The Road to Guantánamo

Michael Winterbottom & Mat Whitecross, UK, 2006
3.5 out of 4 stars

Michael Winterbottom, as any article you read about him will tell you, is a man of many filmic styles, but one that he seems to keep coming back to, albeit in varying shapes and forms, is the docudrama. While his earlier film In This World used nonprofessionals reacting naturally to more-or-less fictional occurrences, this film uses actors to depict the true story of a handful of young British South Asian men who, while visiting Pakistan for a wedding, make an extremely ill-advised detour into Afghanistan right when the Americans start bombing it.

As you can guess from the title, these guys eventually end up in Cuba, where we are treated to a series of harrowing mistreatments and abuses of power that, let’s just say, made me even less proud to be an American than I already was. The docudrama style is effective here because the depictions of prisoner abuse stand on their own, without any need for manipulative music or embellishment of psychological detail. This isn’t to say that I value “realism” in film for its own sake, but in cases such as these, some form of it is probably the best way to get the point across. The decision to include interview segments is an interesting one, but it ultimately prevents this from becoming some kind of inscrutable art-film by allowing us some idea of what the prisoners were thinking.

It must be said that the entire film does not take place in prison camps, and the lead-up to this portion of the film is a quite captivating sort of travelogue, as these guys place themselves in the belly of the beast in a misguided effort to make some kind of difference. The film does a good job at conveying their shifting cultural identities, making their fate all the more compelling.

Source: Sony DVD
12 January, 11:55 PM

West Side Story

Jerome Robbins & Robert Wise, USA, 1961
4 out of 4 stars

I saw this film in my capacity as a “projectionist” (actually, I just put in the tape or the DVD) for an undergraduate class, and many of the people there couldn’t help but laugh, even though the professor asked them to look past the cheesiness that admittedly is present in the film. But much as this film is now a touchstone for its now laughably tame portrayal of gang violence, it is actually quite far from the cheesefest that its reputation suggests.

There are certainly weaknesses, such as the sometimes-uncomfortable minstrelsy of two of the three actors portraying the principle Puerto Rican characters (silly accents, mostly, especially in the singing), and the just plan weakness of the white male lead. In fact, I think the best parts of the movie don’t even include the main couple, which makes it amazing that the film works at all.

It does, however, work quite well. I found the dance to be quite exciting and dynamically filmed, and I appreciated how, minstrelsy aside, the depiction of the struggles of the immigrants and the racial prejudices puts the treatment of the same issues in most modern films to shame. The cops, after all, openly state their preference for the white gang (although there are occasional reminders that these kids are “merely” first-generation Americans, and shouldn’t take too much for granted). The fact that the white kids still fight shows that the generational gap is just as importance for them, but it also makes them more complicit in the tragedy that ensues because they don’t really need to fight, at least not as much.

Source: Warner widescreen VHS
11 January, 5:10 PM

Clean

Olivier Assayas, France / UK / Canada, 2004
3.5 out of 4 stars

When a musical legend self-destructs, we have a bad habit of blaming his decline on his wife or partner, as if he had no agency in bringing about his own end. This film is about such a wife, played by Hong Kong actress Maggie Cheung (speaking mostly English and French here), and what she has to do when she finds herself all on her own. I found her character very sympathetic, perhaps because I am always resistant to those blame-the-woman narratives in the first place, but I think Assayas and Cheung do a good job at crafting a character who you can root for even though she obviously is a little bit complicit in some things, especially when it comes to drugs.

The main weakness of the film is that the plotting is a bit haphazard at times, which is somewhat problematic because it’s a largely plot-driven film. Although much of the film is spent depicting some rather difficult times for the protagonist, I felt that the overall tone was surprisingly optimistic, but I don’t know if I was just filling in the blanks the way I wanted to in order to see it as a story of redemption (rather than the opposite). That, however, may be the point; if so, it only enriches the film when two kinds of spectators could validly take something entirely different from the same film.

Source: UMVD DVD
6 January, 1:07 PM

Children of Men

Alfonso Cuarón, UK / USA / Japan, 2006
4 out of 4 stars

So far, this dystopian, apocalyptic tale is easily the best film of 2006. It consists largely of extremely long takes, and while this might sound a bit gimmicky, it’s a very effective and engrossing stylistic choice, and it makes for some absolutely astonishing cinematography. Much as in V for Vendetta, we once again find ourselves in a Britain that has remained stable – but at what cost – in the midst of a world that is apparently in turmoil, due to an unexplained epidemic of infertility. In the case of this film, we know that the outside turmoil is not mere propaganda, thanks to the sight of the many refugees desperately trying to get in or stay in the UK, most of whom end up in camps. Obviously, this a very openly political film, and so of course, Clive Owen’s character presents us with an apparently apolitical hero who is drawn back into action on a course that he doesn’t quite understand, until of course it’s too late for him to step away from it.

Much as he did in his Harry Potter film, Cuarón very effectively sets his atmosphere, conveying quite clearly, even before we see the refugee camps, that “survival” has had a high psychological cost for the British people. While it’s unlikely that we ever have to worry about not enough babies being born, the film nonetheless takes a very compelling look at how far the state could go in response to such a conundrum, and yet, it doesn’t come across as preachy at all; this is in many ways a very good action film, and very accessible despite its many layers.

Source: Universal 35mm print
5 January, 7:10 PM

Once Upon a Time in America

Sergio Leone, Italy / USA, 1984
2 out of 4 stars

This would-be epic about Prohibition-era Jewish (!) gangsters caught my attention at first, as the contemplative tone, elliptical style and in medias res opening suggested that there were many interesting layers to be peeled through in this 229 minute (!!) film. In fact, I did like the stretch of the film concerning the protagonist's miscreant childhood, for the most part. But by about halfway through, the promise of the opening just seems like smoke and mirrors. Leone’s film is overall quite empty at heart, and even if he did film more than 10 hours of footage, there really doesn’t seem to be enough story, characters, or interest here to justify the time spent. I guess I can see what Leone was getting at, I just don’t think I would buy into it in any form. Admittedly, I do have some trouble being objective about a film that trivializes rape in such a horrendous manner, but I don’t really feel that I am in error in making that value judgment either.

Source: Warner DVD
3 January, 6:31 PM

C.S.A.: The Confederate States of America

Kevin Willmott, USA, 2004
3 of 4 stars

This mockumentary, formed out of fake commercials and reenactments as well as decontextualized photos and video, purports to show the viewer how America would have developed if the South had won the war and established the Confederate government over the entire nation. The point of this is that, through various ingeniously repositioned quotes and rearranged or reversed historical occurrences, the director is able to show us how our own society has developed into a slightly cleaned-up, more polite version of this slave society dystopia, rather than something completely opposite from it as we would like to think. What turns out to be shocking is not how alien this scenario is, but instead, how easily various real aspects of American history fit into this alternate trajectory.

I do think that without a basic knowledge of American history (and I don’t claim any more than that), some of these parallels might be lost on the viewer. That is perhaps the main weakness of the piece, which is that it requires a certain amount of knowledge and saavy in order to draw the needed connections, and that those who lack one or both may feel confident in rejecting the content of the film as a mere “what if” flight of fancy. There is some text at the end that attempts to ground us in real history, but while admittedly informative, it comes off as heavy-handed.

It also must be said that the film is not of consistent quality, which is perhaps due to Willmott’s grand ambitions and his low budget. For instance, some period pieces, especially the 1946 film, don’t evoke their periods very well, and we could have used a greater variety of fake talking heads (the ones we have are sometimes a bit too didactic or obvious). Finally, Willmott seems to lose control of his alternate history near the end, as some threads are never resolved properly, such as the fate of Nazi Germany, and this really undermines the effectiveness of the film.

Nonetheless, the message is worthwhile and compelling, and above all, the film is darkly humorous… that is meant in the sense of “black comedy,” but I can’t help but be self-conscious about these kind of expressions after watching this film! The point is, I laughed with horror throughout, and this seems to indicate that Willmott at least captured the right tone, even if he faltered at times in the execution.

Source: Genius DVD
1 January, 8:58 PM

Babel

Alejandro González Iñárritu, USA / Mexico, 2006
2.5 out of 4 stars

I liked this film, but it didn’t really work and it was not a success. The subject of the film is an attack upon two American tourists, played by Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett, but neither actor is really the “star” of the piece; if anything, the film revolves around them while marginalizing them as subjects, in order to focus more on subjects that are more typically marginalized; in this case, families in Morocco, Mexico, and Japan who go through trauma as a result of what has happened. Actually, scratch Japan off that list, because the story that takes place there, while arresting, has only a shallow connection at best to the rest of the story. This would be fine, were it not that the other stories are very closely interconnected, and that there doesn’t even seem to be a thematic connection in this case.

I think that there is a clear and useful message in this film, and I do like how Iñárritu showcases the people on the outskirts that suffer as a result of the trials of the privileged, rather than making the white folks the POV characters, as would occur in a single-narrative film. Nonetheless, I couldn’t help but feel like he was making all these stories as one film because no one would give him funding for any one of them by itself; I would think that this has to be the explanation for the Japan story, but I have heard that at least one of his earlier films is a bit like this as well, although not on such an international scale. I do think that there needs to be some real questions asked as to whether this hodgepodge narrative, fused with the Hollywood “message” picture, really works, especially as it is becoming an annual occurrence.

Source: Paramount 35mm print
30 December, 4:10 PM

Yi yi

Edward Yang, Taiwan / Japan, 2000
3 out of 4 stars

I found it hard to get a handle on this film, but ultimately, I found it to be rewarding and worthwhile. Being that it is almost three hours long, Yi yi is able to be a rather leisurely portrait of a Taipei family whose members are going through a series of lowkey personal crises. Although there really aren't that many main characters, it is hard to keep everyone straight at first, because you don't know who is who and who is important, and because Edward Yang shoots most of this movie in wide angle shots that, at least on video, don't exactly help the viewer discern one person from another.

Why is this movie worth watching, then? It definitely has a good organic, naturalistic feel, and it is free of much of the hysteria and melodrama one has regrettably come to expect from a film about a semi-dysfunctional family. It also features one of the better child performances I've seen in a while on the part of the 8-year-old son who develops an interest in photography. It seems to be a film about patience, both in what it's about and in how it was made, and overall if you are able to be patient, I think you'll find this family worth spending almost three hours with.

Source: Image DVD
21 December, 8:15 PM

Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle

Danny Leiner, USA / Canada / Germany, 2004
3.5 out of 4 stars

Despite all the hype and positive comments from friends, I ignored this film for a while due to my prejudice against what I refer to as "grossout comedies." However, I should have listened. This film is actually quite groundbreaking in that it manages to destroy the assorted "model minority" and "perpetual foreigner" stereotypes that are the plague of Asian Americans, specifically young men in this case, in an entirely "conventional," mainstream setting, through the vehicle of the stoner buddy comedy, which, even if you don't enjoy this kind of film all that much, you have to admire the project. I find it fascinating that the whole thing was written by a couple of apparently Jewish (I'm just guessing from the names here, but they did insert a doppelganger stoner buddy pair that is more overtly Jewish) writers, who apparently understood representation enough to feel like they wanted to do write by their Asian college buddies (in the DVD they say that there is even a real Harold Lee).

Of course, this film could provide all sorts of great comedy and yet ultimately work more against its purpose if it turned out not to be funny. Luckily this is not the case, although i suppose it's impossible for me to know if I would have found it less funny if I wasn't the kind of viewer to appreciate "low" comedy better because of its "political" content. John Cho and Kal Penn are certainly very likeable though, and the fairly traditional quest structure of the plot is largely effective in maintaining our interest while serving as a vehicle for jokes and character development. The only real problem with the film (aside from a few moments that are perhaps a tad bit overkill, although overall this movie fell short of my "grossout threshold") was the low budget, which occasionally required the director to stage an instant night-to-day (and vice versa) transition, something that I've never seen before, at least not so glaring as it was here!

Source: Warner DVD
20 December, 8:42 PM

Stranger Than Fiction

Marc Forster, USA, 2006
3 out of 4 stars

The genre or convention known as "metafiction" usually involves a play within a play, a novel within a novel, and so on, but I imagine this work is not the only example of a meta device in which the internal work is of a different medium; in this case, it's a novel within a film. It's not just any novel, however; novelist Karen Eiffel (Emma Thompson) is a producer of modern "literature" (you know, the stuff no one reads) and Harold Crick (Will Ferrell) is her main character, who, as you probably know from the trailer, has started to hear her narration in his head.

There are of course various pitfalls to be avoided in making a film like this. The filmmakers wisely decide to avoid explaining how any of this can be possible, and they avoid prolonged scenes in which people simply tell Harold how crazy he must be. The other concern, however, is whether a Hollywood screenwriter can convince us that the "novel" would in fact be a serious, worthwhile piece of literature, which is something I felt skeptical about when I saw the ads for the film.

I think, overall, that the conceit works. To some extent, you really do wonder how great a novel this would be, or whether it's only great because they tell you that it is, but the glimpses we get do suggest a meaningful creative process, and this is what the film is about, but not in a way that is overly derivative of films about filmmaking such as Adapatation.

Finally, the film could have easily floundered on the ending, and for a short while I was convinced that it had. However, the filmmakers really show that they have earned their ending, which is really the most important thing, and so I felt that it actually gave more meaning to the film than I would have guessed. I'll conclude by saying that Dustin Hoffman's performance is quite entertaining, and Will Ferrell, while not exactly vibrant, is a convincing everyman.

Source: Sony 35mm print
18 December, 7:15 PM

The Maltese Falcon

John Huston, USA, 1941
3.5 out of 4 stars

Having done a unit on Walter Mosely’s novel Devil in a Blue Dress, I showed my composition students this film so that they could get a handle on the more “archetypal” noir drama and therefore have something to compare the novel to. I knew I was in for some trouble, though, when Miles Archer was shot very early into the film, and most of the class started cackling at the slight whiff of cheese. I understand that sometimes it’s hard to relate to “old” film, but I was frustrated because I knew that they were consciously distancing themselves, rather than trying to bridge the gap and appreciate the film.

As for me, well this was my second time watching it, and I think it’s been more colored by the articles I’ve read in between (and right after this viewing). Mary Astor really does suck, this is even more apparent after watching Lauren Bacall in The Big Sleep; granted, that’s an unfair comparison considering that Bacall’s character has agency and is likeable, but the gap between them is apparent enough even so. Astor just doesn’t seem like she would inspire any real passion, and she just doesn’t seem capable of leading all these men to their demise. The movie mostly survives on Bogart’s attitude, as well as the unique fact that you can actually follow the plot (Dashiell Hammett, unlike Raymond Chandler, has clearly accounted for the deaths of each of his characters). The sex is oblique thanks to the Hays Code, but this doesn’t detract too much. The best part, finally, is the ending; my reading of it may be unique (and that’s sort of the point), but I see it as a tragedy of morals, which (at least when I read the book, before even seeing the film) surprised me greatly.

Source: Warner special edition DVD
4 December, 9:13 AM

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

Marie Antoinette

Sofia Coppola, France / USA / Japan, 2006
2.5 out of 4 stars

It’s certainly very pretty, but it’s hard to know what to think about the film besides that. I do have to admit that I was a little tired going into it, but it did seem rather long despite only being two hours. It also tends to be a film with long stretches of inactivity and then a large number of key events telescoped, by shorthand, into a few brief scene; while I don’t doubt that this was deliberate, it makes for a strange viewing experience. It’s also hard not to shake the feeling that Kirsten Dunst just isn’t up for it, even when “it” is just a party girl from 300 years ago (in fact, I’m not sure that being shallow helps one play a shallow character, and the point of the Marie character here does seem to be that she didn’t start out shallow). After a while, it seems like too much of an uphill battle to continually try to take these “it-girls,” selected for some level of stardom solely based on looks, and thrust them into a leading role in an arty pic, hoping that they will rise to the occasion. Why don’t we just take a cue from the Brits and actually garner actresses for the A-list that can act really damn well?? As it is, there are hardly any such persons to turn to when a director like Sofia Coppola needs to get a marketable star for a piece like this. I’m not convinced that a “weightier” actress would have saved this, but it would have at least helped.

Source: Sony 35mm print
29 October, 9:35 PM

United 93

Paul Greengrass, UK / France / USA, 2006
4 out 4 stars

When filmmakers promise me “realism” and “accuracy,” I usually have low expectations, as the notion of “reality” is simultaneously over-valued and endlessly travestied in modern culture. Jerky camera movements are supposed to reassure the audience that they’re not witnessing something that’s too “Hollywood,” as if we should trust something that deliberately seeks to provoke nausea while evoking little more than The Real World. Meanwhile, fidelity to minute details can often lead directly to an unwillingness or refusal to convey any real truth about the events at hand.

Miraculously, Paul Greengrass has avoided all of these pitfalls to create an astonishingly worthwhile piece about the America-changing trauma that was, and wasn’t. Of course, he avoids making the “let’s roll” guy into Rambo, something that would be terrifying to me but perhaps gratifying to many others, yet at the same time, his depiction of a largely helpless assortment of people (in the air and on the ground) who mostly react to whatever confronts them rather than decisively, out of some grander ideology.

We see all the times the dots should have been connected, and we even see the willingness of people in different offices to connect them, and yet we see how completely awry everything went. Most chilling of all, and still unfortunately relevant when one thinks about Katrina, is the reminder that TimeWarner (through CNN) is so much better equipped and aware of crucial goings-on then that government we pay so much for (and think how incompetent the news channels are!). What’s frightening about this film is that it is a quite real take on a national crisis that has been compared to Hollywood film catastrophes with unsettling frequency; by showing us a certainly mundane terror behind the whole thing, Greengrass actually takes some of the Hollywood out of it.

Source: Universal DVD
20 October, 10:07 PM

The Departed

Martin Scorsese, USA, 2006
3.5 out of 4 stars

I’m not even sure about the extent to which people are aware that Scorsese’s latest is a remake of a 2002 Hong Kong thriller Infernal Affairs, a film I only saw last year. My awareness of the original certainly made for a different viewing experience than that of my peers, as I couldn’t help but spend much of the screen time marveling over how much of the story had made it into the new film.

There are certainly, however, differences worth talking about, which therefore make the movie worth watching. The performances are all stellar, and Jack Nicholson’s in particular outshines his predecessor, Eric Tsang. The overall feel is certainly grittier; I hesitate to use the word “realistic,” but the original was a lot slicker and shinier while this one is almost hyper realistic in its high levels of obscene language and blood-spattering (making allowances for the fact that a gunshot will always be more impressive on the big screen, at least until I can afford surround sound at home!). Overall, this film is a bit more organic, and it’s interesting to see the two different approaches.

Finally, Scorsese and his screenwriter, William Monahan, develop the background at the beginning more thoroughly, and add a coda to the film’s ending that is perhaps the only real departure from the plot of the original. Both are quite dark conclusions in different ways, which in itself is interesting. I suppose I would recommend that you watch the original first, if only because I am a bit worried that you might think less of the original if you saw it after the remake! I’d have to watch Infernal Affairs again, but my feeling right now is that Scorsese put a bit more meat on its bones in his version.

Source: Warner 35mm print
20 October, 10:15 PM

Closer

Mike Nichols, USA, 2004
3.5 out of 4 stars

Although I’m sure I’ve read it somewhere, I don’t think I needed to be told that this was a film adaptation of a play. The film only contains four characters, and it is composed of a finite number of lengthy, talky scenes. Just because it’s obvious, however, doesn’t mean that this is a bad adaptation; in fact, it’s quite the opposite, as I felt that Mike Nichols found a very good balance of cinematic and theatrical sensibilities in this piece.

The stagey origins of this film comes out is through the deliberately artificial quality of some or much of the dialogue. The characters often speak to each other in various series of incisive, if improbable, questions and answers. Julia Roberts is the weakest link, to a point, but overall the actors manage to make this style work, and they therefore make the film possible. As for the plot, I’m not sure if I took it as seriously as I was supposed to; for instance, was I really supposed to take the online sex chat as comedy? I think the piece does succeed in being emotionally involving and engaging, nonetheless, and I suspect, speaking as a lover of the theater, that this play probably works better on screen, with the breathing room it gets through the sets, the outdoors, and Nichols’ camera angles. On a stage, it seems like it could become stultifying.

Source: Sony DVD
19 October, 10:22 PM