Kenception

I know, I know, I know.  I’ve heard the rumors too.  Let me go ahead and dispel them right now.  Ken is not dead.  True, his lack of posting over this last month has given much credence to the numerous theories, however his only response is this simple comeback: I just haven’t seen many movies lately.  Sure, there’s been a Coraline, Grizzly Man and Bottle Rocket, but other than that, nothing.  Sorry to disappoint.

That being said, after weeks – nay, months – of waiting, Ken has finally seen the movie he has been waiting to see.  Inception.  He must say that it was painful to endure the weeks gone by of other humans discussing, debating, praising, parsing and other such conversational exercises of the merits of Christopher Nolan‘s most recent film.  So he finally put his foot down and saw the damn thing.  To say that he liked it doesn’t quite capture the sentiment.  It wasn’t simply a matter of liking or loving, something about Inception moved him, and it had little to do with the surrounding controversy.  To help break down his feelings, he would like to revert to a favored format of reviewing, the Top Ken.  He tends to use this only for the heaviest of weights in cinema, and to say Inception is a heavyweight is a bit obvious at this point.  So, after weeks of wondering what Ken thinks about Inception, he delivers the goods.

1.  Christopher Nolan has to be considered a living master at this point.  His ability to blow and bend minds without resorting to cheap tricks or never-before-seen technology is a testament to his creativity.  I mean come on, Memento, Batman Begins, The Prestige, The Dark Knight and now this?  Yikes.  And this guy is only 40 years old.  Everything he has touched has turned not only to gold, but a very cool, unique kind of gold.  Inception is a beautifully directed film that looks great on every level and actually keeps you on the edge of your seat for over a good hour and a half.  It kept Ken smiling almost throughout and he was so very pleased with just about everything he saw.

2. The hotel room/hallway sequence alone is worth the price of admission.  I have heard (meaning I haven’t done the research to actually look into it) that everything was done without special effects for this scene, which makes it that much more incredible.

3. The cast is obviously great, and the acting lives up to the billing.  Leo is, as always, damn good.  Ellen Page gets the job done even though her part is more than a bit expositional.  Ken Wantanabe rules.  Marion Cotillard has become the de facto “it” girl for filmmakers who are looking for someone sexy who hasn’t been seen too many times and delivers the goods.  Michael Caine isn’t there long, but it’s always nice to see him.  Tom Berenger makes a well received appearance.  Cillian Murphy (who I remain 100% neutral on, meaning I’ve never liked nor disliked him) is serviceable in his role.  Even Pete Postlewaite gets in on the action.  Tom Hardy is probably the best of the bunch and would have stolen the show if not for…

4. Ken’s strange man-crush on Joseph Gordon-Levitt.  For whatever reason Ken has grown more and more in love with young JGL of late.  I am proud to say that I have been a fan of his since way back in the days of Holy Matrimony and Angels In The Outfield, and when he was cast as the lead in Brick, I was quite pleased to see him as a star.  Then came (500) Days Of Summer which Ken loved and JGL killed in, and the floodgates seem to be opening.  Not so secretly, I’m hoping that he can follow in the footsteps of Leo or Drew Barrymore as a star that makes it out of childhood and into A-list status, although I’ll settle for an Elijah Wood-type arc if need be.  I think maybe his clothes had something to do with it, but I loved him so much in this movie and the aforementioned hotel sequence only made him seem that much cooler.  Somewhere last year’s man-crush Adam Lambert has mascara rolling down his cheeks knowing that Ken has moved on to a new man.

5. I bought the love story.  I’ve not heard many people talk about this, but I was genuinely moved by Leo and Marion’s love and without giving anything away that wasn’t in the trailer, believed the tears.  I would love to hear the opinions of other everlasting lovers on this one.

6. I know it was in the trailer, but the moment when Arthur (JGL) is trying in vain to shoot the electrical boxes and needs Eames (Hardy) to help him out is delightful.  ”You mustn’t be afraid to dream a little bigger darling” just sounds so cool, and then to back it up by pulling out the big guns, perfect.  It felt very Dark Knight-esque and I’m not sure why but quite probably my favorite part of the whole movie.

7. Here is where things get a bit dicey.  The idea of creation, which is so prevalent on many different levels, was both interesting and inspiring.  Ken resonated not only with the creation in the film, but the creation of the film itself.  This was one hell of a tricky movie to come up with, and yet they did and it looked great.  How does someone think this stuff up?  Hats off again to Mr. Nolan.  Afterwards I felt so compelled to create.  To write. To make movies.  To do something great.  Now whether or not that ever happens, I would like to at least thank Inception for planting that seed in my mind (you see what I did there?).

8.  On the other hand, I also felt incredibly sad after seeing the movie because I am well aware that something as magical as Inception just doesn’t exist within Ken’s head.  Now this is not me crying in my soup nor disbelieving in myself, it is just that my mind doesn’t work that way.  I loved the romance, I loved the science, I loved the action, I loved how cool everyone looked, I loved the visual effects.  I pretty much loved everything about Inception but I also know that what drew me to it is definitely not what I see within myself.  Does that make sense?  Basically, I felt inadequate after watching this movie.  I suppose that is part of what is great about art: it puts you in your place while inspiring you at the same time.  Something good has to come of that if you work towards it.

If you haven’t seen the movie, stop reading now.  Seriously.  I’m going to touch upon my thoughts about some sensitive, spoiling issues here and I don’t want to ruin anything for any of those who haven’t seen it.  I am going to continue typing for a few minutes if only to put some line barriers between here and the next two points to keep your eyes from drifting.  Perhaps I will take this moment to mention that I have a theory about Leonardo Dicaprio and how there is no perfect role for him and how he will never be typecast.  I’ve been sitting on this for a long time and at some point will actually get around to writing a full-blown essay about it and share it with you.  But for now, just start thinking about when you have seen him playing a role that can be considered right in his wheelhouse.  By that I mean certain great actors have certain roles that are just perfect for them, think Johnny Depp or Philip Seymour Hoffman and how they manage to find those roles that are just so them.  I don’t think Leo has one.  Again, he’s a phenomenal actor and this doesn’t take away from that, but it is interesting nonetheless.  Anyway, hopefully that is enough room between the top 8 and the spoilers.  Again, stop reading now if you don’t want any inside info.

9. I say the last scene is purposefully put in just to mess with us and to get people talking.  I don’t believe that there is a right answer to the question as to real world or dream world and it is up to the audience.  I don’t think there are definitive clues within the film that point one way or another.  For the theorists out there, go ahead and make your theories, but my take is that it’s a choose your own adventure.

10.  That being said, I like to believe that it is the real world.  Call me a dreamer, but ending that movie on a happy note feels a whole lot better than on a mind-deterioratingly sad one.  I mean come on, that top was slowing down right?  If nothing else, it wasn’t spinning perfectly, which it always does in the dream world.  Plus, and I’m not sure if this would stand up in court or not, but Leo never had the memory of his kids’ faces, so why would he now?  If the down ending proponents are right, then everything else in the whole film is called into question as unreal and then what is the point?  Again, I don’t think there really is a right or wrong answer here, but if I had to choose, I choose the happy ending.

So, there it is.  Ken thinks Inception is amazing and has already had ample opportunity to use parallels in everyday conversation, and there is nothing Ken loves more than being able to do that.  To think that you are waiting for Ken’s recommendation to see this means you are silly, but if so, rush out to see it as soon as you ken.

The post you’ve all been waiting for

I just went back and had a look at the poorly written and even poorerly adhered to About Me section, which promised so many things that have not come to fruition.  With that being said, I would like to make good on a promise to write film reviews in haiku form.  Also, this gives me a chance to clean out the backlog, which is great because it has now been so long since seeing some of those movies that any attempt to write an informed review would be silly.  So, without further adieu, let’s 5/7/5 these suckers.

The Informant!

Soderbergh gets it!

The right ‘stache plus the right star

always makes us smile

———————–

Alice In Wonderland

The 3-D was cool,

as was the art direction,

but ’twas not Tim’s best

———————–

The Hurt Locker

A great movie, sure.

But was it really the best?

Absolutely not.

—————————

The Blind Side

We all love Sandy

This was a great film for her.

When’s Speed 3 come out?

————————-

Julie And Julia

Not the greatest script,

but Adams, Streep and Tucci

make it worth Ken’s while

—————————

Hot Rod

It looked really dumb

and lo and behold, it was,

yet Ken laughed a lot

You’ve Got To Have Conflict

One of the first things they will tell you in screenwriting school (which Ken did not attend) is that you’ve got to have conflict.  Without believable and compelling conflict, you have no story.  Without a story, you have no movie (insert loud objections from Ken’s Michael Snow and Bruce Conner fans) and then what’s the point?  Well, I would like to inform my fair readers of one such movie that had conflict in spades and on oh so many levels, The Messenger.

The first and most pressing conflict has nothing to do with the script at all.  In fact, it is borne by the audience.  Should I trust Woody Harrelson‘s ability to deliver a solid performance in what is clearly a heavy film?  I’m not sure that there are many out there who think of Woody as a good actor when they are first posed the question.  He has been known to mail in some pretty garbagey films and his persona in general leads us towards not trusting him.  However, despite his checkered reputation, he has also delivered many a fine performance in top-notch movies.  If you ask Ken, Woody gets a bad rap and should in fact be considered good at his job.  But that is for you to decide, thus, conflict number one.  (Woody is fantastic by the way.  He is believable.  He is powerful.  He is both strong and broken.  He was nominated for an Oscar.  He deserved his nomination.)

The next few levels come within the film itself.  How does a soldier handle the news that he has to deliver the news to people that their son/daughter/husband/etc. has died in war?  How does this soldier deliver said news?  How to respond when a family member goes nuts on him?  All very conflicting elements that smack the lead, Will Montgomery (well played by Ben Foster) in the face within the first twenty minutes.  Immediately this film comes out and throws down the gauntlet, “try to not feel anything when you see me.”

More conflicting still, how does a soldier pick up the pieces of his life upon returning home?  What to do when the love of your life has left you for another man, if only because you went to serve your country and weren’t around?

And yet even more conflicting, what do you do when you fall for a woman when telling her the tragic news that her husband has been killed?  The friendship/romance between Will and Olivia (an interesting turn for Samantha Morton) is really, really strange, but not necessarily in a bad way.  If you are Will, how do you handle this? If you are Olivia, how do you handle this?  The film does a very good job of presenting these questions without giving an obvious answer.  Conflict aside for a moment, there is one scene in particular (the kitchen scene) between the two that is so very well done that I almost felt like applauding afterwards because it could have ruined the movie if handled poorly.

And when it’s all said and done, we are back to the audience’s conflict.  How do I feel about Ben and Olivia?  Do I want to root for them?  Am I appalled by them?  Nothing sits well in the end, but in a strangely satisfying way.  This movie doesn’t tie things up nicely and let you go on your way.  It forces you to think about it, to engage not only with the fictional characters, but the actual people who are in fact professional bearers of bad news.

All told, this is a very good movie and should be seen by more people.  I would imagine that in a few months time (if not already), this will be forgotten, and that is a shame, because it is worth our time and our thoughts.  Look out for a very interesting performance by Steve Buscemi, who plays a character that we are not accustomed to seeing from him.  I think that it is a bit of a moot point by now to say that he is a fine actor, but his role in The Messenger adds a new dimension and Ken, for one, found it refreshing to see him do it.  Rent The Messenger on a night when you want a meatier film to think about.  It’s probably best to have someone around to discuss it with, but it might just add even more conflict if you have to deal with it yourself.

Here’s To The All Whites

Those poor, poor Kiwis.  Not only was their heroic World Cup draw against Italy quickly forgotten in light of the American’s wild finish yesterday, but sadly, it was unrewarded as well, becoming only the 4th team in history to not advance despite not losing a game.  Well Ken will not let that stand.  While proudly sporting a Waikato t-shirt, I’m going to drop a review and a few random Kiwi film thoughts on you.

Whale Rider

This wonderful and beautiful coming of age tale first hit American shores back in 2003.  It quickly gained popularity due to deserved praise on the festival circuit and even garnered an Oscar nomination for its young star, Keisha Castle-Hughes.  Writer-Director Niki Caro‘s Whale Rider focuses on a small Maori village awaiting its ancestor, Paikea, to return and lead once again.  The village elder, Koro, excellently played by Rawiri Paratene, begins training the youth in the warriorly pursuits fundamental to leadership.  He refuses, however to train his granddaughter (also named Paikea), because girls cannot be chief, despite her more than capable qualifications.  It’s a relatively slow story, but extremely powerful, exploring social, gender, familial and spiritual constructs.  Paikea’s tribute to her grandfather near the end of the second act is one of the most powerful scenes Ken has ever seen.  You’ll know it when you see it, and you will not be unmoved, unless you are a snake.

The script is very good, expertly showing native culture with great dialogue from start to finish.  The cast, particularly Castle-Hughes, is phenomenal.  Obviously, when dealing with New Zealand, the setting is gorgeous and is well filmed.  Shot on a relatively meager budget of $6 million NZD ($4.2 million US), this shows just how resourceful and creative Kiwi filmmakers can be, and proving once again, that a great film needn’t cost the world.  If you have any knowledge of Maori culture, you will likely enjoy this even more so, but if not, you will still find it beautiful.  It definitely adds to the magic and mystique of New Zealand that makes all Americans (and the rest of the world really) want to go there.  Seriously, go out with Summer for ten minutes and someone will inevitably ask where she is from, then proceed to tell her how much they want to go there or loved it when they were.  Anyways, this is a great film and Ken strongly recommends it to everyone.

Now as for other Kiwi films.  As I have mentioned before, I am still longing for the day when Boy is released in the States.  It showed well at Sundance, which gives me hope that it will make it out here some day, but when that day is, I am not sure.  If you are looking for a few more real Kiwi films (Lord Of The Rings doesn’t count), I have a few suggestions for you.  Eagle Vs. Shark is easily accessible for all Flight Of The Conchords fans due to its star, Jemaine Clement.  It’s cute and funny and shows a different NZ than what you are expecting.  The World’s Fastest Indian was a crowd pleaser, although not Ken’s favorite.  The Piano was a massive success.  Perhaps the most important NZ film is 1994′s Once Were Warriors, which will absolutely shed a whole new light on the country and culture.  It isn’t the best made film for production value, but it is fabulous content-wise.  Every Kiwi has seen this one and will likely warn you to watch it but to be prepared.  And then of course, is Ken’s favorite Kiwi TV show, Bro’Town.  Plenty of the jokes will be lost on you if you’ve not been there, but it never fails to make Ken giggle.  You can check out a few clips here.

Anyways, here is to the All Whites and to Kiwis everywhere.  If we’re lucky, maybe, just maybe, this site will have a Go Bats! review coming soon, which celebrates all things Pirongia.  Enjoy yourselves responsibly, and God defend New Zealand.

Oh the damn French

Nobody likes the French, that’s a given.  But there are some things that just cannot be denied when it comes to the pesky frogs, one of them being that they know how to make a damn good film.  With the France-Mexico World Cup game looming and a possible theatrical viewing of Breathless on the horizon, Ken thought it would be a good idea to go ahead and discuss the most recent French film he’s seen, Coco Avant Chanel.

I challenge anyone with a heartbeat to look Ken in his one good eye and tell him that they didn’t fall in love with Audrey Tautou when they first saw Amelie.  She’s made several movies since then, but she will forever be known as Amelie.  This is a shame, because she is a fine actress who should be recognized for the good work that she does.  Case in point, Coco Avant Chanel.  Everyone wanted to see this movie (mostly because of the draw of Tautou), but few actually did.  This is also a shame.  Coco makes a strong case for the best film Ken has seen in 2010.

The story follows young Coco Chanel from the dance halls and saloons, to the top of the fashion world, with a world of growth, love and heartbreak in-between.  Tautou plays Chanel with a masterful blend of strong-willed stubbornness and creative innocence.  I believe her – and in her – every step of the way.  The supporting cast does a fine job of shaping and sharpening Coco as she discovers who she is meant to be.  I will say that Benoit Poelvoorde (so, so very Belgian) is remarkable as her benefactor/keeper/sometimes lover and deserves high praise for the performance he gives.  On the other hand Alessandro Nivola (surprisingly American) seems slightly creepy as the true love of Coco’s life.  I think it’s his teeth that put me off, too much of them.  His acting isn’t bad, he just looks funny and it was a real distraction for Ken.

Shot beautifully by cinematographer Christophe Beaucarne, the sights and sounds of turn-of-the-century France come alive to terrific effect.  If you look closely, many of the shots are taken straight from classical impressionist painting.  The film actually sheds light on said paintings, giving them a three-dimensional life, and adding a modern contrast with Coco’s own stylings.  The costuming needed to be perfect, especially given the subject matter, and it was.  If Ken was a woman, he would have loved going through still shots of the film to form the basis of a new wardrobe.  Obviously Ken is not a woman, thus, he does not care, but it is worth mentioning.

This movie won’t be for everyone.  Most young, single men will likely not see it because a)it is about a fashion designer and b)it is French, but I do think that there is a lot more to this film than just that.  It is an extremely well done period piece that manages to break out of the large shadow cast by its subject matter.  It is reminiscent of another recent period piece with a well known history, 2005′s Pride & Prejudice (which we will be getting to in a few weeks).  Ladies, you already want to see this movie, so no encouragement is necessary, but guys, Ken strongly recommends this one, especially if you are in need of a date night rental.

The Colin Farrell Question

Please pardon me for interrupting the not-so-continuous streak of reviews to try and answer a burning question that has been bothering me for some time now.  The question, that had for so long been obviously answered with a resounding no, has been thrust upon Ken over the course of this past year and has forced some serious fanship introspection: is Ken a Colin Farrell fan?  The latest Farrell film to weigh in is the Terry Gilliam-Heath Ledger vehicle The Imaginarium Of Dr. Parnassus.  I will sidestep the typical review of the film, offering only that I liked it a lot and it continues to show just how tragic the death of Heath Ledger was to the cinematic community.  Instead, I would like to use this as another piece of the oh-so confusing puzzle that is Ken’s relationship with Colin Farrell.

This story begins back in 2002.  Freshly graduated from Granite Bay High School, still reeling from the heartbreak of the fixed Western Conference Finals, before he was ever called Ken, young KC Brown went to the movies to see the latest Steven Spielberg picture Minority Report.  He liked the movie, but was confused by the new actor who had so much screen time as the polarizing Danny Witwer, Colin Farrell.  Who was this guy?  Did I like him or hate him?  At the time, that was all I had to go on and couldn’t make head nor tail of it.  I figured I would just have to wait and see.

Not long after, I would see the movie The Recruit.  It had been highly recommended by a friend and looked interesting from a spy movie/action flick perspective.  It sucked.  It sucked big time and I hated every minute of it.  And nothing sucked more than Colin Farrell.  I had my answer.  Then I saw Phone Booth, American Outlaws, Daredevil and SWAT, Colin Farrell’s career had been cemented.   I hated him so much that he was easily my least favorite actor.  I didn’t even bother with Alexander, despite the fact that it was Oliver Stone, just because I couldn’t handle that much CF.

One day I saw some of the movie Tigerland, which actually looked sort of interesting.  Colin Farrell was the star, but he didn’t seem like the man I so detested.  Maybe because this had come out years before I had come to hate him, or maybe it was because it was a semi-decent movie.  Oh well, it still didn’t detract from my dislike.  Miami Vice came out and was not a viewable option for all the same reasons.

Then came In Bruges.  When Ken (now a few years into Kenship) saw the previews, he went into full on “I refuse to see this and it looks so incredibly stupid if only because of it’s star” mode.  It was, to my surprise, nominated for Best Original Screenplay and was hailed as a fantastic film by anyone who saw it.  Granted, no one saw it, but the critics loved it and so did these two kids standing near me at the theater around the time it came out.  A year went by and Ken was bored one day and stuck with a glut of choices On-Demand.  For some unknown reason, he went for it.  Maybe it was the draw of Brenden Gleeson and Ralph Fiennes.  Maybe it was to see another Farrell train-wreck.  I will never know.  Either way, I hit the rent button and away we went.

As the first act came and went, I found myself drawn into the story and the characters and the wonderfully written dialogue.  Things continued to progress and I found myself actually enjoying the things coming out of Colin Farrell’s mouth.  By the end, I was openly rooting for him.  It felt so very unnatural, but I couldn’t help it, the movie was just that good (please, please go see this by the way) and Farrell was terrific.  Afterwards I sat in confusion.  Everything I had known up to this point seemed to be wrong in a two hour span.  Surely this was just a one-off though and soon all would be right.

Later, as Ken has previously told you, I was to see Crazy Heart and be stunned by how much I wanted more of Colin Farrell.  He was one of the more promising parts of the film and criminally underused.  Most recently came Imaginarium where I once again found myself enjoying him.  In fact, it seemed as though my former hatred of any screen time afforded Farrell had been shifted to Jude Law, who I thought was the weakest part of Imaginarium.  I am now genuinely interested in seeing Ondine, where Farrell plays an Irish fisherman who catches a woman he thinks might be a mermaid.

The strangest part about it is not that he has made a few good movies, but I am now rethinking prior roles.  The Minority Report question could have gone either way as to whether or not he was good, but now it seems obvious that he was, in fact, very good in it.  Tigerland looks to be a must-watch and I can finally see Alexander (which I realize was panned heavily, but don’t care because it is still Oliver Stone).  Maybe Phone Booth was a decent thriller despite it’s silly premise.  Maybe American Outlaws was just a stupid fun movie.  There will never be any reconciliation for Daredevil, SWAT or The Recruit, but three stinkers is hardly enough to base a lifetime of hate on.

So here we are.  Ken is confused.  Is he a Colin Farrell fan?  Perhaps we will have to wait and see.  Give him a few more years and see if he can keep up his recent string of good work.  If so, count me in.  If not, well, bummer.  I may not ever be a fan, but it is safe to say that as of right now, Colin Farrell is not Ken’s least favorite actor.

Two Docs & A Sleeper (and not in no nice way)

In yet another effort to clean up the backlog, Ken has decided to go with three more quick reviews.  If you aren’t interested in documentaries, go ahead and skip the first two.

This Is It

Ken has an interesting relationship with this one.  Something people tend to forget is that for years and years it was so very uncool to say that you liked Michael Jackson.  I know it sounds insane now, but basically from the mid-90s to the mid 00s, any high school kid claiming fanship was silly.  This, of course, had little to do with the music itself, and so much more to do with the undeniable fact that MJ was a weirdo with a shady history.  Around 2003 though, he became less toxic and at least it was ok to come out of the MJ closet again.  But nothing could prepare Ken for the explosion of adoration and love following his death last year.  It was as though he had never been uncool and to not know his entire catalogue was a sign of ignorance.

When he announced that he was doing a comeback tour, I remember thinking to myself, “this is never actually going to happen.”  It seemed as though every year there were rumors of a concert or tour, and every year he found some way to back out.  Tragically, he found yet another way to prove me right.  But at least they salvaged the situation by making a movie about it.  Or so I thought.

This Is It became the stand in for the real thing.  I was pretty excited to see it, especially with all the hype it was getting.  When I finally did though, it felt like the poorest of substitutes.  Yes, it was definitely cool to see some of the dance moves that made him such a renowned showman.  It was equally exciting to watch the planned music videos and the lights and choreography.  I think my favorite part of the whole movie was watching the American Idol-like dance tryouts.

The problem, though, was that it just wasn’t that compelling of a movie.  I certainly do not fault director and fellow Ken, Kenny Ortega for this.  You could tell that this was a labor of love and tribute to a friend.  But still, it just got really boring.  One of the great staples of MJ’s career were his extended music videos/shorter films:  Moonwalker, Captain EO, Ghosts.  Had This Is It been another hour long music video, I would have been much happier.  But as a feature documentary, this really, really dragged out to the point that I tried stopping it early many times, only to second guess myself in case there was a big finale.  There wasn’t.  Ken thinks you should watch this for a while, but don’t be afraid to do something else while it plays in the background.

Man On Wire

Now here we have a fascinating documentary.  For those of us born after 1974, there once was a man who walked on a tightrope between the twin towers.  His name is Philippe Petit.  He is French.  He wrote a book about it and then someone made a movie about it.  The movie is called Man On Wire.

The very first thing that comes to mind when you hear that someone walked on a tightrope across the twin towers is, “that guy is nuts.”  The very first thing that comes to mind when you see Philippe Petit on screen sharing his story is, “that guy is nuts.”  Petit is not just an acrobatic tightrope walker, but an artist.  He has all the earmarks of self-involved artist: a bit crazy, a bit manipulative, a bit genius, a bit dreamer.  But what sets him apart (aside from the medium) is that he is joyful.  He just seems so damn happy about it all.  During the process it feels slightly creepy how animated he is, but by the end you just kind of put your hands on your hips and smile.

The film itself includes original footage from the preparation of the event, interviews with the people involved and some new dramatized footage.  It makes for an interesting and mostly enjoyable viewing.  Yes, it does get boring from time to time, and you kind of tire of seeing and hearing Petit, but it is such an interesting topic and even though you know he is going to succeed, some suspense is managed, which is impressive.  If nothing else, there is some amazing footage of a man doing some amazing things.  Ken thinks this is definitely worth watching.

The Invention Of Lying

Boring.  This movie was boring and this review will be boring.  Ricky Gervais pretty much does it all in The Invention Of Lying and other than the premise, not much good comes out of it.  He lives in a world where lying has never been thought of and everything is boring and everyone is brutally honest all the time.  He then discovers how to lie and makes his life significantly better, although he has to learn some lessons along the way.  It seems like a great idea, and it is, but the execution was really lacking.

Ricky Gervais is obviously very funny, but he hasn’t challenged himself very much recently and his character is wearing thin.  Maybe had this movie come out five or six years ago, it would have been hilarious, but we’ve seen the awkward guy a million times in those last five or six years and it gets old.  What’s worse, is that there is a wonderful supporting cast (mostly in cameos) that similarly does very little to get this thing off the ground.  Rob Lowe was funny, but that’s pretty much it.  I will say that I chuckled throughout the movie.  There were definitely humorous moments from beginning to end, but I expect some belly laughs from this cast, and particularly from Gervais.  They never came.  Summer tried and succeeded to fall asleep during the movie because she was so bored.  I tried and failed and was frustrated with my failure.  It just wasn’t good.  Ken definitely thinks you shouldn’t waste your time with this one.

8.5, Nine, Ken

Nine

It only took about ten seconds of trailer for Ken to fall head over heels in love with Rob Marshall‘s latest film Nine.  Somehow, it managed to even overshadow my excitement for the impending release of The Fantastic Mr. Fox, and nothing short of the resurrection of Alfred Hitchcock could overshadow my excitement for a new Wes Anderson film.  Let’s look at this objectively:  the director of Chicago making another Chicago-esque musical, Daniel Day Lewis leading an all-star cast and the ghost of Frederico Fellini and his masterpiece 8 1/2 hovering over it all.  That is a deadly combination for enjoyment. Ken was already picking this as his Oscar favorite even before seeing it (it didn’t get nominated, but we will get to that later).  Well now we are many months removed from initial trailering and Ken has six thoughts on Nine for you:

1. Art direction ruled the day.  Every scene in this film looked stunningly beautiful, or at the very least, incredibly sexy.  The choice of recycling the main set for the various song/dance sequences was the right one and rather than feeling tired, it added to the depth of Guido’s (DDL) memory and torment.  The costuming was perfect.  It just oozed style and definitely left Ken wanting to look more like an Italian film director.  Even the wig that Judi Dench borrowed from Javier Bardem in No Country For Old Men somehow managed to look cool.

2. The cast was mostly spectacular.  Penelope Cruz was wonderful as always.  The aforementioned Dench was great playing a cooler version of her character M in James Bond.  Sophia Loren was a very nice addition.  Nicole Kidman was good with what little screen time she had.  It was Marion Cotillard, however who stole the show.  In a cast of major, major stars, she shined brightest as the loving but neglected wife.  I will say that Kate Hudson seemed a bit out of place.  Maybe it was her character and maybe it was her, who knows.  But I do know that this film would have been just fine without her.

3. I didn’t find the songs to be particularly great.  They weren’t bad, they just weren’t great.  This isn’t a knock on the film, considering this is an adaptation of a stage musical, but I didn’t feel particularly excited about any of them.  It may be unfair to compare Nine to Chicago, but if it went down to song choice, Chicago had it beat hands down.

4. The cinematography was quite impressive.  The art direction and fantastic sets and costumes ensured that what was on the camera looked great, but some very smart moves were made by cinematographer Dion Beebe, capturing everything with it’s proper vibrance, or lack thereof.  Alternating between the grainy old film stock and the super high definition worked great, lending the right tone to the right scenes.

5. As stylistically brilliant as this film was, it was not the overall film experience that Ken was hoping for.  There was something missing.  I am still not sure what it was, but I know I am not alone.  Normally I would chalk this up to overblown expectations, but I am convinced that something genuinely was missing.  If I figure it out, I will let you know.

6. Which brings me to the Oscars.  While Nine was decidedly not the best picture of the year, it certainly deserved a nomination if for no reason other than it’s technical genius.  Considering that there were ten spots available and one of them went to The Blind Side, Nine should have easily grabbed a nod.  I respect the Academy for not grandfathering it in just because it was supposed to (A Serious Man), but I think they put the foot down in the wrong place here.

In sum, Nine was a stylistically perfect movie that looked great.  If we are looking for an overall perfect movie, we might be better off watching the original Guido story, 8 1/2.  If you liked Chicago, you will probably like Nine.  Ken liked Chicago and he liked Nine, but it wasn’t worth all of the blind allegiance that the trailer commanded.

The First Ever Four For One

Ken has found himself in the extremely unenviable position of being way behind on his reviews.  There are eleven that need to be done.  Four of those go so far back that they are going to be ignored unless asked for (The Hurt Locker, Alice In Wonderland, The Blind Side, Julie & Julia), two of them will get more time devoted to them in the near future (Whale Rider, Nine), one of them is going to be a special home video edition (Go Bats) and four are going to be shotgunned right now.  Pardon Ken for today’s lackluster performance, if only because the table needs to be cleared.  As Mario says, here, here, here we go.

It’s Complicated

If you are under the age of 45, there is a very good chance that you will not enjoy this movie.  Nancy Meyers‘ It’s Complicated is perhaps the most adult focused movie I’ve seen in the last decade.  In fact, Ken has never felt more untargeted as an audience member for any movie not rated G.  You know how you listen to older people make jokes and they find it terrifically funny and you can find no semblance of comedy in them?  That applies most of the time in this movie.  I’m not saying this was not funny, just that I need another twenty years of life to reach that point in my humor.  Meryl Streep (quite possibly the greatest actor of all time), Alec Baldwin (comedic genius du jour for people not interested in Judd Apatow) and Steve Martin (comedic genius du 80′s) headline and make for an interesting if older love triangle, with John Krasinsky representing the only link to the younger audience.  Streep, it pains me to say, was off her game.  Martin was tragically underused and miscast.  Baldwin was actually pretty damn funny throughout.  And Krasinsky performed admirably.  In fact, Baldwin and Krasinsky alone took this adults only film and made it highly enjoyable for Ken, who is decidedly not an adult.  If you like 30 Rock and The Office, you will get some pleasure out of this, if not, you Ken skip it.

Sherlock Holmes

Guy Ritchie‘s early career turned him into one of cinema’s finest talents.  It also boxed him in.  Lock Stock & Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch blazed a wonderful trail of funny, gritty, complex gangster life, and left everyone wanting more.  Only Ritchie seemed interested in making other things.  He was roundly panned for his later films for not living up to his earlier works.  And then comes Robert Downey Jr. and Sherlock Holmes, offering the perfect marriage for Ritchie’s sensibilities.  Because of the star (Downey) and the story (the classic Holmes), Ritchie doesn’t have to be the main focus, freeing him up to do what he does best: fast, funny and clever action.  Holmes purists might have hated this for the relatively unfaithful renditions of the story and in particular, of Dr. Watson (Jude Law), but on the whole, this movie did the job and was very entertaining.  Downey was great, Law was pretty good, Rachel McAdams seemed a bit out of place but it’s nice to see her, and of course Eddie Marsan (another unheralded all-star) was terrific.  It’s a good movie.  It’s no Snatch, but fortunately for Ritchie, you aren’t thinking about that while you watch it so you get to appreciate all the things that he does without comparing it to other stuff.

Paper Heart

Ken stayed awake long enough during Paper Heart to like Charlyne Yi and to see Michael Cera do what Michael Cera does, be awkward.  After about fifteen minutes though, he fell asleep and woke up only at the very end to see what had happened, which, by the way, was predictable.  Summer gave me the rundown and I didn’t feel the need to actually see it.  Ken did like the idea of the scripted documentary, but it didn’t seem to be anything worth seeing after the first few minutes.

Rudo Y Cursi

From the writer of Y Tu Mama Tambien comes Rudo Y Cursi, another young man’s battle film starring Diego Luna and Gael Garcia Bernal.  Luna and Garcia Bernal play relatively poor brothers with little going for them in the Mexican countryside.  Tato (Bernal) is the stupid, good looking one who dreams of being a singer.  Beto is hard working with a family, but has a penchant for gambling.  A chance encounter with a soccer scout leads Tato to the big leagues where he becomes a star.  Beto is soon to follow and the film chronicles their personal and professional ups and downs.

Ultimately this film is about the two boys and what a little bit of fame and fortune can do to them, with the beauty of soccer being the overriding motif.  The scenarios are mostly implausible for an American audience, but it doesn’t really matter anyways.  As the plot unfolds we are presented with a very interesting dilemma at the climax, that makes the viewer choose not between which brother they are rooting for, but whether they are rooting for the characters in the story, or for goodness and purity to win out, or perhaps love of the game.  I don’t want to give away too much here, thus the nondescript nature of that last sentence, but it will make more sense when you see it.

If you are a fan of the Cuaron brothers and Y Tu Mama Tambien in particular, then you will probably like this.  Sex is replaced with soccer as a means of creating conflict between the two boys, but they both perform admirably again and Carlos Cuaron shows us that he really is a strong voice in Mexican cinema.  Ken doesn’t give it a must-see rating, but it is worth seeing if you are looking for a foreign film that is substantial but not too heavy.  There you go.

And I am glad those are out of the way so we can move on without feeling like these four movies got gypped out of their due Ken thoughts.

That Old Comedy Pitfall

The Men Who Stare At Goats

I first saw this book back in England at my friends Phil and Jenny Hoyle’s house and became interested.  I then saw the first few pages of it and became more interested.  I then saw they were making a movie about it and I became even more interested.  I then saw the movie at Blockbuster and yet more interested.  I then saw it, and for a good 60 minutes, couldn’t have been happier to have invested so much interest into it.  I then saw it all fall apart…

The first thing that stands out about The Men Who Stare At Goats is it’s sheer wackiness.  From the title to the theme and the poster, all the way down to the script and story, this movie is wacky.  The cast, headlined by four serious heavyweights in Oscar winners George Clooney, Kevin Spacey and Jeff Bridges and probable winner someday Ewan McGregor, is stellar to say the least.  And more important than the dramatic pedigree of the headliners, is the penchant for the screwball that we all love so much from Clooney, McGregor and Bridges.  They have all shown the ability to knock comedy out of the park.  And again, for an hour, they did just that.  That is of course, until Spacey showed up.

The story follows McGregor’s Bob Wilton on a personal/journalistic quest to find more about a secret CIA psychic program that is noted for, among other things, training operatives to kill goats simply by concentrating on them hard enough.  Wilton meets up with Lyn Cassidy (Clooney) and their Middle Eastern adventure begins.  The dialogue between the two is extremely fun with nuances that reward an active audience member.  The various situations they find themselves in are reminiscent of the best buddy films in recent memory.  Eventually Bridges shows up in flashback as Bill Django, a soldier-turned-hippie-turned-super soldier.  In classic Bridges form, he makes the goofball with a heart of gold funny and lovable.  The story goes back and forth from Clooney and Mcgregor in the Iraq desert to Bridges’ quest to train his psychic army.  And it is great through and through.

But then around the one hour mark, the wheels fall off.  Kevin Spacey, who Ken really likes despite a recent string of unimpressive films, is added to the mix as the foil to Clooney and Bridges and everything goes downhill.  His character is supposed to be funny but he isn’t.  He is supposed to be vile, but he isn’t.  He is supposed to present the main conflict for all the characters, but it just doesn’t work.  I don’t blame Spacey for this, it was just a poorly written character.  The biggest problem for comedy films is presenting a story that works well for a full three acts.  What often happens is that the first two acts are crammed full of jokes but not so much story.  This is fine for an hour, but if the writers run out of jokes, the painfully thin plot is exposed and it leaves a bad taste in the viewers’ mouth.  Such is the case with The Men Who Stare At Goats.

If you are a fan of wacky humor, then Ken suggests you see this movie. If you want to walk away from it thinking that it was wonderful, then Ken suggests that you turn it off about ten to fifteen minutes after you first see Spacey.  It isn’t his fault, but it is the signal that things are about to go askew.  Of course, you can always try staring at the screen and trying to make Kevin Spacey explode, but my guess is that the movie will be over before you do and then you just got stuck watching a bad ending and looking like a jackass when your wife has long since gone to bed.