Cody's Film Review: A Serious Man

It has always taken me a few viewings to appreciate Coen Brother films and A Serious Man will be no exception. Films like Barton Fink and Millers Crossing I enjoy at first then after watching it a few times I begin to love them and they become some of my favorite films. Other times I watch The Ladykillers and O Brother, Where Art Thou? and multiple viewings do not help me appreciate them more. A Serious Man may fall into the latter category. I am being a little hard on it because I expect the world from the Coen brothers and I know what they are capable of. Technically the film is flawless, it looks great and the acting is right on. Roger Deakins photography is excellent and you feel you are in 1967. The main problem I had was the story, it's simple and nothing really happens. Michael Stuhlbarg is great as a man who's life is suddenly falling apart and his religion is doing nothing to help him, that is pretty much the entire story. I am sure it has a few hidden agenda's like women are the root of all evil, corruption leads to death, and don't sweat the small stuff because more serious problems are on the horizon,but I'm not sure and thats what multiple viewings are for. The only problem I had with Stuhlbarg's character is he is such a victim that after awhile you lose sympathy for him simply because he never stands up for himself. Some of his problems are so simple to get out of that all he has to do is say "no" or just talk to someone and his problems are over. There are too many dream sequences and too many characters that are their just to be quirky. I wanted a standout performance or a deeply enriched character, and instead we get good acting with nothing too memorable.The story can be confusing at times if you know nothing of the Jewish religion, but they repeat themselves a few times and the uneducated viewer,like myself, gets the jist of it. I was lucky enough to go to the New York Premiere where the cast and crew were present, and I really wanted a Q&A afterwards to possibly get some deeper meanings, if any, on the film as a whole. I think the audience felt forced to laugh at the quirkiness and maybe a little inferior because of a feeling that their should be something more to the film. If you are a Coen Brothers fan then I recommend this film, you will get something from it, but not their top work. Don't let the greatness of the ending fool you into thinking this is a great movie. 3 out of 5 stars.

R.I.P. Patrick Swayze

It has been a tough summer for those of us who grew up watching films in the 80's. First we lose John Hughes back in August(Podcast on that subject is coming soon,that is why no tribute on the blog), now we have lost one of my childhood heroes with Patrick Swayze. Like Hughes,Swayze has been around, but his best work died when the 90's began. Patrick Swayze was very good in Donnie Darko(2001), but that is the only memorable performance since Point Break(1991). The first thing I saw him in was in The Outsiders(1983), and I must have watched that film a hundred times. Over the next 8 years(which seems like a lifetime when you are a kid) I watched everything he was in including Tiger Warsaw(1988). Swayze had a great commanding voice and a terrific screen presence. There was a reason he was in charge in every movie he was in, he chewed up screen time and always gave that older brother vibe. I loved every film he did from 1983-1991, but these are my favorites.

The Outsiders(1983) The first time I saw Swayze was as leader of the Greasers and Ponyboy's older brother Darrel Curtis. He was a real prick at the beginning, but then Ponyboy and Johnny killed Leif Garrett and he stopped being a hard ass. With the crew of talented actors in this film Sawyze takes control and leads them to victory over the well dressed Socs.





Dirty Dancing(1987) Yes it's a girlie film, but if all girlie films were this good then I would be a happy man. Johnny Castle is perhaps the role that will always be associated with Swayze. Good story and good cast,but I always felt that Johnny and Baby didn't have great chemistry. That is mainly because Baby had nothing to offer to the older and cooler Johnny but youth and sex, and he didn't need any help in that department. Swayze reeks of coolness, confidence and really carries this film. Only Swayze is allowed to put Baby in the corner.

Youngblood(1986) This is Rob Lowe's film,but Swayze's Derek Sutton makes this ship float. This isn't a great film,but I watched it so much as a kid it still holds a place in my heart. Swayze is the veteran player that must teach young Lowe how to stop being a pussy and fight the hated and hairy Racki. Again Swayze plays the older brother/mentor role that he shined at. I watched it again recently and it still holds up for me.





Red Dawn(1984) Out of all of his films this one had the most impact. As a child I had a great fear of Nuclear War and Red Dawn fed that fear more than any film. It was a mixture of fear of a Russian attack and the fun of playing guns in the woods that made this film so appealing. Again Swayze is the leader(Jed) of a bunch of kids hiding from a bunch of evil Reds. He takes charge and decides to fight back, and he does it his way on his turf. Swayze is so in charge that a older Powers Boothe and crazy C.Thomas Howell don't even try to take control. Jed doesn't take prisoners, allow crying, or put up with snitches. Red Dawn is a film of it's time and it is a shame they are remaking it. The producers have big shoes to fill and they won't come close to filling Swayze's.











Point Break(1991) The last great performance. A action film is only as good as it's villain, and Swayze's surfer Bodhi plays it to the tee. He is so good in this that you care more about him than Special Agent Utah. I watched this the other night and even when you find out Swazye is the bad guy you don't stop liking him, in fact you root for him. It's a shame Swayze didn't go out riding the treacherous waves from the 100 year storm.




Road House(1989) The name is Dalton! Was their any doubt that this would be on my list? This movie is like a fine wine and improves with age. I think Swayze's role as Dalton has become his second most beloved character behind Johnny Castle, but it is easily my favorite. Anyone who whips comebacks like "Pain don't Hurt.", "Your too stupid to have a good time!", and "Opinions Vary." is all right in my book. I noticed none of the online obituaries mention this film because Road House is all balls and adrenaline and it caps my most beloved decade in film. I was lucky enough to see this film at the theater and had the same reaction as a 9th grader as I do now...Fun Filled Greatness! In fact The Outsiders and Youngblood were cable movies for me , the rest I saw at the theater. Other films that almost made the list were Ghost(1990),Next Of Kin(1989), and Grandview,U.S.A(1984) all good films,but I like these a bit better. Lets not forget the funny side of Swayze, his S.N.L. performance with Chris Farley as competing Chip and Dale dancers is gold. He will be missed and sadly another part of my childhood is gone.

Top Ten reasons Inglourious Basterds isn't the masterpiece Tarantino thinks it is

(spoilers)

1. THE PLOTHOLES: Almost as many as District 9: 1) Landa falling into that trap at the end—letting himself get cuffed then carved up—when in every other scene he’s the smartest character in the movie 2) Landa killing the German actress for plotting to blow up the theater, even though he’s doing the exact same thing 3) Shosanna’s story being included in the first place—if she hadn’t plotted to blow up the theater, then Landa and the Basterds would’ve done it for her.
2. THE TITLE: It’s like calling Pee Wee’s Big Adventure instead Amazing Larry. The Basterds are secondary characters, a subplot to Shosanna’s story when it should be the other way around. (Not to mention, they’re introduced first as a band of lawless killers, but the potential of that concept isn’t explored at all. It’s completely dropped when they’re brought back to be recruits for a special mission. It makes their introduction as lawless killers a waste of time).
3. THE STYLE: You can’t take Leone’s framing, pacing, and music wholesale and then put your name all over it like you reinvented cinema.
4. THE THEME: Tell me what this movie is about. His other movies bothered to have a theme, even if it was as simple as exploring middle age or the paradoxes of vengeance. I swear Babel had more of a defined theme than this movie.
5. THE SUBTEXT: Using nitrate film as a weapon is kind of an awesome idea, and since the movie suggests that "film" itself is in a very legitimate way owned by the Jews (by bringing up the Jewish producers & studio heads in the British officer’s orientation scene) then Tarantino's choice to slaughter the Nazis with film is maybe the most clever thing in the movie, it’s like having them be slaughtered by bagels or I don’t know, diamonds. It’s kind of amazing that it works, but he does nothing else with it and it’s not developed any further (like say how propagandaistic film can do more to end a war than actual firepower, a variation on the pen is mightier than the sword, etc). It just seems like this whole movie’s construction was some scribbled notes about what would make “The Ultimate WWII movie , OKAAY?”, without any sort of sense of how it would logically come together.
6. THE TENSION: What makes the opening of Once Upon a Time in The West so great is that Leone doesn’t spend the next 2 1/2 hours repeating himself. Some scenes are shorter, some are funny, some aren’t fraught with tension. So when a scene comes along that is overwhelmingly intense, then it’s that much more powerful because there's a variety of tone. But almost every scene in Basterds builds the same exact way with the same prolonged tension, and pretty much makes the movie monotonous by definition.
7. THE BEAR JEW: Kevin Costner in 13 Days does a better Boston accent than Eli Roth’s faux-Affleck squawk. Not to mention the character doesn’t make any sense—why all the ominous buildup spent on him? Getting taken out by a baseball bat blow to the head is kind of mercy killing, at least compared to getting scalped.
8. THE EDITING: The scene with Landa and Shosanna in the restaurant is a tension build for nothing, it’s a cheat. That and the first half of the basement bar scene could be completely lost and it would be the same movie.
9. THE FONT: When did he get so font happy. It's distracting and just underscores how inconsistent this movie is.
10. THE LAST LINE: Tarantino’s lack of humility would be tolerable if he were still making something purely his own like Pulp Fiction, but I can’t think of an instance where a director was so megalomaniacal so to have his character practically be a stand-in for him, and address the audience, so to tell us that we just watched what he “thinks is a masterpiece,” only to be followed by the “written & directed by” signature. What this guy needs is a movie with a story credit by Roger Avery again. Actually, anyone even. Tarantino is probably surrounded by more Yes Men than George Lucas at this point.

Then again, Christoph Waltz is amazing in this, and the 1st scene is a perfect example of what Tarantino can do best, and I admit that I wasn’t clawing at the seats like I was during that Jungle Julia bullshit. I just wish he had figured out how to make the movie about badass Nazi killers that I bought my ticket to see.

Cody's Film Review: District 9

District 9 is Alien Nation(1988) meets The Fly(1986), except not as good as those films. An interesting story with very good SFX,but has too many holes. The movie has a lot of gore and as a viewer I felt very dirty,which I applaud the filmmakers for my uncomfortableness. The problem I had was the lead actor,although he did a good job I never cared about him. I found myself more invested in the aliens and wanted more of them.The entire film is shot in two styles, documentary and a CNN type broadcast.I would have preferred the documentary style through the whole film. I wanted the story to be told through facts instead of through helicopter cameras.The first half was thoughtful and had my attention, by the second half the cliches set in and so did the plot holes.**SPOILERS** It never explains why alien fuel turns humans into aliens. The viewer was also left in the dark at why some aliens were smart and some were animalistic,or were they,I don't know it never says.I was perplexed at why the aliens didn't use their weaponry to stop the humans from pushing them around. They are a militaristic race,why do they allow people to enslave them and push them around. They still have their weapons,and two aliens alone take out a building and a whole platoon of humans.The main human character (Copley) is a spineless company man and his character is unlikable and all over the place. One minute he double crosses the one thing in the world trying to help him and the next he sacrifices everything to save him and his son. The villains are one dimensional and cartoonish and by the end I really didn't care and was just waiting for them to get theirs. By the end I was just thinking how Alien Nation was a better film and that the term "Slag" was replaced by "Prawns" and rotten milk was replaced by cat food. It's not a bad film it just falls apart at the end and could have been something special. 3 out 5 stars

Funny People

Fuckin A. Not sure what the haters are all about with this. This could be Apatow’s Reds. Ambitious, confessional, messy as fuck, sincere and direct in a way that no $60 million Adam Sandler flick has any right to be--not to mention paced with the digressive, unhurried rhythm of a motherfucking Eric Rohmer movie--and with a ballsy 2nd gear shift that rivals both Roller Boogie & L’Avventura, this is the kind of movie James L. Brooks has been trying to nail his whole career.

and the nominations go to....everyone

I know I teased a Martin Scorcese show, but we felt it best to put the top 5 lists on hold and talk about something else.

Last year, 'Slumdog Millionaire' won best picture, but people will remember it more for winning eight oscars. It isn't enough for the academy to award a film for its merits in their respectful categories, but more than ever it seems that quantity defines the films relevance. Earlier this summer, the academy announced they would be expanding the number of best picture nominees from 5 to 10. To me, this move speaks in the same concieted voice as was racking up the awards for the academy's obvious favorite a year ago.

Phillip Renke joins us from Austin. Cody and Scott are in NYC as we have the first all-Skype episode. Yeah, Cody and Scott are in the same room but you get the point.

As always, you can email the show at doomsdaypodcast@gmail.com.

If you have trouble streaming it from the player below you can also find the episode for downoad here as well as iTunes.


Powered by Podbean.com

Cody's Film Review: The Hurt Locker

I did not go into this film with high hopes,because I have no interest in films about the war in Iraq. The subject of the Middle East is about as interesting to me as Hurricane Katrina. It's a tired subject and I get enough about it on television. The modern day War Film is in a recession now because there hasn't been a war of interest since Vietnam. Bad asses like Rambo, Riggs, and Kurtz can't exist in a war that consist of suicide bombers and playing watchdog in a occupied territory. Three Kings(1999),Standard Operating Procedure(2008), and Generation Kill(2008) are the films about Iraq that I've enjoyed the most. Kathryn Bigelow's The Hurt Locker isn't as good as these films,but it does come close. The story of bomb defusing during a war is a subject I have never seen on screen, and Bigelow makes it interesting and tense. The acting is top notch all around, and Jeremy Renner is outstanding as the lead. Renner and Anthony Mackie have a great repoir and play off each other beautifully. The Hurt Locker has some of the best cameo's that I have seen in a long time. Guy Pierce is so great at the beginning that I wanted more of him, and it just adds to Renner's performance that you don't miss him after awhile. David Morse is extremely intense as Colonel Reed. He straight out frightens you and his scene with Renner is one of the most uncomfortable moments I have seen in a long time.It was great to see the re-pairing of Bigelow and Lenny Nero AKA Ralph Fiennes. Fiennes plays a bounty hunter and is so good I think Bigelow could make a prequel on his character alone,and probably make a better film. The main problem I had with The Hurt Locker was the length.The movie runs about 15-20 minutes too long.I am not sure where to cut,because all the scenes were necessary or too enjoyable to cut. Towards the end you just start to get fatigued and start looking at your watch. All the acting was superb except for the third person of their team Brian Geraghty. I thought he was the weakest link and he had too much screen time without much to contribute. I also (again) had a problem with using hand held camera with the action. Shaky cam is a TV trick for shows that have no budget, and I'm sick of everything trying to look like the Bourne films. It's a fad I wish they would start ending now. I want to see the action and along with crappy CGI films of the last few years is going to look like rear projection of the 40's and 50's. It's just a sign of laziness and I hoped Bigelow would stick with her old school action ways. Overall it's a good film with great acting, but I am not sure how much re-watching value it has. 3.5 out of 5 stars.

Cody's Film Review:(500) Days Of Summer

500 Days Of Summer is at times really original and at other times formulaic. It's a great debut for Marc Webb and the writers of Pink Panther 2. What really makes this film work is the impressive performances of Joseph Gorden-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel. They have great chemistry and the relationship seems real. Levitt's character acts like a normal person and doesn't follow the usual romantic comedy conventions. He is very likable, has realistic reactions and doesn't fall every five minutes or act like a buffoon. Zooey is great because her character is not a bitch and you never fault her for her decisions. She is cute as a button and has a great personality,so you understand why he falls for her. This movie falters when Zooey and Levitt are not on screen. The entire supporting cast brings nothing to the table. They don't provide comic relief, forward the story, or even apply descent acting.Here is a run down of the supporting cast and why they don't work.Geoffrey Arend plays a drunk and lonely friend who is not funny,and his only contribution is he tells Zooey that Levitt likes her. Arend is the best of the supporting cast, but fails to turn in what could have been the best character.Think of Alec Baldwin in She's Having A Baby or Jim Belushi in The Man With One Red Shoe,and you will know what I'm talking about. Matt Gubler is a married friend who provides no advice of any kind,and seems to struggle with the art of acting.Clark Gregg is Levitt's boss who tries to provide comic relief,but every joke he delivers you see a mile away. The worse is 12 year old actress Chloe Moretz who is the most annoying cliche in film. She is the typical younger sister giving relationship advice, and is the poor child surrounded by moronic adults. Kids ten times smarter than adults does nothing but make me mad.It has been done a million times and is insulting. If you want to find out a Jonas Brothers hit or what Hannah Montana thinks the best soda is, ask a 12 year old. I was shocked how at times the story and acting was flawless followed by conventional and tired cliches. I recommend this film for the two leads who get absolutely no help from the supporting cast, but you do walk away with some nice moments. 3 out of 5 stars

The Underrated Work of Mel Gibson

I have a soft heart for action films. 

There, I said it, but can you blame me? I grew up on the works of Steven Seagal and Jean-Claude Van Damme. The first movie I honestly remember seeing was Lethal Weapon 2. 

And one can only surmise that's when it started. But upon talking with my brother this past weekend, it dawned on me once more—Mel Gibson isn't that bad. And three of his late-career films have proved that he is, in fact, pretty damn amazing. 

Especially at the whole crazy bit. 

1. Conspiracy Theory (1997) 

This mystery/suspense film was a bridge for Richard Donner and Gibson. They had hooked up, of course, on all of the Lethal Weapon movies. And if one were to judge a movie by it's poster, this one seemed to be a bridge of sorts for all involved. A bridge for Donner waiting for the guys at Warner to finish the script for Lethal Weapon 4 (aka, the one with Jet Li). A bridge for Roberts waiting for the next Garry Marshall production. 

But Gibson chews up the screen as the pop-eyed taxicab driver who "pointlessly" and neurotically thinks of government schemes and buys copies of The Catcher in the Rye. 

Conspiracy Theory is probably the darkest film Gibson or Donner were a part of back in 1997. The lighting crew on this one used two settings—crimson and black. And Patrick Stewart does his best evil grimace. 

It isn't hard to notice that this film is way out of Donner's league. That guy is best when he's making buddy movies. Hell, even 16 Blocks wasn't bad. But this one, it's pretty damn passable. If only for the fact that Gibson does the OCD bit almost better than Jack Nicholson in As Good As it Gets. 

2. Payback (1999) 

Before Tarantino killed Bill, Gibson and the writer of L.A. Confidential, Brian Helgeland, were fighting each other over which version of this pre-millennium gem audiences would see. 

Payback is a revenge flick. It's title says exactly what Gibson's Porter will do—he will payback all those people that tried to kill him. But Porter does this in the most gruesome ways. 

This is Eli Roth-type stuff, before Eli Roth ever thought of writing it down. 

But this isn't Hostel. No, this is badass. Gibson uses this movie to mutter and mope around like an estranged cousin of Clint Eastwood. And he fights none other than Kris Kristofferson and James Coburn. Gibson doesn't take no damned prisoners. He just wants his slim share of money. 

If anyone were to write a film essay on the thesis "violence begets violence," this movie would hold its rightful place in that novel. But I have a feeling naming the flick, Killing Spree, wouldn't have got many Lethal Weapon fans in the theatre. 

3. Ransom (1996) 

I was roughly nine years old when this movie was released. In this movie, Gibson was on the last leg of his popularity, re-teaming with Rene Russo to create a drama about a kidnapping gone wrong. 

This movie was a solidified hit when the trailer ran. Ron Howard was running off the fumes of the magical Apollo 13. Gary Sinese was earning his title as one of the best supporting actors in the business with turns in Apollo 13 and Forrest Gump. 

Ransom earned Gibson a Golden Globe nomination for his portrayal of millionaire Tom Mullen. The film is worth watching just for his stellar TV-spot he does with a pile of money, asking the kidnappers to give him his child back. 

In conclusion 

In no way does this mean Mel Gibson should be categorized as a saint. He's not the best actor in the world. He's pulled some ludicrous stunts as well. 

And these movies, they aren't perfect. Some might call them merely guilty pleasures. To me, they hint at something more. 

Here's to hoping Gibson quits the detective schtick and comes back with something along these lines. 

top ten

Check these top tens, gave me a little more respect for Diablo Cody

http://www.criterion.com/explore/top10

and put yours in the comments (criterion or otherwise)