Tag Archives: Movies

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

January 13, 2024

Posted under

Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment

Mean Girls (2024)

The film Mean Girls came out 20 years ago and was a big success. It has become a touchstone for that generation and continues to be a film many look back on fondly. A Broadway musical was made from the film and has apparently done well enough over the years to justify a film version, which is what we got this month.

Before this week I think I may have seen the original film twice. Once when it came out and once when it was released on home video almost 20 years ago. I revisited the movie the night before last, in anticipation of the new film. It continued to be very entertaining and maybe the high point of Lindsay Lohan’s career in front of the camera. It wasn’t too much longer after this that Lohan seemed to go off the rails and have difficulty in her life and her film choices went severely downhill. Still the movie is warmly remembered, but it’s not that old, so the question then becomes is a new version really necessary? The one thing that the new production has going for it are the songs that are being transferred from the Broadway show. If they were not a part of the film then I would say that this whole Enterprise was superfluous. However the songs are here and they make the movie entertaining enough and distinct enough to give it a mild recommendation.

I don’t want to say anything negative about the young lady who takes on the role that Lindsay Lohan had. She sings quite well and her performance is sturdy. Angourie Rice was in “The Nice Guy” a few years ago and she was great, but when comparing the two Mean Girls ,films which was easy for me to do having seen them back to back on subsequent nights, it’s clear that Lindsay Lohan had some kind of charisma that made her much more effective on screen. It’s not so much that she was a better actress, it’s that her personality and her facial expressions feel more in tune with the material. The current film suffers a little bit because of this lead role. The strongest performance in the film comes from the actress  Reneé Rapp,who plays Regina George, the queen bee of the Mean Girls. She has a terrific voice and sells the songs that she’s doing very effectively. In the last part of the film she also successfully transitions from a villainous character to a more sympathetic comic one. When looking at the film, I think it will be judged by each of the musical sequences that make up the 90 minutes of the movie. Regina George has two of the best numbers, and as a consequence Cady, fades into the background a little bit more than she should.

The director of the film has made several cinematic choices that work pretty well in bringing the Broadway play to the big screen. There are for example, several points where we get a selfie shot video from the phones of the stars of the film. That justifies a little bit more of the musical sequences. I never felt however that there was a knockout sequence in any of the musical numbers. There are some effective lyrics, and some funny moments, but the choreography seems relatively tame for a film that is spoofing High School and is spoofing the high school spoof that it is based on. “Anna and the Apocalypse”, a film that probably had 1/10 of the budget, was much more creative and integrated the student body into the big numbers, making it feel like the film really was a musical come to life. In this film the musical sequences seem staged and occasionally perfunctory rather than essential to the tone of the film.

Most of the new film follows very closely the structure of the original. Most of the lines are repeated and there’s not really an essential need for updating the dialogue, with a couple of exceptions. The story of Cady being a transplant from Africa, is largely extraneous to the events that happened in the film, unlike in the first film where her unfamiliarity with the culture explains some of the things that her character does. In this film the African background merely allows for some of the musical sequences to play around with animal motifs and references to more primitive social structures. It’s all well and good and definitely some fun, but it misses the point that was being made in the original film.

Some minor changes have been made to the characters in the film. The most noticeable one may be that there is now a romantic relationship between the teacher played by Tina Fey and the principal played by Tim Meadows. That was missing from the earlier film, and it allows for some slightly different humor than some of the things that took place 20 years ago. Although I’m not sure that the humor was more fun.

As I said the only thing that really justifies this film are the songs, and they are acceptable but not particularly strong. If the sequences where the songs were being presented were more elaborate, perhaps along the lines of the “Barbie” movie, then I might find this film to be more successful. As it is, it is entertaining enough and if I run across the movie in a few years I will probably stop down and watch for a while, but it doesn’t feel like I will be putting this film in myself to watch on a regular basis. And that to me is one of the ways that you can mark a really good film.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

January 8, 2024

Posted under

Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment

The Lord of the Rings Trilogy

I’m starting off 2024 with a challenging proposition, seeing all three of The Lord of the Rings films in one setting. I’ve done it before, in fact twice. But as I get older it does seem to be a little bit more of a challenge to both stay awake and not have my ass hurt at the end of the day. This is going to be a lot of fun regardless of whether I fall asleep or have a sore butt tomorrow.

These films are impressive regardless of the atmosphere that you watch them in, but when they’re presented on the big screen they do take on a special quality. And nowadays it’s most likely that you will see the extended Editions which is indeed what this was. Whenever people ask me which of the three films is my favorite I do answer, but I want to remind people that it’s really just one film broken into three parts. I have a special affinity for the first of the films “The Fellowship of the Ring”. I like the setup in Hobbiton, I like the brief references to Bilbo’s backstory, and I like the introduction of Gandalf as if he is just a traveling performer that the locals both love and fear. Of course the New Zealand surroundings make all of us wish that we could live in the Shire. It is a truly beautiful composition that includes Hobbit holes, quaint Pony Corrals, and a lively Inn where Rosie Cotton serves the drinks.

The Fellowship also has my favorite sequence in the films, the journey through Moria. Gandalf’s confrontation with the Balrog is one of the iconic moments in all of the films, and I love seeing it played out on the big screen in all of its Glory. I’ve written about all three of these films in the past, so I’m not going to cover them again in great detail, or note where changes to the stories are  made in bringing them to the screen. The performances continue to be outstanding, and each time I see Sean Astin’s version of Samwise Gamgee I am impressed and wonder how it is that he was not given some sort of award for his performance.

One of the things that I noticed in the special editions is that the title caption comes up in a different spot than in the original theatrical versions, and with Fellowship, I really do think that the original theatrical caption of the main title was Superior. That however may be the only thing that is superior because all of the additions and changes that are made in the special edition really do seem to strengthen the storytelling and build character more effectively. Like most fans of the original books I do miss having Tom Bombadil in the story, but I can completely understand why that would have been a complication that made the movie less efficient.

So many people like “The Two Towers” as their favorite of the films, including my own daughter. I do think that “The Two Towers” is a very good film, and it introduces my favorite character in the stories, King Theoden. Bernard Hill is the embodiment of the character I always saw in my head when I read the books as a kid. The transformation from the possessed version of the king to the restored Theoden is a very solid piece of CGI Magic that works to convince us that evil is in fact in control in Rohan. I also like that Eowyn is depicted both as a Fearless Warrior who must hide her participation in battles, but also as an incompetent cook whose food is not really edible. The films do have small pieces of humor like that which make the movies even more ingratiating. “The Two Towers” is also the film where the character of Gollum appears in his more complete form, and Andy Serkis delivers a great CGI enhanced performance, sometimes against other actors, but in very effective scenes, against himself.

The spectacular combat that dominates “The Return of the King”, is of course deserving of the accolades that it received at the time of its release. It still holds up on screen as one of the most elaborate uses of visual technology, integrated with actors performances. Just as in Fellowship, “Return of the King” has a great moment when Eowyn confronts the witch King and reveals that she is no man. The extended Editions also contain the creepy sequence where the Mouth of Sauron appears on screen and delivers a bone chilling threat to our heroes. In trying to induce a moment of despair, it is Aragorn’s optimism and refusal to accept that Frodo is dead that is the Turning of the tide. Of course the speech that Aragorn gives men of the West is also a moment that will raise the hair on the back of your neck and make you glad that you were watching this movie one more time.

We came well prepared for the event, with sandwiches and scones, which would have to substitute for lembus bread, and we also had clotted cream, butter and jam to add to the scones. We tossed in a piece of chocolate, and we had a blanket that we could lay under if we got tired. It was a long day and I did take a break at one point to come home and feed the dogs, while Amanda stayed in the theater. There were intermissions between the features but they were not clearly marked as to how long they would be. For the third film we went ahead and got our usual popcorn and soda to finish off the day, because after all, we were in that theater for 13 hours watching the three films, and we deserved some movie treats. I don’t know if I will ever be able to do the trilogy again on the big screen, but I do know if I get the chance I might be willing to attempt it, these films are that good.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

December 28, 2023

Posted under

Uncategorized

Comments

1 Comment

The Boys in the Boat

Everybody loves an Underdog Story. When they happen to be true it makes them even more compelling. George Clooney has directed a film that takes the underdog motif and uses the 1936 Olympics as a way to engage the audience in a rooting interest. The rowing team at the University of Washington was a consistent loser to the University of California team for 20 years, but the coach at Washington found eight men who could pull together and overcome their tradition of losing to become winners. The story however does not stop with a success against a local rival. There is also the little guy against the entrenched forces, the rich and well-off against the poor and struggling, and eventually Western democracy against Nazi totalitarianism.

Clooney seems to have an affinity for historical settings, three of his best have fallen into that category. I think the film “Monuments Men” is his best work, but that’s not to undermine “Good Night and Good Luck “ which was another piece set after WWII. He also did a quite good job with a football film set in the early days of the NFL. So it appears that the Depression era United States is a palette  that he feels comfortable painting from. The visualizations of the era are authentic, in fact it is a little disconcerting that the shanty town at the beginning of the film is labeled Seattle, but the year 1936 could easily be replaced with 2023. The idea that widespread homelessness accounted for much of the trauma of the 1930s is a little depressing when we look at contemporary times. Maybe we’ll get lucky and some extraordinary story will grow out of these times. For now we have the story of the 1936 Washington Huskies eight-man crew.

Actor Joel Edgerton is nominally the lead, but he is supported by several actors that you will probably not recognize. The story does require that the rowers work as a team and that may be one of the reasons that there is not an individual story for everyone. For the most part we get entry into these events through the experience of a single man who is struggling to work his way through college and takes up rowing simply to be able to earn a living and pay for school. I’m not sure if the NCAA existed in this time era, but it sure looks like some of the boosters would be violating what used to be the rules of College athletics, at least before NIL.

The real main character is Joe Rantz, who is trying to get through college after having been abandoned by his family at age 14. There are others on the team who have gone through similar struggles but the focus here is really on the athletic event and the hard work that it takes for a team to truly become excellent. So except for a love story and a brief callback to the past, even Rantz’s story is limited to the team. 

Edgerton as the coach is relentless in finding ways for the team to mesh. As entertainment a movie like this can’t really be an instructional film on how the sport of rowing works, but we get enough detail and we see a few examples that let us know how each person’s behavior and skill contributes to the team effort. In addition we get a little bit of personal story about the coach and his struggles to keep the team going in the face of limited success and budget shortfalls, and Joe Rantz  and his romantic relationship with a coed at the University. Neither of these side paths takes up much time, which is a good thing because we have at least three major competitions that provide plenty of drama.

Obviously the team manages to be successful so they can end up in Germany for the 1936 Olympics. So the outcome of some of those contests is a foregone conclusion, but director Clooney, like most people who make these films, has found a way to make those kinds of foregone conclusions entertaining and suspenseful. It helps that we got some details about how the crew develops a strategy and in particular how this group, who are actually the JV team at the University, managed to be a force to be reckoned with. I assume that it is relatively accurate when it comes to the way this event was covered by the media. I know that in contemporary times you’re not going to get 100,000 people showing up for a crew race between college teams. But in 1936 the world was a different place, Sports occupied a preeminent place in the culture because there were limited entertainment alternatives, and because it was radio friendly. Maybe the radio friendly thing is the thing that draws Clooney to a story like this.

I’m not familiar enough with the story to say if all of the drama that takes place at the Olympics was in fact historically accurate, but I can say it felt authentic. The showdown at the Olympics is the major set piece of the movie, and it requires some elaborate production design, multiple teams representing different countries to be portrayed on screen, and a special guest appearance by Adolf Hitler himself.

As inspiring as it is to see other nations challenging the Third Reich on the field of sports, the emotional high point for me came earlier when the team had to find a way to finance their way to the Olympics. After having struggled to qualify it seems that only Elite schools would be able to go because they had the financial resources to do so. The University of Washington team had to find what would be a substantial sum of money in order to make the trip. It is in this section of the film that real sportsmanship is demonstrated by somebody who has only been a very tangential part of the story, and in fact would be classified as an antagonist. At least until that moment when we all choke up at the gesture that is made by someone who understands what sports is supposed to be about.

It was a little curious that the actress Hadley Robinson who appears as the romantic interest in this film, was in the film we saw last night “Anyone But You”. Congratulations to her for having two films that open in the same week. That is fairly unusual and is usually an indication that an actress is on the cusp of a breakthrough. The Romantic subplot is not overdone, but it does help give us something to focus on other than the grinding preparation of the boat and team.

I found the movie quite fulfilling, it touched me in an emotional way at a couple of points, and I learned a lot more about the eight man crew and the sport of rowing than I ever expected to know. Although the events occurred nearly a hundred years ago, I think the story still resonates because we all love underdogs, we admire sports, and in our heart we want the good guys to win.