Sweet Land

Ali Selim, USA, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

The premise of this film is that, somewhere in the Midwest immediately after the first world war, a Norwegian immigrant has summoned a mail-order bride who turns out to be (somehow unbeknownst to him) from Germany. It’s not quite on the order of what happened to Japanese Americans in the next one, but as the film presents it there is still quite a large degree of anti-German sentiment that prevents the marriage from occurring as planned, starting with the openly bigoted preacher. Other arrangements are made while the two perhaps get a better chance at becoming acquainted with each other than they otherwise would have without the obstacles.

In a sense, this is the Minnesota version of the British “heritage” film, complete with a tiresome framing story within a framing story in which the next generation agonizes over the old “selling out to the developer” conundrum. This stuff threatens to mar the film proper but is thankfully forgotten for most of it.

Most of the movie is taken up by an understated, but ultimately not underplayed love story set against the backdrop of a less-discussed form of intolerance. I particularly found the minister’s character interesting; there are things about his character arc that are cliché, but I give the filmmakers credit for making his character more complex than you might expect. The lead actors also have good chemistry with each other, and the film ultimately isn’t too sedate. It’s a pleasant experience – take that with both its positive and negative connotations.

Source: Fox DVD
25 Dec, 7:56 PM

Good Night, and Good Luck

George Clooney, USA, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

A film like this raises inevitable difficulties when one sets out to evaluate it, and it is safe to say that these difficulties have been well covered by the criticism that has already been written regarding Clooney’s agit-prop resurrection of the newsman who, we are told, took down McCarthy and therefore left a lesson to us all, media people and common people alike, that we are clearly not living up to in the age of Bush II.

First, there is the question of whether this even really counts as a film. I would say yes, but just barely, and clearly filmmaking for its own sake was not key to Clooney’s agenda. It’s tempting then to ask what, exactly, this film is supposed to do. So-called intellectuals such as myself don’t really need to be educated on who McCarthy was. Perhaps I needed some education on Ed Murrow, the primary figure here, but amusingly, that has already been provided by the significant media coverage of the film. Of course, this coverage would not exist without the making of the film itself, and that leads me to conclude that the main reason that this is a motion picture is that, due to the medium, it therefore demands more attention than a book or, dare I say it, a television special, either of which might have been more appropriate for conveying this “lesson,” especially considering how much archival footage is used and how long the film spends showing us some of it.

Finally, then, we must consider how the “ignorant” would respond to such a film. I vaguely remember my roommate, who is not the brightest pulp in the package, being unsure as to what time period the damn thing took place in, but on the other hand, the undergraduate class that I watched most of it with (in my role as “projectionist”) seemed to get involved in the thing, cheering at some of Murrow’s more provocative lines.

And sure, I imagine we could have gotten the benefit of these choice tidbits from archival footage of Murrow’s show itself, but it goes back to the question of “would anyone have watched it in that case, even in a classroom?” I think the answer is no, and I have to admit that, for some reason, the film actually is pretty entertaining. It is a slight but also hard-hitting propaganda piece that has the benefit of being on the side of truth, more or less. So yeah, I recommend it, even if I’m somewhat bemused by it.

Source: Warner DVD
23 April, 6:37 PM

The Motel

Michael Kang, USA, 2005
2 out of 4 stars

This Asian American coming of age story is a bit unusual, but largely ordinary, in the way that many low-budget, self-consciously "indie" films strive to be. I usually don't mind it when a film is short, but this one seems to be only 77 minutes because the filmmakers simply don't have anything else to say. Everything seems to follow a pattern and the acting is a bit off, perhaps because the emotions are overly muted. I understand the value of understatement, but this is a film that wants to make some kind of statement, so it's a bit problematic in this case. It's a valiant effort, but just not that good.

Source: UMVD DVD
23 March, 9:28 PM

Riding Alone for Thousands of Miles

(Qian li zou dan qi)
Zhang Yimou, China / Hong Kong / Japan, 2005
4 out of 4 stars

An elderly Japanese man is trying to bridge an unexplainable gap that has developed between him and his son, when his daughter-in-law gives him a tape of that son’s trip to China to film a folk opera. Inspired by a promise the son makes to film a different piece next year, the old man travels to Yunnan province to do it himself, hoping that this gesture will mean something to his son.

Yes, in between the interesting but flawed House of Flying Daggers and the positively infuriating Curse of the Golden Flower, Zhang Yimou actually made another “human” film hearkening back to his old days, but the introduction of the Japanese element makes this a different film, as we now have Ken Takakura, apparently a major film star, acting alongside the local non-actors that Zhang had become accustomed to using before he switched to wuxia. And of course, Takakura’s character and the Chinese villagers he meets don’t understand each other and interpreting services are not always easy to come by.

Simply put, this is one of the best quest-driven films I’ve seen in a while, and although I’ve liked Zhang’s earlier films, I think I liked this one even more because it has those quiet, reflective moments but uses them in service of a surprisingly-compelling story (whereas that description above might have given away the entire plot of some of his films, there are plenty more twists and turns in this one). The theme of communication, or lack thereof, is very successfully developed throughout; this man can’t talk to his son, he can’t talk to the Chinese, but somehow these folks find a way, more or less. It’s all very moving and surprisingly funny at times. I strongly recommend checking this out.

Source: Sony DVD
22 March, 12:02 PM

Welcome to Dongmakgol

Park Kwang-hyun, South Korea, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

This is something of a high-concept drama, lighthearted at times, but one that takes its subject, the Korean War, very seriously of course. It involves soldiers from the North, the South, and even the US who end up separated from their colleagues and take refuge in the titular village, an inexplicably utopian settlement that has something of an Edenic quality to it, as the villagers don’t even understand what the guns do, leading of of the funniest standoff scenes I’ve ever seen. The filmmakers wisely avoid making these unsophisticated country folk the butt of any jokes, while similarly avoiding any heavy-handed, didactic speeches. Instead, there are some spectacular visual scenes, although I wasn’t always entirely sold on the style used in some of them, particularly the boar scene. The characters are a little thin, too, although this may not be entirely inadvertent.

I mentioned earlier that there is actually an American soldier in the town along with the soldiers from the two Koreas, and I can only figure that he is there for balance, because, overall, the Americans are portrayed with visual and musical queues that remind the viewer of the Empire from Star Wars. While I think it would be an exaggeration to say that this film is entirely a straightforward political allegory, it’s hard not to draw parallels with how many Koreans in the south today feel about America’s role in the division of the peninsula.

Source: KD DVD
14 February, 11:15 PM

Conversations with Other Women

Hans Canosa, UK / USA, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

I had never heard of this film until I saw it on a Blockbuster shelf, and having one last in-store rental from my free trial with the online service, I picked it up solely on the strength of the actors, Aaron Eckhart and Helena Bonham Carter. I anticipated that the film would be exclusively focused on them, and that their performances would be very engaging, and I was right on both counts.

The two actors play wedding guests who meet and begin flirting. Two things stand out right away. The first is that the dialogue is sparking and quite clever, and the second is that everything is in split-screen. This is a difficult effect to describe; sometimes each actor occupies a different side of the screen, sometimes we get different angles, different moments in the scene (some of which appear to have not actually occurred), and even flashbacks, on occasion. It actually did take me a little while to get accustomed to this very singular stylistic choice, as sometimes it’s hard to know where to direct one’s attention! Furthermore, although as usual I don’t want to give anything away, you can’t take everything these characters say to each other at face value, at least not at the beginning.

Ultimately, I would say that the interplay between these characters is really entertaining and moving, and that the actors definitely sell it. I think the split-screen works, although it perhaps would have been better to just use it in part of the film, as there are moments in which it seems unnecessary. This is a good solid film; there just isn’t enough here for it to be a great one (and with less-talented actors, it might well have been a bad one).

Source: WEA DVD
8 February, 8:32 PM

The Death of Mr. Lazarescu

(Moartea domnului Lazarescu)
Cristi Puiu, Romania, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

Spending two and a half hours a man slow decaying towards a fate preordained by the title itself is the kind of film experience that critics rave about (it was on many top 10 lists) and audiences shun (the American box office was a whopping $80,301). As for myself, well, I often lean towards the critics in cases like these. I think they may have overpraised the film a bit, but I also think that this film is exactly what it is supposed to be.

The length is certainly excessive (even some of its strongest proponents have said so), and yet the lackadaisical pacing is key in the director’s attempt to convey the maddening delays and demurrals of the Romanian medical system – at least as depicted here. The characters are thinly sketched, but this is also necessary; Lazarescu needs to be enough of everyman that the pathos can come from the events (or lack therof) alone. While I wasn’t exactly rapt with attention, I was invested enough with Lazarescu’s plight that, even though I knew what would happen, I felt hopeful when he seemed to come across someone willing to do something for him. The point is, this is not an unrelenting film in which people are all bad, which is what you might expect from the premise and from the execution. Instead, it shows a world in which pettiness and decency are mixed, often in the same people. It might try the patience of some folks, and it’s not the masterpiece that some critics claim it to be, but it is a good, solid, and unusual film.

Source: Genius DVD
27 January, 7:03 PM

Kill Zone

(Sha po long)
Yip Wai Sun, Hong Kong / Macau, 2005
2 out of 4 stars

So what happens when you mix the martial arts genre (more recently associated, at least by Western audiences, with the period piece) and the cop genre? At least in this film, the result seems to be some kind of reconstituted slasher film, and I have to admit that I have never been one to get behind the slasher genre. It’s one thing to have some gore in the battle scenes, but some of these characters aren’t even capable of putting up enough of a fight, meaning that many of the “action” scenes are nothing more than slaughters.

In fact, the fighting is quite good in this film, although it is nothing groundbreaking. Although the filmmaking isn’t incompetent, there’s not all that much else to celebrate I about it, and the acting is particularly laughable at times (strong emotions come out of nowhere and then disappear again). My usual complaint in these kind of films is that I am just waiting through the bad acting for the good action, but in this case, I guess I also have to complain about the general nihilism that is the inevitable consequence of veering too far into slasher territory. It seems like the filmmakers wanted to have some kind of weight behind the whole thing, but really, this is an insubstantial picture with a underlying morality that is muddled at best.

Source: Genius DVD
25 January, 10:53 PM

Gabrielle

Patrice Chéreau, France / Germany / Italy, 2005
4 out of 4 stars

This is, in essence, a chamber drama that basically sustains a very narrow focus on an unexpected marital crisis for 90 minutes, and yet it is much more filmic and more alive than such an accurate description would suggest. There are certainly some surprising, successful flourishes employed to tell this story, such as the unusual use of monochrome and title cards. Furthermore, the classical music score is expertly done and quite disturbing, especially when it (apparently) doesn’t at all match with what we’re seeing on screen. Finally, the camera work is very vibrant when needed, and when otherwise, it conveys very well the moroseness of the situation.

All that said, of course a film that is mostly about two people imploding needs some good performances, and these are certainly provided by Pascal Greggory and Isabelle Huppert, the one manic and strangely engaging, the other hiding something with a series of elliptical looks and remarks. I do imagine this film is not for everyone, but for me, it was one of the better films that had its American release (such as it was) in 2006.

Source: Genius DVD
22 January, 11:55 PM

L’Enfant

Jean-Pierre & Luc Dardenne, Belgium / France, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

The film opens with a young woman carrying a very little baby, but this is misleading – we end up spending much more time with the emotionally-stunted father of the child as he embarks upon a series of very ill-considered choices, none of which I will mention here as you could basically spoil the entire story in a few lines (I find myself generally avoiding even the Netflix or Blockbuster disc sleeves as they tend to give you plot points from halfway through the film, so I try to do what readers I have the courtesy of facilitating an unspoiled viewing of a film if they choose to watch it).

Although this is the typical French understated drama, in which characters don’t say a lot, especially not what they feel, my comments above are misleading, in that the Dardenne brothers, at least in this film, use this style to tell an actual story, rather than just a mood piece or a character study. While the latter two possibilities wouldn’t necessarily make a bad film, it was nice to see some storytelling nonetheless, and the plot is indeed fairly compelling.

So overall, I enjoyed this film, but I didn’t think it quite lived up to its potential, although I’m not exactly sure what could have been done differently. While I won’t describe the ending, I will say that it was at that point, as it often is for me, that I realized that I hadn’t quite been emotionally involved in the piece. I watched what was seemingly a very moving moment with near-total detachment. Maybe that was what the Dardennes wanted from me, but even if this is the case, it doesn’t change my assessment; this is a compelling movie worth watching, but it’s, I hate to say it, sometimes hard to tell what the point is.

Source: Sony DVD
14 January, 12:30 AM

The Proposition

John Hillcoat, Australia / UK, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

Like any good western, this film is about bringing “civilization” to those who are uninterested in it, but ambiguity sets in as the villains seem almost like the victims at the beginning, and when they reveal themselves later to be far from harmless, we find ourselves unsure how the film wants us to regard the idea of civilization… and that seems to be the point of it all. The main character in the film turns out to be the lawman (an capital in the imperial army though, not a sheriff) who proposes an interesting way to deal with the villainous gang, and then watches his society and even his own marriage nearly break under the strain when his choices gradually come to light. The relationships between the murderous band of outlaws are a bit murkier, and perhaps required more work to understand than I was willing to put in (especially as far as the ending was concerned). Overall, though, the film manages to be taciturn without being inscrutable, which is always nice. Certainly worth a look for the interesting questions it raises, and then refuses to answer.

Source: First Look DVD
26 September, 8:37 PM

Thank You for Smoking

Jason Reitman, USA, 2005
2.5 out of 4 stars

To no one's surprise, I wasn't able to get this one written until quite a while after having actually watched it, so it will be slight, to say the least. This is the first movie in a while that I can remember watching from start to finish on an airplane. It was certainly an effort, as I had to hold the headphones to my ears to understand what was being said. Luckily, since this was British Airways, no censorship was employed, meaning that there was both sex and bad language. What was the most curious was the way in which they chose to deal with screen ratio. Some scenes were in widescreen, but then others were cut off at the sides. The weirdest thing was when this transition occurred in the middle of a given scene!

Okay, as for the movie itself, I'm not even sure if it could be classified as satire. It features a rather engaging antihero, the tobacco lobbyist, who faces enemies that are largely bufoonish. As our sympathy is continually placed with the lobbyist, we start to wonder who is being lambasted, exactly. There does actually seem to be a larger point that the filmmakers want to make about the system, but I'm not entirely sure if pays off. The humor is wry, although not as dark as it could be. Most of the enjoyment comes just from watching the man work and not caring if it's "right."

Source: Jaguar airplane video
17 August, 4:45 PM

Brick

Rian Johnson, USA, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

I always thought of noir as a genre, but after watching this film and talking with my friend about it, I’m beginning to see that even (especially?) at its best, it’s really more of a formula. Chinatown seems to be the exception which proves the rule (or at least proves that noir doesn’t just have to be variations on a theme), but then again, some quite good films are made by introducing very unlikely or outrageous variations on said theme, such as The Big Lebowski.

The premise of this film is both fascinating and in danger of becoming old before you even see it. High school noir? Haven’t these people seen Veronica Mars? In fact, Brick tries to fit high school into noir, whereas Mars more successfully fits noir into high school. Certainly, a high school setting shouldn’t define a production, considering the wide varieties of quality and genre among films and shows which such settings. This wide variety, however, does lead one to wonder if setting anything in a high school is something to get that excited about. This is after all an “indie” film rather than a wide-release, mainstream piece, but it nonetheless comes off as a weird cross between a high-concept studio pitch and a film school experiment (you at least seem to need to know a bit about noir in order to get much out of it).

All this said, it’s a good film, if not entirely great or as clever as it’s meant to be. The very-stylized dialogue is nigh-impenetrable at the beginning, and it rubbed me the wrong way at first because I felt like someone was just showing off to me. Eventually I did get sucked in, but I’m not sure I was jolted in quite the way I was supposed to have been at the beginning there. The hero is engaging, if significantly less sympathetic than his predecessors. The plot is, well, formula, but the best feature, aside from the brief, kinetic fight sequences, is the sight of the noir formula transpiring in suburban homes and veritable wastelands. Noir usually takes place in Southern California, but this manages to be the least “glamorous” depiction of the usual noir landscape yet.

Source: Universal DVD
14 August, 10:29 PM

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

Shane Black, USA, 2005
3.5 out of 4 stars

What a shame this film didn’t get a real wide release, because it seems like with some real promotion and distribution, this might really have caught on. Here you have a seemingly worn-out premise, the buddy/romance/detective picture, somehow brought to new life with just the right flavor of wit. Writer-director Shane Black was responsible for writing the Lethal Weapon series (I only saw the fourth one and some of the many imitators), and it seems like this movie is about as revolutionary (from what I’ve heard of the original) in attempting to rejuvenate the genre… too bad nobody is ready for that anymore nowadays.

Robert Downey, Jr. and Michelle Monaghan are quite formidable here (in different ways), while Val Kilmer is more just okay, although his gay detective character is great anyway. Downey narrates the whole film (as his character, but also as a “narrator) and his commentary is mostly hilarious, although there are a few moments of meta that fall flat (and that must be saying something considering how much I love meta). The plot is convoluted, but it sets off the difference between “fantasy” and “reality” in a much more creative and even insightful way than how these films usually present outlandish events while impotently asserting their verité. It’s not perfect, but I do feel vindicated in my constant protests that mainstream film doesn’t have to be the thoughtless swamp of nonsense that it usually is now. The experiment doesn’t always work, but overall this film is meant to entertain and succeeds; are you really telling me that it was “too challenging” for the average moviegoer?

Source: Warner DVD
6 August, 9:32 PM

Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story

(A Cock and Bull Story)
Michael Winterbottom, UK, 2005
3.5 out of 4 stars

As I’ve said before, I’m sucker for meta, so my enjoyment of this film was all but guaranteed. However, aside from a disorienting ending, A Cock and Bull Story is actually quite linear, largely giving us a 24-hour period in the making of an actual Tristram Shandy film (the original British title making the point that this is not that film; presumably it was changed because we Americans genuinely don’t know what a “cock and bull story” is).

Much of it, then, consists of Steve Coogan portraying himself. He’s clearly the protagonist in Michael Winterbottom’s film, but his most of the Coogan character’s efforts are spent making sure that he will in fact be the protagonist and lead in the film that “Mark” is making. Considering that I’d never even heard of Coogan before, I was quite glad that the American DVD distributor included a trailer for the box set of his old mock talk show, which comes up several times throughout the film (and is therefore a must-view for fellow clueless yank viewers; it’s the last one that plays before you get to the menu). Even with this admittedly fuzzy knowledge, I still really enjoyed Coogan’s persona and the unerringly hilarious antics that the film provides. There’s also a lot of good observations and snarky commentary implicit in the how Winterbottom deals with high literature and high film, and the usual cluelessness that the characters, especially Coogan, have regarding both despite the task at hand. Amazingly, there is even a bit of a plot too; it’s just not Shandy’s story, although I did actually wish we’d seen a bit more of that, despite my appreciation of what I did get.

Source: Warner DVD
23 July, 2:37 PM

Caché

Michael Haneke, France / Austria / Germany / Italy, 2005
3.5 out of 4 stars

This is a “family under siege” film in which the threat (or menace) increasingly seems insignificant compared to darkness in the protagonist’s own past. Georges’ darkness has political shades to it, but most interestingly, it’s always a little fuzzy just exactly what happened, and this lack of clarity continues into the “present day” of the film. I’m used to ambiguous endings and what not, but this film threw me off a bit in regards to how the director included ambiguity throughout what seemed to be a “realist” rather than impressionist film, and yet managed to do it without leaving the viewer merely irritated. My observations on this count were influenced, to some extent, by my viewing of the director interview found on the DVD.

Source: Sony DVD
3 July, 1:22 PM

Paradise Now

Hany Abu-Assad, France / Germany / Netherlands / Israel, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

I expected this film to give me a good look at the experiences of two potential suicide bombers, and at Palestine in general, and it certainly did. However, it’s not exactly some kind of verité piece either. It’s very beautifully shot and contains some rather affecting moments. While the directing is largely unobtrusive, it’s not absent either. I did think that there were some aimless patches and that some of the motivation shifts weren’t quite clear, which is unfortunate considering that this film is almost entirely about motivations. However, the film succeeds because the director takes a clear eye at a very difficult and disturbing issue, and doesn’t choose to preach or condescend to the viewer. It’s meaningful, but unlike, say, Hotel Rwanda, it doesn’t just coast on its meaningfulness.

Source: Warner DVD
20 June, 10:56 PM

Pride & Prejudice

Joe Wright, UK / France, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

Perversely enough, I started to become interested in seeing this film after I heard three of my friends railing against Keira Knightley when she was nominated for the Oscar. Indeed, Knightley is the weakest link in this version, not standing up too well to Jennifer Ehle (1995 BBC version) or even Aishwarya Rai (2004 “Bollywood” version). Thankfully, Matthew Mcfayden, while still no Colin Firth, does us the pleasure of not trying to be Firth, and certainly whups Martin Henderson’s ass (not much of a challenge, admittedly).

Overall, I quite enjoyed this rendition. What it lacks in thoroughness and in acting (compared to the BBC), it makes up for with production values, which are thankfully not put to use. The cinematography is quite beautiful, especially when regarding the English countryside where some key tableaus occur, and the dinginess of the Bennett home is keenly brought into view in a clearer fashion than I’ve seen in most Austen interpretations. Finally, Joe Wright has a strong style, with some signature, abrupt reaction shots and other little flourishes I’m not knowledgeable enough to name, and ultimately, this helps the film be a worthwhile contribution rather than a half-assed cash-in type of remake. Knightley, however, did bug me, especially in the opening part of the film, which made me feel that, despite her age, she might have been better cast as Lydia, someone she probably resembles more closely. Every time she crinkled her nose laughing, she seemed to convey a lack of depth that didn’t fit her character. I imagine marketability was, to put it lightly, the main reason for her inclusion.

Source: Universal DVD
6 June, 9:10 AM

Lady Vengeance

(Chinjeolhan geumjassi)
Park Chan-wook, South Korea, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

This is yet another film that I started to lose faith in as it got nearer to the end, and I kept asking, “and then what?” I think that it suffered unfairly from comparisons to Park Chan-wook’s previous film, Oldboy, so I will probably need to watch it again when it comes out on DVD. I did really enjoy the main character, even though her very personality is hard to pin down thanks to the machinations of the plot. The other characters are interesting, but there are a lot of them, and it’s hard to tell who’s who after a while. In general, there are several confusing aspects of this film that made me feel as if I would need a full plot summary after watching it.

I do think that this film is saying something interesting and important about revenge, and that this is reflected in the somewhat-slow concluding portion of the film. The “message” does strike me as a tad bit obvious, but then there are a lot of different ways to react to the protagonist’s decisions near the end, so there does seem to be a worthwhile amount of ambiguity. I think the best parts of the film are the jail flashbacks and the adoption subplot. Once we get fully into the vengeance, the film becomes more contemplative, but somewhat less interesting.

Source: Tartan 35mm print
1 June, 7:18 PM

Water

Deepa Mehta, Canada / India, 2005
Three stars

This is an often beautiful, sometimes elliptical but mostly somewhat-conventional film about the unsettling ways in which widows – including children – were treated in India, at least in the 1930s (the ending title card leaves it ambiguous as to how much of these practices continue today). Probably the strangest aspect of it was how the film started by focusing on the young child, then switched over to a love story bit that seemed always Disney-esque, and the film shifts focus once again even after that. Although it’s not as if these elements are unrelated, the film isn’t really set up as a multiple-perspective affair, which makes it all somewhat jarring. Overall I liked it, but I was not really blow away either, and I imagine that had the subject matter been slighter and more familiar, I would have been harder on it.

Source: Fox 35mm print
21 May, 7 PM