A Pair of Star-Crossed Lovers

Every once in a while, I get on a genre kick. Sometimes it's horror, sometimes comedy or foreign. This week I was all about biopics.

First up:
"Bright Star" (2009)
Director: Jane Campion
Starring: Ben Whisaw (Keats), Abbie Cornish (Fanny), Paul Schneider (Mr. Brown)

** (2 stars)

Based on the poet John Keats secret love affair with Fanny Brawne near the end of his life. Fanny comes from a somewhat established family and is of the age when she must think about marrying, and more importantly, marrying a man with money. Her best prospect is family friend and failed poet Mr. Brown, who teases her life a child on the playground. Enter young Keats- poor, mysterious, talented. Fanny is immediately drawn to him and their secret rendez-vous commence. Tragedy strikes when Keats contracts TB and is sent off to Rome to convelese. Months later, he is dead at 25- a failed poet.

If this sounds like spoilers, I apologize. However, history tells us these things so I don't feel I'm ruining anything. That you know the romance is ultimately tragic was part of the marketing campaign.

The film has a great premise. Part biography, part history, part love affair; how could it go wrong? But, wrong it does. The film feels overly long dispite coming in just under two hours long. The acting is good, Cornish and Schneider especially. Cornish displays the naivity and ideality young woman possess, and that many a heroine of romantic lore have been written around. Schneider, perhaps best known for independent films "All the Real Girls" and "Lars and the Real Girl", has a fantastic Scottish accent and teases Miss Brawne as if it's an Olympic sport. Whisaw is fine as Keats, but it does not compare to his "star making" turn in "Perfume" or more recently on BBC's "The Hour".

Furthermore, the film is boring. Too much film is spent on voice over's of letters written and poems being tried out when it could have shown the action to a much better result. Campion is the champion (pun intended) of quite, moody, romantic fare. Her approach is no different here, though I feel she was far more interested in her subjects personally than she was at making us fall in love with them.

The movie did make me want to know more, mostly because I was left knowing so little, so I jumped to Wikipedia for an overview. Five minutes browsing the internet left me with a much better taste in my mouth. Why didn't they play up the secrecy of their affair? No one knew until Fanny's death when she bequithed the love letters to her children. Her life was far more intersting during and after her time with Keats, I wish the film had focused more on her.

Next, I finally say Cronenberg's "departure" film.

"A Dangerous Method" (2011)
Director: David Cronenberg
Starring: Michael Fassbender, Keira Knightley, Viggo Mortensen, Vincent Cassel
Awards: Golden Globe nomination, Best Supporting Actor- Viggo Mortensen, London and Los Angeles Critics Association Best Actor- Michael Fassbender, Venice Film Festival Golden Lion- David Cronenberg

****(4.5 stars)

Just after the turn of the century and prior to World War I, a destraught Russian woman, Sabina (Knightley), is delivered to Jung's Zurich clinic. She is histerical and fights help with every fiber of her being. Jung begin's what was then refered to as "the talking cure" on her, based on his readings of Freud's papers. As Sabina gets better, so does the relationship between student and teacher, both of Jung and Freud and Jung and Sabina) developes. Together, Freud and Jung work to develope and create what becomes psychoanalysis. As Sabina gets better, she begins a long-term affair with the married Jung that releases him from his own mental confines. She goes back to school and becomes a therapist herself. However, this love triangle soon becomes toxic to many involved ending in the infamous rift between these two masters of the mind.

The biggest surprise in this film may be Knightley. She physically embodes a woman suffering from past trauma's and guilt. The opening scenes in which her whole body fights her revelations is brilliant. Fassbender may be the most exciting actor of his generation. Jung could easily become an unsypathetic character, yet he creates a man flawed and accepting of his own flaws. Mortensen and Cronenberg should have a contract, along the same lines as Time Burton and Johnny Depp, and make as many films together as possible. Both bring the best out of the other and the unscene relationship that must be evident off camera bleeds into the performance.

The film makes clear the stylistic differences between Freud's and Jung's approach to the psyche that is easy for the layman to grasp. Again, it is the female character that is almost more interesting. Sabina graduates and becomes a respected psychoanalyst. During the war, she moves back to Russia with her husband and family. During World War II she refuses to leave her home and is killed, along with her children, by the Nazi's. That she is no longer forgotten is wonderful.

I would certainly recommend this movie to anyone interested in the birth of our understanding the mind, to those with a major crush on the actor's or director (guilty!), or to anyone interested in a movie that makes them think. I certainly understand you may need to be in the right mind set for such a film, but try to get there!

Cronenberg is a director that continues to grow even though he doesn't need to. Having made his name as the Canadian father of horror, he know puts that same eye to detail, destruction, and psychology to more realistic forms. His next project, "Cosmopolis", takes him back to the future armed with the character development he has perfected in recent years. Not even the presence of Robert Pattinson is enough to turn me off this film.

Skyline

** (2 stars)

Thursday night my friend Jennie and I went to a screening of "Skyline". I really like these late night shows (it was slated to start at 10 PM) because they give me a chance to unwind from the day and make dinner instead of stuffing my gourde with nachos.

There is nothing new about "Skyline". Aliens have descended on Los Angeles and begin collecting people and destroying buildings. A group of douche bag survivors are holed up in their penthouse trying to figure out a way to escape (my apologize to the director, I understand it's his house) . Did I mention the aliens produce this blue light that apparently boils your blood causing your veins to pop to the surface of your skin and mesmerizes you into coming closer to them so they can eat you? No?

Directed by The Brothers Strauss (Collin and Greg) and starring Eric Balfour ("Haven", "Six Feet Under"), Donald Faison ("scrubs"), Brittany Daniel (I always think of her from "Sweet Valley High"), David Zayas ("Dexter"), and Scottie Thompson (mostly TV guest spots but she was Nero's wife in "Star Trek"). This is The Brothers sophomore effort after directing "Alien vs Predator- Requiem". They got their start doing Special FX and own their own company, Hydraulx. You may have seen some of their work in a little movie called "Avatar", as well as "2012", "X-Men Origins: Wolverine", "Fantastic Four", and "Titanic".

It's this background that provides the only good thing in the movie. The FX are dazzling. In particular, the veins that appear on the characters faces when the look into the blue light (have they been watching "The Vampire Diaries"? Very similar). The aliens interact well with the actors and the destruction is sure enough. The scene hinted at in the trailer that takes place in a parking garage is really good and the only bit of fright in the whole pic. I gave the movie an extra star for that sequence alone.

The biggest flaw with the movie is the script. Written by FX guys (and Hydraulx employees) Joshua Cordes and Liam O'Donnell, it's clear these guys have never written anything before. I would be surprised if they've even read a good script, and no; I'm not counting Scriptwriting for Dummies. The dialogue that comes out of the actors mouths is unintentionally hilarious. In particular, David Zayas' super is a mash up of discarded one liners from "Miami Vice" or "NYPD Blues". I'm not sure why he only talks in cop speak, but it's really distracting. Why is he so angry? Who put him in charge? What a douche! I expected very little from our female leads and was not let down, but Balfour was a real disappointment. I've really enjoyed him on the Syfy original series "Haven" (helps to have awesome writers) and hope that this lifts the curse he seems to have over the fate of TV shows. It seems like every show he stars in gets cancelled or ends it's run. I hope this is not the case with "Haven". The first season was so good and there are so many unanswered questions! But I'm distracted, where was I? Oh yes, the acting is horrible. Hideous may be a better word.

I laughed several times during the movie, sometimes when I was supposed to, but I didn't jump once. Shouldn't a horror movie be scary? The ending is so ridiculous I'm tempted to blow it for you here but I won't. Let's just say it's what happens when a novice writer gets stuck in his own work. It makes no sense and the whole film should have ended 5 minutes earlier. However, the movie is only 93 minutes, so that's another plus.

I would wait and rent this movie if you're really interested in it, but I would not pay $10.

The Crazies

ARCHIVE

So last night my friend Jennie (of word of the day fame) and I had the pleasure of seeing an advanced screening of "The Crazies" brought to us by Texas Frightmare Weekend . We were super stoked, as you can imagine with us being HUGE horror fans. I got there plenty early to secure good seats and boy, did we have them. Right off the bat, something was off. I've been to my fair share of screeners and never have the producers of the event failed to welcome us, promote whatever they're selling. Sometimes, there are even give aways. None of that happened. One minute we're sitting and chit chatting, the next the lights dim and on with the show. Oh well.

Within 90 seconds of the film starting, it abruptly stopped. This should have been my first indication ( I believe in signs, and this was a big one). So, we sat around the theatre waiting for someone to tell us what was going on. They never did. Eventually the movie started back up and away we went.

This is another remake of a movie many of us were too young to remember and wasn't that great in first place. Starring Timothy Olyphant (LOVE! as the fearless leader/county sheriff), Rahda Mitchell (as his pregnant (?) wife and doctor), we learn pretty quickly that things are starting to go wrong in the town of Odgen Marsh, Iowa. Within 24 hours everyone has gone crazy (hence the title) and the government must intercede in the most obtuse way (as they must in every horror movie). It's hard to put aside the stupidity that follows.

My biggest problem with horror films is writing. If you're going to include soldiers and cops in your movie, maybe it would help to talk to one first. Maybe they could read the script and give you notes. You know, so the characters can act in a reasonably truthful way. Just because this is horror, doesn't mean you can make up anything you want to. Why would you give a decoy the Glock and keep the revolver? Personally, I want as many bullets as possible, especially if I don't think my friend is coming back. If you don't have a great and clever writer, perhaps you should cut some of the dialog. Case in point: At a baseball game. "That kid throws fast". "Just like he drives". Really? At another point in the movie, our hero's are trying to escape when a helicopter roars over head. "Do you think they saw us?" Uh, yea! They're in a helicopter, we can assume they're not blind. You're in a car on a deserted road. Do the math!

Second biggest problem with the movie- camera angles. They were rudimentary and juvenile at best. What was worse is you could tell the DP had some skill, or maybe he just lucked into some great shots (what's up turbine!). The whole movie is told in medium twofer's that only serve to alienate the audience, not bring them into the thick of the action. For an example of good camera work in medium to close-up see "The Hurt Locker". Also, many frames where out of focus and I can only assume it was poor focus on the part of the DP and assistants. This is not counting the blurry gore. I would rather you not show the gore than to blur the image. I can't see that! More importantly, it's hurting my eyes. It's all or nothing people!

Other things that made me laugh in a bad way- the prerequisites: hillbilly with a Mohawk (PS- he's in his 50's), the crazies all sing old folk tunes (of course), and the lead characters can't just go crazy like everyone else; no they always stay more "sane". This thing has a 24 hour incubation period and you're still cognizant after a couple days? NO!!

I will say there was one thing that I enjoyed, and that was Joe Anderson as the Deputy Sheriff (of "Across the Universe" and "The Ruins" fame). I just love him! He also gets the best lines and acts the most believably. The other actor's seemed forced or sad they had to be there (I'm looking at you Olyphant).

In closing, "The Crazies" is not worth you $10 theatre ticket price. I suggest waiting for Netflix and enjoying it with a group of friends. I certainly enjoyed the talkative group of theatre goers and critics I was sitting next to!