A movie that tries too hard to be "dark' and ends up inadvertently just an imitation of dark comedies; littered with clichés, and absent any of the insight or wit that turns a movie dark and comedic. Plus, with a cast as theatrical as john malkovich, angelica huston, jim braodbent and the son of anthony minghella - certainly no strangers to a fine arts degree - this is a movie built from experience. In that respect, easy for zwigoff...but also lazy. He's not taking us underground so much as simply ripping it off! Art school is no doubt a strange bag of idiosyncrasies and distractions, but you'd hope the writing would reflect the sort of grace gained from having come and gone, something more to show than a mere caricature? This movie regurgitates some true-enough details in place of the depth, or the real confidentiality, that likely underlies what is surely outrageous about art school personalities. For zwigoff, these personalities remain a sad hypocritcal joke and the whole of art school remains just a setting, not a subject. The story is trite. The characters are one-dimensional. And the ending is a classic film student blunder... ironically.
Reviews
9 Reviews
Hero
(2002)
An otherworldly Painting
15 January 2012
It's possible we've never seen color applied so beautifully or so pointedly on screen before. This film is a painting - with composition so classical and stunning that i kept forgetting to read the subtitles and having to rewind. Zhang Yimou, words cannot say, he knows how to stage a scene. This film is otherworldly in its imagery, something that works for this particular narrative, which takes place mostly in fantastic sequences of recollection rather than reality. In turn, the dominant color of each sequence identifies and emboldens the differences between each of these alternating perspectives. And in the end, Tarantino-esque, these swirling pieces of memory coalesce as the narrative of a single conversation between two main characters, the king and his assassin. I gave it a rousing eight stars because, as an audience, we are engrossed and captivated by the audacity of the cinematic effort, and we can understand the meaning of the film in the application of this visual artistry. The reason i gave it only eight stars is because i think that the film is academic in the sense that i never identified with the characters on an emotional level. The themes come together, but more in the mind and less in the heart. My appreciation remained safely in the technical/artistic spectacle of the filmmaking; but that alone - I promise - may well move you to tears.
Kids
(1995)
The Grandaddy of Dark and Real
15 January 2012
This is not a super super film, but it stays with you, which was sort of the point - especially if you saw it at the time it was released, before the onslaught of "dark" teen movies over the decade following. This was the granddaddy of the genre and remains one of the darkest and grittiest of them all, in both subject and style. Perhaps in part because the subjects were an urban group of kids, rather than the angsty suburban set we've grown accustomed to seeing, there is a rare and truthful ferocity to the characterizations. The emotive mechanism isn't their redemption as mere children, but their total fallibility as young adults. Though obviously this represents a small sample of teenagers in the united states, it will make you think twice about how much earlier we seem to lose our childhood these days. Great ensemble cast with very believable performances. Its attempt to approximate the reality of a documentary is a unique success. In addition to stong dialogue and direction, credit should be given to the cast for that; obviously, chloe sevigny was a standout here. A really important subject for its time and a very credible portrayal.
Clean
(I) (2004)
Wasted Potential, Flat Execution
15 January 2012
This movie is badly written and well acted, which is a shame because you're interested in the characters right away, and the movie begins as though it's going to be a different sort of drug redemption film, one that might just skate the line between glorification and demonization. Instead, the script loses it's emotional way and falls fast into a four star disappointment. Terrible follow-through. Both maggie cheung and nick nolte provide a fair- enough effort, yet their relationship never picks up any developmental speed. The other characters are quasi-interesting, but probably because we never really find out anything about them. Plus, the little boy didn't get the direction he needed, because he sounds like he's reading lines, to the point that you're embarrassed for the filmmakers that they even attempted the hook, line and cute-kid sinker. And finally, the music should be more than just set dressing in a story so critically dependent on rock credibility. Though i'd admit that there were a couple interesting sequences, i wouldn't recommend a film this weak to anyone. The script doesn't nearly get redeemed by any particular virtue of filmmaking.
Derrida
(2002)
Nails On Chalkboard
15 January 2012
No no no... This movie isn't even an intro to Derrida. To start with, the film is riddled with absurd, nails-on-chalkboard voice over (as if one should NARRATE Derrida in the first place?!). Awful! If the only footage you have is of Derrida walking down a street alone, best not to spoil it with a terrible pseudo-reading of what YOU think he's thinking! Plus, the bits where Derrida rambles about himself as the subject of a documentary are about as hokey and obvious as the play on words in the opening credits, DE-RRIDA. (seriously?). And what better way to trivialize one of this century's foremost critical thinkers than to put him into a montage that looks like it was composed of b-roll home videos. And then to splice in random bits of lecture taken horribly out of context. I venture to guess that the last thing Derrida would have wanted was a two-bit editor to "reconstruct" his words into a messy pile of sound-bites. Not worth watching if you've read Derrida. Misleading for Derrida first- timers. Worth checking out if you're obsessed with Derrida and can get over the shortcomings described above. This is a two-star film only because it's rare to see this sort of subject on screen at all. Too bad it was so unforgivingly botched.
Breach
(2007)
Mouse and Mouse
15 January 2012
Here's a film with all the usual suspects of a stylish cat and mouse thriller: agents, double agents, entrapments, liars and loyalties... But as it turns out, these are mere accessories to a script which itself is a weak psychological portrait of an aging spy who doesn't really seem to be fooling anyone after all. Despite my love for Chris Cooper, his all-important character never quite feels dangerous or cunning enough to bring the audience to the edge of their seats. Plus, the writing is relatively flat for this genre - no twists, no complications, no surprises. Not that we always need to be shocked by the turn of movie events, but the plot never develops past the first motivation, to convict "the worst traitor in U.S. History." But we know he is. It's a true story, we already know the basic details. This movie fails to find the drama beneath the account. On the other hand, despite its mediocrities, the movie is still not bad. The camera-work is clean and subtle, the characters are not uninteresting, the acting works... A six star achievement. I only wish I had been convinced by the film that these events had the magnitude for a more dramatic realization.
Broken English
(2007)
Broken
15 January 2012
What's broken in this film is the part where there are two believable characters who do something interesting together. This film has trouble with both likability and credibility, perhaps because they seemingly stole their plot from the bowels of a fortune cookie. On the one hand, we're looking for love in all the wrong places. On the other hand, we're loving ourselves in order to be loved. And these tired little anecdotes... just ugh. For her part, the director compounds these weaknesses by not understanding how to flesh out a character. She stereotypes the mother. She mishandles the circumstances of romance. She cuts moments that would have helped with character motivation (see deleted scenes); instead, wasting time on a series of lousy, boring dates that fly from one farce of a scene to the next. Parker Posey's character is the only one that isn't totally flubbed by hastiness. The film takes care in describing the anxieties that can impound a state of 30-something loneliness. The rhythms of being single are incisive, and underscored by a range of thoughtful, sympathetic details. But again, this isn't a vignette or portraiture; it's a full- length feature film that lacks the sophistication to be romantic.
The Fall
(I) (2006)
A climax of a film
15 January 2012
This is a climax of a film. And you can absolutely watch it for the knockout punch of its graphic audacity - this film will bring you to your knees, it's so beautiful. But Tarsem is also a filmmaker's filmmaker, a James Joyce of the big screen, who seems to create films not only for the sake of film criticism but also wildly for the sake of cinematic gluttony. His films are like feasts, they spare nothing; but, like Joyce, Tarsem's extravagance is also mitigated by clear, didactic expertise. This film knows its own references. With lavish certainty, Tarsem gives deference to his predecessors while, politely, blowing them out of the water. Can we recall a richer treatise on the psychology of cinematic narration since Kurasawa? But Tarsem's is also a bent genealogy. We see the traces of ancestors as remote to cinema as they are bravely imported
the animation of Escher, the phantasmagoria of Dali, the gravitas of Matta-Clark
and yet plainly we submit to the particular hex of Tarsem. The cinematic medium finds new lineage and new expression in his hands. And this film demands that recognition, unapologetically. Here's a director who emboldens the profession with his excesses while he whispers in the ear of his audience
watch closely
Gray Matters
(I) (2006)
Light and Delightful!
15 January 2012
A light and delightful movie that's satisfying at a perfectly weightless pg-13. Being charming is what this movie does best, but i'd add that it doesn't seem to try or fail to be more important than that. Stylistically, the movie is consistently handled, with scenes that are quick and clever and adorable. We can all maybe admit that Heather Graham knows adorable, but she carries this film in other dramatic regards as well. Gray's relationship with her brother is very sweet, right away... and her attraction to Charlie is touched with a graceful amount of emotion. In my opinion, this is a newbie filmmaker with the editorial delicacy of a veteran. She delivers the right moments at the right times, building the chemistries early and easily. For this alone, six star territory. But here, a simple film with a sure grip on several tricky relationships - and somehow it still finds the recipe for whimsy. This movie runs away with quirky dialogue and a fetching cast... far-fetchedness be damned! Similarly, i loved the dancing and the run-on movie analogies! I think they are successful complements to the script, but they also work as pure indulgences. They are fun and energetic bits that will endear you to a movie that might very well have been another flimsy love-triangle remake. In this film, idiosyncrasies matter! This movie isn't meant to be deep, thank goodness, because it would have lost all of its sitcom mirth.
Tell Your Friends