January 14, 2007

Children of Men

Children of Men **** ½ I really liked this film. I am struggling when thinking of this film to separate my knowledge and love of the novel (which I first read in 1994 and have reread many times as one of my favourites of all time) from the story depicted in the film. First off, the film is only based on the novel and does not depict either the breadth of or the specific details of the novel; some key details in the relationships and characters are different, and much of the background of the world of 2027 – plagues, wars, the immigrant situation – is either left out or only briefly touched on. But the 2 main points – that mankind is infertile and civilization has descended into chaos and decay – are central to the film, with the later point portrayed in wonderful tragic ways. It was awesome/awful to see the world as we know it – schools, coffee shops, banks – after 20 years of abandonment. Bleak, gray, overgrown, the world is decrepit and the remaining humans seem like a miserable lot. Visually, the film is stunning – the desolation is made so vivid and real. At one point, the film takes on the feel of a documentary, as blood and dirt are splashed on the camera lens that is following Theo through a battlefield, and those splashes remain a part of the images for a few long tough minutes.The magnitude and impact of complete human infertility is not emphasized enough, so part of the point of the story is missing, making the ending more absent of the hope that should be restored here. The performances are also good, especially Clive Owen and Pam Ferris (as Miriam). Clive Owen is good as the despondent depressed Theo, although his motives for getting involved with “The Fishes” is unclear, as the chemistry between Julianne and him was not great. One thing I did not like much was the music; absent for much of the film, the inclusion of some rather harsh but in appropriate songs was distracting. Overall, I really liked this film – I was moved, surprised, intrigued, awestruck, and fascinated by it, and recommend it, not least for the post-film conversations that can be had after viewing that speculative look at the near future.

January 12, 2007

European Women

Volver *** ½ European films often have a “huh?”-factor for me, which does not make them bad, just difficult to evaluate or explain. This film was no exception. While it was a nice story about how various deaths serve to separate or reunite this family of women, I’m not sure what the film’s overall message is. But, films don’t always have to have meaning or a message. The portrayals of women in this film are wonderful – each character has depth, complexity, beauty, history, and strength, with a healthy dose of strangeness to keep them real. When there are complaints that there are no good roles for women any more, this movie should be the counterargument.

January 8, 2007

3 Fab Flicks

The Queen (loved it!)
I haven't read much about this movie, so I'm assuming that everything except for a few tidbits is conjecture - about what the Royal family is like in their private converstaions and dealings. Steadfastly NON-sensational, this is a fascinating and absorbing depiction of a woman (a family, an institution) that very few people really know.
Perfectly formal and austere in her royal duties, completely self-assured in her royal authority, living (by tradition and habit) in a buffered bubble, Elizabeth is portrayed respectfully and sympathetically as a long-experienced ruler in changing modern times and also as the caring matriarch of a family that is dysfunctional in some very common ways. Helen Mirren was superb. Michael Sheen was terrific, also. I enjoyed James Cromwell as Prince Phillip, a very natural and believable performance. He had me wondering if Prince Phillip really IS that annoying?

Blood Diamond (loved it!)
Leo, oh Leo, you are so very hot. The best part is that you are also so very talented.
This movie had me wanting to swear off all diamonds, forever, without feeling like a lecture or heavy-handed morality tale. This was acheived mostly by a compelling and complex central character, acted exceptionally well by Leonardo diCaprio. By comparison, Jennifer Connelly's "attractively courageous, big-hearted reporter who is after a story that will expose corruption and change the world" comes off a little simple. Djimon Housou, while effective, mines familiar territory (pardon the pun) as a moral but desperate man in extreme duress.
The movie shows South Africa (or Africa, generally) as beautiful but dangerous, chaotic but somehow organized and controlled (albeit by violent and inhumanely exploitative factions). This movie was more violent than I expected but it was a necessary part of the story. "TIA, right?"

Notes on a Scandal
This movie offered more than what I'd expected. I thought it would be a drama about a teacher who has an affair with a student.
But it's really about two women, one of whom has an affair with a student and the other is a bitter, lonely and obsessive friend.
Cate Blanchett playing Sheba is lovely and effortless, as always, but the real attraction is seeing Judi Dench as Barbara, the older disliked teacher who acts almost like a stalker and keeps a diary brimming with malicious criticisms.
Skillful story-telling avoids us getting wrapped-up in judgement of Sheba's ill-chosen affair and keeps us focussed on Barbara's twisted manipulations. Bill Nighy is perfect as husband to Sheba, a better-than-average supporting role that contrasts Sheba revealingly.

A Four-Star Saturday

This past weekend, recognizing that the serious movie season was upon us, we went for a triple-header on Saturday and boy, did we pick winners!

Blood Diamond **** Much better than I expected. The action is very good, tense and not at all gratuitous, and the story does not digress into too much political lecturing or unreal romance, even though the potential is there. Leo is exceptional – really lost in the character, and his facility with language and accent was astonishing; I forget how truly excellent he can be. Djimon Hounsou was also good, showing intensity and depth, but not much different from several of his other characters in memory (Amistad, Gladiator).

The Queen **** Excellent film. Assuming this is an accurate portrayal of the royal family, it is delightful to see that they are so very normal in such extraordinary circumstances – meaning their everyday lives of privilege and splendour, but also the pressures and responsibilities. Some of the portrayals were a bit too caricature - Prince Charles was a bit of a goof although still trying to do the best for his boys, and I thought that they made Cherie Blair look a bit shrill and silly and the Queen Mum look truly dotty – but the main characters of The Queen and Tony Blair are superbly done. Most striking to me was the change in the Queen’s voice when she gives the televised address – suddenly, there was the fluid high-pitched even-cadenced voice of the sovereign that we all know, and it was striking to see and hear the sharp contrast to the private Elizabeth we’d been watching up to that point. Especially prescient is the Queen’s comment to Tony Blair about the headlines and the fickle nature of the media and the public – his current unpopularity is a sharp counterpoint to the PM on top of the world back in 1997. Go Helen Mirren!!

Notes on a Scandal **** A very compelling story. Could have very easily become tawdry and tabloid, but it stayed very real and very adult. This is a very grown-up chick-flick. Judi Dench, Cate Blanchett and Bill Nighy were all wonderful. Judi Dench is particularly malevolent, if not truly evil – you grudgingly have a measure of sympathy for her, right before she does something despicable. The music was also great, although once I was reminded I recognized it as very similar to the music from The Hours (same composer). Most interesting to see the media portrayed here as the callous and crass scrum that were vilified in the film we watched just a few hours earlier – clearly, we have not learned a thing since 1997 if scandal and vice are still front-page news.