“The Messenger” Review

themessengerMaybe it was wrong of me, but for a minute there, I really thought that we would get a second great film dealing with the war in Iraq this year, which would of course bring the total number of great films dealing with the war in Iraq up to two. Unfortunately, The Hurt Locker must remain alone on that list, as Oren Moverman’s The Messenger may not be a bad film, but it just isn’t that good. I’m not sure why I expected something more, given the rather pathetic history of films dealing with Iraq, and the fact that it is Moverman’s first film as a director, but he did co-write Todd Haynes’s brilliant I’m Not There. Plus, the cast includes Ben Foster, Woody Harrelson, Samantha Morton and Steve Buscemi, all of whom have done great work in the past. The film was praised coming out of Sundance (even though that really doesn’t mean a thing anymore), and it won a Silver Bear at Berlin for best screenplay. Unfortunately, all it amounts to is an inconsistent, shallow, cliché mess with a few bright spots.

Ben Foster plays Sgt. Will Montgomery, who has been injured in Iraq, and ordered to spend the final three months of his enlistment as a casualty notification officer teamed up with Captain Tony Stone (Harrelson). They both have to deal with their own emotional traumas, and Montgomery’s are complicated when he begins to fall for Olivia (Morton), one of the widows with whom he must speak. Even though I called it a film dealing with the war in Iraq, there are no battles in this film. Every scene takes place back in America as the three main characters struggle to come to terms with everything that has happened in their lives. Foster is perhaps best known for his great role as a sociopathic killer in the otherwise insipid 3:10 To Yuma remake. This is his first major starring role, and while I wish he had been a bit less reserved at certain moments, he does a fine job. Harrelson essentially plays a less funny version of the same falsely jaded character he did in Zombieland, but it works in this film. He brings just the right combination of audaciousness, humor and poignancy to create a good character. Stone tries to get by on fortune-cookie philosophy and a false tough-guy act (he says, “We’re just there for the notification. Not God. Not Heaven”), but throughout the film, cracks in his armor begin to form, and the job, considered by many to be the worst in the army, begins to take its toll. Unfortunately, the usually great Morton is given a role that nobody could work with. The writers try to have her character use whatever simple language they expect out of an army wife, but they still have her make big speeches with complex ideas. The worst example of this is late in the film, as Olivia and Will begin talking about her late husband, and how he had changed when he first came home from Iraq, before reenlisting. The writers try to get across complex ideas on the horrors of war through dialogue that essentially breaks down to “he was real mean to us,” and it comes off as forced and silly. Ultimately, through these characters, the film tries to achieve a lot, but does not succeed. Some ideas are just underdeveloped, such as the motivation of the soldiers and the grief of the families they meet, while others have been explored in better films before, especially the role of the individual and his or her emotions vs. procedure. This last one is arguably the main theme of the film, but they get it across in cliché dialogue along the lines of “You didn’t follow procedure!” “Oh yeah, well fuck procedure.”  The film awkwardly jumps through various storylines (Will and his ex, Tony’s alcoholism, Olivia and her son, Will and Olivia’s relationship, Will and Tony’s friendship, etc), each one with a different tone and rarely coming together. Will is the center of it all, and even though Foster is pretty good, he is not a strong enough character to bring a real sense of cohesion to the film as a whole.

As Montgomery and Stone make their trips, the moments of sadness begin to pile on top of each other in what eventually becomes little more than a montage of grief. Of the dozen or so notifications that we see, you may remember that one was in Spanish, or one was a father and daughter or a husband and wife, but only two of them stick out with any detail. The rest are the same screams and the same nameless loved ones. I’d say this was an intentional decision to explore the casualty team’s job a bit further, but during these scenes Moverman switches to a hand-held camera, which becomes nothing more than a cheap way to try to manipulate the emotions of the audience. Morton’s first scene sticks out because she does not start screaming and she becomes a major character later. The other noteworthy one, which is undoubtedly the highlight of the film, features Steve Buscemi in a cameo as a father who gets angry at the officers. Despite only having a few minutes of screen time, he gives the best performance of the film, because his anger and his emotions feel much more real than anyone else’s. The notification scenes could have given a full, deep picture of the spectrum of human emotion, but Moverman chose to make most of them the same and he achieves nothing more than simple manipulation. I found the shifts in camera-movement particularly bothersome. It has become a trend in recent years to use a shaky camera to punctuate emotional moments by adding a hint of realism, but, unless it’s used throughout an entire film (Rachel Getting Married), it generally comes off as a way to add extra emotion to a scene that doesn’t entirely work on its own. In a film that already features a story that fluctuates in tone, it adds an extra degree of annoying tonal inconsistency.  While the film does have a few good features, including the decision to remain politically neutral, which is vital in a story about people rather than ideas, these tonal inconsistencies and obvious manipulations lead to an emotional shallowness that prevent it from aspiring to anything above mediocrity.

-Adam Burnstine

The Messenger is rated R for language and some sexual content/nudity

Opens at the Kendall Square Cinema in Cambridge November 20th 2009

Directed by Oren Moverman; written by Oren Moverman and Alessandro Camon; director of photography, Bobby Bukowski; edited by Alexander Hall; original music by Nathan Larson; production designer, Stephen Beatrice; produced by Benjamin Goldhirsh, Mark Gordon, Lawrence Inglee and Zach Miller; released by Oscilloscope Laboratories. Running time: 1 hour 45 minutes.

WITH: Ben Foster (Staff Sergeant Will Montgomery), Woody Harrelson (Captain Tony Stone), Samantha Morton (Olivia Pitterson), Jena Malone (Kelly), Eamonn Walker (Colonel Stuart Dorsett) and Steve Buscemi (Dale Martin).

“The Road” Review

the-road-movie-posterThe official trailer for the film The Road scared me more than any horror film released this year. As a fan of Cormac McCarthy’s Pulitzer Prize winning post-apocalyptic novel, the rapid images of Earth’s demise and destruction intercut with a father and son fighting against the evil villains to survive in this new world are a far cry from the bleak yet touching story that brought tears of both joy and sadness to so many readers.  (To see what I’m talking about, check out the trailer at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbLgszfXTAY.) Thankfully, this trailer is just a marketing stunt. For the most part, the film stays close to the novel’s core, recreating the sparse yet hopeful world where the father and son must survive.

Although the spectacular moments of violence and explosions would lead you to believe otherwise, The Road is a simple story about the Man (Viggo Mortensen) trying to protect his innocent son (Kodi Smit-McPhee) as they journey east and south towards the ocean. It is unclear what has happened to society, only that humanity is being replaced by a dangerous and corrupt savagery as it struggles to survive. Against all odds, the father tirelessly fights to care for the family’s basic needs: food, clothes, and shelter. However, the Boy refuses to compromise his goodness, constantly putting his concern for others ahead of his own needs for survival. His insistence on “carrying the fire” and “being the good guys” is both a question and representation of hope’s existence for humanity.

A the screen adaptation stayed faithful to the prize-winning book, this underlying meaning of the struggle for hope in the world’s darkest hour appears just as strongly on the silver screen. Unfortunately, the screenwriter and director didn’t trust on the power of their images, instead adding in wordy voice over narration by Mortensen to hammer home the frustrations of living in their dismal world. Although not needed, hearing Mortensen articulate McCarthy’s poetic verses do remind the viewer to question the deeper meaning of the story. The only real failure in the script and movie was how heavily it relied on flashbacks to happier times. If the purpose was to juxtapose the difficulty of continuing life during an apocalypse with the joys of life before, it was totally unnecessary. More likely, the executives wanted to justify the casting of Charlize Theron as the Woman (a part that hardly exists in the book). Or, perhaps they wanted to add some scenes typical to what viewers expect to see in a movie released during Thanksgiving weekend. This may also be why they removed some of the most graphic sequences from the book.

Whatever the case, the acting in The Road is impeccable across the entire cast. Mortensen (The Lord of the Rings trilogy) thrives in these sorts of minimalistic roles that require ruggedness and emotionally guarded yet loving relationships. Newcomer Kodi Smit-McPhee as the Boy is a convincing innocent, making the relationship between father and son especially touching. The supporting cast, especially Robert Duvall and Guy Pearce, expertly round out the cast and bear witness to the decay of civilization.

The washed out images of unspeakable horrors do more than the narration or the acting to propel this story of physical and spiritual survival towards hope. Cinematographer Javier Aguirresarobe (Vicky Cristina Barcelona, New Moon) creates images that capture the desolate world that seems bound to corrupt anyone attempting to survive in it. And yet, the camera allows the most powerful moments of hope. After growing accustomed to this de-saturated world existing almost exclusively of neutral hues of grays, browns, and blacks; every hint of color-whether the blue in a floral pattern or the red of a Coca-Cola can-becomes a powerful representation for a reason for hope.

Ultimately, The Road has succeeded in recreating a slightly-more-optimistic version of Cormac McCarthy’s masterpiece. However, this dark and sparse yet beautiful story of hope will likely gain more critical than financial success, as audiences instead turn to holiday films that reinforce joy through cliché Hollywood happy endings.

-Rachel Imbriglio

“Fantastic Mr. Fox” Review

Fantastic-Mr.-Fox-Character-poster-the-brainsAt some point along the line, we all sort of knew Wes Anderson was going to try to make an animated kid’s movie. The set design and inserts from The Royal Tenebaums and The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou all seemed like pastel throw-ins from Blue’s Clues. All of Anderson’s characters, from Max Fischer down to Francis from The Darjeeling Limited, exhibit the listless naivety of youth that comes from being a child or wishing to be one again. But given the somewhat more mature Darjeeling, it should be some sort of surprise that The Fantastic Mr. Fox is a work of stop-motion beauty, capitalized by a not-so-kid-friendly script adapted from Roald Dahl’s book of the same name.

The story centers around Mr. Fox, a retired burglar who is trying desperately enjoy living a life of newspaper columns and dealing with his repressed son, Ash. Anderson added in most of the first and third acts of the plot to bracket Dahl’s pleasantly unencumbered story; even without reading the 70-page kid’s book, one can immediately tell that Ash and cousin Kristofferson are products of Anderson and co-writer Noah Baumbach’s weirdo aesthetic. Fox, voiced by George Clooney, fancies himself a four-legged version of Davy Crockett, even though his plans often go awry thanks to a heightened sense of danger his wife, Mrs. Fox, doesn’t share.

Plot feels less central to Fantastic than it probably should, mainly because the visuals are done with such colorful precision. Life Aquatic animation director Henry Selick tags along with Anderson again in this one, and his fall foliage-centric atmosphere (complete with Christmas lights-esque highlighting) heightens the evil of ‘cut down the forest’ industrialists Bogis, Bunce and Bean. The metaphor for consumerism is a little heavy-handed, but one can’t blame Anderson (or Dahl, for that matter) for doing it; hell, Wall-E was better off with the allegory.

Most of Anderson familiar tropes and teammates make appearances in Fantastic, with the exception of a few notable absences (no slo-mo?! no Kumar Pallana?!). Characters look straight in the camera, and we as an audience often feel like we’re watching an elaborately put together puppet show. Indie-rock mainstay Jarvis Cocker makes an appearance as folksy Petey, the servant of Bean. Michael Gambon and Willem Dafoe steal the show from sometimes listless Clooney; Dafoe’s alcoholic rat is on par with the dastardly lovable Anderson villain Allistair Hennessey from Aquatic. Gambon gets the line of the movie when, after Petey sings/narrates a montage of Fox and friends robbing the three evildoers, he yells “That’s just bad songwriting! You wrote a bad song, Petey!” Elsewhere, Anderson’s former roommate Owen Wilson makes a cameo as a gym coach, Adrien Brody makes the cute appearance of the movie as a field mouse, and “BAM” chef Mario Batali lends his help as a rabbit. Oh, and if you’re up on your Anderson DVD commentary, you might be wise enough to notice a familiar voice as a real estate weasel.

To call Fox solely a kid’s movie, however, would be doing it a profound disservice. Only elder audience members will catch the genius in the witty replacement of curse words for “cuss,” the WTF inclusion of a wolf, or Kristofferson’s terror that his dad may be dying. Anderson gleefully paints a mature portrait on top of Dahl’s juvenile framework, and nowhere is that more evident than Fox’s speech at the end of the first act to Kylie, his opossum sidekick: “Why a fox? Why not a horse, or a beetle, or a bald eagle? I'm saying this more as, like, existentialism, you know? Who am I? And how can a fox ever be happy without a chicken in its teeth?” Anderson tale, as it so often is, relies more on the realization that we are only what we are made from, and anybody else we try to be is just a façade. Perhaps Fox can’t be Davy Crockett, but by the end of the film, he might just realize that it’s sublime to just be the fox that he is. Maybe the youth won’t receive this message so easily, as it is coated among Anderson’s in-jokes and Rolling Stones songs, but perhaps Anderson’s lasting message of the fantastic Fantastic Mr. Fox will be heard by the parents who didn’t expect to hear it.

-Tyler Remmert

“Z” Review

Original Z posterOne of the crucial lessons of 20th century politics is that authoritarianism is unsustainable in the long run, because people are naturally inclined to be free and the information that will allow them to be free will eventually, inevitably leak out.  One or two people might be able to keep a secret, but an entire government cannot.  The “9/11 Truth Movement” is ludicrous for that reason, as is the recent “Birther” phenomenon and the more fantastical theories regarding the Kennedy assassination.  Truth might be stranger than fiction, but when it comes to government, usually the simplest explanation is the correct one.

Costa Garvas’s Z, the 1969 lampoon of governmental malfeasance—specifically, the 1963 assassination of Greek politician Gregoris Lambrakis and the would-be military cover-up that followed—is a bit more cynical about the chances for truth to shine through.  Not only is the good-hearted, peace-loving politician gunned down—actually, clubbed down—in the height of his rhetorical powers, but the man who uncovers the conspiracy behind the killing is punished and those responsible are all but exonerated.  What gives?

The film’s title is an allusion to a Greek slogan, “He lives.”  In this case, “he” refers to the Deputy (Yves Montand), the film’s stand-in for Lambrakis, whose death represents a martyrdom of sorts and a call to arms for his left-wing supporters against right-wing military rule.  We have seen similar demonstrations of defiance to iron-fisted regimes since 1969, and they have often come in the form of lone individuals.  In 1989, the Tiananmen Square crackdown in China was encapsulated by that one anonymous man standing in front of the tanks.  Similarly, the immediate legacy of the Iranian uprising this past spring centered on Neda Agha-Soltan, a private citizen whose violent death in the streets, captured on video, was seen by millions around the world and was instrumental in driving the protesters to march on.

Because Z is a satire, it is not so much about a massive popular revolt as it is about the shenanigans that fester at the top, as uncovered by a lone enterprising photojournalist, played by Jean-Louis Trintignant.  As the Deputy is a stand-in for an actual politician, so does the investigator represent a real-life sleuth in the Greek case, namely Christos Sartzetakis, who would later serve as a Supreme Court justice and, from 1985 to 1990, the president of Greece.  However, he spent an awful lot of time either in jail or in exile before getting that far, and Z is a very angry film about the injustices that often fall on the very people most needing the law on their side.

The nonsense begins with an enormously foreboding sequence in which the organizers of a major speech by the Deputy are forced to change the venue and prepare for a counter-demonstration.  As the Deputy crosses what is indeed an impressive turnout of right-wing agitators, he sets himself up for a turkey shoot that results in a nasty bump on the head before reaching the auditorium to speak.  When the speech is over, he makes a similarly dangerous walk back to his car and is met by a seemingly out-of-control vehicle carrying three men and a club.  The man carrying the club strikes the Deputy to the ground, in plain view of all those present, and the resulting wounds eventually lead to the Deputy’s death.

Law enforcement’s actions in the aftermath of the assassination are shown as all-too-obviously fraudulent in stacking the deck against the plain truth of what happened in the streets that night.  The police and the military successfully (for a time) turn the incident into a Rashomon scenario, with different people remembering the same event differently.  The word “assassination” isn’t even allowed to appear in the official report.  It’s like the FBI man telling a witness in Oliver Stone’s JFK, “You didn’t hear four shots—you heard echoes.”

Watching Z, I was reminded a bit of the 1949 classic The Third Man, where Joseph Cotton’s impromptu sleuthing uncovers a plot so convoluted that he mistakes his own best friend for dead until very late into the story.  That film took place in Vienna in the dirty aftermath of World War II, when the paranoia of the Cold War was barely underway.  Z is a natural continuation of that darker side of a European society unsure of its values, its purpose or its prospects for a free future.

-Dan Seliber

“Z” is rated PG (Parental guidance suggested). Physical and political violence.  Despite rating, not particularly for kids.

Plays at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, December 9-13

Directed by Costra Gavris; written by Jorge Semprun, based on the novel “Z” by Vasilis Vasilikos; director of photography, Raoul Coutard; edited by Francoise Bonnot; music by Mikis Theodorakis; production designer, Jacques D’Ovidio; produced by Philippe d’Argila and Eric Schlumberger; released by Rialto Pictures. Running time: 2 hours 7 minutes.

WITH: Yves Montand (The Deputy), Irene Papas (The Deputy’s wife), Jean-Louis Trintignant (The Examining Magistrate), Jacques Perrin (Photojournalist

Review: “Post Grad”

85023_AB_PGSG_1SHT_R4.qxd:1 SHEET MASTER (CTP READY)The unemployment rate is expected to hit 10% this year. Companies and consumers are buckling down to spend less---meaning less job opportunities, fewer benefits, and lower salaries. Not a great time for young college graduates. The immediate future is a bleak and scary place, filled with endless interviews, student loan payments, and no silver lining on that college diploma. Just don’t tell that to the makers of Post Grad.

At the opening of Post Grad, a flurry of Web 2.0 animation provides the background of our heroine’s perfectly planned life: overachieving Ryden Malby (Alexis Bledel) will graduate from college, land a prestigious job at a top publishing firm, and live in a spacious luxury apartment in Los Angeles. Her biggest problems are that her “frienemy” has claimed valedictorian, and her college best friend Adam (Zack Gilford) longs for a romance. Quickly, though, reality rushes in, and she is left jobless, homeless, carless, and with only one option: to move back to her parents’ house and search for a job and a life.

Ryden’s family is a group of quirky (but entertaining) misfits. Her father (Michael Keaton) is a schemer prone to blurting out socially isolating phrases. Her mother (Jane Lynch) is preoccupied with her brother’s “weirdness.” (He is in the habit of licking children in his class and communicating via sock puppet.) And Ryden’s chain smoking grandmother (Carol Burnett) is intent on shopping for her state-of-the-art casket with her oxygen tank in tow. Living with this family could have created comic gems similar to Little Miss Sunshine or Juno. Unfortunately, though, the focus of Post Grad remains on very normal Ryden’s very typical quest for a job.

In her feature length live-action debut, director Vicky Jenson (Shrek, Shark Tale) hoped to capture the angst and frustration of the post-college scramble to put life in order: the feelings of inadequacy, fear over finances, and the never-ending difficulty of constantly trying to impress many hiring managers at companies any job prospect shouldn’t actually care about.  However, this was executed in more entertaining and realistic ways in other films (Reality Bites, Say Anything), and the film comes off as pandering and a bit desperate.

Alexis Bledel’s popular Rory Gilmore is essentially reprised in her portrayal of Post Grad’s Ryden Malby. Her very PG-rated experiences turn what could have been a unique dark comedy into an elongated family-friendly sitcom. And although it is morbidly entertaining to watch a “Disnified” character suffer in our reality for awhile, the film misses its chance to connect with its audience.

Post Grad is filled with a slew of talented comedic actors who are regrettably under-used. There are several truly laugh out loud funny moments, several contrived attempts at humor, and one bit about a cat in such poor taste I found myself counting the (many) minutes until it was over. But the true differentiator of Post Grad is its tone.  In a market saturated with R-rated bro-mances and hipster independent comedies, this film dares to be neither. Instead, it is a mild and mainstream family friendly comedy with a better-than-average soundtrack. “Family friendly” is not necessarily a bad thing- just not a realistic narrative for this current, economic age.

Spoilers: As expected for a Disney-esque story, Ryden is given more than her fair share of chances. After her initial struggles, she soon lands a great job, learns what is truly important in life, and accomplishes it at the ripe age of 22. If only we all could be so lucky to live in the Enchanted Happily Ever After.

-Rachel Imbriglio

Review “9”

9 transports viewers into a meticulously created apocalyptic fantasy world. The premise is a popular fear in science fiction: Man finally creates a machine with the power to invent other machines- which inevitably means a mechanical apocalypse.

Viewers enter the story as if opening a children’s illustrated fantasy book.  An old man carefully sews a burlap sack, a zipper, and some metal parts together with thread, creating a person-like sock monkey. Moments later, there is a blue light, and 9 (voiced by Elijah Wood) awakens to a world devoid of life. Left alone to navigate the chaos, 9 makes his way down the bombed streets with the one possession he kept from his birthplace-a mechanical medallion with unusual hieroglyphics. Soon, he stumbles upon #2 (Martin Landau), a frail but wise old inventor who helps him find his way, until he is attacked and taken by a mechanical beast. Hurt and left on his own, the newborn hero faints.

Awakening, 9 finds he has been taken into a tribe of his kind. With #2 gone, the group numbers have dwindled to only four: the cautious and domineering leader #1 (Christopher Plummer), friendly but conflicted #5 (John C. Reilly), the eccentric artist #6 (Crispin Glover), and the muscles behind the leader #8 (Fred Tatasciore). Three had already disappeared when venturing out into the wastelands: nonverbal twins--#3 and #4—and the one female of the group, warrior #7 (Jennifer Connelly). Because of this, as head of the group, #1 has instructed his people to never leave their safe fortress in a run-down cathedral, and insists that 9 may not leave to rescue his new friend. However, 9 cannot heed these rules, and sets out to brave the wastelands and save #2. But by entering the beast’s cave, the group get much more than they bargain for when they awaken a mechanical monster responsible for the destruction of humanity called the Great Machine. 9 must unite the ragtag team as one in order to find a way to defeat this enemy and preserve life on Earth.

The petite size of the characters adds to the visual splendor of 9. As the heroes are no bigger than an adult’s sock, the small world gives opportunities for innovative use of everyday objects and a new and mystical look to our everyday world. Battles take place with kitchen knives and scissor halves, and fearsome monsters are created from hoses, dolls, and engine parts. This completes the visual style of the gothic nightmare animation--and creates some of the coolest monsters I’ve ever seen on screen. Producer Tim Burton’s (Beetlejuice, The Nightmare Before Christmas) style influenced the visuals, while producer Timur Bekmambetov (Wanted) definitely influenced the action sequences.

Unfortunately, the intriguing premise, the original battles, and the unique visual style could not make up for the lack of substance in this feature film. 9 is based on a 2004 Academy-Award nominated animated short of the same name by director Shane Acker. This 10-minute short is a blueprint for the 79 minute of the film, with all major plot points (and even specific shots) covered in the short version. Although this is essentially one large spoiler for the film, you can watch this short below.

Pamela Pettler (Monster House) wrote the feature-length version of the screenplay, but she did not add much to the 10 minute version. The longer version of the film seems to be nothing more than an extended cat and mouse sequence between our team of heroes and an array of mechanical (albeit very cool) monsters who come to fight them. The script does little to inspire connection with its characters, and has no deeper theme-unless you are someone who fears the coming of the machine apocalypse. Although scenes and references grasp at a hodgepodge of religions, ideologies, and mythologies, this makes it quite impossible to strain a meaning out of the competing ideas. Since Up!, Coraline, and most recent animated or CGI films (including screenwriter Pettler’s Monster House) have trained American audiences to find great truths about life within animated films, viewers will leave 9 feeling especially empty. A film is nothing if not first and foremost an engaging and relatable story, and sadly 9 doesn’t live up to its own visual inventiveness.

-by Rachel Imbriglio

Original \"9\" Short by Shane Acker