Before watching this one the wife and I decide to purchase a fifth of Vodka. We are adults and we drink responsibly. She thought it would just be nice to have an adult drink for once, I thought it was required to get through Ever After.
Much like Dreamer, Ever After is essentially a harmless movie. It is the retelling of Cinderella with Drew Barrymore as "Cinder," Angelica Houston as the wicked step mom and two actresses I don't know by name as the wicked step sisters. In this version, an elderly woman has called the countries stories teller in to correct their version of Cinderella.
This retelling focuses on a young girl who loses her father shortly after he marries the baroness and returns with her two daughters. After his death, Danielle (Barrymore) is placed into a life of servitude for her step mother and her daughters.
When she is older Danielle has a chance meeting with the Prince which leads to another meeting between the two which creates a opportunity for the Prince to mistakenly believe that Danielle is above the servant class. The two find themselves crossing paths again and again as their relationship grows and regardless of the obstacles we all know this one is going to have a happy ending.
Barrymore plays Danielle as something of a modern woman. She reads despite her step mothers displeasure with it and she has no problem vocalizing her opinions in regards to errors in treatment of the servant class as well as other issues plaguing their society. Dougray Scott plays the Prince, he is witless and virtually superfluous to the story because the story is all about Danielle.
I remember when this film originally came out it was built up as a Cinderella story that had more of an adventure feel to it. I also remember thinking that if I talked to girls at that time I would have liked to have asked one out on a date to go see this film. I'm married now and before we sat down to watch this together my wife said this film is like the Princess Bride only better. I could not disagree more considering this film is not even remotely funny and the action/adventure sequences are weak by comparison. With all that being said I can see the appeal of watching this with my daughter when she is old enough. Outside of that though I can not imagine any amount of alcohol being enough to get me through watching this film again.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
The term "original" is a sometimes over used and more often incorrectly used when describing films. More often than not what we think is original is actually an homage to past films or a rip off depending on the filmmakers motives. And there is no genre in modern films in which this more true than romantic comedies. There is a formula that exists in creating a romantic comedy that consists of such things as casting big stars with chemistry and finding ways to drag things out for 90 minutes until you finally allow your central characters to come together. Sometimes this done in an entertaining fashion, sometimes it's mind-blowing awfulness, but rarely is it original.
An exception to that rule would be Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. A romantic comedy (or dramedy if you prefer) that matches a boring and introverted Jim Carrey as Joel Barrish with a lively extroverted Kate Winslet as Clementine. The two have been together for two years when a fight leads to Clementine seeking to have an elective surgery done that will remove Joel from her memory. When Joel discovers what Clementine has done his anger leads to him seeking out the same procedure to remove her from his memory. However, once the procedure begins, Joel's memory begins to realize that perhaps this is a mistake and he fights to save his memories of Clementine. It's as crazy as romantic comedies can get.
Of course, this is not why I believe the movie is original. While the concept of a lover wanting to remove a past lover from their memory is unique, I don't consider it to be all that original to have a romantic comedy centered around a seemingly improbable scenario. After all, we movies like Joe Versus the Volcano which provides ridiculous scenarios to bring a couple together.
What makes Eternal Sunshine original is it's approach to the relationship between Joel and Clementine. We see them initially after there memories have been erased as two strangers who are drawn to each other. Joel is a man who is much like myself. He can easily identify a woman he would like to have a conversation with and is scared to death when she actually tries talking to him. The two seem to have a connection although neither of them know why. They spend time together and agree to go on a date together.
Then we cut to Joel crying in his car and discovering why Clementine doesn't recognize him. Angry, he wants to know if the procedure is a hoax and when he believes it is legitimate he decides he wants it too. He goes home and is asleep in bed when 2 technicians come over to preform the procedure. As they begin we see Joel and Clementine break up, we see them struggle with goals regarding the direction of their relationship and dealing with feeling like members of the dining dead. In short, we see everything that would make you say that perhaps these two people should not be together.
However, as the night progresses Joel starts to lose memories of the good times and we see his memory begin to fight for it's own preservation. Joel teams with his memory version of Clementine to try and hide out in memories that Clementine otherwise does not belong in. The two struggle as the lead technician and the procedures inventor fight to find the memories and erase them for good. The final memories Joel loses retrace how Joel and Clementine came to meet and we see them as two people who are interested in each other despite the clear differences in personality.
What I love about this movie is that it is a celebration of not only the good parts of relationships but also the parts of human nature that create difficulties with in relationships. It's one of the great mysteries in life that a couple who has been together for "X" number of years can still struggle to communicate and we see Joel and Clementine is painful situations that may mirror situations we have survived. It is not romantic and yet I argue that it is greater than any cookie cutter definition of romance we see out there. It is as real and genuine a romantic comedy as I have ever seen.
The film also soars on the strengths of it's performances and the creative team behind the film. Jim Carrey gives one of the 3 performances in his career for which he was robbed of even getting nominated for an Academy Award for and Kate Winslet who was nominated for an Oscar is able to fill Clementine with an intoxicating spirit and life that makes it impossible for you to take your eyes off of her when she is one screen. The supporting cast is equally terrific as Frodo plays one of the creepiest characters in film, Mark Ruffalo plays the lead tech, Kirsten Dunst plays his girlfriend who is more in love with the procedure's inventor Tom Wilkinson who has been one of the more consistently great actors of the past ten years. Add to that the visionary direction of Michel Gondry and the unparalleled dialogue provided by Charlie Kaufman's script and the film becomes a representation of the very best work that Hollywood is capable of producing.
The film approaches it's end with Joel and Clementine receiving tapes of their interviews for explaining why they wanted to other one erased from their memory. It creates a great juxtaposition as two people who think they have just met and want to start dating are faced with the realities of all the difficult things a relationship together will ultimately bring. Having been through my fair share of difficult times in my own life, this film serves as a reminder to me that no matter how bad things seem in your relationship things are still better with that person than with out them. Movies love showing us how people come together, Eternal Sunshine shows us why we stay together even when things appear to be at their worst.
An exception to that rule would be Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. A romantic comedy (or dramedy if you prefer) that matches a boring and introverted Jim Carrey as Joel Barrish with a lively extroverted Kate Winslet as Clementine. The two have been together for two years when a fight leads to Clementine seeking to have an elective surgery done that will remove Joel from her memory. When Joel discovers what Clementine has done his anger leads to him seeking out the same procedure to remove her from his memory. However, once the procedure begins, Joel's memory begins to realize that perhaps this is a mistake and he fights to save his memories of Clementine. It's as crazy as romantic comedies can get.
Of course, this is not why I believe the movie is original. While the concept of a lover wanting to remove a past lover from their memory is unique, I don't consider it to be all that original to have a romantic comedy centered around a seemingly improbable scenario. After all, we movies like Joe Versus the Volcano which provides ridiculous scenarios to bring a couple together.
What makes Eternal Sunshine original is it's approach to the relationship between Joel and Clementine. We see them initially after there memories have been erased as two strangers who are drawn to each other. Joel is a man who is much like myself. He can easily identify a woman he would like to have a conversation with and is scared to death when she actually tries talking to him. The two seem to have a connection although neither of them know why. They spend time together and agree to go on a date together.
Then we cut to Joel crying in his car and discovering why Clementine doesn't recognize him. Angry, he wants to know if the procedure is a hoax and when he believes it is legitimate he decides he wants it too. He goes home and is asleep in bed when 2 technicians come over to preform the procedure. As they begin we see Joel and Clementine break up, we see them struggle with goals regarding the direction of their relationship and dealing with feeling like members of the dining dead. In short, we see everything that would make you say that perhaps these two people should not be together.
However, as the night progresses Joel starts to lose memories of the good times and we see his memory begin to fight for it's own preservation. Joel teams with his memory version of Clementine to try and hide out in memories that Clementine otherwise does not belong in. The two struggle as the lead technician and the procedures inventor fight to find the memories and erase them for good. The final memories Joel loses retrace how Joel and Clementine came to meet and we see them as two people who are interested in each other despite the clear differences in personality.
What I love about this movie is that it is a celebration of not only the good parts of relationships but also the parts of human nature that create difficulties with in relationships. It's one of the great mysteries in life that a couple who has been together for "X" number of years can still struggle to communicate and we see Joel and Clementine is painful situations that may mirror situations we have survived. It is not romantic and yet I argue that it is greater than any cookie cutter definition of romance we see out there. It is as real and genuine a romantic comedy as I have ever seen.
The film also soars on the strengths of it's performances and the creative team behind the film. Jim Carrey gives one of the 3 performances in his career for which he was robbed of even getting nominated for an Academy Award for and Kate Winslet who was nominated for an Oscar is able to fill Clementine with an intoxicating spirit and life that makes it impossible for you to take your eyes off of her when she is one screen. The supporting cast is equally terrific as Frodo plays one of the creepiest characters in film, Mark Ruffalo plays the lead tech, Kirsten Dunst plays his girlfriend who is more in love with the procedure's inventor Tom Wilkinson who has been one of the more consistently great actors of the past ten years. Add to that the visionary direction of Michel Gondry and the unparalleled dialogue provided by Charlie Kaufman's script and the film becomes a representation of the very best work that Hollywood is capable of producing.
The film approaches it's end with Joel and Clementine receiving tapes of their interviews for explaining why they wanted to other one erased from their memory. It creates a great juxtaposition as two people who think they have just met and want to start dating are faced with the realities of all the difficult things a relationship together will ultimately bring. Having been through my fair share of difficult times in my own life, this film serves as a reminder to me that no matter how bad things seem in your relationship things are still better with that person than with out them. Movies love showing us how people come together, Eternal Sunshine shows us why we stay together even when things appear to be at their worst.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Dreamer: Inspired by a True Story
As a parent there is always a thought in your head of how far am I willing to go when it comes to encouraging my children to like the same things I like. There are some who think you should just let your kids decide for themselves what they like, but that's not for me. I am sure most people would agree that buying my son a baseball glove is okay while tying his right hand behind is back to force him to be left handed because it's easier to be a professional baseball player if your left handed is going a little to far.
With all that in mind we have Dreamer, a movie about a little girl and horse. It's one of my wife's films, but when it came time to watch she had only a passing interest because the reason we own it is for our daughter who is almost two years old and went to bed tonight in horse pajamas with a horse stuffed animal. At this point it would be very ironic if her favorite animal ends up being a cat.
About the movie, it's a harmless underdog story that is probably best watched on a Saturday afternoon when it's raining out and your sick of watching Real World marathons on MTV. I'm not a fan of Dakota Fanning but she is fine in this and I liked the performances of Kurt Russell, Elizabeth Shue and David Morse. The characters themselves are somewhat one dimensional but they aren't so dry that you don't like. The film also has a few cringe worthy moments as it dramatizes a real life story in such a way that would make the folks at Lifetime jealous.
I have to admit that I did get up at one point let the film continue running for virtually 20 minutes while I was in the kitchen talking with my wife and I am pretty sure I did not miss any key plot points. Still, what I did watch was enjoyable for what it was. The film knows exactly which strings to pull and when to pull them and while there were a few groan worthy moments the film is ultimately pleasant. I think my wife is right about one thing. It'll be fun to watch this with my daughter when she is a little older. That is assuming she likes horses more than cats.
With all that in mind we have Dreamer, a movie about a little girl and horse. It's one of my wife's films, but when it came time to watch she had only a passing interest because the reason we own it is for our daughter who is almost two years old and went to bed tonight in horse pajamas with a horse stuffed animal. At this point it would be very ironic if her favorite animal ends up being a cat.
About the movie, it's a harmless underdog story that is probably best watched on a Saturday afternoon when it's raining out and your sick of watching Real World marathons on MTV. I'm not a fan of Dakota Fanning but she is fine in this and I liked the performances of Kurt Russell, Elizabeth Shue and David Morse. The characters themselves are somewhat one dimensional but they aren't so dry that you don't like. The film also has a few cringe worthy moments as it dramatizes a real life story in such a way that would make the folks at Lifetime jealous.
I have to admit that I did get up at one point let the film continue running for virtually 20 minutes while I was in the kitchen talking with my wife and I am pretty sure I did not miss any key plot points. Still, what I did watch was enjoyable for what it was. The film knows exactly which strings to pull and when to pull them and while there were a few groan worthy moments the film is ultimately pleasant. I think my wife is right about one thing. It'll be fun to watch this with my daughter when she is a little older. That is assuming she likes horses more than cats.
Die Hard
Yippee-ki-yay!!!
That's right folks, it's time for Die Hard. Another $5 bin find that I probably get as much enjoyment out of watching as I do asking my wife if she would like to watch with me. It's one of the "classic" films from a childhood filled with watching movies that were inappropriate for my age when I watched them.
The film itself is interesting because of it's place in film history. Released at a time when action films were dominated by bulking heroes like the Govenator, Stallone, and even the great Dolph Lundgren, Die Hard aimed to return action films to the common blue collar dude.
That man is John McClane, a play by his own rules New York cop flying to L.A. for Christmas wife his estranged family. The plan is for McClane to meet his wife at her office for their Christmas party before heading home.
The plan of course is rudely interrupted by a group of European terrorists looking to spread their own form of Christmas cheer. The terrorists are lead by Hans Gruber who is played by Professor Snape (Alan Rickman). Gruber is callous, inposing, creepy and inarguably the difference between this movie being just another action film and one of the great action films of the past 30 years. The bad guy is what makes all the difference in films like this. The performance must toe the line of between controlled and over the top so that you can enjoy the character while still rooting against them. Rickman is great at this.
McClane is the only thing these terrorists did not account for and the movie follows McClane as he takes down one bad guy after another until he gets to Gruber. It's a happy ending as McClane not only learns how tough he is, but also how much he loves his family and what he needs to do to fix things in the future. It's the sorta ending that you should have in all Christmas films.
Now, the one issue that remains for me is how good is this movie? There is no doubt that it's a guys movie and I have heard many times that it was able to rejuvenate the action film genre and is responsible for later action films such as Speed. I have already spoken to how much I enjoy watching Alan Rickman's performance as Hans Gruber and the film also works in some small twists along the way. The problem however is that the film is over twenty years old and has been imitated many times since. If you were to watch it today for the first time having heard it was a classic would it live up to the expectations. In my opinion the answer to that is no. The weakness of the film is the peripheral characters and the films attitude towards them. Everyone who is not "blue collar" is essentially a bully and an idiot. The cop in charge is a jerk who thinks McClane is as much to blame as the terrorists and the FBI guys who take over the investigation put into a play a plan that includes be okay with 25% of the hostages being killed. Inside the company, McClane's wife has to deal with idiots who do coke at their desk before confronting terrorists as if he were playing lets make a deal. Perhaps it's too much to ask for a film to have placed thought into every character, but this film puts very little thought into anyone outside of the main characters. This, along with the fact that other films have come out and raised the bar on this genre makes it impossible for the film to live up to expectations. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy it and whenever I just want to watch things go BOOM! I happy to know it's there. But it's not a must see because I can't recommend it with a warning about how it was made in the '80's. Having said all that, perhaps it's time I stop threatening my wife with making her watch it.
That's right folks, it's time for Die Hard. Another $5 bin find that I probably get as much enjoyment out of watching as I do asking my wife if she would like to watch with me. It's one of the "classic" films from a childhood filled with watching movies that were inappropriate for my age when I watched them.
The film itself is interesting because of it's place in film history. Released at a time when action films were dominated by bulking heroes like the Govenator, Stallone, and even the great Dolph Lundgren, Die Hard aimed to return action films to the common blue collar dude.
That man is John McClane, a play by his own rules New York cop flying to L.A. for Christmas wife his estranged family. The plan is for McClane to meet his wife at her office for their Christmas party before heading home.
The plan of course is rudely interrupted by a group of European terrorists looking to spread their own form of Christmas cheer. The terrorists are lead by Hans Gruber who is played by Professor Snape (Alan Rickman). Gruber is callous, inposing, creepy and inarguably the difference between this movie being just another action film and one of the great action films of the past 30 years. The bad guy is what makes all the difference in films like this. The performance must toe the line of between controlled and over the top so that you can enjoy the character while still rooting against them. Rickman is great at this.
McClane is the only thing these terrorists did not account for and the movie follows McClane as he takes down one bad guy after another until he gets to Gruber. It's a happy ending as McClane not only learns how tough he is, but also how much he loves his family and what he needs to do to fix things in the future. It's the sorta ending that you should have in all Christmas films.
Now, the one issue that remains for me is how good is this movie? There is no doubt that it's a guys movie and I have heard many times that it was able to rejuvenate the action film genre and is responsible for later action films such as Speed. I have already spoken to how much I enjoy watching Alan Rickman's performance as Hans Gruber and the film also works in some small twists along the way. The problem however is that the film is over twenty years old and has been imitated many times since. If you were to watch it today for the first time having heard it was a classic would it live up to the expectations. In my opinion the answer to that is no. The weakness of the film is the peripheral characters and the films attitude towards them. Everyone who is not "blue collar" is essentially a bully and an idiot. The cop in charge is a jerk who thinks McClane is as much to blame as the terrorists and the FBI guys who take over the investigation put into a play a plan that includes be okay with 25% of the hostages being killed. Inside the company, McClane's wife has to deal with idiots who do coke at their desk before confronting terrorists as if he were playing lets make a deal. Perhaps it's too much to ask for a film to have placed thought into every character, but this film puts very little thought into anyone outside of the main characters. This, along with the fact that other films have come out and raised the bar on this genre makes it impossible for the film to live up to expectations. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy it and whenever I just want to watch things go BOOM! I happy to know it's there. But it's not a must see because I can't recommend it with a warning about how it was made in the '80's. Having said all that, perhaps it's time I stop threatening my wife with making her watch it.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
The Devil Wears Prada
One unspoken goal I had when I began the task of watching every film my wife and I own was to give the ones that primarily belong to my wife a fair chance. It's true that there are some films like Hope Floats and Hardball that I have already seen and I already have a great distaste for and then there are those that I have avoided like the plague and will now be trying to give a fair chance.
First up on our list is The Devil Wears Prada. Sadly, this is not a supernatural film that attempts to destroy the image of a devil being red and having pointy ears and a long tail. No, it is a tour de force romp through the world of high fashion that at it's core is a fish out of water story.
Our fish is played by Anne Hathaway who plays a Northwestern graduate that has recently moved to New York City looking to start a career in journalism. However, starting a journalism career in New York can be difficult with nothing more on your resume than a degree and the work you did for your schools paper. Desperate, Andrea (Hathaway) takes a job as an administrative assistant for the devil Meryl Streep.
Streep plays Miranda Priestly, the woman in charge of Runway, a magazine which is considered to be the be all and end all of the fashion world. To her credit, Streep plays the role of the devilish dictator with a soft yet intimidating voice. She knows that every one is terrified of her and she maintains a sense of tension by continually giving off the impression that she can not be swayed by emotion or any other human feelings.
Andrea, who prefers to go by Andy, is driven by the opportunity to prove herself to Miranda despite the fact that she is totally out of her element working for a high fashion magazine. She is resourceful in this role and after attempting to make a statement against high fashion she finds herself conforming to the ideals established by her new peers.
Of course, as she conforms to her new peers she begins to alienate her old friends. The film continues on this path and Andy is faced with daunting challenges such as providing Miranda's daughters an unpublished manuscript of the final Harry Potter book. We also get glimpses behind the curtain as we see that Miranda is a person who has chosen to be successful professionally while sacrificing family and that that choice remains a painful one for her.
The film follows all of the typical cliches of the fish out of water story. Andy at one point finds herself fiercely defending her boss as she wins her approval only to feel blindsided when she realizes Miranda is even more in control than she ever knew.
So the question becomes, did I like it and the answer is no, but it's at least was not as painful to watch as I imagined it would have been. Watching with my wife and listening to her comment on the fashion and which outfits she liked made me realize that for me I felt the same way watching this as she does watching Miracle. I don't like the people Andy meets in her job. Miranda's other assistant is a walking cliche of bad attitude and worse self image. Stanley Tucci plays Nigel, another character who feels a need to make someone who is a size 6 feel fat is some how supposed to be the nice guy in the fashion world who personally helps Andy improve her sense of style. Outside the fashion world, Andy's friends and boyfriend bemoan the changes she is going through while failing to ever give me any reason to like them. On that note, I watched them feeling like I was watching a group of hipsters who sit in coffee bars or night clubs and seem to hold an equal level of disdain for people not like them that the fashion crowd has. In particular, her boyfriend seems to never be willing to give her new career a chance or to see an possible joy that career could bring her.
Another issue I have the film is the same one I seem to have with most "chick flicks" I watch and can't get into. The film fails to deliver a single male character who I can relate to, that I can enjoy watching and root for. This film is similar to another recent chick flick that received favorable reviews called The Waitress. Both films had strong and likable lead female actresses, but not a single male character that I care for. For the record, The Waitress treated men as if they are the scum of the earth while this one simply chooses to not give them a voice beyond the one dimensional focus the film needs them to provide. There are a handful of chick flicks out there that I enjoy provide a balance in strength between the male and female characters (a great example of this is Return to Me). This film provides me with none of that. I know some men out there will settle for a chick flick that has some "hot" actresses to look at, but that is not enough for me.
Ultimately, I leave watching this understanding why my wife loves it and thinking that that is okay. It's certainly not for me and for any guys out there I can not recommend it as a compromise film unless you somehow get your girlfriend or wife to watch Die Hard, Terminator, Aliens or something else along those lines as repayment.
First up on our list is The Devil Wears Prada. Sadly, this is not a supernatural film that attempts to destroy the image of a devil being red and having pointy ears and a long tail. No, it is a tour de force romp through the world of high fashion that at it's core is a fish out of water story.
Our fish is played by Anne Hathaway who plays a Northwestern graduate that has recently moved to New York City looking to start a career in journalism. However, starting a journalism career in New York can be difficult with nothing more on your resume than a degree and the work you did for your schools paper. Desperate, Andrea (Hathaway) takes a job as an administrative assistant for the devil Meryl Streep.
Streep plays Miranda Priestly, the woman in charge of Runway, a magazine which is considered to be the be all and end all of the fashion world. To her credit, Streep plays the role of the devilish dictator with a soft yet intimidating voice. She knows that every one is terrified of her and she maintains a sense of tension by continually giving off the impression that she can not be swayed by emotion or any other human feelings.
Andrea, who prefers to go by Andy, is driven by the opportunity to prove herself to Miranda despite the fact that she is totally out of her element working for a high fashion magazine. She is resourceful in this role and after attempting to make a statement against high fashion she finds herself conforming to the ideals established by her new peers.
Of course, as she conforms to her new peers she begins to alienate her old friends. The film continues on this path and Andy is faced with daunting challenges such as providing Miranda's daughters an unpublished manuscript of the final Harry Potter book. We also get glimpses behind the curtain as we see that Miranda is a person who has chosen to be successful professionally while sacrificing family and that that choice remains a painful one for her.
The film follows all of the typical cliches of the fish out of water story. Andy at one point finds herself fiercely defending her boss as she wins her approval only to feel blindsided when she realizes Miranda is even more in control than she ever knew.
So the question becomes, did I like it and the answer is no, but it's at least was not as painful to watch as I imagined it would have been. Watching with my wife and listening to her comment on the fashion and which outfits she liked made me realize that for me I felt the same way watching this as she does watching Miracle. I don't like the people Andy meets in her job. Miranda's other assistant is a walking cliche of bad attitude and worse self image. Stanley Tucci plays Nigel, another character who feels a need to make someone who is a size 6 feel fat is some how supposed to be the nice guy in the fashion world who personally helps Andy improve her sense of style. Outside the fashion world, Andy's friends and boyfriend bemoan the changes she is going through while failing to ever give me any reason to like them. On that note, I watched them feeling like I was watching a group of hipsters who sit in coffee bars or night clubs and seem to hold an equal level of disdain for people not like them that the fashion crowd has. In particular, her boyfriend seems to never be willing to give her new career a chance or to see an possible joy that career could bring her.
Another issue I have the film is the same one I seem to have with most "chick flicks" I watch and can't get into. The film fails to deliver a single male character who I can relate to, that I can enjoy watching and root for. This film is similar to another recent chick flick that received favorable reviews called The Waitress. Both films had strong and likable lead female actresses, but not a single male character that I care for. For the record, The Waitress treated men as if they are the scum of the earth while this one simply chooses to not give them a voice beyond the one dimensional focus the film needs them to provide. There are a handful of chick flicks out there that I enjoy provide a balance in strength between the male and female characters (a great example of this is Return to Me). This film provides me with none of that. I know some men out there will settle for a chick flick that has some "hot" actresses to look at, but that is not enough for me.
Ultimately, I leave watching this understanding why my wife loves it and thinking that that is okay. It's certainly not for me and for any guys out there I can not recommend it as a compromise film unless you somehow get your girlfriend or wife to watch Die Hard, Terminator, Aliens or something else along those lines as repayment.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Dead Poets Society
The body of work that defines an actor has the potential to leave them in a category that says "I never have to ask for forgiveness regardless of what projects I do in order to cash a check." I recently I felt like Robin Williams had finally removed himself for that standing when he finished a decade of mediocre at best and more often than not painfully bad work with the mind-blowingly awful suckfest that was Old Dogs.
Which brings me to Dead Poets Society. Watching this film again for the first time in several years I am remind of how Mr. Williams became a 4 time Oscar nominated actor and 1 time Oscar winner.
The film follows the lives of a group of prep school boys whose lives are changed by the new English teacher and his progressive manor of teaching. The setting is 1950's and the school itself has a reputation of preparing it's students for success in the Ivy League. The schools faculty believes that the best way to achieve this goal is to overload their students with so much work that they have no choice but to spend their entire lives studying. Williams plays John Keating, he is tough, but his focus is on creating free thinkers rather than book worms.
The boys themselves are a colorful bunch of otherwise one dimensional characters. You have "the leader" Neil Perry, the quite one whose life is changed the most in the end Todd Anderson (played by Ethan Hawke) along with the genius, the rebel, a romantic and a brown noser. They are one dimenshional, but they are not boring. There is something in each one that I can find relatable.
Which reminds, not to get off on a tangent, but I want to make one thing very clear. This is not a chick flick. Yes, it's a drama and yes it has the ability to make you cry and has made me cry in the past. It's a film I own because it is a "guys film." In the same vain as perhaps Scent of a Woman is a guys film because it's focus is on adolescent males and it is extremely successful in simply being and feeling very easy to relate to. It's true, I never hung out with friends and read poetry before, but I have sat around listening to music and watching movies with friends and in those situations what is ultimately the same is the fact that we are feeling inspired and conversation is sparked by other peoples art. Whether your reading Whitman, listening to OK Computer or watching Evil Dead it's all just guys hanging out together.
Okay, I got that out. I do think I should mention that as I study for my master's in education this is one of the films that resonates with me and made me want to be a teacher from the first moment I saw it. Robin Williams plays John Keating as a teacher whose passion comes from a belief that the best way to get through to his students is to believe in them and to share his passion. His methods are considered unorthodox in comparison to his colleagues and the film is realistic in the fact that throughout the film he has kids who sit dead eyed in his class, but the point is that he is trying to give them something they have never had before, an advocate.
Before watching this again I wondered if the loss of respect I have been feeling for Robin Williams because of his decade of dreadful work would have a negative effect on how I feel about this film, but there was no such negative effect. Williams work is inspiring and the film is still a joy to watch to this day. It makes me wonder if Robin Williams still has one great film left in him. Hopefully we can at least hope that he can't do any worse than Old Dogs.
Which brings me to Dead Poets Society. Watching this film again for the first time in several years I am remind of how Mr. Williams became a 4 time Oscar nominated actor and 1 time Oscar winner.
The film follows the lives of a group of prep school boys whose lives are changed by the new English teacher and his progressive manor of teaching. The setting is 1950's and the school itself has a reputation of preparing it's students for success in the Ivy League. The schools faculty believes that the best way to achieve this goal is to overload their students with so much work that they have no choice but to spend their entire lives studying. Williams plays John Keating, he is tough, but his focus is on creating free thinkers rather than book worms.
The boys themselves are a colorful bunch of otherwise one dimensional characters. You have "the leader" Neil Perry, the quite one whose life is changed the most in the end Todd Anderson (played by Ethan Hawke) along with the genius, the rebel, a romantic and a brown noser. They are one dimenshional, but they are not boring. There is something in each one that I can find relatable.
Which reminds, not to get off on a tangent, but I want to make one thing very clear. This is not a chick flick. Yes, it's a drama and yes it has the ability to make you cry and has made me cry in the past. It's a film I own because it is a "guys film." In the same vain as perhaps Scent of a Woman is a guys film because it's focus is on adolescent males and it is extremely successful in simply being and feeling very easy to relate to. It's true, I never hung out with friends and read poetry before, but I have sat around listening to music and watching movies with friends and in those situations what is ultimately the same is the fact that we are feeling inspired and conversation is sparked by other peoples art. Whether your reading Whitman, listening to OK Computer or watching Evil Dead it's all just guys hanging out together.
Okay, I got that out. I do think I should mention that as I study for my master's in education this is one of the films that resonates with me and made me want to be a teacher from the first moment I saw it. Robin Williams plays John Keating as a teacher whose passion comes from a belief that the best way to get through to his students is to believe in them and to share his passion. His methods are considered unorthodox in comparison to his colleagues and the film is realistic in the fact that throughout the film he has kids who sit dead eyed in his class, but the point is that he is trying to give them something they have never had before, an advocate.
Before watching this again I wondered if the loss of respect I have been feeling for Robin Williams because of his decade of dreadful work would have a negative effect on how I feel about this film, but there was no such negative effect. Williams work is inspiring and the film is still a joy to watch to this day. It makes me wonder if Robin Williams still has one great film left in him. Hopefully we can at least hope that he can't do any worse than Old Dogs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
