Upon first seeing the trailer for the upcoming film 'Watchmen,' I was moderately put off. The main reason was it had a tag of, 'From the visionary director of 300.' "Visionary Director?" What in the hell does that mean? Oscar Winning Director, I get. Visionary Director doesn't mean anything. That's even a step below 'Acclaimed ______ of ________.' Plus, 300 was really, really awful.
But Zack Snyder did direct the remake of Dawn of the Dead, which is one of the better recent horror movies, so he gets some slack.
Originally the concept of Watchmen seemed bland and confusing, with the trailer really revealing no plot whatsoever. But with the movie about to come out, I decided to pick up the original graphic novel to read beforehand. Let me tell you: This was a great decision. I can't put this novel down, it's so good.
I know the novel came out in ~1986, so I'm behind the curve, but cut me some slack. It's so interwoven and intricate that I have to force myself to stop reading it so I don't finish it in a day. Few books do that for me. I think the last one to do that was 1984.
I can imagine that it is a near impossible task to put this much material into a film, but hopefully it won't be a blown opportunity. I'm ready to accept that the film won't be as in-depth as the novel, but damn, does that trailer look better every time I watch it. I will definitely be there opening day.
1.25.2009
Reevaluation of Watchmen
1.24.2009
Top Ten of 2008
I know that January is almost over, but here is my belated top ten of 2008!
First, let me say that this year was not as strong as last year. Last year I had trouble just picking ten (you can see the list here), and while I've seen plenty of movies this year, few have had a lasting impact, which is somewhat required of all great movies. A movie has not done its job unless you're still pondering about it 24 hours later. This year, lots of films need to be fired.
1. WALL-E
I struggle with this choice, because choosing an animated film as my number one of the year seems taboo. Well, rules be damned, this is a spectacular film. Pixar has achieved such a significant level of storytelling that they scarcely even need dialogue anymore. WALL-E, both the robot himself and the film, possess an overwhelming compassion. WALL-E, with more determination than any robot has ever had before him, begins by pursuing his love for EVE, and ends up saving humanity. At first he tries to recover the plant to impress EVE, but along the way, somewhere, he realizes his purpose. Similarly, EVE transforms from a simple one-track robot to a real character, capable of more emotion than most characters in most other films. For these reasons, along with perfect animation, a great soundtrack, and a high 'cute' factor, WALL-E is the best film of the year.
2. Slumdog Millionaire
In my 'review' I copped out, saying that to reveal any plot details at all would dishonor the film and ruin the experience. I stand by that. This is not a film that is watched, but a story that is experienced. There is no better reason to go to the movies this year than to see this film. We shall discuss it later.
3. Revolutionary Road
Unlike Slumdog Millionaire, this is not a film for everyone. Revolutionary Road is a story likely to hit emotional chords with specific viewers, because its characters have big dreams and even bigger falls. The truth about life is that not everyone finds their happy ending or meets their one true love -- some people end up living in the suburbs and slowly die little by little every day. I have a feeling this is one of those films that will be praised ten years from now, but until then, be passed off as mediocre. Trust me, it is a great treasure.
4. The Wrestler
Mickey Rourke, as The Ram, struggles deeply with his identity, his past, and his addictions. What is so touching in this story of one man's life is not the actual wrestling, but how far his life has gone past its prime, and how determined he is to make it right, even after he blows it one time after the other.
5. In Bruges
I recently watched this again, and am thrilled that the film has a screenplay nod for the Oscars. Sure, the politically incorrect humor is funny, but behind the vulgar comedy is a fine layer of weaving between the characters and their actions that makes the film work. Each viewing leads to the picking up of something new, for instance, when Ken drops the coins from the top of the tower toward the end, he doesn't just happen to have coins (like most people), but they are the coins the clerk would not take way earlier in the film. Excellent.
6. Gran Torino
Can we all agree on something? Clint Eastwood is The Man. Not only is he one of the best actors to ever live, but he has directed many GREAT films -- not 'good' films, but great ones. Just counting recent years, we have: Million Dollar Baby, Letter From Iwo Jima, Mystic River, and now Gran Torino. Dealing with aggressive racial issues (sort of like In Bruges, but in its own way), Gran Torino is a spectacular film about acceptance, forgiveness, vengeance, and doing the right thing. No matter what you read, it will still not be what you expect, but you will enjoy every minute of it.
7. Iron Man
Yes, there is a superhero movie on this list. No, it is not the overrated Dark Knight. Iron Man is such a success because -- and this is fundamental to all stories -- we care about the protagonist, the man, the hero. Tony Stark, while kind of a jerk, makes us laugh, and laughter is the way to the heart, right? I think that's a proverb. This is a superhero film done extremely right, and the best since Spidey 2.
8. Rachel Getting Married
Seemingly strangely like a documentary, this film is a treasure. It uses a unique pacing style to include the audience as a member of the family, and by the end we still don't completely understand the dysfunction, but we appreciate it. Anne Hathaway has not been better, but the whole cast is perfect in this little film about what chunks of our past belong to us, which chunks are community canon fodder, and why some people can't stop being selfish, just for one day. But why should they have to?
9. Religulous
Bill Maher makes fun of every religion, pointing out all of the contradictions and implausible theories behind creationism, the virgin Mary, Jesus, etc. Not perfect, but very funny.
10. Milk
A film that is moving, because Harvey Milk was not just fighting for gay rights, but for the rights and equality of all peoples. He was beaten election after election, but through perseverance, determination, and a little luck, he succeeded. Again, not a perfect movie, but one that everyone could benefit from seeing.
And that is it for 2008. Intentionally left off because they are undeserving of any 'best' list, or any 'Best Picture' nomination: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, The Dark Knight, The Reader.
1.22.2009
Worst Oscar Noms Ever
After two great years with multiple potential winners, I knew it had to come to an end.
Here are the Best Picture 5:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Frost/Nixon
Milk
The Reader
Slumdog Millionaire
You can see the full list here (don't feel like copy/pasting).
I'm glad The Dark Knight did not get nominated, but this is a horrible list. The only film that deserves to be on there is Slumdog Millionaire. The academy's taste is bland for the ordinary, bandwagon choices. I was prepared for all of these, though, except for The Reader, which, while decent, is complete trash compared to the dozen other great movies from this year that are much more deserving.
Revolutionary Road got shut out, The Wrestler got minimal nods, and I am very displeased. This will go down as 'one of those years,' in which the AMPAS messed up. They didn't even nominate Synecdoche, New York for Original Screenplay.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button was a strong film visually, but its storytelling was overall weak. I'm glad David Fincher got a long overdue Best Director nomination, but Ben Button getting 13 nominations total? Sad.
Just when people get hope that the Academy may think differently -- delusions that maybe a 'comic book movie' or an 'animated movie' may break Best Picture, we're reminded that they are, more often than not, old and boring. They did throw the movie-going public a surprise, but what was it? Nominating a film about the Holocaust. Way to go back to a stereotype.
With all this said, I am 100% hoping Slumdog Millionaire wins every category it is in, because not only is it one of the top three films of the year, it is easily the best out of any of the films nominated.
1.21.2009
If I Could Pick the Oscar Nominees....
I hate predicting Oscar nominees. That means I have to get five things right in each category. What a joke. And I hate when people list their five, and then have an 'alternate' and a 'potential upset' and a 'dark horse.' What the hell is that? Picking eight choices? Such a cop out.
Now, note, I still have a couple movies to see from this year. I have, however, seen most of the notable films, so this is a close-to-complete list. Note: These will all be in order of preference.
Also, note, that these are highly chimerical and unlikely at best.
Best Picture
Slumdog Millionaire
WALL-E
Revolutionary Road
The Wrestler
In Bruges
Best Director
Danny Boyle, Slumdog Millionaire
Sam Mendes, Revolutionary Road
David Fincher, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Andrew Stanton, WALL-E
Darren Aronofsky, The Wrestler
Best Actor
Leonardo DiCaprio, Revolutionary Road
Mickey Rourke, The Wrestler
Sean Penn, Milk
Colin Farrell, In Bruges
Clint Eastwood, Gran Torino
Best Actress
Kate Winslet, Revolutionary Road
I have not seen enough great actress performances, so Kate Winslet wins by default
Supporting Actor
Heath Ledger, The Dark Knight
Dev Patel, Slumdog Millionaire
Brad Pitt, Burn After Reading
Michael Shannon, Revolutionary Road
Philip Seymour Hoffman, Doubt (bandwagon pick)
Supporting Actress
Marisa Tomei, The Wrestler
Kate Winslet, The Reader
Penelope Cruz, Vicky Cristin Barcelona
Frieda Pinto, Slumdog Millionaire
Cate Blanchett, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Original Screenplay
Andrew Stanton, WALL-E
Martin McDonagh, In Bruges
Charlie Kaufman, Synecdoche, New York
Robert D. Siegal, The Wrestler
Woody Allen, Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Adapted Screenplay
Simon Beaufoy, Slumdog Millionaire
Justin Haythe, Revolutionary Road
Eric Roth, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Mark Fergus, Hawk Ostby, Art Marcum, Matt Holloway, Iron Man
...anything besides The Dark Knight
Best Editing
Slumdog Millionaire
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
WALL-E
Revolutionary Road
Frost/Nixon
Best Cinematography
Anthony Dod Mantle, Slumdog Millionaire
Claudio Miranda, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Roger Deakins, Revolutionary Road
Harry Savides, Milk
Wally Pfister, The Dark Knight
Not gonna bother with the rest, other than WALL-E for animated feature, obviously.
We'll see tomorrow!
1.16.2009
Review: Religulous
'Religulous' is one of those 'documentaries' that seems more like stand-up comedy. As Bill Maher, the main man of this production says, he is not promoting atheism. He is promoting doubt. His talks with authorities of various religions, as well as a few scientists, are entertaining, but the film crams in a huge epiphany toward the end. It seems like Bill Maher had his film done, but a studio exec said to him, "Bill, this is funny, but what does it mean?!" This is a touch of death to most works of art, and that situation applies here as well.
Maher himself was brought up in a 50/50 house, split between Judaism and Catholicism. He rags on all religions, some we are familiar with the origins of (Christianity, Catholicism, etc), some we, in the West, aren't too familiar with (Islam, etc.). The film gets joy by pointing out obvious contradictions and flaws of the Bible to religious fanatics and seeing how they fumble as they try to defend themselves. One example is how nowhere in the Bible does it say Jesus was born of a virgin. Apparently, this was all made up. His logic is that this does seem like something so significant that... why would the people who wrote the New Testament leave it out? If it was even remotely true, it wouldn't have been.
Anyone who knows me knows that I think God is (to steal from Daniel Plainview) a superstition. While I enjoy seeing Maher make jokes and poke fun at religious inconsistencies, it seems that, spare a Jesus impersonator, none of his opponents are worthy of a debate. This Jesus impersonator can keep up with Maher (whether his arguments hold water is up to you--I think not), and at least he has answer for all of the questions. Unfortunately, most people don't. They misquote scripture or contradict themselves, which is humorously accented by constant splices to films, movies, scientific authorities, religious authorities, or even simple subtitles.
The problem with these constant interruptions is that they only contribute to the actual film about 40% of the time. The other 60% are just wasted space. Maybe they needed a way to break the 90 minute runtime barrier. Who knows? Regardless, the choice is poor. Overusing anything effective effectively kills it. If I type every sentence with an exclamation point, not only would it seem like I'm shouting, but they would lose their effect. However, if save the use of the exclamation point for one really important idea, people will notice it, and there will be a 'wow' factor. In 'Religulous,' Maher uses exclamation points at the end of every sentence.
At least the film does not take itself too seriously. The camera crew is constantly visible, which is a good choice here. If we were watching Maher lecture us straight for 100 minutes it would be monotonous. We are constantly reminded that this is a documentary and not a film for a theology class, which I can imagine makes people who would normally be offended feel more comfortable.
I spoke of the ending. It escalates to a tremendous wave of 'religion causes death and destruction.' That point may be true, and maybe people do become terrorists for their religion. But that feels not only out of place in this film, but so rushed that it's a complete shift from lighthearted stick-poking to propaganda. Maybe propaganda is too strong a word, but that is what it felt like.
And for these reasons, I give the film a 5.5/7
1.14.2009
1.11.2009
The Globes Were Good (For Once)
Tonight was the 66th Golden Globes, and usually the Globes string together a mess of disappointing wins. Not tonight. For once they got almost all of the categories right.
The high point of the night was Kate Winslet's double win. She notoriously gets overlooked during awards (both the Oscars and the Globes), and tonight she won for The Reader and Revolutionary Road. The latter was so well-deserved and I'm very happy for her.
Also, Slumdog Millionaire won a slew of big awards, including Best Picture - Drama, Best Screenplay, Original Score, and Director. Fantastic and the right choices all around.
Vicky Cristina Barcelona won Best Picture - Musical or Comedy. Surprising, yet the right choice. Go, Woody Allen.
Some other great wins:
Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger
Animated Feature: WALL-E
Comedy Actor (TV): Alec Baldwin (30 Rock)
Comedy Series (TV): 30 Rock
Comedy Actress (TV): Tina Fey (30 Rock!)
Comedy Actor (Film): Colin Farrell (for In Bruges, a great movie that hopefully won't be overlooked anymore)
Drama Series (TV): Mad Men
Lead Actor, Drama: Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler)
Actually, there aren't any awards here that I'm upset with. Kind of the perfect ceremony. If only the Oscars go this way, too....
1.09.2009
Review: Revolutionary Road
When reduced to the basics, there are two types of stories: comedy and tragedy. Revolutionary Road is a film so gripping that being a fly on the wall of a suburban home has never been such an emotional drain, except in maybe one other film--American Beauty. Not coincidentally, both films are directed by Sam Mendes.
Revolutionary Road takes in a short time span of the lives of Frank and April Wheeler, two 30 year-old people living in the 1950s. Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet play the leads, and again, prove why both of them are two of the best actors of this generation. The film almost immediately has our two characters break into a fight about how their lives are going. Right away it's clear that Frank is one to talk things out so they can be resolved quickly. His words are often so truthful and penetrating that they hurt. April, the complete opposite, believes that silence is the answer. She just needs to think. As with all relationships, when the members have the opposite ideas as to how to solve a disagreement, like Frank and April do, it ends badly.
Frank is stuck in a boring day job that he hates. He admits he hates it. His father worked at that company for twenty years, and he always hoped to God that he wouldn't end up the same. The only place he'd ever felt alive was when he visited Paris.
Despite having two kids, Frank and April's marriage can best be described as failing. April has given up on her aspirations to be an actress and now stays at home with her two kids. Monotony and routine are killing this family. And suddenly, on a whim, April thinks to move to Paris. They have money saved up. Frank can figure out his calling. She can get a secretarial job to support them. It seems perfect. This is their fantasy, their hope, their dream, and it resuscitates their marriage. They tell their friends and finally feel like they're living again, while ignoring a few practical problems, the looming one being that in the 1950s it was completely unacceptable, socially, for the woman to support the family by herself.
The cast of this film is small, but each character pulls one of the strings to the story. A 'insane' son of the Wheeler's friends is introduced to our protagonists to help him be rehabilitated. The Wheelers are seen as the perfect couple from the outside, but they are anything but that. Instead of the normalcy of the Wheelers rehabilitating this insane man, his lack of tact and reserve tugs the truth out of others, forcing them to realize their faults out loud instead of letting them brood.
The film is a refreshing example of how strong a film can be with bare essentials. To tell a fantastic story we don't need million dollar special effects or a huge cast. You need real, true human emotions, human problems. When watching this film, you may sympathize with both Frank and April, but undoubtedly feel that one is 'right' and one is 'wrong.' Each person will have a different opinion and a different reason why. That is why this film is so great--the concepts of right and wrong are blurred to the point where nothing is discernible other than what these characters feel.
Rating: 7/7
1.08.2009
Review: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Benjamin Button is in the unique position that he was born an old man and ages backwards. This is an interesting concept, done especially well in F. Scott Fitzgerald's original short story, but the film embellishes so many details that we linger too long on an easy to grasp concept and not long enough on what makes Benjamin Button a human being.
The original text was very different from the film. The only real similarity is Benjamin Button (played by Brad Pitt) and his condition. In the story, he is raised by his father, and there is a moral, physical, and philosophical problem when the child looks older than his father, and then they look like brothers, and then finally they swap back to how they should look. The film, instead, has Benjamin's mother die in childbirth and the father abandons him on a doorstep. This is a step backwards, going from an original idea into a comfortable stereotype that people will seem to 'bond' with.
The film is also told in flashbacks as Elizabeth, in a hospital in New Orleans just before Katrina, is visited by her daughter. The daughter reads Daisy the journal that Benjamin left her while he was still old (or, young) enough to write. What a tried and boring premise, honestly. The story would have been significantly better if it was just told straight with voice-over from Benjamin. The narration doesn't need to be justified. Like Nike: Just do it.
Part of me wishes I had not read the original text, because having done so, it is very easy to find flaws in the film. Fitzgerald knew that the aging backwards concept could not carry a whole novel, just as it cannot carry a 2.5 hour film. Fitzgerald made his work short, whereas director David Fincher (whom I usually enjoy immensely) and screenwriter Eric Roth (Munich, Forrest Gump) didn't pick up on that thought.
There are many good moments in the film, which I guess corresponds to the film's tagline: "Life isn't measured in minutes, but in moments." The film doesn't take off until Benjamin meets Daisy, who is mentally the same age as Benjamin, but aging naturally. She senses a connection to him, and despite his appearance, she knows that they are alike.
The heart of the story is muddled at best, with some focus being paid to Daisy as she gets older (and turns into the lovely Cate Blanchett) and Benjamin gets younger. Benjamin realizes what it is like to do solid work (he was not a lively energetic kid, remember, but a crippled old adult for his younger years). Daisy goes to become a professional dancer. As much time as we spend with the characters in the film, their actions never make sense. With any character, what they do does not have to be something we, the audience, would do, but we should never doubt that the character is capable of something. Why do Benjamin and Daisy continue to elude each other? Even if they can't figure it out, we should be able to.
In summary, the film feels flat. Fincher and Roth attempt to make a grandiose film about one man's entire life, but they only ponder on the surface level issues of Benjamin's case. The elements were in the original text, and why they didn't carry them over, I have no idea.
Rating: 4.5/7
1.07.2009
Review: The Wrestler
Note: New reviews coming daily for a few days for supposed Oscar contenders. Consequently, a Top 10 of 2008 coming soon as well.
Wrestling is fake, no? Sure, maybe the thrown punches and body slams are fake, but there is some brutality and a bond of self-mutilation that comes with the territory. Randy "The Ram" Robinson stores a piece of razor in his bandages so he can cut his forehead. He does this while he's down so when he is thrown into the corner it looks like that blow caused his head to bleed. Those chairs aren't fake and the glass is real: You still have to be able to take one hell of a beating to be one of those 'fake wrestlers.'
The Ram is played by Mickey Rourke, who could easily be a wrestler in real life. In the time of the film, The Ram is 20 years past his prime. Yet interestingly enough, little of the movie takes place in the actual wrestling ring. The Ram has a day job stocking a grocery store and on the weekends he works a local wrestling circuit. To everyone who is not a fan, he's a joke. His boss continually cracks jokes. The Ram asks for a raise, and his boss quips, "Did they raise the price on tights?"
The most important thing in Randy's life is, without question, wrestling. He flirts with Cassidy, a 40-something woman who works at a local strip club. She's often passed over because of her age (but let's be honest, it's Marisa Tomei, and she's definitely still a hottie) and it seems Randy is the only one who appreciates her. But he's a customer and she's a mom. She knows stripping is a job and her personal life and work life don't, and cannot, mesh. She is fond of Randy, though, and even helps him reconnect with his estranged daughter.
Randy's daughter Stephanie (Evan Rachel Wood) is Randy's last hope to have someone in his life as he grows old. But, estranged as she is, she's pissed. She knows her dad is a fuck-up and she knows he shouldn't get another chance. Their relationship, while not taking up a big chunk of screen time, is pivotal and sad. Evan Rachel Wood has teen angst down to an art, here even better than in 'Thirteen.'
Darren Aronofsky, director of the great 'Requiem for a Dream,' mediocre 'Pi,' and horrible 'The Fountain,' manages to change his tone dramatically. While those three films were grim and dealt with supernatural circumstances, 'The Wrestler' is amazingly grounded, both in concept and execution. We never doubt the characters' sincerity in their actions. Oddly, all four films are about obsession, so maybe there is still a running theme.
'The Wrestler' feels like a handful of lofty unachievable dreams pulling its players through the dirt. Wrestling, while it has shaped The Ram's life, now seems to destroy it. But he can't stop. It is who he is. He's a failed father, he's unloved, and the ring is all he has left. He feels at home there, and by the end of the film, we all do too.
Rating: 6.5/7
1.06.2009
Review: Slumdog Millionaire
I wrote a long review of the film, but deleted it. I will save all of my comments for when I make this film a 'Movie to Study,' which it is if there ever was one.
Slumdog Millionaire is a mystery and to remove the surprises from it would be a crime. Instead, I will simply list adjectives: Slumdog Millionaire is gruesome, uplifting, violent, real, gritty, romantic, optimistic, humorous, determined, and above all else--fantastic.
See this film. If you do not, I don't know if we can be friends.
1.05.2009
Sounds Like Terrible Cover
I really like Flyleaf. Solid CD and their acoustic stuff is good. However, browsing YouTube, I saw a video of them covering Nirvana's Smells Like Teen Spirit. Oh. My. God. I want five minutes of my life back.
Check it out. But not all of it. I'm scarred for life. Just watch like a minute.
1.04.2009
Random Grammar Note
This has nothing to do with anything, but I really like when this phrase is in a sentence: thoroughly thought through.
It's just so mellifluous. Also, I guarantee it would cause a double-take to any reader and make anyone reading your work out loud take a second to recollect their thoughts. Try it. It's fun.
For reference, this post was not thoroughly thought through.
1.02.2009
Movies to Study: Bringing Up Baby
I usually try to keep the Movies to Study column about films that are fairly recent. You can go almost anywhere and find essays on why Citizen Kane or The Godfather are perfect films. Tonight I was watching Bringing Up Baby and my sister came into the room. I paused the movie and said, "Do you know who that is?"
"No," she replied.
"Katherine Hepburn. Do you know who she is?"
"No."
Then I went forward a couple frames and did the same thing for Cary Grant. Same response. It's sad how most people in the young generation have no clue who these people are, yet they are icons and have been in more great films than almost any of the actors working today. So in order to champion my cause of pushing older classics, that is why Bringing Up Baby is the newest Movie to Study.
The heart of this film is a romantic comedy, and for a film made in 1938, the material is still fresh. A lot of these jokes and setups are still used in comedies today. There's some slapstick, some puns, some general turmoil, misunderstandings, crazy characters, cross-dressing, and leopards. All necessary elements for a successful comedy.
The main reason this film succeeds is simple: because of Katherine Hepburn. There are no two ways about it. The script is fantastic, and Cary Grant sells his part well, but Katherine Hepburn does her best work in this film. Not one film historian will agree with me on that, but damn them all. With so many great performances on her resume, I still love Susan Vance the best. In this film she is described as on the verge of a nervous breakdown. Is she really going a little crazy, or is it that being around Cary Grant makes her feel that way? She admits late in the film that nothing she did was ever thought through other than how it would keep him with her. In old movies like this there didn't have to be a crazy stalker agenda, or a strong sex drive, or relentless pursuing of another person. The only thing we feel is that Susan needs David (Cary Grant). It also helps that Kate Hepburn was quite young in this role and played a part dependent on another person, whereas in a lot of films (and in her life) she was controlling. Nothing wrong with that, but when her character is the other way around, it's more endearing.
The film digresses to calamity towards the end when everyone is in jail. It feels like a cut reel from a Marx Brothers film. My one gripe with the film is that the jail scene goes on a tad bit too long, but that is more than made up for when, in one of my favorite scenes from any movie, Susan returns to the jail dragging in 'Baby.' Oh. Baby is a leopard that has come into Susan's possession. It's one of the many trifles that tie her and David together, along with a dinosaur bone (he's a paleontologist [or, as Susan would wrongly call him, a zoologist]), a suit, a million dollar grant, and a stolen car.
The plot of the movie is sort of a roundabout of events, one piling on top of the other. Most comedies do do that. Fortunately, Bringing Up Baby manages to keep everything in line and is very subtle in the details it brings up. When Susan first gets the tame leopard from her brother Mark, she reads the letter: " 'He's three years old, gentle as a kitten, and likes dogs.' I wonder whether Mark means that he eats dogs or is fond of them?" When one person reads the letter, I'm sure they interpret that one way and one way only. Interesting that Susan would think both ways. Also, of course, they have a pet dog named George.
One problem with modern comedies is the predictability pattern. At least with bland comedies. Irony has become so commonplace that it almost never surprises anymore. If a character goes to a bar and says, "I hope Mike isn't here," every single time Mike is going to be there. Movies like Bringing Up Baby had it right. I don't want to ruin it, but there is a scene in the woods (when they are hunting the escaped leopard) where Susan mentions that something should not be a problem, and then immediately after, the characters fall and we see she was wrong. There is no time to really comprehend what happened, because the joke knows it doesn't have to linger. The film understands that the audience should not be given time to think--they must be forced to move with the film. Oh, and in that scene, Susan's justification for her error is also brilliant.
I haven't even addressed the issue of David's fiancee from the beginning and end of the film. What's also great here is that we get all of our exposition in, literally, the first 3 minutes of the film. We find out David is engaged to Alice, that they won't have a family of a honeymoon, but she wants to marry him because they share a career. Obviously he's unhappy with this. We also get that he's awaiting the delivery of the last bone to complete his brontosaurus (this bone is another plot device). Afterward, we can focus completely on David's relationship with Susan.
The film was a complete failure when it was originally released. Why? Who knows. We could possibly put it down for 'ahead of its time.' Since this was 1938, that's not too hard to imagine.
I promise that if you watch this film you will be entertained. It is better than 99% of the 'comedies' released these days. And if you don't like it, honestly, you have no appreciation for good humor and should go back to watching 'Meet the Spartans.' Bringing Up Baby is on par with the best.
Posts
