Watchmen

2009

3.5/5 Stars

I was skeptical going into Zach Snyder’s film adaptation of Alan Moore and David Gibbon’s hugely successful graphic novel.  The novel redefined the medium through its complex storytelling and seamless integration of both paneled comic book art and passages of written prose to supplement the main storyline.  The book was dark, cerebral, and often times riveting, employing multiple flashbacks to communicate multiple storylines regarding the rise and decline of the “superhero” in an alternative version of the United States.  Could Snyder manage to maintain the depth of this complex piece of popular fiction in making the transfer to the big screen? 

The answer is, fortunately, largely “yes”.  As is the case with any film adaptation of a longer written work, certain plotlines have to be trimmed and others removed entirely, but the decisions made here work and manage to keep the audience engaged throughout the 162 minutes of the theatrical release (there are also 186 and 215 minute versions available, but I have yet to see those). 

The mood of the book is intact for most of the film.  A dark brooding mood surrounds the noir murder mystery as our anti-hero in Rorschach (played brilliantly by Jackie Earle Haley) tries to track down the killer of the “Comedian” (also a strong performance, turned in by Jeffrey Dean Morgan).  One advantage that the film has over the book is the addition of music, which is strong from start to finish.  The opening sequence (set to Dylan’s “The Times They are a-Changing”) is outstanding as it efficiently and memorably lays a considerable amount of back story in just a few minutes. 

On the downside, not all the performances are on the same level.  Swedish-Canadian starlet Malin Akerman at times seems out of her depth as the emotionally overwrought Laurie Jupiter.  I also questioned the decision to cast 38 year old Carla Gugino as Laurie’s frail 70-something mother, who lives in a retirement community.  The “old age” makeup was unconvincing to me and as a result this character missed the mark by a wide margin. 

This said, these are relatively minor gripes.  On the whole, the film is very good.  Most of the performances are excellent and the plot-trimming from the graphic novel is largely understandable (although at times it can be a little heavy handed).  While fanboys may debate the merits of the surprise ending - which deviates from the book quite a bit- it succeeds in wrapping up the story in a believable way.  Even for those not familiar with the book, “Watchmen” is a worthwhile film that provides an engaging alternative take on the superhero genre.  

Anchorman

2004

4/5 Stars

“I’m not a baby.  I’m a man.  I’m an anchorman.”

Anchorman tells the story of the rise, fall, and ultimate redemption of Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell), a star news anchor for a local news station in San Diego in the 1970s.  After years of success, including perennial television ratings superior to the rival news team led by Wes Mantooth (Vince Vaughn), Burgundy and his team struggle to adapt to change when a female reporter (Veronica Corningstone aptly played by Christina Applegate) is introduced to the newsroom. 

After an affair between Corningstone and Burgundy turns sour, Burgundy fails to cope with his own insecurities and falls out of favor in the eyes of his friends and loved ones.  When a prank gets out of hand, the city of San Diego- which once embraced him - turns its back on Ron Burgundy and leaves him lost and alone. 

In the end, Burgundy must break free from his “glass cage of emotion” and re-build what was once his.  With the help of his multilingual terrier (Baxter), Burgundy defeats the bears and emerges a stronger person.  

Pee-Wee's Big Adventure

1985

3.5/5 Stars


“I know you are, but what am I?”

Pee-Wee’s Great Adventure takes us into the bizarre alternative world of Paul Reuben’s Pee-Wee Herman.  The feature-length directorial debut of Tim Burton, Pee-Wee’s Great Adventure stretches across the United States and features the cartoon-like protagonist on a quest to rescue his most prized possession- his tricked out bicycle. 

This film is a visual delight, and a perfect match for the highly stylized Burton.  Coupled with the playful music by Danny Elfman, the “Great Adventure” succeeds in being weird and crazy, yet entertaining and fun.  Reuben is a gifted character actor with great timing and a knack for physical comedy.  His childish banter with his arch-rival Francis (Mark Holton), which culminates in a great fight sequence, is worth the price of admission. 

The movie has some scary moments (involving sadistic clowns and the ghost of “large Marge”), which can make it feel a bit uneven at times.  This said, Pee-Wee doesn’t even have to talk to be funny in most scenes and the chase sequence at the climax of the film through the WB studios is straight from the keystone cops films of the 20’s (except this chase features an appearance from TWISTED SISTER!). 

Weird and quirky, but a lot of fun.  

Airplane!

1980

1.5/5 Stars

“Go out and win one for the zipper!” 

Oh god.  A wildly successful smash hit of 1980, Airplane! is silly and ridiculous throughout.  It follows the main protagonists Ted (Robert Hays) and Elaine (Julie Hagerty) as they have to conduct of an emergency landing of a commercial airliner after things have gone nutty! 

Sorry- this film felt terribly dated to me throughout and has not aged well.  What was a cutting edge comedy in 1980 feels flat and, at some points, just plain offensive in 2010.  Gay and racist jokes (including a pair of “jive talkin’” blacks- WHAT are they even SAYING?!! HAHAHA) are mixed in with a ton of goofy/silly slapstick gags (like the dying girl who makes funny faces when her life support system is accidentally knocked loose!). 

There were a couple of chuckles in this one (Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is funny in his random appearance as the co-pilot), but overall, it is a LONG 90 minutes.  I would only recommend it to a serious fan of the “zany screwball comedy” genre.   

Swingers

1996

4/5 Stars

“You’re SO money!  Now kill the bunny!”

Written, directed, and starring Jon Favreau, Swingers is the film that first put Mr. Favreau on the Hollywood radar.  Made on a shoestring budget ($200,000), the film grossed $4.5 million and still has a following today.  Swingers has spawned several impersonators in the bro/buddy/dude genre, but while often imitated, it has rarely been duplicated.

Strangely enough, I had never seen this movie until recently.  I went in expecting HBO’s “Entourage” in movie form, but what I got was a bit more nuanced than that.  Sure, there is a lot of “guys being guys” nonsense (much of it coming from the outspoken Trent, played brilliantly by Vince Vaughn), but I was surprised by the amount of character development in the movie. 

The plot revolves around Mike (Jon Favreau), a would-be Hollywood comedian, who is six months out from a brutal breakup with a longtime girlfriend.  As his personal and professional life stumbles, he relies on the support of his friends- mainly Trent and Rob (Ron Livingston) – to help him see things through.  While Trent is the show-stopping loudmouth that tries to jar Mike from his funk, Rob is more soft-spoken and outwardly sympathetic.  While these characters aren’t above giving one another shit and talking trash (especially over games of NHL on the SEGA Genesis), it is evident that they really care for one another and want to see things work out for Mike.  (They come off more as nice guys and less as pure assholes as the crew in Entourage.) 

I went in expecting the film to be a straight comedy, but it was more of a drama/comedy hybrid.  There are a lot of quotable lines (mostly coming from Trent), and while the movie can feel dated at times (VERY 90s) and the pacing sometimes seems slow, this is a well written and believable piece for anyone that has taken a long time to recover from a bad breakup.  Some of the “bro” dialogue can be over the top, but I thought this showed the movie wasn’t taking itself TOO seriously.  The actors seem to be playing slightly exaggerated versions of themselves, which just adds to the realism (and sense of fun) to the whole piece.  

Head On

2004

3/5 Stars

The German language title for Fatih Akin’s 2004 film is “Gegen die Wand”, which translates literally to “against the wall.” I suppose they changed the English title to “Head On” in an effort to emphasize the visceral reaction to watching a violent car crash.

The film received tremendous critical praise upon its release- so much in fact that the back cover of the DVD is overflowing with positive reviews from a wide range of reliable sources and contains little in the way of describing what the film is actually about. A sentence or two reveal that the film revolves around a love story and involves questions of Turkish heritage and tradition in Western society (or something like this).

With this limited knowledge going in, I was shocked by the unapologetic and brutal film that followed. Framed within a Turkish love song, the story revolves around the evolution of the relationship between Cahit (played by Birol Uenel) and Sibel (played by Sibel Kekilli).

In short, both are of Turkish origin and living in Germany. Sibel wants to experience life fully- unrestricted by the conservative traditions of her Turkish parents. Cahit is a lost soul, devastated by the death of his wife. The two meet in a psych ward after both have failed suicide attempts.

Sibel devises a plan for the two to marry – not out of love or any desire to be with Cahit, but in an effort to get her out from under her parents’ roof (and the chance to have sex with lots of men around town). Cahit eventually comes around to the idea- in spite of a rocky “first date” with Sibel- and the “sham marriage” begins.

I won’t give much more away in terms of plot, but I will note that both characters are deeply flawed and have serious psychological problems. The movie portrays an underworld of drug and alcohol abuse that is realistic and unsentimental. This style carries over to the more brutal elements of the film—depictions of murder, suicide, rape, and physical assault- are horrific in their stark realism. In the violent flashes throughout the film, there is no music or slow motion. There are no dramatic speeches given by dying characters. The camera never pans away in the face of the violence (nor glorifies it). Akin goes the opposite direction in fact- he will keep the shot unedited and the camera static both during and after the traumatic violence.

There is also beauty in the film, however. In spite of these shocking flashes of violence, there are also depictions of love and happiness. One sequence involving Sibel at a carnival is particularly memorable (these bits ARE set to music). There are also moments of dark humor scattered throughout the piece- the sequence in which Cahit seeks the approval of Sibel’s parents to get married (with a friend posing as his uncle) is one such moment.

The acting, especially from the two main leads, is phenomenal. In spite of the fact that I did not particularly like either character (he is a bum and she is fucking psycho), I could not deny that the performances by Uenel and Kekilli were indeed outstanding- one can easily forget that these are actors and not actually real people.

The larger commentary that the film provides on the contradictions and difficulties confronting Turkish culture and the East/West divide is also of value. The scene in which Sibel’s brother and his friends openly discuss their experiences with prostitutes and then become enraged by Cahit’s “disrespectful” question as to why they don’t “fuck their wives” - drives home these points effectively.

In the end though, this powerful film left me broken, traumatized and exhausted. It was difficult to finish watching the film, and when the end eventually came (several slashed wrists later), I didn’t really care much what the point of it all was. Spending what felt like a very long 2 and a half hours with such damaged characters left me feeling damaged myself- as the Turkish song that frames the movie wound to a close (with the dramatic line: “I am eternally sad…”) I realized that I didn’t really care why anymore and was eager to move on with my life.

Big Fish

2003

5/5 Stars

Tim Burton’s adaptation of Daniel Wallace’s novel tells the life story of Edward Bloom, a charismatic southerner with a penchant for storytelling. Set mostly in Alabama, the American South plays a major role in the film. There is some irony here as the two stars that portray Bloom- Ewan McGregor as a young man and Albert Finney as an older one- are not even American (Scottish and English, respectively).

This does not matter much, however, as both performances are excellent. Fortunately for the audience, most all of the performances in the film are done very well. The women in the movie are memorable. Jessica Lange and the ever impressive Marion Cotillard play the loving wives to Edward and his son Will. They portray their characters as strong, graceful women, but their different approaches reflect their completely different backgrounds (Lange’s Sandra is born and raised in the American South while Cotillard’s Josephine is a world travelling Frenchwoman). Other notable performances come from Helena Bonham Carter (a Burton favorite), Steve Buscemi (as a failed poet), and Loudon Wainwright (as a creepy but benevolent mayor of a small town).

The main plot deals with a son on a quest to find who is father is. This is accomplished through fantasy vignettes and stories that flesh out “Edward Bloom”. Tim Burton’s distinctive style is well suited to tell these larger-than-life tall tales. These pieces can often be funny, but what makes them memorable are the morals and life-lessons to take away from them. Like all good stories and fairytales, these are the themes that resonate and matter. While the stories themselves are often fantastical, Burton never gets overly preachy or ham-handed in his presentation of the morals behind them. In simultaneously telling the (less fantastical) story of Edward’s present “reality” through the eyes of straight-laced Will, Burton gives the audience a fuller picture of who this character is.

By the film’s finale, the audience comes to realize how much they have come to care about these people. The results are emotionally powerful - particularly for anyone who has loved or been close to a gifted storyteller. There is a great deal of wisdom in the stories told here, but most central is the idea that the love you give and the relationships you have are what matter most in the end.