I will also add another movie to this list, because I just watched it on DVD - Easy A. I have a few comments to make about that train wreck, and this is as good a time as any. But let's go in chronological order, starting with Lincoln.
Lincoln
I want to keep this blog post somewhat brief and since I have five movies to review, I'll be as condensed as possible. First of all, I loved this movie. I'm going to put that out there right now. I am probably biased, of course, because I am fascinated by the Civil War - by the psychology of war, as a whole, in fact - and I personally think that Abraham Lincoln is one of the most important figures in history. Not just American history - but in all of history because for better or worse, America is one of the strongest nations existing today and Lincoln had a big part in shaping America's identity. Over the last week, I've discussed this movie with a number of different people who have also seen it because I'm interested to see why so many people loved it so much. It wasn't very action heavy. It wasn't super schmaltzy (though it definitely had a little schmaltz; this is Spielberg we're talking about here). It didn't feel overtly emotionally manipulative (and I am very sensitive to that). A lot of it took place in a court room. This movie could have easily been boring or too dreary or not serious enough, given what was happening at that time. Over 600,000 soldiers died during the Civil War. Some experts say that approximately 50,000 of those soldiers died at Gettysburg alone. This was a dark and horrific time in American history and the tone of this movie would be very important indeed and would have to toe a certain line... which Spielberg managed to do with so much finesse and love.
The movie showed Lincoln as a storyteller as well as a man beaten down by years of war and yet maintaining his heart and his belief that he was on a path that he could not walk away from. The movie was in turn light and sentimental and then brutal and heartbreaking. Parts of the movie reminded me very strongly of To Kill A Mockingbird (one of my favorite movies of all time) - it was the sort of courtroom drama that leaves the audience with the idea that... people can be better. That we, as a society and as a nation, have the power to make things better for ourselves. Personally I don't even think it was a story entirely about Lincoln: they didn't delve too heavily into his personal life (with exception of some wonderful, sometimes heart wrenching scenes with Sally Fields). I also don't think it showed the world through rose-colored glasses, either. It showed us a war-torn nation that just wanted the war to end, whatever it took. Free the black citizens? Release the slaves? Fine, whatever, if it'll end the war, do it. That was the mentality of so many people of those times, and Lincoln had to live with that reality and push forward anyway. And don't get me started on the superb job that Tommy Lee Jones pulled off. That magnificent bastard had me in tears by the end.
As a whole, the cast was amazing. Daniel Day-Lewis, as usual, was absolute perfection. There is nothing that man can't do. James Spader and John Hawkes provided much needed levity, but never crossed the line to buffoonery. And I cannot leave out Jared Harris, of Mad Men fame. He played an understated Ulysses S. Grant with a quiet strength. No, he didn't have a big role in the film, but he was able to convey so much in a look - and his final scene with Lincoln was another tearjerker for me.
All in all, I give it an A!
The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2
I'll be honest. I have developed a strange weakness for these horrible movies. I don't know why or when it happened but here we are. I am not going to go into any great detail because we all know the story and it's a silly one - one that makes very little sense and stars two very horrible leads. I will say this, though: of all the Twilight movies, this one was the best. I was engaged the whole time. My mind didn't wander. Honestly, I think it was because they had FINALLY moved past the "will they/won't they" phase of the story and the action finally started to pick up. Granted the action STILL didn't take place until the last 30 minutes of the movie, but the build up was interesting enough to keep me engaged. And the battle at the end was GLORIOUS. Honestly, had all the movies been like this, I would have been an avid defender of these films... but alas, it was mostly about a stupid girl who keeps chasing after some guy that keeps abusing her (both physically and emotionally) until he finally realizes he can't get rid of her so.... he marries her. At 18. Because he will only have sex with her if they're married? And she really wants to have sex, so she's like, "Sure whatevs"? Honey, you can get it from someplace else, he's not worth it! Ugh. I'm getting all mad but my point is... I actually think the final movie was decent if only because it was so absurdly gruesome.
I give it... hmmm... as a series, I give is C-. As a stand alone, a B-.
Skyfall
What can I say? I love me some James Bond. I am a defender of most Bond movies, even the really bad ones (example: The Living Daylights, which I will openly admit was dull as dirt during most parts, but was a welcome change from goddamn Roger Moore's buffoonery). Given all of that, I will say that this was probably the best Bond flick I have seen in YEARS. Now, I adored Casino Royale, and I loved Daniel Craig's rough, hard-bitten version of Bond. Bond as a figure of action. Bond as a flawed man. Bond as a dark commentary of our times. He is real, he is a person, he is brooding but not for the sake of brooding - because of what life has done to him. He's never too elegant. He's not perfect. He's no Sean Connery - the international man of mystery who always does his job to perfection and never falters. I love this new Bond... however, as much as I loved Casino Royale, I think it was a touch too dark. And.... I won't even discuss Quantum of Solace (aka one of two bond films, with License to Kill, that I will loathe forever). I will just pretend it didn't happen. So moving on - back to Skyfall - this movie finally managed to do everything I wanted a Bond movie to do: combine the New Grittier Bond with the Old Traditions of Bond. The cast in this movie was amazing - Bond's chemistry with pretty much everyone was right on point. I hope this entire cast is in the next Bond flick, because it was absolute perfection. I won't say more because I don't want to give any spoilers... but there were reinvented characters, already famous from Bond folklore, that have emerged bigger and better - honoring the old fans, and bringing something fresh for the new ones.
But the best thing for me is that the movie managed to keep a good pace (something that Bond movies are famously bad at) and wasn't afraid to be a little cheeky. Also, there was never a clear morale compass telling you, "These are the good guys and these are the bad guys." The movie was gray, and the relationship between Bond and M (the wonderful Judi Dench) was fantastic and beautiful and never too sentimental because that wouldn't be quite right.
I'm going to make a bold statement. With Casino Royale and now Skyfall, I may have to admit that Craig is my favorite Bond. I know, I know, it may be too early to tell... but he is at least tied with Connery. I love them both for very different reasons. Connery is a caricature. Craig is a man. Maybe one more movie will solidify my opinion one way or another. Either way, this was a great film and highly recommended.
I give it an A-. (The minus is because while the pace was good, there was still a little dragging in the middle.)
The Sessions
I saw Skyfall with my dad and we were supposed to go to another movie together but after lunch he ended up meeting a friend for drinks and I decided to see another movie by myself at E Street Cinema (my second home). I also figured I'd see a movie that I knew I would never see with my dad... The Sessions, the story about a polio-stricken and physically paralyzed man who realizes the only way he's going to lose his virginity is by hiring a "sex surrogate." This movie was funny, insightful, brave, and way more upfront about the realities of sex than most American films tend to be. It never holds back, but it also doesn't use sex as some sad and dark backdrop like in Shame (which, by the way, is actually fantastic and should be seen immediately if you haven't yet). The movie never really has you feeling sorry for the story's protagonist. John Hawkes (who I love love LOVE) manages to make him quizzical and earnest but not saintly. He is charming and yet quietly frustrated, but not angry at the world. Also, while the sex in the movie can be a tad graphic (as it should, considering the subject matter and the whole basis of the film), it never quite feels... cheap.
It was a sweet and honest and was a testament to the strength and beauty of the human spirit. I definitely walked out of the theater thinking, "Shit, life is pretty good." You probably will too!
I give it an A-.
And last and definitely least...
Easy A
First of all, I have seen this movie before. I watched it at a friend's house ages ago, and I remember thinking it was kind of cute in that teen movie sort of way. I have a weakness for teen movies and tv shows (i.e. my obsession with John Hughes and The O.C.). It only makes sense that this movie, Easy A, with its constant Hughes movie references and its quirky cast and its wicked humor would be a no-brainer - of course I'd love it! But when I watched it a second time, the rose-colored glasses fell of of my face and shattered into a lot of little pieces.
Here's the thing. Remember how I said one of the reasons I loved The Sessions was because it wasn't cheap? Well Easy A is as cheap as it gets. Not sexually - but thematically. The movie is trying so HARD to be a John Hughes movie and at one point, the main character actually makes us sit through a manage of John Hughesian film clips: fist pumping, riding on a lawn mower, and fucking Jake Ryan. Hey, Easy A - don't throw Jack Ryan in my face. The audience this is appealing too, by the way, probably don't even understand the epicness of Jake Ryan anyway. Even I - as much as I adore the shit out of Sixteen Candles - was only 1 year old when that movie came out. Come on. It would make more sense if you referenced movies like Clueless, given the age of the central character. Also, Emma Stone's main antagonist, Marianne (annoyingly played by Amanda Bynes) is a COMPLETE ripoff from Saved!'s Hilary Faye (played with delicious insanity by Mandy Moore). In fact, this whole movie was just a crappy version of Saved! so if you decide you want to see Easy A, just go watch Saved! instead. It's smarter, edgier, and never quiiiiiiitttttte steps over the line of "too ridiculous to believe."
So yeah. Easy A is what would happen if Saved! and Every John Hughes Movie Ever got together and had a really stupid baby. Actually, let's throw Mean Girls in there too. The parents in Easy A? Delightful but delightful rip off from Lindsay Lohan's quirky parents in Mean Girls.
Also just as a side note: Lisa Kudrow's entire character was fucking pointless. I know I said I'd avoid spoilers but I'm warning you now, I'm about to give one: why the HELL did they have Kudrow there for about two scenes only for the purpose of having an affair with Marianne's boyfriend? It would have made way more sense if Marianne was secretly having sex with her boyfriend - will all her crazy protesting against sex and sin. This could have acted as the flip side of Olive, Emma Stone, who was lying that she was having sex to.... what? Be more popular? Get more money? To help out poor sex-starved students? Her intentions aren't even clear. Ugh. Such a mess.
All in all, I think a big part of the reason I can't stand this movie is because it not only lacks ANY originality or genuine smarts, but after recently seeing The Perks of Being a Wallflower, I don't think I can ever watch another mindless teen film again. I won't get into my love for Perks; this post is already becoming a beast and I could talk about that movie and how perfect it is all day long.
I will close with one last thought: John Hughes films definitely had some cookie cutter endings. I won't act like they didn't. I mean, Jake Ryan and the fucking birthday cake? That scene alone probably ruined me for life. And Judd Nelson getting with the prom queen in The Breakfast Club? And the whole group bonding? No one's life is like a John Hughes movie, not really (though I think we've all been friends with a Duckie at some point in our lives). Easy A beat this idea over our heads over and over and over again... but the thing is... there's a certain sentimentality that John Hughes was able to bring into absurd situations. There is a heart to his films. To this day, I still get chills when I watch the scene between the principle in the Breakfast Club and Judd Nelson, in the closet. The scene where you realize, this "punk," this "trouble maker"... he's just a kid who has had a pretty shit time in life and just needs one person to show him that they give a shit. And the reality of that moment, when you see how scared he actually is, makes all the other absurd things that happen somehow not so absurd. There's never That Moment in Easy A. And because of that, it fails.
Therefore, I give it a D. It didn't get an F because I did kind of like her parents in the movie, goddammit.
And that's all there is, folks! Next post: Holiday Cheer is Here!
No comments:
Post a Comment