TO THE WONDER

TO THE WONDER
"Written and Directed" by Terence Malick
Starring Ben Affleck, Olga Kurylenko, Javier Bardem and Rachel McAdams

Father Quintana: Where are you leading us? Teach us how to seek you out.

To be honest, it is an actual wonder to me that Terence Malick actually thought his latest film, TO THE WONDER, to be finished. I don’t see how on any level he could have watched this film and thought that it would be satisfying for any audience, from his devout fans (of which he has many) to the casual filmgoer. Even at a reasonable two-hour runtime, I found it difficult to get through TO THE WONDER. I lost my patience about half way through and by the end, I actually found the film to be practically insulting on the part of the filmmaker. The man is famous for taking forever to finish a movie. Why he rushed this one, I will never understand.

There is a story embedded somewhere deep within TO THE WONDER, which is essentially the crux of the issue. Ben Affleck and Olga Kurylenko fall in love in France and eventually make their way back to America, Oklahoma to be precise. There, she is out of place and he does not know how to make the relationship work. There are also subplots that involve Javier Bardem as a displaced priest and Rachel McAdams as a woman from Affleck’s past. The plot itself is thin enough already but it is clear from Malick’s execution that he has no idea how to tell this story. A slew of supporting characters never even made the cut (from Michael Sheen to Rachel Weisz) and Malick buries the rest of the story (which consists mostly of misery) within one long stream of consciousness poem. Now, I’m no poetry expert but even I know lines like, “What is this love that loves us?” are nothing but pretentious crap.

Malick is under no obligation to make movies for anyone other than himself. I’m sure his producers would disagree with that statement, but as an artist, he is entitled to express himself any which way he would like. After last year’s masterpiece, THE TREE OF LIFE, Malick seems to have found a pattern that he is fond of. He is not the least bit concerned with dialogue or convention (Affleck speaks so little in the film, for a while, I thought his character might actually be mute); no, Malick is more concerned with the image and the tone of the piece, and allowing life to unfold rather than having it told. TO THE WONDER often feels like an attempt to recreate the same aesthetic of his last project, and at times, at least visually, thanks to the always brilliant work of cinematographer, Emmanuel Lubezki, it is striking to behold. THE TREE OF LIFE was about something though (and some might argue, it was about everything), while TO THE WONDER is about so little, it never justifies all the work involved in watching it. This infuriating film is not just a misstep for Malick, but a full on embarrassment.

THE VOW

THE VOW
Written by Abby Kohn, Mark Silverstein and Jason Katims
Directed by Michael Sucsy
Starring Channing Tatum, Rachel McAdams and Scott Speedman


Leo: I vow to fiercely love you in all your forms, now and forever. I promise to never forget that this is a once in a lifetime love. 

I had immediately dismissed THE VOW from the moment I first saw the trailer. It seemed insipid to me and disturbingly manipulative. The charming and beautiful, Rachel McAdams, who incidentally starred in the mecca of romantic weepers such as this one, THE NOTEBOOK, gets into a car accident with her handsome husband (Channing Tatum) and forgets she ever knew the man, let alone loved him. It reeked of the dreaded, “Based on the beloved Nichols Sparks novel” to fall below the title, which I usually take to mean I should stay away. So what happened to change my mind and finally see THE VOW? I developed a mad crush on Channing Tatum; that’s what happened. (Thanks a lot, Steven Soderbergh!) Well, now that I’ve seen it, I’m both pleased and surprised to say that THE VOW is not only not based on a Nicholas Sparks novel, but that is was actually pretty compelling too.

Now, I didn’t realize this before, not that it would have done anything more to get me to see this in theatres, but THE VOW is based on a true story. Somewhere out there, there are two people who actually went through this. I doubt their lives were as well lit but this grounding in reality does a lot to anchor THE VOW, saving it from romantic improbability. I’m not sure whether the real Leo & Paige were quite as pretty as these two either but if they went through half of the turmoil this pair went through, their story will go down as one of the greats. Sure on film, it plays out as dramatic and overly romanticized but a good deal of credit is due Tatum and McAdams for bringing the characters’ most vulnerable fears to the surface. They each bravely give into this all consuming love and all devastating circumstance and their commitment sells the movie.

Michael Sucsy, a director who previously drew impressive performances from Drew Barrymore and Jessica Lange in GREY GARDENS, seems to have a knack for making unique situations understandable and almost relatable. He can draw great sympathy from the viewer without having to lay it on too thick. It’s just thick enough, if you will. Somehow, despite all the gooeyness, I was able to see right through to the substance at the center of the film and feel their pain. What you’re left with in THE VOW is a man whose great love is always just outside his reach and a woman who knows she’s supposed to feel something monumental but can’t. I found myself not only rooting for them to find each other again but rather just for the kind of love these two felt for each other, the kind of love that admittedly seems to only exist in the movies, to live on as well. If it did, then maybe it can also survive off screen as well.

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

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: 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 ...

MORNING GLORY

Written by Aline Brosh McKenna

Directed by Roger Michell

Starring Rachel McAdams, Diane Keaton, Patrick Wilson and Harrison Ford

Mike Pomeroy: Half the people who watch your show lost the remote. The other half is just waiting for their nurse to turn them over.

In MORNING GLORY, the darling Rachel McAdams plays Becky. We all know Becky. We don’t necessarily know her in real life because I’m not convinced she actually exists anywhere other than in Hollywood films. Becky is married to her job as the executive producer of fourth place network morning show, “Daybreak”. As queen worker bee, she has no time for a life, let alone any time for love. We all know from the moment we meet her that she will inevitably find the balance in her life to live happily ever after, simultaneously providing a ripple effect of equilibrium to the people that surround her. In real life, Becky works around the clock, has meaningless sex if she’s lucky, and probably has to take a multitude of medications to keep up the pace necessary to maintain her “life”. That would be way too depressing for a romantic comedy though.

MORNING GLORY may not be grounded in anything other than a clichéd perspective on life, but director, Roger Michell (NOTTING HILL) still manages to pull enough genuine emotion from his cast to make the experience pretty pleasant and often pretty funny. McAdams is the center, a 28-year-old who must choose between her dreams and reality (28 is apparently the cut off age for chasing dreams). Her effortless charm propels her through countless difficult situations but you can tell she can feel the sting of failure catching up behind her and pushing her forward at the same time. Her morning show anchors are played by legends, Diane Keaton and Harrison Ford. Keaton is sadly underused but looks to be having a blast whenever on screen. As for Ford, it was refreshing to see him look like he’s trying for a change. As former trusted news anchor and current unemployed curmudgeon, Mike Pomeroy, Ford’s cold exterior and antagonizing delivery could not be better suited. By the time he has to show a little heart (c’mon, you knew he would!), it practically feels like it could change the world.

I would like someone to answer this question for me. When is Patrick Wilson going to just waltz into my empty elevator on one of the worst days of my life like he does for Becky on hers? I would settle for someone who isn’t Wilson but is as equally attractive. The truth is though that, while life doesn’t work this way necessarily, people do still find happiness by searching, hoping and never giving up. It’s just a lot easier for them to find it when there is a director behind a camera making sure that all the missing pieces are waiting to be found in plain sight.