North by Northwest, it is entirely apparent why Hitchcock is push-pinned as one of America’s finest directors. Between the sarcastic comedy, the light sensuous romance, and the definitive action, it is obvious that Hitchcock knows what buttons to press, at the most opportune time. For instance, his camera work with the drunk-driving scene is utterly superb, while his choice of shot post-murder is entirely effective; both scenes bottle-up the tone of the piece like no other. Furthermore, Hitchcock’s placement of the opening credits – parallel to the buildings – are stupendous an undoubtedly an inspiration for David Fincher’s Panic Room.

Originally titled, “The Man on Lincoln’s Nose,” North by Northwest was a film that happened to be crafted around its Mount Rushmore climax. Nonetheless, North by Northwest is more famous for its crop-duster sequence, which even makes the non-agoraphobics fearful of wide-open spaces. Nevertheless, that is the beauty associated with North by Northwest; there is something to clamor over around each and every turn. Be it the erotic romance (between a machismo male and a fiery female), the pre-James Bond action/suspense, or the Hitchcockian token in which each set of number mentioned sum to 13, North by Northwest is one of the great films of the ‘50’s. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Chocolat (2000)

2006-03-29T13:37:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 12/15/00
Running Time: 2:02
Rated: PG-13 (Sensuality, mild profanity, some violence)
Cast: Juliette Binoche, Victoire Thivisol, Johnny Depp, Alfred Molina, Hugh O'Conor, Lena Olin, Peter Stormare, Judi Dench, Carrie-Anne Moss

Director: Lasse Hallström
Producers: David Brown, Kit Golden, Leslie Holleran
Screenplay: Robert Nelson Jacobs, based on the novel by Joanne Harris
Music: Rachel Portman
Studio: Miramax Films

Any connoisseur of "food films" would quickly inform a watcher of Chocolat that its confections are merely shadows of its inspirations. Mixing the fairy-tale feel of Like Water for Chocolate and the religious oppression of Babette’s Feast, Chocolat attempts to liberate its company with rich, delicate, and decorative chocolaty treats. Yet, in the process, Hallström’s stab at a food film comes off as largely unoriginal in plot and religiously undermining in scope.

In "a quiet little village in the French countryside," ruled by Comte de Reynaud (Alfred Molina), tranquility and penitence are of chief importance—especially during the Lenten season. However, once Vianne Rouhon (Juliette Binoche) and her daughter Anouk (Victoire Thivisol) arrive, with the North wind at their back, trouble begins to boil.

As soon as Vianne opens a chocolaterie in town, she begins to unshackle the townsfolk and stimulate their palettes with a mix of unrefined cacao and chili pepper. Among the influenced, are Vianne’s landlady, Armande (Judi Dench), a local shoplifter and abused wife, Josephine (Lena Olin), and a boycotted "river rat" named Roux (Johnny Depp). Conversely, when Reynaud speaks to his fellow parishioners – vicariously through the clergy – the bulk of the townspeople heed his warnings, which describe Vianne’s chocolate as being sinful.

Under the direction of Hallström (The Cider House Rules, What’s Eating Gilbert Grape), Chocolat takes on a lengthy languid pace. While Chocolat may be of epic size, with its two-hour-plus running time, it overstays its welcome and borders on being overtly subversive. In addition, Chocolat is demeaning towards the honesty, humility, and sacrifice of the Lent-observing Christian. Sadly, instead of capitalizing on its decadence and charm, Hallström allows his paper-thin characters and "chilly disposition" to seep through the screen.

With names like Johnny Depp, Judi Dench, Juliette Binoche, and Alfred Molina, Chocolat may sound like an ensemble production. In contrast, Molina dishes out the only acting that is actually worthy of mention. His character’s prayer to the Crucifix and closing indulgence are a breath of fresh air among the other forced and plastic portrayals.

Even though the film appears to possess a pretty outer shell (with flawless lighting) and emit an overall aura that is light and sweet, perceptions can be deceiving. On the inside, Chocolat is a processed and contrived treat. Shortly after you bask in its delights, what has come before loses its initial luster; the characters and their genuineness begin to melt; and a center that is somewhat spoiled is revealed. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Tampopo

2006-03-19T17:23:00.000-05:00

United States, 1986
Running Time: 1:54
Rated: NR
Cast: Tsutomu Yamazaki, Nobuko Miyamoto, Ken Watanabe, Kôji Yakusho, Rikiya Yasuoka, Kinzo Sakura

Director: Juzo Itami
Producers: Seigo Hosogoe, Juzo Itami, Yasushi Tamaoki
Screenplay: Juzo Itami
Music: Kunihiko Murai
Studio: Itami Productions
In Japanese with English subtitles

“Everyone has their own ladder; some climb the rungs to the top, and some don’t ever know they have one.”

Akin to a steaming bowl of noodle soup, Tampopo is satisfying, enriching, and...hilarious?! Best described as a spoof/parody/satire on the American spaghetti Western, Tampopo’s protagonist shows a shadow of Clint Eastwood, and its plot follows the familiar formula of: cowboy comes to town; cowboy saves the day. However, in this Japanese Western (if you will), the cowboy doesn’t ride into town on a lightning-quick steed; he drives a semi. Additionally, spaghetti isn’t the pasta in question; it’s hand-rolled and homemade ramen.

On a rainy night, Goro (Tsutomu Yamazaki), an out-of-town trucker, develops a hankering for noodle soup and struts into the dilapidated restaurant of lady chef, Tampopo (Nobuko Miyamoto). After strongly criticizing her cooking, Goro and his friend Gun (Ken Watanabe) agree to teach Tampopo the arts of cooking and customer service. While on the quest for the perfect noodle recipe, Goro and Tampopo strive to acquire the right concoction of noodles, broth, spring onions, pork, and shinachiku (pickled bamboo shoots) to attract the hungry and stimulate the senses.

Amid the meat of the plot, a few vignettes are stuffed. While these seemingly-irrelevant scenes may first come off as nothing but dramatically pointless filling, in the long run, they are effective additives that offer generous asides on food. Be it the ordering at the business luncheon, the slurping at the etiquette seminar, or the sensual sharing of the egg yolk, each ingredient further encourages the viewer’s appetite to grow. To boot, the manner in which director Juzo Itami splices these scenes together is rewarding.

Out of all of the food films, Tampopo is perchance the most gifted. It packs in its gusto and guffaws in the most satirical of ways—keeping interest at a high. To label Tampopo the Japanese king of the food films would not be an overstatement. And to exclude Tampopo in any college colloquium film series on food would be an utter misfortune. Simultaneously, Tampopo is a cinematic and comedic delicacy for any food and/or film fan. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Dave Chappelle's Block Party

2006-03-15T13:13:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 3/3/06
Running Time: 1:43
Rated: R (Profanity)
Cast: Dave Chappelle, Mos Def, Erykah Badu, Lauryn Hill, Kanye West, Talib Kweli, Dead Prez, Jill Scott, the Roots, the Fugees, Bilal

Director: Michel Gondry
Producers: Skot Bright, Doug Levine, Greg Manocherian
Screenplay: Dave Chappelle
Music: Cory Smith
Studio: Rogue Pictures Release

With Dave Chappelle’s recent success in landing a $50 million contract, not only did his income increase, but also his incentive to make charitable contributions. On September 18, 2004, Chappelle compiled some of rap/R&B’s finest artists for a free “block party” concert to take place in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York. At first glance, Chappelle’s documentary of the preparation and the execution of this event may appear to be nothing but an extended rap video; yet, at long last, it is an entertaining concoction of culture, music, and comedy.

Chappelle starts the show by offering “golden tickets” – good for admission, hotel, food, and travel expenses – to a few of his hometown (Dayton, Ohio) residents. Among this list of invitees is the entire Central State College Marching Band—who later joins Kayne West in playing his hit, “Jesus Walks.” Consequently, all of the invited combine to create an energetic assembly of fans and artists that no rainstorm could possibly quiet.

By avoiding the pratfalls of “gangsta” rap and including artists who actually have something to productive to say in terms of politics and societal issues, Chappelle creates a concert that is sure to garner a newfound respect for the genre. With headliners like Erykah Badu, Mos Def, Kanye West, Talib Kweli, Jill Scott, the Roots, Dead Prez, and the Fugees, each viewer gets a dose of some of the best voices rap/R&B has to offer.

Sprinkled with improvised comedy and backstage footage, Dave Chappelle's Block Party is outright hilarious when it tries to be. However, as the film progresses, it gradually shifts from a comedic documentary on the mind of Dave Chappelle, to a pure unadulterated concert film. Nonetheless, laden with both jokes and song, Block Party possesses more entertainment value than your typical documentary.

Director Michel Gondry, whose last project was the quirky yet masterful Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, directs Block Party with unbridled confidence. His camera work, which captures the event’s down-to-earth atmosphere in every frame, is peppered with the perfect amount of passion that constantly calls attention to the bigger picture behind the surface of the event.

Ultimately, Block Party is an exposé on the human urge for the serenity of music, laughter, and togetherness. In addition, it’s an eye-opener to those not privy to rap and a joy to those familiar with the style of a comedic genius. And that, perhaps, is Block Party's biggest plus. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: This Divided State

2006-03-06T12:43:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 8/05
Running Time: 1:28
Rated: NR (Profanity, adult themes)
Cast: Michael Moore, Sean Hannity, Kay Anderson, Jim Bassi, Joe Vogel

Director: Steven Greenstreet
Producers: Phil Gordon, Steven Greenstreet, Kristi Haycock
Studio: Minority Films, LLC

This Divided State opens with a quote from Joseph Smith, Jr. (the founder of Mormonism) that reads, “Political views and party distinctions should never disturb the harmony of society.” In the subsequent 88 minutes, Smith’s wish is perceptibly ignored, as director Steven Greenstreet captures the barking dogs from both sides of the political spectrum. Liberals and conservatives square off in this intriguing and intelligent documentary that does more informing than offending—no matter your political affiliation.

The basis for the film is grounded in the controversy of having liberal documentary filmmaker, Michael Moore speak to the students of Utah Valley State College (UVSC) and its surrounding community for a $40,000 fee. Considering UVSC is located in Orem City, Utah (a.k.a. Family City, U.S.A.), where the Republican to Democrat ratio is 12 to 1 and where 75% of the population is Mormon, Moore’s anti-Bush and “un-American” ideology is obviously not part of the majority’s mindset. Yet, as one college official states, “Colleges and Universities are supposed to be free markets of ideas...all ideas, all perspectives, and all point-of-views—including and especially those that we disagree with strongly.”

Once the announcement is made that Michael Moore will speak on UVSC’s campus, the tornado officially begins to churn. President of the student body, Jim Bassi, and Vice President, Joe Vogel, are barraged with hateful remarks and death threats. Students are encouraged to sign petitions, and community activist, Kay Anderson, is determined to cancel the event. Anderson campaigns to remove Bassi and Vogel from office, offers the school $25,000 to cancel the event, and even files a lawsuit.

To settle the conservative crowd, UVSC hires Fox News’ Sean Hannity (a self-proclaimed right-winger) to speak one week before Moore. However, the hiring of another voice only worsens the situation, as the townspeople discover that Hannity was paid $50,000 for his transportation—after he waived his usual speaking charge.

By not projecting his own politics into the film, director/producer/editor Steven Greenstreet greatly exceeds expectations. Unlike Michael Moore, who possesses no shame in voicing his own opinions, Greenstreet merely presents the claim and counterclaim of the status quo and then allows the audience to side with whom they please (or even end up somewhere in the middle). Moreover, both Greenstreet’s ability to condense 76 hours of raw footage into a terse and evenly-paced 88 minutes showcases his talent, while his choice to exploit the simplicity of “Pachelbel’s Canon” (at the opening and closing) to counter the complexity of the situation displays his taste.

Additionally, the film offers insightful opinions from the land of academia. When the animated UVSC Professor of Humanities, Alex Caldiero, says, “There is no such thing as an objective viewpoint,” and, “We all see things through filters...filters,” we listen. When one student exclaims, “You don’t stop the [ominous] messenger; you evaluate his message,” we are inspired. And, when a foreign exchange student speaks on the worth of the First Amendment, we are humbled.

At the end of the day, Greenstreet’s pre-2004 election memoir of the failure of civil discourse in America is both entertaining and effective. Its liberating effects of convincing the audience not to jump to uneducated conclusions, while still finding a common ground in conservative morals, are striking and influential. After all, the main aim of the feature is to unite our nation – be it liberal, conservative, Republican, or Democrat – under one roof and paint the house neither blue nor red, but rather one congruous color. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

The Aftermath: Post-Oscar Analysis '06

2006-03-06T12:06:00.000-05:00

Another New Year’s. Another Valentine’s Day. Another Academy Awards. Yet, despite an overall unappreciative atmosphere, a few aspects made the night unique. For starters, Jon Stewart: I wouldn’t say that the man triumphed or bombed; I would, however, say that he was no Billy Crystal/Steve Martin. It seemed as though Stewart’s jokes either fell flat or went over the heads of the audience members. Perhaps, the funniest part of Stewart’s “political” emceeing came when Stephen Colbert (Stewart’s former employee) voiced the campaign commercials—with Keira Knightley’s “God-dust” being the highlight. Maybe next year, the call will go to Colbert instead of Stewart. All-in-all, Stewart provided the sophistication factor, but lacked the oomph of Crystal’s musical numbers and Martin’s energy.

Additionally, the “play-the-music-during-the-acceptance-speech” strategy worked for the time-constraint, but sucked up most of the potential emotion like a vacuum. While some winners’ microphones were cut off, some of the “team/partner” winners were not even given the chance to speak. My advice is cut down on the montages and allow the winners to speak from their hearts.

As far as surprises go, I was thrilled to hear Rachel Weisz’s name called for Supporting Actress, and delighted to see Crash take the Best Picture trophy. I, along with most, thought for sure that Brokeback would take the cake—considering it had all the elements and a heck of a lot of positive press. Conversely, the voters selected right; Crash is most definitely the best picture of 2006 and one of the very best dramas to touch the screens in a long while.

Overall, I was 16 for 21 with my predictions—gaining one over last year's forecast. Though getting 3/4 of the winners correct may be only an average percentage grade, I will take it proudly—especially considering the incorrect selections were in non-major categories.

Perhaps, the most memorable moment of the night was when Three Six Mafia’s “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp” upset Kathleen “Bird” York’s “In the Deep” for Best Original Song. I was not surprised with this win, considering a rap song (albeit a good one in Eminem’s “Lose Yourself”) won in the past. However, the quote of the night came from Mr. Stewart saying, “For those of you keeping score at home, that is Martin Scorsese zero, Three Six Mafia one.”

For some reason, in its 78th year, the Academy Awards did not live up to its hype of being “the biggest night in entertainment.” Instead, the show lacked the gratitude and dramatic wallops that have been present in year’s prior. Call me a drama king, but weren’t you secretly wishing for Jennifer Garner to fall, someone to kiss someone unexpectedly, and something better than a rap group getting bleeped out to top the headlines? Hopefully, next year, we can do away with the unnecessary montages, keep the number of live songs to three or less, and ignite some zest into show.

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

A Look into My Crystal Ball...(Oscars 2006)

2006-03-04T18:14:00.000-05:00

Best Picture
Brokeback Mountain
Capote
**Crash
Good Night, and Good Luck
Munich

In the closing months, the most hubbub and support has blanketed "that gay cowboy movie," Brokeback Mountain; however, the Brokeback Mountain that I saw was not the Best Picture of 2005. On March 5th, the Academy will disagree. If there is any chance for an upset, Crash is the film to do so. Crash is one of the finest films to come along this millennium, and to lose to a slightly overrated love story would be a travesty. Too bad the loss is practically a reality.

Probable Academy Pick: Brokeback Mountain

Best Director
**Ang Lee, Brokeback Mountain
Bennet Miller, Capote
Paul Haggis, Crash
George Clooney, Good Night, and Good Luck
Steven Spielberg, Munich

The director category is perhaps the most definite. Ang Lee is the low-odd favorite to win, and that's what he'll do. Haggis and Spielberg are equally deserving, but Lee's masterful work will win the award--hands down.

Probable Academy Pick: Ang Lee

Best Actor
**Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Capote
Terrence Howard, Hustle & Flow
Heath Ledger, Brokeback Mountain
Joaquin Phoenix, Walk the Line
David Strathairn, Good Night, and Good Luck

In the realm of Best Actor, you can parlay last year's Jamie Foxx prediction on the insanely talented Mr. Phillip Seymour Hoffman. His role as the intelligent and effeminate Truman Capote in Capote defines brilliance. The emotions that he emits and the persona that he takes on are both of the highest caliber. All four of the other nominated men deserve to be included on this list, but haven't got a chance to pull the carpet out from under P.S.H.

Probable Academy Pick: Phillip Seymour Hoffman

Best Actress
Judi Dench, Mrs. Henderson Presents
**Felicity Huffman, Transamerica
Keira Knightley, Pride & Prejudice
Charlize Theron, North Country
Reese Witherspoon, Walk the Line

Maybe it's just me, but a role that requires a female to play a male who becomes a female is a bit more challenging than anything else attempted on film this past year. Plus, considering Felicity Huffman's recent fame with "Desperate Housewives," the voters may turn in her favor. However, it will take a great deal to steal the statue from Reese Witherspoon for her exquisite and charming role as June Carter, "the woman, behind the man, behind the legend." In addition, it is a shame that Joan Allen was skipped over for her marvelous work in The Upside of Anger.

Probable Academy Pick: Reese Witherspoon

Best Supporting Actor
George Clooney, Syriana
**Matt Dillon, Crash
Paul Giamatti, Cinderella Man
Jake Gyllenhaal, Brokeback Mountain
William Hurt, A History of Violence

Matt Dillon's performance in Crash is shattering and better than any other supporting work of 2005; however, Dillon is up against stiff competition. Jake Gyllenhaal grabs his first nomination with his honest portrayal of Jack Twist. Paul Giamatti attains a nod after being robbed of one for last year's Sideways. And, William Hurt picks up a nomination that he has a chance to win. Yet, at long last, the Oscar will either end up in the hands of Dillon or Clooney. Dillon should win, but Clooney will capture the gold.

Probable Academy Pick: George Clooney

Best Supporting Actress
Amy Adams, Junebug
Catherine Keener, Capote
Frances McDormand, North Country
**Rachel Weisz, The Constant Gardener
Michelle Williams, Brokeback Mountain

Supporting actress is typically a tight race, and this year is no different. Ebert has his support behind Adams. Mine is behind the beautiful Miss Weisz. Yet, the Academy will choose Michelle Williams for playing the victim of true love. Brokeback Mountain can tally another one up on the board.

Probable Academy Pick: Michelle Williams

Screenplay--Crash
Adapted Screenplay--Brokeback Mountain
Cinematography--Brokeback Mountain
Editing--Crash
Art Direction--King Kong
Costume Design--Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
Score--Brokeback Mountain
Song--Hustle & Flow
Makeup--The Chronicles of Narnia
Sound--Walk the Line
Sound Editing--King Kong
Visual Effects--King Kong
Animated Feature--Wallace & Gromit
Foreign Language Film--Paradise Now
Documentary--March of the Penguins

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: The Famine Within

2006-02-26T15:24:00.000-05:00

Release Date: 1/90
Running Time: 0:55
Rated: NR (nudity)
Cast: Rebecca Jenkins (voice)

Director: Katherine Gilday
Producer: Katherine Gilday
Screenplay: Katherine Gilday
Music: Russell Walker
Studios: Kandor Productions Ltd., High Road Productions Ltd.

After scraping its way through the 1990 Toronto Festival of Festivals and the Sydney Film Festival, Katherine Gilday’s The Famine Within has endured a rather bleak afterlife. Currently unavailable on any store/rental shelf and apparently only available on the Filmaker’s Library website (for a whopping purchase price of $295 and a hefty rental fee of $75), The Famine Within is a Canadian documentary that contains a mint of informing statistics that all pre and post-pubescent women should hear. However, maybe a fifty-five minute round of interviews punctuated with cheesy 80’s music and corny runway walks is not the most suitable and most influential forum to inform.

The Famine Within depicts how media advertising has created a Barbie doll stereotype to serve as an unrealistic ideal to all women. In fact, one modeling-agency executive states, that out of a group of 40,000 female applicants, only four possessed the “potential” to become a supermodel. This impractical pressure to be increasingly skinny has pressed women, sociologically and psychologically, to diet feverishly and even be driven to anorexia nervosa and/or bulimia. The film’s countless interrogations of the obese, the starved, and the qualified professionals clarify any misconceptions of this statement.

After sitting through interview upon interview – with intermittent statistics – the film’s narration simply reads like a college thesis on the subject matter. Yet, even though this thesis may appear to be well-developed, with its terse running-time, The Famine Within only scratches the surface of what could have been said.

Although, when The Famine Within has something to say, it says it without any shame or restraint. “I’d rather be dead than fat,” claims one victim of multiple eating disorders, while a Jungian psychologist asserts that the archetypal associations with a non-fit female are “passivity, ineptitude, and weakness.” The film also urges on the importance of the realizations that weighing scales should not rule a woman’s self-esteem and that body-size should not determine a woman’s worth. Additionally, what The Famine Within has to say about a woman’s natural biology is intriguing; women are made for fat storage to assist in menstruation and childbearing. Yet, ironically, even though women typically provide nourishment (through breastfeeding and/or cooking), they view their own indulgence in sustenance as sinful.

All-in-all, The Famine Within is an honest film that comes up a trifle too impassive. Hopefully, Gilday’s truncated work will serve as a muse to those inspired by the topic, and with any luck, a better resolution (than the film’s orgy shower scene) and more of a dramatic punch will result; because sadly, the issues raised by The Famine Within are just as pertinent today as they were in 1990, if not more. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Eating (1990)

2006-02-13T15:01:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 11/90
Running Time: 1:50
Rated: NR (Language, partial nudity)
Cast: Lisa Richards, Mary Crosby, Marlena Giovi, Nelly Alard, Frances Bergen, Gwen Welles, Marina Gregory

Director: Henry Jaglom
Producer: Judith Wolinsky
Screenplay: Henry Jaglom
Studio: International Rainbow Pictures

Some claim that a Henry Jaglom film is “as close to capturing contemporary reality itself.” However, with Eating’s unceasing psychosis towards food and its inane plot development (during the film’s final third), Jaglom forcefully creates conflict instead of allowing it to evolve on its own. While Eating may be, as its subtitle states, “A Very Serious Comedy about Women & Food,” at long last, it is also very tedious, feigned, and bland.

Thirty-eight women of various ages converge at a Southern California home to celebrate the 30th birthday of Kate (Mary Crosby), the 40th birthday of Helene (Lisa Richards), and the 50th birthday of Sadie (Marlena Giovi). However, the party soon becomes the grand stage for Helene’s French houseguest, Martine (Nelly Alard), to film her documentary on “American women.” Meanwhile, Helene’s mother (Frances Burgen) tries to convince each woman that they are perfect in their own right, and Helene’s friend, Sophie (Gwen Welles), attempts to create unnecessary drama.

When one of the women initiates a conversation, she begins by paying another woman a compliment, and then, almost immediately, she shifts gears and emphasizes her own bodily imperfections. Having women incessantly complain about their body-image is a considerable turnoff, and having this presented in a cinematic format, results in the subject at hand becoming all too stale a little too quick. Eating is not as bad as grinding teeth, but it is painfully close; the griping and whining occur ad nauseam.

Mid-move one of the film’s characters quotes, “Twenty to thirty years ago, sex was the secret subject of women; now, it’s food.” Yet, with a horde of women seemingly discussing nothing but food, it seems as though the cat has already been left out of the bag. Yes, there are a few insights on abortion (from a pro-choice point-of-view), bulimia, and sex, but none are substantial enough to leave a lasting impression. Sorry, but a film that shares musings as stirring as the doldrums on fat, food, sex, hair, “sagging tits,” men, and weight, just isn’t my cup of tea. (*1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Capote

2006-02-04T14:14:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 9/30/05 (limited)
Running Time: 1:54
Rated: R (Profanity, violence)
Cast: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Catherine Keener, Clifton Collins Jr., Chris Cooper, Bruce Greenwood, Bob Balaban, Amy Ryan, Mark Pellegrino, Allie Mickelson

Director: Bennett Miller
Producers: Caroline Baron, Michael Ohoven, William Vince
Screenplay: Dan Futterman, based on the book by Gerald Clarke
Music: Mychael Danna
Studio: Sony Pictures Classics

Single-handedly, Capote can be set apart from In Cold Blood by its earnest depiction of an author who loves only himself and his writing. While Truman Capote has been labeled one of America’s finest authors, through this motion-picture exploration, we learn that his self-absorption in the source material resulted in him rotting from the inside out. Written by Dan Futterman, based on the book by Gerald Clarke, Capote is a deep character study – highlighted by a virtuoso lead – that rocks you to the core.

The film begins in 1959, when Truman Capote (Philip Seymour Hoffman) spies an article concerning a senseless murder of a family of four in Halcomb, Kansas. After gaining approval from his editor (Bob Balaban), Capote decides to travel to Halcomb with his female friend, Nelle Harper Lee (Catherine Keener), who is in the process of publishing her book To Kill a Mockingbird. Once in Kansas, Capote sets out to investigate the effects of the murders on the town and write an article for The New Yorker magazine on the subject matter. Yet, after Capote speaks with the town police chief (Chris Cooper) and the two killers Perry Smith (Clifton Collins Jr.) and Dick Hickock (Mark Pellegrino), he decides to write a “non-fiction novel,” entitled In Cold Blood, on his research.

Over the next few years of interviewing and writing, Capote bonds with Perry and begins to feel pity for him. Capote’s partner, Jack Dunphy (Bruce Greenwood), becomes suspicious of their relationship, but Capote reassures that their relationship is strictly professional. After initially offering to assist Perry and Dick in their attempts to appeal, Capote becomes lax in wanting to help the pair and seeks closure in their eventual hangings.

Without Philip Seymour Hoffman, Capote would not be near the same. His eccentric and effeminate portrayal of the author is borderline brilliant and carries the overall production. Hoffman has gone long overdue for any official recognition of his abilities; view his prior work in any P. T. Anderson film to confirm how underrated of an actor he is. Beyond any shadow of a doubt, P.S.H. earned his Best Actor statue for 2005.

In support, Catherine Keener, Clifton Collins Jr., and Chris Cooper all perform well, but none outshine Hoffman or really achieve anything nominee-worthy. On the other hand, with these fine supporting actors, Capote is centered on its characters’ interactions and behavior, not plot. That is what makes this film such a shooting-star among a dark night’s sky. Just when you think the film is about Truman Capote writing a book, it is about the inner turmoil that the narcissistic author goes through to change the face of non-fiction and write his life-defining and life-crippling opus. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Big Night

2006-02-03T12:08:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 9/27/96 (limited)
Running Time: 1:49
Rated: R (Profanity)
Cast: Stanley Tucci, Tony Shalhoub, Minnie Driver, Isabella Rossellini, Ian Holm, Allison Janney, Marc Anthony, Campbell Scott

Directors: Campbell Scott and Stanley Tucci
Producer: Jonathan Filley
Screenplay: Joseph Tropiano and Stanley Tucci
Music: Gary DeMichele
Studio: The Samuel Goldwyn Company

Big Night could easily be referred to as the Italian/American version of Babette’s Feast, considering numerous parallels are present. Not only does the film arc with a lavish meal in which all expenses are expunged, but it also matches the 1987 Danish/French feature in size and scope. With a pinch of poignancy and a dollop of comedy, Big Night is the perfect recipe for a warm, endearing evening filled with laughs, smiles, and feelings of satisfaction.

Two brothers, Primo (Tony Shalhoub) and Secondo (Stanley Tucci), are the co-owners of an authentic Italian restaurant called The Paradise. However, The Paradise isn’t the only Italian restaurant on the Jersey shore in the 1950’s. A sleek grotto across the street, called Pascal’s, presents itself as competition. The owner, Paschal (Ian Holm), operates under a “give the customer what they want” mentality, and unlike Primo and Secondo, Paschal knows how to pack in a crowd.

After being informed that the bank will foreclose on his business if a payment is not received by the end of the month, Secondo asks Pascal for assistance. While unable to provide any monetary support, Pascal tells Secondo that he will invite his good friend and jazz legend Louis Prima to The Paradise for dinner. Pascal promises that this will, in turn, increase business and profitability for the two brothers.

Meanwhile, in addition to encountering financial troubles, Secondo runs into trouble with his girlfriend, Phyllis (Minnie Driver). To boot, Primo finds it difficult to speak to his flower-girl love interest, Ann (Allison Janney). Nevertheless, both brothers hope that with all they have on the line, one big night – with a jazz legend in attendance – will be just the ticket they need to get back on their feet in more ways than one.

Three cheers for Stanley Tucci and Campbell Scott. Not only is their acting on-par with the rest of the ensemble cast, but their directing is also creditable—especially considering this film represents the first time for both men to sit in a director’s chair. Even with one-too-many unnecessary profanities and one poorly-shot scene that makes it blatantly obvious that Ian Holm has no clue how to tickle the ivories, Tucci and Scott have crafted a near-perfect, top-shelf food film.

Positively, it is Tony Shalhoub who steals the show with his spot-on accent and his side-splitting comedy. His description of Pascal’s cooking as “the rape of cuisine” and his labeling of a woman, who orders two starches as “a criminal,” are both unforgettable quotes. Yet, even amidst Shalhoub’s standout performance, Ian Holm still manages to entertain with his refreshingly hysterical role, despite his Italian accent being hit-or-miss. In addition, Minnie Driver, Isabella Rossellini, and Allison Janney are also notable in their respective roles.

All things considered, Big Night is as rich and sumptuous as any film in its genre. It is a picture that is best watched on a full stomach; otherwise, you are sure to salivate for the better part of the running-time. It is a dynamic and comedic ode to the ever-standing battle between art and commerce, and above all, it speaks volumes of the bonds of brotherly love.

With its magnificent closing scene, which depicts Secondo cooking breakfast for three in one beautiful unbroken 5:22 take, Big Night elevates its status to al dente. And, as Secondo informs Primo towards the opening of the film, “If you chop the garlic too fine, that is all you’ll taste.” In the case of Big Night, thank the heavens; the garlic is just right, and the result is a film you can bite into at any point and taste a vast array of effectual and sensational flavors. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: My Dinner with Andre

2006-01-23T10:03:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 10/11/81
Running Time: 1:50
Rated: PG
Cast: Wallace Shawn, Andre Gregory, Jean Lenauer, Roy Butler

Director: Louis Malle
Producers: George George, Beverly Karp, Michael White
Screenplay: Wallace Shawn and Andre Gregory
Studio: New Yorker Films

Louis Malle’s My Dinner with Andre is the grandfather of all conversation films. However, while this 1981 low-budget production successfully spawned several great conversation pieces (including Before Sunrise, Before Sunset, and Mindwalk), in this case, it is the offspring that outshine the inspiration. Even though My Dinner with Andre is original and unconventional in its approach, it is also – at times – unappetizing in nature. To call My Dinner with Andre a masterpiece (like so many other critics) would confirm the very principle (of falling victim to influence and routine) that the picture attempts to refute.

Throughout its 110 minute running-time, My Dinner with Andre solely depicts two men conversing over potato soup, French pâté, roasted quail, salad, and espresso respectively. These two men are Wallace Shawn and Andre Gregory, who play themselves in the film. Wallace is a struggling playwright/actor who is initially pessimistic of how he and Andre are going to keep each other’s interest during the course of an entire meal. Andre is an old friend of Wallace’s and a successful New York theater director, who has just returned from an emotional, soul-searching journey abroad.

After Wallace expresses, in his opening voiceover, that he “doesn’t feel like playing doctor to Andre” and has “problems of his own,” he decides to “play detective” and continue to ask questions of Andre’s voyage. However, once Andre begins to open up and provide Wallace with intriguingly vivid answers, Wallace really begins to listen. From there, the conversation ensues, and Wallace becomes decreasingly reticent.

While 60% of Wallace and Andre’s conversation drips with profundity, the other 40% (which mainly spews from the lips of Andre) seems more like deliberately inflammatory psycho-babble. This is why practical audiences have a better chance of relating to Wallace than Andre the nut-job. When Andre lectures on being in church as “a huge creature appeared with violets coming out of its eyelids and poppies growing out of its toenails,” Andre and the audience are a complete disconnect. Further, his strange chats on leading cult-like “beehive” activities, being buried alive on All Soul’s Eve, and spending time with a Japanese monk – who defies the laws of physics – in the Saharan Desert expunge any relation between the viewer and the lead. Yes, the majority of Andre’s comments on human beings living “in ludicrous ignorance of each other,” “in a trance – like zombies,” and “in a psychotic dream world,” are thought-provoking, but other films have gotten the same points across indirectly and with more success.

Wallace’s frenetic responses, concerning the neighboring cigar shop and the reasoning behind keeping his electric blanket among other things, keep the film rolling. His summation of Andre’s monologue in saying, “I don’t really know what you’re talking about,” is indeed the turning-point of the picture. Above-all, My Dinner with Andre effectively signifies the ability for a surrealist and a realist to agree to disagree, yet still be moved by one another’s near-incessant rants.

Beyond any shadow of a doubt, stimulating discourse is healthy for the soul; it’s just that, even though it is important to open up, avoid living mechanically, and really commit to being, sometimes the more-personal late-night conversations – that we have with our own friends, family members, or even strangers – strike a deeper chord within our psyches. Even if My Dinner with Andre doesn’t exactly nourish your cinematic stomach with sustenance in every way, shape, and form, the film does provide your mind with an ample supply of nutrients. And that is perhaps the film’s most redeeming quality. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Brokeback Mountain

2006-01-15T14:51:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 12/16/05 (limited)
Running Time: 2:15
Rated: R (Sexual situations, profanity, nudity)
Cast: Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Michelle Williams, Anne Hathaway, Randy Quaid, Linda Cardellini, Anna Faris

Director: Ang Lee
Producers: Diana Ossana, James Schamus
Screenplay: Larry McMurtry & Diana Ossana, based on the short story by Annie Proulx
Music: Gustavo Santaolalla
Studio: Focus Features

Much like The Bridges of Madison County, Brokeback Mountain is about longing for an illicit love. It’s about suppressing a soul-mate in fear of society’s non-conforming standards. In fact, the only key difference between the theses of Bridges and Brokeback is that Ang Lee’s love story stems from the hearts of two men.

Labeled ad infinitum as “that gay cowboy movie,” Brokeback Mountain is an honest, impervious romance spliced together with simplistic grace from a herd of hired hands. Despite a few sloppy scene transitions, the direction is admirable, the score is sensuous, and the acting is stellar.

In the summer of 1963, Ennis Del Mar (Heath Ledger) and Jack Twist (Jake Gyllenhaal) share the task of tending sheep through the Wyoming countryside. After a few days of fending-off wolves, eating canned beans, and drinking whiskey, the two spontaneously and violently engage in intercourse. The next morning Ennis says to Jack, “This is a one-shot thing we got going on here; I ain’t queer.” Jack replies, “Me neither.”

Once the two cowboys deliver the sheep and descend Brokeback Mountain, they part their separate ways. While Ennis marries his longtime sweetheart, Alma (Michelle Williams), and has two children, Jack marries a feisty cowgirl named Lureen (Anne Hathaway) and fathers a son. Years pass, until Ennis and Jack finally reunite. Jack urges Ennis to flee his family, so they can start a life of their own, but Ennis reminds Jack, “This thing grabs hold of us at the wrong time, in the wrong place, and we’re dead.”

The invariable depiction of the intricate facets in Jack and Ennis’ relationship is a testament to master director Ang Lee’s knowledge of character development. Because of Lee’s unyielding focus, the film strolls along at the leisurely pace of tumbleweed—delicately rolling down a lonely stretch of dirt road. Yet, its progression is comforting, and in no way tiresome. In addition, Gustavo Santaolalla’s simplistic, yet infectious, score blends beautifully with the unhurried aura that Lee already accomplishes.

Heath Ledger turns his acting career on its ear, with his nominee-worthy role as the reserved and inertly-troubled Ennis Del Mar. However, more impressive is the generous support that Ledger receives. As Jack Twist, Jake Gyllenhaal dismisses any second-guessing that he is one of the most adaptable and talented actors in the game. Anne Hathaway proves that she is more than Disney’s Princess with her exquisite performance (especially during the telephone conversation). Michelle Williams (Heath Ledger’s real-life love interest) intensifies the feature with her emotional portrayal of the wife and victim. In addition, both Randy Quaid and Anna Farris leave their comedic characterizations at the door and place the very best they have to offer on display.

While conservative critics have publicly renounced the film because of its homosexual subject matter, liberal critics have saturated the film with more praise than it deserves for the very same reasons. Brokeback Mountain should not be judged solely on its inclusion of gay love. All politics aside, Brokeback Mountain is commendable for an honest portrayal of its romance and estimable for the passion exuded by all involved.

In a final appraisal, however, Brokeback Mountain is not the best feature of 2005. Even so, bet the farm that it takes home the “Best Picture” honor at the Oscars; after all, it has all the epic fixings that the voters have come to know and love. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: 2001: A Space Odyssey

2006-01-11T18:29:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 4/3/68
Running Time: 2:19
Rated: PG (Mild violence, mild profanity)
Cast: Keir Dullea, Gary Lockwood, William Sylvester, Douglas Rain (voice)

Director: Stanley Kubrick
Producer: Stanley Kubrick
Screenplay: Stanley Kubrick & Arthur C. Clarke, based on "The Sentinel" by Arthur C. Clarke
Studio: MGM

2001: A Space Odyssey is a lightning bolt of a film that imparts a ghost-like haunting long after the screen goes dark. Upon an initial viewing, its astonishing amalgamation of sight and sound singes itself deep within your consciousness; its effects are forever etched into your brain. The film is as thought-provoking and amazing as any other major motion-picture in existence. Even as its pacing may seem sluggish, the avant-garde approach that Kubrick takes makes 2001 a cosmic meditation for the mind and one of the most applaudable pictures of all-time.

2001 begins with “The Dawn of Man,” in which prehistoric man finds a mysterious black monolith and then learns to use a bone as a weapon. This scene then jettisons thousands of years into the future, where man has left the sandy soils of the earth for the starry Solar System. Spacecraft dance through the Milky Way, while a deeply lulling “Blue Danube Waltz” plays in the backdrop.

Dr. Heywood Floyd (William Sylvester) travels to the moon to view an object that was deliberately buried beneath the surface four million years ago. To maintain absolute secrecy, the public is distracted by the cover story of an epidemic; however, Floyd knows the truth. Whatever it is, it is sending a signal to Jupiter.

Eighteen months later, aboard the spaceship Discovery, two crewmen, David Bowman (Keir Dullea) and Frank Poole (Gary Lockwood), three cryogenically frozen scientists, and the brain and central nervous system of the ship, the HAL 9000 computer (voice of Douglas Rain) venture towards Jupiter to investigate the receiving end of the signal. However, when HAL becomes unstable, the mission is jeopardized.

During the film’s final act of four, “Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite,” Bowman discovers yet another (and much larger) black monolith, and when it aligns with the moons of Jupiter, Bowman is catapulted through a collage of colors to another space and time. He ages in a matter minutes, witnesses a towering monolith watching over him as he dies in bed, and is reborn as the “star child.”

Perhaps, the most stunning aspect of 2001 is that even though its depiction of the future is way off the mark, its special-effects and cinematography appear as flawless as any modern-day CGI film. In fact, 2001 is so visually arresting that it unequivocally demands a pair of unflinching eyes, as well as, captivates its audience in the disbelief that it was filmed nearly 40 years ago. Kubrick’s camera tricks are as mind-boggling as a book of optical illusions.

Throughout the entire epoch of science-fiction, no other film has emoted such ecstasy in response to the questions of the Great Beyond and established such a mystical oneness with the universe in which we live. And, while its sequel, 2010, does provide some insights into the whys and hows of 2001, the effects of the original are better off left open to the viewer's perception. 2001 is a groundbreaking motion-picture that gets the gears of your brain rolling and animates your inner life-force. It is a visionary masterwork and one of the finest features ever crafted. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: Broken Flowers

2006-01-08T11:39:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 8/5/05 (limited)
Running Time: 1:46
Rated: R (Language, some graphic nudity, and brief drug use)
Cast: Bill Murray, Jeffrey Wright, Sharon Stone, Frances Conroy, Jessica Lange, Tilda Swinton, Julie Delpy, Alexis Dziena, Christopher McDonald, Chloë Sevigny

Director: Jim Jarmusch
Producers: Jim Jarmusch, Jon Kilik, Stacey E. Smith
Screenplay: Jim Jarmusch
Music: Mulatu Astatke
Studio: Focus Features

With Broken Flowers, Jim Jarmusch has apparently graduated from making independent art-house films (like his anthology Coffee and Cigarettes) and has chosen to concentrate on a more mainstream approach with an exceptional actor. However, without Bill Murray as the lead (a role that Jarmusch wrote exclusively for him), it is hard to say what Broken Flowers would be. While Flowers is a solid script and a tightly-focused character study, it doesn’t accomplish too much of anything in the long run. Furthermore, the film unexpectedly leaves a bland, rather than an exceedingly saccharine, aftertaste. Perhaps this is precisely what Jim Jarmusch intended, but considering the story closes without a much-needed release or revelation, Broken Flowers comes off as more literary than cinematic.

Don Johnston (Bill Murray) is an over-the-hill Don Juan, who opens a mysterious pink letter—just after his girlfriend, Sherry (Julie Delpy), breaks up with him. The letter – unsigned and without a return address – informs Don that he has a 19-year-old son.

Once Don’s neighbor and wannabe detective, Winston (Jeffrey Wright), sees the letter, he immediately plans Don’s journey to find the four former flames who could potentially be the mother of his “hypothetical” son. Winston tells Don to search for clues, dress conservatively, and also bring flowers...pink flowers.

On this expedition to find the bearer of his son, Don first runs into full-time closet organizer, Laura (Sharon Stone), and her appropriately-named daughter, Lolita (Alexis Dzienza). After rekindling the flame with Laura, Don meets Dora (Frances Conroy), a former hippie who is now one-half of a prosperous real-estate couple. Next, Don visits Carmen (Jessica Lange), an animal communicator who has apparently switched from liking males to females. Lastly, Don sees poverty-stricken Penny (Tilda Swinton), who has nothing to offer but profanities and punches to the face.

While Jarmusch succeeds at showing an off-kilter trek across the nation, he fails to get the audience emotionally involved in his story. However, despite this disunion between the viewer and the main character, it is Murray who makes the picture watchable. And, even though he may be reason enough to see the motion-picture, he isn’t enough to love it.

Yes, Broken Flowers does have its merits in terms of both drama and comedy, and yes, Broken Flowers is Jarmusch’s most comprehensive and laudable film to date, but while fans of Jarmusch’s work will applaud, others will be frustrated with its open-endedness.

Before the film went into the post-production stages, Broken Flowers was entitled Dead Flowers. While “broken” is a better word to use in the title, it is also a viable adjective to use when describing the film. Unfortunately for Jarmusch, the film was not broken beyond repair. With a little fixing here and there, Broken Flowers could have been a deeply evocative and flourishing film. Too bad Jarmusch could not crawl out of the Punch Drunk Love mindset and make Broken Flowers the subtle, subdued, yet sublime feature that audiences pined for. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2006

Movie Review: The Happy Elf

2005-12-29T22:48:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 12/6/05 (DVD)
Running Time: 0:45
Rated: NR
Cast (voices): Rob Paulsen, Carol Kane, Mickey Rooney, Lewis Black, Harry Connick Jr., Kevin Michael Richardson

Director: John Rice
Producers: Harry Connick Jr., Ann Marie Wilkins, Scott Landis, John W. Hyde
Screenplay: Andrew Fishman, based on the song by Harry Connick Jr.
Music: Harry Connick Jr.
Studio: Anchor Bay Entertainment/IDT Entertainment

Based on Harry Connick Jr.’s song of the same name – a cut from his encore Christmas album, entitled “Harry for the Holidays” – The Happy Elf is a short-film that aspires to be the next animated holiday classic. Although, Harry Connick Jr. himself has said that the film was built “off of the skeleton lyric that [he] had.” Connick’s use of the word “skeleton” should be proof enough that stretching a film out of a song is a bad idea. While novels and short-stories have been adapted into decent full-length films, adapting a song into a movie is just about as logical as turning an SNL skit into one.

While The Happy Elf may seem to be a good excuse to gather the family around the hearth, it merely serves as a 45-minute diversion for only the youngest of viewers. Its dialogue is weak; its character development is near nonexistent; its CG-animation is run-of-the-mill; and, its storyline is basic and unmoving.

Eubie the Elf (Rob Paulsen) is one of Santa’s helpers. He is overzealous to the point of annoying, and no supervisor wants to manage him. However, when the “Naughty-and-Nice” department becomes backed up with checking Santa’s list a second time, Eubie gets assigned to the task. In checking to see which kids were naughty and which were nice, Eubie discovers that an entire town, called Bluesville, made the naughty list. With a last minute effort, Eubie attempts to restore the Christmas spirit in the dreariest of townspeople.

Rob Paulsen does an adequate job as the energetic, motor-mouthed, bucked-toothed Eubie. With the same frenzied voice he used to play Yakko on WB’s “Animaniacs,” Paulsen easily emits a character that appears to have taken a high dosage of Prozac. Also, with her same whispery, New York-accented voice that she applied as the Ghost of Christmas Present in Scrooged and as Valerie in The Princess Bride, Carol Kane creates Gilda—Eubie’s love interest and the one character who possesses awkward and over-exaggerated lip movements. In addition, Lewis Black as Eubie’s boss, Mickey Rooney as Santa Claus, and Harry Connick Jr. as Lil Farley (the narrator) perform equally well.

In terms of comedy, most of The Happy Elf’s jokes fall flat. With lines like, “He started it; she escalated it,” “I could have a panic attack just thinking about it,” and “This conversation is giving me hives,” screenwriter Andrew Fishman tries to crack a few smiles, but looks of tedium are sure to result. The Happy Elf also attempts to reach the adult audience by quoting a few well-known productions. When the one-woman show of the Smiling League of Bluesville (S.L.O.B.) demands “Serenity Now,” it rings false sentiments of “Seinfeld.” When Eubie exclaims, “Wax on; wax off,” it is only the umpteenth time we have heard this Karate Kid quote, and when someone asks a worker at "The What Factory” what factory he works at, his answer of “Yeah, that’s right,”—only mimicking the “Who’s on first” Abbott and Costello routine that tired everyone out over 60 years ago.

In the long run, The Happy Elf is suitable for any child under the age of seven. Any one over the age of seven will most likely be insulted by wasting three quarters of an hour. While the film is colorful and gets across its “Kids need to be well-behaved all year round” message, the picture trudges along—even wasting time by having the main character say “Goodbye” in about 30 different languages and show his Mouse Trap-esque thought-process to arrive at an idea. Also, even though the majority of Connick’s tunes are catchy, the instruments are basically inaudible—resulting in the musical numbers sounding more like a cappella charts, with a recording playing down the street and around the corner.

Considering Eubie’s overused motto is “Think big, and you can do great things,” too bad the production team didn’t take the protagonist’s words as advice. The Happy Elf: “A new animated Christmas Classic,”—in Anchor Bay Entertainment’s dreams. Give me Rudolph and the Misfit Toys, Frosty, Charlie Brown, or the Grinch over Eubie the Elf any day. (* out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: The Bridges of Madison County

2005-12-27T23:50:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 6/2/95
Running Time: 2:15
Rated: PG-13 (Mature themes, brief nudity)
Cast: Clint Eastwood, Meryl Streep, Annie Corley, Victor Slezak, Jim Haynie

Director: Clint Eastwood
Producers: Clint Eastwood and Kathleen Kennedy
Screenplay: Richard LaGravenese, based on the novel by Robert James Waller
Music: Lennie Niehaus
Studio: Warner Brothers

When Clint Eastwood takes over a production, he makes it his own. He stars. He directs. He uses his talent to the best of his abilities. In the case of The Bridges of Madison County, Eastwood shines, but not bright enough to block either Streep in her wonder or the intense romance based on the novel by Robert James Waller.

Francesca Johnson (Meryl Streep) is your typical 1960’s housewife. She does all the cooking, cleaning, and caring. Born in Italy, Francesca once had dreams and aspirations of her own. However, now married, she is limited to living in an Iowa farmhouse that has been passed down through the generations to her husband. Her two children don’t give her the time of day and constantly slam the kitchen door closed. Her husband shows her no affection and doesn’t offer to help out around the house.

Cue Robert Kincaid (Clint Eastwood). In town to photograph a few of the county’s covered bridges, Robert meets Francesca (whose husband and children are away at the Illinois State Fair for four days) and the two begin to converse. After a few iced teas and an intriguing conversation, a relationship quickly buds and blossoms. Only, at the end of the fourth day, Francesca must decide to either leave town with her soul-mate or remain faithful to her family.

The outcome of this decision is already apparent to the viewer, because the entire film plays out in the fashion of a flashback. As Francesca’s son Michael (Victor Slezak) and daughter Caroline (Annie Corley) read their now-deceased mother’s journals, they are shocked to learn that she was involved in an affair with Robert—the man she describes as her one true love. Through these readings, Michael and Caroline come to know Robert and the relationship that he and their mother shared, and in doing so, they also find themselves.

Even though the son and daughter storyline is undoubtedly the weak point of the film, it is absolutely essential to the “looking-back” structure. At times, when Michael and Caroline occupy the screen, the film feels awkward, yet its core lies in the romance. The love between Robert and Francesca easily burns the heart and sets the tear ducts into motion.

Although some may find it morally difficult to attach themselves to a character that is having an affair, the story is about more than infidelity. It is a life-altering opportunity and a chance for a woman who has lost herself – who feels nonexistent in her own life – to express her true self and experience the passion of connecting to someone on a most intimate intellectual and emotional level. For a woman who barely gets any attention from her family, she immediately cherishes the prospect to share a few lines of Yeats, smoke a few cigarettes, and drink a few beers. The film is about finding love where, under the circumstances, it is forbidden. Whether or not Francesca’s actions are justified, is irrelevant and immaterial to the storyline.

Accentuated by two heartrending character portraits from Meryl Streep and Clint Eastwood, it is obvious why this film is a female favorite. Streep alone – with her impeccable accent, melancholy facial expressions, and alluring body language – contributes to the film’s relaxed pace and magical aura. Eastwood also fares well—throwing his Dirty Harry stereotype out the window and playing a man of depth, heart, and muscle.

Curl up on the couch with The Bridges of Madison County. It is a poetic, profound, and even erotic romance that depicts an affair growing from the smallest seed. Like a bridge, this film is firm, steady, and well-supported, and like an old covered bridge, this movie is truly a rare find. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: King Kong (2005)

2005-12-17T14:55:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 12/14/05
Running Time: 3:07
Rated: PG-13 (Violence, frightening images)
Cast: Naomi Watts, Jack Black, Adrien Brody, Andy Serkis, Jamie Bell, Kyle Chandler, Thomas Kretschmann, Colin Hanks

Director: Peter Jackson
Producers: Jan Blenkin, Carolynne Cunningham, Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh
Screenplay: Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens & Peter Jackson, based on the story by Merian C. Cooper and Edgar Wallace
Music: James Newton Howard
Studio: Universal Pictures

When Peter Jackson set out to recreate King Kong (a film already done twice-over in 1933 and 1976), he was handed $200 million and elevated expectations to follow in the greatness of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. What he has helmed is a near immaculate action-adventure pic and a love story for the ages. Even though its hyper-extended running-time nearly causes the kettle to bubble-over, King Kong is still a tour-de-force of action, adventure, and intensity and an emotional roller-coaster powerful enough to set your heart aflame.

After Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts) loses her job as an actress/dancer at a vaudeville theater, she is left to roam the streets of New York unemployed. Seemingly by chance, she meets Carl Denham (Jack Black), a filmmaker who is pressed for time to find a leading lady to star in his next film. When Darrow first learns that the film is set to film in Singapore, she displays a lack of interest. However, once Carl mentions that Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody) is aboard, Ann is immediately attracted to the project, and once Driscoll lays his eyes on Darrow, another attraction surfaces. Little does Ann know that she is setting sail on a most-dangerous mission to locate...Skull Island.

Hoping to stumble upon the uncharted Skull Island, to use its scenery as the backdrop for his film, Carl convinces the Captain (Thomas Kretschmann) of the ship to stay on course—in accordance with his oilskin map. Even after a minor detour, the ship’s crew and passengers soon find themselves traversing through a thick fog—only to crash into dry land.

Once ashore, the sailors and the production team encounter a group of savage natives who begin to slaughter the crew members. In the mix, the natives kidnap Miss Darrow and attempt to sacrifice her to the beast hidden behind a wall. After observing this beast – a 25-foot ape, whom the natives call “Kong” – grasp Darrow in his palm and head into the jungle, Carl bands together with the other men and follows Kong into the foliage. While on their quest to save the girl, the men encounter everything from a dinosaur stampede to an infestation of the world’s largest insects. Meanwhile, Darrow witnesses a ferocious T-Rex battle and a certain primate’s fixation with her blonde beauty.

Months before King Kong’s theatrical release, an online poll asked the public how they felt about the reported 187-minute running-time. The most popular response was, “Who cares? I’m there!” Now, after sitting through the feature, it is obvious that a good 30 minutes could have easily been cut. While Jackson’s Lord of the Rings pictures warranted an inflated three-hour running-time, King Kong simply feels unnecessarily long.

To add to its extensive length, King Kong does have a few petty faults. Some may argue that there are one-too-many prolonged gazes between the beauty and the beast. However, it is equally arguable that the extended eye-contact allows for the perfect height of sentimentality and assists in adding credibility to the CGI ape’s emotions. Also, the character of Jimmy (Jamie Bell) could have been cut entirely; his side-story is irrelevant and distracting. In addition, with King Kong, the suspension of disbelief must be taken into account. Could a young woman really withstand the clutching grasp of Kong and the whiplash – equivalent to 12 car accidents – which he provides? Is it feasible to assume that anyone not central to the storyline has a greater chance of being crushed, beheaded, or eaten than the film’s main players? Could Kong easily adjust to the snowy climate of New York in two shakes of a lamb’s tail? Plus, exactly how does the crew escort a sleepy 25-foot-tall ape to the States, on a tramp steamer that has already taken on water? (At one point, anything not bolted to the ship was thrown overboard in fear of the ship sinking.) Nonetheless, by no means do these discrepancies bog down this monumental motion-picture, and even if you find yourself shifting your weight throughout, the bulk of the shifting will come in the film’s second hour—when a shift from the meat of your seat to the edge will inevitably occur.

To couple the greatness of the action, King Kong is also well-acted. Naomi Watts is utterly iconic—playing the emotional, yet sultry, blonde role that Fay Wray once screamed her way through. Watts is perfect for the part, because she possesses the uncanny ability of being able to muster a jungle of emotions and emit them all through a single teary-eyed gaze. Jack Black, although questionable at first glance, pulls off his dramatic turn as the frenzied and money-hungry filmmaker. If you can avoid the myopia of picturing Black as Dewey Finn from School of Rock or the lead singer of Tenacious D, then you will most likely appreciate his work. Andy Serkis, who previously performed the voice and motions of Gollum in The Lord of the Rings, fares well as Lumpy the cook and also does a gracious job of executing the ape’s every motion. In addition, Serkis gets by far the coolest death of all the film's characters. Adrien Brody, Kyle Chandler (formerly from CBS’s “Early Edition”), and Colin Hanks are also pleasing in their limited roles.

Considering the majority of the movie’s midsection is non-stop action, the hardest question for the teenage boy in every male – since “What is the meaning of life?” – is “What is your favorite scene from Jackson’s King Kong?” While the T-Rex battle will most likely take the cake for the action-hounds, those with a softer side will appreciate the beauty in watching Ann and Kong observe a sunset and later dance playfully on a frozen Central Park pond.

King Kong is hands down an awe-inspiring, kinetic motion-picture that possesses an octane level high enough for rocket fuel. It’s the biggest blockbuster of the year—combining all the pluses of the 1933 original, Spielberg’s Jurassic Park, and Cameron’s Titanic. King Kong is certainly worth every dollar of its $200 million budget and worth every dime of your ticket price. Grab the biggest tub of buttery popcorn you can find and curl up with the King; it has all the trimmings of a mid-summer classic, yet it’s undeniably an early X-mas gift. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Reservoir Dogs

2005-12-15T00:49:00.000-05:00

U.S. Release Date: 10/92
Running Time: 1:36
Rated: R (Strong violence and language)
Cast: Harvey Keitel, Michael Madsen, Steve Buscemi, Tim Roth, Lawrence Tierney, Christopher Penn, Kirk Baltz, Quentin Tarantino

Director: Quentin Tarantino
Producer: Lawrence Bender
Screenplay: Quentin Tarantino
Studio: Artisan

When you throw sharp dialogue, an ingenious structure, and extreme violence in the same boat, and ignite it all with a spark by the name of Quentin Tarantino, you get a bonfire big enough to burn its image into your iris. Reservoir Dogs, Tarantino’s freshman film, is certainly the type of film that impacts the impressionable; it is taut, gripping, and gut-wrenching. While it plays out in the style of a borrowed Brit crime caper (influenced by Scorsese and Woo), it still gushes with unflinching originality.

After a jewelry heist goes wrong, four hired con-men (who are given the names of colors to conceal their identities from one another), their boss Joe Cabot (Lawrence Tierney), and his son Nice Guy Eddie (Chris Penn) all converge in an empty warehouse. Mr. White (Harvey Keitel) and Mr. Pink (Steve Buscemi) attempt to analyze how the robbery went awry, and in their evaluation, they believe one of the hired hands is a rat.

Meanwhile, Mr. Orange (Tim Roth) lies on the floor critically injured and bleeding buckets, and Mr. Blonde (Michael Madsen) arrives with a hog-tied cop (Kirk Baltz) in the trunk of his car.

No review would be complete without mentioning the “ear scene” – in which Michael Madsen dances to the Stealers Wheel tune, tortures a cop to the point of slicing off his right ear, and then douses the “pig” in gasoline. This several minute sequence displays the idiosyncrasies of Tarantino’s method of mixing gore and comedy and also proves that Madsen can be cooler than a cucumber. However, this is not the only sequence worthy of note.

Throughout the picture, a variety of other moments are also capable of causing you to cringe, laugh out loud, or even both simultaneously—showcasing Tarantino’s guts, glory, and guile. The opening conversation – culminating in Pink’s motion not to tip – dually results in a few musings and laughs. The execution of the commode story – in which Roth’s character speaks the voiceover (a technique Tarantino uses again in Sin City) – is transfixing; yet the scene itself is both witty and intense. Also, while the closing shootout may be bleak and brutal, it justly suits the dark humor that preceded it.

With its ample allowance of dark humor, Reservoir Dogs satisfies not only in script but also with structure. To showcase the jewel heist, its preparation, and exactly what went afoul, the viewer is gradually given the pieces of the puzzle in a series of rewound clips. This non-chronological, energetic approach packs twists and turns around each corner.

In addition to its twists and turns, the soundtrack to Reservoir Dogs is, in a word, ideal. As the sand of the film’s hour glass transfers from top to bottom, the viewer is treated to tunes like: “Little Green Bag,” “Hooked on a Feeling,” “I Gotcha,” “Fool for Love,” “Stuck in the Middle with You,” and finally Harry Nilsson’s “Coconut”—all as part of “K-Billy’s Super Sounds of the ‘70’s.” By avoiding a score and sticking with a soundtrack, Tarantino certainly enhances the overall experience.

In the minds of many, Reservoir Dogs is Quentin’s most tightly-focused and best work. If not the best, then it arguably comes a close second to Pulp Fiction. It’s a gangster movie without the Italian Mafia stereotypes; it’s a comedy without a heart; and, it’s a film with “masterpiece” branded on its forehead. If you want to have your stomach bathed in blood, lassoed tight, then violently wringed out by the coarsest of hands, then Reservoir Dogs is your ticket. I highly recommend it. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

What to Watch This Christmas

2005-12-09T23:55:00.000-05:00

Each and every Friday throughout the calendar year, fresh theatrical releases find their way into cinemas worldwide. With genres abounding from drama and comedy, to action and romance, there is always something for all tastes. Nevertheless, come late November/early December, Hollywood typically attempts to get movie-theater goers into the Christmas spirit by emptying their wallets for one or two holiday-oriented features. This year the evidence would be 20th Century Fox’s The Family Stone. (Films like Jarhead, The Ice Harvest, Just Friends, and Rent are also set during the holidays, but according to popular definition, these are not “holiday” pictures.)

Whatever your appetite, there is without a doubt a wide variety of Christmas treasures available on both DVD and VHS that offset other cinematic lumps of coal. Hopefully, the following list will provide you with an understanding of which films should help decorate your mantel and which motion-pictures should be buried beneath the North Pole.

Let us first start with the classics. Before the 1970’s, Santa’s cinematic sack was stuffed with lots of gifts of joy and spirit. I’m sure everyone is more than familiar with both the stop-motion animated favorite of Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer (1964) and the cartoon animated classics of Frosty the Snowman (1969), How the Grinch Stole Christmas (1966), and the 30-minute A Charlie Brown Christmas (1965), but some of the most endearing Christmas films to date came long before Alaska and Hawaii were added to Santa’s schedule of U.S. stops.

In 1946, Frank Capra helmed the outstanding story about celebrating life, entitled It’s a Wonderful Life, and one year later Kris Kringle was on trial with the fantastic Miracle on 34th Street. Finally, to round out the early Christmas ornaments, the thoroughly entertaining White Christmas (1954) is undoubtedly a holiday musical favorite.

Moving on, post-disco era to present, there are a few films that take on the comedic aspects of the holiday season, including the outright uproarious A Christmas Story (1983), the popular choice of National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation (1989), and the equally enjoyable Home Alone (1990). Also, newly added to the comical collection of Christmas features is the amusing Elf. So, whether it’s watching Ralphie nearly “shoot his eye out,” the Griswald’s family fun, Kevin defending his house, or Will Ferrell playing a six-foot tall elf named Buddy, either way, be sure your bladder is emptied of all eggnog before viewing these comedic treats.

On the other hand, if it’s originality you are searching for (that is far from a strictly inspiring or sternly side-splitting motion-picture), there are a few twinkling lights on the tree. Robert Zemeckis’ The Polar Express (2004) is highly recommended; both its computer animation and elements of faith are outright astounding. Tim Burton’s The Nightmare before Christmas (1993) is out-and-out innovative—combining the creatures of Halloween with the spirit of Christmas. Also, Scrooged (1988) is a unique and pleasant take on the frequently remade classic A Christmas Carol. In addition, for more of a dark comedy that isn’t afraid of offending anyone, search for none other than Bad Santa. Bad Santa is hands down one of the funniest films of 2003, and in terms of its Christmas laughter-inducing level, it’s right up there with A Christmas Story—just with a completely different (and more adult-oriented) tone.

In contrast, there are some full-length feature films of the Christmas variety that aren’t so hot in terms of quality. The Santa Clause (1994), its sequel (2002), and Schwarzenegger’s Jingle All the Way (1996) are cute, but just nominal, while Tim Allen’s more recent holiday endeavor, Christmas with the Kranks, is downright detestable. For a better understanding of more Yuletide refuse that should be thrown out with the leftover fruitcake, look no further than 2004’s Surviving Christmas (which was out of theatres before turkey day) and 2005's The Happy Elf (which went straight to DVD). And finally, to round out the holiday-season films that I would not touch with a 39-and-one-half foot pole is the horrible horror film Jack Frost (1997), its even more abhorrent sequel, Jack Frost 2: Revenge of the Mutant Killer Snowman (2000), and Santa Clause Conquers The Martians (1964).

Regardless, ‘tis the season to be jolly, so make sure you find a film that gets you into the spirit of the season—be it an inspirational drama, a hysterical comedy, or a fantastical fairy-tale. Hence, from me to you: happy viewing and happy holidays.

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Walk the Line

2005-12-03T00:47:00.000-05:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 11/18/05
Running Time: 2:16
Rated: PG-13 (Profanity, drugs)
Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon, Ginnifer Goodwin, Robert Patrick, Dallas Roberts, Dan John Miller, Larry Bagby, Shelby Lynne, Lucas Till

Director: James Mangold
Producers: James Keach, Cathy Konrad
Screenplay: Gill Dennis & James Mangold, based on the biographies of Johnny Cash
Music: Johnny Cash (songs)
Studio: 20th Century Fox

One would assume that with the recent influx of musical bio-pics (Ray and Beyond the Sea), the rise-fall-rise formula – tweaked with infidelity, drugs, and music – would become stale. However, Walk the Line does the two-step around both Ray and Beyond the Sea by incorporating the heartfelt love story of June Carter and Johnny Cash. Under Mangold’s direction, Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon dish out two faultless character portraits. Consequently, these nominee-worthy actors’ ability to cover Cash and Carter’s classic hits elevate Walk the Line’s entertainment value to plentiful.

The film chronicles the life of county music legend John R. Cash (Joaquin Phoenix). Born in Arkansas on a cotton farm, Johnny lived through the death of his older brother Jack (Lucas Till), and was told by his father Ray (Robert Patrick) that God took the wrong son. After spending a good amount of time in the armed forces and with his wife Vivian (Ginnifer Goodwin), Johnny finally gets his break. He auditions for Sam Phillips (Dallas Roberts) of Sun Records in Memphis, Tennessee, and before he can say “sarsaparilla,” he is aboard a tour with the likes of June Carter (Reese Witherspoon). Johnny quickly takes a liking to Miss Carter and thoroughly desires to be with her. However, a few things – their own marriages, children, and Johnny’s drug addiction – stand in the way.

Phoenix and Witherspoon provide spirited and sharpened images of their characters and belt out their own unflawed vocals. Yes, Joaquin does stumble a bit vocally when singing in the airport hanger, but just like a developing singer, with time and a microphone he becomes, “steady like a train…and sharp like a razor.” While Joaquin Phoenix’s portrayal of Cash is not as impressive as Jamie Foxx’s Ray Charles, Phoenix still does his own singing (unlike Foxx)—making Phoenix’s performance an honest and capable bid to take home the “Best Actor” prize. As for Witherspoon, it is a pleasure to see her turn towards more serious acting; she cannot be unsuccessful with such respectable and dynamic roles like this one.

In conjunction with Phoenix and Witherspoon, Robert Patrick plays Johnny’s stern and unsupportive father with the perfect intensity. Ginnifer Goodwin also adds a nice touch to the cast; although, her role is limited. In addition, Tyler Hilton, Waylon Malloy Payne, Johnathan Rice, and Shooter Jennings all cover the parts of Elvis Presley, Jerry Lee Lewis, Roy Orbison, and Waylon Jennings respectively with looks of steel and personalities of gold.

Overall, Walk the Line is a finely told tale of the pangs of Cash and Carter's love for one another and one of the better bio-pics of recent past. This musical bio-drama makes you want to strap on a guitar, slick back your hair, and go find every chart of music that bears Cash’s name. With its hub of the story centered on the two friends and soul mates, who truly loved making music together, Walk the Line rises above its formula. It is an authentic love story driven by raw human emotion and one of the better pictures of the year. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Rent

2005-11-26T01:31:00.000-05:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 11/23/05
Running Time: 2:15
Rated: PG-13 (Profanity, mature themes, violence, sexual situations, brief nudity)
Cast: Rosario Dawson, Taye Diggs, Wilson Jermaine Heredia, Jesse L. Martin, Idina Menzel, Adam Pascal, Anthony Rapp, Tracie Thoms

Director: Chris Columbus
Producers: Michael Barnathan, Chris Columbus, Robert De Niro, Mark Radcliffe, Jane Rosenthal
Screenplay: Stephen Chbosky, based on the musical play by Jonathan Larson
Music: Jonathan Larson
Studio: Columbia Pictures

The best thing that can be said about Rent is that it’s faithful to the award-winning Broadway musical. Conversely, it is easy to argue that Rent is too faithful of an adaptation—bringing its lack of character development and hammy stage theatrics along as baggage. Yes, I have seen Rent on Broadway, and yes I enjoyed it; after all, live on stage is the very medium to see Rent shine. On the other hand, as a film, Rent fails to exhilarate the viewer, yield a reasonable running-time, and light the candle within.

Set in the East Village of New York City, in the year 1989, Rent chronicles the lives of eight closely-knit friends from one Christmas to the next. Mark (Anthony Rapp) is an aspiring filmmaker, whose Jon Bon Jovi look-alike roommate, Roger (Adam Paschal), can’t seem to find the inspiration to complete a rock song on his guitar. Roger is stricken with AIDS and scared to start a relationship with Mimi (Rosario Dawson), an exotic dancer and heroin addict who lives in their building. However, considering the two roommates’ friends Tom Collins (Jesse L. Martin) and Angel (Wilson Jermaine Heredia) are also stricken with the disease, yet still carry on with love for one another, they provide all with hope.

Meanwhile, once Mark’s girlfriend Maureen (Idina Menzel) leaves him for a woman named Joanne (Tracie Thoms), Mark attempts to warn Joanne that her new lesbian lover has a hard time being faithful. Joanne takes some convincing, but soon realizes that retaining Maureen as a life partner will be a difficult task. Nevertheless, a more complicated undertaking plagues them all: the group of friends must avoid eviction from their former friend Benny (Taye Diggs), and learn to appreciate their lives day-in and day-out.

Six of its eight principals are original cast members from the 1996 world premiere. The two new additions are Rosario Dawson and Tracie Thoms, and ironically, these two boast the best vocals and emit the strongest acting emotions. Jesse L. Martin, in the role of Tom Collins, fares well in voice, but looks too old to be convincing. Wilson Jermaine Heredia stands out as Angel, the drag-queen with a caring heart, but truthfully, the Utz chips promotion is more memorable than any individual’s performance.

As for Idina Menzel who covers the part of Maureen, watching her air-suck a cow’s udder is definitely the low-point of her horrendous “artistic” performance piece. If the director wanted to embarrass Idina and cause the entire audience to be unable to stifle their overwhelming laughter, then here are two words for Mr. Columbus: mission accomplished. Personally, I could have also done without seeing her pale tattooed buttocks.

Jonathan Larkin’s original score is charging, yet mostly mediocre. While songs like “Seasons of Love,” “Rent,” “La Vie Boheme,” and even “Out Tonight” segueing into “Another Day” don’t necessarily disappoint, the majority of Rent’s numbers feel juvenile and affected. Lyrically, Rent attempts to bask in the profound and the political, but most of the words come out as spoon-fed schmaltz. While the film focuses on the effects of drug use, AIDS, and poverty, it fails to leave a lasting impression—despite continually driving home the “No day but today” theme.

In comparison to the musicals of recent-past, Rent doesn’t hold up. While Chicago cleverly incorporated its musical numbers into its script, Moulin Rouge dazzled the eye and ear, and even The Phantom of the Opera displayed a few positives in making the leap from stage to film. However, with Rent, the pauses between its musical numbers constantly deaden the pace of the film. Just as the audience senses minor emotions of elation, the screen fades to black and we are forced to wait around awhile for the next song to start.

On the whole, Rent is merely a stage show captured on camera, and the close-ups don’t do the thirtysomething leads any justice to the twentysomething parts they are playing. It also doesn’t help that the film closes with both the most ridiculous resurrection of all time and a documentary film that looks like a few snapshots carelessly thrown together. Plus, the film feels like its 525,600 minutes long.

Certainly there will be “Rentheads” who are disappointed, “Rentheads” who can’t wait for the DVD to be released, and “Non-Rentheads” (virgins to the experience) who either immensely enjoyed themselves or weren’t impressed. But, the bottom line is “Renthead” or not, Rent – as a major motion-picture – is largely cornier than a five dollar bucket of popped kernels and cheesier than a nacho tray full of processed orange goo. (** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: City of God

2005-11-19T19:14:00.000-05:00

Brazil, 2002
U.S. Release Date: 1/24/03 (limited)
Running Time: 2:15
Rated: R (Extreme violence, sexual situations, nudity, profanity, drug content)
Cast: Alexandre Rodrigues, Leandro Frimino da Hora, Phellipe Haagensen, Deu Jorge, Matheus Nachtergaele, Douglas Silva

Director: Fernando Meirelles
Producers: Andrea Barata Ribeiro, Mauricio Andrade Ramos
Screenplay: Braulio Mantovani, based on the novel by Paulo Lins
Music: Antonio Pinto, Ed Cortes
Studio: Miramax Films
In Portuguese with English subtitles

Hundreds of motion-pictures come and go year after year. Seldom, one stands out by making an indelible mark on its genre. Rarely, one soars to the status of an all-around tour de force. Yet, City of God masterfully manages to attain this very level. As it shuns the superficial and broadcasts the breadth of human violence and poverty, City of God secures a spot on the shelf alongside the acclaimed classics of The Godfather, Citizen Kane, and Cinema Paradiso.

In the favelas (slums) of Rio de Janeiro, where drug trafficking employs just as many as those who are on a fixed payroll, hostility churns between both the pre and post-pubescent gangsters and the police. The citizens of the City of God (Cicade de Deus) know they have no way out. Their violence stems from an unimaginable dearth that breeds death and establishes a never-ending cycle of suffering.

Fortunately for Rocket (Alexandre Rodrigues), his interest in photography could be his ticket out of the favela, but that won’t stop him from having run-ins with the city’s most threatening thugs. Li’l Zé (Leanadro Frimino da Hora) is the prime example of a “hood” who strives to be seen as the town’s top-tier dealer. He murders unmercifully, shows no respect, and refuses to let anyone jeopardize his rise up the hierarchy—including rivals Carrot (Matheus Nachtergaele) and Knockout Ned (Deu Jorge).

First-time director Fernando Meirelles has compiled a narrative based on actual events that includes kids whose stories are as daunting as they are intriguing. Without the slightest ounce of reserve, Meirelles takes an unflinching look at life in the ghetto. His scenes of violence, such as when Li’l Zé traps two children into a corner and forces his protégé to pull the trigger and when Knockout Ned’s girlfriend is battered and raped, are unforgettably unsettling.

City of God is so intense that, by the film’s end, you’ll swear it was in English. This Brazilian tapestry covers the harsh realities of greed, drugs, and war in the most kinetically stylized of fashions. Never before has a film so aggressively grabbed me by the collar, gone right for the jugular, and yet still shown a hint of hope and a heap of exhilarating artistry.

To further encourage all to see this motion-picture: Even after observing the quote, “This is one of the best films you’ll ever see,” (from the world’s most renowned movie critic) on the DVD’s cover art, your expectations will still be abundantly exceeded. City of God is a brilliant work of transcendence and a monumental masterpiece that blesses the eye in every way, shape, and form. If I were the curator of a cinematic museum, I would make sure that City of God had its own glorified display. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Like Water for Chocolate

2005-11-15T16:28:00.000-05:00

Mexico, 1992
U.S. Release Date: 3/93
Running Time: 1:45
Rated: R (Nudity, sexual situations, violence)
Cast: Lumi Cavazos, Marco Leonardi, Regina Torne, Mario Ivan Martinez, Yareli Arizmendi

Director: Alfonso Arau
Producer: Alfonso Arau
Screenplay: Laura Esquivel
Music: Leo Brower
Studio: Miramax Films
In Spanish with English subtitles

The title Like Water for Chocolate alludes to the Mexican custom of continually boiling a pot of water until it reaches its highest temperature – so that when the water is mixed with hard cocoa, the chocolate can easily melt and the hot cocoa can be enjoyed. This symbolic title also implies the inherent desire for lovers to release their sexual fervor by connecting the sensory with the sexual at the opportune moment.

Based on the novel by Laura Esquivel (who also penned the screenplay, narrates the motion-picture, and is the wife of the film’s director/producer Alfonso Arau), Like Water for Chocolate is a fantastical food-centric film; yet, it’s more of a lavish love story than anything else. On the whole, it is the combination of the suppressed romance and the film’s recurring food metaphors that elevate this foreign affair to the level of eroticism, enchantment, and extravagance.

In the early 1900’s, Mama Elena (Regina Torne) – a cruel widow, ranch owner, and mother of three daughters – informs her youngest, Tita (Lumi Cavazos), that she will never marry. Instead, in accordance with the family tradition, Tita must remain single and look after her mother until she dies.

Ignorant to this family tradition, Pedro Muzquiz (Marco Leonardi) falls in love with Tita. In an effort to get closer to the woman of his dreams, he agrees to marry Tita’s older sister Rosaura (Yareli Arizmendi). However, Pedro still longs for the touch of Tita, and Tita still incessantly yearns for Pedro. Through her frustration, Tita learns to expend her sexual energy into the food that she prepares, and in doing so she impacts those around her in grandiose ways.

Her sister Gertrudis (Claudette Maillé) is so aroused by Tita’s quail with garlic and rose petal sauce that she is spontaneously swept off her feet by a revolutionary cowboy. Her other sister, Rosaura, is assigned to a special diet to cope with her severe digestion problems, and the love of her life, Pedro, is awestruck by Tita’s attempts to gain his heart via his stomach.

Undoubtedly, the heart of the picture is in examining the effects of Tita’s cuisines on others; whatever emotion she pours into the recipe, the results are easily observable. She possesses the ability to stir her sentiments into a batter and bake them into an entrée, and by doing so, she is able to speak to those around her in a manner that does not require verbal communication.

In all of its wonder, Like Water for Chocolate is a story that combines the oppression of Cinderella, the mysticism of Babette’s Feast, and the sumptuous beauty of Romeo and Juliet. It is a magical tale straight from the heart of Mexico that covers all the bases from repression to freedom and jealousy to tragedy. For a voluptuously delicious cinematic comida, Like Water for Chocolate is sure to spike your senses. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Derailed

2005-11-12T13:24:00.000-05:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 11/11/05
Running Time: 1:45
Rated: R (Violence, profanity, sexual situations, rape)
Cast: Clive Owen, Jennifer Aniston, Vincent Cassel, Melissa George, Addison Timlin, Giancarlo Esposito, RZA

Director: Mikael Håfström
Producer: Lorenzo di Bonaventura
Screenplay: Stuart Beattie, based on the novel by James Siegel
Music: Edward Shearmur
Studio: The Weinstein Company/Miramax Films

With a near nonexistent advertising budget for Derailed, The Weinstein Company opted to conserve its cash and hope that their A-list actors were enough to increase the head-counts in every theater. Even though the best reason to see Derailed is for the impulsive infidelity of its marquee actors, the film is mostly implausible, ridden with clichés, and entirely predictable. Anyone familiar with the ways of the genre will be correctly suspect from the onset of the action.

After a chance meeting on the commuter train to work, advertising executive Charles Schine (Clive Owen) and financial advisor Lucinda Harris (Jennifer Aniston) hit it off and begin an affair. Despite the fact that both are married and have a daughter, they allow their passion for one another to escalate to the point of purchasing a hotel room.

Once inside the hotel room, Charles and Lucinda are interrupted by Philippe Laroche (Vincent Cassel), a French criminal who wants more than their money. After holding the two at gunpoint and stealing Charles’ wallet, he beats Charles to a pulp and rapes Lucinda. Knowing that Charles and Lucinda were having an affair, he threatens to both inform and harm Charles’ wife (Melissa George) and kid (Addison Timlin) unless he receives a large sum of money.

Much like a combo of his characterizations from Closer and Sin City, Clive Owen is able to exude the full embodiment of the protagonist in distress with ease. Similarly, Vincent Cassel draws on his role as the villain in Ocean’s 12 and effortless plays the part of the maniacal gum-chewing antagonist. Aniston, on the other hand, is difficult to accept as the anti-girl next door. Nonetheless, by depicting her potential depth in films like this one and The Good Girl, she is surely on the path to becoming a more mature and prevalent Hollywood star.

Surprisingly, the Wu Tang Clan’s RZA and MTV’s Pimp My Ride’s Xzibit hold their own in their respective roles. While RZA stands out more with his charming wit, Xzibit simply doubles as an outline for your stereotypical sidekick thug.

Derailed is not a bad movie; it’s just too much of an obvious amalgamation of films like Unfaithful, Fatal Attraction, and Cape Fear to be called original and unpredictable. Yes, it has its parts of successful suspense and dynamic drama, but the picture is more generic and protracted than anything else. With its “December” epilogue that pays homage to the horror genre (in a sense that the killer, who is presumed dead, comes back for one final scare), Derailed renders the effectiveness of its artificial ending defunct.

In one of its opening scenes, Derailed mentions the importance of possessing an intriguing narrative and sucking people into the storyline. Sadly, Derailed doesn’t practice what it preaches. While it is marginally better than your average thriller, in this day-and-age, that ain’t saying much. With an obvious twist and one-too-many unlikely occurrences on its tracks, this train leaves the rails and violently collapses on its side. (** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Eat Drink Man Woman

2005-11-02T22:29:00.000-05:00

Taiwan, 1994
U.S. Release Date: 8/3/94
Running Time: 2:04
Rated: Not Rated (Mature themes)
Cast: Sihung Lung, Kuei-Mei-Yang, Chien-Lien Wu, Yu-Wen Wang, Winston Chao, Chao-Jung Chen

Director: Ang Lee
Producer: Li-Kong Hsu
Screenplay: Ang Lee, James Schamus, and Hui-Ling Wang
Music: Mader
Studio: The Samuel Goldwyn Company
In Mandarin with English subtitles

From the director of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, The Wedding Banquet, and the imminent 2005 Oscar contender Brokeback Mountain, comes this charming Chinese food film entitled Yin shi nan nu, which literally translates to “eat, drink, sex.” With Ang Lee’s Eat Drink Man Woman, these essential ingredients of life serve as both a substitute for communication in the characters’ familial relationships and the crux of the storyline. By gracefully and colorfully blending the enriching traditions of food with the love and nostalgia of the father-daughter bond, Lee makes Eat Drink Man Woman a universally heartfelt and harmonious drama.

Every Sunday, father, widower, and master chef Tao Chu (Sihung Lung) slaves over the hot stove and cooks an extensive multiple-course-meal for himself and his three unappreciative daughters. Jia-Jen (Kuei-Mei-Yang), the oldest, is a chemistry teacher in her late twenties, and in-between her lectures on valance electrons and orbitals, she chooses to look after her aging father, lament the loss of her former lover, and worship Jesus Christ as her loving savior. Jia-Chen (Chien-Lien Wu), the middle daughter, is a busy corporate executive for a major airline company. Jia-Ning (Yu-Wen Wang), the youngest of the three, is a cashier - at the local Wendy’s fast-food restaurant – who inadvertently steals her friend’s boyfriend.

At each of the Chu’s Sunday meals (or “torture rituals” as the three daughters label them), someone exclaims, “I have an announcement to make.” With these words, the words that follow initially appear detrimental to the very fabric of the family. When Jia-Chen explains that she is moving out, or when Jia-Jen and Jia-Ning discuss their wishes to marry, Master Chu realizes that just like his sense of taste, his girls are leaving him in his old-age. However, the actions that push the family farther apart ultimately bring them closer together.

Eat Drink Man Woman drives home the theme that fathers knows best. Throughout the film, Chu’s Confucian fatherly figure – for the most part – lacks fluent communication with his daughters; yet, in the end, he exploits the strength of family ties and the importance of verbalizing his love. Even though there may have been both a contrast between his and his children’s attitude towards the dynamics of the family and a distinct separation between their perceptions of being selfish and selfless, Chu elects to redefine himself and his relationship with his daughters.

Perhaps Eat Drink Man Woman’s most intriguing attribute is that, amid all of its poignant family moments, it still manages to incorporate a few unexpected twists. Not that the film goes as far as turning everything that has come before on its ear, but when the plot does twist, it is entirely unpredictable and surprisingly effective.

Eat Drink Man Woman is mellow, moving, and visually stunning. And even though it is slow-moving at times, never is it boring. With its wondrous cinematography (especially the walk-through of the monstrous kitchen and the pan of the final family dinner) and neatly trimmed script, Eat Drink Man Woman defines itself as one of the most lustrous food films to date.

At one point in this flavorsome film, Master Chu tells his friend, “My food is only as good as the expression on your face.” If the same line of thinking is applied to this film experience, most are certain to exit their seats with a smile that is warm and hearty. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Saw II

2005-10-31T23:42:00.000-05:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 10/28/05
Running Time: 1:33
Rated: R (grisly violence and gore, terror, language, and drug content)
Cast: Donnie Wahlberg, Tobin Bell, Shawnee Smith, Franky G, Beverley Mitchell, Dina Meyer, Glenn Plummer, Emmanuelle Vaugier, Erik Knudsen, Tony Nappo, Noam Jenkins, Lyriq Bent, Tim Burd, John Fallon

Director: Darren Lynn Bousman
Producers: Peter Block, Jason Constantine, Stacey Testro, James Wan, Leigh Whannell
Screenplay: Darren Lynn Bousman and Leigh Whannel
Music: Charlie Clouser
Studio: Lions Gate Films

Following the success of last October’s overrated independent horror hit Saw, Lions Gate Films and Twisted Pictures immediately began scampering around like chickens with their heads cut off. What they sought was an already written screenplay to adapt into a Saw sequel. Luckily, they found Darren Lynn Bousman’s “The Departed”—a story that features eight people trapped in a house of torture.

Once the rights to Bousman’s script were acquired, returning screenwriter Leigh Whannell was instantly assigned to work with Bousman in morphing his premise into what would be Saw II. While the duo’s product does preserve the same dark, gritty texture of Saw—equipped with another revelation ending, this time – with a new writer/director – Saw II features a tighter plot, improved acting, and more crimson-colored liquid.

When Jigsaw (Tobin Hall) is captured by the authorities, the police believe that his games have ceased. However, upon uncovering Jigsaw’s lair, detective Eric Matthews (Donnie Wahlberg) also unveils a series of monitors, which display a video-feed of eight people trapped in an unidentifiable house. Among these eight people are Eric’s son (Eric Knudsen) and a previous survivor of one of Jigsaw’s tests named Amanda (Shawnee Smith). Eric is told that his son and the seven others will die in two hours due to a nerve agent that poisons each player with each breath. Considering there is a tremendous lack of leadership within the group of eight, Eric and his one-time partner Kerry (Dina Meyer) must figure out the location of the house and not forget that at all times they are subjected to Jigsaw’s rules.

Even though N.K.O.T.B.’s Donnie Wahlberg and “Becker”’s Shawnee Smith aren’t exactly the cream-of-the-crop off of Hollywood's shelf, they still dole out better acting than the original’s Cary Elwes, Leigh Whannell, and Danny Glover combined. In addition, Tobin Hall takes center-stage and leads the cast with his sadistic portrayal of Jigsaw. His dialogue with Donnie Wahlberg’s character – explaining his motives – is the film’s highlight in terms of spoken word.

There is no doubt that Saw II – like its precursor – is not for the squeamish. In some of the film’s most disturbing scenes a man must extract his right eyeball in order to live, a pyromaniac is burned within the walls of an oven, and a drug addict is literally thrown into a pool of hypodermic needles. On the other hand, these scenes should come as no surprise to any fan of the first film—considering (right from the get-go) the villain forewarns, “Oh yes, there will be blood.”

In more ways than one, Saw II is most certainly a step ahead of its predecessor. Even though common gripe would be the lack of character development given to each of the victims, individual backstories of expendable characters are typically unimportant in the horror genre. For pumping out a sequel only one year after the original’s release, the result is pretty impressive. On the flipside, with more funds in the Saw cash drawer, it is evident that both Bousman and Whannell must have purchased a whet stone pre-production—because this time around, the blade was wisely sharpened prior to pushing the record button and allowing the butchery to begin.

Surely, the Saw films have defined themselves as the horror franchise of the new millennium. While Saw II isn’t exactly faultless, you get more bang for your buck--compared to the original. Bring on the third and fourth installments. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: 11:14

2005-10-22T11:41:00.000-04:00

United States, 2003
U.S. Release Date: 10/11/05 (DVD)
Running Time: 1:25
Rated: R (Violence, sexuality, and pervasive language)
Cast: Hilary Swank, Colin Hanks, Rachael Leigh Cook, Henry Thomas, Shawn Hatosy, Barbara Hershey, Patrick Swayze, Ben Foster, Clark Gregg, Blake Heron

Director: Greg Marcks
Producers: Mark Damon, Stewart Hall, Jeff Kwatinetz, Sammy Lee, David Rubin, Hilary Swank, Tripp Vinson
Screenplay: Greg Marcks
Music: Clint Mansell
Studio: New Line Cinema

Subsequent to trumpeting through the festival circuit in 2003 and garnering all positive remarks, 11:14 never received the widespread US distribution that first-time writer/director Greg Marcks desired. Instead, more than two years after his picture debuted at various film festivals, New Line finally released 11:14 - in one theater - and then dumped it on DVD. It is truly an indignity that so few eyes have been privileged to this film; this ultra-limited release truly is a treasure of a find.

The definitive reason why a major production company did not purchase Marcks’ feature sooner was that no studio could decide on how to market the film. Was it a clever gimmick, a black comedy, or an insistent drama? Well, the answer is: all of the above. 11:14 is a screenplay that any writer would be proud of; it’s taut, original, and capable of captivating an audience as it folds back upon itself in a deeply intriguing manner.

11:14 has already been called a combination of Go, Crash, and Memento. Yes, it’s an intertwining ensemble piece, and yes, the story unfolds in a non-chronological order; however, this film applies an entirely different central premise than the aforementioned.

In eighty-five minutes, 11:14 connects the lives of 11 characters in five separate storylines. Each of these character’s actions crisscross with negative consequences, as the clock strikes precisely 11:14 pm—unveiling murder, deceit, and a series of sorrowful emotions. Providing any more details would most likely lessen the shock-value of each plot element as it is revealed.

While Marcks’ direction is superb—for a new-comer to the game, his concept of the reality of time seems a little distorted. For instance, Cheri’s last 20 minutes feel more like 45. In addition, Marcks could have easily tacked on an additional 15-20 minutes to the conclusion to both provide closure and allow the characters to breathe. Nonetheless, this writer/director wholly succeeds with a crisp script packed with creative characterizations and sharp twists—making his name one to keep an eye on in the future.

A sterner gripe can be made with Clint Mansell’s soundtrack. After handling the score to Darren Aronofsky’s Requiem for a Dream (one of the best cinematic score’s of all-time), better is expected. Also, with a lackluster rendition of “These Boots Are Made For Walkin’,” playing over the film’s final minutes, one has to ask, why would such a distractingly unpleasant track be chosen to match such a finely-crafted closing?

Nevertheless, in stressing the repercussions of unethical acts and the power of karma, Greg Marcks’ well thought-out debut is worth every penny spent, as well as your time. Go out and rent it; heck, go out and buy it. And, if you really want to impress your friends, start the film at 9:49 pm—that way, as the credits roll, the clock will read precisely 46 to midnight. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Babette's Feast

2005-10-14T12:51:00.000-04:00

United States, 1987
U.S. Release Date: 10/1/87
Running Time: 1:43
Rated: G
Cast: Stephanie Audran, Birgitte Federspiel, Bodil Kjer, Bibi Anderson, Jarl Kulle, Jean-Philippe Lafont, Ebbie Rode

Director: Gabriel Axel
Producers: Just Betzer and Bo Christensen
Screenplay: Gabriel Axel, based on the short story by Isak Dinesen
Music: Per Nørgård
Studio: MGM Studios
In Danish and French with English Subtitles

When it comes to films on food, some focus on the fattening, sentimental, or even social qualities of cuisine, while others spotlight its comforting capability over the mind, body, and spirit. Babette’s Feast is one such film that conforms to the latter perception. By depicting love through both sustenance and creed, Babette’s Feast establishes itself as an elegant and profoundly religious plate-of-art that binds us all together as living, loving, and sentient beings.

Based on the short story by Isak Dinesen, Babette’s Feast tells the story of twin sisters, Martina (Birgitte Federspiel) and Philippa (Bodil Kjer,), who live on Denmark’s Jutland peninsula, during the late nineteenth century.

In their younger years, Martina (Vibeke Hastrup) easily attracted the likes of Lieutenant Lorens Lowenhielm (Gudmar Wivesson), while Philippa (Hanne Stensgaard) effortlessly enticed Achille Papin (Jean-Phillipe Lafont)—a famous opera singer. Nevertheless, the sisters declined their respective suitors in order to remain dedicated to their father’s (Pouel Kern) ministry of helping others.

Thirty five years later, now that their father has been long deceased, the two saintly siblings continue to carry on their father’s preaching of responsibility and charity and serve as the heads of the small Danish village’s religious sect. Practicing what they preach, the sisters graciously welcome a stricken French woman, named Babette (Stéphane Audran), into their home. After realizing that Babette was sent in the name of Achille Papin and that her entire family had been killed in Paris, Martina and Philippa embrace their guest and begin to teach her how to boil cod and make ale-bread soup—the mainstay diet within the poverty-stricken sect.

It isn’t until after 14 years of service, that Babette feels as though she is truly able to repay the sisters with a splendid French feast. The sisters allow Babette to cook the extensive meal for the 100th anniversary of their departed father’s birth, and it just so happens that the now decorated General Lowenhielm (Jarl Kulle) is invited.

Despite Babette’s Feast being slow-moving during its first half, the pace quickens in the climactic second half throughout the preparation, presentation, and consumption of the feast. At this point, Director Gabriel Axel skillfully conducts Babette’s kitchen as if it was a symphony—providing the utmost attention to detail. In both the preparing of the food and the presenting of the drink, Axel utilizes the bubbling of the pots, the fizzing of the champagne, and the soft clanking of the silverware to a blissful extreme. In doing so, he wisely avoids any type of musical fanfare that forces the audience to feel a certain way; instead, he allows the near silence to reveal the sincerity that Babette pours into making each delicacy as perfect as humanly possible.

Babette’s Feast is a beautiful reminder of how bountiful the banquet of life can truly be. It is a picture that promotes peace and tolerance and trumpets the importance of overcoming self-doubts, displaying God-given talents, and uniting a community in meal, song, and praise. With the capacity to both make your tastebuds dance and fill your heart with hope, Babette’s Feast is guaranteed to satisfy.

When asked to recommend a film that champions food and its ties to the body and soul, no other film is more exquisitely superb and wonderfully nourishing than Babette’s Feast. This 1987 Oscar winner for “Best Foreign Language Film” reigns queen of all that is culinary and cinematic. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: The Milagro Beanfield War

2005-10-09T15:28:00.000-04:00

United States, 1988
U.S. Release Date: 3/18/88
Running Time: 1:57
Rated: R (Profanity, violence)
Cast: Chick Vennera, Carlos Riquelme, Christopher Walken, Sonia Braga, Daniel Stern, John Heard, Melanie Griffith, Julie Carmen, Richard Bradford, Ruben Blades

Director: Robert Redford
Producers: Moctesuma Esparza, Robert Redford
Screenplay: David Ward and John Nichols, based on the novel by John Nichols
Music: Dave Grusin
Studio: Universal Pictures

Much like John Nichols’ 1974 novel of the same name, The Milagro Beanfield War is difficult to label as either a comedy/drama or a fantasy/shoot-‘em-up western. Despite this uncertainty of the film’s genre, Milagro displays a few fine moments of dramatic folklore and joy. However, in all of its warmth, the film possesses too many instances where its elation is broken up by unnecessarily erratic scenes.

In Milagro, New Mexico, a town that translates to “miracle” in Spanish, a clash between the quirky residents and the unjust authorities ensues. It all starts when Joe Mondragon (Chick Vennera) accidentally kicks a water main open—causing water to trickle down into his father’s old bean field. The only problem is that the water does not belong to Joe; it belongs to a band of developers, headed by Ladd Devine (Richard Bradford), who plans on transforming the town into a recreational center—equipped with condos, ski-slopes, and an 18-hole golf course.

By using the company’s water, Joe divides the town into supporters and cynics. Among the supporters are: Ruby (Sonia Braga), a local garage owner, Charlie Bloom (John Heard), a former attorney who now serves as the town’s newspaper editor, Herbie Platt (Daniel Stern), a NYU sociology student who is conducting research on the locals, and Amarante Cordova (Carlos Riquelme), the town’s oldest citizen who talks to angels and his pig. Meanwhile, as the town sheriff (Ruben Blades) attempts to mediate the far-from-gun-shy townspeople, a hired gun – named Montana (Christopher Walken) – is out to stop Joe from irrigating his land and end the community’s quarrel with modernity.

With The Milagro Beanfield War, it is difficult to distinguish exactly what Redford wants to stress. Is he pushing the preservation of land, the rise of the working-class, or the influence of the Anglo/Spanish/Indian culture? All of these themes – while intriguing in their own rite – appear to lose each other in the mix.

Sadly, between both Milagro’s fantastical scenes and Dave Grusin’s Academy Award winning score, a few weaker scenes jut out. For instance, Redford’s incorporation of numerous construction scenes – that are egregiously louder than any of the dialogue – is enormously distracting. In addition, scenes like the playful dancing of the angel at the beginning of the film followed by the argumentative town meeting further allow the film’s focus to become fuzzy.

In the case of The Milagro Beanfield War, most will exit their chairs feeling neutral—moved by its communal sentiments, yet unhappy with its unevenness. Nonetheless, it is inspiring to know that such a collective movement can be spiked by a simple batch of legumes. It’s just too bad Redford didn’t apply the correct concoction of water and sunlight to this screenplay. With a bit more emotion and focus, and less seams in the storyline, The Milagro Beanfield War could have been a picture worth harvesting. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Flightplan

2005-10-02T22:12:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 9/23/05
Running Time: 1:28
Rated: PG-13 (Violence, profanity)
Cast: Jodie Foster, Peter Sarsgaard, Sean Bean, Kate Beahan, Erika Christensen, Marlene Lawston

Director: Robert Schwentke
Producer: Brian Grazer
Screenplay: Peter A. Dowling and Billy Ray
Music: James Horner
Studio: Touchstone Pictures

Taking on only her sixth role in ten years, Jodie Foster tackles the task of playing a bereaved mother in distress. Similar to her most recent role in 2002’s Panic Room, Foster puts her guts and brains to the test and allows the waterworks to flow for her young daughter. However, unlike the airtight, white-knuckling, and entirely feasible Panic Room, Flightplan is mild on might, mediocre on suspense, and not wholly credible.

While aboard a newly-designed double-decker 474 airplane, aeronautics engineer Kyle Pratt (Jodi Foster) awakens to find that her six-year-old daughter Julia (Marlene Lawston) is missing. The funny thing is: when Kyle demands the crew to search for her only offspring, not one soul onboard even remembers ever seeing the child. In fact, the airline’s records show that her seat was never paid for, and when the plane left the ground, it was unoccupied. Already tried by the recent death of her husband, Kyle must prove her sanity to the captain (Sean Bean) or else solve the mystery on her own.

Flightplan is much like The Forgotten in a sense that the female protagonist’s child disappears, and despite what the mother exclaims, the lack of evidence dismisses her claims and deems them senseless. Even so, Flightplan is a step ahead; its lead is capable of carrying the picture beyond its inconsistencies, and as a thriller, the production is bearable.

Perhaps, the film’s most redeeming quality is the adamancy that Foster exhibits. She is absolutely unrelenting in her search to unite with her daughter, whom she believes to be alive. Unlike her costars, her emotions run high. Peter Sarsgaard, fresh off of his make-out scene with Liam Neeson, is largely lethargic, yet convincing when he needs to be. On the other hand, Erika Christensen, Sean Bean, and Marlene Lawston are all underused.

While Flightplan is a tad mindless, especially in both clarifying some of its unclear aspects and justifying how a few conversations go unheard, it still doesn’t come up bankrupt—like so many airline companies today. Even though one scene in particular – where the aircraft’s passengers applaud – is inexplicable and the screenwriters come off as a little lazy, Flightplan still remains mostly engrossing. Sadly, if you have seen the trailer, you already know nearly 70% of the storyline.

Flightplan doesn’t exactly soar, yet it doesn’t necessarily crash and burn either. The million-dollar question is: are its errors subtle enough for the majority to overlook them? Unfortunately, the answer is no. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: This Is Spinal Tap

2005-09-28T16:02:00.000-04:00

United States, 1984
U.S. Release Date: 3/2/84
Running Time: 1:22
Rated: R (Profanity, mature themes)
Cast: Rob Reiner, Michael McKean, Christopher Guest, Harry Shearer, Tony Hendra, June Chadwick, David Kaff

Director: Rob Reiner
Producer: Karen Murphy
Screenplay: Rob Reiner, Michael McKean, Christopher Guest, Harry Shearer
Music: Rob Reiner, Michael McKean, Christopher Guest, Harry Shearer
Studio: Embassy Pictures

Anyone who has ever been a member of an 80’s glam-rock band, has seen one on stage, or has just watched one of those “Behind the Music” TV spots, will enjoy in the brilliance of This Is Spinal Tap. Its characters are exceedingly pathetic; its antics are blatantly preposterous; and for precisely these reasons, Spinal Tap is downright hilarious. In terms of its comedic and cinematic excellence, Tap most certainly sits among the top. Spinal Tap is truly the greatest and most ground-breaking “mockumentary” and one of the funniest films ever brought to fruition.

This is Spinal Tap documents the life of the United Kingdom’s “loudest” band entitled Spinal Tap. The band consists of David St. Hubbins (Michael McKean) on lead vocals, Nigel Tufnel (Christopher Guest) on lead guitar, Derek Smalls (Harry Shearer) on bass, Vic Savage (Tony Hendra) on keys, and a variety of drummers who sadly always perish from some unlikely cause.
In the film, documenter Mary DiBergi, played by the film’s director Rob Reiner, attempts to capture both an understanding of Spinal Tap’s change in musical interest over their 17-year life – through behind-the-scenes interviews and footage – and the highlights of their current United States tour.

The band has just unleashed their 15th album, “Smell the Glove,” and in promoting this musical marvel, the band pumps out such hits as: “Hell Hole,” “Big Bottom,” and “Sex Farm.” However, American audiences don’t seem to be taking a liking to Spinal Tap’s sound, and the band can no longer pack the large arenas like they once could. When David’s girlfriend Jeanine Pettibone (June Chadwick) arrives on the scene, she takes over as band manager; the group further spirals into shame—accepting gigs at the local Air Force base and playing the opening act for a puppet show.

Throughout its curt 82-minute running time, This Is Spinal Tap overflows with opportunities to induce laughter. From Derek Small’s staged metamorphosis pod not opening on cue, to the 18 inch model of Stonehenge being lowered from the rafters—followed by the quote, “Our prop was in danger of being crushed by dwarfs,” Spinal Tap ensures that you’ll laugh so hard, that you will not only strain your abdominals, but you will also witness a near bodily earthquake.

In addition, Spinal Tap is chock full of celebrity cameos. For instance, Ed Begley, Jr. plays the band’s first drummer; Fran Drescher plays Bobbi Flekman, Tap’s public relations person; Billy Crystal and Dana Carvey serve as two mime waiters; Paul Schaffer covers the hilarious role of Artie Fufkin—quoting “Kick my ass,” over and over again; Angelica Houston plays Polly Deutsch, the band’s prop design specialist; and Fred Willard makes an appearance as the Lieutenant in charge of the Air Force base’s entertainment.

With all of the pros aside, this must-see recommendation does come with one caveat: in order to fully enjoy all of the laughs that are meant to be had, you must be privy to both the ridiculousness of ‘80’s rock and the ongoing challenge that aging musicians face in trying to keep their rock-star status afloat. With these two aspects in mind, it is nearly impossible for any viewer to leave his/her seat unhappy.

Even though Spinal Tap is centered on a fictitious band, the film truly feels like an authentic documentary every step of the way. (For more of this eccentric and sardonic filming, check out Christopher Guest’s Waiting for Guffman and Best in Show.) By taking a stab at nearly every rock ‘n roll convention, Reiner’s film defies logic and becomes both ridiculously funny and insanely intelligent. With a perfect mix of idiocy and ingenuity, the entire production team amplifies the picture “up to 11.” Spinal Tap is a bona-fide classic, the quintessential “rockumentary,” a film that tackles its own texture, and a justifiable cult phenomenon.

Christopher Guest’s character Nigel says it best when he quotes, “There is a fine line between stupid and clever;” and within the world of Hollywood, a better truth could not be spoken. Fortunately for Spinal Tap, its positives can be found on both sides of the line. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Diner

2005-09-17T16:41:00.000-04:00

United States, 1982
U.S. Release Date: 3/5/05
Running Time: 1:50
Rated: R
Cast: Steve Guttenberg, Daniel Stern, Mickey Rourke, Kevin Bacon, Timothy Daly, Ellen Barkin, Paul Reiser

Director: Barry Levinson
Producers: Jerry Weintraub, Mark Johnson
Screenplay: Barry Levinson
Studio: MGM

Have you ever entered a restaurant to convene with company more so than to dine? For some reason, when friends meet at table, familial bonds develop; it’s not only the served sustenance that keeps them nourished, but it’s also the communal conversation and the ephemeral laughter. Barry Levinson’s directorial debut, Diner, skillfully depicts a succinct link between six friends’ love for gravy fries, cherry-cola, and each other.

Set during the Christmas Season of 1959, in the city of Baltimore, Diner showcases a pack of brotherly best friends who are wrestling with the transition from adolescence to adulthood. Shrevie (Daniel Stern) is having trouble communicating with his recently wed wife, Beth (Ellen Barkin). Eddie (Steve Guttenberg) is set to tie the knot with his fiancée, but first, his soon-to-be bride must pass a quiz on Eddie’s beloved Baltimore Colts. In the meantime, Boogie (Mickey Rourke) – the sly hairdresser/law student – digs himself into deep debt with the local bookie, and Fenwick (Kevin Bacon) drinks his troubles away; Modell (Paul Reiser) continues to “beat around the bush,” and Billy (Timothy Daly) pleads with his pregnant girlfriend to marry him so they can raise their child together.

As the young men discuss everything from women and football, to rock n’ roll and cars, first-time writer/director Barry Levinson does a praiseworthy job. Levinson succeeds in vacuuming the viewers’ focus into characters that are amiable and relatable. He cleverly incorporates both a spectacular spat over a roast beef sandwich and a superb discussion between Eddie and Shrevie concerning the married life. In addition, Levinson also makes the wise decision of keeping a trivial character’s face hidden from sight to avoid any unnecessary attachment.

Serving as the springboard for all seven of the film’s main players, Diner elevated every one of its twenty-somethings into Hollywood success. Even though Rourke and Guttenberg basically scrapped their acting careers with boxing and the Police Academy series respectively, both shine as if they were on their way to superstardom. On the other hand, while Stern and Barkin both dole out emotionally superb performances, Bacon and Daly merely blend in with the background.

Unfortunately, Diner does exhibit a few weaknesses in cohesiveness, attention to detail, and establishing a core built on emotional sentimentality. The film’s intro and outro feel void of much-needed drama, and its pacing could be better throughout. Perhaps the most tiresome of Diner’s downfalls is its inability to make musicians look like musicians. When anyone playing a musical instrument is visible, no effort is taken to make their hands appear remotely in rhythm with the recording. Nonetheless, the picture’s faults (big or small) do not bog down the production enough to cause the film to be forgettable.

The picture’s best aspects are in its witty chatter and its coming-of-age camaraderie. Diner is a film that champions conversation and promotes personal growth. Moreover, it is Steve Guttenberg’s lone shining moment and much more intellectually appetizing than Porky’s as an 80’s anthem for young adults. In fact, in most cases, the post-pubescent connection with the characters is so strong that you feel like you’re sitting in the nearby steel-and-vinyl booth—eavesdropping on the young men’s friendly banter.

Through the metaphorical comparison of a single frame found mid-film, which depicts the marrying of ketchup, Diner’s theme can be perfectly realized. Just as the tomato paste slowly slides from one glass bottle to another, Diner’s male characters shift from immaturity and manhood; their old self is left behind, and a new feeling of being complete, full-hearted, and actualized is found. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Red Eye

2005-09-04T11:36:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 8/19/05
Running Time: 1:25
Rated: PG-13 (Violence, profanity)
Cast: Rachel McAdams, Cillian Murphy, Brian Cox

Director: Wes Craven
Producers: Chris Bender, Marianne Maddalena
Screenplay: Carl Ellsworth
Music: Marco Beltrami
Studio: Dreamworks

With Red Eye, director Wes Craven has stepped outside of the box. Not within his horror comfort-zone, Craven manages to prove that he is capable of creating a cerebral thriller unlike his typical fare. Red Eye represents a tremendous growth in Craven’s career and quite possibly the peak of McAdams’ and Murphy’s as well. Red Eye is a taut, condensed suspense thriller that, just like its leads, is fresh, electric, and in no way congealed.

While attempting to return to Miami on a red eye flight, Lisa Reisert (Rachel McAdams) meets Jackson Rippner (Cillian Murphy). Jackson seems charming at first, but Lisa soon realizes that his intentions are sinister. Lisa must comply with Jackson and assist him in assassinating the Director of Homeland Security (Jack Scalia), or else her father (Brian Cox) will be killed.

Despite its lengthy set-up, Red Eye’s tension crescendos up until the film’s final scene—where time is finally allocated for an exhale. Even as the wheels meet the runway and the leads begin to play an action-packed and intelligent game of cat-and-mouse, the film's apprehension caroms to an increasingly heightened level. Not only does Red Eye solidly snowball its tension throughout, but it also maintains plausibility around every corner.

Rachel McAdams' performance should give off a high--similar to the altitude of where the plane flies. Yes, she really is that good. The fear and intensity that she so effortlessly displays not only sets her apart from all of the previous air-heads that Craven has utilized, but it also places her on the path of becoming the next American Sweetheart (i.e. Julia Roberts). After The Hot Chick, Mean Girls, The Notebook, Wedding Crashers, and now Red Eye, McAdams has continuously compounded her acting ability, and some how she just keeps getting prettier too.

As for Cillian Murphy, if there is a better living actor to play a villain in all of Hollywood, he/she has surely not yet been discovered. After spiraling off of his astonishing success – with a potato sack over his head – in Batman Begins, Murphy returns to the big-screen as an even more potent threat. The man’s facial features alone are enough to creep out any moviegoer, but because Mr. Murphy’s acting is so good, he makes it hard for viewers to turn away from the sight of him.

With its inclusion of a scar on Lisa’s chest and everyone asking her if she is alright and if she is sure, Red Eye creates a heroine who is admired by her hotel guests and coworkers, yet simultaneously insecure and unsatisfied. Only revenge and the inherent protection of the two most important men in Lisa’s life can cure this discontent. Despite Lisa’s choice to safeguard herself from love, she discovers her physical and emotional tenacity, and thereby begins to love herself.

On this level, Red Eye is deeper than your run-of-the-mill thriller. It is far from far-fetched and positively one of the most airtight thriller since 2002’s Panic Room. Certainly, as you unfasten your seat belt to exit your seat, you will be more enthused with Red Eye than irritated. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Super Size Me

2005-09-01T15:13:00.000-04:00

United States, 2004
U.S. Release Date: 5/7/04 (limited); 5/14/04 (wider)
Running Time: 1:38
Rated: Not Rated (Profanity, occasionally disgusting images)

Director: Morgan Spurlock
Producer: Morgan Spurlock
Written by: Morgan Spurlock
Studio: The Samuel Goldwyn Company

In the United States, food portions are larger than in any other country, and so are the people. Some have coined America’s rapid increase in obesity a “sudden epidemic,” and most pin this outward expansion exclusively on the fast food industry.

To prove that fast food is the driving cause of Americans’ growing girth, first-time writer/director/producer Morgan Spurlock attempts a 30-day McDonald’s binge (or as one doctor calls it a “Mac Attack”). Before overindulging in nothing but Mickey D’s, Spurlock lays out a few rules. He must eat three meals a day—entirely comprised of items on McDonald’s menu. He must order every item on the menu at least once, and he must “Super Size” a value meal when asked upon ordering.

Prior to partaking in this gluttonous experiment, Spurlock enlists himself under the care of three different physicians: a cardiologist, a gastroenterologist, and a family practitioner. Spurlock also seeks additional counsel from a dietician and an exercise physiologist. In each of the doctor’s professional opinion, Spurlock shows outstanding general health—spot-on blood pressure, normal cholesterol, low triglycerides, and flawless liver and kidney functions. However, by the end of his McDiet, the results are shocking.

Throughout his month-long pig-out on quarter-pounders, Spurlock maintains both a witty attitude and a lack of concern in depicting his degradation. Surely, vomiting out of a car-window and hearing your girlfriend complain about your energy-level in the bedroom is embarrassing. Nonetheless, Spurlock willingly depreciates himself, and in doing so, he keeps viewers entertained and enthused.

While Spurlock’s ingestion of fat is the film’s primary focus, the picture’s most intriguing moments are derived elsewhere. Through a series of various interviews with lawmakers, health experts, kids, and cooks, Spurlock reveals stunning facts and numbers. His conclusions – concerning the overall declining health of our nation and the impact that a corrupt and immoral food industry poses – are both informative and captivating. Spurlock’s interview with a few kids sums up the shock value best, when the children instantly recognize a picture of Ronald McDonald over a depiction of Jesus Christ.

While the Academy Award nominated documentary does take on a satirical overtone, its excellent graphics, super-shocking statistics, and engrossing information stress the gravity of the subject matter. Its aftereffects are daunting enough to prevent anyone from pulling up to a drive-thru after viewing. In fact, some may be so utterly disgusted with fast food that they will ban every processed food found between buns.

Is it a coincidence that six weeks after Super Size Me premiered at the 2004 Sundance Film Festival, McDonald’s expunged its “Super Size” option from their menu and suddenly became more diet conscious? I think not. Because the savvy Morgan Spurlock sacrificed his health, there may be hope for healthier choices when it comes to eating fast and inexpensive food.

Even though Super Size Me could have used crisper organization and a more in-depth analysis of both corporate social responsibility and the conundrum between economics and ethics, it is still a must-see. My order is in for Super Size Me to be projected on the moon; that way, our entire nation will be better informed about what the human body should be able to distinguish as waste before consumption. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Sin City

2005-08-29T15:09:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 4/1/05
Running Time: 2:03
Rated: R (Violence, nudity, sexual situations, profanity)
Cast: Bruce Willis, Mickey Rourke, Clive Owen, Jessica Alba, Rosario Dawson, Jamie King, Brittany Murphy, Benicio Del Toro, Nick Stahl, Elijah Wood, Michael Clarke Duncan

Directors: Robert Rodriguez, Frank Miller, Quentin Tarantino ("special guest director")Producers: Elizabeth Avellan, Frank Miller, Robert Rodriguez
Screenplay: Frank Miller & Robert Rodriguez
Music: Robert Rodriguez, John Debney, Graeme Revell
Studio: Dimension Films

Any phrase, that begins with the word “visually” and ends with a superlative adjective, could be said about Frank Miller’s Sin City. Be it “visually invigorating,” “visually arresting,” or “visually inventive,” Sin City is truly an orgasm for the eye. However, Sin City not only appeals to your sense of sight, it also allows you to feel for its captivating characters, hear the intriguing thoughts of its voiced individuals (multiple characters do not speak at all), and taste the finest adaptation of a comic-book/graphic-novel ever put into motion.

In a city full of murder, prostitution, cannibalism, and rape, three separate storylines chronicle the ways of Marv (Mickey Rourke), Dwight (Clive Owen), and Hartigan (Bruce Willis). Based on “The Hard Goodbye,” Marv is out to take vengeance on the man who killed a prostitute - who gave him the night of his life - named Goldie (Jaime King). Derived from “The Big Fat Kill,” Dwight helps a group of girls, who forcefully keep their streets clean, conceal the murder of a crooked cop named Jackie Boy (Benicio Del Toro). And finally, with “That Yellow Bastard,” Hartigan, an aging cop with a “bad ticker,” tries to protect a young girl named Nancy (Jessica Alba).

Sin City is, by far, Robert Rodriguez’s shining feature. At the very mention of his name, Sin City should crawl from the very cusp of your cerebellum right to your lips. Movie fans everywhere must learn to forget the futile time he spent working in three-dimensions, with both Spy Kids and The Adventures of Shark Boy and Lava Girl, and remember Rodriguez for his more generous deeds--like providing viewers a setting so unfamiliar, yet blissful, in Sin City. Also, after the Director’s Guild gave him slack for making Frank Miller – the author of Sin City, a co-director – Rodriguez immediately handed in his resignation. Now, if that doesn’t define commitment and class, what does?

Quentin Tarantino also makes a “special guest” appearance in the director’s chair. Responsible for the scene in which Dwight is driving to “the pits” and talking to Jackie Boy’s corpse, Tarantino wanted Jackie Boy’s Pez-dispenser-of-a-head to have an affect on his speech. Also in this scene, Tarantino directed Dwight to verbalize his thoughts, instead of using a voiceover; this way, the scene stands out and seems all-the-more surreal. With Tarantino’s garnishes and Rodriguez and Miller’s meat and potatoes, Sin City is a modern-day Pulp Fiction and a feast for comic-book noir buffs.

For those who appreciate cult classics, Sin City deserves the status. While its three-pronged storyline – jolted with brilliance – is enough to push you to your knees, its brute force and style are enough to knock you flat—face first into the mud. Sin City is as gritty as a mouthful of sand and as machismo as The World’s Strongest Man--dripping with adrenaline and infused with a drum full of anabolic steroids.

Throw all of the trash talk - concerning sexism and nihilism - down the drain, and immerse yourself in this wet, stark, and insanely satisfying endeavor. If it is a stylistic sock to the jaw and the darkest, most unabated work of the year you yearn for, then search no further; Sin City is the remedy for every cinematic woe attributed to uniformity. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: The 40-Year-Old Virgin

2005-08-29T15:02:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 8/19/05
Running Time: 1:55
Rated: R (Sexual situations, nudity, profanity, drug use)
Cast: Steve Carell, Catherine Keener, Paul Rudd, Romany Malco, Seth Rogen, Elizabeth Banks, Leslie Mann, Jane Lynch

Director: Judd Apatow
Producers: Judd Apatow, Shauna Robertson, Clayton Townsend
Screenplay: Judd Apatow & Steve Carell
Music: Lyle Workman
Studio: Universal Pictures

Steve Carell should be a name/face you know. Many will probably distinguish him as Michael Scott from NBC TV’s “The Office,” while others will identify him as Brick – the mentally-challenged weatherman – from Anchorman. Regardless if you recognize him or not, just note that in the near future, Steve Carell will be one of comedy’s leading men. The 40-Year-Old Virgin only marks the onset of the Carell Capades.

With The 40-Year-Old Virgin being the vehicle to get Steve Carell’s cinematic career – as a lead role – off of the ground, funny-man Carell is setting his bar high. Virgin is one of the funniest films of the year, and while audiences may not match the intensity of a few laughs they had during this year’s Wedding Crashers, The 40-Year-Old Virgin kills with consistency—spreading its laughs out evenly from beginning to end. Apart from director Judd Apatow’s recent failure, Kicking and Screaming, The 40-Year-Old Virgin is a cohesive comedy that contains a healthy balance of both heart and funny bone.

At age 40, Andy Stitzer (Steve Carell) stills collects toys and reads comic books. In addition to discovering these juvenile characteristics, Andy’s male coworkers find out that their pal, Andy, is a virgin. Even though Andy imagines his first time blossoming from a relationship of love, his guy friends have other options in mind.

David (Paul Rudd), Jay (Romany Malco), and Cal (Seth Rogen), all commiserate Andy for his abstinence and submit themselves to the task of finding their friend a woman. All three give Andy endless pointers, place him in a speed-dating service, and even offer him a prostitute. However, once Andy lays his eyes on Trish (Catherine Keener), he is charmed. Andy desires to have a relationship with Trish, but a young voluptuous blonde by the name of Beth (Elizabeth Banks), offers him an alternative.

Much like Wedding Crashers, The 40-Year-Old Virgin manages to squeeze in a love story for its leading man. Nevertheless, with The 40-Year-Old Virgin, the romance works on a much greater scale. In between laughing at Andy’s loneliness and immaturity, the audience is rooting for the guy, and once he shows that he is a tactful and respectful man, he becomes a true and tender hero.

On the downside, The 40-Year-Old Virgin runs 10-15 minutes too long. In contrast, the tight script keeps the train rolling. The only point where the film shows any sign of losing steam is when Andy’s relationship inevitably crashes for a preposterous reason—just long enough to bring him to a crossroads and present him with a choice between two women. As the reel comes to an end, Andy makes the right decision (as expected)—sending viewers home happy and content.

As for those who post a limit on their raunchometers – that is, if the raunchy humor in films like American Pie and There’s Something About Mary disgusted you in any way – then chances are, you will not enjoy the randy comedy that The 40-Year-Old Virgin has to offer. Just remember, this film did not succumb to temptation and censor down for the PG-13 crowd. Conversely, if you enjoyed these two sexual, yet classic, comedies, then hold on to your hat, sit back, and enjoy the fun.

If its poster isn’t hilarious enough to provoke you into seeing the film, then take my recommendation: see The 40-Year-Old Virgin; you won’t regret it, and even on repeated viewings, it is sure to be just as satisfying as the first time. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: The Godfather Part II

2005-08-22T23:01:00.000-04:00

United States, 1974
Running Time: 3:20
Rated: R (Violence, mature themes, language)
Cast: Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, Lee Strasberg, John Cazale, G. D. Spradlin

Director: Francis Ford Coppola
Producer: Francis Ford Coppola
Screenplay: Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo based on the novel by Mario Puzo
Music: Nino Rota
Studio: Paramount Pictures
In English and Italian with subtitles

The term sequel is a word frequently applauded among production studios and appalled among critics. However, most recently, The Lord of the Rings trilogy proved that sequels can equal or better the very majesty that birthed them. In the ‘70’s, The Godfather spawned Part II – an effort that matches the marvelous original in both size and scope.

The Godfather Part II is the only sequel to grab the Oscar for Best Picture besides the 2004 winner, The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King. With that said, The Godfather Part II is an entrancing continuation of a hard-to-top masterpiece and a film that can best be described as refined, realized, and remarkable. It is the prime example of how to construct an epic motion-picture; it’s long, yet substantive in its characterizations and masterful in its presentation.

In a series of extended flashbacks, we observe the beginnings of Vito Corleone (Oreste Baldini). After both his parents and brother were murdered by Don Francesco Ciccio (Giuseppe Sillato), Vito flees to America to start anew. In America, Vito (Robert De Niro) lives as an impoverished immigrant for quite some time, but eventually, his ambitions overcome him. Before long, Vito is one of the most powerful men in New York.

Meanwhile, amid the flashbacks, we witness the growth of both Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) and his inherited Mafia empire. Some forty years later, the times are changing, and so are the family’s relations. Michael soon suspects that there is a traitor within the Family. In addition, he realizes that both his sister Connie (Talia Shire) and wife Kay (Diane Keaton) are becoming rebellious and untrusting. Michael must identify who sold him out, restore his family’s ties, and attempt to make the Family business legitimate once more.

As expected, the acting is top-of-the-line. Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, and John Cazale all return and provide exceptional support. Robert De Niro is superlative as the young Vito—exhibiting both signs of Brando’s signature raspy voice and a spot-on Italian dialect. Lastly, Al Pacino is both convincing and menacing in his reprise role of Michael. He successfully makes it apparent that his character truly cherishes his father’s values and wants to uphold his legacy. At the same time, the expression on his face – post Kay’s revelation – is priceless. There should be no question as to why Pacino was nominated for Best Actor in a Leading Role in 1975.

Is Part II better than the original? As far as I am concerned, both are compelling enough to be deemed masterworks. While Part II does not quite keep on pace with the emotions and iconography of its predecessor, its style of splitting the storylines and driving home the sizeable “like-father-like-son” theme is exquisite. Three cheers for The Godfather Part II – one of the best sequels in all of cinema. I bow to thee and kiss thy hand; The Godfather saga of the ‘70’s governs absolute. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Guess Who

2005-08-19T16:40:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 3/30/05
Running Time: 1:45
Rated: PG-13 (Sex related humor)
Cast: Bernie Mac, Ashton Kutcher, Zoe Saldana, Judith Scott, Kellee Stewart

Director: Kevin Rodney Sullivan
Producers: Jason Goldberg, Steve Greener, Ashton Kutcher, Bernie Mac, Erwin Stoff, Betty Thomas, Jenno Topping
Screenplay: David Ronn, Jay Scherick, Peter Tolan
Studio: Columbia Pictures

Guess Who. No, it’s not that Milton Bradley game where you ask if the other player’s person is wearing glasses or balding. Guess Who is the motion-picture that is simply a slight twist on the Meet the Parents storyline, with that twist being race. Considering its lead couple is interracial, Guess Who presents itself with several opportunities to tackle the black/white barrier, and when it tries, it succeeds. It is just that, on the whole, Guess Who does not contain enough redeeming qualities to make it a memorable comedy.

After Simon Green (Ashton Kucher) quit his job with a reputable company, he can’t bring himself to tell his fiancée Theresa (Zoë Saldana). Simon elects to keep his unemployment a secret from Theresa to prevent himself from spoiling their trip to her parents’ home.

Theresa’s parents, Marilyn (Judith Scott) and Percy Jones (Bernie Mac), are planning to celebrate their 25th wedding anniversary by renewing their vows. However, considering Theresa did not share any specifics about her new beau with her parents, both Marilyn and Percy are shocked to discover that their baby’s boyfriend is a white man. From moment one, Percy is determined to separate his daughter from her non-athletic, dishonest, Caucasian boyfriend. In the process, Percy digs himself into a hole.

If you have been predisposed to Guess Who’s trailer, chances are you already know where the picture is going in terms of its laugh-grabbing antics. Basically, all of the film’s gags can be observed in the preview of the film. It is a shame that the trailer isn’t featured on the DVD’s special features; that would make for a quick and easy means to watch the film in all of its comedic splendor.

No, Guess Who isn’t the worst film, but it isn’t a masterpiece either. It is just another run-of-the-mill comedy involving in-laws and a lovey-dovey duet that can’t stop calling each other, “baby.” Truthfully, Guess Who does have all the elements to be a successful comedy, only sequences like the go-kart race and the lingerie try-on scene push the picture from enjoyable to inane.

Let us hope that the film’s producers aren’t ordering a sequel in which Theresa would go to Simon's house to experience more of the same. That scenario just wouldn’t work on screen, and it couldn’t possibly improve on this mildly engaging yet forgettable feature. (** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Secretary

2005-08-18T16:41:00.000-04:00

United States, 2002
U.S. Release Date: 9/20/02 (limited)
Running Time: 1:45
Rated: R (Sexual situations, S&M, nudity, profanity)
Cast: James Spader, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Jeremy Davies, Lesley Ann Warren, Amy Locane

Director: Steven Shainberg
Producers: Andrew Fierberg, Amy Hobby, Steven Shainberg
Screenplay: Erin Cressida Wilson, based on the short story by Mary Gaitskill
Music: Angelo Badalamenti
Studio: Lions Gate Films

Secretary’s DVD cover slightly misleads any potential viewer into thinking that it is a borderline-porno feature about kinky sex and bondage, between a lawyer and his secretary. However, Secretary is not quite the S&M hormone-inducing film that one would expect. While its main characters’ relationship is highly unconventional, its first hour is extremely sluggish, and after thrusting along at a leisurely pace, the picture pulls out before climaxing.

After Lee Holloway (Maggie Gyllenhaal) is released from a mental institution, she applies for a position as a legal secretary. Although, once E. Edward Grey (James Spader) grants her the job at his law firm, her occupation isn’t the only position Grey places her in.

Once Grey notices Lee’s burn marks, open wounds, and scars from her days of self-mutilation, the two develop a relationship of taboo proportions. Grey channels his secretary’s energy, which she previously used to mutilate herself, by presenting her with another exploitative option. With each typographical error that Lee makes, Grey abuses Lee—both verbally and violently, in the manner of a sexual fetish. Grey goes as far as spanking her, masturbating on her backside, and making her both wear a saddle and eat a carrot like a horse, and Lee loves it all.

With that said, Secretary is nowhere near a pornographic film, but rather a bold picture about replacing one violent behavioral fixation with another. The most important thing that can be taken from this film is a beautifully logical explanation of why one would want to multilate oneself.

Chances are, if you are anticipating the sadomasochist segments alone, you will walk away unsatisfied. At its center, Secretary is a love story—albeit atypical and perverse, yet a love story nonetheless. Mind you, Secretary is not quite the perfect film to rent for a sweet Saturday-night date; however, its elements of romance are still original and deep.

For many, the notion of sex in an office setting is stimulating, but in the case of this feature, its effects are principally unfulfilling. If you find yourself keen on the idea of observing pointless and unarousing aggressive fantasies fulfilled – without actual seeing any of the action – between a scarred woman and a psychotic man, then Secretary is the film for you. On the other hand, if you value romantic films that rely on bubbly character chemistry and dreamy relations, then Secretary is only worth your time and money if your options are limited. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Chicago

2005-08-16T22:43:00.000-04:00

United States, 2002
U.S. Release Date: 12/25/02 (limited); 1/17/03 (wide)
Running Time: 1:52
Rated: PG-13 (Sensuality, profanity, violence)
Cast: Renee Zellweger, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Richard Gere, John C. Reilly, Queen Latifa

Director: Rob Marshall
Producers: Marty Richards, Harvey Weinstein
Screenplay: Bill Condon, based on the play by Fred Ebb & Bob Fosse
Music: John Kander, Danny Elfman
Studio: Miramax Films

After opening in 1975, the Broadway musical Chicago was rewritten in 1996 with a couple of differing numbers. Ever since the success of this revised musical, a film adaptation has been in the works.

Early on, Goldie Hawn and Madonna were cast as the lead roles, but wisely production suddenly stopped. Once the filmmakers observed the magnitude of negative reviews that Madonna received for her role in the major musical flop Evita, they felt that Chicago wasn’t going to work with "The Material Girl" as the lead. Production on the film ceased entirely. The popular jazzy musical was not given another shot at the big screen until choreographer-turned-director Rob Marshall picked up the project. Needless to say, Marshall choreographed a musical gem that earned 13 Oscar nominations and won six of the categories, including the Best Picture of 2002.

Roxie Hart (Renee Zellweger) is your everyday housewife, who is married to a hardworking loving man named Amos (John C. Reilly). Roxie is striving to become a vaudeville star just like Velma Kelly (Catherine Zeta-Jones), the successful singer/dancer whom Roxie sees perform. This young wannabe would do just about anything to get her chance to make it big—including sleep with other men and even kill.

After shooting her lover, who promised to help her get her singing career up and running, she finds herself on the ladies’ death row with none other than Velma Kelly. Both women are then represented by the undefeated lawyer, Billy Flynn (Richard Gere), whose tactics include giving them continuous media coverage and promoting their charm and innocence. Roxie plans to use her newly acquired fame to hit the stage and become the biggest name in the lights, but Flynn must first “razzle-dazzle” his way out of another one in order to save her from being hanged.

The musical numbers build into the story’s structure like side notes to the script; they blend in smoothly with the dialogue and acting. With tunes such as “All That Jazz”, “Cell Block Tango”, “Mister Cellophane”, and “We Both Reached for the Gun” coming unexpectedly from actors with surprising splendid voices, Chicago is the musical America has been waiting to see for more than a decade. Excellent choreography, camera work, and lighting add to a super screenplay with top-notch performances, to make a picture deserving of its Best Picture nomination. At the same time, The Pianist should have easily trumped Chicago for the title of the Best Picture.

One can only hope that more well-written musicals with more surprise vocal performances, will follow in Chicago’s wake. Although it is not as masterful and entrancing as some of the late 50’s and early 60’s musicals (Singin’ in the Rain, My Fair Lady, The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, and West Side Story), Chicago is still inspirational, fun, and nicely done. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Wages of Fear

2005-08-07T18:02:00.000-04:00

France, 1953
Running Time: 2:24
Rated: Not Rated (Violence, brief nudity)
Cast: Yves Montand, Charles Vanel, Peter van Eyck, Folco Lulli, William Tubbs, Vera Clouzot

Director: Henri-Georges Clouzot
Producer: Henri-Georges Clouzot
Screenplay: Henri-Georges Clouzot and Jérôme Géronimi, based on the novel by Georges Arnaud
Music: Georges Auric
Studio: DCA
In French with subtitles

Wages of Fear (Le Salaire de la Peur) is a film that embeds itself deep within the trenches of your brain’s every fold. Subsequent to an initial viewing, the film will surely cling to your thoughts and inspire you to indulge in its expert craftsmanship again and again. Its camera work is close to the cream-of-the-crop of the time, and its ability to close like a Shakespearian tragedy rather than a happily-ever-after tale, makes it far more rewarding than most of the stock stories that have followed.

The two-hour-and-twenty-four-minute running time abides by a fairly simple premise: four men must drive two six-wheeled trucks full of nitroglycerine for more than 300 miles. Once their task is complete, they will collect a wage of $2,000 apiece. On the downside, if the truck hits a bump too hard or the temperature gets too hot, the nitroglycerine will explode in atomic fashion. The two teams of men must maneuver their way through the treacherous terrain as cautiously as humanly possible in order to get the deed done.

The four brave, yet desperate, men to attempt this stunt are: Mario (Yves Montand), Jo (Charles Vanel), Luigi (Focco Lulli) and Bimba (Peter Van Eyck). All of whom are eager to “clear out” of the poverty-stricken town in which they currently reside called Las Piedras. The four men decide to risk their lives so as to gain an opportunity to live a better life elsewhere. Once the rickety wheels begin to roll, the four daring souls have a one-way ticket down a long, long road full of obstacles.

With director Henri-Georges Clouzot’s other masterful suspense thriller Diabolique, the man they call the “French Hitchcock” provides an excellent one-two punch. Despite Clouzot’s continuous use of wipe-away screen transitions, he uses the camera in a flawless manner—traversing the two trucks and their separate storylines, emphasizing the action that the men encounter, and intensifying the suspense that they undergo.

Wages of Fear is the absolute epitome of high tension and as good as it gets in terms of establishing trepidation. While the trucks do endure various accelerations and sudden stops, it is in every steer of the wheel and every loss of traction that the levels of nervousness are heightened. When considering films like Speed and its own 1977 remake Sorcerer, it is obvious that Wages of Fear is the granddaddy of all that is gripping.

For those who are unfamiliar with a bulk of black-and-white foreign films, this one will have you yearning for more. By the picture’s end you will most definitely have both a pair of white knuckles and a movie title to add to your list of favorites. Wages of Fear is a multilingual nail-biter, which proves that human beings can hold their breath longer than science perceives to be possible. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

2005-07-31T23:15:00.000-04:00

United States/United Kingdom, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 7/15/05
Running Time: 1:55
Rated: PG
Cast: Freddie Highmore, Johnny Depp, David Kelly, Helena Bonham Carter, Noah Taylor, Deep Roy, Christopher Lee, Annasophia Robb, Julia Winter, Jordon Fry, Philip Wiegratz

Director: Tim Burton
Producers: Brad Grey, Richard D. Zanuck
Screenplay: John August, based on the book by Roald Dahl
Music: Danny Elfman
Studio: Warner Brothers

“Weird” – a word that is worn-out in Tim Burton’s retelling of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory – is single-handedly the best adjective to use in describing this film. Then again, with Tim Burton in the director’s chair, oddity is expected. With Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Burton conveys his typical dreariness and idiosyncrasies and utilizes his favorite faces in Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter. In an attempt to appease Roald Dahl’s literary legacy, Burton has crafted a film that is more faithful to the text, yet more bleak and bitter than the fluffy original.

Willy Wonka (Johnny Depp), the world’s most infamous candy creator, is reopening his doors to give five lucky children a tour of his marvelous, yet mysterious, chocolate factory. Children can only gain entry to the factory by finding one of the five golden tickets wrapped inside Wonka’s many-flavored chocolate bars.

After chocoholic Augustus Gloop (Philip Wiegratz), video-game nut Mike Teavee (Jordon Fry), spoiled rotten daughter Veruca Salt (Julia Winter), and gum-chewing champion Violet Beauregarde (Annasophia Robb) all find golden tickets, the final ticket finds its way into the hands of the near-penniless Charlie Bucket (Freddie Highmore). Upon entering the factory, the five children and their family-member escorts are reminded that only one of the five will win something “beyond their wildest imagination.”

Freddie Highmore, whom Depp recommended to Burton based on his work in Finding Neverland, is the perfect choice to play the title character. His Charlie calls for far more praise than Peter Ostrum’s young Bucket. Highmore brings a sense of innocence and depth to the lead role. However, it is odd that the 1971 musical is named after Willy and the new version is named after Charlie (as the book is) – yet Willy still steals the show.

Playing Willy Wonka, Johnny Depp further shows off his versatility; however, his character does possess the capacity to creep out the faint of heart. While some have compared his Wonka to Wacko Jacko, this connection is moot. Although, pedophilic undertones could be drawn when Wonka explains, “Everything in this room is edible, even me.”

In support, David Kelly displays his best Burgess Meredith impression and dances his way through the film as a spry Grandpa Joe. Also, Christopher Lee holds a commanding – albeit small presence – in the role of Willy’s father. Intimidation for Lee comes easy—considering he last played Saruman in The Lord of the Rings. In addition, the hundred-times-over digital clone of Deep Roy manages the difficult redefinition of an Oompa Loompa.

While Charlie and the Chocolate Factory has its moments of fantasy and visual acuity, Burton is at his best when he sticks to his stop-animation or the reflective likes of Big Fish. On the whole, the factory doesn’t work as well as it should. A cog is missing, and that cog is a justifiable reason for this remake. While fans of the novel will be pleased, the million-dollar question is: How many moviegoers will exit the theatre feeling more morose than mirthful—longing for blue round Oompa Loompas and the same old song and dance from Gene Wilder? (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Wedding Crashers

2005-07-24T12:52:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 7/15/05
Running Time: 1:56
Rated: R (Profanity, sexual situations, nudity, violence)
Cast: Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, Rachel McAdams, Isla Fisher, Christopher Walken, Jane Seymour, Bradley Cooper

Director: David Dobkin
Producers: Peter Abrams, Robert L. Levy, Andrew Panay
Screenplay: Steve Faber & Bob Fisher
Music: Rolfe Kent
Studio: New Line Cinema

While Wedding Crashers mimics the same sex-crazed shenanigans of American Pie, Animal House, and Old School, some unexpected romance can also be found. In terms of the film’s slightly deterrent romance, you already know the formula: boy becomes smitten with girl, but there’s an obstacle in his way; girl becomes smitten with boy; girl finds out boy lied; boy has to win girl back. However, underneath this standard romantic-comedy recipe, it is the crudeness and hilarity that makes this film worthwhile. Despite its clichés and formula-driven plot, Wedding Crashers is the low-odd favorite for comedy of the summer and quite possibly of the year.

Jeremy Grey (Vince Vaughn) and John Beckwith (Owen Wilson) are divorce lawyers, but ask them what their true profession is and their answer will be wedding crashers. In an opening montage, these two thirty-somethings are shown at a series of different weddings using fake names, charming everyone in sight, and eventually laying a multitude of naked women in their beds. Jeremy and John play a continuous con game of utilizing women’s heightened levels of estrogen during the romantic wedding season to tally another notch on their belt.

However, once the shameless twosome crash the wedding of one of U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Cleary’s (Christopher Walken) daughters, John falls for another one of his daughters named Claire (Rachel McAdams). The swindling is cut short as John’s love for Claire continues and his desire to philander is subdued. But, with Claire’s boyfriend (Bradley Cooper) down John’s throat and Jeremy itching to leave the party because of the Secretary’s clingy yet kinky other daughter named Gloria (Isla Fisher), things get complicated.

The duo of Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson connect with faultless comedic timing and chemistry. While Wilson dishes out droll charisma as Vaughn’s sidekick, Vaughn is at his very best, as the ingenious motor-mouth, since his “Vegas, baby” Swingers show. The two are so believable as the raunchy longtime friends, that when they say, “I love you,” to each other it isn’t weird in any way.

Along the same lines of Alyson Hannigan in American Pie, Isla Fisher covers the half-ditsy half-psychotic role, except Fisher quadruples Hannigan’s sex appeal. As for Rachel McAdams, she is absolutely alluring as Wilson’s love interest. After The Notebook and now Wedding Crashers, McAdams has established herself as a delightful and credible actress who can suck any viewer in with her smile.

Aside from the mass of good-looking women and the romance they serve in the end, Wedding Crashers thrives on the physical comedy of its male leads. Between the triad of Vaughn, Wilson, and Walken, there are enough instances to spread hooting and howling throughout the theatre. Nonetheless, with the addition of Bradley Cooper as Sack Lodge and a hilarious bit part by Will Ferrell, Wedding Crashers becomes the most enjoyable and attendable laugh-out loud endeavor since Meet the Parents.

Combine Vaughn and Wilson with randy college-humor and a splash of romance, and you get a blockbuster for all to enjoy. If you are able to look past both the normalcy of the love story and the fact that ten minutes could have been shaved off of the running-time, you are sure to have a fun time at the movies. Thankfully, the trailer for Wedding Crashers does not put all of its antics on display, and in the same breath, does not do its hilarity justice. Go see this excellent mix of tomfoolery and true love; you won’t be disappointed. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Hide and Seek

2005-07-13T17:31:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 1/28/05
Running Time: 1:42
Rated: R (Violence)
Cast: Robert De Niro, Dakota Fanning, Famke Janssen, Elisabeth Shue, Amy Irving, Dylan Baker

Director: John Polson
Producer: Barry Josephson
Screenplay: Ari Schlossberg
Music: John Ottman
Studio: 20th Century Fox

One would think that in order to secure two high-stature stars like Robert Deniro and Dakota Fanning in a psychological-horror film, the script would have to be of the highest caliber. Then again, money can buy big names for films with mediocre screenplays. Even with its two high-profile actors, Hide and Seek is nothing more than a disappointing gimmick that frustrates with its worn-out plot twist.

David Callaway (Robert Deniro) and his wife Alison (Amy Irving) are meandering through a rocky marriage. Nevertheless, they have a daughter, Emily (Dakota Fanning), and that is where their love is concentrated.

One morning, just after 2am, David awakes to find his wife dead in the bathtub of their house; she slit her wrists and committed suicide. After Emily witnesses her mother’s blood-bathed body, David decides to move him and his daughter into a rural New York home to escape their past.

Once inside their new house, Emily informs her father that she has made a new “friend” named Charlie. Despite the psycho-babble – explained by Emily’s psychiatrist Katherine (Famke Janssen) – which describes Emily’s “friend” Charlie as imaginary, David begins to second-guess the diagnosis when weird occurrences start happening around the house. The words “You let her die,” are scrolled on the bathroom walls; dolls are mutilated; and the cat is found drowned in the bathtub. David is determined to get to the bottom of whom or what Charlie is and why he is terrorizing the household.

Hide and Seek contains an inexcusable romance – between David and a younger woman named Elizabeth (Elizabeth Shue) – that doesn’t even bud; it just appears. This romance is ridiculous—only serving one main purpose: to keep the plot rolling. Of course, the actors can’t help it if the script is unsatisfying and the editing is choppy; the filmmakers have brought that upon themselves. The solitary fact that the DVD features four alternate endings is a huge hint that the production team did not have a clue as to how they were going to close this publicity stunt of a motion-picture.

In this throwaway thriller there are diversions aplenty. Usually in a "who-done-it?," whenever attempts are made to make a character look guilty, that should be proof enough that he or she is innocent. With Hide and Seek, obvious clues and red herrings are thrown at the viewers—making the twist unrewarding. In fact, the twist is so expected that when it occurs, there is not an ounce of revelation or poeticism to be felt. Further, after the twist, the main characters manage to exit their mansion and randomly run into a dark cave. What a poor stab at intensifying the already minimalist frights that preceded.

When children play hide and seek in a single room, there are only so many places to stay out of sight; this quickly makes the experience dull and curbing. Sadly, the same can be said about Hide and Seek. Being solely based on a gimmick, there are only so many ways to wrap up this charade, and once its time is up, the result is corny and undesirable. Hide and Seek is one disappointing game that no one should play. (*1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: The Girl Next Door (2004)

2005-07-08T17:12:00.000-04:00

United States, 2004
U.S. Release Date: 3/12/04
Running Time: 1:48
Rated: R (Sexual situations, profanity, nudity, brief violence)
Cast: Emile Hirsch, Elisha Cuthbert, Timothy Olyphant, James Remar, Chris Marquette, Paul Dano

Director: Luke Greenfield
Producers: Harry Gittes, Charles Gordon, Marc Sternberg
Screenplay: Stuart Blumberg, David T. Wagner and Brent Goldberg
Music: Paul Haslinger
Studio: 20th Century Fox

At the sound of it, a film that is both anchored on teenage raunchiness and equipped with a love story between a male high-school student and a pretty porn-star doesn’t exactly spell-out “masterpiece,” but The Girl Next Door defies this logic. Spliced together with the utmost of care, The Girl Next Door combines exceptional directing, editing, and acting, along with an alluring lead couple and a soundtrack that nearly tops all of 2004. The Girl Next Door is surprisingly fresh, magnetic, and beautiful.

Matthew Kidman (Emile Hirsch) is a studious high-school senior who has just earned his acceptance to Georgetown University. But, in order to attend this prestigious college, Matthew must awe the financial aid committee with his speech and win a scholarship to the school. Just after he makes a rough draft on a few index cards, he meets Danielle (Elisha Cuthbert). Danielle makes him strip – after she noticed Matthew sneak at peek at her through her bedroom window – and turns Matthew’s world upside-down. With each passing day, Danielle shows more-and-more spontaneity and Matthew falls harder and harder for her.

Once Matthew observes Danielle in an adult video, their relationship turns to shambles. Danielle, unsure of which way to turn, gets coaxed back into the pornography industry by her brute producer Kelly (Timothy Olyphant). At this point, Matthew must decide what is more important: his own opportunities at college or protecting the woman of his dreams.

Newcomer Emile Hirsch attempts his best Tom Cruise – in Risky Business – impression and surpasses it with style. Meanwhile, Elisha Cuthbert works the part of the spontaneous and sexy Danielle with grace and vitality. Both Emile and Elisha emit a chemistry that excites electrons simply with a bite of a lip here or a soft giggle there. At any given moment, each and every look (subtle or intended) that the pair share, is priceless. Timothy Olyphant also stands out as Danielle’s intimidating porn-producer. In addition, David Daskal from “Average Joe: Hawaii” and comedian Alonzo Boden from “Last Comic Standing” make for a few noticeable cameos.

During the film’s opening montage, that depicts the archetypal antics of high-school and the divisions between jocks and nerds, David Bowie and Queen’s “Under Pressure” plays. This perfectly chosen song is merely foreshadowing to the additional top-quality music to come. At a captivating moment in the plot, Matthew has a choice to either succumb to the fact that he is a nerd and live life by the book, or throw his inhibitions to the wind. This is the precise moment where Matthew launches his movement from zero to hero, and it is accented perfectly by David Gray’s “This Year’s Love.” Also, the uses of The Verve’s “Lucky Man” and The Who’s “Teenage Wasteland” are unforgettable. The Girl Next Door truly possesses a soundtrack that, with each song, liberates the mind and unshackles the heart.

The integration of the Uncle Sam poster, the shift from briefs to boxers, and the continuous homage and established parallels between the lead protagonist and JFK are all tactful tidbits that add to the picture’s splendor. In fact, every individual scene that this movie contains borders on brilliance. I just wish Greenfield would have focused one-minute more at the close on the romance and less time on the progress of the sex-tape.

At its shell, it is a perverted rated-R movie, with the spirit of a PG-13 romp—on the same page as the American Pies; but at its core, it is a fine coming-of-age romance that radiates a desire to be spontaneous and carefree. No matter what your mood, The Girl Next Door will lift you up and impart the importance of unconditional love.

The Girl Next Door is the ultimate teen movie. It provides numerous incidences of knee-slapping laughter; yet, it encourages being acutely aware of the world’s surroundings and ignoring the temptations of superficiality in order to find love. Ever since I first saw this movie in 2004, I have had a crush on it—a crush that I can’t imagine ever fading. The Girl Next Door is, by all means, highly recommended. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: War of the Worlds (2005)

2005-07-05T14:59:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 6/29/05
Running Time: 1:57
Rated: PG-13 (Violence, frightening images)
Cast: Tom Cruise, Dakota Fanning, Justin Chatwin, Tim Robbins, Miranda Otto

Director: Steven Spielberg
Producers: Kathleen Kennedy, Colin Wilson
Screenplay: Josh Friedman and David Koepp, based on the novel by H.G. Wells
Music: John Williams
Studio: Paramount Pictures

In years past, Steven Spielberg has helmed a boatload of gems. Very rarely is an unfavorable film added to his extensive filmography. With War of the Worlds—a remake of H.G. Wells’ sci-fi classic, the special effects, human drama, and brooding intensity compensate for any missteps that the happily-ever-after ending hastily takes. Even though War of the Worlds is neither a gem nor an unfavorable feature, it is still one loud and riveting ride.

One morning, crane operator Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise) returns home from a long shift to greet his ex-wife Mary Ann (Miranda Otto), teenage son Robbie (Justin Chatwin), and pre-teen daughter Rachel (Dakota Fanning). It is Ray’s weekend to have the kids. Ray has not had a good standing relationship with his children for quite some time, but that changes once a series of fierce lightning storms result in the surfacing of massive alien tripods. After evading one of the tripods, which have the capacity to dematerialize a human-being, Ray quickly gathers his offspring and makes a mad dash for Boston to meet his ex. Meanwhile, the tripods are roaming the Earth and decimating anything and everything in their paths.

Despite his recent pitfalls with the press, Tom Cruise is back—in a film where one and all can forgive him for constantly professing his love for Miss Katie Holmes, openly spreading the Scientology word, and profusely jumping on Opera’s furniture. Cruise performs on par with his previously shown aptitude as the uninvolved-turned-attached father. Although, it is difficult to pass Cruise – New York Yankees hat, jeans, and all – for a blue-collar worker, considering he has such a metrosexual head on his shoulders. Nonetheless, Cruise still belongs on the pedestal as one of this summer’s biggest action stars.

At Cruise’s side, Justin Chatwin (who Steven Spielberg previously cast in his TV mini-series “Taken”) fairs well as a typical disgruntled teenager. Spielberg’s utilization of Chatwin should serve as a stepping stone for him to move on to bigger and better things. Likewise, Dakota Fanning cries, screams, and hyperventilates quite convincingly. Bar-none, Fanning is one of the finest child actor available; here, her talent is a tad underused.

In addition to the core family of characters, Tim Robbins executes his role as a barn-laden ambulance driver with his expected vim laced with eeriness. Morgan Freeman also assists in the production by providing the opening and closing narration—making War of the Worlds the second theatrical release of 2005 (alongside of March of the Penguins) to feature Freeman’s voice, but no face.

Spielberg’s direction is as flawless as ever. Exactly how he incorporates the ILM technology is mesmerizing. From the initial instances where the “tripods” appear, to the concluding wonderment of the “red wheat,” Spielberg conveys oomph unlike any other—constantly elevating the level of suspense and suffocating the audience from scene to scene. However, with his faithful-to-the-novel ending, where the tension abruptly subsides, he falls into the snake-pit of convention.

War of the Worlds is wrapped up a little too quickly—enough to leave both an exceedingly saccharine and sour taste in the mouths of the moviegoers. Instead of rewriting an ending and taking the road less-traveled, screenwriters David Koepp and Josh Friedman allow their script to plummet into clichés and emit a bulk of artificial emotions. This is heartbreaking, because when War of the Worlds reaches its climax, it is on the verge of being outstanding.

War of the Worlds may be a slight comedown – with its conclusion – for Spielberg, but it is still a blockbuster motion-picture that deserves to be seen. On the whole, War of the Worlds is a big-budget summer hit that will make you both not regret withdrawing a few bucks from your wallet and forget that you are even wearing a watch. (*** our of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: The Amityville Horror (2005)

2005-06-30T14:57:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 4/15/05 (wide)
Running Time: 1:25
Rated: R (Violence, gore, scary images, brief nudity, sexual situations, drug use)
Cast: Ryan Reynolds, Melissa George, Jesse James, Jimmy Bennett, Chloë Grace Moretz, Rachel Nichols, Philip Baker Hall

Director: Andrew Douglas
Producers: Michael Bay, Andrew Form, Brad Fuller
Screenplay: Scott Kosar, based on the novel by Jay Anson and the screenplay by Sandor Stern
Music: Steve Jablonsky
Studio: MGM/Dimension Films

The Amityville Horror flashes the phrase, “Based on the True Story,” at its beginning. However, the film tests how far one can teeter with the words, “based on.” Considering only the film’s first five minutes are “based on” the actual story and the rest of the running-time is just winged to assist in raising the scare factor, The Amityville Horror is a total traitor of an adaptation. Despite it being light years ahead of its time compared to the original, The Amityville Horror doesn’t accomplish much more than a few solid frights.

While living in a large white house—considered to be cursed, Ronald Defeo slays his wife and children and then claims that voices from within his house told him to murder his family. One year later, Kathy Lutz (Melissa George) and her new husband George (Ryan Reynolds) are in the market for a new house. The couple stumbles upon a house that, at a glance, appears to be out of their price range, but in fact, it is a hellacious deal. “What’s the catch?” says George; “There is always a catch.”

This question prompts the real-estate agent to inform the man and woman that one year prior, a family was murdered in the house and the slayer said that “the house made him do it.” George retorts, “Houses don’t kill people; people kill people.” Thus, they decide to make a down payment and move in. Consequently, George soon finds himself following in Ronald Defeo’s footsteps—descending into wickedness with each passing day.

In terms of horror, The Amityville Horror is respectable. Aside from the “boo” moments, Amityville even has a few scenes that both make your skin crawl and your blood curdle. On the other hand, scares are really all The Amityville Horror has to flaunt—that is, with the exception of Ryan Reynolds’ ripped upper-body.

Ryan Reynolds fairs well in his dramatic turn. After completing several substandard comedies (Van Wilder, The In-Laws, and Blade: Trinity), here Reynolds takes on the body of a wrestler and the beard of Ryan Gosling from The Notebook. Aside from Reynolds, all of Amityville’s other acting is entirely forgettable.

With The Amityville Horror, there is a lot to complain about. For starters, the move-in montage is tasteless, and the characters’ clothes rarely fit the 1974 timeframe. Also, the story itself is anti-climactic and borders on annoying when it depicts Kathy and George each giving the children cheap advice while the other listens from outside the doorway. What’s more, the inclusion of the sexy, over-confident babysitter (Rachel Nichols) who smokes pot, is damaging to the film; it only represents a reason to further excite the film’s core audience of teenage boys. Also, why is the phrase, “Catch ‘em,” spelled with a “K?” Finally, if mainstream Hollywood incorporates one more frantic search through a local library’s archived newspapers, I will personally pen a complaint letter.

For those of you who enjoy the horror genre, Amityville will most likely do the trick. However, for the moviegoers who enjoy more substance than scares, The Amityville Horror will be yet another second-rate choice on horror rental shelves come late October. While this revamped version is an improvement on the original, it basically just provides a deeper means to fear the two quarter-circle windows that have burned themselves into everyone’s brain. (** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Hostage

2005-06-22T14:58:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 3/11/05
Running Time: 1:53
Rated: R (Violence, profanity)
Cast: Bruce Willis, Kevin Pollak, Jonathan Tucker, Ben Foster, Jimmy Bennett, Michelle Horn, Marshall Allman, Serena Scott Thomas, Rumer Willis

Director: Florent Siri
Producers: Mark Gordon, Arnold Rifkin, Bruce Willis, Bob Yari
Screenplay: Doug Richardson, based on the novel by Robert Crais
Music: Giovanni Fiore Coltellacci
Studio: Miramax Films

With Bruce Willis now in his fifties, his legit action-star clock is ticking. Then again, Hostage presents conditioning for Willis to once again take on his iconic persona of John McClane in the impending Die Hard 4.0. However, unlike the Die Hard films, Hostage is spotted with a handful of tension truisms and a heightened suspension of disbelief. Yet, even though it could be considered a staple and somewhat-implausible action-thriller, Hostage is taut, gripping, and aptly-titled.

After witnessing a mother and child brutally murdered – on his watch – as an LAPD negotiator, Jeff Talley (Bruce Willis) shifted occupations and became the police chief of a less-hectic community in Ventura County, California. While Jeff’s relationships with his wife Jane (Serena Scott Thomas) and daughter Amanda (Rumer Willis) seem to be on the rocks, deep-down Talley loves his family and would do anything to protect them.

Once a hostage situation arises in Talley’s territory, he takes command as the hostage negotiator—that is, until he readily turns over control to a higher authority. An accountant, Walter Smith (Kevin Pollak), and his two children Tommy (Jimmy Bennett) and Jennifer (Michelle Horn) are held captive by three intruders—two brothers Dennis (Jonathan Tucker) and Kevin Kelly (Marshall Allman) and Dennis’s new friend Mars Krupcheck (Ben Foster). However, what Jeff doesn’t know is that Walter is an important man. A threat is made on the lives of Jeff’s wife and daughter; if he doesn’t resolve the hostage situation, his family will be slain. Jeff must maintain his composure and save a stranger and his family to ensure that the two women he loves the most are safe.

During its opening credits, Hostage displays a graphic blend of blacks, whites, and reds which exhibits first-time cinematic director Florent Siri’s fine sense of scope. Formerly a video game director, Siri exudes poise with a medley of visionary tenacity, dramatic fluency, and edge-of-your-seat suspense. Without a doubt, his work here will earn him enough accreditation to keep him on the Hollywood market.

Then again, when Bruce Willis is in command, he makes any production his own. Willis oozes with his typical action charm as though he is no where near being “over the hill.” As always, with Willis as the lead, he makes the movie worth your time and money.

In the case of Hostage, a picture that works on every level it aims for, it is the able combo of Willis and Siri that make this popcorn outing a surefire success. While Hostage may be stock on action, it is border-line nightmarish at its close and fresh enough to be called engrossing. Get your hands on Hostage, and don’t let go. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Batman Begins

2005-06-19T16:39:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 6/15/05
Running Length: 2:20
Rated: PG-13 (Violence, disturbing images)
Cast: Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Liam Neeson, Katie Holmes, Gary Oldman, Ken Watanabe, Morgan Freeman, Cillian Murphy, Tom Wilkinson, Rutger Hauer

Director: Christopher Nolan
Producers: Larry J. Franco, Charles Roven, Emma Thomas
Screenplay: Christopher Nolan and David S. Goyer
Music: James Newton Howard and Hans Zimmer
Studio: Warner Brothers

With an eight-year gap in the Caped Crusader’s screen-time, Warner Brothers hopes that audiences can forgive them for Joel Schumacher’s two Batman droppings (Batman Forever and Batman & Robin) and grant the Dark Knight another chance to start anew. Considering Batman Begins contains the term “begins” it its title, the film itself undertakes the gutsy restoration of both Burton’s and (more so) Schumacher’s injustice to the saga of Bruce Wayne and his alter-ego—and, oh boy does it deliver. With the immensely talented Christopher Nolan in the director’s chair, both the revival of a legend and the best superhero story – ever – have surfaced.

After witnessing his mother and father being murdered, Bruce Wayne – the heir to Wayne Enterprises – withdraws from his lucrative lifestyle and becomes a prisoner. Once he is rescued from his imprisonment, by Henri Ducard (Liam Neeson), he trains to join Ducard’s League of Shadows—a group of vigilantes, led by Ra’s Al Ghul (Ken Watanabe).

Following the completion of his training, Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) returns to Gotham City and becomes Batman. With his bat suit, car, and weaponry, Batman takes on the likes of mob boss, Carmine Falcone (Tom Wilkinson) and Dr. Jonathan Crane/The Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy), whose knowledge of pharmaceuticals assists him in poisoning his prey. But, Bruce is not out for everyone; he does have his faithful butler, Alfred Pennyworth (Michael Caine), a handy Q-esque hook-up, Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), his childhood sweetheart, Rachel Dawes (Katie Holmes), and the only “good” cop left in the city, Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman).

Nolan directs the transformation of Bruce Wayne, from kid to criminal and from criminal to Batman, with the utmost of care. One of Batman Begins strongest suits is that the story is credible; the suspension of disbelief is low, and the effort taken to both construct and develop Bruce Wayne – as a man – is high. Viewers feel for both his affinity to fight crime and his choice to become a force to be reckoned with—creating a character that is easy to both root for and relate to.

By far, Christian Bale is the best embodiment of Batman yet. In comparison to the other actors who have previously played the Dark Knight of Gotham City, Bale edges out Keaton with his multi-dimensionality and blows Kilmer, Clooney, and West out of the water with his intensity. Regardless of which scene he is in, Bale is equally convincing as both the billionaire heir and the nocturnal threat to all that is unlawful.

Michael Caine and Liam Neeson are equally outstanding, while Morgan Freeman, Ken Watanabe, Gary Oldman, and Tom Wilkinson all hold their own—given their limited presence. Conversely, it is Cillian Murphy who steals the show from all others, excluding Bale, with his crazed interpretation of Dr. Crane. Katie Holmes, as Wayne’s damsel in distress, is the weak spot of the cast. Her character’s emotions feel strained, and unlike Mary Jane in Spider-Man, Rachel never fully connects with Bruce on an emotional level.

Conversely, the shadowy score connects with the film’s overall disposition. James Newton Howard and Hans Zimmer have collaborated to create a dark atmosphere that matches the brooding mood of both the cartoon and the comic book. Nolan’s choice to use two gifted score writers instead of one, definitely paid off—considering both conductors’ flavors are equally audible.

Batman Begins is not only a prequel to Tim Burton’s 1989 original, but it is also a new beginning – a renaissance of the DC Comic hero – with “beginning” being the key word. The entire production team has already made a verbal commitment to a trilogy—making Begins the start of something grand. Without a doubt, the success of Batman Begins puts a smile on the faces of both the WB bigwigs and moviegoers around the world. In fact, this superb superhero feature, that features a protagonist who possesses no superpowers, is nearly as captivating as a bat’s night-time means of echolocation. (***1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Hitch

2005-06-18T12:44:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 2/11/05
Running Time: 1:56
Rated: PG-13 (Sexual situations, profanity)
Cast: Will Smith, Eva Mendes, Kevin James, Amber Valletta, Julie Ann Emery

Director: Andy Tennant
Producers: James Lassiter, Will Smith, Teddy Zee
Screenplay: Kevin Bisch
Music: George Fenton
Studio: Columbia Pictures

Since the mid-‘90s, Will Smith has been a blockbuster name; wherever he goes in Hollywood, the fans and money follow. With Hitch, the case is no different. Hitch grossed just over $172 million theatrically, and it had good reason to. It is bubbly, comedic, and intelligent—albeit formulaic, and for a couple searching for a respectable romantic-comedy to watch, Hitch offers an entertaining evening to say the least. While it may be a tad clichéd and mechanical, Hitch gives the audience what it wants—a few good laughs throughout and a warm smile at its close.

It is a factual certainty that women make men weak in the knees. When attempting to obtain a date with a desirable woman, guys primarily fumble for words and stare at curves. For this Achilles' heel, there is a remedy...and his name is Hitch.

Alex “Hitch” Hitchens (Will Smith) is a self-proclaimed “Date Doctor,” who provides romantically-challenged men with the confidence and capability they need to not only approach, but also woo the woman they want. Hitch’s latest client, Albert Brenneman (Kevin James), serves as his greatest challenge, or as he says, his “Sistine Chapel.” Albert is an overweight, apprehensive, and clumsy man who is smitten with his company’s most prominent client, named Allegra Cole (Amber Valletta). Hitch provides Albert with everything he has, in hopes to bring the fat man and the phenomenal female together, but it is ultimately up to Albert to impress his burning crush with his corny charm.

Meanwhile, Hitch meets world-weary gossip columnist, Sara Melas (Eva Mendes). A relationship begins to bud between the two. Conversely, for some reason, Hitch can’t seem to apply the very same love tactics he teaches to other men in need.

Will Smith reunites with the very same charisma that landed him the role of The Fresh Prince, but this time he plays the guy who gets the girl. It is good to see Smith still succeed outside of the action genre; he plays the Date Doctor with smoothness and flair. However, it is Kevin James who steals every scene in which he inhabits. If there is one thing this film could have used more of, it is definitely The King of Queens. Kevin James makes the transition from CBS TV star to Will Smith’s supporting actor with ease. In fact, in the future, do not be surprised to see him soon in more starring roles on the big-screen and less shows on the small-screen.

Even with all of the comedic moments from the duo of Smith and James, the script has a handful of sharp things to say. The remarks on how to use active listening, body language, and poise to connect with a woman are all words that every man should hear. And, the quote, “Any man has a chance to sweep any woman off her feet; he just needs the right broom,” serves as not only an apt tagline, but also a clever metaphor.

The best aspect of Hitch is certainly the chemistry the cast exudes, and when four leads mesh this well together, the film has recommendation written all over it. With its consistently amiable script and its sweet – yet inevitable – happily-ever-after ending, Hitch is quality entertainment that deserves a date. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Kicking and Screaming

2005-06-16T17:12:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
Running Time: 1:36
Rated: PG (thematic elements, language and some crude humor)
Cast: Will Ferrell, Robert Duvall, Mike Ditka, Kate Walsh, Musetta Vander, Dylan McLaughlin, Josh Hutcherson, Steven Anthony Lawrence

Director: Jesse Dylan
Producers: Judd Apatow, Daniel Lupi, and Lata Ryan
Screenplay: Leo Benvenuti and Steve Rudnick
Music: Mark Isham and David Newman
Studio: Universal Studios

What do kids do when they can’t get their way? They kick and scream. What an appropriate title for Will Ferrell’s latest—considering each and every audience member, be it kid or adult, will most likely throw a tantrum over Kicking and Screaming’s ordinariness and shortcomings. Unfortunately, not even Ferrell’s physical antics can save this cookie-cutter kiddy comedy from being unexceptional and just plain unfunny.

Ever since Phil Weston (Will Ferrell) could hold a ball in his hand, he has undercut his competitive father’s expectations. Phil has never beaten his father Buck (Robert Duvall) in anything, and every time Phil seems to do something grand, his arrogant father one-ups him. When Phil announces his engagement, so does his father—to a younger and prettier woman; when Phil has a child, so does his dad—and it is no surprise when Buck’s son, Bucky (Josh Hutcherson), is one ounce heavier than Phil’s son, Sam (Dylan McLaughlin). With Buck, everything is a competition.

However, when Phil gets the opportunity to coach Sam’s soccer team and go up against his father’s team, he jumps at the chance. Once Phil’s team starts to win, Phil becomes overly obsessed with winning and – just like his champion father – does anything and everything to avoid losing.

Phil becomes a monster, and his transformation from a klutzy dork into a Bobby Knight wannabe, really isn’t as funny as one would think. In fact, it is a little tiresome. Watching Ferrell pushing kids to the ground, encouraging his players to “break someone’s clavicle,” and forcing parents to run laps, only provides enough chuckles to count on one hand and further downgrades the already deprived script. Ferrell has finally come down off of his four-picture high.

While Kicking and Screaming serves as a train-wreck for Will Ferrell, it serves as a vehicle for Mike Ditka. Ditka, who plays himself, is Phil’s assistant coach and Buck’s raucous neighbor. Even though the man who led the Chicago Bears to the ’85 Super Bowl may be a dynamic motivator, the same cannot be said for his acting ability. To put it simply: Ditka cannot act. In fact, with him included, the film seems more like an SNL sketch with Mike Ditka as the host.

At most, Kicking and Screaming is fair-weather. Just like Farrell’s character, this film has the coordination of a baby giraffe and the agility of an elephant. Instead of gag after gag, it is yawn after yawn. Similar to Little Giants, Kicking and Screaming is truly an underdog family comedy that never gives families a reason to get excited. Before this child’s play even began production, someone should have blown the whistle and gave K&S a red card. (** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: High Tension (Haute Tension)

2005-06-12T00:03:00.000-04:00

France, 2003
U.S. Release Date: 6/10/05 (wide)
Running Time: 1:25
Rated: R (Violence, gore, sexual situations, nudity)
Cast: Cécile De France, Maïwenn, Philippe Nahon, Franck Khalfoun, Andrei Finti, Oana Pellea

Director: Alexandre Aja
Producers: Alexandre Arcady, Robert Benmussa
Screenplay: Alexandre Aja, Grégory Levasseur
Music: François Eudes
Studio: Lions Gate Films
Dubbed into English

Warning: This review contains comments that some may perceive as spoilers.

After a few mildly distracting overdubs, High Tension’s viscera begins to churn, and from there, it never lets up. Within High Tension’s first hour or so there is much to praise; the terror is top-shelf, the score (which is comprised of more wind, creaks, and static rather than music) is outstanding, and the killer is perhaps the most psychotic and merciless in recent horror history. However, during the film’s off-kilter climax, all hell breaks lose. In terms of horror, suspense, and tension, High Tension does indeed rank high, but in its final ten minutes this otherwise superlative feature spirals into senselessness.

In an overused fashion, High Tension reveals a piece of the conclusion in its opening sequence. The audience observes the film’s lead running through the woods—covered in blood with a stab wound to the stomach. This scene builds a platform as to where the rest of the film will lead.

Rewind one day. Alex (Maïwenn) and her friend Marie (Cecile de France) are traveling to Alex’s house to cram for their upcoming college exams. Once they arrive, Alex introduces Marie to her mother, father, and brother, and shows Marie her room. When the lights go out, a creepy truck – reminiscent of the vehicle seen in Jeepers Creepers – approaches the house. A man (Philippe Nahon) exits this vehicle, rings the doorbell, and – once he is greeted at the door – begins butchering every member of Alex’s family. It is not until Alex is chained, gagged, and thrown into the back of the killer’s rusty truck, when Marie attempts to fend for both her and her friend’s lives.

How the entire production team sat through the filming of this feature without screaming, “Wait! Stop! None of this makes sense!” is absolutely beyond me. The filmmakers’ have previously tried to explain the picture’s numerous plot holes by claiming that the story is supposed to be told through the deranged killer’s point of view. However, this still doesn’t explain how one person can be in two different places at the same time on more than one occasion. If only Aja had stuck to convention and avoided an attempt at ingenuity, his effort would have then been one of the most impressive horror films to date.

Without the twist, this film would have easily been given a three-and-one-half star rating, but because Aja takes the most irrational of routes – thereby plummeting the plot into utter implausibility – High Tension drops a full star on the rating scale. For those who are true horror aficionados, High Tension is worth a trip to the theater, but, upon exiting, everyone will almost certainly share in my frustration. If you enjoy copious amounts of blood and gore, High Tension is the fix you have been looking for, but if you possess a functional brain, the territory the film treads into will easily prove to be illogical. Unlike Maxwell House, this bloody ode to American horror is not “good ‘til the last drop”; sadly, in the case of High Tension, it is the last drop that spoils the whole pot. (**1/2 out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: The Godfather

2005-06-11T16:47:00.000-04:00

United States, 1972
Running Time: 2:51
Rated: R (Violence, mature themes, language, brief nudity)
Cast: Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, Al Lettieri, Sterling Hayden, John Marley, John Cazale, Richard Conte, Al Martino

Director: Francis Ford Coppola
Producer: Albert S. Ruddy
Screenplay: Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo based on the novel by Mario Puzo
Music: Nino Rota
Studio: Paramount Pictures

There isn’t much that hasn’t already been said concerning the excellence of The Godfather. Nonetheless, I present the umpteenth dissertation on why not giving The Godfather four out of four stars is about as unjust as sentencing an innocent man to death.

Francis Ford Coppola’s 1972 effort is truly an epic for the ages. The acting, directing, cinematography, score, and script are all of the highest possible caliber—making the near three-hour running time more of a blessing than an inconvenience. The Godfather is not only the Don of all Mafia melodrama, but it is also the standard grade of superiority for critics and filmmakers alike.

Based on Mario Puzo’s bestseller of the same name, the story begins in 1945 at the wedding of Connie (Talia Shire), the daughter of Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando). Even on his daughter’s day of celebration, Don Vito still manages to take care of “business.” After a few men grace his presence and ask for a few favors – revenge, a leading role, etc. – the Don unites with his family for the ceremony. His youngest son Michael (Al Pacino), who has recently returned home from war a hero, brings his new love Kay (Diane Keaton), and the Don's two older sons, Sonny (James Caan) and Fredo (John Cazale), along with his “adopted” son and consigliere Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall), also come to celebrate their sister’s special occasion.

With each of the five major mob families straining to gain ground on one another, the budding industry of narcotics presents a forum for a few to achieve a competitive advantage. However, it is Don Vito who declines Sollozzo (Al Lettieri), the drug supplier, of his offer to commence an involvement in narcotics trafficking. His son and heir apparent, Sonny, obviously disagrees with his father’s choice – seeing that drugs are the wave of the future – but the Godfather does not concede. Don Vito understands that the drug industry is a cutthroat business where friends are few and far between. It is this rejection that spirals the Corleone family down a brutal one-way street that will both cost the five families many lives, and allow a new Don to emerge.

Al Pacino plays the supporting role of Michael with fire in his eyes. His transformation, from a civilian to a Godfather in both senses of the term, is the film’s main and most dynamic storyline. In almost every sense, Pacino steals the thunder out from under Brando; nonetheless, Brando’s role is perhaps the most iconic role in all of cinema. His character, styled after real life mobster Frank Costello, is one of the films many highlights.

Despite an unmistakable missed punch, a few continuity issues, and an abundance of character roles to keep straight, The Godfather remains one of the most influential films in cinematic history. Not only will Brando’s husky whisper continue to be copied for generations to come, but also the only fruit that shares its name with its color will always signify an impending death or violent incident.

Aside from all of the orange metaphors, The Godfather’s resounding themes on the duality of man – love and hate, good and evil, loyalty and betrayal, and family and violence – allow it to emit an atmosphere like no other film. The Godfather is the utter embodiment of the ultimate “guy film”, yet whether you are a male or female or a frequent or infrequent moviegoer is not dependent on how much appeal you will hold towards this first-rate pulp crime drama. Regardless of your status, you will be taken aback by its magnificence.

On The Internet Movie Database’s website, The Godfather is listed as the number one favorite movie of all time, and on The American Film Institute’s chart of the “100 Years…100 Movies,” it is listed as the number three greatest film. First or third, there is no question why The Godfather holds a spot on a gaggle of Top 10 lists, mine included. It is a seminal classic that will only continue to steamroll sovereignty, praise, and admiration. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: The Life of David Gale

2005-06-06T16:38:00.000-04:00

United States, 2003
U.S. Release Date: 2/21/03 (wide)
Running Time: 2:10
Rated: R (Nudity, violence, profanity, sexual situations)
Cast: Kevin Spacey, Kate Winslet, Laura Linney, Gabriel Mann, Matt Craven, Rhona Mitra, Leon Rippy

Director: Alan Parker
Producers: Nicolas Cage, Alan Parker
Screenplay: Charles Randolph
Music: Alex Parker
Studio: Universal Pictures

In my opinion, The Life of David Gale is a thriller/mystery with a sharp blend of plot and politics. However, a highly notable critic disagrees whole-heartedly.

On February 21, 2003, Roger Ebert reviewed The Life of David Gale and gave it zero out of four stars—claiming that this film could not have been set in Texas. To quote Ebert directly, he said that, "While Texas continues to warehouse condemned men with a system involving lawyers who are drunk, asleep or absent, confessions that are beaten out of the helpless, and juries that overwhelmingly prefer to execute black defendants instead of white ones, you can't make this movie. Not in Texas."

It is because of Texas's exceedingly high execution rate, that people relate the death penalty with Texas and vice versa. The impact of choosing Texas for the backdrop works for that very reason. Using some other state like Illinois, which Ebert suggests, would have been less effective in getting the picture’s anti-death penalty message across. Ebert should realize that this is a movie, not a true story or even based on a true story. Even if some of the politics may be a little stretched and the main plot may be, as Ebert writes, "an absurdly ironic development," this film still provides intellect, thrills, and mystery, which is something most films in this genre do not faithfully dish-out.

David Gale (Kevin Spacey) is a psychology professor at the University of Austin, an author of several books, and a member of the national death row abolitionist group called "Death Watch.” After being accused of the rape and murder of Constance Hallaway (Laura Linney) and then losing both his job and family, David Gale finds himself on death row for murder—claiming that he was framed by conservative, right-wing, capital punishment supporters. As he sits on death row with only three days until his execution, he tells his story to reporter Bitsey Bloom (Kate Winslet). From there, this "who done it and why" murder mystery becomes a race against the clock. Will Bitsy be able to prove Gale’s innocence in the limited three day’s time?

While Kevin Spacey still gives off his usual depressed aura as Gale, he does add some brains to spice up his excellent character interpretation. Alongside Spacey, Laura Linney creates a super dramatic performance that is deserving of multiple merits. Surely her role seen here will earn her future casting calls for more daring and extraordinary leads. In addition, Kate Winslet's portrayal of Bitsey Bloom is credible and noteworthy. Also, both Rhona Mitra, as Berlin, and Leon Rippy, as Braxton Belyou (Gale's attorney), make for excellent additions to the cast.

With The Life of David Gale, it is necessary to pay attention to detail; the film does not spell everything out. While you may have some critical thinking to do during the feature and some questions to ask afterward, the astute viewers should be able to answer all of these queries. Even so, for those who don't catch everything in one viewing, you will most likely notice both the drunken wandering Socrates speech and the shrewd Judas comparison. Both of these scenes are both very keen on philosophy and prove that between David and Constance, there is a profusion of delectable discourse to be heard.

Typically, films that contain an abundance of political dialogue, such as this one, come across as preachy. Thankfully, at no point does The Life of David Gale feel like a drawn-out, definitive sermon. It instead allows viewers to have or make their own opinion about the Death Penalty and does not ask them otherwise. Although, the movie may shed enough light on the matter to possibly reconstitute a few capital punishment advocates’ beliefs.

When Hollywood strives to leave a lasting impression and enlighten viewers about a touchy topic and its two polar extremes, in most cases, it is either a love it or hate it condition. Nevertheless, for anyone who is willing to open up and watch The Life of David Gale, just remember: unlike Ebert, take it for what it is worth. Aside from the sticklers of the United States judicial system and its methodology, most will find The Life of David Gale’s storyline to be provocative and its conclusion to be striking. (*** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: White Noise

2005-05-31T23:42:00.000-04:00

United States, 2005
U.S. Release Date: 1/7/05 (wide)
Running Time: 1:38
Rated: PG-13 (Violence, disturbing images, profanity)
Cast: Michael Keaton, Chandra West, Deborah Kara Unger, Ian McNeice

Director: Geoffrey Sax
Producers: Paul Brooks, Shawn Williamson
Screenplay: Niall Johnson
Music: Claude Foisy
Studio: Universal Pictures

You might be wondering: Why hasn’t Michael Keaton picked up a lead role in nearly a decade? Well, White Noise is the answer. With a running time just under one hour and forty minutes, White Noise is 98 minutes too long. It is way too vanilla to be even described as a decent psychological horror film. Worse than both Dragonfly and The Forgotten, White Noise makes the likes of The Grudge and even Darkness Falls look frightening and commendable. White Noise is an utter cacophony of insanely predictable plot developments, silly science, and stupid static that will surely lull any moviegoer into a slumber.

Jonathan Rogers (Michael Keaton) is a well-off architect whose wife Anna (Chandra West) announces that she is pregnant. After some small poorly inserted love scenes – with smiles and laughs shared between husband and wife – that solely establish a connection (albeit a bad one), you guessed it…Anna dies. Her car is discovered on the side of a road near a small cliff, and her body is found on the rocks below. Apparently, her death was caused by severe head trauma from the fall.

Months later, through a series of transmissions via various electronic devises, Jonathan hears his dead wife call out his name. Jonathan then turns to Raymond (Ian McNeice), an obese British man who explains the concept behind Electronic Voice Phenomenon (EVP). EVP is the supposed means wherein the dead can contact the living through the static of any electronic equipment—you name it: televisions, telephones, radios, CD players and answering machines; apparently, the deceased have their own channel that spans all mediums.

As fast as you can snap your fingers, Jonathan goes from highly skeptical of Raymond’s convincing, to an absolute EVP fanatic—buying every type of electronic equipment you can think of and then both watching and listening to endless hours of static. Maybe it is just me, but after seeing nothing buy grey pixels and hearing nothing but a crackling buzz, your mind definitely has the ability to decide what visions you see and what sounds you perceive.

Nevertheless, the sights and noises that Jonathan observes show him the deceased before they die. Jonathan believes that his wife is sending him these messages to keep the living alive, but a blind fortune teller thinks otherwise. The one thing that Raymond forgot to tell Jonathan was to stay away from those images and reverberations that seem to be sinister.

Identical to a foreigner attempting to speak another country’s native language, director Geoffrey Sax clumsily pieces something together. His effort is missing credible plot developments, any trace of legitimate science, and a hefty amount of promising scares. In addition, a crucial aspect that Sax fails to impede is the suspension of disbelief; seeing the dead on a TV screen is just about as authentic and tangible as spotting the Virgin Mary on a grilled cheese.

Being that its EVP focus is at least absorbing, White Noise – in terms of plot, structure and horror – underachieves in everyway imaginable. In fact, the trailer’s introduction to EVP is more intriguing than the actual film as a whole. Its scares are too ridiculously inexplicable and its drama is too drab to become the slightest bit enthralled with the storyline.

Because White Noise’s ending makes no sense whatsoever, it leaves a heap of questions left unanswered. Still, by the end, not one single soul will care to have these questions answered. With poor direction, a script full of errors, and a lead who snores through his role, White Noise is one reel that should have never made it past the cutting room floor. (* our of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005

Movie Review: Crash

2005-05-27T00:11:00.000-04:00

United States, 2004
U.S. Release Date: 5/6/05 (wide)
Running Time: 1:40
Rated: R (Profanity, sexual situations, nudity, violence)
Cast: Matt Dillon, Don Cheadle, Sandra Bullock, Brendan Fraser, Thandie Newton, Ryan Phillippe, Larenz Tate, Jennifer Esposito, William Fichtner, Terrence Dashon Howard, Ludacris

Director: Paul Haggis
Producers: Don Cheadle, Paul Haggis, Mark R. Harris, Robert Moresco, Cathy Schulman, Bob Yari
Screenplay: Paul Haggis & Robert Moresco
Music: Mark Isham
Studio: Lions Gate Films

After penning a phenomenal three-pronged character study in Million Dollar Baby, Paul Haggis has written and directed an astounding ensemble feature in Crash. By colliding racial prejudices, articulate dialogue, and ingratiating irony, Haggis has signed, sealed, and delivered a complete package of a movie. It is disheartening, unflinching, and at times even thwarting, but at no point does Crash falter and lose its effectiveness. While Crash may be bounded by an overused formula (where the characters interweave and the story wraps upon itself), the script is still dynamic and sole.

At the film’s opening, we are introduced to a homicide detective named Graham (Don Cheadle) and his partner - both on the force and in bed - named Ria (Jennifer Esposito). Both were just involved in a car crash atop the hills of Los Angeles (quite reminiscent of Mulholland Drive). At this very same crash site, the body of a kid has been found.

Rewind one day. Well-to-do District Attorney Rick (Brendan Fraser) and his snobbish housewife Jean (Sandra Bullock) are car-jacked by two African-American thieves named Anthony (Chris “Ludacris” Bridges) and Peter (Larenz Tate). While the DA’s primary concern is losing the black vote, his wife’s racial insecurities surface. She becomes so distressed with the car-jacking that she lashes out at her husband to have their locks changed again; she is convinced that the Latino locksmith that they hired, named Daniel (Michael Pena), is going to copy their new keys and sell them to his “homies.” However, the locksmith really isn’t a “gang banger,” but rather a respectable, safety-conscious family man who lovingly supports his wife and daughter. Later, it is Daniel’s run-in with a Persian shop owner named Farhad (Shaun Toub) that results in the spiraling and potentially disastrous upshot.

Elsewhere, veteran LAPD officer Ryan (Matt Dillon) and his rookie partner Hanson (Ryan Phillippe), pull over a distinguished African American couple, Cameron (Terrence Dashon Howard) and Christine (Thandie Newton). Ryan’s racism exudes when he “searches” Christine for weapons and threatens to cuff and book them both. Because of Ryan’s unnecessary actions, Hanson requests a change in partner, and as a newcomer to the force, he attempts to be fair and just towards all walks of life.

Come Crash’s closing, some may conclude that Haggis overused coincidence and irony to resolve every plot thread, but it is through irony that karma and self-actualization are realized. Once the story arcs and the characters intersect, those who once held stereotypes – based on the shade of one’s skin – have developed, and those who were once blind to racism’s deafening effects have established racial suppositions of their own.

With Crash, it is a feat in itself that Haggis has compacted an ensemble script into a Hollywood-friendly one-hundred minutes. Unlike P.T. Anderson’s Magnolia, Crash’s stories mesh quicker and more brazenly. Crash is a rare occasion where an additional thirty minutes of running time would have been accepted with open arms. We become so enraptured by each one of the characters that any extra screen time from any of the equally excellent actors would be entirely conducive.

After Baby and Crash, it is easy to conceive that Haggis may have the Midas touch. Crash is simply one of those golden pictures that you wish you could compel everyone in the world to watch. It is a sad truth that Crash’s fifteen-plus central characters serve as a microcosm of the very world in which we live. But perhaps the saddest aspect of Crash’s storyline is that between all of the murdering, blackmailing, racial stereotyping, and stealing, not one single soul seems to take notice that it is the Christmas season.

Crash is an important must-see and a wake-up call to all who possess even the slightest social discrimination. It depicts the boiling and brewing of an urban cauldron filled with whites, blacks, Latinos, Middle Easterners, and Asians; high-class and low-class; cops and civilians. It capitalizes with some of the most intriguing discourse on racism, and in all its violence, rage, and tension, Crash does not contain one single purposeless scene. Seize my suggestion, and see the multi-layered, cogent, and forceful Crash. (**** out of ****)

© Copyright Brandon Valentine 2005