A little perspective. Yes, I’ve read Sophie Kinsella’s novels and no, I didn’t take anything from them beyond a few hours of entertainment. If you’re looking for a message about controlling your spending and how debt can ruin your life you’re climbing up the wrong tree – you may want to book those tickets to Dr. Phil though I doubt he’ll be any more helpful. Kinsella created a tragically comedic character which we shake our heads at because we’ll never be as bad off as she is (or so we hope). I guess if you really stretched it, you could dig a message out of the stories but frankly, they’re not worth the bother. I had hoped the same to be true of the movie adaption but somewhere in the middle of Confessions of a Shopaholic’s 100 minute run time, I went from complacency to anger. Why is it always the apparently harmless stuff that presses my buttons?

I’m not even sure where to start with this disaster. This isn’t even a movie – it’s an attack on the senses. Too bright, too loud, Isla Fisher (in the lead role as Rebecca Bloomwood) is annoying as hell and whoever thought it was a great idea to cast Joan Cusack and John Goodman as Becky’s parents must have had too many cocktails the day before casting. Kristin Scott Thomas? What are you doing in this movie? And let’s not even get started on Hugh Dancy who is given so very little to work with that he comes across as more of a ass than a sweeping heartthrob. Sure he looks the part but there’s no spark, no chemistry, no charm. How the production managed to kill even Dancy’s natural charm is baffling.

And that’s just the surface. Let’s look a little at what we’re dealing with here. Becky has a problem: she’s a shopaholic. In one scene, ironically this takes place at a Shopaholics Anonynous Meeting (I’m sure they figured this was genius at work - can you picture the script meeting?), she fetishizes shopping as if it were her best lover (complete with climactic moaning). And then there’s the moment when she buys back her designer dress (which costs her three times as much) rather than the maid of honour dress for her best friend’s wedding; and not just her best friend but apparently her only friend. And yet life goes on. The lies continue to build, getting bigger until, OMG!, it all explodes in her face. In public. Everyone knows and she can’t hide it. It’s at this point that I start to hyperventilate. They actually managed to get a message in there? One that has real repercussions? If this movie doesn’t end well I’m throwing a party and inviting the entire block to celebrate. But of course that’s too much to ask. It has to end well otherwise what type of feel good movie would that be? This thing doesn’t know what it wants at once encouraging the audience to indulge and enjoy Becky’s spending (and perhaps our own) and in the next admonishing us for doing so. It’s as confused as I was but not nearly as angry.

I didn’t expect to think and if the movie had been blander, I probably wouldn’t have given this a second thought but the fact that it so outlandishly says that it’s OK to go into debt because there’s always a solution (one that isn’t particularly difficult or cost you much heartache) just pushed one too many buttons. Heck, at one point Mr. Bloomwood tells his daughter that if the US economy can survive when it’s billions in the hole, she should be able to survive too. Honestly? This is good advice? Really? Think it would be too much to ask the video store to refund the rental cost? Even that isn’t as easy as the solution to all of Becky’s problems.

I’m done. P.J. Hogan, I’d like to thank you for once and for all proving that I shouldn’t trust you even for my mindless entertainment. And Mr. Dancy, I hope you find yourself a better agent. Any more roles like this and I may need to re-think my crush.

Around these parts we were so excited about the Alien Trespass trailer that we posted it twice. Indeed, seems like sometimes it takes schlocky sci-fi to make us happy. Sadly, as is often the case, the film didn’t open anywhere near me (or anyone else from the sounds of it) but fear not schlocky sci-fi fans the goodness is coming to you sooner than you think.

Starring Eric McCormack, Robert Patrick, Jenni Baird, Tom Braidwood, Dan Lauria and directed by R.W. Goodwin of “X-Files” fame, the film takes place in a small town in the 1950’s. A flying saucer has crash landed and an alien invasion begun…what to do? Yes, it looks as cheesy as it sounds but it oozes goodness and soon we too will share in that goodness because you see, the DVD will be here before the invasion is complete.

Horror-movies.ca has details that Alien Trespass will be coming to DVD on August 11th and the release has a few nice extras including:

• “Watch the Skies” Alien Trespass Featurette
• “Meet the Person” with Edwin R. Burroughs 
• Breaking News Report 
• Live News Update 
• R.W. Goodwin Interview 
• Eric McCormack Interview 
• Theatrical Trailers 
• Deleted Scenes

Seriously though, they could release this bare bones and I’d be excited for the release. Just let me at it already!

The September Issue

It may be hard to grasp just how important Anna Wintour has been and continues to be to the fashion industry. As the editor-in-chief of American ”Vogue,” Wintour has been choosing what we wear for a couple of decades and even if you don’t wear the latest and greatest fashions now, her picks will eventually trickle into the marketplace.

Wintour was the not-so-secret villain in 2006’s The Devil Wears Prarda but that was only one side of the story, a side which portrayed her as both a first class bitch and an icon to be revered.

This new documentary revolves around the September issue of “Vogue” (which pretty much outlines what we’ll all be wearing for the next six months of the year) while giving some insights into the woman who pulls it all together. I’m curious to see how deep director R.J. Cutler manages to get into Wintour’s world but to be frank, any film that features Wintour telling Oscar de la Renta that she wouldn’t put one of his latest creations in a show is enough of a seller for me.

At this point The September Issue opens in New York on August 28th and then expands to a limited release on September 11.

The Burning Plain

Writer/director Guillermo Arriaga comes from great pedigree. The screenwriter has been involved with some of best films of the last few years including Amores perros 21 Grams and The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada.

For his feature film debut he continues with a difficult drama, this one about two women trying to take hold of their lives after a devastating incident. Kim Basinger, who I haven’t seen in anything of note since the underrated Cellular, Charlize Theron and Venice award winner Jennifer Lawrence star as three women whose lives are all intertwined and turned sideways by a death. The trailer isn’t very clear on who is related to who and why but the description has this as a “two-tiered storyline” which could mean that perhaps none of the women are related. In either case, I do love the look of the trailer and I’ve enjoyed most of Arriagan’s past films so I’m more than willing to give this one a look.

The Burning Plain opens in limited release on September 18th.

I love the Vancouver International Film Centre but if at all possible, I’ve become even more enamoured with the theatre after seeing the latest line-up for a new “festival” which, I believe is their first of this kind.

Running from July 24th through August 18th, “Summer of Sound” features 23 of the best music on film (and music films though I don’t spot too many musicals in the mix) and the line-up is nothing short of spectacular. Here’s the run-down:

Throw Down Your Heart
Maria Bethania: Music is Perfume
Miriam Makeba: Like in Stockholm 1966
Gypsy Caravan
The Blue Angel
Almost Famous
Ziggy Stardust
Velvet Goldmine
Apparition of the Eternal Church
32 Short Films About Glenn Gould
Once
Across the Universe
Umbrellas of Cherbourg
Leonard Cohen: I’m Your Man
Be Here to Love Me: Townes Van Zandt
True Stories
Stop Making Sense
Csny Deja Vu
Neil Young Heart of Gold
Shine a Light
Gimme Shelter
Woodstock
My Generation

I can already see a few on the list that I’ll have to watch on the big screen and some which I’ve never seen before. Looks like I’ll be busy for a few weeks later this month.

Much more information on the films, show times and ticket costs (including a full series pass for $50 - that’s a deal if I’ve ever seen one) is available at VIFC.

I suppose the point is that bloggers will post the motion shot and talk about it, wonder what the point is, but when the movie hits theater lobbies everyone will say, “oh yeah, I saw that poster online. Let’s see that movie.”
/rant

.

This is the third of at least 224 planned posts in which I shall slowly work through my DVD collection. The reason for doing this is first and foremost to admit that I have a problem. I buy way too many DVDs that I want to watch but never watch. On the morning of May 24th, 2009 I owned 224 DVDs which I have never seen. I have never seen them theatrically, on television, on VHS, on Beta or even by means of the DVD which I own and possess on the shelf. My plan is to watch at least one of these each week. If I’m lucky I will see more than one but to keep this reasonable considering my time restraints one a week is pretty good. I will write up my thoughts on each movie.

I have purchased a few more DVDs so I am back up past 224 DVDs to watch. I’ll add the new ones to the list coming up. I have this bad feeling that by the time I am done DVDs will no longer even be available at the rate I keep adding new ones.

Darkman

For my third movie I chose to watch Sam Raimi’s Darkman. Before Raimi was brought on to direct the Spiderman series he had Darkman. Darkman tells the story of Peyton Westlake (Liam Neeson), a scientist who is attempting to discover a way to grow skin. Peyton wants to marry Julie (Frances McDormand) but Julie discovers that her boss is involved with some nasty criminals led by Robert Durant (Larry Drake). Durant and his goons break in and attempt to kill Peyton while looking for evidence that Julie has. Unfortunately for them they don’t kill Peyton. Peyton ends up with such terrible burns that the doctors perform a special surgery that remove his sense of touch and pain sensors. Peyton seeks his revenge while trying to keep himself under control as he looses control of his anger which is a side effect of his surgery.

I’m still trying to come to terms with why Darkman is such a fun movie. Recently, I was listening to the Film Junk podcast and they were talking about 80s action movies and how they were just more fun (or at least that is what I took from their discussion). While watching Darkman I couldn’t help but think about just how much fun it is to watch. It is bizarre, funny, scary and cheesy all at the same time. If I was asked to pick a superhero movie to watch Darkman would definitely be high up on the list. The superhero movies today either take themselves too seriously or else they make them for all ages. I would love it if there was more camp still being done in this genre.

I should mention that I had seen this one before but I remembered nothing of it. I do not know if my sense of humour and what I like in movies has grown or changed since I watched this way back in early 1990s but all I could remember about it was that I was not that impressed. Upon this re-watch I have decided that it definitely deserves a place amongst the top of the superhero movies. I don’t think it will ever get the respect that it deserves (except amongst the cult movie crowd and fans of Sam Raimi) but I for one will recommend it to all my friends who haven’t seen it.

The trailer is here. For the full short, check beneath the seats…

.

.

Director: James Gray (We Own the Night, The Yards, Little Odessa)
Screenplay: James Gray, Ric Menello
Producers: James Gray, Donna Gigliotti, Anthony Katagas
Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Gwyneth Paltrow, Vinessa Shaw, Isabella Rossellini, Elias Koteas, Moni Moshonov
MPAA Rating: R
Running time: 110 min.

Irecall walking away from James Gray’s We Own the Night thinking that I’d just seen the beginning of something special. Though the film was overlooked by critics and the general public there was something about it that sat with me long after the credits rolled. Joaquin Phoenix’s performance as Bobby Green was understated but powerful and Gray’s direction was demure and beautiful.

I instantly paid a little more attention when a new Phoenix/Gray collaboration was announced and when the trailer for Two Lovers premiered, I knew it was a film I had to see even if the trailer was misleading (as I assumed it was). The trailer does this film very little justice.

Phoenix plays Leonard Kraditor, a man who moved back with his parents after his ex-fiance’s family canceled their wedding. He took the breakup badly, retreating into a world of self abuse and attempted suicides eventually returning home to start rebuilding his life. But months have passed and though he appears to be getting better, his parents are visibly worried and they want him to move on with his life. They devise a plan to set him up with Sandra (Vinessa Shaw), the daughter of a local business owner. Things start off well and the two seem to hit it off but things aren’t as perfect as they appear. Immediately after meeting Sandra, Leonard meets Michelle (Gwyneth Paltrow), his new upstairs neighbor and becomes instantly smitten by both her looks and her personality. In an instant Leonard goes from meek and shy to juggling two very different women in two very different relationships.

As with his previous films, Gray and cinematographer Joaquín Baca-Asay use their surroundings as an additional character to the story. The city is as alive and important as the characters living in it and Gray isn’t afraid to let the film drown momentarily in the culture. Some of my favourite scenes in We Own the Night were those that showed the city in all it’s beauty and though here the truly breathtaking moments are those between the characters, I love that Gray lingers on small scenes that add little to the story (a walk through the city, an extended scene in a nightclub). But the small moments are fantastic. He’s mastered the art of capturing the interaction between characters and there are moments in this film that are nothing short of spectacular. There’s a rawness to the interaction and emotion on-screen and you can almost feel the awkwardness or intensity between the characters but never do the scenes feel put-on or played up. Certainly kudos must be given to the actors who do an outstanding job and though Phoenix is excellent in his role, I was really taken by Vinessa Shaw’s performance which was tender while never being weak.

What is most impressive about Two Lovers is the direction Gray and co-writer Ric Menello take Leonard’s character. He begins as a meek and depressing figure, the type of person you can’t help but feel sorry for and yet, as the story develops we come to see a man torn between two women and in the end a man who we both pity and hate. The script asks that Phoenix walk a fine line between love and hate and he does so amazingly well never once alienating the audience though you’ll likely be angry at his actions. And that doesn’t even touch on the complexity of the relationships that Leonard is involved in. On the one hand is Sandra, a grounded woman who wants to look after the obviously broken Leonard; on the other hand there’s Michelle, the free spirited soul who is even more broken than Leonard. Leonard’s choice is not really surprising but the events that follow his decision opens the door to more than a handful of questions on relationships and the choices we make and why we make them.

I expected good things from Gray but Two Lovers is an impressive film which surpasses any expectations I may have had. It’s an emotional and beautiful film, one that will likely change with time and whose appreciation will grow with additional viewings. This marks the coming of age of a great talent in American cinema and one I hope won’t be forgotten before he’s clearly recognized.

Two Lovers made it’s way to DVD on Tuesday, June 30th and the release includes a director’s commentary and an interesting HDNet preview of the film which includes a short but interesting interview with Gray.

Most musicals and comedies made during the 1930s were escapist fluff, meant to take audiences’ minds away from the troubles of the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl for a couple of hours of music and laughter. Fred and Ginger’s dancing at RKO, Bing Crosby’s singing at Paramount, MGM’s Broadway Melody series, the screwball comedies of Hawks and Leo McCarey, the slapstick stylings of the Marx Brothers - all of them sparkling and calculated to ignore the economic woes of the world outside.

But Warner Bros. as a studio was known for making less glamorous, more hard-hitting films in the 1930s, building their reputation on gangster films and “ripped from the headlines” social commentary pictures. It’s probably not surprising, then, that musicals made at Warner Bros. would have a different tone than most contemporary musicals. Sure enough, both show business classic 42nd Street and lesser-known programmer Gold Diggers of 1933 (which would spawn two sequels) take the Depression itself as a major theme and plot point.

Gold Diggers of 1933

42nd Street (1932)

42nd Street isn’t known as the granddaddy of backstage movies for nothing - it opens with word spreading around Broadway that famed director Julian Marsh (Warner Baxter) is putting on a show, continues through auditions and rehearsals, setbacks and last-minute casting changes, and finishes with the opening night extravaganza.

(Click through for the rest of the entry. The video below is a brief bit of amusement from Gold Diggers of 1933.)

Marsh is just recovering from a nervous breakdown, and this show may be his comeback or his downfall. He’s really the central character of the story, though he’s surrounded by a large supporting cast: Ruby Keeler as the bright-faced wanna-be chorus girl, Dick Powell as the peppy juvenile actor, Bebe Daniels as the big star who brings the money to the show in the form of infatuated checkbook-weilder Guy Kibbee, George Brent as the man who threatens the show by coming between Daniels and Kibbee, and Ginger Rogers and Una Merkel as the wisecracking comic relief. There’s a lot going on, and a lot of subplots, but it all holds together rather better than you’d expect.

But let’s make sure we’re a little honest here. 42nd Street isn’t a great movie because it has a cast full of great actors. Warner Baxter holds it together dramatically as Marsh, and Rogers and Merkel keep it sarcastically funny, but no one else can act at all. It’s not even a great movie because it has the best singing and dancing ever - Keeler made a lot of tap-dancing movies in her time, and compared to, say, the dancers in 1920s movies, she’s not bad, but just wait until Ginger actually got some real dancing parts, or Eleanor Powell started hoofing at MGM. That spelled the end for the relatively heavy-footed Keeler.

42nd Street works because it has a vitality and freshness that actually revitalized the musical as a cinematic form. It works because choreographer Busby Berkeley is a genius of some sort. You can’t really call a lot of what he does dancing - it’s more like geometric manipulation that has to be seen from the top or bottom or other views that could not possibly exist in an actual live theatre, but that’s just the thing. He liberated the cinema musical from its dependence on stage-bound design. And it works because of its inspired mix of cynicism and optimism that could perhaps only come out of the Depression.

It’s not five minutes into the movie that Bebe Daniels tells her wanna-be lover/investor that she can’t have her pick of shows, “not with this Depression,” but the thought is belied by her incredibly large and well-appointed apartment. Later, Marsh gives Keeler (who predictably gets bumped up from the chorus into a leading role) a pep talk largely based around how many jobs would be lost if she fails to win over the audience. Though the characters don’t constantly harp on the Depression verbally, it’s sort of a background constant, and the climactic title number - a mini-story in itself, though not as epic as some of Berkeley’s later extravaganzas - brings out the desperate mood of the times with its minor key, depictions of murder and death, and yet gives a sense of the vibrant life that continues and will continue as long as Broadway itself stands. As the song goes: “The big parade goes on for years; it’s the rhapsody of laughter and tears. Naughty, bawdy, gaudy, sporty, 42nd Street.”

Gold Diggers of 1933

Gold Diggers is both more explicit about and less infused with the Depression than 42nd Street. It begins with Ginger Rogers singing “We’re in the Money” (which includes lines like “Old Man Depression you are through, you done us wrong” and “we never see a headline about a breadline today”), but it turns out to be a rehearsal that gets interrupted by creditors shutting down the show for lack of payment for the theatre. From there we find three showgirls lamenting how few jobs there are and how they can’t afford food and clothes - but their spacious New York apartment is almost less believable than Bebe Daniels’ in 42nd Street. After all, these are chorus girls, not established stars.

Anyway, they learn a producer friend is putting on a show and the songwriter (Dick Powell again) across the courtyard somehow has the money to back it, with the caveat that his sweetheart Ruby Keeler (again) play the lead. From there, though, the story sort of devolves into a brief mystery regarding Powell’s true identity and where his money comes from, and then a REALLY contrived and unbelievable plot involving Keeler’s friend Joan Blondell (who’s far better than the material she’s given) and Powell’s rich brother, who doesn’t want Powell to get mixed up with showgirls. It also loses the undercurrent of the Depression, as it focuses on the backstabbing and role-playing and inexplicable falling-in-love of the characters, who start living up to the title of the film even though most of the point is supposed to be that they don’t.

By the time it’s over, there are so many unmotivated character shifts and unprovoked decisions that it’s really better to ignore the plot altogether and focus solely on Busby Berkeley’s dance routines and the one-off zingers that Blondell, Rogers, and Aline MacMahon can deliver so well. The last number finally remembers that the movie originally wanted to be about the Depression and ties it into the veterans of WWI, lamenting the fact that so many men who fought for their country are now in breadlines. Thankfully, the film ends with the strong visuals and emotion of “Remember My Forgotten Man” rather than with any silly pleasantries of the plot.

Yet even with its silliness, I still have a huge soft spot for Gold Diggers of 1933. Maybe it’s Ginger singing in Pig Latin, or dialogue exchanges like “If Barney could see ME in clothes…” / “He wouldn’t recognize you!” Or maybe it’s the shameless extravagance of Berkeley’s choreography, which would never fit on an actual stage - the routines are actually quite a bit better and more polished here than in 42nd Street. Or maybe it’s Warner Bros’ willingness to keep harping on the Depression, however sporadically and unevenly, and allow Harry Warren and Al Dubin to pen minor-keyed songs about it rather than allow people to just pretend everything’s all hunky-dory for a couple of hours in a cinema.

42nd Street is easily the superior film of the two and works much better as a whole - but I still wouldn’t give up the many delightful moments in Gold Diggers of 1933. Other films in the same vein are the other two Gold Diggers films, Gold Diggers of 1935 (which is similarly weak on story, but has the extended “Lullaby of Broadway” number which stands as one of the greatest things ever put on film) and Gold Diggers of 1937 (which is worth no-one’s time), as well as Dames (1934), Footlight Parade (1934 - gains a bit of cred due to James Cagney’s presence), and Go Into Your Dance (1935 - gains little cred, but historical interest due to pairing Ruby Keller with her real-life husband and renowned entertainer Al Jolson). It’s also interesting to compare the Gold Diggers series with MGM’s similarly-themed but much more posh Broadway Melody series (of 1936, 1938, and 1940) to see the marked difference in studio style.

Just for kicks, Ginger Rogers doing “We’re in the Money” in Pig Latin. Legend has it she was bored on set doing tons of retakes and did a verse of the song in Pig Latin. Director Mervyn LeRoy liked it so much he left it in the film.

You’ve probably seen the trailer. If not, I stuck it under the seats; but it is completely misleading. The marketing department hoped to push this movie as a care-free, uplifting comedy that is just edgy enough for the seventy-something crowd to come away from it thinking it was dark humorous fun. This is what I had planned on. And I suppose to some extent, it’s true. But it’s so much more… for the better.

The film really has very little to do with crime scene cleanup. The story is actually a little bit fragmented and tries to deal with many different characters all going through their own unique, personal struggles. Whether it be single parenting, extra-marital affairs, loss of a loved one (mothers, sisters, wives), business struggles, school problems, chemical abuse, insecurities with peers and even physical disabilities. Some of these things are delved into deeper than others, but all of them are tackled in one form or another. And for a film to get into all of this, and do it coherently and structurally sound, is quite a task in and of itself.

What’s in the trailer isn’t lies. There are some fun moments and cute, chuckle worthy moments, but in actuality the film is a lot more serious than the marketing lets on. And yes, some of it might feel a little heavy handed and manipulative, but that’s okay. I like to be man handled if it’s done correctly and with grace. There is an ongoing “bit” about how the two sisters are searching for a way to reconnect with a deceased loved one. It could’ve been over the top corniness, but it is constructed slowly and the payoff works like gangbusters. Yes, there maybe was a lump in the throat. Like I said, I’m sucker for that sort of thing - true friendship and/or love in the face of extreme hardship in a movie gets me everytime (if it’s done well).

Sunshine Cleaning really surprised me and I encourage all to give it a chance. It won’t make any year end top ten lists or any Oscars, but it’s another example of a potentially great female director in the works. This is the film I could’ve seen Adrienne Shelly putting together if she were still with us. Heavy but not heavy handed, though admittedly not the greatest bits of humor ever to grace the screen, but quite an enjoyable film that despite the outrageous scenario, somehow really rings true and hits many many notes on cue and in key.

.