JeromeFreeman Reviews

Magnificent Desolation: Walking on the Moon (2005)

When the Moon Hits Your Eye -- Magnificent Desolation Tickles All Senses.

[8/10 · 17 November 2005]

Magnificent Desolation plays mostly as a promotional piece for young, would-be astronauts. The impetus for the production, it seems, was the thought that interest in the Moon, and space exploration in general, has been waning. The film is about one-third education, one-third inspiration and one-third mystifying 3-D visual effects.

At 40 minutes, it's a short number -- which suits school children well. Now that my attention span has grown with age, however, I wished it had been longer and the recreated 3-D scenes had been more embellished -- maybe an adult version fraught with fictional peril. I became greedy for more time in the 3rd dimension.

The three-dimensional visuals are stunning – like none that I have ever seen. The 3-D glasses are still somewhat clownish in appearance, but are an advancement compared to the cheap-paper disposals I am accustomed to, as they don't distort your view with hues of blue and red.

I predict that there will be renewed interest in viewing films in 3-D, and Robert Zemeckis and Co. are wise to re-release the Polar Express in 3-D IMAX format this December.

Although for the adult, the educational aspect may be a little rudimentary or underwhelming, Magnificent Desolation is inspiring, and I'm always willing to pay a few bucks for some inspiration; to be reminded of how incredibly amazing our achievements have been over the past 100 years, and how amazingly able we humans are at realizing dreams that still seem so impossible, so mystifying -- whether viewed through 3-D glasses or just contemplated on a clear night while looking up at the night's sky.

To be the first man to ever set foot on the Moon is an ineffably fantastic feet; to think that you were the first person to set foot on something that every living inhabitant of this earth has looked upon since the inception of this planet. It's amazing -- one of the most extraordinary experiences one can have -- talk about "out of this world!" I didn't fully appreciate the awesomeness of this accomplishment until I was forced to think about it this past weekend while watching this film. So, I think the Magnificent Desolation is effective at getting audiences to think a little more about how amazing the original Apollo missions were.

In closing, even though my matured tastes left me wanting more, in the end I think it best that Magnificent Desolation is what it is: a simple, short film that captivates the eyes, minds and, hopefully, hearts of young and old alike, inspiring us all to continue reaching and dreaming of things that appear beyond reach of human capacity, for Magnificent Desolation reminds us that how things appear is just that, illusionary appearance. In this world, during our lifetime, anything is possible.

Prime (2005)

Prime Premise Was Ripe, but Spoiled with Underdeveloped Script.

[4/10 · 10 November 2005]

Plot: If you've seen any promotional material for this film, you probably already know the premise: 37-year-old female Rafi Gardet (Uma Thurman) is encouraged to have a little "fun," by her therapist (Meryl Streep as Lisa Metzger), in the wake of a recent divorce, but when the "new-guy" she meets turns out to be a 23-year-old, and Metzger's son, both women have to make tough decisions and hilarity ensues, or does it? Read on to find out.

Analysis of Screenplay and Production Quality: The first thing I want to do when I watch a film about the younger guy scoring "the woman," is compare it to The Graduate. But Prime is sufficiently novel. It's an interesting premise, and seems ripe for comedy, but I was disappointed.

Firstly, the movie is too long. Scenes should have been cut to improve the focus of the narrative. With a tighter script, and more focus on character development, there would have been a stronger chance at focusing on the emotive development between Rafi and her young lover (Bryan Greenberg as David Bloomberg). Secondly, the sex scenes hurt the film, especially because they occurred before I was able to decide on whether I bought into this on screen couple, and the sincerity of their "feelings" for one another. Developing the relationship between the two central characters should have been of paramount importance for the screenplay, but it was not and it seemed their quick sexual relationship deadened my hope that the film would attempt to develop their emotional connection. It seems clear that writer/director Ben Younger intended to make this both comedy and, in a way, tragedy – or at least touching. His sentimental soundtrack sure supports this conjecture, but the film wasn't especially moving and it had the makings to be more poignant than it was.

Younger tried to fit to much in – there's the sub plot of Bryan's immature young friend, Bryan's own bouts with boyish immaturity, Bryan's rebellion against his mother, his self- conscience ambitions to become a professional artist confronted and unrealistically fulfilled and the philosophical issues raised about the role of a therapist in these peculiar situations. Again, the most important aspect of the story – establishing a credible relationship between the two love interests – was not focused on.

In addition, often the comedy was forced, gratuitous and clichéd. Comedy should have flowed naturally given the premise of the film and it does, when the time is right, when Rafi is revealing, in detail, the sexual prowess of her new lover. The addition of characters like Rafi's unbelievably stoic doorman at the apartment complex she lives and the brief scenes that surround his character attempt to add comedy that is incongruous with the rest of the film, and does nothing to advance the storyline or improve our relationship with the central characters.

Acting: Streep, as always, infuses a sense of impromptu naturalness to her characters that is refreshing to watch. Beyond that, the performances were flat -- largely because of an unfocused script.

JeromeFreeman.com

Wall Street (1987)

More Relevant in 2005 Than Ever Before

[7 November 2005]

Wall Street: Retrospective

For a dark film, Oliver Stone's Wall Street is surprisingly inspirational. Moreover, the film resonates as even more poignant in 2005, 18 years after its release. The story engenders the uplifting, paradoxical idea that light often emerges from great darkness – and sometimes one must know this darkness before he can see light; before he realizes his errors. With the disconcerting number of corporate scandals being uncovered by the SEC, the film has become even more compelling and prophetic today! And in our current culture of increasing corporate distrust and a changing socioeconomic hierarchy, this film is a must watch for anyone who seeks a knowing appraisal of how some bombastic, unscrupulous financial big-wigs make it to the top.

Plot: The story is common. A stock broker (Bud Fox, played by Charlie Sheen), recently out of college, straddled with loan debt, struggles to make it in Manhattan. He is ambitious, but after a year of cold-calling doctors and lawyers to push stocks, he becomes disillusioned. He wants more, and soon gets his shot when his persistence wins him a five-minute meeting with one of the top financiers in the city (Gordon Gekko, played by Michael Douglas in his Oscar winning performance). Gekko is unimpressed with the stocks Fox recommends during their meeting and with his patience running thin, Fox suggests he take a look at Blue Star Airlines (after hearing from his father, an employee of the airline, that a lawsuit has recently been settled that will favorably affect the stock price once disclosed to the public. Gekko takes the bait, scores big and as a result, he employees Fox as his broker. Enamored by Gekko, Fox soon begins compromising his morals for his new employer. The more money he makes, the more risks it seems he's willing to take. He's on the up-and-up, until…

Philosophical Underpinning: In one of my favorite scenes, Gekko pulls Bud aside and proclaims, "the illusion has become real," as they look at a painting that has increased in value precipitously during the time he has owned it. He goes on to say that as a stock and real estate speculator he "creates nothing, (he) owns everything." It seems that for Gekko his success or failure is based on the perception of others. In the business world, perception is reality -- and it is Gekko's job to know that perception, to manipulate it if need be; to make the illusion a reality.

And so, it's a profession without any real work-product. Profits are created through the transfer of someone else's property. The type of property is of no consequence. The only thing of consequence is the illusion of value behind a particular product, stock, building, etc.

This idea of ownership is vastly different from the ownership developed by Bud's father, working as blue collar mechanic for a struggling airline. He is critical of Bud's job as salesman. He would prefer if he were involved with something that provided a real service. "Create," as he remarks, "don't just live off the buying and selling of others." He has a great deal of respect for his company and those who founded it, who built it up "from a single plan" into a large airline providing a valuable service for many.

Here we are presented with two varying philosophies on business. One involves making a contribution, whether as an entrepreneur, or working to maintain the creation of an entrepreneur. The other merely involves exchanging the work and the livelihood of others with no particular concern for the creative input of the products, services or properties being exchanged.

It's an interesting way to think about the whole business of speculation, and casts a very dim view on it. As if speculation is parasitic in some way. It's interesting to think of the "Kings of New York," the biggest hedge fund managers on Wall Street as nothing more than parasites making money off the selling of other peoples labor and intellectual contributions to society.

JeromeFreeman.com

The Matador (2005)

"Brosnan, Pierce Brosnan," is not all you think...Matador is KILLER Comedy!!

[7 November 2005]

A Note: I think it's best if go to the theater thinking, "Pierce Brosnan = James Bond." This is what I was expecting. Normally, I will have seen the trailer before going to a film. In this instance, I saw an advance screening as a part of the Austin Film Festival and had only seen a promotional photo of Brosnan walking away from an exploding car. This reinforced the stereotype I had for Brosnan. I think the distributor of this film would have been wise to promote it in this manner, feeding people's stereotypes by using this James Bond-esquire image, for I think the effectiveness of the comedy may in large measure be a reaction to what a drastic departure it is for Brosnan. And this was, no doubt, his intention.

Plot Summary: The story is about hit man Julian Noble. Noble, on assignment in Mexico City, has somewhat of a meltdown when he realizes his nomadic existence has left him with no one -- no friends or family, not even a place to call home. Desperate for companionship, he starts up conversation with Danny Wright, a normal guy, with a normal life, in town on business. Unaccustomed to normal social etiquette he scares Wright off, but pleads for forgiveness the next day and requests that he accompany him to a bull fight. And the comedy begins as Julian decides to open up to his new friend more about what he does for a living. All is well until Julian realizes his "meltdown" is serious and he is having difficulty following through on his "assignments." He therefore has to ask for help from his new friend Danny.

Analysis: Brosnan took a substantial risk in signing on to this picture. Paying him less than he would normally receive, and requiring that he sport a creepy 'stache, a pot belly and trade in his custom- tailored Armani suits for tight-fitting-euro-pimp threads, you would think he would be out of his element. It turns out to be quite the contrary. Brosnan proves that he is more than James Bond or Thomas Crowne. He proves that he can be one of the most entertaining comedic actors working right now as well. The dynamic between Kinnear and Brosnan is delectable. Kinnear plays such a likable straight man cum everyman, and Brosnan plays such a likable hit man, and the combination of the two is irresistible. Their rapport with each other is so ripe for comedy that you want it in every scene.

While the film uses many conventional cinematic devices, I couldn't help but feel as if I was watching something very fresh and original. Largely, I can attribute this to the performance of Brosnan, but it was also interesting that the film maintained the feel of a fast passed action movie, in keeping with Brosnan's most notable genre.

I highly recommend this film.

JeromeFreeman.com

Donnie Darko (2001)

Donnie Darko: Cerebral Workout

[7 November 2005]

Donnie Darko is an original science fiction film that leaves a thoughtful viewer pondering well after the closing credits.

Plot Summary: The story chronicles the strange experiences of Donnie Darko (Jake Gyllanhaal), a sensitive and intelligent high school student struggling with schizophrenia. His schizophrenic episodes, and the imaginary friend he interacts with during them, seem to give him supernatural powers that manifest themselves in reality, which brings into question whether these experiences are fantasy at all! This uncertainty of fantasy and reality continues throughout the film. When a motivational speaker comes to town preaching about the harmfulness of being inhibited by personal fears, Donnie chastises him, claiming that he is not realistic. He asserts that there are problems in this world that are more complicated, that cannot be remedied so easily.

On a lighter side, the film resembles many of suburban teen films of the 80's, almost to the point of parody. There's the Asian girl who is aggressively assaulted by bullies and has a crush on Donnie, the relationship Donnie establishes with an out of town girl trying to escape a difficult past, the quarreling between Donnie and his Harvard-bound sister, the dead beat dim-wits Donnie hangs out with, and the retro soundtrack used during scenes in and around the high school

The most haunting part of this film is how so many of the characters seem as if they know more than they let on; that they understand something that we don't. I wish they would let me know because I have yet to reach a satisfactory understanding of the film – it will, therefore, require a second watching which I look forward to because it is, indeed, entertaining, cerebral and well-acted.

Bee Season (2005)

I Wish More Had Been "Spelled Out" For The Audience

[7 November 2005]

Since I have not read the novel upon which Bee Season is based, I cannot evaluate the film's interpretation of the book. It seems, however, that there is more occurring within the characters of this story that is not stated or developed within the screenplay. And unfortunately more needed to be conveyed, and developed in order for this film to affect the audience in a useful way. Plot Summary: The film is about an intellectual, dynamic family. Eliza (Flora Cross) enters a school spelling bee, wins, and soon realizes she has the ability to visualize words and their correct spelling. She says she feels and sees the word "talking to her." Her father, Saul Naumann (Richard Gere), a professor of Judaic Mysticism at a San Francisco university later decides that Eliza has the unique ability to speak to God. He becomes preoccupied with nurturing and developing this "gift" within his daughter, and in the process falls out of touch with his son Aaron (Max Minghella), who becomes disillusioned with his faith in Judaism and rebels against the influences of his father. Aaron begins studying Buddhism after meeting a female romantic interest who is sympathetic to his expressed feelings of emptiness and detachment. Saul's Wife, Miriam (Juliette Binoche), struggles with her own detachment from reality as she continues to mourn the death of her parents who died in an accident when she was young girl. My Analysis: Like some of the characters in the film, I too left the film somewhat empty, or unfulfilled. I wanted to know more about what was going on with this family. The relationship between Gere's character and his son is somewhat familiar -- a son rebels against a father who is too strongly pushing his faith and interests. This form of rebellion seems typical of most adolescents. The mother and daughter share the unusual relationship; both of whom seem to possess certain supernatural powers. While it is the daughter's power to visualize and spell that is the focal point of the film, it may well be a similar ability that drives her mother to mental illness. The relationship between them should have been developed more, however. I wanted to know what the mystical-supernatural ability meant, but the screenplay doesn't explain much, and this is frustrating. In addition, when it becomes apparent that Miriam is suffering from a severe mental disorder and continues to mourn the death of her parents, I questioned why her husband was so utterly unaware of her suffering as it had been going on for some time. He was an intelligent man who had great concern for the welfare of his family, and it didn't seem to fit his character. The film might merely be about a domineering father and the influence his beliefs have over his family. But I'm hoping it's more than that. The story goes to pains to make it clear that there is a very real supernatural element at work here, but the film doesn't do enough to convey what this means and why it's important. I appreciate movies that are efficient, that don't hold my hand through everything and that give me credit for making inferences to tie a storyline together, or even leave the story purposely ambiguous so as to allow for interpretation, but in the case of the Bee Season, the subject matter is too abstruse and the story is too underdeveloped. I could not reach a satisfactory understanding of what occurred and why it was important. The acting was strong, however. Binoche, Gere and company make the best of an underdeveloped script. The quality of the acting makes the problems with the script even more frustrating because it seems like this film could have been much more.

The Weather Man (2005)

Weatherman Paints Bleak, Cold, Cynical Outlook on Life

[7/10 · 7 November 2005]

The Weather Man opens to the cracked ice of Lake Michigan rising and falling with the current. And, in a way, this relates to the depiction of life this film develops; a cold world in which one's chances of creating an identity that is fulfilling become less great as time progresses. And, in the end, all you can do is feel good about yourself and your "shit life" by looking at other people who are worse off than you.

Plot: The story is centers around David Spritz, a divorced Chicago Weatherman, and his relationship with his father, ex-wife, and children. David realizes his life is not what he hoped it would be. He's messed up too much and now he wants to "knuckle down" and make things work, but it things might be beyond repair. David wants to make a change not only for himself, but also to please his Dad, a well respected writer, who David described during one of his many voice over moments, as an "excellent father." His father is diagnosed with Cancer during the film and only has a few months to live. Now he wants to show him he is capable of making the hard decisions of grown up life and sacrificing for the sake of his family. The story is upsetting, because we are presented with a man who genuinely loves his children and wants to spend time with them, but often has a difficult time connecting with them.

Critique: At first, I thought this movie was bleak. There are some very funny scenes, but overall, it ended and I felt cheated. I wanted more resolved. I wanted the triumph of Lester Burnam in American Beauty when he decides to change his life -- and this comes with pot smoking and a new sports car. This doesn't happen in this film. While Spritz does, indeed, change, it wasn't the same kind of 180 degree change that I wanted to see.

I have, however, reached a satisfactory interpretation of the film. Spritz's unhappiness, in large part, is not a result of is high paying job that requires little effort -- in his opinion -- but his own inability to do something meaningful in the eyes of his father -- who isn't especially encouraging, supportive or interested in his occupation. It's refreshing then, when Spritz's own son reveals his interest in becoming a cameraman for Monday night football, Spritz is highly supportive. But nothing is ever emphasized much by the filmmaker. I never got the sense that the story or the filmmaker was highlighting one aspect of Spritz's relationships or problems. As a result, the film maintains its bleakness and the pessimistic ideal that sometimes even if your intentions are noble and sincere, there is nothing to grab hold of in this world and one ought to just be happy he isn't homeless – or something like that; deduce pleasure in the idea that you are less miserable than some people.

So much for the American ideal that anything is possible and that any moment we can alter our position and attitudes. So much for the idea we ought not measure our success by the failures of others, but continue "to serve, to strive and not to yield." And while it's important to be thankful for what we have, I feel like I would fall down a pretty slippery slope if I began to measure my happiness in relative terms.

The Weatherman is funny at times, I guess because it is somewhat real. It shows, at times, the comedy behind failed struggles to impress and find our identity and a meaningful occupation to fill our days with. I guess "real" can be bleak. And when dealing with real life, not everything is resolved. One can't have everything. People fall out of love, and money cannot always fix the past. People say and do stupid things. People are insensitive, nonsensical and enjoy seeing milkshakes thrown at other people. As Michael Caine's character said, parents can never feel completely comfortable -- they will always worry about the well being of their children. This is life.

And while this might be real, I guess I prefer ideal. I prefer to hold fast to the notion that anything is possible and that one ought never settle.

JeromeFreeman.com

Crash (I) (2004)

WIll Touch Everyone Differently, but it WILL Touch You.

[8/10 · 7 November 2005]

Crash is a terrific film, and a genius screenplay. Ironically, I felt both disturbed and inspired after watching it, and I'll bet that many people will feel the same way. The film is so dynamic, and personal that I surmise that everyone's relationship with it will be unique. There is so much going on within all of the characters emotionally, that I immediately wanted to watch it again. I wanted to learn more from it. And this is the real beauty of the film. It appeals so much to basic human emotions; and to the very American ideals of justice and liberty for all. It's important that everyone watch this film because everyone is a part of its message. Everyone has discriminated and everyone has felt anger and fear. Everyone has played a part in maintaining stereotypes. And, as a result, everyone is a part of this Film. Great art need not be instructive, great arts speaks to the heart, the greatest enactor of change.

The acting is top-notch. Everyone is feeding off of one another. It's a great thing to witness.

JeromeFreeman.com