rwd4evr Reviews

Monster (2003)

Theron earned that Oscar.

[9/10 · 25 September 2004]

Not being very familiar with the true story behind this film, I'll opt out of judging its veracity in terms of objectively defining Wuornos' character.

However - Charlize Theron has indelibly stamped her mark on the shortlist of actresses who truly morph into each new role. Meryl Streep, for example.

The film, for all its shortcomings, is riveting, mainly by virtue of Theron's portrayal. Christina Ricci and Bruce Dern are notable, as well. The seamy, downscale side of Florida is well represented, as is the unrelenting desperation of its down-and-out underclass.

It's a film worth watching several times. The dialogue is sometimes slightly muddled and hard to follow, simply because Theron is so absorbed in being Wuornos, she doesn't always enunciate well enough to be understood.

I'd like to have seen a bit more fleshing out of her background and the process that led up to her death sentence. The major flaw in the whole premise may have been that it was told entirely from her POV -- which causes some dissonance between the person we see and her ultimate fate, which comes across as quite unfair. As another reviewer said, she couldn't have been just another "misunderstood bad guy." None of the above detracts from Theron's work here. Her range is the stuff of legends.

/r

Big Fish (2003)

Glad I Caught This One

[9 July 2004]

Solidly acted and enjoyable throughout. Albert Finney, Jessica Lange and Ewan MacGregor were all wonderful, and Billy Crudup was very nice to look at.

The story keeps one guessing right up to the end - and I appreciate the trailers for keeping it a mystery. The "fantasy funeral" scene near the end segued perfectly into what followed.

A sweet, very imaginative movie. Anyone who liked "Edward Scissorhands" and "Secondhand Lions" will add this one to their collection. Finney's performance also reminds one of Jack Nicholson in some of his more recent works, such as "About Schmidt" and "Something's Gotta Give."

Parenthood (1989)

A movie for all stages of life

[10/10 · 28 March 2004]

This is an excellent movie, very similar to Terms of Endearment. It shows how even in a close-knit family, each member brings his or her unique personality and perspective.

Jason Robards is the self-made patriarch, with strong opinions about the definition of "success." He clearly approves more of his son Larry (Tom Hulce), a ne'er-do-well con artist who cannot manage his money or his relationships. Larry talks his father's party line and manages to fool him until the final minutes of the film. This misplaced favoritism is especially hard on the oldest son, Gil (Steve Martin), who lives his life in a super-responsible manner, taking on guilt for his own failings and everyone else's. Gil is especially worried about his oldest son who, at age 8, is already neurotic.

Helen (Dianne Wiest) is Gil's divorced sister, trying to raise a teenage daughter (Martha Plimpton) and an adolescent son (Joaquin Phoenix). The daughter is heavily involved with a good-natured slacker (Keanu Reeves), and Helen is terrified that she is not doing enough to keep her daughter from making an irrevocable mistake with her life.

These stories, and the other subplots in the film, are serious in nature, but Ron Howard, Ganz and Mandel combine their talents to make a fabulously lighthearted product that is also satisfyingly profound.

Toward the end of the film, Jason Robards concedes to Steve Martin that parenthood is a job that never ends, no matter how "grown-up" your kids become. This movie can reaffirm anyone of any age who is a member of any family.

/r

The Year of Living Dangerously (1982)

An exotic, romantic eye-opener

[10/10 · 28 March 2004]

High school social studies never made me care about Indonesia the way this film did. It examines the sweeping forces of change and clashes of cultures that have struck so many parts of the world since the second world war.

Most moviegoers will be drawn to this film by the presence of Mel Gibson and Sigourney Weaver, who do an outstanding job as Guy and Jill. Guy is a cocky, pragmatic news reporter, who is mentored by a fellow Australian, the half-Chinese Billy Kwan (in an awe-inspiring performance by Linda Hunt). Billy has seen Indonesia through his camera lens; he knows first-hand the daily trauma and heartbreak under which Indonesia's poorest citizens live. He adopts those he cares about, and follows their progress obsessively, assembling dossiers and secretly photographing them. Billy is an idealist who believes that Sukarno holds out the greatest hope for the Indonesian people.

Another of Billy's obsessions is Jill Bryant, a gentle Englishwoman who works for the embassy. Billy orchestrates a meeting between Guy and Jill, who, in the movie's most moving scene, break curfew and flee to Guy's cabin in a hail of bullets. Billy lurks outside, clearly satisfied that the puppets are filling the roles he has written for them in his private shadow play.

Betrayal is a huge ongoing theme in this movie. Billy, the idealist, always expects more from those around him than they deliver. He befriends the assortment of foreign journalists who pass through his world, only to be shocked at their exploitative behavior with the natives. Sukarno says one thing on TV but demonstrates very different motives as his reign continues. Billy despairs that he will not be able to change the way things are. Finally, Guy's relationship to Jill represents yet another betrayal -- he takes advantage of classified information that Jill passes to him out of concern for his safety.

I found the ending (no spoilers) to be the most disappointing thing in this movie -- it seemed somehow anticlimactic, and I would have liked to see something more, but cannot think of what. The ingredient that makes this film what it is is Maurice Jarre's wonderful, haunting score. The pacing of this picture is slow by today's standards, but did not seem so in 1982.

/r

Silkwood (1983)

Fear on many levels

[9/10 · 28 March 2004]

Anytime someone asks me what I'd consider the scariest movie ever, I say "Silkwood," and they say "But that's not a horror movie."

No?

There is so much to fear here, and scariest of all, probably, is the fact that the title character lived just a few decades ago, in modern-day America.

There is the fear that comes from living in poverty, or right on the edge of it. Silkwood, her cohorts, and most of her coworkers have little education; they live humble lives of church revivals, rebuilt cars, and "mystery meat" sandwiches brought for lunch in brown paper bags. The nuclear plant where they work is the only game in town (or the entire state), in terms of wages and benefits. And so, every day, they live in fear of losing their jobs. They have spent their lives being instructed to trust authority and submit to it. They are intimidated by the managers and supervisors who frown on camaraderie, and positively scowl on their labor union.

There is the fear of the unknown at the plant -- trucks being dismantled and buried behind barbed wire, under guard and under cover of darkness. Management gives the workers the minimum amount of information they need to perform their jobs, and often withhold or disguise facts that are essential to their very survival.

Karen, a somewhat rebellious, less-than-conscientious worker, is shocked into activism when her co-worker Thelma, becomes exposed to radioactive contamination, or "cooked." For me, this sequence is one of the most disturbing. Thelma is probably only in her 40s, but she looks like she's ready for retirement, due to the hard life she has lived. Her daughter is dying of cancer, and she herself wears wigs most days, because her hair is falling out. It's hard to watch the weeping, pleading Thelma being forcibly scrubbed head to toe with a stiff brush, water being shot into her eyes and nose, in a dubious attempt to "decontaminate" her. She is then patronized by a doctor who straight-facedly assures her that she has only superficial exposure and will be just fine.

There is fear when Karen sticks her neck out -- talking to union reps, traveling to Washington, and being sent back to work with a dangerous assignment: to gather evidence. At one point in the film, absolutely no one is supporting her. Her roommate feels resentful and rejected; her boyfriend has moved out, jealous of her involvement with the sophisticated people from Washington, and her co-workers treat her like a pariah, afraid that being seen talking to her will brand them as troublemakers, endangering their jobs, or even their lives.

Their worries seem more and more valid as the movie progresses. She walks into a roomful of supervisors, and they all fall silent. Suddenly, every time she walks past a radiation monitor, the alarms sound and she, like Thelma, is dragged to the dreaded decon room, where her skin is scrubbed raw -- torture chillingly disguised as medical necessity. Even her home is no longer safe. Plutonium is found in a urine sample that she brings from home, and every item in her house--right down to the wallpaper--is emptied and taken away from her. Her stone-faced, smooth-talking boss is right there, encouraging her to sign a statement that will undoubtedly absolve the company of any responsibility.

The headlights Karen sees in her rear-view mirror are not the last thing we see that frightens us. It's her wrecked car being slowly towed past the restaurant where a union meeting is still in progress.

The movie hits so many of our fear buttons: Helplessness, loneliness, rejection, vulnerability, and finally, the bottom-line thing we all fear the most. The most encouraging note is the awareness that anyone who sees this movie will come away with. It's a blueprint for empowerment.

e.w.

Hannibal (2001)

Compelling, but Flawed

[8/10 · 23 March 2004]

As a big (big, big) fan of Thomas Harris' 1999 novel, I literally counted the days to the release of the film and was one of the first on line. Surrounded by a few hundred of my fellow Lecterphiles, I sat for two hours, drinking it in.

It was a treat seeing the characters step off the page to walk and talk...but still, I left the theater feeling quite let down.

The musical score was sublime. Most of the actors did a fine job. The problem was twofold. First, the ending differed markedly from what was given in the book. No spoilers; if you liked the book you've seen the movie already. If you didn't like the book, you still know what the ending was. Just suffice it to say, Ridley Scott and Stephen Zaillian took a safer route. Kind of like taking the safe route through Yellowstone because you're afraid of getting squirted by Old Faithful.

Another objection I had to this movie was the excessive gore. The whole story is supposed to have a dreamy, other-worldly quality, and the rivers of blood and lingering closeups on various no-longer-internal organs is a turnoff that does nothing to aid the story. I'm told the DVD contains many deleted scenes, and this is good, because the theatrical version was choppily edited. I walked away thinking there was so much they could have added to maximize the impact. The sound quality was less than ideal. Even with Dolby, the audience strained to catch mumbled lines.

Even those of us who can never quite get enough of Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter are rather unanimous in our belief that we've had more than enough of Ridley Scott's disregard for fine literature.

RWD4EVR

Mr. Holland's Opus (1995)

A "real" story, if not a true one.

[9/10 · 22 March 2004]

There are many profound places in this movie. The best thing, for me, is that it doesn't over-glorify the subject matter. Holland is never portrayed as a superteacher. If he does find peace in his life choices, it's a process that takes years and years. Another thing I liked is the transitioning from decade to decade. We can't help but see that time is slipping by for Mr. Holland...and for all of us!

I also appreciate that the school is shown as an average one. It isn't a sparkling architectural gem, as in John Hughes' films, nor is it a pit of squalor, as in the first act of "Lean on Me." The bureaucrats who oppose Holland are not villains. The students are neither budding prodigies (in most cases); nor are they pitiful caterpillars struggling vainly to emerge from their cocoons. In sort, Holland, his colleagues, his wife, son and students, are all REAL.

Anyone who appreciates music (or who didn't appreciate their music teachers enough) will enjoy the singing (well, maybe not Richard's, but...)

Glenne Headley was outstanding, too.

/r

The King of Comedy (1982)

Darkly, Starkly Funny

[9/10 · 22 March 2004]

Saw it first time late at night and never thought about sleeping again for a couple of days.

DeNiro nails perfectly the unflappable and determined comic wannabe. We watch him throughout the whole film, wondering, Is he really just that sure of himself, or is he dangerously deranged? That question will take you through right to the end. Between Rupert, whose basement (in his mother's house) is decorated like a comedy club, and his oddball chum (S.Bernhard), there's considerable pathos. Jerry Lewis gives a lot of insight into the real person behind his easygoing public persona.

Part of what makes this movie so compelling is Scorsese's decision to keep the musical score to a minimum. Music could force the viewer to a conclusion that isn't entirely accurate. Listening to Rupert's endless exchanges Jerry, and everyone who stands in his way -- as is, without musical coloring -- enhances the "squirm factor."

Anyone who has been in the uncomfortable position of coming to regret being nice to someone will relate to this movie. It's a must-see, and despite being more than 20 years old now, it is not a bit dated.

/r

Groundhog Day (1993)

See it again and again and...

[10/10 · 20 March 2004]

What a fabulous movie. So lighthearted, but profound at the same time.

No point in giving away the story -- it's rather self-explanatory.

My favorite scene is the initial encounter between Phil and the Most Obnoxious Insurance Salesman in Movie History, the incomparable Ned Ryerson.

N: Now, don't pretend you don't know me, because I sure as heckfire remember you.

P: nk look]

N: Ned! (lifts hat to expose bald head) Ryerson! Needlenose Ned, Ned-the-Head, c'mon, buddy! Case Western High! Did the Whistling Bellybutton Trick in the talent show...bing! Caught the shingles REAL BAD senior year, almost didn't graduate...bing! Dated your sister Pat until you told me not to...bing!

P: Ned Ryerson??

N: BING!!!!

P: Bing...So, uh, Needlehead, did you ever do go pro with that bellybutton thing?

N: No - I sell insurance now.

P: What a shock!

Yes, I've seen the movie at least twice (LOL) and find something new in every viewing. It will make you laugh, and it will make you think. It may even make you take out an insurance policy or buy a Sonny & Cher CD. /r

The Little Drummer Girl (1984)

Great Natural Anesthetic

[1/10 · 20 March 2004]

Oh, God, this movie was wretched. I saw it once when it first came out, 20 years ago, and still remember how awful it was.

Don't worry about spoilers; I have no idea what the storyline was. All I remember is Diane Keaton just whining and wailing her way through the whole 5 hrs (oh, it was only an hour or two? coulda fooled me...). I don't think the writers, director or cast had any inkling of what they were doing or where they were going, and that's probably why Keaton's performance seemed so pointless.

Who else was in it? Darned if I know...

/r

Bastard Out of Carolina (1996)

OK movie. Book must be better.

[29 February 2004]

Spoiler alert Found this on a cable station, not knowing what to expect. It was worth it mainly for the acting talents of Jena Malone. Her portrayal of "Bone" brings the viewer completely inside her painful 1950s world.

I found the picture a bit disjointed in its narrative, and believe that storyline continuity was sacrificed for the sake of picturesque humor at the beginning. Plenty of footage is used to show tobacco-spitting Granny in her rocking chair, but virtually no time is spent explaining who Bone's first stepfather was. In the cut I saw of the film, Anney tells her daughter she's about to go out with a nice man; she marries him; he treats Bone well, and then he's dead, with his previously unseen family blaming Anney for his death.

As for Glen, yes, he's despicable, but aside from being childish and unrealistic about his desire for sons, his early characterization doesn't mesh with Bone's wary response to him. Perhaps the viewer is meant to understand that the instincts of a child are always on-target, even when an adult is on his best behavior. Since we already have plenty of voice-over narrative from Bone, could we not have gotten a little clarity on this point as well? Without some guidance, all we end up with is some clumsy foreshadowing: "Uh-oh, Bone doesn't trust him, watch out, he's gonna turn mean."

The scenes at the end were also ambiguous. Bone tells her uncle and aunt how much she hates her mother for taking Glen back after he hurt her. Then Anney comes out of nowhere, hands Bone her amended birth certificate, tells Bone she never thought Glen would hurt her, then leaves. If she's come to this realization about Glen, surely she isn't still with him? It would be nice to get some clarification here, too. The last few lines of v/o were jarring, though most likely, they're taken from the book. Bone says she wants to grow up to be as strong as her mother. Huh??

Therefore, I can only assume (hope) that Dorothy Allison's novel is written with more coherent detail. "Dolores Claiborne," another Jennifer Jason-Leigh vehicle, tells a very similar story in a much, much more satisfying way.