Black and white film, quirky music circa 1940's, scene framing you haven't seen in years and a flash back to Casablanca, these and many more make The Good German a disturbing film to watch. Oh Yes, the subject matter of the script is also kind of disturbing , but only mildly.
Seeing George Clooney as a clone of Humphrey Bogart in this recreation of a 1940's genre film, but to see Cate Blanchett in the place of Ingrid Bergman was amazing, but it was the bump that knocked the baby out of the buggy. By that I mean that the techniques Steven Soderbergh used might have been fun and somewhat entertaining, they did not enhance the story or frame the characters in this film. Instead they distracted the viewer from the plot.
In trying to resolve the complicated and end the film, Soderbergh recreates the final scene from Casablanca. All of this is...well cute. But did this script deserve better from it's director? I think so.
and wicked jeep driver, played by Tobey Clooney famous for his playing the cool and unbeatable outsider, who somehow is always inside, fights the military in it's attempt to cover up a murder because it might upset the delicate Potsdam Conference which decided the fate of Europe. The story is compelling and Clooney and Blanchett do have what critic's like to call "chemistry", I like to call believability. She is his former lover when he was a bureau chief in prewar Berlin. Returning after the fall of the third Reich, he finds her through his connivingMaquire.
This drama takes us into the intrigue of international politics's and the ugly part of making piece and just for the record what kind of mind set got us into the Cold War. Again the story is worth telling, the lesson is worth learning, again. Unfortunately the story teller is distracting us with tricks.
Monday, October 29, 2007
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Lust, Caution, He Said
It's China in the 1930's. The Japanese are invading the country. A group of young Chinese students in the Hong Cong successfully produce a play that inflames passion produced threat from the Japanese. Their heady success and new found patriotism leads them to plot the death of a high official who is betraying his countrymen to the enemy, Their plan is to assassinate him. When his security foils them at every turn they turn to the beautiful actress to seduce him. She does, but than what?
Ang Lee's film depicts the era with chilling reality. The brutality of the invading force and the duplicity of the the collaborators leads to the horrible deaths of many people, But this is war and the youth of the nation are not to be lead to slaughter or submission without a fight no matter how great the odds.
To me the similarities between this film and Paul Verhoeven's Black Book (Zwartboek) are amazing. In both cases the heroine is motivated to play the role seductress and sleep with the enemy for the cause. In both cases, the target becomes hopelessly infatuated with the women, dropping their guard and becoming vulnerable. The sacrifice the women make is both appreciated and rejected by the underground that supports her. And in the end, salvation is not the earthly reward one would hope for. There is the man who worships the seductress from afar, but his love is repressed by the needs of the cause.
Ang Lee's contribution is a more epic slower moving film that takes some patience. Lee is trying to show us a culture we don't entirely understand that was going through a momentous and epic change. He wants us to understand the culture, the people and the landscape. At the same time he is pointing out the universal human quest for freedom and self expression and the necessity of waging a constant fight against subjugation and repression. This is a big bite out of an even larger sandwich. I get sucked in to these films easily, so maybe my opinion is shaped by my interest.
The film is compelling from a number of aspects, but in the end it's the human character of the seductress, Wang Jiazhi, played by Tang Wei, that reaches out and grabs our hearts and minds. She is troubled by the changes in her country, but is also besieged by her confusion over the inattention she receives from the man she loves, the rebel, Kuang Yu Min. His feelings are apparent, but he buries them as she becomes the principle player in their game to seduce and kill the collaborator, Mr Yee.
Her seduction of Yee is successful, but his brutal and sadomasochistic form of lovemaking is somehow appealing to her. her body betrays her mind and in the end the plot fails because of her inability to act. This film is R-rated because of the sex scenes, but without them the story can not be told or understood. You may not feel comfortable watching this film, but than that is not Ang Lee's intention.
Ang Lee's film depicts the era with chilling reality. The brutality of the invading force and the duplicity of the the collaborators leads to the horrible deaths of many people, But this is war and the youth of the nation are not to be lead to slaughter or submission without a fight no matter how great the odds.
To me the similarities between this film and Paul Verhoeven's Black Book (Zwartboek) are amazing. In both cases the heroine is motivated to play the role seductress and sleep with the enemy for the cause. In both cases, the target becomes hopelessly infatuated with the women, dropping their guard and becoming vulnerable. The sacrifice the women make is both appreciated and rejected by the underground that supports her. And in the end, salvation is not the earthly reward one would hope for. There is the man who worships the seductress from afar, but his love is repressed by the needs of the cause.
Ang Lee's contribution is a more epic slower moving film that takes some patience. Lee is trying to show us a culture we don't entirely understand that was going through a momentous and epic change. He wants us to understand the culture, the people and the landscape. At the same time he is pointing out the universal human quest for freedom and self expression and the necessity of waging a constant fight against subjugation and repression. This is a big bite out of an even larger sandwich. I get sucked in to these films easily, so maybe my opinion is shaped by my interest.
The film is compelling from a number of aspects, but in the end it's the human character of the seductress, Wang Jiazhi, played by Tang Wei, that reaches out and grabs our hearts and minds. She is troubled by the changes in her country, but is also besieged by her confusion over the inattention she receives from the man she loves, the rebel, Kuang Yu Min. His feelings are apparent, but he buries them as she becomes the principle player in their game to seduce and kill the collaborator, Mr Yee.
Her seduction of Yee is successful, but his brutal and sadomasochistic form of lovemaking is somehow appealing to her. her body betrays her mind and in the end the plot fails because of her inability to act. This film is R-rated because of the sex scenes, but without them the story can not be told or understood. You may not feel comfortable watching this film, but than that is not Ang Lee's intention.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Michael Clayton, He Said
George Clooney plays Michael Clayton is his usual cool and deliberate self until the circumstances surrounding him and challenge his integrity and values. Clayton is the New York born attorney with the law degree from Fordam. Good enough to land a job in the D. A."s office, but how and why he ends up as one of the golden boys in a blue chip law firm is answered in the first scene. Clayton is called out of an underground poker game to "handle" a problem for a fellow attorney who's client is involved in a hit and run. It's the job of the firms fixer, Clayton, to confront, cajole and comfort the wealthy, irresponsible and irate client.
With a divorce and gambling addiction in his past Clayton is now facing the reality that the bar he"s financed for his addicted and ne'er-do-well brother has failed and the escape price is more money than he has. Ratcheting up the tension is the discovery that the firms top litigator has gone nuts during a deposition and is threatening to sabotage the largest client the firm represents.
Make no mistake, this is a movie written, produced and filmed to make a point. The point is that big law firms exist to keep big clients out of trouble. Justice is not something that's decided, or frankily discussed, in the law office. Justice is dealt with by a court. It's the job of the attorneys to provide information to the court and the information the court recieves may not be complete if the lawyers can limit, select and stall long enough to influence the outcome. It's a messy business and sometimes events just get messed up way beyond any way to clean them up.
The tension through out this film is palpable. Clayton seems to be in control, but the audience is given enough information to know that he is sliding into a trap. Frantically reaching out for help, he knows not whom he can trust or count on. Even his brother, a career cop, seems to doubt his purpose. The problems neatly come together in the tightly packaged solution. Michael can solve all of his problems and everyone can walk away, but the solution is a compromise in justice.
How Clayton handles this is interesting and satisfying. Surrounded by talent in excess, Clooney shines in a role that was literally made for him. To say he did a great job in this dark urban thriller is fine But Clooney in his quest to make movies that say something important is in danger of becoming a caricature of himself. To handsome, to moral, flawed, but redeemable is okay and it has worked several times for him, but sooner or later Clooney is going to have to do an "Oh Brother, Where Art Thou" to remind me he still has range.
With a divorce and gambling addiction in his past Clayton is now facing the reality that the bar he"s financed for his addicted and ne'er-do-well brother has failed and the escape price is more money than he has. Ratcheting up the tension is the discovery that the firms top litigator has gone nuts during a deposition and is threatening to sabotage the largest client the firm represents.
Make no mistake, this is a movie written, produced and filmed to make a point. The point is that big law firms exist to keep big clients out of trouble. Justice is not something that's decided, or frankily discussed, in the law office. Justice is dealt with by a court. It's the job of the attorneys to provide information to the court and the information the court recieves may not be complete if the lawyers can limit, select and stall long enough to influence the outcome. It's a messy business and sometimes events just get messed up way beyond any way to clean them up.
The tension through out this film is palpable. Clayton seems to be in control, but the audience is given enough information to know that he is sliding into a trap. Frantically reaching out for help, he knows not whom he can trust or count on. Even his brother, a career cop, seems to doubt his purpose. The problems neatly come together in the tightly packaged solution. Michael can solve all of his problems and everyone can walk away, but the solution is a compromise in justice.
How Clayton handles this is interesting and satisfying. Surrounded by talent in excess, Clooney shines in a role that was literally made for him. To say he did a great job in this dark urban thriller is fine But Clooney in his quest to make movies that say something important is in danger of becoming a caricature of himself. To handsome, to moral, flawed, but redeemable is okay and it has worked several times for him, but sooner or later Clooney is going to have to do an "Oh Brother, Where Art Thou" to remind me he still has range.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Into the Wild, He Said
It's one of those films that many of us know what the end is going to be. I'm not spoiling the film when I tell you that Chris McCandless was found dead in an abandon bus in the Alaskan wild. But as is so often is the case, it's not the end of the story that provides the value, but the journey the subject takes. Sean Penn has brought us a movie that beautifully tells this tale of a young man searching for himself and his place in the world.
Sean Penn's passion for this film is obvious in the construction and presentation. He wrote the screenplay from Jon Krakauer's book. The book is a story of young Chris McCandless. Once he graduated from college Chris took off on a odyssey to find himself that eventually lead to his accidental death. That trip, a search for reality and truth, is beautifully portrayed by a young unknown actor, Emile Hirsch. Hirsch has the right combination of charm and seriousness that brings the message to the front and puts the adventure in perspective. The sensitivity with which Penn presents this tale reflects his open admiration for McCandless's journey. He does this by not only showing us how the people that Chris runs into as he travels effect him, but how he in turn effects them.
This film is a masterpiece in every aspect. The script is clean and straightforward. The acting is superb. The photography is breathtaking. See this film.
Sean Penn's passion for this film is obvious in the construction and presentation. He wrote the screenplay from Jon Krakauer's book. The book is a story of young Chris McCandless. Once he graduated from college Chris took off on a odyssey to find himself that eventually lead to his accidental death. That trip, a search for reality and truth, is beautifully portrayed by a young unknown actor, Emile Hirsch. Hirsch has the right combination of charm and seriousness that brings the message to the front and puts the adventure in perspective. The sensitivity with which Penn presents this tale reflects his open admiration for McCandless's journey. He does this by not only showing us how the people that Chris runs into as he travels effect him, but how he in turn effects them.
This film is a masterpiece in every aspect. The script is clean and straightforward. The acting is superb. The photography is breathtaking. See this film.
Monday, October 1, 2007
The Valley of Elah, He Said
This is one of those films that is tough to watch, but like the car wreck on the freeway, we can't take our eyes off it. Tommy Lee Jones plays the Vietnam veteran father of a son, who, in the opening scenes we learn, is missing from his home base after returning from a tour of duty in Iraq. When a cursory look at all of the possibilities turns up nothing Tommy Lee, the former MP goes into Investigator mode with avengence.
The skill and determination that he attacks this situation is almost irritating as time after time he points out things to the authorities that they have missed. And there is little doubt that they have missed these details because they are lazy, incompetent or trying to cover up the truth.
As the movie progresses we learn about the nature of this man. A man who as he embarks on his quest stops to right a flag on the school flag pole that was mistakenly hauled up up side down by a immigrant janitor. A man who has no problem going into a strip club to find his son, but gives the impression that he doesn't see the naked women, because they offer no clue as to his son's where abouts. We see him pulling the crease into his pants on the motel bureau. We witness his embarrassment by the thought of a women see him only in a tee shirt as he does his laundry in a Laundromat as he runs to the dryer and pulls out a half dry shirt and puts it on.
However he is not afraid to go where he has to go to find the truth and like the distorted video images from his son's cell phone, the longer he looks the messier it gets. The twists and turns in this plot scoop up facts in evidence that casts a huge net of responsibility for the eventual solution to this one incident. But Paul Haggis the writer director of this film has a lot more to say than "who done it". Skilfully using the talents of Tommy Lee Jones, Charlize Theron, and Susan Sarandon, to name the top billing actors, Haggis has given us a glimpse into the part of War the Pentagon, the president and others intent on waging war do not want us to see and that is what happens to the poor soldier that has to fight these wars of liberation.
The ending of this film can be interpreted in a number of ways, because control of the events was in the hands of a number of people. This film is about what we do to our military people by putting them in harms way. And how, because of our military mythology, what they experience is not acknowledged or dealt with in any meaning full way. And yet, like the cop on the corner we are more than ready to take for granted the tranquil peace their presence affords and to blame them for their failure when things go wrong
The skill and determination that he attacks this situation is almost irritating as time after time he points out things to the authorities that they have missed. And there is little doubt that they have missed these details because they are lazy, incompetent or trying to cover up the truth.
As the movie progresses we learn about the nature of this man. A man who as he embarks on his quest stops to right a flag on the school flag pole that was mistakenly hauled up up side down by a immigrant janitor. A man who has no problem going into a strip club to find his son, but gives the impression that he doesn't see the naked women, because they offer no clue as to his son's where abouts. We see him pulling the crease into his pants on the motel bureau. We witness his embarrassment by the thought of a women see him only in a tee shirt as he does his laundry in a Laundromat as he runs to the dryer and pulls out a half dry shirt and puts it on.
However he is not afraid to go where he has to go to find the truth and like the distorted video images from his son's cell phone, the longer he looks the messier it gets. The twists and turns in this plot scoop up facts in evidence that casts a huge net of responsibility for the eventual solution to this one incident. But Paul Haggis the writer director of this film has a lot more to say than "who done it". Skilfully using the talents of Tommy Lee Jones, Charlize Theron, and Susan Sarandon, to name the top billing actors, Haggis has given us a glimpse into the part of War the Pentagon, the president and others intent on waging war do not want us to see and that is what happens to the poor soldier that has to fight these wars of liberation.
The ending of this film can be interpreted in a number of ways, because control of the events was in the hands of a number of people. This film is about what we do to our military people by putting them in harms way. And how, because of our military mythology, what they experience is not acknowledged or dealt with in any meaning full way. And yet, like the cop on the corner we are more than ready to take for granted the tranquil peace their presence affords and to blame them for their failure when things go wrong
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)