No Apologies

You know the drill.

New Year. New Films. Let's try this again.

It's Coming Back...

...I promise.

In the meantime, watch this movie if you haven't already.

Link Roundup

I thought today, as this is the first roundup of links and such, I'd just give a few road signs to places on the internet that I visit daily. Next week I'll start by linking to specific stories, pieces, trailers, etc. Some of the following links are already linked to on the side, but I thought I'd give them all a proper plug.

Dark Horizons- Updated most weekdays with the latest news, rumors, etc. Despite its sometimes focus on science fiction and fantasy genres, it does a good job of covering all the latest news. Plus it links to most all of the latest trailers to be released.

Awards Daily- If you want the latest Oscar news and a good place to join in discussions on upcoming movies with awards potential, this is the place. Things really heat up in the fall and when it gets closer to the show itself. You can also follow the editor, Sasha Stone, on Twitter: @AwardsDaily

Film Experience Blog- online journalist Nathaniel Rogers runs this blog which has a greater personal feel to it than the previous sites. I would be lying if I didn't say some of the things I'll be doing on here weren't inspired by his work. He's also on twitter: @nathanielr

Neal Reviews- Good friend of mine Neal Tucker reviews many things, and his film reviews are very insightful.

The Auteurs, or MUBI- It was once called The Auteurs and now it seems they're trying to switch the name to MUBI, though I'm not sure why. It's a social networking site, a la Facebook, for serious movie buffs. I'm a member. Shouldn't you be?

Those are the places I go the most often. Now a couple of things you should see:

Seriously, how fantastic is this trailer? When I first heard about the movie, I was skeptical, but the more I see the preview, the more excited I get. Hopefully the movie will live up to it.
The Social Network:



This movie, Howl is based on the publication of the titular poem by Allen Ginsburg. Looks promising, great cast. And of course, since it's set in mid-20th century America, it has Jon Hamm.

Great Scenes- Fort Apache (1948)

Today's great scene comes from John Ford's Fort Apache. I was inspired to make my way through all the John Ford Westerns after watching Stagecoach the other evening (My Darling Clementine predates this one but I'll be going back to it tomorrow). The film depicts life within a frontier outpost, with its military hierarchy, formal and informal relationships, and some humor along the way. The Indian question comes into focus in the second half of the film, and the climax presents the American forces, led by Henry Fonda, riding against the Apache forces led by Cochise and Geronimo.

The scene, comprising the last ten minutes or so of the film, is notable for both its camerawork, showcasing Ford's familiar mastery with the Monument Valley location, and the way it brings most of the narrative questions of the film to a head all at once, as great climaxes are known to do. John Wayne's character, Captain York, is at odds with Colonel Thursday, played by Fonda. The regiment splits into two factions, following each officer, and Fonda's by-the-books approach becomes his downfall.

Without giving away each plot point, the moral ambiguity of the scene is central to the film's understanding of native American policy. It doesn't serve as a fully realized criticism of the government's treatment of the various tribes, as the film's final moments glorify the American troops who, within the story, still continue to fight to tame the West. However, it does stop short of imbuing the troops with moral certitude.

The final portion of the battle scene features a wonderful shot of Captain York standing tall against a cloud of dust kicked up by the Apache troops. He often serves as the film's moral center, but he is forced to make some concessions. When he is speaking with reporters a couple of years after the battle, we can see the conflict as he remembers his former commanding officer, and we get the sense that the way he glorifies his comrades may not be wholly sincere, but an act of public relations demanded by his new post.

Salt (2010)

(Quick disclaimer. Yes, I've seen Inception. Yes, I really liked it. However, I am waiting to write about it until I've seen it a second time. It's the kind of movie that requires it. So expect some thoughts on it next weekend.)

It's easy to see why Salt was originally designed with Tom Cruise in mind. There's a lot of running. However, I'm not sure Cruise would have maintained the ambiguity that the main character requires in the way that Jolie does. For a significant portion of the film, you are unsure of whether Salt is a patriot or a traitor. Remembering that this is a big budget Hollywood movie will quickly dispel that confusion, however it is a tribute to Jolie that we find Salt potentially duplicitious in the least.

Much has been written by critics about the implausibility of the plot. Is it outlandish? Yes, at times. But I am confused as to why non-realism is being used as a way to critique a spy film. There have been some "realistic" spy movies in the past. The Bourne series is probably as realistic as any successful spy movies have ever been. However, audiences have never expected realism in this genre. They want false identities, double agents, cool gadgets, and outrageous stunts. Salt delivers those in spades.

While not being realistic, I think, is not a valid criticism, the way the movie handles its inherently unrealistic plot is a different matter. What the movie really needs is a sense of humor. It's not a problem to ask the audience to believe certain silly things. That's central to enjoying a lot of movies. However, to take it too seriously on top of that is dangerous, and that's where Salt gets into trouble.

I've been intentionally vague about the plot, because I'm assuming some degree of familiarity about the basic premise. Any other information on my part would fall into the realm of spoiler. Overall, I did enjoy myself to a certain extent. The movie has its thrills, yes, but is ultimately a slight affair. Though the ending promises sequels (rather heavy-handedly I must say), I can't say I'm dying to see them.

Stagecoach (1939)

I picked up the Criterion blu-ray edition of John Ford's Stagecoach yesterday (I highly recommend it, great transfer). A bit of background if you're unaware: the first major Western by John Ford since the mid-20s, the first serious Western made by anyone in a good while, first star turn by John Wayne, first major collaboration between Wayne and Ford, nominee for Best Picture, winner of Best Supporting Actor for Thomas Mitchell (the inebriated doctor), and placed amidst one of the best years of American cinema ever (other films that year: Gone with the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Ninotchka).

The film tells the story of several strangers thrust together in a perilous stagecoach ride across the desert, with the constant threat of attack by Apache Indians, as well as the threat of sabotage from within. The group is a microcosm of society: an outlaw, a prostitute, a society lady, a doctor, a salesman that everyone mistakes for a reverend, a Southern gentleman/gambler/cad, and a couple of trusty cowboys.

Pauline Kael calls it "Grand Hotel on wheels" and David Thomson describes the characters as being dipped in a "marinade of cliche." Both of these statements make perfect sense, particularly the latter, as the film does have a nostalgic feel in hindsight, but it's difficult to gauge how audiences might have received it back at its release. Frank Nugent's original NYT review tells us: "He (Ford) prefers the broadest canvas, the brightest colors, the widest brush, and the boldest possible strokes. He hews to the straight narrative line with the well-reasoned confidence of a man who has seen that narrative succeed before. He takes no shadings from his characters: either they play it straight or they don't play at all."

One gets the sense that audiences had seen all of these characters before, but never in such an artistically satisfying form; up until this point, most Westerns were B-pictures. For our purposes, it's as classic as a classic Western gets. And as with many great movies, knowing exactly what's going to happen next isn't a detriment. And at a breezy 96 minutes, it's incredibly economical.

The movie has its famous flourishes: John Wayne (as The Ringo Kid) has one of the greatest entrances in one of the most exciting shots I've ever seen. It's such an appropriate first appearance for one of the greatest stars who ever lived. The chase sequence through Apache country is brilliant, with stunts that baffle you. It's one of those moments that makes you realize just how cheap CGI can be. And you can see some classic Ford touches, such as his doorway shots and appropriate balance of moving and static shots.

In all, it's a must-see if you haven't already. If you've never seen many films by John Ford, this is a good place to start. It's him at his most crowd-pleasing. Sometimes, because of his influence, it's hard for modern audiences to get what kind of style Ford worked in. His language has become so absorbed that it seems average at first glance, but there's something about Stagecoach that hooks you so quickly that you can't help falling in love and wanting to see more.

The blog returns...really. I mean it this time.

Some of the posts on the main page are a year old. I regret that. The past year has been probably the busiest ever. I took a lot of classes, directed two shows, and generally ran around like crazy. That, combined with the general lackluster nature of this year in film, has not exactly inspired me to write much. In general, my movie-watching habits have suffered. I do not watch as many older films as I used to. But I miss that, and I miss studying the films I watch and writing about them. So in order to be more regular with the blog, I'm establishing a schedule that I'm going to try to keep up with. It will be as follows:

Sundays: Review of a new or recent theatrical release
Mondays: Thoughts on a favorite scene in a great movie
Tuesdays: A roundup of links and pieces online that I recommend reading
Wednesdays: Some thoughts on a certain actor, writer, director, etc.
Thursdays: Wild Card!
Fridays: A fun list to generate thought and discussion
Saturdays: A review of an older or classic film

I am fully aware that I have lost any and all readers that I had. Hopefully people will be drawn to the blog again over time. However, at the end of the day, this is for me, not anyone else. That being said, if you do read the blog, comment often! This will help me stay motivated to continue this. I want this to be a forum for discussing movies, not just me talking about them at length. Let's have fun.

"There's a passage I got memorized. Ezekiel 25:17. 'The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you.' ...I never gave much thought to what it meant. ... See, now I'm thinkin': maybe it means you're the evil man. And I'm the righteous man. And Mr. 9mm here, he's the shepherd protecting my righteous ass in the valley of darkness. Or it could mean you're the righteous man and I'm the shepherd and it's the world that's evil and selfish. And I'd like that. But that ain't the truth. The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be the shepherd."

(In an effort to get back to normal with this blog, I've decided to just start posting something from or a reflection on whatever movie I've been thinking about most on a given day. I usually refer back to movies far more than is probably normal, but oh well. Hence this blog. This scene kept ringing in my ears today. Probably one of my favorite bits of dialogue in all of cinema. In fact, Jules is probably one of the best characters Tarantino ever wrote, with Hans Landa coming at a close second. I digress, but at any rate, this is how I feel today. I'm trying. I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd.)

The Best Films of 2009

I’ll skip the usual apologies for not updating the blog in so long. I was busy. But now it’s back. At least for this year’s top ten. I can’t say 2009 was a great year for movies. Especially compared with some recent years, like 2007. As usual, except for the number one slot, all the others are ordered in a relatively arbitrary fashion. After the list, my personal picks for some of the awards being given tonight (whether they are nominated or not), and then some notes on the Oscars. I’ll try to update tomorrow after we know who’s gone home with what. But now, without much further ado:

The Ten Best Films of 2009

1. Inglourious Basterds

One of the most cathartic film experiences of the year. Tarantino was firing on all cylinders, and there are few films I have seen in the past few years that utilize all the qualities and potential of the cinema as well as this did. I’m sure this movie isn’t “for everyone” but it has something for everyone. Much has been said about Christoph Waltz, and it’s all true, but let’s not forget the rest of the cast: Diane Kruger, Michael Fassbender, and Melanie Laurent all turn in wonderful performances. It won best ensemble at the SAG Awards, and it really truly feels like one. It’s visually, audibly, and textually brilliant, and gets better with each viewing.

2. Nine

I seem to be one of the lone defenders of this strange concoction, but I enjoyed it on an emotional level perhaps more than any other film. The critics wanted 8 ½, and when it wasn’t, they panned it. Audiences, I think, were confused as to what they’d find, and so stayed away. But history will vindicate this spectacular movie. The showmanship, from director Rob Marshall, that made Chicago work so well finds a better match here in dealing with issues of cinema, illusion, and performance. It’s an intimate character study with a theatrical twist, and the most underrated movie of the year.

3. A Serious Man

Not many people make movies about religion anymore. Some are set in the world of religion, but few films actually tackle the inner workings of faith and theology, and so it is in that regard that the Coen Brothers’ latest film is a bold one, and one of their best. As a result, it has the freedom to ask some of life’s biggest questions, and doesn’t shortchange its audience in the process.

4. The White Ribbon

I don’t have a lot to say about it at this time, because I’ve only seen it once. It is one I will definitely watch again, and I know there is much more to be had than what I gleaned the first time around. I can with certainty say this: it is a wonderfully-shot, expertly-directed, and, at times, disturbing film. If you have not heard of it, you should see it anyway. It would not help for me to tell you much about it, it’s something you need to encounter for yourself without any preconceptions.

5. Public Enemies

A movie that really didn’t come alive for me until the second viewing (perhaps because I was exhausted the first time). It’s another one of this year’s underrated wonders. An old-fashioned gangster film with a modern sensibility. Every time I want to write off Johnny Depp as a pop-culture fad, he surprises me with a performance like this. And, between this and Nine, Marion Cotillard proves she is one of the world’s best film actresses.

6. Bright Star

Films about Romantic English poets aren’t probably going to attract a ton of attention, but this one deserved it. Great performances all around, and director Jane Campion is able to lead us to an inevitable ending with patience and serenity, where other directors would probably lapse into melodrama. It’s a movie I’ve been eager to watch again since I first saw it back in October, just to make sure it’s as good as I thought it was that time. I’m certain it is.

7. A Single Man

Much has been made of its cinematography and music, both of which are gorgeous. But what makes this film work is the excellent performance at its center: Colin Firth (finally proving what I’ve always suspected about him as an actor) as a broken man stuck in a world that doesn’t allow him the right to grieve.

8. In the Loop

I could go on for ages about the stupidity of the prejudices that many artists have about comedy as opposed to “drama.” Here is a film about the lead-up to a war in the Middle East, but rather than beating you over the head with rhetoric and political commentary, it cracks you up and works better than perhaps any film yet dealing with the war on terror/Iraq. The screenplay is rightly nominated tonight, but Peter Capaldi deserved a nomination, if for nothing else than one particular scene in which his Malcolm Tucker almost breaks down. If you’ve seen any of the BBC show the film is based on, it’s a truly memorable moment.

9. Fantastic Mr. Fox

The best animated film of the year (sorry Pixar). I’ll admit that it’s possible I’m just a Wes Anderson junkie, but the general acclaim it got makes me feel my praise is warranted. Appropriate (i.e. non-gimmicky) voice acting and old-fashioned animation make this one of the fullest expressions of Anderson’s style. It ranks right up near The Royal Tenenbaums and Rushmore.

10. Star Trek

I bet I’ll take some flack for this one. I already wrote a short review of it, so I’ll be brief. It’s fun, excellently-made, and one of the most purely entertaining movies this year. At the end of the day, sometimes you just can’t beat a thrill ride.


The Second Tier

11. (500) Days of Summer
12. Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call- New Orleans
13. Un Prophete
14. Il Divo
15. The Road
16. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
17. Up
18. Away We Go
19. The Young Victoria
20. Up in the Air

Honorable Mentions (Five films that don’t belong on any best-of list, but I still really enjoyed)

District 9
Me and Orson Welles
Observe and Report
Avatar
2012

Best Actor: Colin Firth, A Single Man

Best Actress: Abbie Cornish, Bright Star

Best Supporting Actor: Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

Best Supporting Actress: Marion Cotillard, Nine AND Public Enemies

Best Director: Quentin Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds

Best Original Screenplay: Joel and Ethan Coen, A Serious Man

Best Adapted Screenplay: Armando Iannucci, In the Loop

And I won’t pretend, like others, to know enough about the craft of any of the technical categories to pick what’s best. I’ll leave that to the Academy.

Quick Oscar Thoughts: You’ll probably notice a glaring omission in this list: The Hurt Locker. Is it a bad movie? No. Good movie? Perhaps. Overrated? Most definitely. While a win for it would not be as infuriating as Slumdog’s triumph last year, it would still be another example of the Academy getting behind what it thinks is an “important” movie and letting that carry it all the way to the finish line. The movie has its virtues, and I do think it’s pretty good, but I just can’t get behind calling it one of the best movies of the year. I believe the fact that it’s probably the best of all the Iraq movies, something that Oscar has felt the desire to comment on in the past few years, has brought it to the podium.

Avatar: I enjoyed it, as I indicated above. Yes, yes, it’s a technological breakthrough that’s probably changed movies forever, etc. But a place in the top twenty? I think not. It is visually dazzling, no doubt about that. It deserves the Visual Effects Oscar it receives tonight. But the melodrama and faux-profundity kept me from truly engaging with it. But as I said, I did (and will continue to) enjoy it.

The Ten: I seem to be one of the few people out there who likes the return to ten best picture nominees. If you look at the best director lineup, you can see what are the five “real nominees,” and the inclusion of The Blind Side gives the sense that the rest of the list is the Academy checking off demographic categories (Fanboys? Check. Middle America? Check.) But I like the chance to include more genre entries like District 9 and Up. Plus, the change in the balloting system has resulted in one of the least-certain best picture races in recent history.

So here’s to you, Academy. Here’s hoping you don’t embarrass yourself like last year. Here’s hoping that, despite the glaring omissions in your list of nominees, you manage to make some decent picks. Here’s hoping you’ve learned your lessons.

Who am I kidding? Bring on the headache.

Inception

Watch This:

Movie Review Haiku!

Seen quite a bit, and things are starting to get busy. So here they are: short reviews in Japanese poetic form.


Funny People

A weak narrative
Keeps dragging on forever
Boring, not funny


The Hurt Locker

Intense action film
Possibly overrated
But still, it's quite good


(500) Days of Summer

It's a great delight,
Similar to Annie Hall
Knowing and witty


District 9

It's filled with gore
Surprise! It's very thoughtful
Quite original


Ponyo (on the cliff by the sea)

Striking imagery
But why such a weak climax?
Hello Tina Fey


Inglourious Basterds

Christoph Waltz is great!
Full review is forthcoming.
Must see it again.

Presenting the Sixth Film by Wes Anderson

Coming Soon

If you've never watched, it's time to start.

The Beatles

A Hard Day's Night
The first and best of the Beatles films. It's a testament to their talent that they are as photogenic and personable as their music is enjoyable. As a group, they wreak havoc on peaceful communities as Beatlemania follows them around. As individuals, they get into mischief and have surprisingly humorous adventures considering they are playing themselves.

There's no real plot. They are in a town to do a television broadcast. Paul's grandfather, a "king mixer" according to Paul, accompanies them and serves to fill people's heads with false notions, particularly Ringo, who decides to go "parading" late in the film, leading to the narrative's only moment of real crisis.

The scenes of Beatlemania, from all accounts, are toned down. The craze was often more frantic and at times more violent than what the movie shows. And of course the music is great, with the first Beatles album of completely original music. The title track was written over a couple of hours at the behest of the producers, who needed a song to go along with the name of the film.

It's a hugely entertaining film, with a kind of silliness that is missing from a lot of modern films. Every once in a while you need a good flick with little plot and plenty of personality.


Help!
Even more silly than Night but with more plot, which becomes problematic at times. Ringo has randomly come into possession of an Indian sacrificial ring which a cult will stop at nothing to get back. For whatever reason, the ring means that Ringo will soon be covered in red paint and killed as a sacrifice. The film follows the Beatles as they travel around evading the cult and playing music along the way.

It's also a good deal more surreal than their previous film. For instance, the house that the Beatles all live in is a cross between a funhouse and a barracks. George's room features a lawn equipped with a gardener who uses fake chattering teeth to trim the grass. John has a bed built into the floor.

The events are sometimes transitioned by humorous intertitles, telling us what to expect or what happened in between scenes. At one point, Paul is shrunk and his impending journey is announced as "The Exciting Adventure of Paul on the Floor."



It's not quite as charming as their first film, and in some ways is one of the strangest films I've ever seen. But The Beatles are all there, with their personalities in tact. And because of that, and the music, it's still a very entertaining movie.

Update at Large

A few updates on some films I've seen in the theatres, most of which haven't inspired a full review:


The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3
Much better than most of the reviews would have you believe. I haven't seen the original, but that doesn't really matter. It's a solid thriller with two good performances at its center. This is one of those John Travolta roles that pops up every once in a while and reminds you of why he's a star, and helps you to forget some of the drivel he's done in the past decade or so.

I will agree with the critics who were unhappy with Tony Scott's style. At times, the style works, like in Man on Fire. But this story has enough adrenaline that the frenetic editing and music becomes overkill. Still, as I said, it's mostly consistent and a good piece of entertainment. It is what it is, and if that's what you're looking for, you got it.


Year One
There's some good, clever ideas here. But in the effort to make it a more accessible Jack Black vehicle, it becomes an unqualified mess. And I mention Jack Black specifically because this is the film in which he has officially worn out his welcome. I don't want to see him and his usual schtick for a long, long time.

The tinkering results in scenes that go nowhere, gaping plotholes, and narrative lapses, such as two or three scenes in which a character is in mortal danger only to cut to the next scene in which they are perfectly fine, with no hint of how they escaped certain peril. It's not a good film by any means, but a few bright spots remain, particularly the show-stealer David Cross.


Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
Much has been said, so I won't devote a lot of space to it. Any charm that the first one held has been squashed in the sequel by Michael Bay's doubling of everything. Since the first film had one dog, the second has to have two, and so on. It's silly and medicore at best. However, a phenomenon has to be pointed out: for the most part, audiences have really enjoyed it. In some sense, it gives people exactly what they want. And for whatever reason, that includes Robot Heaven.


Public Enemies
A fascinating and entertaining look at one of America's last great outlaws. In a sense, it has feet firmly set in both the classic gangster genre and the 21st century, mostly owing to the high-definition digital cinematography. While it might be a tad bloated, Johnny Depp keeps our attention riveted on Dillinger. Christian Bale serves his purpose, but without much flair.


Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
One of the highlights of the series so far. There has been some rumbling among fans about the ending and other differences from the book. I'll say it again, you can't judge a film by its faithfulness to the source material. Period. End of story. Get over it. It's a lovingly painted portrait of a year at Hogwarts, and the last bit of innocence that these characters get to have. It's as enjoyable as the series has ever been, owing largely to the central characters, who have grown into fantastic actors. Jim Broadbent makes a wonderful addition to the cast. In a way, it's a transition piece, sort of in the vein of The Empire Strikes Back. There's no real beginning or ending, but it's a great ride nonetheless.

Best Pictures: Going My Way, 1944

I feel rather bad calling Going My Way a simple film, but it kind of is. I feel guilty, in some kind of religious way, almost, in not recognizing some kind of deeper significance to Leo McCarey's 1944 Oscar winner. But still I stumble through to my verdict- a kindly film without a whole lot else beneath it.

It's the story of a priest trying to modernize a parish at the behest of his bishop. He intially butts heads with the elder priest in charge, but they reconcile. There are a few subplots, including one dealing with a banker trying to foreclose on the church and his son who is in love with a girl from the streets (providing the film with its edgiest material- a vague reference to prostitution).

The priest (Bing Crosby) also nurtures a boys' choir and uses their talents to get a song ("Going My Way") published so he can raise money to save the church. The priest is more worldly-wise than the elder (Barry Fitzgerald), going so far as to take the kids to baseball games and movies (gasp!). It's almost like a kind of anti-Doubt.

That's probably too much plot, but there's not much else that inspires me to write. It's a solid, friendly narrative, capably directed by McCarey, with a couple of good performances to anchor it. Beyond that, it's not what I'd call great, or "best."

A bit of data: The other nominated films that year were Double Indemnity, Gaslight, Since You Went Away, and Wilson. I'm a fan of Wilder's Indemnity, but I can see where the Academy would go for something like Way over the sometimes ambiguous tone of the former.

Best Pictures: How Green Was My Valley, 1941

It's the film that beat out Citizen Kane for Best Picture in 1941, and today that seems to be it's only claim to fame, but unfairly. It's a solid picture, well-directed by John Ford. On the surface it seems to be rather simple, but underneath brews a myriad of interesting topics that provide an eeriness that underscores some of the beautiful images such as the one pictured above.

The narrative, simply put, concerns a family living in a valley in Wales, one that is dominated by a coal mine through which all men must pass. The family experiences its ups and downs, all seen through the eyes of young Huw Morgan(Roddy McDowall). He lives in a house with his parents and his many brothers, and one sister (Maureen O'Hara) who is pressured into an unsatisfying marriage. It's one of those slice of life stories that Oscar seems to favor so often, covering great lengths of time and showing you the life of people long ago and far away. However, because of plot points I won't divulge, it's not merely a memoir, but more like a eulogy.

But the film also deals with themes like unionization, corporal punishment, religious discipline, and environmental decline. These revolve around an emotionally satisfying and dynamic pastoral drama, and help to keep it from becoming pure sentiment. Uniting it all is a restlessness about the status quo and man's place in society. If the film has a singular focus it is the tendency of politics to ruin a community (an idea which resonates particularly well with me).

So while it may not have the technical innovation and proficiency of Kane, it's probably got just as much heart and insight. In terms of Ford's body of work, it's not as memorable or iconic as, say, The Searchers, but it's consistent. Part of that is due to the lack of a standout performance, despite Walter Pidgeon's strong turn as the humanistic minister. Part of what makes The Searchers so fascinating is because its part of that mythos of The Duke. While Valley can't claim that kind of Hollywood glamour, it still excels on its own terms.

Up

You'll have to forgive me for this review. It will probably devolve into a string of superlatives. I would love to be able to provide a thoughtful, balanced, and grounded analysis, but I'm not sure it's possible, at least after only one viewing. But at the same time, I won't apologize for my response, since Up provided me with one of the most profoundly emotional experiences I've had at the movies in a long time.

I don't want to go into much detail, because you should see it all for yourself. You probably already know a little about the plot, and that's fine. It's a unique story, part old-fashioned adventure serial, part fairy tale. But what makes it so compelling is its central character, the elderly but spry Carl Fredericksen, voiced by Ed Asner.

The movie is artistically brilliant as well. If it's one thing that the animators at Pixar know it's cinematography. One shot in particular sticks in my mind. I won't give the context but it happens at sunset, as we see Carl and his floating house silhouetted against a backdrop of purple, orange, and red. It's a breathtaking sight.

I'm not sure what else to write about. It's incredibly enjoyable, not just for children. If you don't feel something while watching it, you're a rock. There's something so elemental about animation, especially in the hands of Pixar. The characters' performances can cut through to us in a way that live action performances can't. We don't have any preconceived ideas about the actors; we've never seen these people before. The emotions are distilled down to their pure essences, and they're very effective. At least they were for me.

Best Pictures: The Great Ziegfeld, 1936

Right from the opening titles, you know to expect big things from The Great Ziegfeld, a biopic chronicling the life and times of one of America's greatest showmen. The concept of the showmen is a curious one, and almost obsolete. But in this film you see it fully realized in the life of Ziegfeld and the lavish musical numbers mimicking those Ziegfeld actually did.

And its the musical numbers that provide the biggest thrill of the film, and they occupy most of the middle section of the film. After an hour of traditional biography material, detailing Ziegfeld's romantic entanglements and development from glorified ringmaster to true impresario, we get several huge production numbers that truly befit Ziegfeld's reputation. One particularly lavish number features a large circular stairway (pictured above) which the camera climbs, incorporating Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue to great effect. It's the highlight of the film, and for good reason.

However, these numbers also cause problems for the film's structure. They are the film's centerpiece, but everything around them dulls in comparison. The work is the meat of Ziegfeld's life. His offstage dalliances are far less interesting, though William Powell makes good use of what he is given. I suppose we, in the twenty-first century, are just very used to seeing tales of men going through numerous women that we're jaded. Part of the problem, though, is that the film sanitizes and lessens these flings so as to soften the scandals.

Still, we are given a lavish biopic with a good cast to boot. Myrna Loy, though given second billing, has very little to do in her role of Ziegfeld's second wife Billie Burke. Luise Ranier is the real standout in her role of Anna Held, though her scenes are allowed to go on far too long. She's humorous, but we grow tired of her by the time we are meant to pity her. We also get some good turns from members of Ziegfeld's troupe playing themselves, namely Ray Bolger and Fanny Brice. All in all, it's a pretty standard biopic with some fabulous highlights, and for those we have Ziegfeld himself to thank.

Best Pictures: Mutiny on the Bounty, 1935

Directed by Frank Lloyd, Mutiny is a surprisingly compelling film that is remarkable for its tonal shifts. The first thirty minutes imply a jaunty nautical melodrama that later showcases cruelty unexpected in a film from this period. One minute a drunken peglegged surgeon is being hoisted aboard the ship to laughter and applause. The next minute Captain Bligh (Charles Laughton) arrives only to have a corpse beaten with a cat of nine tails in front of his crew.

For most of the film, we see an ideological conflict in the form of Bligh and his first mate Fletcher Christian (Clark Gable), who wants more humane treatment for the men. One of the best features of this film is when that conflict is muddied by the harsh actions of Christian during the mutiny, leading to the climax of the film when a departing Bligh delivers a powerful condemnation to the mutineers. The moment presents us with a villain who is heroic and a heroic rebel with no real plan and debatable leadership qualities.

Unfortunately, the climax comes about 45 minutes before the end of the film. Once Bligh and Christian are separated, the main conflict is gone. Christian wanders about Tahiti with the other mutineers, bedding a native girl who gives him a daughter. Indeed, between Bligh's cruelty and Christian's dalliances, we get a picture of sovereignty and imperialism run amok. Of course, the natives in the film are more than happy to accommodate their invaders, and the native women go weak at the knees whenever a shirtless white man walks by.

The film is well constructed, with some notable editing techniques reminiscent of that other great film less than a decade prior that also dealt with mutiny on a ship. There's also some good performances, with an interesting picture of British and American acting techniques at work in the film's central conflict. Laughton, in technical terms, acts circles around Gable, but there's no matching Gable's charisma and heroic qualities. Even when his character becomes less than noble, Gable makes Christian very enjoyable to watch.