The Netflix Files: June 25 - July 1

The Game (1997) dir. David Fincher

One of Fincher's lesser-discussed efforts (despite its impending Criterion Collection release), this dark thriller features the director doing fine work in his comfort zone, even as he's saddled with a screenplay that's little more than ordinary outside of its conceit. Michael Douglas gives a nice turn as a man pulled into an all-consuming "game," and Fincher's signature touches (green/yellow color palette, chilly and elegant camera work) give the film a sense of heft it might have been lacking in less distinct hands. And, for much of the two hour run time, it's an engaging little thriller. Only in the last act does it start to venture closer into absurd territory. It never flies off of the rails, but there comes a point when the central idea feels dangerously close to running amok to the point of self-parody. Fincher has, to his credit always worked in the studio system, never venturing off into indie territory like so many contemporary auteurs. The work he's created thus far is an impressive testament to big studio/auteur director collaborations. Still, one can't help but feel that something like The Game, despite its merits, feels a little too much like "just another big studio thriller," instead of "a David Fincher film."


Grade: B-

The Mirror (1975) dir. Andrei Tarkovsky

Though best known for Solaris, Tarkovsky's The Mirror is often considered to be his crowning achievement. Consider me among the unconvinced. While moments work and it never does anything actively bad (the ideas are certainly interesting, despite their ambiguity), it feels too experimental for its own good. Many films require lots of thought or repeated viewings (or both) before one acquires a full appreciation, but the usually give a significant amount that is immediately compelling and satisfying. With The Mirror, Tarkovsky goes a little too far out of reach in terms of structure, rendering even straightforward scenes too abstract for their own good.


Grade: C+

Punch-Drunk Love (2002) dir. Paul Thomas Anderson

There's no doubt that Paul Thomas Anderson is one of the most striking and important working directors out there. Unfortunately, everyone has a misfire or two, and for Anderson, it's this nearly decade-old "romance." Anderson has a remarkable ability to render run down and ordinary landscapes in a manner that somehow feels epic, and that remains true here. The wide shots and gliding camera movements create a very large world, despite the actual intimacy of the story. Adam Sandler is strong in lead role, and Anderson does a strong job of putting us inside of the character's head on every front, particularly with the anxiety-inducing score. Unfortunately, due to the nature of the character, there's a limit to how much time we can spend feeling things as they occur in his head space. After a while, it feels more like the film's execution is assaulting you with sensations, and even at 90 minutes, it's too much. Some scenes have a chaotic feel that becomes too much, and it blurs the line between our perception of the character (and his perception) and our perception of the film as a whole, with pretty severe consequences. The vision is there, and in its own way it's somehow a compelling film, but the little tics that Anderson slathers on just about every scene grow tiresome far too quickly.


Grade: C


Mean Creek (2004) dir. Jacob Estes

Jacob Estes hasn't released another film since his critically hailed sophomore effort, and it's a real shame, because if Mean Creek is any indication, the writer/director is one of the most exciting voices in current American indie cinema. Though the first act has some pacing issues, as the film blossoms into a bleak (but never manipulative or maudlin) teen morality tale it digs deeper and deeper and really delivers when it counts. The main cast members, all under the age of 20 at the time of filming, give tremendous performances, even though the occasional line of dialogue feels a little stiff or too grown-up. This is an extremely grounded film that works precisely because Estes never feels the need to strain for something bigger or more intense. Brief research reveals that Estes is actually at work on a third film, and after seeing this, I couldn't be more excited to see what he does next. 


Grade: B+

The Netflix Files: June 18-24

 Louie Season 1 (2010) created by Louis C.K.

Seeing as Louie is often described as the "actual" best comedy on TV, I jumped at the chance to give it a go when it showed up online, seeing as the new season was right around the corner.  With shows like these - based on a comedian's life/stand up material - one has to be open to a very distinctive point of view, which often presents some type of adjustment curve. With Louie, however, the adjustment curve lasted a long time (essentially the whole season), and at the end I still wasn't sure I was a fan, let alone a believer that this was the best show on TV. Mining humor out of awkward situations is nothing new at this point, but C.K. seems to revel in a certain blend of ugly unpleasantness and direct social commentary that often feels forced and unfunny. Comedies with darker sides are, likewise, not novelties, but Louie goes too far with it at times, being too dour, unpleasant, and/or gross for its own good, often suffocating the humor in order to make some sort of point.


Grade: C+/C


Louie Season 2 (2011) created by Louis C.K.

If the first season of Louie was a major disappointment, then consider season two the show's redemption. While the problems of season one are still present, the humor comes through so much more, and the bitterness and melancholy often feel earned. The episode structure remains the same (and is surprisingly limited, consisting usually of two separate sequences that never go very far) but the results are so much stronger. The mid-season episode "Subway; Pamela," the series' shining moment so far, is the best example, providing moments of hilarity, absurdity, and just the right touch of sadness, courtesy of C.K.'s relationship with fellow single parent Pamela (Pamela Adlon). And, where season one ended and left me seriously debating whether I wanted to continue with the show, season two's wonderful conclusion has left me eager for the start of season three this Thursday.


Grade: B/B+


Raise the Red Lantern (1991) dir. Zhang Yimou

Before Zhang Yimou began making wildly colorful fantasies (Hero, House of Flying Daggers), he made his mark on global cinema with this lush, restrained look at family relationships in 1920s China. After her father's death, Songlian (the seemingly ageless Gong Li) is married to a wealthy man, becoming his fourth (simultaneous) wife, and competes for his attention and affection with the man's three other brides. The material certainly has some operatic overtones, but Zimou and the cast manage to execute the story, set entirely within the rooms and walls of the husband's stone compound, with a level of dignity (and even coldness) that prevents it from devolving into melodramatic nonsense. Performances all around are strong, and it's easy to see why Li's career quickly exploded after the film's debut. A slow, but sumptuous and ultimately affecting drama that has held up well. 


Grade: B+


The Man Who Wasn't There (2001) dir. Joel Coen

One of the Coen brothers' lesser discussed efforts, this foray into noir proves to be surprisingly engaging and enjoyable. The plot hits many familiar beats (a man blackmails his wife and her lover until things spiral out of control), but the screenplay navigates the territory so as to make it feel fresh. Billy Bob Thorton, in the central role, is used to strong effect as Ed, a low-key, quiet figure who finds himself in escalating circumstances. The supporting cast is great as well, filled with nice turns from Frances McDormand, James Gandolfini, Tony Shaloub, and Katherine Borowitz, who delivers the film's best performance in a single riveting (and bizarre) conversation with Thorton. Despite the Coens' tendencies to wink at the audience, the film does play well as a straight noir despite one bit of out-there plotting (it's too good to spoil) and a smart jab at the verbosity of noir voice over narration. It may not get the recognition it deserves, but this strongly acted and immaculately designed film (thank you again, Roger Deakins/Dennis Gassner/Mary Zophres/etc...) is a true gem in the already jewel-encrusted crown that is Joel and Ethan Coen's career.


Grade: B+/A-

The Netflix Files: June 11-17

Don't Look Now (1973) dir. Nicolas Roeg

A steadily engrossing mystery/thriller, Roeg's film, starring Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie, builds its atmosphere more on grief and dread than on any sort of scares. The story of a couple trying to rebuild their lives in the Venice after their daughter drowns in an accident certainly takes its time to really get moving, though the pay off is ultimately worth it. Certain elements feel either stiff or dated - unfortunately this includes some of Sutherland's acting - but Roeg's method of capturing the scenes, often through delirious camera movements and off-kilter edits deserves credit. And even though the climactic scene almost threatens to throw the themes overboard in favor of shock value, it presents a memorably unsettling image that will make you question ever following someone in a red trench coat. 


Grade: B




OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies (2006/2008) dir. Michel Hazanavicius 

Before storming awards season with The Artist, Michel Hazanvicius, Jean Dujardin, and Berenice Bejo were busy mimicking another time period and genre of film making. Itself a spoof of a series of spy novels, Nest of Spies is the director's resurrection of the slick spy flicks of the 50s and 60s. Mocking everything from the era's sexism and racism (Dujardin's protagonist is a firm believer that everything French and Western is the only way to go), the film is an enjoyable trifle, though it does outstay its welcome by about 10 minutes. Dujardin is once again perfectly cast, and Hazanavicius' mimicry of the old spy films is uncanny, but the overall feeling afterward is that this could have been a much sharper, wittier, and funnier film. 


Grade: B-/C+

The Terminator (1984) dir. James Cameron

No, this isn't the first time I've seen Cameron's landmark sci-fi action film, but it's been long enough that it seemed to merit a re-watch. Surprisingly, despite certain elements that either feel dated (the score), or reveal the film's budget limitations, the film remains an engaging and exceedingly taut piece of film making. Cameron's direction is uncluttered, and he invests the chase scenes and shoot outs with a bluntness that keeps them from devolving into exhausting or overwrought spectacle. The concern remains, somehow, on the characters, as limited as their arcs are, and it works. There are plenty of cheapshots one can take at Cameron's filmography, but nearly three decades later, The Terminator remains a definitive example of American action cinema at its best (on a tight budget, no less).


Grade: B+/A-

The Netflix Files: April 30 - May 6

Midnight Cowboy (1969) dir. John Schlesinger

Despite all of the controversy surrounding this X-rated Best Picture winner upon its release, nowadays it's the sort of "classic" film that people just don't seem to talk about that much. After finally seeing it, it's somewhat understandable. Jon Voight and especially Dustin Hoffman are outstanding, and the two play off of each other's extreme differences quite well. Yet even though there's plenty to admire, Schlesinger's direction sometimes feels too chaotic for the story's own good. 


Grade: B

Lolita (1962) dir. Stanley Kubrick

Lolita may not be up there with Kubrick's most memorable films, but it does still feature the director's ability at exercising complete control over a film's imagery and themes. At two and a half hours, the film does drag in spots, but the black humor and excellent performances often make up for it. James Mason and Sue Lyon have just the right chemistry as Humbert and Lolita, never letting us in too deeply into the relationship between step-daughter and step-father. The real highlights, however, are Shelley Winters as Lolita's volatile mother and Peter Sellers as the eerie Clare Quilty. The film's marketing back in 1962 teased audiences with the question, "How did they ever make a movie of Lolita?" The answer is with snark, subtlety, and black-as-night humor.


Grade: B+

4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days (2007) dir. Cristian Mungiu
I've been meaning to catch this 2007 Cannes champion for a while, but haven't had the chance until now. Having finally seen it, I can only say that I'm glad I waited as long as I did; the 'me' of 2007 probably wouldn't have appreciated Mungiu's work as well then. Though the first 30 minutes are dedicated all to basic character intros and sketchy plot setup, once the two female protagonists find themselves locked in a vicious argument with the abortionist they've sought out, the film flies off into the stratosphere. Mungiu's style, in keeping with the Romanian New Wave, features lots of long shots, which lends a nice amount of documentary-like style to the gritty, frank tale. But even though the story may be about a girl helping her friend secure an abortion (at a time when the procedure was completely outlawed), Mungiu's film is more focused on painting a general picture of life and friendship (or lack thereof). Anamaria Marinca is brilliant in the lead role, while Vlad Ivanov lends a realistic sense of menace to the abortion doctor, a man who feels as though his clients are both cheating him and possibly endangering his life. The level-headed, even distant treatment, though off-putting at first, pays off, and creates a brutally realistic sense of unease that is critical to the film's tremendous success.

Grade: A

The Netflix Files: March 19 - 25

Caravaggio (1986) dir. Derek Jarman:

Among one of art house director's more straightforward efforts, Caravaggio is still a Jarman film down to its core. From the dark, stagey (yet in a good way) set design filled with anachronisms, to the touches of homoeroticism, the late auteur's depiction of the famed painter's life is a lush film that beautifully does for Caravaggio what Julie Taymor would do nearly 20 years later for Frida Kahlo with Frida. Told in a series of flashbacks, the film's main focus is on the love triangle that develops between Caravaggio (Nigel Terry) and a young couple (Sean Bean and Tilda Swinton). The way Jarman lyrically moves between episodes is fascinating to watch. And though the film does touch on Caravaggio's youth, it avoids trying to depict his entire life. By focusing on the non-traditional love triangle (it begins between Caravaggio and Bean's Ranuccio), Jarman is able to contrast the painter's struggles in work (which are somewhat downplayed) with the more volatile struggles in his personal life. It's a rich, sumptuous vision, with, filled with lovely costumes (often against minimalist sets that still speak volumes) and gorgeous photography that does a low-key, yet still effective job of using an episode in a person's life to somehow capture them as a whole.

Grade: B/B+

The Netflix Files: March 12 - 18

The Servant (1963) dir. Joseph Losey: An outstanding domestic thriller that owes more to its screenplay (adapted by Harold Pinter from Robin Maugham's novel), The Servant starts with ordinary ingredients and few predictable turns, but manages to end up in a frightfully exciting place at the end. Aside from the fascinating is-there-isn't-there? homoerotic subtext to the relationship between aristocrat Tony (James Fox) and socially awkward servant Barrett (Dirk Bogarde), the film's sharp deconstruction of employer-employee power dynamics is thrilling to behold. Throw in the fact that it's edited and paced just about to perfection, and even the more mundane conversations feel as though they're richly layered with barely visible tension. The final half hour is a bit of a sharp turn stylistically, like something that Ingmar Bergman and David Lynch might have cooked up over coffee, but in the end it only elevates the film, which owes so much to Pinter's excellent script to another level. Not terribly deep from the human side of things, but as a work of narrative manipulation and character maneuvering, it's a wonderful little gem of a thriller.

Grade: A-

Le Cercle Rouge (The Red Circle) (1970) dir. Jean-Pierre Melville: Melville's last noir (and his penultimate film as a director) also stands as one of his best. Understatement is the name of the game, but even coupled with the film's deliberate pacing it never fails to intrigue, if at times from a very chilly distance. Melville takes his time setting up the four principals (three criminals, one cop) and their loose connections to each other. The film won't ever be remembered as a strong work of character study, but at least the gradual pacing and extreme understatement lend the material more depth than would have been there otherwise. Much more impressive is the narrative's build towards its masterful highlight: a near-silent heist sequence set inside a supposedly impenetrable jewelry house. It's stripped down, icy stuff, but Melville ultimately makes all of the pieces worth caring about, even if the emotional reactions it inspires are often rather muted.

Grade: B+

The Netflix Files: February 6-12

Mona Lisa (1986) dir. Neil Jordan

Neil Jordan is one of those directors whose films I really want to like, yet something always gets in the way, usually the pacing. Sadly, Mona Lisa is no exception, though it certainly has its strengths. Bob Hoskins gives a strong performance as a man slowly (very slowly) dragged into the seedy underbelly of London, and his chemistry with Cathy Tyson makes the film worth sticking with. It also features some nicely handled tense sequences, and the film's one big blow up of violence is quite effective in its simplicity. Mona Lisa isn't striving to be a crime epic; the nature of its story is small, even though the consequences can be severe. Unfortunately, Jordan's pacing isn't on the same level of consistency as the performances, and as such it's easy for one's mind to wander in the first hour, which becomes repetitive after a while. A noble effort with strong parts that ultimately add up to a whole that isn't quite all there.

Grade: B/B-

Trainspotting (1996) dir. Danny Boyle

Long before Danny Boyle was filling the screen with zombies or taking us through the streets of Mumbai, he made a little movie about drug addiction that catapulted him into the limelight, and for good reason. It's got Boyle's signature all over it, which helps keep the often dour plot from becoming unrepentant misery porn. There are even a few moments of black comedy that work nicely to punctuate the unsettling subject matter. Yet when Boyle wants to make the film hit hard, he does so masterfully. In what is easily the film's best scene, we see Renton (the wonderful Ewan McGregor) going into withdrawal in his childhood bedroom. Boyle pulls out all of the surreal stops here, and the longer the sequence goes on, the more powerful it becomes. Even though smaller characters don't feel as well-rounded as Renton does, Boyle captures the lower middle class druggie lifestyle with such skill that it does little to hamper the film's impact. Pair this with a screening of Requiem for a Dream, and you'll never even think about doing meth or cocaine for quite some time.

Grade: B+/A-

The Netflix Files: January 23-29

Farewell, My Concubine (1993) dir. Kaige Chen

It may span an butt-numbing 171 minutes, but thankfully Kaige Chen's acclaimed cross-over hit earns every minute. This is a big film that tells a big story, starting in 1924 and ending in 1977, yet no time or period feels short-changed. For a film to cover the life of one character is impressive. Chen's film covers three. Filled with memorable characters, excellent performances (including a very young Gong Li), and stunning production values, Chen's film smartly navigates the expansive timeline, grounding each period of Chinese history just enough to make sure that it all sticks. At times the characters can feel a bit like they're being maneuvered and manipulated to achieve somewhat mechanical dramatic ends, but the overall achievement is more than worth a look, because it works as a character drama, a romance, and a big slice of complicated Chinese history, all while remaining coherent.

Grade: B+/A-

You Can Count on Me (2000) dir. Kenneth Lonergan

It took a distressingly long time for Lonergan's second film, Margaret, to hit theaters, only to be seen by virtually no one. After taking a look at his directorial debut, it really seems like a shame, because if You Can Count on Me is any indication, Lonergan is one of the most promising directors out there. Filled with moments of tenderness, anger, cruelty, and joy, the writer/director's exploration of family ties between a divorcee (Laura Linney) and her unreliable brother (Mark Ruffalo) has an undeniably authentic feel to it the whole way through. Linney and Ruffalo have an instant brother-sister chemistry from their first appearance together, and the way the film gives both characters their fair share of examination creates the feeling that you know these people inside and outside. The only element that feels off is Matthew Broderick as Linney's new boss, though this has more to do with the actor's performance than Lonergan's writing. He's the one part of the film that doesn't feel entirely authentic, although ultimately it's easy to ignore, particularly when scenes like Linney and Ruffalo's parting-of-ways comes along and emotionally wreck you.

Grade: B+

Sherlock: Season 1 (2010) created by Mark Gatiss & Steven Moffat

The setting may be thoroughly modern, but Gatiss and Moffat's (best known as the current show runner of Doctor Who) modern adaptation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes novels is a delightfully executed slice of TV that makes you beg for more after each episode (which is a problem, since each season is only 3 episodes). With each episode lasting roughly 90 minutes, Gatiss and Moffat straddle a fine line between serialized TV narrative and TV movie/mini-series, which gives the series a richer, more epic feeling. Case in point, the first episode, "A Study in Pink," which acts as a perfectly self-contained story all while establishing Holmes (Benedict Cumberbatch) and Watson (Martin Freeman) in the show's modern-day London setting. Yet even though Moffat brings a certain amount of appeal to the series, it's watching the spectacularly-voiced Cumberbatch and Freeman play off of each other that's truly a joy to watch. Cumberbatch's Holmes is driven to the point of insensitivity, prone to arrogance in his quest to analyze and get to the bottom of things. Watching the actor recite detailed breakdowns of crime scenes, combined with the flashy close-ups and edits, is as riveting as any number of big setpieces in recent blockbusters. Freeman's more mellow, "every day" nature brings a nice touch to Watson. He's not a doofus, but he's a "normal" smart guy who still has to contend with the seemingly god-like analytical capabilities of his crime-solving partner. So even though episodes 2 and 3 (mostly 2) aren't quite as effective as "A Study in Pink," the actors and general execution make the show worth keeping up with. Now to get onto season 2 so I can see the much-buzzed-about finale...

Grade: B+

The Netflix Files: December 26 - January 1

Misfits - Season 2 (2010) created by Howard Overman:

Having firmly established its universe in season one, Howard Overman's hugely popular Brit super hero show moved on to bigger (but not too big) things in its superior second season. Though I still find Robert Sheehan's Nathan Young to be one of the most insufferable characters on TV, I have to concede two things. The first being that he did actually make me laugh a few times, the second being that the early episode involving a long-lost brother (from another mother) was exceptionally well done. Lauren Socha's brash Kelly remains my favorite of the cast, although Nathan Stewart-Jarret's Curtis and Antonia Thomas' Alisha seemed like they were given more (and better) material to work with than season 1. The episode involving Curtis (who can rewind time) messing with the incident that landed him in community service was one of the season's best. I go back and forth as to whether I find Iwan Rheon's portrayal of Simon, a shy nerd with the power of invisibility, irritating or not, however. Still, I liked how season two further introduced antagonists with super powers, without doing anything too bizarre (and this includes a villain with control over dairy products). The season's penultimate episode, which involves the main characters (and others affected by the lightning storm) being brought into the limelight, is also a highlight, though part of me wishes the writers had avoided the deus ex machina at the end, even though ignoring it would have created a plot hole. And while the finale wasn't as good as that episode, it did at least deal with an intriguing possibility, and ended on a simple but game-changing decision. As a whole, Misfits continues to feel better made, washed-out look included, though the star remains Vincent Pope's stellar (if at times too epic for its own good) score, one of the most vibrant and memorable I've heard in a TV series in quite some time. I hate to rip him from Misfits, but the man needs to make the transition to scoring films ASAP, as he's the closest the show has to a true hero.

Grade: B+

The Netflix Files: December 19 - 25

Le Doulos (1962) dir. Jean-Pierre Melville:

One of the reknowned French director's best-loved noirs, this entry in the genre, Le Doulos features some stellar scenes amid a narrative that drifts just a hair too long. Despite an excellent, bleak ending, there are moments along the way where the narrative is in need of a little tightening later on. Still, it's hard to overlook Melville's gifts as a director and story teller. His cast is strong, and when scenes really need to connect (albeit in a very distant manner), Melville hits a home run. As Silien, Melville regular Jean-Paul Belmondo turns in a reliably solid performance, playing one of many two-faced characters throughout the story. As in most of his films, however, the true star remains the man behind the camera, for good reason.

Grade: B/B+

Misfits - Season 1 (2009) created by Howard Overman:

Consider Misfits the antithesis of NBC's short-lived Heroes. The NBC show introduced a large ensemble filled with startling powers and a narrative that involved the fate of the world. Misfits, on the other hand, is focused on a very small group, and though there are struggles, everything is relatively self-contained. After a group of teens sentenced to community service get caught in a freak lightning storm, they discover that they've been given various powers. Though Misfits is generally well-made (ignoring the horrible desaturated color correction that makes even plant life look grey), it does sometimes suffer from a sense of aimlessness. The devotion to the limited set of characters is nice, though it's honestly not as deep or insightful about youth culture as it would like to believe. Still, the actors are quite engaging to watch (except for fangirl favorite Robert Sheehan, whose character I just want to punch over and over again), especially Lauren Socha's feisty, profane Kelly. Now that season 1 is out of the way, however, it will be interesting to see if Misfits can try its hand at something more ambitious, without stretching itself too far.

Grade: B-

The Netflix Files: December 12-17

Downton Abbey - Season 1 (2010) created by Julian Fellowes:Though he won an Oscar for his screenplay for Gosford Park (2001), writer Julian Fellowes clearly wasn't done exploring the upstairs/downstairs dynamic he brought so vividly to life almost 10 years ago. Opening in 1912 with the sinking of the Titanic, Downton Abbey focuses on the Crawley family and their staff. The tragedy at sea has left the family (and therefore, the property of Downton) without a male heir. The search for a husband for eldest daughter Mary (Michelle Dockery), however, is but one of any number of juicy plots, some sustained, others wrapped up in individual episodes. And even though the overwhelming majority of the action takes place inside Downton, the writing and pacing are swift, constantly bringing characters in and out of focus, so as to never become dependent on any specific plot thread to the point of detriment. Performances all around are excellent, though the most fun comes from watching Maggie Smith and Penelope Wilton take understated swipes at each other. It's all good fun, some of it verging on overwrought, but at the end of the day, it's an engaging look at the struggles of two very different levels of wealth and power in a time when those two factors meant just about everything.

Grade: B+/A-

The Netflix Files: December 5-11

White Teeth (2002) dir. Julian Jarrold:

Adapted from Zadie Smith's wonderful novel of the same name, Jarrold's 4-episode miniseries is certainly engaging, if not quite as successful as its source material in getting the point(s) across. White Teeth's main concern is the question of what it means to be British in an era of multiculturalism, and features characters who are white, black, Bengali, Christian, Muslim, etc etc. But even though the casting is generally spot-on, the screenplay fails to find a means to transmit Smith's omniscient narration and exposition to the screen, leaving the story feeling less insightful than it really is. One complaint that often arises when novels are adapted is that the adaptation is too short, and leaves too much out. The same is true here, even though each episode is roughly 50 minutes. In dividing the story among the four main male protagonists, supporting characters and subplots don't feel as fleshed out as they should in order to achieve real impact. That said, it's at least well-assembled and well-acted (Geraldine James as the intrusive Joyce Malfen - Chalfen in the novel - in particular), and Jarrold directs the whole affair nicely and with strong soundtrack choices (the "Flight of the Bumblebee" scene is perfection), although it's a far cry from what he achieved last year with the Red Riding Trilogy. My only worry about this miniseries, though, is that anyone who sees it without reading Smith's novel may not think there's much more to the story or characters, when there truly is.

Grade: B-

The Netflix Files: November 21-27

Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1958) dir. Richard Brooks:

A deserving classic if ever there was one, Richard Brooks and James Poe's excellent adaptation of Tennessee Williams' play about southern discontent is still a remarkable achievement, and a great example of how to transfer a dialogue-driven piece to the screen. The main story may be dramatic, but there are little flashes of humor (the way Maggie goes off about May's "no neck" children is priceless) that add the slightest touches of levity. Elizabeth Taylor and Paul Newman are expectedly excellent, though the show ultimately belongs to Burl Ives as Big Daddy (who somehow missed out on an Oscar nomination for the performance). Toward the end the story does feel a tad drawn out, and occasionally dialogue circles around issues too long before getting to the point, but overall, time has been kind to the film, and I suspect it will continue to be kind for many decades.

Grade: A-

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) dir. Mike Nichols:

It's no horror movie, but Mike Nichols' stellar debut has to go down as one of the scariest, most intense depictions of a failing marriage ever committed to the silver screen. Adapted from Edward Albee's play and only featuring four characters (and four Oscar-nominated performances, with two winning), Virginia Woolf is something of a bottle movie, though the emotional fireworks prevent it the settings from ever becoming constricting. The performances from Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, and George Segal are uniformly magnificent, even if the 2 plus hours of bile-spewing can get exhausting. The wild card is Sandy Dennis as Segal's young wife. It's likely a love or hate performance, and I'm inclined to lean on the hate side. The character is easily the weakest of the four, and by incapacitating her (she gets hammered pretty fast), she feels like the odd woman out. Granted, Segal and Dennis' characters are meant to be be manipulated by Taylor and Burton, but it's a shame the battle between generations ends up becoming 2 vs 1 instead of 2 vs 2. Now that would have been a match up...

Grade: A-

Brick (2005) dir. Rian Johnson:

Splice a hard-boiled noir with a high school drama, and you have Rian Johnson's debut feature. Filled with teenagers who talk in cryptic codes, it's tempting to label Brick as little more than an overblown student film. Thankfully, Johnson's execution sidesteps this label with snappy (but thoughtful) pacing, intriguing characters, and an offbeat score. Joseph Gordon-Levitt turns in a strong performance as Brendan, and watching his stoic exterior slowly (but never completely) deteriorate is a marvel, even if Johnson's direction sticks more to the surface. At times the whole thing can feel overheated (Brendan's exchanges with a conniving drama student are among the film's weakest links), even with the occasional flashes of deadpan humor, but on the whole this unique take on the mystery and noir genres is an understated ride worth taking.

Grade: B+

The Netflix Files: November 7-13

Army of Shadows (1969) dir. Jean-Pierre Melville:

Not officially released in the United States until 2006, this long-withheld gem from French master Jean-Pierre Melville is a highlight, regardless of what year you consider its true release. Documenting (from a fictionalized perspective) the director's experiences in the French resistance, the film is a long and somber look at a group of people under constant threat of sudden death. Beautifully shot and strongly acted, it possess a slightly clinical view of its characters, but don't mistake that for a lack of humanity. Melville keeps his distance to that when moments really need to hit home, they do. Rather than drown us in anguish or suffering, he raises the stakes subtly, culminating in several moments of heart-stopping (though never exploitative) emotional trauma. It's a sobering film to be sure, one that doesn't shy away from the unpleasantness of the war, or the resistance members' actions. It's also quite a brilliant one, and it deserves to be exalted after being kept in the dark for so long. The film's initial release may have been in the 60s, but not for one instant does it feel dated.

Grade: A-/A

Reservoir Dogs (1992) dir. Quentin Tarantino:

I was a little surprised when Reservoir Dogs didn't grab me right off the bat. I generally like or love Tarantino's work, and was taken aback when I wasn't sold immediately. Unfortunately, things didn't improve from there. Though it has all of the trademarks found in his subsequent works, Reservoir Dogs is lacking the sharp, darkly funny, absurd characterization that fills just about everything else he does. So despite all of the talent flooding the ensemble, there just wasn't enough to keep me fully engaged, which is surprising, considering how fond I am of Tarantino's work in general. The structure is fun, but at the end of the day, the characters never felt strong enough to make distinct marks.

Grade: B-

The Netflix Files: Oct 17-31

Only one entry for the past two weeks (it's been buuuuuuuusy), but at least it was a memorable one.

Fellini Satyricon (1969) dir. Federico Fellini:

Filled with spectacular, wild imagery, Fellini's take on the Satyricon by Petronius is an eccentric, sometimes meandering, slice of mythology. One of the director's major forays into color (along with the better-regarded Amarcord), Satyricon isn't one of the revered director's best. It might even be said that this film marked the slow start of a general decline in his work. That said, it's one hell of a way to "go out" on. The sets, more fanciful than realistic (think Titus, not Gladiator) along with the rest of the production design, are part of what carry this psychedelic venture through ancient debauchery. And, by and large, it succeeds; the style effectively fills the void for substance. So even though the central characters aren't particularly memorable (they're moved by the plot, rather than the other way around), the way Fellini tells the string of episodes is remarkable. Not that it doesn't get bogged down. As was common with some of his later films, Satyricon gets indulgent at times, to the point where it feels like it needs a handful of reels removed. Still, it's hard not to be impressed with Fellini's execution, and the way it vividly creates and image of the wildness of ancient Rome. An imperfect vision, but nonetheless a remarkable one.

Grade: B+

The Netflix Files: Oct. 10-16

Anthony Zimmer (2005) dir. Jerome Salle:

After finally shaking off my rage towards last year's The Tourist, I decided that it would be worthwhile to check out one of that film's key inspirations: the French thriller Anthony Zimmer. As it turns out, The Tourist wasn't merely inspired by Salle's film; it's pretty much a remake with a different location and slightly different characters/set-ups. It's also nothing remotely noteworthy, which I guess is somewhat tolerable, since it means that The Tourist didn't defile some great work of cinema. What Salle's film has going for it, aside from the chemistry between Yvan Attal and Sophie Marceau, is in its pacing and construction. The Tourist's Venetian setting wins in terms of glamour, but Anthony Zimmer is far and away the better-made film. Salle actually injects a sense of style to the proceedings, even though the story still suffers from the same silliness that plagued The Tourist. Additionally, the male lead is no longer a spineless wimp throughout the entire film, which adds an interesting dynamic to the central relationship. Still, it doesn't do enough to raise the film above the "disposable fun" category.

Grade: C+


The Trip (2011) dir. Michael Winterbottom:

Though billed as a comedy, Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon's reunion with Michael Winterbottom has quite a bit of melancholy running through its veins. Playing loose versions of themselves (their names are even the same), the pair play friends who, on an assignment for a magazine, travel across the English countryside surveying notable restaurants. As the two bounce off of each other on the road and at the dining table, they talk about life, their careers, and who between them can do the best Michael Caine impression (both are pretty damn good). It's not so much laugh-out-loud funny as it is amusing, but Coogan and Brydon have strong enough chemistry to carry the film through its repetitive structure...to a point. The Achilles Heel of The Trip, which features some surprisingly lovely shots of the English countryside during its transitions, is that it runs nearly 2 hours. When the film finally takes a detour from formula, and has the pair walk around some cliffs, it's easy for your mind to wander. So even though the increasingly melancholy tone of the piece is genuine, it simply takes too long to get there, draining it of some impact. The Trip is a solid, and at times extremely enjoyable and insightful film, but it's desperately in need of some trimming. As the men of Monty Python would say, "Get on with it!"

Grade: B-

The Netflix Files: September 5-11

Bronson (2008/9) dir. Nicholas Winding Refn:

Though it doesn't lack for style, I'm not really sure whether Bronson is fascinating, or merely dressed up exploitation. Starring Tom Hardy as the U.K.'s most notorious criminal, Refn's film, much like A Clockwork Orange, does not have a likable protagonist. Bronson is deranged, for reasons never really explained. Instead, we're treated to scenes of Bronson's years in and out of prison, framed with the character talking directly to the camera, and to an audience as he stands on a stage in white make-up. Refn certainly has a panache that elevates the execution above the ordinary; it's theatrical, but still grounded in gritty details. Unfortunately, Refn and Brock Norman Brock's (yes, that's really his name) screenplay is much too thin to completely sustain viewer interest, even though the film is only 1 hr 25 minutes. And as for Tom Hardy, as much as the story provides ample opportunity as an acting showcase, there's little that the actor brings to the role other than dedication. With such superficial direction and writing, Hardy can't overcome the film's shortcomings. He's certainly dynamic, and he burrows into the character's physicality quite effectively, but at the end of the day it's not enough to pick up the slack. Bronson isn't a failure, but it is a missed opportunity, devoid of entertainment value and/or character study.

Grade: The Movie: C+/Tom Hardy: B-/Style: A

The Netflix Files: August 29-September 4

The Thing (1982) dir. John Carpenter:

Horror isn't necessarily my favorite genre, if only because of the past decade's flood of 'torture porn' films. That said, when the genre is done right, I'm all for being scared witless, and that's exactly what John Carpenter with The Thing. Though actually a remake, Carpenter's version is often considered the definitive telling of the story, and after seeing the film, it's easy to see why. Carpenter's direction is wickedly atmospheric, creating a quiet sense of unease right from the beginning. He doesn't rely too much on jump scares or intrusive music (though Ennio Morricone's contributions are excellent), with the result being that even scenes that end without anything bad happening still feel tense. If there's one major gripe to be had, it's that the characters aren't necessarily that well developed. Not that this was meant to be an actor's piece, but they're all pretty interchangeable, and when someone dies, we're left strictly with a feeling of horror and panic, with little to no connection to the individual. Still, Carpenter and co. deserve credit for showing the monster in such graphic detail, while still earning genuine scares.

Grade: B+/A-

Europa Europa (1990) dir. Agnieszka Holland:

It's not every day that a horror remake ends up being superior to a World War II film, but that's what happened this week. Though it has a compelling, true story as its source, and even won the Golden Globe for Foreign Language Film, Europa Europa doesn't appear to have aged terribly well. Though the story covers an awful lot of territory, it doesn't handle the pacing of events well (the unfortunately overwrought score, by the otherwise excellent Zbigniew Preisner, doesn't help matters). The protagonist, Saloman, is constantly introduced to characters, only to have the film rip them away through death or some other means. This may have been done to emphasize the impermanence caused by war, but Holland's execution leaves a lot to be desired. The story does settle down at around the 1 hour mark, and there's a particularly chilling scene set in a shower, but by then it's too late. Even with roughly another hour left, Holland's film can't make up for the absolute hollowness of the first half, and it carries over with hugely detrimental results.

Grade: C

The Netflix Files: August 22-28

The People vs. Larry Flynt (1996) dir. Milos Forman

Milos Forman wasn't intending to generate any controversy with his portrait of Hustler founder Larry Flynt, but after initial ecstatic reviews, he found his work at the center of a debate. Was Forman's film too soft on Flynt, or did it do his story justice all while making a statement about censorship? I'm inclined to side with the latter argument, if only because I'm not sure I find Forman and Woody Harrelson's take on Flynt to be as flattering as others. He is the film's protagonist, but the film doesn't treat everything about his lifestyle as admirable (in fact, it barely portrays anything about him as admirable). And thanks to this understanding, Forman and company are able to create a film that is engaging and entertaining, without going too soft on Flynt himself. Harrelson's Flynt may be the protagonist, and his goal may be to fight against censorship, but he's far from being a hero. Bolstered by a character-driven sense of humor and strong performances from Harrelson, Edward Norton, and (of all people) Courtney Love, The People vs. Larry Flynt is yet another strong entry in the filmography of the man behind One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and Amadeus.

Grade: B+

The Passion of Anna (1969) dir. Ingmar Bergman

I'm not sure if I've ever felt such widely different opinions on the films of a director as I have with Ingmar Bergman. He's made his fair share of difficult-but-brilliant films (Persona, The Seventh Seal, Wild Strawberries), and some that I find to be too obtuse and distant for their own good (Hour of the Wolf). Unfortunately, The Passion of Anna lands in the latter camp. Though it features reliably good work from regular collaborators Max von Sydow and Liv Ullmann, nothing about this mystery-accented drama that ever grabbed me. Even the famous black and white dream sequence, easily one of the highlights, fell flat. This is, sadly, one of those films that just feels so analytical and cold that it never engaged me with its story or its characters. There is an interesting subplot involving a unknown criminal who goes around harming local farm animals, but it doesn't mesh well enough with Adreas and Anna's relationship breakdown to build to anything remotely memorable.

Grade: C+

Eyes Wide Shut (1999) dir. Stanley Kubrick

Kubrick's final film is not generally considered to be among his finest, but that's not to say that it isn't at least worth a look. Though it features some stiff acting from Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman (some of which may be attributable to the writing), it does lure you in. Kubrick's love of long, gliding shots is as prevalent as ever, and helps create the dream-like state the director appears to be going for. Then of course there's the famous (infamous?) masked orgy scene, which in its own is a mesmerizing piece of direction. The problem is that once this 35 minute portion of the film concludes, the film seems to go downhill, even though it does leave you longing for answers. It's not Kubrick's finest work (and sadly, it was his last), but like most films by the revered director, it's worth discussing, and maybe even revisiting someday.

Grade: B-

The Netflix Files: May 30-June 5

Half Nelson (2006) dir. Ryan Fleck: Ryan Gosling earned his first Oscar nomination for this low-key drug drama, and it's easy to see why. As Dan Dunne, a middle school history teacher struggling with addiction, Gosling does tremendous work, even if he occasionally crosses from brilliant over to bug-eyed. He's backed up by lovely work from Shareeka Epps as Drey, a student who befriends Dan, and a script that treats its subject matter with smarts. Writers Fleck and Anna Boder avoid the typical ups and downs of addiction drama, focusing more on how the characters interact, instead of dragging drug use to the front to beat us over the head with. Other story threads, like Drey's relationship with her mother and imprisoned brother, aren't quite rounded out so well, but the film's understated portrayal of its central duo through their personal struggles is hugely successful.

Grade: B+

Stalker (1979) dir. Andrei Tarkovsky: Solaris, Andrei Tarkovsky's other major (and widely revered) work, earned comparisons to Kubrick's 2001. Yet despite the fact that the films share settings in outer space, I'd venture that Stalker left me with similar feelings to Kubrick's masterpiece. Set in Russia, a three men (one of them a guide) venture into a mysterious area known as The Zone in order to find a room where people's dreams come true. After a frenzied opening chase/shoot-out, the film settles down and becomes increasingly mysterious, and increasingly mesmerizing. Things as simple as a walk down a tunnel become hypnotic to watch, because even though barely anything actually happens (other than walking) in Stalker, the level of mystery that the script develops is unlike anything I've ever seen. It presents explanations and "answers" that are often more confusing than the situation in question. This does mean that the film can be rather frustrating, but it's the sort of film that makes you want to find out answers, even if some things are simply meant to be left to interpretation.

Grade: A-

The Piano Teacher (2002) dir. Michael Haneke: Like a less obvious Lars von Trier, Michael Hanake often seems to enjoy exposing twisted situations, often with equally twisted results. The Piano Teacher is no exception. Isabelle Huppert stars as Erika, a strict piano teacher who starts an affair with a young student to explore her sexual fantasies, fantasies built up from years of sexual repression. Haneke's film doesn't shy away from showing us a few icky details. Still he refrains from making these moments take up the entire film. Roughly the first half (maybe more) goes by, and the affair hasn't even started. Haneke's dedication to building up this character before heavily deconstructing her only makes the film that much more unsettling. Of course, it would be inappropriate to continue on without discussing Huppert's phenomenal work as Erika. By turns icy, distant, and vulnerable, this is not a character we're supposed to like, and yet Huppert makes her every move fascinating to watch. So even though the film ends on a bit of a vague note, one that seems to lack the analytical focus of everything that came before, The Piano Teacher is still a provocative and disturbing look at one woman's path towards self-destruction.

Grade: B