Category: 2000-2010

“In the Cut” (2003) starring Meg Ryan, Mark Ruffalo, & Jennifer Jason Leigh

EmmaLeave a comment

Everything you know about desire is dead wrong. -Tagline

On the LES of NYC, Frannie Avery (Meg Ryan- age 41 and de-glamorized)- a college English teacher/writer- begins an affair w/ Det. Giovanni Malloy (Mark Ruffalo- age 35 w/ a mustache)- one of the cops investigating the murder of a young woman. Malloy’s partner, Det. Ritchie Rodriguez, is played by Nick Damici (who I haven’t seen in any other movies/shows). Malloy believes the murder is the work of a serial killer. Frannie continues her relationship w/ Malloy, even after catching him in a lie (which could be dangerous). This is the (controversial) film that tanked Ryan’s acting career and derailed that of director Jane Campion. Originally, Nicole Kidman (who served as a producer) wanted to play Frannie. She decided to drop out, as she was going through a (much publicized) divorce from Tom Cruise. Mickey Rourke was considered for a supporting role; however, he was allegedly vetoed by Kidman b/c of his hard-partying reputation. The film is based on a 1996 novel by Susanna Moore.

Frannie: I was at the Red Turtle with one of my students.

Det. Rodriguez: One of your students?

Frannie: Cornelius Webb, but it was early, three-thirty. I was there for a short time, then I went home.

Det. Malloy: Cornelius Webb. Is that with two B’s or not two B’s?

It’s rare to see an erotic thriller (or neo noir) from the POV of a (complicated/independent) woman, as many critics/podcasters/viewers have commented. Usually, the male cop is the central figure, as in Laura (1944) or Basic Instinct (1992). Ruffalo went undercover w/ NYPD officers to prepare for his role. Malloy is macho, rough-hewn, and uses the language of the streets. However, he can also be soft-spoken, compassionate, and witty. Pauline (Jennifer Jason Leigh- age 40) is Frannie’s slightly younger/half-sister; the women have a close/warm relationship. Pauline is a stylist who lives above a go-go (strip) bar; she’s self-aware, yet looking for love (in ALL the wrong places). The costumes were bought from the The Job (2001), a cancelled TV show, for only $400.

I think the scenes are really good though, I think they’re very honest. Jane didn’t want them to be coy, so I don’t think they are at all. And I love how much dialogue is in those scenes. That’s what makes them really intimate. -Meg Ryan re: the love scenes (at TIFF during film’s debut)

Warning: This film NOT for sensitive viewers (incl. those expecting the rom com version of Ryan); it’s gritty, bloody, w/ dark themes and nudity. I saw this movie (which has an R-rated and Unrated versions) many yrs ago; it’s now available to rent (Amazon Prime video). Last week, I came across a (new) pod review of it, so decided to take a (2nd) look. One common complaint from viewers was that characters don’t develop or change. They’re also unapologetic re: their desires. This may remind some of you of European films. One of the main notes Campion gave to Ruffalo was “never apologize.” The filmmakers create an undercurrent of foreboding, showing us how it’s like to be a (big city) woman who is being perceived by (potentially dangerous/deadly) men.

[1] Ryan has never been better than she is here. She plays Frannie almost as if she were one of the urban walking dead, just right for a modern woman who feels no real emotional connection with the world and the people around her.

Mark Ruffalo is excellent as the cop who may be more of a threat to Frannie than the killer who’s terrorizing the area.

[2] This is certainly one of the most unique films I have come across, but I don’t say that in an overly positive manner. It is a very good-looking film, and ignoring camera angles and editing techniques, it still looks very solid on a visual scope.

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews

“Lions for Lambs” (2007) starring Robert Redford, Meryl Streep, & Tom Cruise

EmmaLeave a comment

Injuries sustained by two Army rangers behind enemy lines in Afghanistan set off a sequence of events involving a senator, a journalist and a professor. -Synopsis

This out-of-the box film (directed by Robert Redford, who passed away recently at age 89) consists of 3 separate (yet interconnected) segments. The time is our (recent) past, Dubya is the prez, and there is (seemingly unending) war in the Middle East. Many viewers were most interested in the interview between the experienced political journo, Janine Roth (Meryl Streep), and a youthful Republican politician, Sen. Jasper Irving (Tom Cruise). They discuss foreign-policy in a war of choice, now running longer than WWII. The senator (a military adviser to the prez) is trying to convince Janine into “selling” a new plan of attack in Afghanistan. In a SoCal university, Prof. Stephen Malley (Redford), a Poly Sci prof has a meeting w/ a bright (yet recently slacking) student, Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield).

Sen. Jasper Irving: [to Janine] In sense we’re both on the same team. We’re teammates. We’re both have a responsibility. You’ve already sold the war. Now I’m asking you to help me sell the solution.

The film is short and stays mostly to the point of a debate weighing the pros and cons of war, terrorism, and freedom. The photo on the senator’s office wall (Cruise dressed as a West Point cadet) is a still photo from Taps (1981). Alternating w/ the other segments are scenes in Afghanistan featuring two Army rangers, Arian Finch (Derek Luke) and his BFF, Ernest Rodriguez (Michael Peña). They’re POC and recent college grads who chose to enlist. What lives are most at risk in times of war? It’s the youth, esp. men of color and/or those living in poverty, as Prof. Malley explains to Todd (white, raised w/ privilege, and from an upper-middle class neighborhood). Check it out (on Amazon Prime video) if you’re looking for something different.

Prof. Stephen Malley: The decisions you make now, bud, can’t be changed but with years and years of hard work to redo it… And in those years you become something different. Everybody does as the time passes. You get married, you get into debt… But you’re never gonna be the same person you are right now. And promise and potential… It’s very fickle, and it just might not be there anymore.
Todd Hayes: Are you assuming I already made a decision? And also that I’ll live to regret it?
Prof. Stephen Malley: All I’m saying is that you’re an adult now… And the tough thing about adulthood is that it starts before you even know it starts, when you’re already a dozen decisions into it. But what you need to know, Todd, no lifeguard is watching anymore. You’re on your own. You’re your own man, and the decisions you make now are yours and yours alone from here until the end.

[1] It is not a perfect film in some regards, but it is not preaching but rather challenging all viewers, no matter what you think, to get involved, to take part, to question things, to think for one’s self. It is thought-provoking and challenging and for that it is well worth seeing for yourself.

[2] …the movie is not about a heroic battle or an indelible mistake by a over zealous, self absorbed government. It is about understanding a mindset. If any of you have ever read Francis Fukuyama… its about history repeating itself.

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews

Close-Up on Civil Wars: “Ride with the Devil” (1999) & “The Wind That Shakes The Barley” (2006)

EmmaLeave a comment

Ride with the Devil (1999) starring Skeet Ulrich, Tobey Maguire, Jewel, & Jeffrey Wright

On the Western frontier of Missouri, the American Civil War was fought not by armies, but by neighbors. Informal gangs of local Southern Bushwhackers fought a bloody and desperate guerrilla war against the occupying Union army and pro-Union Jayhawkers. Allegiance to either side was dangerous. But it was more dangerous still to find oneself caught in the middle... -Prologue

Jake [after reading a letter to a Union soldier]: One mother’s very much like another.

Pitt Mackeson: Remember one thing, her boys will kill you if they can.

Jake Roedel (Tobey Maguire) and Jack Bull Chiles (Skeet Ulrich) are best friends/neighbors in rural Missouri when the American Civil War starts. Jake lives w/ his German/immigrant father, who feels their ppl should have nothing to do w/ this war. After his older sister’s wedding, Jack Bull’s father is murdered by Union soldiers, who were also looking for him! Jack Bull (more the leader of the pair) and Jake (the follower) run away from home that same night. One year goes by; the young men have joined the Bushwhackers (loyal to the Confederacy); they ride w/ Black John (Jim Caviezel) and infiltrate enemy territory (disguising themselves as Union soldiers in blue uniforms). As one critic said: “This is guerrilla warfare- or terrorist tactics- depending on one’s viewpoint.”

Y’all prolly haven’t heard of this movie, unless (like me) you’re into history or fan of Taiwanese-American director Ang Lee (Sense & Sensibility; Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon). The screenplay is by James Schamus; it is based on the novel Woe to Live On by Daniel Woodrell. Lee (who attended NYU film school w/ Spike Lee) is an immigrant to the US; he makes unexpected choices here (which brings depth/richness to what could’ve been a simple war story). You’ll get a kick out of seeing young/international actors (NOT yet famous): Mark Ruffalo, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Simon Baker, Jeffrey Wright, Jewel, and Jonathan Brandis.

I remember on the set you [Ang Lee] kept repeating: I don’t wanna make a white man’s movie, I don’t wanna make a white man’s movie. -Jeffery Wright, actor

Jake (called “Dutchie” as an insult) is an outsider among the men at the Bushwhacker camp; long-haired/wild-eyed Pitt Mackeson (Irish actor Jonathan Rhys Meyers) antagonizes him whenever they meet. Jake wants to prove himself as an American; unlike most of his peers he can read/write. I learned re: the division btwn (native-born) Americans and German immigrants (who settled in the Midwest in large numbers in the mid-1800s). Perhaps the most interesting character is Daniel Holt (Jeffrey Wright- from DC; then known for theater work), a Black man recently freed by his master, George Clyde (Aussie actor Simon Baker). George is a quiet observer (until the 2nd half of the movie) and an expert marksman. Wright commented that the ensemble cast “all got to be pretty good w/ horses.”

[1] Lee handles the subject with aplomb, never rushing the deep introspection that the plot demands in favour of action and this lends the film a sense of the reality of war – long periods of boredom and waiting interposed with occasional flashes of intensely terrifying fighting. The action is unglamorised and admirably candid, recognizing that both sides committed a great number of atrocities.

[2]  What is beautiful about the movie, like all of Lee’s films, is that he doesn’t “side” with his characters. He creates characters, embodies them with life, problems, and ambiguity… and endows them with a reality that often hits far closer to home than with which many are comfortable.

But as an exploration of the greater human ambiguity that surely dwelt within the Civil War, it is a masterpiece.

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews

The Wind That Shakes The Barley (2006) starring Cillian Murphy, Liam Cunningham, & Padraig Delaney

Against the backdrop of the Irish War of Independence, two brothers fight a guerrilla war against British forces. -Synopsis

In the early 1920s, rural Ireland is a battlefield of republicans fighting British security forces. Med school grad, Damien O’Donovan (Cillian Murphy), is the pride of his village; he is planning to train at a London hospital. On the day when he’s about to leave, he witnesses the brutal abuse of commoners at the railroad station. Damien pledges loyalty to the local IRA brigade, commanded by his older brother, Teddy (Padraig Delaney- in his 1st film). In the 2nd half of the movie, we learn that IRA leaders negotiated a Free State (yet still under British crown). Teddy and Damien have V different reactions!

I saw this film several yrs ago, BUT didn’t do an in-depth review; I recall being impressed, as I was on re-watch! The British director (Ken Loach) is known for Socialist realism; he often focuses on the working class/ordinary ppl. Most of the actors come from County Cork (where the story is set). Fans of Game of Thrones will get a kick out of seeing Liam Cunningham (whose character sees things from a Socialist lens). In the past yr, you may’ve noticed Cunningham speaking re: a free Palestinian state. Last month, I came across a news clip w/ screenwriter (Paul Lafferty); he’d been released from jail after protesting in London (in support of Palestinians). Yup, these filmmakers are real ones!

The young rebels are lean, proud, and V determined; they hunger for respect, freedom, and opportunity denied them on their native land. Early in the film, a teen boy is beaten to death by British soldiers after refusing to speak English (instead replying in Gaelic). You will see the (guerrilla) tactics used by the IRA, though the violence is brief (and NOT glamorized). As some viewers commented, there is NOT much blood shown; this was to protect the (fragile/period) costumes on a small budget. Damien wisely comments that Britain will never give Ireland freedom, b/c that will open the door for colonies- India and some African nations. This film (told on a small scale/intimate in nature) makes history come alive!

[1] The Wind That Shakes the Barley is a film that doesn’t shy away from the unrelenting terror and bloodshed of the revolution. The working-class accents and dialects are authentically preserved, with constant debate and war never ceasing. The film raises an important question about whether the Irish Revolution was a socialist or nationalist one.

[2] The film consists of two parts. Part 1 is about violence on the side of the English occupier, Part 2 is about Irish disunity.

The English violence in the movie did cause some discomfort at the time of release. We are accustomed to war crimes perpetrated by Germans, but the English? It should, however, not be forgotten that the English used WWI veterans in the Irish war of independence. Particularly the “Black and tans” were notorious.

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews

“The Departed” (2006) & “Infernal Affairs” (2002)

EmmaLeave a comment

The Departed (2006)

Lies. Betrayal. Sacrifice. How far will you take it? -Tagline

The state police in Boston is waging war on the (Irish-American) mob. A recent police academy grad, Billy Costigan (Leonardo DiCaprio), is assigned to infiltrate the syndicate run by crime boss Frank Costello (Jack Nicholson). DiCaprio gained 15 lbs. of muscle for his role. Colin Sullivan (Matt Damon) is an informer for this syndicate; he is quickly rising in the Special Investigation Unit (SIU). Each man becomes deeply consumed by their double lives, gathering info about the plans and counter-plans of the operations they’ve penetrated. In time, it becomes clear to both the mob and the police that there is a mole in their midst! Martin Scorsese said that didn’t realize this was a remake of a 2002 Hong Kong film (Infernal Affairs) until after he had agreed to direct it. In 2003, Warner Brothers bought the remake rights to Infernal Affairs for $1.75M.

Originally, Nicholson turned down his role, but after a meeting w/ Scorsese, William Monahan (screenwriter), and DiCaprio, he was finally convinced. Nicholson had previously done a few comedies, and wanted to play a villain again; he considered Costello to be the ultimate incarnation of evil. As research for his role, Damon worked w/ a Massachusetts State Police unit (Boston). He accompanied them on routine patrols, participated in a drug raid, and was taught proper police procedures (EX: how to pat down a suspect). As a kid, Sullivan is mentored into crime business by Costello, who becomes the father figure he never had. Costigan, coming from a crime-ridden family, decides to become a police officer. Capt. Queenen (Martin Sheen) and Sgt. Dignam (Mark Wahlberg) send Costigan undercover to find out more about the criminal underworld (incl. Costello). With his family’s past, Costigan fit’s perfectly into the situation!

I saw this movie (NOT long after it came out); however, I didn’t recall much about it! When I recently re-watched it, I realized why- it’s basic (few surprises and little flavor). I expected a LOT better from Scorsese! I heard that they shot on location in Boston, BUT you can tell a LOT was done in the studio. The dialogue is NOT impressive; also, if you hate cursing, then avoid this movie (filled w/ f-bombs). As for the (dumb) love triangle, it was unnecessary; there was no heat (chemistry) between the actors involved. Vera Farmiga met w/ a real LAPD psychiatrist to prep for her role. The psychiatrist read the script; she told Farmiga that Madolyn (her character) did pretty much everything wrong- LOL!

[1] I couldn’t feel for Leonardo. He was crying and breaking up after what? SIX MONTHS? Damn! Tony Leung was a undercover for nine years and he didn’t sign up because he chose to, he signed up because that was the only way he could be a cop! Martin Sheen got shafted in his role. There was no time for his character to develop a believable relationship with Leonardo. His screen time was wasted. […]

Mark Walhberg and Alec Baldwin got shafted, too. Mark Walhberg was reduced to a foul mouth asshole turned plot device. […] The only bright spot in this movie is Jack Nicholson. But even his talent is wasted because he had no one but “Mr. French” to play off his evilness. The classic scene of the original Infernal Affairs had Jack’s character to confront his counterpart in the police station with some of the most memorable moment of the film. Jack has no counter part in “The Departed” and his brilliance was wasted.

[2] Some scenes have a lot more impact in Infernal Affairs than in The Departed. I’m gonna cite 3 scenes which are some of the most important in the story in my opinion:

-The death of Wong/Queenan: In IA, Wong falls suddenly, lands on a taxi cab, taking Yan by surprise. When Yan realizes Wong is dead, you can feel the suffering Yan goes through by the loss of the only person who knows he’s a cop, but also (mainly) by the loss of his friend.

– In The Departed we see Sheen falls in slow-mo until he hits the ground in a splash of blood. There’s absolutely no connection, no friendship between DiCaprio and Sheen. We see DiCaprio almost on the verge of crying. But why? He’s not his friend and there’s still Wahlberg to prove he’s a cop.

-The death of Sam/Costello: In IA, Ming seems to show a desire to redeem himself and become a good man for his girlfriend. When he confronts Sam in the parking lot during the raid, he kills Sam to remove any evidence he’s a mole and restart on a blank slate.

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews

Infernal Affairs (2002)

Andy Lau (who US audiences may recall from House of Flying Daggers) and international star- Tony Leung (recently seen in Shang-Chi)- are the lead actors in this Hong Kong crime/police drama. Chan Wing Yan (Leung), an undercover cop, has spent the last 10 yrs. infiltrating various gangs and exposing their criminal dealings. Inspector Lau Kin Ming (Lau) is a police mole secretly working the Triad (the same gang w/ which Yan is currently affiliated). After an expensive drugs transaction goes wrong for both the gang and the police, each side suspects that they have a traitor in their midst. In an ironic turn, it falls to each of the two moles to find out who it is!

I saw this movie (streaming on HBOMAX) earlier this Spring. It’s tight (well-paced), exciting, and the acting was good- unlike The Departed. I was pleasantly surprised; I haven’t watched many Hong Kong-set action films yet. The world of the film is gritty, moody, and feels lived-in, unlike the cleanliness/blandness of the sets/locations used in The Departed. I connected more to Leung; unlike in his (Western) movies, he is youthful, sports longish hair/bangs, and is slouchy (reflecting his down mood/tiredness). The two women in the movie don’t get much to do; I wish they’d been more developed. However, this is mainly a world of men (displaying machismo and enacting violence), and women’s presence is a rarity.

[1] Both leads are perfect. Lau’s cold calculating intellect against Leung’s anguished and tormented heart, complimentary opposites. There aren’t enough words to commend this fresh, invigorating film…

[2] Both main actors do a good job of maintaining the intensity of the story. There are certainly countless parallels to be drawn between the characters, but what struck me most were the contrasts between the two: Ming is a cold, devoted and ruthlessly efficient; Yan has been reduced to a tired and neurotic wreck after a decade of living in fear.

[3] A seriously refreshing police thriller that cranks up the tension to the max. There’s no overblown gunplay or buddy cop crap here, this baby is tight as a drum and will have your nails down to the quick. Superb performances, a tight script and tense direction make this a winner in every department.

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews

20th Anniversary: “Pride & Prejudice” & “Star Wars: Episode III – The Revenge of the Sith”

EmmaLeave a comment

Recently, there were special events (incl. re-releases) centered on 2 much loved (and much-maligned) blockbuster movies from my mid-20s- Pride and Prejudice (P&P) and Star Wars: Episode III – The Revenge of the Sith (TRS). Nostalgia is a big thing these days, esp. among those who are Xennials (b. 1977-1983) and Millennials (b. 1981-1996). Were you a fan (or hater) of P&P and/or TRS upon 1st release? Have you re-watched these movies? Have your opinions changed? Let me know your thoughts (in comments below)!

P&P (which boasted a cast of soon-to-be famous/cute/young faces) is an important film to my fam: we watched it in the theater over Thanksgiving 2005 (w/ my future BIL)! On a recent re-watch, I realized that it’s still a fun/well-made movie, though NOT accurate to Jane Austen’s book (as many have said in past). The young/British director, Joe Wright, had a fresh/controversial take on the Bennett fam (incl. their farm-style home, hairstyles, clothes, and-perhaps a BIT too quirky- personalities). I was (again) impressed by ALL the British character actors. When it came to casting, Rosamund Pike (who studied Austen in college) fitted the role of Jane perfectly. The best things about this adaptation are its music (composed by Dario Marinelli) and Matthew McFadyen. The tall/theatrically-trained actor conveys Mr. Darcy’s (unspoken) shyness, sadness (he lost parents when young), and vulnerability. And when Darcy (a socially awkward hero) finally smiles- wow, he wins over the audience!

In the climax of TRS, Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen)- in Sith mode- declares to his Jedi mentor/BFF, Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor): “If you’re not with me, then you’re my enemy!” For the “olds” (like me), this may remind you of former prez. (Dubya’s) words after 9/11: “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.” Is the acting good? Well, it’s a mixed bag; Chancellor/Emperor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) is compelling/effective in his scenes. The film’s most important element is Anakin’s seduction to the Dark Side of the Force by Palpatine. One reviewer on IMDb said: “He is the lifeblood of the film.” Is the writing good? Well, it’s still basic (as w/ the 2 earlier prequels). Is the directing (by Lucas himself) effective? This is tough to judge, but Star Wars fans know Lucas is infamous for NOT saying much to help along the performance of his actors. There are times when I cringed, wondering why he didn’t give the actors another take of a scene. The first 20 mins. (mainly action) are quite exciting, as are the final 30 mins. (incl. the battle btwn. Anakin and Obi-Wan). The music (composed by John Williams) continues to be impressive, as you’d expect. Hey, I still got a BIT emotional at the end- I’m NOT immune to nostalgia!