Defiance

Will Leitch wrote a pretty good review of the film that I think gives a decent overview of its strengths and weaknesses. As for me I found it to be a solidly done, solidly acted, entertaining film, but really its that word 'solid' that sums up my biggest problem with the movie: given the story the makers had to work with it should have been a great film not just a good one. The true story Bielski partisans, and their efforts to fight the Nazi's while building a community of Jews in the Polish woods is an amazing one, and would be compelling as a community theatre production, let alone a major Hollywood film. That's why its so frustrating that Defiance is merely adequate and not transcendent. When watching a film based on true events it shouldbe able to stand on its own regardless of the veracity of the story. I should care about its characters and be engaged on a high level even if it were fictional. Unfortunately in this case I think if I didn't know that the story was a true one the film would have just come off as an entertaining B-movie about Jews fighting Nazi's. Like leitch points out Ed Zwick shoots it completely uncynically, which while not necessarily a bad thing, leads to some cringe inducing moments (Daniel Craig really needs to give his big speech while riding a white stallion - really?). Also I would have liked more emphasis placed on the actual workings of the community they built up and not just have it rushed through a montage sequence and some postscript at the end of the film. Its this part of the story that was the most compelling, and not the action scenes that I'm sure were emphasized at the studio's request.

Looking at what I just wrote I sound more negative than I intended. This really isn't a bad film, and I'll probably go and read the book it was based on to learn more about the actual facts of the story. I just wish that it had been great instead of merely good. At the least it's the best of the WWII films I've seen over the past month or so, and I would recommend it over Valkyrie and most definitely the Reader (about which I'm becoming more annoyed by the day by the best picture nomination).

Dexter Season 2

Going into the season finale my two thoughts were:

1) Man this show is tremendously engaging
2) I have no idea how they can keep the momentum going

Happily I can say the finale didn't do anything to effect the first opinion, and slightly mitigated the second. The entire second season dealt Dexter avoiding capture as an investigation of his murders has been ongoing, and while its been incredibly well played out and generated a lot of tension, the fact that I'm aware of the third season means that I knew our intrepid anti hero would eventually pull through. The problem is that if the show continues to place prominent emphasis on Dexter just trying to keep from getting found out its eventually going to get tired, and they're going to run out of compelling ideas to keep Dexter out of jail (unless the show really wants to take an interesting turn and have him get caught, which I doubt). In contrast, what makes a show like Breaking Bad so engaging is that they don't really dwell the idea of whether the main character is going to get caught and just revolve the show around how he deals with his illegal activities (though I will admit it is easier to make a meth producer who's trying to help his family sympathetic than it is a serial killer). Thankfully this season ended with Dexter starting to embrace what he sees as his moral code and desire to optimize his skill set, rather than just exist to avoid capture and fulfill his primal urge to kill. I'll be interested to see how they actually play out this idea. I just hope they don't turn him into some kind of demented superman (though there have always been those overtones) and maintain the ambiguity, tension, and dark sense of humor that's marked the show so far.

One Tree Hill

And the goodness continues

-Full crowd for an NBDL game which is interesting since they usually attract 2000 on a good night, but hey it is Charleston maybe there really is nothing else going on.
-The point guard playing in front of Nathan is portrayed as the most self absorbed ego driven athelete this side of Barry Bonds (33 points and 1 assist that only came from a airball that was laid back in). When he refuses to pass on the last play Nathan goes in and of course feeds the winning basket.
-The show's treatment of hollywood is almost as good as their treatment of sports. Lucas and Julian keep trying to find a director to adapt his book (including a coke snorting James Van Der Beek) and this episode finds them in a junkyard with a stereotypical indie director (golf hat, elvis costello glasses) who gives them his vision of turning the book into a gang war set in a white trash neighborhood. Apparently they'd already turned down five others for not being quite right (including a guy who made an incest movie with sock puppets - which I need to see). When the studio head gives them a 24 hour ultimatum to pick one, Van Der Beek comes back to try and convince them to give him the job and is portrayed as how somebody from nebraska views hollywood directors (sample dialogue: "You guys are thinking about Fast Food, Beer, and getting laid', 'When we're done we'll all get more ass than a toilet seat at yankee stadium'). Van Der Beek then goes and steals Lucas' speech about the film and uses it to get the job from the money guys. I hope this means we'll be seeing a healthy dose of Rules of Attraction Van Der Beek in future episodes.
-The last couple of episodes have brought back one of my favorite running features of the show - opportunistic merchandising. Last season the show runners found some myspace singer named Kate Vogle, made her a character on the show and now have her premier songs and tour dates as the character. Plus since I've been watching the show online the CW helpfully puts a link to purchase the album underneath the player. This storyline is by far the most overt example of blatant commercialization on the show but my favorite is still the episode that used the video game 'Rock Band' to try and bring Nathan and Halie back together (you think I'm kidding). Its rare to find a show that so fully embraces the merchandising properties available to it. This thing must be a cash cow.

Guilty Displeasures

Inspired by a recent Onion AV Club post (and the fact that I don't feel like working at the moment) I've decided to list some things that the general culture have decided are great art (or entertainment) that I just wasn't able to get into. In no particular order:

-There Will Be Blood - the ridiculously written pastor character killed it for me
-No Country for Old Men - 1st hour great, the rest ridiculous
-Bruce Springsteen - don't hate him, but I've just never really been that amazed either
-Any 'CSI' type show
-Dave Matthews Band
-Outkast
-2001: A Space Odyssey
-Coldplay - I really tried with these guys but I just can't see why you wouldn't just listen to Radiohead and U2 instead of an inferior ripoff
-Dr. Strangelove - to steal from the Onion list
-No Doubt - The 'Hey baby' sing still haunts my dreams
-30 Rock - Again not horrible, and I've only seen four or five episodes, but I just can't seem to get into it.
-John Feinstein
-Your Mom

Academy Award Nominations

I'm try not to get too fired up by these since within I year I usually forget who won anyways, but really?

Best Picture

"The Curious Case of Benjamin Button"
"Frost/Nixon"
"Milk"
"The Reader"
"Slumdog Millionaire"

Substitute the Wrestler for Button, Dark Knight for the Reader, and I don't know In Bruges or Man on Wire for Slumdog (which I enjoyed, but best picture? The hype levels are getting to the point where I might end up feeling negatively about a film that I enjoyed upon first viewing. Something I like to call the 'Crash' effect) and then we might have something to talk about. I haven't seen Milk yet so that means there may still be a spot for Step -Brothers on the list.

Only By the Night - Kings of leon

So here's a what I'm listening to entry, deal with it, its my blog.

Rarely in today's media environment do I find something that catches me completely by surprise. There are just to many reviews and news articles floating around that its almost impossible to run into something that you haven't heard somebody's opinion about. This is particularly true of new music for me, since there is so much of it out there I generally have to use a review or somebody's recommendation as a filter before listening to an album, and in that case my listening is already colored. This King's of Leon disk was a pleasant exception. A friend of mine gave it to me and said they really enjoyed it, but since this friend's musical taste usually runs a little poppier (and eighties) than mine, I really didn't have any kind of expectations. However after I threw the disk on the way home I was pleasantly surprised. Overall this was a very solid disk that I thoroughly enjoyed. Most importantly the album passed three of my most important tests when deciding whether or not something is worth listening to:

1) The road test: Basically this one tests whether or not I would want to throw on the disc while driving. This isn't as insignificant as you would think. Given the nature of how I live, the car (or ipod, or some other travel device) tends to be how I end up listening to music at least 90% of the time so something's travel listenability is key. This isn't a deal breaker with an alblum since much of the world music and jazz that I listen to doesn't translate well to the car (Mingus I'm looking at you), but when it comes to rock or pop it's a necessity. Since I pounded throught the entire alblum in one drive home from Monteray I would say that that it definitely met this criteria.

2) Completeness Test: Too often I end up only likeing one or two songs from a disc and the rest of it is never listed to again (Dresden Dolls I'm looking at you). Even alblums I really love often have tracks that I find disposable (as much as I hate to say it Radiohead's Kid A, an alblum I completely love, falls under this category) so if I can get through the entire tracklist without thinking about hitting skip its an accomplishment. Again this alblum passes the test completely. I'm sure there will be certain tracks that I end up listening to more than others (cold desert and Closer being the early favorites), but (other than the stupid dance remix track stuck on the end of the 'deluxe' alblum I was given) the entire thing seems equally strong to me and at no time did I feel the urge to jump a track.

3) Relistenability Test - Self explanatory, but considering I pounded through the whole thing twice on the aforementioned drive home so far so good.

Look I'm not going to make any grand claims about how this is the greatest alblum of the year because I don't know. I also think a lot of my reaction had to with the enjoyment of being taken completely by surprise for once. But I will say I think this is a solid disc and its worth checking out.

The curious case of benjamin button

Lets just get right into this

The Good:

-The film is shot beautifully, and the makeup work is superb
-the Tilda Swinton storyline is well done

The Bad:
-Benjamin Button is not really that compelling as a lead character. I never really cared what was happening to him, and he spent the whole film with the same expression on his face - sort of like a stoned Forest Gump (which makes some sense since both films had the same writer)
-At the end of the film I was left asking "What's the point?" Yes I know there was something in there about the power of undying love, and how the world is filled with all types, and I couldn't have cared less. Not a good sign.
-The script was fairly heavy handed, overly expository, and desperately needed some humor. I'm not saying that it had to be Late Night in the Apollo, but this thing was so somber and serious and look at how important I am, that by the two hour mark I was considering skipping into Yes man. Even worse the film's one attempt at a running joke (involving an old man getting struck by lightning) became tiresome an heavy handed after the, I don't know, fourth time it was told.

I have nothing else to say, Go see The Wrestler instead.

And because I'm cheap here's this

A Crime

Okay not really a media presentation but I did see someone commit a crime today. I was walking down a pretty big street on the way to lunch, when I passed a major clothing retailer that had some boxes out front filled with clothes and a sign that said '$5.' Just as I was passing the boxes a high school aged girl sprinted by me and, without breaking stride, pulled the top item off out of one of the boxes and proceeded to almost knock over three pedestrians as she sped away. Now granted this wasn't probably even a felony but a few thoughts crossed my mind while watching this act of petty larceny:

How did the thief even know what she took was going to fit? Did she come by earlier and put the item of clothing she wanted on top? Would she give it to a friend who it did fit? Would she try to return it? Would she keep doing run by's until she got the item she wanted? I need to know these things.

And obviously these weren't what we would consider high end items, was it really worth it to grab some piece of clothing that you might hate and risk (albeit a small one) getting busted? Damn kids and their rock and roll, I blame television.

The Wrestler

Darren Aronofsky has made a lovely little character piece set in the world of Professional Wrestling and Small Town Strip Clubs. And whats an independent character driven film without grown men staple gunning each other, lots of barbed wire, andMarisa Tomei playing an aging tatted up stripped? All kidding aside, Tomei and Rourke respectively give excellent performances as the aforementioned stripper (of course with a heart of gold) and professional wrestler with serious physical problems. The film does a nice job capturing the aging process and how it feels to be trapped in a world that's passed you by (tremendous use of a cliche on my part). The only part that didn't work at all for me was the storyline involving Rourke's estranged daughter. Their relationship was underdeveloped in relation to the rest of the film, and as a result the emotional swings between the two of them feel forced and are unearned. I think the entire subplot could have been cut out and the film wouldn't have suffered for it. Otherwise the film deserves all the accolades its gotten, and if you're a fan of subtle character driven pieces, featuring spandex and steroids, check it out.

On a side note this is third film in a row I've seen that featured the trailer for two lovers. Now the trailer looks unbearable, but what I really want to know is in what world do attractive single women find awkward thirty something loners who live at home with their parents irresistible? I can speak from personal experience, I mean a friend's experience, that this is not any reality that you or I know of, and these type of films just exist to make me, I mean my friend, go crazy.

Doubt

Incredibly well acted film, that will probably net Oscar nominations for both Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Meryl Streep. The film also does a nice job using their characters' relationship as a metaphor for the changes that were occurring in the catholic church (and society as a whole) during the late sixties. I also appreciated how the resolution to the main conflict (whether or not Hoffman's priest character molested a child) is left ambiguous, and forces to viewer to draw their own conclusions. My only real problem with the film is that I didn't completely buy the last scene, which unfortunately is one of the pivotal points of the narrative. This didn't do enough to keep me from recommending seeing it, but I think it did keep me from feeling the full impact of the film's message.

Since I have nothing else to say there let me just go on a brief jag about how Amy Adams may be the most likeable actress working today. She just has a certain vibe that every time I've seen her in something I've raised my interest level. This isn't like getting interested whenever you see Marissa Miller (not that Adams is unattractive) or Meryl Streep (though I find Adams to be talented, and somewhat underrated), its more of just a feeling of 'oh this could be good' I get when I see she's in something. I even found myself thinking that the film Sunshine Cleaning (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN5hSoC4-cQ) could possibly be worth watching just because she was in it. And after seeing the trailer I think we can probably agree that it won't. And while I'm at it, is there a more overrated film from the past couple of years than Little Miss Sunshine? The answer is of course yes (There Will Be Blood), but I just wanted to make the point that I didn't find Little Miss Sunshine to be that impressive. Okay I really have no point. I'm sick, leave me alone.

Frost/Nixon

Don't be fooled by what anyone tells you Frost/Nixon is at its core the ultimate sports movie. You have a plucky underdog going over his head against a superior opponent.. Imminent failure, followed by sweet redemption...and of course the flying V (I may have made that last one up). Really though I don't have much to say. All the praise you've read is warranted, the acting is superb, and the film manages to turn a set of television interviews into a tension filled two hours. Well worth checking out.

Momma Mia

Okay look, I'm on vacation at my parents, I'm sick, and Mark Kermode (whose podcast I highly recommend) said it had to be seen. After watching it I don't know that I would go so far as to say you 'have' to see it, but I can also understand why the film was so popular. I'm not even going to bother explaining the plot or characters, both are flimsy at best, and solely exist to get you from one song to another. If you like the songs (which apparently many people do), then the film delivers them in a mostly satisfactory (Except for Pierce Brosnan) manner. The film also looks good, and does have a certain manic energy to it that I could see becoming infectious. It's not what I would consider it a good film, but really how much depth did many of the so called classic musicals from the 40's and 50's have? Take this from a guy who played in the pit orchestra for several Rogers & Sondheim/Hammerstein/Hart productions - they didn't. As to recommending seeing this - its tough to say. If you like ABBA and old musicals then you'll be entertained, if you don't you'll want to slit your wrists vertically. Personally, I do respect that the film does exactly what it sets out to do (set some jaunty musical numbers to ABBA songs), and there is something perversely entertaining in watching big hollywood stars doing what is essentially drunken karaoke (Kermode's description) for 2 hours, but I really don't think I'll ever go out of my way to see it again.

One Tree Hill

Wow Our First TV Post

Maybe one day I'll go through my jag about why this is possibly the greatest show of all time, but not now. I will just say that it has transcended guilty pleasure status and truly become enjoyable. I'm not even going to bother going into plot synopsis just call out some moments that were truly tremendous.

-The last couple of episodes have burned alot of time setting up Peyton having cancer, the last episode even ended with her tearfully calling Lucas saying she had to tell him something and...of course she's pregnant.
-In my favorite utterly inexplicable storyline, Nathan has spent the last season or so begging to get another shot at the NBA, and finally after over a year (or so who knows) he's finally able to get a D- league shot. Now this was a guy who was a top ten Draft pick only a year earlier, hurt his back in a bar fight, and then rehabbed (with the help of a Magical Negro) back into shape, and you're telling me not one team would take a shot on him? Really? Jay Williams was in a horrific motorcycle accident, destroyed his knee, and still got a shot. Whereas everybody on this show acts shocked that a former division I all american who was a lock to be a first round draft pick would get another shot at the league. For some reason this is the part of the show that I find the most inexplicable (which is saying something). God I love this show.
-Since Dan has been pretty much been eliminated from the show, the writers thankfully added another one-dimensionally evil villian - the guy who shot quentin, beat up Brooke, and has now kidnapped Sam. They even gave me a shot of him leering at Sam on the floor and then unwrapping duct tape while grinning gleefully into the camera.
-Everybody on the show are bad actors, but the Mouth and Milly characters are the only ones played by really bad actors and they pretty much kill any narrative momentum (such that it is) whenever they're onscreen. Unfortunately this episode continued to linger on their increasingly psychotic relationship (again not unusual for the show) which manages just to be incredibly boring and tedious.
-This episode also featured too much of possibly the most annoying child character of all time - Jamie. And of course he once again goes off on his own, freaking out adults (seriously why they don't lojack him by this point is beyond me) but in the end there's a heartwarming scene at a graveyard and everybody forgets what an incredibly irresponsible and whiny kid he actually is.
-Of course there is the scene where Brooke realizes psycho guy is the one holding Sam and rather than waiting five minutes to get the police, she goes all Charles Bronson on him puts a gun to his head while flashing back to her beating...but once Sam calls her Mom, her heart breaks and she doesn't kill him (but she does pistol whip him) and then spits his pithy one liner back at him (you have a nice night). This really is a tremendous show.

The Reader

I'm not quite sure how I feel about this film. Everything about it is well done. The casting is generally solid (Kate Winslet, to steal a line from someone else, gives a performance that can best be described as naked), and the story moves along in a convincing manner. However after it was over my overwhelming thought was "What's the point?" The whole film is set up to make a powerful point about human guilt, absolution, and shame, but really when all was said and done the only real message I could seem to pull from it was that bad stuff happens and there's really nothing to learn from it. I'm sure I'm missing some broader point, and much of the power of the film, but I'm over it. I'm sure most people will find it moving and incredibly powerful, and they are probably right. Also I don't want this to sound like I disliked it, because I didn't. I just didn't quite absorb the impact the film was set up to deliver. I blame the mind numbing effects of rock and roll (and a lifetime of methamphetamine abuse).

Slumdog Millionaire

Before getting into the film itself here's a few reasons (if the movie is accurate) as to why the Indian version of who wants to be a millionaire destroys ours:

1) Apparently it airs completely live - you know there would be a one F-Bomb dropped, and a lot more uncomfortably awkward interaction between the contestant and Regis. Plus seeing Regis roll totally live would be tremendous.

2) On the Indian version you have to decide if you're going to take the money and leave before you see the question. None of our weak letting the contestant deliberate for 15 hours after reading the question and then walking away. This ups the tension considerably.

3) Once you miss a question you lose everything. No checkpoints where you have guaranteed money no matter what happens. No more coddling of contestants.

4) Indian Regis pretty much finds it acceptable to heckle the guests, make fun of their jobs, and generally be dismissive of their social standing if they come from a lower caste. Really it's like if Don Rickles hosted the show, but better since in India you can make fun of someone because of where they were born and everybody is cool with it (on the other hand that's kind of like how we treat people from the south).

5) And by far the best reason is that if Indian Regis thinks you don't have the background to be doing as well as you are, he has no problem having the police throw a burlap sack over your head, smack you around, apply electro shock, and Abu Gharib you for 24 hours until you confess to cheating. I think I can safely say that if Jeopardy did this it would be the greatest thing in the history of the world.

As for the movie itself, somebody lent me an academy screener (I know I'm so connected, bow to me you insignificant people) and my brother and I watched it on his 13 inch flat screen, therefore it iss possible I missed some of the visual splendor. The film basically follows a kid from the slums as he plays the aforementioned game show on his way to the grand prize of 20 million rupees. I will say that I made the, 'oh so now he's won about $57' joke at least sixteen times throughout the course of the film and it never stopped being funny. Yes I am older then 13.

Anyway, as our protagonist goes through the game the film flashes back to points in his life showing how he had a unique life experience coincidentally related to each question, allowing him to know all the answers, even though he's basically an uneducated slum kid. Really that's it (there's also a love story) and either you buy the central conceit or you don't. The film is really more magical realism than a realistic depiction of poverty (though it definitely has those elements), and if you don't get on board with that the whole thing will be unbearable. Thankfully the Director, Danny Boyle, sprinkles in enough grit, humor, and really just some crazy scenes (including someone who holes up in a bathtub filled with cash for a shootout), to keep the film from being unbearably cute and pretentious. Though the film feels a little choppy at times, and was overly broad at others, in general I cared about the characters, and was engaged throughout. As long as you're not too thrown by its fantastical underpinnings, the film worth checking out.

Valkyrie

I'm going to describe this film with a phrase I read in another review - exceedingly competent. Everything is done satisfactorily, the film kept my interest for two hours (which isn't an insignificant accomplishment considering you know the ending going in - Spoiler Alert they don't kill Hitler), and nothing in it particularly annoyed me. The filmmakers picked an interesting story to follow, and in general it was fairly well cast (yes even Mr Scientology was fine). However I didn't leave the film with a particular desire to see it again so do with that what you will.
If you do see this film and want to see some other WWII assassination movies I recommend The Dirty Dozen: The next mission. This gets around the whole pesky constraint about not being able to actually have Hitler Killed, by having the protagonists kill some other much more threatening Nazi instead. However if you want to get some WWII entertainment that doesn't feel the need to be constrained by what actually happened than read Phillip Dick's The Man in The High Castle. The book takes place in an alternate reality where the Axis won the War, and all I will say is this is one of the few pieces of fiction that completely blew my mind. I walked around for a good ten minutes afterward trying to figure out what I'd just read. Seriously you have no idea what you're getting into. I don't know if this is a recommendation or not, but check it out. Especially if you enjoy Acid trips.