Review: Coraline

Coraline (2009)
starring voices: Dakota Fanning, Teri Hatcher, Kieth David, John Hodgman, Ian McShane
dir. Henry Selick


I'm goona keep this one simple. It's too long and there is something very small that is missing that makes me not really care about Coraline getting to the end of her adventure. I think that has to do with it being too long. Running at an hour forty-five, this sucker would have been much better had it fallen in the 75-80 minute range. The drag starts kicking in around 90 minutes and they just keep piling on event after event, climax after climax. It is a common problem that should start being called LOTR syndrome.

Other than that, it's a pretty magical and beautiful film. It's filled with great character and set designs, some really nice voice work, especially by Kieth David, and a musical score that blends fantasy, chaos and that gothic touch that holds a twinge of Franz Waxman.

This is not for little kids. I was floored by how many parents were there with three and five year old kids. I was not floored by the amount of crying, screaming and demands to leave out of fear I heard during the movie. Come on parents, watch a preview, think a little, be a responsible adult and responsible movie goer. Don't take the little ones to see it, this is for the 10 and up set. Tweener girls will give it a big thumbs up. I'd much rather see fleets of girls in Coraline hoodies and backpacks than some damned Nightmare Before Christmas accoutrement. This far exceeds Selick's previous work and makes up quite a bit for the Monkeybone (2001) debacle from a few years back.

I'm still not sold on the latest 3-D craze. I can see it working with slasher films that hurl axes or machetes at the viewer. It looks fine here, but I was much more interested in the look and design of the film rather than the distance between fireplace and chair. I don't want my movies built around a gimmick, I want the story and the characters. 3-D seems to limit creativity rather than add another dimension to it. (Yes, bad pun intended.)

Not being a 13 year old girl, I'll not revisit this film as often as others, but it is well made despite time span flaws and is such a breath of fresh air to watch a form of animation that has a level of tangibility to it rather than an electronically added drop shadow.

8 out of 10

R.I.P. James Whitmore

James Whitmore 1921-2009


Whitmore is probably known to most oeople today as Brooks from The Shawshank Redemption (1994). It was a plumb role in a plumb film, but Whitmore contributed quite a bit over his 87 years on this planet.

For me, the killer role came early in his career as Gus in The Asphalt Jungle (1950), John Huston's slice of fried gold. He'd also play the cop Ben Peterson in the awesome Them! (1954). How many of us (not suffering from mental illness) can say we fought off giant radioactive ants? Other films of note include The Eddie Duchin Story (1956), Planet Of The Apes (1968), and Tora! Tora! Tora! (1970). He also did enough TV to make you wonder how the guy lived so long in the first place. It seems he was always appearing in something. 146 TV appearances and films alone.

His IMDB resume doesn't even touch the acres of stagework that he did. He played Will Rogers, Harry Truman and Theodore Roosevelt and had takne home a Tony at one point. The guy was "An actor's actor", according to longtime friend and fellow actor James Arness. I'd have to agree.

Sure, Whitmore isn't James Cagney or Bogart or even Sterling Hayden. But what he brought to the screen was always fun to watch and as almost everyone will say that his performance in Shawshank is endearing, heartfelt and heart-breaking. Even if you didn't know his name, he touched your soul.

Review: Che Pt. 1 (The Argentine)

Che (2008)
starring: Benecio del Toro, Demian Bichir, Rodrigo Santoro, Julia Ormond
dir. Steven Soderbergh



I find it interesting that we sit around and complain about the standard structure of the biopic and then when someone comes and messes with it, we get upset about it. It's kind of ridiculous and then I discovered Steven Soderbergh has said the same thing about his epic tale of Ernesto "Che" Guevara. Great minds think alike. But it's true, Che is unlike any other biopic and deserves kudos for beings as such.

This isn't a movie about getting us to sympathize with Guevara's cause or hating him for being a killer, but showing the process of how the Cuban revolution took place and what his feelings were about it and why he was involved. AT this the film succeeds with flying colors. Flashing between Che's trip to the UN in 1964 and his push through the jungles of Cuba as they move towards Havana, helps create the psychology and conviciton of his beliefs. It's laid out for the audience to witness and either accept or reject it, but it cannot be dissmissed that we see why he did what he did. That is the power of Soderbergh's film and the power of a one of a kind performance by Benico del Toro.

Del Toro gives a flawless turn, never playing on our sympathies or hatred. He just plays it for keeps, a man with a series of beliefs who will stick to them no matter what the cost. But it is never through grand gestures or giant monologues rousing the troops to take action. It's all about small moments and that's where this deviates from your standard biopic. This is a film about small moments and not about grand gestures or giant confrontations. It's about the brief moment of disappointment when learning Fidel wants him to train instead of lead. The passing off of a medical bag as he moves from being a doctor to become a guerrilla. A laugh shared with friends late at night around the table.

Che is a film based on the notes in between the notes. The events that seem very minor or inconsequential, but say just as much if not more about a person than the sweeping portraits that are portrayed in history books. This isn't Lawrence of Arabia (1962), because it's not intended to be. That's the greatest achievement of this film. For once a viewer is allowed to decide for themselves and not be persuaded by cinematic intervention.

Che is a man who has entered the pop culture lexicon and become representative than more than the sum of his parts. Now we can see the parts and decide for ourselves what the myth of Che Guevara means to us as individuals and not as a social conscious.

9.5 out of 10

The Eclectic Choice: Ruthless

Ruthless (1948)
dir. Edgar G. Ulmer


Ulmer was a real king of the B film world and ruthless is no exception. It may not carry over a lot of the visual flourishes from his masterpiece Detour (1945), but it is a fascinating little noir that looks at love, greed and ambition with a fun story and some pretty well drawn characters.

It's a bit like Citizen Kane (1941) with its flashback structure as we follow the life of Horace Woodruff Vendig. Opening at a party celebrating Vendig's philanthropy, we're introduced to people from his past. This triggers the flashbacks, starting with his impoverished childhood and the act of humanity that begins his cutthroat journey to the top of the investment world.

The acting is par with the exception of the always awesome Sydney Greenstreet as Buck Mansfield, the big financial fish that Vendig sets his eyes on destroying. Greenstreet is one of those character actors that light up the screen and give anything he does a level of energy and easy charm. There is a very small cameo by a mustachioed Raymond Burr that is also fun as he passes on money and advice to a young Vendig in an early flashback, but Greenstreet steals the show.

Ulmer was a filmmaker that was known for squeezing as much as possible out of a ten dollar budget. The seams always show, but there are always moments that rise above it's poverty row roots and delve into a dark side of humanity that very few big budget filmmakers could have gotten away with.

I can't really recommend a purchase though because of the quality of the print. But it's well worth a rent and discussion with fellow film nerds after.

Review: Taken

Taken (2009)
starring: Liam Neeson, Maggie Grace, Famke Janssen, Xander Berkeley, Leland Orcer, Jon Gries
dir. Pierre Morel


Producer/writer/director/craft service maestro Luc Besson has developed a formula for creating genre movies and he pretty much nails it every time. He has developed franchises like The Transporter and Taxi (in France, not America). As well as tight little hits like District B-13, Danny The Dog (aka Unleashed) and now Taken. Besson's secret is to strip away all of the bullshit and just deliver a film that has quick strokes of character, a plot that is easy to understand and eye popping action that delivers stand up and cheer justice. This time Besson re-teams with District B-13 director Pierre Morel who delivers a harsh, vengeance filled movie that makes Liam Neeson look like the badass of all badasses.

The plot is simple. Neeson plays Bryan Mills an ex-CIA operative who has retired to try and build a relationship with his estranged daughter. Neeson is overly protective and overly cautious. He has skills and knows how to use them to his benefit. All of this is good since his daughter is kidnapped while vacationing in Paris and Mills realizes there is a limited amount of time before she becomes just another statistic. The clock is ticking, so he shoots, stabs, electrocutes, breaks, busts and blows up every thing he comes in contact with to get her back. You're in and out of this movie in ninety minutes and you enjoy every second of it.

I would like to say, this type of film making isn't easy. Morel crafts visual images that build tension and fast pacing, without taking away from the moments Neeson needs to display who Mills is and how his mind works. His direction and framing is so good that even knowing Neeson is probably not the most limber actor on the planet, he looks like he could fuck up an army with a toothpick and Wet-Nap.

The film is a balancing act of action and character. It's an act that works because it's a movie about blacks and whites, there is no need for gray areas. This could become a direct to video Steven Segal piece of junk, but Besson and Morel know to keep it simple, tight and bring in solid talent who can deliver the goods.

My only complaint is that there is too much talent on display. Mill's former CIA buddies include character actors Jon Gries and Leland Orser who are given very little to do. I was expecting them to show up in the third act to pull off some Dirty Dozen style rescue mission, but they simply disappear after a couple scenes in the beginning. Is this a set up for a franchise like most of Besson's actioners seem to be? Who knows, I just wish there was more of Orcer and Gries.

But in the end it isn't about grand storytelling. It isn't about Neeson's character trying to get his ex-wife to understand him. It isn't about him finding out about himself. It isn't about putting his life back together and becoming a sensitive guy. It's about a dad fucking up a bunch of Parisians to save his daughter, end of story.

We live in a time where films have twists and convoluted plots and characters who have to resolve their entire life by the time closing credits role. Taken is as streamlined as Neeson's character. It's a bullet moving from point A to point B with no distractions. This is something that a lot of action films could take a note from.

8.5 out of 10

Review: The Reader

The Reader (2009)
starring: Kate Winslet, Ralph Fiennes, David Kross,
Bruno Ganz
dir. Stephen Daldry

This seems like an odd statement to make, but rarely do I walk away with the idea the feeling that a slow film felt rushed. It's as if the filmmakers knew how they wanted the movie to work and instead of finessing and massaging until the storyline found the proper times to shift gears, it just grinds the clutch and shifts to fit within a predetermined structure. This is not saying that The Reader is a bad movie. Quite the contrary. I was pleasantly surprised at the interest I took in the characters and the emotional dilemmas facing them. This surprise didn't kick in until close to the halfway point of the film and left near the final scenes, but it was still a surprise.

The first third is a very standard awkward love story as a young Michael Berg (Kross) becomes infatuated, then physically involved with, an older woman (Winslet) who likes being read to. She is illiterate and even though it isn't stated until later in the film, the visual cues smash you over the head like a piano crashing down on the Coyote in a Road Runner cartoon. The affair is cut short, which is a shame since I was quite enjoying watching Winslet walking around naked.

The film then shifts to Berg in law school after the war where he gets to go along with classmates to witness the trial of a few SS guards accused of murder. Guess who is one of the accused guards? Yep, our lovely Ms. Winslet. This is where the film gets really interesting for a few minutes. Questions about responsibility are brought up and asked by Michael's law professor played by Bruno Ganz. When it comes to being an employee of the nazis, what is your role and what are you responsible for in a government that continually commits atrocity after atrocity? This could have been the entire film itself and would make a really interesting and involving watch, but this isn't a movie about that, so it's brushed quickly and quietly under the love story carpet. Kate is screwed over by her fellow SS gals and sentenced to life in prison.

We then shift into a grownup Michael, well played by Fiennes, dealing with his emotions for a woman who he feels betrayed by in several ways and has never truly gotten over. This is steamrolled through with a montage, a promise, a death and a confession. Role closing credits with a sad score. Again, I'm trouncing on it a bit, but it felt like a movie that could have been really special and ended up being typical Oscar fodder.

Winslet has been nominated for a best actress Oscar and she may have nailed this one. Her character is complex and honestly naive. It's fascinating to watch her wrestle with her feelings and the results of her actions. It's great to watch her work. No matter how undesirable the character may be, she finds the humanity and never lays it on too thick.

In the end though, it's a choppy film filled with some very strong visuals and excellent performances. The ideas and all of the ingredients to make a fully satisfying meal are there , it just feels like it wasn't mixed properly and needed a little more care and attention before being served.

6.75 out of 10

Everyone Is A Critic: WJE45551

One of the things I love about Netflix are the member reviews. When I find someone who interests me I add them to my followers list and keep an eye open for any new reviews.

Here are some from my favorite bible banging, God fearing film critic, WJE45551

Gran Torino
"7 blasphemes (G-damn) in this movie. 71 F-bombs. Way to go Clint. Another AA coming your way I'm sure. Enjoy." Rating: 1 star

The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
"Definitely not for your 13 year old. Way too much sex, nudity, profanity (3 blasphemes "G-damn). Thanks for more trash UnHolywood." Rating: 1 star

Witless Protection
"This was a pretty good movie (i.e. made me laugh out loud occasionally), but does not live up to Larry's Health Inspector movie, which was much funnier." Rating: 3 stars

The Wrestler
"17, count them 17 blasphemes (G-damn) in this movie. 53 F-bombs. Enjoy." Rating: 1 star

And of course...

Fireproof
"Extremely well done. Very funny scenes. You'll laugh way more than you do at cheesy 'date' movies. Very uplifting. You'll go away smiling rather than regretting what you just watched. This is truly a movie for our time. With so many marriages failing and so many trapped in the addiction of pornography, not to mention so many being lost, this is a story that everyone can benefit from. More movies like this please!" Rating: 5 stars