Whip It

courtesy of http://www.filmofilia.com

When I sat down to watch Whip It, I was skeptical of whether or not I’d enjoy it.  I had previously attempted the Ellen Page-fronted Juno years ago hated – no loathed it.  I fit the demographic to a ‘T’: music and film nerd of epic proportions, feminist, sassy and sarcastic – that’s me through and through.  The problem I had with Juno lay completely in the writing.

Diablo Cody’s personal background intrigued me.  A “riot grrl”, if you will; stripper-turned-screenwriter – I was definitely interested in what she had to say.  It turns out that she didn’t have much to say that was of interest to me.  The dialogue was painfully forced and juvenile, the band dropping was way over-done, and the mise-en-scene was so faux kitschy that my brain rejected the notion of even trying to take it all in.  A person can only take so much hipster-branded irony, and Juno proved to not know where to stop.  But what does all of this have to do with Whip It?

Admittedly unjust in my initial reaction upon seeing the trailer for the film, I rejected the idea because it looked like Juno tries roller derby.  I expected the same forced dialogue and “look at me, I’m so cool because I know who The Melvins are and have a hamburger phone” attitude that oozed from Juno‘s celluloid.  I was pleasantly surprised to be proven dead wrong.

Whip It tells the story of Bliss Cavendar, a 17 year old Texan whose mother wants her to become a beauty queen.  Bliss goes to pageant after pageant at her mother’s urging, and never wins.  She’s a painfully awkward teen who has one friend and works at the local barbecue joint with her sole friend, Pash, and their manager “Birdman”.  One day, during a shopping trip, Bliss sees a roller derby team advertising their next match.  After much urging, she and Pash manage to sneak to the match, where Bliss’ world is turned upside down.

I found myself interested in Ellen Page’s painfully shy and awkward Bliss Cavendar.  I loved the way she and Brooke Cavendar (Marcia Gay Harden) played off of one another.  Don’t we all know what it’s like for our parent(s) to have one wish/hope/dream for us and for us to want to veer off in the completely opposite direction?  Even greater than the dynamic between Bliss and her mother, Brooke, was her lone friendship with Pash (Alia Shawkat).  It was so nice to see a character completely blossom around her best friend, and without any sort of pressure!  These two girls had a very strong relationship, and you could tell without having them to spell it out.  I also really enjoyed watching the interactions between the derby ladies.  Juliet Lewis really blew her role as ‘Iron Maven’ out of the water.  This truly was the best I’ve ever seen her, and probably the only time I’ve actually enjoyed a character that she’s played.  Kristen Wig’s ‘Maggie Mayhem’ was lovely and subtle; a nice change from the goofball characters she generally plays.  In addition to the characterization, the derby scenes were amazing and so much like every derby match I’ve ever been to.  Let’s face it, watching women kick major ass is never dull.

As with almost every film, there was an awful lot about Whip It that I didn’t like.  To begin, Bliss’ relationship with small time-attempting-to-make-it-big rocker Oliver (Landon Pigg) felt unnecessary.  While I liked the overall portrayal of the relationship, it felt written in solely that we could have an excuse for Bliss and Pash to test their friendship (in the form of a fight, naturally).  As with Juno, I didn’t appreciate Whip It’s band name-dropping and the “irony” (Bliss wearing a Stryker tee).  I felt some scenes were forced, simply as a means to have characters having an excuse to interact, or as an attempt at forced humor (hot tub scene with Jimmy Fallon’s ‘Johnny Rocket’).  I also felt that Drew Barrymore’s ‘Smashley Simpson’ was the most obnoxious and juvenile character, and Eve’s ‘Rosa Sparks’ was merely a token with no real place other than to be the one-liner girl.

Overall, this was a job well-done for first time director Drew Barrymore.  While a good bit of the film felt like filler, there was enough substance and weight that it made the extras okay.  The actors did a fantastic job of playing off one another and the story was solid.  It was truly refreshing to see a film of strong and loving female relationships that didn’t revolve around shopping and men.  Whip It is a fantastic example of the types of films that that women and young girls need to see more of; Alison Bechdel would be proud.

Fantastic Mr. Fox

Courtesy of austincinephile.com

Quite a bit late to the game, I went to see Wes Anderson’s Fantastic Mr. Fox last night.  Based on the book by Roald Dahl, the story follows Mr. Fox, his family, and friends as they have adventures and mishaps – all due to Mr. Fox’s mischievous nature.

After settling down with a newspaper column (after finding out that Mrs. Fox (Meryl Streep) was with child), Mr. Fox (George Clooney) decides that he no longer wishes to live in a hole – but a tree instead.  Not only that, but he longs for the days when he was stealing birds from farmers.  It is then that he decides to take on the three biggest/most successful farmers there are – Boggis, a chicken farmer; Bunce, a duck and goose farmer; and Bean an apple farmer who makes a mean [alcoholic] cider (voiced by Michael Gambon).

Mr. Fox comes up with a master plan, and with the aid of his possum friend, Kylie (Wallace Wolodarsky), they put the plan into action.  Each night, they successfully hit each farm, until they come to Bean’s apple farm where they run into a bit of trouble from Rat (Willem Dafoe), Bean’s cider security guard.  Much to their luck, they’ve enlisted the help of Fox’s nephew, Kristofferson Silverfox (Eric Anderson), an ace athlete who takes Rat down and they manage to escape.  From there, the farmers decide to wage war on Mr. Fox, his family, and the entire underground animal kingdom.

This film, with original music by Jarvis Cocker (as Petey), is such a delight.  It’s really fun to watch stop-motion, the attention to detail is very clever – there is a romantic scene between Mr and Mrs Fox with this song from Disney’s Robin Hood playing softly in the background; and it is wildly funny!

Normally, I am not terribly excited about this; however, I am pleased that I got to see this film in a theatre with children, as I can attest to how much they also enjoyed it and were laughing right along with the adults.  Therefore, parents, if any of you are worried that your children may not enjoy this – rest assured that kids love it.

I have always enjoyed Wes Anderson’s films, and this film certainly is no exception.  It’s got the feel (and soundtrack) of his live-action films, but with a little extra.  I definitely hope to see more animation from him in the future, as you can tell that he (along with everyone else) had so much fun with this one.  It is definitely not to be missed.

Monsturd

Courtesy of rockwitch.com

I was in the mood for shitty (no pun intended) movie that would render a chuckle or two.  Thank goodness for Netflix!  I saw this little gem on the instant watch list, and it just screamed at me.

In Butte County, California, an imprisoned serial killer manages to break free.  He seeks refuge in the sewer, while being chased by the police and FBI.  However, little do they know that a morally/ethically bankrupt scientist has polluted the sewer with man-eating, bacterial sludge.  The killer gets eaten alive by the sludge, and turns into a man-eating shit monster.

This movie is fun, and funny.  As a spoof, not only of those 1950′s horror/sci-fi films, but also the modern cop dramas on television, it does a good job of not leaving a single stone unturned.  Nothing is sacred in this film that is chock full of “toilet humor” (I’m on a roll tonight), gross-out gags, puns, and a soundtrack that is specially tailored for this film (that “Number 2″ song is darn catchy).  It is also full of the worst acting I have seen since Troll 2 (be still, my heart), terrible cinematography, and terrible… well, it’s all around terrible; with the exception of the shit-monster.  The monster is clearly where the budget of this film went, because it is a work of art – you can almost smell this poo coming off the screen when that thing is on.

I can appreciate a film that knows it’s bad, and just runs with it – which is exactly what this film did.  You could tell that everyone had a blast making it, and as such, I had a blast watching it; all the while, shaking my head in disbelief that someone actually thought of this storyline, and then created it.

This is the type of film that only a select type of person will enjoy.  If you are entertained by poop jokes, puns, and cheesy one-liners, this is the movie for you!  I also think that those who enjoy the films that Troma put out, you will probably enjoy this film.  It’s definitely not for the squeamish!

 

The Hangover

Courtesy of misspinkslip.wordpress.com

The Hangover is touted as 2009′s “funniest movie of the year”.  It’s the latest addition into the “bromance” school of comedy – or what I refer to as “Frat Boy Comedy”.

I wasn’t particularly excited to see it – in fact, I had pushed it out of my head, repeatedly.  Every time I heard “The Hangover” mentioned, I had to Google it to see what it was – and then I would just push it out of my memory again.  A good portion of this was because, in my head, it was the same movie as Wedding Crashers, and I would have much rather gouged my eyes out than to sit through that drivel ever again.

How I ended up going to see it was as an outing to cheer up a friend – plus, it was only $1.  If the price is right, you must buy.

The premise of The Hangover (for those who, like myself, continually push it out of mind) is that a man (Justin Bartha) who is getting married goes to Las Vegas with three friends (Bradley Cooper, Zack Galifianakis, and Ed Helms) for one last “wild night out”.

Why the film is entitled The Hangover is that the majority of the film takes place from the morning after said wild night – when the groom goes missing and the friends in their groggy, memory-lapsed state have to find him.  It’s from this point that the hijinks ensue.  Or rather, that the hijinks that have ensued the night before begin to unfold.

At this point, I was pleasantly surprised that I wasn’t seeing a reincarnate Wedding Crashers.  Hell, there were even some laughs to be had.  Though, to call it the funniest film of the year is taking it a bit far.

What The Hangover has going for it is that it is so strange and absurd that it is actually quite funny.  Also, Zack Galifianakis is a really funny guy.  He plays the moron – as the fat, hairy guy typically does in “Frat Boy Comedy”.  But, he plays it so subtly that it actually works.

The other typical characters are there – the arrogant one, the whipped one, and your average schmoe.  Also, as it takes place in Las Vegas, there is a drunken mistake of a wedding.  But, that’s about it as far as your run-of-the-mill, four guys in Vegas typical story arc goes.

I give The Hangover points for some originality, also for being able to make me laugh.  And major bonus points for not being Wedding Crashers.

While it has the above going for it, I would be hard-pressed to call it a “must see” film.  But, if it’s on – or if you need a cheer up, definitely use it as an opportunity to watch the film.  It’s a pretty okay film.

Zombieland

Courtesy of examiner.com

I was eagerly awaiting Zombieland, and actually had an opportunity to attend a free sneak peek of it – however, due to other circumstances, I completely forgot that it was happening, and had to wait until the opening weekend.

No matter, because it was definitely well worth the wait.

Zombieland is great fun.  Not too long (clocking in at 80 minutes), and pretty good action, it makes a great addition to the zombie franchise.  Jesse Eisenberg plays “Columbus”, a neurotic, very nervous 20+-year-old who teams up with “Tallahassee” (Woody Harrelson) – a bad-ass, zombie killing machine with an obsession with Twinkies.  In the hunt for a supply of Twinkies, the two get bamboozled by “Wichita” (Emma Stone) and her 12-year-old sister, “Little Rock” (Abigail Breslin).  The four eventually team up to become the ultimate zombie killing team.

“Columbus” narrates the film and gives us an explanation of how the U.S. became “Zombieland” (mad cow disease gone horribly, horribly wrong).  He also equips us with a list of rules that are periodically outlined in the film’s scenes.   One of the rules is to trust no one and “travel light” – hence referring to others as only the towns they’ve come from or are going to.

There are a few surprises in the film (one, for me, was very big and amazing – I will give away nothing), and they work quite well.  The greatest part of the film is just how funny it is.  I expected some humor (I mean, Woody Harrelson is great at that in every role that he plays), but it was great from every character.  And the gore (by now, you all know how I love the gore) is very well done and abundant.  You could tell that this was made by true zombie fans.

Definitely do not miss this one, you won’t be disappointed!

Julie & Julia

Courtesy of iwatchstuff.com

I saw this film today -as the third installment of my “Weekend of Three”.  I must admit that seeing the make-up of my fellow audience members started to make me a little bit nervous.  For me, the audience is as much a part of the movie-going experience as the movie itself.

The audience was comprised of 6 men (I counted) and a multitude of women – some of who were knitting.  My first thought was, “this better not be a romantic comedy in disguise”.

To my surprise (and relief), it was not.  It was (to sound very corny for a moment) a cute little “heartfelt” comedy about cooking, striving for greatness, and the battle to become a published author.

The characters were already married, so there was no need for a romance angle (thank god), so it just got straight into the story.  Now, I love Julia Child.  I love cooking shows.  I don’t know very much about the personal lives or histories of the people who do the cooking shows that I watch.  Nor do I care very much to know the personal stories of those people.  That said, this served as a nice little biopic into how Julia Child became the world famous professional chef that we all know and love.

Going into this film, I was a little bit confused about the plot.  Who is this “Julie” and why is she in a film about Julia Child if she has nothing at all to do with her life?  Well, I’ll tell you.

Julie Powell (Amy Adams) is a 29-going-on-30 New Yorker who is in the stage that all of us mid-to-late twenty somethings know very well – the “oh god, I’m turning 30″ stage.  She and her husband relocate to Queens from Brooklyn to be closer to his job, and she works as an insurance claims specialist for families who were directly affected by the September 11, 2001 tragedy in New York (this takes place in 2002).

Her friends are successful, professional business women who have personal assistants and access to way too much money.  Julie basically hates them.

With the aid of her husband, she gets this idea to start a blog in which she endeavors to cook every recipe in Julia Child’s “Mastering the Art of French Cooking” in a year.  After all, she enjoys cooking, and who doesn’t love good food?

So, this film parallels the life of Julie Powell and Julia Child (Meryl Streep).  We get to know 1940′s Julia Child who moves to France with her husband Paul (Stanley Tucci), an employee of the U.S. government.  We watch as Julia, bored with being a housewife, takes up cooking classes in an attempt to pass her time.

As the film unfolds, both the audience and Julie learn more and more about Julia’s life.  Julie through reading books with published letters that Julia and Paul wrote to their friends, as well as watching Julia’s old cooking shows (and that famed, memorable SNL sketch with Dan Akroyd playing Julia Child).

This was a good, very cute movie that didn’t try too hard to be anything other than just a good, very cute movie.  The characters were well-written, and the acting was great.

Don’t see it on an empty stomach.

‘Inglourious Basterds’

Courtesy of iwatchstuff.com

This was a great film weekend for me, in that I got to see three extremely different movies.  The first being Tarantino’s newest installment into his collection, Inglourious Basterds [sic].

This (much like all of his films) is very much a Tarantino film.  I feel that that should be something that is known first and foremost.  Therefore, if you don’t like Tarantino, you probably won’t like this movie.

‘Inglourious Basterds’ is set in 1940′s Nazis-invaded France.  In addition to the film telling you that it is in France, the setting itself is very French.  The film opens with “Chapter One” (much like how ‘Kill Bill’ was done in chapters, ‘Basterds’ is as well) and a shot of the beautiful French countryside.

It is here that we immediately meet Perrier LaPadite (Denis Menochet) and his three lovely daughters.  It is also here that we realize that, unlike most American-made films set in different countries, the characters aren’t going to be speaking English (I don’t know about you, but I think that Mr. Tarantino deserves a “bravo!” for that, alone.) – therefore, if you don’t like to read subtitles, don’t see this film.

As quickly as we are introduced to our surroundings and first characters, we are introduced the film’s villain – Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz).  Nicknamed “The Jew Hunter”, he works as a detective for the SS and terrorizes both Jews in hiding as well as the people who hide them.  But remember, this is a Tarantino film, so if you expect to outright hate Landa, you are mistaken.

When Col. Landa initially comes on screen, the dialogue begins in French for a good 15 -20 minutes (maybe?) and then effortlessly (and slyly) switches to English.  The audience may be under the impression that it is done to appease us, however it is nicely written into the script as a ploy put on by the very clever Col. Landa.

It is also in this chapter that we first meet the film’s main antagonist, Shosanna Dreyfus (Melanie Laurent) – a Jewish woman whose family is killed by Landa and his men.

Before I move on to the next chapter, I would like to time-out and discuss dialogue.  As a fan of Tarantino’s work, I don’t mind his very manic manner of speaking nor that it carries over into the way that his characters speak.  After all, whenever I’m watching one of his films, it gives me an opportunity to see what goes on in his head (I’m a psych major, what can I say?  I like that stuff).  This film, while dialogue heavy, is a very toned down and not anywhere near as manic as Tarantino’s typical dialogue.  I don’t know if it was because of the subject matter, the foreign languages, or the fact that doing it in chapters gave the film more focus – but, it is done quite well.

I also want to note that I have read countless reviews that have complained about this film being “advertised as action when it’s not”.  I would like to address that, as well.  I think of action in a number of ways – there are your “summer Hollywood blockbusters” which are chock full of explosions and are very loud; there are your horror/slasher movies which are chock full of teenagers running around and getting hacked to bits; and there are your films with a lot of verbal action.  To me, this was an action film, but the characters sparred verbally rather than physically.  You can’t build the kind of tension that this film did without well-written dialogue.  I don’t know about everyone else, but Landa’s speech about he being a hawk and the Jews being the rats, and the way he toyed with LaPadite was some of the best on-screen tension I’ve experienced in a while.

Moving right along to “Chapter 2″ which introduces us to “The Basterds” – a regime of angry Jewish (mostly American) soldiers who  are on a mission to kill Nazis and are led by Lieutenant Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt).  Lt. Raine is a southern, quick-tongued, witty man with a goal.  The Basterds at the forefront are Sgt. Donny Donowitz (“The Bear Jew” played by Eli Roth), Sgt. Hugo Stiglitz (Til Schweiger), and Private Omar Ulmer (Omar Doom).  Together, they strike fear into the Nazis – particularly “The Bear Jew” who is known for beating Nazis soldiers to death with a baseball bat.

If you’ll recall from the trailer, Lt. Raine wants “100 Nazis scalps” from each of his eight men.  Tarantino doesn’t spare us the opportunity to see the men collect the scalps.  I suppose most people saw this as gory – I wasn’t one of them.  But, if stuff like this bothers you – don’t see this film.

Chapter two gives you your usual Tarantino – dorky, “tough guy” characters that you love to watch and laugh at.  A highlight being after The Bear Jew bashes in a skull, and runs around screaming as if he just hit a home-run in an actual baseball stadium.

“Chapter three” reintroduces us to Shosanna years after her family’s demise.  She now owns and runs a movie theatre that she’s inherited from an aunt (I’ve read reviews that said it’s never explained how she comes to own the movie theatre, but I thought it was very obviously explained several times… oh well.) where she screens German propaganda films.  One night, while changing the marquee, a German soldier/hero named Frederick Zoller (Daniel Bruhl) becomes enamored with her and seeks her out everywhere she goes.  As a result of his fondness, she meets Joseph Goebbels (Sylvester Groth) and his French mistress/translator, Francesca Mondino (Julie Dreyfus) and they choose her theatre to do a private screening of their latest propaganda film (which also stars Zoller).

This chapter also puts Shosanna and Landa back together when he comes to meet with her in order to discuss the security measures that will be taken for the screening at  her theatre.  It is in this scene, again, that tension and suspense are built – this time, simply by having Landa order her a glass of milk to go with her strudel.

Chapters 3, 4, and 5 I won’t discuss at great depth, as they involve scheming and revenge getting at their finest.  You will simply have to see the film to find out what else happens.

This film was Tarantino at his finest, and possibly even his most focused.  This is easily one of his best films, in my opinion.  I would highly recommend it (except for… you know, if you fall into the above categories that I told to not see this film).