Even when small independent films contain a variety of flaws, they often provide a much more fulfilling viewing experience than most of the box office giants. A Little Help, written and directed by Michael J. Weithorn, is a perfect example. Despite the flaws identified below, I thoroughly enjoyed watching A Little Help and recommend it to all you indie film fans.
A Little Help stars Jenna Fischer as Laura, a dental hygienist struggling to be a good parent to her 12-year-old son while suspecting that her husband is having an affair. She’s right about the affair, but her husband dies before that is confirmed and now Laura has to figure out how to be a single parent. This might be easier if she wasn’t constantly being “helped” by her controlling sister, Kathy (played by Brooke Smith), and her critical nagging mother (played by Lesley Ann Warren). To make life even more complicated, Laura discovers that Kathy’s husband, Paul (Rob Benedict), has been in love with her since high school and recently she has found herself attracted to him.
Laura is such a flawed, immature infuriating character (she is not exactly a role model for good parenting), that we should not be sympathetic towards her, but Fischer does a tremendous job of making Laura look vulnerable and picked on, so I did want to support her struggle to get out from under her overbearing relatives and greedy lawyer and find happiness.
Nevertheless, as I mentioned, A Little Help has its share of flaws. For example, individual scenes are better than their sum (the story does not flow the way it should), the direction does not feel very tight and the comedy often felt forced to me. Still, like I said, I enjoyed the film very much and am giving it ***+. My mug is up.
For those readers waiting for me to say something more critical about a film’s acting and directing, your wait is over.
Roman Polanski’s last film was my second-favourite film of 2010 (The Ghost Writer). This time he has taken a well-known play by Yasmina Reza and turned it into a film that doesn’t quite work. Carnage is an eighty-minute conversation (and heated argument) between two New York City couples who end up consuming an entire bottle of expensive Scotch, with predictable consequences. The couples, who are meeting for the first time, have been brought together because one of their boys hit the other in the face with a stick.
Polanski assembled a great cast for Carnage, including Kate Winslet, Jodie Foster, Christoph Waltz and John C. Reilly, but I was decidedly unimpressed with all of the performances. Perhaps Polanski is to blame for the over-the-top acting and unrealistic reactions (which might work on stage but not in a film), but none of the actors were particularly believable (the men fared slightly better than the women).
Carnage does show how unhappy all four of these characters are, despite what they generally display to the outside world. One is a workaholic, one is his neglected wife, one is a peacenik who is not at peace and one is her insecure husband whose patience is waning. The characters themselves were entertaining and the dialogue was often quite funny, with a few profound moments, but, in the end, the screenplay and direction were disappointing.
Given my critique, it might be surprising that I am giving Carnage ***, but the fact is that I want to see it again. My prime criterion for *** (as opposed to less than that) is that I would like to watch the film again. So my mug is up but the taste of the stuff inside sure did not live up to the expectation generated by the ingredients.
I am reviewing this film for Media Matters (Third Way Cafe), so in two weeks I will provide a link to the full review. In the meantime, I will say that Monsieur Lazhar, a French-Canadian film written and directed by Philippe Falardeau, is top-ten film material (it was also nominated for Best Foreign Language Film). If you have a chance to see what filmmaking at its finest looks like, don't pass it up. Monsieur Lazhar gets ****. My mug is up.
I’ll agree that 2011
was a better year than most for movies, and so I’ll definitely fill out my ten
plus a couple of honourable mentions this year, though I don’t think I’ll
follow your lead, Vic, and comment on 15. I’ll remind readers that I don’t list
movies for objective quality but for subjective value.
Then, I’ll clarify that I have not seen several potential
candidates yet. Among these I would include: Hugo, The Descendants, Moneyball and Take Shelter. My guess is that any other movies I haven’t seen
wouldn’t make it. And I’ll award honourable mentions to Win Win, In a Better World, A Separation, and The Beaver.
On to the top ten:
10. Tree of Life –
Terence Malick and I will never quite get along because the whole visual poetry
thing doesn’t work for me, but this was certainly a whole lot better than The New World (though, paradoxically, I
actually liked the visuals better in that film – it just put me to sleep). Tree of Life drew me in by awakening a
simultaneous inner reflection on my own boyhood while watching the one
onscreen. This was impacting enough, combined with a few thought-provoking
scenes, for this film to make my list. But the whole cosmic thing left me cold,
and, I find the overall style alienating – makes me turn entirely inward and
imagine life from this kind of alienated, disconnected position – as if I were
a spectator of life rather than a participant.
9. It’s Kind of a
Funny Story – I always have to find at least one movie like this to include
– a quirky indie comedy of psychological interest. My memories of it have faded
too much for more comment, but I thought there were valuable insights and
enjoyable scenes.
8. Limitless – I
thought this the best of the recent soft sci-fi crowd (together with Source
Code and Inception)in terms of staying closer to the real range of possibility
and therefore exploring more helpful territory. I think it was misunderstood by
many, unless I’m wrong in seeing it as a very relevant tragedy on where our
individualist, technological culture is headed.
7. The Help – I
appreciate a good, solid story that can be appreciated by a wide audience.
Interesting, amusing and well-acted, and emphasizes the great point that
helping relatively powerless people to tell their story and be heard is
powerful.
6. Margin Call – I
like a dialogue-rich, focused kind of film (the opposite of Malick’s visual
style mentioned above). This story pulls you into an unfortunately realistic
world and lets you see it from a variety of perspectives. Each of these
illuminates the problem and enables a deeper understanding of those we might
see as the enemies in the financial scandals of recent years – without
minimizing the horrific, self-centred damage that was done.
5. The Way – Having recently done a
pilgrimage (less famous than the Camino in Spain), I was very interested and
not at all disappointed in this pilgrimage tale. There were a few moments that
I might have wished for more of some kind of sparkle, but it’s a great example
of how warmth and connection can happen among some prickly people under the
right circumstances.
4. Incendies –
Very powerful film that sacrifices a little credibility in order to hit with a
very clear punch. That punch is so worthwhile and important that one forgives
the credibility gap. If only we could all really believe that violence tends to
make us all into victims and perpetrators
unless we are enabled to escape the cycle of revenge.
3. Midnight in Paris
– Perhaps I rate it higher than it deserves to make up for all the Woody Allen
slamming I’ve done in recent years. This was a very enjoyable and thoughtful
film that was probably especially enjoyable for me because of the study abroad
trips to Europe that we’ve been leading for years now. Plus the idea of
important moments in creativity and cultural ideas arising in specific times,
places, and real communities of friends is an important one to me.
2. Higher Ground –
A well made depiction of the kind of personal journey in and sort-of-out of
faith that really needs to be understood better by the church and society.
There’s enough lightness and clever moments to keep the enjoyment up in an
otherwise serious and bittersweet story.
1. Of Gods and Men
– Such a beautiful movie – a great tribute to the power of a humble community.
It shows the potential of a monastic life to create inward depth and outward
engagement in order to respond thoughtfully and intentionally to a chaotic and
confused world. It probably didn’t need any help, but when I read about how the
actors felt like they were formed into a meaningful community through their
learning to sing together, this movie’s no. 1 spot was clinched. It was even
better when I saw it the second time, and I look forward to seeing it again.
Michael Fassbender and Carey Mulligan, who have had another great year (Jane Eyre, Drive, respectively) are two of the best young actors of our time and their brilliant raw performances in Shame will only enhance their reputations, not least because of the unsympathetic characters they play in this cold dark film.
Fassbender plays Brandon, a sex addict living alone in a cold white apartment in Manhattan. It is clear from the start that Brandon gets no pleasure from his addiction, or, for that matter, from the rest of his life. His emotions, such as they are, generally vary only from anger to frustration to self-loathing. When his sister (Sissy, played by Mulligan) moves in, Brandon is not amused. But something happens when he watches Sissy sing at a bar one night. Is he remembering something? We don’t hear much about their past, but there are hints that it was far from good. Is there any hope for these two broken and desperately lonely people?
Rated NC-17 in the U.S., Shame is not for those who are offended by sex or nudity (or dark dramas about sex addiction). But it is a haunting powerful film by Steve McQueen, featuring great acting, cinematography and music. ***+. My mug is up.
I read many of the Tintin graphic novels (in French) back in my high school days. I loved them, especially appreciating the artwork and the sense of wonder and mystery in the clever convoluted plots. Now here comes a Tintin film directed by Steven Spielberg no less (the director who has more films in my top 150 than any other director). Still, I resisted seeing the film (for a month anyway) for two reasons: 1) it’s in 3D; 2) the animation bears little resemblance to the artwork in the graphic novels. As it turns out, those are my two primary complaints about The Adventures of Tintin, though there is one more major complaint and some minor ones (which I will get to in due course).
The Adventures of Tintin provides exactly what it advertises: a nonstop thrill-ride of pure old-fashioned adventure (like Indiana Jones). The animation is remarkably realistic, which is amazing and beautiful but obviously not aimed at fans of the novels, because, as I said above, it bears little resemblance to the novels’ artwork. Given that the novels’ artwork is key to their brilliance and popularity, this seems both strange and tragic. The 3D only highlights the difference (and you all know what I think of 3D, though, as in Hugo, the 3D was not highlighted in as distracting a manner as I had expected).
If I could set aside the distraction caused by the changes made to the artwork, I would say this is a very well-made animated film with good acting (voices), lots of comedy and lots of action and adventure (though the sense of mystery I was hoping for was barely noticeable). But, alas, I could not stop there. I would have to go on to point out (no doubt risking the exasperation of some readers) that, given the realistic animation style, The Adventures of Tintin has far too much violence for a film aimed at children. I was rather shocked by how quickly and easily Tintin uses a handgun. I suppose that must be the case in the graphic novels as well (I haven’t opened one in at least a decade) but at least there is no feel of realism there. Since I encouraged my children to read Tintin at an early age, I cannot imagine that the novels had the same violent feel as the film. Still, this violence is nowhere near as offensive as it is in the Narnia films (Tintin is, after all, not a child).
So, in spite of all the flaws mentioned above, I am still going to give The Adventures of Tintin a solid *** for providing an enjoyable film-viewing experience. My mug is up.
Like the British miniseries, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is painstakingly slow-moving. This is, of course, not a criticism. In fact, when you add intelligent dialogue and brilliant acting to that, you’ve got a winner. But there’s more. Tomas Alfredson has managed to perfectly recreate the feel of John le Carre’s 1974 spy novel, with its dark grey and brown palette and its dour performances. Those performances convey the real dreariness and horror of being a British Cold War spy, unlike a certain Bond fellow who usually treats it all rather lightly.
In Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, George Smiley, recently dismissed, is called back to hunt for a mole at the very top of MI6. Gary Oldman’s performance as Smiley is particularly outstanding, but he has lots of excellent support, notably from Colin Firth, John Hurt, Mark Strong, Benedict Cumberbatch and Tom Hardy.
But despite the fact that the screenplay is well-written and well-paced, it is also the film’s biggest flaw. A slow-moving spy film should not require the many sudden leaps of logic which Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy contains. At least three times it was impossible for me to figure out how Smiley got from point A to point B in his investigations. The sold-out crowd around me (it was opening night) shared my opinion on this, as I heard person after person say they were hopelessly lost and could not figure out what was going on half the time. As a lover of spy films, I wasn’t lost, just frustrated. Without this flaw, TTSS would surely have made it into my top ten films of 2011. Another easy ***+. My mug is up.
So these two brothers who love movies and like to write want to have an excuse to watch movies and write about them. As a bonus, though they're an ocean apart (ok - now only half a continent), they get to have an ongoing conversation. You're welcome to eavesdrop on this conversation, especially if you like to think about movies and other cultural offerings with some occasional theological and psychological nuances. And, of course, you're welcome to join in the conversation.
