Smash Cuts: Hanna

Hanna (Wright, 2011)

Does it count as a revenge fantasy if everyone is terrible? Well, you know, except for the times where they aren't. But who cares about those times, we need the testosterone to flow! We need to see that you have balls! Balls! Action! Killing! Balls! You really have to admire the balls of what is likely the year's best action film - I mean really - simply because it takes the conceit of bringing this tiny fourteen year old female and turns her in to a force of unstoppable brutality. This is probably what The Hunger Games is like, except good. You have big shoes to fill. Figuratively anyway, Saorise Ronan probably doesn't have abnormally large feet. I know she doesn't cry! Except - of course - when she does. By moving at such a break neck pace it's hard to get bogged down in all the plot intricacies or the weak characters. We just need to cut.

Don't Stop Imagining. The Day That You Do Is The Day That You Die.

It's Awards season, and the time where year end wrap ups begin to hit hard. As a result, I need to begin writing at a much more rapid pace in an attempt to crystalize my thoughts on all the wonderful (I know, but bear with me) film that are sure to be released in this time. So what we have are an upcoming series of shorter reviews that will rarely delve in to the same type of analysis synthesis that I attempt to craft with my writing. Then there will be a huge onslaught of year end lists. I'll try and sprinkle a few editorials in there as well, and there's probably a major site overhaul coming up. So there's the state of Processed Grass, and now on to the review!

We Need To Talk About Kevin (Ramsay, 2011)

The new film from acclaimed Scottish filmmaker Lynne Ramsay, We Need To Talk About Kevin, recently had a one week limited pre-Oscar qualification run type deal in NYC and I had a chance to see it during that time. Basically what we have is a quasi-horror film that, much like other indie standout Martha Marcy May Marlene, takes many of its cues from psychological horror and Gothic tropes than delving in to new age cinematic scares.

Don't Give Up Now, Just A Little More Persistence

The Interrupters (James, 2011)

Over the summer I visited Chicago for a weekend. While I was aware that I had not actually even scratched the surface of what the city has to offer, after seeing a film like The Interrupters I almost feel as if I should have taken even more precautions as I walked a very standard pass through the city. Actually, as I exited the theater in Philadelphia and I walked back toward the train station to get home I almost felt a bit more paranoid than I should have given the time of day and relatively safe area of the city. But as I continued down the streets, looking all around and moving at a quicker clip than I normally would, I became cognizant of my actions. I was acting this way because of the documentary I had just watched.

I Wanna Be Like You, I Wanna Walk Like You, Talk Like You, Too

Animal Kingdom (Michod, 2010)

"Every morning in Africa a gazelle awakens knowing it must today run faster than the fastest lion or it will be eaten. Every morning a lion awakens knowing it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve. It matters not whether you are a gazelle or a lion, when the sun rises you had better be running." This African proverb seems to perfectly encapsulates the world of David Michod's Australian crime drama Animal Kingdom. The people in this film, whether cops or criminals, are always running from, or after, one another in an attempt to keep balance in Melbourne, Australia. The world is a bitter struggle for comfort and survival, two ideas the film explores in great depth.

All Roads Lead Toward The Same Blocked Intersection

Kick-Ass (Vaughn, 2010)

Christopher Nolan. David Fincher. Quentin Tarantino. Zach Snyder. And now, I suppose, Matthew Vaughn is a name to add to the list of directors who can be charged of crafting films that ooze style while skimping on the substance. While I would debate the grounds of many of these claims, as most of the directors have crafted at least one film that would serve as an effective counter point, whether found in the strong subtext present in Fincher's Fight Club, the sprawling narrative in Snyder's take on Watchmen, and just about all of Tarantino's library, (though I suppose that does leave Nolan out in the cold), Vaughn's latest effort (following up his 2007 sophomore film Stardust) may justify such a claim being leveled at the filmmaker. Though I haven't seen either of his two previous pictures, meaning I shall concentrate mostly on my reaction to the man's latest creation, Kick-Ass, an adaptation of Mark Millar's series of graphic novels by the same name, Vaughn has created an interestingly diverse set of films. But sometimes I need more than interesting to keep me going, or maybe I don't, or maybe Vaughn just doesn't want me to know what I want at all.

If the director does, in fact, want to keep me feeling off kilter throughout the entire film he has successfully accomplished his initial mission because, for all intents and purposes, Kick-Ass is a messy and inconsistent film in just about every regard. The score ranges from overbearing to needlessly quiet, yet this pairs with such a delightfully scattershot soundtrack that features a hodgepodge of styles and sounds with each cue seeming almost too perfect for the current scene, practically mirroring the construction of the film as a whole. The three act structure is followed incredibly strictly, so much so that, unlike just about every other successful film based on a graphic novel, no twists or turns at all occur in the narrative. It remains entertaining, but devolves incredibly quickly into predictability, which also mimics the camera tricks that Vaughn employs throughout the film where, during each and every tense scene, we are expected to wait until the a character is placed in a deadly situation before, at the very last second, the tables turn. For a film that is so intent on taking risks with its content the tale is told in a mighty generic manner, and I know I don't go for generic. Even stylized generic, so despite using all those wonderful long shots and top down angles, and starting off by using comic book cues such as text boxes reading "Meanwhile" and other descriptors before eventually abandoning that idea completely, I don't know if the minimal technical flourishes are enough to keep the film afloat by my traditional standards.

But this is an actor's film damn it! Or maybe not. Sure Nicolas Cage follows up one of 2009's best performances in The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans with a smash up performance that succeeds where the film tends to stumble, blending comedy seamlessly with action. And even Chloe Moretz does a decent job of that as well, but I got the feeling while watching her that the character, the disturbingly ruthless preteen Hit-Girl who cares just as much about dropping the C-Nuke as she cares about slicing apart one of the many nameless goons she confronts in the film, is more interesting than her performance. I guess between this and her annoying turn in (500) Days of Summer that means I have even more reason to be concerned about the upcoming remake of Let the Right One In. Anyhow, what seemed so odd was not the actors in the film, but the fact that none of the characters ever seemed fully developed, and nearly all the secondary characters were reduced to caricatures nearly by default. Thankfully the smaller lead roles were anchored by two of the best performances in the film. I do not know if the public as a whole is still unable to separate Christopher Mintz-Plasse from his McLovin character, but I have little problem doing so, and he brings such a presence to the screen each time he is on camera that believing him in the role of Red Mist is a simple task. And then there is Clark 'Bar' Duke as one of Kick-Ass's best friends, allowing for him to generate the funniest moments in the film. Yeah he's doing a similar shtick to what he did in Clark and Michael, but he pulls off that undeservedly cocky, overly hip, self aware comedy that it doesn't matter. Speaking of Michael Cera this is the part where I start to bash lead actor Aaron Johnson. Johnson is supposed to be playing this socially outcast high school student who doesn't communicate well with the opposite sex, yet we still need to be able to identify with him and root for him for the film to work. However, what we get are a few fleeting glimpses of the types of characters that Cera and Eisenberg have perfected with none of the chemistry that Cera could bring to those Clark Duke and Mintz-Plasse scenes. Hell, even Anton Yelchin could have worked better than the emotional sinkhole that is Aaron Johnson.

But now I'll take a page out of Vaughn's book and switch this shit up at the drop of a dime without any warning or sense.

Up until this point I feel as if I have been deceptively negative, perhaps betraying just how much I enjoyed this film. It seems ever since Avatar that action scenes are becoming much more tolerable as traditional editing is used to keep pace while directors intelligently color code each side to make these fast paced sequences simple to follow. And boy damn are the action scenes on display here a rush and a half, they are, for lack of a better term, the definition of bad ass. In fact, some may say they kick ass (how can I pass something like that up?). But even the action scenes are off kilter as Vaughn crafts the world in such a way that the viewer is constantly questioning the purpose of this gratuitous violence. Early on in the film he establishes these make shift superheroes as incredibly human and capable of dying, yet like a lamb to the slaughter this realism is sacrificed without explanation when it would enhance the cool factor. And don't get me wrong, it does, and maybe the desensitization that goes along with the violence is part of the satire, but for that to be the case it would make more sense to not include those scenes that show the gruesomeness of violence, and, really, watching a young girl get punched in the face or gun down a ton of different guys is going to get a reaction no matter how desensitized we may be.

And with that I ask, among the separate realms of action and comedy, in a film that seems to go out of its way to not establish a consistent tone, for a movie that succeeds so well at entertaining but is so stiff and calculated that outside of the shock any traces of heart are severely minimalized, does Kick-Ass have a point? Perhaps not, but maybe that's okay? At one point the film seems ready to begin exploring the idea of escapism and the futility of this exercise, and then all the pieces are set to look into the creation of celebrity in relation to the physical toll this takes on individuals, but none of these ideas are followed through in any substantial manner. But in not probing these ideas am I being asked to simply watch, to be a hog in the mud and revel in the ultra-violence while not looking any deeper into this film? I cannot do that. The obvious point of comparison for this film, I assume, is Watchmen, but while that film suffered from having too much going on outside of the action sequences Kick-Ass is concerned with accomplishing too little outside of its action. Yes, it appears to be a love letter to the comic book lover. Yes the dialogue is fun, and the film is a blast, but it is also just so problematic and personally distressful. I take no offense to the content, in fact I wish that more films would take the risks that Kick-Ass takes, but with those risks there needs to be a purpose outside of simple entertainment.

This reflection has been more rambling than I had intended, but I firmly believe that, as a writer, my obligation is to best convey my experience and response to a piece of culture, and without getting into spoilers that add a few more specifics to my reaction I think that is what I have done here. Films like Kick-Ass only serve to further negate the meaning of rating systems. At the end what I have learned is that the film is fun, it is stylish, and despite all its faults key members of the cast increase the enjoyment to be had. But those inconsistencies, the lack of purpose, the absence of themes outside of the most basic type, I should be ripping this film apart, not considering seeing it again on DVD. Either way, a film like this one does, in retrospect, make me appreciate something like Speed Racer all the more, a stylized tent pole film (though the origins of Vaughn's film hardly qualify as traditional studio fare as it effectively straddles the line between perceptions of independent and mainstream cinema) that blends the humor with the action, that gives purpose to the events, that may not be perfect but provides all the fun of an event movie with the cerebral simulation of more 'serious' films. Or even a Sin City that uses hyper violence and a unique visual style that weaves seamlessly with a consistent and intriguing narrative. I'm going in circles now. Kick-Ass is fantastic and fun. Kick-Ass is terrible and pointless. Kick-Ass is a thrill ride that challenges conventions while being cliche ridden and trite. The film is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma. Is it August yet? I need Scott Pilgrim vs. the World to show me what a great director can do with similar material.

B or 3.656247572394862375832657932

Comments are welcome and, for anyone with a literary mind, I encourage checking out my poetry blog filled with all original works for your reading pleasure.

Also I am on the old Twitter thing so I guess you can follow me at twitter.com/FLYmeatwad.

He Has Fixed His Sign In The Sky

Antichrist (Von Trier, 2009)

Word out of Cannes this year was that Lars Von Trier's latest film, Antichrist, was either one of the greatest things to grace a screen in recent memory or one of the most horrible, disgusting, worthless pieces of shit to ever masquerade as art. Now I knew little of this film when the buzz started building at the festival, but as the US release date started approaching I saw a trailer, heard that a video game tie in is planned, and learned basically He and She go back to Eden for something or another. Also, people have sex on a tree, potentially a tree made of people. I have to imagine, at least partially, that Terrence Malick would be proud of a more direct representation of his flora fetish. Either way, I still did not know entirely what to expect as the innocently chaotic title was etched across the screen in such a diabolical yet childlike fashion. All I knew was that I should be excited, and then it all starts, and I am left questioning if this is, in fact, the best place for me to begin delving into Von Trier's filmography.

Well, let us answer that question through a more thorough look at Antichrist, or at least what I am able to surmise with only a single viewing and a mind that still is attempting to process all the symbols and themes that Lars is compelled to toss my way over the relatively lean 110 minute run. Through a wonderfully disciplined style, possessing the occasional whimsy of Alice in Wonderland mixed with the stark realism of a film more akin to Elephant, Von Trier crafts what is, without a doubt, one of the most visually beautiful films in a year that is packed with gorgeous cinema. Whether wandering through the woods and back to Eden, or remaining captive in the close quarters of the run down shack, the film blends the real and the surreal fantastically, which further highlights the Biblical ideas that run throughout without ever directly weaving the real world, theoretically 'our' world, together with the perceived, or perhaps symbolic is the better term as the religious aspects certainly do not appear to be presented as factual. It may be overly cliche to say that the filmmaker is a artist whose canvas is his film, but Von Trier has so many sequences in this film that just stand out as portrait~esque that the comparison is more than relevant. And then to have such sequences placed alongside the sex scenes, it just creates a magical juxtaposition, given the presentation of sex throughout the latter part of the film.

Speaking of sex, it seems that there is a good deal going on here, but it all serves a greater purpose and is really not as plentiful as is to be expected given how much attention I am drawing to the scenes. I suppose in many ways the film is about, at least to an extent, the evils of sex, or pleasure in general. Dafoe's character advises against sex with his wife during her mental healing, it may partially be to blame for the initial tragedy, and Gainsbourg's behaviour in the final chapter can likely support a reading of the evils of sex. Yet Von Trier does not make things that simple at all, he adds in the whole portion about acorns to show the preciousness of life, he directly frames sex as beautiful during at least three portions throughout the film, and he does not let Dafoe off in the least, in fact he may even be condemning Dafoe. To prevent any further rambling, for now, I'm going to completely ignore transitional rules and jump right into performance. Dafoe is solid, and perhaps he has the tougher task given that he is expected to mostly be the serious and straight character, but what Charlotte Gainsbourg does as the She character is phenomenal. I liked her role in I'm Not There, but in Antichrist she does not only turn in a performance worthy of an Oscar, she displays one of the greatest performances of all time. The strength is not found in how much she has to do so much as it is found in the emotion that she brings to the role. Given the film's ambiguous nature she has to play evil and righteous, whore and saint, sane and insane, and still convey the grief that anyone in her situation is expected to possess. Praise upon praise can be given to Gainsbourg for her performance in Antichrist, but the most effective summation is best kept simple: she brings an insane complexity to a nameless character, Gainsbourg is fantastic.

Aside from performances, the chapter structure of the film is interesting as well. The breaks help keep the pacing pitch perfect and they all tie together into a mostly cohesive whole, retaining meaning as individual portions and as a collective. They chronicle the degradation of everything as well, and I do not mean to be vague by using the term 'everything,' but I do feel that it is the most applicable word in this case. Either way, let's toss up a spoiler warning now for the parts that seem to have audiences all riled up. Likely it will not mean too much out of context, so you should be safe reading, but if you do not want some specific actions revealed then I guess continue to the final paragraph for my closing thoughts. Antichrist was, despite causing who knows how many people to scream and faint and whatever else at Cannes, relatively tame throughout. Sure the film is occasionally overt in the way sex is handled and Gainsbourg has a scene where she walks around completely topless, and then there's that doe with the miscarried deer hanging out of it, but the only parts that I had any trouble watching, and even these are watchable as they are not very long, is when Gainsbourg smashes Dafoe's penis in with something, though that is concealed. However, the follow up where she gives him a hand job so he ejaculates blood instead of semen is slightly unnerving. I was unsettled throughout the whole scene, but I suppose that is to be expected. The other, and likely more unsettling, bit is when Gainsbourg castrates herself by cutting off her clitoris. It's an intense scene, but it serves a purpose and showing the act graphically is necessary to get the full effect, especially when paired with the cut to the deer that immediately follows. So yeah, the film gets unsettling in a few parts, but otherwise I do not understand exactly where the disgust for the film originates.

So was this the best place to start with Von Trier? I'm not entirely sure without seeing what else he had worked on, but given the numerous layers, symbols, themes, and ideas that he has going on during this film I have to imagine that it will be tough for his older works to create the same reaction I had toward Antichrist. Antichrist has all the markings of a technically great film, and as far as the extraneous material goes I found myself engaged throughout the entire run, so from an entertainment perspective, and I use the term referring to my mental engagement with the film not any pure bliss of simply watching, it's pretty fantastic as well. Antichrist contains some of the year's best cinematography, likely the year's best performance so far, and more literary and artistic flourishes than just about anything I have seen all year. I need time for it to sit and another viewing to process a good majority of the material properly, so I cannot say if the film is nearly as good as Adventureland, Lymelife, or The Cove just yet, but Antichrist is at least the fourth best film of the year and a truly jarring and rewarding experience.

A/A+ or 4.7891724235416938561359136519

So I'm also pretty behind in other reviews, which means that my next entry will probably be a short three or four paragraph post covering films that are more happier than Antichrist. On tap for that entry are, at the very least: Away We Go, Tulpan, Sin Nombre, and Anvil! The Story of Anvil!

Comments are welcome and, for anyone with a literary mind, I encourage checking out my poetry blog filled with all original works for your reading pleasure.

Also I am on the old Twitter thing so I guess you can follow me at twitter.com/FLYmeatwad.

They Came In By The Dozens

So, I have been getting back into college routine again, so my reviews have slowed down slightly. As such, I'm going to attempt to do some quickie reviews and, when a film warrants it, give a full review. Also, I encourage that all readers check out my work, and the other contributor's works, over at The Reelists.

Inglourious Basterds (Tarantino, 2009)

While I have already engaged in a round table chat about Inglourious Basterds here, I feel compelled to talk about the film a little more. Little can be said about how great both Brad Pitt and Waltz are in their roles, so I am going to instead focus on some interesting aspects of the film. The choice to break the film into five parts pays off excellently, as it allows Tarantino to only use about 16 scenes or so over 2 and a half hours, without any of the parts ever dragging. The dialogue is gripping and keeps the film engaging throughout, which is good since the violence, which the trailer touts, is really not a huge part of the film. A truly amazing character study, Tarantino's latest is a love letter to cinema and a thrilling re-imagining of history. Not the year's best film, but it is right up there.

A or 4.647832946231756123956129

Wizards of Waverly Place: The Movie (Spiro, 2009)

As a fan of the show, I was pretty excited to have a chance to sit down and see if any of the magic would carry over to the film. Sadly, I did not find myself as enchanted with the Russo family vacation as I would have enjoyed. However, as a coming of age story the film works decently enough and the scenes with Jake T. Austin are absolutely hypnotizing. Golly, I am a pun machine today, I'll try to stop myself. David Henrie is, as expected, quite the talent and his performance here further cements him as a name to look for in the future. Selena Gomez is incredibly engaging as well, as she is on the show, and manages to hold up a film with a fairly flimsy plot. The ending is frustrating, but the direction is decent, the humor mostly hits, and some of the set pieces are truly spellbinding. Damn it, I'll stop here before I pain you any more. Could not say that I would like the film to disappear as it is a fairly successful extension of the show, but the film does not have enough extra going on to make it much more than casual escapist cinema with simplistic themes.

C+/B- or 3.192372148732804517358

Extract (Judge, 2009)

Let's get this out of the way first, despite any similarities that the trailer may imply, this film is not Office Space. Nor is the film the simplistic romantic comedy with a twist that the trailer implies. Extract is a film is a solid cast of comedians, headlined by Jason Bateman in a thrilling performance where he channels his Michael Bluth, and supported by the surprising Ben Affleck, always funny Simmons, and stunningly attractive Kunis. The Whig character could have been more fleshed out, and I could probably have used more Brad, but the story here is engaging and the laughs are pretty plentiful. Mike Judge has a knack for taking the mundane and making it comedic, and his style of humor comes shinning through during this film, but I will need another viewing to accurately comment on how deep the humor digs. I could probably see this becoming another 'cult classic,' and I may like it even more than Office Space, as this film gets a bit darker towards the latter half. Plus I think the driving force of the plot is more interesting on a base level, though it is not given all the attention it needs. Still, it's a film anyone with a dry sense of humor can love while also containing enough big laughs to entertain any dinkus who may tag along.

B+ or 3.878264872316549837561

Comments are welcome and, for anyone with a literary mind, I encourage checking out my poetry blog filled with all original works for your reading pleasure.

Also I am on the old Twitter thing so I guess you can follow me at twitter.com/FLYmeatwad.

I Wish You Could Swim Like The Dolphins, Like Dolphins Can Swim

The Cove (Psihoyos, 2009)

While I would not consider myself very well versed in documentary film making, I do have an interest in these types of films and, when one builds buzz like The Cove, I feel compelled to do everything in my power to check out these types of films. Luckily, The Cove opened at a local theatre this week and I did not have to go incredibly far out of my way to see the film. The power of a documentary is something that few other films, or even many other artistic mediums, can effectively wield because, quite obviously, a documentary has the advantage of, at least to an extent, presenting life in its purest form. I knew little of the material that would be covered, only that dolphins in Japan were a focus, so I was hardly prepared for what I was about to witness.

About a year after the mesmerizing, and Academy Award Winning, doc, Man on Wire, The Cove begins to set up as a documentary that draws influence from various styles of film, most notably espionage films. While The Cove has far fewer constructed sequences than Man on Wire, the comparisons to these genre films are still incredibly warranted because, even without the construction, the entire film is practically an adrenaline rush of social and political intrigue that had me riveted from beginning until end. The action sequences here, and by action I mean the car tailings, the cop stuff, and the actual infiltration, are all nicely handled and enhanced by one of the best scores of the year. The film is surprisingly suspenseful for the type of film that it is and, quite masterfully, never skips a beat in terms of narrative, which is and of itself an impressive characteristic in any type of film, let alone a documentary.

Of course the film also succeeds as a standard documentary as well. The interviews all serve the film's purpose, the examination is immediately identified and builds throughout, and the whole thing advertises a payoff that, unlike in other docs, hits incredibly hard. For example, the film goes about humanizing the dolphins incredibly effectively. However, to say that the film is simply about dolphins is misleading, as Food, Inc, as well as other older documentaries, has chronicled an abusive industry. No, the tragedy of The Cove is elevated by the dolphin trade, but the actual sadness is in the exposure of government policy, the corruption of power, and the countless victims that will result in the future, all of which the film covers nicely. These aspects are all universal, and I would argue that every individual a part of at least once, usually for extended portions of time. The struggle is tragically heartbreaking and seems to be overlooked in favor of the film's more overt material.

SPOILERS FROM HERE ON OUT...I reckon. I mean the trailer kind of spoils it, and I have made references earlier. Still, spoilers.

Still, I do not mean to lessen the effect of the dolphin killings on screen, as the film serves wonderfully as a call to arms for that particular cause as well. The entire film's intrigue is built on seeing the inside of this cove, and once the film really starts to drive at that things start to pick up immensely. And of course that all leads to the hidden cameras in the cove, and the final fifteen minutes of the film, which also happen to be the best fifteen minutes or so of the year in cinema thus far. Soul shatteringly gruesome, the massacre of these dolphins is shown in full force, capped off by the greatest shot of the year, a cove where the water has gone completely red. The film then starts to wrap things up in grandiose fashion. One interview we have been seeing throughout the entire film is revealed to have taken place after the discovery of the footage, as O'Barry, after just being shot down with "I told you, we are not going to talk about what ifs," pulls out a camera and asks the man to take a look at some footage. Sure it's not very professional, I guess, but it's such a satisfying conclusion, you just want the man to be confronted with this evidence. And his reaction is priceless. Cue the reveal at the IWC, the final monologue, the obligatory call to arms, and then the mesmerizing introduction of David Bowie's "Heroes" as the credits start to roll.

It started during that hidden camera sequence, but by this point I had been effectively bowled over. I recall getting upset over films, I recall weeping after seeing George Washington, but until watching The Cove I had never broken down in tears in a movie theater. The political implications I talked about earlier, mixed with the chilling score and the scenes of the red water left me practically immobile. Does the film have some flaws as a documentary? Probably, as there are one or two points that really do not go very far. Does The Cove present all the facts? I don't really know. However, as I finally worked up the strength to leave the theater and began stumbling my way to the car before breaking down again, I was practically positive that The Cove is nothing short of one of, if not definitively, the best films of the year so far.

A+ or 4.9128934721842374230174

Comments are welcome and, for anyone with a literary mind, I encourage checking out my poetry blog filled with all original works for your reading pleasure.

Also I am on the old Twitter thing so I guess you can follow me at twitter.com/FLYmeatwad.

There'll Always Be A Few Things, Maybe Several Things, That Your Gonna Find Really Difficult To Forgive

Princess Mononoke (Miyazaki, 1997)

Well, I suppose it is about time that I get to Miyazaki's crown gem, or what I assume is his crown gem considering that Spirited Away is not nearly that great. Going into Princess Mononoke I had only the film's reputation to go on as I did not know anything of the film's plot. Of course as I gazed down at my Netflix sleeve to see that the run time was listed as two hours and fourteen minutes I found myself pretty worried that this film was going to be a bit too long for its own good, after all, the best Miyazaki films are the shorter ones. Oh yes, I was also pretty sure that I heard this film dealt with some environmentalism crap, and since I have made it my mission in life to personally see my own carbon footprint before I die I was pretty sure that any overtly environmentally friendly themes would end up pissing me off. But hey, I'm an open minded kind of guy, so bring on the Mononoke!

The first striking characteristic the film possesses, well aside from the visual aesthetic, is found in the form of the story. Now I do not use the word story in the sense that the word refers to plot, but rather I mean to say in the way the story is told. In many ways Princess Mononoke is a fairy tale, not unlike classic Disney films that focus on Princesses, albeit with much more characterization, as it possesses all the whimsy of a magical world existing in a mostly realistic setting. The world is really well established. The story is simple enough that it feels like it is being told instead of watched, a characteristic that is captured perfectly in the film, but I do not think designating Mononoke as a simple fairy tale completely does the film justice. In many ways Princess Mononoke feels more like a myth, lore passed down from generation to generation and being refined through each progressive telling of the tale. Now I'm sure I got this feeling because of the film's context, it does take place in historical Japan, I think, so the fact that it feels like a myth rather than a fairy tale is expected. However, what I found particularly fascinating was how it felt so culturally specific yet works so well for an audience member who is not a part of this culture. I think part of Miyazaki's ability is to craft and play with this universal magic without sacrificing the Japanese element of the film. In short, the way the story is presented is pretty wonderful.

Of course that is not to say that the film is all whimsy and child friendly. The content is rather mature, limbs fly all over the place and blood plays a hefty part in Mononoke, but it is all handled so gracefully. And there is that little environmental aspect, but the film handles it more as a reverence that is nicely disguised to work with the time instead of being something that hits the viewer over the head. Plus the film does not take the whole 'all technology is terrible' route either, so I can definitely appreciate that given the way Miyazaki openly says that both sides can coexist peacefully. The film works as an allegory alright, but as a straight up film it works as well. The opening sequence is riveting and really all of the action sequences are high energy filled thrill rides. On top of that the film mostly nails all of the sombre moments as well, so I am mostly confident when I say that the run time, despite being a little lengthy, is not a detriment to the film at all, though I did need to take a break during the run time for what that is worth. Actually though it is refreshing to see an animated film willing to stretch out the run to over two hours, as most great animated films I generally want to see more of, so having Mononoke take on a lengthier feel, which also enhances the mythological epic feeling, was a wise choice.

Speaking of animated films, all the technical aspects on display here are top notch. From character animation to the way scenes are drawn, the film is a visual power house. Obviously the imagination in the fantastic characters is going to stand out, Miyazaki has a way with designing these larger creatures that oozes originality, but the real strength is the way that he designs the worlds. The forests, the mountains, and the towns all have a believable beauty to them, not to mention that the traditionally drawn animals are incredible. However, to enhance these creatures, the ones that actually speak are voiced with an insane intensity that makes for numerous great voicing performances. Now I watched the film with subtitles so really all I could go on was how the lines were delivered, but even with this I found myself mostly swept away with the characters. A lot of effort apparently went into the dub as well, so I watched a few scenes with the American voice cast and I can mostly say that the quality of the voice acting there is at least on the level of the Japanese voices. The film, all around, sounds spectacular. Mix that with a brilliant score and the film records high marks in terms of technical quality as well.

So by now it should be pretty obvious that I loved my time with Princess Mononoke. The film is mature, complex, and pretty much a master piece. It avoids the pitfalls that plague some of Miyazaki's lesser works like Spirited Away and Howl's Moving Castle, and I would have to say that it rivals My Neighbor Totoro and possibly even Porco Rosso as the best Miyazaki film that I have seen. Okay, well maybe not Porco Rosso, but I certainly love it as much as Totoro. Any minor problems that I found with Princess Mononoke have quickly been forgotten in one night's time and I am left remembering all of the breath taking positives. On the whole, the film seems to capture what is great about animation, both Eastern and Western, and I think for that alone Princess Mononoke deserves to be championed as an artistic accomplishment. Truly one of the best films ever made.

A+ or 4.83748324623954163596159

Comments are welcome and, for anyone with a literary mind, I encourage checking out my poetry blog filled with all original works for your reading pleasure.

Also I am on the old Twitter thing so I guess you can follow me at twitter.com/FLYmeatwad.

Surrenderin' For What? No Wavin' The Bandanna. Tell The Tool Man How I Handle The Damn Hammer

Boyz N the Hood (Singleton, 1991)

I was glancing over my other reviews and I noticed that, with the possible exception of The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad, I have yet to write a definitively negative review for a film. Going into Boyz N The Hood I was aware that director John Singleton is the only African American to ever be nominated for Best Director and, I learned this later, he is also the youngest nominee for the category. Now add that into the fact that I knew the film had a reputation for being a really great and insightful look at urban violence that neither glorifies or condemns the lifestyle, though that proves to be a misleading notion, while telling a compelling story with believable characters. I usually like films of this nature, the ones that ask questions and expose problems. So mix all of these things together with my fairly high expectations and what result is yielded? My first overtly negative reflection, of course.

Boyz N the Hood starts off wielding a ten ton hammer that is swung around with more violent rage than any act of brutality in the whole film, all in an attempt to hit the viewer over the head with some simplistic parallel that apparently is designed to be deep or insightful or something like that which hardly works. The scene which I refer to is, of course, the one where the children see that blood is turning yellow and one says "that's because of the plasmids separating," or a similar line. Oh boy, it's like the kids are learning the same thing as everyone except in a different way because of their living circumstances. The streets are just as educational as the classroom. Piss off, John Singleton, you think this is anything but a needlessly overt way to start off a film? Mix that in a few scenes later with Trey's arrival at his father's house depicting, after cleaning, a run down lawn shown alongside the neighbor's beautiful green grass. Lovely, everything is always greener on the other side. Good move.

Thankfully, Singleton backs off of these cliched and overly simplistic literary devices when the boys exit childhood and become high school seniors preparing for the end of school. Sadly, what replaces these tired devices proves to be just as detrimental to the film. Singleton essentially trades in his run down Toyota for a tractor with two wheels. The script takes an odd turn to a very cliched Hollywood story telling sense where a love interest is needlessly thrown in, a wife and bastard child are added to set up for more emotional impact later in the film, and the story takes no turn from the first party until the credits. The film just feels like an independent film fighting with a Hollywood film and, much like Doughboy and Ricky earlier, the film just gets dingy and gives up. While there are the occasional sequences that do take a few risks, as a whole the film is so by the numbers that these small probes into meaningful territory are completely undermined.

What seemed so tough whilst watching the film though was not that the film simply kept inserting cliche after cliche, but that it needlessly heightened just about every circumstance and conflict. A scene towards the end where Ricky's SAT scores are revealed proves to be absolutely cringe worthy. Singleton forces stakes into the film and they really stick out as cheap and unnecessary when placed alongside what is supposed to be a tragically brutal and realistic portrayal of impoverished life. On top of that, Singleton's direction, while a few really great shots are used, such as the walk down the rail road tracks, is pretty erratic, ranging from terrible to incredible at any moment in the film. Toss in the score and many times the film started to feel less like an in depth look at urban life and more like an after school special.

Perhaps Singleton's most apparent crime in the film is not inserting needless drama, though that charge is mighty hefty, but rather the most glaring flaw is Singleton's refusal to let the film speak without dialogue. Despite having opportunities, and even using them at times, to imply things instead of directly speaking to the viewer, Singleton feels compelled to give elongated monologues where Larry Fishburne speaks to the audience about his message, and it really comes off as insincere and overly constructed. Then there are parts where someone talks about how things just keep happening "over and over again." It's all pretty painful to listen to and detracts from any impact the film hopes to make on a viewer. The film is not helped by the actors either. Fishburne is decent, but Cuba is pretty bad and Ice Cube is mostly tolerable.

And of course there is the fact that the film is going over territory already explored in much greater depth, in much more detail and with much more sophistication, in other films. The whole concept of being trapped and unable to escape, or the perceived mentality of being contained, is straight out of Charles Burnett's wonderful film Killer of Sheep. Aside from being a much more striking and emotionally engaging film, Killer of Sheep also exists in a much more reserved fashion and does not need to insult the viewer by spoon feeding ideas at each possible opportunity. On top of this, Spike Lee has explored the other territory this film masquerades as exploring in an attempt to appear complex and thought provoking. Despite it not being a tremendous film, Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing provides a more engaging and insightful look at urban life and the injustices of American society without resorting to the theatrics on display in Singleton's film, allowing for a more naturalistic film that enhances the message instead of detracts.

Much like Do The Right Thing, Boys N the Hood becomes incredibly overt at the end. Yet while Spike continues to call on reality, Boyz N the Hood continues to rely on its cheap theatrics to attempt and force a greater emotional impact on the viewer before proving to be an ultimately hollow experience. The follow up 'here's what these characters are doing now' lines that fade in and out, aside from reinforcing the After School Special feeling, continue to draw attention to the fact that everything on screen is artificially heightened and constructed; thus, any attempt to draw parallels between these characters and the reality is, for the umpteenth time, ground into a dust and blown away in the wind.

Ultimately, Boyz N the Hood is nothing more than a jumbled mishmash of ideas that are far too willing to conform to Hollywood convention to discover the sort of effective statement that the film so desperately attempts to find. Even without considering the fact that other films, and older films, have done what Singleton attempts, Boyz N the Hood still proves to be a joke of a film that struggles to ever find ground solid enough to stand on either as a high profile Hollywood film or as a thought provoking call to social action. I honestly would like to know if anyone, after seeing the Burnett film and the Lee film, can still make a case for Boyz N the Hood being worth much at all. Hell, I'd be interested in hearing this case made even from someone who has not seen either the Lee or Burnett films because it baffles me that this film can be considered anything except for glorified garbage. I imagine there is more entertainment and more insight to be gained from watching Don't Be a Menace to South Central While Drinkin' Your Juice in the Hood.

D/D+ or 1.718921742381742835723108

Comments are welcome and, for anyone with a literary mind, I encourage checking out my poetry blog filled with all original works for your reading pleasure.

Also I am on the old Twitter thing so I guess you can follow me at twitter.com/FLYmeatwad.

Let Me Hear You Say, "Fight the Power!"

Welcome to Processed Grass, my blog for film, music, television, novels, and any other forms of culture that are not directly video game related, as those cultural venues are covered over at Multiplatform. I will give a proper first post later, but for now let's kick things off with a reflection on a brand new film!

Public Enemies (Mann, 2009)

My first experience with Michael Mann comes in the form of Public Enemies, the period piece dealing with John Dillinger, events that I have minimal knowledge about and mostly only know that Nick Twisp would like to adopt the surname in the Youth in Revolt series. Still, it bills Depp and Bale as the lead actors and the 'lesser' roles are really nothing to sneeze at either, so regardless of my knowledge of the events I should at least be able to fall back on a well known director and a good number of big name actors in what I assume, judging by the release date, is so big budget summer popcorn film that is going to follow up Transformers. I mean all the pieces are in place for a smash hit thrill ride that follows the gangster formula and plays to a market that really hasn't seen a similar film released since The Departed, correct?

Well, partially I suppose. Mann's direction ranges from brilliant to irritating, though he handles all of the action sequences spectacularly, unlike two other films featuring Bale released recently, and really the whole film is visually stunning. The costumes are great, the scenes are beautiful, and there are a number of shots that are simply top notch. All in all I'm pretty pleased with what Mann put together. Similarly, the acting is pretty damn great as well, though I don't really understand why Bale is billed as a lead. Sure he plays an important role in the plot, but he is not in the film an incredible amount of time and there are points where it is easy to forget that he is even around. When he is on screen though he's really good, playing his character believably and drifting in and out of accents that seem straight out of his 3:10 to Yuma character and the Jack Rollins character from I'm Not There. The real star though, as expected, is Depp. His performance is perfect, he brings so much to the Dillinger character that each moment he is on screen the audience is left guessing what he will do and how he will react to the situations around him. Depp plays things cool and collected when needed but he also captures the force of a truly dangerous man, it's damn impressive.

Aside from the leads though, all of the supporters do an excellent job whether their roles be small or large. Obviously the next biggest role is the love interest, played by Marion Cotillard, and she does make the most out of her screen time. I haven't seen her in anything else so I really do not have anything else to compare her performance to, but she does a really nice job here and there are a few scenes, one particular one later on, where she is pretty fantastic. Sometimes great actors and actresses come together, and I'm not saying that Bale is a great actor, and things do not always work as well as they should, but in this film all of the actors did a bang up job that became really refreshing in the midst of a lackluster summer movie season.

Actually, the entire film is a nice break from the summer blockbuster season and from the typical summer popcorn film. What could have easily been a generic over the top gangster film takes on quite a few layers by not cramming itself full of overblown gun fights or bank robberies, actually the number of each are kept surprisingly minimal, and really remaining focused on watching the characters exist in this brilliantly established world and documenting what was happening. I'd actually be really surprised if this film makes a ton of money or if it becomes associated with the stereotypical summer blockbuster because the film seems to go above and beyond that label by ignoring most conventions found in other releases this year like Star Trek or Transformers 2.

To be honest the most notable difference between those films, and I suppose a similarity as well, is how plot is handled during the film. Dillinger speaks about not living in the past or being overly concerned about the future, it's all about "where you're going," and the film seems to follow this idea in the way the film is set up. Minimal back story or motivation is given, perhaps because it's a 'true' story or perhaps not, and the film never clearly establishes a definitive goal that should be reached by the end; very little overarching plot exists in the film. Still, the film is incredibly captivating. This structure is mighty interesting and should make for a dull film that does not demand engagement, but Mann establishes the world so perfectly that it is simple to be swept away and simply go along as an observer in a manner that combines all the entertainment of a film with the interesting aspects of a History Channel special. It's pretty damn impressive and it is nice to see Mann not overly cram the film with cliche and convention in favor of entertainment and an easy to swallow film. He simply lets the film exist, adding to the 'real world' quality and enhancing the world that is presented, all blending together spectacularly.

So do I know if all the facts line up? Probably not. Is it the best film of the year or a transcendental experience? Nope. Hell, do I even think that it is one of the best gangster films ever made? Certainly not. But Mann provides an entertaining, interesting, and exciting film that is a breath of fresh air in an over crowded, explosion filled summer, and for that I can be pleased.

B+ or 4.189812423748214727895637198

Comments are welcome and, for anyone with a literary mind, I encourage checking out my poetry blog filled with all original works for your reading pleasure.

Also I am on the old Twitter thing so I guess you can follow me at twitter.com/FLYmeatwad.

Photos from cinematical.com, scribeculture.com, and joblo.com in order of appearance