AICN-Downunder: CLOVERFIELD, CHARLIE WILSON, News, And More!!
Published at: Jan. 21, 2008, 8:58 a.m. CST by merrick
This was a particularly bad case of somebody being cut in half.
AICN-DOWNUNDER
It's always fun compiling a best of list. You get to revel in the great films and tear into the bad ones... although there wasn't really anything I saw in '07 that was as gloriously bad as FANTASMA in '06 (which I declared to be the worst film I'd ever seen), so I didn't really get that same joy. But still, it's a blast.
It's also kinda fun trying to predict Oscar nominations, but it's a bit of a hollow pursuit. Sure, they're the highest-regarded awards in the world, but even if your number one pick gets their deserved gong (go, Marty!), you need to leave yourself some wiggle room for when an undeserved nominee gets it. That way you can still dismiss them as political and unfairly weighted, because, let's face it, we know better.
I mention all this, because when I started to write this article, it was with the express intent of trying to predict my Best of 2008 list. When I started compiling that list, I realised it was a fairly standard list of the most highly-anticipated films of the year (Soderbergh, Coens, DARK KNIGHT, etc), and the things that make a Best Of list interesting -- ie: the unexpected gems -- can't possibly be predicted, for the simple fact that you don't see them coming.
So, though I salivate in anticipation of Ledger's Joker, of James Franco's pot dealer, and of Pixar's Wall-E, it's the films I haven't even heard of yet that I'm going to toast here. Arthouse/foreign/independent film I've never heard of: I look forward to our introduction.
NEWS
Nicolas Cage clearly can't get enough of Melbourne. After the raging success of GHOST RIDER, he'll be returning to Australia's Prague (I just made that up) for Alex Proyas, who is from Sydney, but still made DARK CITY (thus equalising his karma). The pair will make KNOWING, about a man who likes to shout intermittently at unexpected moments, who then finds a time capsule containing chilling and accurate predictions of the past. And, more excitingly, chilling and accurate predictions of the future. I could have sworn Richard Kelly had something to do with this film, but imdb.com doesn't have him listed... and imdb is never wrong... or is it? OMG -- the capsule predicted it!
AWARDS, FESTIVALS AND SCREENINGS
2008 FRENCH FILM FESTIVAL
Technically, it's the 2008 Alliance Française French Film Festival, but who wants to type out all that? Anyway, I was looking at the playlist, and this one that anyone who loves film, speaks French, or enjoys things should check out. The festival begins in early March, and will be playing in Sydney, Melbourne, Canberra, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth. That's right, all of the capital cities! Except two whose names escape me. Impress your postgraduate girlfriend by booking tickets here: http://www.frenchfilmfestival.org
BOX OFFICE
JUNO managed to get an impressive fifth place (given the competition, number of screens, and my assumptions about the stupidity of the general public), and is easily the best thing on the list. CLOVERFIELD isn't a big surprise in the top spot, and though 27 DRESSES doesn't look like it's worth the time, I'm happy for any James Marsden-related success.
If you missed my thought on CLOVERFIELD, click here and be amazed at how opinions can translate to text so well.
LUST, CAUTION
I knew nothing about this film other than it was directed by Ang Lee, but that was enough. There are a lot of filmmakers who automatically command your attention, without the need to ask "What's it about?". Ang's earned that, particularly given he hasn't lost his mojo after going to Hollywood. (I'm a proud member of that small group that considers HULK a total masterpiece, by the way.)
This is, however, a review, and so the question must be asked: what's it about? Well, it's about sex.
No, that's not true. It contains sex. The sex doesn't start until about an hour and a half into the thing, but it pretty much doesn't stop once it gets going*. It's important to mention this, because there are many who would avoid a film that has so much intersexualcourse in it, and many more who would make a point to see it because of this. I think the latter is more likely to read this column.
So, okay, it contains sex, but what's it about? Well, that's the thing. The plot itself concerns a young woman living in Japanese-occupied-Shanghai, who finds herself as a key player in a plot to assassinate a high-up Japanese official. It's a very good story that would nicely fill out a two hour film. Two and a half hours, it must be said, it pushing it. It's overlong, and by the time you get to the finale (which we'd seen parts of in the obligatory and over-used device of showing bits of the end at the start), you're resisting the temptation to look at your watch.
However, the film is rather brilliant. Ang Lee said in a recent interview that he found shooting the sex scenes to be quite uncomfortable and hard. I remember wondering, whilst reading the interview, why he'd put them in. Surely the sex scenes are the one thing that could lift out easily? No. In fact, they're absolutely integral to the film, and in the future when I find myself fervently arguing against censorship, this is a film that will be recruited to my cause.
The sex is an absolute representation of the invasion itself. Wong Chia Chi is Shanghai, Mr Yee is Japan, and Guy-Who-Deflowers-Wong is also Shanghai, but specifically the part that collaborates with its invaders. It's an indictment of not only Japan's brutality during this time, but of those elements within China that acquiesced. Or possibly, it's an indictment of China's own human rights abuses. I'm not sure, I'm still trying to figure out what the "deflowering" scenes represent. But the Mr Yee scenes are unmistakable in their analogousness, with the brutality of Yee's behaviour easing, but ever-present.
It's a difficult concept to discuss given I suspect its complexity is greater than my ability to communicate. Also, it's one of those things that really only becomes clear after a half dozen viewings and a good year to mull it over. Either way, despite the film as a whole not being a brilliant piece of art, I'm convinced and quite blown away by the way the film created a metaphor for the invasion using the ultimate form of invasion there is.
WALK HARD: THE DEWEY COX STORY
For a few months now, we've been hearing about how the musician biopic is dead. What's interesting about that statement is which film it attributes this death to. It's been said of CONTROL, of I'M NOT THERE, and of WALK HARD. I think it's a terrific trifecta. Three films that could not be more different from one another, each highlighting exactly what your standard biopics do wrong.
Though we've suffered through many stock standard biopics in the past, it was the one-two hit of RAY and WALK THE LINE that really highlighted the genre's cliches. Neither of these films are particularly bad (nor particularly great), but they echoed one another so closely, it was impossible not to find the unintentional humour. Traumatic childhood event? Check. Drugs? Check. Rehab? Check. Extra-marital affairs? Check. Seeing the light? Check.
Obviously, if you're examining someone's life and their story contains all of these elements, it's foolish not to include them. After all, you're telling a story, and a story needs certain beats. With these beats pre-written, why not use them? Why not use the most significant moments in a person's life when you're telling their story? Well, the answer is that with so many of these lives following a similar path -- a rise to the top will frequently have humble beginnings, and the temptations this rise gives way to will inevitably include drugs and sex -- you're left with basically the same story over and over again.
My favourite biopic to date has been THE LIFE AND DEATH OF PETER SELLERS, which, going in, I didn't think was going to work. The reason it did is that instead of giving us that checklist of highs and lows and big life moments, the film attempted to examine who Sellers actually was. Who he was is more interesting that what he did, particularly in a life story. That's why biopic like RAY and WALK THE LINE ultimately fail, and why WALK HARD could not have come at a better time.
WALK HARD is such an intensely funny and sharply satirical film, I really don't see how any self-respecting filmmaker could make another stock-standard biopic ever again. The cliches of the genre are so brilliantly lampooned that anyone who has seen even one of the films that it's sending up will recognise every single one of them.
The central concept of the film is that it doesn't know it's a comedy. The fact that the film clearly believes itself to be a big Oscar contender, and thusly treats its subject with similar reverence, is one of the greatest launching pads for a film that I can think of.
From John C. Reilly playing Dewey Cox from age 14, to the men from the record company, to Dewey's introduction to pot smoking (possibly the best scene in the film), to his rehab, to everything involving Jenna Fischer, this film is brilliantly funny. There are moments where it falls a little flat, and there are a handful of scenes that don't quit hit their mark, but I was close to tears for the majority of the film's running time, so those moments are easy to forgive.
I very rarely get the temptation to repeat jokes from films to people who haven't seen it, but it's been very difficult to bite my tongue with this one. It's very, very quotable, insanely funny, and -- if there's any justice -- will change the genre it's so aptly sending up.
I will be utterly amazed if we get another comedy this year that's even remotely this funny.
CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR
To say that I think scripts are better when they're written by Aaron Sorkin is an understatement. A more accurate description of my feelings about the man would be: if you have a script, rub it over Sorkin's body, and it will instantly become at least 70% better.
So, basically, I was geared to love this film. Script by Sorkin, direction by Mike Nichols, and performances from three actors who are, frankly, at the top of their game. Yeah, there was no way this was going to disappoint.
With a setup like "There was no way this was going to disappoint", this is the sentence where I'd turn the review on its head and tell you that it fell short. Only it didn't. I loved it in exactly the ways I was expecting to. The script is top notch, the direction is excellent, and the performances are flawless. It was everything I knew it would be.
The cleverest part of the film is its lack of judgment. It mixes America's successes with its failures, and never praises or condemns. There is one moment towards the end where we get a beautiful, brilliant moment where future events regarding Afghanistan are alluded to, but it's handled with the perfect amount of subtlety. The film never beats us over the head (see: LIONS FOR LAMBS), or dumbs itself down (see: THE KINGDOM), or tells us what to think (see: FAHRENHEIT 9/11).
It's also a very funny film, and one that manages to inform and entertain us in ways that only Aaron Sorkin can. Must see.
DEATH DEFYING ACTS
I suspected, for the first half of DEATH DEFYING ACTS, that the film didn't really know what it was about. During the second half, I came to realise that the film knew exactly what it was about, it just chose to keep the audience in the dark. And not in the good way, either. For the first half, the script is so consumed in its own motivations, that it never actually gets around to letting us in on what these motivations are.
I quite like writer Tony Grisoni, and I'm unfamiliar with the other writer, Brian Ward, but this script feels one big draft away from being ready. Catherine Zeta-Jones gives it her all, but her character never quite convinces. See, she's a destitute woman trying to raise her daughter under difficult conditions. She'll do just about anything for money, which usually involves conning members of the public. So when the mega-rich Harry Houdini turns up, appears to fall in love with her, and begins his wooing, she resists. Why? It's never made entirely clear.
For a lot of the running time, Houdini's attraction to Mary is quite inexplicable. When it's revealed why he's infatuated with her, it's a resolution to a mystery we didn't know was there. I wish it had been set up as a mystery, or that the film acknowledged that there was something going on there. Until we're given the "explanation", it just seems like poor characterisation. That left me torn between trying to watch the film and trying to go back through the film to unweave many of my initial problems, which were no longer problematic.
The motives of Houdini's manager Sugarman and Mary's daughter Benji are not quite as muddled, but nor are they crystal clear. This is not to say I'm adverse to some character depth -- I don't need everything spelled out -- but, as I said in the beginning, the way in which these character inconsistencies are presented makes us feel as if the writers know exactly what these characters are up to, and keep forgetting to tell us.
These are the problems that were most frustrating during the film, which is otherwise quite good. It's a bit frothy, but then it's supposed to be. Guy Pearce is terrific as Houdini, and Saoirse Ronan is very good as Zeta-Jones's daughter. (Apparently, Ronan was in ATONEMENT, and will be in CITY OF EMBER and THE LOVELY BONES, which is all good news based on her performance here.) Australian Gillian Armstrong does a great job with the direction, and I wish she'd go after more films in this vein -- it seems to bring out the best in her (keen-memoried readers will recall that I was not a big fan of her last film, the docu-drama UNFOLDING FLORENCE).
Not the work of genius that the talent involved may suggest, but still worth a look.
NEXT WEEK
- George Miller reveals the big changes he wanted to make to the now-halted JLA movie included the heroes not engaging with any villains, but simply waiting for their karmatic punishment in the POETIC JUSTICE LEAGUE
- Frank Oz to direct appropriately-named Native American actor Litefoot in progressive kids' movie sequel THE INDIAN IN THE CLOSET
Jack White cancels plans to appear in his own series of spy thrillers after receiving the screenplay for THE WHITE SUPREMACY
