Change Your Image
PhilipLRuss
Reviews
The Last Castle (2001)
It's about leadership.
It's about leadership. Does the leader tighten down the screws, block the alternatives, so that people will go the way he wants them to go? Or does he do himself what he would ask anyone else to do, provide an example, reason about ends and means to obtain commitment? Does one lead from the rear or from the front?
There is also something here about values. Do we want a secure, orderly, predictable, and quiet place to live? Of course. Can we be moved to action when we perceive injustice to others, taking on personal risk without expectation of personal gain? One hopes so.
Mr. Redford seriously acts the way he hasn't in many a recent movie. Mr. Gandolfini is utterly convincing. The movie sets up a totally involving dramatic conflict on the levels of ideas, personal commitment, and helicopters crashing and things exploding.
I love this movie. In it's class, second only to "Twelve O'Clock High".
21 Grams (2003)
Why bother?
I came to this movie with high expectations after reading Elvis Mitchell's very positive review in the New York Times. I was gravely disappointed.
It seems the director had this idea about a triangle involving a man who accidentally kills a man and his two daughters with his truck, a second man who receives a transplant of the father's heart, and the surviving wife of the dead man. OK, but what then? It seems the director couldn't work out a real story, so we are given lots of time spliced scenes of these characters and their families suffering and not doing too much. We, the audience, are kept busy trying to figure out the straight line time sequence and admiring the moody and sometimes interesting photography. We are never made to care about any of these people. In fact, they are so sad and dull, one just wants to get away from them.
At this juncture I could not help compare this film with Mystic River, which is a great film. Like 21 Grams, we have a seemingly chance death, the characters are related, their families are involved. The characters are not always attractive, but we can understand why they do what they do and sympathize. We see people taking action compelled by their up-bringings, their family circumstances, and the necessities of the situation. It is a powerful mix of acting, directing, and writing.
21 Grams has none of this. The actors who, you can see, are trying to make something of this, have nothing to do but represent suffering while they hang out. They have nothing to say/think thanks to the writer. The director can't find any meaningfully motivated actions for them to perform faced with their suffering.
Why bother?
School of Rock (2003)
Safe and Disappointing
Based on Jack Black's brilliant characterization in "High Fidelity" I was very much looking forward to this movie. I was expecting Mr. Black to take a character something like that further. Instead, I found the movie and the characterization both a dumbing down and flattening out. The same predictable jokes and shticks are repeated ad nauseam inside the most well-worn movie formula: "let's put on a show and save the teacher"/"let's put on a show and save the spontaneity/innocent joy/etc of the kids" (of which qualities we see precious little). No surprise, inspiration, nor creativity in the dialog or plot. It's rather sad to see Mr. Black pumping more and more energy into his performance hoping for funny or inspired and achieving only dead-end maniac.
Still, I look forward to Jack Black's next effort. Someone please let this creative spirit out of the box!
Under the Tuscan Sun (2003)
Gorgeous cinematography, charming characters, not much story.
Gorgeous cinematography, charming characters, not much story. The film always felt ready to go, but no one ever gunned the engines. Of course, life is sometimes like that.
Performance: King Lear (1998)
Note the parallels between Lear's and Glouster's families
This "Lear" was one of those Shakespeare productions that got me to see a familiar play very differently. What choices do Lear and Glouster make? What choices do their children make? How do they affect (respond to) each other?
I'm on the "this is really good acting" side of the fence here. I was impressed and convinced by all except Edgar. He starts as so dull and stupid that when he grows into an icon and mysteriously wise man, it's hard to swallow. The evil sisters are not simply monsters, they are made to vacillate between concern for their father and "sensibleness", concern for position and desire.
I really liked this production.
Spy Game (2001)
So much toil and complication to produce so little.
The best I can say about this movie is that it might be a good antidote for TV's Alias. In Spy Game the training, the setting up, the eventual execution of plans take forever. Everyone, good guys and bad guys alike, looks painfully dubious about the effectiveness and/or the morality of actions contemplated. After 30 seconds of this, each one just falls in line and does what he was considering in the first place. There is so much mystery about who is on whose side and what the relations are, and for what? Some terrorist is almost accidentally blown up and the a couple of semi-competent agents have to be sprung from prison. Everything in the movie points to Big Deal while the viewer keeps wondering who these people are, what are they doing that matters, and why should we care?
I can't help compare this Redford movie with The Last Castle where scenes are so quietly underplayed as everyday occurrences but the issues of leadership, loyalty, and competence are brought out thoughtfully and forcefully.
The Anniversary Party (2001)
Disappointingly self-indulgent. All the good parts were in the trailer.
All the good parts were in the trailer, which appeared funny in an adult and serious way. The movie turned out to be unfunny while struggling to be serious but ending up only self-indulgent. "Let's show how we're not self-indulgent by making all the characters awful, including ourselves." In the end I couldn't find a single character to like in the entire film.