In anticipation of Daniel Craig's debut as James Bond in Casino Royale, I decided to rent Layer Cake. I wanted to see for myself what all the fuss was about. Maybe it's his steely blue eyes, or his Steve McQueen looks that caused all the hubbub. It certainly wasn't his acting in this movie. However, after looking at his filmography, he does have large body of work. He was in Elizabeth, Tomb Raider, Road to Perdition, and Munich. I don't think I ever noticed him in any of those movies.
The cover of the DVD states that the movie is “hilarious� and “cool.� I don't think it was either. The entire plot is about Craig's character outsmarting everyone to come out on top of the “layer cake� in the end. I'm still not quite sure I understand that metaphor, especially since the layers referred to were layers of shit. The ending was very good. It was rather unexpected, but fitting. There are alternate endings on the DVD and I think that the director - or whoever had the final say - made the right choice on the ending.
Also, it was great to see Colm Meaney in this film. He was a favorite as Chief O'Brien in Star Trek: The Next Generation and in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, so it was nice to see him in this movie.
Imagine for a moment that life was very different. You're sitting at your desk at work reading through your email. You come upon a message that gives you good news. Instead of firing up instant messenger, you sing a song. Or, how about this. Your sitting at a friend's house with a group of people. It's been a long, hard day. You start singing of your troubles. Wouldn't that be strange? I think, that would be wonderful.
Songcatcher is about how life and music intertwine. People really do start singing when they want to up in the mountains. The folks songs in the movie are all Irish and Scottish folks tunes that were preserved over time by the isolation of the mountains. The movie is set around the turn of the century, when these ballads were first discovered. There may be subplots in the movie that cause a bit of distraction. However, if you didn't have them, there wouldn't be any conflict to resolve in the end.
If you liked Cold Mountain or O Brother, Where Art Thou? For the music, this movie is worth viewing.
You can hardly go wrong with the cast of The Illusionist. Edward Norton is one of my favorite actors. He certainly didn't disappoint in this movie. Rufus Sewell is the best bad guy around. See A Knight's Tale or The Legend of Zorro for further proof. And Paul Giamati, well, he's a good dupe in just about any movie. Jessica Biel is pretty, which is really all the role required. The stilted accents could have been omitted though. It was rare that any of the actors could pull it off consistently.
I was excited that the score was by Philip Glass. He did the score for The Hours - loved it - and many other things, including a piece for Battlestar Galactica. It's hard to precisely describe in words his compositions. It's a feeling that you get when you listen. The music lulls. It's sort of like listening to the ocean as the waves reach the shore. Each wave sounds the same as it hits, but you wait for one to make a big crash. I've always thought that his compositions do a great job of creating and sustaining an emotion, but never completing one. It's amazing.
I also liked the fact that the movie payed homage to early cinema. The tones used in the scenes of Sophie and Eisenstein when they were young had that warm sepia tone that hearkens to old daguerreotypes. The iris in and out used for transitions was also a tribute to those early days of cinema. And the name Eisenstein, well, if you don't recognize it, try looking it up.
My only minor disappointment was that I knew how it would end. I didn't read about it and spoil it, but I knew. When Eisenstein was checking his watch as he was supposedly waiting for Sophie, I just knew. Besides, why bother calling the movie the Illusionist if the main character can't pull off one amazing trick and get the girl? But I think the tell was how Eisenstein and Sophie always talked about disappearing. Why bother to mention that if some attempt to do so isn't made? And, since Eisenstein was such a master illusionist, why not pull off a grand illusion and fake Sophie's death? I wasn't sure how Eisenstein was going to get out of it or how the Prince would fair, so I can't claim I knew everything. Also, the denouement was a little weak and a little too reminiscent of The Usual Suspects. It could have been much better.
And finally, as love stories go, this was a charming one. I nearly cried when Eisenstein was telling Sophie that he traveled around the world and couldn't find any real mysteries. That is except why his heart couldn't let go of her. That line nearly got me. Because of this, it ranks third in my list of lines of dialog that confess love. The first being, of course, Li Mu Bai's confession of love to Shu Lien in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. The second being the Captain's written confession of love to Ann in Persuasion.
Originally written December 4, 2000
The film, You Can Count on Me is about denial. Often when we go to the movies, we expect to sit spellbound in the theater. We also expect to become emotionally attached to a character in a film and to have their problems resolved by the end of the film. Although You Can Count on Me does follow a typical three act structure and uses many of the conventions of continuity editing, it plays with the viewers expectations of what they should know and see.
The film’s plot denies the viewer expected story information throughout the film. In the second scene, the Scottsdale police come to inform Sammy and Terry of their parents’ death. We expect to see the officer tell the children what has happened and we expect to see their reaction. We can see in the police officers eyes that it is a difficult task. But we are never allowed to hear him say what happened to the parents. Nor are we allowed to see the children’s reactions. Instead, the film moves on to the funeral. As the pastor speaks, her words are drowned out by the non-diegetic music on the soundtrack. As the camera moves to the children, they sit motionless and tearless. The film then skips several years (if not decades), never giving us any information on how the children were provided for after the loss of their parents. As the film ends, there is little resolution for any of the characters. Terry has left home, without any real plan for providing for himself. Sammy’s relationship with Bob is not resolved (will she marry him?). And it is not clear how Rudy will handle the truth about his father and the loss of his Uncle Terry.
The relationship that we see on screen between Sammy and Rudy is also marked with this denial. Never do we see them embrace or exchange signs of affection (like saying I love you to one another). The film sets up Sammy as a good mother, who leaves work to pickup her son each day from his bus stop, but she is never shown to be an affectionate mother. The film works to deny us access to the character’s emotions and by doing so, does not allow the viewers emotional attachment to the characters.
The film also uses framing and editing to deny the viewer some of their expectations. There were many long takes throughout the film that framed only inactivity when there should have been a cut to a reaction shot or a close-up. One examples is at the funeral, as the camera frames Sammy and Terry sitting silently and motionless. A few close-ups of the children in tears would normally been expected, but instead the camera lingers over them as they sit. Another example of how the long take is used in this manner is during Terry and Rudy’s pool game at the bar. After Terry intentionally misses a shot, their opponent takes over. As this person shoots, the camera frames only Terry and Rudy as they sit and watch. We are never allowed to see the opponent or shots from his point of view. Normally, it would be expected that there would be several different shots in this sequence, but there are not.
This is not a film that tries to immerse the viewer into the story. Instead, it works to expose the fact that a film cannot replicate the human experience. Often as viewers, we expect to sit captivated while watching a movie, forgetting that we are only watching light passing through celluloid. Each time the camera lingers a little too long, or the music drowns out the dialogue during the film, we are reminding that it is, after all, only a film that we are watching.
Originally written December 18, 2000
Music connects people. What connects people together are the ideas, thoughts and feelings that are expressed in the music. Whether these things are in the lyrics or the dynamics of a piece, everyone understands them in some manner. The three films, Almost famous, Light of Day and Grace of My Heart, each show how music can function to connect people to one another.
In Almost Famous, we encounter three characters, Russell, William and Penny. Russell is the self-absorbed, stereotypical rock star. William is the young naive rock critic and Penny is the starry-eyed dreamer. The most powerful scene in the movie that exemplifies how music brings people together occurs after the band has a fight. Russell leaves angrily and goes out to find some “real� people. He finds a local party, takes some acid, dives off a roof and proclaims himself a “golden god�. When the band manager picks him up the next day, the level of tension was high on the tour bus. No one was talking to each other; everyone looked angry and hurt. Elton John’s song “Tiny Dancer� was playing in the background and one person began to sing, then another. Soon the whole bus was singing and all was forgiven. Music is what holds that group together, since it is something they all share and can understand.
Light of Day presents a disturbing perspective on the power of music. For the sister, Patti, music is an escape from her responsibilities as mother, daughter and sister. For her, music is a moment where no pain exists, nothing but the bang of the drums and the scream of a guitar. For the brother, Joe, music is a way to get closer to his sister, someone who he admires. It was quite disturbing to see the scene where the mother, dying of cancer, has a final heart to heart conversation with her daughter. She tells her daughter all the things that she never did before; how much she loves her and how strong she is. But there is no such conversation for Joe. He has spent the entire film working desperately to keep the family together. His reward for this was to sit in the hall and wait for the news of his mother’s death. Although the final bar scene, in which the Barbusters reunite for one more show, was supposed to signify a happy ending, it seemed instead rather sad. Both Patti and Joe were there again on stage again drowning out the pain of their lives with music.
The film, Grace of My Heart, takes a different perspective on music. Music is an emotional release for the song writer, Denise. For every trouble or joy she encounters in her life, there is a song. Music is a means of expressing her own emotional ups and downs as well as that of others. When she meets a young unwed girl who is pregnant, she writes a song about it. When she meets Kelly Porter and learns about her secret life as a lesbian, Denise writes a song for Kelly that tells of her secret love and helps keep her relationship together. This film really gets at the heart of how music can communicate ideas and feelings.
Music is a powerful medium. Each of these films illustrate how important music is to a film, as well as how important it is in many people’s lives.
Originally written August 30, 2001
Each time the door opens to the Venus Beauty Institute (the salon carries the same name as the film), the sound of a harp playing a gently ascending scale can be heard. Little touches like this are what I enjoyed most about Venus Beauty Institute. The film comes from France and is the story of Angele, a beautician who struggles to find love and forgiveness in her life. Angele rubs away tired muscles, exfoliates dry skin and rejuvenates her clients every day, but she cannot seem to find any comfort in her own life. One stylistic element other than the sound that intrigued me was the lighting. The cinematographer attempted to have realistic lighting in many of the shots. In one scene where Angele and her friend are having lunch, Angele’s friend is lit with too much back light from the window behind her. Perhaps it was a mistake in filming to leave out the fill light and tone down the backlight, but it made the scene seem more realistic.
Venus Beauty Institute played at the Heights Theater for the closing night gala. One of the speakers who talked before the film said that the film was “very French�. Perhaps it was the nudity, sex or lengthy dialogue that made the film “very French�. However, I am certain that it was not very Hollywood in the sense that there was only one scene with a gun and you could see that Angele had wrinkles!
The movie adaptation of The House of Sand and Fog was difficult for me to like. I started reading the book one day while killing time in a coffee shop. My son was at practice and I decided that a cup of tea would be nice. I saw this book on the bookshelf in the coffee shop and began to read it. It was fascinating to read. I only made it through the first chapter, which was told entirely from Behrani’s point of view. I didn’t find out anything other than his backstory and that he was planning to buy a house that was up for auction. I liked what I read so I decided to rent the movie. I think if I hadn’t read that first chapter, I wouldn’t have understood a single thing about the movie. I know nothing of the history of Iran, so that first chapter was just a crash course. The movie, as many movie adaptations do, relied upon the fact that the audience read the book. It glossed over the details of who was where and why. Some details were divulged as the story progressed, but I think that it relied too much on the fact that you read the book.
The movie itself was beautiful to watch. The panoramic views of the ocean, the fog rolling over hills, the sun setting, were all beautiful. But what exactly were they doing in the film? I don’t think I understood their use. Where they in the movie to evoke a feeling that I missed? There was one particular shot where the fog was spreading over the hills in thick tendrils. I thought that the shot was implying that something terrible was about to happen. Was that it’s purpose? Something terrible did happen, but I wasn’t really sure if that was the purpose of the shot or if it was to just look pretty.
I think there were moments in the movie that tried to evoke tragedy. By the end, I didn't feel that the story was tragic. Instead, I thought that the characters were rather stupid. The men seemed to be the bringers of doom and the women seemed to be witless victims, unable to control any part of their lives. I was especially disturbed by the fact that the daughter’s existence was completely forgotten by the end of the movie. She was married off and then forgotten. It was clear that she meant nothing to Behrani compared to her brother. Her brother and parents are all dead by the end of the film and no one seems to even consider her at all. And what about Lester’s family? They seemed completely disposable. Too bad his kids will not only have to grow up without a father, but also with an abent father who is a criminal. Maybe the book did a better job of following those story lines, but I’m not sure if I’m going to waste my time and find out after seeing the movie. Maybe I will skim through it, the next time I'm at the coffee shop and have nothing better to do.