Ten Past Midnight: July 2005

Cinderella Man
An amazing film, and so far, the best film of the year. Everything clicks in this film. The acting, the directing, the screenplay, the editing, the music...every little piece is so clearly defined, it's obvious you're watching some masterful skills at work. The extremely sad thing is that this movie will not win the Best Picture Oscar (and possibly not even be nominated), no matter how acclaimed it is at year's end. The most obvious reason is, of course, that a boxing film won last year (Million Dollar Baby). Other reasons include the fact that the release of the film was delayed from last winter to this summer (the Academy frequently fails to "remember" films released in the summer season), and it failed at the box office. The only reason it may luck out and get nominated is if it's a bad year for good movies...
Anyway, we have a masterpiece on our hands here. One of the best films of the past several years. I cannot stress enough how good this film actually is... I've never been a big fan of Russell Crowe, but he's excellent in this, as is Renée Zellweger. The big standout performance here, though? Paul Giamatti!! Everyone, including me, who was pissed when he didn't get an Oscar nomination for Sideways, should be pretty happy next year, because he's almost a total lock for a supporting actor nomination for this, and he just might walk away with the award. He is nothing less than amazing in Cinderella Man. His performance is full of vitality and energy, and in some of the boxing sequences, his performance is what keeps the film moving. It's a big, loud, angry (but still charming) performance, the complete opposite of Sideways. Giamatti has a hell of a lot of range... I hope he gets noticed this time.
Ron Howard has really outdone himself with this. He won the Best Director award for A Beautiful Mind, but this is a much better showcase of his talent. While that last film saw him using a grab bag of visual tricks to convey the inside of someone's mind, this film has a very simple, restrained Howard simply telling his story. The direction in the film is very reminiscent of Howard's own Apollo 13, especially during the last 20 minutes or so. The direction is extremely tight and solid during this time, creating almost unbearable suspense as we (and everyone in the film) wait anxiously to see the results of the final fight, much like the feeling Howard created in Apoll0 13 as everyone anxiously awaited the fate of the astronauts. (Howard used a Crane 88 with a remote head (a remote-controlled camera on the top of a large camera crane) for these sequences in both movies, which gives a great, "sweeping" quality to the feeling of the films.)
This brings me to the reason why the film, and this ending sequence, works in the first place. Just like in Apollo 13, there is so much on the line in this picture, that by the time the ending rolls around, we feel so much for these characters. We want them to succeed, yes, but we identify with them in such a way that if they were to fail, it wouldn't feel like a plot device, but rather like the tragedy it is. This ending sequence is one of the best edited sequences in an extremely well-edited film. It's just long enough to make the suspense almost unbearable, but not too long to the point where it's overkill. This film, like Apollo 13, should be required viewing for people who want to see great examples of the traditional 3-act structure done right.
It also made me think, over and over again, about how much better this was than that "other" boxing movie. This movie just has so much more to offer than Million Dollar Baby: characters that are interesting, have motivations, and actually have something to lose; a screenplay that embraces its characters rather than looks down on them; and a screenplay that creates real obstacles and problems, rather than just taking the easy way out and creating a villain that needs to be defeated. Things have weight in this picture. Things never go beyond the surface in MDB.
Another thing that has to be mentioned is that this film contains one of the best depictions of poverty I've ever seen in film. I don't know if it was good research or if some of the people involved in this actually experienced extreme poverty, but I have to say that it hits the facts and the feelings SPOT ON. It's so truthful in how it handles this aspect, that it (1) Immediately gains your faith and your trust in the filmmakers to lead you through this story with confidence and grace, and (2) Accomplishes something which is extremely difficult and rare: Creates a strong connection and devotion to the main characters within just a few scenes. I have not felt such love for characters in a film in a long time. A far cry from Million Dollar Baby, where we see one scene of the main character stealing food, and that's all we see of her personal struggle.
Everything in this film just feels right. It's one of those films that puts your faith back in movies again, if only for 2 ½ hours. Don't miss this. Highly recommended.

(5 stars out of five)

War of the Worlds (2005)
A complete and total mess. The worst Spielberg film since... man, we might have to go all the way back to 1941 for that. One-dimensional characters, zero plot, Dakota Fanning (who's usually good) is annoying as hell, it's overlong, it's overbearing... and it reminds you of a million other better movies (especially when an alien chases some characters around in a basement - the scene is straight out of Jurassic Park). Worse still, it starts out by setting up a nice, dark tone... which it completely throws away later on in favor of a happy ending. Avoid like the plague.

(2 stars out of five)

Land of the Dead
A fitting fourth chapter to George A. Romero's Dead films, Land of the Dead rizes above the usual horror fodder by having a great cast, some memorable characters, and by including some of Romero's usual social commentary - to great effect.
In this film, the living dead have finally taken over the earth. The few survivors are (in a scathing commentary on the American social class system) split up into two groups: the rich live in a huge skyscraper that towers above the ground, surrounded by electric gates and other things to keep the zombies out. The poor, on the other hand, are forced to fend for themselves on the streets.
There's a bit of fun casting, with John Leguizamo and Dennis Hopper in supporting roles, and there's some great dialogue in Romero's script. Of course, there's enough blood and guts to keep the gorehounds happy, and there's also some genuine scares and suspense. The third act is a little typical, but everything else is so good, that can easily be forgiven. The ending, I have to say, is very satisfying. If it is the last film in the series, it's a great, subtle ending (I won't give it away, but it's great) that brings the entire story back around full circle, theme-wise, to the original Night of the Living Dead. Horror fans should like it, Romero fans will love it, and everybody else should give it a chance.

(3 ½ stars out of five)

Mr. and Mrs. Smith
Well, Doug Liman has finally made his first piece of shit. Swingers was great (mostly because of Favreau and Vaughn), Go wasn't bad, and even The Bourne Identity was a pretty good studio action picture. Mr. and Mrs. Smith is a complete mess, and a huge waste of talent. You can't even say that there's a good film waiting to get out, because the script is insanely fucked from the start... You have a picture in which there's no hero, no villain, no one to side with, no one to follow, the thinnest thread of a plot imaginable that things are hanging on, and a third act that not only negates the entire rest of the film, but is a complete cop-out. Everyone else in the theater seemed to like it, but I just couldn't get into it. They were laughing, and I sat in silence. I guess I went into it expecting more, and that's why I was so disappointed. I expected more from Doug Liman. I guess if it was Joe Schmo who directed this, I'd be a little more forgiving, but this was a Doug Liman film. If the man who directed Swingers has this much of a budget and comes up with something that's this pedestrian, it's definitely disappointing. That's the only way I can think of describing the film. Pedestrian. The action sequences, everything...it's just... there.

(1 star out of five)

Lords of Dogtown
What a great, great movie. It overcomes almost all of the conventions of the genre to become an entertaining, funny, and even touching story of a group of kids whose passion is skateboarding. What's even more amazing is that even though it's based on a documentary film called Dogtown and Z-Boys, and rehashes almost all of the events that were mentioned in the documentary, it still feels fresh and exciting. Amazingly, the film is actually a great companion piece to the aforementioned Dogtown documentary (which is excellent, by the way), and it manages to flesh out the characters even more the second time around. Catherine Hardwicke directs the film with a quality of honesty and an integrity that's rarely seen in movies these days. The result is a film that explodes with the true feelings and emotions of adolescencece. Of course, it doesn't hurt if your cast contains some of the most talented young actors working today: Victor Rasuk (from Raising Victor Vargas), Emile Hirsch (from, unfortunately, The Girl Next Door), John Robinson (from Elephant), and Heath Ledger, who's actually quite good in this (and unrecognizable) as the oldest guy, and thus the leader of the pack. There's some great dolly camerawork, and the production values on the picture are top notch, as well as the acting. Highly recommended.

(4 stars out of five)

In Good Company
This is one of those movies that really shouldn't work... On paper, it looks pretty problematic: you have a plot that feels just a little too much like a "studio pitch" summary (i.e. interesting situation that can be summarized in 25 words or less -- Middle aged man gets a new boss - someone who's young enough to be his son! And said new guy falls in love with his daughter!....lol), and films that have to use a "hook" like that usually don't offer the most satisfying viewing experience... Fortunately, In Good Company rises above its formulaic plot trappings and provides a truly good film. It really has things to say, and it doesn't hesitate to say them the way it wants to. Unfortunately, the things it has to say about corporate America, while totally spot-on and relevant, become much too over-the-top and and exaggerated near the end. It becomes overly preachy and almost threatens to negate the entire film. It's one of the rare wrong notes in the film, but it hits this sour note long and hard. It's a credit to the quality of the film that you're able to continue with the rest of it mostly unscathed, and the tone of the film unharmed. What it has to say about life and love and being in your early 20's, however, is what elevates this film to memorable status. (If you haven't seen the movie and don't wan't any spoilers, stop reading now....) It's one of the few recent Hollywood films that doesn't cop out in how it portrays a young relationship. It's been a long time since I've seen a film in which the two characters don't stay together in the end, and also a while since I've seen an ending like that and felt so satisfied. The movie has great messages about living your life and going out and doing what you need to do to be happy. It is, of course, helped immensely by the wonderful soundtrack populated by such bands as Iron and Wine, and it elevates the film once again to another level...and in my eyes, into the group of great coming of age movies, and movies that defined generations of young people, such as The Graduate and Garden State.
Not that it's without flaws, of course... For one thing, there's a few too many musical montages in the film... it's great music, sure, but it quickly became too predictable, and a little tiring to see yet another montage sequence happening. Scarlett Johansson's character is pretty thinly drawn, and so is the wife of Dennis Quaid's character...but I suppose that's beside the point. This is a film about two men and how they deal with life at their respective ages. More than anything, it's a film about making your life the best it can be, and doing whatever you have to do to achieve that. Topher Grace and Quaid are great, and turn in truly memorable and special performances. At the end, when Topher is running along the beach, at sunset, for the first time truly comfortable with himself and not needing anyone else, as "The Trapeze Swinger" plays on the soundtrack... you can't help but be inspired, for something more, for something else...for happiness. There was a smile on my face throughout this movie; a totally effortless smile. It was a joy to watch. The kind of film you want to share with others. Highly recommended.

(4 stars out of five)

Don't really feel like writing full reviews of these films
Hotel Rwanda