2009 Best Film Nominee #7- Up

Is there a studio more consistent than Pixar? Year in, year out it delivers family films that not only entertain the kids, but operate on a level palatable to adults. Now, it’s had a film nominated for best picture and, as you can see by my ranking, I think it was a quality enough film to compete with some of the other nominees. This evaluation contrasts my criticisms of The Blind Side in which I claimed it is not a best picture caliber film and, therefore, shouldn’t be in the category. Ultimately, I would also concede that neither is Up. However, I rank it ahead of District 9 and A Serious Man because it is simply executed so tremendously.

Sometimes when you watch a film, everything just seems to work and everything just fits. I felt that way watching Up. The animation, as we all have come to expect with Pixar, is fantastic. The story is cute and the themes of adventure and love match it perfectly. Everything in the film, all the way to the score, fits together in the same unique style. I’m not saying this film will change your perspective, but it truly is the definition of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.

What allows for this harmony of intermingling aspects of the film is its solid backbone of a well-structured, well-told story. Its set-up manages to cover a lifelong relationship from its inception to its conclusion in a heart-warming, efficient manner so that when Ellie dies and Carl is left alone, we understand why he is such a bitter old man, and, therefore, we’re okay with it. That incredible crafting of the story’s introduction allows Carl room to grow so that his journey is relevant to him for more than the adventure. It is literally life changing. From there, the story moves along at a good pace. It doesn’t speed through character development and it doesn’t loll between the more exciting action scenes. Every single beat of the story hits at the appropriate time, which makes it easier to follow and easier to lose yourself in. Every single turning point makes sense and the ending is both fitting and touching. I honestly cannot look at any part of the movie and say it should have been done differently.

With such high praise, you must be wondering why I only rank it as number seven. Well, despite the incredible execution of the film, the premise is not that strong. To sum it up in a sentence, I’d say, “A grumpy old man attaches thousands of balloons to his house to fly away on the adventure he and his late wife never took, but he finds an unwelcome guest in the form of a boy scout has come along for the ride in Up.” After you get past the idea of helium balloons lifting a house from its foundation, you get a story that isn’t really fresh- an old guy reliving his childhood and going on an adventure. That movie came out recently and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull flopped. Just ask Shia LaBeouf. On top of it, the adventure is to find an exotic bird. Really, that’s an adventure? Well, at least give us a menacing enemy. Nope- An even older man and a pack of talking dogs. Who green-lighted this flick?! And look where it ended up. Like I said, incredible execution by a trusted studio.

Along the same lines of the weak premise, I do handicap Up because it’s a children’s movie. This handicap is not some sort of personal, statutory limit I’ve imposed on kids movies, like ‘no movie under PG-13 will ever make my top 5”. Rather it is because the themes are dealt with on a more childish, elementary level… as they should be. Generally, children’s films can’t be entertaining and understandable to children as well as challenging and thought provoking to adults. In this film, an elderly man tries to move on now that his lifelong partner and soul mate has passed, and he does so pretty easily, without much heartache. I can’t imagine the anguish someone must feel when they lose a partner of roughly 60 years, and, the film ignores that entire dynamic, which it really must do because it is a children’s movie.

To sum it up, this is simply just a good movie. It is charming, funny, and heart-warming and the story will keep you entertained and involved regardless of your age. If you have kids or are one and you haven’t seen this movie yet, let me be the first to welcome you back to Earth and suggest you hop in the car (or online) and go pick it up. If you don’t have kids, I’d still recommend you rent it if you’re in the mood for something a little lighter and easier to watch.

Scale:

1- Lots of Better Movies at Blockbuster

2- Might Be Worth Renting

3- Rent It When You Get to It

4- A Must Rent, at some point

5- Put It in Your Queue NOW!

My Rating: 3.5

Buy Up (Four-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo + BD Live) [Blu-ray]

2009 Best Film Nominee #8- A Serious Man

It pains me to put the Coen brothers this low because I admire their work, but this particular film, A Serious Man, just didn’t do it for me. I wanted to like it. I tried to like it. I re-watched it hoping I’d like it more the second viewing. Alas, no, it was simply too dry and mundane for me. I know this may be blasphemy to some (process of elimination tells you an animated film beat it), but please hear me out.

I admired the film for all its technical aspects and production. I love the way the Coen brothers set up a shot and they do it well in this film. The acting is excellent. Michael Stuhlgard masterfully played a helpless victim unwilling to accept his victimhood, but also too nice and meek to really do anything about it. The supporting cast shines as well. The Coen’s also plant good set-ups early on that they use to reap the benefits of comedic payoffs throughout the film (particularly Larry’s son’s obsession with the aerial).

From a story perspective (you know how much I love story!), the Coen’s accomplish what The Blind Side could not: they take a passive character and make him move the story forward. Larry even exclaims in exasperation multiple times throughout the film, “I didn’t do anything!” This is a bit of a paradox because Larry indeed does nothing to cause the misfortunes that befall him. However, he moves the story forward by actively trying to find meaning in them. Despite not appearing to be particularly pious, Larry embarks on a spiritual journey of sorts and visits rabbis to find answers to his crumbling life. He doesn’t simply roll with the punches and carry on with business as usual.

The story also effectively conveys a darkly humorous tone. It is brilliant in its subtlety (I love the scene in which Larry first comes home only to be attacked by an angry wife and daughter for reasons that he doesn’t know and are not his fault, all while his deadbeat brother shouts from the bathroom, “I’ll be right out!”- genius). The film also exposes the ugly side of life’s institutions such as family, marriage, and religion in an amusing way. Don’t expect to fall out of your seat though! The humor is so subtle and downplayed that, in my opinion, it is lost at times. In order to really get the humor and really enjoy it, you have to have a very dry and pretty dark sense of humor.

I also think part of the reason I missed out on some of the humor is due to my own ignorance. I am not Jewish and am not an expert on the religion or culture. As a result, I got the sense that some of the potency of the humor was lost on me because I am an outsider. Since much of the humor was satirical, and the “who” is often the most important aspect of the humor in satire, my unfamiliarity with the Jewish religion or culture left a gap for me. I believe this may have been true of the story as well, particularly in the opening scene. To me, it seemed very unnecessary to have that scene as a sort of fable that, bluntly, shows that s*** happens. They easily could have expressed all relevant information in a more concise, story-centric way, but they didn’t. I assume it was for the entertainment value, which, being an outsider was less effective to me. That’s not to say it was the wrong choice for the film. I just didn’t get it.

My biggest critique, though (and the reason I rank A Serious Man this low) is that it is a story about ordinary people living ordinary lives, with every day, ordinary things happening to them. It sounds kind of boring, right? About half the audience could claim to have an equally exciting life story, maybe even more compelling depending on the audience! Why should I invest my time and energy into a story about fictional characters that is no grander than my own life story? I’m not saying I need Pandora to be entertained, but do something to draw me into the story! Going into a film, I have nothing invested in its characters or story. It is the story’s job to grab my attention and make me care about it whether I want to or not. Unfortunately, I found so many of the scenes to be so ordinary and dry that I just found myself getting bored and waiting for the film to end.

So, there you have it. Chalk the low ranking up to personal preference. The film is very well done. The acting is great and the writing is witty. If you like the Coen brothers, you’ve probably already seen the film and aren’t awaiting my recommendation with bated breath. If you consider yourself a bit of a movie buff who enjoys indie films and enjoys films that aren’t high concept, go ahead and rent it. However, if you really only enjoy the Hollywood blockbusters, then this one probably isn’t for you.

Scale:

1- Lots of Better Movies at Blockbuster

2- Might Be Worth Renting

3- Rent It When You Get to It

4- A Must Rent, at some point

5- Put It in Your Queue NOW!

My Rating: 3

Buy A Serious Man

2009 Best Film Nominee #9- District 9

No, I didn’t rank District 9 number 9 to match the title. I put it here, ultimately, because I liked the idea of the film more than the actual film. District 9 is a very ambitious movie that deals with themes ranging from apartheid to Christianity: all encompassed in a sci-fi thriller. I love the scope it tried to cover, but unfortunately the pursuit of that scope hurt the story.

First, I criticized The Blind Side in my last post for not having the best picture style, something that is a non-issue for District 9. Aesthetically, the film works. The handheld style and bookend documentary-style segments contribute to the film’s goal of making this hypothetical world seem all the more real, a great choice for those purposes, but at the cost of the storytelling.

I love story, and I think the documentary style segment up front crippled the film’s story. In this segment, the film shows all the necessary exposition explaining how the world came to be the way it is. It explains how the aliens arrived, how they were discovered, how they are treated, etc. It reveals all the possible reveals of the story so that by the time the story begins, we the audience already know every interesting aspect of this imaginary world. This choice allows the film to jump right into exploring its themes, but it blows the opportunity to gradually clue us in on how this world differs from our own, making the story drier as a result.

The documentary style approach also leads to my second point: the media in the film. Starting with such a long, documentary style segment allows the audience to remain arm’s length from the story and the main character (Wikus) for two reasons. First, rather than feeling like we’re being drawn into the story and building a level of intimacy with it and its characters, we are reminded through the opening documentary that we are sitting on our couch watching characters on a screen. It’s like watching the Discovery channel if you knew that everything was fake. You may care about the people you’re watching, but only if you really force yourself to, which leads to my second point. Why should we? If the terrible treatment of these creatures is commonplace for this new world (as the distribution through media would suggest), then what’s the big deal? Why should I care what happens to these people and in this story. I can flip on the news and see similar things happening to real people in the real world and not care enough to do anything about it, so why should I care about these fake people in this fake world? I understand that is one of the points of the film, but it sacrifices the uniqueness and effectiveness of the story in order to make the point. It makes the film more of an academic hypothesis rather than a movie with a gripping story, which is fine, except that if the goal is to make the themes resonate with the audience, the latter of which is a much more effective vehicle.

Finally, I think this film simply bit off more than it could chew. It has so many themes and so many allusions that they dominate the entire movie. It set up this hypothetical world: what if aliens arrived and they were non-violent and, for the most part, submissive? Rather than choosing one aspect of that story and running with it, the film seemingly tries to cover EVERYTHING that would happen. It covers corporate and government corruption, apartheid, religion (any time a character’s name has the initials “JC” or the word “Christ” in it, look out for a literary “Christ figure”. This film’s two for two: Christ-opher Johnson - initials flipped), organized crime, drugs, prostitution, etc. It seems so concerned with shedding light on human nature and how our societies and governments work, that the story is simply meant to serve these themes, instead of the themes organically arising from a well-told story. The approach the filmmakers took is not wrong; I just think it is very difficult to cover the breadth of topics they take on in less than two hours. I would like to have seen this film approached as a television series along the lines of The Wire. I think with the added time, characters could have been developed to the point that the aforementioned topics would have more significance when they occur to and around our characters and, ultimately, I think the themes would have resonated more.

Overall, District 9 swings for the fences and, I won’t say it struck out, but that ball definitely stayed in play. I love the topics it deals with and it approaches them in a fresh, imaginative way. The film quality is superb and fits the goals of the film and the acting is good as well. On the other hand, it might be the most boring alien invasion story ever told. If you enjoy watching a film with your mind instead of your heart and/or you love any and everything sci-fi, I highly recommend this film. However, for the average movie-goer looking for an entertaining story, this one might not be for you.

Scale:

1- Lots of Better Movies at Blockbuster

2- Might Be Worth Renting

3- Rent It When You Get to It

4- A Must Rent, at some point

5- Put It in Your Queue NOW!

My Rating: 3

Buy District 9 (Two-Disc Edition)

2009 Best Film Nominee #10- The Blind Side

Surprise! (Just kidding, I suspect many of you saw this one coming). In adhering to the compliment sandwich for, well, criticism, I’ll begin by telling you what I like about the movie. Sandra Bullock appears as charming and likeable as I hear she is off screen. She clearly elevates the movie and nails her role. Further, I was impressed with the supporting cast. There weren’t any truly moving performances, but all the actors were convincing and played their parts well. I was impressed with Jae Head (S.J. in the film). I thought he showed good timing, sharpness, and presence that most child actors struggle with. More than anything, though, the best compliment I can give The Blind Side is that it delivers on the premise it promises. It is exactly what it claims to be: a warm, heartfelt, family movie about redemption, triumph, and family. The problem is, it’s not what the Academy nominated it to be: a best picture caliber movie.

I could speculate and throw out unfounded theories all day about why I think The Blind Side was nominated, but I’ll spare you the headache and just tell you why I don’t think it’s on that level. First, the story doesn’t challenge me at all. What makes it so easy to watch and great for the family is that you know the entire story when you see the trailer (or, in my case, watched the 2009 NFL Draft- yup, they covered the whole thing). It shies away from anything unpleasant or any of the grittiness of the story: Michael’s background in the projects, his relationship with his mother, etc. I’m sure these elements occurred in the true story (which is amazing and inspiring) and would have made the movie sizzle with more conflict (much like Precious). Rather, the filmmakers went the Disney route.

Secondly, it doesn’t have the best picture “style”. This is hard to specify, but you can tell when you see it. Some examples I see where it lacks the style are: the football stock footage and voice-over which explain the title before the movie even really starts, the parade of groveling real life college football coaches (coaches aren’t Oscar worthy actors and I see Lou Holtz drooling enough on the set of ESPN during football season), and the fudging of reality in a story based in reality (Sorry, I don’t buy a mother getting away with stopping practice to lecture her son. I especially don’t buy the fact that her lecture about protecting his family transforms him from a bumbling backup to a technically sound, blue chip recruit. That’s just one example.)

Finally, the story isn’t crafted and executed THAT well. It’s a good story overall, but it suffers from a crisis of identity. By this, I mean: whose story is it? Who is the main character taking us through this journey? The obvious first choice is Michael Oher. He has the furthest to go and is in the most need of change, so he sets up to be an interesting main character. However, his timidity makes him very passive. He’s a tag along in the film. He goes with the flow. The first major decision he has to make is made for him. He doesn’t want to spend that first night at the Tuohy residence; Leigh Anne tells him to and this proves to be the rule, not the example to it. He does not drive the story forward at all and, therefore, is not the story’s hero (unlike a similar character who DOES drive the story forward in another Best Picture nominee that may have been mentioned earlier…)

Anyway, The Blind Side was NOT Michael Oher’s story and it’s a shame because his story is the most interesting one. Rather, it is Leigh Anne Tuohy’s story, which has potential, but there was a lot of meat left on that bone. To put it shortly, Leigh Anne is too perfect and everything goes too smoothly for her. There’s no struggle and her character is flat- meaning she does not change or evolve throughout the film. Where’s the fun in that? Part of what makes a great story is the struggle of the main character- her ups and downs and how she must adapt to her unforeseen circumstances so as to persevere and not crumble. At the heart of change is conflict and without conflict, there is no story. Sadly, I think a lot of the conflict and change that exists in the true story was absent in the film.

Now, it’s time for the other piece of bread in the compliment sandwich. This may seem like a very meaty sandwich, but keep in mind I’m judging this film on the best picture level, which I think is unfair. Further, if the only good movies were best picture quality, we’d only get a handful a year (if that) and Hollywood probably would have gone out of business decades ago. Like I said in the beginning, this is a good movie for what it is. When you watch it, you can’t help but get a goofy smile on your face and feel all warm and fuzzy inside at times. It’s extremely easy to watch and the characters come across as genuine, good people- a refreshing lark into the metaphorical world of white-picket fences and smiling neighbors. The Blind Side provides this type of reprieve and if you like that type of movie, this film’s for you! If that’s not your preference, I think there are plenty of films out there that'd you prefer more, but I can pretty safely guarantee it’s not the worst way to spend two hours. (You could have spent it listening to Tim McGraw “Over and over again…”)

Scale:

1- Lots of Better Movies at Blockbuster
2- Might Be Worth Renting

3- Rent It When You Get to It

4- A Must Rent, at some point

5- Put It in Your Queue NOW!

My Rating: 3

Buy The Blind Side