Unknown White Male (aka. Unknown)
Why does it feel like I have already seen this film before?
The Fighter
I am not expecting Raging Bull level of intensity, but the casting has raised my level of interest for this film.
Showing posts with label Liam Neeson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Liam Neeson. Show all posts
Monday, October 25, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
That Chloe Is Such A Tease...
Chloe
Atom Egoyan is often on the receiveing end of a lot of blogger’s tongue lashings. I am not sure why he strikes up so much venom in some people. Egoyan is a skilled director who has made some very good films over the years. I feel it has to do with the way critics, especially here in Canada, tend to fawn over him a little more than they do David Cronenberg. Despite his accolades even Atom Egoyan can stumble every now and then. I would not call Chloe a major misstep, as there are many good moments in the film, but it does not reach the level of intrigue it really should.
Chloe is a remake of the 2003 French film, Nathalie, which starred Emmanuelle Béart, Fanny Ardant, and Gérard Depardieu. In Atom Egoyan’s version of the tale, Catherine (Julianne Moore) suspects that her husband David (Liam Neeson) is cheating. Unable to shake her suspicions, Catherine hires a prostitute, Chloe (Amanda Seyfried), to see if David will succumb to temptation. Soon Chloe is providing Catherine with regular updates of her encounters with David. As the two women spend more time together, Catherine becomes increasingly more aroused by the sordid details of Chloe’s reports.
It has been over a week now since I watched Chloe and I must admit I am still on the fence about it. There are elements I thought worked very well in the film, but there are times where the film does not live up to its potential. Despite making a film with all the trappings of a salacious Fatal Attraction-style tale, Atom Egoyan never seems comfortable with fully committing to the genre. There is a great scene in the film where Amanda Seyfried’s Chloe, on the brink of tears, stops and gives a chilling look directly into camera. The look clearly says that the gloves are off and all hell is about to break loose. Instead of capatilizing on this scene, Egoyan pulls back the tension and tries to make the film more artsy than thriller. Unfortunately the more he tries to avoid the conventional route, the deeper within it he actually falls. Atom Egoyan’s uneasiness is most evident in the final act of the film. It is at this point where the director backs himself into a corner with no other choice but to go the traditional Hollywood style ending. The ending of the film is sloppy and almost laughable. It is hard to believe that any of the characters would end up in the state they are in by time the final scene hits.
I think it would have been wiser for Egoyan to go with a completely different path in regards to the way the film plays out. I understand that he is remaking another person’s work, but he should have taken more liberties with the script if he wanted to make a serious character study. Instead of turning the ending into a straight thriller, he could have found another way highlight the consequences of desire and betrayal. The interesting thing is that for the first two-thirds of Chloe, Egoyan really seems to understand what is driving all of his characters. Catherine is disgust by the thought of her husband cheating, but she is also turned on by the youthful recklessness of it all. She feels abandoned by all the men in her life and wonders how she ended up in this state. The relationship between Chloe and Catherine is intriguing because both women are having their different needs met. Chloe thinks she is getting the love that has evaded her, partly due to her line of work, for so long.
Personally, I found Chloe to be the real victim in the tale. She is the only one I actually felt something for by the end. A large reason for this is the great work that Amanda Seyfried does in the film. Instead of making Chloe a deranged character, Seyfried brings a human element to every one of Chloe’s actions. Her scene with Julianne Moore are what really keep the film interesting; they play off each other so well that it I wanted to see their relationship develop far more than it actually does. Liam Neeson is good in the film though his character is fairly stunted overall.
If the film had to be graded on the first two acts then I would highly recommend it. Unfortunately the last half really derails the overall film. At best I would have to give Chloe a mild recommendation as the potential was there. I just wish Atom Egoyan had been more daring and confident in regards to his direction this time around.
Chloe is a remake of the 2003 French film, Nathalie, which starred Emmanuelle Béart, Fanny Ardant, and Gérard Depardieu. In Atom Egoyan’s version of the tale, Catherine (Julianne Moore) suspects that her husband David (Liam Neeson) is cheating. Unable to shake her suspicions, Catherine hires a prostitute, Chloe (Amanda Seyfried), to see if David will succumb to temptation. Soon Chloe is providing Catherine with regular updates of her encounters with David. As the two women spend more time together, Catherine becomes increasingly more aroused by the sordid details of Chloe’s reports.
It has been over a week now since I watched Chloe and I must admit I am still on the fence about it. There are elements I thought worked very well in the film, but there are times where the film does not live up to its potential. Despite making a film with all the trappings of a salacious Fatal Attraction-style tale, Atom Egoyan never seems comfortable with fully committing to the genre. There is a great scene in the film where Amanda Seyfried’s Chloe, on the brink of tears, stops and gives a chilling look directly into camera. The look clearly says that the gloves are off and all hell is about to break loose. Instead of capatilizing on this scene, Egoyan pulls back the tension and tries to make the film more artsy than thriller. Unfortunately the more he tries to avoid the conventional route, the deeper within it he actually falls. Atom Egoyan’s uneasiness is most evident in the final act of the film. It is at this point where the director backs himself into a corner with no other choice but to go the traditional Hollywood style ending. The ending of the film is sloppy and almost laughable. It is hard to believe that any of the characters would end up in the state they are in by time the final scene hits.
I think it would have been wiser for Egoyan to go with a completely different path in regards to the way the film plays out. I understand that he is remaking another person’s work, but he should have taken more liberties with the script if he wanted to make a serious character study. Instead of turning the ending into a straight thriller, he could have found another way highlight the consequences of desire and betrayal. The interesting thing is that for the first two-thirds of Chloe, Egoyan really seems to understand what is driving all of his characters. Catherine is disgust by the thought of her husband cheating, but she is also turned on by the youthful recklessness of it all. She feels abandoned by all the men in her life and wonders how she ended up in this state. The relationship between Chloe and Catherine is intriguing because both women are having their different needs met. Chloe thinks she is getting the love that has evaded her, partly due to her line of work, for so long.
Personally, I found Chloe to be the real victim in the tale. She is the only one I actually felt something for by the end. A large reason for this is the great work that Amanda Seyfried does in the film. Instead of making Chloe a deranged character, Seyfried brings a human element to every one of Chloe’s actions. Her scene with Julianne Moore are what really keep the film interesting; they play off each other so well that it I wanted to see their relationship develop far more than it actually does. Liam Neeson is good in the film though his character is fairly stunted overall.
If the film had to be graded on the first two acts then I would highly recommend it. Unfortunately the last half really derails the overall film. At best I would have to give Chloe a mild recommendation as the potential was there. I just wish Atom Egoyan had been more daring and confident in regards to his direction this time around.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Fricassee Five Friday: Liam Neeson
Spiced Just Right
Kinsey
A biopic not only needs to tell a good story, but it should also inspire you to learn more about the subject. This film did just that. Sadly Neeson got snubbed when the Oscar nominations rolled around that year.
Batman Begins
There is a common perception that avid comic book readers are never satisfied by comic-to-film adaptations. Personally this is not the case when dicussing Batman Begins. There is not a single thing I would change in this film.
Schindler’s List
There are several times in the film when Neeson’s co-stars steal his thunder. Regardless he gives a great performance throughout. It is hard to not be moved by this great film.
Okay calling it one of his best may be a bit of a stretch. Truth be told I could easily have placed Breakfast on Pluto in this spot. Still, I have an odd love for Taken. It is a guilty pleasure that entertained me far more than most of the big budget movies released in that year.
Rob Roy
Liam Neeson and Jessica Lange were great in this film. Unfortunately Rob Roy had the bad luck of being released mere weeks apart from Mel Gibson’s Braveheart. We all know how that turned out.
Lay Off The Cheese
Kingdom of Heaven
I actually watched this film over the course of three separate viewings. I kept falling asleep at different parts each time. Kingdom of Heave is my version of NyQuil.
The Haunting
When the only positive thing a person can say about a movie is “it has Catherine Zeta-Jones playing the sexy lesbian”, as friend once said to me, you know the it is garbage. I avoided the The Haunting when it was in theatres, but I made the mistake of renting it on video. Either way it was a no win situation.
Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace
Is it wrong that I think Qui-Gon Jinn showed more life in the Lego Star Wars video game? I cannot even blame Liam for this film. All the acting in the film, as well as the story, had to take a backseat to the visuals. Nell
This is one of those films that probably worked well on the stage but as a film it was painful to sit through. K-19: The Widowmaker
While I was not expecting something as memorable as Das Boot, I was hoping it would at least entertain me. Frankly I found The Hunt for Red October and Crimson Tide to be better films than this one.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Ponyo Only Swims In Kiddie Pools
Ponyo
There are times when, regardless of how much you like the director or cast, you just have to throw your hands in the air and concede defeat. It is tough to do, I know, but we must all face that fact that some films are simply not made with you in mind. Ponyo is an example of this for me. Despite being made by animation legend Hayao Miyazaki, whose works I normally love, Ponyo is a film clearly designed for people ages five and under. Anyone older may find themselves contemplating the various ways to bang one's head against a wall.
Based on Hans Christian Andersen's classic tale, The Little Mermaid, Ponyo is a story about friendship and love. Sosuke (Frankie Jonas) is a five years-old boy who one day finds a goldfish, Ponyo (Noah Lindsey Cyrus), trapped in a jar near his home. Sosuke rescues Ponyo and treats her with the love and care that a pet goldfish deserves. Unbeknownst to Sosuke, Ponyo is no ordinary goldfish, her father (Liam Neeson) is a powerful wizard and her mother is the goddess of the sea (Cate Blancett). Ponyo soon falls in love with Sosuke and is determined to do anything to become human. Yet Ponyo does not realize the devastating consequences this may have on the world.
I was lucky enough to see Hayao Miyazaki in person, at the 2002 Toronto International Film Festival, when he held a brief Q & A session for his film Spirited Away. Miyazaki stated that after making films like Princess Mononoke, he wanted to make a film that his grandchildren could enjoy. Well if Spirited Away was made for his grandchildren, then I must assume that Ponyo is for his great-grandchildren. This is the only way I can see him justify this in coherent mess. Spirited Away was a film that did not talk down to the children who watched it. It offered several messages on family, duty, and love that both children and adults could understand. Ponyo is the exact opposite of this, Miyazaki tries to make grand statements about responsibility, love, taking care of the environment, etc. Yet opt to convey these messages by talking to core audience like they are babies. This uneven juxtaposition plagues the picture all the way to the very end.
On one hand Miyazaki revels in the innocence of youth and the friendships that often result from it. The relationship between Sosuke and Ponyo is similar to two kids at a family gathering. Inevitably one child, in this case Ponyo, will run around mimicking everything the other says and does. It may be annoying to the rest of us, but the kids are having fun in their own little world. It is this sense of play and abundant energy that Miyazaki wants children to cherish. Yet Miyazaki then turns around and gives Sosuke and Ponyo a quest which not only impacts their future together, but of the fate of the world as well. One of the most ridiculous scenes in the entire film comes when Sosuke's mom (Tina Fey) decides to leave Sosuke and Ponyo, at home alone, in the midst of a violent storm. Why does the mother leave? well she is worried about the folks in the retirement home where she works. Before leaving she gives Sosuke a speech regarding how, at age five, he is mature enough to take care of himself and keep Ponyo safe. Seriously. Worst mother of the year award goes to... .
Even if you are willing to ignore the ages of the two main characters in relation to the themes in the story, it is tough to ignore how sloppy the plot and overall editing is. Ponyo is heavy on childish repetition but slim on substance. The lack of a coherent plot is one of the most shocking aspects of the film. Especially when you consider the source material it is based on. The film often feels like it was thrown together last minute. Issues are raised but never followed through with, characters disappear for long periods of time, people make silly decisions for no other reason but to advance the story, etc.
The best examples of all the story and editing flaws become apparent when looking at the characters, like Fujimot (Neeson) for example, directly. Despite looking human, Fujimoto "dries out" when on land but still needs an air bubble to travel underwater. Fujimoto is in the house when Ponyo first tries to transform, yet somehow is nowhere to be found once Ponyo falls in the potions and sets the catastrophic events in motion. Also, one minute Fujimoto is determined to bring Ponyo home because her being human will set the world in flux. Yet, later on, Fujimoto and Gran Mamare (Blanchett) whittle the whole issue down to a "as long as he treats my daughter well, I'm fine with it" style discussion. Which makes the quest that Sosuke and Ponyo find themselves on seem rather pointless when you really think about it.
I know many will say that I am being too harsh on the film, but I refuse to use the "it's meant for kids" excuse to justify the film's many shortcomings. Hayao Miyazaki has proven in the past that he can make quality children's films that are full of substance and beautiful animation. Yet, with Ponyo, Miyazaki is merely relying on his wonderful animation skills to coast through. Unfortunately, it will take far more than pretty scenery to make Ponyo worth even a rental. While Miyazaki's overall track record speaks for itself, Ponyo is clearly one of his weakest films to date.
There are times when, regardless of how much you like the director or cast, you just have to throw your hands in the air and concede defeat. It is tough to do, I know, but we must all face that fact that some films are simply not made with you in mind. Ponyo is an example of this for me. Despite being made by animation legend Hayao Miyazaki, whose works I normally love, Ponyo is a film clearly designed for people ages five and under. Anyone older may find themselves contemplating the various ways to bang one's head against a wall.Based on Hans Christian Andersen's classic tale, The Little Mermaid, Ponyo is a story about friendship and love. Sosuke (Frankie Jonas) is a five years-old boy who one day finds a goldfish, Ponyo (Noah Lindsey Cyrus), trapped in a jar near his home. Sosuke rescues Ponyo and treats her with the love and care that a pet goldfish deserves. Unbeknownst to Sosuke, Ponyo is no ordinary goldfish, her father (Liam Neeson) is a powerful wizard and her mother is the goddess of the sea (Cate Blancett). Ponyo soon falls in love with Sosuke and is determined to do anything to become human. Yet Ponyo does not realize the devastating consequences this may have on the world.
I was lucky enough to see Hayao Miyazaki in person, at the 2002 Toronto International Film Festival, when he held a brief Q & A session for his film Spirited Away. Miyazaki stated that after making films like Princess Mononoke, he wanted to make a film that his grandchildren could enjoy. Well if Spirited Away was made for his grandchildren, then I must assume that Ponyo is for his great-grandchildren. This is the only way I can see him justify this in coherent mess. Spirited Away was a film that did not talk down to the children who watched it. It offered several messages on family, duty, and love that both children and adults could understand. Ponyo is the exact opposite of this, Miyazaki tries to make grand statements about responsibility, love, taking care of the environment, etc. Yet opt to convey these messages by talking to core audience like they are babies. This uneven juxtaposition plagues the picture all the way to the very end.
On one hand Miyazaki revels in the innocence of youth and the friendships that often result from it. The relationship between Sosuke and Ponyo is similar to two kids at a family gathering. Inevitably one child, in this case Ponyo, will run around mimicking everything the other says and does. It may be annoying to the rest of us, but the kids are having fun in their own little world. It is this sense of play and abundant energy that Miyazaki wants children to cherish. Yet Miyazaki then turns around and gives Sosuke and Ponyo a quest which not only impacts their future together, but of the fate of the world as well. One of the most ridiculous scenes in the entire film comes when Sosuke's mom (Tina Fey) decides to leave Sosuke and Ponyo, at home alone, in the midst of a violent storm. Why does the mother leave? well she is worried about the folks in the retirement home where she works. Before leaving she gives Sosuke a speech regarding how, at age five, he is mature enough to take care of himself and keep Ponyo safe. Seriously. Worst mother of the year award goes to... .
Even if you are willing to ignore the ages of the two main characters in relation to the themes in the story, it is tough to ignore how sloppy the plot and overall editing is. Ponyo is heavy on childish repetition but slim on substance. The lack of a coherent plot is one of the most shocking aspects of the film. Especially when you consider the source material it is based on. The film often feels like it was thrown together last minute. Issues are raised but never followed through with, characters disappear for long periods of time, people make silly decisions for no other reason but to advance the story, etc.
The best examples of all the story and editing flaws become apparent when looking at the characters, like Fujimot (Neeson) for example, directly. Despite looking human, Fujimoto "dries out" when on land but still needs an air bubble to travel underwater. Fujimoto is in the house when Ponyo first tries to transform, yet somehow is nowhere to be found once Ponyo falls in the potions and sets the catastrophic events in motion. Also, one minute Fujimoto is determined to bring Ponyo home because her being human will set the world in flux. Yet, later on, Fujimoto and Gran Mamare (Blanchett) whittle the whole issue down to a "as long as he treats my daughter well, I'm fine with it" style discussion. Which makes the quest that Sosuke and Ponyo find themselves on seem rather pointless when you really think about it.
I know many will say that I am being too harsh on the film, but I refuse to use the "it's meant for kids" excuse to justify the film's many shortcomings. Hayao Miyazaki has proven in the past that he can make quality children's films that are full of substance and beautiful animation. Yet, with Ponyo, Miyazaki is merely relying on his wonderful animation skills to coast through. Unfortunately, it will take far more than pretty scenery to make Ponyo worth even a rental. While Miyazaki's overall track record speaks for itself, Ponyo is clearly one of his weakest films to date.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Zombie Offers Land Discounts For the Brainy
Zombieland
One of the hazards with being a movie lover is that you often end up watching more films than you really should. After a while you see the same themes being played out over and over that you start to judge certain films harsher than others. I remember getting into a debate with someone over my thoughts about the movie G.I. Joe. During the discussion the person remarked that I was "being too critical" to which I responded "we are all critical, how else do you know if you like something or not?" Needless to say this took the debate to a whole other philosophical level. I knew what the person was trying to get at though. Basically he was saying that I was unable to simply sit back and enjoy a movie as pure mindless entertainment. Which I completely disagree with; I think we all, film buff or not, have a personal gauge for what films we find pleasing or not. How else would we find ourselves in discussions on the merits of G.I. Joe?
The point is there are some movies that I liked for no other reason than I had a blast watching it. It just happens that what I often consider enjoyable fluff others are not too fond and vice versa. One example this in 2009 is the movie vengeance flick, Taken. There is no deep statement being made, no scorching acting performances, etc. Taken is simply two hours of watching Liam Neeson physically going to town on a bunch of really evil dudes. I know many panned the film but I cannot deny that I had a great time watching it and will probably add it to my DVD collection at some point. Another film that falls into that same "guilty pleasure" category for me is Ruben Fleischer's Zombieland.
After a tainted hamburger sets off a series of events that turns the bulk of the world population into zombies, society is reduced to nothing more than a survival of the fittest mentality. Luckily, Columbus (Jessie Eisenberg) has come up with a series of strict rules which believes are key to ensuring longevity during the zombie epidemic. Along his travels Columbus encounters Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), a man who cares more about killing zombies in creative ways than he does about following anything resembling structure. The two unlikely drifters decide to team up but soon find out that working together has its equal share of advantages and problems. One of the problems comes in the forms of siblings Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Abigail Brislen). Not only does the arrival of these sisters threaten to hinder Columbus and Tallahassee's budding friendship, but it also may cost the men their lives.
Zombieland may not be as strong a film as fellow zombie comedy Shaun of the Dead but it was funny nonetheless. This is one of the few films I have seen in recent years where I actually would not mind seeing a sequel made. Normally I am against unnecessary sequels, or prequels for that matter, but Zombieland’s brisk pacing really left me wanting more. Plus, Columbus' list of rules can easily be expanded if they were to make a future installment. The thing I really enjoyed about the various rules was how practical, and simple, they all were. Part of the fun of this movie is picturing how you would cope in that situation. At first the seat belt rule seems silly but, once you see it in practice, you quickly realize how brilliant it actually is.
Sure I found the whole amusement park finale extremely far fetch, but I was having so much fun up until that point that I was willing to let it slide. If you really think about it, Zombieland is nothing more than witty pop culture references and creative zombie deaths. Yet that was enough to keep me both engaged and laughing. I will not try and give a highbrow spin on the movie because it is not deep at all, although it tries to be at one point. The whole no man is his on island theme regarding family worked much better in the films such as About a Boy. Regardless, Zombieland was a true guilty pleasure for me and I look forward a trip back sometime soon.
One of the hazards with being a movie lover is that you often end up watching more films than you really should. After a while you see the same themes being played out over and over that you start to judge certain films harsher than others. I remember getting into a debate with someone over my thoughts about the movie G.I. Joe. During the discussion the person remarked that I was "being too critical" to which I responded "we are all critical, how else do you know if you like something or not?" Needless to say this took the debate to a whole other philosophical level. I knew what the person was trying to get at though. Basically he was saying that I was unable to simply sit back and enjoy a movie as pure mindless entertainment. Which I completely disagree with; I think we all, film buff or not, have a personal gauge for what films we find pleasing or not. How else would we find ourselves in discussions on the merits of G.I. Joe? The point is there are some movies that I liked for no other reason than I had a blast watching it. It just happens that what I often consider enjoyable fluff others are not too fond and vice versa. One example this in 2009 is the movie vengeance flick, Taken. There is no deep statement being made, no scorching acting performances, etc. Taken is simply two hours of watching Liam Neeson physically going to town on a bunch of really evil dudes. I know many panned the film but I cannot deny that I had a great time watching it and will probably add it to my DVD collection at some point. Another film that falls into that same "guilty pleasure" category for me is Ruben Fleischer's Zombieland.
After a tainted hamburger sets off a series of events that turns the bulk of the world population into zombies, society is reduced to nothing more than a survival of the fittest mentality. Luckily, Columbus (Jessie Eisenberg) has come up with a series of strict rules which believes are key to ensuring longevity during the zombie epidemic. Along his travels Columbus encounters Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), a man who cares more about killing zombies in creative ways than he does about following anything resembling structure. The two unlikely drifters decide to team up but soon find out that working together has its equal share of advantages and problems. One of the problems comes in the forms of siblings Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Abigail Brislen). Not only does the arrival of these sisters threaten to hinder Columbus and Tallahassee's budding friendship, but it also may cost the men their lives.
Zombieland may not be as strong a film as fellow zombie comedy Shaun of the Dead but it was funny nonetheless. This is one of the few films I have seen in recent years where I actually would not mind seeing a sequel made. Normally I am against unnecessary sequels, or prequels for that matter, but Zombieland’s brisk pacing really left me wanting more. Plus, Columbus' list of rules can easily be expanded if they were to make a future installment. The thing I really enjoyed about the various rules was how practical, and simple, they all were. Part of the fun of this movie is picturing how you would cope in that situation. At first the seat belt rule seems silly but, once you see it in practice, you quickly realize how brilliant it actually is.
Sure I found the whole amusement park finale extremely far fetch, but I was having so much fun up until that point that I was willing to let it slide. If you really think about it, Zombieland is nothing more than witty pop culture references and creative zombie deaths. Yet that was enough to keep me both engaged and laughing. I will not try and give a highbrow spin on the movie because it is not deep at all, although it tries to be at one point. The whole no man is his on island theme regarding family worked much better in the films such as About a Boy. Regardless, Zombieland was a true guilty pleasure for me and I look forward a trip back sometime soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)