Movie news on your iPhone today!
Advertisement
Sign in
Username   Password         Forgot password?
Wanna join? Sign up
Find movies you'll love

SpoutBlog on spout.com

  • Happy-Go-Lucky Review and Interview

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

    Happy-Go-Lucky  (2008)

    This story originally appeared during the Telluride Film Festival. Mike Leigh’s Happy-Go-Lucky opens in theaters today.

    Mike Leigh’s Happy-Go-Lucky begins as a leisurely yet engaging character study, seemingly unconcerned with a traditional conflict/resolution narrative. Sally Hawkins’ performance as Poppy, a bubbly, sarcastic, and endearing elementary school teacher is a delight to watch. An hour into the film, I pleasantly resigned myself to enjoying it as a disconnected series of episodes. This could have been annoying, if not for the stellar performance by Hawkins. Her comedy and breezy demeanor nearly covers Poppy’s immaturity and apparent fear of commitment, while still giving us a glimpse that something more lurks beneath all the giggles and quips.

    The character is so delightful, in fact, it almost comes as a surprise when conflict eventually erupts between her and her driving instructor Scott, played by Eddie Marsan. It’s a marvel that the animosity between these two characters, and the eventual resolution, is so well-rendered, considering how late it appears in the film. This is by no means sloppy filmmaking on the part of Leigh. On the contrary, he has perfected a sort of inverse method of story telling. Whereas normally we are dumped into a narrative-in-progress and bombarded by exposition to let us know who the characters are supposed to be, Leigh takes his time, building his characters first, then letting the drama follow.

    When I asked him if the conflict between Poppy and Scott was part of the initial concept of the film, he said, “No…you explore and develop, and out of it comes the drama. It can’t be there at the beginning because you have to have the characters there before you have the drama.”

    Leigh’s unique way of working becomes apparent as we live with the characters on screen. Rather than starting with a script, he creates a rough outline. The dialog and the characters are developed with the actors. “I gathered together talented actors and collaborated with them to create characters and bring the whole world of the film into existence through a very long creative process that lasted months. And you know my job is to guide all of that so that I can draw from it and build as we go along.”

    As mentioned, Poppy is a chipper if somewhat immature single woman. Encouraged by her longtime roommate, she decides it’s time to learn to drive. This reveals her penchant for procrastination, given that she’s thirty years old. Scott, the driving instructor, is her polar opposite in every way. If Poppy is the living embodiment of good-natured chaos, Scott embodies a bitter adherence to order. Even while their squabbles seem purely comic, it’s clear that these characters are different at the very core.

    Leigh makes sure that the actors’ knowledge of the film matches their characters knowledge of the film. “The simple principle is this: They only know what their characters would know. They are liberated to see the film from their character’s point of view. They aren’t inhibited or distracted by an overview of the film. Apart from anything else, what you have to remember is my way of making films is that their journey of exploration…is my journey too. So it’s not as if I start with an absolutely clear fixed set of ideas about exactly what the film is going to be and then just carry it out. I really embark on a journey with everybody to discover the movie. … It’s about creating a space for the actor to be completely creative and to collaborate with me on creating the characters. And because each actor only sees the world of the film from his or her character’s point of view, then it means that it can be totally truthful.”


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Twilight Suddenly Looks Awesome. Clip of the Day

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful. [What do you think?]
    Under discussion:

    Spider-Man  (2002)

    The Express  (2008)

    Twilight  (2008)

    Max Payne  (2008)

    I knew from the recent Hollywood Reporter feature on Twilight that Summit Entertainment planned to release a new trailer more geared toward a male audience, but I never would have guessed they’d do such a damn good job of it. I’ve been hating on this movie from the beginning, but now part of me is actually thinking I’d like to see it. And I bet a lot of teenage boys will be thinking the same, only more so.

    This is pure genius marketing, and it would have been in Summit’s favor to have gone this route all along. What with superheroes so huge right now, why hadn’t they already tried to sell this thing as being like a comic book movie rather than a sappy adaptation of goth chick lit? Wasn’t that bit of dialogue referencing Spider-Man and Superman in the film the whole time? Such a line needs to be exploited, and it’s a shame the fledgling studio took so long to employ it. This trailer is seriously what Summit should have shown at Comic-Con.

    Well, better late than never, right? Considering there’s more than a month left before Twilight hits theaters, it’s not too late. But since the young Stephenie Meyer fans are already sold on the film and its romantic elements, Summit should definitely concentrate on this trailer and possible TV spots cut from it. Air commercials during Smallville and Heroes (if anyone is still watching that confused and redundant mess they’ll certainly be turned on by how much cooler Twilight looks than Season 3 so far). Run the trailer ahead of male-friendly movies like Max Payne, Quantum of Solace and maybe even a football movie like The Express.

    Young girls are still going to be the majority of the audience for this film, and they may even be the only ones who come away satisfied with it, but don’t be surprised if you see a lot of boys in the audience (myself included), too.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Felon Fest: The Sounds in Our Pretty Little Heads

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

    Vantage Point  (2008)


    Last weekend, I stumbled home from seeing Ballast at New York’s Film Forum, stunned at its contemplative regard for human-sized people working out their human-sized problems. Gorgeous. Some great films leave you a staggering drunk; Ballast is one of those greats that leave you hobbled but stone sober, lucid, hearing through walls. So when I plopped down on my bunk that night, you can imagine how rattled I was to hear Dennis Quaid getting keelhauled by automobile across a strip mall. That’s what it sounded like, anyway. There were about fifteen minutes of squalling tires, shrieks, Mr. Quaid growling incomprehensible orders, glass shattering, curses in several languages, metallic sobbing/slapping/ripping noises.

    The ruckus was coming from the next bed, from Salaam’s portable DVD player. He was half-awake, his leg dangling from the top bunk, head nodding then springing up at the more violent eruptions. I said, “Yo, Salaam, what’s that you watching, Innerspace?” Salaam perked up. “Nah. What the **** is Innerspace?”

    “Dennis Quaid shrinks down and goes inside Rick Moranis—no, Martin Short.”

    “Goes inside—what? You be watching some weird shit, man. Nah, this is Vantage Point.”

    “Oh, yeah, right.”

    I remembered the trailer for Vantage Point, which was just like being keelhauled through Barcelona: The plot involves an assassination of the U.S. President at an outdoor gathering in that city, seen from several vantage points, including that of Secret Service pro Dennis Quaid. Quaid, Forest Whitaker and others in the international coffee cast go on a white-knuckle race against time to piece together the crime.  In the trailer, as in the film, the chaos—the keelhauling—starts early and rarely lets up.

    I overhear it a lot at the house, emanating from thrillers-on-bootleg like Street Kings and Eagle Eye: a wall of sound. And I’m not talking Sigur Ros here. Isolated from the picture, many of these films sound like an undending cycle of shouts, rapes, baptisms, humiliations, bloody births, tortures, demented soliloquies and procedural jargon whispered in the stuttered breaths of a masturbator on the verge. These movies sound clammy and sweaty, anxious to get you to buy, like a Mid-Manhattan electronics dealer. These movies sound like they want in your panties and in your wallet, at once, or they will taser your nerves with ugly sounds until you submit. These movies also sound like they’re out to impress as much as molest. Shock and awe.

    But, just as I don’t suppose there was much genuine awe in Baghdad on the morning of March 20, 2003, I doubt that too many mouths are hanging open at these films’ sense of spectacle. These movies are desperate to bring off a feeling of technological might and national will, but they sound like the aural equivalent of a short gym rat talking shit outside the club. These movies want to be paeans to the strength and resolve of our institutions, the genius of those who devise, attend to and even subvert them. The worst of these so far this year is The Dark Knight, a summer movie that lingers in the cellar of my memory next to spinal surgery and getting jumped in the street. Its “complexities” and “dark themes” threw many critics off the trail of its central thesis: Whatever dialectic struggle lawmen and criminals are locked in matters far less than the finesse and awesomeness on each side. The wonderful toys, and our heroes’/villains’ mastery of them, are the takeaway. These movies flatter the professional classes, protectors and captains of industry with the romance of their own stalwart super-competence. The rest of us are meant to bow and be grateful we have them around to keep this crazy world from falling in on our fragile little heads. Or so I hear.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • YEAST and NIGHTS & WEEKENDS: Greta Gerwig x 2

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

    With Mary Bronstein’s Yeast debuting on DailyMotion tonight, and Joe Swanberg’s Nights and Weekends opening this weekend at the IFC Center, the two SXSW 2008 premieres starring Greta Gerwig will suddenly become available to a non-festival audience simultaneously. When I heard this was going to happen, I dug up some of the press Gerwig has garnered over the past year, most of it pegged to her appearance in the Duplass brothers’ Baghead. I quickly noticed a trend: Gerwig has been covered exhaustively by male writers who a) have a tendency to label her an “ingenue” or an “‘it’ girl“, and b) devote much column space to the question of whether or not Gerwig’s main talent is playing herself.

    Certainly, the great success of Hannah Takes the Stairs, the highly improvised project on which the pixie-cute actress collaborated with Swanberg and friends, is that it parts of it seem so lacking in cinematic artifice, they can play as glimpses into lives in progress. But if Hannah seems real enough to reach through the screen and touch, Gerwig’s title character is too exasperating to make that a particularly attractive proposition (or maybe not: almost like a classic femme fatale, it’s hard to deny her appeal even as she’s leaving you for your best friend). So when in Baghead, she plays a pixie-cute actress collaborating with friends on a highly improvised project––who drinks too much, takes little convincing to remove her top, and ultimately ends up with the funny, schlubby nerd––it seems too coincidental to be fiction, and apparently too cute to resist.

    Gerwig hasn’t resisted the suggestion that the roles she plays grow out of who she is, but Nights and Yeast add two disparate but fully realized characters to her repertoire. Yeast is, for some, an endurance exercise; for me, it’s a comedy, and on the contrary, it’s the comparatively gentle but fundamentally flawed Nights and Weekends (on which Gerwig is billed as co-writer/director alongside Swanberg, and co-producer alongside Swanberg, Anish Savjani and Dia Sokol) which tries patience. If the latter shows Gerwig pushing a character way beyond adorable, it often feels like an exhausting exercise for all involved. It’s her work as Yeast’s only semi-relatable comic relief that throws up a middle finger at the ingenue concept, literally.

    I’ve written a great deal about Yeast and don’t want to rehash too much of my previous ramblings here. But watching the film this week for the first time in months, it was impossible to ignore the lack of vanity amongst all three actresses. In a film with concerns about as far as you can get from the bedroom-bound romantic roundelays associated with the M-word, Gerwig’s crunchy Gen is sweaty and zitty and nothing at all like the DIY sweetheart at the center of so many Arts & Culture profiles. Both a catalyst for the film’s girl-on-girl violence and the only character in the film who seems to be a stone’s throw away from the ability to be civil, Gen’s vacant smile is both compelling and really unsettling. Punctuating sentences with a Butthead-like “heh”, Gen’s grin never fully matches up with her ping-ponging eyes.

    Those who want to stick to their perception of Gerwig as the quirky, if frequently topless, object of desire would best be advised to stick to Nights and Weekends. Or would they? Though both Swanberg and Gerwig cross nudity off the checklist in the first scene, Gerwig spends much of the first third of this naturalistic long-distance relationship drama cast in the role of insecure shrew. Her Mattie, a New York-based nursing student who visits boyfriend James (Swanberg) in the depths of a Chicago winter, waste precious nestling time needling, a bad, nervous habit which hits its zenith with the shriek, “I don’t respond to sarcastic fun!” Mattie’s obsession with controlling every moment feels unnatural, and Gerwig’s plays it with unexpected affectations, her voice snapping quickly from deep mumble to high-pitched sing-song of doom.

    I’ve seen the film twice now, and both times I’ve struggled to find a way in until almost half-way through. I now think it’s because Gerwig doesn’t ever seem to play to her expected strengths until about thirty minutes in. By this time, the action has jumped to New York, and Mattie is dead scared, apparently both of losing James and of being bonded to him for life by a baby. In the midst of a conversation between James and Mattie about the sincerity of “I love yous”, the camera settles on a reaction shot of Gerwig, her pupils drifting off into the corners of her eyes. At this point, the actress seems to suddenly yank the reigns of a film that just a moment earlier felt as if it was to floating without direction, and demands that we pay attention. We come to realise that the first section of the film feeds into an incredibly delayed punchline: the pattern of conflict that Gerwig and Swanberg set up at the start and then leave behind eventually pays off, but it doesn’t really happen until Night’s final ten minutes. I’m not sure if the wait is ever made all the way worth it, but it’s ameliorated by Gerwig’s performance in the film’s final scenes, in which Mattie temporarily gives up control, and then, suddenly and rather spectacularly, reclaims it.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • City of Ember Review

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

    Monster House  (2006)

    City of Ember  (2008)

    Bill Murray in The City of Ember

    I’ve been a fan of Jeanne DuPrau’s Ember book series for several years now, having found them to be a great blend of post-apocalyptic dreariness and steampunk tomfoolery, and all in a young adult book. Tom Hanks’ Playtone production company must have thought so too, since they optioned The City of Ember and gave it to Gil Kenan (Monster House) to direct. I was able to see City of Ember at Fantastic Fest, and it’s sadly not the Ember adaptation I’d been hoping for.

    The basic plot of Ember is set up in the opening moments of the film, which show how the City of Ember was created in an effort to keep the human race going after the surface of the Earth has been ravaged by … something, maybe a virus, war, an infestation of zombies, or who knows what. Ember is sealed with a time capsule that is given to the mayor, and it is set to open in 200 years. Over generations the box is handed from mayor to mayor, but it accidentally becomes lost and forgotten about.

    Lina, played by Saoirse Ronan, receives her job on Assignment Day, along with the rest of her class. You choose a position by drawing a slip of paper out of a musty bag (it makes the Sorting Hat in Harry Potter look like your best friend in comparison), and this is the job you’ll have for the rest of your life. Lina draws up the dreaded Pipeworks job, which will keep her deep in the bowels of Ember. However, her classmate Doon (Harry Treadaway), who longs to do something useful and wants to try to get close to the Generator to see if he can fix it, has picked Messenger, and he eagerly wants to trade with Lina, which she is more than happy to do. In their respective jobs, Doon soon finds out that the city is barely running as it is, and that no one really has an idea what to do about the future. The generator, which powers the entire city of keeps the lights on, has been prone to blackouts that keep getting longer and longer, citizens have begun venturing out into the dark and encountering strange beasts, and Lina is passing strange messages from the Mayor (Bill Murray) to a storeroom worker named Looper (Mackenzie Crook, better known as Gareth from the British The Office).

    That’s where our protagonist Poppy comes in. It’s readily apparent that Ember is doomed, but luckily Lina finds her younger sister Poppy eating shreds of paper out of a mysterious box…the very same box that was passed down from generation to generation, and had become lost. Lina pieces the scraps back together and finds instructions for leaving Ember. However, Lina has been causing problems for the mayor, who has also learned that she has the mysterious box. Cue the chase scene, with Doon, Lina, and Poppy barely making it out of Ember alive. As they ascend to the surface, they spy Ember barely visible far down below through a crack in the Earth, and drop a rock down with instructions tied to it. Thankfully, it doesn’t bash someone’s brains in.

    The real disappointment of the film is that you never get a real feeling of what life is like in Ember, which is more fully explored in the books. For instance, the Library of Ember isn’t even mentioned in the film, and it plays a large part in the novel. The little details from the book that flesh out the world don’t exist, like the delight Poppy feels when she finds a new color of crayon that she’s never seen before. This was a temporary world that was meant to be lived in for only 200 years, and it’s nearly 50 years past that date when the events of the movie/book occur.

    There are moments created for the film that try and capture this: an answering machine is run by Lina on a combination sewing machine/treadmill to lull Poppy to sleep, the Pipeworks is a mess of patches and half-rigged bypass valves. Tim Robbins plays Doon’s father, and he is constantly tinkering with machinery, and Martin Landau plays a narcoleptic pipeworker alongside Doon.

    Throughout the climax, I was constantly reminded of The Goonies, when they were being chased by the Fratellis through the waterslide sequence. That felt real and terrifying as a kid, but the CGI water effects in Ember feel fake and transparent. There’s no real terror on the faces of the actors, despite the fact that a virtual tidal wave is hurtling them at breakneck speed past razor sharp rocks and stalagtites. There’s no imminent sense of danger for these kids, and that goes for the entire film, not just the ending.

    The world of Ember is certainly realistic, and they’ve done a good job combining some of the digital effects with the massive set they created in Belfast. It’s just a pity that we don’t spend much time at all with the Generator, which is practically a living, breathing entity in the novel. It’s the lifeblood of the city, huge and mysterious, yet no one knows much about it, although no one is willing to admit that. The film would have benefited from having an antagonist aside from the comical antics of Murray as the mayor. His part, and Looper’s, seem like they were cast for comic effect, and as a result Lina is left without a real nemesis––or, at least, one that seems threatening.

    At the Q&A for Ember at Fantastic Fest, Bill Murray was asked why he decided to work on the project, and he said he’d heard the words “Young Spielberg” thrown around when people were referring to director Gil Kenan. Let’s hope that Ember is his Duel or his Sugarland Express, and that his Jaws is still forthcoming. Young audience members will probably enjoy Ember for the visuals, but adults will find it lacking. For the true experience, give the first book (in what is now a series of four) a whirl.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Rudin Exits Reader. Trade Roughage 10/10/08

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

    • Scott Rudin is taking his name off Stephen Daldry’s The Reader after losing his heavyweight battle with Harvey Weinstein regarding the film’s release schedule. Now that Rudin has left the project, though, can we expect the producer to push his Revolutionary Road even harder for the Oscar? And will Kate Winslet be treated like a poor child of divorce who’s made to pick one parent over the other?
    • Confirming little more than what the movie blogs have been rumoring all week, Variety reports that super hot right now Josh Brolin is in talks to play the DC Comics gunslinger Jonah Hex. Perhaps with everyone respecting comic book characters so much these days this role will be the one that Brolin finally gets an Oscar nomination for.
    • I guess when your film stars George Clooney, Ewan McGregor, Jeff Bridges and Kevin Spacey, you can get just any old actress to play the lead female part. But picking the most boring Lost character ever (well, the actress who plays her, anyway) to costar in Grant Heslov’s Men Who Stare at Goats seems a bit counterproductive.
    • Continuing the trend of making uncomfortable topics funny, Seth Rogen is producing and will co-star in a comedy about cancer from an autobiographical script by HBO producer Will Reiser.
    • Despite another bunch of box office contenders entering the multiplexes this weekend, including the heavily starred yet topically cursed Body of Lies, the bets are that Beverly Hills Chihuahua will stay on top for a second round.

    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog