Showing posts with label meryl streep. Show all posts
Showing posts with label meryl streep. Show all posts

11.07.2012

50/50 Review #43: Out Of Africa.

This... is one really long movie. Going in, I knew very little about the film except the setting and its stars and that there's a romance. And now that it's over... all I'll probably remember is the setting, it's stars, and that there was a romance. Karen (Meryl Streep) moves to Africa with Baron Bror (Klaus Maria Brandauer). But after he sleeps around with others and leaves her, she begins a love affair with Denys (Robert Redford).

And that's the story of this just shy of 3-hours movie. I'm a sucker for a good romance (I said good romance. Not like Twilight or any of that crap). At least for me, a romance is as strong as its female lead and as fascinating as its male lead (I suppose for a LGBT romance, it's as strong as its main character and as fascinating as its romantic lead). Where something like Twilight fails (and it fails in many, many places... but speaking from a romance perspective) is that Bella is about as weak as you can get in a main character of any variety, romantic or otherwise. She's a cardboard cutout with a hole at the head for women to poke their faces through and take her spot (I won't get into the whole "terrible person" thing). And then you have Edward, who is just not a fascinating character, either. He's a creepy, sparkling, asshole stalker. And both of these characters exist purely for the other. They have no lives outside of this romance, and everything they do revolves around it--it's even brought up within the books themselves at one point. The story is a feminist's nightmare.

Don't worry, I'm not going to say this is Twilight in Africa. Not even close. Robert Redford has the best character in the film, and I'm constantly drawn to his charisma (as always). But there's one scene in this movie that basically says everything I felt about this relationship and about Karen. They're sitting by the fireplace, and Redford wants to go on a Safari. Streep doesn't want him to go since he just came back from one. They argue, and Redford accuses Streep of confusing what she needs with what she wants and how she always has. And Streep doesn't help her case when every word out of her mouth shows how she lives to be in a relationship--that's her sole purpose in life. If she's not married, she needs to be looking to marry. You can call it a view of the times, but it bothered me. I had a lot of trouble getting behind her character and didn't find her very likable (except when she was interacting with the natives). So what I'm getting at here is that the movie was fascinating and enjoyable when Redford was on the screen. But when it was just Streep... it took a lot more work to keep itself going for me.

One thing that really helped was the setting. The visuals of this film were gorgeous, from the landscapes to the wildlife. Anytime the focus was brought to the scenery or, say, the lions (particularly the lions), my attention shot up considerably. Also, as stated before, anytime there was attention given to the tribespeople, I found myself interested. I liked the deal she makes with the boy with the hurt leg. Anything to deal with that was fascinating. Unfortunately, that didn't come up all that often (at least considering the running time).

Otherwise, I'm struggling finding much to talk about. Redford is great, but he's barely in the film until the last hour. Up to that point, it felt like it was going to be a long haul with only some occasional good scenes (anything in the previous paragraph). It's definitely not a bad movie, as evidenced by its multiple Oscar wins. It just had a romance I had trouble with due to a character I couldn't entirely get behind, and a length that was far too long (...and don't get me started on the accent). But the setting, visuals, and overall culture of it was great. If anything, see it for that. Well, and Robert Redford... but that's kind of a given.


Stop Saying OK! OK.

1.02.2009

2 In 1: I'm Reed Fish and Adaptation.

This 2 In 1 focuses on two movies that play with similar narrative ideas. I don’t want to go into too much detail here, but this first movie did remind me of the second (which I saw a while back, and am going to finally review). So without dragging this out too much, here you go (Oh, and the second review might be slightly spoilerous only if you have no idea what you're getting yourself into and/or have never heard of the movie or Charlie Kaufman).



I’m Reed Fish.


While this movie’s plot makes it sound like your average, run-of-the-mill romantic comedy, it’s really anything but. Instead, it’s more of a dramedy with a bit of narrative flair. Reed Fish (Jay Baruchel) is the local radio show host/news anchor for the incredibly small town of Mud Meadows, working along side best friend Frank (Victor Rasuk) and the small town mayor, Maureen (Katey Sagal). He’s soon to be married to the lovely Kate (Alexis Bledel), as well, and everything is going to plan. But then an old childhood crush, Amy (Schuyler Fisk), returns for the summer, and everything turns to chaos. Also starring are the likes of DJ Qualls, Shiri Appleby, Chris Parnell, A.J. Cook, and Blake Clark.


If ever there were a movie with an ensemble cast full of underused and/or unappreciated actors and actresses, it’s this one. But it really is Jay Baruchel who holds the whole movie together, finally getting some time to shine in a leading role as opposed to his supporting roles in most Judd Apatow films (or the like). Though, for fans of Alexis Bledel, she’s actually not in the film all that much, despite being the main character’s fiancĂ© (well, for a little while).


And what I mean by that last statement is this: You know how in basically every romantic comedy, there’s the build up between the romantic leads that just builds and builds until the end of the movie when it reaches a point where there’s a big fight and the guy has to try and better himself and fix everything? Well, that moment happens in this movie, too, except within the first thirty minutes. The rest of the movie is built around the relationships that Reed has with his small town, while he also tries to patch himself together and fix things. The relationships between Reed, Kate, and Amy, on the other hand, were the weakest point of the movie. It almost felt as if the film were not really a love story, and that the romance part of the film was one of the lesser aspects that needed to be brought forward. But I felt this only hurt the film in the end, when it tried to tie up all the loose ends and fix relationships. I just didn’t feel the character connections, and I even felt confused as to certain character reactions.


But confusion ran high toward the end (and a little ways into the beginning) when you’re thrown for a pretty interesting loop. Not only is this not your everyday Rom Com, but it’s not your typical narrative telling. It really did get into some weird Adaptation territory (or a better example, even though I haven’t seen it, but to compare it to things I’ve heard about the plot, is Synecdoche, New York). And similar to Adaptation, Reed Fish is actually the writer of the film (much like Charlie Kaufman was the writer for the aforementioned film, as well as the main character). But this is no Adaptation. This is maybe Adaptation Lite. But it’s still a fun little film.


So whatever your preference is, whether you’d like to see Jay Baruchel really get a chance to carry a film, to see Alexis Bledel outside of Gilmore Girls or those Pants movies (and don’t feel like watching the broody Sin City), to see Schuyler Fisk in something for what feels like the first time since Orange County, or just because you’re a fan of wacky narratives, I would recommend the film. It’s no masterpiece, and it could have used a bit of tweaking in the story department, but it’s a good little film.


Photobucket
I Am McLovin!



Adaptation.


When I first saw this movie a while back, I thought it was a total mind trip. Well, I finally got around to seeing it again so that I can review it. So how exactly do you adapt a book that can’t be adapted? You make it into a movie about your struggles adapting it into a movie and add in all the Hollywood-esque romance and conflict you didn’t want to add in the first place, but this time as a straight-up commentary on the idea of Hollywood screenwriting. Nicolas Cage stars as Charlie Kaufman and (fake) brother Donald. Charlie struggles with adapting the book “The Orchid Thief” for the big screen while Donald flourishes with a common thriller that includes everything Charlie hates about modern cinema. Meanwhile, in flashbacks, we are shown the relationship between the author of “The Orchid Thief,” Susan Orlean (Meryl Streep) and the man she interviewed, John Laroche (Chris Cooper).


Just the mere thought of this movie is enough to make one’s brain hurt. It’s a fictionalized version of Charlie Kaufman’s attempt to adapt a non-fiction book without fictionalizing it. And then it throws in everything that Charlie claims he wants to stay away from. Events that occur in the movie are later established by Charlie as he attempts to get over his writer’s block, making you wonder if anything you’ve seen thus far (or have yet to see) actually happened within the realm of the film or is just the adaptation of the adaptation about the adaptation (I had to think about it just to figure that out). And then there’s the whole mystery about whether or not Donald is real or just a split personality based on a conversation they have about multiple personalities being a Hollywood clichĂ© (which is a perfect thing to add into this movie), so as to juxtapose it next to Donald’s screenplay about a serial killer with multiple personality disorder. But then you see Donald interacting with other people, but then you wonder if those people actually exist, too. This movie messes with your head so much it’s quite literally insane. And I love every bit of it.


The acting is done so well. This has to be Nic Cage’s best movie (or at least one of them). Just to see his range difference between the characters of Charlie and Donald is amazing enough. And I read that Mr. Cage decided to go against acting instincts for this movie and just do the character exactly as the director (Spike Jonze) told him to. And he got an Oscar Nom for it. I think that says something. Meryl Streep and Chris Cooper also do a fine job, especially Chris Cooper, who I really didn’t recognize at all in the film despite his large role. And then, of course, you have the brief supporting roles of Tilda Swinton, Maggie Gyllenhaal, and Ron Livingston, all of which do just fine.


I can’t say much else. This movie is all about the story and the acting, though especially the mind-freak of a story. Funnily enough, both Charlie and Donald (who doesn’t even exist) Kaufman are both credited as writers of the movie, adding to the zaniness. If you haven’t seen this one already, I really do recommend it at least once. It’s worth the ‘trip’, especially if you know who Charlie Kaufman is and are a fan of film.


Photobucket
Royale With Cheese