Archive for the 'SIFF Screenings' Category

Sneak Preview: Fracture

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Fracture

Yummy! I’ve missed a bunch of free SIFF screenings in the last month, so I was glad to make one finally. They’re really gearing up for the main festival to start, so there’ll be many more events leading up to it. Unfortunately I’ll probably miss most of them!

Anyway about the movie. I liked it — let’s get that straight. It was a pretty solid crime thriller, and I probably can’t say much more without spoiling the ending. Sort of reminded me of The Dying Gaul, as in it was a well-written, well-acted, and beautifully-shot movie. But it’s about rich people, and it’s almost too beautiful. (Like, for a guy that doesn’t know how to wear a tux, Ryan Gosling’s character looks REALLY good in a suit.) And for that reason it’s not real enough, and it ends up being a pretty forgettable movie. Again, I liked it, but it wasn’t profound or anything like that. However, please put this in perspective by remembering that my favorite movie of all time is Jerry Maguire.

As for acting, I loved how Ryan Gosling (first movie I’ve seen him in since Half Nelson) takes the mumbling, wincing, and chuckling to the new level of acting. Anthony Hopkins might as well have had the Hannibal mask on for this movie, going strong with the familiar whispering of witty and sometimes creepy remarks.

Sneak Preview: God Grew Tired of Us

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Note: I created a category called SIFF Screenings to mark all the posts I write after I get to see a free movie thanks to the SIFF membership benefit.

God Grew Tired of Us poster God Grew Tired of Us is a documentary about the “Lost Boys” from Sudan who came to the United States after fleeing the violence in their homeland.

It is a film that is both uplifting and sad. It is uplifting to see these young men have such a great outlook on life after facing so many unbelievable challenges. Their life in the US is by no means easy, but they do reap some deserving rewards as they continue to be true to their roots, and work towards what they believe is the right thing.

It is sad because it reinforces the other side of the material wealth we enjoy here in the US, some of which inlcude: the working poor who must take on two, three shifts to keep up; the culture of alienation where strangers feel no connection to one another, “even though they’re all Americans”; and racism, stereotypes, and the culture of fear against foreign individuals. The film reminds us that no matter how many text messages we exchange with our friends, these boys from Africa can experience far richer connections with their loved ones, precisely because of what they lack.

It’s a pretty emotional film, with some not-so-subtle calls to action attached. For one the display of names of Hollywood stars connected to the film are obvious (Brad Pitt, Nicole Kidman, Catherine Keener, and more I’m sure), and the screening in Seattle made available some supplemental material that could be used for further education, as well as to find additional foster homes for the boys still in Africa. Also one of the boys in the film organizes a rally to educate the Americans about the situation in Sudan. I think a documentary is a pefectly good vehicle for something like this, so I would welcome this kind of propaganda!

Highly recommended, if you can catch a screening. It also won the Grand Jury Prize and the Audience Award at last year’s Sundance.

Sneak Preview: Bobby

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Bobby still photo
Bobby (2006), The Weinstein Company

Once again, I took advantage of a free screening preview offered from SIFF. This time it was Bobby, a movie about the day Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated, as told from perspective of various people who were at the Ambassador Hotel for one reason or another to witness the tragedy.

It’s a simple premise, really — the movie begins in the morning of June 6th, 1968, and it constantly switches shots between the 22 characters’ lives as it leads up to the finale of RFK getting shot in the kitchen. We see many different types of characters, each with their own set of problems. The movie basically gives us the glimpse of what it was like to live in that time, with the reality of an unpopular war staring most people in their faces. And with two of the most influential figures in recent history brutally assassinated, the all focus — and hope — was on Robert Kennedy to change the world, something his brother and Dr. King couldn’t continue to do.

We see everything through the characters’ eyes. All shots of RFK are actual clips from the 60′s, and when he is “in” the movie they obscure his face so it’s unclear who’s playing him. The point was not necessarily to tell the story of RFK, but to show that everyone was profoundly affected in their own ways by everything that happened during that era. The movie’s climax and the finale come with Kennedy getting shot and carried off to the hospital. Even though for the entire length of the movie we see these characters’ stories develop, we don’t get to see how they are affected by this particular tragedy.

That seems to be the most common criticism of the movie, that all the subplots are overshadowed by one man’s death at the end. I personally didn’t mind it that much. All that the subplots really represented was the confusion, anger, and the hope that many people felt. Rather than tidying up the meaningless details of the subplots, I appreciated that the movie ended the way it did, because it somehow drew more attention to RFK’s overall message of hope, tolerance, and demanding a little bit more from one another as we try to make the world a better place. It sounds cheesy, but that’s all it was, wasn’t it? It’s easy to see the pararell between the movie and what’s happening today. Not just Vietnam and Iraq, but the culture of divide. By bringing his message to the forefront, rather than the negative impact of the events, I think Emilio Estevez (who wrote and directed the film) was just trying to inspire us to come together and hope, like they all were ready to do with RFK as a president. Overall I liked the film. It’s a Yummy!

Some of my negatives with the film — sometimes the dialogue was kind of predictable and cheesy. I have to admit that Ashton Kutcher as a stoner/drug dealer was pretty funny, but there were too many “easy-laugh” scenes of the two campaign workers getting high and being jackasses. And oh yeah, Ashton’s character getting busted at the end seemed highly obligatory, afraid to appear like they are condoning drug use. Lindsay Lohan was average in both appearance (intended) and acting (probably not). Scenes in the kitchen with Edward (Laurence Fishburne), Miguel (Jacob Vargas), and Jose (Freddy Rodríguez) were good and engaging, but a bit heavy-handed.

Sneak Preview: Stranger Than Fiction

Wednesday, November 1, 2006

Stranger Than Fiction still photo
Stranger Than Fiction (2006), Sony Pictures Entertainment

Recently I received a complimentary SIFF membership for a year. (Thank you, SIFF!) That means that from time to time, I’ll have a chance to go see a film before it opens nationwide. So I jumped on an opportunity to check out Stranger Than Fiction, scheduled to open November 10.

In short, I enjoyed it more than I thought I would. I know that’s not saying much, but I can’t spoil the movie because Lucretia has not seen it and she’s a large chunk of this blog’s readership — so I can’t afford to offend her.

But I will say a bit more. I think the main concern I had before I saw the film came from a review I vaguely remember reading a while back, which accused the film of relying too heavily on the initial “interestingness” of the premise — which is the main character played by Will Ferrell, Harold Crick, can hear the voice of the author narrating the story of his life — to carry the entire film. I’m not sure if I summarized that correctly, but now that I’ve seen the film, I don’t agree with that statement. I believed in the characters, I sympathized with them, and I was touched by what happened in the end. It didn’t matter that the plot was wholly unrealistic or not believable, because the characters were all likable, sympathetic, and well acted. The “interestingness” of the premise didn’t seem overused — with a film like Being John Malkovich or Memento, sometimes you find yourself distracted by the trickery, and looking for some inconsistencies in the film so you can feel smart. With this one, not so much. I was basically content to watch the film and root for the main guy.

I hope Lucretia will see it so we can talk about it more!

Browse

Categories

Archives

My flickr

Deer near the pond
Working from home
Goal dance
Making a necklace

Meta