DavidGHeiser.com » Movies

Frozen River - Movie Review

David Heiser — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 05:20:29 +0000

Frozen River won 24 awards and was nominated for 16 others (including two Oscars). Still, I can pretty confidently say that even you — someone who has taken the time out of their day to read a completely unadvertised movie blog — didn’t see it in theaters. I can say this because Courtney Hunt’s brilliant film had a criminally low domestic gross of $2.5 million.

Frozen River centers on part-time dollar store employee Ray Eddy’s seemingly futile efforts to keep her family’s head above water financially, despite being married to a gambling-addict who continually sabotages her plans. Ray and her two sons live on the New York-Quebec border, where the harsh weather and job market are equally unforgiving. The region is also home to a Mohawk Indian reservation, which happens to be the haven of a thriving human-smuggling operation.

When we meet Ray, her husband has just run off with the family car, as well as the down payment on their brand new double-wide. After finding the car in the possession of a Mohawk woman who claims that she found it next to a bus stop, Ray is coerced into carrying two immigrants over the border. Though she has serious moral qualms with the practice, her initial, involuntary run forces Ray to think seriously about how far she is willing to go to provide for her family.

Frozen River’s strength lies in the unbelievably honest, Oscar-nominated performance of star Melissa Leo (who has an IMDB resume a mile long, but you’ll likely only remember as Benicio del Toro’s wife in 21 Grams), as well as the directorial prowess of rookie filmmaker Courtney Hunt. Leo gives Eddy a balance and depth that is rarely seen on screen today. She conveys a great deal of emotion without ever crossing the line into caricature. Of course, her work on screen is supported by an exceptionally well written screenplay from Hunt, who does a great job of preventing her characters from feeling static. Each character responds to the crises that are presented in a way that feels very true to life.

I was also impressed with the film’s pacing. Low-budget indie movies have a tendency to drag, but Frozen River manages to avoid that through its taut 98-minute running time. Though this certainly isn’t the first film to discuss illegal immigration, it does present a fresh take on the issue — happily, one that doesn’t push an agenda or place the blame on one particular source.

Though its release was rather small, I do believe that Frozen River will appeal to a wide range of movie goers. If you’re in the mood for a well-acted, socially relevant drama, this film is worth every penny of a rental at Blockbuster.

Wendy and Lucy - Movie Review

David Heiser — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 23:39:21 +0000

MetaCritic Score: 80

When Wendy and Lucy showed up on my radar a couple months ago, I was torn over whether or not I should bother renting it. The reviews were solid (80s are few and far between on MetaCritic), but what I had read/heard about the plot lead me to believe that it might be unbearably slow, even by artsy indie movie standards. On the other hand, the film’s star, Michelle Williams, has developed a reputation as one of our generation’s best young actresses over the past few years, so I decided to give it a shot.

Wendy and Lucy is incredibly small in scope. The film captures about a week in the life of Wendy, a seemingly aimless young woman drifting across the country on her way from Indiana to Alaska, with only the vague notion that she wants to spend the summer working in a fish cannery. We meet her as she’s already on her way and leave her before she has much of a chance to get any closer to her destination. We’re given no real exposition or denouement, but the crazy thing is that it really works wonderfully.

The hosts of one of my favorite podcasts, Filmspotting, are constantly criticizing movies for awkwardly forcing back-story details into places where they don’t fit. One recent - and particularly egregious - example of this took place in Taken, Liam Neeson’s recent ode to badassery. In that film, Neeson sits around a poker table with several of his CIA buddies discussing the highlights of his career and his love for his daughter. Filmspotting’s Adam and Matty were spot on when they said that this sort of spoon feeding shouldn’t be necessary. We don’t need to be told Neeson’s character’s full history in order to understand why he’s so intense in pursuit of his daughter’s captors; we should be able to gather that ourselves through his actions, words, and emotions. This is one of the key reasons why I see Wendy and Lucy as such a success; director Kelly Reichardt doesn’t need to waste any time with flashbacks, because Williams’s incredible acting and Jonathan Raymond’s screenplay give us a deep understanding of the character as we progress through the film.

What’s most impressive about Williams’s performance is how much authentic emotion she is able to convey with such a sparse script. She controls her expressions with incredible skill and reflects a deep sadness, teetering on the edge of hopelessness without overplaying it for a moment. Her stoicism is really beautiful in that regard. The fact that she essentially carries the film by herself, as Wendy is the only character of real significance, is another testament to the quality of her work here.

Reichardt also deserves a lot of credit for shooting this film in a way that reflects the tone of the story and the atmosphere of the setting. The locations chosen couldn’t have been better, and the muted color scheme that permeates every scene reveals the general malaise that sits over the whole town in which the story takes place.

In whole, Wendy and Lucy is an excellent film. It’s worth seeing for Michelle Williams’s performance by itself, but I really think that it succeeds on a number of levels. It’s not fast paced, and the story isn’t grandiose, but, as Film Threat’s Don Lewis said in his review, “Unless you’re an antsy movie-goer or have a cold heart, by the end of Wendy and Lucy, you’ll be engrossed, hoping for the best possible outcome.” So, check it out; I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

Let the Right One In - Movie Review

David Heiser — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 21:15:46 +0000

As much as I love horror (even awesomely-bad horror), I’ve never really developed much of an affinity for vampire movies. Most of the time they are too cliched and ridiculous for even my forgiving tastes. Even so, I couldn’t resist checking out the unbelievably well-received Swedish vampire flick, Let the Right One In.

Set in 1982 and based on John Ajvide Lindqvist’s best selling novel, the story centers on Oskar, a small, quiet boy who is recipient of frequent bullying by his classmates. One night, while hanging out in the courtyard of his apartment complex, Oskar encounters a young girl, Eli, with pale skin and a wardrobe that seems woefully inappropriate for Sweden’s frigid winter climate. Though their initial encounters are standoffish (Eli repeatedly questions Oskar about his motives, “If I weren’t a girl, would you like me anyway?”), the two eventually form a bond.

I don’t think I’m spoiling anything when I tell you that we quickly learn that Eli is in fact a vampire. The older man she lives with–who we are initially led to believe is her father–seems to be little more than her glorified errand boy, “hunting” when she is thirsty and disposing of her “leftovers” when she must catch her own food. Although she is obviously a very deadly creature whose very existence depends on the death of others, we almost never feel like Oskar is in danger around her. That dynamic represents a good part of where the beauty of Let the Right One In comes from, this bizarre, yet touching friendship that forms between Oskar and Eli, who both are unable to make any other significant connections in their lives.

To classify Let The Right One In as just another horror movie really doesn’t do it justice. There are elements of horror (and Tomas Alfredson does a nice job using the bleak, muted Scandinavian setting to create suspense), but the main questions of the work don’t center on who will survive and who won’t–as in most horror films. Instead, we wonder about the possible outcomes of this relationship between a young boy and a vampire who has looked 12-years old for God knows how long. This ties in to one of my favorite things about Alfredson’s work here, which is that he leaves the ending open to interpretation. In fact, in the “Behind the Scenes” feature on the DVD, he discusses how the film’s ending can be justifiably seen as either happy or quite depressing.

Outside of Alfredson, I think both stars of the film deserve a great deal of credit. Kåre Hedebrant (don’t ask me to pronounce that) shows great emotional depth as Oskar, a pretty typical 12-year old boy thrown into a bizarre situation. His counterpart, Lina Leandersson, is similarly excellent as Eli, managing to simultaneously convey both the natural innocence associated with her character’s appearance and a subtle menace which hides just below the surface.

Overall, Let the Right One In is a outstandingly crafted film that will be enjoyed by most audiences. If you’re squeamish and concerned about gore, be aware that there are a few somewhat graphic scenes, but nothing too bad. If you’re willing to turn your head away for a few seconds every once in a while, you should still really enjoy this film. One final recommendation: Before you start watching the movie, make sure you adjust the settings to Swedish audio with English subtitles. My girlfriend and I just selected “Play movie” and were subjected to some unsurprisingly terrible English dubbing.

My Winnipeg - Movie Review

David Heiser — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:55:00 +0000

I usually like quirky movies. Most of the time, when a film is a little too out there for my friends, I just get more excited to see it. That being said, there is still a point where my attention can be lost. Unfortunately, Guy Maddin’s My Winnipeg was one of those films that lost me.

Though I had never actually seen any of Maddin’s other work (he’s much more popular in Canada than the U.S.), I had gathered that he had a unique style and was some what of an acquired taste. True to the rumors, My Winnipeg was unlike anything I had ever seen.

The film is presented entirely in low-lit black and white. The scenes are divided with shots of falling snow, and they all visually reflect the dream motif that permeates My Winnipeg’s story.

Speaking of the story, Maddin categorizes his film as a “docu-fantasia.” The general premise is that Maddin wants to finally escape Winnipeg’s air-tight grip on its residents, but in order to do that he must first take a deeper look at his past, reimagining how things might have gone differently. The film includes scenes covering everything from the time Maddin’s sister hit a deer (and may have had inappropriate “relations” with a boy) to the bizarre “man pageants” that used to be presided over by the mayor.

Maddin narrates My Winnipeg in a semi-poetic fashion. Some scenes are almost completely lyrical, while others drift more toward traditional documentary narration.

Overall, while the film is definitely visually interesting and creative, I just didn’t find it to be entertaining. Though I don’t need a movie to be action packed, I do need to be engaged in the story in order to give it a positive recommendation. With that said, I can’t recommend My Winnipeg to most viewers. Unless you’re a fan of Maddin’s other work, or are seriously interested in bizarre arthouse cinema, I’d probably leave this one on the shelf.

Religulous - Movie Review

David Heiser — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 05:15:00 +0000

Yes, I’m a registered Democrat, but that doesn’t mean that I’m automatically going to blindly praise whatever video propaganda is released by the world’s left-leaning documentarians. In fact, I rented Religulous, the controversial film from controversial liberal talking head Bill Maher, fully expecting to slam it for being mean spirited and one sided.

So, were my preconceptions confirmed? Yes and no. Like I expected, Maher made sure that he only interviewed people who fall into three categories: 1) Those that disagree with him, but are so ridiculous that they cannot be taken seriously, 2) Those that agree with him and he can use to prove a point, and 3) Those who fit snugly into commonly held stereotypes and are there for us to ridicule. Also as expected, Maher gets in his fair share of caustic remarks. These are usually directed at foreign people who might not fully grasp that they are being insulted or at those who are too stupid/uninformed to stand up for themselves. Still, I can’t bring myself to dismiss Maher’s film completely, because it really has some very funny moments.

The key to enjoying this film is not looking at it as a serious investigation into modern religion. You have to go into it expecting about the same level of journalistic integrity as you would from Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. Once you are able to view the film in this way, it becomes very difficult not to chuckle during scenes like those in which Bill interviews a Puerto Rican guy from Miami who claims to be the second coming of Christ, or a former member of a ’70s R&B group-turned reverend whose blatant lack of knowledge of the Bible is comical.

However, while there is certainly some gold to be found here, the bulk of the film is really just Maher’s effort to make believers of any religion out to be morons. Even as someone who isn’t religious, I found this to be offensive. Sure, everyone needs to be able to take a joke once in a while, but that doesn’t mean that it’s acceptable to imply that everyone who believes in a particular religion necessarily endorses everything that has ever been in the name of that faith. That is my real issue with the film.

Would I recommend it? I’d only suggest Religulous to people who I know to share Maher’s skeptical view of religion, those that aren’t likely to be offended by his stereotyping and exaggerations. That being said, if you fit that bill, then by all means go check it out; you’re guaranteed to get a few laughs.

(DH’s FYI: The movie’s title is pronounced re-lij-yu-lus, not re-lig-yu-lus. I got this wrong for about two weeks before someone corrected me.)

Happy Belated Birthday to the Blog!

David Heiser — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:12:00 +0000

All,

I just want to take the opportunity to thank everyone for their continued readership. It’s been just over a year since I started this site, and it has been more successful than I ever could have hoped.

What I might be most proud of is the fact that I’ve been able to stick with it. Though there have been some slow periods, I’ve still churned out just over 100 posts in that time. By tomorrow we should also reach 17,000 visitors, which I feel is a great start.

In the next year, I’d like to increase subscriptions, comments, and, hopefully, the amount of reviews I write per month. If you have any suggestions or recommendations, please let me know. I’m always open to constructive criticism.

Again, thanks for supporting me here at DavidGHeiser.com. I’m looking forward to another great year.

- DH

Funny Games - Movie Review

David Heiser — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 03:30:00 +0000

MetaCritic Score: 41

On MetaCritic, Funny Games received seven ratings of 80 or higher (which is really good), and six ratings of 20 or lower (really bad). It’s very rare to see critics as polarized as they were about German writer/director Michael Haneke’s remake of his own 1998 film by the same name. Now, what kind of movie could split critics into such distinctly different camps? How about an incredibly well crafted and suspenseful horror film with brutal violence and an almost unbearably pessimistic message about our society?

Funny Games centers on a young family heading to their vacation home for a quiet week away. Shortly after they arrive a young man (Brady Corbet) shows up at their door claiming that he was sent by the neighbors to borrow a few eggs. What starts out as merely an awkward interaction quickly becomes something much more sinister when the young man’s companion (Michael Pitt) arrives. The pair soon informs the family that they will be participating in a bet, and that their participation isn’t up for debate. The terms of the bet are simple; the young men bet that the family will be dead by 9 a.m. the next day. The family, of course, must bet that they will be alive.

What’s most disturbing about the mayhem that follows isn’t gore (there really isn’t much of that at all). No, what will stick with you after watching this film is the cold calmness with which the two assailants carry out the night’s festivities. They very rarely seem to ever lose their airtight grip on the situation. We’re never given a real reason for why they’re doing this, and that’s partly why Funny Games is so difficult for some people to stomach.

Outside of the moral criticisms Haneke is trying to make of our society, this film is a whole lot like Bryan Bertino’s 2008 film, The Strangers. What I mean is that both films primarily serve as an exercise in creating and sustaining suspense. In both cases, it won’t take long before you’ll have a pretty clear picture of the plot’s final outcome, but that doesn’t make them any less effective. The tone of both works lets you know that nothing positive could come out of these situations and it is simply something the viewer must accept. Thankfully, another similarity is that both films are tremendously successful at creating that suspense and sense of impending dread that they set out to. In Funny Games, Haneke accomplishes this by using a lot of long, sustained shots. You often feel certain something is about to happen, but Haneke doesn’t always follow through on those expectations, which will just leave you feeling even more antsy.

While the direction is fabulous, Funny Games biggest strengths are the performances delivered by almost every member of the cast. I can’t say enough about how perfect the choices of Pitt and Corbet were. Pitt especially is fantastic. He is so eerily self-assured that everything he does on screen is frightening. When he occasionally breaks the fourth wall and addresses the audience directly it is truly chilling. On the other team, Tim Roth (the husband) and Naomi Watts (his wife) are both excellent as well.

While I really enjoyed Funny Games, it certainly isn’t for everyone. It is unflinchingly dark and depressing throughout. Haneke offers a criticism of American audiences’ thirst for violence in a way that may be difficult for some viewers to take. On the other hand, I found the way he goes about delivering his criticism to be intriguing, and the story kept me on the edge of my seat from start to finish. If you like horror movies or suspense driven thrillers, then you NEED to see this film. It’s definitely one of 2008’s best in the genre.

Milk - Brief Movie Comments

David Heiser — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:54:00 +0000

MetaCritic Score: 84

Most of you don’t know me personally, but here’s a little secret: I’m not a morning person. The entire time I’ve been in college, I’ve made it a rule to not have any classes before 11 a.m. My plan worked wonderfully for my first three-and-a-half years in school, but this semester it’s finally caught up with me. The one class I need to finish my sociology major is only offered at 8 a.m. Needless to say, it hasn’t been an easy adjustment, seeing as how I’m almost always awake until 3 or 4 a.m. Normally a lack of sleep just leads to afternoon naps, but unfortunately this time it affected my ability to adequately review this film. I don’t think I really missed anything, but I was fighting heavy eyelids for almost the entire second half of the movie.

Anyhow, let’s get on with my impressions of the film. First of all, Milk represents another directorial home run for one of our generation’s best, Gus Van Sant. The pacing is excellent, and Van Sant does a wonderful job blending stock footage with the rest of the film.

Though the subject matter alone makes his role Oscar bait, Penn lives up to the hype and delivers a characteristically stellar performance as the man himself, Harvey Milk. Though I wasn’t particularly impressed by James Franco, Josh Brolin and Emile Hirsch picked up the slack with brilliant showings.

All that being said, I don’t think I enjoyed the movie quite as much as I expected. Perhaps it’s just because the movie has been so hyped, but I was really expecting to be blown away. Milk is really well written and directed, but the entertainment factor just wasn’t as high as I had hoped.

Still, if you have an opportunity, Milk is definitely worth seeing. If you’re in Charleston, you better hurry; this is the last week Milk will be showing at the Terrace.

Towelhead, Wanted, and Snow Angels - Mini Movie Reviews

David Heiser — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:37:00 +0000

I’ve got to stop letting myself get behind on reviews. Anyhow, here are three brief reviews of movies I’ve watched recently.

Towelhead

I don’t remember hearing about this film when it was in theaters, but I recently saw a preview for it on another DVD and was intrigued. Towelhead is the story of Jasira, a 13-year old Lebanese-American girl who is just beginning to discover her sexuality. Jasira’s combination of a physical appearance beyond her years and an age-appropriate level of naivety make her a frequent target for the sexual advances of men of all ages. Her father’s judgmental, disciplinary nature and mother’s absence leave her without anyone to talk to and, as a consequence, without the guidance or knowledge necessary to safely navigate the situations she will face. Summer Bishil (who is actually 19) is fantastic job as Jasira, and Aaron Eckhart, who I have trouble picturing as anything other than a clean-cut good guy, is surprisingly effective as the pedophile neighbor. Perhaps a bit more subtlety could have helped, because sometimes writer Alan Ball (American Beauty, Six Feet Under) can be a heavy handed with his themes, but overall Towelhead is still worth renting.

Wanted

I had high hopes for Wanted. The previews looked awesome, leading me to believe that it would be like a more substantive version of 2007’s Shoot Em Up. Unfortunately, Wanted’s absurdity was equal to just about anything in recent memory. The plot is weak, the dialogue is campy, and it’s not a stretch to say that this film may have featured the worst performances I have ever seen from Morgan Freeman and James McAvoy (both of whom I really like). On the positive side, the special effects are pretty cool; although, the bullet-bending trick does get a bit repetitive after a while. If you’re into mindless action and special effects, then by all means give Wanted a shot. Just don’t rent it hoping for an Oscar caliber story. Also, this movie loses extra points for making Freeman drop the F-bomb twice. Freeman seems way too classy and intelligent to ever do that.

Snow Angels

I’ve never been a fan of Sam Rockwell, and I usually don’t like Kate Beckinsale much either. Snow Angels has, at least temporarily, changed my opinion of both actors. Focusing on the lives of a woman, her estranged alcoholic husband, and a high school student she used to babysit, the film examines how, especially in a small town, the lives of individuals can be inextricably intertwined. What makes Snow Angels so great is the authenticity of the characters. Even in the film’s most extreme moments each character’s actions remain believable. The script is excellent and the performances are all exceptional. Be sure to move this one near the top of your “must-see” list.

Transsiberian - Movie Review

David Heiser — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 04:06:00 +0000

MetaCritic Score: 72

I think Ben Kingsley deserves some sort of an award. Yea, I know, he already has an Oscar, but this is different. According to my research, Kingsley has now played a character of every ethnicity in the world except for African-American and Japanese.

Okay, I made that up, but seriously, his range is really impressive.

Transsiberian is the latest film from writer/director Brad Anderson, whose previous work includes the eerie Christian Bale film, The Machinist, and a variety of TV shows, most notably two episodes of the greatest series of all time (The Wire).

The story follows a young American couple as they take the Transsiberian Express from Beijing to Moscow, an eight day voyage through one of the world’s harshest landscapes. Roy (Woody Harrelson) is a caring but naive train enthusiast and his wife, Jessie (Emily Mortimer), is a reformed bad girl working hard to keep her life in order.

While on the train they meet another young couple. Abby (Kate Mara) is also an American; she’s a 20-year-old with sort of an Avril Lavigne look going on who hit the road early to escape a bad home life. Her boyfriend Carlos (Eduardo Noriega) is a well-traveled Spaniard with a good 15 years on his girlfriend. Being the typical passionate Spaniard that he is, Carlos immediately makes his interest in Jessie almost blatantly obvious through a series of awkward, prolonged stares. Still, Abby and Roy somehow manage to not notice.

Tension begins to build as it becomes clear that something is a little off with Carlos. That tension comes to the first of several crescendos when Jessie realizes Roy didn’t make it back to the train after going for a walk with Carlos at the previous stop. Panicked, Jessie decides to get off at the next town to try and track down Roy. Abby and Carlos are concerned for her safety, so they decide to wait with her. Roy eventually reappears, but by this point Anderson has thoroughly established a grip on his audience, one which he refuses to relinquish for the rest of the film. From this point forward, a heavy feeling of dread hangs over the characters. The audience knows that the other shoe is going to drop, but Anderson never lets you become too confident of when that will be.

When Jessie and Roy reboard the train (without Abby and Carlos, which is all I will say), Roy introduces Jessie to a new acquaintance he met while trying to meet back up with her. Grinko (Kingsley) is an affable and outgoing Russian narcotics detective. While their initial interactions are friendly, Grinko becomes suspicious when Jessie fails to sufficiently answer some basic questions about her interactions with Carlos and Abby. From there, a web of poorly told lies digs Jessie–and Roy by association–into a hole from which they may not be able to escape.

From a directorial standpoint, Transsiberian is a success on nearly every level. Anderson uses setting and location masterfully. Bleak, wide open Siberian landscapes are contrasted with the closed, almost claustrophobic feel of the train, each lending its unique characteristics to help build the suspense. The film’s pacing is also spot on. Anderson makes sure that there is just enough time between each twist that the audience isn’t ever quite able to fully relax.

I’ve never been Woody Harrelson’s biggest fan, but with his work in this film and No Country for Old Men he’s gained my respect. His portrayal of the Roy’s naiveity felt authentic, when it would have been easy for his character to become a static exemplification of that trait. Mortimer does a fantastic job with Jessie, giving her depth throughout the film, even before we learn her past. It’s quite an accomplishment for an actress whose characters are usually more of the “delicate flower” variety. Kingsley, as expected, was also excellent, delivering the goods as a stone cold Russian with the same brilliance as he has as an Iranian and Indian.

Overall, Transsiberian is an excellent film that I wish would have received more national recognition. I would recommend pushing this film up near the top of your “must-see” list. Check it out next time you have an opportunity.