Reviews: "Beowulf" and "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead"

Epic Distortions

It’s amazing what the new wave of technology can do now. It can take Ray Winstone and turn him into a lean blonde with a strong six pack and huge biceps. It can take Crispin Glover and transform him into a nine foot tall, horrific monster. It can even make the 3-D process one of the best ways to see a movie. However, all that technology doesn’t mean very much when the actual depth of a story hasn’t caught up with those advancements. Beowulf suffers from a problem like this, and it is the reason it is a near miss of a film.

Taken from the ancient, and one of the most despised, epic poems, this grand tale revolves around the central title character, acted by Ray Winstone but modeled by someone with a much better body, who is a hero sent to destroy the monster Grendel, played by Crispin Clover. It is here we get a barrage of characters which include King Hrothgar (Anthony Hopkins) who is an aging coot that is losing his grip on his kingdom, his queen (Robin Wright Penn), who is there to look good while keeping her clothes on, and Grendel’s mother (Angelina Jolie) who is there to look good without keeping her clothes on. The eye is also treated to a world of fancy with gushing blood, limbs torn apart, and animated nudity. Oh boy, what a nickel!

However, while Beowulf is very pleasing to the eye, there is a substance to it that is inherently missing. I think the missing element is something that cannot be avoided, no matter who adapted it, and it is the simple fact of the source material. Epic poems and ancient works are very difficult to translate into the modern age without either losing the symbolic references or adding too much joyride action. Strangely enough, this film actually suffers more so from the latter. When the action scenes do arrive, it never seems to be in great numbers. One of the first battles between Beowulf and Grendel has a balance of excitement and campy humor. Beowulf goes into this fight completely nude while director Robert Zemeckis takes cues from the Austin Powers filmmakers by strategically covering up his genitals with a sword or arm. However, once it is over, the fight doesn’t seem to have any significance, mainly because almost all the scenes involving Grendel that take place after a battle slow down the pace to an irritable crawl. Also, in the magnificent climax of the film when Beowulf fights off a dragon, it feels over too quickly and without any satisfaction afterward.

Even still, the film has a quality to it that will more than likely draw us in, and that is the animation. Robert Zemeckis, whose directorial career has included blockbusters like Back to the Future and the Oscar-winning Forrest Gump, has cornered the market on the motion capture animation industry that absolutely dazzles the eye. The sweat that falls from the heads, the gleaming of muscles, even the perfect capture of skin is much more refined than Zemeckis previous attempt with the Polar Express, and his style of direction makes good use of how technology can help a story.

Yet, technology still can only go so far. Screenwriters Roger Avery and Neil Gaiman have made what was an epic piece of ancient literature and have basically turned it into a thirteen year old boy’s fantasy. A movie with this much violence, gore, and nudity would be rated R in the live action world, but now animation has granted it a lower rating. I’ve no problem with the rating. I do have a little problem with technology at this point, however. It can make Ray Winstone look attractive, but still cannot make a plot have a lasting impact. **1/2 / ****; GRADE: B-.






It's A Family Affair

Every once in a while, I see a film that possesses an unknown quality but does its best to capture my senses. I don’t know why I’m engrossed, but there is something about the presentation that arrests my mind and yields my thoughts to believe that what I’m watching is something grand and extraordinary. That element is what I felt when viewing this film, a smart, fast paced thrill ride that is also a great piece of filmmaking.

The story is a crime thriller, of sorts, that takes the cues of the multiple perspectives that interlock with other characters. At the center are the Hanson brothers. Hank Hanson, played with a wonderful sense of angst from Ethan Hawke, is a divorced dad with a nagging wife looking for her alimony payments, played by Amy Ryan who made an impressive turn in Gone Baby Gone. He is in desperate need of money and a break. Andy Hanson, with the impressive aid of Philip Seymour Hoffman, is a well to do businessman with a social life in shambles, a nasty drug habit and a hollow relationship with his wife, fellow Oscar winner Marisa Tomei. He is in desperate need of money and a break. It is Andy who proposes a solution to the problem of his and Hank’s. The plan: organize a faux robbery of their parents’ jewelry store and make off with the cash. However, the plan doesn’t go as conceived and painstaking detail is taken to reveal the events that led up to and followed that tragic moment.

A great strongpoint of the film is the magnificent ensemble where at the center is Hawke and Hoffman. Hoffman’s Andy is a devious and maniacal little man, but there is a sense that he isn’t totally bad. His ethics are very much in question, but the way he describes his plans and then his reaction to the botched robbery seem like genuine emotions that could draw us in and believe that his intentions are good. Hawke’s Hank is obviously a good man at heart with problems that would convince anyone to go along with Andy’s plan. Yet he handles situations very poorly, which causes resentment in his character that he could be so gullible. Both Hawke and Hoffman pull of these characters’ persona and make them believable. It does seem that Hoffman is on an acting level that’s a little higher than Hawke, which Hawke tries to match up to, but the two do excellent work. The supporting players, ranging from Tomei’s wife who only wants a spark in her marriage, to Albert Finney’s Charles, the father of the two who goes on a Death Wish like hunt to find answers surrounding what happened, are also a fine addition to the story that gives it an extra sense of wonder.

With its capitol use of interlocking storylines, different perspectives, fast dialogue, long camera takes, and quirky editing, one would think this is the work of a fresh-out-of-film-school director with an encyclopedic knowledge of Reservoir Dogs to his credit. What makes the film even more interesting is that is actually the work of legendary director Sidney Lumet, who at the spry old age of eighty-three manages to prove that he has no signs of stopping. Lumet is a director from the fifties, and that style is one that no longer is carried even by the best of filmmakers. It is a style that uses the actual art of making a movie to display its own characters. Every time Lumet moves the camera or edits to a different scene, it is actually an attempt to look into the soul of a character. Classic films like 12 Angry Men and Network use this similar method and Lumet knows how to use it. He also has the thankfulness of Kelly Masterson’s screenplay, a first attempt from this unknown writer who flushes out a rich story with characters to match.

This is more than likely the type of film that won’t get as much play or press time than others. And quite honestly, when December rolls around, and studios start campaigning for their releases two weeks before the year is gone, this will more than likely be film that will become lost. That is a shame because here is a great work of art that indulges the mind in viewing characters with questionable senses or morality while still containing a deep, emotional and human core. Not many films have done that for me. This one has, and I only hope that it can for others. **** / ****; GRADE: A.

Reviews: "No Country for Old Men" and "Lions for Lambs"

Coensisting

In the first few moments of No Country for Old Men, there is already a feeling that this is a tale that will spark a trip that one might not expect. The cool landscape of the Texas desert combined with a somber narration from Tommy Lee Jones registers heavily with the viewers. It seems to speak that what we are about to see is grimly dark, yet at the same time poetic and beautiful. I feel that perfectly sums up this film, which is a grand return from the famous directing duo.

Though normally Joel and Ethan Coen have divided up the work of producing, writing and directing (over the years they've done it all, but only one would take credit for directing and the other producing), here they share all three credits. The film, which the Coens adapted from the Cormac McCarthy novel, is set in a seemingly deserted Texas landscape around 1980. In this barren wasteland, there enters an assortment of fascinating characters. One is Llewelyn Moss, played with deep earnest by Josh Brolin. He's a Vietnam vet who tries to just make ends meet when, while hunting antelope, he stumbles upon a drug trade off gone bad. It is here he discovers a suitcase filled to the brim with hundred dollar bills and, being the opportunist, he takes the money. This sets into motion a driving plot that introduces even more wild characters. We get Ed Tom Bell, played with considerable ease by Tommy Lee Jones, as the local sheriff. Bell is an old fashioned guy who detests the way violence has spread through America and also hopes to find Llewelyn before someone else does. That someone else is Anton Chigurh, the infamous Javier Bardem. Chigurh is an assassin hired to find Llewelyn and the money, and he obviously has no shame in killing anything that gets in his way.

The most interesting thing about the film, and the most celebrated part, is how the Coen brothers crafted this film. They use a balance of interesting angles and quirky editing (done by the Coens under their trademarked pseudo name "Roderick Jaynes") to infuse the piece with a wondrous sense. Even a strange use of sound editing is perfectly matched in this film, such as early on when Chigurh strangles a deputy, a train whistle can be heard. There's no explanation, but it adds a little more to the scene than had it been left disturbingly silent. Much of their success is also added by the brilliant cinematography from their long time collaborator Richard Deakins. Deakins has already provided the photography for two other films this year, and the Academy should certainly see fit to award him an Oscar this year either for this film of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. It is really the Deakins cinematography that brings life to this film, and it is mixed with the Coens' direction that gives it a real instense feeling.

Certainly the main attraction in terms of the performances is Javier Bardem. He does indeed create a chilling and demonic psychopath that will definitely be remembered throughout the history of films. Armed with a compressorized slaughter gun and a shotgun fitted with a bold silencer, Chigurh defines himself as a force to be reckoned with. Even his low voice can send chills down the spine as it reminds us of a sosciopathic personalitly that is very unpredictable. Brolin also does good work at creating a character that we can both root for and despise at the same time. He isn't a saint, and many times he is a selfish bastard who likes to think about the money he's got stowed away more so than other's safety. However, we do get tender moments from him, and it is a nice mix to his character. As for Tommy Lee Jones, he is a great actor, however one cannot deny that the role of a Texas sherriff is by no means a stretch for the man, but he does a nice job at portraying some sort of morality pole in the entire film.

As much as I loved this movie, I have to admit that I did find flaws. As poetic as those first few moments of the film are, the film does take its tedious time in getting into its suspenseful plot, mainly because Chigurh is more so portrayed as a more laughable/horrific psychopath rather that a totally frightening one. Also, and I'll attempt not to give too much away, the ending is missing a sense of closure. An idea like this is often debatable, but for this viewer it was certainly necessary to completely fall in love. Still, those are small complaints and should not be judged heavily in watching this film. After a string of interesting, but ultimately, underwhelming flops like O Brother Where Art Thou, The Ladykillers and Intolerable Cruelty, it seems that Joel and Ethan Coen have finally reminded us why their classic black comedy from more than a decade ago put them on the movie scene as gifted filmmakers. They are now back in a familiar country again: watching bad things happen to questionable people. *** 1/2 / ****; GRADE: A-.

The Political Seen

If anybody read my review of Rendition a few weeks ago (don't bother raising your hands), I mentioned an infection to be tearing itself through Hollywood about the onslaught of post-9/11 films that attempted to deal with the subject of battling terrorism and commenting on the war in Iraq. That film was by no means an antidote, and the only thing that had come close at the time was Paul Haggis' very flawed In the Valley of Elah. Now Robert Redford and an impressive cast chime in with his film, which is still flawed but possesses something that the others lack, which also gives it stance of recommendation: actually talking about politics.

The film contains three different stories that are central to its theme. The first, and the undeniably more interesting one, is the trade off between Meryl Streep and Tom Cruise. Cruise is Jasper Irving, an ambitious Republican senator from Illinois who has agreed to be interviewed by Streep's Janine Roth, a television journalist (strangely absent from a camera).

The second scenario involves Robert Redford as Stephen Malley, a political science professor at a California University having an intense political/sociological debate with hard ass student Todd Haynes, played by Andrew Garfield.

The last story explores the lives of Ernest Rodriguez and Arian Finch, two soldiers fighting in Afghanistan, played by Crash's Michael Peña and Antwone Fisher's Derek Luke, respectively, that are trapped on a snowy mountaintop in the country surrounded by the enemy. This story is a bit of a cheat at combining two, because it also includes flashbacks to scenes when Rodriguez and Finch were students in Malley's classroom and the intense arguments they had about joining the military.

Though this is a flawed film, I found that the actual discussions about politics was really the determining factor that sets this apart from other films about this subject. You really get this from the Cruise/Streep scenes. Their clever banter with each other are well played, and you can really see the great chemistry these two have. Their scenes also work because both liberal and conservative ideals are both supported and attacked. Irving is very ambitious and has the tongue of a usual politician, but also understands that being a Republican is a tough job, and he knows the tricks of the trade to get people to try and see his justification. Roth points out the flaws in Irving's grand idealism, but also is subjected to the slander that liberal media stations often endure in order to get a story by taking interviews out of context. It is really fascinating watching these two go at each other.

Redford is a fine actor and director, but its normally a role that must be separated. When it is shared on screen, there is a feeling of laziness with his direction and he resorts to stationary camera moves and formulaic editing styles. With one exception, this is the case, but Redford as director is better when he isn't directing himself. His scenes with Garfield aren't quite as provocative as the ones with Cruise and Streep, but they do bring up interesting subjects to talk about, such as the affect of politics on the youth and the unwillingness to sacrifice, even if they don't necessarily resolve the issues at hand. Likewise, conversations between Redford and the soldiers hold high marks in showing how some members of the youth feel the need to sacrifice and how that decision can be met with some opposition. However, the scenes that actually take place in Afghanistan are the weakest part of the movie. I think these two soldiers behave irrationally, and the ending they encounter is very far-fetched and unbelievable.

In the end, what makes this movie works better than most other films about this subject is its commitment to politics. The whole situation in Iraq and the war on terror is very politically motivated, and I feel it is the best option to discuss when approaching this subject. Rendition came close to that ideal, but failed to devote as much screen time to those characters. Robert Redford's film is occasionally murky, with one story line that feels out of place, but the overall message is clear. I don't think we have found that "antidote" yet, but the closest thing we have is the blood from this lion. *** / ****; GRADE: B.

Review: "American Gangster"

Gangster Rap

I love the many parts that make up this movie. Denzel Washington is one of the finest American actors working today, Russell Crowe is a powerful persona and Ridley Scott has a strong and stylish vision as a director. So when it came time for this film to be released, I was ready for another masterpiece that would re-establish Scott as one of the great directors, and hopefully get him the Oscar that was denied when his film Gladiator won Best Picture. I was expecting something great. What I got was something good. Not great, and that is disappointing.

Denzel Washington plays the notorious, and factual, Harlem drug trafficker Frank Lucas whose Scarface-esque story built him up from a low level chauffer for a previous drug lord to a powerful man who controlled nearly the entire heroin flow heading in across One Hundred and Tenth Street. Russell Crowe is Ritchie Roberts, he’s a too-polished police officer who heads the newly formed narcotics unit in New York City. The film goes back and forth showcasing the lives of these two men, and the stark contrasts they share: Lucas is criminal and drug runner, but has a strong sense of family values; Roberts is so clean of a cop that he alienates himself when he refuses to pocket nearly a million dollars found in a truck, but has a horrific personal life that is riddled with divorce, custody battles and questionable friends. So it is inevitable that the lives of these two men eventually cross, and they meet each other face to face.

The movie tries so hard to have itself be the next great American crime drama, to follow in the footsteps of The Godfather and The Departed. Sadly, it never gets there. The film, at many points, seems so overwhelmed by its central character, that if forgets to actually show him. It bombards the audience with work and his process for handling delicate situations, but the actual man who is Frank Lucas is never fully exposed. We get some spots of his sociopathic ways, but then he subsides into his businessman suit. However, Washington does do an outstanding job at taking a character who appears to be so limited and churning out as much as he can, as well as making him as rich of a personality as he can be. Russell Crowe does a good job at taking this character that is very opposite from Lucas, and making him a person just as interesting. Most of the time, his character would be a useless subplot that is only to pad the movie’s long length, but Crowe makes us believe in this character and sympathize for him. The two do excellent work as they perform solo, and their confrontation at the end of the film is the stuff that cinematic excellence is made from.

Ridley Scott is one of my all-time favorite filmmakers, but I couldn’t help but think something was missing here. Scott is a director that has normally relied on style, such as in Gladiator, Alien and Black Hawk Down. However, the film feels more structured, and I kind of resent that. Any director could have done that, but I wanted Scott to use his touches to flush out the swaying camera moves and peculiar angles. Not much of that is present here. It by no means diminishes Scott’s ability to direct a movie, but it does set a different mood. Perhaps it is also Steve Zallian’s script, who writes like he’s still trying to dry up his tears from the panning of his remake to All the King’s Men. The script is layered with good characters, but all their dialogue feels labored. Hopefully, Zallian will remind us that he is still the Oscar-winning writer of Schindler’s List, but it hasn’t happened yet.

This film has been hyped, hyped, hyped for Oscar attention, and it does live up to some potential, but not all. Washington is the star player here, but Scott is disappoints by not providing a film that is on his level of prestige. This isn’t a bad film. It is very good. But when you’ve spent the better part of six months waiting for the next American classic, it’s a little saddening to find the next American popcorn flick. *** / ****; GRADE: B.

Ten Best Director/Composer Collaborations

10. Alejandro González Iñarritú and Gusatvo Santaolalla

There's always something special that happens when these two get together. They both have a unique sense of style that seems like a perfect match. Both of them have a somber tone within their work that can be powerful without being overly dramatic. The two have had a strong career together, working on Iñarritú's three most memorable works Amores Perrors, 21 Grams and Babel. The last film in this self described trilogy garnished Best Picture and Director nominations for Iñarritú, and granted Santaolalla his second consecutive Oscar for Best Original Score.

9. John Carpenter and John Carpenter

Most of the time, a director and composer should not be shared by the same person. However, I believe this to be the only exception where the shared position works out with fantastic results. There have been very few times that John Carpenter has not provided the music for his own films, and when he does we get an unbelievable score. He's had many to his credit, such as The Fog, Village of the Damned, Vampires and Big Trouble in Little China, but it is those daunting piano keys from Halloween that will always bring a chill to the spine.

8. M. Night Shyamalan and James Newton Howard

Even though many might argue that Shyamalan's work has diminished over they years, his great collaboration with James Newton Howard has not shown any signs of stopping. Ever since The Sixth Sense, M. Night has relied on Howard to create his eerie scores to perfectly fit the mysterious mood of his films. Shyamalan and Howard have continued to work together all the way up through The Lady in the Water, but listen to the chilling score to Signs in order to understand the true magic these two can bring to the screen.

7. Robert Zemeckis and Alan Silvestri

Zemeckis and Silvestri seem to go so perfect together simply because of the product that happens to come out. They first worked together for 1984's Romancing the Stone, and since that film their collaboration has not stopped. While we will always have scores like Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, What Lies Beneath, The Polar Express and Death Becomes Her, it will be the operatic and playful tunes of the Back to the Future trilogy that we'll always be humming.

6. David Cronenberg and Howard Shore

Howard Shore will always have Peter Jackson to thank for his three Oscars, but he'll also have to pay tribute to David Cronenberg for his instance in the very beginning to always keep him working. Cronenberg has made it very well known that he prefers to continue working with his Canadian film crew, and that persistence has led to some great scores between the two of them. Cronenberg's sense of foreboding darkness and twisted morality is perfectly captured by Shore's abundant use of horns and violins. The best highlights: the cool and somber notes to 2005's A History of Violence and the chilling, almost operatic score to the 1986 horror remake of The Fly.

5. Ridley Scott and Hans Zimmer

These two are one of the greatest matches ever. This is probably because they both share a love for the operatic and theatrical. We remember Scott from films like Alien, Legend and Blade Runner while Zimmer has been known for his impactful scores to As Good as It Gets, Rain Man, and not to mention his Oscar-winning work on The Lion King. These two first met up with 1991's Thelma & Louise, but nine years later, they'd be back with a punch for 2000's Best Picture winner Gladiator. Since then, with movies like Hannibal, Matchstick Men and Black Hawk Down, these two keep providing great works that forever establishes them as the masters of epic.

4. Sergio Leone and Ennio Morricone

These two masters pioneered the "spaghetti western"genre with their unique style of the tunes they managed to create. Leone's epic grand scale was perfectly manifested in Morricone's playful use of instruments such as the guitar and strings. Together, they provided the memorable scores to films such as Once Upon a Time in the West, A Fistful of Dollars, Once Upon a Time in America, For a Few Dollar More, and, perhaps the best use of a whistle in a motion picture score: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly.

3. Steven Spielberg and John Williams

One of the things that makes a collaboration so great is the mere fact of a lasting impact. These is perhaps more than present in the famous duo of Steven Spielberg and John Williams. Ever since their Oscar-winning work on Jaws, the two have never stopped working together. Every film from then on that Spielberg has directed, with the exception of The Color Purple, has been scored by John Williams. Some examples of the most memorable pieces of music history they have made: Indiana Jones, E.T. The Extra Terrestrial, Saving Private Ryan, Amistad, Jurassic Park and Munich.

2. Alfred Hitchcock and Bernard Herrmann

Alfred Hitchcock was dubbed the master of suspense when he was at his prime. Bernard Herrmann was just the composer to bring the grand vision of Hitchcock to the screen and translate it into an epic sound. Their collaboration came late in Hitch's career, in 1956 with The Trouble with Harry, but this duo soon learned there was much more to be found. North by Northwest succeed on creating the magnificence of the set and big stars, Vertigo was a masterful art piece that swayed its audience with lullaby notes, and no one will ever forget Psycho's daunting, high pitched violins.

1. Tim Burton and Danny Elfman

Never has there probably been a greater marriage between film and music than that of Tim Burton and Danny Elfman. Both of their film careers being started for 1985's Pee-Wee's Big Adventure, these two have been working together for all of Tim's films, with the exception of Ed Wood and the forthcoming Sweeney Todd. Burton's exquisite sense for the Gothic and macabre is solidly matched in Elfman's stylish mood in the music. It is difficult to imagine what their films would have been like if they weren't together. Such wonderful scores like Beetlejuice, Edward Scissorhands, Batman, Sleepy Hollow and Big Fish might never have reached our ears. Let us be thankful that it has.

Like the list? Did I leave a duo out? Comment below.