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.

Bourne Ultimatum

I finally saw the final installment of the Bourne Trilogy and it lived up to my expectations. A smart thrill ride. I didn't find it as compelling as Supremacy, but it was still heads and tails above most films of its genre.
The story was a little convoluted with all the zipping around Europe hoping to find "the source." I also found Bourne's character less compelling in this installment. He was too flat.
While it did a great job of wrapping up most of the questions about Bourne, the movie left one gapping question open: what is the relationship between Nikki and Bourne? It is odd that she shows up in all three movies because she is a very minor player in the plot. They could have left her character out after the first movie. The plot device bringing her into the second movie was plausible, but not great. The device used to bring her into this installment was lame. Add that to the comment "with you it was hard" and the obvious disappointment she displays at separating from Bourne and the look on her face when she sees Bourne kill Deft. There is a relationship of some kind there. Nikki clearly has/had feelings for Bourne/Webb.
While I don't really want to see this franchise keep churning out sequels, I would like to know what that relationship was. Maybe they could make a chick flick called Romancing the Bourne or the Bourne Tryst....

I Am Legend

"I Am Legend" is an interesting movie. It falls squarely into both the post-apocalyptic genre and the zombie genre. I'm pretty sure its intended more as a post-apocalyptic movie than a zombie movie since the zombies play a minor role and are technically not zombies (the 28 series of movies shares the same non-zombie zombie problem as "I Am Legend" but are most definitely zombie movies).
Will Smith puts in a solid performance as the sole survivor of a global holocaust. He makes the character's delicate grip on sanity, his loneliness, his monomaniacal drive, and his innate nobility tangible. The character could be either too easily pitied or loathed in lesser hands. Instead, Smith's portrayal makes him human.
The CGI and the setting shots are erie. The CGI effects are kept to a minimum and look natural. The New York of the movie is too easily recognizable in its emptiness. Instead of being devastated, it is just empty. Like a ghost town, nature has started to reclaim what man wrought.
My only complaint with the movie is that the story begs for more than a 1.5 hour screen play can deliver. The movie does an admirable job of staying focused. However, there are questions around the edges that are never tackled.
The question about the infected's humanity is the biggest one for me. It is clear that the battle between Smith and the infected is over a woman - yet the infected are treated only from Smith's perspective. He views them as both less than human and in need of saving (from a disease he had a hand in creating). Have they really been reduced to inhumanity? Does the drive to protect a mate only make it more imperative that they be "cured"? Or are they simply transformed into something beyond Smith's understanding and deserve to be left alone?
Perhaps the infected deserve to inherit the earth than Smith's kind nearly destroyed?
There is irony in the movies premise also - but letting out of the bag would spoil things....

Charlie Wilson's War

Good movie with solid performances. Not really worthy of multiple nominations however. The performances are what audiences should expect from seasoned veterans - no more no less. Think place kicker hitting an extra point.
The script is disjointed but not fatally. The biggest example I can think of is the scene where Wilson is throwing away all of his booze - there is no explanation about why such a hard drinking womanizer would randomly toss out his booze. The underdeveloped love story between Wilson and the rich lady is also distracting.
The meat of the story - the Afghan War - is done well. I imagine the other stuff was tossed in to maintain some sense of historical accuracy.
It does provide an interesting look at how the Soviets were beaten back and how the Islamic terrorist movement made such a quantum leap. The relationship is not entirely causal - the terrorists may have found another home and eventually developed the skills needed to be a serious global threat without the Afghan War - but the two are tightly bound.
The closing quote is the most profound statement of US policy failure and continued failure - "we fucked up the endgame."

Lucky's

It must be pretty lucky if it hasn't gone out of business yet. A restaurant in the basement of a warehouse in the middle of an unpopulated part of town that does not have a sign must be pretty spectacular if it can survive year after year. Right?
Not Lucky's. It is good, but not great. The service was above average, the food decent, the atmosphere forgettable, and the prices steep.
Luckily the quality of the company makes just about any locale fun.