256. Anaconda

256. (28 Oct) /Anaconda/ (1997, Luis Llosa) 51



I feel like I've been misinterpreting directorial ineptitude as hokey charm, as Anaconda has never seemed so choppy as it did on this viewing. There's still camp value to spare in the effects, Jennifer Lopez's sincerity and particularly Jon Voight's terrible performance. But the movie that was so impossibly fun when I was a teenager now seems slow, sloppy and very, very poorly written. It's still an entertaining jungle adventure movie and a guilty pleasure, but I'm far guiltier now about thinking it's anything more than what it is.

Midnight in Paris

Midnight in Paris, 2011
Directed by Woody Allen
Potential Nominations Include: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay

Synopsis: Engaged couple, Gil and Inez have come to Paris with Inez's parents as tag-alongs on her parent's business trip. Gil instantly falls in love with the city, ready to give up his life as Hollywood screenwriter, his life in California to live in Paris and finish his novel he's been labouring over. Inez feels differently, and see's it as a tourist trip, and more looks forward to going out dancing with her friends, than taking in the city like Gil. But after midnight, Gil experiences something very strange on the streets or Paris. Suddenly it's Paris 1920, he gets invited into an old car, taken about the city and meets people like Fitzgerald, Hemingway, Picasso. But while he seems to be discovering himself, and where his heart truly lies, he's also discovering where his heart doesn't lie.

Ironically, this is probably the last potential Best Picture nominee I'll need to see, but it was the first one released, making it's debut in theatres in June. I've heard so many good things about it since then, it having been nominated for all 4 Guild Awards (SAG, PGA, DGA, WGA), making it a lock for a Best Picture nomination. Also, it's Woody Allen, who is extremely well known and loved. So, naturally, I've been waiting a while to see this film.

Knowing the concept I was wondering how it would pan out without seeming cheesy, or simple, or just plain generic. But it was done very well, and I could see the moral of it The idea of nostalgia is brought up very early on and we can see where this film is headed. Gil is determined 1920's is the Golden Age, between the writing and the art, and the music.

Overall, I didn't find the movie ah-mazing, but I did enjoy it. It was nice to see Owen Wilson in a different type of role, and seeing that he actually does have some talent, hidden behind those awful movies he usually does was nice. He was well-acted, funny, and just so human. He was star-struck, but at the same time retrospective as well as introspective. While it wasn't an Oscar winning performance, or even worth a nomination, I enjoyed him as Gil. We saw Marion Cottilard as Adriana, the alluring French woman that has captured the hearts of Picasso, a variety of famous painters, and, finally, Gil. Marion was completely alluring, yet seemingly innocent, and played her part well. Everyone in the cast did a great job, and it was a hefty cast indeed including Rachel McAdams as Inez, Tom Hiddleston as Fitzgerald, Kathy Bates are Gertrude Stein, Michael Sheen as Paul, the intelligent man that Inez adores. The casting was great, and made it star-studded, but not overly so, though well-done.

Owen really carried the film on his shoulders. We really understood Gil, where he was coming from, and his aggrevation at Paul being a know it all, Inez shushing him and adoring Paul, and just trying to finish his novel, looking for better life than his shallow one in California. The story was just told in a way that we so believed. We were able to put off our sense of disbelief and just accept everything, and we couldn't understand why Inez didn't see it, or why she didn't understand. Gil was a very likable character, and was told so honestly.

Additionally, the shots of Paris really were beautiful. I felt like I saw so much of the city, though I've never been to it. We understood Gil's love for the city, and we see what he sees, the beauty in everything. Also, the costumes were great, and were just so 1920's (obviously), but they were just so well done. The hair, the dresses, the suits, everything just looked so great, but in a subtle way. We could see it was still the same Paris that Gil and Inez are in, but it's also the one Hemingway and Fitzgerald lived in. The same, yet subtly different. The screenplay was also well-written. As I mentioned, Gil is such a believable character, but yet so are so many of the others, including Inez, and Hemingway, and Adriana. It had touches or humor, but it was also touching, and intelligent.

Overall, again, I thought it was a good movie. It was a nice, humorous story about a couple who are clearly not right for each other, and the idea of never being satisfied with where and who we are. Had people not known the references in the film it wouldn't be appreciated, and I only picked up on about 75%, enough to appreciate, but also just a little too much I didn't know that I felt slightly left out. I liked it, I'd watch it again, and I'd recommend it, but it's not my top film of the year. Didn't hate it, didn't die over it. It was a nice film, with a nice story.

7/10

Midnight in Paris

The quickest review of Midnight in Paris would be that it's a magical and charming time travel whimsical American tale set amidst the beauty that is Paris, France with classic (Woddy) Allen-esq neurotic characters. It's also a film that proves to be every art majors wet dream come true.

In fact i'm going to take the easy way out and won't go into detail anymore, except that the cast is spectacular (notably Kathy Bates, Michael Sheen, Marion Cotillard, and Adrien Brody) and Owen Wilson captures the neurosis of Allen perfectly, making this one of the best romantic fantasy comedies of the year.

The magic of Midnight in Paris is going to watch it without knowing much about it, as I did. It catches your attention when you least expect it and takes you on a journey, along with its cast, that is simply enchanting and colorful.

If you like good cinema that excites the brain, then make sure you watch this wonderful adventurous story that raises the question of whether "the good ol' days" really are what we make of them?

Rating 4.5/5

470. Midnight in Paris

470. (20 Nov) Midnight in Paris (2011, Woody Allen) 54



There's clumsiness in both the film's key plot device and the way famous individuals who populated 1920's Paris are introduced. Though warmth and charm carry a handful of scenes, it's burdened by inobservant observances like no time period recognizing its own significance. Owen Wilson's character wants to take his chances with an entrancing young woman in the past rather than his clearly dreadful fiancee in the present; that sort of deck-stacking prevents the film from feeling romantic or insightful. There are also some smug moments like Wilson pitching a scenario to Luis Buñuel.

REVIEW: Cars 2 (C)

(dir. John Lasseter and Brad Lewis, 2011)

Regardless of what you hear, there is a lot to enjoy about Disney and Pixar's newest film, Cars 2.  But, in line with what you've heard, there's also a lot to not enjoy.  Much ado has been whispered and shouted in regards to the reason this film was made.  It's well documented (including in an hour-long documentary) that the original Cars was a passion project for director and Pixar creative master John Lasseter, and the film just happened to become a hit with children (if not the critical masses) and a merchandise Goliath.  So is the sequel to Pixar's least-favorably-reviewed film a project of passion or dollar signs?

Answer: It doesn't matter.

As with all Pixar films, we start with the adorable protagonists, erstwhile upstart and now reformed race-car Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) and stupid is as stupid does best pal Mater (Larry the Cable Guy).  In the original, McQueen was the star, and in a curious and ultimately successful move, Mater has become the chief hero of the sequel.  Long story short, in the throes of a worldwide World Grand Prix race sponsored by alternative fuel icon Sir Miles Axlerod (Eddie Izzard), Mater is mistaken as a high-class spy and hilarity ensues; well, it almost ensues.

There are some funny parts.  A rather clever scene wherein Mater eats pistachio ice cream, only to find out he had really eaten a scoop of wasabi (you know, the things adults get and kids don't).  There are fun parts even; the races are visually stunning and the battle sequences are awe-inspiring.  A particularly strong opening sequence (seemingly borrowed right from the storyboards of a James Bond flick) gave me hope for the rest of the picture.  But it's the overarching aspects where the film falters.  There's no real emotional core, you struggle to really care about anyone aside from Mater, and there's no cohesively strong theme to the piece.  In the end, it's just a "see, your stupid friend can do stuff, if only by accident" story.  All new and old characters are bland and mostly forgettable, from the barely-there McQueen to the new Mater love interest Holley Shiftwell (voiced, presumably while napping, by Emily Mortimer).  New driving rival Francesco Bernoulli (a Formula-1 car voiced by John Turturro) is a recycling of Turturro's character from The Big Lebowski and Sasha Baron Cohen's foreign racing rival from Talladega Nights.  It was just...fluff.  Devoid of the heart and soul we've come to expect not only from Pixar, but from all good animated films.

Cars 2 feels so empty, even if it is full of color.  For all the disdain most give the original, I respect it for what it was.  It had heart, and that heart belonged in the characters of Radiator Springs, and the town itself.  Cars 2 takes half the lovable characters out of the equation and transplants McQueen and Mater to Italy, Japan, and London.  There's no love or connection with these cities; visually, they're amazing, but the characters have zero connection to them. And in a wanderlust sequel to a film that was originally all about the importance of a small town, this feels like a misguided ripoff.

I saw this movie with five children, four of which literally worship the ground all things Cars walk drive on.  They laughed a lot, and when we left they said it was the "best movie ever," and that they "loved Lightning."  And, in the end, I guess that's the point isn't it?  For animated films at least, to entertain children and take them to another world that's fun and where cars can fly.  So what if their parents, siblings, or film critics thinks the movie is stupid, they get a kick out of it.  For so long now, animated films have surprised us by not being just animated films, but something greater.  So when they're not, we're disappointed, and we miss the point of them to begin with.  GRADE: C

CARS 2

Written by Ben Queen

Directed by John Lasseter

Voices by Larry the Cable Guy, Owen Wilson, Emily Mortimer

and Michael Caine

Luigi: No fight more important than firendship.

CARS 2 marks the first time where I could not care less about a Pixar release. I didn’t buy the world made up entirely of cars in the first instalment and thought the idea of a race-car learning to slow down in life to be pretty dull. Getting behind the wheel again was the last thing I wanted to do but I’m sure glad I did. CARS 2 is a ton more fun than its predecessor, as it follows the best thing about the first film, tow-truck, Mater (Larry the Cable Guy), through a mistaken identity spy caper. It never reaches the true greatness that most Pixar pictures achieve but by speeding up the action, Pixar revs up for some much-needed excitement for these former clunkers.

Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) is once again racing to prove something in CARS 2, in this case to prove his virility and quiet the taunts of another racer, Francesco Bernoulli (John Turturro). In a bold move on Pixar’s part though, McQueen’s brilliantly animated race around the world is downgraded to a secondary plot for the sequel. This allows us to tag along with Mater as he joins forces with Finn McMissile (Michael Caine) and Holley Shiftwell (Emily Mortimer) to take down a bunch of lemon cars determined to dissuade the world from using new forms of fuel. The lemons are in possession of an untapped oil reserve so alternative energy is their nemesis. All the while, Mater and McQueen’s friendship is tested when McQueen is embarrassed by Mater’s naïve antics. This in turn forces Mater to pop his own hood and look inside so that he can learn to love his own make and model. Good thing too because nobody likes an insecure car.

In many ways, director, John Lasseter (who directed the first CARS and the first two TOY STORY films) has dumbed down the CARS 2 to make it even more accessible. It is completely ludicrous when you piece the plot together but its simplicity allows for a more enjoyable time that I’m certain will get little boys everywhere clamouring for more car toys, especially now that the cars come with guns and missiles attached to them. That said, this is a movie populated with talking machinery so I’m not sure whether ridiculousness should even be a consideration here. As gimmicky and forced as the spy adventure spin is, it adds some serious traction to this budding franchise that should surely carry it safely over the finish line in first place.

REVIEW: Midnight in Paris (A-)

(dir. Woody Allen, 2011)

There are many kinds of Woody Allen movies.  There are the good ones and the bad ones.  There are the tough-nosed Manhattan tales and his whimsical fantasies.  His dramas and his comedies.  For a man with such a specific style, he seems to blur such nuanced genres in line with his signature storytelling.  Unfortunately, he hasn't been doing much of that late.

Midnight in Paris is Woody's third European film, following London and Barcelona-based Match Point and Vicky Cristina Barcelona.  When Woody experiments with style, sometimes it can be thrilling (Interiors, Manhattan Murder Mystery) and sometimes it can be awful (The Curse of the Jade Scorpion, Melinda and Melinda) but this fantasy tale so evoked the purity of the Allen form that it was a homerun from the beginning.

Set, obviously, in Paris, this is the story of a successful beat screenwriter (Owen Wilson) trying to fulfill his true potential as a novelist while vacationing with his snotty fiancee (Rachel McAdams, playing the role so well you hate her) and her equally snotty parents.  While there, Wilson falls head over heels for the City of Lights, finding that the purest pleasure from the city isn't material consumption, but rather just seeing the city.  Over and over he states how much wonderful Paris would have been in the 1920s.  It becomes very clear quickly that what McAdams and Wilson have isn't very meaty, which actually prompts Wilson's quest for fulfillment very believable.  One night, while walking the streets of Paris, the midnight clock rings, a 1920s car pulls up and transports him to the world of Paris in the 1920s where he meets artistic icons and one sultry muse.

It's been said that Wilson is the best Allen stand-in since Allen himself, and I tend to agree with that (after having to suffer the indignation of Josh Brolin and the atrocious Larry David), for Wilson understood and exacted the typical nebbish nature of the character Allen has penned.  Though, oddly, this successful Woody Allen film doesn't exactly have a standout performance.  In his career, Allen has been so prolific with writing great roles for actors and specifically actresses.  But in Midnight in Paris, a few bit characters really steal the show.  It's not the apt Wilson, the painfully truthful McAdams, or the perfect Parisian Marion Cottilard.  But rather, it's Alison Pill as Zelda Fitzgerald, Corey Stoll as Ernest Hemingway, and Adrien Brody as Salvador Dalí.

I dare anyone not to sit through Brody's sole scene without splitting a side; his ridiculous commitment to the absurdity of Dalí and his obsession with rhinoceroses is just magnificent.  Pill as the country-bumpkin turned booze maven is a delight, chewing her words and making Zelda just as we'd always imagined her.  Stoll, too, deserves some credit for not exactly having as a comedic a role as the aforementioned two, but still delivering a blisteringly true performance as Hemingway.

Overall, Allen's message in the film is a fine, clear one.  It's nice to see an Allen film not as focused on infidelity or sex as his previous films have been, and he's allowed his truly great story to shine.  It's a small, quiet tale told in fantastic measure, yet with such a profound and grounded conclusion.  I can say without hesitation, that this is Allen's best film in nearly 20 years.  Surely come Oscar time, this film will get at least attention for Allen's superb screenplay.  GRADE: A-

.

MIDNIGHT IN PARIS

Written and Directed by Woody Allen

Starring Owen Wilson, Rachel McAdams, Marion Cotillard and Michael Sheen

Inez: The studios adore you; you’re in demand. Do you really want to give it all up just to struggle?

Every time I review a Woody Allen movie, it seems I address the same issues time and time again. This is likely because Allen always chooses to tackle the same themes – class, art and commerce, American values, inferiority and infidelity, to name but a few. Often times, he falls flat, which is entirely reasonable when one takes into account that he makes a movie every year, but once in a while, his recurring neurosis come together so perfectly, they reveal his true genius. MIDNIGHT IN PARIS, Allen’s 41^st feature film, embodies this culmination brilliantly and is perhaps his most enchanting film in years. It is unmistakably “Woody Allen” but for some cinephiles out there, that is cause for celebration and not reason to run away.

Allen opens MIDNIGHT IN PARIS the way he always does, with plain white titles on a black background and a plucky jazz track playing. Suddenly, he interrupts himself and goes into a montage of Paris postcard shots, spanning a day that sees all the sights, a heavy rain fall and the kind of charm that only an evening in Paris can provide. It isn’t that the montage itself isn’t also quintessentially Allen-esque that is striking; it is the interruption that announces that Allen is alert and making choices instead of just letting everything play out naturally. It also allows the viewer, or any remotely sentimental one anyway, to get fully sucked into the clichéd idea of Paris as the most romantic city in the world. The images themselves are stunning yet subtle, thanks to cinematographer, Darius Khondji (who has worked with Allen once before on ANYTHING ELSE, but we probably shouldn’t talk about that), allowing Paris to be its grand self and showing us very clearly how much Allen is in love with the city.

Owen Wilson is Gil, the Allen figurehead in this story (and a very suitable one at that). He is a successful Hollywood screenwriter who considers all his success to be built on the production of meaningless material. He and his fiancée, Inez (Rachel McAdams, who does materialistic and shallow all too well) find themselves in Paris on her parents’ dime, just as he has decided to try his hand at writing a novel in hopes of achieving a more respectable level of artistry. Their priorities are clearly at odds; she prefers to go out and party while he prefers to soak in the city’s elegance. More importantly, she is of the moment and he cannot help but long for a simpler time, when life was rich and not empty like the constantly moving present. Then one night, Gil gets exactly what he has been longing for. He is mysteriously whisked away to the Paris of yesteryear when the clock strikes midnight. Here he meets artists he has always admired and finds romance he has only dreamed of. If only he wasn’t from another era.

It may sound a little “je ne sais quoi” but MIDNIGHT IN PARIS is truly a magical experience and meant to be absurdist and surreal. The cast is delightful, from Marion Cotillard as Gil’s other world love interest to Michael Sheen as the pedantic windbag archetype Allen loves to mock so much. Paris, past and present, also presents Allen with an opportunity to showcase exquisite production designs and lovely costume pieces. The literary references may go above some heads but aside from that, it is practically impossible not to get caught up in the glamour of it all. Despite all of this allure though, what most distinguishes this work from so much of Allen’s previous work, is Allen’s shift towards resolution. Infamous for being trapped by the past, Allen now moves towards letting go of his illusions of the past, allowing for a catharsis that his films rarely ever achieve.

Midnight in Paris trailer drops

Or as non-dorks call it, another Woody Allen film.  But this Woody Allen film is the one slated to open Cannes in a few month's time.  Sure, the last few Allen projects have been bumpier than not, what with Match Point and Vicky Cristina Barcelona being the standouts amongst some of his career-worst efforts like Whatever Works and You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger.  But here's a toast to not judging a book by its cover and hoping that Allen has found his groove in Paris that he seemingly lost in London last summer.  Anyone else excited for Michael Sheen in a full-on beard?  Prime Minister say what?

This film's BEAUTIFUL poster after the cut ...

HOW DO YOU KNOW

Written and Directed by James L. Brooks

Starring Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson, Paul Rudd and Jack Nicholson

Psychiatrist: Figure out what you want and how to ask for it.

Lisa: Those are both really hard.

Silly me. I assumed that HOW DO YOU KNOW, the new film by Academy Award winning director, James L. Brooks, was asking an age old question about how you know when you’re actually in love. I did not realize that what it could also be asking is how do you know when you’re watching a bad movie. For me, I knew when I was about half way through this muddled mess of a romantic comedy and still had no idea what the story actually was. Everything looked so pretty that I hadn't noticed that Brooks had yet to make any effort to answer the question himself.

Reese Witherspoon returns to the big screen for the first time in two years in what certainly must have looked like a good project on paper. Everyone wants to know how you know you’re in love, including her character, Lisa, an Olympic softball player whose career has just stalled and whose interest in finding love seems to have stalled long before that. She is going through the motions with her casual boyfriend, Matty (Owen Wilson) but the clueless twosome actually think they are breaking new relationship ground every time he makes some space for her in his sock drawer. Meanwhile, Paul Rudd’s George is going through a crisis of his own but he knows without a doubt that Lisa is the girl for him. Naturally, we know as well too so we just have to sit around and wait for Lisa to get on the same page as everyone else.

If George can figure the whole love thing out, it stands to reason that anyone can, but Lisa and Matty exist on this plain where apparently love is a convoluted concept, that is as hard to understand as Jack Nicholson’s decision to appear in this farce. Love needn’t be so complicated but at least one thing is clear in this film – Brooks doesn’t know how you know anymore than anyone else does.