I have been excited about this film since I first heard about it. I am a great fan of comic books and Wolverine is one of my favorite characters ever and he's never been anything but a joke in the movie franchise so far. This rating could be high, because I had very little reason to believe this time out would be different, but I was happy with it. With that preface, I would like to break it down for you.
I chose to give this one a 9 for wit. This to me is an out and out win. It's been a lot worse. I never rated X-Men Origins: Wolverine, but if I had to guess, I'd bet I would have given it about a 5. I compared it to Winter's Bone and Zero Dark Thirty and it wasn't close, but compared to more modest fare like Watchmen and Valkyrie, it thrilled. The former two were 9.5's and the latter were 9's. The dialogue rarely felt forced or over-expository. It genuinely felt on par with some of its source material. The ultra-purists will scoff, but all the relationships were dealt with deftly and the actors made it all feel real.
Hugh Jackman and Famke Janssen reprised major roles. Hugh finally felt at home in the character in a way he'd failed to previously. Famke played solely in dreamy sequences and spent most of her time playing out Logan's demons, which she did, without seeming too out of place. It's not easy to ride the line between, clearly not real and dream-believable.
Newcomer Tao Okamoto made a splash in my mind as well. I will definitely look forward to her next appearance. She managed to play strength and weakness in equal measures, to have confidence and yet vulnerability. I was truly impressed. The rest of the actors were more or less forgettable, but filled their place well. The writers both have made a number of solid, if not remarkable films, but this seems like a step up to me.
For wisdom, I felt the movie had a lot in common with True Grit (2010). Some basic questions about revenge and justice came up, but this one avoided a lot of that by putting Wolverine in a different place than he often is. Don't get me wrong; he kills a bunch of dudes and that can't simply be overlooked. But he only kills criminals in the pursuit of murder, kidnapping, etc. The bigger questions are about his obligation to be a hero and to step in when he sees injustice. This kind of stuff gets me going. He realizes the essential truth that hiding from the world is not an option. One has to take action in the face of evil.
There is also a subplot about the possibility of healing and peace, even for those who have seen and done hard and harsh things for the right reasons and people who have experienced great loss. They come down squarely on the more optimistic side, which I approve of. Overall, the film is close to perfect in this regard. I only have a few reservations about its characterization of love. Specifically the whole, "I love you but I have to leave you" schtick. I don't buy it. So 9.5.
For wonder, I choose to give a 9.5. A couple of points push this. One is the realism of, that is the lack of distraction from, his claws. They really looked real, metal, and menacing. Other than that it looked great and sounded great. And surely the director isn't a complete bozo. Some of the stuff was weird and I don't know how it will be dealt with, but I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt. Go see this movie. Or rent it. And please, pray that Disney and Fox can come into some sort of agreement to bring the X-Men and other Fox properties together with the Avengers, where they belong.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
True Grit** (2010) 9.5, 9.5, 9.5, 28.5
This is only my third post since I got home and my first of the month, so I thought I'd celebrate some milestones. I have passed a hundred views from Russia and Germany. Whoever you are, thanks. My most popular post, the one on Flame and Citron is at 91 views and would be my first to 100. I am nearly to my 50th post and I thank you all for reading.
Now I'm sure you've all seen this movie, but I have to admit this was one of those watch-whatever's-lying-around choices. Obviously, from the score I gave, I like this film, so this is no insult, but I feel like this isn't going to blow anyone's mind. You probably all have your opinions, but I know I've never gotten mine well-formulated before so I thought I'd put it here for your perusing pleasure. Let's break it down.
For wit, I chose to award it a 9.5. It was only barely off a 10. This film is nearly perfectly scripted, deftly handled dialogue to match any Coen brothers' outing, and superbly acted. The easy comparison for writing alone was Slumdog Millionaire. They both have a funny way of sounding like a story you've always known. The main players deserve special attention.
Jeff Bridges reinvents a part played to near perfection by the Duke himself. There is no sign of John Wayne here, but in his place is a completely new performance that opens up nuances that are missing in Mr. Wayne's performance. I know I like to pretend at the first name basis with my actors, but this is just anyone. Jeff brings in a level of indolence and carelessness to the role, while maintaining an air of nobility.
Matt Damon doesn't fail to impress either. I've never thought of Matt Damon as an actor with a lot of different speeds. He does well in particular parts, but the only two surprises he ever gave me were in this and The Informant! In this, he achieves an unbelievably silly earnestness that warms my heart and pisses me off. He's obnoxious to his compatriots without being obnoxious to the audience.
Josh Brolin and Barry Pepper both manage to simultaneously blend in and stick out. Neither one gives you any reason to remember that they have ever played another part before. They genuinely seem to start from scratch in creating their characters, not easy, because I have really liked both of them before. They stand out by being interesting characters and disappearing into them.
Hailee Steinfeld deserves a mention, if only for being more of stoic canvas for the story than Kim Darby. She was amazingly worth watching in scenes filled with more-seasoned actors. And when she played without Jeff and Matt, as when she bargained for horses or fell in a snake pit, you couldn't take your eyes off of her.
Now to the tricky matter of the wisdom. I've debated this a good deal in my head and can't come to any decision, so I'll lay it out here. The pluses can be summed up with this quote, "You must pay for everything in this world, one way and another. There is nothing free except the grace of God." There is a very deeply ingrained part of me, backed up by mountains of Scripture and a good deal of reading and learning which tells me that this is one of the wisest statements in history. But I am also aware that it ignores grace and mercy and a slew of Christian virtues. Well, not ignores, but seems to pay little more than lip service to. This lip service, especially as it is far more than that, for the character, if not the writers, seems enough to get this one to a 9.5. Rooster kills a lot of men and never bats an eye, but never any but confessed violent criminals. He has a moral code that beats that of most and he sticks to it. I don't know if I convince myself, but maybe I convinced somebody.
As far as wonder goes, I have compared it favorably to Uncertainty, which garnered a 9. It has a quality feel, but not much setting it apart within its period domain. The reason I gave it a 9.5 is about the matter of dialect. I don't know where I heard it before, but I remember the stickling for period speech really makes a big difference. One can clearly feel the difference when Josh talks. His minimum of contractions gives a very different feel to his character. This is a big point for the directors in my book.
I hope I said something worthwhile and a little new about something for someone. If you haven't already seen it, get on it. If you have, maybe you can watch it different this time. Enjoyez!
Now I'm sure you've all seen this movie, but I have to admit this was one of those watch-whatever's-lying-around choices. Obviously, from the score I gave, I like this film, so this is no insult, but I feel like this isn't going to blow anyone's mind. You probably all have your opinions, but I know I've never gotten mine well-formulated before so I thought I'd put it here for your perusing pleasure. Let's break it down.
For wit, I chose to award it a 9.5. It was only barely off a 10. This film is nearly perfectly scripted, deftly handled dialogue to match any Coen brothers' outing, and superbly acted. The easy comparison for writing alone was Slumdog Millionaire. They both have a funny way of sounding like a story you've always known. The main players deserve special attention.
Jeff Bridges reinvents a part played to near perfection by the Duke himself. There is no sign of John Wayne here, but in his place is a completely new performance that opens up nuances that are missing in Mr. Wayne's performance. I know I like to pretend at the first name basis with my actors, but this is just anyone. Jeff brings in a level of indolence and carelessness to the role, while maintaining an air of nobility.
Matt Damon doesn't fail to impress either. I've never thought of Matt Damon as an actor with a lot of different speeds. He does well in particular parts, but the only two surprises he ever gave me were in this and The Informant! In this, he achieves an unbelievably silly earnestness that warms my heart and pisses me off. He's obnoxious to his compatriots without being obnoxious to the audience.
Josh Brolin and Barry Pepper both manage to simultaneously blend in and stick out. Neither one gives you any reason to remember that they have ever played another part before. They genuinely seem to start from scratch in creating their characters, not easy, because I have really liked both of them before. They stand out by being interesting characters and disappearing into them.
Hailee Steinfeld deserves a mention, if only for being more of stoic canvas for the story than Kim Darby. She was amazingly worth watching in scenes filled with more-seasoned actors. And when she played without Jeff and Matt, as when she bargained for horses or fell in a snake pit, you couldn't take your eyes off of her.
Now to the tricky matter of the wisdom. I've debated this a good deal in my head and can't come to any decision, so I'll lay it out here. The pluses can be summed up with this quote, "You must pay for everything in this world, one way and another. There is nothing free except the grace of God." There is a very deeply ingrained part of me, backed up by mountains of Scripture and a good deal of reading and learning which tells me that this is one of the wisest statements in history. But I am also aware that it ignores grace and mercy and a slew of Christian virtues. Well, not ignores, but seems to pay little more than lip service to. This lip service, especially as it is far more than that, for the character, if not the writers, seems enough to get this one to a 9.5. Rooster kills a lot of men and never bats an eye, but never any but confessed violent criminals. He has a moral code that beats that of most and he sticks to it. I don't know if I convince myself, but maybe I convinced somebody.
As far as wonder goes, I have compared it favorably to Uncertainty, which garnered a 9. It has a quality feel, but not much setting it apart within its period domain. The reason I gave it a 9.5 is about the matter of dialect. I don't know where I heard it before, but I remember the stickling for period speech really makes a big difference. One can clearly feel the difference when Josh talks. His minimum of contractions gives a very different feel to his character. This is a big point for the directors in my book.
I hope I said something worthwhile and a little new about something for someone. If you haven't already seen it, get on it. If you have, maybe you can watch it different this time. Enjoyez!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)