list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Thirteen Days on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Thirteen_Days/176274/default.aspx Title: Thirteen Days
Year: 2000
Director: Roger Donaldson
Plot: Director Roger Donaldson teams up with star Kevin Costner for another political thriller (after their 1987 pairing, No Way Out), only this time with a film based on the actual events surrounding the Cuban missile crisis of 1962, taking place during the titular thirteen days wherein the U.S. and the Soviet Union nearly engaged in full-scale nuclear war. After President John F. Kennedy (Bruce Greenwood) is shown photographs from a spy plane detailing the presence of missiles in Cuba capable of obliterating massive areas of the U.S., he must immediately decide the most effective course of action for the country. With the aid of best friend and special assistant Kenny O'Donnell (Kevin Costner) and brother Robert (Steven Culp), the President must avoid a dire chain of events that could be dictated by General Curtis LeMay (Kevin Conway), who would rather take immediate action and invade Cuba. After initial reticence about leaking the information to the nation, President Kennedy eventually tells of the conflict, leading to widespread panic and a blockade of Cuba. With the aid of Robert McNamara (Dylan Baker) and Adlai Stevenson (Michael Fairman), the leaders must find a way to alleviate the tension of the situation. Thirteen Days also features Walter Adrian as Lyndon Johnson. ~ Jason Clark, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 6
Number of Lists: 7
Number of blog posts: 6
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Mon, 11 May 2009 20:16:43 GMTThirteen Days2000Roger DonaldsonDirector <a href="/players/P____88014/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Roger Donaldson</a> teams up with star <a href="/players/P____15189/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Kevin Costner</a> for another political thriller (after their 1987 pairing, <a href=/films/24893/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>No Way Out</a>), only this time with a film based on the actual events surrounding the Cuban missile crisis of 1962, taking place during the titular thirteen days wherein the U.S. and the Soviet Union nearly engaged in full-scale nuclear war. After President John F. Kennedy (<a href="/players/P____28600/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Bruce Greenwood</a>) is shown photographs from a spy plane detailing the presence of missiles in Cuba capable of obliterating massive areas of the U.S., he must immediately decide the most effective course of action for the country. With the aid of best friend and special assistant Kenny O'Donnell (<a href="/players/P____15189/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Kevin Costner</a>) and brother Robert (<a href="/players/P____16111/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Steven Culp</a>), the President must avoid a dire chain of events that could be dictated by General Curtis LeMay (<a href="/players/P____85758/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Kevin Conway</a>), who would rather take immediate action and invade Cuba. After initial reticence about leaking the information to the nation, President Kennedy eventually tells of the conflict, leading to widespread panic and a blockade of Cuba. With the aid of Robert McNamara (<a href="/players/P_____3389/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Dylan Baker</a>) and Adlai Stevenson (Michael Fairman), the leaders must find a way to alleviate the tension of the situation. Thirteen Days also features Walter Adrian as Lyndon Johnson. ~ Jason Clark, All Movie Guide6Taggedy Taggged (6-10)763http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t109666xtfx.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Thirteen_Days/176274/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/warmovieblog/archive/2009/1/16/39587.aspx Post By: WarMovieBlog
Post To: WarMovieBlog Blog
Post Date: 1/16/2009 9:01:08 AM
Body: Thirteen Days (2000) IMDB The closest the world ever came to all-out nuclear war, when the clock read two minutes to midnight, and the nation held its breath...  Those Thirteen Days in October of 1962 will forever live in history as the height of the cold war, and a landmark of a situation never to get into again.So, you might be thinking to yourself, how can a movie which primarily takes place behind closed White House doors and is mostly comprised of talking heads be any good?  Well, this one is.  Mainly because its just plain well done, from a production standpoint especially, but also in some well-cast and believable roles. I'm not even going to try to outline the plot here, that's a known part of history, and if you're unfamiliar with it, just do a search on Wikipedia for "Cuban Missile Crisis" for starters.  That should tell you all you need to know.  The short version is this:  The Soviet Union deploys medium range nuclear missiles into Cuba, and the ensuing diplomatic battle which ensued basically defined the Cold War as we'll remember it.  The movie basically chronicles in a 'docu-drama' style the entire chain of events, from the first U-2 photos of the missile installations, to the final agreement by the Soviets to dismantle them.White House aid Kenny O'Donnell (Kevin Costner) is the "focus" of the story, that is, its through his eyes primarily the story is told, and such, we get to know his family and a look into the feelings of everyday Americans during the situation.But the scope of the entire picture is what is amazing.  I will pit this film up against such docu-dramas as "Tora! Tora! Tora!" and "The Longest Day" any time.  From the White House, to the O'Donnell house, to Cuba and the surrounding waters, Air Force bases, the UN... everything in this movie just looks great.And the cast.  You'll have to go read up on IMDB about everyone involved, but suffice it to say that every major player in the incident is represented here, from President Kennedy (Bruce Greenwood), Robert Kennedy (an excellent casting move with Steven Culp), Robert McNamara (Dylan Baker), Adlai Stevenson (Michael Fairman)... the list goes on and on.  All of which were mostly good to excellent.  Huge kudos to Culp who pulled off one of the more convincing Bobby Kennedy's I've seen.  Normally I like Costner (yes I said it, I'm a Costner fanboy!) but here I wasn't too impressed with his interpretation of "the" accent.  Greenwood did an OK job most of the time, with a few stellar moments.What keeps the movie from getting too dull with all the talking heads is timely exits to other key events, such as actually seeing the crews fueling up the Cuban missiles, the Air Force bases, the U-2 vs. SAM battle, the entire blockade sequence.  Without these I don't think it would have been the movie it was.I would highly recommend this film to anyone, especially for a history class or the like.  Apart from a few unavoidable spats of profanity there's nothing in here to keep Thirteen Days out of the classroom.Speaking of which, here's the U-2 vs. SAM sequence I was talking about.  Which never happened.  Really! And the trailer, which should give you a good idea. Thirteen Days (2000) on Spout.com Originally posted on:War Movie Reviews and News
]]>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:01:08 GMTWarMovieBlogWarMovieBlog Blog1/16/2009 9:01:08 AMThirteen Days (2000) IMDB The closest the world ever came to all-out nuclear war, when the clock read two minutes to midnight, and the nation held its breath...  Those Thirteen Days in October of 1962 will forever live in history as the height of the cold war, and a landmark of a situation never to get into again.So, you might be thinking to yourself, how can a movie which primarily takes place behind closed White House doors and is mostly comprised of talking heads be any good?  Well, this one is.  Mainly because its just plain well done, from a production standpoint especially, but also in some well-cast and believable roles. I'm not even going to try to outline the plot here, that's a known part of history, and if you're unfamiliar with it, just do a search on Wikipedia for "Cuban Missile Crisis" for starters.  That should tell you all you need to know.  The short version is this:  The Soviet Union deploys medium range nuclear missiles into Cuba, and the ensuing diplomatic battle which ensued basically defined the Cold War as we'll remember it.  The movie basically chronicles in a 'docu-drama' style the entire chain of events, from the first U-2 photos of the missile installations, to the final agreement by the Soviets to dismantle them.White House aid Kenny O'Donnell (Kevin Costner) is the "focus" of the story, that is, its through his eyes primarily the story is told, and such, we get to know his family and a look into the feelings of everyday Americans during the situation.But the scope of the entire picture is what is amazing.  I will pit this film up against such docu-dramas as "Tora! Tora! Tora!" and "The Longest Day" any time.  From the White House, to the O'Donnell house, to Cuba and the surrounding waters, Air Force bases, the UN... everything in this movie just looks great.And the cast.  You'll have to go read up on IMDB about everyone involved, but suffice it to say that every major player in the incident is represented here, from President Kennedy (Bruce Greenwood), Robert Kennedy (an excellent casting move with Steven Culp), Robert McNamara (Dylan Baker), Adlai Stevenson (Michael Fairman)... the list goes on and on.  All of which were mostly good to excellent.  Huge kudos to Culp who pulled off one of the more convincing Bobby Kennedy's I've seen.  Normally I like Costner (yes I said it, I'm a Costner fanboy!) but here I wasn't too impressed with his interpretation of "the" accent.  Greenwood did an OK job most of the time, with a few stellar moments.What keeps the movie from getting too dull with all the talking heads is timely exits to other key events, such as actually seeing the crews fueling up the Cuban missiles, the Air Force bases, the U-2 vs. SAM battle, the entire blockade sequence.  Without these I don't think it would have been the movie it was.I would highly recommend this film to anyone, especially for a history class or the like.  Apart from a few unavoidable spats of profanity there's nothing in here to keep Thirteen Days out of the classroom.Speaking of which, here's the U-2 vs. SAM sequence I was talking about.  Which never happened.  Really! And the trailer, which should give you a good idea. Thirteen Days (2000) on Spout.com Originally posted on:War Movie Reviews and News http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/12/3/37896.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 12/3/2008 3:00:52 PM
Body: It’s more difficult to be convincing as a real person when acting on film than on the stage. The camera can get closer and your image ends up projected many times larger than life size. So, despite giving a Tony Award-winning performance as Richard Nixon in the theater version of Frost/Nixon, Frank Langella was not initially thought of as worthy to reprise the role in Ron Howard’s movie adaptation of the play. Part of it was that he’s not a big name, but another reason was that he looks nothing like Tricky Dick. Ultimately, Langella did get the part, and while he doesn’t resemble the former president, he apparently does a bang up job in the role. But the transition could easily have been as awkward as Ralph Bellamy’s reprisal of his Tony-winning portrayal of Franklin Roosevelt in Sunrise at Campobello. In the film version of that play, Bellamy’s vocal impersonation comes off more like a Scottish brogue (he sounds exactly like Sean Connery, in fact) than FDR’s signature “Locust Valley lockjaw.”  Instead, Langella is on track for an Oscar nomination, and is sure to join the following actors who also gave convincing performances as world leaders. As a handicap, SpoutBlog has limited the selections to modern era leaders whose real persona exists on film/tape and are therefore more easily comparable to actors’ representations. 10. Anthony Hopkins as President Richard Nixon in Nixon (1995) The performance is exaggerated almost to the point of out-doing Dan Hedaya’s comedic portrayal in Dick, but Hopkins’ Nixon isn’t the failure that many reviews criticized it as. The art of a convincing portrait is not so much about presenting an exact likeness as it is about expressing a perspective, and Oliver Stone’s employment of Hannibal Lecter as the (then) most hated president brought the viewpoint across right away. It may not be Hopkins’ best Oscar-nominated presidential performance (that would be his John Quincy Adams in Amistad), but it is one of his most spectacular accomplishments. 9. Josh Brolin as President George W. Bush in W. (2008) Stone surprisingly went a different way with his latest presidential biopic (which was not, as has been claimed, the first film about a sitting president; see #6). Brolin is much less a caricature than was expected, and the actor even welcomes sympathy from Bush-haters. It’s not necessarily an exact impersonation; it’s better. Brolin makes the role his own while also doing some requisite aping, and it’s a performance that should garner him an Oscar nomination next month. 8. James Brolin as President Ronald Reagan in The Reagans (2003) Like son, like father, though instead of appropriately portraying the elder Bush (he might have done as well as James Cromwell in W.), Josh Brolin’s father plays that president’s predecessor in this made-for-TV biopic. He looks a little silly in the role, but James Brolin does an excellent job with the voice and the overall execution of the actor-turned-leader’s public persona. The conservatives may have hated the movie, but the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences were convinced enough to nominate Brolin for an Emmy Award. 7. Jerry Haleva as Saddam Hussein in The Big Lebowski (1998) Sometimes professional impersonators are the most perfect people to play figures on the big screen. Unfortunately, people like Queen Elizabeth look-alike Jeannette Charles (The Naked Gun; European Vacation, Austin Powers in Goldmember) aren’t famous enough or talented enough actors to carry a whole film like The Queen. The late Haleva made a career out of portraying the Iraqi dictator, appearing prominently in such comedies as Hot Shots!, Hot Shots! Part Deux and Jane Austen’s Mafia! But it’s his silent performance in The Big Lebowski that works best (though his lisped Hussein in the Hot Shots! sequel is hilarious). Even Hussein’s own sons could have made the mistake of thinking it was the real dictator up there on the screen. 6. Bruce Greenwood as President John F. Kennedy in Thirteen Days (2000) Back in the 1960s, President Kennedy got to be part of the casting process for Warner Bros.’ depiction of him in the WWII drama PT 109. His selection of Cliff Robertson was fine, but if he’d been alive long enough to also assist the production of Thirteen Days, he would have surely agreed with the casting of Bruce Greenwood. The actor doesn’t look much like JFK in this non-biopic about the Cuban Missile Crisis, but to agree with Kevin Costner, Greenwood is Kennedy in the film, only bettered by Steven Culp as RFK. Too bad Costner has to be in there at all. As usual his talent for accents is atrocious, but at least he didn’t bother attempting to play the president. Greenwood was definitely deserving of an Oscar nod for his portrayal, but apparently only one presidential role (Jeff Bridges in The Contender) was enough for the 2001 Supporting Actor race. 5. Gary Sinise as President Harry S. Truman in Truman (1995) The problem with famous actors portraying well-known real-life figures is that the audience more than likely sees the actor first. It’s a problem with most of the portrayals on this list, and it’s certainly true for Gary Sinise in the role of Truman. He looks just like Gary Sinise with some necessary prosthetics. And his voice is distinctly his own, too, despite an attempt at the accent. Yet the performance is engaging enough to make the viewer forget all that and become adequately convinced enough to accept Sinise as the president with the difficult task of ending World War II through drastic measures. 4. Bruno Ganz as Adolph Hitler in Downfall (2004) It’s easy to play Hitler; just don the signature mustache and you’re good to go. Ganz went above and beyond, though, to not just convincingly represent the Nazi dictator but also to capture his thought-non-existent humanity. His voice is perfection and his overall performance is astounding. Had the three-dimensionality of the portrayal not been so controversial, Ganz could have garnered an Academy Award nomination. 3. Edward Hermann as President Franklin Roosevelt in Annie (1982) A lot of actors have attempted FDR, from Bellamy in Sunrise at Campobello to Kenneth Branagh in Warm Springs (and let’s not forget Jon Voight’s laughable turn in Pearl Harbor), but nobody else is as good as Hermann, who played the four-term president in two TV movies prior to reprising the role in this screen version of the lovable Broadway musical. The only reason he deserves more credit here than for his two Emmy-nominated portrayals is because in Annie he joins in to sing “Tomorrow” with the li’l titular orphan, and that’s believably something the real FDR would have taken much pleasure in. 2. Michael Sheen as Prime Minister Tony Blair in The Queen (2006) Langella and his Frost/Nixon costar, Michael Sheen, are equally being recognized for their performances in that film. But a couple of years ago, Sheen was upstaged by the Oscar-winning Helen Mirren in The Queen. Still, despite his lack of a deserved nod from the Academy, he was highly acclaimed for his portrayal of Tony Blair, a role he’d already perfected in the British TV movie The Deal (from the same writer-director pair as The Queen). And the performance rushed him to the top ranks of acting talent, allowing him to be unquestionably worthy of reprising his stage role as David Frost and easily thought of as a front-runner for the Oscars this time around. 1. Martin Sheen as President John F. Kennedy in Kennedy (1983) Sheen was so good as JFK in this TV miniseries that in The Goonies “Mouth” (Corey Feldman) confuses the president for the actor on a 50-cent piece. And well, Mouth, as Cyndi Lauper sings on the soundtrack, “What’s good enough for you is good enough for me. It’s good enough. It’s good enough for me. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:00:52 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com12/3/2008 3:00:52 PMIt’s more difficult to be convincing as a real person when acting on film than on the stage. The camera can get closer and your image ends up projected many times larger than life size. So, despite giving a Tony Award-winning performance as Richard Nixon in the theater version of Frost/Nixon, Frank Langella was not initially thought of as worthy to reprise the role in Ron Howard’s movie adaptation of the play. Part of it was that he’s not a big name, but another reason was that he looks nothing like Tricky Dick. Ultimately, Langella did get the part, and while he doesn’t resemble the former president, he apparently does a bang up job in the role. But the transition could easily have been as awkward as Ralph Bellamy’s reprisal of his Tony-winning portrayal of Franklin Roosevelt in Sunrise at Campobello. In the film version of that play, Bellamy’s vocal impersonation comes off more like a Scottish brogue (he sounds exactly like Sean Connery, in fact) than FDR’s signature “Locust Valley lockjaw.”  Instead, Langella is on track for an Oscar nomination, and is sure to join the following actors who also gave convincing performances as world leaders. As a handicap, SpoutBlog has limited the selections to modern era leaders whose real persona exists on film/tape and are therefore more easily comparable to actors’ representations. 10. Anthony Hopkins as President Richard Nixon in Nixon (1995) The performance is exaggerated almost to the point of out-doing Dan Hedaya’s comedic portrayal in Dick, but Hopkins’ Nixon isn’t the failure that many reviews criticized it as. The art of a convincing portrait is not so much about presenting an exact likeness as it is about expressing a perspective, and Oliver Stone’s employment of Hannibal Lecter as the (then) most hated president brought the viewpoint across right away. It may not be Hopkins’ best Oscar-nominated presidential performance (that would be his John Quincy Adams in Amistad), but it is one of his most spectacular accomplishments. 9. Josh Brolin as President George W. Bush in W. (2008) Stone surprisingly went a different way with his latest presidential biopic (which was not, as has been claimed, the first film about a sitting president; see #6). Brolin is much less a caricature than was expected, and the actor even welcomes sympathy from Bush-haters. It’s not necessarily an exact impersonation; it’s better. Brolin makes the role his own while also doing some requisite aping, and it’s a performance that should garner him an Oscar nomination next month. 8. James Brolin as President Ronald Reagan in The Reagans (2003) Like son, like father, though instead of appropriately portraying the elder Bush (he might have done as well as James Cromwell in W.), Josh Brolin’s father plays that president’s predecessor in this made-for-TV biopic. He looks a little silly in the role, but James Brolin does an excellent job with the voice and the overall execution of the actor-turned-leader’s public persona. The conservatives may have hated the movie, but the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences were convinced enough to nominate Brolin for an Emmy Award. 7. Jerry Haleva as Saddam Hussein in The Big Lebowski (1998) Sometimes professional impersonators are the most perfect people to play figures on the big screen. Unfortunately, people like Queen Elizabeth look-alike Jeannette Charles (The Naked Gun; European Vacation, Austin Powers in Goldmember) aren’t famous enough or talented enough actors to carry a whole film like The Queen. The late Haleva made a career out of portraying the Iraqi dictator, appearing prominently in such comedies as Hot Shots!, Hot Shots! Part Deux and Jane Austen’s Mafia! But it’s his silent performance in The Big Lebowski that works best (though his lisped Hussein in the Hot Shots! sequel is hilarious). Even Hussein’s own sons could have made the mistake of thinking it was the real dictator up there on the screen. 6. Bruce Greenwood as President John F. Kennedy in Thirteen Days (2000) Back in the 1960s, President Kennedy got to be part of the casting process for Warner Bros.’ depiction of him in the WWII drama PT 109. His selection of Cliff Robertson was fine, but if he’d been alive long enough to also assist the production of Thirteen Days, he would have surely agreed with the casting of Bruce Greenwood. The actor doesn’t look much like JFK in this non-biopic about the Cuban Missile Crisis, but to agree with Kevin Costner, Greenwood is Kennedy in the film, only bettered by Steven Culp as RFK. Too bad Costner has to be in there at all. As usual his talent for accents is atrocious, but at least he didn’t bother attempting to play the president. Greenwood was definitely deserving of an Oscar nod for his portrayal, but apparently only one presidential role (Jeff Bridges in The Contender) was enough for the 2001 Supporting Actor race. 5. Gary Sinise as President Harry S. Truman in Truman (1995) The problem with famous actors portraying well-known real-life figures is that the audience more than likely sees the actor first. It’s a problem with most of the portrayals on this list, and it’s certainly true for Gary Sinise in the role of Truman. He looks just like Gary Sinise with some necessary prosthetics. And his voice is distinctly his own, too, despite an attempt at the accent. Yet the performance is engaging enough to make the viewer forget all that and become adequately convinced enough to accept Sinise as the president with the difficult task of ending World War II through drastic measures. 4. Bruno Ganz as Adolph Hitler in Downfall (2004) It’s easy to play Hitler; just don the signature mustache and you’re good to go. Ganz went above and beyond, though, to not just convincingly represent the Nazi dictator but also to capture his thought-non-existent humanity. His voice is perfection and his overall performance is astounding. Had the three-dimensionality of the portrayal not been so controversial, Ganz could have garnered an Academy Award nomination. 3. Edward Hermann as President Franklin Roosevelt in Annie (1982) A lot of actors have attempted FDR, from Bellamy in Sunrise at Campobello to Kenneth Branagh in Warm Springs (and let’s not forget Jon Voight’s laughable turn in Pearl Harbor), but nobody else is as good as Hermann, who played the four-term president in two TV movies prior to reprising the role in this screen version of the lovable Broadway musical. The only reason he deserves more credit here than for his two Emmy-nominated portrayals is because in Annie he joins in to sing “Tomorrow” with the li’l titular orphan, and that’s believably something the real FDR would have taken much pleasure in. 2. Michael Sheen as Prime Minister Tony Blair in The Queen (2006) Langella and his Frost/Nixon costar, Michael Sheen, are equally being recognized for their performances in that film. But a couple of years ago, Sheen was upstaged by the Oscar-winning Helen Mirren in The Queen. Still, despite his lack of a deserved nod from the Academy, he was highly acclaimed for his portrayal of Tony Blair, a role he’d already perfected in the British TV movie The Deal (from the same writer-director pair as The Queen). And the performance rushed him to the top ranks of acting talent, allowing him to be unquestionably worthy of reprising his stage role as David Frost and easily thought of as a front-runner for the Oscars this time around. 1. Martin Sheen as President John F. Kennedy in Kennedy (1983) Sheen was so good as JFK in this TV miniseries that in The Goonies “Mouth” (Corey Feldman) confuses the president for the actor on a 50-cent piece. And well, Mouth, as Cyndi Lauper sings on the soundtrack, “What’s good enough for you is good enough for me. It’s good enough. It’s good enough for me. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/leeroy711/archive/2008/10/2/35833.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: leeroy711 Blog
Post Date: 10/2/2008 1:44:17 PM
Body: John Adams (2008) *** 1/2 Stars out of 5 Directed by: Tom Hooper Starring: Paul Giamatti, Laura Linney, Tom Wilkinson and Stephen Dillane Running Time: 201 minutes Rated: NR Released: 2008 Language: English Review: Something dawned on me as I was watching this series. At one point we watch the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Another shows the inauguration of the first President of the United States. We also see the depiction of the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party early in the series. I came to wonder: Why haven’t I seen this before? Aren’t these some of the most pivotal moments in the shaping of our nation? I’ve read about them in books, and I probably seen some of this stuff re-enacted on the History Channel or public broadcast. But, never on the big screen or a major production cable special such as this. I’ve seen some pretty good political thrillers that are based on historic events, such as Thirteen Days, Munich or Z. But none of those events took place in what could be argued as the most important period of the forming of our nation. The Patriot takes place during this period. But that movie was much less about the events taking place than it was about the characters involved. So why is it that some of the most riveting, philosophically provocative and emotionally charged real life stories have been confined almost solely to the pages of a history book or bad re-enactments on PBS? I have my own speculations but I will quickly remind myself that this is supposed to be a review of the series and not the incessant ravings of a libertarian mind. So, let’s start off where I typically like to, with the cinematography. In the first couple of episodes, I was very taken by some of the beautiful scenery and use of color pallets. A lot of the shots I enjoyed the most were filmed in the winter with a thick bed of snow on the ground contrasted with all of the earthy tones of the various structures and fauna springing up from the ground. Much of these gave a very Norman Rockwell-like impression. There were also plenty of shots that I not only didn’t care for, I was ultimately annoyed with. This series is filled with one technique that was completely overused. What I’m referring to is when the audience is subjected to watching a scene unfold from behind an out of focus obstruction or obstructions. Imagine watching something happen as you are peering through weeds or grass. This makes sense, if you are being laying down in an open field and being chased by Jeepers Creepers. This makes no sense however, when you are watching a heart to heart conversation between a 90 year old John Adams and his beloved son. Why are we hiding in the grass? Are we waiting for a plot twist in which Mr. Adams takes his big walking stick and beats his son to death? (SPOILER ALERT: This does not happen) This series is completely filled with these shots and every one seems very out of place. I removed a half star just for that. Moving along, the cast was quite good. I was a bit worried simply because of my lack of affection to Paul Giamatti and Laura Linney (Mr. and Mrs. Adams, respectively). I was a bit surprised at how much I enjoyed both of their performances. Giamatti put down what I would call his best performance thus far with passion and fervor. Linney played the more patient and reserved, but still passionate counterpart to the team. Tom Wilkinson was very good as the pragmatic yet somewhat frivolous Benjamin Franklin. And Stephen Dillane was Thomas Jefferson. He was a very integral part of Adam’s story. He established himself as Adam’s closest friend and ally. Later, politics would try their friendship to its very brink. He may have been the best performer of the series. It was certainly one of the more challenging roles. One of my favorite scenes is towards the end when John Adam’s doctor says that while some wrote or spoke or fought for this revolution, it was Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson who thought for us all. Rufus Sewell, I believe clearly established himself as the series’ only true antagonist, the empirical Alexander Hamilton. His character was one of the most interesting to watch because it showed (assuming historical accuracy) how quickly a revolution spawn from ideal, philosophy and principal could be infiltrated and sullied by politics and partisanship. The only other problem I had with this series was somewhat inherent in the nature of a miniseries. A decent 2 ½ hour long movie may have a lull that lasts 45 minutes or so. A series that spans about 9 hours however is subject to a much longer and less forgivable lull. The first couple of episodes really pulled me in. We are treated to very well put together depictions of both the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party. Unfortunately, we must very quickly shift to a much slower gear and remain there for the rest of the series. I recall thinking to myself, after watching the fourth or fifth episode, that if I had to wait another week for the next installment, I very likely would have given up on it. I’m glad that I didn’t, because once you have gotten used to the slower pace, you can more easily take in and process the deep rooted philosophical banter that is thrown about between the founding fathers………..and still today. In summary, I will give this series my recommendation. It is more than likely, the most historically accurate telling of the events that took place in New England during the late 18th century. Although, the story is primarily about its namesake, John Adams, it is just as much about the American Revolution as a whole. This story has been sugarcoated and hand fed to us practically since it was current events and any history buff that’s interested in a more candid look at the founding fathers would do themselves justice to pick this one up. Recommendations: If you have already seen this one and enjoyed it, I would suggest checking out other HBO series. I would say Deadwood and Carnivàle are good choices.
]]>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:44:17 GMTleeroy711leeroy711 Blog10/2/2008 1:44:17 PM John Adams (2008) *** 1/2 Stars out of 5 Directed by: Tom Hooper Starring: Paul Giamatti, Laura Linney, Tom Wilkinson and Stephen Dillane Running Time: 201 minutes Rated: NR Released: 2008 Language: English Review: Something dawned on me as I was watching this series. At one point we watch the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Another shows the inauguration of the first President of the United States. We also see the depiction of the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party early in the series. I came to wonder: Why haven&rsquo;t I seen this before? Aren&rsquo;t these some of the most pivotal moments in the shaping of our nation? I&rsquo;ve read about them in books, and I probably seen some of this stuff re-enacted on the History Channel or public broadcast. But, never on the big screen or a major production cable special such as this. I&rsquo;ve seen some pretty good political thrillers that are based on historic events, such as Thirteen Days, Munich or Z. But none of those events took place in what could be argued as the most important period of the forming of our nation. The Patriot takes place during this period. But that movie was much less about the events taking place than it was about the characters involved. So why is it that some of the most riveting, philosophically provocative and emotionally charged real life stories have been confined almost solely to the pages of a history book or bad re-enactments on PBS? I have my own speculations but I will quickly remind myself that this is supposed to be a review of the series and not the incessant ravings of a libertarian mind. So, let&rsquo;s start off where I typically like to, with the cinematography. In the first couple of episodes, I was very taken by some of the beautiful scenery and use of color pallets. A lot of the shots I enjoyed the most were filmed in the winter with a thick bed of snow on the ground contrasted with all of the earthy tones of the various structures and fauna springing up from the ground. Much of these gave a very Norman Rockwell-like impression. There were also plenty of shots that I not only didn&rsquo;t care for, I was ultimately annoyed with. This series is filled with one technique that was completely overused. What I&rsquo;m referring to is when the audience is subjected to watching a scene unfold from behind an out of focus obstruction or obstructions. Imagine watching something happen as you are peering through weeds or grass. This makes sense, if you are being laying down in an open field and being chased by Jeepers Creepers. This makes no sense however, when you are watching a heart to heart conversation between a 90 year old John Adams and his beloved son. Why are we hiding in the grass? Are we waiting for a plot twist in which Mr. Adams takes his big walking stick and beats his son to death? (SPOILER ALERT: This does not happen) This series is completely filled with these shots and every one seems very out of place. I removed a half star just for that. Moving along, the cast was quite good. I was a bit worried simply because of my lack of affection to Paul Giamatti and Laura Linney (Mr. and Mrs. Adams, respectively). I was a bit surprised at how much I enjoyed both of their performances. Giamatti put down what I would call his best performance thus far with passion and fervor. Linney played the more patient and reserved, but still passionate counterpart to the team. Tom Wilkinson was very good as the pragmatic yet somewhat frivolous Benjamin Franklin. And Stephen Dillane was Thomas Jefferson. He was a very integral part of Adam&rsquo;s story. He established himself as Adam&rsquo;s closest friend and ally. Later, politics would try their friendship to its very brink. He may have been the best performer of the series. It was certainly one of the more challenging roles. One of my favorite scenes is towards the end when John Adam&rsquo;s doctor says that while some wrote or spoke or fought for this revolution, it was Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson who thought for us all. Rufus Sewell, I believe clearly established himself as the series&rsquo; only true antagonist, the empirical Alexander Hamilton. His character was one of the most interesting to watch because it showed (assuming historical accuracy) how quickly a revolution spawn from ideal, philosophy and principal could be infiltrated and sullied by politics and partisanship. The only other problem I had with this series was somewhat inherent in the nature of a miniseries. A decent 2 &frac12; hour long movie may have a lull that lasts 45 minutes or so. A series that spans about 9 hours however is subject to a much longer and less forgivable lull. The first couple of episodes really pulled me in. We are treated to very well put together depictions of both the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party. Unfortunately, we must very quickly shift to a much slower gear and remain there for the rest of the series. I recall thinking to myself, after watching the fourth or fifth episode, that if I had to wait another week for the next installment, I very likely would have given up on it. I&rsquo;m glad that I didn&rsquo;t, because once you have gotten used to the slower pace, you can more easily take in and process the deep rooted philosophical banter that is thrown about between the founding fathers&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;..and still today. In summary, I will give this series my recommendation. It is more than likely, the most historically accurate telling of the events that took place in New England during the late 18th century. Although, the story is primarily about its namesake, John Adams, it is just as much about the American Revolution as a whole. This story has been sugarcoated and hand fed to us practically since it was current events and any history buff that&rsquo;s interested in a more candid look at the founding fathers would do themselves justice to pick this one up. Recommendations: If you have already seen this one and enjoyed it, I would suggest checking out other HBO series. I would say Deadwood and Carniv&agrave;le are good choices. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/9/2/34658.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 9/2/2008 4:00:50 PM
Body: The Democratic National Convention is over, and all the ecstatic party members have left Denver to go back to their zombie-esque lives (Bob Hope said it, not me). But after four days of celebrating what it means to be a Democrat, some may not wish to settle down and calmly wait out the next two months until Obama’s (possible) win, let alone the next five months waiting for the candidate to (possibly) be sworn in as President, participating in the normal non-specifically-Democratic, non-self-congratulatory activities that most of us are content with. So, one thing excited Democrats can do is watch movies that will continue to inspire and encourage their beliefs and politics. As Karina already wrote, The American President is one movie that just barely may allow Obama fans to relive his DNC speech. Also, beginning yesterday, the Oscar-nominated documentary No End in Sight will be available in full on YouTube through till Election Day. Of course, there’s always other anti-war and anti-Bush docs for free viewing online, at such sites as SnagFilms and FreeDocumentaries.org. And since there are so many docs out there that can make a Democrat giddy with the want for change, I’ve decided to limit today’s list to fictions and dramatizations, because they are more about feelings than facts, and that’s all you really need for political inspiration these days. As usual, I’m leaving out a lot of picks, both obvious and obscure, so feel free to tell us what movie make you feel most proud to be a Democrat. Mr. Deeds Goes to Town - Never mind that Frank Capra voted Republican or that ultimately this film has rather conservative messages regarding traditionalism, privatization and self-sufficiency; all the allusions to the New Deal are strong enough to excite any Rooseveltian liberal. In its time it may have fooled the population by seeming pro-FDR, but today it can still be appreciated by Democrats for demonstrating the President’s Depression-era programs in a way that may be celebrated by those who believe in them. Just concentrate more on screenwriter Robert Riskin’s influence and contribution and ignore Capra’s underlying and conclusive ideology. Cradle Will Rock - Another Depression-era film, though this one was made 63 years later and is actually pro-New Deal, directed by the openly liberal actor/filmmaker Tim Robbins. In a way, it’s probably more left-wing than even some Democrats can agree with, but a general appreciation for government-funded and supported arts, as well as a hatred of conservative-pressured cuts to similar programs, should allow most in the party to enjoy the film. The People vs. Larry Flynt - You can’t have a Democratic film marathon without at least one title celebrating the First Amendment. Feel free to substitute with Lenny, or just add it to the list. Roe vs. Wade - A TV movie, sure, and not even a great one, but when it comes to films about women’s right to choose, you’ve either got great foreign films (Vera Drake; 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days), which don’t exactly represent U.S. politics, documentaries (which don’t qualify the list), and satires (Citizen Ruth would be a decent inclusion, maybe, but it kind of ridicules all sides). So, here’s the direct dramatization of the court case that made history. Thirteen Days - JFK’s presidency is well-enough renowned by the Democratic Party, but this specific portrayal of one of his greatest moments in office is also important viewing for fans of RFK and Adlai Stevenson. Dick - It’s possible to get excited while watching All the President’s Men and celebrating the outcome of Woodward and Bernstein’s investigation, but Dick is a little more anti-Nixon, at least in a lampooning manner. Plus, as great as Redford and Hoffman are in AtPM, I prefer Will Ferrell and Bruce McCullough as the journalists who helped to take down the corrupt Republican. Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay - And if you prefer Dan Hedaya’s humorous portrayal of Nixon in Dick to Anthony Hopkins in Nixon, you’ll likely enjoy James Adomian’s caricature of George W. Bush in this Harold & Kumar sequel. It’s a little jokingly apologetic, but it will tide you over until W. comes out — if you’re even eager to see a full biopic about your worst enemy, that is. Inherit the Wind - Based on the infamous 1925 trial of science teacher John T. Scopes, who was convicted for teaching evolution in a state allowing only creationism to be taught, this 1960 adaptation of Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee’s play continues to be significant in the ongoing debate regarding science vs. religion and the division of Church and State. To Kill a Mockingbird - Since I can’t decide on any movies to include that directly deal with the Civil Rights Act, here’s the movie based on the book that inspired me most about civil rights when I was young. It should be required viewing (and the book should be required reading) for all kids of impressionable age. Three Kings - I certainly wouldn’t vote for somebody solely based on his or her movie tastes, but I will admit to liking Bill Clinton a little bit more, post-presidency, after learning from his guest appearance on Roger Ebert & the Movies that he loved Three Kings. And, the other way around, I had an even greater appreciation for the film after Clinton’s endorsement, which included a reading of the film, which goes as follows (thanks to Salon for the quote and lead-in): He saw the movie as an indication that we need to face up to society’s “oldest, most primitive problem, our tribalism, our tendency to go beyond a natural pride in our group, whether it’s a racial or ethnic or religious group or whatever,” which results in “fear and distrust and dehumanization and violence against ‘the other.’” Of course, just because Clinton liked Three Kings doesn’t mean other Democrats will. Or vice versa. Ronald Reagan was apparently a big fan of Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, which hasn’t made me any less of a fan. So, I’ll ask again, differently, since the Democratic Party is anything but completely united: what movies are most relevant to your politics as a Democrat? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 20:00:50 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com9/2/2008 4:00:50 PMThe Democratic National Convention is over, and all the ecstatic party members have left Denver to go back to their zombie-esque lives (Bob Hope said it, not me). But after four days of celebrating what it means to be a Democrat, some may not wish to settle down and calmly wait out the next two months until Obama’s (possible) win, let alone the next five months waiting for the candidate to (possibly) be sworn in as President, participating in the normal non-specifically-Democratic, non-self-congratulatory activities that most of us are content with. So, one thing excited Democrats can do is watch movies that will continue to inspire and encourage their beliefs and politics. As Karina already wrote, The American President is one movie that just barely may allow Obama fans to relive his DNC speech. Also, beginning yesterday, the Oscar-nominated documentary No End in Sight will be available in full on YouTube through till Election Day. Of course, there’s always other anti-war and anti-Bush docs for free viewing online, at such sites as SnagFilms and FreeDocumentaries.org. And since there are so many docs out there that can make a Democrat giddy with the want for change, I’ve decided to limit today’s list to fictions and dramatizations, because they are more about feelings than facts, and that’s all you really need for political inspiration these days. As usual, I’m leaving out a lot of picks, both obvious and obscure, so feel free to tell us what movie make you feel most proud to be a Democrat. Mr. Deeds Goes to Town - Never mind that Frank Capra voted Republican or that ultimately this film has rather conservative messages regarding traditionalism, privatization and self-sufficiency; all the allusions to the New Deal are strong enough to excite any Rooseveltian liberal. In its time it may have fooled the population by seeming pro-FDR, but today it can still be appreciated by Democrats for demonstrating the President’s Depression-era programs in a way that may be celebrated by those who believe in them. Just concentrate more on screenwriter Robert Riskin’s influence and contribution and ignore Capra’s underlying and conclusive ideology. Cradle Will Rock - Another Depression-era film, though this one was made 63 years later and is actually pro-New Deal, directed by the openly liberal actor/filmmaker Tim Robbins. In a way, it’s probably more left-wing than even some Democrats can agree with, but a general appreciation for government-funded and supported arts, as well as a hatred of conservative-pressured cuts to similar programs, should allow most in the party to enjoy the film. The People vs. Larry Flynt - You can’t have a Democratic film marathon without at least one title celebrating the First Amendment. Feel free to substitute with Lenny, or just add it to the list. Roe vs. Wade - A TV movie, sure, and not even a great one, but when it comes to films about women’s right to choose, you’ve either got great foreign films (Vera Drake; 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days), which don’t exactly represent U.S. politics, documentaries (which don’t qualify the list), and satires (Citizen Ruth would be a decent inclusion, maybe, but it kind of ridicules all sides). So, here’s the direct dramatization of the court case that made history. Thirteen Days - JFK’s presidency is well-enough renowned by the Democratic Party, but this specific portrayal of one of his greatest moments in office is also important viewing for fans of RFK and Adlai Stevenson. Dick - It’s possible to get excited while watching All the President’s Men and celebrating the outcome of Woodward and Bernstein’s investigation, but Dick is a little more anti-Nixon, at least in a lampooning manner. Plus, as great as Redford and Hoffman are in AtPM, I prefer Will Ferrell and Bruce McCullough as the journalists who helped to take down the corrupt Republican. Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay - And if you prefer Dan Hedaya’s humorous portrayal of Nixon in Dick to Anthony Hopkins in Nixon, you’ll likely enjoy James Adomian’s caricature of George W. Bush in this Harold & Kumar sequel. It’s a little jokingly apologetic, but it will tide you over until W. comes out — if you’re even eager to see a full biopic about your worst enemy, that is. Inherit the Wind - Based on the infamous 1925 trial of science teacher John T. Scopes, who was convicted for teaching evolution in a state allowing only creationism to be taught, this 1960 adaptation of Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee’s play continues to be significant in the ongoing debate regarding science vs. religion and the division of Church and State. To Kill a Mockingbird - Since I can’t decide on any movies to include that directly deal with the Civil Rights Act, here’s the movie based on the book that inspired me most about civil rights when I was young. It should be required viewing (and the book should be required reading) for all kids of impressionable age. Three Kings - I certainly wouldn’t vote for somebody solely based on his or her movie tastes, but I will admit to liking Bill Clinton a little bit more, post-presidency, after learning from his guest appearance on Roger Ebert & the Movies that he loved Three Kings. And, the other way around, I had an even greater appreciation for the film after Clinton’s endorsement, which included a reading of the film, which goes as follows (thanks to Salon for the quote and lead-in): He saw the movie as an indication that we need to face up to society’s “oldest, most primitive problem, our tribalism, our tendency to go beyond a natural pride in our group, whether it’s a racial or ethnic or religious group or whatever,” which results in “fear and distrust and dehumanization and violence against ‘the other.’” Of course, just because Clinton liked Three Kings doesn’t mean other Democrats will. Or vice versa. Ronald Reagan was apparently a big fan of Mr. Deeds Goes to Town, which hasn’t made me any less of a fan. So, I’ll ask again, differently, since the Democratic Party is anything but completely united: what movies are most relevant to your politics as a Democrat? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/7/22/32892.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 7/22/2008 12:00:34 PM
Body: If there’s one thing I relate to on the big screen, it’s the depiction of fraternal relationships. I’m the middle of three brothers (excluding the half-brother I only knew as a toddler and the former stepbrother I only knew briefly as an adult), and at different points in my life I’ve either hated them or considered them my best friends. So, yeah, I can’t wait to see Step Brothers, starring Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly as new siblings who go from being enemies to BFFs when forced to live together. Choosing a handful of favorite movies about brotherhood is really tough. After all, tales of brothers go all the way back to almost the beginning, with the story of Cain and Abel. And a number of favorites can’t exactly be discussed, because the revelation of brothers, especially twin brothers, is often the surprise twist in films. So, before you start naming a thousand other films about brothers that I’ve forgotten (such as The Brothers McMullen and Legends of the Fall), keep in mind that I’ve actually left out a whole pile of brother films, and this is more of a personal favorites list. Coupe de Ville – If there’s one movie that seemed to define my brothers and I growing up, it’s this underrated road movie about three estranged siblings (played by Patrick Dempsey, Arye Gross and Daniel Stern) delivering the titular automobile to their father (Alan Arkin). As kids, my brothers and I couldn’t have been any more different, just like the guys in the movie. For at least half a decade, until he seemed to disappear after he left the sitcom Ellen, Gross was like my cinematic alter ego, just because I felt a kinship with his middle-brother character in Coupe de Ville so much. Twins – While I’m on the subject of identification, here’s another movie I was able to relate to, as my older brother was (in my young, confused mind) like Schwarzenegger and I was a fat kid. Now that we’re in our 30s, we’re fortunately more physically balanced (or is it just that my perception has matured?). The Godfather Part II – At one time or another, to one degree or another, most of us with brothers have unfortunately had fratricidal thoughts. Again, murdering one’s brother is a plot that goes back to The Book of Genesis, and the theme shows up in some of the greatest of stories, from Shakespeare’s Richard III to the Shakespearean animated film The Lion King. But as I never wanted to murder either of my brothers for gain of power, I’m including this film instead. Oh, wait, I guess I never actually struggled with the idea of whether or not to kill my brother because he’s a liability and an embarrassment, either. The Public Enemy – In fraternal stories, if brothers aren’t trying to kill each other, they’re at least following separate paths, morally and occupationally. Typically, one is a criminal and the other is a cop, politician or priest. This particular gangster film doesn’t portray the divergence as clearly as subsequent films, such as Johnny Dangerously, We Own the Night or any number of Bollywood films, including the classics Deewaar. But it’s the scene in which the brothers argue about their differences and, ultimately, their similarities, that makes the film that much more interesting. Amar Akbar Anthony – Like Deewaar, this film stars Indian superstar Amitabh Bachchan and is also about brothers. This time, though, there’s three of them, and each one allegorically represents a different prominent religious group of post-colonial India. Bachchan plays the Catholic one, and the film is worth checking out just for his musical number involving a giant Easter egg. The Best of Youth – Another film about brothers that also represents its nation’s history, this six-hour saga is even longer than the mere three hour Amar Akbar Anthony. If you’re ever in a fraternal mood, you can fill up a whole day of loosely learning about India and Italy via these movies. Or you can simply enjoy two great movies about brothers. American History X – After fratricide and divergence, another common plot involving brothers is the one found here: elder brother tries to keep younger from following in his footsteps. Interestingly enough, Edward Furlong plays the younger in both this film and in Little Odessa. Adaptation – My younger brother and I are differently creative, and in the past we’ve been mistaken for being twins (unlike me and my older brother being like Twins). So, of course, I had to be a sad sack and identify with the protagonist of the story, while viewing the character’s more popular, more successful brother as my own brother. I guess that would put the third act into a sort of wish fulfillment of fratricide. Maybe I need to stop this list before it upsets my currently great relationships with both my brothers. Big Night – Though differently creative, my younger brother and I have at times worked really well together. As many brothers in history have. Though we never attempted to operate a business together, we were in a band together. I guess for that reason I could have used The Blues Brothers here instead, but I like Big Night a whole hell of a lot more. The Darjeeling Limited – Return of the brotherly trio on a trip. Only this time the father has died (good ol’ Oedipal patricide is almost as popular as fratricide – not that any of the brothers killed Dad; I’m merely talking about wish fulfillment for the audience again) and the brothers are even more different (who would ever believe Jason Schwartzman, Owen Wilson and Adrien Brody as actual siblings?). I wonder if Wes Anderson ever saw Coupe de Ville. Or Amar Akbar Anthony. And here’s 10 more favorite brother films: Simple Men; Rain Man; La Bamba; Undertow; The Brothers Grimm; The City of Lost Children; The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford; Thirteen Days; The Funeral; The Wind that Shakes the Barley. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:00:34 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com7/22/2008 12:00:34 PM If there’s one thing I relate to on the big screen, it’s the depiction of fraternal relationships. I’m the middle of three brothers (excluding the half-brother I only knew as a toddler and the former stepbrother I only knew briefly as an adult), and at different points in my life I’ve either hated them or considered them my best friends. So, yeah, I can’t wait to see Step Brothers, starring Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly as new siblings who go from being enemies to BFFs when forced to live together. Choosing a handful of favorite movies about brotherhood is really tough. After all, tales of brothers go all the way back to almost the beginning, with the story of Cain and Abel. And a number of favorites can’t exactly be discussed, because the revelation of brothers, especially twin brothers, is often the surprise twist in films. So, before you start naming a thousand other films about brothers that I’ve forgotten (such as The Brothers McMullen and Legends of the Fall), keep in mind that I’ve actually left out a whole pile of brother films, and this is more of a personal favorites list. Coupe de Ville – If there’s one movie that seemed to define my brothers and I growing up, it’s this underrated road movie about three estranged siblings (played by Patrick Dempsey, Arye Gross and Daniel Stern) delivering the titular automobile to their father (Alan Arkin). As kids, my brothers and I couldn’t have been any more different, just like the guys in the movie. For at least half a decade, until he seemed to disappear after he left the sitcom Ellen, Gross was like my cinematic alter ego, just because I felt a kinship with his middle-brother character in Coupe de Ville so much. Twins – While I’m on the subject of identification, here’s another movie I was able to relate to, as my older brother was (in my young, confused mind) like Schwarzenegger and I was a fat kid. Now that we’re in our 30s, we’re fortunately more physically balanced (or is it just that my perception has matured?). The Godfather Part II – At one time or another, to one degree or another, most of us with brothers have unfortunately had fratricidal thoughts. Again, murdering one’s brother is a plot that goes back to The Book of Genesis, and the theme shows up in some of the greatest of stories, from Shakespeare’s Richard III to the Shakespearean animated film The Lion King. But as I never wanted to murder either of my brothers for gain of power, I’m including this film instead. Oh, wait, I guess I never actually struggled with the idea of whether or not to kill my brother because he’s a liability and an embarrassment, either. The Public Enemy – In fraternal stories, if brothers aren’t trying to kill each other, they’re at least following separate paths, morally and occupationally. Typically, one is a criminal and the other is a cop, politician or priest. This particular gangster film doesn’t portray the divergence as clearly as subsequent films, such as Johnny Dangerously, We Own the Night or any number of Bollywood films, including the classics Deewaar. But it’s the scene in which the brothers argue about their differences and, ultimately, their similarities, that makes the film that much more interesting. Amar Akbar Anthony – Like Deewaar, this film stars Indian superstar Amitabh Bachchan and is also about brothers. This time, though, there’s three of them, and each one allegorically represents a different prominent religious group of post-colonial India. Bachchan plays the Catholic one, and the film is worth checking out just for his musical number involving a giant Easter egg. The Best of Youth – Another film about brothers that also represents its nation’s history, this six-hour saga is even longer than the mere three hour Amar Akbar Anthony. If you’re ever in a fraternal mood, you can fill up a whole day of loosely learning about India and Italy via these movies. Or you can simply enjoy two great movies about brothers. American History X – After fratricide and divergence, another common plot involving brothers is the one found here: elder brother tries to keep younger from following in his footsteps. Interestingly enough, Edward Furlong plays the younger in both this film and in Little Odessa. Adaptation – My younger brother and I are differently creative, and in the past we’ve been mistaken for being twins (unlike me and my older brother being like Twins). So, of course, I had to be a sad sack and identify with the protagonist of the story, while viewing the character’s more popular, more successful brother as my own brother. I guess that would put the third act into a sort of wish fulfillment of fratricide. Maybe I need to stop this list before it upsets my currently great relationships with both my brothers. Big Night – Though differently creative, my younger brother and I have at times worked really well together. As many brothers in history have. Though we never attempted to operate a business together, we were in a band together. I guess for that reason I could have used The Blues Brothers here instead, but I like Big Night a whole hell of a lot more. The Darjeeling Limited – Return of the brotherly trio on a trip. Only this time the father has died (good ol’ Oedipal patricide is almost as popular as fratricide – not that any of the brothers killed Dad; I’m merely talking about wish fulfillment for the audience again) and the brothers are even more different (who would ever believe Jason Schwartzman, Owen Wilson and Adrien Brody as actual siblings?). I wonder if Wes Anderson ever saw Coupe de Ville. Or Amar Akbar Anthony. And here’s 10 more favorite brother films: Simple Men; Rain Man; La Bamba; Undertow; The Brothers Grimm; The City of Lost Children; The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford; Thirteen Days; The Funeral; The Wind that Shakes the Barley. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/usesoap/archive/2008/3/10/26070.aspx Post By: usesoap
Post To: usesoap Blog
Post Date: 3/10/2008 9:04:01 PM
Body: Jason Statham is not a name that exactly inspires confidence in moveigoers.He was director Guy Ritchie’s lapdog for “Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels” and “Snatch,” before boxing himself in to roles that played up his martial-arts prowess, squelching any dramatic potential that nuanced his performances.Starring in a string of empty-calorie cinematic Twinkies (“The Transporter” films, “Chaos,” “War” and “Crank” were all designed solely to accentuate his pugnacious proclivities) only kept him out of the direct-to-video purgatory that befell fellow fighters Steven Segal and Jean-Claude Van Damme.He’s often dismissed as the British version of Bruce Willis (balding, gruff on-screen demeanor, characters of few words and a cupboard filled with cans of whoop-ass), but he has the potential to bring on more than brawn to his roles.His followers may be small, but they are loyal, and he has staked his claim on the late-winter box office, when his films are typically released to mild success.The generically titled “The Bank Job,” (what, was “Robbery in London” already taken?) is perhaps the most un-Statham film to star Statham, but it is also the most entertaining film on his resume in quite some time, and provides him the chance to trade deadly dropkicks for dramatic dialogue.Even though the title claims it was “Based on Actual Events,” you can easily weed out the facts from the filmic flourishes. Yes, it was the 70s; yes there was a robbery; and yes, an amateur ham radio operator overheard the whole break-in and phoned police. The rest of the tale seems wholly constructed from the mind of screenwriters Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais, two Brits responsible for the wry kiddie flick “Flushed Away.”Here, the two toss in storylines ranging from Princess Margaret porn pictures to radical black activists to brothel-frequenting Parliament members. And while most of these subplots seem to be creative liberties thrown in to sex up a mundane tale of rookie robbers, they manage to keep all the threads flowing without getting knotted up in confusion.Statham plays Terry Leather (nope, not a typo), a two-bit car salesman whose being pinched by some rather unsavory characters collecting on some old debts. Terry is contacted by former flame Martine Love (played by Saffron Burrows) who “stumbled” upon a score that would alleviate Terry of his financial woes and perhaps get something out of it herself.Terry hustles his local barroom brethren for the job and within days they are tunneling their way under the streets to a local bank vault.“The Bank Job” may come across as a grittier, scrappier, across-the-pond cousin to the “Ocean’s” series, but what it lacks in expensive duds and mega-watt star-power, it makes up for with its hungry heart.Director Roger Donaldson has been somewhat of a journeyman behind the camera, responsible for such stillborn atrocities as the Tom-Cruise-bartending-epic “Cocktail” and the I-was-boinked-by-an-alien fiasco “Species,” but he’s also helmed such superior potboilers as “No Way Out” and nail-gnawing “Thirteen Days.”He offers no particular flair here, leaving that to the intricate-but-immanently watchable story of Terry and his mates entering what appears to be a financial honeycomb, but instead stirring up a hornets’ nest of trouble.Given the lack of big names, vanilla title and low-key release date, “The Bank Job” will most likely vanish to obscurity from the theaters rather quickly. But it is a film that merits cinematic life support from those who bemoan the lack of breezy, twisty thrillers that used to populate the theaters decades ago.“The Bank Job” also provides a broader swath of American audiences the chance to witness the magnetism of Statham, who is poised to wrestle free of the trappings of his bare-knuckle cinematic straightjacket and muscle his way into roles that require more kicks from his dialogue than his nimble feet.
]]>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 01:04:01 GMTusesoapusesoap Blog3/10/2008 9:04:01 PMJason Statham is not a name that exactly inspires confidence in moveigoers.He was director Guy Ritchie&rsquo;s lapdog for &ldquo;Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels&rdquo; and &ldquo;Snatch,&rdquo; before boxing himself in to roles that played up his martial-arts prowess, squelching any dramatic potential that nuanced his performances.Starring in a string of empty-calorie cinematic Twinkies (&ldquo;The Transporter&rdquo; films, &ldquo;Chaos,&rdquo; &ldquo;War&rdquo; and &ldquo;Crank&rdquo; were all designed solely to accentuate his pugnacious proclivities) only kept him out of the direct-to-video purgatory that befell fellow fighters Steven Segal and Jean-Claude Van Damme.He&rsquo;s often dismissed as the British version of Bruce Willis (balding, gruff on-screen demeanor, characters of few words and a cupboard filled with cans of whoop-ass), but he has the potential to bring on more than brawn to his roles.His followers may be small, but they are loyal, and he has staked his claim on the late-winter box office, when his films are typically released to mild success.The generically titled &ldquo;The Bank Job,&rdquo; (what, was &ldquo;Robbery in London&rdquo; already taken?) is perhaps the most un-Statham film to star Statham, but it is also the most entertaining film on his resume in quite some time, and provides him the chance to trade deadly dropkicks for dramatic dialogue.Even though the title claims it was &ldquo;Based on Actual Events,&rdquo; you can easily weed out the facts from the filmic flourishes. Yes, it was the 70s; yes there was a robbery; and yes, an amateur ham radio operator overheard the whole break-in and phoned police. The rest of the tale seems wholly constructed from the mind of screenwriters Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais, two Brits responsible for the wry kiddie flick &ldquo;Flushed Away.&rdquo;Here, the two toss in storylines ranging from Princess Margaret porn pictures to radical black activists to brothel-frequenting Parliament members. And while most of these subplots seem to be creative liberties thrown in to sex up a mundane tale of rookie robbers, they manage to keep all the threads flowing without getting knotted up in confusion.Statham plays Terry Leather (nope, not a typo), a two-bit car salesman whose being pinched by some rather unsavory characters collecting on some old debts. Terry is contacted by former flame Martine Love (played by Saffron Burrows) who &ldquo;stumbled&rdquo; upon a score that would alleviate Terry of his financial woes and perhaps get something out of it herself.Terry hustles his local barroom brethren for the job and within days they are tunneling their way under the streets to a local bank vault.&ldquo;The Bank Job&rdquo; may come across as a grittier, scrappier, across-the-pond cousin to the &ldquo;Ocean&rsquo;s&rdquo; series, but what it lacks in expensive duds and mega-watt star-power, it makes up for with its hungry heart.Director Roger Donaldson has been somewhat of a journeyman behind the camera, responsible for such stillborn atrocities as the Tom-Cruise-bartending-epic &ldquo;Cocktail&rdquo; and the I-was-boinked-by-an-alien fiasco &ldquo;Species,&rdquo; but he&rsquo;s also helmed such superior potboilers as &ldquo;No Way Out&rdquo; and nail-gnawing &ldquo;Thirteen Days.&rdquo;He offers no particular flair here, leaving that to the intricate-but-immanently watchable story of Terry and his mates entering what appears to be a financial honeycomb, but instead stirring up a hornets&rsquo; nest of trouble.Given the lack of big names, vanilla title and low-key release date, &ldquo;The Bank Job&rdquo; will most likely vanish to obscurity from the theaters rather quickly. But it is a film that merits cinematic life support from those who bemoan the lack of breezy, twisty thrillers that used to populate the theaters decades ago.&ldquo;The Bank Job&rdquo; also provides a broader swath of American audiences the chance to witness the magnetism of Statham, who is poised to wrestle free of the trappings of his bare-knuckle cinematic straightjacket and muscle his way into roles that require more kicks from his dialogue than his nimble feet. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cuba/MemberTagFilms.aspxcuba
Number of films tagged: 225

Number of people who tagged: 24

Number of times used: 46

]]>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:19:27 GMT2252446Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/president/MemberTagFilms.aspxpresident
Number of films tagged: 808

Number of people who tagged: 21

Number of times used: 46

]]>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:07:18 GMT8082146Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/russia/MemberTagFilms.aspxrussia
Number of films tagged: 485

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 39

]]>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:27:22 GMT4852039Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/coldwar/MemberTagFilms.aspxcoldwar
Number of films tagged: 203

Number of people who tagged: 16

Number of times used: 23

]]>Tue, 12 May 2009 13:09:30 GMT2031623Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/1960s/MemberTagFilms.aspx1960s
Number of films tagged: 15

Number of people who tagged: 12

Number of times used: 19

]]>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 04:40:41 GMT151219Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/important/MemberTagFilms.aspximportant
Number of films tagged: 22

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 23

]]>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 07:08:27 GMT22823Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/nuclearweapon/MemberTagFilms.aspxnuclearweapon
Number of films tagged: 272

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 10

]]>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:03:15 GMT272610Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/jfk/MemberTagFilms.aspxjfk
Number of films tagged: 8

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 9

]]>Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:13:33 GMT859Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/missile/MemberTagFilms.aspxmissile
Number of films tagged: 93

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 3

]]>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:09:43 GMT9333Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/accurate/MemberTagFilms.aspxaccurate
Number of films tagged: 10

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 10

]]>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:01:33 GMT10110Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/kennedys/MemberTagFilms.aspxkennedys
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:01:19 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/nuclearthreat/MemberTagFilms.aspxnuclearthreat
Number of films tagged: 31

Number of people who tagged: 0

Number of times used: 0

]]>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 13:02:14 GMT3100Tag