Friday, February 3, 2012

(Mostly) Catching Up With 2011

I had quite a few thoughts on Scream 4, Moneyball, and Attack the Block after watching them and not a lot of time to write posts about them, so I fear they'll be getting short shrift (or this will be a really long piece [I don't think I've ever written "shrift" before]).

If... -- Lindsay Anderson
My reaction to If... is basically summed up by the ellipses in the title. It was good. Nothing about it arrested my attention for more than a few minutes at a time (the first time it switches from color to black and white then back to color caught my eye). It's a world I'm not too familiar with made all the worse by my exposure to the world of Harry Potter. Private schools and the lives within will forevermore recall Hogwarts. Of Anderson's films, I've only seen this and This Sporting Life which garnered a similar reaction. Still, kudos to the movie that brought Malcolm McDowell to the attention of Stanley Kubrick.

Scream 4 -- Wes Craven
Scream 4 didn't get the best reviews on its release and I've learned since talking to people about it that the Scream series isn't viewed to highly by many (I'm very surprised by how many hate the second Scream as I remember critics claiming it's better than the first at the time of its release). I classify as a full-fledged fan of the series. It hits the right marks between comedy and horror and it wholly justifies it's existence as a series (which I speak of in this post from a few years ago). Plus, I'm a big fan of who-done-its and that's exactly what the Scream movies are so I was optimistic about the experience.

And it's fun. Exactly what one would expect from a Scream movie. The opening scene playfully mocks the opening scare M.O. of endless horror films (including this series) and there's tons of other meta stuff to play around with including references to Courtney Cox and David Arquette's real life marriage and divorce and Hayden Panettiere saying that she might have super-powers. It's also a lot of fun that while there have been no more Scream movies, they are up to seven Stab movies within Scream. I like that the series went from being based directly on Sidney to jumping off into ridiculousness (if the brief descriptions are to be believed) while Sidney lives a safe life. Sure, the meta-ness gets a little too cute at times and sure, there are more red herrings than imaginable, and yes, how long has Ghostface been waiting in that closet for this exact scenario to happen so the kill can be most effective and have the proper audience, but it's all still a good time. It's well made and tense, though it's hard to believe I ever found the series as scary as I did. There's also a great line about messing with the original that I wish was the last of the movie.

A few other comments about the series:
-- I really like that it's one of, if not the only, horror series that has maintained three of its leads and that the expectation that one of them is definitely going to die keeps getting subverted. At least until now...
-- It's really cool that the series is able to just replace the killer(s) under the costume for each new movie. This prevents them from having to figure out how to resurrect the iconic monster while maintaining said monster. Even though there's a lot of suspension of disbelief in the Scream series, it still basically takes place in a real world.

Moneyball -- Bennett Miller
Fire Joe Morgan changed the way I watch and think about baseball (who knew a comedy writer could do that?). Much of their writing dealt with Joe Morgan and his absolute rejection of Moneyball and mocking him for thinking that Billy Beane actually wrote the book (I wonder if Joe Morgan thinks Billy Beane directed Moneyball). I'm not sure if the movie will do the same for anyone, but I hope it at least directs them to the book which is a lot better (an age-old refrain).

It's not that Moneyball (the movie) is bad; it just focuses on some of the wrong things. I know that a Hollywood movie has to try to "humanize" characters and appeal to many demographics, but the stuff with his ex-wife and daughter is treacly nonsense. It's there for narrative purpose only. Why does he go back to the stadium? His daughter tells him to. Why doesn't he take the Boston job? His family daughter isn't there. The only good thing about that plot is that Spike Jonze pops up as his wife's new man. Since I've been catching up with The Increasingly Poor Decisions of Todd Margaret where Jonze plays a similar character, I've crafted an alternate universe where it is the same guy. The idea amuses me greatly.

The film is at its best when we're learning about the new system and how much adversity they face trying to implement it. Getting a look at how trades are made and a team is built. The book didn't become a best seller. It became a best seller because it's about how to operate a successful business against incredible odds. There is no need to add a family because the story is inherently relatable and dramatic. It's not about baseball. It's about adversity and that dogma isn't always truth. The saddest thing is that Beane never got to win a World Series and now nearly every team is playing Moneyball which puts him right back where he started.

Attack the Block -- Joe Cornish
It's a brave move to have the characters you're going to spend the entire movie with rob someone at knife-point in the first scene. Everyone talks about the importance of having "likable" characters and this sets them off on the wrong foot (I've only seen one bolder attempt at this ever). They don't even show any remorse. It's unrepentant. But, being a movie, they are forced into interacting with their victim in dire circumstances where everything can get worked out. That sounds sappy, but the portrayal of the Sam (the victim) encountering the gang is solid and believable. It's an extreme situation and some threats are bigger than others.

I was nervous about Attack the Block because I really hate British thug life (really, thug life). It's just a bunch of people acting like assholes for no reason (though, as AtB attests, there are multitudes of reasons). Fortunately, the action starts fast, so our time with the obnoxious version of these characters is short. The rest of the film flies by and is remarkably effective. It's very tense with some good scares and a lot less humor than I was expecting, which isn't a bad thing (though it's not unfunny). There's a lot that suggests what a small world these characters live in which really helps create a sense of reality in this unreal scenario. Speaking of which, the aliens are amazing creations. They practically devour light save for their glowing teeth which, in an awesome design move, look like eyes when their mouths are closed. 

My only real issue with Attack the Block is the chanting at the end. I seriously doubt that most of the people chanting know anything about why they are doing so (unless it's a commentary on mob mentality, which I doubt). It's overly sentimental ending for a movie that takes very little time for sentiment. 

King Corn -- Aaron Woolf
King Corn makes the mistake of thinking that it's "protagonists" are the most interesting part of the documentary. Any time Ian Cheney and Curtis Ellis are on screen, the movie reeks of contrivance. The shots are all set up and they're pondering aimlessly, or "discovering" something (except the camera is already inside so we know that they've already had a look around), or playing whiffle ball. Even the idea of going to Iowa to plant an acre of corn is contrived (and I can't stand that they talk about the "work" they were doing when it was all someone else driving machinery over their acre. They paid for the seed and the lot. That's about it). Infinitely more interesting is when they actually getting around to discussing the corn culture of our country. The uses, the subsidies, the volume. There is something clearly very wrong. But they put themselves at the center of it all. And guess what: they're not that interesting. King Corn is almost good despite itself. 

No comments:

Post a Comment