Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow
September 14, 2004; AMC Fenway #12 (Advance Screening)
* * * * (out of 4)

A word of caution before stepping into that theater: do not expect anything. Leave any modern cynicism at the door, because there’s no room for it here. Once the film starts to roll, you will be emerged in the richest, most fantastic fantasy world to be created in a long time, and there’s no point in half-assing it; if you want to enjoy this movie, enjoy it with all of your being. It’ll deliver that much fun, if not a little more.

Sprung from the formidable imagination of first-time filmmaker Kerry Conran, Sky Captain is in all aspects unlike anything I can recall. In writing this, I tried to make comparisons, but nothing fit. Conran crafts a completely unique world, drawing on film noir, a nostalgic view of the 1930s, and comics to give the film a consistent feel from the beginning. His style requires the actors to work doubly hard, since every scene in the movie had some CG effect in it, requiring a massive amount of green screen work. And even though this style is definitely going to be one that viewers will completely love or completely hate, even those who hate it need to hang around and watch the movie. Everyone knows pretty pictures can’t sell a movie on their own.

The film follows Chronicle reporter Polly Perkins (Gwyneth Paltrow), a woman who will do anything and everything to get her story, on the trail of scientists who keep disappearing. When giant robots attack New York and seem somehow to be connected to the kidnappings, Polly attaches herself to old flame Joe Sullivan (Jude Law), a.k.a. “Sky Captain,” to guarantee herself the exclusive. Sky Captain brings with him Dex (Giovanni Ribisi), his trusted mechanic, and enlists the aid of Frankie Cook (Angelina Jolie), another very capable woman from his past. When Dex gets kidnapped in a second attack on New York, Sky Captain and Polly set out on a trek across the globe to find his friend and get the scoop on the missing scientists… and maybe save the world from certain doom on the way.

If all this sounds black and white, good vs. evil… it is. And it’s done almost flawlessly. Law plays Sky Captain as the all-around American hero – not a superhero who needs extraordinary circumstances to aid his climb, but an everyday guy who worked hard and worked towards his goal. Paltrow discovers that as good a career as she’s had, she would have made a killing had she been born at the turn of the century, and been able to play this character her entire career. Polly Perkins in the role she was meant to play. The supporting cast is just as strong, never surpassing the couple who are designated the leads, but adding just the right amount to show that these are the people Sky Captain is fighting for, and as loyal to and protective of them as he is, they are just as devoted to the hero as well.

Sky Captain is also a kids movie in disguise. This is a solid PG, and the kind of swashbuckling adventure that had long since died when I was growing up. The movie ditches any token American cynicism, and looks at the world with a wonder and awe that only children are usually allowed to possess. This is on that level, but that by no means implies that it’s low; if anything, the execution is more sophisticated than most action movies because of the approach. Despite the villains and evil robots, it focuses on the magnificence of the world, the wonders that have been created. There’s no room for negativity in that image.

I pray this movie takes off. Any movie that gets an audience cheering and applauding in the middle (don’t worry – you’ll know the scene when you see it) deserves a huge run and following. Sky Captain is about having fun at the movies again, from the beautiful, fantastical style to the pure heroism of the good vs. evil battle. It resurrects something that’s been missing from the cinema for quite awhile, and if your attitude is open, nothing should stop this movie from putting a smile on your face, no matter who you are.

Overnight (Boston Film Festival)
Monday, September 14; Loews Boston Common #3
* * * ¾ (out of 4)

If by any stroke of luck, you ever hit it big in any facet of the entertainment industry, watch this movie to learn precisely what not to do. There were many times in this movie I sat dumbfounded by the complete lack of professionalism, common courtesy, or simple common sense exhibited by Troy Duffy. It’s a hard pill to swallow, assuming that anyone could be this diluted, but the evidence presented by filmmakers Mark Brian Smith and Tony Montana is very consistent, and pretty much speaks for itself.

The documentary follows the rise and plummet of Troy Duffy, who several years ago was being lauded as the next big thing in Hollywood. The Boston bartender wrote a script called The Boondock Saints, which caught the eye of Miramax bigwig Harvey Weinstein. Duffy embarked on a dream journey, landing a deal that saw his script sold, and placed him not only in the film’s directing chair, but also producing and performing the soundtrack with his band. Overnight was originally contracted to tell Duffy’s rags-to-riches story in all its sparkling glory, but as the film began to fall apart, Duffy did as well, and supplied the filmmakers with some much more interesting material, necessarily changing the direction of their film.

Some of the footage is unbelievable. Duffy’s outbursts are obscene, rude, ungrateful, self-serving, and disgusting. Instead of being the ultimate rise to fame that everyone wanted and expected, Duffy becomes the poster child for inflated egotists, launching his abuse at everyone around him, including everyone who made his success possible, from Weinstein himself to Duffy’s own younger brother. The film shows a frightening progression in Duffy as his inner circle gets tighter and tighter, until he has burned every bridge possible, and stands alone to take the majority of the heat.

There’s no doubt the film is biased, but it seems like it would be hard to show anything else. Mark Brian Smith was on hand after the film to answer questions, and according to him, the footage used was not only typical of Duffy, but the filmmakers “could have used much worse.” Smith and Montana joined Duffy’s circle a while before the deal for Saints was struck with Miramax, and got to know Duffy & Co. very well. Smith said after the showing that the personality Duffy exudes in the film was not something that came with fame, but something that was enhanced by fame. The film succeeds in showing that Hollywood’s next wonder-boy, albeit an excellent writer, was not prepared to play the game, and refused to keep his ego in check at the most vital times.

To the filmmakers’ knowledge, Duffy has issued only one response to the film, allegedly calling it two hours of bullshit. His lack of resistance only lends credibility to the portrayal in the film. Smith and Montana take a hefty risk in showing a story whose main character really has no redeeming qualities – even his ambition is so overdriven that it is angering. Braver still is their decision to tell as much of the story as they can, and truthfully; they too were taken by the allure of show business power, and they admit to it fully in the film. Overnight is an exemplary look at a promising situation gone terribly, terribly wrong, and sets an example everyone could follow by showing the example no one should.

Before Sunrise
Sunday, September 13; Matt’s Dorm Room
* * * ¼ (out of 4)

This is a movie that suffered because it was viewed out of sequence. I saw Before Sunset a few weeks back, adored it, and very much wanted to see where everything started from. Unfortunately, I went in expecting the same type of film, with the same style. Sunrise and Sunset are two very different movies, and while that’s not at all a bad thing, in the end I enjoyed the second film more than the first. Whether I would say that had I seen the two in order, I can’t say.

Jesse (Ethan Hawke) and Celine (Julie Delpy) meet on a train headed for a stop in Vienna. Shortly before arriving, the young American writer and the beautiful Parisian artist begin talking on the train, discussing politics, their own lives, anything and everything that came to mind. Jesse will be catching a flight out of Vienna in the morning, and invites Celine to join him for the evening exploring city and continuing their conversation, which they both realize is uncovering an incredible connection. She agrees, and they spend one night together as wandering tourists, eventually confronting their feelings for each other.

In ways, this is a ‘standard’ love story, but other aspects make it very special. Yes, these are two people placed together by circumstances that most of us will never experience – much of the world is far too self-involved to start a random conversation on a train – but what deserves attention is that these two people follow through in a way that very few would even dare. Something that works through the entire movie starts at the very beginning, and that’s the chemistry and attraction between Hawke and Delpy. There’s no question that these two people see something very special in each other, and that they are willing to explore that with no promise of resolution (due to the planned parting of ways in the morning) makes their connection much more endearing. The two play off each other beautifully… every awkward moment is awkward but playful, every silence carries weight for a variety of reasons. There’s tension and passion very well balanced in the air between them at all times.

But it looks like a standard romance. As in Sunset, director Richard Linklater shoots his setting beautifully, letting the audience experience Vienna just as his characters do, but beyond that this feels like it could be any number of romantic comedies. The sequel had a feel to it that kept the focus almost entirely on the characters as people, not as a couple. That notion isn’t as prevalent here. Necessary, since this movie had to actually establish the two as a couple, but it is certainly something I missed. Along with that, the script was more of a straightforward romance, without the philosophic and political discussions Linklater wove into the later piece, which made the characters much more interesting as we got to see where they conflicted with each other.

Again, nothing is by any means wrong with any of this. What’s here is a beautiful, touching love story about a one-in-a-million meeting that few people will ever have the opportunity for, and which fewer still will take. Hawke and Delpy create a magnificent couple, and set up a story I would look forward to hearing about again and again as time passes.

Back to Massachusetts!

So my triumphant return to Boston and Northeastern University has come, and with it a return to much more adequate screen coverage and movie variety. Hollywood has quite a bit to offer this semester, as does the Brattle theater in Harvard Square, and the Boston Film Festival kicks off in a few days, though the site's lack of a schedule is a little discouraging. So it ought to be a busy 4th quarter of 2004, and I'll try to keep this as current as I can, working around schoolwork and HOPEFULLY a job.

Keep reading!

De-Lovely
Wednesday, September 1, 2004; Patriot Cinemas Nickelodeon (Portland, ME)
* * 1/2

I’m kind of glad the movie musical resurgence hasn’t been complete and overwhelming. There are a lot of bad musicals out there that I fear would be fodder for a lot of bad movies, and lord knows the studios couldn’t stand to leave them untouched if it looked like they’d make the money. It’s something that must be done correctly, trying to maintain the spectacle of the Broadway musical, but taking advantage of the different offerings of the film media. De-Lovely accomplishes that, but unfortunately falls short in some places because parts of this movie are either distracting, or simply not entertaining.

It tells the story of Cole Porter (Kevin Kline) as he looks back on his, which plays out in the form of a stage musical. Jonathan Pryce plays Gabe, some representation of Porter’s subconscious that guides him through his own story. In addition to examining the incredible career and talent that was Porter, the story concentrates on the complex and confusing relationship he had with his wife and muse, Linda Lee Porter (Ashley Judd). Porter wanted to experience life and love in all it’s forms, and no matter how pure and true his love for Linda was, someone living that lifestyle is sure to run into conflict with their partner.

Porter’s life is presented in a straightforward-enough fashion; it’s chronological, with one or two inaccuracies. The first being that Linda Lee is younger that Cole Porter, a fact that was reversed from real life. This may be by casting necessity, since it would be quite a feat to make Kevin Kline look younger than Ashley Judd, but it’s still one of those intimate details of Porter’s life I wish they would stick to. There are some scenes that are presented in a very unflattering way; it felt like Porter’s scenes with his male lovers were presented as Porter’s dark secret, the thing that was ruining his marriage, and since this movie focused on the love story, I suppose that’s true. But his homosexual urges were a part of who Cole Porter was; he wanted to experience every possible type of love and companionship, and in his eyes his male lovers were completely separate and uninvolved in his married life. It doesn’t seem fair or truthful to his life story to present these events in a negative life.

There were some technical issues that bugged me as well. First off, Kevin Kline is just too old to play Porter in some of the scenes, especially early on. Some of the makeup jobs were angering. At times, the latex on Ashley Judd’s face was plainly visible, and at others the makeup was strikingly effective. It was also poor casting to put Kevin Kline, who can sing very well, in the only role in this movie who is supposed to sing badly.

The movie certainly does a good job of showing the ease with which Porter drew on his genius and talent, and the tension that must have existed between he and his wife. Unfortunately, the time in between is less than captivating (not sure how much of that is Porter’s true life, or how much is subpar writing), and some technical elements kept this film well below where it could have been.

Garden State
Sunday, August 29; Regal Falmouth #3
* * * * (out of 4)

Let’s not fool around. I loved everything about this movie. It just felt right all around. I have no hesitations in saying that Zach Braff has completely aced his first foray into writing and directing, not to mention propelling himself far beyond “Scrubs.” He gathers the perfect cast, makes all his dialogue fit, sets a perfect picture, and balances all the issues almost perfectly. All this combined puts Garden State in stiff competition with Spider-Man 2 and Kill Bill, Vol. 2 for my favorite movie of the year.

After more than ten years, Andrew Largeman (Braff) returns home to New Jersey for his mother’s funeral. Quickly we learn that “Large” is a very troubled man, consistently medicated since the age of 10. He has found moderate success as a television actor, but between his prescriptions and his introverted nature he’s lost touch with any form of emotional attachment. While he’s home, he must try to reconnect with his father (Ian Holm), with whom he’s barely spoken in that decade, try to catch up with friends, and try to recover some semblance of himself. A chance meeting at the doctor’s office with Sam (Natalie Portman) will turn this somber trip home into something much more hopeful.

The love story is the backbone of the movie, but in the first half hour before Portman is introduced, Braff gives us a perfect idea of how lost this guy is. He and his father have nothing to talk about; he holds no interest in the less-than-legal recreations his high-school friends still enjoy; and he shows such disgust at the pharmacy in his medicine cabinet that he embarks on his trip home with none of his prescribed medication. It’s obvious by the way he reacts to anyone that Large is so numb, he can hardly walk without getting in his own way. The way Braff develops this character is perfect. The progression from beginning to end is perfectly natural at every step, and it’s very obvious what – or who – is catalyzing these changes.

The romance is so perfectly built that it really doesn’t matter that it happens over the course of four days. Sam and Large find in each other a type of person the other has never met before, which is precisely what they each need. Portman’s Sam is that type of crazy that anyone can admire – so unconcerned with what the rest of the world thinks of her, but sensitive to the world nonetheless. She pulls Large through a change so remarkable that there’s really no question why he adores her, and her attraction is equally obvious when you consider the type of reaction she probably usually gets from guys who get at all involved in her life.

Technically, the movie feels perfect. Braff’s biggest credit is the dialogue. It sounds exactly right. There’s not anything that feels exaggerated or forced, with credit going to his cast as well. The settings are ideal; a party at a friend’s house actually reminded me instantly of the house of a friend of mine. Braff shoots the whole movie as close to realism as he can; I think I counted one computer effect, and it was only in a transition – an effective one, at that.

Whether you’ve ever felt lost, abandoned, alone, or outnumbered, there is someone here with whom everyone can connect. The love story is beautifully told. It’s the ideal story of that one person who had such a profound effect on your life over such a short amount of time, á la Before Sunrise and Before Sunset. The couple is charming, his friends are perfectly placed, and Sir Ian Holm as his father gives just the right combination of shame and fatherly affection. Zach Braff has proven himself a jack of all trades on his very first attempt, and I personally hope Garden State is the first of many great films. This is a rare, rare gem.

Read more about Garden State straight from the creator: Zach Braff's Garden State Blog.

Without A Paddle
Thursday, August 6; Regal Falmouth #2
* * ¾ (out of 4)

There’s a formula for a joke. There’s a set-up… and a punchline. Really, it’s not a complicated formula, and it’s one that can be messed around with for a vast array of effects, some of which are funny. Eliminating the set-up is not a good experiment to try. Punchline upon punchline is not only hard to pull off, but in a movie, it drops the audience behind, abandoning any kind of sense when going for the chuckle. Without a Paddle tries to do this too often and for too long.

The story involves four childhood friends with big aspirations. After high school, all four goes off to find their futures. Ten years later, they are reunited when Billy (Antony Starr) dies on one of his adventures. Reminiscing in their hometown, suffocating executive Jerry (Matthew Lillard) and all-around slacker Tom (Dax Shepard) decide to resurrect a childhood fantasy – a canoing/camping trip that would lead them to the lost fortune stolen by D.B. Cooper, something Billy always dreamed of. Mousy doctor Dan (Seth Green) is very reluctant, but naturally, the other two talk him into it (otherwise, we’d have no movie). So off they go on a trip through the wilderness, three guys with varying skills, personalities, and insecurities… you get the idea.

Problem number one is that there’s really nothing new here. This is a buddy movie. It doesn’t really stray from that idea, as the three take turns helping each other, reassuring each other, and ragging on each other. The plus side of this is that Shepard, Lillard, and Green definitely look like they’re all having a good time. There’s a definite best-friend chemistry, especially when the larger two are picking on Green. There’s a great ongoing joke about his character being a massive Star Wars geek – funny because it’s true for Green. In fact, none of the guys really seem to be stretching that much, mostly because it’s just not required. Not that I expected it going in, but it still would have been interesting to see the roles mismatched a little bit, just to see what might happen.

The jokes are where this movie falters, though. Somehow, every ridiculous crazy in the world seems to be positioned on this river at the exact moment the three guys decide to go. It leads to a string of events so far-fetched and disconnected from one another that the movie just stops making sense. Things just get dropped in your lap while someone shouts, “ISN’T THAT FUNNY?” and then they move onto the next. When they finally returned to the D.B. Cooper plot, I had pretty much forgotten it existed.

There’s funny stuff, but somehow it all gets lost in the confused mess of a plot. The three leads do have a good time, and they’re all likable sorts; it just seemed like the catchphrase of the movie during writing was, “as if things couldn’t get any weirder.” There’s nothing that really ties it together, but you’ll walk out feeling good about your friendships, if nothing else.