Skip to content

Special Note: Film Studies at Carleton University

In spring 2018, I find myself applying to Carleton University’s one-year Post-Baccalaureate Diploma program in Film Studies. In case anyone is coming here in that context, I wanted to not have my review of The Wolfman be their initial introduction to this site.

The format here is simple, with screening dates listed in every review and initial posting dates on each post. Most reviews were written between mid-2008 and early 2011. The text is all searchable so if you’re wondering whether a particular film is reviewed (or mentioned in another review), simply search for it.

In case you don’t feel like randomly searching through the available reviews, I’ve selected a handful which represent my style of analysis:

Synecdoche, New York
Scarface (1983)
Helvetica
Jackass 3D
Rumble Fish
In Bruges
The Messenger
Toy Story
Contact
Taxi Driver

If you would like to randomly read some reviews, you can go to “OLDER POSTS” at the bottom, and then change the number in the URL from “2” to some other number, up to “33”. After about 50 reviews, I started adding a 6-word summary to the end, as an exercise in concise writing.

Enjoy the site, and if you’re reading a bunch of reviews, have fun watching the progression of my writing style and review style.

The Wolfman

February 16, 2011:  The Wolfman

There’s absolutely no reason to watch The Wolfman other than to see the Oscar-winning makeup, and I don’t think it’s really anything we haven’t seen before.  The Victorian-era story, a variation on the typical “werewolf terrorizes small town” idea which brings family connections into the fold, is kind of a neat idea but gets lost in its own pompous telling.

There’s no shortage of star power on hand here.  Anthony Hopkins can do calmly murderous in his sleep, and he delights in another chance at it here.  Benicio del Toro gets to dress up and be classy, something he’s not often given a chance to do.  Emily Blunt gets to play an intelligent and influential woman in Victorian times, which is of course something she’s familiar with (wink, wink).  And Hugo Weaving, who is capable of incredible range in his typical supporting roles, gets to totally ham it up here and he’s loving evey minute of it.

Where this all doesn’t help, though, is that a neat idea needs to be fleshed out to feature length.  Father/son conflict with a bit of werewolf thrown in is great, and some nice werewolf transformations and slashing of innocent townspeople is part and parcel of the genre (hence the aforementioned makeup Oscar), but in my opinion werewolf hand-to-hand combat is as useless as that between vampires unless they are trying to shoot each other with silver bullets, and people usually don’t get long drawn-out death speeches when they have been shot through the heart, and really, how many people need to die mysteriously with the exact same type of unidentifiable injuries before everyone admits that there’s a werewolf running around?

The Wolfman’s flaws exceed its merits, so I can’t recommend this one.  In a touching note, at the Oscars when the film won for its makeup, special effects legend and now-seven-time Oscar winner Rick Baker (most notable for An American Werewolf in London – 1981) said just a few words before turning over the microphone to his co-winner.  Upon taking the podium, Dave Elsey said “It was always my ambition to lose an Oscar one day to Rick Baker…this is better”.  Now, I have to say that THAT almost tips the balance toward me thinking that this movie should exist.

Innovative werewolf movie squanders its potential.

Another Year

February 14, 2011:  Another Year

I had figured, based on the title and the fact that this film was written and directed by Mike Leigh, that someone in the movie was going to be given just one more year to live.  As it turns out, Another Year instead takes the attitude that life goes on despite the ups and many downs experienced by people across society, but Leigh manages to make even that message kind of a downer.

That’s not to say this isn’t an inspiring and excellent film.  On the contrary, the deeply incisive performances and matter-of-fact setting make the reality of the film’s themes even more strikingly genuine, as we follow a year in the lives of a middle-aged central couple, and the friends, family and acquaintances who populate their lives through that time.  Jim Broadbent and Ruth Sheen play the couple, who live a quiet and contented life in the outskirts of London.  Their son has established himself in the world but continues to search for companionship.  Their extended family are only occasionally seen because they don’t particularly have anything in common.  They enjoy spending time with their good friends, but find their time somewhat taxed by acquaintances as well as old friends with whom they don’t really share much of a connection anymore.  For the most part, they manage to hold it together, and they rely upon their time alone with each other to process what’s gone on around them.  I think they both secretly wrestle with the question of why they are so lucky as to have avoided so many of life’s pitfalls, when they don’t think that what they do is so remarkable.  They do remain on an even keel most of the time, though at times to their own detriment as they let certain friends suck the energy out of them, but they stand up and strike back when it’s appropriate and they are not pushovers.  There’s drama here but not melodrama; this is on the scale of the little arguments that real people get into.

I think Another Year is, in the end, an affirmation of how the ability to enjoy the simple pleasures in life (gardening, cooking, wine, books) is a major key to finding contentment.  Accepting one’s own personality and living that life is important, and when people forget to do that, they find themselves wanting in all kinds of ways.

Reassuring treatise on achievement of happiness.

The Tempest

February 13, 2011:  The Tempest

The Tempest is one of those Oscar nominees which comes out of left field because it catches the eye of the professionals in one particular filmmaking craft, and they are able to disregard the abysmal quality of the overall movie because they are so taken by one aspect of it, in this case the costumes.  The Tempest borders on being unwatchable, and while the costumes are certainly striking, I definitely wouldn’t say that they save the movie.

The film is based on the Shakespeare play, which I haven’t read so I don’t know the story, and I can’t even tell how much that matters to my experience of the film.  It seems that the ambiguous setting and period must already be taking liberties with the source material, and besides, the plot doesn’t seem to be of particuarly great concern to anyone here.  An all-star cast, including Helen Mirren, David Strathairn, Chris Cooper, Russell Brand, and Alfred Molina, approaches the material with obvious joy, in their anachronistic and overblown costumes and with several of them faking British accents as best they can (with mixed results), clearly loving the experience as this is unquestionably an actor’s dream movie.  However, it’s all a bit too cerebral for me, and they don’t really bring life to the story, whatever it may be.  With visuals reminiscent of The Fountain (2006), plus a trippy outer space sequence, and with Mirren in charge of a bunch of ghostly spirits, it’s hard to see what the point is.  The director being Julie Taymor does at least partly explain this, as she is known for confusing films which are an actor’s dream (Across the Universe – 2007), odd Shakespearian adaptations (Titus – 1999), and overblown productions (the recent failed Spider-Man musical on Broadway).  I think of myself as liking Taymor’s boldness, and yet I can’t think of anything she’s done that I liked.

Don’t bother with this one unless you like overly cerebral reinterpretations of classic literature that you probably haven’t read anyway.  The costumes are a sight to behold, granted, but it doesn’t make it worth sitting through this mess.

An out of control director’s indulgence.

The Illusionist (2010)

February 13, 2011:  The Illusionist (2010)

I saw The Triplets of Belleville (2003) when it came out, and its charming story and rambling animation style immediately won fans, including myself.  The Illusionist is the latest from the team which brought us that delightful earlier effort.  However, I found The Illusionist to be a relentlessly downbeat film and I couldn’t see the point of it all, so while the lighthearted humour and charm are still there at times, and the animation is similarly defiant of today’s ultra-realistic computer-based work, I couldn’t connect to the story and it ultimately fell flat for me.

Nominated for the Best Animated Feature Oscar, The Illusionist was as usual up against the latest from Pixar, in this case Toy Story 3 which ultimately won the award.  The Triplets of Belleville was also nominated and defeated by the Pixar entry of its day, Finding Nemo.  The story here follows a travelling magician as he scrapes out a living in Scotland, against the majestic backdrop of Edinburgh Castle.  He ends up taking a young woman under his wing, and they travel together as he plies his trade and she takes care of him.  He brings momentary joy to people’s lives with his magic, but becomes increasingly irrelevant as the world grows cynical about magic.  And that’s about it, as far as I could tell.  There’s plenty of insider back-story to this film, it being based on an unfilmed semi-autobiographical story written in the 1950s by legendary and now-three-decades-deceased French filmmaker Jacques Tati, but I’d need to watch at least a few more movies to even comment on that angle, so I’ll go the half-assed route with this one.

Animation legend drags us all down.

Restrepo

February 12, 2011:  Restrepo

Restrepo, nominated for the Best Documentary Feature Oscar, is about a US platoon in Afghanistan and the effort they expend to capture and retain a particular hill deep within the enemy territory in that country.  I can’t tell what point the film is trying to make, but the one it makes to me is that war continues to be a useless waste of untold quantities of human and material resources.

We begin with a new captain coming on, as the previous one completed his 15 month deployment to this area which is acknowledged as the most dangerous of all US-occupied territories.  The new captain proudly says that he’ll be a change from the previous insensitive boss, but it quickly becomes clear that even this new guy doesn’t respect the local population as people with lives and opinions and rights.  During the film, a group moves from the safe stronghold they have, a quarter-mile ahead to a different hill, and they lay down roots there amid constant and violent battles with the locals.  The soldiers, who are sensitive upon reflection in interviews after their deployment, are the absolute stereotypical arrogant and macho guys, breaking into spontaneous wrestling matches and always posturing even though they are really just scared kids from suburban and farming communities all over the US.  They are storming through a foreign country, doing their tiny little piece, without understanding what they are doing as part of the overall effort.  It’s a distressing example of American arrogance, with the new outpost being named Restrepo after one of the men they lost earlier, and they want to take their revenge on the local population who killed their man, thus guaranteeing the never-ending cycle of violence.  Restrepo is another in a long line of documentaries which clearly illustrate the futility and senseless waste of war, but it doesn’t seem to have any impact on how this world is run.

Disheartening picture of kids following orders.

The Kids are All Right

February 10, 2011:  The Kids are All Right

The Kids are All Right seemed to capture the mood of a lot of people and the state of society last year, with its raw and emotional portrayal of a middle-aged lesbian couple dealing with their kids growing up, and it absolutely is a big step forward for American society to embrace a story of such a family so openly, but I have to admit I found the film to be overly melodramatic and trying so hard to be “normal” that it ended up seeming way too negative.

Nominated for 4 Oscars, including Best Picture, Best Actress for Annette Bening, Best Supporting Actor for Mark Ruffalo, and Best Original Screenplay, The Kids are All Right certainly has a solid pedigree behind it.  Director Lisa Cholodenko also co-wrote, and as a proud middle-aged lesbian herself she certainly must bring some authenticity (as with High Art in 1998) to this painful story of how a couple, played by Bening and Julianne Moore, struggle with the kinds of things that I suppose all couples deal with as their nests become empty and they have to face up to some of the repressed emotions which have dogged them through the years.  Perhaps the relatively short-form nature of a feature film is part of the problem here, since I was never able to come to any understanding of what attracted Bening’s and Moore’s characters to each other in the first place, since they seem to have opposite personalities, and are constantly bickering.  Even when recounting their earlier courtship in the “happy” scenes in the film, I still got the impression that they were never really happy or content together.  This has nothing to do with the same-sex relationship – it’s always awkward to see characters who have purportedly spent decades together while seeming to have never really enjoyed any of that time.

But the film isn’t entirely about that.  Their daughter has reached age 18 and is encouraged by her younger brother to contact the anonymous sperm donor who is their shared father (each of the women had one child with the same donor, so the children are actually half-siblings – pretty cool, actually).  After a shaky first meeting which leaves each of the kids with different impressions, they continue to see their father, unbeknownst to their mothers, until the news slips and they have to deal with that elephant in the room.  The film gets to explore the topic of the moral and legal obligations of sperm donors in this current age of records opening up when the kids turn 18, and this is layered on top of the relationship woes of the mothers including uncomfortable questions about their actual sexual orientation.

As I began to explain above, despite a few genuine moments, Moore and Bening didn’t seem ultimately believable to me as a couple, but I feel guilty for not trusting the director to have portrayed this in a realistic way.  The “tense couple moments” are too broad, which detracts from the more tender moments and makes them seem fake.  There are a few contrvived “movie moments” such as when Bening breaks into song during a family dinner, and while the ideas explored in these scenes are good, it’s too blunt a way of presenting them.  I found Bening to be just as annoying here as I almost always do; the only time I’ve ever felt that her intensity was correctly placed was in American Beauty (1999), a film which required everyone to be an exaggeration of the type they were playing.  Here, she’s just cranked up a few levels too high for the intimate intentions of the film.  In the end, as the daughter goes off to college, it turns out that the kids are indeed all right, and their mothers realize that they should perhaps take a page out of that book and get back to what brought them together in the first place.  The Kids are All Right didn’t really resonate with me as a complete film, though the themes were certainly worth pursuing.

Melodrama wrecks an otherwise thought-provoking story.

Incendies

February 9, 2011:  Incendies

Canada’s Oscar-nominated entry for Best Foreign Language Film is a gripping and heartbreaking story of a woman’s children forced to come to terms with her past, after she is gone.  Incendies is nicely structured, keeps its audience guessing, and delivers a devastating revelation at the end.  I found it to be a worthy nominee and a tremendous film in its own right, and while the ending seems like a bit of a narrative cop-out to me, I have to forgive it because the setup is so well-crafted.

In contemporary Montreal, a lawyer brings together a brother and sister following the death of their mother, to read her will.  The mother has written cryptic letters to each of them, telling one to go and find their missing brother, and telling the other to go and find their missing father.  The news that they have a brother is a shock, and they had also long-assumed that their father was dead.  The sister pursues her mother’s wishes with gusto, travelling into the middle east to discover her mother’s rocky past, but the brother resists.  Eventually he is forced to join in, and the two could never have imagined what they would find on the path to discovering these two missing members of their family.

The film is lengthy, but that’s because it has a complex story to tell about a whole lifetime, and each new discovery leads to more and more questions about their mother’s past as well as renewed amazement at the strength she mustered in the face of the terrible things she lived through.  When the brother and sister eventually learn the truth about their family, they are dismayed but at the same time appreciative of the closure that they didn’t know they needed.

I shouldn’t say much more about the film, except that the subject matter (shootings, bombings, rape, death of children) is harrowing and difficult, which might impede its appreciation by some viewers.  Incendies is a world-class film which, as I say, relies on a not-uncommon resolution, but the depth of the story it lays out leading up to that conclusion gives it the right to utilize this particular device.  It’s a rewarding viewing experience if you can deal with the subject matter.

Impressive and engrossing Canadian Oscar entry.

How to Train Your Dragon

February 8, 2011:  How to Train Your Dragon

How to Train Your Dragon is an animated film about a remote Viking community hundreds of years ago, plagued by constant dragon attacks.  For generations, youngsters have been trained as warriors, to kill dragons in battle.  One meek and gentle kid, whose father happens to be one of the most fearsome warriors in the vllage, doesn’t want to grow up to kill dragons, that’s just how it is.  Breaking from conformity is a recipe for being ridiculed by peers and having disappointed parents.  Does this sound like an idea which has been beaten to death in movies for kids?  Well, that’s because it has.

The kid, quite by chance, manages to bring down a “Night Fury” dragon during a battle, though nobody else notices this.  He goes out to find this downed dragon and discovers that it is just as afraid as he is.  I don’t think I’m spoiling the film for anyone, because of the title, when I say that he learns how to train dragons and figures out their motivations, and of course he becomes a hero in his village for it.

The story here is pretty heavy-handed, with the boy being forced to attend dragon killing classes which include the usual arrogant and hormonal teenage types as well as the hot girl who he wins over in the end.  The Vikings have Scottish accents, which I suppose might or might not be historically accurate but does give a certain Shrek-like tone to the comedy.  There are shades of King Kong at times, which I thought was perceptive and nice to see.  The animation is stylized but pretty clean, and the story is no more contrived than that of Toy Story 3, so I might have liked to see an upset in the Best Animated Feature category in the Oscars (I didn’t), and the film was also nominated for its musical score, which covered a wide range from heavy action in battle to the tender scenes of mutual discovery between a boy and his dragon.  How to Train Your Dragon is nothing special, but was perfectly fine typical entertainment for the kids.

Unremarkable animated story about personal growth.

The Dilemma

February 8, 2011:  The Dilemma

Oscar season this year coincided with cereal-box movie passes, and I’m not one to turn down cheap or essentially “free” first-run movies (I eat the cereal), even if I am in the middle of a desperate campaign to see the 40-odd Oscar nominated films.  Being generally a fan of Vince Vaughn, I wanted to see The Dilemma before it disappeared from theatres.

I would like to characterize this as a concept comedy, but really, the concept is so weak and mundane that I’m surprised anyone decided to greenlight it.  Vaughn plays a man who is in the auto parts manufacturing business with his college buddy and best friend (played by Kevin James), and he finds out that James’ wife is cheating on him, and has to figure out whether or not to tell his friend.  That’s the movie.

This might make for a wonderful little 40-minute film about moral obligations and how modern society has forced different expectations upon people.  However, someone was trying to make it into a feature-length watered-down PG-13 comedy vehicle for two big box office stars (not to mention a complete waste of time for talented co-stars Winona Ryder and Jennifer Connelly).  I’d like to just say that it doesn’t quite work, but that would be a bit too generous.  Plot elements such as Vaughn’s sneaky pursuit of his friend’s wife’s lover are just jarringly out of place and detract from the moral question at hand.  Plot devices such as Vaughn’s struggle with gambling are seemingly tacked on just to smooth out a couple of plot contrivances, without addressing the huge implications not related to the story at hand.  And subplots such as the major automotive breakthrough the guys are about to make – throaty muscle-car sounds for electric cars to make them seem cool – are so unbelievable that it’s hard to understand how anyone thought they would be either funny or not a total distraction from the main story of the film.

I didn’t hate The Dilemma when I saw it, but in the time I’ve had to reflect on it, I’d have to say it has diminished quite a bit and I now don’t see a lot of redeeming value in the film.

A waste of tremendous comedic talent.