I have no problem admitting it when a "classic" film doesn't go over well with me, and Visconti's acclaimed epic is one such film. Though it's an undeniably BIG, beautiful film, everything else leaves a lot to be desired. The point of film, based on the Italian novel of the same title, seems to be that the rich and powerful stay the same, regardless of what goes on in a country politics-wise. This would make for a fascinating look at Italy in the tumultuous 1860's (the Garibaldi days), but Visconti's film more than outstays its welcome. At just a smidge over three hours, by the time it's over, it makes you wonder, "so what was the point of all of that?" From a historical standpoint, a lot of sweeping events occur, but we get them only in snippets of dialogue (save for one big invasion/battle sequence in the first hour) and usually from quite a distance. We're looking at these events from the perspective of a prince, and as such, it feels like little has happened or changed. This also makes the great Nino Rota's (8 1/2, The Godfather, etc...) score seem utterly laughable in some of the film's massive pan shots of the Italian countryside. The film also seems oblivious to the irony that Prince Salina (Burt Lancaster), who gives a small speech about the difference between the stagnant nobility (the "lions" and "leopards") and the people who are always working for change (the "lambs"), comes off as a bit of a lamb himself, because he's so passive. The script also makes the mistake of keeping most of the final hour in one location, at an interminable ball sequence where nothing of great note is said or done. It's enough to make you want to quote Vicki Lawrence from The Carol Burnett Show's spoof of Gone With the Wind: "Well that's pretty, but it doesn't answer my question."Grade: C
Lemon Tree (2009) dir. Eran Riklis:
Hiam Abbass may be a potential Oscar contender for her work in the upcoming Miral, but that film won't be the first time that she's been the star of a story about tensions between Israel and Palestine. In Lemon Tree, the actress (who made her US debut in The Visitor) plays Salma Zidane, a Palestinian woman near the border who owns a field of lemon trees. When the new Israeli Defense Minister moves in next door, and the trees are deemed a potential security risk, obviously things go south. Riklis' film is a nicely told film that explores the innocent players in the Israel/Palestine conflict, without ever lurching into melodrama or hysterical political grandstanding. Abbass' Salma may be a tough, likable character, but her opponents are never painted in broad strokes so as to make the film totally lopsided (although it does still side with her). It's not a great film, but it does do a nice job of incorporating issues within its story, and shows how the innocent are affected during conflict.
Hiam Abbass may be a potential Oscar contender for her work in the upcoming Miral, but that film won't be the first time that she's been the star of a story about tensions between Israel and Palestine. In Lemon Tree, the actress (who made her US debut in The Visitor) plays Salma Zidane, a Palestinian woman near the border who owns a field of lemon trees. When the new Israeli Defense Minister moves in next door, and the trees are deemed a potential security risk, obviously things go south. Riklis' film is a nicely told film that explores the innocent players in the Israel/Palestine conflict, without ever lurching into melodrama or hysterical political grandstanding. Abbass' Salma may be a tough, likable character, but her opponents are never painted in broad strokes so as to make the film totally lopsided (although it does still side with her). It's not a great film, but it does do a nice job of incorporating issues within its story, and shows how the innocent are affected during conflict.Grade: B
Paris, Texas (1984) dir. Wim Wenders: 
A film that should probably be better remembered for its performances and cinematography than for its writing, Wim Wenders' film isn't the sort that struck me as a classic (the way it has many), but it's still a very good film, albeit in need of a better editor in spots. As the wandering Travis, Harry Dean Stanton gives a marvelous performance as a man trying to put his life back together, only without having any idea of how to do it. He's backed up (late in the game) by Natassja Kinski, with whom he shares the film's best scene; slow conversation is rarely this striking. The gorgeous cinematography, mixing landscapes and the glow of neon lights, combined with the sparse, twangy score only add to the experience. Unfortunately, Wenders' story telling doesn't always match up. I understand that Travis is supposed to be slightly "off," but it's a little much when he leaves his son sleeping out all night by a bank while he sits in his car (also asleep) across the street. Then there's Travis' son, Hunter, who in spots borders on precocious. Still, it's hard not to be taken away by the journey that Travis embarks, especially when you see what it all adds up to. Not quite the classic it's been hailed as, but strong work all the same.
A film that should probably be better remembered for its performances and cinematography than for its writing, Wim Wenders' film isn't the sort that struck me as a classic (the way it has many), but it's still a very good film, albeit in need of a better editor in spots. As the wandering Travis, Harry Dean Stanton gives a marvelous performance as a man trying to put his life back together, only without having any idea of how to do it. He's backed up (late in the game) by Natassja Kinski, with whom he shares the film's best scene; slow conversation is rarely this striking. The gorgeous cinematography, mixing landscapes and the glow of neon lights, combined with the sparse, twangy score only add to the experience. Unfortunately, Wenders' story telling doesn't always match up. I understand that Travis is supposed to be slightly "off," but it's a little much when he leaves his son sleeping out all night by a bank while he sits in his car (also asleep) across the street. Then there's Travis' son, Hunter, who in spots borders on precocious. Still, it's hard not to be taken away by the journey that Travis embarks, especially when you see what it all adds up to. Not quite the classic it's been hailed as, but strong work all the same.Grade: B+
Secrets and Lies (1996) dir. Mike Leigh:
Before he got caught up in the slice-of-life sub-genre, Mike Leigh used to make movies with some semblance of a forward-moving plot. Frankly, I miss this Mike Leigh, because Secrets and Lies outshines his more recent work quite a bit. When Hortense (Marianne Jean-Baptiste) decides to find her birth mother, she meets the lower-class Cynthia (Brenda Blethyn), and from there everything bubbles to the surface. Leigh's screenplay seems less open to improvisation here, and the film is all the better because of it; Leigh is much better when he doesn't give up too much control to his actors. That said, he still needs to work on his pacing, because at roughly 2 hours and 25 minutes, it's far too long for what it is (the big revelation of Hortense meeting her birth mother comes over an hour in). Still, the performances are uniformly strong, especially from the very likable Jean-Baptiste. Blethyn, though at times grating (any chance she gets to squawk out the word "sweetheart," she seizes) is strong and has wonderful chemistry with Jean-Baptiste. The problem, aside from the revelation, is that by the time we reach the end, too much comes up at once, and it all feels a bit misshapen, plot-wise.
Before he got caught up in the slice-of-life sub-genre, Mike Leigh used to make movies with some semblance of a forward-moving plot. Frankly, I miss this Mike Leigh, because Secrets and Lies outshines his more recent work quite a bit. When Hortense (Marianne Jean-Baptiste) decides to find her birth mother, she meets the lower-class Cynthia (Brenda Blethyn), and from there everything bubbles to the surface. Leigh's screenplay seems less open to improvisation here, and the film is all the better because of it; Leigh is much better when he doesn't give up too much control to his actors. That said, he still needs to work on his pacing, because at roughly 2 hours and 25 minutes, it's far too long for what it is (the big revelation of Hortense meeting her birth mother comes over an hour in). Still, the performances are uniformly strong, especially from the very likable Jean-Baptiste. Blethyn, though at times grating (any chance she gets to squawk out the word "sweetheart," she seizes) is strong and has wonderful chemistry with Jean-Baptiste. The problem, aside from the revelation, is that by the time we reach the end, too much comes up at once, and it all feels a bit misshapen, plot-wise.Grade: B/B+
From Here to Eternity (1953) dir. Fred Zinneman:
Though parts of this romantic, WWII-set Best Picture winner haven't aged well, it remains an engaging, well-acted drama. The cast is full of strong performances, especially from Montgomery Clift and Donna Reed (Reed and Frank Sinatra won the Supporting Actress/Actor awards for their performances). However, with the characters' story lines somewhat spread apart, the Burt Lancaster/Deborah Kerr romance, while benefiting from the talents of the two stars, feels rushed and underdeveloped to be truly compelling. Not to mention that any character who has emotional baggage delivers it all at once in a slightly clumsy manner. Still, after over nearly 60 years, the film remains a stirring work that has survived because of its directing and acting.
Though parts of this romantic, WWII-set Best Picture winner haven't aged well, it remains an engaging, well-acted drama. The cast is full of strong performances, especially from Montgomery Clift and Donna Reed (Reed and Frank Sinatra won the Supporting Actress/Actor awards for their performances). However, with the characters' story lines somewhat spread apart, the Burt Lancaster/Deborah Kerr romance, while benefiting from the talents of the two stars, feels rushed and underdeveloped to be truly compelling. Not to mention that any character who has emotional baggage delivers it all at once in a slightly clumsy manner. Still, after over nearly 60 years, the film remains a stirring work that has survived because of its directing and acting.Grade: B+
No comments:
Post a Comment