Movie Review: A Serious Man

From the prolific purveyors of dark comedy, Joel and Ethan Coen, the guys who brought us Barton Fink, Fargo, No Country For Old Men and a few other unforgettable movies, A Serious Man was a huge disappointment. I am by no means a prominent reviewer. I am just a girl who loves the movies and sees just about everything. But I did not see what many other paid and well respected reviewers saw. I may have laughed two or three times. One quarter of the people in the movie theater walked out. I try not to do that. You never know, maybe during the last fifteen minutes the movie redeems itself. That didn't happen. The message of the movie: Even if you are a good, upstanding and devout person, bad things can happen to you. And then there is the message my mother always told me, "Remember sweeheart, nothing is so bad it couldn't get worse". (She was right, by the way). The little addendum in the movie is that in the end, it may not matter. Although I don't think you have to be Jewish to understand this movie (putting aside whether you like it or not), if you are not Jewish, plenty will be missed. I'm not going to belabor this review. It is well acted. Michael Stuhlbarg is perfect as Larry Gopnik, the main character and quintessential nerd who keeps hitting rock bottom and then manages to reach new depths. No complaints there. Just not funny, not compelling and not interesting. In addition, we are forced to "listen" to Larry's socially inept brother, Arthur (Richard Kind) in the bathroom, draining his sebaceous cyst with a suction machine. Not for me. Near the end of the credits it says, "No Jews were harmed in the making of this motion picture". Well, maybe not in the making but how about in the viewing?

Movie Review: Michael Jackson's: This Is It

Fist and foremost, Michael Jackson's:This Is It is an extraordinary accomplishment in film editing. Taken from over a hundred hours of footage gathered during rehearsals for his final concert performance, this one hour and fifty minute documentary is surgically assembled. As it moves from one practice session to the next, your only tip off is he is wearing different outfits - amazing. It is directed by Kenny Oretega, Jackson's good friend and director of Disney's High School Musical series. But make no mistake, this project was directed by Michael Jackson. He is in charge. He knows exactly how he wants every second to look, feel and sound right down to the most nuanced breath. In one segment he says to the band "let it simmer", trying to convey a feeling he wants the music to have but everyone else seems to have difficulty understanding. "That's why we rehearse" he says, always ending his criticisms with, "the love, L-O-V-E", and for some reason, it never sounds artificial. Throughout most of the rehearsals, Jackson is conserving his voice and his energy. But while working on Billy Jean, he can't hold back and to the absolute amazement of his crew, he lets loose and belts out the song while doing his signature dance moves. Everyone stops, jaws drop and the room breaks out in applause. And because we are all still experiencing the aftermath of the tabloid portrayal of his life and death, we are amazed by this man who may not be at the top of his game but who is always, every bit, the consummate performer. At times, he does appear frail, but he does not appear ill. Yes, he gets a little more winded then his 20 year old dancers but after all, he is 50. What is so obvious from this production is that Michael Jackson was so great because everything mattered so much to him. He never looses his focus. He was a perfectionist of the highest order. At the end of the movie, everyone in the theater was on their feet applauding. The documentary also features; Humphrey Bogart, Edward G. Robinson, Rita Hayworth, polar bears, a killer whale, a bulldozer and much more. The concert would have been nothing short of incredible.

QUITTING SMOKING: A MUST - A Posting for Smokers

By the year 2030, the worldwide death toll from cigarette smoking will be 10 million annually (20 per minute).
The tobacco industry has a multi-billion-dollar lobby and an 8 billion dollar a year advertising budget to insure that statistic is realized.
Other then driving a car without brakes, there is very little you can do that is worse for your health then smoking. It really does not matter what else you do to take care of yourself, if you smoke, you are sending a crystal clear message to your body. On a deep cellular level, you are changing the very fabric of your DNA and doing untold damage. Now, in all fairness, you are not smoking because you want to. You are smoking because you have to; you are addicted to one of the most powerfully addictive substances on this planet, nicotine. The most fascinating thing about addiction is, until the realization comes that you no longer can or no longer want to continue using (whatever the substance is), you think you are doing it by choice. You are not. That is why it is called addiction. It is important to understand this because if you are one of those people who feel it is a sign of weakness to use some type of support to quit (like the patch or gum or medication), you are doing yourself a tremendous disservice. This is especially true for smoking because it is not the nicotine that is killing you. It is the delivery system for the nicotine that is killing you. It's called a "cigarette". It is the 4000 compounds and high levels of oxidants found in cigarette smoke that are doing all the damage.

There is something else you should be aware of; the tobacco industry has been adding adulterants to tobacco for decades. Primarily, coumarin (also known as rat poison), which is added for flavor and as a tissue softening agent. By softening lung tissue, it allows nicotine to be absorbed deeper into the lungs creating an increased need for the drug. In addition, they intentionally manipulate the amount of nicotine in cigarettes increasing the overall addictive effect. You see how cleaver the industry is. They have gotten away with this for years. When Dr. Jeffery Wigand (The Insider) blew the whistle on the tobacco industry in 1996, their attorney, Thomas Bezanson claimed that it wasn’t “untrue but that on trade secret grounds, it should not be revealed”. Coumarin was banned as an adulterant in 1997 but due to lack of reporting, it is still found in tobacco products.

Some quick stats rattled off by Wigand in an interview a few years ago: " The number of people in the U.S. who die each year from smoking-related illnesses: 430,000. The percentage of adult smokers who started before they turned 18: 80% to 90%. The amount of money tobacco companies spend on advertising each year: more than $8 billion. The percentage of 6-year-olds surveyed who associated Joe Camel with smoking: 91%." Now that is scary.

In Philip J. Hilts book, "Smoke Screen: The Truth Behind The Tobacco Industry Cover-Up", the extent of the deception is revealed. Study after study (conducted by the tobacco industry) that disclosed just how lethal their product is, were encoded and buried. Even within the original documents, words like "cancer" and "nicotine" were given code names. But the industries most closely guarded secret is it's targeting of youth. It is something the industry must do to sustain itself. If they cannot recruit new smokers, what do you think would happen to the demand for cigarettes in a relatively short period of time? It would drop to zero.

What I am trying to impress upon you, is that the tobacco industry has knowingly, willingly and with deceit, created a world full of people addicted to a drug that they, almost exclusively, provide the delivery system for. And what I am asking you to consider is; do you want to support an industry that promotes human suffering and profits from its blatant disregard for human life?

Let's talk about money. Not yours, ours. The economic burden that cigarette smoking places on the United States for medical care and lost productivity is conservatively estimated to be $180 billion dollars a year. The health care costs alone are about 97 billion. Who's paying for that? We all are. Everybody has to share the cost. A significant percentage of this country's total health care bill is attributable to smoking. A very unfortunate statistic is that some of the recipients of those health care dollars are not smokers. They live or work with one. Approximately 54,000 people die every year from second-hand exposure to cigarette smoke. A recent report estimated that second hand-smoke cost the U.S. 10 billion a year.

To be con't....

Movie Review: Where the Wild Things Are

From Maurice Sendak's ten sentence classic children's book, "Where the Wild Things Are", Spike Jonze and Dave Eggers create a magical looking 95 minute, feature film. The movie almost captures the essence of the tale (it's a little tame) about a nine year old boy named Max who has more raw emotion then he can possibly handle. From the opening credits (which are scribbled on with a crayon), we see a boy who is understandably, out of control and has mastered the art of the tantrum. He is dealing with his parents divorce, his older sisters' indifference, mommys' preoccupation with work and her new boyfriend and his science teachers' doomsday vision of the future. Max is brilliantly portrayed by Max Records, a 12 year old who nails this role in a way I can't imagine another child doing. Max Records IS Max, angry and anguished, impossible, confused and very vulnerable. After a day of being pushed to his emotional limit, he runs away, finds a little sailboat and makes his way to an island inhabited by giant, childlike monsters (created in Jim Henson's Creature Shop). In true fairytale fashion, Max learns his life lesson from living with his newly inherited family where he is the self proclaimed King. The question that begs to be asked is, "Who is the intended audience for this movie"? Parents, who should see it, will not go without their kids. It is too scary for very young children and not scary enough for older children. Jonze and Eggers said they "wanted to make a movie about childhood, not a children's movie". They succeeded. It should probably be required viewing for therapists. The movie gives you a birds-eye view of just how lonely, painful and scary a child's life can be. It also provides evidence (because the home life scenario is so real), that sometimes a tantrum is the appropriate response. And for a culture that loves to medicate all behavior that is difficult to manage, it is enlightening, to say the least. The movie features the always perfect Catherine Keener as the very harried and distracted mother and Mark Ruffalo as her boyfriend. James Gandolfini, Forest Whitaker, Chris Cooper, Catherine O'Hara and a few other notables, provide the beasts with their voices and perfect blend of sensitivity and frightening rage. A little bit of trivia: When Sendak misbehaved as a child, his parents would call him "vilde chaya", which means "wild beast" in Yiddish.
Fifteen minutes shaved off of this movie would have made it more watchable. Unfortunately, I cannot recommend waiting for it to come out On Demand or DVD because it will loose a lot of it's visual impact (the cinematography is unique). The bottom line, I think most people will walk away from this movie a little disappointed. What can I say.

Movie Review: Amelia

Amelia is 2 hours long and you feel every minute of it. It is not a good movie and it should be. The screenplay was written by Anna Hamilton Phelan who wrote Girl Interrupted and Gorillas In the Mist, and Ronald Bass who wrote Rain Man. Three outstanding movies. It was directed by Mira Nair who directed The Namesake, Monsoon Wedding and a number of very notable documentaries. Hilary Swank, the Oscar winning actress who blew everybody away with her portrayal of Brandon Teena in Boys Don't Cry and who was the Million Dollar Baby and who happens to be a dead ringer for Amelia, plays Amelia. So, why doesn't the movie work? Because it's not compelling. The story of Amelia Earhart is compelling so at the very least you should walk out of the movie theater feeling like you have seen a compelling story - but you don't - because you haven't. Biopics are very challenging. For the most part, everybody in the audience already knows what happened. The movies 'job' is to give you insight into the character. What drove her? Was it her alcoholic father (who actually spent time in a sanitarium drying out)? Was it her courageous mother? One interesting fact only mentioned as an addendum is that Amelia's' mother, Amy, was the first woman to climb Pikes Peak. Some of the more fascinating aspects of her life; her bisexuality, the possibility of her being a spy, her infidelities are barely touched or not mentioned at all. The disappointment is that the movie only tells us what we all already know and does it in a very uninspiring way. On the upside, the cinematography is gorgeous and the costuming is perfect. The movie also stars Richard Gere, miscast (he's too old) as her publicist husband, George Putnam and Ewan McGregor as Gene Vidal, fellow aviator and lover (one little kiss in an elevator). Vidal's son Gore, who we do get a glimpse of, grows up to be the very famous novelist, Gore Vidal. He wrote the book Lincoln which sits on my bookshelf and I have read twice. Wait for the movie to come out On Demand and watch it on your flat screen.

I want to mention two movies that live up to the challenge of the biopic; The Aviator and Le Vei En Rose. The Aviator, directed by Martin Scorsese is the story of Howard Hughes (played brilliantly by Leonardo DiCaprio). The movie gives us a heart wrenching glimpse into the madness of this legendary aviation giant who, despite his private anguish, was able to achieve greatness. We witness how his phobias and obsessive behavior drove him into seclusion. Le Vei En Rose is the story of Edith Piaf (portrayed with perfection by the beautiful and talented Marion Cotillard), the French singer whose reputation, before the movie, was that of a drug addicted, abusive tyrant. The movie explains how, as a small, very frail child, she was frequently abandon, used and abused bringing understanding and compassion to this incredibly talented, deeply spiritual but tortured woman. Both of these movies are VERY long but you are upset when they end. They are captivating. You can't take your eyes of the screen.
Are these stories more compelling then the Earhart story? I don't really think so. They were simply better written and better directed.

Movie Review: Bright Star

"There is a holiness to the hearts affection. You know nothing of that!" John Keats shouts at his friend and writing partner Mr. Brown. That is what I loved most about this movie, its ability to articulate passion and love-sickness. The movie spans the three year love affair between Keats (Ben Whishaw) and Fanny Brawne (Abbie Cornish).
Bright Star is deeply romantic and slowly paced. It will only appeal to those of us who love romanticism and are fascinated with period movies. It is rich in its portrayal of the early 19th Century; the dress, language, landscape and strict code of etiquette. The movie will remind you of The Age of Innocence (Daniel Day-Lewis, Michelle Pfeiffer, Winona Ryder) but even without a famous cast, Bright Star is infinitely better simply because of the poetry. It is skillfully worked into the film, never feeling forced; an undeniable challenge. The movie was written and directed by Jane Campion who is best known for her Academy Award winning masterpiece, The Piano (Holly Hunter, Sam Neill, Anna Paquin and a miscast Harvey Keitel). Bright Star is not in the same league as The Piano (not by a long shot) but it has a different, quieter appeal that allows it to stand on it's own. Unfortunately, comparisons will be made (just like I did). When a slow moving movie runs for 2 hours the tendency is to say "It should be shorter" or "They should have spent more time editing". Quite frankly, it would not have made any difference. Five, ten, even twenty minutes shorter, it would still feel long. It's the nature of this movie. Liken it to sitting and reading Keats, it is impossible to rush through it.
One more thing: Bright Star makes it clear, 'clothes on' can be more erotic then 'clothes off'.

In case you're interested...
The poem Keats wrote for Fanny:
Bright Star
Bright star, would I were stedfast as thou art--
Not in lone splendour hung aloft the night
And watching, with eternal lids apart,
Like nature's patient, sleepless Eremite,
The moving water at their priestlike task
Of pure ablution round earth's human shores,
Or gazing on the new soft-fallen mask
Of snow upon the mountains and the moors--
No--yet still stedfast, still unchangeable,
Pillow'd upon my fair love's ripening breast,
To feel for ever its soft fall and swell,
Awake for ever in a sweet unrest,
Still, still to hear her tender-taken breath,
And so live ever--or else swoon to death.

Now that is simply very beautiful.

Movie Review: Paranormal Activity

If you want to enjoy this movie, try to ignore all the hype. It is a good movie. Is it the greatest scary movie ever? No. But this VERY low budget film is good and will stay with you and make you scared when you get into bed at night and shut the lights. The beauty of this movie is its simplicity. First time movie maker Oren Peli knows what Hitchcock knew and all the other great scary movie makers know; less is more. You don’t have to show a lot to scare people. Noise is scary. Low lights with shadows are scary. You don’t need blood spurting, heads rolling, monsters or psycho killers. The movie is shot documentary style like The Blair Witch Project and Cloverfield. It uses suspense instead of violence and very few special effects which allows you to think, “Could this really be happening?” The premise is simple. A young couple, Kate and Micah (their real names by the way), decide to investigate a spirit Kate believes has been following her since childhood. They set up a camera in the bedroom and the audience witnesses what happens. Although I have a feeling this movie will become a slumber party favorite, for the full scary effect, it needs a dark, packed movie theater. So go, sit back in your seat, be patient and I promise, you will experience Paranormal Activity.

Movie Review: Whip It

Ellen Page, the tiny 22 year old Canadian actress who can command the screen like nobodies business (think Juno and Hard Candy), plays Bliss, a 17 year old who wants to follow her heart and join a roller derby team called, The Hurl Scouts. The only problem is, her mother, played perfectly by Marcia Gay Harden, is intent on her becoming a beauty pageant queen. The Hurl Scouts, a team made up of women who wear highly modified Girl Scout uniforms, with names like Maggie Mayhem and Bloody Holy, are a no-holds-barred group of girls who really know how to have fun. Juliette Lewis (am I the only one enamored with her because she flaunts her incredibly flat chest), plays Iron Maven, Bliss's nasty adversary who manages to steal every scene she is in. The singer/songwriter Brandon Pigg, plays the adorable but not so admirable, love interest. Drew Barrymore does a great job in her directorial début mixing badass moments with scenes of tenderness. Whip It is a coming of age movie but more importantly, it is about Girl Power. It's fun, fast moving and I would be very surprised if it doesn't reach some kind of cult status.