W.

Last Saturday H and I saw W at the theater in West Newton.
I expected the movie to evicorate President Bush in a hillarious black comedy. My expectations were way off base.
Instead of making a farce of our parody of a President Stone took the high, and more difficult, road. The movie plays it straight. Brolin plays Bush as an under achiever trying desperately to live up to the family heritage.
Overall, the movie is a solid piece of work. It is not spectacular in any way. No new insights are gained. You will not laugh, or cry, your ass off. You will enjoy a well told story.

Tropic Thunder fails to Boom

There are a few actors whose films I do not see. Ben Stiller is on the list. In fact, he is so bad that not even John Stewart can make the man seem funny. However, he has been in movies with other actors that overwhelm his badness. I'm thinking "The Royal Tanabaums."
I was hoping that Robert Downey Jr., in black face, and Jack Black would do the trick for Tropic Thunder. I was wrong... It was about what I expected from a Stiller film: stupid, sophomoric humor that often falls flat.
Ironically the best performance in the movie comes from another actor on my avoid list: Tom Cruise. He is fantastic.
Cruise is on the avoid list for being an ass. He can act.

The Dark Knight

The movie is as awesome as everyone says it is. Unlike most comic book spin-offs, it does not give up on having ideas. The story line is solid and does not rely on great special effects and fight scenes.
In many ways, it is the accompanying cast that make the movie. Ledger's Joker, Olodman's Gordon, and Eckhart's Dent overshadow the Knight. This is both good and bad. It makes the movie more watchable. However, it does make it a little harder for the audience to feel the struggle going on inside Wayne.
The only real concern was the Batman voice.....

Like Greek food?

It had been a very long while since I had seen any of the movie group clan so tried to corral people for dinner. I managed to meet up with a few of the group on Friday night. I was kind of craving Greek food but had bit of a challenge finding a place that was near a T stop in Cambridge that wasn't too pricey. I managed to discover Greek Corner II which is actually a mini knockoff of the Greek Corner Restaurant in Porter Square. The place was small - looks like it caters more to the take out crowd - but it met my needs. The food was basic but yummy (I had souvlaki) and the price was right. I would definitely recommend this place for take out or if you want a quick bite. But if you want a bit more atmosphere for during your dinner, would suggest you look elsewhere. However, the best part of the night was spending some time catching up with a few friends who I hadn't seen a while.

War, Inc.

I was excited to see a John Cusack film that harkened back to his golden age. War, Inc. had the potential to be witty and cutting. It also had the potential to be a complete disaster.
The truth was somewhere in between. Like his early films, War, Inc. is very uneven. The premise takes a poignant relevant issue and takes it to it ridiculous extreme. There are many scenes that are excellent. The space between the excellence range from mediocre to painful.
Largely this is the fault of the script. The main characters do an admirable job. Cusack plays the troubled assassin with his usual aplomb. Joan plays his corporate assistant in her typical harried, slightly crazy manner. Tomei is cute as the love interest. Most surprising is Hillary Duff. She does a great job of playing a twisted version of herself.
The best way to sum up the movie is this: Gross Point Blank with a preachy message.

Lions for Lambs

In a word: Preachy.

It is incredibly boring, self-absorbed crap full of common place high mindedness.

Iron Man

Another excellent Marvel adaptation. Downey is excellent as Tony Stark. The CGI is fantastic.

Places to Eat in VA

Last week H and I traveled to Colonial Williamsburg for a vacation. I expected that we'd find loads of great places to eat, but was a little disappointed. Most of the places we found were OK, but not great.
There were, however, a few that stood out:
The Blue Talon Bistro in Williamsburg is one of the best places I have ever eaten. It is located on the outskirts of the historic district and looks pretty regular from the outside. Inside, the atmosphere is pleasant and relaxed. The wait staff was attentive without being in your face. We ate at the Blue Talon twice. The first time we stopped for a late dessert and coffee. The desserts were the perfect size - enough to be filling but not overwhelming. I got a chocolate torte with banana ice cream. The chocolate was lush and bitter. The banana ice cream added a nice balance. I could have done without the sauce added as a garnish, but it was subtle enough to not detract from the dish. The coffee was served in a French press and was also excellent. The following day we went for dinner. The dinner menu is small and interesting. I ordered the Mac & Cheese. As with the desserts, the portion size was ideal. The mac and cheese was superb. The pasta was just a tad al dente. The cheese was flavorful and creamy. The side of asparagus was perfectly steamed and peppered. They were firm with just a bit of bite.
Aromas, across the street from the Blue Talon, was also very good. The iced coffee was a little watery, but the other drinks were fine. They serve a diverse menu of food. I got a salad with chicken that was quite nice. H ordered a scallop dish that she enjoyed. Aromas is always busy and full of college kids.
Pierce's Pit, also in Williamsburg, is a great BBQ joint. It looks like a dive and is off the beaten path, but is worth finding.
The last find is a coffee place in Mechanicsville. We were on the drive down to Williamsburg I was jonesing for a coffee, so H fired up the GPS and located Coffee Lane Cafe in Mechanicsville, VA. The store was closing in 30 minutes and we were about 30 minutes away. We arrived with minutes to spare and the staff was cheery and made us great drinks. It was so good we stopped on the way home also. This time the owner and a jolly assistant helped us out. I got a non-fat, sugar-free caramel latte that was most excellent.

Rendition

We rented Rendition over the weekend on the recommendation of a friend. I don't feel like I wasted five bucks, but I feel like I could have spent the money better.
The movie had a number of problems:

• Meryl Streep's character was too cynical to be believable.


• Jake Gyllenhaal


• Reese Witherspoon's character was too earnest. Don't even get me started on the fact that she was pregnant also.


• The time phased love subplot was disconnected from the main action of the movie.

To sum it up: The movie was two movies. One was a trope about the out of control US security agencies in the age of Terror. This one was populated by transparently stock characters. They are either boring or over the top.
The second movie, which could have been a good movie, is a mystery about a father trying to solve a crime and find his daughter. The character's in this movie were sympathetic and interesting. If it had been pull away from the sad "message: movie and allowed to stand on its own two feet, this movie would have been an excellent movie.
Sadly, it was not.

The Counterfeiters

The Counterfeiters tells the story of a group of men who survive in a concentration camp by working as counterfeiters for the Nazis. Unsurprisingly, it is not a good date movie. Holocaust movies are rarely uplifting. Even when the protagonists survive, they are broken and their humanity has been stripped away. Even in victory they are defeated.
In The Counterfeiters, the choice of main character adds a twist to the standard narrative. He is a criminal whose humanity is already in question. We know, even before he is interred, that he will do anything to enrich himself. As the story progresses, he seems to gain humanity. In a sense, he becomes the nobel criminal. He uses his talents and questionable morals to help his fellow prisoners. He allows one of his mates maintain his honor and not become dehumanized.
I'd definitely recommend the movie; just not when you are in the mood for something light.

3:10 to Yuma

This remake of a spaghetti western is excellent. Christian Bale delivers a typically excellent performance as a down on his luck rancher. Russell Crowe also delivers a solid performance as the romantic bad guy.
The plot has all of the stock western elements. The pacing was a little slow in places, but overall excellent. The cinematography was also great.
It would have done much better had it not been released in the same year as No Country for Old Men and There Will be Blood. It was just of the same caliber.

There Will Be Blood

Daniel Day Lewis is an amazing actor. His portray of a megalomaniacal oil man is the best performance I've seen in years. It is up there with Philip Seymore Hoffman's Capote.
The long opening sequence with out dialog sets up the character perfectly.
The foil is well chosen and well played by a young actor.
The ending is brutally perfect.

Just see the movie!!

In the Valley of Ellah

In the Valley of Ellah is a political movie. Its catalyst is the horror of the Iraq war. At several points in the movie it states that what is happening in Iraq is worse than any previous war. It also hints that the military is more than willing to cover up bad behavior.
If this message is contrary to your politics, you will hate this movie.
If you can swallow the message, the movie has a lot to offer. Tommy Lee Jones and Charlize Theron both put in solid performances. The pacing is excellent. The story is moving. The suspense is well maintained.
Jones plays a father trying to find out how his son is killed. He refuses to accept the easy answer offered up by the military and pushes Theron's character to investigate further. He does an excellent job of playing the regimented ex-MP. He is tough, but you can see the depth running bellow the surface.
Theron's single mom, run down, possibly sleeping with the boss, disrespected detective is well done. Theron seems to do her best work when she is playing a rundown everywoman. Perhaps we just give her a pass because that character is so far away from the scary hot reality that is Charlize Theron.

Michael Clayton

Goerge Clooney's '07 vehicle is a good suspense movie. The plot is tight, if predictable. The acting is solid, if average. The story is interesting, if uninspired.
Clayton struggles to decide between doing the right thing and doing what he is expected to do. He struggles to be better than the man he has become. The ending is Hollywood, but the struggle is there.

Eastern Standard

The group did an early dinner at Eastern Standard this weekend. After taking a cocktail class with the bartender, Joe and Mistress Hopington renewed the groups desire to attend this trendy downtown enclave of the "cafe class." Earlier attempts were frustrated by poor planning and lack of reservations. Only the tres chique get seats without reservations.
The atmosphere was excellent with bright, but subtle lighting, dark woods offset by white linens, and well appointed wait staff. Our waiter was charming, informed, and attentive without being too attentive. The presentation of the food and drink was pleasant.
All was not perfect however. The cocktail menu, while full of clever names and descriptions, was devoid of useful content. The waiter spent many minutes explaining what was in the drinks.
The drinks, once we figured out what was in them, were good.
The food was OK. I got the short rib entre and it was superb. The meat was juicy and melted in my mouth. I could have done without the grits, but if you like that sort of thing... Most of the others reported that the food was good, but not great.
Given the price, Eastern Standard is a disappointing dinner venue. For cocktails, it is great.

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

"The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" is a visual interesting movie. Many of the scenes are shot from the point of view of the main character who has limited movement of his head and eye. This trick succeeds in conveying the issolation of the character. The use of flashbacks reinforces the tragidy by contrasting his current life with the vivaciousness left behind.
The performances are top notch. The ex-wife's pain and dedication are poignant. The father's performance, although brief, is one of the most touching I've seen.

Movie Physics

Why is it that science must always comment on the impossibility of movie magic? Does anyone really think that people can simply jump through space like a quantum particle? I don't, but it is a nice fantasy.
I just read an article that went through several movies and showed how, based on physics, they could never happen. I think the authors must be miserably lacking in imagination and hope. They feel crushed by the "Laws of Physics" and want us to be equally as crushed.
Maybe a man will never be faster than a speeding bullet, but maybe he can....

Cloverfield

The first big movie of the year turned out to be a very small movie. J.J. Abrams took the monster movie genre and turned it on its head.
When I hear monster movie, I think lots of special effects, big creatures, explosions, and an epic battle for the safety of the city. Even the pitiful Godzilla flick with Matthew Brodrick stuck to form. The monster shows up and wreaks havoc. The army comes in and does battle with the monster. A group of scientist work feverishly to understand the monster and find its weakness. In the end, the monster is destroyed (or driven back into dormancy). The world continues as normal. Everything about these movies are big. The monster is a major character. The plot is centered on the fight against the movie. Everything in the movie happens because of the monster.
In Cloverfield, the monster is the catalyst for the action. The monster does show up and wreak havoc. The army does do battle with the monster. However, the monster is not a major character. The plot does not center on the fight against the monster. Nobody is focused on understanding the monster or finding its weakness. The monster and the fight against the monster are simply plot pieces. They create the situations the characters react to, but they are not explored.
So, Cloverfield is not a monster movie. It is just an action movie. The story is told Blair Witch style. We see the action unfold on a handheld video camera. We watch as a group of friends try to cope with a horrific situation. They race through the city in an attempt to rescue a friend and then escape the city. They face death, the military, run ins with the monster, collapsing buildings, and a deadline before the city is destroyed.
While the action kept me on the edge of my seat, I cannot say I loved the movie. The characters were thin and their central motivation was not compelling. I didn't believe that the main character and the girl they rush to rescue are that in love. The movie does not do the work to make it believable. The supporting characters are more believable.
Cloverfield is a good movie. It puts an interesting twist on the monster movie genre. However, the story falls short of greatness.

"Shut up, you old bag," would be impolite

But do tell: What do you when you're in the theater and your fellow movie-goers are talking through the film?

When I went to see, "Before the Devil Know You're Dead," last night at the West Newton Cinema, we were relegated to one of the tinier theaters upstairs, with few seats and much fewer audience members.

But a couple of minutes into the movie, two women walked in, talking in regular voices as they found their seats - just a few over from mine. The continued to talk and soon, again in a regular speaking voice, asked me, "Did it just start?" I nodded in the affirmative, hoping they'd get the hint that I wasn't up for a conversation.

And through every twist and turn in the plot, the two shared their feelings with everyone in the theater.

I've been known, on occassion, to kindly ask folks to quiet down in the movies, but I'm always a bit shy about it. I was scathing, but kept my mouth shut in this instance.

When the credits rolled, and everyone began collect their belongings and leave, the man seated in front of me looked at them, and very quickly - as if he'd been rehearsing it in his head throughout the flick, said, "If you're going to talk through the movie, next time, would you move your seats away from eveyone?"

They looked baffled and one woman replied, "What, were we talking? Well, you could have moved YOUR seat."

Sigh.

'Before the Devils Knows You're Dead'

As someone who loves seeing and hearing different points of view, and utimately waiting for the moment when they all converge, I enjoyed, "Before the Devil Knows Your Dead," even if the plot relies too heavily on viewers to fill in emotional blanks.

The story, which boils down to how far over the line - between good and evil - folks are willing to venture for money, is an intriguing one. The idea becomes even more complex when the potential sacrifice for money is not only morality, but family.

And tossing Phillip Seymour Hoffman into the lead role to illustrate the hypothetical is always a good move. Adding yet another distinct character to his repetoire, Hoffman is stellar as the ruthless, but somehow vaguely sympathetic Andy, who solicits his younger brother to rob their parents jewelry store.

The changing point of view, though not a new technique, also had a refreshing twist. Viewers travel back and forth in time, watching days unfold for each character, but not necessarily from each character's perspective. When we're given the textual cue that we'll be seeing Andy's day unfold, for example, we see him, not his point of view, i.e., the camera is focused on him, not what he's seeing.

The film is innovative, well acted and suspenseful, but leaves quite a bit to the viewers imagination. Character's don't necessarily make quick transformations, or many senses, any transformation, but they make serious, life-altering decisions, while the audience gets only snippets of their motivation.

Overall it's worth seeing for entertainment's sake, and as a conversation starter about morality, but don't look too deep in the film itself for answers.