Martin's Musings

Children of Men presents a really unsettling picture of the world, circa 2027: all women have been infertile for 18 years, there is widespread poverty, no clear leadership, and bands of rebels use militaristic efforts to forward their goals. It’s not a pretty picture. So when a miracle pregnancy is discovered, extreme measures are needed to keep the secret and not interfere with the birth. Enter Clive Owen’s character, Theo Faron, who is grappling with his own inner demons (his child died years earlier), and who is charged with protecting the mother. That’s about all I understood about the movie. There’s a bit more to it, and much of that went over my head. I was unclear about what the Fish were doing, why Julianne Moore was only on for about 15 minutes, what Michael Caine had to do with any of it, and how this movie, which is actually quite good despite my not following it entirely, could resort to things like a character (the mother) whose name is Kee and a ship named Tomorrow. They’re not exactly subtle symbols. But anyway, I didn’t want to see Children of Men when it first came out, but the good reviews changed my mind. And now that I’ve seen it, I can’t say I entirely agree, but I do still think this is a very good movie — largely because I was impressed by the vision of writer/director Alfonso Cuaron, and because I thought Clive Owen made an engaging hero. So I’m giving Children of Men a B+.

I always hate going to the movies after year-end awards have been handed out because I can’t help but be biased while watching the film. It’s like my inner critic is crying out, “Impress me!”

And yet I do it anyway, mostly out of obligation, because I want to be able to have seen the major Oscar nominees.

So with that kind of mindset, I went to see The Queen on Saturday. And it’s a good movie, but I won’t be adding it to my top 10. Continue reading →

Easily, the best moment of the Golden Globe Awards last night was Sacha Baron Cohen’s acceptance of his award for Best Actor in a Musical or Comedy for Borat. Check it out here. (Or here.) (Or here.) (Or watch it below.)

[Note: This review contains plot spoilers, so if you have any intention of seeing Alpha Dog, don’t read this review until after you’ve done so. Or, read this review and change your mind about seeing it.]

There are a few things wrong with Alpha Dog, but one of the biggest — the plot — just can’t be helped because the film is “inspired by actual events.” Alpha Dog tells the story of Jonny Truelove (a.k.a. Jesse James Hollywood), a drug dealer who, to exact revenge on a delinquent customer, kidnaps Nick (Anton Yelchin), the customer’s 15-year-old brother. Truelove’s friends, including Frankie (Justin Timberlake), unwittingly go along with it, and show Nick a good time when he’s left in Frankie’s care. Had the film not been based on a true story, chances are it would have ended with Nick being returned to his family and Truelove behind bars, and the film would have come off like a fun story about this kid who was abducted and was actually better off for having had the experience. But that’s not what actually went down, and the film takes a much darker turn that does it in.

Not that it would have been a much better movie had the kid lived. The script is generally lame, the acting doesn’t help it, and together, it makes for a film about a bunch of not very likable, not very cool, not really tough, and actually, pretty lame people. And it’s a shame, because not only did I think the trailer made the movie look pretty cool, but I’ve always sorta thought Emile Hirsch (who plays Truelove) was a pretty good actor (I particularly like him in The Girl Next Door) and I hoped Timberlake would be fun to watch, but neither one is particularly good (though I’d say Justin has his moments, and he’s certainly better than Lance Bass was in On the Line). So, I’m calling Alpha Dog a disappointment. And I’m giving it a C–.

Like any sports movie worth its salt, We Are Marshall plays with your emotions using the typical methods: an underdog who everyone has counted out, swelling orchestra music to generate a bigger response, gruff non-believers, and more.

So knowing you’ll be getting stuff like that going in means you have to evaluate the movie on a different level.

To that end, Marshall is a movie you can root for. It’s not the best sports movie ever, and it doesn’t really earn your tears like, say, Rudy does, but it’s a rousing tribute to how a school and community got back on its feet after a terrible loss. Continue reading →

It could have been God awful, but thankfully, Rocky Balboa redeems itself as a worthwhile movie and a nice send-off for the beloved character.

Basically, that’s because the movie has a lot of heart — actually, that’s all it has. And to that end, there is a lot of sad-sack Rocky bemoaning the past — both his boxing heyday and his late wife, Adrian — and there are quick shots of the people who’ve crossed his path (old opponents like Clubber Lang and Drago, old trainers, etc.) and trips to places of significance. Continue reading →

Can Dreamgirls really live up to the hype? I mean, you can’t shake a stick these days without seeing a story (like the one I wrote about Jennifer Hudson) or seeing a commercial or hearing a song or something related to the movie. But the good news is that the hype is justified: Dreamgirls is one of the best times you will have at the movies this year.

A big, slick, well-orchestrated Hollywood machine (and that’s really the only word you can use for it), Dreamgirls tells the story of a 1960s Supremes-like girl group and how their rise to great fame takes its toll on the girls’ friendship. Unless you’ve been under a rock, you know that the movie is based on a Broadway show, and that Beyonce plays the Diana Ross role (and though she tries to deny it, there’s no escaping the comparison), Jamie Foxx is the villainous Berry Gordy-type, and Eddie Murphy is the James Brown-esque soul singer who the girls initially attach their fortunes to. The film is substantial and not lightweight, with a strong statement about what really makes a star.

Not surprisingly, while the acting across the board is good, the film belongs to the women. Hudson’s performance of “And I Am Telling You I’m Not Going” is already the stuff of legend, and for good reason. It’s a fierce, powerful performance — both vocally and visually — and like the words Hudson’s character is singing, Hudson is daring you not to love her. When she finished, a guy behind me said, “She turned it out!” and most folks burst into applause. The sound system where I saw the movie was less-than-optimal, but Hudson’s performance here is so towering that it overcame the technical issues. She’ll earn the Oscar for that scene alone. And Beyonce’s “Listen” turned me into a serious fan. The song was written for the film, and she just blows the roof off with her passionate performance of it.

To be honest, though, the film and show do a real disservice to both women, especially Hudson. She has a few good songs (I also really like “Love You I Do,” another song written just for the movie), but after her big number halfway through, Hudson basically disappears. Suddenly the movie is all about Beyonce and Hudson is stuck in the background, right when she’s upstaged everyone else on screen. Beyonce, too, is basically nice to look at and she generally holds her own acting-wise, but her only really good moment comes near the end when she’s belting that song. I wish the show/movie’s creators had seized the momentum of Hudson’s performance better and gave Beyonce more chances to blow us away. Instead, both get these huge showstopping moments that make the rest of their performance seem less impressive.

But no matter. As a whole, Dreamgirls is a great, wholly entertaining movie. I was tapping my feet, holding back applause, and smiling through most of the film. When the lights came up, I started to make plans to see it again as soon as I could, in a theater with better sound. Right now, I can’t wait. Dreamgirls gets an A–.

—
Update, 12/31: I’ve now seen this movie twice and I don’t know if it was the better presentation quality or that I knew what to expect, but I have to say, unsurprisingly, I enjoyed Dreamgirls much more the second time. Jennifer Hudson’s performance came off much better to me — it didn’t seem as lacking in the second half — and even Beyonce was impressive throughout. This second time I appreciated stuff I didn’t appreciate as much the first time, like Eddie Murphy’s performance; it’s also really good. Yes, the movie is a bit lopsided, with all the good music in the first half and all the serious drama in the second, but it doesn’t drag, and this time I felt more invested in the plot so it came off as a better movie. And let me just say this: if you’re going to see Dreamgirls, see it the way it’s meant to be seen, on a big screen with big, clear sound. It makes all the difference. I’d see it again. And again. I really like this movie.