biography

Archived Posts from this Category

June 29, 2009

A Beautiful Mind

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 2001, biography, drama, entertainment, movies, trailers | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

Abeautifulmindposter

Based on the life of John Nash, the famed Nobel Laureate in Economics, Ron Howard’s 2001 film A Beautiful Mind is a biopic that runs a touch too long and plays a little too fast and loose with the facts to be effective. A leaner, less glossy approach would have made for better viewing, but Howard’s not exactly known for being subtle (Frost/Nixon being an exception, of course).

Russell Crowe stars as Nash and we are introduced to him as he arrives at Princeton University. He was promised a single room, but winds up with a roommate named Charles Herman (Paul Bettany) anyways. The two become fast friends, with Charles helping Nash out in some stressful situations and edging him into a social environment to help him with his personality. Nash comes off as somewhat abrasive and eccentric, but this fits just fine with the territory of a highfalutin university such as Princeton.

Nash also strikes up an awkward friendship or two, but he’s having trouble pulling together any serious work despite having a mind filled with brilliant ideas. His lack of focus threatens his future until he finally composes a breathtaking theory in mathematical economics and governing dynamics. Nash receives an appointment at MIT and winds up teaching a class. He meets student Alicia Larde (Jennifer Connelly) and the pair eventually strike up a relationship and marry.

As life continues, Nash is invited to a “secret” Department of Defense facility within the Pentagon to crack a secret code. He meets William Parcher (Ed Harris) and ends up being dispatched for what he sees as important missions for the United States government. The missions begin to take over his life and he becomes paranoid, only to have Alicia and his friends soon discover what the real story is.

A Beautiful Mind is based on Sylvia Nasar’s book of the same name, which is in turn of course based on the life of John Nash. The film’s narrative clearly differs from the real life account of Nash, as most biopics do, but there are some adjustments Howard and the screenwriters made that could have been better left untouched. Perhaps a smaller production would have brought out more of the controversial elements in Nash’s life and made for a more interesting, less romantic motion picture.

Nevertheless, Howard takes the “blockbuster” approach here and is saved by his great actors. Crowe is terrific, proving why he’s one of the best actors of his generation, and Connelly is a perfect accompaniment for him. She shares the screen well, her elegant beauty almost overwhelming and her character’s forwardness a sort of ideal foil for her counterpart’s natural shyness and eccentricity. This allows the film’s exploration of mental disorder to feel more legitimate, thankfully.

There are some interesting components to Nash’s life that could have used a look, including the actual chronology of his hallucinations and their nature. In reality, they were solely auditory. The device used by Howard to make them visual serves the purpose of a movie, of course, and allows for performers to step into the roles and captivate, but perhaps another approach could have made more out of the claustrophobia of hearing voices inside as opposed to seeing them manifest outside.

There is also the question of his relationship with Alicia. Nash, in real life, wound up divorced from Alicia in 1963 and the two worked hard to recommit and reconnect. His son, featured on the outskirts of the movie only slightly, was also a sufferer of schizophrenia. Nothing in this relationship is even faintly explored.

Overall, A Beautiful Mind still somewhat works as a beautiful testimony to the bravery of the human spirit and the power of relationships. It is fuelled largely by the great performances within, but Howard’s heavy-handed direction has sequences feeling a little too big and glossy for the subject matter. It’s too bad that the reality behind this biopic is so drastically different and, in effect, so much more interesting.

5.2/10

Trailer:

 

June 18, 2009

Girl, Interrupted

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 1999, biography, drama, entertainment, movies, trailers | Tags: , , , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

girl_interrupted

Based on a true story or perhaps countless true stories, Girl, Interrupted is about how a 60s culture dealt with mental illness. We are given access to the story through the eyes of Susanna Kaysen, played in the movie by Winona Ryder. Kaysen’s memoirs of the same name were adapted for the screen by director James Mangold and Lisa Loomer. According to Kaysen, the finished product was a film with too much “melodramatic drivel.”

For the most part, Kaysen is correct. While Girl, Interrupted is well-acted and looks pretty good, it lacks the meandering quality of the memoirs and attempts too rigid a plotline. Instead of perhaps talking about the system of mental health care and how problems were dealt with at the fictional Claymoore Hospital (for Kaysen, the real facility was McLean Hospital), Mangold veers down a path of melodramatic posturing and blows momentum with a problematic third act.

Susanna is 18-years-old. She’s what we could call a typical teenager, except one day she downed a bottle of pills and chased it with a bottle of vodka. Who knows? Maybe that’s still typical teen stuff. Susanna “voluntarily” checks herself in to Claymoore Hospital and meets the supervising nurse (Whoopi Goldberg) upon arrival. She’s whisked into an almost magical world of various patients suffering with various conditions. They’re all jammed on to the same basic floor in the hospital, regardless of the severity of the condition.

There’s burn victim Polly (Elisabeth Moss), pathological liar Georgina Tuskin (Clea DuVall), the abused and self-abusive Daisy Randone (Brittany Murphy), anorexic Janet Webber (Angela Bettis), lesbian Cynthia (Jillian Armenante), and some others. The “leader of the pack,” so to speak, is a wild sociopath named Lisa Rowe (Angelina Jolie). As Susanna gets to know the various people in the hospital, she starts to make friends and realizes something she never had in the “outside world.” The cost of these friends turns out to be more significant than she ever thought possible.

Kaysen’s memoirs detail what is described as two years of life lost. She is now a “recovered borderline personality,” apparently, so perhaps those years weren’t lost after all. The events of her life are shrouded in some ambiguity, as the memoirs reflect, but Mangold’s picture leaves none of that to the imagination. Instead of psychological meanderings, we’re given direct, sharp plot points complete with a runaway trip to visit a released patient and a stupid conclusion in the bowels of the hospital.

But the reason to see Girl, Interrupted really has little to do with whether or not Mangold got Kaysen’s memoirs quite right. The real reason to see this movie has to do with the performances. Frankly, they’re all very good from the top to the bottom of the cast. Goldberg is comforting and amusing as the supervising nurse, while Ryder plays a convincing lead character yet again. Murphy puts forth what is doubtlessly the best performance of her haphazard and perplexing career, too.

It is Angelina Jolie, in her Oscar-winning performance, who really knocks it out of the park though. She’s a loose cannon in every sense of the word, launching herself headfirst into the role of Lisa with a sort of impish, disrespectful abandon. There’s nothing to her and there’s everything to her, all at once, as she’s able to shift gears on a dime and really give her character deep, weighty context. It’s easy to play a crazy person; it’s less easy to make that person relevant and ultimately human.

Overall, however, Mangold simply dropped the ball here. Despite being given the gift of solid performances and a great cast, he fiddles and fusses with the material too much to make much of an impact. There’s too much convolution outside of the hospital and too little concern with why these women are there inside the facility. It’s almost as though they become caricatures only saved by the quality of the performances behind them. As such, Girl, Interrupted is nowhere near as good as it could have been.

4.6/10

Trailer:

 

June 6, 2009

Notorious

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 2009, biography, drama, entertainment, movies, trailers | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

Notoriousposter08

As a sleek, well-tuned biopic, Notorious works nicely. It refocuses the common narratives of rapper Notorious B.I.G.’s life and tells a story about the boy behind the man, reaching inside B.I.G.’s legacy to tell a more difficult, more poignant tale. Directed by George Tillman Jr., Notorious succeeds in large part because it is driven by the music and the mood of the 1980s and 1990s.

Biopics can be tricky even in the most competent hands. There is often a tendency to romanticize the subject and the performers are often put in a position of emulation rather than dedication. Here, however, Notorious achieves a nice balance, exposing the flaws of Biggie Smalls without demonizing him and exploring the heights of his career without glossing over the shadows below.

Jamal Woolard has his work cut out for him playing Big Poppa. Woolard is a rapper too, working under the name “Gravy.” Interestingly, Gravy can be heard on Tupac’s Pac’s Life record. Playing B.I.G. isn’t an easy task, but Woolard seamlessly integrates himself into the persona of the larger-than-life presence. He looks an awful lot like Biggie as well, so that helps add some certain realism to the performance.

Despite the fact that Woolard knew how to rap already, he took voice lessons for six months to nail down that signature Biggie sound. It pays off and the rhymes are incredible. Woolard’s portrayal is compelling in that it references multiple sides of B.I.G. We are shown his complexities and his difficulties with relationships, but we are also shown his dedication to his mother (Angela Bassett) and his need to become a man.

The rest of the cast is terrific as Tillman Jr. showcases some pretty outstanding talent. Derek Luke is Sean Combs, Marc John Jefferies is Lil’ Cease, Anthony Mackie is Tupac Shakur, Antonique Smith is Faith Evans, and Naturi Naughton is Lil’ Kim. Smith is of special note, as she’s a dead ringer for Faith and manages to bring dignity and class to the role. Naughton is spunky and spicy, just like Lil’ Kim.

Bassett deserves attention as Voletta Wallace, as she avoids the selfish mother figure and gives B.I.G.’s fountain of inspiration a backbone. She portrays Voletta’s “tough love” approach with stoutness, efficiently exhibiting why she’s one of the best actresses in the world when it comes to stern resolution. Also certainly of note is Biggie’s son, Christopher Wallace Jr. He plays a young version of his father in a courageous, energetic performance.

Tillman Jr.’s picture was certainly no easy task. Providing an acceptable and entertaining film about the life of one of music’s most compelling figures is never a walk in the park, but Notorious manages to pull it off by keeping focused and maintaining an eye on its roots. Tillman Jr. never overdoes it, laying off of the camera tricks and special effects shots to maintain the film’s tidiness and concision.

Notorious operates with Voletta Wallace’s blessing. It doesn’t get bogged down with the West Coast vs. East Coast conflict and sticks to the emotional responses in regards to Tupac’s and B.I.G.’s death. The rivalry and friendship between the two icons is explored as it occurred and sensationalistic conspiracy theories are left on the sidelines. As such, Notorious is tasteful and distinguished without being ignorant with respect to the flaws and problems that led to the early demise not one but two great artists.

8.2/10 

Trailer:

 

February 12, 2009

Persepolis

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 2007, animated, biography, drama, entertainment, foreign, historical, trailers, war | Tags: , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

persepolis-poster-1

To say Marjane Satrapi led an interesting life is an understatement. Born in Iran in 1969, the graphic novelist and filmmaker witnessed the fall of the Shah and the stripping away of civil liberties in her homeland. Marjane’s experiences went into a graphic novel called Persepolis and that graphic novel was made into a 2007 animated feature directed by Satrapi and French comic artist Vincent Paronnaud.

In many ways, Persepolis is merely a coming-of-age story set to the backdrop of the Iranian Revolution. The film, which won the 2007 Jury Prize at Cannes, follows Marjane through her life using elegant animation in both black and white and colour. We begin with Marjane in the airport smoking. She begins to think back to her life in Iran in 1979 and we follow her thoughts back to where she was born. As a young girl, Marji had dreams of becoming a prophet. She loved Bruce Lee. As an adult, her idealism has drained out.

The film uses Marjane’s memories and black and white animation to highlight the historical context behind the young girl’s experiences. We learn of the uprising against the Shah, the hopes of the Iranians for a more just society, the unity of family in tough times, and the crushing reality of war. Throughout it all, Marji has a more urgent task. She is precocious, listens to Iron Maiden, and later heads to school in Austria to “grow up.”

The animation style of Persepolis is similar to that of the graphic novels. The simple black and white shimmers with remarkable detail. The style attempts to fit Marjane’s massive story into a 98-minute frame and succeeds wonderfully. This is an animated film for adults, one that is dazzling to look at and loaded with context and information to ponder.

In many ways, Persepolis is an ultimately refreshing coming-of-age tale in a decade loaded with them. Here we have a young woman with purpose and with legitimate trials to overcome. And she does overcome, marvellously and elegantly in her own way. She offers hope when there is little and keeps her wits about her as long as she can. But the crush of things and the weight of life eventually wear Marjane down and Persepolis allows us to experience that, too. We break when she does.

For the sake of this review, I watched the English dubbed version of the movie. The vocal talents were tremendous, with Chiara Mastroianni voicing teenage and adult Marjane in both the French and English versions. Catherine Deneuve is Marji’s mother in both versions, while Sean Penn voices the father in the English version. The father in the French version is voiced by the one and only Simon Abkarian. Also featured in the English version is Iggy Pop as Uncle Anouche.

Persepolis is a special motion picture. Painstakingly animated and brimming with vibrancy, this film yearns to be seen. Show it to your children, if you have any, and explain it to them tolerantly. They (and you) will learn about life from another point of view and about growing up as a human being in a world that is often uncertain, upsetting, and unsafe. They’ll also learn that it’s okay to hope, laugh, play, and listen to Iron Maiden at full volume.

9.3/10

French Trailer:

 

October 23, 2008

Into the Wild

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 2007, adventure, biography, drama, entertainment, movies, trailers | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

The idea of letting go of everything, cutting up the credit cards, and shipping off for the wilderness is an idea that many of us encounter. It’s tempting. The purity of the wild, of breathing in the fresh air without the umbrage of exhaust fumes or modern pressures clogging our lungs, is seductive to say the least. But most of us, if not almost all of us, resist the seductive siren song of the trees and the brush and go about our daily business of tilling the concrete soil in the modern world.

Christopher McCandless heard the song, perhaps through a Jack London novel, and gave in to it. With a strong will, a book about poisonous plants, and a devotion to bucking modern life’s trappings, McCandless headed out after graduating from Emory University in Georgia in 1990. He gave $24,000 of his leftover college fund to Oxfam and bolted for the open road. McCandless worked a variety of jobs from time to time and slipped in between periods of having money and food to periods of having no money and very little food. His goal was Alaska. McCandless consistently kept a journal, writing in it up until his final days in Alaska. He died of starvation inside of a bus he had lived in.

McCandless’ story was turned into a bestselling non-fiction book by author Jon Krakauer and was made into a film by Sean Penn. Penn’s film stays remarkably close to the story as found in Krakauer’s book. Pieces of McCandless’ journal and testimony from witnesses and people who knew him fleshed out the story for the book, giving us a picture of McCandless as a young man with a will for adventure and a disdain for the times in which he lived, his parents, and modern society as a whole.

Emile Hirsch stars as McCandless in Penn’s film. He inhabits the role beautifully. Other performers swirl around him, caught up in his presence and enamoured with the vision of Christopher that he so graciously conjures. We are introduced to a cast of characters, given glimpses at the real people who Christopher surrounded himself with and given a chance to guess at why he wanted to escape some others. His parents, for one, were clear motivators for his decision to head into the wilderness. Here they are played by William Hurt and Marcia Gay Harden. His confused but sympathetic sister (Jena Malone) narrates the tale as best she can.

Penn has constructed a film that does not glorify Christopher McCandless. It does not mourn him, celebrate him, or condemn him. Instead, Penn’s passion as a director is evident in his ability to let the story breathe and to let the reality sink in. It is a serious film, deeply reflective and filled with the uncompromising nature of the land and of Christopher’s ideas. Indeed, the grand lesson that Penn aims to impart here is that McCandless doubtlessly died from loneliness…poisonous plant seeds, starvation, or not.

Perhaps we all know a Christopher McCandless. Maybe we know somebody who wanted to get away from it all, who wanted to escape, and who had the desire and passion to do so despite all odds. McCandless, as embodied by Hirsch and described by Penn’s film, had his escape, but he also had his defiance and his idiocy. Indeed, by abandoning his sister to the strains of their existence and by casting off the shackles of life in such a dramatic fashion, it could be argued that he is far from heroic. Brave, maybe, but Christopher McCandless is no hero. And Sean Penn has no desire to make him one.

Instead, the best lesson to be grasped from Into the Wild is that we ought to take heart and take it often. Life is wild; it is a frenzied, often-trying existence with little respite from the chase of material goods and the ire of those who wish to see us fail. McCandless escaped that, not realizing that the true heart of existence comes not from solitude in the wilderness but from the people he encountered along the way. Each, in a small or big way, saved him.

Unity, compassion, friendship; that is Penn’s message.

9.4/10

Trailer:

 

July 29, 2008

Becoming Jane

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 2007, biography, drama, entertainment, historical, movies, romance, trailers | Tags: , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

Julian Jarrold’s Becoming Jane is really kind of a bore. Based on the early life of Jane Austen, this 2007 film assumes a generally unproven relationship between Austen and Thomas Langlois Lefroy. The screenplay was based around real events, for the most part, and author Jon Spence, who wrote Becoming Jane Austen, served as a consultant on the picture. Two other biographers of Jane Austen confirm the existence of the Lefroy/Austen relationship, so an alleged historical basis is good enough for me.

Regardless of how accurate Becoming Jane is or turns out to be, it is still a rather slow-moving film. Anne Hathaway stars as Jane, the younger daughter of Reverend Austen (James Cromwell) and his wife (Julie Walters). Jane wants to become a writer, which endlessly bothers her mother and endlessly pleases her father. Jane spends a good deal of time turning down the affections of various potential suitors. She’s disappointed in the courtship practices of the time and disdains that the idea of marriage is all about money and status. She wants to marry for love, after all, and desires affection.

Along comes young Lefroy (James McAvoy). Lefroy is a rough-and-tumble lawyer with a bad reputation. He’s also arrogant and, at first, precious Jane can’t stand the brute. Eventually, however, she gives in to his charms and a romance begins to bud. Jane and Lefroy can’t be together for a number of reasons and the politicking of family dynamics soon takes its hold over both of our star-crossed lovers. Becoming Jane focuses more on the journey of Jane to be with Lefroy than it does on the journey for Jane to actually “become” Jane Austen.

The thing about Jane Austen and her works is that her followers and her fans don’t analyze her books to death; they simply love them. It is true that Austen’s influence on the world is profound, as Pride and Prejudice serves as the basic blueprint for our romantic films and her other works are still selling like hotcakes. So finding the ideal actress to play such an influential author was a bit of an uphill climb, I’m sure. With Hathaway, the choice wound up being a good one. Sure, her accent is not overly convincing and she may stumble somewhat through the role, but she has a profound likeability that is virtually unmatched among modern actresses. That plays out very well for her in this film and makes even the most boring of sequences a bit more tolerable.

James McAvoy is quickly developing into a favourite of mine, too, and he was quite good here. He plays the ragamuffin role rather well and it is pleasing to see the chemistry between his Lefroy and Hathaway’s Austen. There are some truly good moments between the two of them, but sadly these moments don’t occur often enough.

One of the problems with Becoming Jane is that there is no real clear indication as to what young Miss Austen is, in fact, becoming. Is she becoming the novelist we love? Or is she simply becoming a woman? Perhaps it’s a bit of both, but Jarrold’s film stumbles so much in establishing the purpose that I think the film falters under the weight of its own uncertainty. Scenes without purpose tend to be boring and Becoming Jane has an awful lot of those.

There are also some factual difficulties to contend with, although I doubt many of these will be all that bothersome to the Jane Austen fan. Take for instance the existence of Jane’s relatively quiet writing area. That likely wouldn’t have existed, as Virginia Woolf points out Austen’s nephew as stating that Jane wrote her works in the common sitting room with everyone else simply prancing about around her. No matter, it makes for a lovely picture and this film has quite a few of those. The direction is quite good and the lush green grounds are nice to look at.

But overall, it keeps coming back to the fact that this movie is just a little too tiresome and a little too sluggish. A fan of most period pieces, I was disappointed at how little “oomph” this particular one had and how, despite the chemistry of the lead actors, there was so little to play with. Inventing and building about the framework of speculation should allow for more creativity than what Becoming Jane wound up with, I would think. As such, it’s just a very average period romance. See Atonement instead.

4.5/10

Trailer:

 

April 14, 2008

The Spirit of St. Louis

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 1957, biography, drama, entertainment, historical, movies | Tags: , , , |
1 Comment 

Billy Wilder and James Stewart team up for the 1957 biopic The Spirit of St. Louis. Based on the book by Charles Lindbergh which was, in turn, based on his experiences making his historical transatlantic flight, the film exceeded my expectations and was incredibly enchanting and charming. While I can’t claim to have had a lot of interest in the subject matter, I found myself very pleased with the movie by the final frame and had experienced a fun little surprise.

Stewart had heavily petitioned for the role of Lindbergh and actually lost out the first time he auditioned. According to some sources, he had been lobbying Warner Bros. for the part as early as 1954 when the project was first announced. When production began in 1955, the studio offered the part to John Kerr, but he turned it down. Stewart was 47 at the time and was finally cast after pressuring the studio. His age was a problem, as he was playing a 25-year-old version of Lindbergh and needed to look the part. With some dye and a little bit of makeup, the job was done and Stewart looked good enough.

With Stewart as Lindbergh and Wilder as director, The Spirit of St. Louis had the star power to command a fairly extravagant budget. Three replicas of the plane were made for various film units to depict the transatlantic flight as correctly as possible. With the historic flight being the centrepiece of the movie, it was important that the replicas were made with no expense spared. As such, the flying scenes in the film are stunning and often rival similar scenes in modern movies.

The film begins as we drop in on Charles Lindbergh the night before his famous flight. He’s tossing and turning in bed, waiting to take off the next morning. Lindbergh’s internal dialogue is driving him nuts as he tries to get some shuteye. We learn of the gathering of financial support, the building of the plane, and other experiences the led up to the present day through flashbacks. The scenes add depth and character to Lindbergh and increase the concern that we feel as he prepares for his flight.

Finally, the flight time approaches and Lindbergh gets ready to take off. We witness an exciting takeoff sequence and Wilder’s direction here is amazing and thrilling. The takeoff is tricky, yes, but Lindberg’s got the Spirit up in the air and flying in the right direction. During the flight, we witness his struggle with sleep deprivation, a pesky fly, and issues with navigation. We also learn more about Lindbergh’s life through further flashbacks, some of which are awfully funny. When he finally reaches his destination, we can’t help but feel the same euphoria, enthusiasm, and relief.

What makes The Spirit of St. Louis more than a bland biopic is the enthusiasm with which Billy Wilder captures his subject. Stewart, the Tom Hanks of the early days of film, is the ideal performer for the part despite being older than the real subject. The topic of Stewart’s age, while hammered about early on in the press, is a non-issue. Stewart’s performance is ultimately congenial and pleasant, giving depth to the character of Lindbergh and giving him a sense of courage and guts in light of impossible circumstances. Stewart’s boyishness certainly serves him well here.

The Spirit of St. Louis is a potent and thrilling film about the joyfulness of flight. Perhaps more importantly, however, Billy Wilder has managed to capture the joy of the human spirit through triumph. This is a movie about a team of individuals, financiers, bankers, workers, and dreamers that help pull together one of the greatest achievements in human history. The flight scenes are exhilarating and matchless, the performances are grand, and the sense of achievement is given the front page treatment with this one. The Spirit of St. Louis is well worth the rent, as it might surprise some people with its triumphant spirit.

8/10

 

March 24, 2008

Miss Potter

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 2006, biography, drama, entertainment, movies, romance, trailers | Tags: , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

Miss Potter

Chris Noonan (Stepping Out, Babe) directed Miss Potter, the 2006 biopic of children’s author and illustrator Beatrix Potter. The film combines elements from Potter’s life with animated sequences involving characters from her books. Miss Potter was scripted by Richard Maltby Jr. and was filmed in Cecil Court, Covent Garden, and the Isle of Man. The original release date of the film fluctuated several times as the Weinstein Company tried to give the little movie a chance to shine in a crowded awards season. Eventually, Miss Potter was released broadly in December of 2006.

Renee Zellweger stars as Beatrix Potter. The casting once again raised the ire of traditional snobs, as there were questions about an important figure in British literature being cast as an American. The situation mirrored the situation that occurred when Zellweger was cast in the Bridget Jones films. As with that case, the fears were unfounded and Zellweger does a wonderful job in the role. She even earned a Golden Globe nomination, her sixth, for her work in Miss Potter.

Noonan’s film follows Potter as a 30-something single woman living with her social-climbing parents. Her mother, Helen (Barbara Flynn), is exasperated at the idea that Beatrix has turned down all of her potential suitors thus far and looks to remain single without a care in the world. Beatrix has, instead, taken solace in the company of animals and nature. She has made friends with the animals and has involved herself in drawing and writing about them, like she has done since her childhood. Beatrix eventually succeeds in selling her drawings and writings as books and meets Norman Warne (Ewan McGregor). Beatrix and Norman fall in love and life begins to change for Beatrix as she comes into her own.

As usual with these types of biopics, there are those that fuss and fiddle with the idea of historical accuracy and those that enjoy the artist’s rendering of the life of the individual as a film. I fall strictly into the latter category. If I wanted a factual accounting of Beatrix Potter’s life, love, and background, I’d read a biographical book or do some independent study. Because I want to see Potter’s life come to a different sort of artistic realization, Miss Potter is all too suitable to fill that role. Noonan’s film might have muddled the publishing order of some of the books and likely took some liberties with some of the more romantic and dramatic notions of storytelling, but who cares? Noonan has crafted a softly textured little film with Miss Potter and it works to tell his version of the story.

Miss Potter aims to be uplifting and it works on that account. It is an affectionate little film that handles its sorrow with equal parts sweetness and ache. Noonan directs his performers with softness, allowing their range to work with the material to produce a mild film. It works well for families, as its soft tones and gently swaying pace make for a fairly non-obtrusive afternoon viewing. Sadly, Miss Potter is also generally forgettable. It doesn’t resound very well, there is little to no impact, and the performances are simply too unassuming to be memorable. What makes the film effective is also what limits the film’s effectiveness. I’m not sure what could have been done differently, as everything about it seems right. It just doesn’t seem unforgettable.

Zellweger is good here, as she produces a vision of Beatrix Potter that is fragile and determined. Her performance is good and likely deserved the Golden Globe nod, but again there is little to do with range or timing here. Instead, it’s a gentle voyage that stays in one gear throughout. Her chemistry with McGregor is amiable and sweet, too, working with the tempo of the film to keep things balanced. The performances give the whole movie a whimsical feel, which is ideal for a family film of this nature. The villainy of the nagging mother is never too overcooked with Flynn’s performance and the supporting roles nicely blend into the background.

Miss Potter looks great and its cinematography sets it apart from the gentle pathos and romance of Noonan’s pacing. Its lush backdrops and beautiful wide shots of the farming lands and rolling hills really bring home what the region must have looked like through Potter’s eyes. This sort of living tribute is magical in some ways and gives the film the life it seemed to have been looking for.

It’s a mild film that glows with soft hues and warm lights, giving way to a calm story about a tender woman whose gentle characters likely lulled many of us to sleep.  In that way, Miss Potter works in the same way of her characters and her world. Noonan’s film may lack the effectiveness to be ultimately memorable to those with no interest in Beatrix Potter’s world, but for those who find themselves enchanted by Peter Rabbit and her host of animal friends, Miss Potter will likely do just fine.

7/10

Trailer:

 

February 16, 2008

The New World

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 2005, adventure, biography, drama, entertainment, historical, movies, romance, trailers | Tags: , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

The New World

Terrence Malick is a wonderful director whose work is sumptuous and engrossing. With Badlands and Days of Heaven, both of which I haven’t seen in a preposterously long time, Malick’s lingering tones and rich meticulous shots are fully on display. In his career, which has spanned decades, the gifted American film director has only made four feature length films and one short. Malick’s use of his contemplative and pensive directorial style makes his films captivating and involving in the most inimitable of ways, as he unfolds his stories by involving the viewer in the panorama, the characters and the time period without the suspension of belief. Malick’s films have an opulence to them that is rarely duplicated by any working director today. I look forward with immense eagerness to his next film, Tree of Life.

2005’s The New World is surely no exception to Malick’s trademarks. Encased in the most beautiful naturalistic surroundings, this tale of discovery is one of the best films from 2005. Malick also wrote this tale of the founding of Jamestown, Virginia, and the settlement that is placed there by the English. The New World also highlights the story of Captain John Smith and Pocahontas, treating their love story with tenderness and a sense of adventure. The New World features production design by Jack Fisk and costumes by Jacqueline West. The set design and the scope of the production are incredible to experience and still seem remarkable after several viewings of the film.

The New World is a film about the strangeness and complexities of the arrival of the English settlers to Virginia, first and foremost. Using Pocahontas as its central character, Malick’s film explores these notions with depth and detail as her character becomes accustomed to a new society and becomes slowly and reluctantly assimilated into it. Pocahontas is played by the wonderfully talented Q’orianka Kilcher. Kilcher was fourteen at the time of shooting and some of her scenes caused a great deal of controversy, leading to some editing by Malick of a few scenes between her and Colin Farrell. Kilcher’s Pocahontas is never addressed by name throughout the film.

Malick’s The New World strips away all of the fantasy and lore about the arrival of the settlers, choosing instead to see the events through the eyes of Kilcher’s character as the freshness and naturalistic setting of her world suddenly has some very new, very strange visitors. The settlers begin to construct a fort with immediacy as Captain John Smith (Farrell) heads out to explore on his own. He meets Pocahontas and a bond is instantly formed after she saves his life from certain death. The English, especially Smith, are as awed as the natives with the sumptuousness and the strangeness of this new predicament. We explore communications, customs, and ways of life through the eyes of the natives and the English, with neither side being portrayed as villainous or wrong. With Malick’s lens, we all are simply observers of the foundation and exploration of newness, strangeness, and the romantic notion of discovery.

The film works so well because it imagines how these two separate people groups would communicate and how they would interact. As the English become paranoid and a bit fearful, nonsensical events begin to occur that threaten the once-peaceful bond between the natives and the settlers. The contrast between the ways of life of the natives and the English is also explored, as the natives live and flourish because they are involved with the land and nature, whereas the English nearly die because of their arrogance and their unwillingness to learn and understand. There is a meekness here that is imposed by the grandeur of nature, leading to a keen exploration that invokes the senses through Malick’s expert direction. We explore these lands as the characters explore these lands.

As Pocahontas grows up, her life changes and her internal reckonings also change. Smith’s roguish existence gives way to the stability and kindness of settler John Rolfe (Christian Bale). The stories being told here are rather well known and I will allow the viewer his or her own discovery of the details, except to say that the contrast amid Pocahontas’ eventual journey to the lively allure of London and her homeland is immeasurably and magnificently explored. The performances aren’t so much about the art of performances, but rather natural extensions of people existing and being in these places. Malick’s films tend to have occupants rather than actors, so The New World is no different.

There are, of course, two new worlds in this film. One is what the English discover as they approach Virginia for the first time. The other is what Pocahontas discovers in the realm of love and emotion. Malick explores these moments tenderly and with such incredible tact that certain wordless scenes, of which there are many, are simply explosive in their tenacity. In Kilcher is an extraordinary performer and her ability to play this part is unquestionably incredible. When we see her, we recognize her without being told who she is. Kilcher embodies who Pocahontas would have been and who she should have been, helping tell the story properly and with romantic realism, efficiently burying the dull weight of Disney-esque folklore with an affectionate rendering.

The New World is a fantastic film that could be discussed for several hundred more words. The best way to experience a Malick film isn’t by talking about it, however, but rather it’s by seeing it and letting it into your senses. Scenes in The New World impose their will upon the viewer with their engrossing nature, often coming across like an unsullied breeze from the water or through the trees. The New World looks so real and so lavish that the film almost has an aroma of freshness and distinctive romance. It is an important film, a precious film, and a tenderly crafted one.

10/10

Trailer:

 

January 8, 2008

Charlie Wilson’s War

Posted by Jordan Richardson under 2007, biography, comedy, drama, entertainment, trailers | Tags: , , , , , , , |
Leave a Comment 

Charlie Wilson’s War

Charlie Wilson’s War is a late-2007 film about Democratic Texas congressman Charlie Wilson. The film, which was directed by Mike Nichols and written by Aaron Sorkin, details Wilson’s covert dealings with CIA operative Gust Avrakotos to launch an operation to help the Afghan people fight the Soviets during the Soviet-Afghanistan War in the 1980s. The film is adapted from George Crile’s 2003 book, “Charlie Wilson’s War: The Extraordinary Story of the Largest Covert Operation in History.” Charlie Wilson’s War was nominated for five Golden Globes, including Best Picture in the Musical or Comedy category.

This is not a political blog, so I’m going to stay away from any of the facts presented in the film and stick to discussing Charlie Wilson’s War on the merits of film alone. That said, it is important to engage with the material presented in film and to challenge the versions of truth as displayed on the screen, regardless of the film. Charlie Wilson’s War presents a relatively moderate and sympathetic point of view of Charlie Wilson and the covert operation that armed the Afghani people and it does not shy away from pointing the finger of blame at the CIA and other aspects of government. The convoluted process of Congress and government action is given a fairly steady wag of the finger in Nichols’ film.

Charlie Wilson’s War stars Tom Hanks as Charlie Wilson, which is an interesting but effective casting choice. Wilson is a compelling character, always drinking whiskey and surrounding himself with a bevy of beautiful women. He is a congressman with a growing disdain for the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, but feels his hands are tied. Wilson’s anti-communist friend and love interest, Joanne Herring (Julia Roberts) eventually convinces Wilson to tie United States funds to the Afghan fighters on the ground so that they can be well-equipped to fight the Soviets. Along the way, Wilson teams up with CIA operative Gust Avrakotos (Philip Seymour Hoffman) to secure the resources. Wilson’s assistant, Bonnie Bach (Amy Adams), follows gleefully along.

Charlie Wilson’s War is an entertaining and scintillating narrative that clicks along at a great pace. The performances, especially the performance of Philip Seymour Hoffman, are rather good. Tom Hanks is at his best as Wilson, possibly giving the best performance I’ve ever seen him in. His Wilson is a man spinning his tires, growing bored with the women and drugs of Washington, and trying to bring meaning to an otherwise sluggish career. When Hanks’ Wilson and Hoffman’s Gust meet up and begin to work together, Charlie Wilson’s War really gets underway. The chemistry between the two performers is incredible, as both men play off of one another with such wit and grace that it becomes clear that something wonderful is happening. Unfortunately, Julia Roberts as Joanne is unable to deliver as much punch in her performance and scenes with her falter. Amy Adams is suitable as the lovable admirer and assistant to Wilson.

Mike Nichols is the perfect director for this material, too. His last film, Closer, was a quick-witted, dialogue driven masterwork of an adult picture and Charlie Wilson’s War seems to pick up where that film left off. Nichols’ film brings out the best in Hanks and Hoffman, mining them with acerbic wit and caustic attitudes throughout the gentle Texas charm. His direction of the cast of the film is beautifully done, drawing comparisons to the snappy films of early Mike Nichols, including 1967’s The Graduate and the blistering political satire from 1998, Primary Colors. With writing from The West Wing’s Aaron Sorkin behind it, Charlie Wilson’s War has the pedigree to be a work of genius in terms of political satire.

Yet, something about Charlie Wilson’s War falls a bit short of perfection. It is a very good film, with many memorable moments and tremendously entertaining characters. Something about the film falls short of closure, however, and there is a feeling that it ended about 30 minutes too soon. At just over 90 minutes, Nichols’ film is a tightly wound little spitfire, but had it had an extra 30 or so minutes, it could have achieved epic ironic greatness. There are hints towards the inexorable history of things during Hoffman’s last scenes in the picture, but overall the finale as we see it feels a bit slight and underwhelming for the build-up.

Charlie Wilson’s War can best be summed up by Hoffman’s engaging final scene, in which he tells the story of a Zen master and a village. As Hoffman eventually finishes the story, with it’s “We’ll see” ideology (or punch line, depending on your outlook of history), we too learn something about Charlie Wilson and the events swirling around the bowl. We learn that history is about results, not necessarily planning. As they say, you can plan plans, but you cannot plan results. The same is true for the composition of Charlie Wilson’s War. Something in the film is slightly out of step, yet it remains a sharp and often stellar film that should win audiences and fans for years.

8.4/10

Trailer:

 

Next Page »