Oscar Predictions 2012

I can gripe all I want about them but the Oscars aren’t going anywhere so we might as well have some fun. Last year I was 12 for 24 guessing the winners so let’s see if I can’t do a little better this year.

Picture: The Artist

Director: Michel Hazanavicius, The Artist

Actor: George Clooney, The Descendants

Actress: Viola Davis, The Help

Supporting Actor: Christopher Plummer, Beginners

Supporting Actress: Octavia Spencer, The Help

Adapted Screenplay: The Descendants

Original Screenplay: Midnight in Paris

Animated Film: Rango

Art Direction: The Artist

Cinematography: The Tree of Life

Costume Design: W.E.

Documentary Feature: Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory

Documentary Short: The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom

Film Editing: The Artist

Foreign Film: A Separation (Iran)

Makeup: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Music (Original Score): The Artist

Music (Original Song): “Man or Muppet” from The Muppets

Short Film (Animated): Morning Stroll

Short Film (Live Action): Time Freak

Sound Editing: War Horse

Sound Mixing: Hugo

Visual Effects: Rise of the Planet of the Apes

- Steve Avigliano, 2/26/12

Best of 2011: My Top 10 Movies of 2011

The list below is of my favorite movies of 2011. I wrote the other day how determining the best movies in a given year can be tough because you can’t always tell whether or not a film will age well. Some movies get better and better the more you watch them. Others make a great first impression but might not hold up to multiple viewings. This list is a collection of first impressions. These are all movies that left a mark on me the first time I saw them. I’ll check back with them a few years down the road and see how they hold up.

In the meantime, most are on DVD or will be soon (and The Descendants is still in theaters now). So use the on demand/online streaming/DVD-in-the-mail service of your choice and check them out. (I’ll also share with you a well-kept secret of where to rent movies that I use all the time: the library. Most local libraries have large movie collections and get all the new DVDs. You might have to fight with the woman down the block who has a crush on Ryan Gosling in order to get your hands on a copy of The Ides of March but, hey, it’s free.)

Before we get to the Top 10, here are five films I admire that didn’t make the list: Another Earth, The Future, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Moneyball, Terri

10) Midnight in Paris (Original review)

Woody Allen’s globetrotting continues with Midnight in Paris, a breezy, time-traveling comedy starring Owen Wilson who, in a fine performance, splits the difference between his own comic persona and the neuroses of Mr. Allen. Those familiar with the major figures of art and literature in 1920s Paris (Ernest Hemingway, Gertrude Stein and Salvador Dali, to name a few that appear here) will be delighted but you don’t have to get all the references to enjoy the film. Mr. Allen’s own love of these artists shines through every scene and Mr. Wilson is great fun to watch as he marvels at being transported to the bygone era he adores. A love letter to the city and a bittersweet (though mostly sweet) study of how nostalgia afflicts us all.

9) Take Shelter

Take Shelter is an absorbing psychological thriller about a blue collar Midwesterner, Curtis LaForche (Michael Shannon), on the cusp of a schizophrenic breakdown. Or is he? He begins having horribly realistic nightmares of an apocalyptic storm but are the dreams premonitions of some rapture to come, or is his mind descending into madness? Neither option bodes well for him and his family. The film, written and directed by Jeff Nichols, is engrossing because Curtis’s supernatural fears have real world consequences. When he becomes obsessed with renovating an old tornado shelter in the backyard, the expenditure puts a significant financial burden on his family. This is a beautifully shot, gradually paced and absolutely gripping movie.

8) A Dangerous Method (Original review) 

A Dangerous Method follows the professional and personal relationship of psychologists Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender) and Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen) but this is not a typical historical biopic. This is an exceptionally talky film; Jung and Freud’s discussions on the subtleties of psychoanalysis are only occasionally broken up by scenes of kinky sex between Jung and his patient-turned-student-turned-lover, Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley). Despite the dry nature of the material though, there is a current of excitement running through A Dangerous Method. These were intellectual innovators on the verge of changing the way the world thought about the human mind and director David Cronenberg elegantly captures that moment in this fascinating film.

7) The Descendants (Original review)

Alexander Payne’s films tell wonderful, human stories. Like previous Payne features Sideways and About Schmidt, The Descendants depicts a man facing a personal crisis, and does so with compassion and humor. After a boating accident puts his wife in a permanent coma, Matt King (George Clooney) is left alone to father his two daughters. Meanwhile, as the lone trustee to a huge estate, he faces pressure from the other side of his family to find a buyer for the property. The movie, set against a gorgeous, Hawaiian backdrop, has a keen sense of culture and history. It also ends on what might be my favorite final shot in a movie this year.

6) Attack the Block

The definition of what is cool is always changing and often we can look back and identify what sparked certain trends in coolness. Attack the Block is the sort of movie we’ll look back on and say, “Oh, yeah. That’s cool because Attack the Block did it first.” The movie follows a teen gang in inner city London who unwittingly find themselves fighting off an alien invasion. What’s kind of brilliant about it is that they react to this extraterrestrial contact precisely how you’d expect a bunch of fifteen-year-old boys to. When they kill their first alien, what do they do? They drag its carcass through the streets and show it off to a few girls before bringing it to the guy they buy weed from. Fast-paced, funny, sometimes gory, and featuring impressive creature effects. A promising debut from writer/director Joe Cornish.

5) Margin Call

An analyst for a powerful financial investment firm is laid off but before he leaves the building he hands a flash drive to one of his employees. “I think you should take a look at this,” he says. “Be careful.” That’s the set-up of Margin Call, which mostly takes place over one night as the gravity of the information on that drive sinks in – it contains calculations that predict the firm’s doom – and news travels up the ranks to the CEO. This is a tense film inspired by the 2008 financial crisis and successfully makes complex concepts accessible without dumbing them down. Writer/director J.C. Chandor seeks to do nothing less than question the morality of capitalism but never demonizes his characters. Instead, he invites us to ask ourselves: What would I do in this situation? Is jumping ship and saving myself the right thing to do? Characters in the film are always asking this but the notion of what is “right” turns out to be a very murky concept indeed.

4) Warrior

This is a powerful story about two estranged brothers – tormented Iraq War veteran Tommy (Tom Hardy) and Brendan (Joel Edgarton), a physics teacher and father of two – who return to their roots as mixed martial arts fighters. Tommy enlists the help of his father (Nick Nolte), a reformed alcoholic and Tommy’s former trainer, to prepare for an upcoming tournament. Brendan, meanwhile, starts participating in pickup matches to make quick cash and stall foreclosure on his house. You might be able to guess where this is going but Warrior is impressive in the way it does not simplify its characters’ complex relationships while still adhering to the crowd-pleasing formula of the fight genre. Audiences largely dismissed Warrior because of seeming similarities to The Fighter, an unfair fate considering it is even better than that film. This one blew me away.

3) Higher Ground

Higher Ground chronicles one southern woman’s relationship with religion, from her tenuous beginnings with evangelicalism and following her as she is born again and subsequently questions her faith. Though it features a fair amount of preaching, the movie itself never preaches. It approaches its characters with a critical eye and its subject matter with an open mind. Vera Farmiga, who stars in the film and makes her directorial debut, is careful not to condescend. Some members of the congregation are naive and old-fashioned but all of them are complex individuals, not stereotypes. The film shoulders big topics – sex, marriage, family, church and the role women play in all of those – but does so gracefully and without passing judgment. This is a quiet movie about the process of self-discovery; there are few grand, dramatic moments in it. Yet, in its subtle way, the film uncovers something true and leaves a lasting impression.

2) Beginners

Tone can be a delicate thing. Mike Mills’s Beginners finds just the right one though; it has an emotional frankness that does not soften its more tragic moments but also has a certain whimsy and love for life that is infectious. We meet Oliver (Ewan McGregor) at the start of a new relationship with Anna (Mélanie Laurent), a French actress he meets at a party. This is intercut with remembrances of his late father (Christopher Plummer) who, in the last years of his life, was diagnosed with cancer and came out of the closet, living as an openly gay man for the first time. The tender relationship between father and son is at the heart of the film but its best moments are in the embellishments Mr. Mills adds. Oliver has conversations with his father’s dog (who talks back through subtitles), recalls childhood memories of his mother (­­­­­Mary Page Keller) and reflects on the differences between his father’s time and the present. A loose, almost free associative structure helps to avoid melodrama. The film opens with the father’s death and moves backward, retracing the end of his life while also moving forward with Oliver’s developing romance and ending on a thoroughly optimistic note. This is a film with style and wit that left on me an imprint of its uniquely pleasant mood.

1) The Tree of Life (Original review)

Terrence Malick is one of the few filmmakers today making great literary art. His latest, The Tree of Life, has a poetic style, chasing moods, emotions and ideas rather than following a straightforward, linear narrative. The film is a major achievement, which is also to say it is not the most accessible or traditionally entertaining of films but here’s my advice if you are interested: Brace yourself for the abstractions of the extended cosmic prologue, which dramatizes the beginnings of the Universe. Know that the domestic scenes set in 1950s Texas suburbia that follow are rich in emotion and feature compassionate performances from Brad Pitt, Jessica Chastain and newcomer Hunter McCracken. Let the mosaic of imagery and music wash over you. Don’t expect a conventional plot but look instead at the small, familial moments Mr. Malick creates and find parallels in your own life. The Tree of Life can be a profoundly moving experience if you’re in the right frame of mind for it. Terrence Malick has crafted a landmark in contemporary American cinema and, for my money, the year’s best film.

- Steve Avigliano, 2/25/12 

Best of 2011: My Favorite Performances

The following are my favorite performances of 2011. They are the men and women* who stood out to me, who were vital to the success of the films they were in, who I thought about weeks and months after seeing. They are presented in alphabetical order by last name except one that I have chosen as my absolute favorite of the year.

Joel Edgarton, Tom Hardy and Nick Nolte – Warrior

There is a lot to love about the rousing fight drama Warrior but its cast is especially impressive. Tom Hardy and Joel Edgarton give understated performances as estranged brothers, one an angry Iraq War veteran (Hardy); the other, a devoted father (Edgarton). Together, with Nick Nolte, who plays their recovering alcoholic father, they form a fractured – and believable – family whose complex relationships elevate the film beyond the ring.

Michael Fassbender – X-Men: First Class, A Dangerous Method

Michael Fassbender had a great year. He starred in a new Jane Eyre as Rochester, a plum role for any brooding actor, and got a lot of attention playing a sex addict in Shame (both films unseen by me). His intensity was a standout of X-Men: First Class where he played the young, Nazi-hunting Magneto, and he gave a more nuanced performance as psychologist Carl Jung in David Cronenberg’s A Dangerous Method. I don’t doubt we will continue to see strong work from him in the future.

Ryan Gosling – Drive, The Ides of March

Speaking of great years, how about that Ryan Gosling? After the romantic comedy Crazy Stupid Love, he had two killer leading roles. I wasn’t as wowed by Drive as some were but I admired Mr. Gosling’s work as the nameless protagonist whose silence hints at a deeply troubled past. And in The Ides of March, he held his own sharing scenes with Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Paul Giamatti. I’d be hard pressed to name a better young star.

Jeremy Irons – Margin Call

The financial thriller Margin Call boasts an exceptional ensemble cast (including Simon Baker, Paul Bettany, Demi Moore, Zachary Quinto, Kevin Spacey and Stanley Tucci) but I want to single out Jeremy Irons who plays John Tuld, the CEO of an investment firm facing certain doom. Mr. Irons has a voice well suited to villainy (his voice will still be familiar to many as that of Scar from The Lion King) but his portrayal of this cold, calculating billionaire is not one-dimensional. Tuld conveys the gravity of their dire situation without wavering from his brutal, capitalist morals, and Mr. Irons delivers some potentially heavy-handed monologues forcefully and convincingly. He is a compelling, absorbing presence in every scene.

Hunter McCracken – The Tree of Life

So few children in movies actually act like children but Hunter McCracken’s performance as Jack, the young protagonist of Terrence Malick’s cosmic opus, The Tree of Life, has astonishing depth and complexity. The film is, among other things, about a boy’s transition from carefree, childhood innocence to the emotional burdens of adulthood. Since the film has minimal dialogue, Jack does not feel like the artificial construction of a screenwriter but, rather, a living, breathing kid. He throws angry fits, is dependent on his mother’s love, and runs through the quiet, suburban streets of his home, unaware of the impossible hugeness of the universe he lives in.

Viggo Mortensen – A Dangerous Method

Viggo Mortensen takes on the weighty role of Sigmund Freud and makes it his own with characteristic ease. His Freud is a highly intelligent man who knows full well the scope of his influence and intellect. He exacts his powerful, analytic mind not only on his patients but also his peers and even himself. He speaks with absolute certainty and clarity. This is Mr. Mortensen’s third collaboration and in each film he has turned in a strong (and very different) performance – a rural family man with a past, a Russian mobster. Few actors are so adventurous in their selection of roles and so consistent.

Christopher Plummer – Beginners

The heart of Mike Mills’s warm, autobiographical Beginners rests in Christopher Plummer’s performance as Hal, a feisty old man who responds to his cancer diagnosis with a continued, unflinching zeal for life. Having only recently come out of the closet, Hal is enjoying a newfound freedom in the lifestyle and Mr. Plummer expresses a wealth of happiness behind the smallest of smiles. The last act of life need not be a bittersweet goodbye and Hal’s optimism is contagious, both to his son, Oliver (Ewan McGregor), and to us.

John C. Reilly – Cedar Rapids, Terri, Carnage

John C. Reilly continues to prove how versatile his skills are. He is a gifted comedic actor whose lovable schmo persona was a joy to watch in Carnage, Roman Polanski’s comedy about bickering couples, and his insurance salesman with a rockstar-sized ego was a highlight of Cedar Rapids. He also gave the high school coming-of-age story Terri some laugh out loud moments as a jovial assistant principal. He is the rare actor who is as comfortable in a Will Ferrell comedy as he is in more “serious” fare, stealing scenes wherever he goes.

My Favorite Performance of the Year:

Vera Farmiga – Higher Ground

Faith is a very personal thing and though it is often celebrated in the company of others, such as in the evangelical community in Higher Ground, the process of exploring and discovering one’s faith must first happen internally. Vera Farmiga has the difficult task of playing a woman, Corinne Briggs, who wrestles with her faith, believing at first that she has found it only to question the role the Lord truly plays in her life. These are delicate feelings that are rarely displayed externally and yet, in the film, there is never a moment when we are unsure what is on Corinne’s mind. Mrs. Farmiga expresses Corinne’s hopeful optimism, her disappointment when her marriage and her church let her down, and her unflagging desire and willingness to open her heart to religion. This is a breakthrough performance from an immensely talented actress and is not to be missed.

* Looking over the eleven names above I notice there is only one woman. A sexist oversight on my part? Perhaps. Worth noting, however, is how few substantial roles there are for women in movies today. The majority of movies I saw this year were absent of female leading roles that were not romantic interests to a more heavily featured male character or sexualized. Also worth noting is that the one woman on my list, Vera Farmiga in Higher Ground, also directed the film. Whether or not women need to be behind the camera in order to get quality parts in front of it is a discussion for another time but these are issues worth thinking about.

(Two notable exceptions from this year are the box office hits Bridesmaids and The Help, both directed by men and featuring female ensembles. I wasn’t a fan of either film but in neither case do their faults lie in the acting, which is strong across the board. And I am happy the popularity of Bridesmaids may open doors for more female-centric comedies.)

- Steve Avigliano, 2/23/12

Awards Season Blues

When did “awards season” become a phrase? It is certainly an accurate descriptor – the avalanche of end-of-the-year movie awards has become as interminable and seemingly unending as a Northeast winter (which has actually been rather mild this year in Jersey) – but has this time of year always been flooded with so much self-congratulatory nonsense? The Oscars have long been a staple of the industry’s love for itself but now we also have the Golden Globes, the Critics’ Choice Awards, the People’s Choice Awards, the SAG Awards, etc., ad nauseam. The airwaves are positively saturated with three-plus hour broadcasts praising the Hollywood elite!

There is nothing wrong with recognizing the year’s best films and performances, and I understand these shows’ appeal. They are fun. Today’s media does not paint a flattering picture of celebrity and these red carpet spectacles offer a certain image of Hollywood glitz and glamour that has otherwise been long lost to paparazzi photos.

Maybe you enjoy seeing who Michelle Williams is wearing or watching Ryan Seacrest pretend to care about how honored Jonah Hill is to be there (Mr. Seacrest has made an art out of vapid celebrity chit-chat). I have no beef with any of that. What frustrates me is how repetitive the actual awards have become.

Each award show's nominees are culled from the same small batch of films and we hear their titles repeated again and again – The Artist, The Descendants, Hugo, The Artist, The Descendants, Hugo – until they are ingrained in our heads as the Chosen Films for this year. Rather than using the end of the year as an opportunity to praise different styles or recommend lesser seen films, December through February has become a time when a select few movies battle for entry into the contemporary cinematic canon whether they deserve it or not.

Awards season begins a little earlier than this though and many of the nominated films are released in the last quarter of the year. Beginning in the fall and chugging along into the early winter, a new batch of historical biopics and stuffy dramas reach theaters, each trying to generate some buzz. Studios do not want their Oscar prospects to be forgotten when the nominees are chosen so they release them as close to the telecast as possible.

This scheduling choice has a wearying effect on audiences. A handful of movies you have only just heard about are being praised as the must-sees of the season and even though the movies range in their subjects, there is a feeling of sameness to them. They all arrive with the label, “Oscar-worthy,” which can have a damaging effect on them. The Artist, The Descendants, and Hugo are all interesting films worth seeing but when these award shows lump them together and pit them against one another, they suddenly feel a lot less interesting. And it can be difficult to give each one a fair shake when their releases are piled on top of each other.

I argue that this idea of seasons is hurting movies on a whole. Is awards season really the only time when thoughtful, well-acted movies can be released? Can’t we see something besides action blockbusters and raunchy comedies in the summertime? The most common complaint I hear about movies today is that they’re all the same. There are no new ideas left, people say. Surely this can’t be true but evidence that suggests otherwise is hard to find.

The reason for this is that studios all have the same goals in mind. Superheroes and men trapped in their adolescence are popular. They’re safe bets. Studios can rest easy knowing they’ll turn a profit as long as the marketing is relentless. A similar business model applies to the “Oscar-worthy.” They are often made on lower budgets and appeal to smaller demographics but studios still want to make money off them. So they wait until awards season to release them and hope that critics and Academy voters will usher them through the various award shows leading up to Oscar night.

So are the nine movies nominated for Best Picture truly representative of the best that 2011 had to offer? Of course not. The Academy has specific (and pretentious) tastes and this year’s nominees run the gamut of typical Oscar fare. You have your sentimental weepies (Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, The Help), some cinephile pandering (The Artist, Hugo), and the requisite period drama from Steven Spielberg (War Horse).

The remaining four (The Descendants, Midnight in Paris, Moneyball, The Tree of Life) are harder to label and, perhaps not coincidentally, are my favorites of the bunch. These are the films I predict will survive the season and maybe even get better with time. The other five, I’m not so convinced about (though I did like Hugo and War Horse). Years from now, which film had a strong showing during awards season will not matter. The Oscars’ history is full of misplaced praise and overlooked classics; they hardly have the final word.

Tomorrow and Friday, in preparation for and as an alternative to the Academy Awards, I’m going to discuss my favorite performances of the year and my personal Top 10 favorite movies of 2011. Will they stand the test of time? I think they will but, of course, who can say for sure? This is later than most critics release their picks for the year’s best but anytime is a good time to talk about great movies. Not just one season.

- Steve Avigliano, 2/22/12

Revisiting Star Wars - Episode III: Revenge of the Sith

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005): Written and directed by George Lucas. Starring: Ewan McGregor, Hayden Christensen, Natalie Portman, Ian McDiarmid and Samuel L. Jackson. Rated PG-13 (Slain younglings and a charred body). Running time: 140 minutes.

3 ½ stars (out of four)

What a relief Episode III is. Where the previous Star Wars movie, Attack of the Clones, often seemed hesitant to do anything but belabor political exposition, Revenge of the Sith lets loose, unafraid to go over the top. This is a film that revels in its grandeur and embraces its eccentricities. For the first time since the original trilogy, we are reminded why George Lucas became such a revered name in blockbuster entertainment.  He swings for the fences and delivers a thrilling, unabashed space opera.

The Clone War is nearing its end and Chancellor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) continues to rally support and gain power in the Senate. He has taken Anakin (Hayden Christensen) under his wing, a relationship the Jedi Council fears. While there is little doubt the Republic is winning the war, the Jedi express concern that Palpatine may be priming himself for a dictatorship once the fighting is over. Anakin becomes caught in the middle, asked by both Palpatine and the Jedi Council to spy on the other.

Though the plot relies on politics established by the previous two films, Revenge of the Sith wisely brings its characters to the forefront and uses the politics as a backdrop for the action. Anakin’s transformation has precedence in the story and we see how Palpatine poisons his mind with tantalizing stories of Sith Lords who have conquered death. This possibility excites Anakin, who grows increasingly fearful that he will lose his wife, Amidala (Natalie Portman). By giving Anakin a clear motivation to turn to the Dark Side, Mr. Lucas brings some much-needed focus to the film.

Perhaps because of this newfound focus, the acting, which was a weak point in both of the earlier prequels, is stronger. Hayden Christensen lacked the subtlety to make Anakin’s initial steps toward the Dark Side believable in Episode II, but his weaknesses as an actor are less of an issue in Episode III, a film with few subtleties. Here, his cheesy line delivery is almost well suited to the film’s tone.

Natalie Portman isn’t given much to do other than look distraught and weep (both are things she excels at), and Ewan McGregor continues his strong work as Obi-Wan. Even Samuel L. Jackson gets some memorable scenes in a part specifically tailored to his strengths – looking cool and delivering passionate monologues. Mr. Jackson has a way of making even the blandest of exposition sound like a sharp one-liner.

The true scene-stealer of Revenge of the Sith, however, is Ian McDiarmid. He is a thrill to watch in his scenes with Mr. Christensen as he gains Anakin’s trust before luring him to the Dark Side. Mr. McDiarmid has the quiet, screen-commanding presence typical of a British thespian but is equally convincing when called upon to shout at the top of his lungs and shoot lighting bolts from his fingers. As the central villain of the entire saga, both qualities are essential.

Mr. Lucas allows a number of scenes to enter over the top territory, a choice that works because of the film’s operatic grandeur. Where else should the climactic battle between Anakin and Obi-Wan take place but on a volcanic planet where lava explodes around them? And while Palpatine bides his time revealing his true motivations, the wonderfully named General Grievous (voiced by the film’s sound editor, Matthew Wood), a caped, asthmatic robot, serves as the antagonist.

Visually, the film is as stunning as we have come to expect from the new Star Wars films but Episode III is also vibrant and colorful in a way its predecessors were not. The sets and costumes are imbued with an almost expressionistic style, making it perhaps the most visually interesting Star Wars. Even a relatively simple set such as the Chancellor’s office is painted lavish hues of purple. Take also, for example, the scene when Anakin and Palpatine converse in a balcony seat at an opera. The scene, which is exquisitely shot, offers occasional glimpses of the performance – ribbons streaking through a watery sphere – and we are reminded that the Star Wars films take place in a richly detailed and fully realized world. Even in his final (to date) film, Mr. Lucas finds room to continue exploring and inventing in his fictional universe.

When watching Revenge of the Sith, one gets the impression that George Lucas is giving it everything he’s got. His energy and enthusiasm can be felt in every scene. Many viewers will likely continue to put the original trilogy on an untouchable pedestal but with Episode III, Mr. Lucas has created an extravagant and supremely entertaining movie, as wild and exciting as one can ever hope for from a Star Wars film.

- Steve Avigliano, 2/21/12

Revisiting Star Wars - Episode II: Attack of the Clones

Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones (2002): Written and directed by George Lucas. Starring: Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel L. Jackson and Christopher Lee. Rated PG (Bloodless violence and some smooching). Running time: 142 minutes.

2 stars (out of four) 

On the surface, Attack of the Clones seems to offer everything we have come to expect from a Star Wars film – lightsabers, blasters, a woman with her hair in a bun. As a standalone film, however, it’s a mess. Strip away the familiar settings, characters and John Williams score and what we have is an overlong political thriller, all exposition and no payoff.

The film begins on Coruscant with a failed attempt to assassinate Amidala (Natalie Portman), who has been elected Senator in the ten years between this film and the last. She has returned to the capitol planet to vote on the creation of an army for the Republic, a military force that would be used to quell the growing separatist party and… already the film has lost us. George Lucas has responded to criticism regarding Episode I’s confusing politics by writing an entire film about them.

But let’s set all that aside for now. What is important is that Amidala is in danger and two old friends are assigned to protect her – Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) and the all grown up Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen). Following a second attempt on the senator’s life, Anakin becomes her personal bodyguard while Obi-Wan follows up on a clue left by the assassin.

His investigation leads him to the rainy planet Kamino where he learns that a clone army is already being built for the Republic. Who ordered this secret army and when? Perhaps answers will be found on the drab, desert world of Geonosis where Count Dooku (Christopher Lee), leader of the separatist movement, hides.

Somewhere in here is the potential for a good detective story but Attack of the Clones is all mystery and no intrigue. We’re always a few steps behind the film, grappling to understand political motives when we should be absorbed in the action. This is what happens when the motives of characters take a backseat to those of committees, senates and councils.

The few characters we have to cling onto aren’t much to speak of. Mrs. Portman is even stiffer than she was in the first. Count Dooku is a perfunctory villain and Christopher Lee’s performance feels strained, particularly in comparison to the actor’s portrayal of Saruman in The Lord of the Rings (which played in theaters the same year as Attack of the Clones). Only Ewan McGregor gets away unscathed; his Obi-Wan is charming, personable and the sole character worth rooting for.

Hayden Christensen, the poor guy, is horribly miscast. His take on Anakin is all wrong. Anakin’s innate abilities have made him cocky but rather than playing the character with a sort of self-assured charisma, Mr. Christensen is unlikable from the get-go. He is whiny and full of himself, oblivious that he comes off as a real prick. He’s the guy you meet at a party and immediately know you don’t want to talk to. I suppose at least half the fault here lies with Mr. Lucas for writing the character this way but, man, you’d think the protagonist of the whole trilogy would at least make for tolerable company.

Then there are the would-be romantic scenes, so clumsy and awkward they threaten to derail the whole film. Mr. Christensen hits on Mrs. Portman with pitiful pick-up lines, ogling her like a pervy teen. The two have no chemistry together and their scenes become labored exercises in clichés that would sound uninspired on a soap opera.

The only moment when Attack of the Clones works is in a scene late in the film when our heroes are tied to stone pillars and face a gladiatorial public execution. The three monsters that show up to kill them look as though they have been lifted from some glorious, forgotten B-grade horror film, and what fun it is to watch Obi-Wan, Anakin and Amidala thwart them!

Even this is short lived though. The troops march in and the battle that ensues is disorienting because we don’t know which side to root for. If Palpatine’s Republic army is a prototype for the Empire from later episodes, aren’t the separatists the good guys? Count Dooku is said to be dabbling in the Dark Side. So he’s on the politically correct side, but the wrong side of the Force? Again, why is George Lucas making everything so complicated? By the time we get to Yoda’s thoroughly silly fight scene, we’ve lost all interest in the film.

Much of the action goes unexplained and the plot becomes so muddled and unclear that multiple viewings are necessary to follow it all. Why, for example, was Amidala the assassination target and not one of the galaxy’s thousand-or-so other senators? And who is behind it all? That these important details should remain obscured from the audience through to the film’s end is absurd. The special effects are amazing as expected but without a coherent story to anchor them, they are just window-dressings. Attack of the Clones is a failure of storytelling, though at least it’s a failure set to a John Williams score.

- Steve Avigliano, 2/17/12

REVIEW: Safe House

Safe House (2012): Dir. Daniel Espinosa. Written by: David Guggenheim. Starring: Denzel Washington, Ryan Reynolds, Brendan Gleeson, Vera Farmiga and Nora Arnezeder. Rated R (Stabbings, shootings, blood and bruisings). Running time: 117 minutes.

1 ½ stars (out of four)

There are two kinds of scenes in Safe House, a new thriller cobbled from used parts of the Bourne movies and TV’s 24. There are action scenes (I’ll get to those later) and there are tense exchanges between its two leads, Denzel Washington and Ryan Reynolds. We’ve seen movies like this before. Where two stars go mano-a-mano, one playing a cop, the other a criminal. The formula is very effective when you have two equally compelling actors playing off each other and much less so when one half of the duo is lacking.

Ryan Reynolds plays Matt Weston, a low-level CIA agent stationed at a “safe house” in Cape Town, South Africa. A safe house, apparently, is a run-down building disguising a high-tech interior filled with surveillance equipment and those interrogation rooms with the two-way mirrors. The CIA uses these stations to temporarily house detainees before shipping them elsewhere.

Weston is terribly bored with his work and desperately seeks a promotion. He pleads on the phone with his superior (Brendan Gleeson) to be considered for a more active position but is told he just doesn’t have the necessary experience. One can imagine a similar conversation between Mr. Reynolds and his agent:

“What about that new romance with Rachel McAdams? I could be great in that.”

“I’m sorry, Ryan. The studios just don’t think you can carry the film. But give this action movie a shot. If you can hold your own with Denzel, I’ll see what I can do for you.”

Mr. Washington is the wonderfully named Tobin Frost, a former star of the CIA who went rogue years back and started selling sensitive information to America’s enemies. We see him in a secret meeting with a British agent who hands him a flash drive that contains a file worth untold millions. When someone tries to kill Frost (causing quite the traffic mess in downtown Cape Town), he flees to the American embassy for safety and allows himself to be arrested.

Government officials are understandably skeptical about this. Why is he turning himself in now? What’s he got up his sleeve? Until they can get answers to those questions, they bring Frost to Weston’s safe house. Weston, who spends a typical shift throwing a tennis ball against the wall and listening to a teach-yourself French tape (his girlfriend (Nora Arnezeder), seen in few scenes, is French), can hardly believe such a high-profile target is in his presence. He is even more surprised when the safe house is attacked and he must escape with Frost in custody.

Now on the run together, the two men have an opportunity to get to know each other and Frost wastes no time in starting his mind games. He taunts Weston and flashes him some of those menacing smiles Denzel Washington is so good at. In turn, Weston is mostly a nervous wreck and I found it hard not to interpret Ryan Reynolds’s performance as the actor’s own intimidation in having to play opposite the Oscar-winner. Weston makes for a lousy protagonist; as an inexperienced field agent, he is in over his head and so is Mr. Reynolds. Honestly, is anyone in the audience rooting for him over Denzel?

As previously stated, these scenes only make up one half of Safe House; the remainder of the film’s time is relegated to disorienting shaky-cam action. Director Daniel Espinosa is adept at making the events in his chase scenes unclear and at pushing an already complicated plot into the realm of the incomprehensible. Determining who a given shot is focusing on is often difficult and forget trying to understand why anything in the movie happens.

The higher-ups at the CIA don’t know either and Mr. Gleeson and Vera Farmiga, a resilient actress who gets stuck playing a lot of government agent types, spend a fair amount of time speaking in faux-technical lingo and debating whether or not Weston has gone rogue like Frost. Weston, meanwhile, screws the pooch time and time again, letting Frost get away, then capturing him, then letting him get away once more. Few thrillers are this frantic and yet tedious.

Safe House must have been a walk in the park for Mr. Washington. He is very good in it but by now he is a pro at playing the “so bad he’s good” part. He does little here that he hasn’t already done in better movies. Poor Mr. Reynolds, on the other hand, struggles to keep pace with him. In one of the final scenes, Weston is seen bloodied and bruised after a fight, panting and crawling on the ground while a cool and collected Frost watches from the next room. Rarely do films summarize themselves so neatly and so perfectly.

- Steve Avigliano, 2/12/12

Revisiting Star Wars - Episode I: The Phantom Menace

With the 3D re-release of The Phantom Menace arriving in theaters Friday, I thought I would take a look back at the Star Wars films and reassess them. I have long been a fan of the series but never gave myself the opportunity to watch them from an unbiased perspective. Beginning today and continuing over the next five weeks I will do just that. I will review them not by comparing them to one another or ranking them, but by looking closely at each and discussing their strengths and shortcomings as standalone movies. I will include a brief wrap-up post following the Return of the Jedi review. (Note: The review below is not of the 3D re-release, which I have not yet seen, but was written after revisiting the film on DVD.)

---

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999): Written and directed by George Lucas. Starring: Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Jake Lloyd, Ian McDiarmid, Ahmed Best and Ray Park. Rated PG (Blasters, lightsabers, the usual). Running time: 133 minutes.

3 stars (out of four) 

The first Star Wars prequel was in an unenviable position in 1999. By some cultural fluke, George Lucas’s films about a galaxy far, far away had become an absolute phenomenon and two decades later, diehards and new fans alike prepared to sit in theaters and watch the first of three new movies in the series. No other film has had to endure these levels of anticipation, and the hype surrounding Episode I will surely never be replicated. The Phantom Menace was perhaps destined to disappoint many, thrill others and set box office records regardless.

Now that ample time has passed and the prequels have jelled into our collective cultural consciousness much as the original trilogy has, we may look at the film for what it really is. Forget comparing the movie to its predecessors. Throw away any preconceived notion of what it should have been. Taken on its own terms, Episode I is a flawed but undeniably entertaining movie boasting a lighthearted tone and a wonderful sense of invention.

We meet a young Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) as he nears the end of his Jedi knight training under Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson). The two have been sent to the planet Naboo to investigate a political squabble. The squabble soon turns into a full-scale invasion by the Trade Federation – a nefarious organization led by a pair of green, robed, noseless aliens – and Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan must protect Naboo’s leader, the young and beautiful Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman).

One thing leads to another and they are forced to stop on a familiar planet (familiar to us, not them): the desert world of Tatooine. There they meet a precocious, little, slave boy named Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd). There is something special about the boy, Qui-Gon says. Those familiar with the original trilogy know what Anakin’s future holds but for now he is simply a gifted child. So gifted, in fact, that Qui-Gon decides to buy him from his owner, Waddo (voiced by Andy Secombe), a winged creature with the schnoz of an anteater, and take the boy on as a second apprentice.

Buying the boy will not be so easy though, Waddo explains. Qui-Gon must win Anakin by betting on a podrace, a delightfully dirty (and very dangerous) sport where racers fly hovering vehicles through canyons and caves. Cheating and sabotaging other racers’ pods are not only allowed but apparently encouraged too.

George Lucas and his team of designers and computer animators let their imaginations run wild with this and every other scene in the film. At every turn, Episode I offers us some new, dazzling thing to look at and the sheer joy of taking it all in is intoxicating. I have not yet even mentioned Darth Maul (Ray Park), the silent, shadowy villain with red and black face paint and horns on his head who stalks our heroes. Or the majestic, underwater world of half-fish people who live in giant bubbles. Or the city so big it takes up an entire planet.

The Phantom Menace is a cheerful adventure that hops from one richly detailed world to another. Is the film’s tone sometimes childish? Sure, but that’s no problem since Mr. Lucas has elected to make a children’s film. One that has the ability to draw you into its playful world if you allow it to. (The much-despised Jar-Jar Binks (Ahmed Best), a resident of the aforementioned underwater world, is a grating presence, that much I will concede, but no less so than any other goofy, kids’ movie sidekick.)

If the movie is truly aimed at younglings, however, why is it bogged down with convoluted political exposition? The opening scroll refers to a tax dispute and trade blockades. There are senators and chancellors debating the galactic legality of the Trade Federation’s actions. Surely Mr. Lucas cannot expect children to follow these scenes, much less enjoy them. Can’t the bad guys just be bad guys for the heroes to defeat?

On top of this, the script is encumbered by clumsy, hackneyed dialogue. Mr. Lucas’s strength never was for writing dialogue but this lack was never as apparent in the original trilogy as it is here. The actors deliver their lines in bland, overly serious, faux-fancy talk, looking less animated than the ubiquitous CGI surrounding them.

In another film these issues would be damning. That the film is still a lot of fun in spite of these problems is a testament to the strength of its action. The finale, a sort of Star Wars Greatest Hits that intercuts a lightsaber fight, a space battle, a ground war and a stealthy break-in, is thrilling enough to make you forget all those dull scenes in the Senate and ends the film on a high note.

Is the movie as good as the old ones? Does it have to be? I am inclined to say that Episode I falls more in line with George Lucas’s original vision for Star Wars than perhaps some fans are willing to admit. His original inspiration came from the serialized space operas of pulp magazines and The Phantom Menace offers many of the same pleasures as those adventure stories: strange planets, heroic rescues, epic battles and more than a little cheese. The film might have benefited from trimming the politics and a few dialogue rewrites but these are not serious detriments because the plot is not what is on display here. This is a movie infatuated with its own bright, colorful, zippy self and, now more than ever, I am all too happy to succumb to its gleeful pleasures.

- Steve Avigliano, 2/9/12