Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Did You Hear About the Morgans? Sadly, Yes.

Did You Hear About the Morgans? did absolutely nothing for me. Nothing. Although it's nice to know Wilford Brimley got a job other than hawking Liberty Medical diabetes testing supplies deliveries. And Meryl is just not a name Sarah Jessica Parker can pull off. She's great and all, but the only one who should be named Meryl is Meryl Streep- despite the fact that even she changed her name to Meryl from Mary Louise. But I digress.

Sarah Jessica Parker plays Meryl Morgan, a workaholic real estate company owner who recently split with her husband because he cheated on her once. Hugh Grant plays her philandering husband Paul Morgan. There was another small plot point in their damaged marriage; she wanted kids, he didn't think he'd be a good dad.

The whole storytelling technique seemed too forced and very predictable. Paul wants to meet with Meryl and tell her he's sorry and wants her back. Meryl can't forgive him. They go for a walk to talk it over and witness a murder and poof, instant back together via the witness protection program. Some of the supporting actors like Elisabeth Moss as Meryl's dedicated and tightly wound assistant and Sam Elliott as the quirky Wyoming officer tasked with looking after the Morgans were welcome sights, but even they couldn't save the movie.

Throughout the picture I kept thinking there just weren't enough laughs. The theater was often silent and not in a good way. The best part really was the PETA bit Hugh Grant is shown doing in the trailer. Do yourselves a favor: don't bother hearing about the Morgans.

In case you hadn't gathered, the chances of this movie even being nominated for an Oscar are less than nothing. Like zilch. Nada. Nein. No way. Like Michael Jackson will come back to life doing the Thriller dance before that happens. OK, glad we made that clear.

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

The Lovely Bones Not As Lovely As I'd Hoped

Just because you have Peter Jackson directing, doesn't mean the film is going to live up to the expectations. Lesson learned.

Don't get me wrong, The Lovely Bones looked lovely and told an interesting and understandable story, but if you've read the book recently it was quite disappointing.

The story, a 14 year-old girl gets raped and murdered in 1970s Pennsylvania and watches over her family as they grieve, stars Atonement's Academy Award nominee Saoirse Ronan as the ill-fated Susie Salmon. The ensemble cast includes big names like Mark Walhberg as Susie's father, Rachel Weisz as her mother, Susan Sarandon providing comedic relief as Grandma Lynn, and a never better Stanley Tucci as the child murdering neighbor. Throw Michael Imperioli in as the detective investigating the disappearance for good measure. All in all, the cast was probably one of the best parts of the film. Interesting fun fact, Jackson cast Ronan with the hopes of having an unknown as the lead, but Ronan's Oscar-nominated turn in Atonement came out first.

If you haven't read the book, the film is satisfying in its portrayal of a nature-filled heaven and the story behind it. Susie is observant, quizzical, curious, and loving. And Jackson did make an effort to include scenes directly from the book in the opening sequences that would have been lost in the script otherwise. We see Susie save her brother's life by driving illegally to get him to a hospital after he swallowed a twig. We see her pursuing her dream of being a wildlife photographer by following around one of her school mates and taking her picture. This is good story-telling, no doubt.

My major beef with the film is the amount of important events in the book that were left out. *SPOILER ALERT* In the book, Susie is raped. There is no mention of that here at all. In the book they find her elbow buried in the ground. In the film, the only thing they find is her hat. In the book her father has a heart attack, resulting in Susie's mother returning to the family she felt forced to abandon. The film uses an attack in the cornfield as the instigator for her return and in addition makes no mention of the extramarital affair between Susie's mother and the detective investigating her murder. Susie's sister Lindsey chooses to give herself to her boyfriend at 14, the same age as Susie's death, in the book. There is barely even a mention of him in the film. And finally, the book spans more than a decade. The film makes little mention of how much time has passed, other than at one point saying Susie's been missing for 11 months. It just seems like a lot to omit from such a compelling story.

Coming out of the film I was very frustrated because of these discrepancies and missing plot points. But regardless of book vs. film, the movie is visually stimulating, emotionally gripping, and definitely gives you a lot to think about. We'll see if Oscar thinks about it come February when the nominations are announced. Considering Stanley Tucci just got a Golden Globe nod, my money's on him to represent the film in March as well.

Sunday, December 6, 2009

The Blind Side Blind Sided Me With How Good It Is

Today I saw The Blind Side. Aside from not liking Sandra Bullock as a blond, this was one of the most delightful films I've seen in a while.

I went into it knowing it had gotten mixed reviews- the good mostly for Bullock's performance- but I wasn't entirely convinced it would exceed my expectations. It could have ended up a drippy, overly sugary sweet sports movie about persevering and overcoming all obstacles, which it kind of is, but it manages to balance that out with a sassy, tart mom with a mouth on her who knows a thing or two about protecting her family.

It's a story about a kid named Michael, Big Mike, from the projects of Memphis who gets picked up on the streets the night before Thanksgiving and offered a place to sleep by the Tuohys. Eventually Michael comes to feel like part of the family. For legalities' sake, the Tuohys ask Michael if he'd like to be an official member of the family. His response? "I thought I already was."

This family is almost too good to be true. And it's hard to look at Tim McGraw as Bullock's soft-hearted, easily influenced husband acting and not think he should be breaking into song. They must've really wanted someone from Tennessee to play the husband. Although without his facial hair you almost forget who he is. Jae Head plays the family son and attention hog, SJ. He was responsible for many of the laughs, especially when acting as Michael's agent while he was being recruited for colleges. "Tennessee offered me a walk on the field AND opportunity to flip the coin. What'll you give me?" And laughs were in abundance when Michael was in training for the fall football season and SJ acted as his coach. His entire body was the barbel that Michael lifted to build strength. SJ even stood on Michael's feet while he did sit-ups. Too cute.

The movie feels long, but it does satisfy that feel-good craving. Small dilemmas develop, but all are resolved leaving the audience joyful and with tears in their eyes. And just try holding them in as pictures of the real Tuohys and Michael appear on screen during the credits. I dare you.

While not yet nominated for any Oscars, the list for Best Actress is getting shorter and shorter and Sandra Bullock may just find herself on it for the first time. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for her.

Thursday, December 3, 2009

Kramer vs. Kramer vs. Grandma's Puzzles

Okay, folks. A post everyday didn't happen. Movies just couldn't compete with doing Thanksgiving puzzles with my grandma. But, after today I will play catch up to make sure 101 movies are indeed covered by the time the ceremony rolls around in March. Let's take a look now at one of 1979's best, Kramer vs. Kramer.

Directed by Robert Benton, Kramer vs. Kramer examines what a home is and what it takes to be a good parent. Dustin Hoffman as the father and as skinny as I've ever seen him. Meryl Streep as the mother who leaves her unhappy life only to return for her son over a year later was so youthful looking I couldn't believe she was already nearly 30 years old. And an adorable 7 year-old Justin Henry as the son they both fight for. As the youngest Academy Award nominee in history, it's too bad his career kind of stalled after an entrance into the industry most actors only dream of.

This film won 5 Oscars, all in major categories, including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actress, and Best Adapted Screenplay. I certainly understand why critics find this movie so compelling. It's hard to find a scene in the entire film that viewers can't relate to. I couldn't help but chuckle every time Justin's character Billy imitated something his father did. Walking to the bathroom and not flushing or trying to cook french toast and doing it incorrectly and making a huge mess in the process.

Although I loved the casting of Meryl Streep as the mother because of her innocence and ability to make you agree that she was justified in her leaving, the role almost seemed too small for Oscar. She was barely even in the film. It was so much more about Dustin Hoffman and his learning to be a good father than about the fight between the two parents about who Billy would ultimately live with. But then again, Dame Judi Dench won one for her seven minutes in Elizabeth, so I guess exceptions can be made.

As I was watching the film though I found myself reflecting on some of the exact same conversations I had with my parents growing up. Reading books together, requesting ice cream for dinner, asking what kinds of things we have now that they didn't have back when they were growing up. My mom loved to tell the story of the typewriter and how if you made a mistake you had to go back and do the entire page all over instead of just being able to hit delete. This story is a story that could happen to anyone.

All in all, the film is real, relatable, evocative, and still relevant 30 years later. And it doesn't hurt that the ending gives parents and children alike a warm and fuzzy feeling all over.

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

2010 Oscars Are Right Around the Corner!

I have always been one to obsess over the Academy Awards. This season, with the move back to March, a new opportunity has presented itself. Exactly 101 days from Thanksgiving is the awards ceremony of all awards ceremonies. The Oscars.

So I have decided to make it my mission to make the most of it this year. Every day from Thanksgiving until The Day, I will post a review or commentary on a film nominated for motion picture's highest honor. Throughout the season I will be watching old films I have never seen that either won or were nominated for one of the top awards, as well as all the films that will be nominated in major categories this season. You may be shocked to learn some of the many critically praised films I have yet to see.

Check back on Thursday to see the first film I tackle!