The Silence of the Praise

The Silence of the Lambs is only the third movie to win all 5 major Oscars (One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is another): Best Picture, Director, Actor (and Anthony Hopkins has some of the least screen time for a best actor winner), Actress, and Best Adapted Screenplay. It is the only horror film to ever win Best Picture, and it made all sorts of money-- staying on top of the box office for like 5 weeks and already having made back its budget in the first. So the data coming in would say that I would probably write a review on how good Anthony Hopkins and Jodie Foster were, and how this is such a landmark horror film that would rival The Shining as being the best ever. But I’m not going to. I believe this movie has been highly overrated, and if you allow me to explain, perhaps you’ll end agreeing with me too.

When you think about this movie, the first thing you think of is either fava beans or Hannibal the Cannibal. But the star is Jodie Foster… What’s her character’s name again? Clarence, Karen, Carly? You know what, doesn’t really matter. We’ll save Jodie Foster for later because Anthony Hopkins is really what this movie is known for. And there’s a lot of good to indeed say. His looking right at the camera as his character is introduced, his improv mocking of Foster’s accent, his unblinking eyes and famous lines. Oscar Winner? Sure. It’s all there. My criticism will be discussed later when we talk about the director. What I will say, however, is that Ted Levine is vitally underappreciated as Buffalo Bill. First, I’m glad to see Teddy in a role that isn’t a sheriff or cop. Buffalo Bill’s luring of women and skinning his victims already made him a viable villain, but it’s his dancing in front of the mirror that takes the crown and serves as the creepiest thing in the film.

Okay, I can’t hold back any longer. Gotta talk about how this movie suffers. Over the course of filming, I have no issue with the directing. It’s not too special, but it’s not bad; the camerawork is a different story. It’s inconsistent, sloppy, and moves around too much. It tries creating a style that just doesn’t work for the film. The exception is Dr. Lecter’s scenes. Everything works there, but it seems like the film basically was built around what happened there. Which brings me to the actual story and the editing. We start with Jodie proving herself in the FBI and toughing it out as a female there. It’s brief, and some exposition is quickly thrown in to establish her character because, after all, we have to hurry up and get to Hannibal. Which still doesn’t seem totally logical. They go to one of the most dangerous and cunning psychiatrists to help catch the notorious Buffalo Bill, and they send an FBI agent who hasn’t even graduated? That doesn’t add up for me. Fast forward a scene or 2 and we get introduced to Buffalo Bill. It’s a disturbing scene, but now we know who everyone is looking for. So the small amount of film dedicated to detective work really hardly serves any purpose because, after all, let’s just get back to Hannibal. However smart the Hannibal scenes may be, they’re also predictable. And the music really is more nonchalant than anything, and when you mix it all together, you get a film that really isn’t all that scary. It’s a cop story with a good, not great, female lead and an unremarkable story, so it all dwindles down to Hannibal. And he’s truly a pretty great movie psycho, but surround him in a film that is surrounded around him, and the result is just eh.

The climax has predictable moments, but it was leading up to the tense finish I was hoping for the entire film. And then the decisive moment happened and it was so lame. The redeeming part is how the movie ended because despite my criticism from before, I thoroughly enjoyed the ending. So there is that. But if you want an actually scary film with a cool, strong heroine, go watch Alien, Zero Dark Thirty, or just something else.

Joker: The Killing Bat

To celebrate its DVD release, there was a special one-night theater showing of Batman: The Killing Joke with a brief talk with Mark Hamill beforehand. This is an R-rated animated film with the best of the best lending their voices with Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill voicing Batman and The Joker respectively. Well, that’s what the movie should focus on right? First you have watch the Batgirl filled first half to get there. Actually, before I start getting too critical it’s vital to know how the plot develops. Batgirl and Batman have a couple bickering matches (that’s not entirely true-- Batgirl does the arguing and Batman will wait and then say one line that signals the end of the conversation) about Batgirl’s role in some of the crimes and investigations being tackled. And this fills the first half of the 76 minute film. Then it switches between the present with how The Joker alters the Gordon’s lives (and ultimately how Batgirl becomes Oracle) and the past of how The Joker came to be.

We’ll take this on half by half. When you think of animated films, you’ll think of in-your-face messages (unless you’re thinking of Pixar of course) told by huggable and adorable characters. But when it’s rated R, you totally change the target audience and the way to present your art to them. Subtle references will be picked up and understood and appreciated, and overall the small details will add to the big picture. That’s really not how this film starts off. Quickly, Batgirl is in conflict with Batman because she thinks he’s being too protective of her by not allowing her to pursue a villain. And Barbara Gordon relates her problems to her gay best friend by saying she is sort of seeing her yoga instructor but that they aren’t really together. To top off this very strangely presented sexual tension that is served with humor that just doesn’t really make the cut, the writers have to make sure the audience is on the same page. When Barbara leaves the library she works at, she listens in to a couple where a guy complains to his girlfriend that she’s being too clingy. It’s moments like these that make me cringe at how directly an outside situation relates to one of the main characters. The dialogue and presentation is sloppy-- only slightly being balanced by Batman yelling his cool phrases “Where is he??” and “I’m going to ask you nicely only one more time.” Don’t lie, guys, you know you read those quotes in your deep, dark, handsome voices.

It should also be of note that I watched this film with Amir Kaskas. This otherwise forgettable guy was useful because he has already read the comic and was able to inform me of how this first half introduction wasn’t in the comic. I guess I understand why they chose the route because of what happens with Barbara halfway through, but it just didn’t generate the development and conflict it hoped to.

This movie gets substantially better in the second half. Although I do feel some of facial structures looked weird at moments, the animation (and this applies to the first half in general as well) is superb. And it provides the most depth ever for Mark Hamill to stretch his laughing chords.

Although still a bit too direct, the writing is some of the best. The Joker gets some great monologues, Batman has cooler lines, and the messages play out so much better. Trying to show there’s craziness in all of us, The Joker formulates an ultimately disturbing plan that tests the body physically and psychologically. And as he does so, the story correlates to an average guy trying to build a family and how his day just continues to get worse. No, it isn’t done with subtlety, but its execution excuses for this.

The problem I will say is with the second half is ironically the story and presentation. I can’t confirm that the comic works it out better, but I presume it does. And I can presume so for a huge reason. I just praised The Joker for some monologues he gets; however, with this as an animated movie, the filmmakers hesitate to add pauses or include more lingering shots. There has to be a flow in everything that is done, so you can’t stay in one spot. Because of this, there’s not as much impact in the moment of the scene, instead it relies more on the audience recalling it in hindsight. That is where the comic would come in handy; you could stay on a page forever or flip back quickly if you think you recalled something. There’s really only one moment in this film where this lingering happens, and that’s the final scene going into the credits. People around us were muttering “Wait, is that it?” “Is it really over?” It’s an ending to either like or dislike, no middle ground. To me it was a special moment that worked prominently and is more of the subtlety I wanted to be presented throughout.

All in all, it’s a special screening that could have had more arguments to see it for the one night instead of just buying the DVD, but when you include a crowd that wasn’t all too pleasant to watch with, the DVD probably would’ve just been better. You will have to endure the first half, and although the second half isn’t perfect, it is still a quality watch. If you haven’t seen an animated Batman film, they have a distinct style that are interesting to watch, and personally from what I’ve seen, Batman: Under the Red Hood is what I would recommend watching.

Okay, the movie included a bad joke, so I have to follow suit. Actually, this isn’t so much a bad joke as it is just a short, black joke. Okay, so I was walking down the street, and I ran into Kevin Hart.

…

And on that note, I’m retiring as a comedian. But speaking of bad jokes and dark characters, Suicide Squad is coming out soon. I honestly have no idea what to make of it yet, and I will await further judgment and see what others think before I decide if I’ll give it a go or not.

What Even is Swiss Army Man

Last time we ventured into the strange SyFy world infested with sharks roaming around in tornadoes minding their own business, probably reading newspapers or something-- unless they’re hammerheads because that would be really difficult for them. ANYways, we are going from the strange and unknown to the even stranger and more unknown.

I recently watched Being John Malkovich and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind; both are unbelievably strange, even surreal (especially Mind), and both very well done and refined and entertaining. I won’t say tonight’s movie is more entertaining, but I will say it certainly is stranger. Harry Potter meets Brian Wilson-- we’re somehow reviewing Swiss Army Man.

If you watched the trailer, that gives you a good, brief overview of the absurdity that takes place. Paul Dano is stranded on an island and is about to commit suicide when a body washes ashore. It’s a dead Daniel Radcliffe, but as soon as Dano returns to trying to hang himself, the weird starts happening. Perhaps it’s just his imagination, more likely it’s a hallucination from his starvation, but Radcliffe’s body starts acting in only the ways the writers could think up while I assume certainly intoxicated. There’s certainly a very juvenile aspect to his motorboat farts and regurgitated water, but enough is done to provide ample laughter that doesn’t die down as much as I first assumed it would.

Dano realizes he has a chance to get back to civilization with the multi-purpose titular Radcliffe body, and this is the thread to propel the story. But if all you get or all you assume you’ll get from the movie is physical comedy with a simple story of trying to return from the wilderness, then you sir aren’t looking deeply at all.

As he returns back to life, Radcliffe is hilariously rude and ignorant because he doesn’t remember society at all, so Dano begins teaching him. The topics of family, friends, girls, etc. is all light-hearted and fun, and it also provides the time to reflect on Dano and how he himself never totally fit in with society to begin with. It brings about a little more existential problems, and adds a couple threads to story. It’s not the most developed and it doesn’t have to be because that’s not what the movie is. And anybody who has seen the film can and will agree with me that there’s no way to say what exactly this movie is.

Dano is charming, but the gold star goes to the derpy-smiling Daniel Radcliffe. His childish antics never loses wit and lust as he determinedly wants to learn the ways of society and how to be happy. It’s surprisingly funny and endlessly charming, but it is also so incredibly strange and that is a huge reason why it never really went to mainstream theaters-- it just doesn’t have that kind of audience. Really I think it’s much more individual-based on who would like the film.

I will end with the ending (no spoilers, don’t worry). I’ve heard complaints about how it ends, and the more I have thought it through, the more I am willing to defend it. The movie ending any other way just wouldn’t be fitting strangely enough. It’s a jigsaw piece that doesn’t match any puzzle, yet it fits in with this film. Truthfully, the only question this movie will have you asking at the end will be, “What did I just watch?” Take that as you may, whatever I watched, I actually enjoyed it.
I could do reviews on the aforementioned films near the top, but we’ll see. I also definitely plan on watching Jason Bourne,so there could be a review related to that in some way.

3 Shark Tornadoes

I’ve been trying to get motivated to write a review for a film recently, but nothing really clicked. I considered an early Quentin Tarantino film, but I wasn’t sure how much I would add to the discussion. I was very close to doing a Finding Dory review-- talking about Pixar using more camera techniques and whatnot-- but decided against that as well. I will say, however, one review I saw said to imagine a scale for Pixar sequels ranging from Cars 2 to Toy Story 3, and Finding Dory would rank around a Monsters University. That’s really probably most of what you need to know. But then, after weeks of grueling searches for the right movie to review, I stumbled upon a recent trilogy-- one that people might even consider cult classics. The drama, romance, comedy, and plot twists! Oh yes, the title of this review was definitely not a giveaway. I’m reviewing the Sharknado films (because I hate myself).

Starring Ian Ziering and Tara Reid, these are Syfy films with huge storms that sweep up sharks in tornadoes and carry them over to coastal states (California, New York, and Florida respectively). Do you want to know how or why this is considered possible? Well, besides throwaway snippets of global warming and a 2nd grade science lesson of warm and cold air colliding, the movie purposefully doesn’t make much of an effort. And let’s be honest, if you’re watching one of these films, then you really can’t care that much either. One of my favorite things (I said favorite hahaha) is how a character will be like, “Sharks in tornadoes over land?? That can’t be possible!” Then someone like the main character will say authoritatively, “It totally is possible, and it is happening.” Of course, side characters hear the confidence in that voice and think well, if he says so then who am I to say otherwise? They shrug it off, and continue to the next area the plot drags them.

I came in with the mentality of this is going to be so bad it’s funny. I am hear to say the first 2 are just bad. So bad. Jaws looks more realistic. That was unfair, I apologize. I should never belittle Jaws so much as to compare it with these films. The lack of budget and writers is so evident in the first that you can create a checklist of cliches concerning both story and character. If you’re wondering if one of your items on the list happens in the films, the answer is yes. I will say the weird sensation of the first allowed a little more freedom with the second, including more ridiculous cameos, but that doesn’t help much. And the characters annoy me. The sharks purposefully are either really good or really bad at eating the humans-- simply depending on if the character is important or if the story calls for more tension. It’s a mess that didn’t receive much from me except a few chuckles mixed with plenty of groans.

With all of that being said, the third actually delivered with some clever jokes and cameos. It made it semi-enjoyable. Well, probably until the sharks started swimming in space. “How do the sharks survive in space?” “How do they survive in tornadoes?” To both of you characters, those are excellent questions! And the fact that the movie recognizes it does not save it from explaining it. Oh what am I saying, I just want to get to the end so that the screen can say fin.

If you have a suggestion for a film for me to watch or review, please feel free to comment. I have more ideas on what to do with this blog, but some of them would take up a bunch of time. So in the meantime, hopefully I can com back soon with a review with a serious analysis and insight. Until next time, be like Batman and always carry your shark-repellent spray.

500 (Days of Summer)

As the narrator tells the audience, this is a story about boy meets girl. But you are mistaken if you think this is a story about love. Now we all know the rom-com formula, so say it with me: Boy meets girl, boy falls in love with girl, girl breaks up with boy, boy and girl make up. Yay. Happy ending. And you find these aspects in (500) Days of Summer, and it certainly does fall under this category, but if I were ever to suggest a rom-com to one of my fellow brethrens, this would be the one (well, maybe Midnight in Paris, but that's not truly a rom-com either). The point is that if you didn't know better, a quick check on IMDB for a summary of the film would make it sound forgettable, but I am here to tell you that there is a bunch worth watching.

Right from the start the film sets the quirkier tone of the humor to play out. And not only is it pretty darn rootin' tootin' funny to me, but the overall clever framework and setups have a broad paint stroke on who it will appeal to. To get the basis down, the film jumps back and forth through the 500 days, and it quickly shows the breakup around day 290. Well, if it just skipped to step #3 of the 4 in rom-coms, why should we bother watching the entire film?

Now I could be cheesy and say, “Oh, but the story of how they fell in love is worth the watch!” Now that wouldn't want you to watch it, me to watch it, or really anybody who has a better way to spend an hour and a half. Luckily, as the narrator suggested, that's not the point of the film. Yes there's solid chemistry between Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel (even if she plays the same carefree, do whatever she wants type of girl in every film), but really the money hits the mark in a couple of standout scenes. I'm talking about the dance number and the expectations vs. reality. And you may have no idea what I'm referring to if you haven't watched the film, and that's okay. All I'm trying to say is that there is actually a script here that takes a story told a thousand times and projects it in multiple appealing ways.

From beginning till end, you will be watching the film happily instead of either taking a nap and pretending to have cared about the past hour or preparing the tissues and triple chocolate ice cream. It's an enjoyable film with a good soundtrack-- not much more you can ask.

I might decide for next week to throw it back to Quentin Tarantino's early days. There's a whole bunch you can discuss with that guy, so I might as well start somewhere.  

Love & Mercy & Beach Boys

It's time to kick off the summer of reviews! And what better way to do so than with Beach Boys? And so we begin with Love & Mercy, with Paul Dano and John Cusack portraying Brian Wilson in his younger and middle years respectively. I have been a fan of Dano ever since I saw his haunting acting in Prisoners, and he has worked his way up in movies such as 12 Years a Slave. And boy does he shine through here. Not only does he look and act the part, he also sounds the part. And when doing a musical biopic, sounding the part is pretty important and impressive.

Now I am a casual Beach Boys fan and really didn't look into their career before this film, but there is really a story to behold. The Dano years of the 60s experiments with LSD and all the typical band stuff from that decade, and it shows the complex mindset of the spontaneous and wonderful mind of Brian Wilson. And you get plenty of good vibrations because you get to listen to a lot of great songs.

Go forward a couple of decades to the slightly eccentric Cusack who buys a car from the beautiful Elizabeth Banks who switches up from her usual comedic roles to be a more serious, “good” character without too much depth (she's not the focus, but is a driving force and provides romantic connections). Gradually, as she dates the divorced Wilson, she discovers the manipulative therapist Paul Giamatti who has kept Wilson away from all of his family for a solid 2 years at least.

These scenes switch back and forth, and it is a solid dynamic to keep the interest fresh for what might be off-putting to some when they hear “biopic.” You will be engaged and committed, especially if you're like me and are unfamiliar with Wilson's life, but you will also see some missed potential. At just over 2 hours, not all scenes hit the mark and tiptoe through the area marked fluff. There isn't always the intensity wanted in the Cusack scenes, so the powerful moments are toned down just a bit. But, then again, hearing Paul Giamatti yell “SLUT!” over and over can't be all bad.

Generally speaking, the Dano scenes are better and what I continued to look forward to in the movie. He does the best acting, and watching his methods to find the perfect melodies while his domestic life has its struggles is engrossing and worth the watch. And again, listening to the formulation of the songs is a big treat.

There isn't much to boast about directing, but the incredible performance by Dano and the more suppressed and gloomy Cusack are attention-grabbing enough if for some reason Beach Boys wasn't. Ultimately, you'll come away with new appreciation and curiosity about the band that was briefly even more popular than The Beatles, and that is always a success in the mind of a filmmaker.

Tomorrow, we continue happy sunshiney times of summer with a genre that can be loved and hated. All I know is that it will be totally rad dude.

Going Across the Universe with Beatles Songs

Jude and Prudence show up to town to allow some more songs from the Beatles to be played. Yes sir, Across the Universe is a musical throwing it back to the 60s for a love story of sorts torn away with war and strife and LSD. If this isn't making too much sense, you're not alone. Despite a couple 5 minute naps, I will attempt to review the film as a whole.

I think the movie took the easy route right from the start, and it never recovered from the decision. What I'm talking about is story structure. Obviously, all the songs are already there. So how did they make the movie? They took the songs, and they attempted to branch a story out of them to fill in the gaps. The result is high-quality music videos with small periods of “story” in between.

“Well, Mr. Smarty Pants, do you have any better ideas?” I do, but it's harder to pull off which is why I said they went easy. There are two types of musicals: Those that have the songs in mind and try creating a story around them (like Across the Universe), and those that have a story already in place that will be propelled forward by the songs. Personally, I feel the latter is almost always the better formula to work with, but even then it's not a perfect system. I'm just saying that it could have been a huge turn-around for this film. I mean, there might be a decent story in there somewhere, but I didn't really find it nor have the patience to put effort into searching for it.

As this is a musical, we should definitely talk about the songs. Give credit to the film for trying to give modern updates to the songs with flashy graphics to help, but the characters don't add anything because nobody cares about them through the story. I will say, however, one of my biggest issues is that I think most of the songs are worse versions than the originals. Maybe that's a personal bias, who knows. My prime example is “I Want to Hold Your Hand;” the film version slows it down. That ruins the entire beat, and the lyrics aren't powerful enough to carry the weight of a slower song. The vocals of the majority of characters is great, but not everyone hits the right notes, and vocals alone aren't worth an update of these songs.

Despite my inner Scrooge to humbug at these modern folks and their attempts to reminisce on previous times, I still found myself singing along with such classics as “Come Together,” “Revolution,” and “Hey Jude.” I wouldn't even call myself the biggest Beatles fan, but those that claim to hate the band probably just haven't heard the right songs.

This 2 hour + movie is not worth it for the few notable songs featured. The story drags on, and it ends up giving you the feeling of “Oh, is this the last song? Nope, here's another scene.” And thus it goes on and on. Maybe I should just let it be. I don't know.

Not sure where it would have fit in, but not seeing “Yesterday” featured was a big bummer. There are a couple other songs I would have preferred, but I honestly am not sure if this was album-based or what and I don't care enough to research it.

Just did a little research, and I'm still unsure of how each song was chosen to appear in the film. Oh well.

I have some movies on my mind that I may review, but comment any suggestion for next week. I'll probably feature at least one summer flick for next week. It won't be long before I figure it out, and I'm sure to get it done with a little help from my friends.