Nick's Flicks

Reenactments in The Thin Blue Line: Valid Illustration or Ethical Violation?

2010-06-25T02:18:00.000-07:00

The Thin Blue Line is a 1988 feature-length documentary written and directed by Errol Morris. The film is a cinematic investigation into the 1976 murder of a Dallas police officer named Robert Wood. David Harris, a sixteen-year-old runaway at the time, testified that Randall Adams, a drifter with Harris the night of the murder, was the man that killed Officer Wood. The film’s title is a colloquial term referring to the thin line of police officers that keep civilization from descending into chaos (as referenced by Judge Don Metcalfe within the film). The film goes on to show how misinformation, bad timing, ulterior motives, and outright lies led to the conviction of a man who did not commit the crime he was accused of. The Thin Blue Line uses reenactments of the murder from the multiple perspectives of Adams, Harris, Officer Wood’s partner Teresa Turko and other eyewitness testimony to allow the audience to better understand the case and separate the facts from the fancy.

According to the IMDb, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences rejected the film from Best Documentary consideration in 1989 on the grounds that the reenactments made The Thin Blue Line a fiction film and not a documentary. However, the film’s use of reenactments does not make it a fiction film and does not invalidate the facts of the murder case because the reenactments are filmed in such an overtly cinematic style that the audience becomes aware of them.

THE REENACTMENTS
The reenactments don’t carry the usual “Dramatization” caption found in most television documentaries or news pieces. As a result, the viewer is forced to evaluate what is heard and said without help, according to Film Art by David Bordwell and Kristen Thompson. Morris’ techniques for signaling and recreating the crime scene involve signature troupes of stylized Film-Noir cinematography, most notably low-key lighting and silhouetted framing of the individual players.

The reenactments use low-key lighting, which immediately sets them apart from the high-key lit interviews. Low-key lighting creates a higher contrast-ratio between the highlights and the shadows, according to The Filmmaker’s Handbook by Steven Ascher and Edward Pincus. A key example of this technique is in the shot that focuses on Officer Wood’s shadow in the headlights of the cop car as he approaches the other vehicle. The shadow creeps into the frame from the top down and the shadow is totally black; No detail, not texture of the concrete road or anything else, can be seen. The deep-black shadow is often used in Film-Noirs to foreshadow incoming danger, in this case, Officer Wood’s death.

The silhouetted framing of individual players within the reenactments corroborate with the limited knowledge of the person telling his or her version of the story. The murderer is never explicitly shown with the camera – a key visual strategy in the film. As different eyewitness accounts of the murder are visualized, the silhouette of the murderer changes to match the different perspectives. When Officer Teresa Turko, Wood’s partner, testifies in court that she saw Adams commit the murder, the silhouette of the murderer has bushy hair. After reading Officer Turko’s original statement, the murderer’s silhouette does not. The film also suggests that she was influenced or pressured to change her testimony by internal affairs to point the finger at Adams. “They refreshed her memory,” replied Adams sarcastically.

The reenactments are filmed in a style more akin to fiction as a way of suggesting that the eyewitnesses’ testimony is not the whole truth but merely their version of the truth. However when interviewing the people involved with the case, Morris uses more conventional and subdued cinematic techniques.

THE INTERVIEWS
The interviews with all the people involved in the case are filmed with the following standard interview techniques: The “talking head” compositions, three-point lighting, and character-defining backgrounds.

The “talking head” composition consists of the camera focusing on a person’s face or upper half of the body as they talk. Sometimes the person being interviewed looks right into the camera, as in news reports, or slightly off camera to where the interviewer is usually sitting. We never do see Morris in the film but hear him once at the very end of the film (more on that later). Some of the characters in the film look off camera, such as Adams and Harris, while the other characters look directly into the camera, such as Detective Gus Rose and Adams’ lawyer Edith James. In fact, Adams looks off camera left while Harris looks off camera right. Whether this was intended by Morris or not is unknown, but the difference subconsciously tells the viewer that only one of these people is telling the truth.

Three-point lighting is a standard lighting technique for documentary and fiction film alike, according to The Filmmaker’s Handbook. The key light is the main light source that illuminates the interviewee and casts a shadow. The fill light “fills in” the shadows created by the key light on the interviewee’s face. The backlight or “kicker” is the light placed behind the interviewee and creates an edge of light on the person’s back. The backlight is usually on opposite side of the key light. A fourth light, called the background or “set” light, illuminates the background. The three-point lighting is adjusted for each interviewee. As mentioned earlier, the interviews are lit in high-key, meaning that the shadows have detail and the contrast ratio between the highlights and the shadows is very small.

Morris uses the backgrounds of some of the interviews to further illustrate the character of the person speaking. Usually the backgrounds are very simple: A map of Vidor, Texas behind the head of a Detective Rose or the office bookshelves behind Dennis White, Adams’ other lawyer. Morris uses a bluish background for some of the detectives like Marshall Touchton or Jackie Johnson to signify them as members of the police force (“The Thin Blue Line”). However, Morris does something very revealing with the backgrounds of the two main players, Adams and Harris.

In the Adams interview, the background is almost totally black. One can barely make out the metal fence behind him, but that is all. The dark background is mysterious and foreboding. As a result, the future of Adams seems to be quite bleak. The audience, having developed sympathy for Adams, fears for him. The background of the Harris interview is quite different. His background is a wall of tiles with one side lit by a bluish light and the other by a reddish light. This juxtaposition of colors – red and blue, hot and cold – suggests a great deal about his personality. As the audience learns while watching the film, Harris can go from being a polite and cordial to violent and destructive in a flash. Note the two extremes: Polite and violent, hot and cold. The color scheme of the Adams’ interview background subtly but effectively comments on this duality.

“I wanted to make a film about how truth was difficult to know," said director Errol Morris. The ultimate irony is that a film about how difficult it is to discover the truth turns out to reveal a very concrete one: Randall Adams did not murder Officer Wood. Toward the end the film, Morris interviews Harris with a tape recorder and Harris says that Adams is innocent of crime because "I'm the only one who knows". As a result, Adams was acquitted of the murder of Officer Robert Wood and released in March 1989. Harris was eventually put to death by lethal injection for an unrelated crime.

As an added irony, Adams sued the director, Errol Morris, for the rights to any book or commercial film about his life. According to an article in The New York Times, the case was settled in early August 1989. In a Wisconsin Public Radio interview in 2004, Morris responded to the suit, “…my wife summed it up very succinctly. ‘Just because he’s a victim doesn’t mean he isn’t an asshole.’”

Bibliography
*Ascher, Steven and Pincus, Edward, The Filmmaker’s Handbook - 2008 Edition, Plume, 2007
*Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristen, Film Art - 7th Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2004
*“A Conversation with Errol Morris,” Wisconsin Public Radio, July 2, 2004
*“Freed Inmate Settles Suit With Producer Over Rights to Story,” The New York Times, August 6, 1989
*IMDb Trivia page of The Thin Blue Line, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096257/trivia, Access Date: December 6th, 2009

Garden State - A Reconsideration

2010-01-09T04:58:00.000-08:00

Garden State, starring Zach Braff and Natalie Portman, came out at a time when I was transitioning from high school to college. I had just graduated San Rafael High and was enrolled to take my fall semester at College of Marin. I was embarking on my official journey into adulthood. Then the film was released. I was 18 at the time.

While it didn’t have the earthshaking resonance of a film like American Beauty, Garden State still spoke to a great many of us young adults. It captured a generational zeitgeist: Doped up on prescription medication, beset by familial pain, we became catatonic in the face of reality. This film was here to sober us up.

The film is about an out-of-work L.A. actor named Andrew Largeman (Braff). One day he is summoned by his psychiatrist father (Ian Holm) to return home in New Jersey for the funeral of his mother. Upon his arrival, Largeman reconnects with old friends Mark (Peter Sarsgaard) and Jesse (Armando Riesco) and meets cute with Sam (Portman), a truly unusual oddball who has a backyard cemetery for her pets and knows just where to kick the dogs when they start humping your leg. Because he left his drugs back in California, Largeman slowly starts to emerge from his drug-induced haze to feel genuine emotions again and finally deal with the troubles stemming from his youth.

Seeing the film again, I'm struck by how sharp Braff's visual style is. Working for the first time on a feature-length film with cinematographer Lawrence Sher, Braff uses a lot of symmetrical compositions to emphasize Largeman's near-comatose state. One of the best is the wide close up of Largeman staring at himself in the mirror, only there is a slit in the middle so the two halves of his face don't match up completely. Visually, this is an excellent choice.

On its theatrical release, Garden State was frequently compared to The Graduate for its generational resonance and Beautiful Girls for its similar coming-of-age plotline and the casting of Portman as the love interest. Actually, the film that Garden State has the most in common with is the 1988 Oscar-nominated dramedy The Accidental Tourist starring William Hurt and Geena Davis. Both films are about protagonists trying to break free from years of emotional paralysis and both include a happy-go-lucky love interest that are instrumental in the heroes’ journey.

In Tourist, Hurt plays a travel writer named Macon Leary who has lost his son several years ago in a fast-food restaurant shooting. When Macon takes his dog to the kennel to stay overnight while he goes on a business trip, he meets Muriel Pritchett (Davis), the woman who’ll slowly pull him out of his funk. Apart from the details of the story, The Accidental Tourist and Garden State follow very similar plotlines and character arcs.

I mentioned earlier that both films had a happy-go-lucky love interest that’s instrumental in the hero’s journey. Nathan Rabin of the A.V. Club coined the term “The Manic Pixie Dream Girl” to describe this type of love interest. His definition of the MPDG is a girl that “exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures.” The definition was expanded in a later article to include the adjectives “bubbly and shallow.” Rabin was correct in using the MPDG in his original article to describe Kirsten Dunst’s character Clair Colburn in Elizabethtown. Hers was an MPDG of the worst kind: The one who doesn't know personal boundaries. Portman’s portrayal of Sam, however, is not an MPDG.

Sam is neither shallow nor bubbly, and while she does inspire the “brooding soulful young” Largeman to get a life, she doesn’t exists solely to serve him. She has her own follies and foibles. For one, she’s a pathological liar. On Sam’s first meeting with Largeman in a hospital, she lies about waiting for someone else. When Largeman asks why she lies, she replies that she doesn’t know and can’t help it. "It's like a tic," she describes. As it turns out, Sam wears protective headgear for when she works because she occasionally gets seizures. When her mother plays a tape of a young Sam ice-skating in a dinosaur costume, she shies away from the TV, embarrassed by the memory of a time when she wasn’t handicapped. Sam is person with an inner life as well as an outer one.

I sincerely hope Braff returns to the director’s chair. Since Garden State, he has starred in the mediocre The Last Kiss and Chicken Little. According to IMDb, he’s still on tap to helm Open Hearts, a remake of Susanne Bier’s 2002 Danish film of the same name. He’s also going to write and executive produce Andrew Henry’s Meadow, the story of a young boy’s hyperactive imagination attracting like-minded children.

The Cinematic Aesthetics of Martin Scorsese

2009-12-24T13:02:00.000-08:00

Whenever you see a Martin Scorsese film, you know it’s a Martin Scorsese film: The fast-moving camera, the sharp editing, the pop soundtrack, etc. Scorsese is both a visual artist and a technical master. Alfred Hitchcock, one of Scorsese’s great influences, loved using pure cinema to tell his stories. Pure cinema, distinct from the “cinema pur“ movement of the 1920s and 30s, is the use of autonomous film techniques (photography, editing, sound, etc.) to create an experience distinct from story. Scorsese has used pure cinema in his films as a way of bringing the audience closer his stories. In the films Casino, Goodfellas and Raging Bull, Scorsese uses pure cinema through slow-motion photography, jump cuts, and/or a pop-song laden soundtrack to put the audience in the mindset of his characters.

A pure cinema moment happens very early on in Casino when Sam Rothstein (Robert De Niro) watches as a local hooker known as Ginger (Sharon Stone) throw a bunch of casino chips in the air after one of her johns accuses her of stealing. After she throws the third cache of chips in the air, the frame freezes focusing solely on Ginger. The soundtrack starts playing “Love is Strange” by Mickey and Sylvia. We cut to a wide close up tracking in toward Rothstein in slow motion. He’s just staring at Ginger, entranced by her beauty. As we cut to a reverse shot of Ginger slinking away from the scene, the camera pans right and zooms in to a close medium shot of her – all in slow motion - walking through the crowd, occasionally shooting a flirty look to Rothstein. From the freeze-frame to the final pan, in three shots, we definitely know that Sam Rothstein has fallen head over heals in love with Ginger.

In Goodfellas, pure cinema is used to show a mobster’s mind at work. It happens about 3/4ths of the way into the film. Jimmy Conway (also played Robert De Niro) is a ruthless mobster being hassled for money by Morrie Kessler, the man who planned Conway’s recent robbery of Lufthansa airport. As Kessler is about to leave the bar, we cut to a medium shot of Conway at the counter just as the song “Sunshine of Your Love” by Cream starts on the jukebox off camera. Watch De Niro’s performance carefully as Conway: The camera pushes in as De Niro’s eyes dart from Kessler to his glass to the man sitting next to him and back to Kessler again. A little bit of a smile forms on his face and then just as quickly disappears before he takes a puff from his cigarette. De Niro’s eyes accompanied by camera’s push in reveal that he’s getting deeper and deeper in thought. The song’s bass-filled opening suggests something ominous. In just one shot, the audience can tell that Conway intends to kill Kessler and keep the money for himself.

Finally, in Raging Bull, pure cinema is used every time Jake La Motta (again, De Niro) sees his wife Vicki (Cathy Moriarty) interact with another man as he suspects she’s cheating on him. When Vicki kisses Jake’s brother Joey (Joe Pesci) on the mouth, Jake suspects Joey. When Vicki is seen talking Tommy Como (Nicholas Colasanto), Jake suspects Tommy (And so on, and so on). One of the ways that Jake La Motta’s suspicions are conveyed is by the combination of slow-motion and jump cuts. When Tommy comes to Jake’s house, there is a moment before they leave in which Tommy kisses Vicki goodbye. We are then shown Jake’s POV: he watches as Vicki and Tommy kiss in slow motion. There are also jump cuts from Vicki to Tommy then to Joey, all within the space of a few seconds. The jump cuts represent Jake’s subjectivity, his selecting of details that add to his suspicions. The slow motion represents his heightened awareness. Both aesthetically convey his sense of paranoia and jealousy regarding his wife.

If you think about, slow-motion photography, fast editing, and a pop song soundtrack aren’t exclusive to Scorsese. In fact, these techniques can be found in many of the action-laden blockbusters that Hollywood turns out from year to year. The only difference is Scorsese uses these techniques not to show off or to simply thrill us but make us empathize with very unlikable people. They are the villains in their world and 99% of the time the audience doesn’t associate themselves with villains but the heroes. Scorsese originally wanted to be a priest when he was young and I suspect he has a special place in his heart for these kinds of villains or sinners. A priest has to have love for the unlovable because, as it says in the Bible, “to err is human, to forgive is divine.”

Burn After Reading (R) ***1/2

2008-09-12T16:53:00.000-07:00

Burn After Reading is one of those movies where you come out knowing less then when you went in, but still find yourself smiling and laughing giddily when you're half a block from the theater. Linda Litske (Frances McDormand) and Chad (Brad Pitt) come into possession of a CD that may or may not have confidential material belonging to one Osborne Cox (John Malkovich). Osborne has recently "quit" his position as a CIA analyst and wants to write his memoirs, both for sake of reflection and personal payback. His wife Katie (Tilda Swinton) couldn't care less about him. She wants out of her marriage and make her bed with a compulsive adulterer named Harry Pfarrer (George Clooney).

While this setup sounds simple enough, knowing the Coen Brothers (Joel and Ethan) means they will find many a clever way to twist the plot so it will churn up the characters in the process. The Coens have always been fond of ever-complicating conflicts, like in "Blood Simple" or "The Big Lebowski". As in those films and this one, characters often find themselves at dangerous cross-purposes, setting each other up to fall, often accidently, without ever really discovery why. In "Burn", we do indeed learn the true nature of the CDs contents early on (Semi-spoiler: The contents aren't "Top Secret"), but most of the characters in the film don't. How the CD is created, and why it is created, is an expert example of how to summon a MacGuffin out of thin air (Points to Hitchcock fans who don't need the word "MacGuffin" explained).

The movie also works as a good case study for how actors (in concert with a sharp script) can create indelible performances. Each actor, main and supporting, infuses their respective character with such energy that we're afraid it will blow off the screen. Clooney plays his adulterer with unbridled zeal, making the phrase "Hi there!" funny with his delivery alone. Pitt's dumb gym trainer Chad never lets out a hint of intelligence, making his happy-go-lucky attitude somewhat charming despite his obliviousness. Malkovich's analyst, on the other hand, is shrewd, exacting and in desperate need of anger management and A.A. McDormand's "positive-thinking" gym instructor is so myopic and dedicated to achieving the perfect body that she just might be the only one to come out of this movie alive (...or barely scratched).

The Coen Brothers, who recently won Oscars for "No Country For Old Men" (a film I need to reevaluate), love to tackle farce and follow their stories to the logical endpoint instead of bailing characters out at the last second. What makes this movie so fun is how the CIA Superior and Officer (they aren't given names, but are played perfectly by J.K. Simmons and David Rasche) are left to make up the film's denouncement, and even they aren't sure what to make of it:

"What have learned here?" says Simmons' character. "I don't know," responds Rasche. "Well, let's hope we don't do it again, whatever it was."

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (PG-13) ***1/2

2008-05-30T04:51:00.001-07:00

He's back!

He's got the fedora, he's got the whip, he's got the gun- Damn, he left that at home. Oh, well. It's good to have you back, Indiana!

In KOTCS, Jones (still played by the rugged Harrison Ford) is forced by Soviet agent Irina Spalko (Cate Blanchett, in probably her oddest role yet) to find an artifact known as the Crystal Skull. Not much is known about it except that there are thirteen of these special kinds of skull in the world and they are all extremely, bizarrely magnetic. All kinds of metal are drawn to it, even gold, which shouldn't be. Along the adventure, Indiana meets the brash, young Mutt Williams (Shia LaBeouf) who's only to trying to find the skull to save his mom. Guess who?!

Along the way, Jones and Williams fight and outwit KGB agents, foot soldiers, and the living dead. For transportation, the two ride motorcycles, trucks, and amphibious vehicles, as well as riding rapids into and out of El Dorado! To complicate matters further, they pick up a deluded Professor "Ox" Oxley (John Hurt), a maternal Marion Ravenwood (Karen Allen!), and a treacherous 'Mac' George McHale (Ray Winstone). And I can't even begin to tell you how Jones stumbles into and out of a nuclear test sight!

There was also a bit of social satire in the film that I found refreshing. When Jones and Williams are on a bike outrunning the KGB agents, they end up in an anti-communist rally. To lose the agents, Mutt kicks the wooden post holding a sign that reads "Better dead than red!" which lands on the hood of the KGB's car. I kind of wished this film had more of these sly pokes, much like how the first one skewered the Nazis. Unfortunately, it didn't.

David Koepp's script is uniformly tight, concise, and energetic. Koepp is a go-to screenwriter for big budget films like Spider-Man and Mission: Impossible. His scripts often start off well and lose their way well into the second act. But here, his writing is strong. Of course, it helps if George Lucas wrote the basic story and the script you write is about Indiana Jones.

This is a fun movie, emphasis on fun. Steven Spielberg, being the major creative head of the film, brings back a lot of the elements that made the original trilogy so winning: escalating conflict with a new predicament beginning just as another ends, strong and intriguing characters, a score by none other than John Williams, and an unnerving sense of comedic and dramatic timing. And the visuals... Oh! While some of the film suffers from what I like to call "CGI fakery," the visuals on display are gorgeous. And there is one shot at the climax of this film that is just plain... majestic.

Starring:
Harrison Ford-Indiana Jones
Cate Blanchett-Irina Spalko
Shia LaBeouf-Mutt Williams
John Hurt-Professor "Ox" Oxley
Karen Allen-Marion Ravenwood
Ray Winstone-'Mac' George McHale

Written by David Koepp
Story by George Lucas and Jeff Nathanson
Produced by Frank Marshall
Directed by Steven Spielberg

21 (PG-13) ***

2008-04-18T03:59:00.000-07:00

"21" is decent escapist entertainment. It starts off well with Jim Sturgess playing gifted mathematics student Ben Campbell at MIT who catches the attention of his professor Micky Rosa (Kevin Spacey). Ben is inducted into a special group of Rosa's students, including Jim's crush Jill Taylor (Kate Bosworth). The group is taught by the professor to work as a team in counting cards at Vegas so they can make the big bucks. The film loses it's way 2/3rds in by not handling Jim's spiral into corruptive emotions with the same kind of wit and acumen as shown in earlier in the film. Still, it is an enjoyable caper where you get your money's worth.

Starring:
Jim Sturgess: Ben Campbell
Kate Bosworth: Jill Taylor
Kevin Spacey: Prof. Micky Rosa
Laurence Fishburne: Cole Williams
Aaron Yoo: Choi
Liza Lapira: Kianna
Jacob Pitts: Jimmy Fisher

Directed by Robert Luketic
Written by Peter Steinfeld & Allan Loeb
from the book "Bringing Down the House: The Inside Story of Six M.I.T. Students Who Took Vegas for Millions" by Ben Mezrich

I'm Back!

2008-03-17T11:18:00.000-07:00

Sorry for such a long absence. Anyway, i've been keeping busy and I have a best (& worst) of 07 list for you, plus my oscar picks. I know the Oscars are already over, but I would still like to share them with you. I actually got 7 of them correct! I'll start including some articles that didn't get into the Echo Times, a publication I work for. Enjoy!

Grindhouse (R) ****

2007-04-08T12:53:00.000-07:00

Oh, baby! They're back and better than ever! Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez have fashioned a double-barreled, action-packed spectacle in tribute to that trashiest of genres: The double-feature exploitation film. You know the genre: Where the gore is unfiltered, the sex is rampant, and the action is unbelievable.

In “Planet Terror,” Rodriguez casts a wide assortment of characters in a town overrun by zombies. He has a one-legged stripper (Rose McGowan), an ex-marine with pitch-perfect aiming (Freddy Rodríguez, no relation), a cook with a super-secret recipe (Jeff Fahey), his sheriff brother (Michael Biehn), the sheriff’s two deputies (Tom Savini and Carlos Gallardo), a doctor with a “prescription for pain” (Josh Brolin), the doctor’s wife with a pack of anesthetics she calls “her friends” (Marley Shelton), a hitchhiker (Stacy “Fergie“ Ferguson), a chemical weapons scientist (Naveen Andrews), and a colonel who’s smuggling said chemical weapons (Bruce Willis). Wow, what a mouthful. Of particular note, McGowan and Rodriquez have great chemistry, and it is great to see veterans like Biehn and Fahey back on the silver screen. Oh, yeah, you know how McGowan gets a gun for a leg? Well, let’s just say it is makes for one of the most kick-ass physically handicapped heroes in movie history!

In “Death Proof,” Kurt Russell is Stuntman Mike, a veteran stuntman from the days before movies went CG. He trails two groups of ladies: one group consisting of Vanessa Ferlito, Jordan Ladd, Sydney Tamiia Poitier, and Rose McGowan (Again!); the other consisting of Rosario Dawson, Tracie Thoms, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, and Zoe Bell. Stuntman Mike bides his time, waits for the perfect moment, and then BAM: Rams his pitch-black car, complete with a skull & cross bone hood into the girls’ cars! The two groups of ladies are surprising well defined characters, which is no surprise from Tarantino, who gave plum roles and dialogue to women like Pam Grier and Uma Thurman. But what is a surprise is how he uses the conversations between the girls to fatten up the audience before Stuntman Mike and his “Death Proof” car strike. The movie plays like a slick remix of Steven Spielberg’s “Duel.”

Even the trailers are the stuff of delightful exploitation fun: In the beginning, we get Rodriguez’s "Machete," about a hit man (Danny Trejo) getting revenge on his double-crossing employer by shooting up stuff and sleeping with the employer’s wife and daughter! In between the main films, we get “Werewolf Women of the SS,” an obscure ode to the really bizarre Grindhouse films directed by Rob Zombie, and “Thanksgiving,” an overt and hilarious parody of slasher films set during holidays like “Halloween” and “April Fools Day.” There’s even one by “Shaun of the Dead” director Edgar Wright that is so funny and clever, I wouldn’t even dare tell you the title.

Now, a lot of critics have already taken a stand on which is the better film. Some say “Planet Terror,” a lot more say “Death Proof,” but for me, they both work great, but for different reasons.

“Planet Terror” works because the film is about a diverse mix of people, each with their own personal trials and tribulations, who get thrown into the mix together when zombies start tearing the city loose. Oh, yeah, it also helps that the action, from a zombie heading towards Doc Block with a motorized saw to El Wray taking out zombies with his sniper-gun and switch blade knifes, is as crazy and unbelievable as it gets!

“Death Proof” works because it is largely a character study about two groups of women who just happened to be chased by a murdering psychopath. If the women were just caricatures, this film would have totally imploded. Oh, yeah, the action in this film is lean, direct, and uncomplicated. What you see on the screen isn’t digitally created; it is made with old school movie magic. You know, the kind where you had to be clever and careful about what is put on the screen and not rely on a computer to dial in an action sequence.

If “Planet Terror” is a buffet, then “Death Proof” is a lean, mean steak. Both go great with soda and popcorn.

Blades of Glory (PG-13) ***1/2

2007-03-30T14:26:00.000-07:00

Blades of Glory is sheer inspired silliness. Will Ferrell and Jon Heder are Chazz Michael Michaels and Jimmy MacElroy, professional ice skating extordinares. Michaels is the shameless lustful slob and MacElroy is the primpy clean wuzz. In other words, they were made for each other.

When a fight over a gold win tie leads to their banishment from men's single skating, Michaels and Macaroy are forced to work together in the men's pair skating. Sure, there are the usual amount of gay jokes (the ackward facing of the crotch as shown in the trailer above), but the jokes are actually good (!) not because what they're doing looks gay, but because what they're doing is making them feel very... very... uncomfortable.

More than that, this film seems to be subverting the ice-skating scene from the ground up. Take the two montages of Michael's and MacElroy's history at the beginning of the film. Most sports shows like to recap a player's beginnings for dramatic reverence and effect. In this movie, the effect is decidedly comedic:

-MacElroy describes his beginnings as happy and ordinary; Cut to his 9 year-old self walking on a treadmill, breathing into a tube, monitored by 5 to 6 doctors.
-Michaels remarks how he's come far from being a drug dealer and criminal; Cut to his cover of the porno "The Iceman Cometh" with pornstars at his feet.

What really surprised me about this movie was Ferrell. Most of you already know him from SNL, Anchorman, and Talladega Nights, and are aware of his talents as a comedian, but in this movie, he rises high to new lows. Will Ferrell, the actor, has no shame, allowing his character, Chazz Michael Michaels, to have even less. When Michaels finishes flaunting his libido, he usually excuses himself by saying "I'm a sex addict" with little or no prompting. Chazz Michael Michaels reminded me a lot of "Bluto" from Animal House: He isn't a character, he's a force of nature. And we love him all the more for it.

Staring:
Will Ferrell : Chazz Michael Michaels
Jon Heder: Jimmy MacElroy
Will Arnett : Stranz Van Waldenberg
Amy Poehler: Fairchild Van Waldenberg
Jenna Fischer: Katie Van Waldenberg
Craig T. Nelson: Coach

In Theaters March 30th.

Happy Feet (PG) ****

2007-03-27T22:05:00.000-07:00

“Happy Feet” is a fantastic film, filled with adventure, humor, heart, and an ample amount of toe tapping. Under the gentle direction of George Miller, the film soars with unique storytelling and excellent vocal performances by all (especially Williams, who does his best voice work since “Aladdin”). And the visuals! Oh! This film is a true cinematic marvel.

Starring:
Elijah Wood: Mumble
Brittany Murphy: Gloria
Hugh Jackman: Memphis
Nicole Kidman: Norma Jean
Hugo Weaving: Noah the Elder
Robin Williams: Ramon/Lovelace

Out on DVD, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD March 27th.

300 (R) ****

2007-03-25T09:58:00.000-07:00

Wow, what a film! “300” is the kind of film to get drunk on. King Leonidas (Gerard Butler) must take 300 soldiers to Thermopylae and defend Sparta from the onslaught of the Persian soldiers. That’s pretty much the skinny on the film’s plot. The rest is sound and fury, except, unlike Shakespeare’s famous words, “300” means something. It’s about defending one’s right to live on one’s own terms, not on anyone else’s. The visuals in “300” were what I expected “Sin City” to be: eye-popping, intense, transcendent, gripping. It’s hard to make visuals that are truly gripping. But 300 does that, and does it damn well.

Starring:
Gerard Butler: King Leonidas
Lena Headey: Queen Gorgo
David Wenham: Dilios
Dominic West: Theron
Rodrigo Santoro: Xerxes

In Theaters March 3rd.