jessecoombs

I've really got to start writing these up before I put them off for too long. Now I'm looking at a list of films that I've seen that you don't know how I feel about! This cannot be!

A Serious Man took me a bit longer than normal to figure out what I thought of it. It made me feel a little confused, dumb, and then excited. Oh, a bit bored too. It's a bit slowly-paced and it's hard to relate or root for the characters for me. In the end, I liked it quite a bit. My girlfriend did too. But reaction has been mixed on this one, and I've been avoiding reviews so that I wouldn't end up regurgitating something someone else said. Some people coming out of the theatre have been sorely upset and disappointed, a good amount walked out before it was over, some have called it genius to my face, a friend I work with called it the worst thing they've done, and one old lady specifically wanted to thank the management for showing such a great movie.

I will say that it's the weirdest and most challenging Coen Brothers movie that I've seen. I've only not seen Blood Simple at this point, so I'm sure this statement will stand.

Here's some thoughts...

I did read this somewhere and am regurgitating it: It IS the Biblical story of Job.
There's a lot of Jewishness to this, and it's as much making fun of it as it is celebrating it; kind of like what they did in Fargo with the people there.
Richard Kind is amazing in this. He was one of the friends of the "Mad About You" couple.
If you like having your plots and loose ends tied up, you may just hate this.
The progression of the Rabbis and their different advice is awesome; all of what they say matters.
Parts of the movie drag and the dream sequence stuff is a little much at times, but I felt that way about the dream stuff in The Big Lebowski too.
As far as narrative structure, it feels to me that the Coens were doing a magic trick that I can't quite explain but I have fun talking about with people.
I haven't wanted to talk about a movie for hours like this in a long time.

Ok, I haven't told you what the movie is about and that's because I don't want to spoil (sometimes I don't care about doing this, so be wary in the future when reading me) the movie and because it's hard to put into words.

I guess it's about a Jewish math teacher who is looking for help in dealing with his family and his career and his life really. It's point is that you have to fix it yourself. At least that's the point I got out of it. I know other people got other things and some got nothing from the movie.

I got stuff to think and talk about. So that's awesome for me. Amelia didn't give me that.

Alexis hadn't seen this one, and we were on a western kick, so it seemed like a decent pick.

She thought it was good, but not as good as I always have. Seeing it this time, I was pretty much just waiting for the cool moments that I knew were coming. Although, even the waiting was good.

the bookend shots of Munny's farm in silhouette
the panic in the kid's eyes when he kills a man
Ned's wife knowing where this is going
the Duck of Death
everything English Bob does (Harry Potter fans take note of what Richard Harris really can do)
Little Bill building his house
"If I was to get a free one..."
the gunfight at the end

I don't really have much to talk about when it comes to this movie. I've seen it many times and it's one of my favorites. I am ready to move on to other westerns, that's for damned sure. Still, if you haven't seen it, you should. It won a best picture oscar, and it's one of the few that truly deserved it.

Dang Matt Damon. I like his stuff.

Is he believable in this role? Not really. I think he's a decent actor, and more importantly, he chooses good projects to be in, but the casting here is a bit silly. It really should have been a paunchy older guy. Oh well, I guess that helped the movie to be made. Although, just Soderbergh should've been "name" enough to get it done. Someone did let him make Che after all.

Anyhoo! The Informant! is a lot of fun! It's another insider movie, much like, well, The Insider. That's a better movie of this sort, but Soderbergh doesn't try to do the same thing as Michael Mann did there. He adds lots of laughs by letting the Matt Damon really milk just how infuriating Mark Whitacre would've been to work with. After watching lots of The Wire, I can really start to empathize with Scott Bakula's FBI agent. It's funny though, but I can see some people getting infuriated with the movie because of the main character.

Yeah, it's a true story and it was a book and it was one of This American Life's best episodes. That said, knowing the story of what happens only slightly affected my viewing experience. We were in a smaller auditorium with stadium seating in a multiplex. There were a few people in the audience, and I think that just about each one of them was talking during the movie. It bothered me to the point where I just couldn't forget that I was watching a movie. That sucked. If there's more people it's actually less bothersome because the general murmur of the crowd and the wrappers and popcorn tends to envelop any conversations. Here though it really bothered me. Also one of the two ladies who sat in front of me had her cell phone on and on her armrest during the whole show, as if expecting a call. I hate you if you have a cell phone turned on in the movie theatre. I also probably hate you if you talk during the movie. Occasional whispering is ok, and that seems fair. Just so you know.

There's some real good stuff with the subtle aesthetics of how they recreated the mid-nineties feel of middle America and how we hear Mark Whitacre's inner monologues drowning out the real people in his life who are trying to reach him. All in all, it's probably a really good movie, but I just couldn't enjoy it as much as I would've liked that night.

Definitely go see it. A rental would probably work too.

I'm a little behind on writing about movies, so time to get to it!

The Wackness is pretty darn good. It's set in New York in 1994 and it's got Method Man in it! Also there's a scene where you can hear Method Man rapping while Method Man is on screen playing a Jamaican drug dealer. Is that allowed? I say yes.

Enough about Method Man. The movie is a about a kid who's just out of school who sells weed from an ice cream cart and how he tries to figure out life and stuff. It's a very well-done coming of ager that I recommend. Ben Kingsley plays his weird psychiatrist (What's the difference between psychiatrist and psychologist?) who trades session time for pot. They become friends, the kid dates his daughter and everyone grows a bit.

There's a nice early/mid-nineties vibe going on here that's a little forced but still nicely nostalgic with the fonts on the chapter titles (June, July, August, etc) as well as the music of the time, mostly East Coast Hip-hop.

There's a nice melancholy indie flick feel to this one that I enjoyed watching in the morning on my girlfriend's laptop. Although, I gotta say that watching it this way, I was prone to distractions of my own creation. I stopped the movie a few times to get coffee, breakfast, or use the bathroom. This didn't quite feel fair to the pacing of the movie that the filmmakers wanted. I think my girlfriend is getting rid of her Netflix account, so I won't really have the option to watch the "on-demand" stuff from them, and I actually think that this is a good thing. The screen is too small, I have to use my headphones sometimes, and like I said, it's just too distracting to watch a movie on a laptop.

I'm not a film purist who must see every movie on 35mm or anything, but I do want to respect the experience a bit. And The Wackness deserves this.

Alexis and I went to go see this at the Alameda theatre. It might be my favorite auditorium in the bay area. It might be one of my favorite epics too. So, all in all, a good night.

Lawrence is insane. I think that fact gets forgotten when people talk about this movie. I've seen Lawrence of Arabia about three times now, and the two things that stood out for me when I saw it this time was the subtle, yet exciting camera work and Lawrence's madness. It's like his sanity is a scab and he can't help but pick at it until it bleeds, merely because he is bored with the world as it is. I gotta say that Peter O'Toole's acting at first seemed effeminate at the beginning to later become over the top. I was wrong in that observation. While there might be some barely hidden homosexual themes in the portrayal, I think that's a huge red herring and kind of offensive to limit Lawrence to a queer who didn't quite know it. Lawrence's sexuality (I'm talking about the movie here, not the history, as I don't know or care what that is right now.) is such a non-subject that it's dwarfed by his amazing collapsing star of madness. From the first frame that you see Lawrence to the last, this is a character arc of crazy. And it's sooo much fun to watch.

Yeah, there's the amazing shots and the epicness and the camera work that I mentioned above. But you really need all that stuff to give one some rest from the intensity of Peter O'Toole's blue eyes and shaking, dancing visage.

Oh yeah, the camera and cinematography. I loved the smaller stuff this time. I was enraptured with the first shot in the map room which has almost no cuts and with a frame so large, why would you need to anyway? And when the camera does move, mostly in these dialogue scenes, it has such a big impact. A simple pan to the left becomes a huge reveal, like opening a door to say: "WAIT, DID YOU KNOW THERE WAS MORE GOING ON OVER HERE!!!"

This movie is one of my favorite rides. Omar Shariff, Anthony Quinn, and Alec Guiness are great. And they can barely hold the screen with O'Toole. So much fun, did I say that already?

Oh there was a real intermission too. Just like it's supposed to be.

This is hardly a good enough end for this write-up. Just watch it, ok?

It's very important that you see this on as big of a screen as possible. A widescreen 60 inch tv is the minimum you are allowed. Any smaller and you're dumb.

Michael Moore doesn't go far enough.

I'm not talking about his stunts and antics, like when he drives an armored truck to the big bank buildings and ask for the taxpayer's money back or when he puts crime scene tape around financial buildings in New York. I'm talking about Socialism.

AHHHHH!

SOCIALISM!!!!

I'm a scared.

He briefly touches on the election and the fear-mongering during the time that unsuccessfully painted Obama as a Socialist. All right, we all know how that turned out. Of course the bigger fear related problem was the panic that caused congress to give our money to the people who screwed up things in the first place. It's interesting that he didn't mention the auto company bailouts, which I think is equal bullshit. Could it be that Moore wants to stay popular with his auto-making roots or was that info simply too late to be included in the movie?

That's interesting, but let me get back to my main point.

Socialism! Well, I'm not really talking about Socialism, I'm talking about solutions. There really aren't any presented in this movie. I guess that's ok, but it leaves me wanting more. I don't want to be herded into a mentality, but some pointers or direction would be good, especially when talking to an audience as big as this movie will receive. There are some good examples of stuff to do and...

wait, a quick aside...

A documentary should probably present things in as objective way as possible while still being watchable, entertaining, and informative. Moore's documentaries are nowhere near being objective, and at this point I doubt anyone harbors that illusion. I mean there are some unnecessary bits of added comedy with splicing of old educational films and adding a crumbling White House press room behind Bush as he speaks. So even Moore isn't bothering to hide his opinion.

And that's fine. We're all adults we know what we're getting with him. We know that most people who watch this will be people who agree with him and those that don't won't. So why do we need the personal "little guy getting screwed stories"? Well, I don't. I've been following this stuff for a while and it's all stuff I know already. And I think that those who don't know what's going on are probably not going to be watching this in the first place.

So why not be more radical and show us more examples of people rebelling against the banks, the government, and the rich? There's a few bits of this in the movie and they are the best part. Neighbors in a standoff against the police to keep a family in their home; workers not leaving their bankrupt window factory until they get the money that Bank of America owes them; a bread company and a robotics company that are both run as a co-op, a sheriff announcing at a press conference to not enforce any evictions in his jurisdiction; and most inspiring, a congress member denouncing the bailouts and openly encouraging defiance of the law. That stuff is great and there's not enough of it.

At the end of the movie Michael Moore says that we should fight back and get to it already. I agree, but since this movie is so slanted already, why not just show more of how to do that. And let's talk about Socialism and what it really is, because I still don't know myself and I'm not afraid to learn about it.

There's a lot covered in this and it's probably the most unfocused of Moore's movies. Since it seems to only skim the surface of a lot of issues, I really wish he dug deeper into one or two subjects instead of touching on many.

Michael Moore has been fairly ahead of the curve with his previous movies, but here he seems to be a bit behind. I hope he catches up with his next one and even shows us what's down the road.

Hmm, summing it up. If you want to get your blood up and get a bit angry, I'd recommend seeing this. It's certainly entertaining. The thing is, after you've calmed down and gotten some sleep, are you still going to want to storm the streets shouting? I'm optimistic and I am excited to try to figure out some solutions that I can do; but I can only do this when I'm rational and calm, not when I want to tear the man down.

I probably screwed up some grammar here. If you want to point it out, I wouldn't mind.

It's a bad movie.

Alexis, my girlfriend, after seeing it wanted to help me bash it on this review. Do I really have to tell you that it's not a good movie? Well, I had somewhat high hopes, as Ricky Gervais is one of my favorite people and he wrote and co-directed it. Well, he wrote some unfunny cliches and attached them to a concept that make the whole movie and the characters in it unrelatable. He isn't making some kind of high-concept art film here with a suicide at the end. That would've worked a little bit better.

There was one thing in the whole movie that made me laugh. If you ask me, I'll act it out for you and save you the ten bucks.

I think this is my first French new wave film sadly. But I've seen lots of good stuff, so I guess it's not too sad.

This movie is pretty great. I've been whining a bit to myself about wanting to see something with more of a narrative and I'm not really getting much of that here, but after about 20 minutes of Truffaut's movie, I didn't really care.

First up, the soundtrack is fantastic. It's really only one or maybe two themes with some variations, but it's so, so perfect for a movie about a French kid who really isn't all right. A friend at work was telling me that this is the first movie of a series of five or so from the same director and with the same actor playing the same role; Antoine Doinel that is. Oh, the actor's name is Jean-Pierre Léaud by the way, and he's really good; actually everyone is, so there's not much to discuss here.

Cinematography and especially the camera work were just plain fun to watch. Some excellent pans and a fantastic tracking shot near the end were highlights of the movie for me. The black and white really popped too.

Oh, I haven't even told you what this movie is about, have I? Well that's probably because the story is kind of minimal with only emotional resolution, not a concretely plotted one. And that's just fine with me. But, since you asked...

A French kid misbehaves until he gets sent away. He has a friend. His parents try, but they may not care. He runs away. Yup.

I'm really starting to appreciate it as I type this now, even more than when I saw it earlier today. I'm not sure what that says about me or the movie, but I can't wait to see what how Truffaut follows this.

Run, run, run, run, and slow down and look. Your feet are wet. It's you after all.

Some friends and I went to see a midnight show of The Wiz last night. Don't go see a midnight show unless you've slept in a lot and the movie is tremendously engaging! Well.

On first feeling, the movie felt well, not bad, not great, just kind of flat. There was some amazing visuals and some very creepy imagery and strange performances. There was a ton of songs and most of them would have been better shorter.

It was a real up and down movie. Parts really stood out as awesome, and those parts were mostly the creepier ones. Evillene's sweatshop, the crows at the beginning, everything in the subway station especially the bouncy paper dolls that attacked, and Michael Jackson's "prophetic words."

The movie didn't jazz me as much as I'd hoped and I just wasn't really in the mood for it or the soul music that was going on throughout the movie. I will say that Richard Pryor was slightly disappointing as the Wiz and the Tin-man, the Cowardly Lion, and the Scarecrow definitely were cool.

There's some really interesting symbolism in the movie and I'm still trying to figure out what the deal was with the taxis that were always out of service, with their windows blinded with the checkered pattern.

If you are a fan of Motown, musicals, urban decay, and unrealized creepiness; I highly recommend it. If you like strong narrative (of which I'm starting to crave these days) I'd just keep it on in the background.

Special note: for those of you who play Don't Rest Your Head, this may be essential viewing. I see the Mad City all up in this bitch.

I just watched a documentary about a fashion guy. He's skilled in the ways of couture, which is a type of fashion I guess that people started around the 50's. Valentino is one of the last of these types of designers and he's in his 70's.

The movie is pretty much a love letter to him and his relationship with Giancarlo Giammatti. I might be spelling that wrong, but those who care will correct me. Giancarlo seems to be his manager/friend/confidant/soul mate/robin, even though he is billed as the VP of the company. Maybe it's the same thing, whatever.

The best part is when it shows his process of creating the dresses for the shows and all the hours of work that those around him have to do based on one little decision to add sequins or not. Sadly, the movie focuses on, well, I'm not sure really. I guess it doesn't really focus on any one thing, so it felt kind of directionless. Not in a bad way, after all it was nice to see all the locales and dresses and celebrities, but I was yearning for more of a story that has some drive to it.

I took a lot of pauses during the movie to make breakfast, get coffee, refill my coffee, get a bagel, and use the bathroom. It was a leisurely way to spend my morning, and I enjoyed it, but without all those extra distractions and accessories to the viewing experience, I wouldn't have liked it half as much.

If you like high-end traditional fashion, you'll probably like it. I thought it was ok.

It would be nice if they showed more of what it takes to do these crazy shows from behind behind the scenes, but that's probably just my logistical side talking.

I've seen this whole series. There was a boxed set that had all of it up to 42 Up, and my ex and I watched it.

What it is, is a documentary series of movies that chonicles the lives of a bunch of British people every 7 years. 7 Up, 14 Up, 35 Up, etc. The first one or two was done on British TV with the rest being feature films directed by Michael Apted. He's done some feature fictional films, but he's also just as much a documentary guy.

It's pretty good, but it grows a little repetitive as you watch more of them. Some stories and people are more interesting than others and some people blend into ones that are of similar class. The higher class people tended to lose more of my interest and that was probably due to the fact that there was less of an arc for them. Go to rich school, meet husband/wife, continue to be rich. I guess there's not much to grab on to there. What was compelling was the people who are struggling to make enough money, those who haven't figured out who they are, and those who make big changes.

My reason for watching 49 Up, after seeing the rest of the series a few years ago, was simply to check up on what was going on with everyone. I almost felt like pushing fast-forward through the scenes of earlier movies, but the editing has kept up with this episode, and we do spend most of our time in the movie with the people in their 49th year. This is good.

I'm now thinking that the novelty of checking in on these people every 7 years is beginning to be unnecessary. If a documentary simply gave us portrayals of various people, what made them tick and what they were passionate about, I'm thinking it would be equally engaging.

If you haven't seen any of the films and only want to see one, I'd recommend watching 28 Up or 35 Up. That should give you a good breadth of these people. I do recommend starting from the beginning and watching them all as well, but if you find yourself getting restless towards the latter part of the series, that's ok since real life can be boring too sometimes.

There is poignancy here, but you gotta be patient.