Based on the novel by Charles Portis, True Grit is a tale of vengeance set in a ruthless time where the law of the land was often cruel and corrupt. After her father is killed by a swindler named Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), 14 year-old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) vows to avenge her father’s death. Seeking a man full of “True Grit” Mattie hires a rough U.S. Marshal, Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges), to hunt Chaney down. To ensure that Cogburn does not run off with her money, Mattie insists on accompanying Cogburn into the Indian Nation where it is alleged that Chaney is hiding out. Mattie and Rooster are accompanied by a Texas Ranger named LaBoeuf (Matt Damon) who has been hunting Chaney for quite some time. Although the trio have the same goal in mind, they rarely any eye to eye. Yet, in the harsh violent terrain they will need to put aside their differences and show what they are really made of.
Having never watched the original True Grit film, nor read the novel on which it is based, one of the traits that immediately struck me about the Coen Brothers’ film is the level of humour. The writing in this film is top notch; the script is a good mix of western grit and witty one-liners. This is evident in the wonderful war of words that Mattie, Rooster and LaBoeuf have with each other. The first half of the film is especially funny as it is filled with many memorable lines. Whether it LaBoeuf commenting on Mattie’s lack of attractiveness, Rooster poking fun at the ineffectiveness of Texas Rangers, or Mattie out witting a trickster to get back her father’s money and horses, there is no shortage of laughs.
The three lead actors have a wonderful chemistry that really helps to enhance the dialogue. After making such a memorable mark in The Big Lebowski, it was not only exciting to see Jeff Bridges back working with the Coens but also refreshing that he was able to create another memorable character. Rooster is exactly what you would hope for in this film. He is the reluctant father figure to Mattie who loves killing just as much as he loves drinking. Rooster rarely lets his guard down, even when he shows a softer side it is only for a few brief moments. Both Damon and Steinfeld are great in their respective roles. There are a few times where the film seems to hint at Mattie and LaBoeuf’s relationship becoming something more but it never follows this idea through. Still, both actors bring so much to their respective characters that you feel like you have known them for a long time.
This brings me to the biggest issue I had with True Grit, the character of Tom Chaney. All of the other characters are so memorable that Chaney ends up being a huge disappointment. The first half of True Grit nicely builds up the lore of Chaney. The fact that it essentially takes two men to track him down gives Chaney the lure of being a really crafty villain. Yet when Chaney finally appears, it becomes apparent that he is nothing more than a buffoon. What is even more baffling is that LaBoeuf had so much trouble catching Chaney in the first place. If this was not enough, the emergence of Lucky Ned Pepper (Barry Pepper) completely overshadows Chaney. Lucky Ned Pepper is a far more interesting character than Chaney and, judging by how fast the film focuses on the Lucky Ned/Rooster arc, the Coens seem to be acknowledging this.
Chaney is practically a blip in the film and it is especially noticeable in the last twenty minutes of the film. From the moment Mattie has the encounter with the snake to the conclusion of the film, True Grit loses some of the shine it had at the beginning. The ending of the movie not only dragged on, but it felt like the film was trying to neatly wrap things up in order to answer questions that no one was asking. Regardless, there is plenty to enjoy in True Grit. The film is filled with great performances and it will have you laughing far more than you would expect from a western.
Despite my overall issues with the unoriginal plot, in my opinion Avatar has set the bar for 3D films. There have been very few 3D films; since Avatar’s release, that have managed to balance visual flair with a decent story. Most of the films have not even warranted the 3D treatment in the first place. Like several films released before it, Disney’s latest 3D adventure TRON: Legacy, boast impressive visuals but is ultimately undermined by the silly plot.
Set 20 years after the disappearance of Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges), the innovative software engineer from the original film, Legacy focuses on how his son Sam (Garret Hedlund) struggles to cope with his father’s disappearance. Sam is now the head of his father’s company, but cares little about seeing it strive. One night Sam is informed about a message sent from his father’s abandoned arcade. In the arcade, Sam discovers a portal that sends him into a digital world known as The Grid. Formerly a place of endless possibilities, The Grid is now a cold world ruled by Clu (Jeff Bridges), a computerized clone of Flynn. Clu is determined to expand his empire into the real world but needs Flynn’s memory disk in order to succeed. Sam, along with the help of Quorra (Olivia Wilde), must race to get his father out of The Grid before Clu can bring his plans into fruition.
As I mentioned earlier, TRON: Legacy is truly a visual treat especially in IMAX. However, there were times when the lighting from the suits would create a blurry effect on the IMAX screens. This was minor blip in an otherwise great job from a technical standpoint. The rendering of Clu is one of the most realistic computer generated characters I have seen in quite a while. Clu’s facial expressions and movements felt more natural than the ones featured in films such as Beowulf and The Polar Express. Another sight to behold is the world of The Grid. The set designs and costumes provided an innovative futuristic look while still acknowledging the original TRON film. I particularly liked the brief moment where Sam steals his father’s famous motorcycle from the first film. It should also be noted that the score by Daft Punk, who make a cameo in the film, also helps to bring The Grid to life. While not the feverish dance beats usually associated with Daft Punk’s work, their minimalist approach for the film works perfectly with TRON: Legacy.
Despite all of the elements in the film’s favour, TRON: Legacy stumbles in its plot which often feels like a hybrid of Batman Begins and Star Wars. There are events that occur in the film at random moments with no real logic at all. For example, Kevin’s Jedi-like powers only appear when it is convenient to advance the plot. Which leads to audience to question if Kevin had this ability all along then why did he not use it sooner? The film is so bogged down with filling the gaps between the original TRON and the new version that it is practically devoid of action. Minus the sequences at the beginning and end of the film, TRON: Legacy is actually a rather boring film. In many ways TRON: Legacy would have worked better as a television series. It would allow for better development of all the various plot points that the film sloppily tries to cram into two hours. Worst of all, the dialogue in the film is both predictable and laughably bad. This is most evident in the forced romantic moments between Sam and Quorra.
Since TRON: Legacy’s plot and dialogue are so weak, the actors try their best with the material they are given. Jeff Bridges is at his best in the film when he is playing Clu. He offers a nice break from the same yet-again-recycled Lebowski character, last seen in The Men Who Stares at Goats, which he brings to the role of Kevin. While Bridges has his moments, the real highlight from an acting standpoint is Michael Sheen. He brings much need energy to the film in his role of the shady Castor. Sheen is the only one who actually seems to be having fun in the picture. Not only that but he makes a strong case for himself playing The Riddler in a future Batman film.
Unfortunately both Sheen’s work and the stellar visuals cannot save TRON: Legacy from its ridiculous plot. No matter how far the technology has advanced, at the end of the day it is the plot that will separate the good films from the average ones.
After being upstaged by his former partner, Tommy Sweet (Colin Farrell), former country star Otis “Bad” Blake (Jeff Bridges) is reduced to playing local bars and bowling alleys. Addicted to the bottle Blake can no longer find the ability to write new songs. While performing a show in Santa Fe, Bad Blake meets and falls for a local reporter, Jane (Maggie Gyllenhaal). Through Jane, and her four-year old son, Bad Blake experiences apart of life that he has neglected for so long. Yet can Bad Blake truly make a new life with Jane? Or will the temptations of alcohol be too great?
The funny thing about Crazy Heart is that it seems to go out of its way to defuse any form of actual tension. For example, the first act of the film alludes to the bitter relationship between Bad Blake and Tommy Sweet. Clearly something really terrible must have happened to sour their relationship. Yet when Tommy Sweet finally dares to show his face it becomes apparent that the whole issue is nothing more than a minor squabble. Tommy pretty much attempts to make amends within the first five minutes of being around Blake. There is never that moment where you question Tommy’s motives or loyalties. You never wonder if Bad Blake will ever be able to work with Tommy again. The tension is defused faster than you can blink.
Come to think of it, Crazy Heart is nothing more than a bunch of little moments that always find a way of being wrapped up with a neat little bow. If you eliminate the Tommy Sweet subplot, then all that is left is the Bad Blake’s alcoholism; and how it affects his relationship with Jane. Unfortunately, neither of these subplots can even muster up a faint spark. The whole deadbeat dad arc has been done better in numerous other films. Plus his plight with alcoholism comes off a little too Hallmark movie of the month for my liking. The defining moment that finally sends Bad Blake to rehab is, in my opinion, more a statement about Jane’s parenting than it is about Blake’s addiction to the bottle. I am not making excuses for his actions, I merely saw the moment coming early on based on how the role of Jane is written.
The character of Jane is nothing more than a quick device to get Bad’s character from point A to B. As much I love Maggie Gyllenhaal as an actress, I could not help but wonder why she was cast in this film. Jane is such a poorly constructed character that the role did not fit Gyllenhaal’s style at all. There were moments when I wondered if she was merely channelling her old Sherrybaby character. When Jane is not being forgotten for large chunks of the film, she randomly falls into long stretches where she acts like a naive school girl. It is hard to believe that she is even a journalist at times.
Crazy Heart is not a great film, nor is it a bad film, it is just there. The only thing that keeps Crazy Heart afloat is Jeff Bridge’s performance. Was it Oscar worthy? That is a tough call. He does carry the entire film on his back and is quite good. Yet I can think of at least three other performances from last year that left more of a lasting impression than this.
This review was originally posted in my 2009 Toronto Film Festival Recap. The review has been re-posted as the film will finally be released in select cinemas tomorrow.
The Men Who Stare At Goats
After a chance encounter with Lyn Cassidy (George Clooney), journalist Bob Wilton (Ewen McGregor) realizes that he might have come across the juiciest story of his career. Lyn claims to be part of a special military group of “super-soldiers” trained in the art of mental warfare. They can become invisible, located hidden items, and even make a goat’s heart stop beating through mere thought. Yet after traveling across the Iraq dessert, in search of Lyn’s former unit captain Bill Django (Jeff Bridges), Bob begins to wonder if Lyn’s tales are actually more fiction than fact.
Grant Heslov’s latest feature evoked mixed reactions out of me at various points in the film. There are times when the writing in The Men Who Stare At Goats is truly brilliant. During these moments the dialogue is fast paced and the film hits all the right comedic notes. Unfortunately there are also times when it becomes painfully obvious that there is really no substance to the picture at all. Clearly they had a great concept but just could muster enough material to sustain a whole movie.
Many people I spoke with, who loved The Men Who Stare At Goats, cited the Coen Brothers’ comedies as one of the reasons they enjoyed the film so much. Whereas this was one of the major reasons I found the film disappointing. To me, The Men Who Stare At Goats plays more like a poor man’s Coen Brothers flick. Even Jeff Bridges seems to be phoning in his old performance from The Big Lebowski for this film. Also, several of the running gags, most notably the Jedi and other pop culture references, become stale rather quickly due to the constant repetition.
The overall casting is great and Heslov allow his actors to really let loose in their roles. Unfortunately Heslov needed to rein in the story much more than he does, especially in regards to the ridiculous third act. Again, there are some truly funny segments that almost warrant a mild recommendation for those scenes alone. Yet on the whole, despite the potential it displayed, The Men Who Stare At Goats was ultimately more disappointing than anything else.
TIFF is done for another year and, although I am still recovering, here is the first wave of mini-reviews for the films I saw. I will repost these reviews with more details closer to when they are released in theaters.
Like You Know It All (Jal Aljido Motamyunseo)
Filmmaker Ku Kyung-nam (Kim Tae-woo) is a critical darling yet he still has not made a commercially successful movie. The general public just cannot seem to make sense of any of his films. When Ku is invited to serve on the jury at a music and film festival, he sees it as a great honor. Yet once on the jury it quickly becomes apparent that reviewing movies is the last thing on Ku’s mind. When Ku is not sleeping through films, or skipping them completely, he is out catching up with old friends and getting into drunken conversations about life. Yet wherever Ku goes trouble seems to follow. Is it possible to have commercial success when you are not even understood in your private life?
Similar to his main character, Ku, director Hong Sang-soo cannot seem to make up his mind on what he wants this film to really be about. He wants defy typical convention by exerting his right to throw several different ideas into the same melting pot. As a result, Sang-soo rarely takes a stand on anything of real significance. Like You Know It All really finds it groove at the beginning as satirical element, regarding the pretentiousness of film festival, is spot on. The problem is that the film gets silly after that. This is due to the various contradictions in the film. Ku prides himself on freedom but constantly craves conformity. This is most evident in his interactions with a former college flame. Ku’s longing for his old flame to be his soul mate is yet another misguided attempt for acceptance. A good chunk of the film focuses on Ku being a callous womanizer who repeatedly puts the moves on his friends’ wives, and leaves drunk-girls in vulnerable positions for others to take advantage of. Yet Ku tries to play the victim in all of this claiming that a soul mate would cure his self absorbed ways. Ku’s constant flip-flopping goes from comical to annoying fairly fast. Since neither Ku, nor Sang-soo, seem to have any really concrete arguments to make, Like You Know It All ends up being much ado about nothing
C -
Cleanflix
What do you do when your religious beliefs conflict with your entertainment choices? Well if you are Mormon, and live in Utah, the answer is simple…you find a workaround. After the prophet declares a ban on viewing R-rated movies, a number of video editing companies, such as Clean Flicks and Flick’s Club, start popping up. Clean Flicks specialized in taking R-rated movies, like The Matrix, and illegally editing out all of the violent and graphic content. They would then turn around and sell the edited version to the masses. This eventually led to a war of words in both the media and in the courts, between the companies that edited videos and the Directors Guild of America. As the media attention grew one man, Daniel Thompson, unwittingly became the face off the whole Clean Flicks industry. Problems arise when it is revealed that Daniel may not quite be the wholesome Mormon he appeared to be.
While Cleanflix takes a firm stance on censorship it does provide a fair look at the ideology of edited movie companies. I also liked how the film provides insight into the Mormon community without making them look like freaks. Directors Andrew James and Joshua Ligairi, who are Mormons, show that the Mormon community is made up of well meaning individuals who are interested in pop zeitgeist just like everyone else. The problem is that they do not see the inherent contradictions with using companies such as Clean Flicks. They are essentially breaking one religious law in order to obey another. One of the funny things about the whole debate is that Hollywood already provides edited movies for television and airplanes, yet they refuse to release them for sale to the general public. Which is perplexing considering that there is clearly major demand for them in Utah and other places across America. It seems like a huge financial windfall that Hollywood is passing up. The one complaint some may have with this documentary is that Daniel Thompson’s story takes up a large amount of the second half of the film. Personally I found Daniel an interesting subject to follow as his lust for media attention provides the documentary with some of its funniest, as well as most disturbing, moments. He is a walking contradiction that perfectly encapsulates the religious versus consumerist debate that is one of the underlying themes of the film.
A
Andrew James and Joshua Ligairi held a Q&A after the screening.
Antichrist
After the suffering the tragic loss of their infant son, a couple (William Dafoe, Charlotte Gainsbourg) attempt to mend the wounds the death has opened. The husband (Dafoe), who is a psychologist, believes that the best cure for his wife’s grief is to confront one of her deepest fears. It seems that the wife (Gainsboug) is having reoccurring nightmares about the woods near their cottage in Eden. At Eden the couple quickly realizes that facing ones fears may not quite be the medicine they were hoping for.
Lars Von Tier’s nightmare look at the stereotype of the sexes is, if nothing else, a film that will stick with you long after you see it. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is up to the individual viewer. This is not the type of film that you really need to see at 9 o’clock on a Saturday morning, but such is the way the TIFF schedule goes. The much publicized graphic scenes are indeed hard to watch and not easy to forget. Yet I found that those particular scenes were more distracting than anything else. Those moments actually ruined everything that was so wonderfully set up in the first section of the film. Antichrist is visually stunning at times; and raises a lot of interesting questions about the dispositions of both men and women. The theme of nature being Satan’s playground is fascinating. I really liked how Von Tier interprets the whole Garden of Eden story and juxtaposes it with the history of burning pagan women for being witches. He also looks at the idea of a woman’s pleasure being a punishable offense. Unfortunately all these great ideas are overshadowed by the excessive later half of Antichrist which almost borders on torture-porn. When reflecting on the film you automatically think back to “the wheel” and other gruesome moments, instead of how wonderful Charlotte Gainsbourg’s performance is. While Antichrist is destined to be the subject of many film school papers for years to come; it is just not as strong, or as focused, as Von Tier’s previous works. The concept is great and the performances are good, but overall I would say this one is a rental.
On a side note, this film, oddly enough, reminded me of the Canadian film Lost Song that played at TIFF 08. That film was also about a couple that go to their cabin in the woods, but this time it was an attempt to cure the wife’s postpartum depression. It would be interesting to watch both that and Antichrist back-to-back one day.
C
Year of the Carnivore
Sammy Smalls (Cristin Milioti) works as an undercover security guard at a local grocery store. When she is not catching shoplifters in the act for her boss (Will Sasso), she is pining over the neighbourhood busker, Eugene (Mark Rendall). After a night of passion, Sammy is shocked to learn that Eugene no longer wants a relationship with her due to her poor performance in bed. Since Eugene refuses to help Sammy improve her sexual technique, Sammy sets out to gain sexual experience by any means necessary.
After directing a few short films and starring in the controversial film, Shortbus, Sook-Yin Lee makes her directorial feature length debut with Year of the Carnivore. The film is a funny and thought provoking look at human connection and the loneliness that we all have…especially married couples. Although sex is the catalyst for the story, it is rarely shown as pleasurable. Heck, even Eugene has a bored look on his face while taking part in a threesome. Sook-Yin wants to show what hinders our sexual encounters the most is both our inhibitions and our lack of true connection. Society spends so much time talking about sex, selling sex, and looking to have sex; yet in reality people rarely act on their impulses. One of the notable aspects about Year of the Carnivore is how every marriage in the film is in trouble. Whether it is the young couple with twin babies or the couple who have been together for 25 years, they have all lost both the passion in the bedroom and the basic art of communication. Sure these themes may not be new, but Lee makes them fresh again with her smartly written script that is both comical and charming. Besides Lee, a lot of the films success is due to the hilarious performance by Cristin Milioti in the role of Sammy. Milioti, who has great physical comedic timing, convincingly conveys both Sammy’s quirky awkwardness and her womanly awakening while avoiding the realm of farce. Year of the Carnivore could have easily been a formulaic romantic comedy but instead it turned out to be one of the festival’s pleasant surprises.
B+
Sook-yin Lee, Mark Rendall and a few other cast members held a Q&A after the screening.
The Art of the Steal
Dr. Albert Barnes held the largest collection of post-impressionist and early modernist art in the world. Despite the Philadelphia Museum of Art’s best efforts to acquire the pieces, Barnes snubbed the Philadelphia elites and housed the collection in suburb of Merion. Before his death in 1951, Barnes made a will to ensure that the collection stayed out of the hands of the Museum and others who wished to profit off the works. Barnes wanted the collection to remain an educational tool for serious students of art and not the casual tourist. Barnes was able to hold off the dollar eyed vultures when he was alive, but once Barnes passed away things changed. Even his iron clad will started to show some cracks...
Don Argott’s documentary was easily one of my favourite films at the festival this year. The story unfolds like a murder mystery complete with a full list of suspects. Argott details step by step how money rules the bottom line of everything. It was the catalyst that forced many Philadelphia politicians and corporations commit crime of stealing Barnes’ collection. The Art of the Steal forces you to question if something as strong as a person’s will can be violated, what say do you really have in any part of your life? The most startling aspect of this documentary is how matter of fact some people, such as the Governor and the Attorney General, are when openly talking about how they essentially blackmailed institutions such as the of Lincon University. The funny thing is both men act like it was just business as usual. It is this type of mentality that is so chilling. The taking over of the Barnes collection was as epic as major corporate merges. Many of the key players not only hid key information from the public but also used public money to essentially commit the crime. It is truly fascinating to see how the Barnes’ collection has ended up becoming everything Barnes objected to when he was alive. The Art of the Steal will make you look at art, politics, education, and the law in a whole new light.
A+
Don Argott and crew held a Q & A session
Kelin
Taking place in 2nd Century A.D., Kelin (Gulsharat Zhubayeva) has two suitors vying for her hand in marriage. Unfortunately her true love, Mergyen (Kuandyk Kystykbaev), cannot afford to pay the same dowry to Kelin’s father that Baktashi (Erzan Nurymbet) can. Although Kelin is reluctant to become Baktashi’s wife at first, she starts to develop genuine feelings for him after a while. Kelin’s blossoming love for Baktashi is soon tested once Mergyen reappears into her life determined to win her back at all cost.
Ermek Tursunov’s film has no dialogue whatsoever which means that it is up to the actors to convey and sustain the story for the 84-minute running time. The cast does a good job rising to the task. Not all the performances are note perfect but they are sufficient enough for the subject matter. Kelin would have been better served with much tighter editing. The film’s pacing is much slower than it really needs to be. Also, there is nothing in the film that really sets you up for the events at the end. Kelin must assume a role for which she has no prior preparation. Tursunov seems to imply that she will rise to the challenge like those before her. Maybe it is a given for those familiar with the history of various cultures within Kazakhstan, but I just did not see how that is possible. The central theme in the film, regarding love and tradition, are nothing new; nor is the overall execution. Kelin is an adequate film but not one that will leave a lasting impression.
C-
Director Ermek Tursunov held a Q & A that turned out to be far more engaging than the actual film.
The Men Who Stare At Goats
After a chance encounter with Lyn Cassidy (George Clooney), journalist Bob Wilton (Ewen McGregor) realizes that he might have come across the juiciest story of his career. Lyn claims to be part of a special military group of super-soldiers trained in the art of mental warfare. They can become invisible, located hidden items, and even make a goat’s heart stop beating through mere thought. Yet after traveling across the Iraq dessert, in search of Lyn’s former unit captain Bill Django (Jeff Bridges), Bob begins to wonder if Lyn’s tales are actually more fiction than fact.
Grant Heslov’s latest feature evoked mixed reactions out of me at various points in the film. There are times when the writing in The Men Who Stare At Goats is truly brilliant. During these moments the dialogue is fast paced and the film hits all the right comedic notes. Unfortunately there are also times when it becomes painfully obvious that there is really no substance to the picture at all. Clearly they had a great concept but just could muster enough material to sustain a whole movie. Many people I spoke with who loved The Men Who Stare At Goats cited the Coen Brothers’ comedies as one of the reasons they enjoyed the film so much. Whereas this was one of the major reasons I found the film disappointing. To me, The Men Who Stare At Goats plays more like a poor man’s Coen Brothers flick. Even Jeff Bridges seems to be phoning in his old Lebowski performance for the film. Several of the running gags, most notably the Jedi and other pop culture references, become stale after hearing them over and over. The casting is great and Heslov allow his actors to really let loose in their roles. Though Heslov needed to rein in the story much more than he does, especially in regards to the ridiculous third act. Again, there are some truly funny segments that almost warrant a mild recommendation for those scenes alone. Yet on the whole, despite the potential it displayed, The Men Who Stare At Goats was ultimately more disappointing than anything else.
C
Good Hair
In Jeff Stilson’s documentary, Good Hair, Chris Rock goes on a mission to try and understand the obsession black women have with “Good Hair.” Whether it is using the harmful chemicals found in a tub of hair relaxer; or spending thousands of dollars on weaves, black women are constantly striving to have European-looking hair. Rock’s journey will not only lead him across America but all the way to India as well. What he finds out along the way is equally hilarious and disturbing.
Good Hair is definitely an eye opening look into the black hair industry. After the film, I discussed many of the points raised with my mom and she was echoing many of the same sentiments that the women in the documentary stated. Generations of women have grown up, and will continue to grow up, longing for “Good Hair.” Rock knows that there is nothing he can do to change this fact, which is why this documentary is more concerned with entertaining than shaking the status quo. Still it would have been nice if Good Hair had added a little historical context in regards to why many cultures covet the European style of hair. Actually it would have been interesting to have a few Europeans provide comments about black hair in general. The only non-blacks featured in the film are of Indian or East Asian decent. Regardless, in the grand scheme of the picture, these are minor quibbles as Rock never intended the film to be a sermonizing tool in the first place. The segments in India are extremely effective in showing how out of hand the hair obsession in North America is. The same can be said for the business side of things, in which the film points out how much money the industry rakes in and who is really benefiting from it. While the film is filled with many great celebrity interviews, Rock really shines when he is interacting with regular folks in the beauty salons/barber shops. Some of the most amusing comments come when the interviewees explain why you cannot touch a black woman’s hair during sex. Good Hair may not strive to be a scathing social critique, but it is still an enjoyable film that is both funny and thought provoking.
B
Chris Rock and model/actress Melyssa Ford held a Q & A session after the screening.
A Serious Man
After last year’s misstep, Burn After Reading, the Coen Brothers find themselves back on track with A Serious Man. Set in Jewish suburbs of Minnesota in 1967, Larry Gopnik (Michael Stuhlbarg) tries hard to live a good and upstanding Jewish life. Despites his best efforts to a “serious man”, Larry cannot seem to stop this downward spiral he seems to have found himself in. His wife (Sari Lennick) has fallen in love with another man and wants Larry to grant her a religious divorce so she can remarry within the faith. Larry’s children only talk to him when they want money or the television fixed. To make matters worst, Larry’s application for tenure at the University is in jeopardy due to a series of mysterious and damaging letters that have suddenly appeared. Looking for guidance, Larry does what any “serious man” would do…seek counsel from the elusive Rabbi Nachtner (George Wyner).
Due to the underlying bleak tone, and the abrupt ending, A Serious Man is bound to divide audiences. Personally I loved the film, as it was a funny commentary on faith and human nature. Larry does all the right things and his life gets worse by the day; whereas everyone else is committing sinful deeds and seemingly living well. Even the religious leaders, who are the most “serious men” of all, are merely going through the motions. All of the various Rabbis in the picture are quick to provide random stories and rhetoric yet none of them can apply the tales to the actual matter at hand. The performances in this film are fantastic even the bit players provided wonderful moments. Stuhlbarg is by far the standout though. Stuhlbarg brings so much comedic subtly to the role that it is easy to miss upon first glance. As I mentioned before the ending will rub many the wrong way, but I found it rather fitting when looking back at the overall themes of the film.
A
Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire
Winner of the festivals top prize, The Peoples Choice Award, Precious is a film that packs a very heavy punch. It is 1987 in Harlem and Claireece “Precious” Jones (Gabourey Sidibe) is barely sixteen and already pregnant with her second child. Living with her emotionally and physically abusive mother (Mo’Nique), Precious constantly dreams of a better life. Unable to neither read nor write, and facing expulsion from school, Precious is forced to attend the Each One/Teach One alternative school. Can this school provide Precious with a way out of her miserable life? Or was merely cursed from birth?
I am hesitant to heap too much praise on this film for I fear that adding to the buzz Precious has already generated might only speed up the backlash towards the film. Still, I cannot deny that Precious finally cements Lee Daniel’s as a director. He skillfully blends the dark themes with the more accessible moments far better here than he did in either The Woodsman or Shadowboxer. This is not to say that Precious is an easy film to watch. On the contrary, the film is extremely bleak and unrelenting. No matter how many times you tell yourself “her life cannot get any worse”…it does. Daniels smartly incorporates just the right amount of fantasy sequences in the film. This allows him to pull Precious, and the viewer, out of the sewage long enough to take a quick gasp of air before being submerged again. Daniels is wise not to overplay these moments as he keeps the dream sequences somewhat grounded. Regardless of how you feel about the subject matter, there is no denying that the Precious features two of the finest female performances you will see all year. Mo’Nique is simply brilliant as Precious’ abusive mother. She brings so much intensity and emotion to the role that, even though you despise her, you fully understand her motivations. While Mo’Nique will most likely get a lot of award buzz, and rightfully so, newcomer Gabourey Sidibe deserves some as well. Due to the nature of the subject matter, the film really lives and dies on Sidibe’s performance. Thankfully Gabourey rises to the extremely high bar that both Daniel’s and Mo’Nique have set for her. Gabourey Sidibe does such a wonderful job finding that dark uncomfortable place for Precious that you barely notice some of the more well-known cast members in supporting roles. While I highly recommend Precious, you should try and see the film before the hype gets out of control. Precious works best if you go in without any preconceived notions.
A
Still to come: The Road, The Ape, Micmacs, The Loved Ones, Youth in Revolt, Life During Wartime, Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, If I Knew What You Said, etc.
