Top Whatevers of Whenever

I've only seen a pitiful 16 new releases in theaters this year, so I definitely can't do a top ten list. I also have several films I still have to see (and might not be able to see for a while unless money falls from the sky), and so this is probably not going to be a comprehensive list. But awards season has begun, and I want to highlight some films that I've really liked (even though I've already wrote about most of them).

A documentary I highly recommend: Into the Abyss
I just wrote about this, but I'm still flabbergasted that it kinda came and went without much fanfare. It was one of many documentaries snubbed by the Oscars shortlist, but that honestly seems to happen every single year. I think the grandeur and uniqueness of Herzog's other doc this year, Cave of Forgotten Dreams, simply overpowered the anticipation for another Herzog doc. The death penalty just can't beat out 3D and albino crocodiles (or was it alligators?), and it's a true shame. Not that I'm putting down Cave of Forgotten Dreams, which I also liked, but Into the Abyss had a deeper effect on me and a deeper meaning.

Other documentaries I saw include With Great Power: The Stan Lee Story, which was interesting, but didn't go into as much detail as I would have liked, Connected, which didn't go on the cliched 'everyone is overstimulated' road that I thought it would, but still didn't quite do it for me, and My Perestroika, a charming film about growing up near the end of the Soviet Union, which I wish got more attention. I have no idea if any of these films have or will come out on DVD, but I'd recommend Cave of Forgotten Dreams, and if you can find it, My Perestroika.

A Foreign Film: The Skin I Live In
Shame on me! This is the only foreign film I've seen this year! (Unless you count London River, I suppose, but I'm not sure it actually counts as one.) As I mentioned in earlier posts, I knew absolutely nothing about this film except 1) it starred Antonio Banderas, 2) it was directed by Pedro Almodovar, and 3) the trailer was fucking nuts. None of those things disappointed. Looking back on it, I can see why some other critics called it a mess; the film does have some subplots in the beginning that get pushed aside by the real meat of the story, but to be honest, I don't think it's that big of a deal. I'm sad that it isn't on the Oscar shortlist (I don't even think Spain submitted it), because there are great themes being discussed in a disturbing but effective way. Self-image, identity, the male gaze, and the awareness of the male gaze are themes set up from the beginning, and they're handled impressively.

Life / Death film of the year: Melancholia
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know Tree of Life was beautiful and all, but Melancholia hit its notes much better than The Tree of Life. (Though I think it's a travesty that the Globes passed over both of them for Best Drama. Hey, they had a few American stars! Come on!) Melancholia is one of those films that I'm not sure if I'd watch again, but I'm very glad I saw it. It's easy to write off Justine's sequence as drawn out and boring, and argue that the message is that we all deserve to die, but that's not looking closely enough at it. Why is the planet (and film) named Melancholia? We have a depressed person and a potentially life-threatening planet named after it, and Von Trier has outright said this was his film about his struggle through depression. The wedding sequence is about depression viewed from the outside; Melancholia is a distant point in the sky, and Justine is isolated from the world, something which the other characters cannot understand. She has a family and a husband that loves her, but they either minimize her emotional problems ("Why can't you just be happy?") or shrug them off entirely. In the second half, Melancholia towers over the Earth, and suddenly the feelings of dread and doom that were incomprehensible are perfectly understandable, and Justine almost revels in the "I told you so". Depression is something that's hard to truly understand unless you've gone through it; it really does feel like some unstoppable force is crushing the life out of you, and von Trier is focusing on that feeling along with a proposed Apocalypse.

I mention The Tree of Life with this because I honestly found the film to have a pretty depressing message, and attempts a similarly stylized and cosmic scale as Melancholia. While Tree of Life really is visually stunning, it rung hollow for me in a way that sharply contrast with what I believe was its intended message, whereas Melancholia is intentionally playing into hollowness.

I'm almost positive this won't be at the Oscars; Von Trier's silly antics aside, it's only gotten three nominations and one win for Best Picture (the win being from the European Film Awards, which I don't think have a lot of weight in our corner of the awards races). And while The Tree of Life is a pretty divisive film, I'm pretty sure it was better loved by critics and Malick has more profundity cred than Von Trier. Maybe it could at least be nominated for cinematography?

I can't explain why I liked this but it was awesome: Drive
I'm not entirely sure why I can't articulate what I liked so much about Drive. Maybe because I saw it five months ago? Maybe because its strengths are its stylish hero, stylized world, and Albert Brooks taking a menacing but nuanced turn as a crime boss? I don't know. I can completely understand why it won't get nominated for Best Picture; it's slick genre with nuance, but it's still a genre movie at heart. But I really hope Albert Brooks continues to get recognized, though I'm pretty sure he'll lose to Christopher Plummer. Nicolas Winding Refn also might be a spoiler in Best Director which would be pretty interesting. He got the award over Terrence Malick in Cannes, and with how well Drive is put together, I can see why.


Yo dawg, I heard you like film: Hugo and The Artist
A critic I follow on twitter (I think someone from the AV Club, I can't remember) asked why everyone hates sentimental mush unless it's about film. To me, the answer is obvious: Hugo and The Artist both play with technical elements (3D cinematography and sound editing and aspect ratio) to both enhance the film experience. Hugo definitely has a few storytelling problems, and The Artist is a simple film at heart, but they're more whimsical than sentimental. If I had to place one over the other, The Artist is a better film, but both are worth seeing. I'll eventually write more about Hugo once I see it again in 3D.

As for awards, these two are definite frontrunners, and I think Hugo really deserves Best Cinematography.  And while I'd prefer Refn to get Best Director, come on. It's Marty! How could I say no to him?


Wait, I should mention this one too: Certified Copy
So...I kind of lied when I said The Skin I Live In was the only foreign film I had seen this year. For some reason I keep convincing myself I saw Certified Copy last year, and while it did release internationally last year, it didn't come here until 2011. I guess I also forgot to mention it because I'm not really sure I liked it; it's a very well done experiment playing with art and reality (it's all particularly meta), but while it's interesting, I'm not sure how much I enjoyed watching it. If you're looking for a film to make you think, I would still recommend it; I certainly don't regret spending money on it.

And now, because I am an inherently negative and jealous person (not going to even hide it), let's talk about some not so great films.

Director, I am disappoint: A Dangerous Method
Man, what the hell happened here? When it came out I wondered why it never went wide like I expected it to, but after seeing it, I can understand why. Cronenberg (and really, everyone involved) took the easy way out, and threw in some bad storytelling along with it. Viggo Mortenson wasn't bad as Freud, so I can't say that he most definitely did not deserve a supporting actor nomination at the Golden Globes, but it seemed more based on "it's a great actor playing a historical figure!" than anything novel in his performance.

Welp, you get what you pay for and I didn't pay a cent: Another Earth and London River
The cool thing about living in New York is that occasionally, something cool happens for free. The cool thing about being an IFC member is every month or so they kinda flit a secret screening at you. So I didn't pay anything to see Another Earth and London River, and I went in knowing little to nothing about them, which is probably for the best, because I wouldn't spend money on either. Another Earth wastes two good premises (the mirror Earth and a former student fresh out of jail for vehicular manslaughter) to tell something about relationships that you can see coming a mile away. London River tries to say something about terrorism and social tensions, but just ends up as yet another "White People Realize That Minorities Aren't That Different!" film, and we really should all be past that.

Aren't things great now that white people saved everyone else from racism: The Help
I don't want to reiterate my ire for this film, but I'm extremely disappointed that Octavia Spencer won Best Supporting Actress  at the Globes this past Sunday over Bernice Bejo. Can we move past the "I'd rather play a maid than be one" stage? I'm truly appalled that it apparently won Best Picture at the Black Film Critics' awards, and if Viola Davis actually wins an Oscar for this, I'm going to throw up in my mouth.
Okay, probably not literally but it really bothers me how much attention The Help is getting like it's deep and meaningful and oh my goooood people were soooo terrible back then good thing we're all best friends now! I feel like I have to go see Pariah or rent Malcolm X in penance or something.

I hope I can get a job or have money dropped on me so I can get a chance to catch up on films, but I may have a chance to see The Descendants soon, which has been getting tons of attention. It even seems like it might be the frontrunner for Best Picture, even above The Artist. Not really sure if I'm going to like it, but who knows? Instincts can be wrong. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is also coming soon; I can see that for pretty cheap and though it's been ignored for a lot of awards ceremonies lately, I think it's going to be important.

A Dangerous Method

I usually avoid trailers because of spoilers and/or trust in the director and actors, but maybe I should have this time, because A Dangerous Method was not what I expected it to be.

A film about the relationship of Sigmund Freud and Karl Jung seemed interesting enough to me; psychoanalysis completely turned the field of psychology upside down, and since has become the most well-known form of therapy in pop culture. We all know something about Freudian psychology, but Jung's work, especially post-Freud, is also interesting, and I was prepared for a film examining the depths of both men's work. The addition of Sabina Spielrein, Jung's first foray into psychoanalysis, seemed like a perfect way to bring the two together.

Unfortunately, Cronenberg takes the easiest route possible and solely focuses on the most rudimentary sexual elements of psychoanalysis, shoving the themes of sexual repression into the audience's face. There is little focus on the relationship between Freud and Jung, instead revolving around Jung and Spielrein's relationship. I don't think it's a spoiler to tell you that it turns sexual, or that the film's conflict is surrounding Jung's guilt over their affair clashing with psychoanalytic views of sex. The relationship between Freud and Jung is rushed through, and after Sabine recovers, any other applications of psychoanalysis are completely glossed over in favor of sex scenes. The dream analysis scenes between Freud and Jung only serve to tell the audience about what we already know is in Jung's head or to show that hey, Freud is all about sex, right guys? We also hear Freud rejected Jung's alternate ideas, but there's little explanation of what these are, because apparently Jung sleeping with his patient is much more interesting.

Even if you ignore the wasted potential of the premise, the film is still very disjointed; each scene seems like its own entity that doesn't quite link with the scenes before or after it. Early in the film Jung complains about having to serve in World War One, but by the next scene, he's already back and nothing significant has changed! It is necessary at points for the film to jump forward in time, but it's done sloppily, which makes the already uneven pacing even worse. Apparently it was adapted from a play, which might explain the odd choices in pacing, but it certainly doesn't excuse it by any means. And this is getting away from a review and going towards my pure opinion, but how many damn costume dramas have we seen that involve repression and scandalous sex? Perhaps none with S&M involved, but Cronenberg is still falling into well tread territory that I'm not afraid to admit completely bores me.

The performances as a whole are serviceable, but I have to mention Keira Knightley's contortions as an untreated Sabine as a particular low. Pulling off hysteric jerks without overdoing it is undoubtedly difficult, but jutting out your jaw to look like you're imitating a bulldog will never look good. It's been two weeks since I saw this film, and I'm still really disappointed in it. Cronenberg and everyone involved could have done so much better.

Hmmm

I should have three new film posts coming up soon:

• The Help: I got this for my mom for Christmas and we watched it together. I really should write something in full, but to give a preview: I hated it. It’s baa manipulative tear jerker about a white woman who’s Not Racist Like THe Rest Of Them and how she helps some poor black people. I mean, the film tryies to say it’s about Abeline by bookending it with her voice over, but when she walks into the sunset, we don’t have any idea what is actually going to happen to her! But Skeeter got a happy ending, so it’s ok, right? 
• Hugo: I think I might see this again in 3D since I had to see it in 2D nd I just feel like it might be more impressive. I have to admit I took a while to get absorbed in the film; it starts off pretty average children’s movie. I didn’t love it the way I expected to, but it’s really sweet and I loved Chloe Mortez as Isabelle. 
• A Dangerous Method: I don’t really know what I was expecting from this film, but it was really disappointing. I might simply have been mistaken; I had assumed that the film was mostly going to be about Freud, Jung, and their theories, but really it was about sex, repression, and Keira Knightley. But even ignoring my disappointment in the plot, I felt this movie was really disjointed. There wasn’t enough connection between scenes or events, so everything got pretty flat. 

I’m also planning on seeing Shame and Into the Abyss soon, probably tomorrow. I also saw the trailer for Rampart and now I’m really interested in it.

I guess part of the reason I haven’t written anything is because I’ve felt a little blah about movies in the last week or so. I was definitely not in a good mood going into Hugo, and I might not have the money to see it again to get a new view. I had also sort of forgotten about A Dangerous Method a little, so I’m wondering ifmy mood is affecting my enjoyment of movies.

Then again, I’m totally stoked for Rampart, so maybe I’m just not doing well with brighter movies. Who knows, I just hope I get my shit together soon.