Movie reviews in brief

Although I haven't been posting much lately, I have still (of course) been watching movies! Instead of doing individual posts for every movie I've seen recently, I thought it might be fun to share some brief thoughts on the films I've been watching.

Two classics are first:

Modern Times

Another one from my mostly seen movies list. Some familiar gags (Charlie getting fed by one machine and caught in the cogs of another) were still quite amusing on re-watching. But my favorite part was a bit I had never seen before, with Charlie as a dancing and singing waiter. Watching as he pulled himself around by the seat of his pants had me laughing so hard I was crying. Chaplin is great. And Paulette Goddard is just so cute!

5/5 wings



As a side point, watching this movie made me realize why it's so hard for me to get into silent movies. Since I love to multi-task, I often put a movie on in the background while I'm doing other things. This works great for revisiting favorite classics where I know what's going on, but silent movies demand more of my attention, so I watch them less frequently. Modern Times reminded me why I should spend more time on movies without dialogue.


Kitty Foyle

The film (particularly the dialogue) does feel a bit dated, but it's worth watching if only to see Ginger Rogers in her strong, Oscar-winning performance. Kitty Foyle is a white-collar girl (the costumes reflect a very literal interpretation of this) facing an important decision: to marry one man or run away with an old flame.

The conclusion to the central dilemma of the story, which man Kitty will end up with, is not really a shocker, but it's an emotional journey nonetheless. I only wish there were more options out there for the heroine. Wyn is fun, rich, romantic, and a coward. Mark is steady, stable, thrifty, and (let's be honest here) rather dull. Are there really no other men in Kitty's acquaintance? In the movies, there is no middle-ground. The choices are love, passion & heartbreak vs. friendship, stability, & boredom. I think Kitty should have held out for door three.

(I'm tempted to give it 3 wings, but I'm weighting it higher as a classic and for Ginger.)

4/5 wings



Now for two new-ish movies:

Chicken Little

Fun family movie that drags a bit toward the end. The very cute Chicken Little really needed a cuter voice. But the vocal stylings of Joan Cusack and Steve Zahn were quite delightful. And Fish Out of Water was just too cool.

3/5 wings



The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

What I liked: The aging effects, the man with the backwards clock, the guy who got struck by lightning, and very little else.

The comparisons to Forrest Gump are justified. And while I'm no big fan of that movie, I think I did like it a bit better than Benjamin Button.

If you take away the gimmick of a man aging backwards and the few interesting things that arise from this, you are left with a very mundane tale. Whether you like it or not then may depend on the strength of the love story between Benjamin and Daisy. While I did sympathize with Benjamin, particularly at the beginning of the movie with his earnest innocence shining through the body of an old man, I personally did not care for Daisy at all (and didn't get why Benjamin did).

What is the message of this meandering movie? That even if your life seems disjointed, it's OK. Maybe you were just born to live a disjointed life. The idea that life is only about what is thrown at you and not what you make of it is not a theory I subscribe to, sorry.

(Would be 1 wing for story alone, but for Pitt's performance and for the effects I'll add on one more wing.)

2/5 wings



Now, a movie I actually saw in the theater! (It's been a while.)

Star Trek

Well, there's definitely things to nit-pick if you want to. Stuff I didn't like: the uninteresting bad dude, what they did to the Romulans (tattooed heads, now?) and a plot that was a bit weak if you thought about it too much (though all time-travel stories seem to unravel if you think hard about them).

But the movie was more about reintroducing the characters and giving their stories a spin, and I thought that was done well. (Although I've never been a huge fan of the original Star Trek, I prefer TNG & DS9, so they could have changed things really dramatically and I wouldn't have minded or maybe even noticed.) It was visually cool and super entertaining. And I think it found a good balance between pleasing Trekkies and finding a new audience (and setting up for some sequels).

A couple leaving the theater just ahead of my group did not agree. Old enough to have been fans of the show when it was first on TV, they did not seem to appreciate the changes at all. The wife was particularly distressed about what had been done to Spock's mother. The husband's complaints were more about movies in general, how the world is so bad that people just want flashier entertainment to distract them. You know, he's got a point there.

(The movie's not perfect, but for sheer entertainment value it gets 4 wings from me.)

4/5 wings



By the way, if you are wondering what happened to the Vulcan James Dean, I retired him so he wouldn't be in your face every time you loaded the page here. But if you want, you can Trek Yourself. It's fun to do with actors and famous movie lines!

What's Tom Hardy doing in Marie Antoinette?

The first time I saw him was as Shinzon, the evil Picard clone in Star Trek: Nemesis. With the veins popping out on his bald head, the crazy costume and his creepy agenda, he is a loathsome offensive brute, yet I couldn't look away. There was something about his quiet power, the smoldering intensity reminiscent of early Brando. "Who is this guy," I thought, "and what does he look like with hair?"

The answer to both questions came when I watched The Virgin Queen. As Robert Dudley, the childhood friend and love interest of Queen Elizabeth I, Tom Hardy is alternately charming and manipulative. Even though I knew Elizabeth never married, I found myself wondering how she could resist such a man. His portrayal leaves open for interpretation whether Dudley was more interested in Elizabeth for herself or for her power as queen. ("Cannot a man love both?" is his answer, which probably amounts to the truth.)

Now for my third Tom Hardy spotting and the reason for the title question of this post. Confession: I was much more interested in Marie Antoinette when I heard that Tom Hardy had a role in it. Though small, his few moments on screen as Raumont are charged with the strength of his presence. He appears in one short scene at a party where, after being thanked for providing the oysters, he plays along with a silly guessing game while the queen and Count Fersen make eyes at each other. In the following scene, Raumont expresses to the queen's friend his disapproval (and jealousy?) of Marie Antoinette's interest in the count. It goes a little something like this:

Raumont: "Our queen seems rather fond of looking at Count Fersen."

Queen's Friend: "Well, he's easy on the eyes."

R, after a piercing look in the count's direction: "Don't you think she favors him too clearly?"

QF: "Just because it is not you."

R: "Don't you think it unbecoming to our queen, I mean, he has quite the reputation."

QF: "He amuses her and she likes to be amused. There's nothing unregal in that, Monsieur."

The funny thing is, this exchange wouldn't have been entirely out of place in The Virgin Queen, as just these sorts of things could have been said about Elizabeth and Dudley. The lines feel a bit hypocritical, coming as they do from the man who played another queen's favorite. It is almost as if Robert Dudley has appeared in a new century with a new costume, still wanting to be as close as possible to whatever queen is at hand.

Given that this scene amounts to the meat of Tom Hardy's role in Marie Antoinette, it seems that he is in the movie specifically for a little inside joke. I don't know how many people saw both Marie Antoinette and The Virgin Queen and made the Tom Hardy connection, but I for one found this moment rather amusing due to the casting choice.

Every old movie is new again

Sometimes it seems like there are no new ideas in Hollywood, that every story has already been told, retold, and revisited. Some examples of movie remakes include Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, King Kong, Ocean's Eleven, Sabrina, and War of the Worlds, to name just a few. This doesn't even begin to touch on movies that were popular enough to produce sequels, prequels, reboots, re-imaginings, or a series, like Star Wars or the growing collection of Batman movies.

I'm not anti-remake as a rule, in fact I think sometimes a movie remake can be better than the original. Being inspired from the old does present certain challenges, however, especially if the source movie is well-known and well-loved. Then the new movie is bound to be closely scrutinized to see how it measures up to the original. For this reason, classic movies are often a great source for remake material, since oftentimes the older version has been all but forgotten or can easily be changed to be made more current.

There's been some buzz about a few movies lately that I'm definitely interested in based on the source material. So here's my thoughts on some upcoming sci-fi movies borrowing from some old ideas:

Star Trek XI (or Star Trek Zero)
Cons: It's a prequel. I don't get the fascination with prequels. (I'm talking to you, George Lucas.) Fans can be cruel when characters/plots set in an earlier time don't match up with what has already been established. Plus, it's pretty impossible to make things look truly older, given the quality of newer special effects. Didn't we see that in Enterprise?
Also against it: this is an odd-numbered Trek film, for those of you that believe in that curse.
Pros: It's Star Trek! Leonard Nimoy is playing Old Spock.
Verdict: I'm a Star Trek fan, but I've never been really attached to the original series, so I probably wouldn't even notice small deviations. It might be predictable and a desperate attempt to keep the Star Trek franchise going, but I'm willing to give it a shot.

Tr2n
Cons: First of all, let's talk about numbers being used as letters. This is no longer clever (and perhaps never was). It's just strange, and in this case, confusing. Are we supposed to read it as Trzn? That looks like it should be the title for an updated Tarzan movie. Why not say Tron 2, or Tron 2.0 or even The Second Coming of Tron? This choice alone scares me a great deal.
Pros: Jeff Bridges is all gung-ho about it, and is returning to play Flynn.
Verdict: The original Tron was great because it was so different. The style and idea of it -- there's nothing quite like it. Will the new special effects capture the old feeling of wonder? Is it a retelling of the old, a new updated story, or a sequel? Will Brue Boxleitner return as well? I'm curious, but feeling afraid for this one.

The Day the Earth Stood Still
Cons: Keanu Reeves. I'm sorry, Keanu fans, but his inherent dopey-ness makes it hard for me to take him seriously.
Pros: Mad Men's Jon Hamm and Jennifer Connelly are in it. The original is great.
Verdict: Updated special effects might actually enhance the story, if they don't take over. And a message of peace is always welcome. I'm excited about this one.

Will these films fail spectacularly, or join the list of successful remakes? Only time will tell. But now's your chance to weigh in with your opinions, if only so you can say "I told you so!" later.