Black Book (***1/2)
(Zwartboek)
It's been about a week and a half now since I saw this, so it's not completely fresh in my mind, but this is in World War II era espionage-type triller directed by Paul Verhoeven, aka the dude who made Robocop. All of the characters speak their native languages, and so the film is subtitled with English, Dutch, German, and Hebrew all being spoken.
The film's protagonist is Rachel Stein, a Jewish woman hiding out in the countryside in the Netherlands during German occupation. She decides to flee on a boat which takes passengers to liberated territory under cover of darkness. The boat, however, is quickly discovered by a German patrol boat and its passengers are gunned down, with only Rachel escaping. The remainder of the film follows Rachel as she attempts to aid the Dutch resistance movement, while also trying to discover what happened the night the boat was discovered. As part of this effort, she seduces a German S.S. officer and begins working at the local Gestapo headquarters under an assumed name.
The film is probably not the most profound movie ever made about World War II, but it does do an excellent job of painting a portrait of the Netherlands during and immediately after World War II, and makes a number of interesting social commentaries. But moreso than that, the film really works as a thriller, and Rachel's elaborate double agent role leads to a number of tremendously tense scenes. Black Book is easily worth a watch.
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Monday, June 04, 2007
PotC: At World's End
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (**)
The Pirates movies have been perhaps not the most important movies made as of late, but they have worked as entertaining escapist adventure movies. The third leg of the trilogy, At World's End, however tries to do way too much, and ends up being more exhausting than anything else. Even though there was a significant cliffhanger at the end of the second film leading into At World's End, in many ways the first two films were basically self-contained. Curse of the Black Pearl centered around Jack Sparrow and company facing off against Barbosa's crew for the cursed Aztec treasure, while Dead Man's Chest centered around Jack's debt to Davy Jones and the Flying Dutchman. In contrast, At World's End's plot is incredibly complex, incorporating characters from both of the two films, who create a number of entangling and changing alliances with each other. I don't know if the last two films were planned out when the first was created, but watching this movie, some of the new things revealed about the characters certainly seem forced to try and fit them into this web of intrigue. All this would be well and good if it added up to something great at the end, but the film's climax, nor any other part of it, is really any more exciting than the sequences that the first two movies culminated with after much less set-up.
If you've seen the first movie you know that (highlight) Jack is dead, and that Barbosa and company are setting out to find him and bring him back. The movie begins with them in Singapore stealing maps to "Davy Jones' locker" to accomplish this task. They meet Chow-Yun Fat, who is sort of wasted as a largely uninteresting pirate captain local to Singapore. They, of course, eventually find Jack, but not before a surrealistic scene of Jack in a sort of purgatory which is mildly amusing but which goes on for way too long. The movie gets more ridiculous from there, as the British navy and the East India Company tries to use Davy Jones and the Flying Dutchman as an enforcer for their own aims. Barbosa and Jack decide that a conference needs to be held with the nine Pirate captains from all over the world to try and stop them, lest pirates become extinct. The entire notion of a pirate council seems too far over the top. The series obviously never attempted to be realistic, but when all the pirates gather around a table in their own crazy looking, stereotypical ethic costumes it almost reaches self-parody (and yes, Keith Richards is in it).
Jack is still funny, the action is still visually cool, and there are a lot of moments which put a smile on your face, but the attempt at adding multiple plot twists and creating a huge web of entangling alliances between the characters is just a bad idea. What results is a convoluted plot that detracts from the simple sense of adventure which is the reason why the series is popular for people other than the 13-year old Jack Sparrow demographic. The movie's run time is three hours, which was fine for an epic like Lord of the Rings, but just exhausting in this case.
The Pirates movies have been perhaps not the most important movies made as of late, but they have worked as entertaining escapist adventure movies. The third leg of the trilogy, At World's End, however tries to do way too much, and ends up being more exhausting than anything else. Even though there was a significant cliffhanger at the end of the second film leading into At World's End, in many ways the first two films were basically self-contained. Curse of the Black Pearl centered around Jack Sparrow and company facing off against Barbosa's crew for the cursed Aztec treasure, while Dead Man's Chest centered around Jack's debt to Davy Jones and the Flying Dutchman. In contrast, At World's End's plot is incredibly complex, incorporating characters from both of the two films, who create a number of entangling and changing alliances with each other. I don't know if the last two films were planned out when the first was created, but watching this movie, some of the new things revealed about the characters certainly seem forced to try and fit them into this web of intrigue. All this would be well and good if it added up to something great at the end, but the film's climax, nor any other part of it, is really any more exciting than the sequences that the first two movies culminated with after much less set-up.
If you've seen the first movie you know that (highlight) Jack is dead, and that Barbosa and company are setting out to find him and bring him back. The movie begins with them in Singapore stealing maps to "Davy Jones' locker" to accomplish this task. They meet Chow-Yun Fat, who is sort of wasted as a largely uninteresting pirate captain local to Singapore. They, of course, eventually find Jack, but not before a surrealistic scene of Jack in a sort of purgatory which is mildly amusing but which goes on for way too long. The movie gets more ridiculous from there, as the British navy and the East India Company tries to use Davy Jones and the Flying Dutchman as an enforcer for their own aims. Barbosa and Jack decide that a conference needs to be held with the nine Pirate captains from all over the world to try and stop them, lest pirates become extinct. The entire notion of a pirate council seems too far over the top. The series obviously never attempted to be realistic, but when all the pirates gather around a table in their own crazy looking, stereotypical ethic costumes it almost reaches self-parody (and yes, Keith Richards is in it).
Jack is still funny, the action is still visually cool, and there are a lot of moments which put a smile on your face, but the attempt at adding multiple plot twists and creating a huge web of entangling alliances between the characters is just a bad idea. What results is a convoluted plot that detracts from the simple sense of adventure which is the reason why the series is popular for people other than the 13-year old Jack Sparrow demographic. The movie's run time is three hours, which was fine for an epic like Lord of the Rings, but just exhausting in this case.
Stranger than Fiction
Stranger than Fiction (***1/2)
If Stranger than Fiction is remembered years from now, it'll probably be because of Will Ferrell's performance. Ferrell, known more for his loud, over-the-top, performances like in Ancorman shows that he can still be funny without yelling and running to walls, and is capable of very serious moments as well. In the film Ferrell plays Harold Crick. He works for the IRS and, even though he's quite good at it, he doesn't seem to care much for his job. He seems to aspire for more in his life, but is too timid to take any sort of initiative. Really, he's not very interesting as a movie character except for the fact that he hears a voice in his head. Not just a voice, however, but a female voice narrating his own life as it happens.
The early part of the film explores this idea. What would it be like if your life was being constantly narrated? How would it be described even when you were doing the most mundane of things? How could you possible concentrate on your life when you heard someone narrating it, and then how would your ensuing frustration be addressed by the narrator? All of this leads to some very funny scenes which, again, show that Ferrell has potential beyond some of the obnoxious characters he's famous for.
The film's real hook comes when the narrator mentions Harold's "imminent death." She doesn't mention how or why he's going to die, only that he is going to die, and soon. Harold goes to see a psychologist who tells him he's schizophrenic, leading to this exchange:
"Mr. Crick, you have a voice speaking to you."
"No, no to me. About me."
And so Harold decides that he has to find someone whose expertise is in stories. He finds English professor Jules Hilbert, played by Dustin Hoffman, who is just eccentric enough and just enough into literature to think that helping Harold might actually be possible. He suggests that Harold try and determine whether the story being narrated about him is a comedy or a tragedy, leading to some funny scenes where Harold awkwardly attempts to get to know Ana Pascal, played by Maggie Gyllenhal, a woman who Harold is enthralled with but is in many ways his opposite.
Over the course of the film it becomes apparent that the narrator in Harold's head is an actual writer named Karen Eiffel, who was once critically acclaimed, but is now trying to overcome writer's block and finish her first novel in a number of years. The movie's ending raises questions about writing, and about death in fictional stories that would seem crazy to even consider, but somewhat seem to make perfect sense in the context of the film. Would we place the same importance on art if people actually died when art portrays death? It's an interesting question.
The film's ingenious plot is what stands out most about the film, but also of note are some of the visual effects used in the film. Harold, being very much left-brained, thinks entirely about math, and as we see him go about his day, we see things he encounters and interacts with overlayed with a mosaic of numbers and diagrams. On the bonus material of the DVD, the artists who created it called it a GUI, as in the GUI of an operating system. It is a unique effect and my only complaint about it is that it isn't used consistently throughout the film, and at times when it crops up it detracts from the dialogue going on at the same time.
Stanger than Fiction is one of the more interesting comedies in recent years. Its strange but enthralling plot let's Will Ferrell create a memorable character that is both very funny and at times a genuinely sympathetic figure.
If Stranger than Fiction is remembered years from now, it'll probably be because of Will Ferrell's performance. Ferrell, known more for his loud, over-the-top, performances like in Ancorman shows that he can still be funny without yelling and running to walls, and is capable of very serious moments as well. In the film Ferrell plays Harold Crick. He works for the IRS and, even though he's quite good at it, he doesn't seem to care much for his job. He seems to aspire for more in his life, but is too timid to take any sort of initiative. Really, he's not very interesting as a movie character except for the fact that he hears a voice in his head. Not just a voice, however, but a female voice narrating his own life as it happens.
The early part of the film explores this idea. What would it be like if your life was being constantly narrated? How would it be described even when you were doing the most mundane of things? How could you possible concentrate on your life when you heard someone narrating it, and then how would your ensuing frustration be addressed by the narrator? All of this leads to some very funny scenes which, again, show that Ferrell has potential beyond some of the obnoxious characters he's famous for.
The film's real hook comes when the narrator mentions Harold's "imminent death." She doesn't mention how or why he's going to die, only that he is going to die, and soon. Harold goes to see a psychologist who tells him he's schizophrenic, leading to this exchange:
"Mr. Crick, you have a voice speaking to you."
"No, no to me. About me."
And so Harold decides that he has to find someone whose expertise is in stories. He finds English professor Jules Hilbert, played by Dustin Hoffman, who is just eccentric enough and just enough into literature to think that helping Harold might actually be possible. He suggests that Harold try and determine whether the story being narrated about him is a comedy or a tragedy, leading to some funny scenes where Harold awkwardly attempts to get to know Ana Pascal, played by Maggie Gyllenhal, a woman who Harold is enthralled with but is in many ways his opposite.
Over the course of the film it becomes apparent that the narrator in Harold's head is an actual writer named Karen Eiffel, who was once critically acclaimed, but is now trying to overcome writer's block and finish her first novel in a number of years. The movie's ending raises questions about writing, and about death in fictional stories that would seem crazy to even consider, but somewhat seem to make perfect sense in the context of the film. Would we place the same importance on art if people actually died when art portrays death? It's an interesting question.
The film's ingenious plot is what stands out most about the film, but also of note are some of the visual effects used in the film. Harold, being very much left-brained, thinks entirely about math, and as we see him go about his day, we see things he encounters and interacts with overlayed with a mosaic of numbers and diagrams. On the bonus material of the DVD, the artists who created it called it a GUI, as in the GUI of an operating system. It is a unique effect and my only complaint about it is that it isn't used consistently throughout the film, and at times when it crops up it detracts from the dialogue going on at the same time.
Stanger than Fiction is one of the more interesting comedies in recent years. Its strange but enthralling plot let's Will Ferrell create a memorable character that is both very funny and at times a genuinely sympathetic figure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)