A Single Man

This film is a very valiant attempt to take a novel and make it work on screen. They do a lot in terms of color and sounds to fully bring about a very novel feeling.

George is a professor at a college in Los Angeles, a few months earlier his long time lover of 16 years died in a car accident. As the time the film takes place in is the early sixties homosexuality was frowned upon. George wasn't invited to the funeral (family only) He goes about his day in the film, and as we watch we start to realize he plans on this being his last. he's getting all his ducks in a row and he plans on killing himself.

Much of what we experience on screen is simply trying to turn what we would have read in the novel into something tangible: The smell of a dog, the sounds of an empty house. These things are easy to imagine while you read, but to watch them is very different. In that sense they were truly successful, they worked hard on picking just the right color, the right angle and timing of everything in the film. In that way it is a novel, along the lines of "The Hours" it goes slow, chooses its words carefully.

George is a man who loves life, and its accentuated by explosions of color on screen when we see something he lusts for or is interested in. All else seems to literally pale in comparison. But even for all that he loves life he is in pain every day without his partner. The music fits perfectly with every scene, in fact it felt like most of the narrative is pushed along by the music, it seems that the music is the driving force behind everything that happens. The cinematography in that same sense is perfectly planned and works its way though the story and pushes it along. They described this as a stream on consciousness narrative, and I don't exactly disagree with that, but its a lot more than that. It is truly how a mind works, it's the little things in George's life that sets him off on a look at the past.

Little things like him telling his close friend Charley (a woman) that he is going to forget the past, totally and forever, is interpreted by her as one thing when he is in fact talking about his own death that he plans on very soon. I imagine this story being a loaf of bread soaked in scotch and sadness, there is a reality to this film that hits me in a very real place.

Colin Firth is always a pleasure to watch, and it's no wonder that he was up for an Oscar for this role. Julianne Moore was also very good, although not in it nearly enough to fully appreciate her. Tom Ford, the director, seems to be a force to be trifled with, this is his FIRST movie, ever, very impressive.

I very much liked this movie, I loved it. The trailer gave me an impression of what this film was about, and it was sort of a lie, but then again the trailer was just images and music, no actual words, which by the way is a great way to make a trailer. Even though this film isn't quite as out there as some other "gay or lesbian" interest movies I think it fits the way life is more than those others do, for gay or straight people. 8/10 stars.

Starring: Colin Firth, Julianne Moore, Nicholas Hoult, Matthew Goode

Director: Tom Ford

The Matador

Two fighters enter, and only one can leave. That is the basic idea behind bullfighting, both are in the fight for their lives, and the winner is almost always man.

David Fandila is a bull fighter in Spain, and is the next up and comer. With only 6 or 7 good years of bull fighting, he is in the pressure cooker of getting his life long dream accomplished. The dream being that he wants to fight, and kill 100 or more bulls within one bull fighting season. He would be only the 13th to do so in the centuries old tradition.

Tradition: They like to throw this word around, as if that makes what they are doing okay. David explains that turkeys are raised to be slaughtered and eaten for Christmas, so why not fight bulls? They at least have the opportunity to defend themselves, and the thing is, is that he has a point. But they don't tell you the full story. The Matador takes on the bull only after it as been antagonized to the point of foaming at the mouth, and then he further injures it by sticking sword like weapons into its spine to weaken it. The animals are bleeding profusely. If something goes wrong for the Matador then 10 other people run out to protect him from being gored. I don't see anyone helping the bull. Once the bull is weakened and injured, only then will the Matador try and kill it with a sword into the heart. They try for the clean kill and to end the suffering of the animal and for that I am happy, but its only after they cause the suffering.

David sees the bulls as most do in the bullfighting community, he is dancing with the brutal and pure nature of the natural world, and in that way it is beautiful. He truly does dance with the bulls, but in that same note, the bull is not dancing, it is desperate to stay alive, which it almost certainly will not. At any point David can turn around and walk away, the bull doesn't have that option.

David is an admirable young man, at 21 he is already chasing and nearly succeeding at his dream. He works hard and has given up much of what makes being 21 a fun age. Although I feel even more sorry for his brother, who gave up being on the national ski team of Spain to be David's "assistant"

The soundtrack is incredible and really makes the fights a spectacle to behold. It's well shot and well edited, its slick enough that you can merely pay attention to the story and not be bothered by poor production values while not being so flashy that it takes away from the film as a whole.

No matter what way you slice it, this is a brutal and savage "sport" When you see blood pouring out of the mouth of one of these animals as they just try and stay on their feet, the ballet, and the art of it all melts away and you see it for what it truly is: People wanting to see blood. As a documentary it is very interesting, and I would highly recommend it, but it is difficult to watch as an animal lover. 8/10 stars.

Starring: David Fandila

Directors: Stephen Higgins, Nina Gilden Seavey

Fantastic Mr. Fox

The charming children's movie still exists. Pixar of course fits into that grouping, and as much as I love what Pixar does with the animation none of it is physically tangible. Unlike this film which is all stop motion, and far from perfect in its animating type.

Mr. Fox is a chicken thief, and not a particularly great one, he spends more time talking and plotting than he does actually being good at what he does. When him and his pregnant wife get caught by some farmers and have to escape quickly he vows to her he will stop. And he does, for many years, but that old creeping feeling is coming back, he's tired of being poor, he wants the adventure back. He schemes up a plot to steal from the three scariest farmers around, and so ignites a war between the animals and the people with each new move upping the stakes.

The stop motion is great, the fur moves from frame to frame since they had to physically handles the models a few pieces of the fur would move and thus you get this very organic effect. The color palette like so many of Wes Anderson's films is vibrant and dense but some how feels artificial. But then again that is what he does, that's his style, and we take it for what it is. For people in film that are part of the Art Dept. this is a real treat, everything is built, it is all planned to a T.

The voice talent spans Anderson's usual cohorts to new and interesting people, Clooney and Streep do a great job, as do smaller characters like Bill Murray and Jason Schwartzman. The list keeps going. The characters are cute and mature, yes unrefined at the same time.

A problem with this film is that it is made by someone who understands Generation X, and Y, but not the children of today. I am almost 25, and am part of Y, so I see this and find is familiar and likable, where as I feel most children will not like it, or not get it. It isn't as wild and colorful as Shreck, or some of these other icons that are so steeped in pop culture its hard to see where one begins and the other ends. As well as I don't know if kids know these characters, or get Roald Dahl's writing, perhaps those books are outdated and have been replaced.

This is a film for people who like Wes Anderson and what he does. I like it, but I feel his work as of late has become repetitive and increasingly underwritten character wise. This on the other hand was different, it had room to breathe and places for the characters to grow. I feel this was possible because Anderson directed this film by E-mail, he was almost never there for when they were shooting it, so the crew was able to take some chances and let things happen like they should have without him planning every single second of the film.

This was fun, I had heard it was good, it fits his style perfectly, it is silly and strange, and adult. Even though they are sure not to swear (all the characters say "cuss" in the place of actual swears) it still isn't kid friendly. Not in content, but in the fact that I think most kids wouldn't like this, or get it for a few more years. Those kids who do will like it. Worth renting, 8/10 stars.

Director: Wes Anderson

Starring: George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman, Bill Murray, Eric Chase Anderson, Michael Gambon, Willem Dafoe, Owen Wilson

I Have Never Forgotten You

I watch way to many documentaries, and I watch way to many docs about the Holocaust.

Simon Wiesenthal walked away from the death camps at the end of WWII little more than a skeleton. Just a few days after his release he saw U.S. soldiers talking in an office about hunting down the Nazis responsible, he immediately volunteered to help them. He had lost every single person in his family, he was the only one left and demanded justice. He worked with them for years, and after the Nuremberg trials the English and the Americans left, the sad truth of the matter is that the Nuremberg trials only convicted some of the guilty, some were let go, and some went to prison. Once the trials were over the rest of the Nazis, some being high officials were just forgotten about, but not by Wiesenthal, he set up his own group to hunt down these criminals who were responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths.

Throughout his life he tracked down the worst of the worst. Was painted as a villain by some (shame on those who did) while he was celebrated and honored by others. He was called a hero, which he always fervently denied, to try and understand why he wouldn't want that you have to put yourself in his position. All of your loved ones are dead, and you live, the guilt must have been so heavy. Yes, he sought justice, and tracked down real monsters, but he didn't want to be the hero.

To those who painted him as a villain, for trying to ruin peoples lives by exposing them all I can think is how anti-semitism is the same, year after year it keeps coming back. Him being a Jew wanting justice is somehow wrong, and the actual wrong doers are now mearly innocents, just following orders, or deserving of a second chance? I don't think so. Are there crimes in war?

How could someone not say yes to that. I think that the German people as a whole now are a good people, but still there is an under belly of anti-semitism, and its sad. It must be a hard legacy to live down and a terrible past to overcome, but to fix that would be to have expelled the guilty after WWII, instead of hiding them and defending them.

I want to call Wiesenthal a hero, or at least a great man, but I know he would have disagreed with me, so for that I respectfully say he was one out of many who sought to right wrongs, and for that he should not be forgotten. 8/10 stars.

Director: Richard Trank

Narration: Nicole Kidman

Starring: Simon Wiesenthal

Surviving Crooked Lake

There have been a lot of films like this. "Deliverance" "Mean Creek" even to a certain extent "Lord of the Flies" That by no means makes this film any less enjoyable, or in its way new, or fresh.

Four girls go out on a canoe trip (Alysha, Candice, Morgan and Steph) along with Steph's older brother Jonah who is a counselor at the summer camp they all attend. Everything is going well for a while, Jonah tries to get Steph over her fear of water since she had witnessed her father die in a water accident. Alysha has her eye on Jonah, after disappearing together for a little while the other girls start to suspect something. Later that night Alysha and Jonah nearly kiss, when they are discovered Alysha runs into the woods, and Jonah follows. There is an accident and Jonah dies. The rest of the film is the girls struggling to survive, to find a way out of the wilderness and what to do with Jonah's body.

Something that stuck out to me, is that since it was a true accident there was no turning on one another going on, which you tend to see in this kind of film. Instead the conflict is brought upon with the problem that Steph doesn't want to leave his body behind, and all these girls are pencil thin(not going to be easy to carry him). As well as Steph has just lost her brother, and had lost her father, so she isn't doing well. There are many films that depict realistically the way we as a species have forgotten how to survive in these sorts of situations. They don't have food, there are animals out there and they are getting weaker and weaker.

There is surprisingly little dialogue in certain parts of the film, and I was very happy with this. The conflict boiled under the surface and only reared its ugly head once in a while, but the tension was always there. For the girls being so young in this the acting was very good, there were of course moments that were over the top, or the inflection in someones voice wasn't quite right, but easily over looked. I saw a movie a while ago called "Paranoid Park" it did well at festivals and was directed by Gus Van Sant, so I thought it might be good, it wasn't, no one should ever watch this movie. Anyway, the cast in that is about the same age as the girls in this, and the acting was so God awful. So to compare the two is like comparing apples and a rotted orange.

The direction as well was spot on, it played out slowly, and wasn't trying to shove to much in, but let it be realistic. The Cinematography at times was gorgeous, but since they were working outside the use of lights was minimized and so didn't have the dramatic flair you might want to see. Although during night scenes, specifically when Alysha is running away and Jonah is following the lighting was great. They used flash lights so you'd only see her for a moment at a time and then gone, very cool. As well as a scene with Steph and something in the woods, all she has is a small flashlight, that's a pretty narrow scope when something is stalking you.

Overall I liked it. Since the story wasn't all that original, and they didn't bring much to the table in terms of new material I cant give it to high a rating. But that's not to say it wasn't good. If there was anything in it I would say would push someone to see it would be the narration by Steph, especially the last monologue, it wasn't over written, it just was the thoughts of a 14 year old girl, raw and sad. 7/10 stars.

Directors: Sascha Drews, Ezra Krybus, Matthew Miller

Starring: Stephannie Richardson, Guy Yarkoni, Alysha Aubin, Candice Mausner, Morgan McCunn

Dirt! The Movie

Dirt is a movie now, just so you know. Like the string of docs that have been coming out the last few years this film follows suit with a blanket concept and tries to cover it as best they can in a small amount of time.

There are times this works, but things have to be sacrificed. Such as with "The Corporation" Its long, really long, so you possibly lose the audience along the way since there are no explosions or tits. This one they kept fairly short at an hour and a half, and they actually covered most of their bases. What the film is trying to say is that dirt is a living thing, and should be respected, as we lose top soil we lose the ability to feed ourselves (we cant grow crops in rock) and as we cover it up in cities we mess up the natural order of things.

Think of dirt as a sort of filter for the world, it cleans waste, it turns garbage into itself. It is what allows life to happen, and we are the only known planet to have it. So as we do things that destroy it we in turn destroy ourselves, and its at this point that it gets very familiar. Ive watched plenty of docs in the last few years with this message, if we destroy life in the oceans we do the same to ourselves, if we pollute the world we do it to ourselves, so one and so forth.

Now does the fact that Ive heard it before make it any less true? No, and I actually agree with them. The way they produce these are very smart and manipulative, they aren't liberal minded, or left wing but simply pro-human and pro-life (not the abortion kind of pro-life) So since the message is a good one, and done well people should watch this and try and make changes to their lives. Film is a powerful medium, but sometimes I feel like it fails, people see them and want to change but just don't. There's the saying that land is valuable, since they aren't making anymore of it, and that holds true. Where there are draughts, and where the land turns to desert we lose something. Yes we can bring water in, but it wont change that fact that at one time the land took care of itself, we did something to hurt it and it basically died. The great thing is that we can actually bring it back to life.

This film wouldn't be for everyone, its preachy at times, but has a good message and a hard one to disagree with. If you are someone who already does what they can for the environment then there is little else to learn, if not maybe watch this and think about changing. 7/10 stars.

Directors: Bill Benenson, Gene Roscow, Eleonore Dailly

The September Issue

Everyone has heard of the movie "The Devil Wears Prada" Well this is the real life woman that the Meryl Streep character is based on. And as scary as Streep played her...well it doesn't really transfer over to the real life.

Her name is Anna Wintour, and she actually wasn't all that bitchy, granted she had a camera on here, which I'm sure made a difference in her disposition. The doc. focuses on the creation of the most important issue of the year for Vogue, which is of course the September issue. So we see as they get the shots and clothes that they want, or don't. The petty squabbling between the people who want one thing and the others who disagree. In that way it's so run of the mill. Nothing that they argue about really matters. Oh! she likes this scarf, but I don't, gasp....someone's about to open up a can of....snide backstabbing remarks.

They are all snarls and hisses but none of these people have any claws. Their art makes no social statement, it doesn't better anything, it just is. Which is fine, if you are someone who hates fashion then you are putting to much stock into it. If that's what these people want to do then so be it, I'm sure there are people who scoff at my chosen career path. There is one thing that these people do that upsets me, and they should be socially punished for. Apparently, and they mention it several times in the doc. Wintour is responsible for the reemergence of fur in the fashion community starting in the mid nineties. They proudly talk about this, they should be ashamed of this. Will some one throw some red paint on this lady, she has it coming, don't worry about her snarl afterwards, shes harmless.

I did pity some of the people in this, they don't realize there is a world outside of fashion, they exclaim they are going to kill themselves because a dress wasn't liked. Turn the drama dial down to like two on the scale. Wintour explains that her siblings do humanitarian work in their careers, even her daughter wants to be a lawyer. There are people who wish to follow in her footsteps, but the people who know her and love her see there are more important things to do with their lives.

I wish they had paid more attention to her family life and dynamic, and her as a real person, but they don't and opt for a glossy high style look at the behind the scenes of Vogue (should I be surprised) The meaningless fights are brought to the forefront, not the real peoples lives, not the cost that the fashion industry has on other countries and groups of people. I wish they had taken it another direction but it was still mildly entertaining. 6/10 stars.

Director: R.J. Cutler

Starring: Anna Wintour