THE FOUNTAIN: Discussion

After seeing the trailer for this movie, I was really excited to go see it and had very high expectations. I thought, “Cool! It’s a love story about a conquistador who discovers the fountain of youth and spends 2000 years trying to find the reincarnation of his love over and over again.” It’s like in Bram Stoker’s Dracula, where Vlad the Impaler loses his wife several hundred years back, and becomes infatuated with Mena because she bears an uncanny resemblance to his original true love. Unfortunately, THE FOUNTAIN was nothing close to the movie I was expecting to see from the trailer, and it took me a good while to figure this out.

Basically, if I’m interpreting things right, here’s how the time stuff played out in this film: All of the conquistador segments were part of Weisz’s novel, all of the present-day segments were actually happening, and all of the future segments had absolutely NO GROUNDING in this film whatsoever!!!! It could have been Jackman finishing Weisz’s book, or it could have been Jackman actually finding the secret to long life, living forever, and traveling to her nebula… I just wish Aronofsky had been a little bit more careful with his handling of the future material, because this is where the film totally fell apart for me.

Personally, this movie became much more interesting once Aronofsky introduced the fact that Weisz was writing a manuscript and I realized that the whole depiction of everlasting love and life was actually just wishful thinking on her part. But then this idea became incredibly garbled and contrived when Jackman stumbled upon the very tree Weisz had been writing about... and uses it to live on and become a part of the MATRIX or something.... I mean, all the Buddhist stuff???? What was that?

I didn't think THE FOUNTAIN was a particularly confusing movie, as a lot of critics have been saying. Instead, I just thought that it was a muddled mish-mosh of ideas. In some ways, THE FOUNTAIN felt a bit like a David Lynch film in this respect…. There were a lot of interesting and moody puzzle pieces composing it, but as a whole it didn’t quite fit together.

If Jackman hadn’t found the tree of life in “reality”, I think this movie would have been much more concise and powerful. It would have touched more upon the heart of what I think Aronofsky was going for here, which was ultimately a story about grieving and coming to terms with the inescapableness of mortality… It’s not how much time you have left, but what you do with your time that counts.

Another big problem I had with this movie was.... for a story about two people who are deeply in love, we never actually get to see the "love" or happy times. The only happy shot we get is that ungrounded image of Weisz running in a red dress with a smile on her face. Would it have been too much to ask for just one or two scenes where we see their honeymoon period, or any kind of sense as to WHY these people are so deeply in love? There was not a single joke or light moment in this entire movie. And I know it’s supposed to be profound, serious, and painful… but sometimes throwing in a couple of highs can make the lows feel that much more powerful.

On a final note… Big props to my friend, Mark Margolis, who played the Franciscan monk. Pretty much the only thing I enjoyed in this entire movie. He is the man!

Okay. That’s my shpiel on THE FOUNTAIN! Feel free to add to this, or write in with anything else you want to talk about pertaining to this movie!

CASINO ROYALE: Discussion

Man, I haven't seen such a good Bond movie in so long! After the last few, I was starting to give up on the series.... don't get me wrong, I liked Brosnan as Bond... but the stories (aside from GoldenEye) were just terrible and unbelievable and campy. THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH was like the BATMAN AND ROBIN of Bond in my opinion. I mean Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist in hot pants????? COME ON!!!!!!

But enough about Christmas Jones....

CASINO ROYALE just got so much right. If THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH was like BATMAN AND ROBIN, then I guess CASINO ROYALE can be likened to BATMAN BEGINS.... where both films re-invent their respective series with a darker, grittier and more serious tone. I love the way all the action felt so raw and ugly, and you always got the sense that these guys were really fighting it out to the death. There was nothing romanticized or glorious about the action in this film. It was all up close, in your face, and vicious. I particularly liked that Parkour sequence in the beginning of the movie, where they're running and jumping like crazy around those cranes!

The thing that I liked most about this film though, was the way it handled all of Bond's iconic elements. Everything that makes Bond the legend that he is was set up so nicely in CASINO ROYALE:

1) THE CARS. Having Bond show up for his first mission with a Ford rental car, then spotting the Aston Martin in the parking lot and eventually winning it off that bad guy during the poker game. Pure genius!

2) THE MARTINIS. Loved all those running jokes throughout the film. After he loses everything to LaChiffre and the bartender asks him "shaken or stirred?" And then Bond exclaims, "Like I give a damn!" That was such a fun little moment. I also liked the fact that a stirred martini almost killed him, and that's the reason why he always asks for them shaken from this point on!

3) THE TRADEMARK TUX. I got so fired up when Vesper gave it to him and then we see him checking himself out in the mirror!

4) The introduction of FELIX may in fact have been my favorite thing about this movie. I was completely blindsided when Jeffrey Wright came up to Bond and introduced himself as Felix... never saw that one coming!

5) And finally, the usage of Bond's THEME MUSIC was just perfect in CASINO ROYALE. It was so sparsely used throughout the film, but when it did show up it really packed a punch! I loved that feeling I got at the end, when the music comes on full blast and he says those legendary words.... "Bond. James Bond." Absolutely fantastic!

The only thing I wasn't crazy about with this movie was the way it really slowed down and lost focus towards the end. The lovey-dovey stuff went on for a little too long, and because the main bad guy had already been killed off, I just didn't care that much about seeing Bond go after the man with half-lensed sunglasses. In fact, that whole action sequence at the end felt a bit anti-climactic to me. I wanted to find out what the deal was with Vesper Lynd and all, but I cared very little about everything else going on. Visually, this sequence didn't quite come together for me either, as the exterior shots of the building collapsing didn't seem to match what was going on inside.

Overall though, I gotta say I was ultimately very impressed with CASINO ROYALE, and am really psyched to see more of Daniel Craig as 007!

How about you guys? What'd ya think?

STRANGER THAN FICTION: Discussion

I thought STRANGER THAN FICTION was a really good film. It's got great performances, it's well crafted, and it ultimately all comes together.... But I still found myself wanting just a little bit more out of this movie in the end.

There were two things in particular that I think could have been done with STANGER THAN FICTION to turn it into a really incredible and significant film. The first, is the differentiation between the real world (the world of the author) and the fictional world (the world that Harold's living in). In this movie, there doesn't seem to be any clear-cut differentiation whatsoever. It's like; the filmmakers set up this gimmick of, "he's a fictional character," and then didn't really do very much with it. The only two things that present Harold as a fictitious character are the numbers that pop up on screen occasionally, and the narration, which was somewhat sporadic and inconsistent as well. Coming from the director of FINDING NEVERLAND, a movie that does an incredible job of establishing fantasy realms, I definitely expected more.

I actually thought Emma Thomson's "world" was, in some ways, more imaginative and playful than Harold's.... At least with her world we got to see all those dark fantasy sequences of her imagining terrible death scenes for her novel. Personally, I would have really liked to have seen some of those scenes get played out in Harold's world, so he's actually enduring those near death experiences and then cursing Emma Thompson's character for coming up with them.

But this brings me to my second issue with STRANGER THAN FICTION... For the most part, we never get a clear idea of what is or isn't written by Emma Thompson's character. I kept waiting for this film to become a story within a story. For some acknowledgement that Thompson's novel was about a fictional man who can hear his narrator. That her book essentially WAS "Stranger Than Fiction." And I kept waiting for some hint that the author had inserted herself as a character within her book, and that the Emma Thompson we were seeing on screen was fictitious as well.

But that never came. The movie never really touches upon any of this. It seemed to me that Harold Crick being able to hear his narrator was some sort of magical, unexplainable rip in the time space continuum or something, and was completely independent of what Thompson was writing in her novel. Now, I know Dustin Hoffman said that her book was a masterpiece and all, but from what I could gather, the only things she actually wrote about were how boring Harold's life was, that he had met a girl, and that he was going to die soon. Seemed kind of lame in my opinion. And I certainly didn't see how Harold getting hit by a bus was pure poetic genius!

I don't know... but for a movie that seemed to put so much emphasis on the idea of a fictional man's fate being in the hands of his author, I didn't feel that STRANGER THAN FICTION took a strong enough stance in establishing who or what actually had control of the events unraveling within this film.

What do you guys think?

BORAT: Discussion

Jagshemash!

This is very exciting. I saw Borat a couple of months ago at an advanced screening, and thought it was absolutely hilarious. The only problem was, I couldn’t talk about it with my friends because I didn’t want to give anything away! It's been eating away at me like crazy ever since, but now that it’s out... my vow of incredibly selfless silence can finally end!

OH MY GOD! There are so many great moments in this movie. So many times where you feel soooo uncomfortable, and yet you just can't help but crack up!

First of all, I have to get this off my chest... the naked wrestling! That may in fact be the funniest five minutes ever. Definitely the best part of the movie in my opinion. I love the way Borat is all censored, and yet his friend Azamat is just hangin’ out there for all to see. (Actually, “love” might not be the appropriate term here exactly, but it certainly was something to behold!) I'm just shocked they were able to keep this whole sequence in and still get an R rating! So glad they didn't have to cut it out. Can you just imagine being one of those poor unsuspecting people in that elevator?

I also really loved the formal southern dinner sequence. The progression of events builds so well, and watching all the dinner guests' reactions to Borat's antics was just fascinating. It was great when Borat gets up to go to the bathroom, and that one woman in red sort of sticks up for him, and then he comes walking back in with a bag of his own excrement. Her reaction there is just priceless. You think she is absolutely going to flip out, but then she winds up still thinking she can change him and takes him to the bathroom. It's not until Borat brings in that adorable black prostitute that everyone loses their cool and threaten to call the cops on him! Was it because she was a prostitute or because she was black?

The part of the movie that I felt the most uncomfortable with (and that is saying a lot), is where Borat and Azamat realize they're in a Jewish household and flee the place in fear for their lives. I think it's kind of interesting that this scene struck the biggest nerve with me, namely because it was completely staged and didn't involve any real-life displays of racism or bigotry the way, say... the rodeo scene did. Maybe the reason I felt this way is because with the real, unscripted interactions, there's a sense of satisfaction that comes along with seeing Borat expose these ugly people. So even though we're hearing something truly scary come out of someone's mouth, Borat always has the one-up on them because he's capturing their true colors on film. But with that staged scene of Borat and Azamat fleeing, you don't get that satisfaction. It's just them drumming up the worst stereotypes they can think of... and of course it's totally ridiculous, because Sacha Baron Cohen himself is Jewish and this is obviously a joke.... but it was unnerving for me to think that those stereotypes actually are out in the world, and you know that some people out there still DO believe them (Mel Gibson I'm typing in your general direction)! Don't get me wrong though, I laughed pretty damn hard through this entire sequence!

It was kind of cool the way you couldn't always tell what was staged and what wasn't. Borat is so far across the line for the majority of this movie, and it's hard to figure out if anyone else is in on the joke with him. It seemed like all the stuff in Kazakhstan, the horse falling over, the kids approaching the ice cream truck with the bear, the "Jew House," and the yard sale with the Baywatch book, must have been staged.

But what about the Pamela Anderson thing... do you think that was real or staged? I mean, they must have let her in on it, right? Right???? She definitely seemed REALLY shocked! It's certainly a better performance than we've ever seen in Barb Wire. But there was also something weird about the way she was acting in the parking lot that didn't completely ring true. And also, if she wasn't warned ahead of time... wouldn't the things Borat did to her be considered at least a felony???? Then again, a friend of a friend of mine used to work for Sacha Baron Cohen, and eventually had to quit because they were so sick and tired of getting into trouble with Johnny Law all the time! One thing's for sure though... Cohen really commits whole-heartedly to his characters!

What'd you guys think?

THE PRESTIGE: Discussion

I went into THE PRESTIGE with very high expectations. I love Christopher Nolan's stuff and will hands down go see anything he ever makes. MEMENTO is one of my all time favorite movies, and BATMAN BEGINS is pretty high up on my list as well. But I've got to say, I walked out of THE PRESTIGE with really mixed feelings.

First the good... and there was a lot of it. In my last post on THE DEPARTED, I talked about how well made movies give you all the information you need to know right at the very beginning of the film. Well, THE PRESTIGE is an another perfect example of this. The first two minutes of this movie are chock full of info, even if we don't quite have the means to understand it yet.

The first shot depicts all those top-hats in the woods; Tesla's machine hard at work. It's the first image we see, and it's actually the answer to one of the biggest questions posed in this movie... "How does that trick work?" It's the question that drives both Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale into the realm of obsession, and holds the key to defeating the other man.

The next thing we see is that great scene where Michael Caine explains the "Pledge, Turn and Prestige" with the canaries to Christian Bale's daughter. I thought this was fantastic. Not only does it introduce us to the world of nineteenth century magic, but it also sets up Christian Bale's character, who ultimately is "the canary." This may in fact be my favorite thing about this movie.... the way each man can be boiled down to one image. With Bale it's the crushed canary; the sacrificed brother for the sake of the trick. And for Jackman it's his wife drowning. It's what defines his motivation, his relationship with Bale, and the actions he ultimately takes to pull off the trick... drowning himself over and over again... suffering as she suffered every time he performs.

But while this film presents us with such rich and intriguing information, the FLOW of this information throughout the story is not quite right. I found myself figuring out all the major plot points way before I was supposed to, and then waiting for the movie to catch up with me. It was all too predictable. As soon as Michael Caine chides Christian Bale about tying his knots, you know he's going to make a mistake and Jackman's wife will die. As soon as we see Tesla's cat get duplicated, we know Jackman's going to work it into his trick, and then it's just a short logical jump for us to figure out that he'll be killing himself every time he does it. Plus we've already seen the footage of him falling into the water tank and drowning...

And as soon as Hugh Jackman hires a double for his act, who shows up at Christian Bale's workshop but... "Fallon." The placement of this introduction (if you can call it that), combined with the earlier scene in which Bale watches the chinese magician fully "commit" to his act, led me to IMMEDIATELY figure out that Fallon was Christian Bale.

Personally, I thought the handling of Christian Bale's brother was wrong, wrong, wrong! We never get a proper introduction to Fallon, and the camera constantly avoids his face while he's onscreen. I know Nolan was trying to make this guy a peripheral character who just sort of sneaks into the story... but it completely backfired on him! I was more confused by this handling than anything else, and as a result I started watching Fallon MORE closely than I would have had he been treated in a normal fashion.

I also wasn't crazy about the fact that Fallon turned out to be Christian Bale's brother and not a clone. In particular, this bothered me because if Bale wasn't using clones, then how could he know about TESLA? He uses Tesla's name as the "key to his trick," thus sending Hugh Jackman on a wild goose chase all the way around the world... but then that name actually turns out to be the real deal!!! That, in my mind, is either a really big coincidence or a really big plot hole. Either way, it simply doesn't work.

But If Fallon had turned out to be a clone, on the other hand, I think everything might have panned out much more neatly. It would have meant that Bale had one of Tesla's machines all along (explaining that he DID know about Tesla and his work), and he was simply messing with Jackman's head by writing in his journal that Tesla was a hoax. Also, there would have been potential to do something interesting with the hangings of both Bale and his wife. Because they both died in the same fashion, I thought for sure that they had both cloned themselves and would resurface alive at the end of the film.

Another odd choice I noticed at the end of the film was the way Nolan reprised Michael Caine's "Pledge, Turn and Prestige" demonstration from the beginning. Don't get me wrong... I loved the way he brought it back... but here's the thing: When Caine describes the "Turn," Nolan cuts to an image of Jackman dying on the floor. This suggests that Jackman's death isn't the end, it's the part of the trick where he "disappears"... and as Caine explains, the audience won't applaud until the "Prestige," where he "reappears". Following this train of thought, I think it would have been a much more solid ending if Jackman had made one last clone, and as Christian Bale stands triumphantly over one of the Jackmans, another one pops up behind him and.... BANG!!!!


What do you guys think?

THE DEPARTED: Discussion

“When I was your age they would say, 'You could become cops or criminals.' But when you’re facing a loaded gun, what's the difference?” - Jack Nicholson as FRANK COSTELLO

This quote at the beginning of THE DEPARTED sets everything up so perfectly. Right away it establishes a sense of moral ambiguity within the film, and it parallels Billy Costigan (Leonardo DiCaprio) directly to Colin Sullivan (Matt Damon). And that's really what this whole movie is all about in my opinion... that these characters are essentially two different sides of the same coin. Costigan and Sullivan are almost exactly the same person, they're just coming at things from opposite angles.

The way Costigan gets introduced is a really great example of this parallel between characters: We first meet him via a montage sequence of Costigan and Sullivan going through training at the Police Academy. Possibly together... possibly not. Personally, I thought this sequence was very confusing as I was watching it. Sullivan is introduced talking with Frank Costello (Nicholson), but now he's a cop... Does that mean he's a good guy now? What's the relationship between Sullivan and Costigan? Do they know each other? Are they in cahoots? Are they even aware of each other's existense? Nothing is clear about this sequence except for one piece of information... both these men are going through the same experience.

Another scene that does a really good job of subtly hinting towards a connection between the two main characters is the scene where Costigan receives his undercover orders from Captain Queenan (Martin Sheen) and Lt. Dignam (Mark Wahlberg). Everything Dignam says to Costigan during that meeting; every quality he mentions... about how he's a chameleon... How he grew up on both sides of the tracks and played multiple roles. How he used different accents. How he doesn't want to be a cop, he just wants to look like one... All of those things are also true about Sullivan and they come out within his character as the movie progresses.

Visually, I think the most striking sequence that illustrates a parallel between these two characters is where Costigan tails Sullivan through the streets after meeting with Costello. There's so much great stuff going on in this sequence! I love that shot where Costigan looks through the store window with all those mirrors inside, and among his many reflections he spots Sullivan's eyes staring back at him. Also, all those great shadows and smoke-filled alleyways! That neat shot of Costigan's silhouette being superimposed over a billowy cloud of smoke! And the fact that both characters physically looked the same as well; both wearing black with hats. It became hard to tell who was tailing who!

But there is one major difference I noticed between the presentation of Costigan and Sullivan in THE DEPARTED, and that's pertaining to the concept of virility. Scorsese definitely suggests that both Sullivan and Costello are impotent in this film... After Sullivan and Madolyn (Vera Farmiga) have sex (we never actually do see their sex scenes) she says something to him like, "Don't worry about it. It's actually very common among men." And then we see him going into a porno theater, and I know I was thinking, "Man! That poor guy really is having trouble down there!" But Sullivan isn't going into that theater for the reason we think. He's actually there to rendezvous with Costello, our other impotent character in the film, who assaults him with a giant rubber phallus! What do you think that's saying???

And there seems to be a correlation between these characters' impotence and the violence that they create. Right before Costello and Sullivan try to blow each other's heads off, Costello says to Sullivan, "I always thought of you as my son." To which Sullivan replies, "Is that what this is all about? All those years of p***y and you never got an heir?" BLAM!

Costigan, on the other hand, is verile. He gets the only sex scene in the movie, and it appears as though Madolyn's pregnancy is because of him, not Sullivan. Meanwhile, Costigan never kills a single person throughout the duration of this film. Even when he can and should kill Sullivan, he doesn't... and he pays the ultimate price as a result.

That seems to be the key difference between these characters... Everyone's living in a murky world of moral ambiguity, but Sullivan and Costello are destructive men by nature, while Costigan is constructive. Costigan and Costello kill people for no reason and don't ever think twice about doing so. They face the loaded gun for personal gain and power, while Costigan faces it somewhat selflessly in an attempt to better society.


What do you guys think? Feel free to comment on this particular topic, or write about anything else you may have found interesting about THE DEPARTED!