pdvincit Reviews

In the Bedroom (2001)

Delivers what Movies are meant to deliver.

[10/10 · 26 August 2008]

I have friends who do not want to see dark movies. Too depressing, given the news these days. I can understand that.

But farce grows quite tiresome. Clever repartee is fine sometimes. Action films are frequently exhausting and you can only watch so many cars, trains, planes and buildings explode. Plus, you are hungry an hour later.

This movie is a rare opportunity to miss excessive violence, pratfalls and smart-mouthed kids, teenage titillation, explosions, chases, stock characters, overacting and thin plot contrivances.

Enjoy a movie where the characters are complex, the actors spot-on in their craft, and the story is compelling.

Or don't. "Independence Day" is probably on cable somewhere.

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead (2007)

A not so simple plan.

[9/10 · 26 August 2008]

I love the Coen Brothers. This movie is not a Coen Brothers Movie.

It could have been.

It has the dark farce of the Coen Brothers -- the dark farce that spoils one for light farce. It reminded me of "A Simple Plan", too (another excellent -- and more satisfying -- movie).

As in "A Simple Plan", and all of the Coen Brothers' movies, the cast is perfectly . . . cast and has all the art and craft which breathes life into the movie. You know -- such that you forget you are not seeing real people behaving as they are inclined, as their personalities lead them to behave, in situations which they created but cannot control. That is where we feel their pain and sometimes see ourselves. These characters are ambitious and hopeful, opportunistic and optimistic, but the world is always crushing them unfairly -- yet with perfect justice.

Casino Royale (2006)

Bond -- Not Just Camp Anymore

[10/10 · 26 August 2008]

If you read any of Ian Fleming's books on Bond, then you know the stories are high-spirited, intense and with detailed descriptions. The devil is in the details and that is how he tempts us to partake. So, perhaps you, too, have ordered a martini the way James Bond prefers them made.

What Fleming's books are not, is campy comedy with an insincere protagonist and disposable attractive women.

If you have never read the books, then Saltzman and Broccoli probably defined Bond for you. You have my sympathy.

So, this movie returns to Bond's roots in more than one way. It starts at the beginning, more or less, and it starts without tongue in cheek. It is about time, too. The camp had been done way past the point of exhaustion -- of the writers, the actors and, most importantly, the audience.

Let us all hope that this Bond does not degenerate the way Saltzman and Broccoli's Bond did in that franchise.

Welcome back, Ian Fleming's James Bond. You have been a long time away.

Priceless (2006)

Attractive Exploitation

[10/10 · 26 August 2008]

This movie is more realistic and satisfying than "Pretty Woman" for all the right reasons. Whereas "Pretty Woman" takes a seedy subject and makes it a fairy tale, "Priceless" reflects (albeit not very deeply) on the motives and motivations of people in relationships. Why be in a relationship? Security, affection, adventure, avoidance of boredom, love.

Wealthy people do exploit the poor as the movie shows. But at least this movie does not try to show the wealthy exploiters as admirable, principled, and attractive (as with Richard Gere). This movie shows that the poor are exploiting the rich as the rich are exploiting the poor. Perhaps not on the same level of immorality, but subject to certain rules and mores.

At least with this movie, we understand the desperation which leads to the characters acting as they do -- and the hope and love which leads them to act in ways that, while not in their best economic interest, are in their best interest as people.

If you enjoyed "Pretty Woman" for the fairy tale that movie is, then you will be disappointed with this movie. If that is the case, the French have another expression for you: "C'est très triste."

The Patriot (2000)

From an Australian: Mel "I hate the English" Gibson.

[2/10 · 15 August 2006]

This is, indeed, more jingoistic propagandized hogwash. But not from America! From an Australian: Mel "I hate the English" Gibson.

David summed it up quite nicely. I would only add that 1) it has a great cast; and 2) it is based (VERY) loosely on the "exploits" of English dragoon Banastre Tarleton in South Carolina and his skirmishes with Patriot general Frances Marion. That would be where a good story and movie would begin, and this movie ended. Too bad that Mel did not apply some of his devotion to realism ("Passion of the Christ") to a story deserving of it.

After "Braveheart" and this, the next movie will star Mel as a Boer General against the awful colonial Brits, or as Gandhi against the awful colonial Brits, or maybe as de Valera against the awful colonial Brits, or maybe Menachem Begin against the awful colonial Brits -- ad nauseum!

On Another Note

Some comments here have asked "whether it made sense to anyone that a black man would ever fight with a slave state" (South Carolina) for the cause of freedom. Despite stereotypical expectations and historical revisionism, black men did, indeed, fight bravely in the American Revolution on both sides. At the battle of Cowpens in South Carolina, Banastre Tarleton was beaten in a fair fight by Patriot tactical brilliance. During the battle, Lieutenant Colonel William Washington (cousin to George Washington) dueled hand-to-hand with Tarleton and was saved only when his young African-American bugler shot his pistol at a dragoon with raised saber.

African-American soldiers later fought on both sides of the American Civil War, as well.

Stay (I) (2005)

Sometimes a Dream is Only a Dream

[7/10 · 29 October 2005]

Possible SPOILER

Psychologists believe that dreams are the unconscious mind helping the conscious mind to work out problems encountered in the conscious world.

STAY is Sam's dream.

There are many common or universally- experienced dream elements to Sam's experience/perception: repetition endless and uniform halls and staircases losing people in endless and uniform halls and staircases the appearance of people important in one's life frustration over illogical occurrences missing details cryptic comments (B.D. Wong's comments) unexplained information happenings which have no apparent connection (the blind can now see) dilemmas which the dreamer creates which are not real (Henry's suicide is an accident and only in any sense a deliberate act when he realizes he has nothing to live for any longer - fiancé and parents are gone.)

Now, what confuses the viewer is some things are common cinematographers' techniques -- Ex.: rather than show Sam interviewing all the different waiters at the diners, he is always getting in the cab from a diner. This is either a dream occurrence or a cinematographer technique. I propose that it is a dream occurrence.

Sometimes Sam is an actor in a scene and sometimes he is not present in the scene. This is either a dream occurrence or a cinematographer technique. I propose that it is a dream occurrence.

Note that only the dramatic dream elements ever create any tension for Sam: the piano scene, the dead mother scene. He is unperturbed over the endless staircases, the appearance of twins and triplets in the people scenes, the reappearance of characters in different contexts.

He is, in the unconscious of his dream, solving the life-changing event of getting married. This is made more pressing by the recent experience of being witness to a horrifying fatal accident -- another powerful, and even life-changing event.

I am not proposing that this is a neat explanation, but it suffices to explain the movie. Is the last scene a dream occurrence or a cinematographer technique to explain it all? I don't know -- I suspect that it is a dream occurrence in that area between sleep and waking. The mind tries to sort it all out.

Upon waking, a person rarely has an epiphany. Instead, the unconscious mind is more prepared to deal with the task of working out problems encountered in the conscious world. And, consequently, the conscious mind is more successful working out problems encountered in the conscious world.

Does this work as a film? Somewhat. I was not more intrigued as the film progressed. Just frustrated with all questions and no answers.