Username Password Remember me Forgot password?

Wanna join? Sign up

Find movies you'll love

Reel Thoughts

A Haunting Modern Masterpiece

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

Under discussion:

The Virgin Suicides (2000)

Since I spent yester-evening glued to the Oscars, which were a largely boring broadcast this year, I watched my Netflix movie of the week earlier in the day. This turned out to be a good thing because it allowed me to digest this haunting film a little. Out of the gate, I believe this is a modern masterpiece, and I'm sad I missed the film until now. Not everyone will agree, of course. For a freshman filmmaking effort, though, Sofia Coppola showed quite a lot of maturity and produced an amazing film in the process. Actually, after this film and Lost in Translation, I'm quite impressed all around.

The Virgin Suicides is based on a novel. It's told from the perspective of five boys (including Trip Fontaine, played by Josh Hartnett, looking very young and boyish, I might add) who lived in the neighborhood and went to school with five sisters ranging from 13 to 17 years of age. Between them, and through the narration of Giovanni Ribisi as one of the boys, unidentified, telling the story in retrospect, they try to unravel the mystery behind what would eventually be a mass suicide. The Lisbon sisters seem to come from an ordinary enough suburban family living in 1970s Michigan - one of the Grosse Pointes, apparently; their father (James Woods) is a high school math teacher, and their mother (Kathleen Turner) is a matronly and concerned parent. Many of the plot summaries provided in various places, including on Spout, indicate that this is a religious family, but aside from a brief mention about a church service following a misstep by one of the sisters and the appearance of a priest at one point, there does not seem to be much emphasis on faith. What the viewer does know is that these parents, or at least the mother, seem to be very strict and overprotective of their daughters, but their seemingly untarnished way of life is shattered when the youngest daughter, Cecilia (Hannah R. Hall - formerly of Forrest Gump fame), develops a deep but puzzling depression and commits suicide. Life for the family begins to unravel in many ways, and the parents try to cope by releasing some of their hold on their daughters, until Lux (Kirsten Dunst) becomes involved with the aforementioned heartthrob, Trip, and he seduces then abandons her. The pendulum of extreme parenting swings again until, eventually, the girls take drastic action to escape.

This movie is a masterpiece because of the attention paid to detail in the film, from story to visual to atmosphere. At first glance, the narrative is disjointed and incomplete - but it's meant to be that way. The story is told entirely from the perspective of all of the engrossed pubescent boys living in the neighborhood, which lends comic relief but also is from a perspective that is never meant to have the complete story, since they were never privy to the inner workings of the family. It's a neighborhood mystery, and the only answers that could ever really come would come from the Lisbon family itself. The fact that the movie never strays from this perspective, not in the least, makes the mystery itself satisfying and the viewer content not to know for certain what may have been the last straw. The viewer, like the boys, is left with only educated guesses. What's even more gratifying is that Sofia Coppola, as screenwriter and director, never takes a stand or force-feeds the viewer any particular possibility as truth. She allows the guesses to linger and evaporate, but the guesses and the outcome are haunting and thought-provoking in the process.

That may be because the story itself is meant to be relatable on several levels. On the one hand, it proves to be a social commentary on the plight of and pressures placed upon the American young woman of any time period, though it seems to offer some hope in its subtle whimsy. On the other hand, it's a sly examination of parenting and possible outcomes, even if the threads cannot necessarily be sewn together between the parents' and the children's actions. On still another hand, it's a graceful study on an epidemic that threatens generations more and more as time plods forward: teen angst to the furthest extremes and the actions taken by teens to cope, including suicide.

What's also amazing about this movie is the visuals. Since the story's told from the boys' perspective, the meandering from reality to fantasy as they attempt to piece together the mystery of the Lisbon girls is quite effective. The cinematography, with its delicate, nostalgic haze, lends well to the blend between the two extremes. The whimsical insertion of fantasy scenes, like the boys' pretend vacations with the girls when the latter is under house arrest and confinement, lightens the viewer just enough to keep from being overcome by the looming, ultimate eventuality.

The soundtrack was also amazing, score and song alike. It hit all the right notes and lent well to the sequence of events unfolding on the screen.

If there was any true flaw to this film, I am not aware of it. It's a heavy topic, to be sure, and I would not really classify this film as a dark comedy, but it's one of those films that has everything, including a full emotional experience and an engrossing, moving storyline.

I think I have to give this film a rare 10 for being a masterpiece. The only film that compares to this film in originality and message in my eyes is American Beauty, but that film (released the same year, I believe) comes from a different perspective entirely and is a dark comedy. I see no flaws to this film, and if I did, I've forgotten them in less than 24 hours. Does it pass the test? I'm uncertain but leaning toward no. It is a very sad movie in the end, and I don't buy too many sad movies. Maybe if I see it again, I can make up my mind better. It's haunting enough for now having just seen it once.

Posted Monday, February 25, 2008 8:39 AM by pippin06 | with 1 comments

Shopgirl Leaves Something to be Desired

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

Under discussion:

Shopgirl (2005)

Shopgirl was my Netflix movie of the week, a romance to commemorate the annual week of romance (this message brought to you by Hallmark). I digress. I had no expectations or preconceived notions about this movie; I only knew that it was based on a novella written by star Steve Martin, whom I adore, and who also wrote the screenplay. Also, I generally love Claire Danes and Jason Schwartzman, the other stars of this film, which, along with Martin, were the reasons my interest was piqued. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to maintain my interest in this film, which had potential, but which left me feeling about as blank, empty, and numb about a film as I can be left to feel - and all without preconceived notions, as I mentioned previously.

Danes plays Mirabelle Buttersfield, a transplant to Los Angeles from Vermont. She is an aspiring artist plagued by mountains of debt and. the viewer comes to learn, medicated depression, and she earns her meager living by working behind the glove counter at Saks Fifth Avenue. Through her mundane daily life, she encounters Jeremy (Schwartzman), also an aspiring artist and something of a slightly egocentric man-child, who is clearly taken with Mirabelle but lacks the certain je ne sais quoi to spark her from her malaise. Though she is willing to give it a try, in her boredom and loneliness, she is soon distracted when wealthy Ray Porter (Martin) begins to woo her. He treats her to dinner, lavishes her with attention and gifts, though he makes it clear to her that he is unwilling to commit to anything more than a sexual relationship, and sweeps her off her feet. Mirabelle devotes herself to Ray in ways he is not willing or unable to reciprocate, in hopes that he will change his outlook on their relationship. In the meantime, Jeremy seeks to change his approach to women and his future with the intention of changing Mirabelle's outlook of him in the process.

For most of the film, I felt like I was watching a mishmash of Lost in Translation and My So-Called Life. Claire is grown up now and a long way from Angela Chase, but her grown-up angst, or at least, Danes' performance in this film echoed that confused and achingly earnest character she played more than a decade ago. What is a little confounding is that Martin's Ray, as well as Martin (who, puzzlingly, narrates the piece, force-feeding the viewer an understatement in place of allowing the viewer to appreciate what was just watched), wants to treat Mirabelle like a fragile, delicate waif to be protected and fixed. Yet, Danes, a very good actress in general, plays Mirabelle as vulnerable but not necessarily this wilting flower suffering a depressed quarterlife crisis. Though her character is desperate for love, in some ways, I didn't generally feel like I was watching someone who genuinely felt that desperation, and it left me disconnected from her character (though I related to her general sense of apathy and boredom).

Also, having never read the original novella, I was a little puzzled as to why we do not find out that Mirabelle is taking anti-depressants until she suffers her panic attack halfway through the film. We see her take pills, but there is never a close-up of what these pills are, and they are stored in and among her vitamins and things of that nature. Since her character did not betray a truly depressed condition until after she supposedly stopped taking this medication, yet it seemed to inform her choices with the few stops she made to her little shelf of pills, I felt this was quite a narrative flaw that should have been better developed when adapting story to screen.

Though the film feels a little like Lost in Translation, it lacks any of the warmth the viewer felt between Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson. I never believed that Ray and Mirabelle could even be a sexual partnering, much less anything with emotional substance. Steve Martin never permitted the Ray character to show any warmth, even though he betrayed the subtlest hints, despite Ray's best protests, that he actually loved Mirabelle. In fact, if it weren't for Schwartzman, I would have found this movie a cold, gray, and empty piece, and I don't think that was the intent at all. Also, I never felt that it was a meeting of lonely minds so much as a meeting of one lonely mind to one mind in the middle of a mid-life crisis, who was also a bit of a sex addict. It also would have been nice to know why the Ray character was seeing a psychiatrist.

In the end, I don't really think it can be classified a romance. I sort of felt it was the story of the coming of age and of the journey of inner strength gained by the Mirabelle character, rather than a love triangle between an unfeeling, unstable fifty-year-old wealthy businessman; an affable but sincere twentysomething; and Mirabelle. Which would be fine, except that this character study was slow and distracted by all of the supposed "romance."

I just didn't like this movie all that much, I guess, except for Jason Schwartzman, who is always a treat to watch but played goofy Jeremy with an undeniable sweetness - which also made the film all too predictable. From frame one, the viewer knew Mirabelle would eventually end up with Jeremy, so as a romance, it lost some credibility. As a character study, though, Jeremy and Ray are interesting foils to and options for the adrift Mirabelle.

All in all, I felt sort of neutral about this film, which I seem to be feeling more often about movies lately. I think I have to rate this one a 6 for being cute but mediocre. The film's heart was in the right place, but it was a little slow, cold, and empty for me to connect to it in any meaningful way. As such, it does not pass my test. Despite the fact that I love Steve Martin and his writing, and the cinematography in this film was actually quite beautfiul as well, Shopgirl left something to be desired.

Posted Monday, February 18, 2008 12:30 AM by pippin06 | with 0 comments

Must-See for Zeppelin Fans

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

Under discussion:

The Song Remains the Same (1976)

I watched The Song Remains the Same instantly on Netflix because I was in the mood for some rock, Zeppelin-style. As one of my favorite bands, I've been motivated to see parts of this documentary before but never made it all the way through because the dream sequences/extra footage made my head hurt a little. Also, the viewer is treated to Zep's 23-minute long rendition of "Dazed and Confused," featuring, among other things, Jimmy Page whaling on his guitar with a violin bow, which is artistically amazing but, as sound, makes my teeth chatter.

Now, I can say I've watched it all and like it. If you count yourself among Led Zeppelin fans, particularly with the band's recent "reunion," this movie is a must-see. It was released around the time of "Houses of the Holy," which features the film's title song as its first cut. The film provides footage of a concert given at Madison Square Garden, when, also, the band's money was stolen, and the band's manager got into it with Garden officials. There are some crazy dream sequences depicting each band member's state of mind and/or hobbies and/or personal interests (oddly enough, John Paul Jones' is the weirdest). Otherwise, you get to see the band play live performances of "Rock and Roll," "Black Dog," "Since I've Been Loving You," "No Quarter," "The Song Remains the Same," "Rain Song," "Dazed and Confused," "Stairway to Heaven," "Moby Dick," "Heartbreaker," and "Whole Lotta Love." Robert Plant seems to have to warm up to his signature screechy falsetto, but he pulls off some good screeching by the finale. Jimmy Page, John Bonham and Mr. Jones are in fine form, extending each song with high-octane jamming. Bonzo's rendition of "Moby Dick" in this one is pretty electrifying and goes on nearly as long as "Dazed and Confused" did.

Because this is a documentary, I won't subject it to the rating system, though it's really less of a documentary than a very long music video collage for several songs. I'm also not sure it passes my test, only because I know there is another two-disc set of live Led Zeppelin that might suit me better, as it leaves out the trippy sequences and sticks to the music. Still, this was worth the look, and no Led Zep fan should neglect it.

Posted Sunday, February 17, 2008 12:08 AM by pippin06 | with 0 comments

Closer Pushed Me Further Away

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

Under discussion:

Closer (2004)

My Netflix movie of the week this week was Closer. I had heard nothing but mixed reviews about this movie since its release. Some people I know truly love it while others seem to hate it or, at least, believe the film version fails to hold a candle to the stage version. I have not seen the stage version, and I thought, since I like all of these actors, I might have a nice, unbiased approach to watching the film. Now that I have watched it, I'm left squarely in the middle, as neutral as neutral can be, regarding what I've seen. At the very least, the movie presents an extremely narrow and cynical, or, at least, one-sided view of love and romance, which, in some ways, is refreshing, as it's not the side usually portrayed, but in other ways is wholly depressing and not in a meaningful or powerful way.

When Dan (Jude Law) meets Alice (Natalie Portman), an American expatriate working as a stripper, after she walks in front of a careening London taxi, it's something like love at first sight. Then, Dan meets Anna (Julia Roberts), a high-concept American photographer living in London, who takes his publicity photos for a novel he's written. Though he is in a lasting relationship with Alice, he is immediately attracted to Anna, forming an unlikely obsession. Anna at first spurns his advances, which Alice overhears while in Anna's bathroom; Alice asks Anna to capture her teary reaction on film. Anna's rebuff prompts Dan to play a prank where he poses as Anna on an internet sex chatroom and sets up a meeting between the real Anna and a horny dermatologist, Larry (Clive Owen), at the London Aquarium. The prank backfires, however, as Larry and Anna hit it off, and when the Dan and Alice are invited to Anna's exhibition featuring the sad photograph of Alice, Dan sees this as an opportunity to home in on Anna. Except, Larry and Alice, who also meet, find some animal magnetism between them and also share the unspoken common thread of self-deception as it relates to their partners and their undeniable emotional connection. Afterward, deception is the key theme, as the four lives interweave, and the complications of love and attraction are explored.

I did not like this movie, but I also did not hate it. I didn't hate it because it was extremely well-performed. Four extremely good actors in the main parts make for some solid performances, particularly from the women. Julia Roberts played a selfish and weak character that is completely against type and as non-celebrity as can be and did so to the complete suspension of my disbelief, such that I forgot I was watching Julia Roberts. Natalie Portman, who never ceases to impress me, played an emotionally complex character and also a character balancing innocence and wisdom, childhood and clearly grown-up ideals. She's not a little girl anymore and wears that badge nakedly (pun intended). She was nominated for an Oscar, and I can see why. The men also gave performances not to be sneered at; I'm always drawn to Clive Owen. Any movie with him in it gets automatic points from me because he is simply so charismatic, even when he is playing someone as flawed as this alpha-male motivated by passion and revenge. Jude Law's performance may have been the weakest, but it was not weak; the climactic scene between his Dan and Owen's Larry, where they reach an uncomfortable understanding about their situation, had me sympathizing for his unsympathetic character.

Mike Nichols directed this film, and I think he handles stage adaptation well because he is still able to capture nuances that always seem to read better on stage. Emotional reaction, moments, chemistry - he is able to illicit these elements from his performers no matter how good or bad his film is. I was engaged because of the strength of the performances and the careful rhythm Nichols employed, with close attention to dialogue tempo, atmospheric soundtrack, and so on.

I didn't like this film, though, because the story, frankly, seemed incomplete and was disjointed. For a character drama, these characters were starkly incomplete in my eyes, with the possible exception of Alice, who is the starting and ending character in focus. It seems like their histories, their motivations, got lost in the shuffle of fast forwarding the story through time, without anything but a brief mention, and which happened quite a bit. I was left asking questions throughout the whole film: why does Dan pounce on Anna the way he does if he's happy and in love with Alice? Why does Anna think it's wrong one minute and ok the next to give into the affair when Alice is still with Dan? Why does Anna lead Larry on if she knows so much earlier that she loves Dan more? Why is Larry so devious - what makes Anna worth it to him? How is Alice different from Anna to either men, and why is Anna, seemingly the more imperfect of the two, the one the two men fight hardest for? All of my questions about Alice were answered, but with the other three characters, I felt something was missing, some vital clue about their character or circumstance that would lead them to act selfishly or deceive each other and themselves into these sins of passion. What I can't figure out is whether it's the stage play or the film to blame for this lapse in the narrative. Perhaps, someone would like to shed some light on that for me.

In the end, I was mildly entertained but ultimately put off and a little depressed about the film, and I think the narrative flaws are kind of huge, because I just kept shouting at the screen: "Why?" and "WTF?" To that end, I rate this film a 6.5, between "cute but mediocre" and "shaky" because it's shaky or worse, but the strength and spectacle of the performances gives it points it would otherwise have lost. As to the test, this is a fail. I didn't like it all that much and would not spend additional money on it for the above reasons. The movie kind of has the effect of making the viewer cynical about relationships in general, and I don't like to watch cynical romance repeatedly, even if it is a new and interesting take on the subject. Such a view doesn't get me any closer to understanding relationships myself.

Posted Monday, February 11, 2008 9:52 AM by pippin06 | with 0 comments

Scandalous Yet Taut Drama

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

Under discussion:

Notes on a Scandal (2006)

My Netflix movie of the week last week was absent because Netflix sent me a damaged copy of Little Children. I managed to make it through half the movie before the disc stopped playing, and I didn't know how I felt about it up until the point it stopped, so I just sent it back and put it at the bottom of my queue. Is there anyone who would like to convince me that it's worth another look-see? It reminded me quite a bit of American Beauty without the poignant, sharp-as-knife satire, yet I haven't seen enough of it to form an opinion one way or another.

So, the next stop on the queue was Notes on a Scandal, which received some Oscar nominations last year without wins for Judi Dench and Cate Blanchett and was a movie I missed at the time. While it played around with elements of Fatal Attraction in unusual situations, it ultimately was a taut and satisfying examination of human psychology, though it was no masterpiece by any stretch.

Dame Dench plays Barbara Covett, a tough-as-nails and domineering history schoolteacher who is respected yet off-putting to most of her peers. She lives a lonely life as a result and seems defiant in her quest to not end up a true spinster. She is also the narrative voice, as she maintains a meticulous diary of all of the goings-on at her school in shocking detail. Cate Blanchett plays Sheba Hart, the school's bright new art teacher. She joins the world of academics, it seems, to escape the life she adopted when she married her much older husband (played by Bill Nighy) and became stepmother to his daughter Polly and son Ben (who has Down's Syndrome). Barbara is quite taken with Sheba in all ways and finds her worthy of her "friendship" despite her decidedly "bourgeois" family. Barbara schemes to reel in the object of her affection; Sheba, however, is a free spirit looking for an outlet, which she finds in one of her 15-year-old students, Steven. His repeated advances culminate in a mutually consented affair, until Barbara discovers them during one of their trysts. Rather than report her to the authorities, Barbara uses the information to covet the otherwise clueless Sheba, and the remainder of the story becomes something of a war between these flawed psychologies.

This movie was hard to watch at points, as it dealt with somewhat controversial subjects, not the least of which concerned what can no doubt be labeled statutory rape on the part of Sheba. I kept screaming "jail bait!" at the screen when this character allowed herself to be charmed by such a young man. In addition, Barbara's propensity for obsession with the objects of her desire (all women), in addition to her cold and calculating demeanor, made the character incredibly creepy.

To wit, Dame Judi and Cate deserved their Oscar nominations. Their performances with such uncomfortable, extremely flawed characters were stunning and brimming with deference, managing to show the humanity of people who would otherwise be judged inhuman by societal standards. The scene that left my jaw open while watching these talented actresses was the scene in which Sheba, broken from the eventual publicizing of her affair and having found Barbara's diaries, confronts Barbara about her misguided feelings.

Bill Nighy was also impressive and highly underlauded. He should have received award nominations for his work in this film. The scene after which he finds out about Sheba's affair is heartbreaking beyond measure.

This film was also very well written. It was short and taut; no scene was wasted, and the movie never dragged. Philip Glass' lively score was in no small part a credit to the pace; it was very complex yet understated, an achievement not often reached in film scoring.

The movie wasn't perfect, though. Aside from the three actors named above, none of the supporting adults and children displayed very good performances. In fact, Andrew Simpson, who plays Steven, was one of the worst of the lot; he showed very little emotional range and was not believable as a charming, cajoling would-be paramour to a teacher much older than him. I think he must have been cast for his looks alone, as he is definitely someone with an extremely boyish and impish face.

Also, story-wise, I was never satisfied with Sheba's decision to engage in this affair. Barbara's character was very well flushed out, likely because she was the narrator. Her motivations were clear from the beginning, and more layers were added as the story progressed (such as the discovery of previous women she coveted). I could never understand, and maybe that's because of my position in life, why Sheba felt this affair was worth giving into. Her reasoning: because she took on an entire family, including a young child with a difficult disorder, and played the good mother in the prime of her youth, she felt she deserved a little fling. There is no obvious discord with her husband, though, and her life seems otherwise happy, though she keeps pictures of her former, younger self, apparently a more goth rock-star version of the present-day Sheba. I guess I was having trouble seeing why she would engage in an affair at all, with any man of any age, much less with a 15 year old (who looked like he was 12, by the way).

In the end, though, it was a good, well-told story about the consequences of acting on and living for false hopes and skewered realities, and to that end, I rate it an 8 for having minor flaws but being very good. As to the test, I don't think it passes. There are some extremely touchy subjects being addressed here that make it impossible for me to enjoy the film on repeat viewing. Still, I would recommend this scandalous picture on the strength of the leading performances; it's by no means a wasted 90 minutes.

Posted Monday, February 04, 2008 8:50 AM by pippin06 | with 0 comments