Thursday, April 26, 2007

Movie Review: Hot Fuzz


First off I have to say that I don’t know how many more films the team of Edgar Wright (writer & director), Simon Pegg (writer & actor), and Nick Frost (actor) have in them, but I hope they keep working together. Their first movie project was Shaun of the Dead, a send-up of zombie movies, ala George Romero. Their latest is Hot Fuzz, a send-up of the cop/buddy/action movies like the Lethal Weapon and Bad Boys movies. What makes their movies unique is their ability to make fun of the movies they’re referencing while at the same time creating a film that can stand on its own within the genre that they’re making fun of. Now that takes talent. And actually in this regard, I think Shaun of the Dead was more successful in this way than Hot Fuzz. Not to take away from Hot Fuzz. It’s a thoroughly enjoyable film.

Hot Fuzz is the story of the driven, hard-boiled Sergeant Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg), who is so successful as a cop that he is sent to the hinterlands of rural/small town bliss (where he’ll have nothing to do), so he won’t continue to make the rest of the cops in London look bad. There in the bucolic village of Sandford, Angel discovers to care for someone other than his job, finds friends, learns what is important in life, and, coincidentally, discovers a nefarious murder scheme. As it turns out, things aren’t always what they appear to. . . whatever. That cliché is part of the genre’s conventions. Anyway, Nick Frost plays his new partner Danny Butterman in Sandford, a guy who appreciates a few pints of beer and has a wall of action movies in his home. Angel teaches Butterman how to be a cop. Butterman teaches Angel how to have fun. Together they solve the mystery and put things right in the village of Sandford.

The supporting actors in the film are excellent additions. Timothy Dalton, Jim Broadbent, and Edward Woodward are all first-rate as residents of Sandford, especially Dalton’s delightfully sinister performance as a grocery store magnate. There are also a number of excellent cameos in the movie: Martin Freeman, Bill Nighy (this guy is in everything), and even an uncredited appearance by Cate Blanchett as Angel’s hazard-suited, masked girlfriend.

For fans of action movies, Hot Fuzz pokes fun at most of the conventions of this genre while maintaining a level of suspense and action that is quite high and frequently better than the films it is emulating. Some of the killings are quite graphic and some are hilarious at the same time, and some of the action stunts are startlingly effective and surprising. Angel delivering a kick to an old woman’s head, for instance. Unbelievable. Hot Fuzz is frequently laugh-out-loud funny. The writing and direction is spot-on. The performances are just right. The chemistry between Pegg and Frost is perfect—they fit together like old chums on a lark. All in all, Hot Fuzz is a homerun, and that makes two for two for this team. Here’s hoping for a long and successful string of hits for these guys.

Movie Review: Grindhouse—Planet Terror, Death Proof, and more!


Grindhouse is more of a concept film than anything else. Kind of a parody, kind of an homage, kind of a post-modern examination of a bygone species of film—the exploitation films of the past (Actually, they’re still being made, but they go straight to DVD or end up on the Sci Fi Channel). The originals were done on the cheap, usually sensational, frequently gratuitous, and always lacking the polish and shine of mainstream Hollywood feature films. In other words, they were crappy movies, but not always intentionally crappy. So the idea was to remake these kinds of movies as a double feature and include a few fake previews of coming attractions, and show everything as one bladder-bustingly long movie. All together, Grindhouse comes in at more than 3 hours long. Although it must be said that, much like the original movies, if you have to leave for a bathroom break, you won’t miss much if you time it right.

Planet Terror is the zombie gore-fest extravaganza directed by Robert Rodriguez. In it, a military bio-weapon is released on a small Texas town with the usual results. Brains are eaten, limbs are ripped off, and chaos ensues. The special effects make-up is especially gooey, squirty, messy, and nasty. It’s on the level of John Carpenter’s The Thing, or George Romero’s original Dawn of the Dead, or even last year’s excellent Slither by James Gunn. The dialog is atrocious and unbelievable, but that fits with the Grindhouse aesthetic. And the performances are sometimes equally bad, but some are pretty impressive. Falling into the bad category is the physically stunning Rose McGowan. She has many of her glorious attributes on display here, but acting isn’t one of them. In the impressive category, we have more to choose from, like Freddy Rodriguez, Michael Biehn, and Jeff Fahey. After seeing Michael Biehn in this, it really made me wonder why he never made it big. He’s got screen presence and charisma in spades. But it is really Freddy Rodriguez that makes the biggest impression. He displays what it takes to make an action hero successful, and he makes it look easy. But despite spectacular explosions, over-the-top make-up, and Rose McGowan wearing a machine gun for a leg, Planet Terror is curiously boring. It seems too self-conscious and tries too hard. Like the worst of the movies that it is referencing, the characters and situations are never believable enough to care about what is happening to anyone on the screen. Rodriguez takes all of the surface tropes of the exploitation horror film and elevates them to the point of satire, but no affection for the genre comes through with it. Rodriguez thinks these films are stupid, and that feeling comes through in the finished product. That’s what makes Planet Terror more of a patronizing parody, and not an affectionate homage. As a counter-point, last year’s Slither takes the opposite approach. James Gunn’s love for genre movies was evident in every scene in that movie, and that’s why it comes across as an homage.

Death Proof is considerably more successful as a movie and not just as a parody. Quentin Tarantino knows how to write realistic dialog and believable characters, and that’s what works in this movie, not to mention the edge-of-the-seat car chases. It’s also a much smaller story and you get to know the characters before bad things happen to them. And when it does happen, it’s all the more tragic because you care about them. That’s what elevates Death Proof above the psycho-killer movies it is patterned after. In most of those movies, the victims are nearly anonymous. The plot of Death Proof is this: a killer named Stuntman Mike chooses his victims, stalks and toys with them, and then kills them with his specially reinforced stunt car. In the ensuing wrecks, he is the only that can walk away. That is, until he picks the wrong victims, who decide to take revenge into their own hands. This is when Death Proof changes from a psycho-killer movie into a woman’s revenge movie, so we get two films in one. Overall, the acting, dialog, and direction are great in this movie. Or more precisely for a Tarantino film, not as good as Pulp Fiction, but better than Kill Bill. Kurt Russell is perfect as Stuntman Mike. Sydney Poitier and Vanessa Ferlitto are beautiful and convincing as victims. Rosario Dawson, Tracie Thoms, and Zoe Bell are at first endearing and then deadly as the revenge seeking vigilantes. It was especially nice to see Zoe Bell in a speaking role. She’s the stunt person who doubled for Uma Thurman in Kill Bill and achieved cult-level fame for stunt doubling for Lucy Lawless in “Xena, Warrior Princess.” It is her performance and stunt work in Death Proof that makes Death Proof one of the most genuinely suspenseful action movies in recent memory. This car chase is without a doubt one of the best ever committed to film. Death Proof only stumbles near the end, when Stuntman Mike goes from being a terrifying boogeyman to a pathetic loser. The revenge that is enacted on him is so extreme that it almost turns the audience’s feelings towards him into pity, which seems like a miscalculation on Tarantino’s part.

The previews deserve their own mention. Robert Rodriguez’s Machete is probably the best of the bunch. It could work as a short film on its own. Edgar Wright’s Don’t is the funniest and the most clever. Eli Roth’s Thanksgiving is a gross-out free-for-all slasher-fest. Ick. Rob Zombie’s Werewolf Women of the S.S. is mostly dumb, except for a scenery-chewing cameo by Nicholas Cage as Fu Manchu.

As far as the total movie-watching experience goes, I have to say that seeing Grindhouse in a modern multi-plex is really unfaithful to the original movies that this is based on. To really see Grindhouse as it should be seen, wait for it to get to your local second-run theaters, if you are lucky enough to have them—the more run-down the better. That will be more true to the spirit of the films. And go late at night with lots of friends. Walking out of the theater when it is still daylight is just plain wrong.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

CD Review: Last Train Home, "Last Good Kiss"


Last Train Home – Last Good Kiss – Red Beet Records RBRCD003 – 48:47 – *****

Relationships are at the heart of most songs—relationships gone right and those that go wrong. There are the relationships that give us a reason to live and those that leave us questioning everything. “Last Good Kiss,” the latest album from the Nashville band Last Train Home, is filled with songs that explore the boundaries of those relationships and examine how they intersect with each other, and they are played with heartbreaking earnestness.

Usually considered to be a leading alt-country or Americana band, Last Train Home is exploring new ground in this album. While some songs contain colorings of alt-country, most of the songs on this album fall into the category of indie-rock. The prevalence of electric guitar, played by Steve Wedemeyer either in understated and minimalist guitar solos or in shimmeringly resonant curtains of chords are all perfectly rendered in the most economical fashion, ends up giving the album a closer connection to rock music. It’s really the subject matter of relationships that ties it to country music, providing a link to the Hank Williams tradition of songwriting. Also helping to break the sound of the group away from alt-country is Jen Gunderman on keyboards, like the pulsing Rhodes piano accompaniment on “You” and even on accordion, surely one of the most underutilized instruments in popular music. Rounding out the group are Jim Gray on electric bass and Martin Lynds on drums and percussion, laying down the solid “tracks” that this Train runs on. Kevin Cordt plays trumpet on a couple of numbers, further taking the music away from the country realm and treading on the boundaries of jazz and Latin music. His boozy beautiful solo on “The Color Blue” is playfully sexy. If you can say anything about Last Train Home, it’s that they know how to play as a group—intuiting both how to step back and support each other, and how to step out front and shine. There’s a level of comfort and confidence that infuses all their performances on this album.

Frontman Eric Brace wrote most of the songs on “Last Good Kiss.” In fact, Brace wrote all of them except for guitarist Steve Wedemeyer’s tune “Can’t Come Undone.” The songs range from seductively timed ballads (Go Now) to energetically driving tunes (Last Good Kiss). If there’s a consistency to the songs on this album, it’s that they’re all consistently excellent. Brace delivers the vocals with sincerity and authenticity that is nearly devastating—every note and phrase rings of heart-felt and life-lived truth. And if there is a better vocalist working the scene at this time, I really don’t know who it could be. His voice is colored in turns by passion, weariness, elation, and angst. Eric Brace is the real deal. “Last Good Kiss” is a significant step forward in the evolution of a great band, and could very well be the best album of their career. This gets my highest recommendation.

Tracks: Last Good Kiss, Flood, Anywhere But Here, Can’t Come Undone, Go Now, May, You, I’m Coming Home, Kissing Booth, Marking Time, The Color Blue

DVD Review: Children of Men


Children of Men (2006)

A bleak and grim apocalyptic look at the demise of humanity in the near future.

Starring: Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, Michael Caine, Chiwetel Ejiofor
Directed by Alfonso Cuarón
Written by Alfonso Cuarón & Timothy J. Sexton and David Arata and Mark Fergus & Hawk Ostby
Extras: The Possibility of Hope; Under Attack; Comments by Slavoj Zizek; Deleted Scenes; Theo & Julian; Futuristic Design
Length: 110 minutes
Rating: *****

It seems like the major marketing ploy for “Children of Men” has been to call it the next coming of “Bladerunner,” or something close to that. In most ways that is a disservice to both movies. As much as “Bladerunner” is a classic sci-fi movie (in truth, it’s one of my favorites), when you think about it, you don’t say, “Wow! Those characters are so real and the acting is so poignant!” Let’s face it; Ridley Scott’s fortes are spectacle, setting, and attention to detail. Scott created a well-used world rich in detail. Characterization, acting, and even plot seem for the most part like necessary evils to get you from the beginning of the movie to the end of the movie. Alfonso Cuarón is a different kind of filmmaker—character, acting, and a tightly drawn plot are very important to him. Before “Children of Men,” Cuarón was known for 2001’s “Y tu mamá también,” a coming of age story set in Mexico, which revolved around those very same qualities. Despite the sci-fi setting, “Children of Men” is filled with richly-drawn characters, no-holds-barred acting, and razor-sharp plotting. To that mix, add direction that is as precise as anything to come out in years and intricately choreographed action sequences that are breathtakingly accomplished. Cuarón favors long unedited continuous shots that don’t seem possible, considering the action and the practical effects (stunt work, explosions and mechanical effects) that are happening throughout the scene. What “Children of Men” does share with “Bladerunner” is that both films feature a believable and fully realized world. But that’s where the similarities end.

“Children of Men” is set in the near future (2027) and is based on a novel by P.D. James. Society is breaking down because women have become infertile and can’t have any babies. As a point of interest, P.D. James’ novel had it the opposite way, that men were no longer fertile. Interesting because James is a woman and Cuarón is a man. You can draw your own conclusions from that. Anyway, the last child was born in the year 2009 and humanity is faced with the very real and finite end of its own existence. This inspires numerous sorts of crises among nations, faiths, ideologies, and peoples. The England of this future is one without infrastructure—garbage is strewn everywhere and the buildings are worn out. People have given up hope, so taking care of the present to protect the future no longer makes sense. The cities are dilapidated and the people reflect and embody this state of ill repair. In making this movie, Cuarón intended for viewers, “not to see the future, but to recognize the present.” Viewers will find this a chilling recognition, indeed.

Clive Owen is Theo, an alcoholic cubicle worker of the future who has lost his ideals and his ambitions. “Children of Men” becomes his own quest for redemption, as he is enlisted, against his will at first to escort a miraculously pregnant young woman out of England. Theo’s ex-wife Julian, played by Julianne Moore, chooses him because she knows that once he is onboard with the task, he will never give up. What follows is a journey through the heart of despairing darkness in what is left of England and civilization. Theo is the clumsy, ill-prepared hero in flip-flops throughout the film, rising to meet the needs of the moment as they present themselves. In this future, the needs are challenging and Theo is faced with the horrors of what the world has become.

Also included in the DVD are well-done featurettes that offer intelligent views of the future envisioned by P.D. James and Alfonso Cuarón by well-known sociologists, futurists, and cultural critics like Slavoj Zizek, and a few concise and illuminating making-of documentaries of the film. “Children of Men” is an extraordinary piece of filmmaking—certainly one of the best films of 2006. Highly recommended.

Photography Book Review: Ghosts in the Landscape



Ghosts in the Landscape: Vietnam Revisited
Photographs by Craig J. Barber, Umbrage Editions, 2006

Craig J. Barber was a combat marine during the Vietnam War in the 1960s. In creating the series of photographs for this book, Ghosts in the Landscape, he went back to Vietnam three times during the years 1995, 1997, and 1998. For Barber, it was the chance to lay these revenants of war to rest, to deal with the memories of what happened in that place and bring closure to what happened to the people he knew and to those he left behind. Vietnam continues to be touchstone for an entire generation of Americans. Writers, poets, filmmakers, and artists have all tried to process the experience of that war in order to make sense of it all. This is Barber’s attempt to do the same. The photographs function as memorials to his memories of war, but they also function as tributes to the land and people of that country that survived after the war.

Before getting to the book, the first aspect to know about Barber’s photography is that his cameras don’t use lenses exactly; they use pinholes. A pinhole is a very tiny hole that is drilled in a metal sheet which functions as a lens, in that it’s able to focus the light into an image and project it onto film or paper. Because the tiny hole also acts like a very small f-stop, the image it creates has tremendous depth of field. In fact, most pinhole photographs have universal depth of field—everything is in focus. The consequence of this is that exposure times tend to be very long because pinholes don’t let in very much light, sometimes lasting several minutes or longer even in bright daylight. This produces interesting motion effects in the images; objects that don’t hold still are recorded as blurs and streaks of movement. The second thing to know about Barber’s images is that his prints are platinum prints, which accounts for the softer look and brown tones. Platinum prints are especially good at rendering subtle light values, while maintaining rich darker values. To the viewer, platinum prints have a nostalgic look about them, which can complement some subjects. In the case of Ghosts in the Landscape, they work very well.

The images in Ghosts in the Landscape are presented as diptychs and triptychs, that is, each image on a page consists of two or three separate images that function as one long panoramic image. This results in a slightly disjointed feel to the images, almost disorienting, where you see elements that should continue, but don’t—like memories that are missing details out of the middle of the experience. Some elements are duplicated in both images; others are left out. The people found in these haunting photographs take on the aspect of faded memories, as if they are people whose very shapes are beginning to shred and disperse due to the passing of time. Of course, this effect is because of long exposures and the inability of the subjects to hold still, but they also serve as a comment on the nature of memory. The landscapes are melancholy and contemplative, darkened at the corners as if your view has been restricted, allowing you to examine only what Barber wants us to see, which is only what he wants us to remember from his journey. And indeed, memory seems to be overriding theme in this book. Barber is dealing with his memories of the war and reconciling those memories against the reality he encountered when he went back to Vietnam. His images are luminous and beautiful with a keen bittersweet edge to them. They are meant to be slowly and patiently taken in a bit at a time, as much as any painful memory should be handled.

Ghosts in the Landscape can be purchased at: www.photoeye.com.

Sunday, April 15, 2007

Welcome

In the future, this will be my forum for getting my writing out into the world, whether it's a review or random observation or even the odd poem or short story. You can always read my reviews (DVDs and CDs) on Audiophile Audition. Otherwise, stay tuned; there's more to follow.