2000-2009 TIME CAPSULE PART THREE: The Most Honorable Of Honorable Mentions conclusion

At long last, here is the final set of honorable mentions...and then, it's onto the TOP 25 OF 2000-2009

THE FILMS OF SOFIA COPPOLA

Granted, during this decade she has only had two films. Yet, I am here to proclaim that Ms. Coppola is the real deal with the cinematic eye of a visionary and, as with the very best filmmakers, she is slowly building her own film language. I think the film world has yet to truly take her seriously, despite her enormous success, Oscar nominations and Oscar screenplay win for her sublime "Lost In Translation." I am wondering if there are still perceptions that she is coasting on her Father's vast film legacy. Ms. Coppola quietly arrived as a film director with her dreamy and effective 1999 adaptation of "The Virgin Suicides." That was followed by her highly acclaimed "Lost In Translation" (2003), a movie that I will reveal has ended up on my list of the Top 25 of the decade--so, I'll talk more about that film later. But, I think it was her visually and thematically stunning "Marie Antoinette" (2006) where her commitment, talent and vision fully arrived and she announced herself as a creative force to be reckoned with. That film, with its minimalist dialogue, modern rock soundtrack, and sumptuous visuals, in which every single shot looked like a perfectly composed photograph, all told a story that was about the hermetically sealed and empty coccon of celebrity and the exploitation of youth. That film had a lot on its mind if people were willing to listen and I am happy to read that despite being ignored by the bos office and many critics, she has pressed onwards and finished her fourth film, to be released in 2010. I hope she stays true to her artisitic vision as she continues to make films, and the success she has already seen with "Translation" will hopefully and deservedly return to her.

THE "HARRY POTTER" SERIES

If I were to make a listing of my favorite books between the years of 2000-2009, J.K. Rowling's seven volume masterpiece of the boy wizard Harry Potter would rank near the top of such a list. Rowling's writing took me completely by surprise because as much I enjoyed her lively Roald Dahl inspired tale of the first novel, I was enraptured at the depth that revealed itself over the couse of the subsequent six novels. I loved the books so much that I actually did not want any of them to be transformed into movies. Her writing is so vivid, so visual that I really didn't know what a movie could add to the experience. But, mostly, I was afraid that Hollywood would taint them source material and dumb it down for mass consumption. Then, with a simultaneous blend of curiosity and begrudgment, I went to see "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" (2001) on this opening day (mostly fueled by the involvement of Director Chris Columbus and Roger Ebert's four-star rating) and by the conclusion, I muttered to myself, "Sensational!! That's exactly how I pictured it!"

The entire film series has followed suit with presentations that belie Hollywood's usual cynical and callous take on big-budget, mass audience productions. The film series has shown that when Hollywood wants to produce something of high quality, it will and with the six films made so far, all directed by Columbus, Alfonso Cuaron, Mike Newell and David Yates on board for the final four films, they have increasingly grown into a collection that I hope will be revisited for many, many years to come. They have earned their success through their casting, their locations, set designs, special effects and their obvious love for the beautiful source material--which I hope fans that have not read the series will flock to. That said, the films have earned their status on their own right as well, first functioning as an excellent companion series to the novels and slowly becoming a highly rewarding film series on its own.

THE FILMS OF WES ANDERSON

This man immediately became one for me to seek out after I saw "Rushmore" (1998), his wry and melancholy ode to adolescence and unrequited love. Yet, over this past decade, Writer/Director Wes Anderson has exceeded my expectations with a collection of films all detailing the lives and times of fractured families, consistently headed by patriarchal dreamers and scoundrels. Within "The Royal Tenenbaums" (2001), "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou" (2004), "The Darjeeling Limited" (2007), and his first foray into animation with "Fantastic Mr. Fox" (2009), Anderson gives us highly artificial worlds and landscapes filled with laconically delivered ironic humor that may be oft-putting to some viewers. But, underneath the artifice is a deeply thoughtful and emotional world, filled with hard truths and layered sadness about lost loves, unfullfilled dreams, death and mourning. One of my favorite scenes in any Anderson movie occurs during a flashback sequence in "The Darjeeling Limited." Brothers Owen Wilson, Adrian Brody and Jason Schwartzman, all heading to their Father's funeral, make a disasterous detour to obtain their deceased Father's sports car from an auto shop. The comedy Anderson mines from the pain of loss makes for a bitterweetness of the highest quality and it is that combination, which exists in all of his wonderful films, that makes them stick firmly as experiences to treasure.

"THE SQUID AND THE WHALE" (2006) Written and Directed by Noah Baumbach

Wes Anderson's occassional writing partner is a filmmaker in his own right. He arrived with a deeply perceptive tale of post-college ennui entitled "Kicking And Screaming" (1995) and followed up wth an underseen yet lovely and literate romantic comedy, "Mr. Jealousy" (1997) starring Eric Stoltz. But, this film is his best to date.

"The Squid and the Whale," an autobiographical tale about the effects of a divorce on two boys in early 1980s New York, was the best film about divorce that I have seen. Baumbach not only shows how children can easily be the least important factor when parents split apart, but how those children can just as easily be used as weapons and collateral damage, when feelings of lost love between adults grows rancorous and raw. It just burrowed under my skin and even angered me to view these affuent, self-absorbed parents battle each other and become so unaware of the warning signs both of their sons are displaying to them. Obviously Baumbach has turned out well and by accounts on the DVD commentary track, his brother has as well. Even so, the pain of divorce can be handled in a myriad of ways but the clueless ways the parents (played by a never better Jeff Daniels and the always reliable Laura Linney) handled their situation, by making their children an afterthought, dumbfounded me and I wondered why these two people even had children at all.

SELECTED FILMS FROM JUDD APATOW

I say "selected" because the man produces so many films that there is just no way to incude them all as they all drift in levels of quality. I want to primarilly focus on his three Writing/Directing efforts, "The 40-Year-Old Virgin" (2005), "Knocked Up" (2007) and "Funny People" (2009) as well as his productions of 2007's "Superbad" (Co-Written by Seth Rogen and Directed by Greg Mottolla) and 2008's "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" (Written by Jason Segal and Directed by Nicholas Stoller).

All of those films, while being some of the highest comedic offerings the decade had to offer, Apatow and his band of campatriots have also reconfigured the vulgar comedy genre by delving smartly and sometimes uncomfortably, into the secret emotional world of men, how they relate to each other as well as themselves, the women they love and fear, their sexual complications and inadequacies and finally, their overall places in the world. They are also some of the very best romantic comedies around as they all have true romance in them and true sexual experiences in them, thus grounding all of the material in a refreshing honesty, no matter how raucous situations become. One of his films has reached my Top 25 as well...stay tuned...

OUR MEXICAN FILMMAKING TRIUMVIRATE:
THE FILMS OF ALFONSO CUARON, GUILLERMO DEL TORO & ALEJANDRO GONZALEZ INARRITU

I have grouped the works of these three immensely talented filmmakers together as they all happen to be the closest of friends in real life. The three have transformed cinema greatly over this past decade in a wide variety of films too wonderful to ignore...and one of them has reached the Top 25 listing as well. I must admit that I have not seen all of their films, but here are the ones I hope you revisit or seek out if you have not seen them already.

Alfonso Cuaron burst into the decade with the stunning "Y Tu Mama Tambien" (2001) which was followed by "Harry Potter and the Prisoner Of Azkaban" (2004), a charming segment in the gorgeous anthology "Paris, Je T'Aime" (2006) and the astonishing apocalyptic "Children Of Men" (2006). I think that of the three directors, Cuaron's films are the ones I have responded to the most. I think what really captures me most is his cinematography and how he expresses so very much visually. He adds a certain level of grit to every film he makes, even one that is as glowing as his entry in the "Harry Potter" series...it always suggests the unrest that lurks whether it is a muderous wizard on the loose, or the conclusion of adolesence, or the feeling the the Earth will swallow us whole through our own worst devices.

Guillermo del Toro has fascinated himself primarily within the horror and comic book genres with his two "Hellboy" motion pictures but it was the devastating "Pan's Labyrinth" (2007) that blew me away. While I am not certain if that is a film I would revisit due to how emotionally wrenching it is, it is an awesome statement of how imagination has the power and capacity to heal, transform and soothe even in the face of the most unthinkable of real-world horrors.

For some reason, I still have not had the opportuity to view "Amorros Perros" (2000) but based upon the brilliance of the chronologically and globally jumbled narratives of "21 Grams" (2003) and "Babel" (2006), the subsequent entries into Inarritu's self-proclaimed trilogy, I feel that I need to get to my video store immediately to check it out. With the other two aforementioned films, he has created heartbreaking tapestries about the human condition itself, by depicting all of the barriers and circumstances that divide us and how we all relate to each other to obtain a sense of understanding. Even with Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett's strong performances, what struck me the deepest in "Babel" was the story centered around an angry, deaf, sexually explicit Japanese teenage girl coupled with the music from Ryuchi Sakamoto. Her confusion and sadness is a feeling that proved to be unshakable and fully representative of the film as a whole.

"WHEN THE LEVEES BROKE: A REQUIEM IN FOUR ACTS" (2006) Directed by Spike Lee

I would say this is maybe the best documentary I saw over the decade and it was absolutely compulsive viewing. Spike Lee has been one of my favorite directors for almost 25 years now and his track record of filmmaking excellence is of almost uncomparably high quality. While not officially a theatrical release, this HBO film is a transcendent exploration of how America failed on absolutely every single account from science, technology, race, class, and governmental response to the citizens that elected them in the first place. By turns exhaustive amd infuriating, this film goes beyond the question of how a modern American tragedy like Hurricane Katrina could have happened but rather, a passionate, anguished cry of "Why?"

THE MATRIX TRILOGY/THE STAR WARS PREQUEL TRILOGY

A slight cheat as both trilogies began in 1999 and I am certain that the mention of George Lucas' epic would be a controversial pick. But first...I must give acclaim to the Wachowshi brothers, who emerged, seemingly from nowhere, with their forward thinking epic. For many people, I realize that the first film is the one that is most celebrated. But, I have to give it to the Wachowski's for adhering to their vision and completing their philosophical, technological, apocalyptic thirll ride. For me, this trilogy could be split into three definitive statements of "Birth," "Life," and "Death" as they all trace the life and times of Neo (Keanu Reeves) and his fight to free humanity from the dependence of the machines which have destroyed the world and transformed humans into batteries. While confounding at first, I was more than ready for the release of "The Matrix Reloaded" and "The Matrix Revolutions" (both from 2003) and they did not disappoint. I appreciated the Wachowski's willingness to not simply deliver the same film two more times. They broadened their story and provided them with even more breathtaking visuals to propel the increasingly dense storyline. The final war sequence is exhausting and I have to say that the freeway chase in the second film is one of the most viscerally thrilling pieces of film I saw this decade.

But now, onto "Star Wars." Yes, it is a controversial pick for a Time Capsule as it has become more than fashionable for people of my generation to rip Lucas' space opera apart and decry that he has somehow raped our collective childhoods. I harbor no such feelings as I legitamitly loved all three films as they detailed the sad saga of how Anakin Skywalker (an unjustly maligned Hayden Christensen) fell to the dark side of The Force to become Darth Vader. To all of the criticisms that George Lucas has indeed raped our collective childhoods through juvenile stories filtered through wooden acting and terribly stilted dialogue, I say the following:

All six of the "Star Wars" films are fairy tales, myths and tributes to the science fiction serials of the 1930's such as "Flash Gordon" and "Buck Rogers," and they are intentionally designed to emulate those films by utilizing stilted dialogue and wooden acting. It is an artistic choice Lucas has made to bring forth his particular vision. The films also have always been intended to be pitched at about an 8-12 year old level. That's the audience, they have never been meant to grow with us and they have never been adult stories.

For me, the prequels, just like the originals, completely satisfied the 10 year old that exists inside of me. I am completely in love with that place a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away and having that chance to revisit and see more of George Lucas' complete vision was enthralling to me. I loved feeling the speed of podracing as well as seeing Jedi Knights battling in their prime at the start of the fabled Clone Wars. The sound of an lightsaber igniting for combat, the eerie howl of the Tie Fighters, making that jump to light speed are all moments that made me first realize what power the cinema holds and George Lucas delivered on all counts for me.

Mostly, I defend George Lucas because of the simple fact that he told his story his way and that he did not listen to the desires of the fan base. Lucas is the one who has to live with this universe of his making and he has every right to do whatever he wishes with it, even if he alienates his biggest fans to do so. If that is not the definition of an independent artist, then I just do not know what is.

THE FILMS OF STEVEN SPIELBERG

My favorite filmmaker of all time is a natural born storyteller of the highest quality and this past decade, he has continued to challenge audiences and most importantly himself, to a amazingly prolific deegree. This is the man who could create the bleak futuristic visions of "A.I.: Artificial Intelligence" (2001) and "Minority Report" (2002) and then alternate to the smaller scaled character studies "Catch Me If You Can" (2002) and "The Terminal" (2004). He could re-make "War Of The Worlds" (2005) and take what could have been a simply great "popcorn movie" and transform it into a hellish allegory of our post 9/11 society; a film which was then followed up, in the same year, by the brutal political treatise of "Munich" (2005). And hey, we even got a new Indiana Jones adventure to boot.

His joy behind the camera is palpable, involving, inviting, celebratory and awesomely inspiring in the best possbile ways. And I have to say the one of those films has found a place near the very tip-top of my Top 25.

But...you know, this has gone on long enough...as I am certain you would agree.

So, the next posting in this series will be the first part of my personal TOP 25 OF 2000-2009!

ENGLISH ROSE: a review of "An Education"

This review was originally written November 22, 2009

“AN EDUCATION” Directed by Lone Scherfig Screenplay by Nick Hornby based upon a memoir by Lynn Barber
***1/2 (three and a half stars)

More often than not, my initial reactions to films tend to be instantaneous upon their conclusions. Positively, negatively or somewhere in the middle, I just know how a particular story reached and affected me. However, I have to admit there is a certain charming pull of the film that doesn’t fully reveal itself to me, until either in its final moments or even after I have left the theatre and have begun to ruminate over what I had seen. The treasures that danced upon the screen that I didn’t quite see as they occurred. The themes that eluded me on introduction. “An Education,” directed by Lone Scherfig is one of those films. Quietly unassuming as I watched but deeply complex, emotionally and thematically once I begun making my trek homewards. And as I write, and as the film continues to resonate, I am realizing more and more how much of a gift this film actually is.

The setting is 1961 on a sleepy street in suburban London. We meet Jenny (Casey Mulligan), a 16-year-old student with a chance to win a scholarship to Oxford. Yet, Jenny is also nursing big dreams of escaping her humdrum life for perceived brighter pastures of falling into the greatest works of literature and art, as well as the sophisticated lifestyle that goes along with French films, smoking cigarettes in bars and jaunts to Paris—the French language being something she lapses into from time to time. On a rainy day, Jenny gains her deepest wishes through a chance meeting with David (Peter Sarsgaard), a handsome middle-aged man with a flashy car, well-trimmed expensive suits and an income of discreet means. He gives Jenny a ride home and by the ride’s end, he has invited her to hear a concerto of Ravel’s music in the heart of London. One date leads to more at jazz clubs, pricey art auctions, an afternoon at the races and introductions to David’s mature social set. Their romance deepens and even culminates in a dreamy getaway to Paris—a wish fulfillment for the wide-eyed girl who yearns for a grand life beyond the simple, the everyday, the seemingly pointless grind and toil of schooling and the people who educate her.

By now, you may be wondering where her parents stand in all of this. Jenny’s parents are loving, while her Father (beautifully portrayed by Alfred Molina) is more on the thrifty, overly cautious and demonstrative side. While also having high hopes for Jenny’s successful transition to Oxford, they too are easily swayed and seduced by David’s charms and perceived wealth and keys to a larger and more experienced and cultivated world. As the story progresses, Jenny’s grades begin to slide, her actions grow more rebellious to the dismay of her English teacher and prim Headmistress (played respectively by Olivia Williams and Emma Thompson), truths are unearthed and consequences must be faced.

While nothing in the film is overly dramatic or revelatory, the film gracefully shows a young woman on the cusp of transformation. In many ways, this film reminded me very much of Paul Brickman’s “Risky Business,” a film that has not only stood the test of time but has broadened with its perceptive nature. That film exuded qualities and questions of how there are no shortcuts in a growing life of maturity and as temptations bombard you, how much of your soul are you willing to compromise to attain all you desire. By the conclusion of “Risky Business,” Joel Goodson (Tom Cruise) indeed realizes his dreams of attending Princeton but at what cost? The film asks of us and of Joel, who is the real prostitute, Lana the hooker (Rebecca De Mornay) or Joel himself?

“An Education” is equally perceptive regarding Jenny, as she often appears to be older than she is, through her carriage, insightfulness and ease with sliding into a foreign world. Yet, as the story takes dramatic turns, her desires of a mature life are called into question. If you are mature enough for the jazz clubs, the expensive art auctions and Parisian jaunts, then are you mature enough to face the consequences for the life altering choices you have made?

There is also the nature of the film’s romance as it is filled with refined thematic elements. You can easily see the draw the two have for each other, despite the inappropriateness. For Jenny, a life with David fulfills her every desire yet she questions whether that life will come with sacrifices she can endure. For David, Jenny is a mold to be shaped. He can have a certain amount of control through the experience Jenny does not yet possess. He can always be in the role of teacher, guide, and expert, leading her from one excursion to the next and he also has the power to take it all away at a moment’s notice. Is David honestly attracted to Jenny? Is Jenny complicit in David’s deceptions as well as the ones to herself? It is a delicate balance held together firmly through the two leading performances.

Peter Sarsgaard has always been a face I have looked forward to seeing ever since I first noticed him in the film “Shattered Glass” where he played a news magazine editor on the trail of discovering the truth about Hayden Christensen’s fraudulent star writer. (I strongly recommend you seek it out if you haven’t seen that film.) With this film, he elicits one of his finest performances with a character who is by turns inviting, creepy, pathetic, worldly, needy and shadowy. You somehow never want to stone the screen or scream to this girl to run as far as she is able away from him. He gives a performance full of intrigue and you can understand how Jenny and her parents are drawn to him.

Much has been written about Casey Mulligan’s performance as Jenny, and I would have to agree. She does indeed at times evoke the image of Audrey Hepburn during her iconic role in “Breakfast At Tiffany’s,” but it is no imitation. It is not a showy performance either. It is a thoughtfully quiet performance that feels supremely effortless, natural and lived in and by the film’s conclusion, I was won over by her exquisiteness.

Special mention must be given to Alfred Molina who gives a performance of shared humor and sadness. He reminded me of Paul Dooley’s classic Father from Peter Yates’ “Breaking Away,” with his gruff demands for Jenny’s school excellence and speeches concerning the scarcity of the family income (one speech in particular about the variety of “money trees” behind the family home is priceless). He too shows unexpected sides, as he also must confront his own wishes and fears of what a life outside of Twickenham may entail.

The empathetic screenplay by Nick Hornby (one of my favorite authors), is as detailed, astute and intuitive as his books. Hornby has consistently found ways to explore the theme of how art speaks to us, defines us and assists us in understanding ourselves and he does so again with this adaptation. Jenny finds new ways to try to connect with those outside of her standard social structure through her deep love of art, music, literature and the like yet Hornby probes deeper, allowing us to explore her choices and consequences just as the character does. Lone Scherfig’s direction remains as beautifully attentive to period details as it is to the characters and their motivations. The style is not flashy. It remains focused, in control and clean, yet emotionally messy to an appropriate degree.

Last week, I reviewed the film “Pirate Radio,” and while I did have some affection towards it, it was not an entirely successful affair. “An Education” could possibly be a companion piece to that film as it depicts a country at a specific point in time, in this case a time when The Beatles and The Rolling Stones had not yet been unleashed upon the public. Jenny’s restless spirit not only echoes the restless spirits of teenagers everywhere but possibly of an equally restless country, whether it knew it or not.

What an amazing film “Pirate Radio” could have been if Scherfig and Hornby were at the helm or in collaboration with that film’s director, Richard Curtis. Thankfully, we do have “An Education,” and through their wit and empathy, I think it is a film that will slowly works its way into your heart just as it did mine.

THE BOAT THAT ROCKED: a review of "Pirate Radio"

This was originally written November 15, 2009

“PIRATE RADIO” Written and Directed by Richard Curtis
*** (three stars)

Between the years of 1987-1991, I fulfilled a childhood fantasy by becoming a DJ on WLHA-FM, the then student radio station on the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus. The station was housed in the deep, dark bowels of the JF Friedrick Center, a now-defunct location which was primarily utilized as short-term housing for University Extension conference visitors. The station’s machinery was completely and utterly archaic. Essential knobs had gone missing as were a few ceiling tiles. The station contained an ever-present musty smell. Lighting was weak at best. We broadcasted with a booming watt and a half of power in MONO no less! And as many of you already know, I LOVED every single moment of it and I still miss it to this day. My very first radio show was presented on Friday mid-mornings and I was actually late to my debut transmission, as I didn’t realize we were broadcasting for the semester yet. I spent the remainder of my college years in a 10 p.m. - 1 a.m. time slot on Saturday nights—a time guaranteed for me to have an ocean’s worth of listeners. And again, I LOVED every minute of it. I loved being able to have absolute and complete creative control over which songs I could play, with the only stipulation being that I choose any three songs from the station’s play list of current albums (which were in fairly consistent rotation) an hour. Once I became the station’s Music Director in my Junior Year and finally Station Manager for my Senior Year, I had the opportunity to speak with record label representatives, distribute pertinent airplay information to the College Music Journal and of course, obtain ALL of the new albums. I guess what I loved most was that I had the pleasure of meeting a collective of students who otherwise may not have met each other if it was not for a shared love of music and having the opportunity to share that love with a listening audience. The camaraderie and communal spirit that existed among the DJs was precisely what I needed as an alternative to the school’s infamous (and endless) party reputation and it also fueled the fantasies I had growing up as I wanted to have an opportunity to look into the mythical world of the DJs I loved listening to. As I arrived at a screening of “Pirate Radio,” the new film from Writer/Director Richard Curtis, I had high hopes and was already rooting for it. Unfortunately, it was not an entirely successful film. While not entirely a failure either, “Pirate Radio” does indeed tap strongly into that communal spirit of a rag-tag band of DJs and the music they would willingly live and die for.

The year is 1966 and rock music has been completely banned by the British government from the radio. Enter the renegade pied pipers of the airwaves who broadcast rock and roll, in addition to a variety of aural pranks and hi jinks, illegally in the North Sea to the hungrily awaiting listeners on dry land. For this film, we set ourselves aboard the ship known as “Rock Radio,” via our audience surrogate, Young Carl (played engagingly by Tom Sturridge, who appears to look like Radiohead guitarist/composer Johnny Greenwood’s younger and even more underfed brother). Carl has arrived on board for his summer holiday and under the care of his godfather, the station manager Quentin (Bill Nighy). From here, we meet the collective of passionate and somewhat stir-crazy DJs who live on-board, work long on-air sifts and play-through either drink, weed, sexual exploits and anything else they can possibly think of-as they provide the soundtrack to the building counter-culture on shore. Determined to stop pirate radio at any cost is Sir Alistair Dormandy (Kenneth Branagh) who, of course, is of the opinion that all of this rock and roll rubbish will negatively impact society and must be snuffed out completely.

The film has no actual plot, so to speak, as it really is a series of vignettes on the boat as we watch the adventures of this collective of eccentrics and oddballs who are all led by The Count (Phillip Seymour Hoffman), an American expatriate who sees his mission to provide music to the masses with a near religious fervor. The style of the film is as ragged as a garage rock tune, which simultaneously feels very true and also a bit boring, as I did find myself shifting uncomfortably in my seat from time to time. I couldn’t help but to occasionally wonder just where was this film going and what the overall point of it was. Curtis, who wrote the excellent “Four Wedding and Funeral,” the fine ‘Notting Hill” and also wrote and directed the epic romantic comedy “Love Actually,” is no stranger to large casts and multiple storylines—a feat he has previously handled with deftness and skill. It seems as if the material just got away from him a bit this time as some sequences tend to drag, and other sections clash tonally, which ultimately undercut any building emotion and tension with the film as a whole.

Not only was this film over-stuffed, it was full of missed opportunities as well. The political story and cultural critique of the period that is so inherent within this material is not touched upon at all, therefore making the proceedings a shallow “Us Vs. Them” story of underdogs against the establishment. Characters come and go with no rhyme or reason (Emma Thompson is here in a “blink-and-you’ll-miss-it” performance). A subplot about the identity of Carl’s Father appears and re-appears as quickly as it is forgotten and discarded. And when the film seems to back itself into a storytelling corner, another song with accompanying montage is tossed into view. The film, at times, feels unsure of what it wants to accomplish and it shows.

Kenneth Branagh is the film’s weakest link. This is not due to his performance but most possibly in the writing as Dormandy, with his exaggerated uptight demeanor, prim and proper attire and vocally trilling “R”s, exists solely as a comic foil to the DJs. In fact, Branagh reminded me of Herbert Lom in Director Blake Edwards’ classic “Pink Panther” films as Inspector Clouseau’s long-suffering superior, Chief Inspector Dreyfus. Dormandy never feels like a serious threat and that lack of real political and suppressive tension downplays the passion of the DJs. All that was missing from this character as presented was a fiendish laugh and an evil twirling of his moustache as he continuously plots their downfall.

To be fair to Curtis, perhaps something went amiss during the film’s production or between the production and ultimate release as this film has undergone a title change (it was previously titled “The Boat That Rocked”) and it has also been reported that 25 minutes had been trimmed as well. But, I can only comment on what was on-screen and it was rough going.

Yet somehow, I found myself caring for this film and crew despite its problems in a number of scenes. The brief romance between one DJ and his American bride is touching in its heartbreak. Another romantic sequence featuring Carl and another sweet young arrival to the boat (and set to Smokey Robinson and The Miracles “Ooh Baby Baby”) is very charming. A dialogue-less moment featuring Carl, the station's two news reporters, one cup of tea and a small plate of biscuits is a wondrously delicate comedy of manners. Those aforementioned montage sections do work strongly to convey that communal spirit between DJ, music and listeners. How the gossamer threads of the airwaves connect us all in a series of moments purely designed to be a shared experienced. This is played out vibrantly in an extended climax, which places our radio crew into a life-threatening situation during which their fates rest in the hands of their devoted followings. The love of music and or connection to music is also depicted beautifully during this section, which is set to a Cat Stevens song. Through the vision of a drowning DJ, feverishly clinging onto the records that have influenced every fiber of his being, the ties between a person and music itself was deeply felt. Even an ending credits sequence of classic album covers from the last forty years is stirring, thrilling and just made my heart beat faster and louder.

The performances from the cast are uniformly excellent. They have an easy rapport with each other and genuine affection is felt. Phillip Seymour Hoffman easily embodies the spirit of radio, as his character of The Count could be a spiritual cousin to his Lester Bangs character from Cameron Crowe’s transcendent “Almost Famous.” He will literally go down with the ship for his music and listeners and when he even pledges that we will keep broadcasting until the day he dies and “even a few days after that,” you believe every word.

Undeniably, there is the music itself, presented as a wall-to-wall collage of classic rock, pop and soul much like in George Lucas’ groundbreaking “American Graffiti.” The music exists as a character, commenting on the action as well as providing it’s ever present beat and pulse. It never wears out its welcome and like radio in the best of times, and definitely from my past, it is there as a friend.

I honestly do not listen to the radio terribly much these days as the individual personalities of each station have been drained away due to corporate interference and greed. But, this film took me back to the time in my life when Larry Lujack and Tommy Edwards of Chicago’s WLS-AM woke me every day and prepared me for school and the same station’s John “Records” Landecker got me ready for bed each night. By middle school, Steve Dahl and Garry Meier were radio’s resident and ultimate bad boys and I relished every obscene and outrageous transgression. The smoky, seductive voice of The Loop’s Patti Haze was my guide into the classic rock that I will love for the rest of my life, the eternally cool Tom Joyner of WJPC provided me with much needed soul and grit and the entire crew of WXRT opened my horizons in ways I never thought possible. The film took me back to a time when “WKRP In Cincinnati” was a wish and my first day on the air was a nerve wracking and ecstatic experience.

It also took me back to a time just a few years ago when I was surprisingly invited to appear on the University campus’ new radio station WSUM-FM for a morning interview. Near the end of that interview, where the young DJs actually referred to me as “Sir,” (Ugh!!) I was asked if I could impart any advice for the students currently on-air or interested in becoming DJs. At last, I was solicited for my sage wisdom! Unfortunately, I really just had no idea of what to say and after a few moments of dreaded dead air, I finally expressed that all I could want for them and their friends was that they truly enjoy this time for it will not last. For they have the opportunity to make the experience of being a DJ exactly what they want for it to be and their collective on-air dreams can be completely individualized. When that spirit is conveyed, people will listen. It doesn’t have to be perfect. It just has to be real.

Despite its faults, “Pirate Radio” worked at it’s very best when it tapped into that feeling of providing something real. For everyone who made the choice to listen, to feel, to dream and to just be connected. And finally, for the “Rock Radio” DJs, who clung to that intense belief for dear life because just like the collegiate and public radio DJs of today, that beautiful time is slowly fading and I think we need them more than ever as they are our torchbearers of continued community in an increasingly isolated world.

Long may they live on our airwaves and may the proverbial needle never leave its groove. “Pirate Radio” is far from perfect but it is honestly and touchingly real.

ON TIME: a review of "Up In The Air"

“UP IN THE AIR” Co-Written and Directed by Jason Reitman
**** (4 stars)

To those who know me and have read my thoughts of current cinema, and especially for the uninitiated, I have mentioned from time to time that I am typically not a crier in movies. The key word in that sentence is “typically,” as I have teared up or quietly sobbed every once in a while for any variety of reasons. Certainly there are the heavy hitters like Steven Spielberg’s “Schindler’s List,” as the subject matter combined with Spielberg’s unparalleled power of reducing a viewer to their most primal emotions made for an unforgettable experience. How could one not be affected by that film? On the same expansive scale but something more personal, Writer/Director Paul Thomas Anderson’s 1999 Altmanesque epic, “Magnolia” leaves me a dish rag, as the emotional fury—especially during its second hour—is as forceful as a piercing gut punch. But then, there are the surprises, the somewhat smaller films, that offer something that speaks to my soul and before I am sometimes even aware, tears are flowing. In the past year, both “Slumdog Millionaire” and “Up” have been ones to blind side me. With “Slumdog Millionaire,” my desire for the lead character’s happiness after such a harrowing life just overtook me. With “Up,” well, so many have seen it and so many have cried along with me and I am unashamed to admit that seeing the brief, elegant, silent montage of a marriage at the beginning of that film and the parting words left behind late in the film were deeply moving.

I have just returned from a screening of Writer/Director Jason Reitman’s “Up In The Air,” a film of immense charm, intelligence and perceptiveness about human nature and life as we know it in our current economical and cultural history. It works as a critique of modern society as well as functioning as a romantic comedy. The characters and dialogue are sharply conceived and written. While it functions largely as a comedy, it never strikes a false note while also never descending into heavy handed preachings. And as much as I was entertained, wouldn’t you know it, something completely unexpected happened. “Up In The Air” made me cry and by the conclusion, I knew I had seen of 2009’s best achievements.

George Clooney stars in one of his finest performances as Ryan Bingham, a corporate assassin and sometimes motivational speaker of the empty “What Color Is Your Parachute?” variety. He endlessly travels across the country from one corporation to another, armed with the task of firing people as he offers empty platitudes of the “This is the first day of the rest of your life,” variety. He is a collection of corporate and club member credit cards, designed to provide him with optimum travel accommodations, from first class seating, accelerated boarding to even corporate programmed pleasant greetings from tickets agents in a sea of airports nationwide. His life is contained easily and securely into one travel bag with wheels. His one-room apartment in Omaha is barely lived in. He claims to be happily unmarried, has no desire to ever walk down the aisle and he is all but a ghost to his family. His one and only desire is to reach the milestone of attaining 10 million flier miles, a task reached by only six unnamed people before him. His life is one of constant motion and fabricated emotions, which undoubtedly makes for an empty existence, if only he could see it.

Then, as if from out of the blue, two women enter his life. In some unnamed bar, somewhere on his travels, he meets Alex Goran (Vera Farmiga in a career making performance), another corporate frequent flyer with a seemingly similar jaded life outlook. The two begin a cross-country affair, meeting in one Blackberry arranged designation after another and when apart, the two co join virtually.

The second woman is Natalie Keener (a terrific Anna Kendrick), a plucky 23-year-old, newly hired by Bingham’s unctuous supervisor (a pitch-perfect Jason Bateman) to provide an innovative (read: impersonal) tele-communicative technique to fire people across the country—a technique that would definitely upend Bingham’s entire life. Furious at the thought of being replaced by machinery, Bingham enlist the company of Natalie to join him on his cross-country treks to personally view and learn about the irreplaceable human flair, psychology and art of firing someone.

From here, the film takes some unusual detours and presents unusual imagery that along with the main plot line, add up to a sumptuous whole. A visit to Bingham’s younger sister’s wedding, a motif of an enlarged cut-out photo of the sister and fiancee poking through Bingham’s suitcase, and a beautifully written and lengthy airport conversation between the two women about the trajectories of their lives are among the film’s consistent delights that Reitman effortlessly puts on display. Each new development is a surprise and every revelation enriches his tapestry. As with his previous film “Juno,” I found myself a tad resistant initially, but as the film continued, it told a story that became better and better.

As I previously stated, Clooney gives one of his very best performances in this film. His unquestionable coolness, tailored suits, cynical edge and sardonic humor belies the hard truths he eventually discovers about himself and his place in the world. Perhaps, he has always known these hard truths about himself but as his life is frenetically on the move, he never allows himself the time to allow those thoughts to enter into his sights. In many ways, he reminded me of the kinds of characters William Hurt inhabited years ago. Clooney subtly breaths vibrant life into the almost nameless, faceless men who wear expensive suits. He finds the soul of this man at a point in his life when he just may be discovering that he indeed possesses a soul.

Vera Farmiga is a wonder in a performance I hope helps her graduate to larger, complex and more heavily seen films. Yes, she has done fine work in films ranging from brilliant (Martin Scorsese’s “The Departed”) to films that are…ahem…not brilliant (the brutal and distasteful “Orphan”), but now is her time to shine and she grabs the role with both hands. In an American cinematic world where there are few adult women on display, the character of Alex Gorna struck me as a refreshingly realistic, 21st century career woman. She exists as a striking counterpoint to the ridiculous and crudely sexist career women we usually see in mainstream films (Sandra Bullock and Katherine Heigl, my sights are set on you!). Alex has a clear, unapologetic and unrepentant worldview that seemingly works for her, making the character so fascinating that I would love to see a follow-up film on her and what her future may entail! Fermiga is supremely confident as she displays a maturity that extends fully through her humor, irritations, sexiness and even questionable humanity.

Anna Kendrick gives a performance of acute snappiness and increasing empathy. In many ways, she is much like Seth Rogen’s fledgling comedian in Judd Apatow’s excellent “Funny People.” The purity of her soul is in jeopardy while she journeys deeper into the cutthroat corporate world and Kendrick is equal to the hefty task. And her scenes with Clooney on the road as they verbally joust and parry provide many knowing laughs.

I said at the outset of this review that this film made me cry. Since many of those reasons are plot-driven, I will not provide any details to as not spoil the film and its many charms for you. I wish for you to see it as I did, without terribly much information. However, I think I can explain this much. As several portions of the film are devoted to the task of firing people and the variety of emotions contained, I could not help but to be affected by the material. I was unexpectedly laid off from my pre-school teaching job last year due to decreasing enrollment as a result of many parents being laid off themselves. While I blessedly found new employment relatively quickly, I will never forget that initial conversation with my Director, who bravely informed me of the news. I will never forget the all-encompassing feelings of failure, uncertainty and terror. I felt as if I was racing at light speed towards the edge of that proverbial cliff. I felt that I now had no purpose in life. I was drowning. It almost…almost felt like dying to a degree. While Jason Reitman handles his film with a light touch, those painful sentiments are given proper weight especially by having most of these roles performed by many people laid off in real life.

Beyond that, I thought that Reitman and his cast truly captured a moment in time. Film critic A.O. Scott recently explained in his review on “At The Movies,” that he feels that if someone 40-50 years from now wanted to watch a film and discover what life in America was like at this point in its history, “Up In the Air” would be the film to see. I am strongly inclined to agree with him, as it understands the tenuous ground we all stand upon right at this moment. In addition, the film asks of all of us, what are the ingredients, choices and consequences that make up a real life--especially when it comes to the topic of casual sex. "Up In The Air" contains feelings of trying, reaching, potentially failing and falling into a sea of frightening uncertainty and all of it burrowed under my skin and overtook me the longer the film unfolded.

On the basis of this film, I am convinced that Jason Reitman is the real deal and not someone coasting on the legacy of his famous Father who happens to be filmmaker Ivan Reitman, who produced “National Lampoon’s Animal House” and directed the comedy classics “Stripes,“ “Ghostbusters,” and “Kindergarten Cop.” With the savage but uneven “Thank You For Smoking,” the excellent and tender teen pregnancy comedy “Juno,” and now his third and best film to date, Jason Reitman is building a film resume to be reckoned with. It recalls the Capraesque films of the past while having its feet firmly placed in the present and what a gift it always is to see a film that succeeds so glowingly.

Even when it may occasionally bring me to tears.

2000-2009 TIME CAPSULE PART TWO: The Most Honorable of Honorable Mentions continued

“MATCH POINT” (2005), “CASSANDRA’S DREAM” (2007) & “VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA” (2008) Written and Directed by Woody Allen

For most average, every day film-goers, I am feeling fairly certain that the consistent output of Woody Allen barely registers. Yes, he has been quietly and prolifically toiling away for over 40 years now, delivering his film every year to year and a half, detailing the sometimes humorous, sometimes nihilistic, sometimes co joined trials and tribulations that exist as part of our human condition and all located in his beloved New York City. With an output as frequent as his, there is bound to be some element of wheat and chaff. For me, he was on a staggeringly high artistic roll during the 1990s when his films included “Bullets Over Broadway,” “Husbands and Wives,” “Manhattan Murder Mystery,” Sweet and Lowdown,” “Everyone Says I Love You,” “Deconstructing Harry,” and the darkly prophetic “Celebrity.” As the new decade began, Allen seemed uninspired, which showed in his work but then, he did something wonderful. Allen traveled to Europe, became creatively rejuvenated and produced films that stand up to the very best of his past material.

In the London set films of “Match Point” and “Casandra’s Dream,” Allen provides us with two grim thrillers which not only delve into our worst murderous impulses and deceptions but also the daily issues of class struggles, the cosmic issues of fate vs. luck and the question of whether we can ever truly “get away with it.” Both films could be companion pieces to Allen’s brilliant “Crimes and Misdemeanors” (1989) to perhaps form a “Crime and Punishment” trilogy. It is a troubled night of the soul for many of the characters in both films and they all boast striking performances from Jonathan Rhys-Meyers in the former as well as Ewan McGregor, Colin Farrell and Tom Wilkinson in the latter.

The greatest Allen joy I had during this decade was with the transcendent “Vicky Cristina Barcelona,” Allen’s very best film in many, many years. It was a romantic comedy that puts nearly all current romantic comedies to shame with evocative performances, gorgeous locales that inspire travel and of course, Allen’s peerless, literate writing. Watching the best of Woody Allen’s work is like being in the presence of a visual novel. I hope that he continues to give us high quality work within this new decade.

THE FILMS OF PIXAR ANIMATION STUDIOS

There have been few films to provide me with higher cinematic joy than the animated gold that has been emerging from the talented writers, directors and animators from Pixar over the past decade. What makes them so brilliant is that they have never treated their primary audience of children as commodities by simply serving them disposable material that solely appeals to their lowest common denominators. These people are making films for the ages by telling stories they would want to hear themselves with high style, great humor and a stunning level of profundity.

The hilarious "Monsters Inc." (2001) also functioned as a lovely Father/daughter or Parent/Child story. "Finding Nemo" (2003), was a film that could have been just a stunning film to solely watch as the underwater world was breathtakingly visualized. Luckily, we were provided with a decidedly intense story and dialogue that matched the visuals (unlike this year's "Avatar") and delved deeply into parental fears. "The Incredibles "(2004), written and directed by the visionary Brad Bird gave Pixar a bold step forward with its first PG rated film that not only owed much of its concept of retired superheroes to the still influential "Watchmen" but also told a story of a man falling heavily into a midlife crisis.

"Ratatouille" (2007) also from Bird, "Wall-E" (2008) and this year's "Up," continued to raise the bar for American animation as the filmmakers have continued to challenge themselves as well as their audiences by giving them material to grow with. Who would've thought that dissertations on the nature of art, dystopian future visions and heartfelt explorations of mortality would provide terrific children's entertainment? That is the true magic of Pixar. not simply making great films for children but great films for all of us. Even the decidedly minor stumble of "Cars" (2006) stands taller than most films in the multiplex.

THE FILMS OF MICHAEL MOORE

A controversial pick for a controversial filmmaker. I did debate adding these films to this section due to a certain lack of re-watchability as his films are very rooted in their times. Yet, perhaps that is the very reason to add him because, if someone were to open a Time Capsule full of movies from this period, then "Bowling For Columbine" (2002), "Fahrenheit 9/11" (2004), "Sicko" (2007), and this year's "Capitalism: A Love Story" defiantly represent a particular perspective of what is has been like to live in the USA at this point in the world's history. Regardless of whether you agree or debate his politics and ideas, Moore is also a searingly accomplished filmmaker. I really do not think of him as a documentarian. I believe that Michael Moore has created a collection of passionate visual editorials and they should be taken as such. But cinematically, he has created his own theatrical language as he has changed the face and appeal of non-fiction films. His style, for better or for worse, is unmistakably his own and I am damn glad here is here to provide his take on the state of the country and world at large.

"DAVE CHAPPELLE'S BLOCK PARTY" (2007) Directed by Michel Gondry

This film just barely missed the final 25 and what a film it is, as I can recall the sheer euphoria I felt as I left the theater. This film was a masterful achievement that transcended just being a "concert film" as it was an endless celebration of community, with messages of self-affirmation for the African-American community in particular. In this film, everyone is a star, from the performers (which included Kanye West, Talib Kweli, Jill Scott, Erykah Badu, Mos Def, The Roots as house band and a reunited Fugees) to all members of the audience, to the high school marching band, to the neighborhood dwellers, inhabitants and workers who allowed for the party and ultimate filming of the party to occur in the first place. It showed how much could be accomplished when we all pitch in and work together.

For Chappelle, this was a grand public statement as it was made in between two pivotal moments in his life and career. Chappelle had just walked away from a 50 million dollar deal with Comedy Central to continue his comedy program and he was about to make his much discussed pilgrimage to Africa and this film seemed to be a sort of self-atonement as it was a desire to have an event that anyone could be a part of. It may have sprung from his mind but it was designed and ultimate creation was made by all parties involved. Lovingly captured and presented by Director Michael Gondry, who made one more surprisingly effective ode to community and neighborhood love with the under seen "Be Kind Rewind" (2008), "Dave Chappelle's Block Party" was one of the most joyous films I saw over the last ten years.

"SPIDER-MAN 2" (2002) Directed by Sam Raimi

Another film that was just shy of making the top 25. In the previous Time Capsule section, I named M. Night Shyamalan's "Unbreakable" as one of the three best comic book movies of the decade. Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man 2" is another one of those three films. I think this entire series is a testament to how difficult movies of this sort are to pull off successfully--even when all of them are coming from the same artistic force, in this case the aforementioned Mr. Raimi. I was unimpressed with "Spider-Man" (2002), as I felt it was about half of a good movie. It has a strong beginning but then, it just settled into the standard summer movie nonsense. The girl screams. Things explode. Yawn. "Spider-Man 3" (2007) was an unfortunate bloated mess, where bigger is not better. It fell under the weight of having just too much of absolutely everything. "Spider-Man 2" was the one where it all fell into place seamlessly, brilliantly and beautifully, making it the best film of its kind since "Superman 2" back in 1981. Everything carried equal weight in this film and nothing felt superfluous. And the love story between Peter Parker and Mary Jane was surprising in its honestly and deep emotion. It provided the film with its proudly and loudly beating heart.

The final list of Honorable Mentions will be revealed soon...

INNER CITY BLUES: a review of "Precious"

"PRECIOUS" Directed by Lee Daniel
**** (4 stars)

She sits silently in the back of the classroom. She possesses strong knowledge of the Mathematics presented on the chalkboard, yet a word never seeps from her lips. She is fixated upon her Caucasian teacher, either through a crush or admiration or unrealistic wish that he will be the one to whisk her away from this dreadful place. Leaning in her seat almost sideways, her head rests upon her hand, in an apathetic fashion, belying her desire to one-day sit in the front of the classroom and show what she knows. Her skin is as dark as coal, with all facial features and expressions hidden from view, as if she is willing her face to fold inwards upon itself to as not reveal the human being that sits there. Despite this withdrawal, her mind races; from her aforementioned classroom desires to therapeutic fantasias of being famous, adored by an endless stream of fans (as well as a young light-skinned Black man) and finally, being anywhere except where she is. Some may feel these visions to be unhealthy but when faced with the alternative, which is her gruesome reality, could anyone truly blame her? Her name is Claireece Jones, known to all as “Precious,” and the subject of Director Lee Daniels’ harsh and painfully empathetic film “Precious.” Much has already been written about the film’s ultimately inspirational tonality but I found the film to be considerably less inspirational yet more informational via its rawness. The film's non-judgemental, brutal honestly makes for ferociously compelling, compassionate and humane viewing of the highest necessity.

Set in Harlem circa 1987, we meet Precious deep the vortex of a family situation where the word “abusive” is too faint a description. Precious is 16 years old, illiterate, and pregnant with her second child, the product of being repeatedly raped by her now absent Father. Her current home life is a graphic and endless cycle of violence. Daily and nightly, she faces the relentless rage of her Mother, the nicotine and television addicted Mary (in a jaw dropping performance by the comedienne Mo’Nique). Mary has duly ignored the years of Precious’ abuse and forces her to obey her every whim, which include (and not limited to) cooking her meals of grossly over sized proportions and nutritional content (and if Mary is not pleased, Precious is forced to eat it all herself).

After being suspended from school once her pregnancy has been revealed, Precious’ principal strongly advises her to attend an alternative school named, “Each One Teach One,” in order to potentially rise above her situation—much to Mary’s vehement dismay, whose degradations of Precious’ beauty, mind, self-worth and spirit are relentless. Since Mary feels that education is futile and her own life is designated to remain upon welfare, Precious' audacity to think that her life deserves better is only rewarded through extreme punishment. The only solace Precious is able to unearth are contained inside of her lofty fantasies of wealth and fame; salvations she retreats to once the demons in front of her and the demons lodged in her memories due to years of rape and incest threaten to smother her.

Somehow obtaining the courage, Precious arrives at Each One Teach One and experiences a newfound education with other troubled female youths under the tutelage of the young, no-nonsense and improbably named Ms. Blue Rain (Paula Patton in one of the film’s several strong performances). While in school, Precious slowly begins to sit in front of the class, learn to read, to make friends, to write and eventually discover her inner strength through the words she had never been allowed to utter, let alone think without remorseless retribution and humiliation. She gradually finds support and love not only through Ms. Rain but also through kindly Nurse John (nicely played by Lenny Kravitz in a small role), present for the delivery of her second child and Ms. Weiss (a strikingly unglamorous Mariah Carey in another small but effective performance). Given these life-saving tools, Precious is confronted with taking those baby steps to meet the challenges of raising her children, completing her education and mostly, rising above the violence that has plagued her family for generations.

This film is a steamroller and the wisest decision Director Lee Daniels has made in interpreting the source material (the novel, Push written by the poet Sapphire), was to keep the audience firmly in the mind of Precious, forcing us to view and feel her experiences from the inside out rather than from some omniscient viewpoint. This decision also allows the film to never fall into hyperbolic melodrama or even worse, “Lifetime movie” territory where the cycle of abuse ends with a firmly declared line of newly attained self –worth, set to a rush of strings and tearful piano chords. Nor is this a film where Precious is simply rescued by some benevolent figure. Although her support system builds, Precious realizes that, in the end, all she has is herself to depend on and the lives of her children desperately hang under the consequences of her actions.

Daniels shows complete faith with the inherent drama of the material and never succumbs to the manipulative trickery of a film like 2009’s “My Sister’s Keeper,” which seemed to exist solely to make audiences cry. Precious’ story is allowed to simply unfold naturally and any theatrical “bells and whistles” are all thematically driven and reflect Precious’ inner state. One transformative fight sequence between Precious and Mary is intercut between tender Mother/child imagery that has never existed within their relationship. Those depictions always float through Precious’ mind as a life-raft and you can feel the desperation.

Concepts of Precious’ self-image are brilliantly and subtly presented as well, especially with a striking short sequence where she looks into a mirror and sees not herself but the vision of a thin, blond woman. The motif of the mirror extends throughout the film in continued graceful notes and the final image is stunning in its simplicity.

The greatest gifts of “Precious” lie in the performances and Daniels could not have found better conduits for his interpretation than Gabourney Sidibe and Mo’Nique. Sidibe gives a heartbreaking performance in the title role without ever being cloying or even sentimental, which would have clashed with the film’s overall severe tone. Her entire performance is disarmingly and endearingly matter-of-fact. You are easily able to see how she tries to simultaneously appear invisible while knowing how visible she is in her surroundings as she is constantly taunted. Her outer walls are strongly in place while her mind is flying, as she devastatingly attempts to find her place in the world. Sidibe, in her quiet dignity, creates a character that evolves far beyond being someone to simply root for. She gives a face and soul to society’s forgotten children and it is an remarkable debut performance.

The improbable casting of Mo’Nique, as Precious’ volcanic, depressing, and monstrous Mother, adds layers of tremendous depth and quality. Most importantly, the film never allows Mary to serve solely as the film’s beast. Daniels and Mo’Nique have given this character a definitive humanity that is, at times, frightening to empathize with—and you do empathize and even understand her, especially when she behaves at her most loathsome. Through the relationship she has with Precious, we see Mary’s own history and the irreparable damage a life of abuse has caused her. It is all she knows and the blind’s eye she turns in regards to the incest inflicted upon Precious is steeped in misguided jealousy and a soul crushing lack of self-worth. Mo’Nique has not one, but perhaps three scenes of awesome power, that again are all striking due to being matter-of-fact and not a campaign for an Oscar nomination. However, if Oscar does not reward these two women with at least nominations, it would be an enormous cinematic crime.

The film ends with the dedication “For Precious Girls Everywhere” and that is this film’s greatest achievement. There are those who have begun to decry the film for its imagery as well as its exposure of painful societal truths. But, sometimes, it is precisely those stories that need to be told the most. In current American cinema, a story like Precious’ is entirely disregarded and this film forces us to take the time to ponder all of those girls and women out there in the inner cities and beyond, whose lives are hanging in a cauldron of unbearable private pain.

“Precious” gives a pure and empathetic voice to our country's lost children and I would guess, to anyone afflicted with an abusive existence. By doing so, the film transcends its own inner city surroundings to make a statement about the history of violence itself. Daniels and his cast seem to be saying that regardless of the nightmare of one's past, the future is boldly unwritten and the cycle of abuse and violence can be broken in equally bold steps and perseverance.

“Precious” is one of 2009’s very best films.

ELEMENTARY, MY DEAR: a review of "Sherlock Holmes"

“SHERLOCK HOLMES” Directed by Guy Ritchie
***1/2 (three and a half stars)

I must admit that despite my life-long love affair with literature and the magic that is conjured through the near mystical act of combining the right words in just the right fashion, I have never, ever entertained the thought of attempting to discover the literary world of master sleuth Sherlock Holmes. I’m not certain why though. I mean—besides being an ardent Anglophile, I have always liked the idea of Holmes; this man, whose intelligence seems so vast, so relentless and so unstoppable that he is always able to discover the logical nature of any situation no matter of how improbable it may appear to be. Perhaps there is some envy buried within this fascination as I am certain that I, and many others, would love to have that power of perception. That said, I have never read any of the books by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle nor have I ever seen any film depictions of Holmes and his trusty sidekick, Dr. Watson. What a difference the right actor or movie star can make. In Director Guy Ritchie’s “Sherlock Holmes,” an adrenalized, brawny re-invention of the classic character that does not squelch anything in the braininess department, he has called upon two actors who exude a level of charisma and sheer coolness that I wish I even had a modicum of in my own life. It would be hard pressed to find anyone better than Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law to take over the iconic Holmes and Watson, and their amazing chemistry with each other and comfort within their roles, sells this film greatly and makes for an exciting film going experience.

As the film opens, we are immediately plunged into the final act of another dark Holmes/Watson adventure, much like the opening of any James Bond or Indiana Jones feature. Our heroes are hot on the trail of the demonic Lord Blackwood (menacingly well played by Mark Strong), who through the means of black magic has already murdered five women and is now about to claim the life of a sixth. It is during this sequence where Ritchie deftly re-acquaints us with the classic characters, albeit through his filter. Dr. John Watson is no longer a bumbling tag-a-long but Holmes’ brother-in-arms. He is an excellent marksman and combatant, complete with a military history as well as a sword tucked within the innards of his walking stick. But, the real surprise is with Holmes, who uses his breathtaking intellect to not only solve the crime, and rescue the girl but to physically defeat his opponents in a bravura bit of exposition as we travel through Holmes’ rapid-fire thought process and knowledge of fragile human anatomical areas. Then, we get to see Holmes utilize that intellect to brutally mop up the floor with Blackwood’s henchmen and what a thrilling sight it is. After Blackwood’s incarceration and execution by hanging, the plot thickens once Blackwood has apparently risen from the grave to wreak more havoc upon Victorian London via Satanic premonitions of three more deaths, a secretive new ultimate weapon, and of course, the promise of Holmes’ ultimate downfall.

The film’s story is also a wonderful character study of Holmes’ brilliant yet deeply fractured mind and damaged heart, which Ritchie utilizes all of the tools at his disposal from set decoration to his leading man. The apartment of Sherlock Holmes is a disaster area, which may be an element that might put off some purists. Yet, for me, it seemed to be a physical manifestation of his brain as it appears to be the reside belonging more to the reclusive and psychologically crippled Howard Hughes rather than the fussily fastidious Holmes. It is filled with failed scientific experiments, clothes strewn all about and obvious traces of alcoholic and/or narcotic remains. It is his retreat after a case has been solved and it shows how Holmes without a project makes for dangerous company, as especially seen during his frequent and punishing visits to underground London fight clubs.

Yet, it is all a front for his wounded heart as his intellect betrays him when confronted with the ones that mean most to him. This includes the returning Irene Adler (Rachael McAdams), the only thief and woman to have gotten away from Holmes’ grasp. But the film’s real love story is between Holmes and Dr. Watson, as Holmes wrestles with his own jealousy and incomprehension that Watson would actually choose a quiet life with Mary (played by Kelly Reilly) over unpredictable excitement, adventure and the thrill of the chase with him. Robert Downey Jr. hits every note of the character perfectly—maybe a little too perfectly--and he is mesmerizing to watch.

Robert Downey Jr. has always been an actor that emerges as the smartest man in the room, or at the very least, maybe three to five steps ahead of everyone else. That quality is perfect for a character like the meticulously astute Sherlock Holmes and with Ritchie’s interpretation of him, Downey Jr. is let loose with a performance that veers precariously close to running off the rails—mostly depicted in his line readings which are presented in a rushed flurry that garbles enunciation. At times, this made it difficult to understand key dialogue but perhaps this acting choice was intentional as it does strongly suggest Holmes’ near state of madness.

A more perfect foil could not have been found in anyone other than the magnetically captivating Jude Law, who blazes across the screen as Downey Jr.’s complete equal. He is the one who understands and knows Holmes better than anyone and continues to follow him despite his better comprehension of what a life with Holmes would mean. He is a man caught in an equally precarious state between the best and worst of his own impulses. Maybe he is what Homes was before his psyche began to splinter, as the two men seem to be cut from the same proverbial cloth. Downey Jr. and Law play with and off of each other luminously and there should be an Oscar given to whomever suggested casting these two men together in the first place. The pairing is that strong and it is a gift to be in their presence.

In other cinematic areas, Guy Ritchie unfolds his film in a triumphant merging of the vintage and the modern. From traditional costuming and set design with CGI, London becomes properly and hauntingly foreboding as well as a place that looks very lived in. You can feel the grime from the cobblestone streets and detect the funk in the air from the sewers underneath. Ritchie’s modern techniques of cinematography, which include that slightly bleached out quality that lends the film a grim dreaminess and brisk editing (which is admittedly sometimes a little too frenetic during the fight sequences) to bring the stately vintage London to blistering life. Key action pieces set upon a shipyard, inside of a grisly slaughterhouse and a battle between Holmes and a giant Frenchmen never feel superfluous to the main story and ratchet up the tension appropriately. Even the music score by veteran composer Hans Zimmer is a joy as he merges tack pianos, and passionately mournful violins with forbidding synthetics and it creates the perfect sound scape to this invigorating new vision.

“Sherlock Holmes” is high entertainment presented in high style, class and intelligence. Nothing feels dumbed down to fit the lowest common denominator of a mass audience. Instead, this is a rare big budget Hollywood feature where the participants all worked at their collective best.

While I have to sheepishly admit this although the success of film was grand, it still didn't make me want to race to the library shelves to read the source material. However, I do know that as this film reached its conclusion and Holmes is presented with a growing story by tracking down an even slipperier and more intense foe, I am already anxious for a follow-up adventure. Maybe it is all due to the presentation and in the hands of Ritchie, Downey Jr. and Law, I will gladly see whatever they are able to construct in the future.