rrogers2-1 Reviews

A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints (2006)

Back in the New York Groove

[8/10 · 3 October 2006]

It's funny, Dito Montiel wrote and directed a film that captures the mysticism and validity of New York City with unerring and deft precision, yet the movie is about leaving all of that behind.

A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints is based on the memoirs of the same name, again by Montiel. Montiel grew up in Astoria, Queens amongst violence, drug use, toil and hopelessness, but as happens in violence, drug use, toil and hopelessness movies, he manages to transcend and move to Los Angeles. Fifteen years later, Montiel has yet to return home. With his father ailing and refusing to go to a hospital, friends and family alike beckon Dito home.

Since we see Dito at two different stages of his life he is played by both Robert Downey Jr. (Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, Wonder Boys) and Shia LaBeouf (I. Robot, Even Stevens). Both do an extraordinary job, although I find it difficult to believe that the goofy, wise cracking LaBeouf grows into the brooding, Fonzie-esquire Downey Jr. Even so, the cast of this film is incredible.

Chazz Palminteri plays Dito's father, an enchanting man so in love with his ideals and his family that he is blind to what is actually happening. He looks after and counts on Dito's pal Antonio (Channing Tatum) so outwardly that we question whom he really wants as a son. Maybe because Palminteri is the only one who sees the truth of Antonio's troubled ways. Beaten by his father and so caught up in that mannish gray area between apathy and loyalty Antonio cannot seem to make the right decisions.

There are so many scenes that you will carry with you after the credits roll. Wrought with tragedy and unspoken codes this film truly succeeds as a tribute to a simpler time when the things that are truly important, friends and family, are the only things that matter. But it isn't done predictably nor is it filled with holiday cheer like Family Man or It's a Wonderful Life. Montiel has used old themes in a unique way.

This film bristles with energy, the sort of vibrancy synonymous with youth and the City. The kids are foul-mouthed and ill tempered and consequently full of the vinegar that makes you love your buddies much less a character in a film. Even though I was watching excerpts of Dito Montiel's life it was very nostalgic and it reminded me of all the stupid stuff that I used to do with my friends.

Montiel utilizes a few techniques that add a bit of stylistic flair but I feel that they are sort of unnecessary. The film achieves a feel of memories replaying as lines are repeated in an echo of reverie. The fourth wall is broken down as characters identify themselves to the audience in pseudo confessionals. While these techniques don't take away from the movie I don't think they add much either. Although, they do provide a sense of realism but it is nothing that was not achieved right off the bat.

On the surface it is very easy to dismiss this film as just another story about a kid overcoming the odds but it is so much more. As the title indicates this films is about being thankful for the people that care about you no matter how misguided, stubborn or controlling they may be.

Cars (2006)

Cars Is Terrible

[3/10 · 2 October 2006]

The premise of Cars is one we've seen a million times before. Hot shot thinks he's the best. Hot shot runs into needy group of screw-ups. Hot shot comes to epiphany and gives up his superficial dream to help his lovable friends. Not that there is a problem with this premise in and of itself. These days it isn't so much what the movie is about as much as how we get there. We've all seen horror movies but Jaws made it an adventure. We've all seen war stories but Saving Private Ryan made it an experience. It is all in the ride, the ups and downs, the twists and turns (do NOT take this to mean all movies need twists (they don't (M. Night Shyamalan is a hack))). Therein lies Cars biggest flaw, the ride. All Pixar movies are gimmicky concepts to begin with but they set themselves apart in the ride. Well, all Pixar movies except Cars. I can't say for certain because I haven't been to Pixar's HQ but I imagine there is a plaque mounted on the front door that reads "MISSION STATEMENT: Leave no object un-anthropomorphized. It's cute and the jokes are easy." Incidentally, their only movie to focus on humans was their best, The Incredibles. But Cars follows the old formula. Instead of windshields the cars have eyes. Instead of grills a mouth. Instead of….well that's about as far as it goes. There is a half-hearted attempt to make the tires into appendages but it falls short and makes you feel like you are watching someone or something with a disability. Simply put, it does not work. The Cars inhabit a world devoid of all animal life (but plants are in full bloom?). While a noble effort it just raises plenty of questions: why do they need buildings? Who made the buildings? Who makes the cars? How do cars "die?" How come all of the cities are fictional and have cute car-related names except for Los Angeles? How do their politicians feel about issues concerning green house gases and exhaust fumes? Instead of using this opportunity to make some funny and insightful jokes the film seems to shrug carelessly and say "well it's just like our world only instead of people they're cars!" Sorry but it is boring to watch cars driving for two hours (NASCAR). Why did anyone think this was a good idea? How long would people sit along side the highway before deciding that they have had enough of watching cars drive by? My guess would be a hell of a lot less than two hours. This movie seems designed for a niche audience. And who knows, maybe I would have liked it a lot more if I were a gearhead. But I feel like I got most of the jokes. Like the car named Luigi (Tony Shaloub), complete with Italian accent and bravado, likes Ferraris, and the Mack truck is named Mack (John Ratzenberger). But suggesting that these jokes would be funny even to gearheads is more insulting than calling them, well, gearheads. Lame. Lame. Lame. Cars go to a diner to eat food. That's crazy. The cars go to a diner to get gas! You know, because gas is like food for cars. Or the flies are really VW Bugs. Get it? Flies. Bugs. Yes, I get it. And it doesn't end there. Cameos galore! Jay Limo is the late night host while Bob Cutlass and Darrell Cartrip are the sports commentators. Not to mention all of the hilarity that ensues in car crashes. I don't know if that's just me but I was sort of put off by the movie's carefree use of multiple car pile-ups. The problems of this film are too many to count and frankly, it is boring me trying to remember them all. Bottom line is that anything that made the old Pixar pics enjoyable is completely lacking here. All jokes are as predictable as the sunrise. The characters are as exciting as 2nd grade sketches. And most importantly there is no worthwhile reflection of our society whatsoever. As a punishment the hero of the film, Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson), has to pave a road. Sounds like punishment to me, so don't make me watch it for a majority of the movie.

Little Miss Sunshine (2006)

Little Miss Perfect

[9/10 · 2 October 2006]

Little Miss Sunshine opens with Olive Hoover (Abigail Breslin) watching, ad nauseam, the crowning of Miss America on television. Olive dreamily mimics Miss Wherever's pageant-perfect motions as we see the cathode rays reflecting in her coke bottle glasses. And thank God for those glasses because they are the only thing protecting sweet little Olive from the horrors of the outside world. As if her glasses were a catcher in the rye, the filter keeping her ideals. Who else would she count on for protection? Her family? Richard (Greg Kinnear) the motivational speaker that can't seem to get past his own insecurities? Dwayne ( Paul Dano) her Nietzsche inspired brother, who has taken a "God is dead," en vogue, vow of silence until he becomes a fighter pilot? Or maybe her uncle Frank (Steve Carell) a Proust scholar who, due to a public embarrassment involving a gay grad student, is recovering from a suicide attempt? Clearly things look bleak for Olive. But then we find out that she is a finalist in the Little Miss Sunshine pageant. Meaning, the family must find a way to get from Albuquerque to Redondo Beach in a day. The trip is delightfully dysfunctional; from shattered dreams to family quarrels this movie is as tragic as it is funny. It is comparable to having the girl of your dreams on a long anticipated date only you're stricken with crippling diarrhea. But for some reason you try to fight through it despite the sweat beading up your forehead and the pressure on your sphincter. What can you do but laugh? Sure your fantasies are gone and your dreams of romance are dashed but, boy, what a story.

And that is the issue of Little Miss Sunshine. Olive is the only member of the Hoover family that still believes that dreams can come true. Grandpa (Alan Arkin) is the only one that recognizes it. Grandpa has presumably led a lifetime of missed opportunities and regret so he is making up for it now. Snorting heroin in the old folks home, buying the dirtiest porn he can find and telling his grandson that he only does one thing he should sleep with a lot of women.

The laugh-out-loud moments (yeah yeah, omg! Lol! Rofl!!!) are everywhere but the best, far and away revolve around the broken down VW Bus. Due to a mechanical error beyond my comprehension the bus cannot switch from first to second gear. Meaning each time the van stops it has to roll down a hill or be pushed to a start. This provides for several hysterical moments: the misfits establishing pecking order of pushers, Olive leaping in after being forgotten at a gas station or Frank running exactly as you would imagine a homosexual Proust scholar to run.

In the end, the movie gets little bit cheesy and sophomoric but it works. The family finally makes it to the Little Miss Sunshine pageant. Viewers and characters alike revel in the haunting aura of the child beauty pageant. The scenes are captivating and chilling in a way that makes you want to grab Olive yourself and save her from this horror. But like a true underdog dreamer Olive perseveres and after all, that is how she would have liked it.

Lady in the Water (2006)

Dead in the Water

[2/10 · 2 October 2006]

M. Night Shyamalan owes me $48.75 and an explanation. The Sixth Sense surprised us all but rewatch it. It lies its ass off. It cheats to make you think that Bruce Willis is alive. Candlelight dinners with the wife, visiting with his star patient's mother before a session, these are all activities that a very much ALIVE child psychiatrist would do. But no, he's dead. If you liked that movie then you should go make friends at a prison because apparently bold-faced, shameless lies are cool to you.

Signs, while it has a couple chilling moments am I really to believe that Mel Gibson's daughter has to be freakishly obsessive-compulsive (the hundreds of glasses of water), his son has to have crippling asthma, his brother has to have a miserable baseball career, his wife has to die in a horrible car accident AND aliens have to invade the Earth just so he can get his faith back? You're a wily one M. Night.

Then The Village, this movie could have been cool but wasn't. M. Night cops out because he couldn't come up with an interesting ending. And, this has vexed me since I saw it, if these people did start a simple society then why did they feel the need to speak as if they were from the 1800's? Oh wait, it was a cheap device M. Night used to trick us, again.

Barring Unbreakable (that's a sweet movie) I'm noticing a trend. Yes, M. Night Shyamalan's movies suck but Mr. Shyamalan has created his own brand of sucking and Lady in the Water is the crowning achievement.

M. Night Shyamalan has become synonymous with crap movies just as Kleenex means quality tissues or just as ipod means I'm hip to the jive no matter how many gigs I got. And this is by M. Night's choice. The first credit at the end of the film reads in Times New Ego "Directed, Produced and Written by M. Night Shyamalan." Not to mention he plays a major role in the movie (as a character whose writing is so important that it changes the course of history). It is no accident that the previews say M. Night Shyamalan's, Lady in the Water or Signs or Infuriating Piece of Crap.

Lady in the Water is the tale of Cleveland (Paul Giamatti), a lovable apartment manager that stumbles into a world of fantasy when a water nymph appears in the pool. Through some hare-brained explanations, that I will spare you 1. because they are boring 2. in case you want to waste $10 at the theatre, we learn of a world full of scrunts, narfs and other nonsense words.

Paul Giamatti delivers a particularly weak performance but I don't blame him. Acting in something like this can only be so good. Giamatti's character is nervous for some unknown reason and suffers from a severe stutter. So severe that is sounds 100% phony. It sounds like a cartoon automobile struggling to turn over, puh-puh-puh-puh.

But where Shyamalan really shines is with the supporting cast. You see, Cleveland manages an apartment building with Z@NY! characters everywhere. Man, what an eccentric group of people! Of course all of the eccentricities come back into play when we least expect it (or exactly when you expect it, depends if you have half a brain or are over the age of 8) It is so transparent that it is sickening. It fits together so perfectly that it feels cheap. Like a porn star.

In the most brutal scene in the film a snot-nosed film critic tries to make a funny, breaking-down-the-fourth-wall analysis of his predicament. You know the "this is the part in a scary movie when X, Y and Z" bit. It is painful to watch and Scream already played that game. For shame M. Night. You got me this time and you'll see me next time. Only then you'll owe me another $9.75.

Snakes on a Plane (2006)

Snakes on the Brain

[2/10 · 2 October 2006]

Please forgive me for saying this but Snakes on a Plane might be the most important movie of the past ten years...

but only because of its viral marketing (people even released a rattlesnake in a theatre showing Snakes on a Plane). Snakes on a Plane's marketing has become such a monster that it is difficult to separate the movie from the marketing. But as entertaining as the catty blogs or the insulting automated phone calls from Samuel L. Jackson can be, Public Enemy put it best when they said "Don't, don't don't believe the hype." If I were to describe Snakes on a Plane in one sentence it would be this: Imagine every part of your body you would not want a snake to bite, then see it happen. The violence is really the only aspect of the film that really captures the potential absurdity that us moviegoers (read: Army of Darkness fans) lust for. There are hints of ridiculousness elsewhere, like the funny feeling that everything has been a pretext to get Jackson to say "I've had it with these motherfucking snakes on this motherfucking plane!" but all of the actors play it straight. There's never a wink and a nod. Which leaves us thinking that a lot of the humor that we are deriving from the movie is tacked on. What I mean is that New Line tried to make a thriller, it ended up sucking, everyone thought it was absurd so they tried to make it even more absurd after it already sucked.

On top of this it is pretty boring. The characters are not interesting. In the beginning we are swiftly and cleverly introduced to all of the stereotypical action/thriller characters but it never really goes anywhere. This was a huge disappointment for me. I thought Snakes was setting up a lot of great jokes but no. The only payoff involves a seemingly gay flight attendant and our inaccurate perceptions of him.

The action scenes are exceptionally confusing. The shots and the editing make it very difficult to tell who or if someone is bitten, or if Samuel L. Jackson killed that snake. Sometimes films like The Bourne Supremacy will achieve a frantic, confusing look for effect but that just does not seem to be the case here. It seems unintentionally confusing.

I guess Snakes on a Plane let me down because I was expecting ridiculous ridiculousness and not gross-out ridiculousness. But hey I got to see a snake bite a girl's boob and I don't know if I will ever have that opportunity again.

Beerfest (2006)

Good Till the Last Drop

[8/10 · 2 October 2006]

I both love and hate the movie Beerfest.

I love it because it is comedic genius. I hate it because I am insanely jealous of the fun these guys are having.

One reason I enjoyed this film is because Broken Lizard (the comedy troupe behind Beerfest and Super Troopers) comes across more heartfelt and more authentic than almost anything I have seen this summer. Not heartfelt in a "get busy livin' or get busy dyin'" sort of way but in the way that a friend will get into a bar fight for you even though you just dumped a beer on a pro boxer's girlfriend for no good reason. There's something pure here. Beerfest doesn't feel like every other comedy that has come out this year. It feels like a movie you would make with your buddies. If people like it, cool. If not, screw 'em, at least you and your buddies had a great time.

Fortunately for us, Beerfest is funny as hell. It all starts when two brothers, Jan and Todd Wolfhouse (Paul Soter and Eric Stolhanske) venture to Oktoberfest to ceremoniously spread their grandfather's ashes. In the process they unwittingly stumble upon a shady underground drinking game competition. After the brothers Wolfhouse are laughed out of the international competition with their family name tarnished, they decide to make their own team and get revenge next year. What follows is the assembly of a colorful drinking team, their absurdly alcoholic training and an epic battle for the recipe of the best beer in the world.

Throughout the course of Beerfest, director Jay Chandrasekhar convinces me that he can not only masterfully direct a comedy but he can direct just about any other genre too. Beerfest, as an over-the-top comedy, sarcastically touches on action scenes, scenes of tragedy and just about any other genre you can think of. And the reason they are so funny? Because they are done so well.

Don't get me wrong, a lot of the laughs are cheap but even those are done in a unique way. The curt delivery, the abrupt cut or maybe the reaction of an actor, even if you've heard the joke before it is now fresh. See, Beerfest doesn't play by the rules. It isn't so concerned with you getting it, that it spells everything out and consequently ruins its own jokes. Beerfest trusts you as a viewer to recognize the new breed of jokes and to pull humor out of old jokes based on stale comedies you're used to.

Suitably offensive and full of pop culture references, Beerfest clocks in at 110 minutes. A 110-minute movie about boobs and beers is far too long, you say? Not nearly long enough, I say. Beerfest opens with a disclaimer about drinking heavily and it climaxes with a final competition of chugging multiple steins of beer. Beautifully book-ended.

Beerfest will make you laugh. Guaranteed. And more importantly, it will leave you wishing for your college days. In fact, even the most hardened drinkers will feel like two-beer queers in the face of Beerfest.

Invincible (2006)

Where Eagles Dare

[2 October 2006]

You know that feeling you get when something seems a little too authentic? Like when you walk into an Italian restaurant, the table cloths are checkered, in discernibly romantic music plays and the maitre de talks like a Mario brother, you almost feel like you're in Italy but then you remember you are actually visiting a cousin in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Everything is so on, that it just has to be off, ya know? Well, that's how Disney's latest effort, Invincible, feels (not the one with Billy Zane).

Invincible tells the story of Vince Papale (Mark Wahlberg). A down on his luck bartender in South Philadelphia that tries out for the Eagles under new head coach Dick Vermeil. The year is 1976, the collars are blue, the city is entirely out of hope but the time is nigh for hearts to be warmed.

With the 70's songs jammin', the thick mutton chops or the nut-hugging shorts on dudes, you get the impression that Invincible is more concerned with period piece details than making a good movie. They talk about football as if it were a religion, hoping the viewers get lost in all of the lore and history of the NFL. To be fair, it does succeed on some fronts, like its portrayal of rotten-to-the-core Philly fans and the ownership that towns feel over their respective teams. These things are captured but really not as a product of this film but rather as a product of the bountiful lore and history of the NFL.

Speaking of rotten Philly fans, every shot of South Philly has a murky amber color treatment. Like we are watching everything take place at the bottom of a dirty glass of water. While heavy-handed, this does provide a nice dichotomy to the football scenes that are vibrant and alive with color, like a lucid bollywood dream.

While it is a fun trip, it's all a rehash. The buddies on strike, the estranged wife, the hope of a town riding on a hometown underdog, I guess I just don't see what separates this from other sports movies. It doesn't have the penned up emotion of Friday Night Lights or the mysticism of Hoosiers. It isn't a bad movie there just isn't much beyond a routine tale of triumph.

My biggest problem with the movie is the love interest, Janet Cantrell (Elizabeth Banks of Slither fame). See she's a Giants fan. It is amusing to see how the eagles fanatics respond to this blasphemy in the city of brotherly love but I wish that she came around in the end. Sure it is commendable when she stands up for her G-Men in a Philly bar. It is just reckless when she wears a Giants T-shirt to Veterans Stadium. And it is a downright shame when she roots for the Giants over the Eagles, the team that features the man she loves.

The film concludes with actual footage of Papale playing for the Eagles. This is the most inspiring stuff in the movie. In a film that strives for authenticity, this grainy film stock hits home. Papale makes tackles, returns a fumble for a touchdown and joyously hops around like a 6-year-old on Christmas morning. And anything that powerful is authentic enough for me.

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (2005)

The Exhumation of Melquiades Estrada

[7/10 · 2 October 2006]

When we think of Westerns what do we think of? Gunslingers? Train robbers? Or maybe a wild burlesque show in a bourbon soaked saloon? The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada has none of these things yet it touts itself as a western. A modern western at that, but isn't that very idea absurd? There is no frontier. There is no quick draw at high noon. There is no cool nickname like Billy the Kid. I'm not entirely sure what makes a modern western but The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada pulls it off and I like it.

The story begins when illegal, Melquiades Estrada (Julio Cedillo) shows up, naïve, amiable and ready for hard work at Pete Perkins' (Tommy Lee Jones) ranch in a border town in Texas. Before long, Perkins, a lone rancher, develops a dependent friendship with the kind-hearted Estrada. Meanwhile, a new border patrol officer, Mike Norton (Barry Pepper) moves in with his wife, Lou Ann (January Jones). Mike is quick-tempered and unsympathetic towards both illegal aliens and his wife. In a bizarre circumstance Estrada finds himself at the wrong end of Norton's gun. Then it would appear justice won't find Mr. Norton. That is until Perkins kidnaps him, forces him to dig up Estrada's body and bring it back home to Mexico.

Tommy Lee Jones makes his directoral debut here and it leaves me looking forward to his next project. Shot beautifully and full of subtlety, this film speaks without speaking and casts shadows of a much bigger picture. This smacks of classic western appeal. Bravo Mr. Jones. As a first timer, Jones boldly trusts his viewers to pick up the details of his story and the intricacies of the characters. The little ways that Norton eats his dinner or the way Estrada speaks very carefully, Jones put a lot of thought into crafting the finer points of this film. Even something as seemingly insignificant as which lines are spoken in English versus Spanish plays a major role in the artistic impact.

However, one thing bothered me deeply about this film. It was the out of order narrative. The film starts out with flashbacks, flash-forward's and present action. I've never been a fan of these types of films. To me it seems like a cheap way to shake things up and make things interesting. Post-production cut-ups like Memento or Pulp Fiction show me that the filmmakers didn't believe their story was strong enough to stand alone. They felt it needs that "Gee I wonder what happened when he shot that gun" or "how on earth did he end up there" factor. And a western, I've always thought, should be straight-forward like a man with a machete and a vendetta. Fortunately this method is more or less abandoned when we get into the meat and guts of the story.

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada is not an uplifting tale. There is a visceral western appeal about it. A blind man requests his murder in mercy, Norton's wife dabbles in prostitution and rattlesnakes are much more of a danger than masked banditos. And all the while, Estrada's body is rotting away with each day that passes.

And Perkins is obsessed with getting this body home, fighting off ants' appetites and the smell. But all the plight and struggle pays off when the wonderful ending makes us wonder what home, friendship and loyalty really mean. And with that the modern western is a success.

The Science of Sleep (2006)

A Good Night's Rest

[7/10 · 2 October 2006]

Michel Gondry (dir. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Human Nature) reminds me of a that kid who just figured out how to do a can opener and yells "look mom!" before every trip off of the diving board. Only the can-opener is some trick from a bag of visual gags and "mom" is the audience.

The Science of Sleep is the story of Stephane (Gael Garcia Bernal), a hapless, imaginative young man that moves to France for a new job and is quickly enamored with his new neighbor Stephanie (Charlotte Gainsbourg). But Stephane is full of surprises. His imagination rivals that of Da Vinci or Jules Verne and his dreams are vibrant and engrossing. As is the case with any genius, it is both Stephane's strength and his weakness.

The lines between dream and reality blur for poor Stephane and for us viewers as well. Gondry weaves in and out of dreams seamlessly, to the point where we question reality just as much as Stephane. This provides a lot of tension and humor like did Stephane really just drop off that awful love note on the nude? Or did he really just ask Stephanie to marry him in song or was that just that dream where he and his co-workers are in a band dressed as cats? The dream world Gondry creates is exceptional. In a world where imagination is pushed to the wayside with movies with monster effects budgets, it is crude and rudimentary, full of stop-motion animation and objects that look like 3rd grade arts and crafts projects. While strange and at times, a difficult pill to swallow, it never becomes a burden. It is always fun and charming to see what is going on in Stephane's head. For example, he hosts his own talk show in his brain and performs bits on a blue screen and he builds cities made entirely of cardboard paper towel rolls. But in reality he still has manages to show Stephanie his one-second-time travel machine, make cellophane take the place of water and turn a toy horse into a galloping source of wonder.

We understand why Stephane does all of this. Not only to impress a girl but to escape the boring world around him. The real world where his disasterology calendar is panned, his love is dating other men and his only friend is a co-worker obsessed with sexual positions like "The Goat on the Cliff." Even though it is full of far-off lands and whimsical beings this is no fairytale Stephane self destructs with the best, of them "I like your boobs. They're simple and unpretentious." He is helpless and moronic like a fly with clipped wings. Stephanie always has the upper hand.

The movie is disjointed but so is their relationship. It is primarily in French but Spanish and English are frequently spoken. The very structure of the film reflects the story being told. With gender roles turned upside down the truth and love between these two is never quite clear. It is authentic, as anyone who has ever loved knows this torture.

The Science of Sleep is funnier, wittier and more lovable than Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Gondry meshes harsh reality with decadent fantasy and makes this trip off the diving board worth watching.