The Films of 2011

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
eerik
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:53 pm
Location: Estonia

The Idiot (Rainer Sarnet, 2011)

#1 Post by eerik » Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:17 pm

Idioot / The Idiot (2011)

Estonian adaptation of Dostoyevsky's novel. Directed by Rainer Sarnet. Estonian premiere is set for September.

Synopsis:
A story of a naive man, whose direct behavior stirs in people moral unrest, rage and embarrassment over their own pettiness, making them yearn for goodness.

Teaser
Trailer
Homeless Bob Productions

Gallery:
Image
Image
NSFWShow
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
eerik
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:53 pm
Location: Estonia

Re: The Idiot (Rainer Sarnet, 2011)

#2 Post by eerik » Tue Aug 23, 2011 7:29 am

Poster:
Image


And new trailer.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Page Eight (David Hare, 2011)

#3 Post by colinr0380 » Mon Aug 29, 2011 9:57 am

The BBC screened this film last night, but it has also been doing the rounds of festivals too (here is the trailer from the Toronto Film Festival), so deserves a thread of its own. The first film directed by David Hare since 1997's The Designated Mourner, it was a very enjoyable return to the 'tension packed conversations in nondescript government offices and conference rooms, classy restauarants, sumptuous apartments and country homes and in the private chambers of the Prime Ministers' style of spy thrillers after the rather over the top shenanigans of the Bourne/Spooks action thrillers. (It also I guess works as a good palate cleanser in preparation for the forthcoming remake of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy)

I am not exactly sure how it will go down in the US as the plot revolves around a source revealing the exact locations of secret US torture sites around the world with the titular page eight being the off hand remark in the file that reveals that the British Prime Minister knew of these actions and colluded with the US in deceiving the British public. Throw in the subplot involving Rachel Weisz as a daughter of a Middle Eastern activist who is looking for justice for her brother killled by the IDF while protesting the demolition of houses in the West Bank during the building of the security wall, a plot which feels as if it combines the current issues involving the Wall with the issues surrounding the protracted inquiry into the death of Tom Hurndall in 2003 (or perhaps even more pertinently, Rachel Corrie), and it might make uncomfortable viewing for some.

The other major 2003 issue that seems to get folded into the drama is the death of David Kelly since Michael Gambon's character as the head of the security agency, after passing over the dossier then suffers a suspiciously fatal heart attack at his home (I am worried that Gambon may be in that stage of his career where the roles may be trying to tell him something - either having him die here, get bumped off in The Good Shepherd, or have an incapacitating illness in The Life Aquatic! Not the most comforting kinds of roles to be offered on a regular basis!) The idea of extra-judicial killing hangs heavily throughout the film, as Bill Nighy's character then goes on the run, although this idea is kept somewhat in the background of the events. This does lead however lead to the marvellously tense conversation with Ralph Fiennes' deeply sinister PM when he demands the incriminating dossier back from Nighy.

I could see how some of the more mannered or oblique spy conversations could become frustrating, though there is a really nice payoff in the one scene between Nighy and Saskia Reeves talking about trust (which acts as a counterpoint to an earlier scene in which Nighy is outlining the dossier for the spiky government minister), that really mitigated that approach for me. Especially as, despite all the heavyhanded political stuff outlined above, the theme of the film feels more about trust between individual people and whether unconditional trust in another person is still at all possible.

Nighy is very good in a role that, like Matt Damon's part in The Good Shepherd, requires a certain monotonous tone to it. However he does add some nice flashes of a buried humourous personality early on (I hate those darn pass code door locks too, and always seem to be the last one informed when someone has changed the codes on them!) and has a really touching scene later in the meeting with his daughter (with a great joke about 'conceptual' artists!)

One of the great strengths of this film has to be the cast. In addition to the above I have to single out Judy Davis, who is magnificent as Nighy's sort-of nemesis in the intelligence department. There also seems to be, in the late in the film revelation about her using her son to get close to Nighy's daughter, a sly dig at the recent governmental scandal of ministers employing their relatives!

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Saranghanda, saranghaji anneunda (Lee Yoon-ki, 2011)

#4 Post by Michael Kerpan » Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:47 pm

(Come Rain, Come Shine or more literally Love You, Love You Not)

Well, I haven't been able to find a single uncritical review for this film, but I liked it quite a lot (and so did my wife). It mostly happens in (almost) real-time, albeit with a gap in the action. The prologue is a prolonged single take, showing a husband (HYUN Bin) driving his wife (LIM Su-jeong) to the airport. As they drive, making small talk, she rather offhandedly informs him she'll be moving out on her return. The rest of the movie covers about three hours, as the wife is supposed to be finishing her packing up to go (as torrential rains steadily fall outside). Both characters are circumspect in expressing emotion, especially the husband -- who seems almost preternaturally composed. The overall mood is indeed melancholic (as reviews suggest), but I thought there was more than a little gentle humor added into the mix. We hear a few ancillary characters on the phone, but the only other characters we see are a stray kitten and the neighbor couple who comes in search of it.

The actors here seem to have been uniformly criticized as "inexpressive", but I think both leads did a perfectly fine job. The cinematography in the main section of the film is all (or mostly all) of hand-held variety. So, if LYK's previous films (like This Charming Girl or Ad Lib Night) bothered one, this will too. As far as I'm concerned, LYK is batting .800 (with only his 2005 Love Talk as a failure, albeit a noble try).

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas (Todd Schulson, 2011)

#5 Post by mfunk9786 » Sun Nov 06, 2011 1:51 am

NOTE: Apologies to the director, who will obviously be reading this because it'll obviously be a great piece of film criticism - but I couldn't fit his full credited name into the subject line.

Anyway, A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas is the most surprising great film of the year. I don't want to overstate the quality of this one (Entertainment Weekly gave it a jaw-dropping A grade, for example), but it is easily on par with the first film in terms of off-color comedy excellence - but this one has a holiday angle, meaning that fans of these characters will likely throw it onto the surprisingly small pile of comedic Christmas classics. The film begins with a screenwriter's dream - the two main characters separated by time and circumstances, and an over-the-top opportunity to bring them back together. There are some awkward moments at the outset (Bobby Lee isn't nearly as funny as he thinks he is), but once Danny Trejo shows up (and more importantly, Harold and Kumar are reunited), the film regains the energy that the disappointing Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay never was able to recapture. By focusing on the silly asides that the first film was so great at setting up, Schulson gets the opportunity to experiment with the 3D format in utterly hilarious little vignettes (the best of which involving Kumar laying out an unbelievably offensive plan to steal a Christmas tree that never comes close to being carried out - these films are at their best when they're just wasting time on something that's ridiculously funny). Schulson manages to tow the line between both the humor and heart that made the first film so successful, and everything develops so wonderfully predictably that the film never elicits any eye-rolls - there's no time, because you'll be laughing so hard.

I expected A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas to be awful. After the first sequel, it seemed that there was no rescuing this series, but I'm as happy as anyone to report that this film is wonderful now that the franchise has regained the out-of-nowhere surprise factor that the original film carried with it (I assume a lot of folks had the experience I did, seeing it with some friends expecting it to be so bad it's good, and then realizing it was just really really good). I went into this with the same expectation I went into the first with, and I came out with a holiday comedy that I can't wait to share with my nephew someday - as soon as he's old enough.

User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas (Todd Schulson, 2011)

#6 Post by aox » Sun Nov 06, 2011 1:39 pm

I am almost ashamed to say it, but I have heard that this film is indeed pretty great.

User avatar
thirtyframesasecond
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:48 pm

Dreams of a Life (Carol Morley, 2011)

#7 Post by thirtyframesasecond » Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:09 pm

This British documentary's coming to the end of its cinema run so I caught one of its last screenings. It's a docu-drama about the life of Joyce Carol Vincent, who was found dead in her flat in North London in 2006, having been there, unnoticed, for three years! Morley uses reconstruction with actress/playwright Zawe Ashton (whom British viewers might remember from 'Fresh Meat') as well as interviews with those who knew Joyce. As you'd imagine there's more than meets the eye. Joyce comes across as a pretty enigmatic woman, superficially confident and with it, but there's hints of private pain that even those who knew her didn't know about. The entire concept of someone with such a network of friends being able to go "missing" would seem improbable, but Morley shows just how easily it happened, especially in a city the size of London. It's fascinating, but obviously rather sad - well worth catching if it shows in the US, though the DVD shouldn't be too far behind.


User avatar
dad1153
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:32 am
Location: New York, NY

4:44 Last Day On Earth (Abel Ferrara, 2011)

#9 Post by dad1153 » Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:33 pm

Saw this opening day at IFC Center with Ferrara (who invited the half-filled theater to join him at a bar on King St. afterwards; I didn't go) and a lot of the crew in attendance, including Abel's girlfriend/leading lady Shanyn Leigh. Willem Dafoe and Leigh play an actor and his much-younger girlfriend painter, respectively, spending the last day they and the rest of the world will have together in her apartment (where 80% of the movie takes place) before it all goes 'Poof' at 4:44AM (NY Time).

The 'end of the world on a low-budget' movie genre is getting crowded with quality product ("Another Earth," "Melancholia," etc.) and Ferrara's "4:44" doesn't convey the big picture of the world ending (minimal special effects, streets around the main location looking normal, a ton of stock footage on TV, etc.) as cinematically as its predecessors. What it does have is Ferrara's knack for portraying a specific type of local New York life, non-glamorous yuppie characters that would get together to get high/drunk one last time (Cisco's visit to some old friends doing just that is a highlight) and the now-expected religious iconography (statues of Jesus/Mary, Buddhist preachings, etc.) to give context to the core of the movie that is the Cisco-Skye relationship. "4:44" features the best use of Skype to get characters separated by distance (emotional and physical) to connect one last time I've seen in a movie, which surprised Ferrara when told this isn't as commonly show in movies as he thought. A Skype scene involving a Chinese delivery guy (Trung Nguyen) really stands out, as does Skye's talk with her mom (Anita Pallenberg) and the TV anchor (NY1's Pat Kiernan) signing off.

Skye kind-of annoyed me for most of "4:44's" running time (too girlish and immature) but, by the movie's end, her character (shades of Justine from "Melancholia") matures-enough to make the final scenes poignant-enough to land the flick on its feet. Dafoe is his usual self, an ideal anchor lead with which to spend 90 mins. moping/grinning (at footage of Al Gore and the Dalai Lama)/loving/struggling/laughing with the heavines of the premise. It's not as good as "Another Earth" or "Melancholia" but "4:44" at least breathes the same air of introspective romantic lyricism of its predecessors. Fans of Abel Ferrara will dig it, everyone else will likely not get it or care much for it.

User avatar
tarpilot
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:48 am

Re: 4:44 Last Day On Earth (Abel Ferrara, 2011)

#10 Post by tarpilot » Sat Mar 24, 2012 1:20 pm

The trailer actually reminded me of Don McKellar's Last Night more than anything else, the approach of which, with the cause never revealed and the film taking place long past any chance of recovery, the entire world treating the end as a foregone conclusion, still manages to seem remarkably unique in the wake of all the apocalypse pics we've been inundated with.

Also, I wouldn't even give a recovering alcoholic a pass for forgoing a drink with Abel. Come on.

User avatar
dad1153
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:32 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: 4:44 Last Day On Earth (Abel Ferrara, 2011)

#11 Post by dad1153 » Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:28 pm

But I don't drink! I did thank him for the offer and shook his hand though, Abel's one colorful dude.

j99
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 10:18 am

Re: Dreams of a Life (Carol Morley, 2011)

#12 Post by j99 » Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:49 am

I saw the DVD last night. What an amazing, yet tragic story. I find it incredible that someone could have lain dead for three years without being discovered. Even the television was still on! The documentary is brilliantly made, and Zawe Ashton is excellent in the lead role, although Martin, one of her ex boyfriends, and interviewee, may well be the star of the whole thing. A haunting tale which I feel will live with me for a long time to come.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The Films of 2011

#13 Post by domino harvey » Sun Dec 29, 2013 8:42 pm

(Don't mind this, folks, just moving my posts from the Top 10 of 2011 Thread to this one)

the Adjustment Bureau (George Nolfi) An unbelievably silly film, but it's all so ridiculous that you either go with it in a goofy way or just get frustrated to the point of murderous rage. Most will go the latter route, I suspect. I await the ridiculous internet memes centered around the plot holes in the film that are no doubt soon to come.

Bridesmaids (Paul Feig) Very amusing crowd-pleaser with a game comic performance by Kristen Wiig, who clearly knows how to write to her own strengths. Not a lot to say about a film like this beyond just listing the justly memorable comedic set pieces (my favorite was the parade of illegal car acts near the end, if just for how Wiig expertly beats the idea into the ground). Another populist all-audience flick I can happily pull off the shelf for pickier guests.

Ces amours-là (Claude Lelouch) I should have known better than to expect anything but maudlin schmaltz from Lelouch, but fool me seventeen times, shame on me... The film starts to right itself towards the end, when it turns into a musical and begs the question why the whole thing couldn't have been sung, though. The self-reflexive moments are pretty clumsy and pretty much cement now just as then how Lelouch had no business being mentioned in the same breath as the Nouvelle Vague-- those were pics made by lovers of great films, his are a product of shitty ones.

Crazy, Stupid, Love. (Glenn Ficarra and John Requa) It really must be the best year for American movies in God knows how long when even populist fluff like this is so much better than it needed to be. Showing a real humanist spirit beneath the romantic comedy veneer, this is a very funny and charming date movie that ticks off all the marks one would ever want in a film of this fashion.

Drive Angry (Patrick Lussier) Grindhouse as envisioned by Maxim Magazine. Seeing it in close proximity with some of my half-remembered basic cable darlings helps with the enjoyment factor-- this is not the work of an aesthetic auteur, but it has an oddly good-natured and laid-back charm for such an absurd glorification of violence geared die-rectly at the targeted frat house contingent. Not a soul on screen is taking this entertaining exercise in excess the least bit seriously. William Fichtner, as ever, steals the show by intentionally mis-inflecting his lines, and while I'm not familiar with Amber Heard's oeuvre (which I assume is primarily of the Wearing Tank Tops and Short-Shorts genre), there's probably no actress alive who could say a line like "I fucking hate devil worshippers! Who do they think they are?" (paraphrased, but within spitting distance) with a straight-face, so it's hard to blame her awkward dialog deliveries. It also doesn't help when you're acting against lines like "I'm going to kill you and then I'm going to defile your corpse" (which, let me assure you, is not paraphrased)

Hesher (Spencer Sussman) The question of why this one had so much trouble getting distributed doesn't take very long to get answered once the movie starts. This is the kind of repellant film that is so proud of its ugliness, so gleeful in its idiotic naughtiness, that it can't be bothered to deign the viewer with any reason for its own existence. No, the mere fact that such vulgar trash exists at all is vindication enough, I suppose, now let's dig in and see how deeeeep this shit truly is! It's anyone's guess what fine young actors like JGL and Natalie Portman saw in this repulsive indie exercise in daring the viewer to stop watching.

Higher Ground (Vera Farmiga) Well-made (if a bit MOR) character piece tracking one woman's life of faith through all its stages. I liked the little moments of observant behavior, like the friendly neighborhood pastor awkwardly meeting with the men of the church to listen to a series of audio tapes on how God wants husbands to manually stimulate their wives' clitorises, or how Farmiga's character will legitimately lapse into theologically-derived conversation at the slightest opportunity. The film does suffer from some actor-turned-director insecurities (those fantasy sequences were flawed with Paul Newman made Rachel Rachel and they certainly haven't aged well here), but I appreciated the intelligent and not overly judgmental approach toward Christianity and the performances are right.

the Ides of March (George Clooney) A strong, mature film that nevertheless doesn't seem to be saying anything new or anything familiar in a new way. The disillusionment storyline progresses in an unexpected direction and flirts with being a nice Mamet-esque story of intrigue and betrayal before settling into a more conventional if still involving plot of political maneuvers. The whole endeavor seems a few jolts short of actually starting up the consternation it wants to ignite.

Insidious (James Wan) Another interesting pic I never would have sought out were it not popping up on some of the other lists here. Wan has a talented eye for the theatrics of suspense and generally any of the "scare" moments that are not derailed by assorted "jump" hokum are first-rate-- he has great control of atmosphere, less so of any of the realities of the scares he teases. If he'd focused entirely on the intangible threats and forsaken the ill-defined spectral world the film devolves into, this might have been a great film. As is, it's still a much better horror excursion than I'd have ever expected from the "auteur" behind Saw.

Jane Eyre (Cary Fukunaga) Superior nth adaptation of the Brontë novel that manages to evoke a sense of place, nature, and atmosphere far better than most period lit adaptations-- wise, since a mood piece is probably the smartest way to approach something like this. Aided by visual wit and ideal performances from Mia Wasikowska (still one of the most consistently interesting young actresses working today) and Fassy (as the girls on my Tumblr Dashboard call him).

the Mill and the Cross (Lech Majewski) Slightly more tolerable than most of the other higher profile art house flicks from this year, but still frustratingly inert and too comfortable with its lack of discipline. Some interesting camera set-ups and the occasional striking image ease the pill.

Nostalgia For the Light (Patricio Guzmán) I just don't understand the arthouse scene anymore. Unfocused, un-color corrected documentary politicizing Chilean astronomy and offering up the occasional striking image that could have easily come from NOVA (and probably would have been surrounded by sounder material)

Restless (Gus Van Sant) Of particular offense in such close quarters with John Green's superior take on the young love and cancer tale, the Fault in Our Stars. This film does everything the book doesn't and shouldn't and wouldn't, and does it poorly. A smug, braindead film so misguided in its intent that there surely must be some other level its operating on, because why else would such grand talent be wasted so spectacularly? Viewing was made all the worse for knowing that the Blu-ray also contained an alternate "silent" cut of the film that eliminated the tortuous dialog. The film's sole saving grace is how beautiful and autumnal everything looks (maybe the film only works as an elaborate Rodarte-esque fashion ad), and the prospect of ditching the dumb specifics of the plot and just telling a cute doomed young love story without the affectations was exciting. But then one sees Van Sant literally used the same blockings and set-ups and just told the actors to intuit their lines wordlessly, the primary functions of which are communicated through obnoxious title cards that foist the same dreadful dialog on us. The resultant "alternate" film is even worse, if that's possible.

Rodarte: the Curve of Forgotten Things (Todd Cole) (Pick one) Fashion as the infinite aesthetic / Aesthetics as the infinite fashion

Take Me Home Tonight (Michael Dowse) Well, That 70s Show was relatively funny, but this is a comedy from writers of that show that didn't make me laugh once, though I must admit the film has a certain 80s movie charm that left me entertained regardless. Teresa Palmer is a qt. Chris Pratt is trim and fit. Bob Odenkirk and Michael Ian Black are wasted. I wish I had been wasted.

Tanner Hall (Tatiana von Fürstenberg and Francesca Gregorini) Truly terrible boarding school "drama" that is less insightful and well-observed into the hows and whys of teenage girls than any given five minutes on the CW (and if that's not damning enough, what is?). How is it that women were responsible for the creation of this cliched monstrosity? The only reason this misfire is on anyone's radar is the presence of up and coming actresses like Rooney Mara and Brie Larson (who at one point sports the most Herculean towel this side of Shirley MacLaine's in All in a Night's Work), and no doubt they'll be working as quickly as possible to make this one fall deeper and deeper down their IMDB profile.

Tyrannosaur (Paddy Considine) I tire so very quickly of films which want to "shock" me, particularly artsy-leaning character pieces like this. The cheap opening ploy, wherein the main character kicks his dog to its death, is only matched in laughable faux-bravado by Eddie Marsden's entrance, urinating over his wife's body while she feigns sleep. Oh my stars, you r soooo brave, movie! Once the film gets this garbage out of its system, it fares a little better than I'd have guessed based on the first half, but this is still bollocky wank shite.

Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives (Apichatpong Weerasethakul) Okay, so I'm cheating here since there is a thread for this, but it's filled with too much fawning for a dissenting voice to be welcomed. So I will simply say, for the sake of anyone else who just doesn't get it either, that this was probably the closest I've ever come to walking out of a movie in the theater. I hated it on a basic level and my arguments against it aren't kind to its fans, so I will leave it at just being one of those things where I'm over here and everyone else is over there.

the Way (Emilio Estevez) Maudlin Sheen Family travelogue masquerading as insightful. Limited filmmaking skills on Estevez' part doesn't help, though Martin Sheen comes off best-- it helps to just picture President Bartlett making the religious trek, as Sheen plays the part nearly identically. So earnest that it's hard to get too worked up against it, but there's not much here beyond seeing the sights/sites depicted.

Your Highness (David Gordon Green) Not really a stoner comedy (there's like two scenes of someone getting high-- every Wes Anderson movie is a stoner comedy three times over comparatively), but then again, not really a comedy either. Oh, it thinks it is, that's for sure. But I count zero laughs, though I recall letting out a chuckle at the intentionally overcooked romantic interest Natalie Portman lays on in one scene (she's the only one who comes out of this thing no worse for the wear). Apparently the dialog was mostly ad-libbed, and even the dregs of improv like Drew Carey and crew could surely do better than "Cervix is where I'll be tonight. When my penis is up your vagina" (or some awkwardly phrased equivalent). As a fantasy adventure, it's not half-bad and is moderately entertaining in spite of itself. Imagine if everyone involved gave up trying to be "shocking" and tried to be "funny," or just made a straight fantasy film-- I at least wouldn't feel embarrassed by-proxy for how expensive this looks.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: The Films of 2011

#14 Post by colinr0380 » Sun Sep 21, 2014 6:35 pm

We don't have a thread for this film or a dedicated Andrew Niccol thread, so I thought I'd throw this review in here:

In Time (Andrew Niccol, 2011)

An interesting film with lots of potential that unfortunately turns into an average Robin Hood-style redistribution of wealth film at the end. The concept is great though: a literal time travel movie (in the sense that you have to spend it to travel across 'time zones' or even just take the bus somewhere!), an unorthodox vampire film (in the sense that people are draining each other of their life essence, with roaming gangs preying on the weak and vulnerable) and a great comment on the current fascination in the culture with youthfully beautiful 20-somethings playing every role in a film, even when they are supposed to be playing somebody's mother or a centenerian!

There's also a great moment in which Timberlake and Seyfried's characters reminise and compare their experiences of their clocks starting, which makes a great class difference point and also is quite funny in the way that their clocks starting seems meant to play as being a little like the onset of menstruation! To push that analogy a little further, that means that Timberlake and the lower orders have to be promiscuous, immediately losing all of his time to others (though it can also play like a handshake gesture of solidarity in certain situations), while Seyfried's alloted time gets bolstered by an extra decade as a celebratory gift from her father, like a chastity belt! Of course as soon as Seyfried gets kidnapped by Timberlake she immediately loses her 'innocence' and all of her time!

I particularly liked that the toiling masses are portrayed as always on the breadline greedily eyeing up the year of time that every child is born with but doesn't start to use until 25, which feels like an interesting sci-fi reinterpretation of an idea of lower class parents living off the benefits that their children provide them with, then being useless once they come of age and have their year siphoned off. The upper classes don't fare much better either with the amusing incestual confusion between mother, daughter and wife given that they're all played by 25 year olds!

This ends up being similarly philosophical though not quite as affecting as Gattaca (it even has a great sea swimming scene that works as a nice companion to Gattaca's), mostly because the great ideas are all packed into the first half of the film, and partly because all of the time-related puns begin to grate after the first hour. Though there is the great line at a swanky party where instead of money our hero gets asked "Do you come from time?", which is one of the best time related puns in the film as well as suggesting a sense that Timberlake has just appeared in the upper crust society out of nowhere like a classical time traveller. Though after a while the straight faced puns on timekeeping get come so thick and fast that I'm surprised nobody got thrown out of a window with the villain saying "My, how time flies!" or something like that!

Yet why did nobody think to call the people with more than a century of time on their wrists Centurions?

By the way, I just caught this on its first UK television screening and just after the scene where Timberlake's character fails to save his mother (in a great small role for Tron: Legacy's Olivia Wilde) from running out of time just at the last moment, the film cut from him weeping over her body straight to this sponsorship ad, which was simultaneously hilarious and a horribly callous juxtaposition!

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Films of 2011

#15 Post by therewillbeblus » Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:57 pm

Another Happy Day: I decided to check the last name off a very small (hopefully only "so far") list and watch Levinson's debut feature, and only finished it in service so that no one else has to endure its heavy-handed emptiness. It's no surprise that his first effort has none of the embellished aesthetics that have come to define his auteurist development, aiding the successful translation of his thematic interests by subjugating the viewer into the experience of flooded anxiety and helpless isolation of youth with stylistic emulation of overstimulation. I genuinely think Levinson has a lot to say and uses the more aggressive possibilities of the medium to conscientiously meet people where they're at, ironically finding a humility in what appears to be exploitation- because exploitation is the language of the generation he targets, and the language he knows will cut to the core. His first feature attempts to examine generational divides and cultural disillusionment without any technical dialectics to support his histrionic approach to content. The result is exactly the kind of exposition on 'dysfunctional family dynamics over the course of a weekend' that we've seen hundreds of times before, only worse because the film is so self-serious from an entirely objective standpoint, unable to pierce the psyche's of his subjects and thus undermining any extremism with thinly-veiled characterizations and inauthentic melodramatic regurgitations.

In fairness, Levinson seems to be most interested in therapeutically dissecting his younger self in Ezra Miller's addict son, but he doesn't know how to engage his characters with each other and develop them through their qualities coming out in relationships, and this goes for the addict as well. Demi Moore's character should have been either humanized beyond Barkin's hatred for her, or reinforced as a trope from the subjective stance of Barkin, but because Levinson doesn't yet have the tools to communicate the latter option, and does genuinely seem interested in granting each character the complexity they deserve from multiple perspectives, it's puzzling how Moore and some other characters wind up becoming less intricate as we see them "develop" (?!) as if the camera is one character's self-fulfilling prophecy, but a character that doesn't seem to exist. You'd think this would be Barkin, Levinson's romantic partner at this point of his life (yep.), but she is the most egregious character with the most hysterical performance of the lot. I honestly thought this movie was just 'okay' in every scene without Barkin, but her full-throated self-victimization is irritating, pathetic, and undeserved from the information we get, her crying screams (95% of her performance, at least) are nails-on-a-chalkboard outlandish, and the moments when she just stares helpless and puppy-eyed made her seem like she deserved to feel how she did in every moment of defeatism. I don't think anyone making the movie is aware of this, but anyone who watches the movie will be. A big swing and a miss, but definitely an amateur demonstration of familiar themes to be profoundly illustrated down the road. Maturity will do that to/for you.

Post Reply