I was tagged by Ibetolis from the great blog Film For The Soul to take part in the Alphabet Meme that has been going around started by Fletch at Blog Cabbins. The basic idea is pretty self explanatory but rules are below anyways.
“You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won't have it!” - Arthur Jensen (Ned Beatty) Guess I'm all about the powerful cameo speeches, huh?
Xis forX-FILES: FIGHT THE FUTURE(Dir. Rob Bowman, 1998) Actually this is far from one of my favorite movies, but as X movies go I like it better than X-MEN and XXX.
1. Pick one film to represent each letter of the alphabet.
2. The letter "A" and the word "The" do not count as the beginning of a film's title, unless the film is simply titled A or The, and I don't know of any films with those titles.
3.Return of the Jedi belongs under "R," not "S" as in Star Wars Episode IV: Return of the Jedi. This rule applies to all films in the original Star Wars trilogy; all that followed start with "S." Similarly, Raiders of the Lost Ark belongs under "R," not "I" as in Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark. Conversely, all films in the Lord Of The Rings series belong under "L" and all films in the Chronicles of Narnia series belong under "C," as that's what those filmmakers called their films from the start. In other words, movies are stuck with the titles their owners gave them at the time of their theatrical release. Use your better judgement to apply the above rule to any series/films not mentioned.
4. Films that start with a number are filed under the first letter of their number's word. 12 Monkeys would be filed under "T."
5. Link back to Blog Cabins in your post so that I can eventually type "alphabet meme" into Google and come up #1, then make a post where I declare that I am the King of Google.
6. If you're selected, you have to then select 5 more people.
I liked but did not love CASINO ROYALE – the 007 reboot debut of the robust Daniel Craig but I was way in the minority, mind you. Folks who never cared for a James Bond movie before, and many who had never seen one before as well, fell head over heels for the intensity of the lead man, the non-stop action set pieces, and the emotional realism that many thought the series would never have. Craig proved himself as a Bond with a difference; one that really bleeds with a powerful palpable anger bottled inside to form a fierce focus. He’s never in need of a gimmicky gadget to save him or a clever quip to break the tension. More BOURNE than Bond some critics claimed, but this was still a preferable approach to the dated fading status of the superspy.
Helmed by a different director (Marc Forster who has never directed an action film and man does it show) QUANTUM OF SOLACE picks up where CASINO ROYALE left off with Bond in revenge mode chasing down the killers of slain lover Vesper Lynd. His adventure begins with wretchedly cut and ferociously un-involving pre-credits car chase which unfortunately sets the standard for the entire episode. We follow Bond, who is still into running and jumping from rooftop to rooftop, from one locale to the next- Haiti, Bolivia, Austria (you gotta have globe trotting) as he kills government traitors and fights to bring down the ginormous terrorist organization Quantum, which is the only connection to the odd title (yes, I know it’s taken from a Ian Fleming short story and that with Bond titles don’t matter). That’s the best I can do with the plot or lack of it. Hard to make that a matter of much criticism when even the best Bond films have had thin narratives but when I didn’t care what the significance of a particular character was or what exactly was happening it’s hard to overlook.
Craig’s performance is the saving grace of this tangled tortured mess of a movie. He has perfected his unique take on the iconic character and has a scorching presence that often helps this material rise above its turgid trappings. It also helps that there’s a strong cast on the sidelines – the always appealing Judi Dench returns as M, Jeffrey Wright again plays Bond’s CIA ally Felix Leiter, and Olga Kurylenko does the best she can with her role as Bond’s requisite love interest Camille. The elements of sex and humor that I found largely lacking in the previous film are also absent here but what’s worse is that this exercise is sadly sans both style and substance. QUANTUM OF SOLACE is a failed follow-up to what I realize much more than before was one of the strongest entries of the Bond canon. CASINO ROYALE didn’t just think outside the box, it ripped the box to shreds and discarded the remains to build its own new box. That the new box is already rotting and needs to be replaced is a shame, but we know James Bond has overcome bigger obstacles and will resiliently return regardless.
And now, for the bloggosphere geek record, and because I feel many of my fellow film bloggers and readers haven’t grown up with 007 like I have, here’s my favorite films featuring the original international man of mystery:
Film Babble Blog’s Top Ten Best Of Bond
1.FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE(Dir.Terence Young, 1963) Despite the heavily derived from Hitchcock’s NORTH BY NORTHWEST helicopter chase sequence, the fight scenes, and the now obligatory boat chase this is more of a straight thriller laced with romance than the expected high octane action ilk and that’s how I like Bond best. Sean Connery’s second performance as 007 captures him in suave stride as he romances a Russian agent (Daniela Bianchi) while battling SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion). Filled with finesse from the first frame to the last and still as sharp today as Rosa Clebb’s poisoned shoe spike was back in the Kennedy Camelot era.
2.GOLDFINGER(Dir. Guy Hamilton, 1964) It’s close to a tie between this and #1; this being the fine tuning of a formula that served the series very well. A megalomaniac (Gert Fröbe) sets out to commit “the crime of the century” by literally going for the gold (Fort Knox) but Bond (Connery) foils his plans and gets Pussy Galore (Honor Blackman) in the process (also literally). The theme song sung by Shirley Bassey (who later did the better than the movie theme for DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER) is as definitive as the film itself.
3.THE SPY WHO LOVED ME(Dir. Lewis Gilbert, 1977) There’s a bias here because this was the first one I saw as a kid at the theater but it’s certainly considered the best of the Roger Moore Bond movies (Moore himself agrees). It has one of the best Bond babes (Barbara Bach), one of the best Bond theme songs (Carly Simon’s “Nobody Does It Better”), and one of the best Bond automobiles (a Lotus Esprit that can convert to a submarine car). It also has the infamous overlarge henchman “Jaws” (Richard Kiel) who was popular enough to be shamelessly trotted out again in the next movie.
4. DR. NO(Dir. Terence Young, 1962) Yep, like the first 3 Elvis Costello albums the first 3 Bond movies are essential IMHO. Connery assumes the role immediately and this has much evidence of the cold cunning killer that folks these days seem to think Craig created. The shot of Ursula Andress emerging from the water in a white cotton bikini with a knife holster is forever etched into my psyche and into film history. Fittingly the scene was recreated with Halle Berry in DIE ANOTHER DAY and to show the tables have been turned in terms of sexual objectification nowadays, Daniel Craig did the honors at the beach in CASINO ROYALE.
5.ON HER MAJESTY’S SERCRET SERVICE (Dir. Peter Hunt, 1969) Maybe an odd choice to some because it featured a Bond one-timer (George Lazenby - who I believe is Marge Simpson’s favorite Bond) but I think it’s crucial for several reasons, the most important being that this is the one he gets married in. Former model Lazenby may have been a horrible actor but he’s got a grand movie surrounding him with the elegant Diana Rigg (fresh from The Avengers) as his bride, Telly Savalas as the most energetic version of Bond’s arch enemy Blofeld to be found in the series, and the first and still best ski chase Bond’s ever been in.
6.FOR YOUR EYES ONLY(Dir. John Glen, 1981) This was a noble and successful attempt to get Bond back down to earth (again literally) after the sublimely stupid STAR WARS cash-in MOONRAKER. Roger Moore’s 5th outing as the secret agent was nicely plotted with a great McGuffin (ATAC - Automatic Targeting Attack Communicator, a thingie that looked like a big calculator) and a toned down sense of self satire, i.e. fewer one-liners. There is genuine drama involving yet another revenge scenario amongst the action sequences which include the expected ski-chases, underwater fights, and a mountain climbing climax which defines the word “gripping”.
7.GOLDENEYE(Dir. Martin Campbell, 1995) Honestly, though I thought he was well cast, I wasn’t a big fan of the Pierce Brosnan Bond films. I felt that it all had been done to death and that the series should retire. This film does address that with M (Judi Dench – the only linking cast member to the Craig Bonds) calling Bond a “sexist, misogynist dinosaur” and a “relic of the cold war”. There is a streamlined effort present to preserve and re-invigorate the adventures of 007 and Brosnan here for his first of five films is well up to the task even if the formulaic packaging falters. That’s not to say there isn’t plenty of fun to be had so it makes the grade.
8.THUNDERBALL(Dir. Terence Young, 1965) Err, make that the first 4 films! Michael G. Wilson, producer and screenwriter of many Bond movies, not long ago remarked “We always start out trying to make another FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and end up with another THUNDERBALL.” As Bond blue-prints go though that’s a pretty good one to end up with. While it’s bogged down with too many underwater fights, THUNDERBALL has a great villain in Adolfo Celi as Emilio Largo (SPECTRE #2) and features Connery’s last best performance as Bond (he pretty much walked through 3 others after this including the weird remake NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN in 1983). I believe this makes the list again because of my love of it as a kid and my ironic fondness for the swinging theme by Tom Jones. Austin Powers took a lot of notes on this one.
9.THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS(Dir. John Glen, 1987) Maybe I’m just throwing a bone to everybody’s least favorite Bond Timothy Dalton or maybe I just have a thing for every actor’s first time in the role but this was a fair effort to move the franchise into a new more realistic direction after the parting of Roger Moore. Dalton, who was excellent as the moustache twirling villain in HOT FUZZ a few years back, brings his stage training to the part and while the standard cold war plot (itself a relic) holds no surprises there is considerable charm and a nice chemistry with Maryam d’Abo, definitely one of my favorite Bond women.
10.LIVE AND LET DIE(Dir. Guy Hamilton, 1973) Roger Moore’s first is again a favorite from my youth and one I always stop and watch when coming across it when flipping through the channels. It has the key elements – great theme song (by Paul McCartney and Wings), great action set-pieces (definitely the best boat chase of the canon), a great lovely lady (Jane Seymour), and a great edgy adversary (Yaphet Kotto). Bond’s brush with Blaxploitation is only marred by the worst, and most embarrassing, deaths of a villain (or of anybody) of all the movies – don’t worry no Spoiler but you’ve been warned.
Whew! Well, that’s my best of Bond. If you are weary of going to see what is surely going to be #1 at the box office this weekend, you may consider catching up with one or two of the classics above.
As I’m sure you well know, last summer the long awaited fourth installment of the incredibly popular Indiana Jones series, INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL, was released to ginormous box office receipts and overall favorable reviews (it’s currently at 76% on the Tomatometer). In the U.S. alone it made over $300 million and is the 3rd biggest grossing film of 2008 after THE DARK KNIGHT and IRON MAN. Well, despite these numbers there were a lot of folk who didn’t “join the rest of the world in breathing a sigh of relief at the multiplex” as I wrote in my review of the film (May 21, 2008). An increasing amount of film bloggers and tons of message board shut-ins, especially as the movie just hit the DVD market, are voicing their displeasure and resurrecting the “they raped my childhood” complaint that was born out of the extreme negative reaction to the STAR WARS prequels.
The fanboy bitching went mainstream a few weeks back when South Park aired an episode that actually featured Indiana Jones getting raped by George Lucas and Steven Spielberg not just once but three times in scenes that borrowed heavily from A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, THE ACCUSED, and DELIVERANCE (of course).
Comedian/fanboy geek (probably best known as the voice of the rat in RATATOUILLE) Patton Oswalt recently went on Conan O’Brien and stated point blank that he thought the movie “sucked” and went on to bash its ending in particular. He elaborated on it in a stand-up performance at Blizzcon, Oct. 2008 in Anaheim, California:
“The last shot of ‘Raiders’, the very final shot of that movie, is that warehouse full of crates. And it was really dark and ominous. And it’s a really ballsy way to end your adventure movie. It’s a perfect film. ‘Raiders’ is perfect. And then the last shot of ‘Temple of Doom’, there’s elephants rearing up and a village is celebrating and he’s kissing the hot woman and you’re like ‘wow, what a cool action movie that was!’ And then the final shot of “Last Crusade” is Indiana Jones and James Bond (!), Sean Connery are on horses zipping away across the desert to God knows what adventures…oh, my goodness, that was great! And then the last shot of “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” is a line of elderly people slowly walking out of a church! And they play the “Raiders” music over them like they’re making fun of them!”
Oswalt had previously done loads of material criticizing the STAR WARS prequels (“If I actually had a time machine I would go back to 1993 or ’94 and kill George Kucas with a shovel…stop him from making the prequels”) so this bit isn’t surprising and, I admit, a good point. For the record I hated the prequels, though I think “raped my childhood” is a bit strong, and understand completely the disappointment surrounding them. While having some familiar elements they didn’t feel to me like the movies I saw and loved so much in the theater as a kid – yes, I’m old enough to have seen STAR WARS before it was renamed “Episode IV: A New Hope” (and I refuse to refer it as such now). Being just the right age for them I equally loved the Indiana Jones movies – they were like an extension of the old timey serial movie inspired fun and saw each of the films more than I could possibly count.
I was extremely skeptical about them making another Indiana Jones film – the 3rd one (INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE -1989) wrapped it all up nicely into a tidy trilogy and it seemed unnecessary to go back again almost 20 years later to attempt to relive past glories. So I was surprised, and maybe a little embarrassed, to enjoy the fourth film so much. I still stand by what I wrote after seeing a midnight show last May that the film was: “an entry that is as good an Indiana Jones movie as could be made today”. Mind you, some folks have told me that that comes off as a backhanded compliment. I really meant it though – I feel given the changing times and the advanced age of the core participants that this was as good as they could produce. I honestly believe that no matter what they served up that fanboys would have problems with whatever element. Back in the day I remember many schoolyard grumblings about implausible plot points and action set pieces of the original films – don’t get me started on how Indy survived that submarine ride in RAIDERS…, etc. These days the message boards and blogs replace the playgrounds as we all age and get more cynical, nitpicking about annoying details while friends and family say repeatedly “it’s just a movie” just over our shoulders.
I’ve already been scoffed at for saying that I liked it better than the dark TEMPLE OF DOOM (the one I saw the least as a kid) but I seriously do think, especially after seeing it more than once, that KINGDOM OF CRYSTAL SKULL is a more even and much more entertaining action film. I didn’t mind the aliens aspect, though I agree with some film folks about it being too X-Files and that the special effects were at times overboard – one message board poster said it was “Indiana Jones and the CGI Jungle” and I can’t really argue with that. I also had problems with the gopher at the beginning, the Shia LaBeouf swinging from vines with moneys like Tarzan scene, and the before-mentioned ending - like blue-velvet-ant wrote in the comments of my review: “He’s Indiana Jones. He doesn’t do married.”
Still, the bottom line to me is that it felt like the Indiana Jones movies I saw at the theater as a kid – it had the same tone, pacing, and Harrison Ford’s crusty charisma carried me through just like before. I went along with the outlandish escapades and was even immensely amused by the much derided “nuking the fridge” sequence (see Urban Dictionary: Nuke The Fridge). I wish folks would cut out using the “raped my childhood” tack – it’s a dead horse beaten beyond recognition at this point and many people are offset and offended by the use of the word “rape” in what is supposed to be a humorous context. Though I’m not saying ban it completely – Patton Oswalt’s line “Hollywood, where dreams come to be raped” is too accurate and brutally funny to be dropped. When somebody makes that “raped my childhood” complaint, perhaps the best response would be this one, from a snarky message boarder: “Well, your childhood was dressed too sexy and all walking around acting slutty; it was asking for it!”
Seems like the world of movie comedy has passed Kevin Smith by these days.
From the many Judd Apatow approved projects to the likes of Ben Stiller, Will Ferrell, and Adam Sandler dominating the raunchy guy genre is there really any place or need any more for Jay and Silent Bob?
Well, thankfully they’ve been left behind (though Jason Mewes does show up) for Smith’s new chance to play catch-up and show he can still make with the crude and rude gross-out gags. Highjacking major Apatow-player Seth Rogen and basking in the low budget roughness in which he created his best work, Smith gives us Rogen and Elizabeth Banks (also a Apatow veteran) as broke best friend room mates who...oh, you know the title.
The use of the word “porno” has caused mild controversy with some markets refusing its title and original promotional images were changed to feature stick figures to both appease the MPAA and make cheap fun of it.
The film was heavily edited to avoid a NC-17 but I doubt any of that material was any dicier or outrageous as the film wants itself to be. The lowdown is that it’s filled with scads of scatological humor, which is mostly tossed of in casual banter, and a lot of nudity (filmed in probably the most unsexy way I’ve ever seen) but nothing that would shock anybody who hasn’t seen the trailer and got already the gist.
That’s not to say it isn’t fairly funny and very watchable - Rogen and Banks are good together with amusing turns from the obligatory real porn star cameo by Traci Lords, Smith stock company member Jeff Anderson (Randal from CLERKS), and the bemused Craig Robinson (The Office, PINEAPPLE EXPRESS).
It appears from the duo’s ideas for a adult movie effort to help pay their bills that Smith’s pop culture reference lingo has really dated - enough with the STAR WARS whatnot! “Star Whores”? Really witty, Kevin. The Star Bucks stand-in “Bean ‘N Gone” that Rogen and Banks work and are forced to film their porno project at (further echoes of CLERKS) reeks of left-over retail complaints you’d think that Smith would be over at this point.
Smith delights in characters and premises that refuse to mature and that's fine, I just wish his film-making would grow up. Crude, badly cut, and just barely holding the narrative together, this movie is not the work of a polished confident director though I bet he would take that as a compliment.
Rogen carries a lot of the film on his affable back, rolling with a laid back nature while Banks’ spirit and go-with-it timing are a welcome contrast to her current portrayal of Laura Bush in W. They're both big reasons to see this movie whatever your views on the View Askewniverse. ZACK AND MIRI... has the soul of an 80’s teen movie, most definitively the oeuvre of John Hughes.
Its heart and motives are a pastiche of well worn tried and true predictability - the funny audition sequence, the on-the-fly dance number, the aim to make a distinction between sex and “making love”. The fact that it has a heart probably won’t concern those who want old school Kevin Smith shenanigans so the best I can say there is that this is much better than CLERKS II. ZACK AND MIRI MAKE A PORNO has too much worthy competition (PINEAPPLE EXPRESS, TROPIC THUNDER, FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL) to be considered one of the best comedies of the year yet it is still likable enough even though it’s not as laughable as I would’ve liked.
Last Friday night as part of a series on film noir, the North Carolina Museum of Art in Raleigh had a screening of David Lynch’s twisted surreal drama MULHOLLAND DRIVE. The film was introduced by Independent Weekly Arts Editor David Fellerath who considers the film a masterpiece and one of the greatest of the last 10 years. He asked how many folks were seeing the film for the first time and a surprisingly huge amount of hands were raised. After some background and an attempt at plot summary, he assured the almost full room that 95% of the film holds up to “logical scrutiny”. I’m not so sure about that, but the film did seem to gain levels of coherence that it lacked for me back in 2001. Fellerath had also stated that if anybody still had problems with the film’s meaning afterwards – “there’s lots on the internet.”
There sure is lots on the internet, starting with one of the lengthiest Wikipedia entries for a film that I’ve ever seen with content headings like "Interpretations and Allusions", detailed character breakdowns, and long intricate paragraphs on the style and critical reception. The references for the entry site 82 articles with such titles as “Nice Film If You Can Get It: Understanding Mulholland Drive” (The Guardian) and Salon.com’s “Everything You Were Afraid To Ask About Mulholland Drive” (which Roger Ebert considers “the best explanation”). Another worthwhile read is Anthony Kusich’s “Mulholland Drive…Explained” which deals which the 10 clues that Lynch included in the notes for the original DVD release. The existence of the clues is curious because Lynch was quoted in the New York Times a few years later as saying that DVD extras can “demystify” a film.
Perhaps what Lynch and many critics have proposed is the most sensible way to take MULHOLLAND DRIVE – not to try and make sense of it. Just absorb the mood and visual tones winding through the various narrative strands. Naomi Watts and Laura Elena Harring are either friends turned lovers named Betty and Rita in a dream or the former lovers now estranged Diane and Camilla in reality or vice versa. It appears that Justin Theroux is one of the only constant characters – an arrogant film director who is pressured by Mafioso types, to cast Camilla in his newest film. In one of the most memorably amusing scenes has Theroux meet a cryptic character called “The Cowboy” (Lafayette Montgomery) who tells him: “A man’s attitude goes some ways. The way his life will be.” When The Cowboy can be seen passing through the background of a party scene later on it is impossible not to take as intensely comical.
A turning point comes when Betty and Rita doing some detective work because Rita has lost her memory (she took her name from a Rita Hayworth movie poster) locate a woman’s dead body. Identities then blend (the Igmar Bergman-esque screen capture above says a lot about the merging of identities I believe) with Rita donning a blonde wig and then they shatter completely with the aid of a shiny blue box (that of course appears with no explanation) and then reassemble or emerge from a dream – as when The Cowboy says: “Hey, pretty girl, time to wake up”. Many elements familiar to fans of Lynch fill the frames throughout – among them the darkened old fashioned back room of the mysterious movie studio string puller Mr. Rogue (Michael J. Anderson) wouldn’t have been out of place in the dreams of Special Agent Dale Cooper (Kyle MacLachlan) on Twin Peaks and the creepy Club Silencio that Betty and Rita attend one fateful night is somewhere you would expect to see Frank Booth (Dennis Hopper) from BLUE VELVET lounging around in.
Writting before about the “love/WTF?” relationship I’ve had with the films of David Lynch (“Inland Empire Burlesque” and “Hey, I Finally Saw...ERASERHEAD”) I had decided to let go of the idea of determining definitive meanings and just go with the freaky flow. Wading through the various analyzing articles previously mentioned of this particular film though is still extremely fascinating because many interpretations can exist side by side, none more valid or more convincing than the other. Maybe MULHOLLAND DRIVE doesn’t make any more sense now than it ever did but its captivating spell has indeed grown and its perverse passion is definitely more powerful than when it was first shown in the heady distracting days shortly after 9/11. For those who haven't seen it before and lived with it for a while, I have to relate this - while the end credits were rolling at the Art Museum last Friday, a irrate woman who was obviously one of those who had earlier raised their hands, was heard complaining: “I’m very upset - it didn’t make any sense! Even PULP FICTION made sense! At the ending it all came together. I mean even AMERICAN BEAUTY made sense too!” So much for discussion, huh?
It’s doubtful that anybody will ever mistake this for a comedy classic. George Clooney’s period piece football follies opened last spring to mixed reviews and bad box office and it’s immediately easy to see why. The first few scenes involving a comic contrast between college and professional football in 1925 breeze by setting the lightweight tone with the tried and true jazz scoring. The all too familiar sense of a by-the-numbers conventional comedy is set in place with only Clooney’s self deprecating charm to elevate it. As you should well know, the man is not above cracks about his age (he’s called “old man” and “Grandpa” throughout the film) and his getting punched in the face is a almost cartoonish given so there’s that. There’s more than a little of Ulysses Everett McGill from O BROTHER WHERE ART THOU in Clooney’s Jimmy ‘Dodge’ Connelly – captain of the Duluth Bulldogs who, of course, are cast as lovable underdogs.
Clooney evidently learned a lot from his three-time collaborators the Coen Brothers, with décor and dialogue that echoes greatly of their particular brand of old timey screwball. This also applies in the case of the fast talking quick witted newspaper gal that sets out to expose a “boy wonder” a la THE HUDSUCKER PROXY except that here Renée Zellweger actually pulls it off better than Jennifer Jason Leigh did. Clooney plots to save his team, and pro football in the process, by exploiting the celebrity of a war hero (The Office’s Jon Krasinski) as a new team member. Everybody’s working their own angles in this enterprise especially a sly Jonathan Pryce as Krasinski’s agent who even tries to throw his hat into thepredictable romantic triangle of the three leads. As for predictable goes, there’s the obligatory bar brawl, much farcical bickering, standard montages of sepia-tinted photographs, and the ole climatic final game that everything hinges on. Yep, we’ve all seen this many times before.
It helps that Clooney and Zellweger have wonderful chemistry in their snappy repartee and a slow dance in a speakeasy certainly gives off sparks, but this is a forgettable formula film. It’s the kind of movie one would watch in a hotel room while going to sleep or glance at randomly while reading a magazine on a plane. I’m sure it'll be playing forever on TBS because it’s exactly their kind of safe family fare. LEATHERHEADS isn’t a bad movie, it just lacks the vital energy that flowed through Clooney’s first 2 films as director - the weirdly absorbing CONFESSIONS OF A DANGEROUS MIND and the sublimely supreme GOODNIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK. I doubt many people would seriously regret watching it, I just think they’ll feel the same indifference that moviegoers and critics showed on its first run. I know I did.
This also died a quick death at the theaters for good reason:
CHAPTER 27(Dir. J.P. Schaefer, 2007)Was it really any big deal that pretty boy actor Jared Leto put on 67 pounds to play Mark David Chapman, the deranged murderer of John Lennon? I mean we’re not talking Robert De Niro in RAGING BULL here, are we? Actually, it’s another De Niro movie that CHAPTER 27 wants to evoke and that’s TAXI DRIVER. Much like Travis Bickle’s inner dialogue raged about loneliness, rain washing the streets clean of trash, and personally vowing to rid the world of scum; Chapman’s focuses on the phonies he hates inspired heavily by Holden Caulfield in “The Catcher In The Rye”. Titled as such because J.D. Salinger’s book contained 26 chapters (get it?), this film depicts the three days in December 1980 that Chapman stalked the streets of New York, lurking for long hours at the gate of the Dakota (where Lennon and wife Yoko Ono lived) with evil intent. He befriends a friendly Beatles fan, played by Lindsay Lohan of all people, named Jude – that’s right. Jude didn’t exist in real life and really shouldn’t exist here but it seems that first time writer/director Schaefer decided there had to be more of a dynamic to this dreary material.
That Leto’s work is the best acting I’ve witnessed of his and the film is well made is the best I can say here. I could never get over the question of “why?” Why recreate the incredibly unpleasant pathetic circumstances of such a wasteful tragedy? Doesn’t making Chapman into a tortured dark cinematic character like De Niro’s Travis Bickle romanticize him in a disgusting manner that really doesn’t fit with his pathetic psyche? Never when watching this film did I feel there was any art or worth in dramatizing these events. At one of many absurdly fictitious moments, Lohan introduces Leto to Lennon’s nanny strolling in Central Park with a young boy supposed to be Sean Ono Lennon. It’s an icky offensive scene that defines how misguided this project was in every sense. The real Sean Ono Lennon called this film “tacky” which is a major understatement; CHAPTER 27 is severely unnecessary but worse, it’s an insult. Schaefer should be ashamed.
Whew! Those last few films weren’t very appetizing. Maybe a rock concert film will lighten things up. Oops, not sure that’s quite in the cards with:
It has been a trend of late for an artist or band to perform a classic album from start to finish. Patti Smith performed her seminal “Horses” for its 30th anniversary in 2005, Sonic Youth not long ago trotted out “Daydream Nation” (1988) to the applause of aging hipsters everywhere, Public Enemy played “It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back” (also 1988), and Liz Phair was able to raise her ticket prices due to resuscitating her “Exile In Guyville”. But while those albums were undeniably classic or at least huge fan favorites, even hardcore Lou Reed fans have had troubles with “Berlin”. I myself didn’t “get it” back in my youth when going through an extreme Velvet Underground phase and devouring all things Lou. It was too dark and repetitive for me so I opted for “Transformer” or “Rock ‘N Roll Animal” when it came to early-mid 70’s Reed repertoire. So grim that I put it on the shortlist I had of “albums to contemplate suicide to” you understand? Well, it’s been years since I’ve heard it and like Lou felt now is as good a time as any to rediscover what I originally thought was a very odd and overly orchestrated song cycle.
Schnabel, a huge fan of the album, filmed Reed and a full band including horns and the Brooklyn Youth Chorus at St. Ann’s Warehouse in Brooklyn, NY over 5 nights in December of 2006. Lou’s longtime guitarist Fernando Saunders and the highly acclaimed Rob Wasserman on stand-up bass make up the band with, most notably, guitarist Steve Hunter who played on the album back in the day. They deliver mighty arrangements for these songs rescuing them from the synthesized chill and giving them much needed warmth, even if it is desperate warmth. Reed looks like he means every word of such weepers as “Caroline Says” (both I & II) and “Sad Song” while “How Do You Think It Feels” as a more straight forward tune (though no less theatrical) is sung with none of his typical detachment.
Knowing that Reed isn’t Mick Jagger and wouldn’t work the audience or cameras in any way Schnabel incorporates film footage that is shown on a screen behind the band and also is intercut through-out. The footage, filmed by Lola Schnabel, depicts the doomed lover characters from the album mostly Caroline (Emmanuelle Seigner – Roman Polanski’s wife!) in purposely blurry artsy scatterings. LOU REED’S BERLIN may not be the most compelling concert film (that would be Jonathan Demme’s STOP MAKING SENSE) but it may prove to be the most haunting. It’s not for the casual fan in that there’s no “Walk On The Wild Side” or “Satellite Of Love” and the long moody pieces may being boring city for some less loyal Lou fans. However just about everybody should appreciate that when savoring the power of the band punching out a furious version of “Men Of Good Fortune” behind him early in the film, Reed actually sports a big smile. And that really is saying a lot.
Just watched it again a few days ago and still love every second. A career best for Jack Nicholson.
E is for
Speaking of a career best, in an incredible cameo Alec Baldwin offers an “alphabet meme” of his own.
S is for SMOKE
That's right. Take that ZELIG!
.jpg)
