Archive for July, 2008

Best Best Supporting Actress

We’re going to try something a little different here. I’ve taken the 16 most recent Best Supporting Actor and Best Supporting Actress winners, for a total of 32 names. We’ll pair them up, somewhat randomly, and once again you’ll get to vote on them.

(It’s not entirely randomly. 2007′s winner is paired with 1992′s, and so on.)

But the criteria have changed a little. This is no longer just a popularity contest, you see, although it’s still mighty subjective.

I chose these winners because I wanted to have a wider spectrum of choices. Your lead actors/actresses are normally going to fit a particular type, rather than having the gift of versatility. Not that Best Actors are overrated, it’s just that with the supporting cast you’re more likely to see a greater variety of roles.

So. Your task is to judge which of the two thespians is a better actor, based on the entirety of their work. That is, you can’t just say that Gene Hackman in Unforgiven was clearly better than Alan Arkin in Little Miss Sunshine; you have to consider their entire careers.

In some cases, these people won their award at the end of their careers (or, at least in the latter third), and others won right near the beginning, like Marisa Tomei. In Tomei’s case, you’d have to consider whether her resulting work has lived up to that one role in My Cousin Vinny; considering she was nominated again later on, I’d say it has.

First, here are the eight Supporting Actress matchups:

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Comments

Popularity Tourney finals!

Well, you voted (some of you), somewhat lacklusterly. And in our popularity contest, who do we have in the Finals but a couple of supporting players?

It’s Snape versus God, FTW!

No Comments

EuroTrip

I caught EuroTrip the other night, and I have to say that it was exhilarating. I thought it was hysterical, a scream, hilarious, and so on. It’s not exactly Airplane or Monty Python, but it’ll do. Oh, it’ll do.

It’s from the same studio that brought us Road Trip, so you know what to expect as you plop the ol’ DVD in there, and you’re not disappointed. It’s raunchy and clever, more so than those wacky-hijinks movies of the 80s, like Porky’s and Police Academy, were.

Plot’s pretty simple. Scott’s (Scott Mechlowicz) dumped by his hot girlfriend, who’s been cheating on him with, virtually, everyone. She dumps him during high school graduation, which is sort of cold, and then at the graduation party, the band (led by an almost-unrecognizable Matt Damon) breaks into a new song called “Scotty Doesn’t Know!” Everyone but Scotty knows his ex was a total slut.

Scott’s been emailing with a German student named Mike, even after finishing his German class. But then Scott’s friend Cooper (Jacob Pitts) warns that one should be careful talking with strange people over the Internet; next thing you know, they want to arrange a “meeting” and get jiggy with you, to use a ten-year-old, no-longer-hip phrase. So Scot blows off Mike when the latter does indeed say he wants to come to the US and hang out with Scott.

But as Scott’s little brother Bert smugly points out, Mike’s a girl – his real name is Mieke, short for Miekela, and Scott’s been assuming he’s a dude. He even has a picture. Oops, turns out that’s Miekela with her brother. Oh no! And he just told her off!

Only one thing to do! Head to Germany and find Miekela! To the planes! Wackiness ensues, because they don’t go directly to Berlin. In London, they run into a rambunctious football-hooligan gang (led by Vinny Jones). In Amsterdam, they have some absinthe, partake in a special club (run by Lucy Lawless), and find out too much about themselves. They find a nude beach in Paris, but it’s all guys. In Italy, they get to wear the Pope’s hats.

Now, this isn’t a family film. It’s got nudity, drug humor, S&M, incest (not really).. it’s really a comedy version of Hostel, which had a lot of that plus a ton of gore. No, this one never makes you flinch uncomfortably, but it does make you laugh a lot, as intended.

The movie’s well cast (sensitive kid, wacky best friend, hot friend, hot friend’s twin brother) for the leads, and there are familiar faces peppered throughout the movie. It has excellent running jokes, too, as the best comedies have: Scott’s and Cooper’s best pals are twins (one of whom is played by Buffy’s younger sister, Michelle Tractenberg) – the joke is that they’re the worst twins ever, because they’re nowhere near on the same wavelength. They’re not just opposite, they’re different species.

And if I never see another movie with a capped pickup truck made to look like the Duke Boys’ General Lee, I’ll still die happy. That was pretty boss. EuroTrip is irreverent, even intentionally offensive, but it’s not daring just for the sake of shocking you. It even has a bit of sweet charm to it, and I think I know why: Scott, our protagonist, isn’t some insufferable jackass full of himself and awesome to the max, he’s just some schlub who’s way too trusting. Like a lot of us.

***

, , , ,

No Comments

It’s the Final Fourpocalypse!

So we’re down to the final four. I’ve noticed that the number of votes has been decreasing. How can this be? Obviously you’re all so bedazzled by my awesome posts that you forget there are meaningless polls to answer.

The results so far indicate one thing for sure: I am a bad seeder. Both of the lowest seeds in the entire tourney are still alive! This isn’t possible. Could we have a 12 seed win it all? I would have thought it less likely than Eddie Murphy’s career being reignited by yet another dumb comedy, but now I’m leaning toward yes.

First, the Bogart Bracket. Harrison Ford was able to hold off the upstart Jolie, possibly because she was too busy birthing twins, or somesuch. Meanwhile, crafty Alan Rickman beat up on poor Bruce Willis.

In the Wayne Bracket, Morgan Freeman pulled an upset on Tom Hanks, who used to be nigh invincible. The man was on Oscar winner every year not too long ago! But he’s been ousted by Hoak. Or God. Meanwhile, Tommy Lee Jones surprised everyone, meaning me, by knocking off Sam Jackson – barely, and that’s mainly because the poll had only seven votes total. But I digress.

7 Comments

402 – 10,000 BC

Although well shot in front of gorgeous vistas, on location in New Zealand, Namibia, and South Africa, 10,000 BC is just another loud, dumb, and eminently pointless CGI adventure from the tactless, talentless, hacky direction of Roland Emmerich.There’s a plot, believe it or not, something about the true love between some tribesman and a hot chick, set in the very distant past, and these rampaging marauders attack their peaceful prehistoric-era tribe and carry off the womenfolk, so our hero spends the next two hours of movie time trying to get her back.

But who cares, right? No one in his right mind would watch a Roland Emmerich movie for the plot. The man brought us Godzilla, Independence Day, and The Day after Tomorrow, after all. No, your focus here is supposed to be on the prehistoric-ness of the thing, like the wild, carniverous birds, or the mastodons, or the sabre-tooth tigers. Oh, and the smoldering hotness of lurve that Our Hero and His Love can barely contain.

Your first clue that this won’t be much more than a silly bore is the simple fact that our noble hunters speak perfect, inflectionless English. No idea why. I’m not the biggest fan of subtitles, granted, but I think here they at least would have made sense. Instead, we have these perfectly coiffed young people with gleaming white teeth – as any prehistoric hunter would have – speaking the Queen’s English to each other. It’s bizarre and off-putting. These cool kids look like they fell out of a Gap commercial; they’d be dead in minutes if they actually had to fend for themselves on a tundra or in the jungle. They’re as believable as Ed Begley, Jr. at a biker rally. Which is not very believable.

And it’s not as if they get clever, intelligent dialog to mouth. D’Leh (heh, sounds like Delay) tells a vicious, trapped sabre-tooth tiger, “Do not eat me when I set you free!” See, because he doesn’t want to be eaten, and he figures that reasoning with the beast will do the trick. D’Leh, played by newcomer Steven Strait, is sort of a poor man’s Colin Farrell, complete with otherworldly eyebrows. He wants you to think he’s earnest and sincere, but instead you think he’s vapid and vain. Crazy!

(“Do not eat me when I set you free!” That’s hilarious right there. Why, it’s right up there with “Throw me the whip, and I’ll throw you the idol!”)

Besides, this whole pursuing-the-savages-who-stole-our-people thing was done much better only a few years ago in Mel Gibson’s Apocalpyto. Now, you might not buy into the notion of using an ancient Mayan dialect in a movie, but at least it made some sense. Using that dialect, with subtitles, there was a real sense of adventure and tragedy; here, the fluid English feels woefully inept and completely anachronistic.

Unlike Apocalypto, there’s scant fighting and mayhem here. The tribe (like that in Apocalypto) is a hunting tribe, so that explains why for much of the movie they run and hide and duck and cover. I will find you! What’s his name cries. And then he finds her and then loses her again, and he says, I’ll come back! And then he spends the next hour or so trying to find her. His One True Love is like a set of pretty car keys.

Back to that tiger, which makes a couple of appearances. Now, I like CGI as much as the next guy. It can very easily enhance a scene, make the unrealistic seem obvious and believable. But this tiger reminded me of the cyclops and other fantastical creatures you’d see in those old fifties Greek-epic movies, the ones featuring the work of the great Ray Harryhausen – basically, essentially, stop-motion animation. And that looks crappy here in good ol’ 2008.

10,000 BC isn’t meant to be a historical epic – the year 10,000 BC is used here merely to connote a Long Time Ago – which is fine in and of itself, but really isn’t anything compelling about it other than its setting. It’s predictable pap without much of a heart, instilling no compassion or feeling from its audience.

**

, ,

5 Comments

I’m no longer a bellwether for schlocky movies

That’s what I’m thinking, anyway. I used to really love big-budget special-effects extravaganzas, used to look forward to ‘em and all, even while trying to be somewhat critical and cynical of them. I didn’t want to lapse into all-out fandom just because a movie was the flavor of the month, but I also never wanted to be one of those humorless scribes who nitpicked every teeny tine aspect of a movie just so he could say he found problems.

For example, when Independence Day came out, I loved it. LOVED IT. Thought it was perfect. Now, time has shown me that it wasn’t really all that great – it was evocative and rousing, but in the end it was illogical. Same with Armageddon. Yes, I admit it – I liked it. Liked it loads. So yes, I fall prey to the hype machine myself.

But this year has given us two movies that seemingly everyone in the universe loved – but that I did not. I don’t mean that the movies made a buttload of money despite critical panning, I mean they made money AND were highly praised by critics. Except for this amateur.

I’m speaking of Wall-E and The Dark Knight.

Now, I’ve said what I wanted to say about these movies (click the links to get the full scoop). I thought the former was too bleak and too colorless to be very compelling, at least in its first half, and I felt that the hero in the latter was bland, emotionless, less a cipher than a dullard. But is it truly me? I saw on IMDb.com recently a poll that asked if The Dark Knight would or should supplant The Godfather as the #1 movie of all time.

Let that sink in for a second. The Dark Knight… as the best movie ever? Have people lost their minds? I know that this sort of thing does happen – that is, a movie kicks ass the first few weeks or months after its release, and then people move on. A rating of, say, 9.5 now might be a 8.1 in a year. But really, are we seriously putting this forth as a possibility?

Let’s be clear. The Dark Knight isn’t a terrible movie, but it’s a deeply flawed, slightly above-average one. Now, at the moment I appear to be in the solid minority there. I wonder if that’ll still be the case in a year. Will the bloom be off the rose at that point, or will the movie have stood the test of (some) time and maintained its high rating?

And if it does maintain that rating, does that mean I’ve lost whatever critical-thinking ability I once had? Or would it mean that I just whiffed on that one movie?

Conversely, if the rating declines – returns to the norm, I’d guess – would that vindicate me?

See, I don’t mind going against the grain (one should never fear that, not as a critic), but usually the so-called Critics of the world disagree with John Q. Public. Some movies are artsy and don’t appeal to Mr. Public, and some are blockbusters and don’t appeal to Mr. Critic. But when they agree with each other but not with me…. is it me or is it them?

2 Comments

Happy birthday, Phil Hoffman

Philip Seymour Hoffman turned 41 today, and I’m sure you’ve all bought him something nice and age-appropriate. I don’t know what the 41st birthday signifies – it’s not like anniversaries, so we can’t say this is Hoffman’s paper birthday, or something. Anyway, perhaps he’d like a few coupons to Subway. Eat fresh, Phillip!

Let’s take the opportunity to not only honor him for surviving another year by taking a gander at some of the Oscar winner’s most relevant and interesting movies.

1. Scent of a Woman (***, 1992). Hoffman has a small role here, but it’s sort of important; he plays compadre to Chris O’Donnell’s character. I mention it here only because it shows the kind of blowhard-bully roles Hoffman took during his salad years.

2. Twister (***1/2, 1996). Hoffman was one of Bill Paxton’s old stormchasing buddies; while Paxton’s moved on and is about to marry Jamie Gertz, Hoffman’s still on the team, crackin’ wise and such. Memorable line: “We crave sustenance!” Hoffman’s Dusty spends much of the movie TOTALLY STOKED about running smack into a freaking tornado. Already, you can see the larger-than-life attitude of Hoffman, an attitude he was to temper a bit when chasing Oscar.

3. Boogie Nights (***, 1997). In another memorable turn, Hoffman plays Scotty J, a crew member on a porno shoot who tries to put the moves on Dirk Diggler. One problem, Diggler’s not gay. Or is he? Anyway, Hoffman turns what might have seemed pathetic into a soulful, empathic performance.

4. Happiness (***1/2, 1998). Todd Solondz’s movie isn’t for everyone. It’s for people who like weird movies and aren’t easily offended, that’s for sure. Here, Hoffman’s a sexually repressed man who can’t approach women, particularly his neighbor, so he makes obscene calls. Again, a pathetic individual is somehow given stature and legitimacy in Hoffman’s capable hands.

5. The Talented Mr. Ripley (***, 1999). Bunch of actors in this whose visibility has increased substantially in the ensuing years. Hoffman is Freddie Miles, pal to Jude Law’s Dickie Greenleaf. His performance is a little lost next to Law’s, or Matt Damon’s, or Cate Blanchett’s, or Gwyneth Paltrow’s… but it’s still outstanding.

6. State and Main (***, 2000). Hoffman is the innocent screenwriter for William H. Macy’s film-within-a-film, The Old Mill. Of course, he improbably gets the girl here, played by Rebecca Pidgeon (director David Mamet’s wife). This is quintessential Hoffman – bumbling, stumbling, awesome.

7. Almost Famous (***1/2, 2000). Hoffman is Rolling Stone writer Lester Bangs (immortalized in REM’s “It’s the End of the World As We Know It (and I Feel Fine)”), who mentors young Patrick Fugit in his quest to write the hell out of everything and eventually bed Penny Lane (Kate Hudson).

8. Capote (**, 2005): Hoffman won a Best Actor Oscar in the title role. Some might be put off by his mannerisms, but rest assured that’s how the real Capote was (just check out Capote in 1976′s Murder by Death, playing a character not unlike himself). Not my cup a tea, but good for him anyway.

9. Mission: Impossible III (**1/2, 2006): Finally, a slick, overproduced comic-book-violence movie. Hoffman is the Evil Mastermind out to rule the world, and only Tom Cruise stands in his way! Not a demanding role for Hoffman, but he’s better than your average despotic movie villain.

10. The Savages (**, 2007): The longtime girlfriend of the father of the grown-up Savage kids (Hoffman and Laura Linney) dies, and turns out Dad (Philip Bosco) has already begun sliding down the slope of dementia. This is a two-character study, and Hoffman’s egotistic, overbearing brother is…. well, he’s a bastard. A spiteful, bullying bastard who’s taken advantage of decades of being the BMoC in the family. His sister ain’t nothing, he thinks, and he believes he knows all. Heh. But it’s a dark, ultimately depressing movie.

11. Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead (***1/2, 2007). Hoffman’s another brother, this time to Ethan Hawke, while being married to Marisa Tomei (!). This caper-gone-wrong story is told Rashomon style, with flashbacks interspersed with the present to create a comingled tale of desperation, ego, and decadence. As with many of Hoffman’s characters, Andy is unsympathetic in the extreme, a canker on the butt of his family; as in The Savages, his younger sib looks up to him and follows his lead (albeit not without some jealousy).

12. Charlie Wilson’s War (**1/2, 2007). Hoffman plays a freewheeling, pissy CIA agent who tries to buck the system’s legendary red tape and get what he wants, so he’s a perfect match with Tom Hanks’ freewheeling Congressman Wilson. It’s yet another role that looks insubstantive at first but that explodes into some awesomeness and complexity, thanks to Hoffman’s nuanced performance, which was Oscar nominated.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Hurrying up and waiting on Netflix

Those of you who have built ginormous Netflix queues undoubtedly have some movies listed thatĀ aren’t available Now. These movies might be presently unavailable for any number of reasons: maybe NF has only one copy, maybe the movie was just in the theaters, maybe there’s been a huge run onĀ Weekend at Bernie’s 2, anything.

So. I would like you to look at your Netflix queue. Scroll down the page and look in the Expected Availability column. What movies are not available Now?

These are mine listed as Very Long Wait:

Spider Baby (1964) [I can watch it online via NF, though.]

Quackser Fortune Has a Cousin in the Bronx (1970) [Early Gene Wilder]

The Andersonville Trial (1970) [Also available online via NF.]

The Front Page (1931)

Fade to Black (1980)

Morocco (1933)

And these are Short Wait:

The Major and the Minor (1942)

How about yours? Do you have any?

No Comments

Round 3: Almost no one died to bring you these polls … of DOOM!

Now things are heating up. You spoke, and some actors choked. The #12 seeds live on! That means, of course, that I suck at seeding.

Tommy Lee Jones vanquished Russell Crowe (?!) and moves on, as does Morgan Freeman, who smacked Matt Damon around. The two other high seeds that got byes for the last round now step in to face these two. Are Freeman and Jones tuckered out? Or are they thirsty for more?

Over the t’other bracket, let’s see who survived. Alan Rickman is a favorite here, I see, as he wiped out George Clooney. And then Harrison Ford beat back that young whippersnapper Johnny Depp. Can they handle Jolie and Willis?

No Comments

Vote more.

http://www.frothyruminations.com/?p=670

I don’t wanna end this round until there’s at least ten votes, which ain’t many.

No Comments

401 – The Dark Knight

This may be hard to believe, but I don’t go into a theater before watching a blockbuster movie with the expectation that it’ll be overhyped and bloated; that’s just how it turns out from time to time. No, I have reasonable expectations just like the next guy.

As I check out the reactions to The Dark Knight from esteemed critics and normal people alike, I notice a common thread – everyone likes the movie. A lot. Particularly, everyone seems enamored of Heath Ledger’s unhinged, magnificent, and terrifying performance as The Joker. Straight out, I want to make clear that I completely agree. Ledger isn’t just some ham acting out in a clown costume; we had Jack Nicholson do that already, nearly twenty years ago. Ledger commands the screen not with an over-the-top performance but a scene-stealing, subtle one. His makeup masks not only a despicable demon who hurts for the sake of causing pain but also a troubled, carefully shaded character worthy of Shakespeare’s finest plays.

Let’s first get to what I didn’t like. Many of the main roles are miscast, sometimes badly so. Christian Bale returns as the Caped Crusader, but if anything his performance is more wooden than in the movie’s predecessor, Batman Begins. See, I’ve always thought the complex Batman character should be someone who’s consumed by inner demons, one who even when unmasked reveals only some layers while hinting at much greater depths. And I never get that impression with Bale as Batman: He is what you see, and little more. Yes, we know he’s got this secret identity thing going, and he doesn’t tell people everything, and that’s nice. Endearing, even. But Bale’s inadequacies as an actor show up in spades here, because I never get the feeling that there’s more than meets the eye. Bale’s Batman doesn’t feel like he’s consumed by demons in the least; he seems like a pretty boy with a lot of money who likes to torture (yes, torture) and kill bad guys without any of the blame or acclaim.

Moving along, we have a new Rachel Dawes, aka The Love Interest, played this time by Maggie Gyllenhaal, who’s a monumental improvement over the terrible performance that Katie Holmes gave in Batman Begins. Even so, as has been noted elsewhere, Gyllenhaal is too intelligent, her eyes too ironically knowing, to play the role. In other words, she seems out of place because she’s smarter than Rachel Dawes – an assistant DA – is. (Of course, we don’t see much of Rachel doing DA stuff; we see her running from place to place in a panic, or professing her love for Harvey Dent through nonverbal ways, or smiling coquettishly.) So: Like the Maggie Gyllenhaal, a LOT, but she was far better than her character was written. Someday they’ll get it right.

And then there’s the third wheel to the love triangle: Harvey Dent, played by Aaron Eckhart. Now, you have to set aside Tommy Lee Jones’s performance as Dent in one of the earlier Batman movies, because this is a new Bativerse, and it’s like those other movies never happened. Dent eventually becomes the physically and mentally scarred Two-Face, but Eckhart can’t quite handle the heavy lifting that the complicated character demands. When you see Eckhart, you think of likable cad, the slightly slimy guy who’s better than the real hero at basically everything. But in a charming way. Here, Dent’s a noble crusader, the district attorney who’s going to clean up Gotham, but Eckhart is just another toothy, slick, Ken doll who’s there just to look good. The way Eckhart plays Dent, you’d think he was just an affable fellow who wants to do the right thing; as with Bruce Wayne, there doesn’t seem to be any undercurrent of ulterior motives, nothing to see here, please disperse. Eckhart, despite having studied split personalities in preparing for the role, is clearly in way over his head here.

The movie itself is overlong, even bloated. It seems the in thing nowadays to have a movie end several times – you know, to keep the Great Unwashed on their toes. Oh my goodness! It’s not over yet! What will happen next? But surely there’s a way to do this without producing a film that’s two and a half hours long. If you’re going to make a movie that long, be my guest, but the movie should be more than our heroes running from action scene to action scene, particularly when nearly all of those action scenes are in dark, dank Gotham City.

The bottom line is that if it weren’t for Heath Ledger’s award-caliber performance, this wouldn’t be much of a movie at all. It’s long, overproduced, overplotted, and miscast in key roles. Ledger acts the proverbial rings around Bale, who doesn’t act so much as react and glower. Oh, and here’s an imponderable for you – how come Bruce Wayne’s voice and Batman’s voice sound so different from each other? It’s not as if Batman’s mouth is covered by his mask; it’s completely unobscured. So why does he sound all throaty, raspy, and clogged when he’s Batman? Does he have a voice synthesizer in his mouth? File that under Idontgetit.

But here are some positives, to make sure all bases are covered. Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine exude effortless efficiency as Lucius and Alfred, respectively, doing far more for the movie than it for them. Both act as Bruce’s conscience, and both roles were written as to be completely believable. Professionalism is always a plus when casting superhero movies. And some of those vaunted action scenes are a lot of fun to watch, although many of them seem to involve Batman jumping off a building, Batman climbing down the side of a building, or Batman throwing someone else off a building. In the dark. Because it’s supposed to be gloomy ol’ Gotham.

So for me, The Dark Knight was a disappointment. It’s not a bad little film, but it felt too loose, as if writers Christopher and Jonathan Nolan had decided on an ending and then threw everything they could think of into the plot to reach that goal. This happens to a lot of middling action films – the hero races to point A, escapes certain death, races to point B, escapes certain death, repeat ad infinitum. Same sort of thing here, only we don’t even get clever plotting that we might expect from what’s purportedly a higher grade of superhero movie. There’s much chaos in The Dark Knight, but ultimately the maelstrom of disorder consumes, rather than engages, the viewer. The Dark Knight is elegy to the great potential – realized and unrealized – that’s forever lost with the death of Heath Ledger.

**1/2

, , , , , ,

3 Comments