Film Review--Elegy

Elegy
directed by Isabel Coixet
written by Nicholas Meyer
based on the novel by Philip Roth
starring Dennis Hopper, Penelope Cruz, Ben Kingsley, Patricia Clarkson, Peter Sarsgaard, Deborah Harry



Based on Philip Roth’s novel “The Dying Animal”, this film explores both the allure and cruelty of beauty. A man with pretensions regarding Self-determination has his emotional life torn asunder by a much younger woman.

David Kepesh (Kingsley) figures he knows himself fairly well. He’s a successful critic and professor who possesses a certain magnetism that many young strumpets are hot for in their in their own special way. He’s got a rule where he won’t go after one of them until after they receive their report card. To this end he pursues Consuela Castillo (Cruz) at a party he throws for his students. He wows her with his knowledge about Goya and quickly thereafter he’s got her into bed. He’s also sleeping with a woman named Carolyn (Clarkson) with whom he shares a unadorned purely sexual tryst every three weeks. It’s simply, to the point, and entirely without any emotional connection. But too his horror he finds himself drawn into the life and world of Consuela. It torments him to be so happy so he goes about his way to sabotage it.

The film focuses mostly on the relationship between David and his two women. In many ways it is more of a film about the myriad levels of female beauty. There is a line from David’s friend George (Hopper) who says that “beautiful women are invisible. “We are so busy [looking] at what’s on the outside that we never get inside.” David seems to have a problem getting past the superficial level of mere beauty. He says he worships Consuela’s breasts and that he can’t stop looking at her face. Subsequently we don’t get much of a clue what kind of art truly moves Consuela or what she thinks about anything at all. She’s a cipher because this is how David sees her. We aren’t given much of an opportunity to get to know her and it proves to be frustrating having to live so much inside David’s head.

David’s seeming inability to allow himself to fully connect with Consuela’s entire being comes through when he fails to show up at the graduation party her parents are holding for her. He lies to her by telling her his car has broken down on the George Washington Bridge. She breaks off the relationship at that point by not calling him. David has a difficult time adjusting to the loss of Consuela and just as he’s starting slowly to adjust to her absence a tragedy befalls him throwing him headlong into a quagmire that he never quite lifts himself out of by film’s end. Yet another bit of terrible news accosts him leaving him reeling from the shock and entirely unsure of what he can do to offer his assistance.

The relationship between David and Carolyn is a basic, easy, unromantic sexual exercise with no strings attached. Carolyn does seem to be a bit territorial and doesn’t exactly want David to be sleeping around which seems odd considering the nature of their arrangement. They don’t really speak about anything, they don’t do much of anything together, and they merely lay about having sex until she leaves and that’s that. Clearly David wants something beyond it and this triggers his interest in Consuela. Consuela is presented at something of a siren who steals men’s souls with her eyes and posture. She dresses early on like a paralegal or a naughty school girl. As David mentions she has a “formal austerity” about her and this is certainly so. Penelope Cruz’s body is cherished by the camera in this film. Her form is lovingly photographed as are her eyes and lips and hair. Indeed, every aspect of her body becomes a fetish item to sear the imaginations of the audience members who most likely sit transfixed over the exquisite nature of the apprehension. Cruz projects both innocence and worldliness in the many shots that focus exclusively on her. She knows things clearly that David is not able to extract from her. She’s got more of a sense of herself than he will admit; she is not merely a girl he is able to sleep with because she is awed by his talent and his position in academia. There is so much more to her fascination with him and he is too bumbling and stubborn to fully appreciate it although they do stay together for about a year which tells more about his ability to perpetually fawn over her than any thing else.

The relationship between David and George is essential to the overall integrity of the film. George is a Pulitzer Prize winning poet who grounds David and keeps him focused. He understands that his friend has been suckered by Consuela’s physical body and is able to offer him advice on how to deal with the tenacity of his connection to her. He listens to David in a way that nobody else will. He knows his faults and everything that he tries to hide from the women in his life. He cannot be fooled and David greatly appreciates this quality about him and their friendship flourishes because it is built upon such simple premises.

Once Consuela becomes frustrated enough the relationship ends. David cannot quite bring himself to be seen as “the boyfriend” to her parents. Their judgement of the obvious age difference between them seems to hold him back from fully giving of himself to her. It’s part of his inability to truly see into her because he, perhaps unconsciously, wants to remain outside merely observing her without getting caught up with being an actual part of her life on the inside. David begins the film well-regulated, organized, and structured. He’s put his life into an easily accessible order and there is nothing out of place. Then he allows himself to give into his basic lust for the girl and everything takes on a stranger, more complicating hue. She literally changes his chemistry and forces him to see his world more openly and he initially reacts by following her to a club where she is dancing with another man presumed to be her brother. The sight of this man sends shockwaves through David and his jealousy is brought to the fore.

David is a man who knows quite a lot about literature, music and art. He has cultivated a fairly well rounded appreciation of the finer aspects of the artistic process and it has succored him over the course of his life. He realizes and teaches that beauty relies on the psychological state of the observer. Ironically he is not as able to see this necessity in himself until it floods over him and he is left confused, strait jacketed and in a state of what he perceives to be acute loss. Consuela represents to him a connection to the beauty he feels so desperate to fully embrace but that beauty proves to be entirely elusive. He is left in a blind attempt to possess her because that is the manner in which he has always approached the beautiful things he has always coveted. David says that Consuela is a work of art and this resonates when later in the film a young woman explains that art cannot be possessed because it is eternal. David has struggled to let go of art his entire life and Consuela is just another object that he cannot explicitly abandon to itself.

This film plays like an exquisitely rendered tone poem to the niceties and horrors inherent in what is perceived to be beautiful. Consuela is presented as a form of physical beauty that beguiles and terrifies. David can only penetrate her through the act of making love but he fails to fully break through into the realm where her thoughts and passions lie. He certainly makes inroads and learns enough to satisfy him by the end of the relationship but his reach is limited by his perceptions. He is awed and transfixed and does realize his limitations have held him back from fully allowing himself to become intertwined with the essence of Consuela.


The flesh is projected with a sacredness and a thing to be valued explicitly for itself without the barrier of harsh observation denigrating it into ruin. All the images of Consuela’s body prove to enhance the overall urgency with which the film explores the nature of the physical body as an object simply to be observed. Yet it is impossible not to “read” a body without tarnishing it with our own delusions and preconceptions. This film seems to be attempting to get at questions of what beauty is without these falsifiers. David “sees” Consuela’s body as something he can appreciate on a purely aesthetic level. She does indeed become a work of art to him because he has taught himself how to appreciate the contours and angles of her body. For him she is beautiful because he has aligned his view of her with all of the structural fantasies and nightmares through which he confronts objects that attract him. Perhaps she is not beautiful at all in herself but rather her entire form coalesces with everything terrible and enticing that David has ever encountered over the course of his life.

The performances in this film all work exceedingly well within the context of the film. Ben Kingsley captures the direct, ordered persona of his character. David possesses a forthrightness and an immediacy that is a product of his rationalism. Kingsley plays his character poetically and with a tremendous amount of charm. David seems to be eternally looking for something significant out in a drift and is always frustrated by his inability to locate it. He is a student of beauty as it is found in women and art but he has grave difficulties seeing straight into the heart of Consuela where secrets and dangerous truths lie. Penelope Cruz has a firelight in her eyes throughout this film. Part of the reason we never learn anything about Consuela is because Cruz is forever diverting our attention as her beguiling eyes look askance. Cruz captures her character’s intense introspection without giving anything significant away. Patricia Clarkson gives her character Carolyn an aching quality in this film that is tinged with both personal satisfaction and a bit of despair. Clarkson expertly provides us with a terribly complicated woman who is just begging to be seen. Dennis Hopper’s character has a jubilant disregard for everything that does not effectively fit into his scheme. He’s direct without being overly aggressive. Hopper gives the audience a forceful presence who is nevertheless nuanced and critically observant. Peter Sarsgaard has a brief role in this film but in the short time he is on screen, he captures both his character’s confusions and his capacities. Kevin, David’s son, is a self-possessed man who is struggling with accepting the fact that his father ran out on him when he was a boy. The fractured nature of their relationship is handled with great observational skill and grace.

Overall, this film explores the many aspects of beauty and how difficult it is to fully accept our limitations in appreciating it for what it truly is. We often see it through the blinders of our own paltry experiences and expectations without daring to look any further. David is a talented man who finds himself in a fit after finally having the opportunity to take Consuela to bed. She proves to be much more than he dared expect and this results in something of a chaos for him that is painful and exacting. Ultimately this film says quite a lot about how beauty of form, style, etc. remains elusive until we are willing and able to effectively apprehend it. This is not a film strictly about a young girl awakening an older man into himself. It’s much more complex than that as David is confronted with all the horrible aspects of beauty that affect the impact it has on him. They terrify him mostly because they are so unexpected and he is used to merely skimming off of the surface. Consuela forces him into a position where he is no longer in control. He finds himself unsure of his special place in the world, unable to firmly grasp hold of anything, forever twisting and tormented by the potentialities that lie withing the body and mind of this most dangerous creature with claws and fangs.

Film Review--Blindness

Blindness
directed by Fernando Meirelles
written by Don McKellar
based on the novel by Jose Saramago
starring Mark Ruffalo, Julianna Moore, Danny Glover, Gael Garcia Bernal, Alice Braga, Don McKellar, Yusuke Iseya, Yoshina Kumura,

A sudden epidemic of blindness transforms clean and orderly neighborhoods into slums and its populations into scavengers. A group of the newly blind have all been forced into a government sanctioned quarantine and are forced to work together in order to survive.

Blindness overtakes an undisclosed number of persons in what appears to be the United States of America. It isn’t clear if this is a world wide phenomenon only that it has taken hold in a particular region. The infected include a Japanese couple (Iseya and Kumura), a Doctor (Ruffalo), the man who helped the Japanese man and then promptly stole his car (McKellar), a man with an eye patch (Glover), a woman who sleeps with men for money (Braga) and a self-willed man who causes a great uproar in the camp by declaring himself King (Bernal). Also present is the wife of the doctor (Moore) who is not quite like the others in that she alone can still see. They are all sent into a quarantine camp where they are forced to live together in order to survive.

The film deals mostly with the small societies that are created within the camp. There are three wards and initially they are able to ration food, keep themselves relatively clean, and look after each other. The landscape of the entire film is filthy, ugly and degenerate. Eventually, one man rises to the top, a natural leader who senses an opportunity, and proclaims himself King. He creates draconian laws that his henchman help enforce. It’s a clear example of any social situation among animals and humans. There is always one person or creature who either comes into power or who retains ambitions to do just that. In this case, the law comes down in the form of a gun. It alone dictates what is done and by whom. The gun is the great equalizer although nobody can surely say how many bullets go along with it. It’s a symbol of strength and order and it changes things dramatically.

In this environment there are moments of discreet pleasure where strangers take some solace in each other’s flesh. It isn’t explicit only a girl comments about already giving herself to a boy; regardless, these acts haunt the mood of the picture and provide it with a sense of decrepitude and desperation. It’s just about the only thing this lot can truly employ to remind themselves that they are indeed still human. Guards are ever present and shoot anyone who dares to come too far out into the courtyard. Again, it’s a world where the gun commands all into obedience and cruelly eliminates anyone who dares to challenge the very simple rule. One never quite understands why these people are being subjected to this kind of treatment. After all, others are allowed to stumble about outside on the streets of what used to be downtown but now resembles the most damaged sort of slum. The kiddies are left to fend for themselves and they truly appear to be fated to commit hideous acts for the same reasons the adults commit them. Blindness is anonymity and anything can happen without it being betrayed by the tyranny of sight.

The idea that sight is but one of the senses is exploited gamely in this film. The characters all adapt to their predicament after a period of conditioning and don’t appear to be particularly worse for wear. There isn’t quite enough of the psychological battle in this film as perhaps the characters adapt too easily to their strange new world. Regardless, the point is that they do adapt and the key figures in this film do not succumb to those base urges that scream survival at all costs. Perhaps this suggests that societal inculcation cannot so easily be replaced by the carnal will in some people. Yet, the scenes in the camp barracks suggest that rigid socialization creates a universe paralyzed by fear and aggression and that crime, brutality, and deprivation are necessary components that always make their presence felt after a while. This film seems to suggest that all social structure require leaders who can deftly influence others and guide them in a direction in which they ought to go. The Doctor’s wife takes on a tremendous responsibility in that she alone can see what no one else in the barracks can. Her role is to use the old way of being to organize the new-fangled through experience, patience, and knowledge.

The burden begins to overwhelm the Doctor’s wife and she begins to show slight cracks in her armour. The pressure is immense and she is overcome with emotion that is deeply troubling to her. It’s her loneliness, her isolation, as well as her sense of guilt that churn away at her and leave her feeling distant and not wholly capable of pushing on. She recovers as one would expect and begins anew her push to ensure that things remain as tranquil as possible. Her level of distress is key to understanding the nature of this film. She proves that it is truly impossible for one single person to govern without adequate support. She is alone and her disconnect comes simply from something that is so routinely taken for granted by those who retain the faculty of sight. She gradually comes to the conclusion through her gestures and demonstrations that she is not entirely alone and that the relationships she is forging are natural and entirely real. She is not a freak among the land of the sight impaired. She is not an outcast who can’t connect to the others. This realization allows her to understand her role more accurately and she launches into it with more grit and determination.

The film betrays slightly the idea that self-preservation wins out when the chips are down and real danger threatens the lives of those placed in the predicament. In this film, the overarching tendency is toward helping others as a sort of declaration of the Golden Rule. The main group that we follow for the majority of the film all share the same basic needs and they manage to unite in a way that is both democratic and fair. But they are but one group and perhaps become subject to the grand will of one man and his ability to convince others to establish his rule. The King is not demonized although he is the closest thing this film has to a villain. He is merely a man who is clinging to his identity and who finds or already possesses the one thing that nobody else possesses. Perhaps it is the gun alone that convinced him of his right to rule. Perhaps he already possessed this will before employing the weapon. Regardless, he alone dared to take the mantle and declare himself King. Once established in that role, he became naturally motivated by the fruits of power and success. He simply desired jewels and women.

The performances in this film are all uniformly excellent. Mark Ruffalo plays his character as an upstanding man who legitimately wants to do everything he can to help others. He’s the moral center of this film and Ruffalo never lets the audience forget this essential fact. Julianna Moore runs through the gamut of emotions in this film. Fear, rage, confusion, joy all work together to create a complex, driven character who is alienated and forced to lead in a world sorely devoid of anyone who can take charge. Moore is deeply sympathetic and most of this plays out on her face. She also conveys a determination and a strong desire to ensure the safety and wellbeing of others. Gael Garcia Bernal shows a fearsome, contained side as soon as his character brings forth the gun. He wields the weapon with authority and his character’s position of authority is clearly defined. Bernal lets slip little moments of vulnerability that come through mostly in his gestures and posture. The character is merely a man who got a simple idea and decided to run with it. Alice Braga’s character is a woman of many talents. Mostly she is a strong force that truly determines to be good. She is also a woman who enjoys sleeping with men for money or whatever she can gain from the transaction. One gets the impression that she is attempting to purge herself of her indiscretions but finds it increasingly difficult to abstain once she’s locked in a world where nobody can read her face.

Film Review--Igor

Igor
directed by Anthony Leondis
written by Chris McKenna
starring John Cusack, Eddie Izzard, John Cleese, Molly Shannon, Steve Buscemi, Sean Hayes, Jennifer Coolidge, Jay Leno, Christian Slater, Arsenio Hall

The untold truth beckons and fawns. A social order is created to exclude joy and tyranny of sunshine. A misshapen freak to the perfect order is born and bound for essential servitude without the merest potentiality of grinding out of his sorry, prefabricated state of lowest existence. Then one is born who questions the order and reacts to his surroundings with dreaded curiosity and perceives the world as if he too were one of those elevated beings who naturally lords over those beneath. In this world, one of the forgotten is called Igor just like all the rest. Only he has learned to see far beyond the limits of his condition and into realms of beauty, capacity, longingness that remain obscure to all the others.

Igor (Cusack) is the slave of Dr. Glickenstein (Cleese), one of the many “Evil Geniuses” who are competing in the only competition that matters in a tiny burg called Malaria. This used to be a lovely place where everyone lived happy little lives and the weather was always temp perfect. Then, a mysterious cloud formation came in and never left, leaving the town gloomy to the core and all its inhabitants broke, desperate, and miserable. From the ashes rose the great leader King Malbert (Leno) who originated the idea for the competition where the “evil” inventions fight to the death to determine who is the most evil one of all. The idea of evil, or evil itself is a theme that runs throughout this film. It informs many scenes although it’s essentially aesthetic.

Dr. Glickenstein dies while attempting to create a rocket ship leaving Igor with the chance he has always dreamed of. So, he goes to work on his big project, in which, like Dr. Frankenstein, he creates life. The result is a giant womanish creature named Eva (Shannon), large in stature and coquettish in demeanor. The only problem is she’s not evil enough. Her evil bone didn’t kick in and Igor tries desperately to make her evil but only manages to turn her into an inspiring actress. From there we have the major aspects of the plot.

The film is computer animated and does manage to create a world that seems worth taking a peek into. The characters all work within the context of the film mainly because the voice work is all up to par. The basic themes in this film are universal and have been explored with more depth and precision elsewhere. The pacing suffers occasionally and the entire production suffers an unseemly stamp of not being particularly special. It feels quite often like a second or even third tier animated film and not something that is ever going to make much of a social impact. Still, the story is solid and it’s impossible not to root for the twisted little imp. Cusack does a fine job getting us to believe in Igor’s majestic plight for greatness.

Everyone can relate to that one massive idea that won’t let us be until we make our best effort to actualize it. Couple that with a paralyzing socio-political landscape and you have the recipe for massive amounts of frustration. We never get an indication of how consumed by this state Igor was because he’s just such a dopey believer from start to finish. He goes about his business for his boss (“pull the switch”) with at least enough conviction not to draw considerable attention to himself. But he is not someone who lets a bit of social pariah-hood stand in his way of satisfying the edicts of his one big idea. With the help of a rabbit named Scamper (Buscemi) that Igor has brought back to life and rendered immortal and a life support robot named Brain (Hayes) that he’s jacked up with a human brain–Igor strives to make the best living thing he possibly can. His work pays off in a big way.

Eva is every prima donna actress who considers everywhere she is at to be a stage. She’s coy, flirtatious, and dreamy. She’s always giddy about the prospects of performing and just can’t seem to think of much else. Her entire brain has become saturated in all things theatrical and reacts to her environment as if it were giving her cues for her lines or where she is supposed to stand on stage.

This is a film about a hated leader who rises out of disaster from obscurity to take control of a once proud nation. How he did it and what is motivations are become revealed in the final act and it’s pretty ingenious to discover the meat behind his motivations. The key thing is to remember that his control over the town is absolute as the film begins. He’s not particularly heinous despite his devotion to all things evil. He clearly enjoys the stage as much as Eva and has great theatrics in mind regarding his own impressive scheme. His art reaches people where they live and is much more effective than anything one can find in a museum or at a theater. Plus it is relentless and nobody can remember when it didn’t exist and it certainly creates a particular mood.

One of the attempts of humor that is persistent is Scamper the rabbit’s multi attempts to kill himself over the course of the film until he inexplicably decides he wants to live. I suppose this is cute for the tots who really ought to be studying cartoon on new ways to end it all but it isn’t funny the first time and grates every time after that. Indeed, there really isn’t anything humorous in this film despite several attempts to say something cute in hopes that people might latch onto it and turn it into one of those dreadful catchphrases that can drag a dead film a few extra miles down the road. Still, there are moments of vitality which lift the film above the solely pedestrian. When Eva is wrecked and hell bent on mass destruction her eyes have a certain hypnotic power to them. The relationship between Dr. Schadenfreude (Izzard) and his little vixen Jaclyn (Coolidge) who ostensibly can transform herself into dozens of women including a terrifying pancake flipper named Heidi is strangely perverse. He can make her, turn her out, and make it with the next one and never have to get tired of the same old thing. Jaclyn is his major dish and she has a feisty bondage babe essence about her which would ensure that she would spin him around when he wasn’t obsessively trying to steal someone else’s entry into the competition.

The engine that drives this thing is of course the idea that all the little guy needs is some space to move and he too can become one of the anointed. It’s the dream of every would be entrepreneur who has been long harboring ideas that they firmly believe have the potential to revolutionize the market place and the way people live. Igor required fate to step in to rescue him from the monotony of his predictable life. A great and terrible thing had to happen for him to finally appear ready on life’s stage able to make things happen for himself. Igor carries with him from the beginning the ability to do something that no other scientist in his world has ever managed to do. He creates a living, breathing and thinking being capable of the widest range of human emotions (perhaps many more we have hardly tapped into) which means that when he too becomes evil he can create an entire race of superbeings who will take over the entire town and enslave the population. At least that’s how I hope it will all turn out.

The performances in this film are all quite excellent. John Cusack gives Igor a fascinating combination of idealism and humility. Igor is also something of a visionary because he sees beyond the simple sense appeal of total evil and into some sort of place where it doesn’t necessarily take hold of the population so crucially. Molly Shannon establishes Eva’s lilting, passionate yearning for something vast and grand. Out of scraps, a truly unique spirit springs forth demanding an essential shift in perception. Eddie Izzard provides just enough demonic fervor to his character without taking him too far over the top. The mad doctor is possessed of a desire for greatness that Izzard exploits with various tics and mannerisms. Steve Buscemi creates a character scorched and corn fed that is believable throughout. Jennifer Coolidge pulls double duty and manages to create two distinct characters of pulsating, feminine charm.

Overall, this film doesn’t quite maintain its energy level throughout. At some point it starts to fizzle out and subsequent sequences lack any necessity they might otherwise have enjoyed. It’s an enjoyable film that certainly has all the right parts in place but the final product is underwhelming. There aren’t any moments of sheer absurdity or even anything that is particularly off-kilter or exciting. It’s merely a cute computer animated feature with little or no qualities that allow it to stand out from the pack. It’s mostly fluff and quite forgettable in the end. The characters are well formulated and the voice work is impressive enough to carry it to a certain point but once that point is cross it just becomes apparent that there isn’t much else here to keep this film afloat.

Film Review--Traitor

Traitor
directed by Jeffrey Nachmanoff
written by Steve Martin and Jeffrey Nachmanoff
starring Don Cheadle, Guy Pearce, Jeff Daniels, Said Taghmaoui, Neal McDonough, Archie Panjabi, Raad Rawi



It’s interesting to consider if films like this one give native would-be terrorists any concrete ideas. If not in a practical sense, then at least hypothetical. This film offers a tense, occasionally hyper real investigation into the mental landscape of those who would, in the name of Allah or without, seek to cause irrevocable damage to the structures and citizens of their adopted homelands.

Samir Horn (Cheadle) is a Sudanese-American, a devout Muslim who quotes the Koran, prays continuously and carries himself with a quiet grace. He’s also a weapon’s supplier and a bomb maker who is the target of a U.S. counterintelligence query because he seems to pop up all over their radar. He is considered a person of interest and is offered an opportunity to walk by FBI agent Roy Clayton (Pearce) in a Yemen prison if he would only cough up a few names. Instead he decides to stay in order to demonstrate his loyalty to a strict cause that he has sworn to ally himself with. He has become associated with a man named Omar (Taghmaoui) before his incarceration and he realizes the necessity of retaining his ties to the man. He continues to plot with a small band of men who have grand plans for upsetting business as usual at a variety of locations.

Horn is a man of honor. Even while we watch him gather up materials for a bombing in Nice, France, we are still amazed by his temerity and his calm. There is something else to this character which he is, for the most part, hiding considerably well. That something proves to turn the story on its head when we discover that Horn is working with the U.S. Government as a secret agent. He is in direct contact with a higher Federal employee, Carter (Daniels). Only the FBI doesn’t know and much of the film conveys the intricate relationship between the FBI and their prey. Indeed, the bureau is portrayed as a genuinely upstanding organization with a clearly defined directive that is aimed directly at affecting the worldwide surge of terrorism. Regardless of their intent, though, there is an infiltrator in their midst who routinely rattles off restricted information to his contacts. There are actually two sides to the FBI that are represented here. Clayton is a thoughtful man who studied religion and got his Masters in the Arabic language. His partner, Max Archer (McDonough) is more of the old school of using intimidation, aggression and perhaps torture to get the subjects to squeal.

This film portrays a secretive world on US shores where Arab immigrants move about with ease amongst the population. It shows how a well-structured group could do to sear their images in the minds of great swaths of the population. It’s a harrowing thought and this film brings home the reality of this potentiality with much more realism than any other film of this ilk. There is one moment in particular where it all comes to a boil and it’s shocking and relentlessly terrifying in its depiction. It raises a simple question regarding how many have to be sacrificed in order to save the whole lot. Is there an acceptable amount of collateral damage if one is marching forth to end the larger war? Pakistan and Afghanistan resonate all throughout this film only it brings the terrorists out of hiding and places them on the largest stage on earth.

The ideological backing comes from the respectable and noteworthy Nathir (Rawi) whose great plan is to unleash an almost poetically orchestrated single moment of extreme terror upon the U.S. He claims that the purpose of these actions is not the destruction of lives or property. No, he says that they are designed to strictly gain a reaction out of those in a position to make decisions and those who are not. In other words, they send a message to every American who Nathir also holds responsible for what he claims are the crimes of the U.S. government. In this context he is the most frightening agent of distress imaginable. He hides behind his sheen of incorruptibility and social standing meanwhile holding decisive anti-American sentiments he is willing to put into direct action. He has been fully integrated into American cultural life while maintaining his ties to those who would love to see this country burnt to the ground. Yes, he’s dangerous and this film does not dilute his corruptive message to all of lousy Americans who apparently are decadents who have pissed off those who prefer to think of the Koran as a weapon of war.

This is not a film that offers safe, pat psychological solutions. It is impossible, for example, to truly consider the “enemies” of this films to be evil in any sense of the world. We see them as devoted Muslims who are behaving in a manner that they feel is sanctioned by God. Rarely has such a truly religious atmosphere been portrayed in a major American film. As much as the characters are devoted, the film is equally so to unveiling the mystery surrounding the absolute allegiance to the purity of the word of God. Throughout the film, one does not forget the severity of the connection between specific acts of mayhem and the worship of Allah. It hasn’t been this spelled out before. It has been addressed but the end result is not a deification as it is in this film. Every frame in this film gives praise without succumbing to the tendency to legitimize the actions of these criminals. Still, it’s ambiguous early on as to who the criminals are and by extension, their deeds. Again, actions must be taken and innocent people will most certainly die. That is the nature of this prolonged, desperate game.

The realities that are suggested in this film are certainly more harrowing than they’ve been in recent films. But this film does more than merely suggest. It manages to live up to the promises it forges during the various maneuvers that make up the latter third of the film. They are terrible promises but they pay off in some twisted fashion leaving the viewer sickened yet strangely satisfied. It wasn’t merely a ghost ship passing in the night.

The performances in this film are uniformly excellent. Don Cheadle projects a grave unease throughout this film as his character struggles to gain foothold on the semblance of an identity. Cheadle brings a uniformity to his character that is fighting to contain the agonies that plague him. It’s Horn’s devotion to God that mitigates the struggles he faces and allows him to proceed. It doesn’t seem clear at the time but it’s most likely that Cheadle sells his character’s true identity in the early scenes when he is working within the terrorist cell. Guy Pearce is perfectly cast as an FBI man who craves deeply to learn everything he can about the nature of this beast.. Clayton is everything the FBI needs to be. He’s learned the language, and understands there are other ways than physical intimidation to get information. Pearce is solid and grounded in this role and he never lets the audience forget who he represents in the film. Said Taghmaoui is believable as a sensitive young man who has devoted his existence to a specific, divisive cause. Omar is a true believer who firmly believes in the legitimacy of his actions. He honestly wants to give God all the glory for anything he might accomplish. Jeff Daniels plays the cool Fed with great ease. His character clearly is a man on the inside who knows a great many things they tell us we’re not ready to know.

Overall, this picture has a clear message about the nature of terrorism and it’s relationship to the devoted worship of Allah. It also deals with a profound conflict that continues to persist and consume the minds and bodies of our most able citizens. The conflict is real in this film and it comes off as much more than a masturbatory cinematic exercise. It does not glorify the behaviors of those who act vigilantly to make their most egregious and heartbreaking mark on the world. It also does not offer pat, simple solutions to the dilemma but merely adds a number of nuanced voices to the dialog. These characters are complex, multi-faceted human beings who resonate long after the film has burned to a close. They speak to tragedy, to struggle, and to the never-ending quest to get to the bottom of this most aching torment.

Film Review--Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired

Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired
directed by Marina Zenovich

This documentary by Marina Zenovich traces that singular moment in 1977 when 44 year old Roman Polanski convinced thirteen year old Samantha Gailey to perform a variety of sex acts with/to him at Jack Nicholson’s house. The film documents the trial and travails of Polanski as he tries to live down this one act of supreme misguidedness.

The film documents the rise of Polanski from show-stopper Polish lad to internationally renowned film maker. The title comes from a comment made in the film stating that Polanski is desired in Europe and wanted in America. Indeed, he has taken refuge in a place to avoid spending any more time in a correctional facility where he was incarcerated for 43 days. If he were to return to America he would face the remainder of his 90 sentence. It seems odd that anyone could get off so lightly for engaging in illegal acts with a minor (his sole charge) but such was his lawyer’s ability to convince the judge to allow Polanski to plead guilty to one charge while avoiding the others which included rape and sodomy.

For her part, Samantha Gailey (now Geimer) tells her story with grace and dignity. According to the film her mother had agreed to let her go out with the much older man so she could take part in a photo shoot. During the second shoot at Nicholson’s house Polanski got a bit too carried away and seduced the young lass and they ended up having sex. There is no suggestion that this girl who had previously engaged in sexual behavior tried to lure Polanski into the sack. Samantha said no three times but was unable to resist this charming man who was known to be irresistible by Mia Farrow among others. So, he did the deed and then the mother chimed in and before too long Polanski was arrested and brought before a judge.

The case is marred from the beginning. The judge is starstruck and arranges his cases to drain the most air time possible out of the local television networks. He wants to put on a show for reporters and the public at large. He seems less interested in seeing justice through than getting his name in the paper (he keeps a giant scrapbook containing all articles that mention his name). There is a real sense that Polanski got off easy perhaps based on his celebrity. A lesser man would have faced all six charges and would have been strung up for many years. According to Samantha Geimer, she was raped and drugged and forced to do things against her will. She succumbed due to frustration and some warped sense of not wanting to contradict this exceedingly famous man.

The best part of the film are the moments between Polanski and his wife, the ill-fated Sharon Tate. It’s heartbreaking to apprehend all of the images of Sharon looking as devastatingly beautiful as anyone dares remember. There is a legitimate indication that Polanski was at the top of his game during this period, madly in love, and nearly destroyed by the events that took Sharon’s life. The photographs where he has broken down are particularly poignant as they display an impetus that would fuel his later work.

One gets a pretty fair impression of this complicated man mostly through scenes of his films replete with soundtrack music. He is portrayed as a man of leisure who enjoyed nothing more than being out on the town with his friends and admirers. At least until Manson’s clan got to Sharon and things took on a different hue. At the heart of this film is Polanski’s universally lauded talent for making complicated films that deeply affect people. His genius is explored while his one of his more glaring foibles is writ large on a screen for all to see. It must be strange to view something so intimate about oneself, particularly a documentary that uncovers dirt you had hoped you were able to previously sweep under the rug. But no amount of housecleaning will ever sever the link between Roman Polanski and his thirteen year old would-be consort. The question remains (although it is mostly irrelevant), did he know at the time that he was breaking the law?

Yeah, yeah. He knew. He knew and he still went after it and hell, it was probably worth it. He didn’t serve much time and he still has the memories. She forgave him a few years back and so there is a warm, glowing feeling all around. Polanski can stay in Europe where we can’t touch him and she clearly has put all this behind her. She’s smart, clearheaded, and able to see a much broader picture than that single night when she gave it up to one of the most necessary and vital film makers of the modern era. This is a film of celebration. Samantha Gailey can celebrate her strength and ability to persevere through a difficult time many years ago. The film makers celebrate Polanski without throwing the onus on him for his singular indiscretion. They merely lay it all out and lets the audience decide what to make of it. It’s hard to thoroughly demonize a Roman Polanski. It’s difficult to make him into a monster for the desire for young white girl flesh that he acted on thirty years ago. His work guarantees that he remains first and foremost an artist who has captivated the hearts and minds of millions of people worldwide. As the film wisely expresses, a man cannot be judged by an inglorious act he committed thirty years ago. That’s absurd. It’s like Bill Ayers forever being tied to the planned attacks he helped originate in the Weather Underground.

Overall, this is an even-handed portrait of a complex and somewhat elusive contributor to the artistic temperament of the age. It isn’t shocking or underhanded, it gives Polanski an opportunity through his work to communicate to the audience though he doesn’t defend himself against his past behavior. This isn’t about his guilt or shame. He admits freely to having sexual intercourse with Samantha Gailey. Still, he managed to sneak away without suffering the full brunt of his punishment which proved to prevent but a slight inconvenience. His one (or perhaps it was more than one, the film didn’t specify) interlude of impropriety means nothing at the end of the day. It once possessed significant power over the minds of citizens across the globe but now it’s merely a cheap moment in an otherwise stellar life. It’s an interesting investigation into how a moment’s pleasure can turn into a firestorm that resonates many years beyond the completion of the deed.

Film Review--Miracle at St. Anna

Miracle at St. Anna
directed by Spike Lee
written by James McBride
based on the book by James McBride
starring Derek Luke, Michael Ealy, Laz Alonso, Omar Benson Miller, Pierfrancesco Favino, Valentina Cervi, Matteo Sciabordi, John Turturro, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, D.B. Sweeney, John Leguizamo

Inspiring, exquisitely constructed and just a bit too long this film captures a poorly-covered aspect of military history. It opens with a terrible deed committed at a post office. A kid reporter named Tim Boyle (Gordon-Levitt) is put on the case after the head of a statue is found in the apartment of the man who did the crime. The film explains from that point how he came to be in possession of it. It’s part of a bridge that the Nazi’s blew up and has been eagerly sought ever since. An all black squadron is fighting on Italian soil while the lovely, lilting voice of Axis Sally (Alexandra Maria Lara) rings out telling these men that if they surrendered they would have it easy in Germany. She goes on to say that the white men back home are most likely raping their women and daughters. The four main soldiers that the film follows are 2nd Staff Sergeant Aubrey Stamps (Luke)--aggressive, intense and focused–; Sergeant Bishop Cummings (Ealy)–sex-drunk, passionate, and a bit unfocused--; Corporal Hector Negron (Alonzo)–sturdy, exacting and in calm–; and Private First Class Sam Train (Miller)–mammoth, hyper religious, and superstitious. Train rescues a young boy named Angelo (Sciabordi) after a bombing and the pair quickly become inseparable. The soldiers soon find themselves in an Italian village where they hole up with Nazi’s surrounding them.

This film captures a piece of history that may or may not be altogether historically accurate. It’s clear that Spike Lee has an agenda in this film which is to show the inherent racism in the political system. Freely, insulting words fall from the lips of officers who consider the operation with the black soldiers to be an “experiment”. It is also to show the heroism with which the black militants fought and died. It’s as if to prove that the blacks that were left out of Clint Eastwood’s films did indeed exist and deserve recognition for their bravery. So, once it is established that the blacks fought with valor the film starts to meander slightly. It takes too long to get where it needs to go and there are scenes that do nothing to enhance the necessity of the plot. Still, at its core this is a strong investigation into a brave new world that deeply impacted the success of the war.

The Nazi’s in this film lack the style and grace of many cinematic versions. They are portrayed mainly as beasts who must be destroyed at all costs. There are a few here and there who demonstrate human values such as kindness and honor but these are cinematically singled out as exceptions to the overall rule. There is a pivotal scene involving one of these Nazis near the end that proves to be decisive to bringing the war sequences to a close. The battle scenes are electric and energetic and it truly feel as if one were in the middle of the fracas. They are frenetic and volatile, consumed with rage and fear.

There is a scene where before deployment the unit is attempting to buy something to drink at a malt shop in Virginia. Unfortunately, the owner is one of those stereotypical ardent racists who clearly expresses his desire for his shop to remain white’s only. It’s supposed to come off as a terrible scene of deep sorrow and white guilt but the racist is so over-the-top he has no direct impact whatsoever. This isn’t to suggest that there weren’t many white folks who shared his sentiments–there were tens of millions–but that the scene is so pedestrian and typical and the man so painfully obtuse. Perhaps it has something to do with the simple fact that it’s no longer possible to accept this kind of attitude even in films that portray that specific era. We have seen it all before and it has become mere satire at this point. It’s supposed to be an example of racism in America during the war along the lines of “look how terrible it was...our heroes weren’t even allowed to walk into a malt shop.” Of course Spike Lee cannot let it stand at that. He has his soldiers come back later with guns so that the shop owner quakes politely in his boots and sheepishly fills their order. It’s a clear vengeance tactic that Lee uses to exploit the clearly defined racial lines that were primary in America around that time. We get it clearly what Lee wants us to believe about this unfortunate chapter in our history but it comes across as funny. Whatever impact he wanted it to have on us white folks is lost due to the ubiquitousness of the image.

The relationship between Train and Angelo drives the film forward. It is awkward because they don’t speak the same language although they do learn how to communicate through a series of taps. It is quite lovely to see a soldier who Angelo dubs “the chocolate giant” so deliberately focus his attention on the well being of a child. In many people’s minds the term would be considered horrifically racist but out of the mouth of an Italian child who has no experience with black people, it comes off as endearing, if not sweet. Angelo is a child whose life has been ripped apart by the war and he breaks down when asked about his parents. He has a direct relationship with the mystical world and he sees things that nobody else can see. He is thought to have magical powers that allow him to fix transmission radios, for example. He and Train bond so decisively because Train is very much like a child himself. He is also a staunch Christian who believes in the word of God.

Religious belief is strongly represented in this film as there are several occasions when God is propositioned to help the meek and lowly solve various dilemmas in their life or to give them courage in fighting a battle. Hopes and fears are brought to bear on these scenes of desperation, desire, and intense need of a lifeline to help sort out difficult questions and imperatives. There is a scene where three distinct groups are shown to be emitting what is basically the same prayer. There is urgency in these moments and they cement the film in a strong religious tradition that Lee presents unapologetically.

The head of the statue becomes a symbol of lasting good that is nevertheless brought back to the states and promptly stored away in the back of a closet. It is feared lost for sixty odd years and when it turns up it causes an international furor. The discovery galvanizes citizens worldwide and the head’s return to Italy is received with great fanfare.

Overall, this film touches on issues of racism, honor, purity of form, and clear cut ability to change one’s immediate environment. The characters are all believabe, structured, and conceivable. They exist in a place where they have given up of themselves to unite in a cause that they hardly see as their own. Yet they are patriots–and this is the point–, black men who rose against the tyranny of expectations and brought the bread home when they weren’t blasted into infinity for their fortitude and rightness. Yes, indeed, the black man too could despite the terror at home become something larger than themselves. They could react and drive home the point of American superiority in the guise of an imperfect war.

Film Review--How to Lose Friends and Alienate People

How to Lose Friends and Alienate People
directed by Robert Weide
written by Peter Straughan
based on the novel by Toby Young
starring Simon Pegg, Kirsten Dunst, Jeff Bridges, Megan Fox, Gillian Anderson, Danny Huston, Hannah Waddingham



In a pedestrian story that follows the bumbling antics of a would-be insider, Simon Pegg manages to give yet another zany and thoroughly intoxicating performance.

Sidney Young (Pegg) is a journalist of sorts. He wants nothing more than to submerge himself in an orgy of celebrities, to be surrounded day and night by the lucky, pretty ones whose every wish, want, and need is provided for them wherever they go. Sidney wants to cover these people up close and with full on access. Unfortunately as the film begins he is struggling with his rag, which gets him positively nowhere and in fact all his efforts to gain access are turned down. He’s in misery when he gets a call from Clayton Harding (Bridges), the main man over at Sharps magazine which is everything Sidney’s little publication isn’t. It has a huge worldwide following, is respected, and affords anyone who writes for it full access. Harding wants Sidney and offers him a job writing for his magazine. Sidney quickly accepts and finds himself entrenched in the precise world he’s been getting wet over nearly his entire life.

The sex-soaked reality show that Sidney falls into is filled with superficial moments and artificial glee. Every scene consumed with models and actors has a fake veneer that Sidney laps up like the pig he brings into a party only to be removed when the animal escapes his room and goes on a rampage. It is perhaps one of the most fascinating moments in the film. A sloppy, hungry beast tears through a room of fake plastic personalities and temporarily wrecks their soft, lazy worlds. The pig is far more elegant than any of the starlets or TV hunks or whatever other form of flotsam is making the rounds at the party. Regardless it is not Sidney’s world until he is sucked up by the only fashion celebrity magazine in the U.S. that matters.

Sidney is a gawker who cannot get over his deeply seated adoration of the open festering celebrity sore. He so desperately longs to be noticed by these would-be royal subjects and can hardly contain himself long enough to do his job properly. He gets an interview and botches it by asking the actor if he is Jewish and then if he is gay. He clashes with Alison Olsen (Dunst), an editor at the magazine whom he met the night before and annoyed to the point of aggravation. It’s perfectly obvious what direction the film is heading in with these two and it’s just a matter of waiting it out until the inevitable happens. Still, there is quite a bit of charm to Sidney’s character and Pegg promotes the idea of a struggling man who cannot seem to calm himself down long enough to make much of an impact. That all changes when he gets his big break and from that moment on he’s inside and soiling his undergarments. Harding tells him early in the picture that there are seven rooms and he is in the first one. Also, he was to never forget that Harding is in the seventh room. Through a baffling series of events despite his many distresses, Sidney makes it into the seventh room. He’s on top of it all and yet he’s still horrifically confused and unsure of what his own celebrity actually means.

Eleanor Johnson (Anderson) is an agent who is able to convince magazines such as Sharps to publish puff pieces on the talent she represents. She’s really grab-you-by-the-balls-and-laugh hard and aggressive while managing to doll it up a bit with her posture and the old sway of the hips nonsense. She and Sidney have their clashes but he is able to forgive all improprieties due to the emergence of Eleanor’s latest client: Sophie Maes (Fox). Sophie is a starlet who has just completed a biopic of Mother Theresa and is getting a considerable amount of buzz. Sidney is immediately stricken with her and her very presence is capable of sending him out of bounds. For her part, Sophie takes a liking to Sidney as well and their energies commingle in a rather dramatic fashion. It’s sexy, base, and with a dollop of desperation. Sophie seems to need something beyond the bubble which protects her elevated Self from many external pressures. She comes off as someone who yearns to find an aspect of herself that cannot be obtained while churning around in the system that has created her.

Megan Fox reaches a level of allure rarely obtained in cinema. She truly seems to be channeling the ghosts of Hedy Lamarr and Lana Turner and she establishes her bombshell credentials. It’s simply a matter of posture and lip-licking with the occasional iconic hand gesture thrown in to complete the picture. Sex appeal is a rough business these days as what comes down to us in its name is often shoddy work, indeed. This time, however, we are given a legitimate gift that ought to be remembered. Unadulterated sensuality of this sort drives mediocre films into the realm of the passable and credible. In this case it merely makes it decidedly more watchable. Simon Pegg and Megan Fox have a particularly decisive chemistry together that ought to see them in further projects together.

The differences between the public persona and the private person are exploited in this film. Sophie gains international superstardom and her image is fixed in the public’s mind. Yet the individual behind the look has doubts about the image and feels sometimes that she doesn’t really exist. Sophie seems to become a bit lost in the confusion surrounding the perpetuation of the image around the world, whether she desires it to be so or not. She is the trapped celebrity who is unable to effectively escape the camera’s lense. Her entire life has been transformed into a chandelier and symphonies, aching moments where she clamors to get out of the way of the electric buzz.

This is a film about a boob who stumbles into shangri-la. Sidney is by all measures a nitwit who cannot help projecting a seriously ill-mannered persona. He insults nearly everyone he meets in some fashion or another and is incapable of treading lightly around sensitive issues. Yet despite it all he’s not without talent and it is this that allows him to stick around long enough to get a choice assignment when it appears that all his crazy hopes are dashed irrevocably. His life is saved and he becomes the image of everything he has always imagined himself wanting. But bliss is a cruel bitch and he finds himself struggling to regain the simplicity with which he once gazed at the world before his view was clogged with botox and eye liner. He longs for Sophie in the worst way but suddenly there is a terrible complication that mucks it all up. He is faced with an agonizing decision that leaves him quaking and wholly unsure of which steps to take.

Sidney reaches the level of excellence that would chap the buttocks of the lowliest grunt writer. His hopes and expectations are given full rise and he sits in the bubble as long as he can take it. In many ways this is a film that manages to state rather emphatically, “watch what you wish for...it just might come true. There are moments of sweet abandon where Sidney reveals his essential, core being is sympathetic and caring. He’s simply awkward in situations with other people and inadvertently comes off as an asshole. But he’s not, really. He’s just a bit unused with dealing with clients and employees at major league celebrity fashion magazines. It just takes practice and fortunately for him he manages to escape the tyranny of his own inadequacies long enough to establish himself to the people that are necessary for his further employment.

The tension surrounding Sidney wherever he turns is palpable throughout this film. He’s a nervous wreck who can’t figure out where to put his body in relation to space. He craves opportunities to improve his lot but manages to damage them through his stubbornness and unwillingness to play it soft although it is precisely this approach that leads to his astronomical success. So, essentially he caves in to rescue his career from the doldrums and the result of this action troubles him immensely.

The performances in this film are all rather credible. Simon Pegg has cornered the market on the aggressively charming capable type who in the end knows what the right thing is and no longer fights against it. He’s typically infectious in a manner that is indeed very rare. It’s impossible to watch a Simon Pegg filml and not root insatiably for his character to succeed in the most blatant way imaginable. Sidney is lovable and darling after a fashion and despite his tendencies to deeply annoy people he’s got a good heart and a kind spirit. Kirsten Dunst is typically forceful in a non-threatening manner. Still, I wouldn’t want to be five minutes late taking her to the dentist. I’m sure she’d find a cruel and unusual use for a stiletto. Dunst creates a character of great and lasting sympathy and it’s enjoyable to watch her move on screen. Jeff Bridges does a solid turn as a self-centered magazine editor-in-chief. He captures the character’s rough edges and establishes the solid foundation upon which he stands and gazes out over the world he partly controls. Bridges is perfectly cast as the occasionally cutting, severe head of Sharps. Megan Fox is as mentioned difficult to gage as an actress. Her performance is riveting mostly because of her physicality but she nevertheless manages to play the ingenue with conviction. She’s slightly self-deprecating and thereby warm and human, nothing like the image that had been created to sell her to the public.

Overall, this film satisfies the need to follow an essential imp up the ladder to the throne of his profession. Sidney is everyman struggling to realize his fondest wish without completely losing himself in the process. He wants success but does it want him? He yearns for a life of elegance and champagne surrounded by the lovely creatures that have always haunted his dreams. He wants nothing more than to breathe the same air as superstars and to be allowed the opportunity to listen to them say inane things about their careers, the economic downturn, or anything at all. Meanwhile, he also necessarily must protect himself and his instincts are set into play to impact the course of his actions. This is a film that celebrates the influence that star power has over the young and impressionable and how it carries over throughout life to be contained as a vision where grace, elegance and style are forever intermingled.