Reviews

I just got back from seeing Brokeback Mountain a few hours ago, and I have to admit that the acting was absolutely fantastic. Especially Heath Ledger. His performance, along with the scenery, are my favorite aspects of the movie.

For me, I thought the movie was more about class and loneliness, rather than pushing some sort of "gay agenda," whatever that means. Brokeback Mountain was set in Wyoming and Texas in the sixties, prior to the advent of identity politics. If you notice, Ennis and Jack both admit after having sex that neither one of them are "queer," at a time when that word had overwhelmingly negative connotations. They didn't see themselves as part of a culture or underclass. They were simply alone-together.

My favorite part of the movie was the first 30 minutes when they both meet and worked as sheep-herders. The work they had to do was back-breaking, dangerous, fascinating, and lonely. So perhaps as a result, they gravitated towards each other.

And it seemed to me that the main reason Ennis couldn't spend more time with Jack was because he had to earn a living. Ennis couldn't move to Texis or Mexico with Jack Twist because he wouldn't be in a position to take care of himself. For me, that is why the movie is so sad---that the economic and social demands of their families kept them apart just as much (if not more) than the fear of homophobic attacks. That's why Ennis and Jack only had Brokeback Mountain!

I have seen "The Age of Innocence" about 15 times since 1994, and find the argument as to whether it is boring or not to be fascinating. Period films are not for everyone, and if you lack an appreciation for subtlety then maybe something like "Joe Dirt" may be better suited for you. But what lies beneath this wonderful movie is a priceless ode to individuality.

Michelle Pfeiffer plays Ellen Olenska, a proto-feminist who flees from her failing European marriage to the home of her blood relatives in 1870's New York Society. She's been away for most of her life and the States are foreign to her, but she quickly realizes that she is viewed as threat, a black sheep ---and Society reacts to her as it would to a dirty black spot on a carpet or on one of their tuxedo shirts. "Harmony could be shattered by a whisper", as well narrated by Joanne Woodward.

Daniel Day-Lewis plays Newland Archer, an up-and-rising patriarch who sees something in her that no one else in his rich circle could offer him: an independent viewpoint to life. As a lawyer and a powerful member of his family, he bravely tries to protect Ellen from basically everyone, esp. members of their own family. Despite all of her difficulties, Countess Olenska refuses to part from her individuality: she smokes in front of Newland, does not hide from men in social situations, and criticizes her surroundings. Archer doesn't necessarily fall in love with her as a person but with what she represents: Romanticism and escape.

There is a lot to love about this film, which is more like a piece of art than a movie. Every scene and every bit of dialogue denotes elegance and brutality simultaneously. All of the leading and supporting characters are so believable and well formed that they trump anything Hollywood has been throwing at us in recent months. And the setting for this film is very unconventional, at least for the 90's. Through excellent film-making, I can see why Society felt the need to operate in such a ruthless fashion, in order to protect itself from Ellen and what she represented to Newland, its newly crowned prince.

Over the past few months, I have also grown an appreciation for Winona Ryder's performance as May. She is a shrewd politician, who uses her "bright blindness" as a megaphone for Society's rules of conduct, a weapon of manipulation against her destined husband Newland, and as a way to continue plotting without easily being detected.

I wonder how many more times I will watch "The Age of Innocence" before I risk being exposed to Hollywood's 21st century conformity, such as "Independence Day" or "Wild, Wild West". All I know is that Ellen Olenska (as one of my favorite cinematic heroines) serves to validate my own sense of individuality, and neither she nor the astonishing beauty of this Scorcese creation, will ever be boring. 10 out of 10 stars.

This film immediately is intriguing.

This guy's mother drops dead, and under normal circumstances he would be grieving. But Buck uses the funeral solely as a reason to invite and seduce his childhood "friend", named Chuck ---a professional yuppie-type record producer, who brings along his "female" love-interest. None of this is relevant to Buck, a 27-or-so-year-old who is locked away in the mind of a young, underdeveloped child.

Logically, to Buck at least, he follows Chuck to LA, where he lives with his girlfriend, and MOVES THERE! He barges his way into Chuck's personal and professional life with the social graces of a love-struck Pollyana, casually believing that his actions are justifiable. Everyone around him, lead by Chuck, try to meet Buck halfway but no one seems up to the task of relating to what he truly needs. No one I know is up to the task of being THAT much of a diplomat, least of all the audience.

And that is what makes this one of the most striking and moving films I have ever seen (BECAUSE OF the uncomfortability of it). The duality of effect in Mike White's performance is a revelation in acting. You really want to care about him as a person but simply cannot tolerate his vulgarly-offensive lack of social intelligence. I have never seen any other film (besides perhaps Midnight Cowboy or Rain Man) try to pull this off. And the talent behind this movie proves that such a stark and unusual approach to relating to an audience is possible. All the way down to the gritty cinematography.

How White's supporting cast react to his behavior runs the gambit of American existence. Chuck, played by Chris Weitz, is intensely believable as the victim and treats Buck as any of us would have in such a situation: at first caring and then aggressively cruel. He has established a credible life for himself as an affluent, heterosexual adult, and cannot afford to return to the person Buck wants him to still be.

So he writes a play as a way to communicate how their pre-teen friendship played a role in the foundation of his identity! That unsuspected twist in the plot sets this unique film down a road of obsession I have never been before. Buck takes his play to a playwright, whom you would expect to see Buck as prey. But as it turns out, she grows to understand this person through his play and becomes even a mother figure to him, thus evolving from a bureaucrat into the sort of diplomat the audience may wish to be to Buck. As I was watching "Chuck & Buck" for the first time, I had NO idea that I would come to care about the theater-owner as much as I would, and it was fascinating to see how Buck's play would play such a positive role in her life. That entire subplot was a completely unexpected miracle for Buck and for me as the viewer.

There are creative relationships between Buck and many other characters in this movie. With the actor hired to play Chuck in the play (who is actually Chris Weitz's real-life brother) and with Chuck's girlfriend, both of whom find Chuck slightly charming for different reasons. They mirror the sympathy I felt for Mike White's character.

Towards the end I was engaged in a war over how I wanted to feel towards Buck: tolerance or condemnation. The answer is given to us by a decision made by Chuck, and it alters the way the audience views Buck and the way he views himself. To this day I still find it fascinating how "Chuck & Buck" made me feel. I truly care deeply about the lead character; very few performances are that lingering.

Movies like this one make me want to be a filmmaker.

I suppose the viewers who label Clockwatchers "boring" simply don't understand that dramas are MEANT to be slower than your garden-variety Indiana Jones or Die Hard. These "action" flicks are ten-times as dull as the corporate setting for this astonishing study on class, friendship, and inner-awareness. Or maybe it is the female perspective or "chick-flick" factor that turn certain people off. Or maybe temporary status in modern American business isn't relevant to everyone. Or the subtle, less gimmicky observations of reality.

Clockwatchers is all of these things at once. Toni Collette plays the ultra-shy newcomer to Global Credit, the ultimate transnational corporation, who slowly comes to realize that the doomed bond she makes with three other temps is an extremely sacred event in her life. Iris slowly gains confidence through such comradery and at one point she doesn't want to leave, even though her father has higher career expectations for his daughter. Iris comes full circle at the end of the film, confronts one of her many bosses whom plot against her, and atones for not standing with Parker Posey, who is the life of the party as Margaret.

The creators of this film are SO incredibly accurate in revealing what worklife is actually like (the boredom, sharing someone else's space, not knowing someone's name or them not knowing yours), that I felt almost honored to know I wasn't alone. (Movies that are this honest about despair are never depressing.) This is combined by the subtle observations of Iris, which I suppose aren't as exciting as blowing someone's head off or toilet humor, but intriguing nonetheless. It is finally layered with political analysis as the female temps organize a strike.

Suffice it to say, Clockwatchers covers a lot of ground, but the layers are folded well together in a way that makes you care about what happens to these characters and their station in life. A must-see sleeper for those who prefer (for example) Merchant & Ivory over Van Damme & Seagal. 9 out of 10.

"Safe" gives us a good reason why we see all of those "This is a smoke-free, scent-free, meat-free household" signs across the Bay Area.

I admit that I don't live a chemically-free, vegan lifestyle; however, I appreciate how this film portrays a polluted world and this woman's slow response to it. What are pesticides and additives really doing to human biology? Carol White is forced to answer this question whether her friends and family understand it or not, even if it leads her to what could best be described as a purification cult.

If you happen to be a strident vegan who posts signs like the one I mention or are simply prone to allergy attacks, your concerns will totally be validated by this provocative movie.

When average movies tackle the afterlife, they usually include a smoke machine, stereotypical angels, and corny music. Albert Brooks will go down in film history as the first person EVER to present a plausible look at what happens when you die.

What I like most about Defending Your Life was how much detail was used in creating the setting of Judgment City. The atmosphere was very practical and "down-to-earth" on one side and surreal and removed-from-time on the other. How this part-time utopia operates makes sense as well: part of the city is devoted to court proceedings and the rest is designed for the needs of its temporary citizens, even down to perfect weather. AND THE FOOD IN THIS MOVIE IS THE MOST APPETIZING I'VE EVER SEEN! (How could the actors resist?)

Second were the performances, particularly Meryl Streep (who is very genuine as Julia) and Rip Torn (who is very believable as an other-worldly defense lawyer).

Third was how Brooks' portrayed the importance of the "insignificant" life of Daniel Miller. The segments that were chosen by the court were incredibly well-scripted and very believable. An overview of someone's life as presented in this film is an extremely profound, almost spiritual concept. I've never seen anything like that, esp. for a comedy-drama.

"Defending Your Life" is one of the most original, life-affirming films I've ever seen, while at the same time not being sappy or over-the-top (like the beautiful but boring "What Dreams May Come"). This one is much better.

Like most excellent movies, "The Last Seduction" contains several superb elements: a great soundtrack, a complex plot. But obviously the best thing about it was Linda Fiorentino's Oscar-worthy performance. I have NEVER seen anyone (male or female) so unapologetically in control. (I tend to respect her more than hate her.)

A complaint that I heard about Bridget Gregory is that she was unbelievable. What I find "unbelievable" is how in almost every movie a lead actress has to breakdown and cry all over the place. It was great to get away from that stereotype and she how far Bridget would go to keep the money she stole, esp. her last seduction.

Even though it's not for everyone, I think it is a must-see.

I didn't expect to like "The Talented Mr. Ripley" nearly as much as I did. This movie beautifully covered a lot of artistic ground at the same time: 50's culture, ex patriotism, Italian life, insanity, homosexuality. But I appreciated how it dealt with class the most; how profoundly desperate Ripley was to move up in this world and how Dickey (Jude Law) could never relate to someone from the working class. ("Quit cleaning up! That's what the f***ing maid is for!") The class distinctions between those two characters hit a little too close to home for me, so much so that I never came to hate Ripley, even at the heartbreaking ending ---a tribute to Matt Damon's honest performance.

The first time I saw Delusion was as a fluke ten years ago when it first came out. I saw it again today, and I am still shocked by how well it is written! The desert setting is very tangible and serves as a stark backdrop for the three central characters. Delusion is basically a Western molded into an early 90's thriller in a VERY creative way. It just keeps getting better and better, especially the closing scenes.