2009 Best Film Nominee #2- The Hurt Locker

The final shock:  I disagreed with the Academy over the best picture of the year, bravely placing their selection, The Hurt Locker, all the way down at 2.  I’m not going to pretend like this is an ‘inferior’ film and try to blast holes in it for my own sake, rather, I believe this was an excellent film, much like Precious, that simply got outdone.

I LOVE the premise of this film.  The opening quote states it so perfectly: “The rush of battle is often a potent and lethal addiction, for war is a drug.”  What a great twist!  Every war movie seems to follow the same cookie-cutter format now a days and this one comes along and completely bucks the trend.  It presents war not as a heroic enterprise, but as a fix for an adrenaline junkie.  This is not to say that soldiers are not heroes and the men and women fighting overseas are not offering the ultimate sacrifice for their country.  Rather, it bravely offers the counterpoint to mainstream thought about members of the military:  some people like fighting, further; they’re addicted to it.

This innovative premise is then maximized due to excellent direction and great acting.  Director Kathryn Bigelow certainly is deserving of her Oscar as she had the tall task of infusing nervous anticipation and intensity into every second of the film.  Her direction allowed for the perpetual feeling of impending doom that is necessary to get the audience’s adrenaline pumping enough for us to actually feel what the theme presents- that the rush of war is powerful enough to be addictive- even if it’s only the tiniest microcosm of reality.  Without that direction and that edge of your seat anticipation, the film does not connect and the theme and everything so great about the premise is lost.  Fortunately for the viewer, Bigelow delivers an excellent film.

Even with the great premise and excellent direction, the film still would not have been nearly as powerful if it weren’t for great acting, particularly from Jeremy Renner.  His Oscar nomination was well deserved as he accomplished what every actor or filmmaker strives to be able to accomplish- he communicated his character’s thoughts through actions and looks, no words.  There are so many times in the film in which his character does something taboo and the only explanation the other characters get (and the audience for that matter) is a close-up of Renner’s face.  He does an impeccable job of not over-acting nor remaining too flat, but finding that perfect middle ground in which his eyes and expression tell the story in a very real, human way.

All the other aspects of the production are very well done also.  From the writing to the sound editing to the cinematography, it is clear that a lot of talent worked on this film and it is reflected in the end result. 

However, if I were to critique (and I am) I would argue that there are some minor story issues.  First, I felt that, based solely on story, the film would have dragged at parts if it weren’t for the excellent direction of Bigelow.  The story never really progresses. It just changes scenery:  a new bomb, a new impending danger, and the same protocol for dealing with it.  Obviously, it’s not that mundane considering it’s people’s lives at stake, but for the sake of argument, the story stalls.

My other point of contention… the ending.  There are two ways of ending this film, in my opinion, different than how it ends (I’ll try not to ruin it).  One (and my preferred way), leave him standing in the grocery store towards the end, trying to process his decision.  I felt that picture spoke a billion words towards what was going through the character’s mind and the contrast perfectly proved the theme.  Two, extend the film by at least 30 minutes to properly show him acclimating to his new surroundings before the ‘relapse’ that ends the film.  (Sorry for being vague, but I am trying not to spoil the ending if you haven’t seen it.)  The way it actually ends feels rushed to me and I could easily do without the last 5 or so minutes after the grocery store.

The Hurt Locker is an excellent movie and a must see for any and all viewers.  It ambitiously tackles a non-mainstream idea about war and executes that idea tastefully and effectively, leaving the audience with a sense that this is a real issue in the real world.  Any time a film can achieve that transcendence, it’s done something right. (I guess it helps that it’s based on real life experiences, but I won’t get into that…)  If you haven’t done so already, check out The Hurt Locker.

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: 4.5

Buy The Hurt Locker

2009 Best Film Nominee #3- Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire

Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire is a beautiful tragedy about a young woman who is dealt every bad card in the deck, yet still manages to cling to hope and aspire for a better life.  I loved this film for many reasons:  its great acting, great direction, great writing, and, mostly, its heart.  Despite the potentially cliché premise (poor girl from a bad neighborhood is beaten and unloved), the film never flirts with the cliché and is powerfully moving.

The film is delivered from the perspective of our heroine, Precious, and much of her characters’ development occurs without any dialogue and little action.  This seems contradictory- how can a character change without doing or saying anything?  Two ways to make it happen: a good director and good actors.  I’ll start with the direction.  Lee Daniels does a fabulous job of getting the shots and the performance out of a very green, but very talented lead actress, Gabourey Sidibe.  He accomplishes this by effectively taking us into the lead character’s head by using great close-ups on Sidibe matched with what she sees and is thinking (in the form of a voice over).  I am normally skeptical of voice over- I think it is often used to try to gloss over a weak story- but in this film, it is used as it should be and the film would not only be impossible without it, but not nearly as well done.

The other reason this film worked so well and the main reason it had so much heart is the acting.  I could gush this entire blog about it, but I’ll try to confine it to a few sentences.  Sidibe, I touched on, is tremendous; I look forward to following her career.  Mo’Nique delivers one of the most powerful, terrifying, real performances I think I have ever seen.  I went into the film not realizing she was in it, and, only being familiar with her comical exploits, had no idea Precious’ mother was played by Mo’Nique until I saw the credits- she’s that out of character and that good.  The rest of the ensemble was also magnificent, even Mariah Carey in her most glitterless form delivers.

In discussing Blind Side I criticized the film for having a passive main character and referenced Precious as being an example of making it work. Well, here it is.  The writing was fabulous and, despite Precious being so passive and shy she borders on being a mute when the film begins, she drives the story forward.  It took creative screenwriting to do it:  incorporating fantasies, witty voice-overs of Precious’ thoughts, and many seemingly small turning points.  Even more impressive than that, though, scribe Geoffrey Fletcher manages to keep the story fresh and interesting so as to keep our attention throughout Precious’ evolution without falling into the pitfalls of being cliché or over-indulging in pity- both easy to do with this premise. (I don’t want to leave author Sapphire out. Although I haven’t read her book nor do I know the dynamics of Fletcher’s adaptation, I have no doubt many of my compliments are attributable to her and her great novel.)

With such a glowing review, you must be wondering why I only have Precious ranked 3 at this point. Well, it’s out of no fault of the film.  Ultimately, I just felt the other two films were better, for reasons I’ll address in the next two blogs.  If I were to critique Precious, though, it would mainly just be about the premise.  The story has been done and told before- not in this way, but it isn’t a new concept.  The themes of the film are not new and the story is one that feels familiar. I didn’t leave the film thinking, “Wow, that’s like nothing I’ve ever seen before.”

That critique aside (which I really had to dig for), Precious is a fantastic film and a must see.  Despite its gloomy premise and potential, the story shines with heart as this downtrodden character refuses to submit to her cruel fate, and she doesn’t do it with fanfare, but through silent strength.  It is moving and I know I left the theater counting my blessings.

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: 4.5

Buy Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire

    

2009 Best Film Nominee #4- Up in the Air

Up in the Air is the definition of perfect timing.  What better environment could there be to release a film about a lonely traveler whose job is to fire people than our current economic climate?  The premise effortlessly sets up the theme that, basically, when things are going bad, don’t forget to count your blessings because odds are you still have some to count, and maybe even more (albeit different) than someone you’d consider “more fortunate”.  It was absolutely brilliant timing and, moreover, delivered a touching, bittersweet tale that seemed to transcend the screen and provide some sort of perspective on the worst recession in this country since the Great Depression. 

None of this works, though, unless the filmmakers turn the good premise into an excellent film, which they do.  I’m a fan of director Jason Reitman’s work (Thank You For Smoking, Juno) and think he was an excellent match for this film.  The subject matter is very dramatic and can be depressing, but Reitman excels at delivering a light-hearted, quirky sense of humor through his direction, which he does just enough of in this film to keep the mood light and stray from a dark path of depression. However, to prove he’s not so insensitive as to make light of an awful situation, he allows honest to goodness citizens to sit in front of an interview camera and vent their feelings about actually being fired… in the real world.  What an awesome touch!  The bookend interviews of people that were fired in the real world expressing their feelings about being fired then explaining how they deal with it instantly makes this film more real. It also does a great job of bringing perspective and, hopefully, solace to the masses that have been fired or laid off (in the film or, to some degree, real life) and it was done in a brief enough way to avoid pulling focus from the actual film (bravo!).

Further, the acting is tremendous!  George Clooney delivers and does a great job of showing his character’s progression from a lonely man who has convinced himself he’s happy to a man that has come to terms with his loneliness (seeing no other alternative) and seems resigned to accept it.  Both Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick nail their characters as well and are deserving of their Oscar nominations.

Coinciding with this great acting is excellent character development through story.  I don’t know if you can attribute the character development to the great acting or vice-versa (probably a symbiotic relationship), but we get these characters.  They progress and change through their actions and reactions to the circumstances that befall them.

Not to beat a dead horse, but, again, what makes this film special is its timing.  I firmly believe that Hollywood trends according to the economy.  The Hollywood films in the boom era of the late ‘90’s and pre-911 2000’s are much more independent-minded films meant to challenge our institutions and social structures.  Films like American Beauty were hits in the box office because the economy was good and people were generally happy, so they could afford the mental fortitude to take on a movie that challenges their way of life.  However, in a recession, when people already have so many troubles (job security, financial security, strains on relationships, etc.) the last thing we’re looking for is a film that gives us more things to worry about.  That’s why you see more comedies, children’s movies, and action/thrillers, because people want that escape.  Up in the Air takes an alternative route. It directly addresses the problem at hand (unemployment and massive layoffs) in a manner that those afflicted can relate to.  Better than escaping is seeing people that feel your pain and can truly empathize with you (like other people that were really fired).  This film does a masterful job of providing this release while also providing the perspective that the people doing the firing may very well be depressed too!  We get people to empathize with and bosses to feel better than. It’s a win-win!

Ultimately, though, this film does not rate higher because the premise, while great, is a little limiting.  The film is very well done and is a very good story, but it just doesn’t have very many turns it can take.  The first half of the film is great. It moves quickly and is intriguing, but, once it passes the midpoint, I feel like it limps a little bit on its way to the third act break.  This is no fault of any of the filmmakers, but just the simple fact that there are only so many things you can show when all the main character does is fly around and fire people (not to say that that’s all that happens, it’s not, but just to put it in the simplest terms).  This slight redundancy aside, the film maneuvers around this hurdle masterfully and is extraordinary. I highly recommend checking this film out!

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: 4

Buy Up in the Air

2009 Best Film Nominee #5- An Education

We made it, the top 5 films nominated for best picture!  Seeing how this year was the first year the Academy expanded to ten nominees for best picture, you could say the remaining five films are my personal nominations for best picture in the traditional format. I have so much influence! (haha) Anyway, I really enjoyed An Education.  It’s a bittersweet, but ultimately pleasant coming of age story about a young girl in London in the early 1960’s who is courted by a much older man who seems to have the world on a string. It is well done, subtle, and, premise aside, actually quite sweet.           

The story is well crafted.  One major mental leap aside, every beat and scene makes complete sense and the story is engaging and has a nice, steady flow to it. The introduction provides all the necessary exposition in a palatable way and the filmmakers do a good job of getting to the story quickly without making it seemed rushed.  In hindsight, the major turning points seem a little obvious, but as the film progresses, each one does surprise, which I think is due to incredible acting.

I’ll attempt not to gush too much, but the acting in this film was very good.  Carey Mulligan is fantastic and every bit deserving of her Oscar nomination.  Her performance is understated, yet she has a presence every time she is on screen.  Further, she manages to portray a sweet, well-meaning girl with her quirky, pleasant smile, while also displaying her inner wild side through mischievous eyes.  Notice I mentioned no words. Much of the time, she simply didn’t need them.  Next to her, Peter Sarsgaard was tremendous at his part.  He probably had the most challenging role in the film and he pulls it off magnificently.  His character is basically a pedophile- he takes an interest in a 16-year-old girl.  Yet, he is so innocent and well intentioned in his manner that he comes across as a genuine nice guy so much so that we, the audience, actually kind of want it all to work out between he and his much younger counterpart.  Without these two stunning performances, I’m not sure that this film works.

The film also has a distinct indie style and direction.  It was well directed and more imaginative in its direction than the standard blockbuster.  We don’t see the camera cutting back and forth to whoever’s talking too much and there is a distinct effort to frame shots in a creative, out of the box way.  In general, the direction effectively tells the story and adds another level of enjoyment.  Some of the more ambitious shots, though, do not work as well as simpler shots.

Earlier I mentioned a major leap in the story, well, it was definitely a big one.  Our heroine, Jenny, has an overbearing, strict father who seemingly trusts Jenny with absolutely no freedom, even when it comes to dating the most harmless, bumbling boy. However, when the much older man (Sarsgaard’s character, David) comes knocking to woo Jenny, he is instantly charmed and caves to any request David makes.  Now, David is supposed to have this sort of touch on people, as evidenced by his line of work.  However, I find it hard to believe that someone presented as such a strong character could so easily do a complete 180.

Ultimately, I know why the filmmakers made the leap. They had to tell their story and this was the way to get to it quickly. They pull so few other shenanigans that I’m okay with it.  However, what ultimately keeps An Education towards the middle of the pack is that the film is just too easy.  Without spoiling the ending for you, I’ll just say that the way the film is resolved takes some of the purpose out of the journey.  When I watch the film, I walk away with the sense that the “education” that Jenny receives is that the world is a harsh place full of people doing what they gotta do as a means trying to reach a desired end.  That being said, I believe the film resolves itself appropriately along those lines.  Jenny does learn this lesson from her experiences.  However, the stakes suffer as a result of the ending and it tiptoes the line of reality.  I’ll leave it at this:  if a lesson is learned due to the consequences of one’s actions, then I’ll say there must have been no lesson learned here.

Overall, I think this was a very pleasant and enjoyable film.  It is easy to watch and the acting is fantastic!  It is well written and well directed and a nice little story.  While it lacks some of the higher stakes of the films ranked ahead of it, it is definitely worth seeing.

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: 4

Buy An Education

2009 Best Film Nominee #6- Avatar

Surprised? Yeah, I know, but give me a break, I couldn’t rank the top grossing film of all time any lower than this (zing)… It may seem harsh, but I feel Avatar deserves a little criticism after it paid hundreds of millions of advertising dollars convincing us it’s the best film ever made (baaaaaa-zing).  Personal qualms aside, though, no one can argue the immense success of the film and it is spectacular in 3-D, IMAX (hope you crammed one of those in your living room [zing]).

Zingers aside, when the top business minds of the country are discussed, I feel James Cameron has earned a mention.  Take this film back to its concept and think of what he must have had to sell to Fox. I imagine it went something like this:

Cameron:  “I’ve been working on this script for a really long time and the technology has finally caught up to it, so let’s do it!”

Fox Exec:  “How much?”

Cameron:  “Well, did I tell you about the story?  It’s a mythological tale of human conquest and exploitation of a foreign land in order to mine its rich minerals. Then-“

Fox Exec:  “It’s about the U.S. invasion of Iraq?” (zing… okay, I’ll stop)

Cameron:  “No, you didn’t let me finish.   A disenchanted Marine takes sympathy with the natives’ plight and turns into one of the local blue cat-people and fights against the corrupt oil (cough) mineral drillers.”

Fox Exec: “So… it’s Dances with Wolves- wait, did you say blue cat-people? Doesn’t matter. How much?”

Cameron:  “It’s going to be totally awesome and you’re going to make a killing!”

Fox Exec:  “How much?”

Cameron:  “Conservatively… $300 million.”           

Fox Exec:  “I don’t know…”

Cameron:  “Titanic.”

Fox Exec:  “Deal.”

And both Cameron and Fox were absolutely right! It did make a killing!  What they had the foresight to see was that 3-D and IMAX are the only point of differentiation for watching a film at the theater rather than on your beautiful, HD, LED screen at home.  People still like going to the movies and they want excuses to see a film in theaters, but, for most films, the people that can afford to go would probably just as soon keep that thirty bucks (including date and popcorn/drink/whatever) in their pocket and wait until they can put it on their queue (like you wonderful people who read my blog!). However, 3-D and IMAX are a whole different can of worms. There was no 3-D in anyone’s homes at the time. If you could utilize that technology so that the theater experience is unique from anything you could see at home, then… then… $2,734,434,940. F*** me, it worked!

So, why do I dislike the film?  First and foremost, it was an awful screenplay.  There’s not much redeeming about it at all. Early on it became clear to me that the story served only as a vehicle to show off Pandora (and all the time, thought, creativity, and money put into it, which is impressive) and to promote an environmentalist message that eerily bordered on crossing into cult territory. 

The story line is completely recycled.  I’m a realist. I know storylines get recycled all the time, but this one really had no twists or turns that mark it as original.  Dances with Wolves and Pocahontas are the same story, just a different setting.  So what does this mean?  The film is completely predictable. The entire time you’re watching it you’re just waiting for the final battle scene, which we all know is coming due it being in the trailer (hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising, remember?), but, oo, that flower’s pretty!

Along the same lines, the setups were very forced.  I don’t want to spoil it, but the panther early on, the terydactyl skull, the whole “seeing” thing (I could look up the actual names of these things, but would you really recognize them in Na’vi?) are obviously planted early on so as to get a payoff later on.  What’s more, everything ties back in at the end of the film.  It is far too convenient to be considered realistic.  Obviously, we know none of Pandora is anywhere near real, but, once we’ve learned the world, it would be nice to think, “Well, in this world, yeah, I could see that happening.”  Bows and arrows taking down helicopters, animals fighting on behalf of humans without any training, and blunt knives being thrust through foot-thick glass from the year 2154 just don’t seem realistic, even in Pandora.

Finally, the acting was average and the dialogue was horrible.  Sam Worthington seemed flat to me in the film, but, in fairness to him and the other actors, there was not a lot to work with.  Characters were either flat and undeveloped or just switched sides without an explanation (Jake Sully being the only exception to both, and even his development seemed forced).  Further, the dialogue was bad.  I laughed at the most dramatic parts of the movie because the dialogue was so painfully awkward.  I just wish that they had said, “Peek-a-boo” in front of “I see you”…

Overall, Avatar was a brilliant business move. I believe it was really the first film to unlock the potential of 3-D, IMAX and it has obviously opened the floodgates.  Further, the attention to detail and beauty of Pandora is truly remarkable.  Its stunning backdrop resulted only due to the hard work of dedicated artists and visionaries.  However, the actual story is very forgettable and passable.  If you saw it in theaters or haven’t spent upwards of a grand on your home entertainment system, don’t bother renting this (again).  However, if you have a good TV and you want to see what all the fuss is about, go ahead and check it out. Hopefully your lowered expectations will enhance your enjoyment of it.

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 Avatar (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo) [Blu-ray]