Saturday, January 23, 2016

Wimbledon** (2004) 8.75, 9, 8.5, 26.25

So this is one of those middling romantic comedies from my youth that I found for $.50 at a store that was moving locations. It's a simple sports film at its core, centering around an aging tennis pro named Peter Colt playing in what might be his last professional tournament at Wimbledon. He comes in with singularly low expectations, but he gains a new perspective when he meets Lizzie Bradbury, as young tennis phenom who takes an interest in him and makes him embarrassed to lose.
I gave it an 8.75 for wit because though it's charming and has moments of snappy dialogue and beautiful romance, it generally doesn't seek to do anything out of the ordinary acting-wise or in terms of the plot and dialogue.
For wisdom, I gave it a 9, in part because it betrays a little bit of the thought of Andreas Capellanus, a fantastic medieval thinker, whose Art of Courtly Love I heartily recommend. Beyond the -.25 for misunderstanding sexuality, hardly worth mentioning, there's also some nice stuff about family and aging romance I enjoyed, though the ending was a little much, which I'll discuss beyond the spoiler screen for those interested.
For wonder, I gave a pretty standard 8.5, because besides some interesting stuff in the music department, not enough to warrant any extra consideration, there's nothing in terms if cinematography, directing, or effects to warrant anything more.
I can hardly recommend this as prime romanticism, for those not inclined to it, but it fills a need. Paul Bettany is a great underdog everyman. Kirsten Dunst is bewitching, though maybe that's just me.
Enjoy, friends!
===============SPOILER ALERT=============
That was probably hardly necessary, because this came out in 2004, but War and Peace was published in 1869 and it takes I'm taking a lot of care and still having parts spoiled. The only bit worth mentioning is the end. Sports movies have a complex issue, particularly singles sports. If your character begins to be successful, which is practically required to make the movie interesting, how far do they have to succeed to avoid anticlimax? If they're the underdog, as here in Wimbledon, the further they get, the more improbable and the greater stretch on the suspension of disbelief. Having forgotten the end, I wanted him to fail before winning it all, so it would feel more real, but a film like this is built on the improbable. That said, when he, ranked 119th in the world, deep into his thirties, wins one of the most prestigious tennis tournaments in the world, it just snapped for me. The suspension couldn't hold. My disbelief flooded in and so 9 for wisdom. There you go.
Thanks if you made it this far. Enjoyez!

Perfect Sense* (2011) 9.25, 9.5, 9.25, 28

This one's been on my Netflix queue for a while. I've always thought the idea was interesting, I have a deep affection for Ewan McGregor, and have been interested in Eva Green since Casino Royale. But I was pleasantly surprised by the depth of artistry and imagination this film contained.
I'll begin with a very flattering comparison to La Jetée, a somewhat obscure French film that awed with its simplicity and use of arresting visual techniques. It's only a half an hour, but uses its time economically and accomplishes more than most two hour films. In Perfect Sense, a similar simplicity leaves us with an hour and a half, which sees a beautiful romance unfurl with a haunting worldwide pandemic as a backdrop. This pandemic involves the loss, one by one, of the senses, in each instance preceded by a violent bout of emotion. In this way, it acts mostly like a fable for the blindness of our selfishness, but in such a way as to offer a kind of hope to be found in love.
This beautiful idea and ideal is extracted by means of a fascinating exploration of the importance of the senses and emotions and aspects of our lives connected to them.
Ewan is great at exploring characters that sit outside the regular Joe mold. In this, we have a aesthetically minded chef that's a bit of a cad, but meets a dejected, recently rejected epidemiologist, who happens to be studying our pandemic, just as she is coming down with the first symptoms.
The acting, from them and the rest of the little cast is always good, occasionally profound. But its the fascinating plot that earns it the extra to get to 9.25 for wit. After taking off the standard .25 for profound misunderstanding of sex, a thing films rarely avoid these days unless they simply ignore sexuality, I felt the acting and writing made up the .5 to get us back.
For wisdom, I gave it 9.5 because of the subtle beauty of the pandemic allegory and the idea that love is the thing that allows us to live, even when we're not whole, as well as the wisdom of the portrayals of love, heartbreak, and despair.
I gave it 9.25 for wonder chiefly on account of the interesting techniques used to play with the loss of the senses.
I really enjoyed this little gem. I hope you enjoy it as well.