http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Sat, 3 Mar 2007 19:25:50 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/03/03/192550.php Mike MoodyHave you ever watched a movie and thought, "Wow, that was a mess, but I loved it"? I have, and I have a name for movies that make me feel that way. I call 'em "beautiful failures."Beautiful failures are usually too long, too weird, too sloppy, or just plain stupid, but they're always strangely compelling and, well, beautiful. They are the movies you think you hate but you can't stop thinking about. You come back to them over and over and you can't figure out why. They can be very complex, pretentious, or even too simple or mass appealing. Other film buffs might tell you different, but there's really no formula to creating a beautiful failure.Some of my favorite beautiful failures are Steven Soderbergh's Solaris, Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut, and David Cronenberg's awkward 1996 thriller Crash. I love these films for different reasons, but I recognize that they're all a little ... dreadful.Here are a few titles I've recently added to my list of beautiful failures. Please, share some of your favorite BFs in the comments.The Science of SleepThe problems start with the packaging and advertising for director Michael Gondry's follow-up to Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. The trailer and DVD box try to sell the film as a quirky romantic comedy full of whimsical dream sequences and cute one-liners. What you really get is a seemingly chaotic but densely structured character study of an unlikable, mentally ill manchild (Gael Garcia Bernal). There's a lot of good here, though. Bernal's character has trouble disassociating fantasy from reality, and Gondry illustrates this with some charming and singular visual tricks. Also, the ending is somewhat of a stunner that brilliantly unites all the disparate ideas and elements that came before. Unfortunately, most viewers will be confused and sick of all the seeming randomness before the third act. Bernal and the rest of the cast are great, but most of the characters are unappealing or hard to relate to. Still, I'll go back to this movie again for its brave storytelling, strange comedic bits, and great visuals. View the trailer.The FountainWhere to start? The Fountain is the perfect beautiful failure. It's at times fiercely incoherent, silly and pretentious, but it's also visually impressive and features a very strong lead performance by Hugh Jackman. All of the "big ideas" director Daron Aronofsky (Pi, Requim for a Dream) attempts to convey here can be gleaned from the preface of one of those Don't Sweat the Small Stuff books, but he delivers his dime store philosophy in an extravagant package that constantly switches from compelling to laughable (picture a bald Jackman reaching nirvana while sitting in a lotus position). Add to that a bunch of muddled biblical references, plot strands that go nowhere, and performances that range from sleepy (Rachel Weisz) to irrelevant (Ellen Burstyn) and you have a BF that, somehow, demands repeat viewing. View the trailer.Ghost RiderThis campy comic book adaptation is about a guy with a flaming skull for a head, but that's the least ridiculous thing about it. After delivering two joyless duds based on Marvel books (Daredevil and Elektra), writer-director Mark Steven Johnson amps Ghost Rider's absurdity factor up to 11. Unfortunately, that's way too high -- even for a comic book movie. The film is a poorly written, painfully simplistic and predictable popcorn flick, but its worst attributes are what will keep me coming back to it. You have to admire a film that so economically delivers the cheap thrills and seems willing to suck ass to do so. The cast members do their best to make sure that Ghost Rider makes you smirk for 90 minutes and slips out of your system faster than a Diet Coke. It's a sick and fascinating thing to watch Nicholas Cage violently hammer tons of trite quirks and ticks into his character. (He eats M&Ms from a champagne flute! He listens to The Carpenters! He speaks with an undefinable accent!) Peter Fonda and Sam Elliot ham it up, but the real kick here is Wes Bentley as the film's impossibly witless and fruity villain, Blackheart. View the trailer, I dare you. Video60472@blogcritics.org Sat, 3 Mar 2007 19:25:50 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/02/02/184612.php Mike MoodyThe theme of this week’s episode was trust -- when to give it and who to give it to. Apparently, according to Veronica Mars, you can kinda trust hookers looking to evade their pimps. Unfortunately, you can’t trust a semi-reformed bad boy like Logan Echolls.The teaser and first act of this ep were hilarious and very, very intriguing. There was no sign of Piz, Mac or Wallace, but we did get a whole lot of face time with Max (a.k.a. the Louis Skolnick-looking dude who sells phony term papers on campus). I couldn’t keep up with how many clever Battlestar Galactica references were dropped in the opening scene alone (I lost count at 400 billion). If more Max means more Galactica references, then I say give the guy some credit sequence billing.Besides giving Veronica a reason to say "frak," Max provided her with the mystery of the week: Track down the hot hooker hired by my friends to seduce me.I was right there with Veronica in doubting the sudden spark between Max and Chelsea/Wendy/Fiona (she’s the hooker with a thousand names, and yes, she has a heart of gold). Veronica’s a little more jaded than most -- coming of age while tailing unfaithful spouses for money will do that to you -- but it wasn’t a stretch to think that, maybe, this hooker was playing our Starbuck-loving friend for a fool. He’s desperate and he’s got wads of cash. He’s the perfect mark for a cute hooker-con woman.But this is Veronica Mars. Things are much more complicated than that. Unfortunately, as the ep went on and the plot continued to coil, things came to a drowsy crawl before the last act hit. It wasn’t hard to keep up with the twists, but after a while I just stopped caring. I’m guessing that most viewers felt the same.The Galactica references were very funny and brave, and the plot wasn’t exactly humdrum, but I was a little disturbed by this ep. With the news that VM will ditch season-long arcs in an effort to gain new viewers, one thought kept running through my brain: Name-dropping another low-rated cult TV series and throwing the viewer a million curveballs in one ep probably won’t help raise the ratings. It doesn’t make sense that the powers that be behind VM would want to sacrifice the arcs, which the fans love and have proven to up ratings, but keep all the obscure references and super-dense plots, which undoubtedly alienate new viewers.Speaking of arcs, we got a great interrogation scene with Keith. Decked out in too-tight fake police duds, he hammered the sanctimonious Lilith House chicks about the night Dean O’Dell died. Yeah, they egged his van and his office, but head Lilith Nish says she egged the dean’s Volvo alone. Too bad for her then that O’Dell wasn’t driving the Volvo the night he died. Also, Nish’s mouth almost hit the floor when she learned that Keith was investigating O'Dell's death as a murder. I guess that makes her suspect number three, right behind Prof. Landry and Cheaty O’Dell.I liked the quiet moments between Veronica and Logan, especially the intimate Q&A session at the end (scored by Leonard Cohen). Veronica was pleased and surprised to find out that Logan had never slept with a hooker. He smartly copped to fooling around with that surfer skank in the last ep, but Veronica was cool with it. However, she wasn't cool with Madison (where'd she come from anyway) saying she had a fling with Logan in Aspen. My guess? It might have happened, but Madison is a liar and she likes to push Veronica's buttons. It wouldn't be the first time she tried to screw with Veronica.Random thought: Why is it that everyone Logan hangs out with or screws, save Veronica, is a shallow jerk (Dick, Mercer, Chip, surfer skank, and now Madison)? Logan's come a long way. Shouldn't his friends reflect that journey?The CW is now streaming this ep online. Also, watch a preview of next Tuesday's ep and consider the question: Is Veronica preggers?Memorable quote (besides all the great Galactica references):Veronica: (Examining the escort search engine) It's like a Zagat guide for hookers! Video59098@blogcritics.org Fri, 2 Feb 2007 18:46:12 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/01/30/034551.php Mike MoodyUh oh. It looks like someone might have nabbed Veronica's "perfect murder" report and followed it step-by-step to get away with killing Dean O'Dell, who's death was officially ruled a suicide. Sounds like we got us a mystery arc for the rest of this season (I only wish it hadn't cost us Ed Begley Jr., he was great in this series).So, who's the murderer? After two and a half seasons of series creator Rob Thomas proving he's way smarter than I am, I've learned to stop guessing so early on. NeptuneSite has a list of possible suspects, if you're into that sort of thing.Instead of depositing my murder theories here, I'd rather dive into what this episode was really about: conviction (personal and political), relationships, and a monkey.We catch up with Veronica six weeks after O'Dell's death. Veronica and Logan are still split, and she's hired by a couple of campus lab techs to find their stolen lab monkey.Many primate jokes abound, including a "the case of the stolen monkey" jab courtesy of Piz, but only Veronica Mars can start an ep with such a basic mystery plot like "find the stolen monkey" and end up being one of the most engaging, fun, and complex things to watch on TV.Veronica goes undercover at the hilariously named PHAT (People for Humane Animal Treatment) group on campus to find the monkey nabbers. We get the usual role-playing and sneaky tactics she's used to great effect in the past, but it was obvious and a little disappointing to find that the guy behind the mystery turned out to be one of the techs who reported it. Also, there was a little too much "girlyness" going on in this ep for my comfort level -- and that's coming from a guy who's been watching Gilmore Girls for years. Plus, we had to sit through a few minutes of sad music-scored animal rights proselytizing (blech), but those were a small price to pay for a damn fine hour of television that delivered a love interest for Mac, a LoVe reunion, and the definition of "Manila."The LoVe reunion that capped this ep was nice, but I really enjoyed Veronica's earlier scenes with Piz. They have a good dynamic, and I really related to their talk about not dating just to date. It's better to stick with what you like, especially when you know what you like, Piz said. True. Too bad for him then, since that means Veronica must go running back to Logan. Piz is cool, but there's tons more drama and conflict with Logan. I still felt for Piz in that last scene, though (been there, dude). But remember, Veronica's interest was piqued when Parker mentioned he might have a girlfriend "back home," so the door was left a little open there.And speaking of Logan, why does he hang around with every scuzzy guy on the planet? He goes surfing with Dick and who do they meet at the beach but none other than Chip Diller, the biggest panty waste on campus. So far, Logan's rolled with a fun loving but brain dead frat boy (Dick), a convicted rapist (Mercer), and now an accused rapist and misogynist (Chip). Come on, Logan, I think it's time to find some new friends. Why don't they pair Logan up with Wallace? I've always dug watching them together. At least then Wallace might show up in a few more eps this season.Besides the last act, episode highlights included the Ted Nugent digs, Veronica's mock rock out to Barenaked Ladies, the Canada room at the "around the world" party, and, of course, Keith's scene with Landry at the bar.What did Keith's "scotch" comment to O'Dell's widow mean? I'm sure he's talking about more than O'Dell's untouched bottle. Like I wrote before, I'm not guessing yet, but I'm looking forward to finding out.Catch a video preview of the next ep on CW's site. Also, the CW is now streaming episodes of Veronica Mars online.Memorable quote: Mac: Okay. I get cruelty free, but I'm an animal, too. The no bathing thing and the clove cigarettes is cruelty to me. Video58882@blogcritics.org Tue, 30 Jan 2007 03:45:51 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/01/14/072823.php Mike MoodyIt’s hard to single out one moment in director Alfonso Cuarón’s Children of Men that doesn’t feel urgent, tense or, more frighteningly, very plausible. Set in a dystopian, war ravaged future Britain where no child has been born for 18 years, the film effectively draws a straight line between the bleak, bombed-out future on the screen and current events, including the war in Iraq and the crackdown on illegal immigration.“This is where we’re heading,” Cuarón is trying to say, but Children of Men, based on the book by P.D. James, is remarkable not because of its social commentary, but for the way it doles the commentary out.Cuarón — clearly a follower of the “show, don’t tell” philosophy — has crafted a thrilling technical achievement here, creating a gray, violent British police state full of visual exposition that shows us everything we need to know. We’re not told the world is in chaos, we see it in the newspaper clippings with wartime headlines, the downbeat TV news reports about casualty counts and terrorist bombings, the political graffiti and in the faces of caged refugees on the street.Corporate structures and bureaucratic buildings are all that stand intact - it’s hard times for sure. It’s anyone’s guess as to who started the war or who’s on the right side, but that information isn’t really pertinent to the film’s simplistic story.Clive Owen cuts a decidedly glum figure as Theo, a former revolutionary turned bureaucratic drone who now kills time by getting high with an aging pot dealer (played warmly by Michael Caine). Theo’s revolutionary past comes back to tap him for a favor in the form of his ex-wife (Julian Moore), the leader of a political extremist group. Moore’s faction is protecting a young woman (Claire Hope Ashitey) who, somehow, is pregnant. It’s up to Theo to use his political pull to get the pregnant woman, named Kee, to another political group called The Human Project. There, supposedly, Kee will get the medical treatment and care she and her baby will need to survive.Children of Men is a surprisingly economic film of ideas, but the film’s driving story is too simplistic. While the world around them is burning with conflict, the film’s main characters follow a standard road movie formula. There are a few shocking scenes along the way, but if you’ve seen the trailer, you know where the film’s heading.Children of Men is most effective when the turbulent world outside comes crashing in on the main characters, leading them into chaotic and shockingly realistic scenes of guerilla warfare and terrorist action. There’s a tense, stunningly shot stretch in the second half of the film in which Owen runs through an urban war zone, evading sniper bullets while those around him fall bloody to the ground. The scene rivals anything I’ve seen in recent war films, including the opening shots of Saving Private Ryan.There’s much to recommend here, including good performances by the cast (especially Hope Ashitey), great music and profound cinematography. I only wish the main story would have taken a few more unexpected turns. Maybe then the film would have held the gripping pace it sometimes achieves. Video58185@blogcritics.org Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:28:23 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/12/28/110433.php Mike MoodyVolver, a charming minor work by Pedro Almódovar, is probably my least favorite film by the great Spanish director.Since the 1980s, Almódovar has delivered a successful string of florid and risky melodramas about Spanish women and their families. For his last two films, Almódvar focused his lens on men, with glorious results. He won an Academy Award for Best Screenplay for 2002’s Habla Con Ella (Talk to Her), a tender drama about two very flawed men in love with comatose women. 2004 saw the release of La Mala Educación (Bad Education), the director’s acclaimed and gripping Hitchcockian suspense tale about two male lovers connected by sexual abuse. Volver, which means “to return” in Spanish, is an apt title for Almódovar’s latest, his comeback to the land of the lady. It marks another film about strong women, another great role tailored for Penélope Cruz (the two worked together on 1999’s Todo Sobre Mi Madre), but a small regression for the director.With Volver, Almódovar tells a female-centric story that touches on all of his hallmark issues — death, abuse, deceit, family, and friendship — but he lets the melodrama simmer instead of boil.Most directors categorized by their penchant for the melodramatic offer laughable or cold results, but Almódovar has always turned high drama into high art. Check his earlier work, especially Madre, and you’ll find visually explosive and powerful films that can essentially be read as artful soap operas. Volver is a story made to be told with such roaring operatics and only traces of the intimate tone present in Habla Con Ella. Almódovar opts for the opposite this time, dampening what could have been a more lively, hot-blooded tale of lives rekindling with a tone too muted. It’s almost like he was timid about displaying his knack for flamboyance.Cruz plays Raimunda, an overworked mother married to a vulgar drunk in Madrid. We meet Raimunda on one of her many trips to her hometown village, scrubbing away at her parents’ tombstone with the help of her teenage daughter Paula (Yohana Cobo) and her sister Sole (Lolela Dueñas). After refurbishing the gravesite, the women visit their geriatric and comically loopy aunt (Chus Lampreave), who’s on the verge of death herself. The first twenty minutes of the film play out slowly, establishing the central characters’ tight bonds and complicated relationships. Things pick up after Paula kills her father with a kitchen knife defending herself from his sexual advances, spurring Raimunda to hide the body and, in essence, take charge of her own life. Then, Sole returns to the village for her aunt’s funeral and comes back accompanied by her mother’s ghost.Almódovar plays all of this surprisingly straight. He documents the strangeness and struggles Raimunda must endure after her husband’s death — which includes stuffing his body in a large freezer and burying it by a lake — with much less of the dark wit and high style he’s famous for. What follows are a number of diverting and funny, but only mildly compelling, scenes of Raimunda and her clan making sweet music, sometimes literally, out of their hard lives and painful pasts. Life-changing secrets are exposed, the dead rise from the grave and a once broken family finds solace from the harsh world within itself. It’s all well done, steadily tailored and glossed, but the bigger moments don’t pull you in like they should.Cruz delivers like a champ despite the film’s mostly flat tone. The early raves for her performance are dead-on. She’s never been better, not even in her other much lauded Spanish language work. Her verve here is infectious and her pain believable. She knew she was making a Pedro Almódovar film. It’s too bad the director seemed to be aiming for something else. Video57543@blogcritics.org Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:04:33 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/12/16/093629.php Mike Moody(Air date: 12/8/06) I must admit that the catalyst for this episode felt a little contrived. How could the fleet suddenly be on the brink of mass starvation, facing a famine that could wipe out humanity?The opening scenes rang more hollow than what I've come to expect from Galactica, but that's how I felt about the start of last week's episode. By the epidose's end I was moved and captivated and ready to name my first child (or at least a pet) after executive producer Ronald D. Moore. I wasn't as spellbound this week, but I almost got there."The Passage," written by former Buffy the Vampire Slayer scribe Jane Espenson, relayed one of Galactica's primary messages: the fight for survival ain't pretty. We witnessed the fleet marines literally falling apart after guiding civilian ships through dangerous radiation in search of food. The fleet's dire straits were underscored by its savorless holy grail - edible algae. It was intense watching Sharon wilt and witnessing her radiation meter spore up during her recon mission through the deadly star cluster. I like that she, once again, proved her worth to everyone on Galactica. Sharon's good deeds don't just solidify the character, they display the fascinating complexity and individuality now apparent in the Cylon race.Back on that suspiciously speckless Cylon ship, Baltar - who awakes after another threesome with Three and Caprica Six - gets wise to Three's suicide game and milks her for information. It seems that in the place between death and resurrection she can almost make out the faces of the five missing Cylons. Is Baltar one of them? I love how Baltar clings to this idea out of a desperate need to absolve himself of his crimes. Like the Cylons, and the humans, he's trying to find his way, a central theme in this episode.Maybe it's because of James Callis' brilliantly offbeat performance, but Baltar has to be the most compelling TV weasel ever. The guy exemplifies selfishness and immorality, but he's one of my favorite characters. Even when he' s not given much to do, Callis makes every moment count. His discovery in this episode -- human and Cylon religions might mix and the missing five exist on some unknown planet -- was slightly intriguing at best (confusing at worst). I dig most everything happening on the Cylon ship, especially that slinky piano score, but I really want to see Baltar return to Galactica. Am I alone here?Back on Galactica, Starbuck figures out that former "stems" addict Kat was a drug dealer on Caprica. She stole someone's identity in order to start a new life after the attempted genocide. I like the way Espenson really fleshed out Kat in this episode. Beefing up peripheral characters seems to be one of Espenson's hallmarks (see the Buffy episode, "Superstar," for the best evidence). We focus on Kat through most of the grueling jump trips in search of food. Her mini arc comes to a head in this episode when, confronted by Starbuck, she has to decide whether she is a corrupt opportunist or a person of integrity. Like most things on Galactica, it's not that simple. She mostly ends up being both. She visits her old sinful life by rekindling a sexual relationship with a drug supplier, but in a selfless act she braves a deathblow of radiation to save a civilian ship. Her return to Galactica, beaten and dying of cancer, was heartbreaking. She takes a nasty fall off the walkway and ends up in the sick bay.Showing Starbuck handing Kat a fatal bottle of sleeping pills on her deathbed was a bold move. The real heart of Kat's final scene came when Capt. Adama, surprisingly, decided to sit with her until she died. Believing the credo that people are defined by their actions, Adama brands Kat a hero and promotes her to KAG before her death. Edward James Olmos, who's found the role of a lifetime here, played his tender scenes with grace.This episode served to quickly move forward some other plots going on this season, including Tigh's return to Adama's side. It was great, and funny, to see these two make light of their terrible situation in another one of Galactica's honest, candid scenes of camaraderie.Many questions remain, including a few big ones about the details of Lee and Starbuck's relationship. What about the controversial use of stems to keep the fighter pilots centered in this episode? Will there be fallout from that decision? Next week, we discover the Temple of Five, another possible road map to Earth, which leads to a deadly standoff with the Cylons.Download Ron Moore's podcast commentary and watch the episode again.Memorable exchange: Adama: I hear they're still eating paper. Is that true? Tigh: No. Paper shortage.Catch up: If you're new to Galactica and want to catch up with the story, check out SciFi.com's recap and primer videos. There's also this handy Galactica wikki that should help fill in some blanks. Video57138@blogcritics.org Sat, 16 Dec 2006 09:36:29 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/12/16/021137.php Mike MoodyIn the DVD commentary track for Night Watch, Russian director Timur Bekmambetov likens film editing to painting and composing music. Where the painter or musician has colors or notes, the filmmaker’s tools are scenes. “Editing is the movie,” Bekmambetov, a former commercial director, says.Night Watch is a fascinating and visually extraordinary film of ideas. It artfully mines history, gothic literature, pop culture and the horror and fantasy genres to create a strikingly original mythology. It even tells a hell of a story in which the fate of the world hangs in the outcome. But, like Bekmambetov said, it’s all in the editing.A film packing such strong visual information and complex concepts would be a chore to sit through if not for good editing. Bekmambetov and his crew pull it off, and teach Hollywood some new tricks. The filmmakers even artfully weave animated subtitles into the visual thread to help move the story along. They secure an energetic pace that’s never too busy or too lethargic. That’s tough to do when you’re making a crazy ass movie about conflicted mystical beings battling oppressed vampires in dank, modern day Moscow.Russia’s first “blockbuster,” the first of a trilogy based on the novel by Sergey Lukyanenko, tells the story of Light and Dark “Others,” human-looking supernaturals living among us who are constantly in conflict with each other. The film starts out with a savagely charged medieval battle scene between the two forces. A truce is called, a pact is made and life continues. The Light forces create a police agency, called Night Watch, charged with keeping the evil Dark Others in check and the world balanced (a simple metaphor for our own conflicting impulses). The Dark Others, constantly burned by the tilted truce in favor of the Light, plot to take over by convincing a super powerful Other to join the dark side, thus tilting the scale in their favor.Our anti-hero is the cynical Anton (Nochnoy Dozor), a Light Other with Dark tendencies. He’s friends with the Darks, who it seems are all vampires, and is used by Night Watch for his tracking and “seeing” abilities. We follow Anton through stunning action scenes and poetic down time, tracking down Darks who break the truce by feeding off humans and turning them into vampires.It might seem like pretty simple good vs. evil type stuff, but it’s more complicated. Even though they have good intentions, the Lights burden the Darks with shifty laws and clumsily forged ordinances. Much like humans, the Others are not perfect and their troubles are almost always self created. Adding to the complexity is something called “the gloom,” a shadow realm where Others can exist but only temporarily, since it feeds on their life. Bekmambetov cleverly illustrates this by populating the gloom with blood sucking mosquitos.Night Watch sometimes buckles under the weight of its own complex mythology and some watching might feel frustrated or confused by a few scenes. Any confusion won’t last though, since the film is good about doling out compelling expository scenes.Night Watch is a rarity, a visionary film rooted in traditional genres that breaks new ground.The sequel to the 2004 film, Day Watch, is slated for a 2007 U.S. release. It’s rumored that the third film in the trilogy will be filmed in the U.S. and feature English speaking actors. But remember, that’s only a rumor. Video57137@blogcritics.org Sat, 16 Dec 2006 02:11:37 EST