The fabulous presentation of Dracula by Ballet Nebraska last Friday night only proves the promise this young company has.
Performed at the Orpheum Theater, the dramatic ballet was a visual feast. From the enormous handsome sets to the impressive lighting, the mood was suitably creepy. Transylvania indeed. Kudos to set design and construction wizards Ron Barrett and Homer McClure, and lighting by Jerry Wolderski of Theatrical Media Services.
And the next best thing to live music is expertly edited recorded music and a great sound system. The music of masters – Liszt, Strauss, Brahms, Kilar, Class, Barry, and Goldenthal – were perfectly blended to set the tone.
The costumes were so beautiful they took your breath away. Lucy’s red dress was perfection, as were the brides’ dresses. Even the flower-strewn hairdos were heavenly. And the Masquerade Ball/Wedding Reception gowns were resplendent. Even the men’s costumes were impressive (especially Dracula’s). All worked to tell the story more effectively.
Ah, the story. A familiar one. Jonathan Harker (Matthew Carter who is also ballet master) come to the Transylvania castle of Count Dracula with papers to sign. There he almost becomes a victim of the vampire, with three of Dracula's brides taunting him (Erin Alarcon, Claire Goodwillie and Kelsey Schwenker). He escapes to his fiancee, Mina. The three vampire brides were so beautiful, and so graceful, it was simply enchanting. The choreography was quite lovely and foreshadowed a larger version later.
The Masquerade Ball offers the opportunity for all of the company to dance, either to a Strauss waltz or as a band of Gypsies who entertain (in more beautiful, colorful costumes). A mysterious masked guest arrives, but no one recognizes Count Dracula as he dances with Mina, the bride, and her best friend, Lucy (in the stunning red dress). After the ball, he returns to find Lucy alone, begins to seduce her then bites her, leaving her dead.
At her funeral, the Count shows up to claim his new bride, taking her body with him to his castle, with Jonathan, Mina and townspeople on his heels.
At the castle, Lucy is brought to life as a vampire. When Mina is left alone, Lucy begins to initiate Mina as Dracula’s next bride. But when the Count sees Mina again, he realizes he is in love with her, so can’t claim her as his vampire bride.
All of these scenes are brought to life with some pretty wonderful dancing. Sasha York IS Dracula. He conveys his creepy nature in a subtle way that is all the more menacing. Natasha Grimm as Mina and Erika Overturff as Lucy were both terrific.
Really, by the last act, I was beginning to be swept away by the ethereal beauty of the dancers – my criteria for a really wonderful experience at the ballet. Guest choreographer Winthrop Corey is amazing, and I think this company was up to the challenge.
Congratulations to Ballet Nebraska founder and artistic director Erika Overturff (also the beautiful Lucy) on her many accomplishments, wearing her many hats.
I am really looking forward to Ballet Nebraska’s next offering, their own brand new version of The Nutcracker. It will be presented at Iowa Western Arts Center on December 2 and the Omaha Music Hall on December 4. There will also be a Nutcracker Tea Party at Joslyn Castle, hosted by the Ballet Nebraska Guild, on November 27. (Visit the website: balletnebraska.org.)
Count Dracula may be scary, but the ballet bearing his name is beautiful!
Saturday, November 5, 2011
To be or not to be ... Anonymous
Did that Bard fellow, William Shakespeare, really write all those plays and poems?
The new film, Anonymous, attempts to answer that question definitively.
Another question: are we the audience able to follow the intricate political thriller?
We shall attempt to answer that question definitively.
Suppose that the reportedly nearly illiterate bard actually took credit for the works of Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford. Why would Shakespeare do it? Why would De Vere permit it? What else is at play at the time of upheaval in Queen Elizabeth’s England circa 1550 - 1603?
If you know the answers to even some of those questions, you should be able to navigate this new film easily. If not, you – like me – will probably suffer from confusion as the fast-talking (with those English accents!) cast weaves its spell.
Okay, it sounds like I didn’t like it. Not so. I just got confused on occasion.
It didn’t help my confusion that the film jumped back and forth in time, forcing me to ID not one, but two, faces for every name.
Here’s the good news: It’s not only an interesting premise, but a pretty convincing one, at least in this context. The film does satisfactorily explain the whys. De Vere, the mature version played by Rhys Ifans (an absolute chameleon – do you remember him from Notting Hill?) – is mesmerizing as the talented royal who was driven to write despite the taboo against him stooping to such a thing. Enter Will Shakespeare, an aspiring actor who in fact could read but not write. De Vere wants his plays produced (at the Rose, later called the Globe, Theater). To do so, he must find someone to submit them; he chooses Ben Johnson, another writer, with the stipulation that he will not reveal the true author. Wait. Where does Shakespeare come in? Sort of accidentally. Once he has taken credit for one of the plays on stage, he has to stick with it, and so does De Vere.
But, that is not the whole story. The big picture includes the struggle taking place over the throne of the aging queen. (Remember that whole Mary, Queen of Scots thing?)
The cast is quite good, including Vanessa Redgrave (looking ancient) and her real life daughter Joely Richardson, who portray the “virgin” queen as older and younger versions. Richardson’s young queen falls in love with De Vere and may have had his child. Okay, I’m going to stop staggering through English history, known and unknown, now because I’m out of my element (and I actually studied this era rather enthusiastically at one time!).
What can’t be beat: the atmosphere of the streets, the palace, the Globe (I have been to the replicated Globe and this brings it to life). The actors, the costumes. If this had smell-a-vision, we’d probably have to leave the theater.
One final prop to Rhys Ifans. He was fantastic. And tell me he didn’t look like Ryan Gosling’s clone! (I’m not the only one who thought so.)
There’s a lot of drama here, and a few laughs along the way. It immerses us in a time four centuries ago with fully realized characters. I do think this will appeal to a somewhat narrow audience. Pity, it’s a fascinating look at history, with not a little speculation thrown in.
So, did it answer the question: Did that Bard fellow write all those plays?
You’ll have to see the movie and decide for yourself. And that’s the fun of it.
I’m giving this three reels (out of four).
The new film, Anonymous, attempts to answer that question definitively.
Another question: are we the audience able to follow the intricate political thriller?
We shall attempt to answer that question definitively.
Suppose that the reportedly nearly illiterate bard actually took credit for the works of Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford. Why would Shakespeare do it? Why would De Vere permit it? What else is at play at the time of upheaval in Queen Elizabeth’s England circa 1550 - 1603?
If you know the answers to even some of those questions, you should be able to navigate this new film easily. If not, you – like me – will probably suffer from confusion as the fast-talking (with those English accents!) cast weaves its spell.
Okay, it sounds like I didn’t like it. Not so. I just got confused on occasion.
It didn’t help my confusion that the film jumped back and forth in time, forcing me to ID not one, but two, faces for every name.
Here’s the good news: It’s not only an interesting premise, but a pretty convincing one, at least in this context. The film does satisfactorily explain the whys. De Vere, the mature version played by Rhys Ifans (an absolute chameleon – do you remember him from Notting Hill?) – is mesmerizing as the talented royal who was driven to write despite the taboo against him stooping to such a thing. Enter Will Shakespeare, an aspiring actor who in fact could read but not write. De Vere wants his plays produced (at the Rose, later called the Globe, Theater). To do so, he must find someone to submit them; he chooses Ben Johnson, another writer, with the stipulation that he will not reveal the true author. Wait. Where does Shakespeare come in? Sort of accidentally. Once he has taken credit for one of the plays on stage, he has to stick with it, and so does De Vere.
But, that is not the whole story. The big picture includes the struggle taking place over the throne of the aging queen. (Remember that whole Mary, Queen of Scots thing?)
 |
| Joely Richardson and Jamie Campbell Bower as the young Queen and Earl. |
What can’t be beat: the atmosphere of the streets, the palace, the Globe (I have been to the replicated Globe and this brings it to life). The actors, the costumes. If this had smell-a-vision, we’d probably have to leave the theater.
 |
| Vanessa Redgrave and Rhys Ifans in later years. |
There’s a lot of drama here, and a few laughs along the way. It immerses us in a time four centuries ago with fully realized characters. I do think this will appeal to a somewhat narrow audience. Pity, it’s a fascinating look at history, with not a little speculation thrown in.
So, did it answer the question: Did that Bard fellow write all those plays?
You’ll have to see the movie and decide for yourself. And that’s the fun of it.
Friday, October 7, 2011
"The Ides of March are come"
As Caesar said, “The Ides of March are come.”
It’s not the 15th of the month, but the Ides are indeed here and there’s no need to beware. The Ides of March, starring George Clooney and Ryan Gosling, opens today, heralding the official beginning of the Oscar race.
What do we think of when we say “Ides of March”? Betrayal by those you trust. Hence the title of this terrific film.
But there are many forms of betrayal, and its many forms are explored here. The story takes place during the last few frantic days before a heavily contested and pivotal Ohio presidential primary, pitting two Democrats. Gov. Mike Morris (Clooney) is waging a tight race led by his campaign manager Paul (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and press secretary Stephen Meyers (Ryan Gosling). Stephen is an idealist who reveres Morris. Paul Giamatti is Hoffman’s counterpart. When a chink appears in the governor’s armor, Stephen faces the biggest challenge of his career. His idealism is shattered in ways we don’t see coming.
 |
| Ryan Gosling is winning, no matter which way the campaign goes. |
The film revolves around the character of Stephen Meyers. Ryan Gosling, that chameleon actor who dominates every film he is in, positively shimmers in this and is sure to garner an Oscar nod. Not far behind is Clooney as the enigmatic candidate. Nor is Philip Seymour Hoffman (I can’t think of a bad performance in his career) who is both likable and ruthless. Paul Giamatti is likewise ruthless. The women in this story are equally powerful and engaging. Young intern Molly Stearns, portrayed by Evan Rachel Wood, catches the eye of Stephen, resulting in a complicated relationship. (FYI, Mollys’ father, Jack, is played by Gregory Itzin, so good on 24.) Marisa Tomei is compelling as New York Times reporter Ida Horowicz.
The script is very smart, and echoes many themes in today’s politics, which even supplies one of the film’s funniest and most ironic references.
 |
| George Clooney (left) and Ryan Gosling (center) in a staff meeting. |
I liked that the movie moved quickly, with zigs and zags we don’t see coming. I love it when I can’t predict where a movie is going.
This is not a spoiler, but the ending is abrupt and may infuriate some. I personally loved it.
Just as I loved this smart film, shot on location in Cincinnati, and especially the acting of Ryan Gosling – who never looked better, and that’s saying something!
This film earns 3 1/2 reels (out of 4).
Sunday, September 11, 2011
“Can’t Take My Eyes Off of You"
"Jersey Boys” keeps you riveted and won’t let you go.
Ever since I saw Joseph Leo Bwarie (Frankie Valli) perform a song from “Jersey Boys” on both the Tony Awards and the Academy Awards, I’ve been excited about seeing this Broadway musical.
Finally, they arrived this week in Omaha for a three-week run at the Orpheum Theater. Oh boy, did they ever arrive!
Friday’s official opening night performance played to a full house. It’s a wonder the roof didn’t come off of the 84-year-old building, if not due to the thunderous response of the audience, then surely due to the incredible vocal range of the show’s star!
Four underprivileged Jersey kids carved out a huge pop career for themselves as The Four Seasons. This is the story of their meteoric rise (after years of struggle) in the emerging rock and roll world, where they continued for four decades. After their first hit, “Sherry,” in 1962, came another, and another, and another. While still in their 20s, they had sold 175 million records. Some reasons for their success: they wrote their own songs (thanks to the brilliant Bob Gaudio and Bob Crewe, who is also portrayed in the show, by Jonathan Hadley, created their own unique sound (thanks to an incredibly talented Frankie Valli), and insisted on doing it their way.
Along with the successes came failures – relationships faltered, alcohol and drugs tempted, love came and went, laws were broken or bent, disagreements sowed dissent, and tragedy struck. Each of the four original members of the group recalled things slightly differently, so the play’s creators decided to tell it narrative-style from each of their perspectives. It works on many levels.
First, it delivers a breakneck pace. Second, it gives you time to bond with each character, investing emotionally in them. Third, it provides humor. Fourth, it presents a unique way of telling a fascinating, and to most of us unknown, story.
The set is stark, a scaffolding of metal staircases and walkways. It works brilliantly, providing for exits while the next scene is beginning (hence that fast pace). Overhead, old-fashioned comic book-like panels provide some more context. Especially fascinating are the projected black and white scenes of appearances on “American Bandstand” and “The Ed Sullivan Show” as the scene is filmed “live” on the stage. It is impossible to discern if those scenes are the originals! It’s very cool.
The band, up to 10 pieces, is onstage throughout, moving around from scene to scene. And they are marvelous.
But wait, I haven’t even gotten to the best parts: The actors, especially the four who portray the group, from their days as The Four Lovers, and other equally-bad group names, to The Four Seasons. From Bwarie (Valli) with his nearly four octave range to Quinn VanAntwerp (Bob Gaudio), Matt Bailey (Tommy DeVito) and understudy Adam Zelasko (Nick Massi), all were perfection. They sounded fabulous as they replicated the Four Seasons’s songs. The crowd went wild with every song – and there were a lot of them.
Standouts were “Sherry,” “Big Girls Don’t Cry,” “Walk Like a Man,” “My Eyes Adored You,” “Rag Doll,” and on and on.
But it was “Can’t Take My Eyes Off of You” that threatened to blow that roof off.
One other really good thing is the sound quality. You can hear every word, spoken or sung. And that is not always the case.
The rest of the cast is also excellent, playing multiple roles
Be advised that it’s not for pre-teens. The story deals with jail, mobsters, loan sharks, and the “f-bomb” is sprinkled liberally – sometimes with great comedic result (hey, these were guys who had done time or narrowly avoided it).
The thing is, this isn’t just a good story or good music. It’s the whole package, adding up to a powerful – and fun – experience. It is infectious, you find yourself moving to the music and in some cases singing along (don’t).
I’ve seen many musicals old and new, and this is far and away the best contemporary musical I’ve seen.
If you are planning to see it, you’d better hurry because I guarantee seats will fill up fast.
Of note: you’ve only got two more performances (Sunday’s) to see the uber-talented VanAntwerp before he leaves to star as Bob on the Great White Way. The good news is, he’ll be replaced by the vastly-talented Preston Truman Boyd, whom I had the pleasure of meeting when he was in Omaha starring as the Monster in “Young Frankenstein.” And a new "Nick Massi" will come from Canada next week, when he wraps up his appearance with that tour. And be advised that Frankie Valli is portrayed by an understudy at some performances.
No matter what, the show will go on, as good as or better than ever, of that I’m sure.
I can’t recommend this highly enough. It is a masterpiece, with music everyone will love.
As Time Magazine proclaimed, “It will run for centuries!” But in Omaha, only now through September 25.
Ever since I saw Joseph Leo Bwarie (Frankie Valli) perform a song from “Jersey Boys” on both the Tony Awards and the Academy Awards, I’ve been excited about seeing this Broadway musical.
Finally, they arrived this week in Omaha for a three-week run at the Orpheum Theater. Oh boy, did they ever arrive!
Friday’s official opening night performance played to a full house. It’s a wonder the roof didn’t come off of the 84-year-old building, if not due to the thunderous response of the audience, then surely due to the incredible vocal range of the show’s star!
 |
| Joseph Leo Bwarie is a vocal marvel. |
Four underprivileged Jersey kids carved out a huge pop career for themselves as The Four Seasons. This is the story of their meteoric rise (after years of struggle) in the emerging rock and roll world, where they continued for four decades. After their first hit, “Sherry,” in 1962, came another, and another, and another. While still in their 20s, they had sold 175 million records. Some reasons for their success: they wrote their own songs (thanks to the brilliant Bob Gaudio and Bob Crewe, who is also portrayed in the show, by Jonathan Hadley, created their own unique sound (thanks to an incredibly talented Frankie Valli), and insisted on doing it their way.
Along with the successes came failures – relationships faltered, alcohol and drugs tempted, love came and went, laws were broken or bent, disagreements sowed dissent, and tragedy struck. Each of the four original members of the group recalled things slightly differently, so the play’s creators decided to tell it narrative-style from each of their perspectives. It works on many levels.
First, it delivers a breakneck pace. Second, it gives you time to bond with each character, investing emotionally in them. Third, it provides humor. Fourth, it presents a unique way of telling a fascinating, and to most of us unknown, story.
The set is stark, a scaffolding of metal staircases and walkways. It works brilliantly, providing for exits while the next scene is beginning (hence that fast pace). Overhead, old-fashioned comic book-like panels provide some more context. Especially fascinating are the projected black and white scenes of appearances on “American Bandstand” and “The Ed Sullivan Show” as the scene is filmed “live” on the stage. It is impossible to discern if those scenes are the originals! It’s very cool.
The band, up to 10 pieces, is onstage throughout, moving around from scene to scene. And they are marvelous.
But wait, I haven’t even gotten to the best parts: The actors, especially the four who portray the group, from their days as The Four Lovers, and other equally-bad group names, to The Four Seasons. From Bwarie (Valli) with his nearly four octave range to Quinn VanAntwerp (Bob Gaudio), Matt Bailey (Tommy DeVito) and understudy Adam Zelasko (Nick Massi), all were perfection. They sounded fabulous as they replicated the Four Seasons’s songs. The crowd went wild with every song – and there were a lot of them.
Standouts were “Sherry,” “Big Girls Don’t Cry,” “Walk Like a Man,” “My Eyes Adored You,” “Rag Doll,” and on and on.
But it was “Can’t Take My Eyes Off of You” that threatened to blow that roof off.
One other really good thing is the sound quality. You can hear every word, spoken or sung. And that is not always the case.
The rest of the cast is also excellent, playing multiple roles
Be advised that it’s not for pre-teens. The story deals with jail, mobsters, loan sharks, and the “f-bomb” is sprinkled liberally – sometimes with great comedic result (hey, these were guys who had done time or narrowly avoided it).
The thing is, this isn’t just a good story or good music. It’s the whole package, adding up to a powerful – and fun – experience. It is infectious, you find yourself moving to the music and in some cases singing along (don’t).
I’ve seen many musicals old and new, and this is far and away the best contemporary musical I’ve seen.
If you are planning to see it, you’d better hurry because I guarantee seats will fill up fast.
Of note: you’ve only got two more performances (Sunday’s) to see the uber-talented VanAntwerp before he leaves to star as Bob on the Great White Way. The good news is, he’ll be replaced by the vastly-talented Preston Truman Boyd, whom I had the pleasure of meeting when he was in Omaha starring as the Monster in “Young Frankenstein.” And a new "Nick Massi" will come from Canada next week, when he wraps up his appearance with that tour. And be advised that Frankie Valli is portrayed by an understudy at some performances.
No matter what, the show will go on, as good as or better than ever, of that I’m sure.
I can’t recommend this highly enough. It is a masterpiece, with music everyone will love.
As Time Magazine proclaimed, “It will run for centuries!” But in Omaha, only now through September 25.
Friday, September 9, 2011
Is Contagion Contagious?
Short answer: maybe. Depends on the kind of movies you like.
“Contagion” opens today, with its star-studded cast and director Steven Soderbergh amping expectations.
First, I love procedurals and medical stories and suspense thrillers. So I should love this, right? And I do, to a point.
The acting is good, especially Laurence Fishburne, Marion Cotillard and Kate Winslet. Jude Law sports the ugliest set of teeth ever, presumably to reinforce that he is English. Matt Damon and Gwyneth Paltrow are good, but their talents are underused I think.
The story of a rapidly lethal new airborne virus that quickly spreads worldwide is a great premise. (Watching the credits, I also thought this movie was a good excuse for some great trips – to Hong Kong, China, London, Atlanta, Chicago, San Francisco and Minneapolis.)
 |
| Gwyneth Paltrow’s luck may have been good at the craps table, but not after the virus claims her as the first victim. |
Anyway, we follow each of these people and many more, as the story cuts back and forth to them, all over the place. If you are not paying close attention, you’ll soon be lost.
The best thing about this movie is the medical jargon and explanations, which are really fascinating. I actually learned something. And this part was entirely believable and, I’m sure, rooted in real science. So we have every reason to worry about this seemingly unstopped epidemic that threatens to rival the Black Plague in fatalities worldwide. Many scenes show either the utter cluelessness of people, or the irrational response to the news of the virus as it leaks out (no pun intended). Panic, which the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and all kinds of others have tried to avoid by keeping the information under wraps, is inevitable.
The actors portray doctors and scientists (Fishburne, Cotillard, Winslet), ordinary people caught up in the growing tragedy (Damon, Paltrow, and many others), and opportunists (Law) – who is exploiting a dubious cure to further his blog. Scientists frantically try to understand the virus so that they can develop a vaccine for the bug that is killing 25 percent of its victims. It has a high incidence of transmission, but the scientists don’t know exactly how it is transmitted.
Of course the suspense arc of the film is: How long will it take them to find the source and a vaccine – and will it be in time for those with whom we have become acquainted?
My chief complaint is that the film felt flat to me, without a real heart-pounding climax. I also felt that because of the large cast, I really didn’t get to know anyone, so I wasn’t very invested in them. The movie, paradoxically, seemed to rush through their stories, while plodding along at the same time. Stories should have “acts,” and varying tension. This seemed to stay on a pretty even keel throughout. And the ending was stunning only in that it ended rather abruptly.
The one actor I have to take issue with was Elliott Gould, as another researcher. His acting style has always been a little affected, but in this I felt he was reading/reciting every line. I did not think he was effective in the role.
So, while I’m critical of many things, there are also many bright spots. Many scenes have stayed in my head, replaying and replaying. There were many interesting subplots – which would have benefited from being developed a bit more. This is not for children, who would not only be bored but probably grossed out, particularly by the autopsy scene (as even the adult audience seemed to be).
Maybe I was just in a mood. Most critics liked it, as did a majority of audience members, as reported on Rotten Tomatoes. If I see it again, I could love it.
This is one of those movies you’ll have to see to judge for yourself.
First impression: I’m giving this movie 2 1/2 reels out of 4.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Jersey Boys Here at Last!
The smash Broadway hit – Jersey Boys, the Story of Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons – is finally in Omaha. Tonight is preview night at the Orpheum Theater, at 7:30 p.m. Tomorrow will see a rare weekday matinee at 2 p.m. and another performance at 7:30.
Then Friday, it’s the official opening night at 8 p.m.
Then Friday, it’s the official opening night at 8 p.m.
 |
| From left, Quinn VanAntwerp, Matt Bailey, Joseph Leo Bwarie and Steve Gouveia will entertain us in Omaha. Photo: Joan Marcus |
The musical about the Rock ’n Roll Hall-of-Famers took home the 2006 Tony Award for Best Musical, the 2006 Grammy Award for Best Musical Show Album among other honors.
January 30 of this year, Jersey Boys worldwide had passed the $1 billion (yes, with a “B”) dollar mark. Not bad for a story about four blue-collar guys from the wrong side of the tracks whose unique sound propelled them to the top of the pop music charts in the 1960s.
The show has been called “a play with music” because of its compelling story. What it is NOT is a tribute band or impersonator group.
There are 52 people in the traveling company, including 19 actors, many of whom play multiple roles, some as many as 16 to 18 roles!
Those four guys sold 175 million records worldwide, all before they were 30. There are 33 songs in the show, including five #1 hits and 11 that made Billboard’s top 10. But there were still 19 hit songs, including four top ten hits, that didn’t make it into the show!
They wrote their own songs, invented their own sound, and became one of the most successful pop sensations of all time.
Three of the four original band members, Frankie Valli, Bob Gaudio and Tommy DeVito, participated in the writing of their “rags-to-rock-to-riches” story. Can’t get much more authentic than that. BTW, the fourth member of the original band was Nick Massi.
The musical has enjoyed great success since it opened on Broadway on Nov. 6, 2005. There are now five touring groups worldwide.
How about more trivia?
- Frankie has five costume changes, destroying a pair of pants a week (sliding on his knees). His shortest costume change is 15 seconds.
- There are 102 shirts in the show, including reproductions of vintage shirts (patterns are printed on fabric by computer and then made into shirts, costing over $200 a yard).
- 87 shoes are used in one performance.
It all adds up to a big show with a big sound.
Say you don’t remember the Four Seasons? How about “Big Girls Don’t Cry” or “Sherry,” or “Can’t Take My Eyes Off You”? Now you remember. Hear these and many, many more, starting tonight.
The show runs in Omaha for three weeks, through Sunday, Sept. 25. Songs like “December, 1963” and some language may be inappropriate listening for younger audiences.
Tickets, starting at $28, can be purchased at the Holland Center’s Ticket Omaha Office, online at TicketOmaha.com, by calling 402-345-0606.
I’ll be there. Will you?
Saturday, September 3, 2011
'Planet of the Apes' Still Rising
 |
| Caesar and Will have a close bond. |
The brilliant Andy Serkis (Gollum in “Lord of the Rings”) is astounding as Caesar, the genetically-engineered super smart chimp rescued from the research lab by scientist Will Rodman (James Franco). The experiment held the promise of a cure for Alzheimer's Disease among other brain ailments, a quest all the more personal for Will because his father Charles (John Lithgow) is suffering from the disease.
Will raises Caesar as a child, with the help of fellow scientist and love interest Caroline (Freida Pinto). Harry Potter fans will get a kick of out Tom Felton’s (very good) performance as the sadistic keeper of heretofore helpless apes in the “sanctuary” where Caesar ends up after a rampage through his neighborhood.
Caesar’s intelligence transforms him into an activist for the humane treatment of his fellow apes. All-out war ensues.A note to science-fiction haters (you know who you are): This plot is crafted so that the premise is really quite believable and easy to accept. Only the ending scenes take a little extra license with reality.
The biggest reason to see this, besides its surprisingly sweet story, is the bravura performance of Serkis and his CGI transformation into the ape. Using cutting-edge technology, the movie makers allowed Serkis to act with the other humans rather than just in front of a green screen. How they managed it is beyond me, but boy, does it work! Caesar is as real as you’d ever want him to be, as are all the other (CGI) apes. If Serkis does not get an Oscar nod for his work, I give up.
 |
| Andy Serkis before CGI! |
This adrenalin rush should appeal to a broad audience. It has something for everyone. Excitement, sentiment, humor (Lithgow is a gift), pathos … you name it, it’s got it. Audiences have agreed, making it one of the biggest blockbusters of the summer.
One of the best movies I’ve seen this year. Really. Go. You’ll love it. Really.
I’m giving “Rise of the Planet” three and a half reels.
'The Debt' Pays Off
Some actors never turn in a bad performance. Michael Caine, Meryl Streep, Judi Dench come to mind. Oh, and Helen Mirren.
So now here’s her latest release, “The Debt,” and she is amazing as usual. But hers is not the only fine performance in this unusual espionage thriller directed by John Madden.
 |
| Helen Mirren as Rachel, 1997. |
The story begins in Tel Aviv in 1997, with the publication of a book by Sarah Gold about her mother, Rachel Singer (Helen Mirren), who along with Stefan and David, are revered for their heroic exploits in 1966. The Mossad trio’s mission was to track down Nazi war criminal Doktor Bernhardt – “The Surgeon of Berkenau,” (Jesper Christensen) kidnap him out of East Berlin and bring him back to Israel for trial. The movie cuts back and forth from 1997to 1966, with young Rachel being portrayed by Jessica Chastain. Marton Csokas and Sam Worthington play the young Stefan and David, while Tom Wilkinson and Ciarán Hinds portray their 1997 versions. All are excellent, especially Chastain, Christensen and Wilkinson.
We learn early on that there is a dark secret about their mission, one that continues to haunt them. I can’t tell you more, lest I spoil the suspense.
 |
| The young trio of spies: Rachel, Stefan and David. |
There is mounting tension as the events of 1966 unfold, punctuated by some surprising and violent developments. And 1997 is not without its shocks either. One event is so well depicted that its conclusion is apt to induce cardiac arrest!
The last act contains surprises and thrills as well.
The drama is dark and tense, but always riveting, as we try to keep up.
This movie signals the start of the “serious” films, those angling to be considered for awards. This one could be in the mix. And it bodes well for the rest of the Oscar-race season to come.
I’m awarding “The Debt” three and a half reels (out of four).
Friday, September 2, 2011
Pardon My Absence...
After a little summer R&R, I’m back and ready to catch up and move forward. I have some reviews for you, as well as some information on future events. Please scroll down to see all my latest offerings.
One amazing thing I’d like to share with my readers first.
There are at least two reasons why I ended up reviewing movies and other forms of entertainment. One is that my father worked in the motion picture business his entire 50+ year career. He retired as a branch manager in Kansas City, Mo. As a result of his job, I had movie passes to some theaters, so I saw a lot of movies. When I was 16, I spent my summer working as a cashier at a local neighborhood movie theater. That’s one reason.
The other reason is that I grew up two doors down from Helen and B.C. Altman. So? Helen and B.C. were the parents of movie director Bob Altman. His daughter Christine was my age and spent the school year at her grandparents’ house. We spent an enormous amount of time together. She was cute and funny and a little glamorous when she began spending summers with her father in California, returning with all kinds of fantastic stories. Bob Altman was just beginning his amazing career. He shot his first (to my knowledge) feature length film in Kansas City, in and around our neighborhood, and in his parents’ house. Christine had a part in that film, titled “The Delinquents.” It is a dreadful film. But there are two redeeming features of it: Christine is in it, and is pretty good, and the star of the movie is the then pretty much unknown actor Tom Laughlin, who went on to become famous for “Billy Jack.” He played a teenager in Bob’s movie, although he was then 24 years old. (Released in 1957, it was shot in 1955.) He showed talent even in this film. (Digging a little, I found that Bob’s then-wife, Lotus Corelli, played Mrs. Wilson in the film.)
So, I was too young then to be allowed to see the movie. Through the years, I always wanted to see it, but before the Internet and video tapes and DVDs, it was pretty hopeless. A couple of years ago, my husband found a listing in “The Big Reel” a now defunct publication that sold all kinds of films. There it was! He ordered it for me for Christmas. The print was event worse than the movie itself – a bootleg copy shot from a car in a drive-in theater! But I finally got to see it.
So, fast forward to Wednesday night. Flipping through the TV channels, I saw “The Delinquents” was just starting. It couldn’t be, I thought. But, it was! At least the print was a little better.
A postscript: Christine’s son, Dana (who adopted his grandfather’s last name) lives here in Omaha and owns a film production company. He is the producer of “Lovely Still,” the well-received indie film from two years ago that starred Ellen Burstyn and Martin Landau and was filmed right here in Omaha!
Just thought you’d like to know.
See my other new postings for much more.
One amazing thing I’d like to share with my readers first.
There are at least two reasons why I ended up reviewing movies and other forms of entertainment. One is that my father worked in the motion picture business his entire 50+ year career. He retired as a branch manager in Kansas City, Mo. As a result of his job, I had movie passes to some theaters, so I saw a lot of movies. When I was 16, I spent my summer working as a cashier at a local neighborhood movie theater. That’s one reason.
The other reason is that I grew up two doors down from Helen and B.C. Altman. So? Helen and B.C. were the parents of movie director Bob Altman. His daughter Christine was my age and spent the school year at her grandparents’ house. We spent an enormous amount of time together. She was cute and funny and a little glamorous when she began spending summers with her father in California, returning with all kinds of fantastic stories. Bob Altman was just beginning his amazing career. He shot his first (to my knowledge) feature length film in Kansas City, in and around our neighborhood, and in his parents’ house. Christine had a part in that film, titled “The Delinquents.” It is a dreadful film. But there are two redeeming features of it: Christine is in it, and is pretty good, and the star of the movie is the then pretty much unknown actor Tom Laughlin, who went on to become famous for “Billy Jack.” He played a teenager in Bob’s movie, although he was then 24 years old. (Released in 1957, it was shot in 1955.) He showed talent even in this film. (Digging a little, I found that Bob’s then-wife, Lotus Corelli, played Mrs. Wilson in the film.)
So, I was too young then to be allowed to see the movie. Through the years, I always wanted to see it, but before the Internet and video tapes and DVDs, it was pretty hopeless. A couple of years ago, my husband found a listing in “The Big Reel” a now defunct publication that sold all kinds of films. There it was! He ordered it for me for Christmas. The print was event worse than the movie itself – a bootleg copy shot from a car in a drive-in theater! But I finally got to see it.
So, fast forward to Wednesday night. Flipping through the TV channels, I saw “The Delinquents” was just starting. It couldn’t be, I thought. But, it was! At least the print was a little better.
A postscript: Christine’s son, Dana (who adopted his grandfather’s last name) lives here in Omaha and owns a film production company. He is the producer of “Lovely Still,” the well-received indie film from two years ago that starred Ellen Burstyn and Martin Landau and was filmed right here in Omaha!
Just thought you’d like to know.
See my other new postings for much more.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
THE HELP needs no help...
The Help is adapted by Tate Taylor (who also directs) from the wildly popular best-selling novel of the same name by Kathryn Stockett.
The year is 1962 and race relations in Jackson, Miss. (and all of the deep South) are far from ideal. Segregation is the norm, rigidly adhered to by whites, including the Junior League ladies who employ black maids to keep their homes and children in line.
One member, Skeeter (Emma Stone) is appalled by the conduct of her old friends and, being an aspiring writer, decides to undertake the story of that life from the point of view of the maids. It takes extraordinary courage for the maids to come forward to talk to her in secret, even with the promise of anonymity. The first is Aibileen, beautifully portrayed by Viola Davis. Eventually, her best friend Minny (Octavia Spencer, who sparkles in this role) joins her.
This is a movie that gives a number of women perhaps the juiciest roles of their careers. But it’s not a “woman’s picture.” I talked to a number of men, including my husband, who loved it too.
Funny scenes such as the joke played on Hilly by Skeeter when she is pushed too hard to publish Hilly’s “Home Help Sanitation Initiative” in the League’s newsletter. The initiative is an attempt to require white families to install separate bathrooms for their “colored” help.
In addition to powerful performances by those three women, and many others including Bryce Dallas Howard as the uber-racist Hilly, Sissy Spacek in a very funny turn as Hilly’s mother, Jessica Chastain as fish-out-of-water Celia Foote, Allison Janney as Skeeter’s mother, Cicely Tyson as Skeeter’s family’s former maid Constantine, Ahna O’Reilly as Elizabeth Leefolt, and the twins Eleanor and Emma Henry as Elizabeth’s adorable toddler, Mae Mobley, who bonds with Aibileen instead of her mother.
Each of these women has some complicated relationships, but the film keeps things straight so there’s little confusion as the many strands of the story play out.
The other star of the movie is the town of Jackson, in all its ‘60s splendor. While the white women’s homes are lovely for their time, they hide their distasteful secrets. The movie keeps us thinking and weighing all the time.
The longish film speeds by, and we reluctantly relinquish our visit with our new friends (primarily Skeeter and the maids). Many scenes, both sad and funny, linger in our memory – the mark of a good movie.
I loved the book, and the essence of it was captured here. As I revisit the book, I see that some things were truncated in the movie to the point you may not fully understand them, but the substance of the book is here.
It’s one of the best movies of 2011 and will surely be prominent come Oscar time.
Three and a half+ reels (out of four) for this lovely film.
The year is 1962 and race relations in Jackson, Miss. (and all of the deep South) are far from ideal. Segregation is the norm, rigidly adhered to by whites, including the Junior League ladies who employ black maids to keep their homes and children in line.
One member, Skeeter (Emma Stone) is appalled by the conduct of her old friends and, being an aspiring writer, decides to undertake the story of that life from the point of view of the maids. It takes extraordinary courage for the maids to come forward to talk to her in secret, even with the promise of anonymity. The first is Aibileen, beautifully portrayed by Viola Davis. Eventually, her best friend Minny (Octavia Spencer, who sparkles in this role) joins her.
 |
| Octavia Spencer (left) and Viola Davis portray longtime friends. |
This is a movie that gives a number of women perhaps the juiciest roles of their careers. But it’s not a “woman’s picture.” I talked to a number of men, including my husband, who loved it too.
Funny scenes such as the joke played on Hilly by Skeeter when she is pushed too hard to publish Hilly’s “Home Help Sanitation Initiative” in the League’s newsletter. The initiative is an attempt to require white families to install separate bathrooms for their “colored” help.
 |
| Bryce Dallas Howard as Hilly (left) shows her true colors to Emma Stone (Skeeter). |
In addition to powerful performances by those three women, and many others including Bryce Dallas Howard as the uber-racist Hilly, Sissy Spacek in a very funny turn as Hilly’s mother, Jessica Chastain as fish-out-of-water Celia Foote, Allison Janney as Skeeter’s mother, Cicely Tyson as Skeeter’s family’s former maid Constantine, Ahna O’Reilly as Elizabeth Leefolt, and the twins Eleanor and Emma Henry as Elizabeth’s adorable toddler, Mae Mobley, who bonds with Aibileen instead of her mother.
Each of these women has some complicated relationships, but the film keeps things straight so there’s little confusion as the many strands of the story play out.
The other star of the movie is the town of Jackson, in all its ‘60s splendor. While the white women’s homes are lovely for their time, they hide their distasteful secrets. The movie keeps us thinking and weighing all the time.
The longish film speeds by, and we reluctantly relinquish our visit with our new friends (primarily Skeeter and the maids). Many scenes, both sad and funny, linger in our memory – the mark of a good movie.
I loved the book, and the essence of it was captured here. As I revisit the book, I see that some things were truncated in the movie to the point you may not fully understand them, but the substance of the book is here.
It’s one of the best movies of 2011 and will surely be prominent come Oscar time.
Three and a half+ reels (out of four) for this lovely film.
Friday, August 12, 2011
30 Minutes or Less
It’s called “30 Minutes or Less.” It could be subtitled “The time it will take you to flee from the theater after the movie starts.”
The premise sounds funny. Unhappy pizza delivery guy Nick (Jesse Eisenberg) delivers to two apes (well, ape-mask wearing idiots played by Danny McBride and Nick Swardson) who have decided to hire a hit man to kill one of their fathers (Fred Ward). The problem: they have no money, especially not $100,000. So why not kidnap someone (Nick), strap a bomb on him, and send him off to rob a bank. When he delivers the money to them, he’ll get the code to shut off the bomb’s timer.
Nick enlists the help of his best friend (Aziz Ansari trapped in a movie unworthy of him) to rob the bank. There’s a stripper and a girl Nick likes (who happens to be his friend’s sister).
What went wrong? Not the bank robbery. Just everything else.
The movie (mercifully short at 1 hour 23 minutes) is a series of cobbled-together scenes, some of which attempt humor (rarely succeeding).
First, I don’t fault Eisenberg or Ansari, or Michael Pena as the hit man. They are pretty good actors, but should choose their vehicles better.
Speaking of vehicles, there are a couple of good car chases in this, but that hardly makes up for the rest of it. Perhaps the funniest scene is the opening one in which Nick gives two bratty kids their comeuppance.
Here’s the thing. I couldn’t concentrate on the plot, or even any “laughs,” because my senses were being constantly bombarded with the F-bomb and all its variations. Every single character in the film uses the terms profusely, every other word. The only time there’s relief from that word, is when they are uttering every other crude word or phrase they can think up, and some that they apparently did think up!
If a normal comedy script is somewhere around 95 pages, and you took out the profane words in this script, it would probably be about 20 pages long. And about that complicated.
Yes, there are a few twists, but not enough to justify the foul-mouthed mess.
Reading some reviews on Rotten Tomatoes (where it scored a low 45%) I couldn’t believe one writer actually said, “rude good fun without excessive raunch.” Huh? How about another writer, who declared, “One of the great disappointments of my cinematic year so far.” More like it.
I’m giving this a reluctant 1 reel (out of 4).
The premise sounds funny. Unhappy pizza delivery guy Nick (Jesse Eisenberg) delivers to two apes (well, ape-mask wearing idiots played by Danny McBride and Nick Swardson) who have decided to hire a hit man to kill one of their fathers (Fred Ward). The problem: they have no money, especially not $100,000. So why not kidnap someone (Nick), strap a bomb on him, and send him off to rob a bank. When he delivers the money to them, he’ll get the code to shut off the bomb’s timer.
Nick enlists the help of his best friend (Aziz Ansari trapped in a movie unworthy of him) to rob the bank. There’s a stripper and a girl Nick likes (who happens to be his friend’s sister).
What went wrong? Not the bank robbery. Just everything else.
The movie (mercifully short at 1 hour 23 minutes) is a series of cobbled-together scenes, some of which attempt humor (rarely succeeding).
First, I don’t fault Eisenberg or Ansari, or Michael Pena as the hit man. They are pretty good actors, but should choose their vehicles better.
Speaking of vehicles, there are a couple of good car chases in this, but that hardly makes up for the rest of it. Perhaps the funniest scene is the opening one in which Nick gives two bratty kids their comeuppance.
Here’s the thing. I couldn’t concentrate on the plot, or even any “laughs,” because my senses were being constantly bombarded with the F-bomb and all its variations. Every single character in the film uses the terms profusely, every other word. The only time there’s relief from that word, is when they are uttering every other crude word or phrase they can think up, and some that they apparently did think up!
If a normal comedy script is somewhere around 95 pages, and you took out the profane words in this script, it would probably be about 20 pages long. And about that complicated.
Yes, there are a few twists, but not enough to justify the foul-mouthed mess.
Reading some reviews on Rotten Tomatoes (where it scored a low 45%) I couldn’t believe one writer actually said, “rude good fun without excessive raunch.” Huh? How about another writer, who declared, “One of the great disappointments of my cinematic year so far.” More like it.
I’m giving this a reluctant 1 reel (out of 4).
Friday, July 29, 2011
Love love 'Crazy Stupid Love'
Crazy Stupid Love could have been another raunchy, sophomoric rom coms. But thank God it isn’t. What it IS is a sensitive, sweet, slightly naughty story of people navigating relationships in today’s world, which often produces hilarious consequences.
This movie deserves 3 1/2 reels.
 |
| Ryan Gosling gives Steve Carell a make-over. |
I didn’t really see this coming. Oh, the cast was promising: Steve Carell, Julianne Moore, Ryan Gosling, Marisa Tomei, Kevin Bacon, a luminous Emma Stone, delightful youngster Jonah Bobo and a couple of funny cameo turns. Who knew Gosling was so funny? And so ripped?!
I’ve really liked Carell since The 40-year-old Virgin, which was also sweet, but much raunchier.
Here’s the clue that this movie scores with all ages. My “mature” husband has declared many times he doesn’t like Steve Carell, mostly because he made “Virgin” (which my husband didn’t see). I finally convinced him to see this movie, and when we emerged he announced that he loved it and that he’d go see Carell again, even in “Virgin.”
An online reviewer summed it up best: "It's romantic, touching, a little risqué and screwball, yet reassuringly down-to-earth.”
He was so right. Carell goes from a schmuck to a leading man, all with a new haircut, wardrobe and dose of confidence. Gosling goes from a shameless roué to a lovesick puppy. Emma, who is adorable, also gains confidence. And the scene-stealer Bobo, embodies every 13-year-old kid entering puberty. All of the characters ring true and act (mostly) like real people would. The twists and turns – and surprises – may stretch it a bit, but they are within the realm of possibility.
He was so right. Carell goes from a schmuck to a leading man, all with a new haircut, wardrobe and dose of confidence. Gosling goes from a shameless roué to a lovesick puppy. Emma, who is adorable, also gains confidence. And the scene-stealer Bobo, embodies every 13-year-old kid entering puberty. All of the characters ring true and act (mostly) like real people would. The twists and turns – and surprises – may stretch it a bit, but they are within the realm of possibility.
While not giving anything away, the plot concerns Cal, a married man (Carell) who is gobsmacked by his wife (Moore) when she announces she wants a divorce. In his misery, Cal visits a bar that is the perfect upscale pick-up lounge, where he meets ladykiller Jacob (Gosling), who makes Cal his project. Meanwhile, Cal’s teenaged son is lovestruck, as is babysitter Jessica (Analeigh Tipton). And as we all know, love doesn’t always run smoothly.
Yes, there’s a little crazy and a little stupid in this film, but there’s a lot of love too.
 |
| The boys of Crazy Stupid Love |
This should appeal to many generations of moviegoers. It’s at least a couple of steps above most romantic comedies, actually displaying both romance and comedy.
This movie deserves 3 1/2 reels.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Welcome Back, Harry!
Tonight’s the night! Harry Potter returns for the 8th and final movie in this record-shattering series based on the books by J. K. Rowling. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II hits theaters tonight at 11:59 p.m. Long lines are assured. Will the faithful come away satisfied? I believe they will.
Wizards Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) continue their search for Horcruxes - objects that hold pieces of Lord Voldemort's (Ralph Fiennes) soul, which they must find and destroy in order to render the dark lord mortal.
First, know that this final film, part two of the seventh and last book in the series, presumes that by this time you know the characters (even the minor ones), so director David Yates plunges right into the story without undue exposition. The more you remember from the previous movies, the more you’ll understand. But never mind that – you’ll be able to follow most of it even if your memory is shot.
As the youngsters have aged, the challenges and dangers have escalated. So too has the violence. While this PG-13 film may be a little intense for the young ones, at least there’s nothing else objectionable in it (language, sex, gore, drugs – well, there are spells). I find it refreshing.
But I digress. While I have loved all the previous films – some more than others and most of all the first one – this one may be the most sophisticated of them all. Not only is it vintage Harry Potter, it now deals with some very heavy and adult themes, the most important being life and death.
Fortunately the acting ability of the young cast, completely intact through all eight films, has grown with each film, leading up to this delicious ending.
So, what can you expect? Many, many of the cast members return, some we haven’t seen for several films. All are a welcome addition. We even get to see Albus Dumbledore again (those who have seen other films can understand the sweetness of this) as well as Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) and Mr. Ollivander (John Hurt). In fact, Dumbledore utters one of the best lines in the movie: "Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?”
Besides the awesome acting of those three kids who have carried the series, especially Daniel Randcliffe who is just amazing, the veterans deliver powerful performances as well. Harry is called upon not only to be the moral and sympathetic center of the film, but in this one, also a buff action hero. He delivers.
I (and the audience) especially loved Maggie Smith as Prof. Minerva McGonnigal and Julie Walters as Ron’s mum. Matthew Lewis does a terrific job in his role as reluctant hero Neville Longbottom.
If you want creatures, you won’t be disappointed. There are some truly awe-inspiring ones, including a huge dragon. Oh, there’s just so much eye-candy and so much action is this, I can’t possible begin to describe it all.
So let me go about this another way. I love the way they bring things back; it’s so satisfying to know they haven’t lost sight of the many things that charmed and enthralled us from the beginning. I was especially delighted by the music, which brought back wonderful memories of the first film. The special effects are so amazing, created by a large contingent of geniuses. Many of them are merely throw-aways, there just to delight us. The cinematography is beautiful – especially in 3-D. Yes, this is one you will want to see in 3-D. (The glasses are Harry Potter glasses!) In this case, 3-D did what it is supposed to do – enhance the experience. Everything had so much depth.
The climactic battles scenes were a little over the top, but after all, it was a battle of good and evil with the outcome of the human race (I presume) on the line. And magic plays a great role in making those scenes new and fresh.
I can’t tell you the ending (in case you haven’t read the book) but it’s a wonderful, satisfying, if bittersweet denouement to a great story.
For some inexplicable reason, the series has not gotten much love from the Academy (Oscars) or even from the foreign press (Golden Globes). I am hopeful that this final film will not be snubbed, but will be accorded the accolades it deserves.
I am very grateful to J.K. Rowling and all the powers that be who decided to be true to the books when translated to film. As millions of children and adults will attest, it was a magical, wonderful ride that has cemented its place in history. Gotta love it.
This film deserves all 4 reels (out of 4).
Wizards Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) continue their search for Horcruxes - objects that hold pieces of Lord Voldemort's (Ralph Fiennes) soul, which they must find and destroy in order to render the dark lord mortal.
First, know that this final film, part two of the seventh and last book in the series, presumes that by this time you know the characters (even the minor ones), so director David Yates plunges right into the story without undue exposition. The more you remember from the previous movies, the more you’ll understand. But never mind that – you’ll be able to follow most of it even if your memory is shot.
As the youngsters have aged, the challenges and dangers have escalated. So too has the violence. While this PG-13 film may be a little intense for the young ones, at least there’s nothing else objectionable in it (language, sex, gore, drugs – well, there are spells). I find it refreshing.
But I digress. While I have loved all the previous films – some more than others and most of all the first one – this one may be the most sophisticated of them all. Not only is it vintage Harry Potter, it now deals with some very heavy and adult themes, the most important being life and death.
Fortunately the acting ability of the young cast, completely intact through all eight films, has grown with each film, leading up to this delicious ending.
So, what can you expect? Many, many of the cast members return, some we haven’t seen for several films. All are a welcome addition. We even get to see Albus Dumbledore again (those who have seen other films can understand the sweetness of this) as well as Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) and Mr. Ollivander (John Hurt). In fact, Dumbledore utters one of the best lines in the movie: "Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?”
Besides the awesome acting of those three kids who have carried the series, especially Daniel Randcliffe who is just amazing, the veterans deliver powerful performances as well. Harry is called upon not only to be the moral and sympathetic center of the film, but in this one, also a buff action hero. He delivers.
I (and the audience) especially loved Maggie Smith as Prof. Minerva McGonnigal and Julie Walters as Ron’s mum. Matthew Lewis does a terrific job in his role as reluctant hero Neville Longbottom.
If you want creatures, you won’t be disappointed. There are some truly awe-inspiring ones, including a huge dragon. Oh, there’s just so much eye-candy and so much action is this, I can’t possible begin to describe it all.
So let me go about this another way. I love the way they bring things back; it’s so satisfying to know they haven’t lost sight of the many things that charmed and enthralled us from the beginning. I was especially delighted by the music, which brought back wonderful memories of the first film. The special effects are so amazing, created by a large contingent of geniuses. Many of them are merely throw-aways, there just to delight us. The cinematography is beautiful – especially in 3-D. Yes, this is one you will want to see in 3-D. (The glasses are Harry Potter glasses!) In this case, 3-D did what it is supposed to do – enhance the experience. Everything had so much depth.
The climactic battles scenes were a little over the top, but after all, it was a battle of good and evil with the outcome of the human race (I presume) on the line. And magic plays a great role in making those scenes new and fresh.
I can’t tell you the ending (in case you haven’t read the book) but it’s a wonderful, satisfying, if bittersweet denouement to a great story.
For some inexplicable reason, the series has not gotten much love from the Academy (Oscars) or even from the foreign press (Golden Globes). I am hopeful that this final film will not be snubbed, but will be accorded the accolades it deserves.
I am very grateful to J.K. Rowling and all the powers that be who decided to be true to the books when translated to film. As millions of children and adults will attest, it was a magical, wonderful ride that has cemented its place in history. Gotta love it.
This film deserves all 4 reels (out of 4).
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Midnight in Paris
Well, I’ve got to tell you – if you haven’t seen a Woody Allen film in recent years, you are in luck. His latest film is one of his best, certainly in the last 20 years or so. Midnight in Paris tells the story of a young man (Owen Wilson at his subdued and handsome best as Gil) who is visiting Paris with his fianceé (Rachel McAdams) and her parents. It is obvious to the observer that these two share very little in common. He is a successful screen writer who dreams of living in a Paris attic and strolling in the rain. She wants a new house in Malibu.
While the story is rooted in reality, a supernaturally fanciful element provides charming answers to his musings. He is transported back to the the heyday of the Jazz Age in Paris every midnight and meets many of his literary and artistic idols. As is typical in an Allen movie, they are played by a parade of famous actors, all of whom have a great time impersonating the likes of Hemmingway, Cole Porter, F. Scott Fitzgerald … I’ll leave the rest for you to happily discover. Oscar-winner Kathy Bates is marvelous as Gertrude Stein and Oscar-winner Marion Cotillard is luminous as Adriana (a composite of Picasso’s mistresses), the object of Gil’s intense interest.
I could really relate to this aspect of the movie because of a dream I had many years ago. At the time, I was studying French in school, as well as Philosophy and I dreamed that I ran into Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J. (1881-1955) and had a long, interesting conversation with him in French (not actually a possibility with my skills!). This movie seemed like a similar experience.
Be aware that the more familiar you are with the writers and artists of the ’20s, the more references you will understand. It’s a very smart and witty film. It is also a lovely love story.
In the course of his trips back in time, Gil examines his relationship with his fianceé and his creative expectations as well. Where the story ends up will keep you guessing. But for many of us watching, the end comes too soon. This is a visual feast of Paris, then and now. It is a love letter to my favorite city. It even included one of my favorite places there, the flea market at Porte de Clignancourt.
My husband loved this film so much, he wanted to go back and see it again a day later. I convinced him we should wait a week or so. We also determined to buy the DVD when it is released so we can revisit it often.
The romantic city bestows a lingering kiss on us all in this wonderful film. I fell in love all over again.
Rating: 4 reels out of 4. The best of the year so far.
While the story is rooted in reality, a supernaturally fanciful element provides charming answers to his musings. He is transported back to the the heyday of the Jazz Age in Paris every midnight and meets many of his literary and artistic idols. As is typical in an Allen movie, they are played by a parade of famous actors, all of whom have a great time impersonating the likes of Hemmingway, Cole Porter, F. Scott Fitzgerald … I’ll leave the rest for you to happily discover. Oscar-winner Kathy Bates is marvelous as Gertrude Stein and Oscar-winner Marion Cotillard is luminous as Adriana (a composite of Picasso’s mistresses), the object of Gil’s intense interest.
I could really relate to this aspect of the movie because of a dream I had many years ago. At the time, I was studying French in school, as well as Philosophy and I dreamed that I ran into Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J. (1881-1955) and had a long, interesting conversation with him in French (not actually a possibility with my skills!). This movie seemed like a similar experience.
Be aware that the more familiar you are with the writers and artists of the ’20s, the more references you will understand. It’s a very smart and witty film. It is also a lovely love story.
In the course of his trips back in time, Gil examines his relationship with his fianceé and his creative expectations as well. Where the story ends up will keep you guessing. But for many of us watching, the end comes too soon. This is a visual feast of Paris, then and now. It is a love letter to my favorite city. It even included one of my favorite places there, the flea market at Porte de Clignancourt.
My husband loved this film so much, he wanted to go back and see it again a day later. I convinced him we should wait a week or so. We also determined to buy the DVD when it is released so we can revisit it often.
The romantic city bestows a lingering kiss on us all in this wonderful film. I fell in love all over again.
Rating: 4 reels out of 4. The best of the year so far.
Horrible Bosses
There seems to be a cascade of raunchy movies hitting the screens, each trying to top the other in raunchiness. Hangover II and its predecessor come to mind. (Saw the first and didn’t like it; didn’t see the sequel.) I haven’t seen Bridesmaids yet, but I guess it’s the female equivalent. We just got Bad Teacher (missed that one also), but the trailer seemed to follow suit. And now we have Horrible Bosses, which I decided to see after I saw the previews. I saw it, and while it was certainly raunchy in word and occasionally in deed, it was funny. The premise has three men who hate their horrible bosses and when someone suggests they kill them, their thoughts turn to murder. Unsure how to go about it, they seek out a hitman and end up with Jamie Foxx as a “murder consultant” who counsels them to kill each others bosses, like Hitchcock’s Stranger on a Train.
The three would-be murderers are Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day; their respective bosses are Kevin Spacey, Colin Farrell and Jennifer Aniston.
What sets this apart is the likability of the three guys (and the truly appalling behavior of the bosses). We root for them, especially seeing that they are supremely inept. They approach their task as most of us would. Reconnaissance that is laughable, and fear that is palpable.
It starts pretty slowly, but the laughs build and some sequences are laugh-out-loud funny. Case in point: their mishandling of a boss’s huge stash of cocaine. Some stuff works, some doesn’t, but if you aren’t easily offended by crude sexual references (Aniston is the polar opposite of her Friends role), then you should enjoy this. I wanted a funny movie that night, and for the most part, I got it.
Rating: 2.5 reels out of 4.
The three would-be murderers are Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day; their respective bosses are Kevin Spacey, Colin Farrell and Jennifer Aniston.
What sets this apart is the likability of the three guys (and the truly appalling behavior of the bosses). We root for them, especially seeing that they are supremely inept. They approach their task as most of us would. Reconnaissance that is laughable, and fear that is palpable.
It starts pretty slowly, but the laughs build and some sequences are laugh-out-loud funny. Case in point: their mishandling of a boss’s huge stash of cocaine. Some stuff works, some doesn’t, but if you aren’t easily offended by crude sexual references (Aniston is the polar opposite of her Friends role), then you should enjoy this. I wanted a funny movie that night, and for the most part, I got it.
Rating: 2.5 reels out of 4.
Green Lantern
Many superheroes are making their way to the screen this year. This is one that hoped to begin a new franchise for Warner Bros. and Ryan Reynolds. Alas, it is probably not to be. It’s not that it was so awful … I actually enjoyed much of it. It’s just, well, a bit tired. There is a lot of exposition in the beginning for those of us who have never read a Green Lantern comic book. While the premise was a bit dodgy, I did like the reluctant and funny human-turned-superhero as played by Reynolds. There were some funny moments, as when the slimey Sen. Hammond (Tim Robbins) got his comeuppance. Sinestro (Mark Strong) was sinister, but the really creepy role when to Peter Sarsgaard as Dr. Hector Hammond.
I have no idea how many liberties they took with the original stories, but for this uninitiated viewer, the story was okay; not great, but okay. What I really l liked in this 3-D film (after I had vowed never to don the glasses again) was the 3-D. I thought they made very good use of it (I dodged more than a few flying objects). And I didn’t get a headache (the glasses have improved). I know the vast majority of critics have disliked this, but I thought the effects and the humor made it two hours of fun. But then, what do I know? This wasn’t made for my generation.
I’ll give it 2 reels out of 4.
I have no idea how many liberties they took with the original stories, but for this uninitiated viewer, the story was okay; not great, but okay. What I really l liked in this 3-D film (after I had vowed never to don the glasses again) was the 3-D. I thought they made very good use of it (I dodged more than a few flying objects). And I didn’t get a headache (the glasses have improved). I know the vast majority of critics have disliked this, but I thought the effects and the humor made it two hours of fun. But then, what do I know? This wasn’t made for my generation.
I’ll give it 2 reels out of 4.
I’m back ... finally! Let’s go to the movies!
Sorry for the delay; I’m up and running now and hope to stay that way!
Attending summer movies, for those of us over 30 (way over), can be a challenge. As readers of my print column know, I have pretty eclectic tastes, but even so, some summer releases are just not my kind of entertainment. But then, if they were yours, you probably wouldn’t be reading this.
Let’s look at what’s out there now that might be worth your price of admission.
Super 8
Super 8 is still in some theaters and if you haven’t seen it, you should. Yes, it is a Steven Spielberg creation … but it’s directed by J.J. Abrams, the genius behind Lost, so it seemed like a no-brainer to see. It’s vintage Spielberg but not cutting edge and it avoids (SPOIILER ALERT?) an unhappy ending, but it will definitely appeal to fans of ET and many other Spielberg movies for the family. Since this is PG-13 (mostly for a little language), many just the older kids. Super 8 tells the story of a group of middle school kids, who while making a Super 8 movie, witness a horrific train crash that may or may not be literally out of this world.
The best thing about this film is the 1979 setting, in which they got all the little details right. Loved that nostalgia aspect and the spot-on understanding of kids of that age. Casting is very good, with the kids the standouts, especially Joel Courtney who plays the main kid, Joe Lamb. He’s cute and he’s funny. Also good are Elle Fanning as the “older girl” Alice, and Riley Griffiths in his first film, as Charlie. Kyle Chandler is good as Joe’s father, the Deputy Sheriff. This isn’t particularly scary (there are moments) but it is often (intentionally) funny. The chase scene is somewhat atypical, and is scary and funny at the same time. It’ll keep you on your toes throughout, whether the scene is frightening, funny or touching. When you go, be sure to stay through the credits or you’ll miss a real treat.
I’m giving it 3.5 reels out of 4.
Attending summer movies, for those of us over 30 (way over), can be a challenge. As readers of my print column know, I have pretty eclectic tastes, but even so, some summer releases are just not my kind of entertainment. But then, if they were yours, you probably wouldn’t be reading this.
Let’s look at what’s out there now that might be worth your price of admission.
Super 8
Super 8 is still in some theaters and if you haven’t seen it, you should. Yes, it is a Steven Spielberg creation … but it’s directed by J.J. Abrams, the genius behind Lost, so it seemed like a no-brainer to see. It’s vintage Spielberg but not cutting edge and it avoids (SPOIILER ALERT?) an unhappy ending, but it will definitely appeal to fans of ET and many other Spielberg movies for the family. Since this is PG-13 (mostly for a little language), many just the older kids. Super 8 tells the story of a group of middle school kids, who while making a Super 8 movie, witness a horrific train crash that may or may not be literally out of this world.
The best thing about this film is the 1979 setting, in which they got all the little details right. Loved that nostalgia aspect and the spot-on understanding of kids of that age. Casting is very good, with the kids the standouts, especially Joel Courtney who plays the main kid, Joe Lamb. He’s cute and he’s funny. Also good are Elle Fanning as the “older girl” Alice, and Riley Griffiths in his first film, as Charlie. Kyle Chandler is good as Joe’s father, the Deputy Sheriff. This isn’t particularly scary (there are moments) but it is often (intentionally) funny. The chase scene is somewhat atypical, and is scary and funny at the same time. It’ll keep you on your toes throughout, whether the scene is frightening, funny or touching. When you go, be sure to stay through the credits or you’ll miss a real treat.
I’m giving it 3.5 reels out of 4.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Up and Running
Welcome to my new blog/column!
For those of you who subscribe to The Daily Record in Omaha, you are familiar with my column, which ran every Friday for 20 years ... right up until May 2011.
In my column, I kept you advised of all sorts of arts and entertainment opportunities in and around Omaha. I also provided you with reviews of movies, plays, operas, concerts, art shows, and whatever else needed reviewing … all in order to help you decide how best to spend your spare time and money!
Tonight and tomorrow I'm off to a couple of such events, so I'll be back soon to post the first of my many columns to come. If, after you read this blog for a while, you have requests for something to be examined and/or rated, just dash off a quick note and I'll do what I can to accommodate your request.
I look forward to a long and fulfilling online relationship with you! Thanks for visiting!
L.A. Boyd
In my column, I kept you advised of all sorts of arts and entertainment opportunities in and around Omaha. I also provided you with reviews of movies, plays, operas, concerts, art shows, and whatever else needed reviewing … all in order to help you decide how best to spend your spare time and money!
Tonight and tomorrow I'm off to a couple of such events, so I'll be back soon to post the first of my many columns to come. If, after you read this blog for a while, you have requests for something to be examined and/or rated, just dash off a quick note and I'll do what I can to accommodate your request.
I look forward to a long and fulfilling online relationship with you! Thanks for visiting!
L.A. Boyd
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)