The Painted Veil

Directed by John Curran (2006)

Starring: Edward Norton, Naomi Watts, Toby Jones, Liev Schreiber, Anthony Wong Chau Sang

The Painted Veil is a very pretty movie, which probably isn’t the most articulate way to begin this review, but it sure is hard to deny.  From costumes (Ruth Myers) to cinematography (Stuart Dryburgh) to score (Alexandre Desplat), it’s pretty astounding.   The romantic drama based on the novel by W. Somerset Maugham follows the marriage of Walter and Kitty Fane (Norton and Watts), who begin problematically.  Walter, a bacteriologist in China, proposes to Kitty after only two meetings.  She accepts, only after hearing her mother lament about her spinsterhood, and their marriage proceeds awkwardly to Shanghai.  Two years later, Kitty has an affair with Charles Townshend (Schreiber), an important British official stationed in China.  Walter uncovers the affair and as revenge takes Kitty into the middle of a cholera epidemic in the country, saying she must go or he will divorce her.

It seemed like this was going to be about distasteful people and the awful things they do to one another.  I was also apprehensive that the film would take to blaming the wife for everything, and while Kitty is not innocent in her marriage, she’s also a figure under considerable strain. She is immature, sheltered and spoiled in her upbringing, but is expected to marry as her duty to her family.  Walter claims he loves her when all her really knows is that she’s pretty, but carries expectations that she will be the charming, loving housewife.  In that dialogue, their marriage is representative of the Problem that Has No Name that Betty Friedan discussed – what happens when a woman is given no expectations besides marriage, then has the expectation of maintaining the emotional bond?

In the country, Kitty is frustrated by how little she can do.  Watts is often shot standing in the middle of a room, incapable of accomplishing anything without becoming frustrated by her situation.  She goes to their nearest neighbor in the town, the stationed commissioner Waddington (Jones), who lives with his Chinese mistress.  How she reacts to their relationship shows just how little she understands romantic love, turning away rather than admitting that their relationship works.

The backdrop of revolutionary China sets the British ex-pat drama under a dangerous air.  While Walter attempts to prevent cholera from spreading, he alienates the local Chinese who see him as threatening their livelihood and traditions.  He has to work with Colonel Yu (Sang) who is equally as suspicious of Walter’s motives, but reluctantly helps him persuade the locals to follow the scientist’s instructions.  I’m not at all familiar with the source material, but based on the Wikipedia it looks like a lot of the changes they made helped develop the story into a mature, modern interpretation.

The Parking Lot Movie

Directed by Meghan Eckman (2010)

Man.

Not all documentaries are able to show humanity or American society so well, and be so funny.  And it is so funny, but in a really fascinating way.  The Parking Lot Movie is about the attendants at the Corner Parking Lot in Charlottesville, Virginia, situated behind several bars.  The attendants are described as social outcasts and well educated at once, several of them attending the nearby University of Virginia.

Not all documentaries do I want to watch twice, let alone in the same night in order to show my friends.

Man.  This documentary.

If you put over-educated men into a service job where they do nothing, they have plenty of time to think about the job, as a former attendant points out early on.  Often these guys come from departments like the Anthropology or Philosophy, sometimes as grad students and often get the job because they’re friends with other attendants.  They make wall art within the booth, decorate and re-decorate the gate, all making observations about the job.  And they love it, and respect it, but also admit that this job can drive you insane.

I don’t want to generalize the attendants much, since they’re so different, but there are some patterns that appear in the position.  As much as they are educated and in a service job, they love it, but they hate the people who use the parking lot.  The criticism from all of them is intense: Hate the frat boys,  hate the sorority girls, hate SUVs, hate alumni– but it is justified.  These people are jerks, which the attendants make abundantly clear.  The attendants will run after cars that will not pay, often becoming violent with the customers.

Contrast that with the zen perspective offered at times, how doing nothing in at this job will lead to a better understanding of self.  That’s fantastic.

It’s also funny as hell, whether the interviewees realize it or not.  Their comments are often spot on, and while revealing the sometimes ugly parts of the job, they’re still laugh out loud funny.  As one former attendant remembers that a classmate wouldn’t pay a $0.40 ticket, he finishes it up by recalling that this classmate’s father was also a jerk.  “Fuck that guy!”  Between the philosophical and the angry, the way these stories are presented makes them hilarious.

It was a successful screening when I showed it to my friends and I’ve been recommending it all over the place.  The Parking Lot Movie: It must be Movie-Love.

Double Feature: Joseph Cotton

Many moons ago, when I watched Citizen Kane for the first time, I wasn’t terribly interested by Orson Welles’ performance.  Crazy, right?  But it was another Mercury actor who caught my eye– the wonderful Joseph Cotton.  For this Double Feature, I figured that some of his best and earliest work makes for a great comparison between his various roles.

The Third Man (1949) Directed by: Carol Reed

The Third Man is considered to be one of the best film noirs out there, set in post-war Vienna.  Cotton plays Holly Martins, a writer of pulp westerns, who has come to Europe with the promise of a job by his friend Harry Lime.  Unfortunately, the day he arrives is Lime’s funeral.  While the police are willing to let go of Lime’s death as an accident, Holly digs deeper, becoming involved in Lime’s inner circle and learning about the mysterious “Third Man.”

There’s a lot about The Third Man which makes a wonderful film– the strong shadows, the famous ferris wheel scene, and the true nature of Harry Lime’s business affairs.  While Holly is the main character, the film is dominated by Lime.

In comparison, Holly Martins seems almost helpless– an alcoholic, out of work writer, who the side characters mostly push around with false leads or coddle him on and off.  Almost every time he sees the police Martins is convinced that it’s best for him to take the next plane back to the U.S. in the morning.  However, in contrast to Lime, Martins is infinitely likable, the last good guy in a post-war world.  His determination to exonerate Lime is echoed later with his desire to be close to Anna Schmidt (Alida Valli), when the world wants to keep him in shadows.

Even if you’re not a big fan of Joseph Cotton, The Third Man is just one of those movies that is enormously fun to watch.  It’s a smart mystery penned by author Graham Greene and is character and plot driven.

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) directed by Alfred Hitchcock

Unlike the likable Holly Martins, Uncle Charlie is a  nihilistic serial killer.  He visits his family in Santa Rosa in order to escape from police.  Charlotte (Teresa Wright), the eldest niece, becomes the only one to know her uncle’s secret.

As one of Hitchcock’s earlier films, Shadow of a Doubt doesn’t have some of his usual signatures– no Bernard Herrmann score, no Cary Grant or Jimmy Stewart, not even a cool blonde.  However, it does have a weird family dynamic, something green (in this case, an emerald ring), and vague psychology, all of which is evident in later films by Hitchcock.

Seeing Shadow of a Doubt is realizing just how good Joseph Cotton is at playing a villain.  Uncle Charlie is nihilistic, obsessive, and crafty.  The only love he seems to show is for the Santa Rosa- Family’s idyllic lifestyle, where everyone is busy.  It’s evident that he doesn’t care for anyone when he quickly turns on his neice.

If you’re ever in need of a Hitchcock fix, Shadow of a Doubt is one of the best.  The story draws a distinct line between Charlie’s big-city worldview and the idealized, small-town America applied to Santa Rosa, but each character is very unique while still fitting into the Hollywood mold.  The father’s favorite hobby is discussing various ways to commit murder with their neighbor and the youngest niece is a voracious reader who shows almost no care at all for anyone else in the plot.  The mother is sweet, but very flighty, although she seems to guess at her brother’s secret in one short scene before dismissing it.

Joseph Cotton proved early on that he was a versatile actor, able to perform good guys and villains, attracting the attentions of talented directors, big studios, and fellow actors.  Suffice it to say, I am looking forward to seeing some more of his filmography very soon.

Singin’ in the Rain

Directed by Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly (1952) Starring: Gene Kelly, Donald O’Connor, Debbie Reynolds, Jean Hagen

Since seeing this film, I have had the music stuck in my head.  I mean that in the best possible way.  It’s absolutely infectious.  It easily tops the list of “I Have Gone Too Long With This Movie Not in My Life.”

Don Lockwood (Kelly) is a silent film actor who earned fame and fortune acting opposite Lina Lamont (Hagen) in romantic dramas.  However, talkies have just been introduced and Lina’s voice matches her personality.  They get the idea to dub over Lina’s lines with Kathy’s voice (Reynolds), who had met Don through a very unconventional way.

I love Cosmo Brown (O’Connor).  God, the most adorable character in the history of film, am I right? (I am totally right).  I love “Make Them Laugh” and the witty one-liners.

The dance numbers are a sight to see.  What I love about the Golden Age of Movie Musicals that we don’t get too much anymore are the fantastic to watch dances.  They about as realistic as a world where people randomly sing, but also just as infectious.  I know that some musicals are better suited to a minor about of choreography, while others seem to exist just to show it off.  Singin’ in the Rain has the right mix: It’s got great music as well as the dances to match them in energy and talent.

Paths of Glory

Directed by Stanley Kubrick (1957) Starring: Kirk Douglas, Ralph Meeker, Adolphe Menjou, George Macready, Joe Turkel, Timothy Carey

There are a few things that I am thankful about with regards of Paths of Glory:

1) I am so glad we covered lens and camera movement this week in Film Analysis.

2) I quite probably have a crush on Kirk Douglas.  There, I said it.

3) Criterion Collection! Behold, something I will own very soon!

In the French trenches of World War One, the 701st regiment is ordered by General Mireau (Macready) on a suicidal mission to take the Anthill, in the German territory.  While Colonel Dax (Douglas) disagrees with this course of action, he relents.  While Dax is able to get most of the soldiers into battle, a third stay in the trenches.  Mireau orders them to be shelled, and this attack is only barely prevented.  Eventually, no land is taken and the soldiers retreat.

Mireau, outraged by this show of “cowardice” wants a general court martial.  Three soldiers are picked, one from each company: Private Ferol (Carey), Corporal Paris (Meeker), and Private Arnaud (Turkel).  The film shifts from the front to a court sequence, with Dax defending his men before the council.  With testimony that it was a lost cause and evidence that Mireau was doing this to further his own career, it all comes to naught: the honor of the French army must be upheld.  The men are sentenced to be executed by the next morning.

Kubrick proves himself a master camera movement.  The sweeping shots of the battlefield and moving through the trenches are marvelous.  He uses lenses and camera angles and with just one shot, characters situations and relationships are quickly understood.  So many great things to appreciate with this movie, I tell ya.

RDJ Week 4: Zodiac & Good Night and Good Luck

Decided to combine this post into two movies where RDJ has more of a supporting role.  Also, I really really like these movies.  POST AWAY!!!

Zodiac directed by David Fincher 2007 Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, Anthony Edwards, Robert Downey Jr.

I remember this movie got a lot of flack when it came out for being slow and crazy-long, but as far as I know it’s got the kind of story which needs to be told in a crazy-long sort of way (unlike The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, but that’s probably better saved for a Fincher-related post).  ANYWAY: this movie has stuff I really freaking like, see: costume dramas with will dressed men!  Huzzah for the well dressed men in costume dramas!

Essentially, we’ve got two sides to the story of Those Who are Looking for the Zodiac Killer: The police, as seen through Inspector David Toschi (Ruffalo) and Inspector William Armstrong (Edwards) and staff at the San Fransisco Chronicle Robert Graysmith (Gyllenhaal) and Paul Avery (Downey Jr.).  Of these four characters, the two who follow the story to its end are really Graysmith and, reluctantly, Toschi. Of the Zodiac Killer, the movie will go to the murder scenes, then cut back to reactions.

Most characters end up washing their hands of this matter and getting on with their lives, except for Graysmith.  The pacing goes from something that is very tense and everyone is very concerned with the Zodiac killer.  Probably the midpoint is when Toschi leaves the theater when he was watching Dirty Harry.  “They’re already making movies about it.” Which hits well, although it makes the third act changes the movie from being about Zodiac to being about Graysmith’s obsession with Zodiac.

I really like this movie as a character study for the main characters, as much as it is a realistic unsolved murder mystery.  I came off it really enjoying Ruffalo’s performance (but I love Mark Ruffalo, so there you go) and Gyllenhaal was very talented in this in a very creepy way.  You see how their lives are affected by the murders, but you also have  a contrast between them. Toschi is trying to get on with his life although he remains involved with the case, and he lets it interfere with his life a lot, but it’s more like a loose end.  Graysmith meanwhile, cares about finding out who the Zodiac killer is, willing to sacrifice his personal life.

This movie has got props, but you might need to break it up over a few viewings.  It’s the sort of story and pacing that deserves a long structure, although maybe it would have worked better as a mini-series.  Just a thought.

image from http://www.cinemalogue.com/2005/10/14/good-night-and-good-luck/

Good Night, and Good Luck Directed by George Clooney.  Starring: David Strathairn, Jeff Daniels, Patricia Clarkson, Robert Downey Jr, George Clooney.

Man.  I really want George Clooney to direct another movie.  I was actually thinking about that a few weeks ago, and I’m not really up on Clooney information, but is he ever going to direct again, or is this a one-time thing?

Edward R. Murrow (Strathairn) has decided to fight against Senator Joseph McCarthy during the time of the Red Scare.  It’s a very tense, well photographed drama, which if you haven’t seen you need to see now.  It’s absolutely excellent.  David Strathairn looks and sounds remarkably like Murrow, and the cast as a whole provide really good performances.

I actually forgot that RDJ was in this movie, and I was really surprised when I saw it on his IMDb page.  And it’s another supporting role, as one of the reporters who work at the CBS studio who has to get cut during the Red Scare.

I’ve been thinking about it a lot since I work at a library and I ran into a book that supported McCarthy’s efforts, saying that by fear mongering he saved us from communists who were working in the government at that time.  The problem with that reasoning is, it doesn’t matter if he got any “bad guys”: What he did was immoral.  The fact that someone can take the fear mongering, witch-hunt of Joseph McCarthy and say that what he did was right just means that a movie like Good Night, and Good Luck is necessary.

Broken Embraces

Los abrazos rotos (2009) dir. Pedro Almodovar

Reflecting the melodrama of classic cinema and melding it with his personal touches, Almodovar has created a new classic for Spanish Film.  More than anything, I just keep thinking about how much I love this movie.

(Of course, something totally personal which I like about this movie is that I got to use it in a film paper recently, fuck yeah!)

Harry Caine (Lluis Homar) is a blind screenwriter, working from his apartment, assisted by his agent Judit (Blanca Portillo) and her son Diego (Tamar Novas).  One day he is visited by an eager director Ray X (Ruben Ochandiano) for a movie about revenge, but Harry turns him flat down.  When Judit leaves for location and Diego nearly dies from a drug overdose, Harry Caine tells his story from 14 years ago, when he was still known as Mateo Blanco.

What follows is the best possible mix of neo-noir and circa-1950s melodrama, opening with Lena (Penelope Cruz) working as a secretary for Ernesto Martel (Jose Luis Gomez) while taking care of her dying mother.  She becomes his mistress, eventually having the opportunity to become an actress.  She auditions for Blanco’s new movie and they fall in love.

The best part of this movie is that it knows how to hold tension without throwing in unnecessary gimmicks, which I feel like some dramas now tend to do.  Broken Embraces feels like a classic drama both in stylization (the film they work on is like an Audrey Hepburn comedy circa 1962) and in execution.  I universally loved all performances, including Martel’s creepy son who follows Lena around with a camera, providing evidence to his father of her affair.  In a factor of creepiness and tension, watching Martel watch the video with a woman who reads lips providing the dialogue.  It is both a testament to the character’s paranoia and the set piece for his realization of the affair.

Everyone in here gives a fabulous performance.  I can’t even pick out a favorite, everyone is really top-dollar here. It’s a really well done drama, carefully thought out and pieced together to form a film that is decidedly beautiful and well-crafted.

An absolute must-see.

Memories of Underdevelopment

I wish I could write something really beautiful to describe this movie, but nothing that comes to me is doing it any justice.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-465669441463792730&ei=3p1sS6eRNZfCrALni6i_Bg&q=memories+of+underdevelopment&hl=en&client=firefox-a#

All I can think of to say right now is that this movie made me very meditative.  I think a lot of the criticism this movie got when it was first release was that it wasn’t true to the Third Cinema ideal by featuring a Bourgeois main character, but I think it hits me more personally because of that.  I have no connections to Cuba, no nothing about it’s history or it’s people other than what I see on television programs.  But this sums up other feelings, things which are more universal than just the hopes and dreams of an underdeveloped nation going through a revolution.

Maybe later I will be able to write something proper about it.

Big Screen: Pulp Fiction

MAN this was fun to see in a theater! It might have had something to do with the fact that the Biggest Fanboys Ever were sitting in the row behind us, laughing in anticipation of certain scenes and quoting the dialogue, but I think it was also just the sheer fact that we were watching Pulp Fiction on the big screen.  So fucking awesome.

I could probably wax poetic about the whole movie experience or even about the movie, but I guess what I realized mainly is that: I have never really watched this movie before.  Not from the beginning to end without any cuts in it.  It’s always been that I would see parts of it on TV or even when I sat down to watch it decisively, something would always come up and call my attention.

I still stand by my opinion that PF is important for being entertainment, maybe not so much for the history of film.  It helps that I can’t figure out what it is about (or maybe the point is that it’s not about anything at all?).  The thing is, it must be some kind of Important because everything scene and 75% of the dialogue has become easily recognizable in our pop culture subconscious.

It’s mainly fun though. It’s mainly a crazy trip.  That’s so excellent!

Casablanca on the Big Screen

Can I just tell you how awesome that was?

The Varsity theater in Chapel Hill has been reopened as a mixture of a revival and cheap old-new movie theater. This weekend I saw Casablanca with bud Katie.

It was pretty damn awesome. Though not especially in a “This is so cool, it’s really big for once and not on Turner Classic Movies” kind of a way. It was just fun to watch in a crowd. While it is nice to have the experience of seeing something so classic on the big screen, what was really awesome was laughing along during the funny moments or else grumbling with the rest of the audience during those moments.

It looked like in the row in front of us, parents were taking their kid with them for her first time watching this movie too, which is the coolest thing ever, let me tell you.

This weekend they’re going to start showing Pulp Fiction for the rest of January and I am already gathering a group for seeing that. Is it weird that I haven’t seen that as anything other than the cut-for-TV version?