This week I watched a couple great British dramas released more than 60 years apart, a couple only slightly above average star-studded American films also released more than 60 years apart, and then one mysterious Argentinean Oscar-winner (somehow I'm much more busy during spring break than normal which is why this filmcap was posted so late, so for that same reason don't expect a lot of movies for the next one).
Brief Encounter (David Lean, 1945): From the man known for huge British epics (Lawrence of Arabia, and The Bridge on the River Kwai) comes an intimate two person love story. This one of his very early films and was long before he got into the epics, and so I had no idea that when I sat down to watch this that I was about to watch one of the best romances ever. The film is around 85 minutes (not an epic length by any standard) and it only has two character, one main female character that is narrating. It's extraordinarily personal and offers an unflinching look at an illicit romance. The film is about two married people who fall in love, it doesn't sound like much but it does everything the best way. It very subtly delves into the subject of guilt in such an emotional way. I loved that it dealt with restraint and was very subtle. If this was made today it definitely would not have been as subtle, this relationship would have blown up and there would have been numerous sexcapades between the characters. The performances were brilliant, especially by Celia Johnson who played the female lead. This is exactly what happens when a good married lady with happy children and husband falls in love with another man. In the film she is the lead character, there is not much focus on the issues of the man in this relationship, and while there could have been, I'm still glad it focused only on her because that way it went into all the guilt and shame she felt for doing what she was doing and we were right in her head the whole time. This is magnificent film that is so subtle and simple but so complex at the same time.
Grade A
The Big Sleep (Howard Hawks, 1946): Here's a movie that is very loved by many but has a plot no one can figure out. Not the screenwriters, which included novelist William Faulkner, not even Raymond Chandler, the man who wrote the source material. Most admire the movie as a movie about the process of an investigation and not the results itself, which is really only the way to enjoy the movie anyway. But I didn't the process all that invigorating. The movie has some great scenes and great dialogue but I didn't find that they came together to form a satisfying coherent whole. Maybe if I watched it again without expectations of understanding the plot I might have gotten more out of it. What I worked in the movie were the characters played by Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall, both had really great chemistry (well they did get married during this movie) and the film was best when both of them were on screen together. As a film noir, this is definitely solid and recommended, but genre withstanding it's above average, but not by much.
Grade: B-
Hunger (Steve McQueen, 2008): This is a very unique film, mostly in terms of structure. It chronicles the prison conditions of a group of Irish Republican Army forces in small but powerful doses. The first part of the film shows the gruesome prison conditions that's hard to watch sometimes because of its painful and unhygienic realism. The prisoners go on a no-wash protest and the film never tells you really explicitly why these people are doing what they're doing in terms of politics, but you see the conditions they live in and their determination to make it better. The second part of the film is an extended conversation between Bobby Sands, one of the leaders of the IRA prisoners, and a priest. It's an absolutely remarkable scene because it is all filmed in one take. The whole 17 minute conversation. The camera sits there and watches the talk about why Sands wants to go on a hunger strike. The third part of the movie is that hunger strike, and that's also really hard to watch because of how much Sands is suffering and the slow death that he goes through. In that part Michael Fassbender shows that suffering in a really amazing way. The film is also absolutely beautifully shot, there are some really patient scenes that just exist to establish a feeling or mood in a really affecting way. The movie has its fair share of breathtaking imagery and as a first movie this is wildly impressive. McQueen is coming out with his next movie "Shame" with Fassbender again, and Carey Mulligan, later this year and I can't wait. This movie showed that he has some big ideas, and knack for unconventional but visually stunning filmmaking. "Hunger" is one of those movies that may not have a huge impact when they come out, but it slowly takes its place and stays with you forever.
Grade: A-
The Secret in Their Eyes (Juan Jose Campanella, 2009): I found this to be one of those films that's very watchable, yet also open to analysis. I don't mean analysis of the plot, but analysis of the intention of characters and what it all means. That's a very impressive combination and not easy to do. Lately I've watched a fair amount of film noirs from the 40's and this didn't feel too different from those. It had a bit more complex subtext, but the plot seemed like it could have been written into a film from that era. Maybe the storytelling is not as great as it could have been with someone like Billy Wilder or Alfred Hitchcock, but where it makes it up is the acting and characters. There are some moments in this mystery film that are very poignant and heartfelt, but it still has the exciting mystery plot stuff as well. One extremely impressive scene in this movie that I'm sure to never forget is a shot that starts in the sky above a soccer stadium, and twirls around and goes all over the hallways of the stadium all in one shot that lasts at least 6 minutes or so. It's different than the 17-minute shot in Hunger because that was static, the camera never moved, in this the camera is only moving, and it's moving all over the place. It's extremely impressive and I'm sure CGI was used for part of it and maybe it wasn't completely one shot, but it appears to be and that's really well done. If there's anything wrong with this film is that if anything, it could have shown some more on the culture they're living in Argentina and incorporate that into the story a bit. The film is a marvel and a must watch for fans of mystery and noir.
Grade: B+
Megamind (Tom McGrath, 2010): The problem with this movie is that there has already been a better movie that trues to do the same thing ("The Incredibles" and its deconstructing of the superhero genre) and there has also been a recent movie that has similar character ("Despicable Me" and it's focus on the villain side). "Megamind" is a very solid deconstruction of the hero-villain complex, but it's not great, and if those other movies didn't exist that wouldn't have been much of a problem. The plot in this is not as great as the plot of "The Incredibles," and the film doesn't succeed as well as "Despicable Me" in creating am emotionally touching villain. Regardless of those things I did enjoy it and seeing how the average villain hero relationship is not just taken for granted. Again, the problem being that there's not just the two other animated films, but there's also things like "Kick-Ass," or "Superhero Movie," and countless other superhero parodies so it's just not as original or clever anymore. The film is still one of the better offerings of Dreamworks Animation, which isn't saying a whole lot I guess. The film is far from a waste of time, there are a good amount of good jokes and an above average plot, but it's also nothing you'll remember for too long.
Grade: C
No comments:
Post a Comment