Username Password Remember me Forgot password?

Wanna join? Sign up

Find movies you'll love

erico_77375 Blog

Die Laughing At A Funeral

Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

Under discussion:

Death at a Funeral (2007)

British farce is a love potion of comedy, vary rarely is it pulled off with the precise timing required, the precise attitude taken, and with the careless abandon needed to make it fun. So, obviously the right director to try it would be Frank Oz. His movie, Death at a Funeral, starts the comedy off straight at the title and keeps you laughing up to the point the movie is over. A daunting feat alone, but even more so when revealed that Oz is a * gasp * American. But along with his writer Dean Craig and a very talented ensemble, he shows that the Yanks are capable of playing at the old boy’s game.

The movie revolves around a three-hour period that a funeral is taking place, definitely not funny, right? First comes the body, which is immediately identified by grieving son Daniel (Matthew MacFadyen) as NOT being his father. So out goes the undertaker with casket. In come fellow mourners like Martha and Simon (Daisy Donovan and Alan Tudyk) along with Martha’s brother. We have cousin Howard (Andy Nyman) whose bringing Uncle Alfie (Peter Vaughn). There’s Daniel’s famous brother (Rupert Graves), the writer that everybody expects to give the eulogy (except for Daniel, who actually IS). And then there’s a strange four-foot guy (the inimitable Peter Dinklage) whom nobody seems to know. Sounds like a typical funeral, well, besides the body mix-up. How about a few family skeletons coming out of the closet at very inconvenient times (including one coming out a very different closet altogether)? Not there yet? Well, let’s add in a blackmail scheme, an overbooked priest, and a thumping coffin? Can we top that? How about some very powerful hallucinogenic that finds themselves in unwitting hands not once, not twice, but three times?

If you are aware of the traditions of British farce, you know how the movie is going to play out, but that’s not a weakness. Farce is efficient, going for the outrageous things to laugh at. It’s comedy of manners, of society and of nature. The story isn’t meant to be original, merely a means of creating the perfect storm of the right ingredients. Look at it this way, if only one ingredient was missing, this funeral wouldn’t have gone crazy. But because all the events that led up to the funeral we precise, we have one hilarious romp. Does the movie go overboard? Well, yes and no. Since farce requires extremes, it means to go overboard (I was grossed out by one feces joke that went a little too far).

To create that perfect storm scenario, casting is important. Let’s take Matthew MacFadyen, whom I had last seen in the latest remake of Pride and Prejudice. He’s obviously able to play deadpan humor like Colin Firth before him (and Alec Guinness before him). When he’s working a scene with the likes of Rupert Graves (who matches his step with equal talent as the freewheeling celebrity sibling) or Peter Dinklage (whom we’ll talk about in a minute), he’s capable of keeping the comedy at level while others like Alan Tudyk just play the more extreme comedy. I also love how the ladies Daisy Donovan and Keeley Hawes (as Daniel’s wife) seem to play an even more interesting level of comedy that’s not entirely deadpan, but neither is it extreme.

I think it’s time we talk about Peter Dinklage, not just about this movie, but his status as the switch-hitter of the movies. You would think there’s only so many movies you can have men of his height be in, considering that the character’s height is ALWAYS the issue. For Death at a Funeral, they turn his height into an asset, but without it being really about his height. I’m glad that the movies are capable of being inventive and sometimes less politically correct, allowing for guys like Dinklage to be apart of a cast as equals and not as “the short guy”.

For Frank Oz and Dean Craig, the movie is a testament to their skills as comedians. Oz, who is known for being the voice of Ms. Piggy and Yoda, as well as directing movies like The Shop of Horrors and Bowfinger, has a knowledge of comedy that few other comedians would understand and knows how to tell a story with it (something even Jerry Seinfeld has a problem doing). His pacing for the film is strict and rigid like the material itself, but even capable of making fun of itself. With his team and Mr. Craig’s screenplay, he has made another memorable comedy worthy of recommendation.

All in all, this is not the best comedy of the year, but in a year of great comedies, it stands toe-to-toe with The Simpsons Movie, Knocked Up and Superbad. It has fun on it’s own terms, laughs at it’s own mistakes, and puts us in a joyous mood. Something you don’t get from your everyday funeral.

Posted Friday, August 31, 2007 4:31 AM by erico_77375 | with 0 comments

Not Hot For Nanny

Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

Under discussion:

The Nanny Diaries (2007)

There are times when I have to ask if the makers of the movie realized just what exactly are they making. While I do ask that when it’s a new or innovative, it’s usually when I see a movie that skips the track and careens off the edge of the Grand Canyon. Directors Shari Springer Berman and husband Robert Pulcini directed one of the most inventive biopics ever with American Splendor. For their follow-up they take on the soul-sequel to the strange yet trashy The Devil Wears Prada; The Nanny Diaries. And here I am, asking that same darned question again.

The Nanny Diaries has the makings of decent movie, new college graduate Annie Braddock (Scarlet Johansson) takes a sidestep in life when she allows herself to become the nanny for an Upper East Side couple (Laura Linney and Paul Giamatti, whom I sense is paying back a favor on this one). The opening of the movie starts off interesting enough; starting off like an anthropology report while we stroll though the Museum of Natural Science, seeing the different family structures around the world. We see the Amazons, the African tribes, and then we see the crusted Upper-Class of New York, where men are pigs who bring home the money so that the wives can spend it. And the kids are put away with their REAL guardians, the nannies. Such biting satire is what we start off with. Young Annie saves Mrs. X’s (Linney) son and through what I assume is a psychological condition thinks that the young woman’s name is Nanny, something that she never corrects the entire time of her employment. Her son, Grayer (poor kid), is the offspring of his environment; elitist, bratty, and mostly a miserable brat. Annie seems to always find herself walking though a minefield in clown shoes as Mrs. X makes little snide remarks that hurt more than any Dickensonian elitism could. We see that classism lives very well in a rich liberal society, where Nanny-Mommy meetings make the poor prisons of Victorian England seem almost blessed.

But the movie makes a serious error in judgment, and even stranger than that, it even announced that it is doing it! The movie “goes native”, which to those anthropologically dull, means that gets too close to it’s subject and feels sympathy. Usually, we can understand this and would even congratulate that. But The Xs do not deserve such. Why should we worry about their marriage when they both embody the selfishness of their stereotypes? How can we feel for a kid that has no sense of realistic footing? True, he’s a victim to his environment, but can’t we say the same for his parents? The movie doesn’t want to open the can of worms by defending The Xs (which Sophia Coppula was bold enough to do in Marie Antoinette, in her own way, of course). And then it decides to give everybody a happy ending (except one, but who cares?) which kind of works for some, but not for others.

I was not a fan of the novel, as I wasn’t a fan of The Devil Wears Prada. There’s something about the employee-scorned genre that rings a little wrong, like making your boss a punching bag for your own self-fulfillment. I am all for exposes into the world of classism that is quickly taking the fill of racism in our new times. But fiction is not a place for personal grudges. With that said, this movie is not entirely bad, just misguided. I could watch this movie again without much problem (or much enjoyment either), which is more than I can say for The Devil Wears Prada.

Scarlet Johansson is certainly capable of holding her own with great casts, but she has yet to own a role. The closest she has gotten was Lost In Translation, but she was basically playing a wallflower. And there was Match Point and Ghost World, but she was never the center of the story. Is she able to lead a movie? With every movie I see with her in it, I am less certain. I begin to think she’s better in roles like The Girl With The Pearl Earring, a character of focus but not entirely about. She stands toe-to-toe with Laura Linney, who has chewed up Sean Penn for lunch in Mystic River. But is this a testament to Ms. Johansson or Ms. Linney? And let’s talk about Giamatti, whom I can almost hear him repaying his debt to the directors for his star-making role in American Splendor. He doesn’t even have a one-dimensional character, but a shadow to play. It’s always sad to see an actor like him to be subjected to the background.

I have already asked the question, but what is the answer? I wonder if Berman and Pulcini would know. I think that they got lost in their own vision, or they were shanghaied by executives trying to make the movie more conventional than it needed to be. But sophomore projects usually go awry, so they shouldn’t stop trying. Just next time, keep your eye on the prize (or stay away from bad executive producers).

All in all, The Nanny Diaries is not a movie I can suggest, but if you happen to come across it with an hour to kill, watch the first half. You’ll find yourself surprised. But when you start feeling yourself going native, step away, take a deep breath, and find yourself something else to do. Maybe take up becoming a Big Brother or Sister.

Posted Friday, August 31, 2007 3:25 AM by erico_77375 | with 0 comments

Make Music, Not Love

Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

Under discussion:

Once (2007)

In my years of walking out of dark rooms having just experienced events and characters not myself, there have been many occasions that I have walked out with a smile on my face, the images burned in my memory and even a song in my heart. The last time it happened for me was United 93, where I was speechless hours after the show was over. And yet, coming out of this tiny music drama called Once, I felt something more profound. As to what that feeling is, I honestly can’t say.

Once is about a man and a woman, neither with a name but played by Glen Hasnard and Marketa Irglova respectively. The man is a street musician/vacuum repairman. She is a flower girl who finds him wailing away at one of his original songs one night, intrigued by his music. She’s a pianist herself. The next day, she takes him to a music shop and one thing leads to another and…they duet in one of most powerful musical moments in the history of the movies. At first, they’re awkward and out of sync. But they eventually not only match notes, but also turn in the ballad “Falling Slowly” (remember that song, you’re going to want to find it after you’re out of the movie). They start a friendship that he wants to see blossom, but she has reasons not to that I’d rather die than to expose. But as they find themselves sharing music, playing together, and sharing the songs of their hearts, they start a romance that is beyond sex, possibly beyond the limits of physical love. It eventually comes down to a choice of moving on that both characters have to face. He obviously has the talent to become more than he is. She can join him, but that would be turning her back on other things more important to her. The ending is pitch-perfect in its sad joyousness. But this is a movie that’s not about the ending; instead it focuses on the journey these two souls take.

Once is a very low-budget feature that feels shot on a low-end digital camera, more interested in the music than the images captured. The film is an extension of the songs sung. The songs are an extension of the joys, the fears, and the anticipation of things to come. The story could be described in terms of other movies by lazier moviegoers. To be honest, I wonder why musicians opt for music documentaries for this style of narrative-driven showcase of songs. And like Once, the songs don’t necessarily have to follow the story, as long as the tones of the music and the movie match.

And let’s talk about these songs just a little more. Not since Almost Famous has a soundtrack really been vital to a film or have left an imprint on your soul. Yes, the music is of the folk-pop persuasion very popular in the UK, as Ireland is where the story takes place. I lost count of all the times I was left tapping my feet to the rhythm and letting the music just take me away from my seat and away from the dark.

But music can only do so much. As a fellow critic once said “Why should I see this movie when I can just get the soundtrack?” In Once, the reason is the beautifully simple story with complex emotions. It’s in the splendid rapport that Mr. Hasnard and Ms. Irglova have. Considering that Mr. Hasnard is in fact not an actor, but a lead for the band The Frames, he shows a range of emotions I believe worthy of Oscar consideration. Ms. Irglova also doesn’t have extensive acting work, and yet she glows with a radiance that makes us fall in love with her every time she comes onscreen.

Director John Carney is new, and yet his simple approach to the material is the right move. There’s no need for tricky camera work (I don’t think he even had the budget for such things to begin with) and that the real fireworks are the music and the characters. In fact, I’m thinking he might be the pioneer of a new genre of narrative-driven musical dramas. I’d love to see what he would do on his next film.

All in all, Once is a film that doesn’t ask you to love it, but you’ll find yourself falling head over heels without even thinking twice. It’s too earnest, too sweet, too understanding of human nature to be cynical or pandering. It might not give us the ending we want, but it gives us the one we know is best. And who knows, the music has never left the movie. And where there’s music, there’s magic more powerful than sex could ever penetrate.

Posted Thursday, August 23, 2007 3:20 AM by erico_77375 | with 0 comments

Canoes Is Sometimes Ten Sheets To The Wind

Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

Under discussion:

Ten Canoes (2007)

Late into the film, a character tells another one that a good story is in the telling. Of course, this film is telling two stories to us from a storyteller who probably can’t keep either one straight on their own. The movie is called Ten Canoes; it’s from the wilds of Australia, told by and about a tribe of aboriginals (the native Australians before the British came into the picture. The story is told deep into its rich history before colonialism reached its shores.

As I mentioned, we’re actually getting two stories; the first being about a young man yearning for his older brother’s young wife. The second and primary story is a morality tale told to the young man by an older man. During this telling, our storyteller is telling us the play-by-play of both stories (which are separated with one story told in color while the other is in black and white. He stops in mid-thought several times to switch stories without warning, and eventually finds some of his own jokes to be funnier than we do. But as for his story, we follow yet another young man falling for his older brother’s youngest of three wives. He gets her alone only to have her shove him away. The village has quite a few quirks to it, including an old man with an addiction to honey, a couple of jealous wives (who are jealous of each other) among other colorful characters. But their world comes to grinding halt with a foreign medicine man comes looking for a trade in magics and instead starts putting spells on some really disgusting stuff. And then there’s the disappearance of a wife, which leads a more major conflict. The story itself, as it turns out, is really about the ending, but a means of occupying time. The message at the end is the one that was basically told in the beginning with the luxury of an added irony. And even at the end, the storyteller can’t say that the message was learned of it was even meant to be learning in the first place.

I love new way to tell stories, different perspectives that shed light on deeper character insight. But this storyteller in Ten Canoes is the equivalent of being told the story of The Three Little Pigs by a drunken relative that needs to stop every five seconds for another drink. That is disappointing since the film does have some great humor in it and is giving us an insight on a world we know little about. The last time Aboriginals are given screen time was Phillip Noyce’s Rabbit-Proof Fence. In this one, we are given an insight to their cultural difference and traditions. Some are nearly barbaric, others quite endearing. Shot with the help of the people of Ramingning Tribe, the film feels authentic in it’s look on the lifestyle, but the way it tells the story feels really cheap and lessens the real drama and comedy of the story. The outer-storyline is worthless and doesn’t really mesh with the more thorough main story. On top of that, the black and white really mess with the white subtitles that makes it very difficult to understand what’s being said.

Director Rolf De Heer has made quite a few movies before Ten Canoes, so he must have known better how to tell a story. The film sometimes feels made by an amateur at times, such as when we’re given multiple versions of the wife’s possible kidnapping. And then there’s one moment when an actor puts his hands on the camera that breaks the fourth wall, but not in a good way.

All in all, do not get me wrong about this movie; it’s not entirely bad. In fact, there are places that are interesting, but the film doesn’t keep it’s attention in the right place most of the time. The movie might lure you in with the promises of a good time, and a good time you might have. As long as you don’t mind stopping every five minutes for quick drink.

Posted Thursday, August 23, 2007 1:43 AM by erico_77375 | with 0 comments

Silly Legion Offers Some Entertainment

Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

Under discussion:

The Last Legion (2007)

How quaint that only a week after we had an overt tribute to The Princess Bride in Stardust that we have another one that less direct, but in the same spirit all the same (and nearly as funny, though I doubt that it would see it that way). But that’s how I felt after leaving The Last Legion, Doug Lefler’s film about the real story about Excalibur. First of all, if you don’t see the irony and humor around that idea, this is not the movie for you. But if you do have an acute sense of humor and don’t require a laugh track, then this movie could be surprisingly hilarious

The Last Legion starts off in Rome where a young boy Romulus (Thomas Sangster) is being crowned the new Cesar. We are already told that each year a new Cesar is crowned after the old one is killed. So naturally, the night after he gets the crown, the Goths (lead by a flamboyant Peter Mullan) attack the Cesar’s mansion on a hill overlooking Rome (with it’s backside facing a vast wooded forest) The Cesar is taken prisoner, most of his men killed. One who survived is Aurelius (Colin Firth), who vows to get his Cesar back. In his corner is a beautiful fighter (Aishwarya Rai, leaving me to ask why is it that all female fighters have to be gorgeous, and that when they fight, they’re always graceful?) from a distant land. They eventually find the kidnapped Cesar and rescue him from wave upon wave of enemy fighters as they try to rescue the boy and his mentor (Ben Kingsley, obviously feeling that movies today do not require much acting). They finally get through the masses, the boy finds a hidden sword, and they escape the clutches of the evil Wulfila (Rome’s Kevin McKidd). But alas, once they feel safe, they’re faced with the reality that the world has changed, that the young Cesar will not survive a Goth-filled Rome. So they hitch up and in five minutes make their way to Britannia (or England for those who require such explanations. And of course, they have to go through mountains (cue of the Lord of the Rings music, people). When they get there, they realize they’ll have to face another evil that lives there, alongside Wulfila’s men who are much better trackers than I thought possible. Eventually a face off must occur and we must have our heroes outnumbered 100 to 1.

Like I’ve said earlier, Stardust was the one to insist on being labeled with Rob Reiner’s classic fractured fairy tale. The Last Legion is less direct, but still as inspired with it’s silly dialogue, off-and-on humor, and deeds of daring do. But the real reason to watch is the stupid comedy that the movie is laced with. Also laced on top of that is that Colin Firth and Aishwarya Rai play their scenes just a little too seriously, but only making the joke to be on them. The movie is campy, silly, and sometimes enjoyable, but almost against it’s itself. But leave it up to Ben Kingsley to make it okay to laugh. In comparison to the other fantasy movie made earlier, this movie makes the corrections that 300 needed to take.

Does this excuse bad filmmaking? Yes and no. The question is if the movie was set up with the parodies and tongue-in-cheek humor from the beginning? If it wasn’t, then it’s no excuse. Director Doug Lefler has made a goofy, silly little movie of little to no ambition but skilled enough to make interesting. But does that acquit him for all the movie’s sins?

All in all, this movie isn’t great, but it isn’t horrible either. There are worse times spending your money and time on this movie, but I would have hoped you had seen Stardust prior.

Posted Wednesday, August 22, 2007 10:15 AM by erico_77375 | with 0 comments

Fall In Love With SuperBad Boys

Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

Under discussion:

Superbad (2007)

Before we go any further, let’s get a few things out of the way first. Yes, this movie his vulgar, crass, and filled with enough sexual references to fill any three porn films. It has enough f-bombs to make Navy SEALS a little green. Its main characters have a bit of a chauvinistic look about women. And in no certain terms can I say that everybody should go see this film. And yet, what I’ve just mentioned is apart of what is one of the year’s best films.

The film is called SuperBad and is produced by the comedic master Judd Apatow, written by his protégés Seth Rogen (yes, that guy from Knocked Up) and Evan Goldberg. The movie follows a 24-hour period in the lives of two 18-year-old boys named Seth (Jonah Hill) and Evan (Arrested Development’s Michael Cera). They are your usual freak and geek, respectively. Seth’s lack of self-restraint is only matched by Evan’s lack of self-confidence. They have been friends since grade school and are going to be split up when Evan leaves for Dartmouth after high school is over, leaving Seth behind. On this day, Seth finds himself getting invited to a party by the beautiful Jules (Emma Stone), who needs him to pick up alcohol for the event. Evan’s own long-time crush Becca (Martha MacIsaac) will also be in attendance. Seth’s idea is to get their respected ladies the required booze to make sex possible. Evan’s not so much a fan of this plan, but decides to go along. Just one tiny problem, now they have the get the alcohol.

Enter Fogell (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), their third wheel who makes Urkell passable as the next Bachelor. As it turns out, he’s getting a world-class fake I.D. Tiny hiccup; Fogell’s license goes under the splendidly nerdy moniker McLovin, something that he’s very proud about. But securing booze turns out to be much more difficult than expected when a robber cold-***** him and the police come on the scene. Seth and Evan flee the scene as Fogell finds himself in the presence of two of the most incompetent police officers in the movies…ever (played by Rogen and SNL’s Bill Hader). Needless to say they buy into McLovin and decide to show him a good time busting drunks, shooting off guns, and eventually running over a pedestrian (although that was an accident). As for Seth and Evan, they find themselves getting into deeper messes as the night continues (at it’s lowest point, Seth has some peculiar blood on his pants and Evan finds himself having to sing to some very coked-out dudes) They eventually get to the party, but not before some deeper psychological issues come out, leaving both boys feeling hurt by the other. At this point, the film takes some wonderfully different choices than I would have expected (and date rape is not one of them). Both Seth and Evan get a realization about women without it being preachy or making women out to be saintly (something that Hollywood and pop culture in general has a way of doing). Fogell finds that he IS McLovin (and I say Amen, brother!). And when we get to the final shot of the film, which in my opinion is the most important, we feel that the boys have taken a larger step into becoming more responsible men, though still FAR, FAR from maturity.

SuperBad is the teen comedy that all teen comedies wished they were. Even the likes of John Hughes’ The Breakfast Club gets lost in it’s own nostalgia. But SuperBad doesn’t fondly look back at high school. It sees high school as it really is, a trauma that no one ever wants to go back to. Its characters are 18-year-olds who see the world from their disadvantage, misinterpreting the pop culture world they live in (Seth’s reason for needing booze to seduce is really an extent to his lack of confidence in his physical attractiveness). The girls in the film are as eclectic as any in an Apatow production. There are some that fall into stereotypes, others that defy the norm. And then there’s McLovin, the wild card among them all.

Casting in SuperBad is one of the best ensembles that I have seen this year. For the odd-couple relationship, Jonah Hill and Michael Cera are perfect as Seth and Evan. Hill has an easy charm about him, no matter what comes out of his mouth. It’s a quality I’ve last seen in the late great John Belushi. Michael Cera has always been great about playing the straight man in manic comedy as he had shown in Arrested Development. He’s almost deadly in underplaying Evan and allowing him to be introverted and doggedly earnest, even when he really wants to be SuperBad. To be honest, I would love to see them team up for another project, be it a whole new feature and not a sequel. But the showstopper is newcomer Christopher Mintz-Plasse as McLovin. He is, well, he IS McLovin! The casting of Seth Rogen and Bill Hader as the police officers is a choice that I think was best. These two men are great improv comedians and really work double-time assisting the new guy to make him look good. Maybe Mr. Plasse might not become a true thespian of the ages, but he was the right man for the job on this gig. But let’s give some credit to the ladies in this film. Emma Stone and Martha MacIsaac both give sympathetic performances that allow for some great comedy, but not at the characters expense. It would have been easy to exploit them for sex appeal, but the filmmakers allow them their dignity, even when one of them does some really embarrassing things.

It is said that Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg started writing this film when they were in high school. I doubt that they ever had an adventure like the ones their characters went on, but I can see inner-truths being said about boys at an age when friendships become paramount and the lure of the opposite sex is too much to bear. Add in Greg Mottola’s direction, which understands that you don’t have to clutter a scene to make it funny. I also am proud how he doesn’t allow pop culture to be laced throughout the film (though I’m sure that the movie itself might influence pop culture for a while). He plays 70s groove songs and 80s rock (with a pinch of 90s hip-hop) to a movie that under less direction would have been filled with the newest hip music.

All in all, I’m so proud of this film, I’m beaming. I remembered at the time I was in high school when the movies presented the experience to be about being the coolest kid in class, getting onto MTV and being in the In-Crowd. Judd Apatow with his brain trust had changed this formula when they made Freaks and Geeks, and now SuperBad is it’s more foul-mouthed cousin. But I cannot recommend it to everybody, only those who can see past the potty-mouths and see the inner-truths presented here. Are there and should there be cops like these? Hell, no! But like the cops, the film is a perfect blend of reality and fantasy done the way only a movie can do it. But don’t try to count the curses; you’ll lose it five minutes in.

Posted Wednesday, August 22, 2007 7:07 AM by erico_77375 | with 0 comments