A Prairie Home Companion

Robert Altman, USA, 2006
3.5 out of 4 stars

First, I want to let you folks know that I did not check this DVD out because the director had just passed away; actually, it’s just been sitting in its Netflix envelope on top of my player for a horrendously long time.

As for the film itself, this is an interesting sort of mood piece in which the main character (playing himself, from a screenplay that he himself wrote) shows himself to be deeply flawed, and yet ultimately does not experience any sort of epiphany whatsoever. That said, I’m not sure that Garrison Keillor’s semi-autobiographical depiction of himself (as “GK”) is even the main character, as the weight is pretty well spread around for what is a very good ensemble cast.

This, however, does not come as a surprise. While I don’t want to over-simplify things, much of Altman’s work consisted of ensemble pieces in which events unfolded in a somewhat free-form fashion, indicated especially by his penchant for overlapping dialog… this can be maddening for someone like me who likes to understand every word that is spoken, but I’ve still seen six of his films, counting this one. On the other hand, we have Keillor’s show, witty at times, but also repetitive and a bit too precious, but nonetheless, something I sorta grew up on.

The reason, I think, that I liked this film better than some of Altman’s critical followers is that it was like the “powers combined” of two artists whom I had some affinity for, but who also have frustrated me on more than one occasion. Because this film tries to capture the laconic, Minnesota ethos, I don’t feel like I’m missing some crucial plot point when I can’t understand a piece of dialogue. And Keillor’s screenplay gamely takes some shots at his tendancy to repeat himself and at some of the excesses of the show. I don’t know that I recommend this or that I can justify my fairly-high rating, but I certainly enjoyed it. Finally, I liked the “angel of death” bit because it grafted just the right amount of plot onto this self-consciously fictionalized slice-of-life piece. As someone pointed out, everyone will be looking at this film through the lens of Altman’s death, but when it comes down to it, I think it was a good note for him to go out on.

Source: Warner DVD
25 November, 3:04 PM

Casino Royale

Martin Campbell, UK / Germany / Czech Republic / USA, 2006
3 out of 4 stars

An astonishingly leisurely film, one that sets the right tone, but does drag a bit at the end due to some interesting plot choices. Actually, for a film that runs about two and a half hours, there is surprisingly little plot to go around. The bad guy has something to do with terrorism (a surprisingly well-handled update to Ian Fleming’s old novel), and the way to defeat him, strangely, is to beat him in Texas Hold ‘em. I felt quite fortunate that I’d become familiar with the game over the last few months, for had I still been clueless about it, the whole movie might have failed for me (but it’s hard to be sure of these things).

I did think that toning down the whole scifi excesses of the last couple of films was a good call on the part of the producers, as James Bond’s adventurers should not be based on the same sort of CGI one-upmanship that governs the rest of the action film marketplace. Surprisingly, another thing that has been toned down is the womanizing; I’m not the first one to observe this, but it seems like Daniel Craig (criticized, for whatever reason, by various heterosexual males I know for not being attractive enough) himself is more objectified by the film than his female costars.

The bit I really have the most problem with, or at least, the bit that seemed the strangest to me, was the ending, and for that, I had better keep quiet. I will just say that I’m glad to hear there will be more of a continuation sequel. It’s not as if events just break-off in mid scene, but there’s something unsatisfying about how this film resolves itself.

Source: Sony 35mm print
24 November, 6:30 PM

Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan

Larry Charles, USA, 2006
3 out of 4 stars

It’s probably too late for this particular piece of advice, but if you plan on seeing this film, stop reading the articles and whatever you do, do not watch that special on Comedy Central… and while you’re at it, you probably shouldn’t watch any more of Da Ali G Show. For my part, I’ve only seen some of the special and some of the show, but I’ve definitely read too many articles. That said, this film was definitely still hilarious much of the time, but I got a very strong déjà vu feeling during many of the scenes. That’s mostly the fault of the overactive hype machine (and the endless commentaries invited by the nature of the film), but what my friend says, that some of the gags repeated are repeated from the televised Borat segments, is a little harder to forgive, if true.

I don’t know if it was the déjà vu, the reactionary commentary I read a few days ago, or what, but I wasn’t really that shocked at the behavior of the “average Americans” Borat encounters during this film. I will say that my blasé reaction wasn’t so much reactionary as it was a cynical failure to be surprised. Yes, of course many of the people you meet here will either condone or openly espouse racism… it’s horrific (and, yes, often hilarious) but not, to me, surprising. There’s also a tension in this movie as to what the real goals are of those who made it. A scene near the end with some frat boys provides some of the more hateful comments made by the drunken college students, but the scene isn’t particularly funny. Something like Borat really doesn’t need to be made without the much-needed subversive angle, yet the subversive and the amusing aren’t always the same thing. Sometimes, as the commentary I was reading pointed out, it is quite amazing how far Borat has to go to rile people up, and it’s times like these that the satire seems to fail. A very strange film (and one with, it must be said, a genuinely pornographic and horrific scene).

Source: Fox 35mm print
18 November, 7:10 PM

The Marriage of Maria Braun

(Die Ehe der Maria Braun)
Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Germany, 1979
4 out of 4 stars

The other film I saw by R.W. Fassbinder, one of those famous European “arty” directors, demanded a lot more of the viewer (but was still good), but this is good in a different way. I’ve seen it described as an “epic” and there’s definitely a touch of bombast here. The movie is about a young woman who marries a soldier very near the end of the war, and then finds increasingly compromising ways to make do when, after the war ends, his return proves increasingly unlikely. That is to say, she never stops believing he’ll come back, but if anything, it’s her soul that becomes compromised even though she herself, materially, seems to be thriving.

Fassbinder clearly had a problem with the complacency of his postwar Germany, and here he does an excellent job of levying his critique against the society in general through the depiction of this one opportunistic woman. Lest this sound like some kind of misogynist scapegoating, let me be clear that the men don’t exactly come off clean either. Maria doesn’t allow herself to be exploited, but ultimately, she exploits herself, and Hanna Schygulla turns in an excellent performance while bringing this across to the viewer. The film is also visually stunning, vibrant but also suggesting decay, and the plot is very compelling. Although there are plenty of undertones, it doesn’t necessarily have the air of an “art film” in its accessibility (although I may be wrong).

Source: Home Vision DVD
18 November, 10:28 AM

The Prestige

Christopher Nolan, USA / UK, 2006
3.5 out of 4 stars

This was a very compelling, and at times (especially near the end), quite disturbing tale about revenge and male posturing. As you may have heard, Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman play two turn-of-the-century stage magicians that develop an implacable hatred for each other that manifests itself in a cycle of increasingly worsening reprisals. It’s definitely an odd piece for multiplex fare, not just because of the subject matter (which improbably, is quite similar to that of The Illusionist and to a lesser degree, Scoop), but particularly because neither man is the protagonist; although I do think that one of them definitely comes off as “more evil” after the final reveal, I’m sure others would disagree. It’s also a beautifully shot film, and quite riveting throughout all its twists, turns, and temporal shifts… basically everything you should expect from Christopher Nolan.

Source: Buena Vista 35mm print
4 November, 10:20 PM