QFLW Blog

Lightly delightful

QFLW — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 03:50:35 GMT

Basically another version of the Cinderella fairy tale, this time featuring a middle-aged woman. Not a lot of character development or weight to the plot, and you can see where it's all going to end, but the cast is a delight. You feel for Frances McDormand's Miss Pettigrew, the one sensible head to be found in the frivolous, gossipy society she's stepped into. Amy Adams bubbles brightly; Lee Pace is adorable as her true love and musical partner. Their scene in the club, where she sings "If I Didn't Care," is the highlight of the film, a lovely, poignant moment that, you might say, brings her character back to her senses.

There were only four people in the theater when I saw it; all of us women. We clapped at the end and came away dabbing our eyes.

The Darjeeling Limited

QFLW — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 00:35:50 GMT

This latest of Wes Anderson's films is, for me, right up there with The Royal Tenenbaums and Rushmore, which I love dearly. Quirky, offbeat, strangely simple (sometimes just strange), engaging, funny, sad. Excellent performances from the three brothers (Owen Wilson, Jason Schwartzman and Adrien Brody) taking this train trip in order to renew their bond after their father has died and their mother disappeared into a convent in Tibet. One of my very favorite moments has no dialog in it at all--it's just Adrien and Jason staring at Owen as he unwraps the bandages from his head and face. Their expressions are perfect and priceless. But throughout the film, more is often said with looks or gestures than through the understated dialog.

Everything about it made me smile, from the large (characters and storyline) to the small: the odd yet well-chosen soundtrack; Anderson's use of color and slo-mo; careful overhead shots of (for instance) a tray's contents; subtle running jokes throughout the film. Etc.

What Heart?

QFLW — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 23:56:20 GMT

The Heart Is Deceitful Above All Things

Written & directed by Asia Argento, based on the novel by J. T. LeRoy

My heart sank when I pulled the DVD out of the envelope. Wasn't interested in watching this film, and my first instincts were correct. A horror story told erratically and clumsily, without any relief. Not the performances, not the writing, not the camera work.

In hindsight I noticed that the kudos on the DVD sleeve are for the novel, not the film. But the film doesn't make me want to read the book.

Let's get togther and be all right

QFLW — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 17:59:27 GMT

Africa Unite: A Celebration of Bob Marley’s Vision

Produced and Directed by Stephanie Black

I’m stealing part of the blurb from the jacket: “In commemoration of Bob Marley’s 60^th birthday, [this film] is centered on the Marleys’ first-time-ever family trip to Ethiopia in 2005…three generations of Marleys take part in a landmark one-week event…with the ultimate purpose of inspiring the young generations of Africa to unite for the future of their continent.”

And so it is. Bright, emotional, flavored with music from a 12-hour concert the Marleys performed during the event—I found it enjoyable and interesting, but it also made me sad, rather than lifting my spirits. So much harm inflicted on Africa from Western civilizations; so much that needs healing. Can and will it happen? I sincerely hope so. Watching and listening to the participants on camera reminded me of hippies in the Sixties. Much positive, strong talk, celebrating and praying, but how much of it translated into action in the end? Perhaps I’m too skeptical or cynical.

Still, the film focuses on an important idea that needs support and encouragement. Plus you can dance to it.

Power Means Not Having to Respond

QFLW — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:30:05 GMT

Out of Balance: ExxonMobil’s Impact on Climate Change

Written, directed and narrated by Tom Jackson

I put off watching this film because I guessed (correctly) that it would outrage and depress me further regarding Big Oil’s sway over the planet. I was pleased, however, to see that despite the gloomy, alarming cover artwork, the documentary is calm and clear, presenting its information rationally, without stooping very much (as far as I could tell) to the rhetoric or histrionics of propaganda.

The film’s primary focus is in disclosing ExxonMobil’s steady campaign to confuse the public, keep us from understanding that the current changes in global climate are unnatural and are definitely a solvable problem. For of course, as the world’s largest corporation and largest oil company, if public and governmental opinion were to go against it, that would cut into its enormous profits. The corporation is so pervasively powerful and wealthy that it has pretty much gotten away with doing exactly as it pleases, without having to bother about the ecological problem it has contributed to, says Jackson.

I’m suspect of claims that any one person or entity is all to blame for anything, but Jackson doesn’t make that assertion. He acknowledges that we are all, to one degree or another, contributors to the current state of affairs. He chose EM as a focus because it is the largest of the oil companies. I would have liked to hear about some of the others in the industry, whether they have behaved in a similar manner in order to sustain profits. Talking about only one of the oil giants could seem to imply that it’s the only “bad guy” instead of merely being Big Oil’s top dog.

Still, hearing of EM’s refusal to acknowledge responsibility and its ability to avoid significant consequences has re-ignited my indignation. I remember when the Exxon Valdese spilled its devastating cargo in 1989. The film touches on how the company did more harm than good while trying to appear that it was cleaning up the spill and asserting that the effects were not as detrimental as claimed. At the time, I chose to never again buy anything from Exxon, but over the years lazily slid out of such determined protest. I’ve decided to go back to boycotting EM, and will look into which political candidates have accepted money from them (or any other oil companies, for that matter). It won’t make a huge difference, of course, but it’s the principle of the thing.

I’d like to see films like this and An Inconvenient Truth shown in science and economics classes. Not as gospels or tools of anti-global warming indoctrination but as starting points for raising questions and concerns.

Thumbs up

QFLW — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 21:12:37 GMT

I disagree with the All Movie Guide: this film is not a stinker and not a waste of talent or subject. I’d been a little reluctant to see it because I feared it might lean too far in the direction of World Trade Center and shamelessly go for the emotional jugular. 9/11 is emotionally affecting enough; there’s no need to push or manipulate us into the “correct” emotional response, thank you. But the reluctance was unfounded. The film has some flaws but is well-written and appealing. I was never a fan of Adam Sandler’s comedies; he can certainly be funny but in general his comic films have left me cold. He’s turned out to be a talented actor, however; in particular I’d point to Spanglish, Punch Drunk Love and now this film in evidence.

What I liked about the film was its focus—not the tragedy of 9/11 but one man’s groping for a way to deal with his part in that tragedy in his own way and time (without the well-meaning but wrong-headed and intrusive attempts by his in-laws to forcibly direct that healing), and the rekindling of a friendship that is beneficial to both men’s lives. The one worrisome bit was Binder’s injection of a romantic attachment between Sandler’s character and the woman who had been making sexual overtures to Don Cheadle’s character. But far from being a vulnerable innocent, Charlie Fineman struck me as being able to take care of himself. Reign Over Me, taken from the Who’s song “Love Reign O’er Me,” becomes an apt title, as both Charlie and Alan (Don Cheadle) struggle to get out from under imposed controls and become open to loving and trusting those around them again.

Good cast, good turns from all concerned, especially Cheadle and Sandler. Well worth seeing. And anyone who gets the excellence of Quadrophenia and The River will always be OK in my book. ;-)

Trailer better than the film

QFLW — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 00:30:11 GMT

Schmaltzy and impossible. Good performance by Robin Williams, but the three leads (Highmore, Russell and Rhys-Myers) do little more than radiate their looks in wide-eyed, wistful or angst-driven poses. The dialog is often inarticulate and pointless. No child could make those sounds on a guitar so immediately and easily. I did like that the film managed to convey the joy and connecting properties in music, but it was obviously trying to push emotional buttons rather than tell a believable story.

Dan's the man

QFLW — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 03:56:34 GMT

In general I did enjoy this movie. Some very funny moments, but I was bothered by the underlying premise: that Dan (Steve Carell) was some sort of sad sack and an overprotective, clueless parent. His two older children are horrible to him without justification. He tries to do the right thing by his brother, and he's good at his column.

Well, at least the lovely Juliette Binoche is part of the cast, and it all ends correctly.

Good, eh?

QFLW — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 21:54:34 GMT

Wilby Wonderful, written and directed by Daniel MacIvor

This film has been referred to as a “dark” comedy, but a better word would be “poignant.” Wilby Wonderful centers on a group of characters in the small Canadian island community of Wilby. Two things are about to happen: the Wilby Days Festival and an ominous disclosure of those who had been involved in “the Watch scandal.” The situations and relationships of the story’s characters become gradually clear.

It begins curiously with a long-faced man on a bridge (James Allodi) who is obviously planning to kill himself by jumping off it. His jump is interrupted by the unexpected arrival of a handyman in his truck. Hastily the man climbs back down, but his foot gets stuck between the bridge’s bars as the driver approaches. The two men apparently know each other; the embarrassment of the one is awkwardly heightened by the silent but understanding concern of the other (Callum Keith Rennie). Our jumper realizes the other guy isn’t going to go away, so he morosely lopes off to his own car and drives off. After watching him disappear, the man with the truck sets about the job that brought him to the bridge in the first place: he pulls out and unrolls a large banner that cheerily declares “Wilby Wonderful.” It turns out to be a misprint—the banners are supposed to say “Wonderful Wilby.” The misprint becomes a gentle pun—things might be misaligned now, but they “will be” wonderful if given the chance.

We find out that the would-be jumper is Dan Jarvis, the video store owner whose wife has just left him after he was discovered in an affair with a man—Walter “Duck” McDonald, the handyman with the truck. Poor Dan’s suicide attempt becomes a running joke throughout the film, as each of his subsequent (and inept) attempts are thwarted. Something in this suggests he doesn’t seriously want to die, he just doesn’t know how to face the humiliation of having been found out.

From there throughout the day we encounter and gradually learn about Emily Anderson (Ellen Page), teenage daughter of single mom Sandy (Rebecca Jenkins). Emily is trying to decide what to do with her hair, then races off to a petting session with her new boyfriend Taylor (Caleb Langille). Emily’s mom runs one of the town’s diners and is still the man-hungry floozy that she was in high school. Emily’s dash across town causes Carol French (Sandra Oh) to slam on the brakes of her bulky SUV while she’s rattling off directives on her cell phone. Carol is a real estate agent who is organizing the festival and trying to sell her mother-in-law’s house to the mayor, Brent Fisher (Maury Chaykin). Carol’s husband Buddy (Paul Gross) is one of the town’s policemen who is investigating the Watch scandal. The mayor’s brother-in-law Stan Lastman (Daniel MacIvor) is Buddy’s partner. Sandy Anderson and Buddy are attempting to have an affair, but so far haven’t gotten beyond surreptitious groping and kissing as brief opportunities present themselves.

Everything comes to a head in the evening. Dan finally manages to hang (but not kill) himself from an exposed beam in the house Carol is trying to sell to the mayor. Flapping papers and muttering to herself about everything that has gone wrong during the day, she doesn’t at first see him. The film takes on a touch of farce as she flies around hysterically trying to figure out what to do. Just as she’s gotten him cut down, the mayor and his family arrive to look at the house. She stuffs the unconscious Dan into the cupboard under the stairs, but the rope he used is still hanging from the beam, and a corner of his jacket is caught in the cupboard door. The mayor’s obnoxious daughter Mackenzie (Marcella Grimaux) won’t leave it alone, opens the cupboard door while the grownups are in another part of the house…Meanwhile, Buddy discovers that Stan has been planting syringes on the parcel of land known as the Watch in order to prove that the Watch is a hangout for drug users, which in turn furthers the mayor’s plan to turn the Watch into a golf course. In the motel room Taylor has taken for them, Emily’s realized she doesn’t want to have sex after all and comes to understand that her mother isn’t a bad person. As Duck tells her, Sandy only wants to love and be loved, just like everyone else.

The comedy is chuckle-inducing, often subtle rather than knee-slapping, and the characters are recognizable without being stereotypes. Everyone comes to a new understanding of themselves or their situations and gets to start afresh. Unlike slick Hollywood endings that imply Perfectly Happy Ever After, Wilby Wonderful ends in low-key believability. Good performances by a familiar range of character actors, especially James Allodi, Maury Chaykin and Sandra Oh. I would just add that Marcella Grimaux (playing the mayor's daughter) is the perfect unpleasant, self-centered teenager, and director Daniel MacIvor’s Stan is a scene stealer. I want to see MacIvor’s other films now.

"He's all of Quebec standing powerful and alive."

QFLW — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 04:06:10 GMT

The Rocket

Directed by Charles Binamé, written by Ken Scott
Roy Dupuis – Maurice Richard
Julie LeBreton – Lucille Norchet Richard
Stephen McHattie – Dick Irvin, coach of the Montreal Canadiens
Ted Dillon – Clarence Campbell, commissioner of the NHL
Phillip Craig – Tommy Gorman, Canadiens’ manager
Serge Houde – Conn Smythe, manager of the Maple Leafs
Sean Avery – Bob “Killer” Dill, player for the NY Rangers

I’ve never followed hockey or been to a game but have enjoyed every hockey film seen. It boils down to the skating. Cooler than any fancy figuring, seeing burly guys zip around on blades without a thought, amazingly balanced as they execute furious, tricky moves. I’ve thought of going to games on occasion, but I’d never get such terrific camera’s eye views at actual games, I'm afraid.

Here then is The Rocket, a film about Maurice Richard, held to be Quebec’s greatest player. Interesting story, but not as much game time as anticipated. It centers more on his life and troubles off the ice rather than his triumphs on it. The film opens on the hubbub surrounding the Canadiens’ game with the Boston Bruins in March 1955. Someone not named is in, or has caused, big trouble. Since the movie’s about Richard, it’s not hard to guess who’s at the center of the storm—but for what? From that opening teaser the film jumps back to Richard as a teenage machinist during the Depression, playing hockey for the postal service after work. Even then he’s something of a stoic, reticent, keeping his head down but playing hockey with determination and intensity.

Five years later the Canadiens take him on as a rookie, but almost from the start there’s a problem: Richard (“The Comet”) has been injured a couple times (broken ankle and wrist). He breaks his ankle again and is then seen as too fragile for the game. One journalist refers to him as “a lemon that’s easily crushed.” They make him sit out games and try to trade him to another team, but no one else will have him. Eventually, out of desperation, coach Dick Irvin, who’d lobbied hard for Richard in the first place, gives Richard another shot. The Comet then proves himself to be The Rocket, shining and scoring despite snide remarks from the press for his halting English and players on rival teams gunning for him physically.

Carefully the film builds up a picture of prejudice against French Canadian players in the NHL. Insulted in the press, unsupported by Anglo managers and refs, Richard and his fellow “Frenchies” shrug bitterly and heroically carry on, complaining only among themselves. The Rocket proves he’ll only swallow so much. At a game with the NY Rangers, Bob “Killer” Dill homes in on Richard, harassing him at every opportunity. Irvin had tried to keep Richard out of the game as long as possible, as everyone knew Dill meant to take Richard out. But after Dill bluntly attacks him, Richard throws down his stick, rips off his gloves and gives Dill a couple no-nonsense punches. Not knowing when to quit, Dill follows him back to the Canadiens’ box and jumps him, only to be pounded further by our Gallic hero. The harassment within the league, in the papers or on the ice doesn’t stop, however. After another attack during a game, Richard comes back with sewn-up eyebrow to score brilliantly yet again. As the team’s owner is congratulating him afterwards, Richard breaks into sobs. As if bursting to say “yes you’re behind me when I win, but where is your regard when I’m being attacked?”

The hitherto reticent Richard turns to the press to complain in print about the treatment French Canadians receive, hoping to expose what “everyone” knows to be true in the hope of changing things, to demand respect and equal treatment for his compatriots. This is all well and good, till he attacks the league commissioner himself. He’s forced to choose between retraction and apology or being expelled from the NHL. And then we come to the fateful event at Boston Gardens on March 13, 1955, that opened the film.

A Boston player strikes Richard in the head with a stick from behind (in those days players didn’t wear helmets). The referees say nothing to the attacker. When Richard regains his feet, he goes after the Boston player and whacks him back. In the ensuing free-for-all, one of the refs holds Richard from behind, allowing another Bruin to punch Richard while Richard’s arms are pinned. The ref finally lets go; Richard turns and knocks the man out with one punch. Sacre bleu! A player, and a Frenchie, has struck a ref!

Campbell’s decision is to suspend Richard for the rest of the season, and from the playoffs as well. Nothing at all is done to Richard’s attackers or the referee who held him while he was being punched. Street rioting ensues; Campbell is physically attacked by fans. Richard’s initial reaction is to quit hockey altogether, but in the end he begs the fans not to make any more trouble, saying he accepts his punishment and he will be back with the Canadiens in the next season. The Canadiens go on to win, with Richard’s help, 5 more Stanley Cups.

Of course I don’t know how bad this prejudice against French Canadians actually was, but the film seems to be using Richard’s story to protest this prejudice, rather than concentrate on Richard’s playing and why he was so good. I’d have liked to see more of his playing and not so much of the stoic soldiering on outside of the rink. But it’s a film worth seeing nevertheless.