A Movie A Week: 'Rachel Getting Married' (2008)

Here's another for the 'A Movie A Week' record.

Rachel Getting Married: In a year of so many great films, this is definitely one of the underappreciated ones. And it has been overlooked for several reasons that range from unconventional camerawork to a narrative that enjoys meandering in every possible direction while telling its tale. Rachel Getting Married is about a young woman, Kym (Anne Hathaway), who has been in and out of rehab for the past 10 years and she has now returned home for the weekend for her sister's wedding. But that premise doesn't really tell you anything at all about what makes this movie tick.

   This film may seem to be about Kym (Hathaway was nominated for an Oscar for her performance after all) but it is really about her sister Rachel's (Rosemarie DeWitt) wedding and how it affects all the people involved. The film is an ensemble piece that uses Kym's addiction to showcase how events can colour perceptions and how dysfunctional families struggle with making things work. The film is written by Jenny Lumet, daughter of director Sidney Lumet, who brilliantly sketches all the characters without needing to spell out histories, emotions or motivations. Kym has to confront many of her issues and finds that to do that the rest of the family may have to as well. That includes her divorcee mother (Debra Winger), her father (Bill Irwin), her stepmother (Anna Deavere Smith) and the brother-in-law to-be, Sidney (Tunde Adebimpe). 

   The character of Sidney has a musical background, which allows an eclectic mix of characters and musical styles to populate the screen and it all intermingles in the melting pot of cultures that is Rachel's wedding. I don't know where director Jonathan Demme ('The Silence of the Lambs', 'Philadelphia') has been for all these years but this is a wonderful return to form for him. The visual strategy is interesting to say the least - cinematographer Declan Quinn shoots it like a home movie of a wedding, the hand-held camera walking in and out of scenes as randomly as you please. The best part is that the style works wonderfully well for the story that is being told.

   The only problem I had with the film is that it was written and shot so that it purposely slows down at unexpected points and spends an inordinate amount of time on scenes that perhaps add very little to the larger narrative. But I also recognise that Demme was going for Altmanesque feel where the trite scenes might actually pose some messages beyond the obvious. And it's a clever contradiction to use because you never know what is fitting together and feels so much more like you are not watching a film at all. Hathaway is off the charts amazing in this film and the Academy Award nomination was well deserved. DeWitt is equally good and she provides the rope for Hathaway to stretch herself. Winger has a smaller role but still manages to hold her own in one particularly powerful scene. And while moving around so many characters, the story does manage to cover many aspects of dealing with addiction and how it can affect everyone around you. 

   This is definitely one of those keep-an-open-mind type of movies because you need to embrace how different it is from any form of conventional storytelling for you to be able to enjoy it. At times it may feel like a raw wound or a reckless home video but it will also show real people muddling through some destructive situations the best way they know how. Weird, strangely cathartic and empathetic at the same - definitely one for the DVD collection!

A Movie A Week: 'Outrageous Fortune' (1987)

I've decided that it would be a mistake to limit my 'A Movie A Week' column to contemporary films when there are so wonderful ones that don't get talked about enough. There are also some classics it's nice to be reminded about. I recently caught this one again and I remembered why I loved it so much - it just continues to stand the test of time.

Outrageous Fortune: The 80s had some truly great comedies - I still remember seeing 'Nine to Five' an extraordinary number of times and never tiring of it. Outrageous Fortune is a lesser known film but it is definitely right up there with any of the other comedy classics. I am a sucker for comedies with female protaganists and sadly there aren't enough of these movies around. 

Shelley Long and Bette Midler star as Lauren Ames and Sandy Brozinsky, two total opposites who are in an acting class together - and unknown to each other they also have a boyfriend (Peter Coyote) in common. When he goes missing under mysterious circumstances, the two women are thrust into a world of chaos and danger while trying to unearth what happened to him. Leslie Dixon pens an exceedingly smart screenplay that gives Long and Midler enough room to do what they do best. And their exchanges are absolutely brilliant - this flick has some of the best acting you'll see in a comedy. Each actress causes the other to continuously raise her game and the result is perfect comic chemistry. 

Interspersing comedy and action is tough to do without it becoming cheesy but this is one movie that does it effortlessly. The 80s just seemed to have a different brand of comedy that has an eternal appeal. Can you imagine anyone but Shelley Long delivering a line like 'How dare you defraud the legitimate theater community of New York City!' or a non-Midler rendition of 'What, was I supposed to let them unhook me from life support so I could pay my bills?'

If you haven't seen this one yet, I highly recommend it!

A Movie A Week: 'Twilight' (2008)

I've been lucky enough (mainly because of an enthusiastic and resourceful movie buff family) to at least catch one movie every single week and it has been going on for a long time now. So, I'll run them down in this on-again off-again column 'A Movie A Week' as and when they come to me.

Twilight: I finally got around to seeing this one recently. After so much was made of Stephenie Meyer's young-adult vampire-romance novel being brought to the screen last year, I wondered which side of the fence I would be on. Unfortunately, not having read the book, I have no basis for comparison and cannot tell you how good an adaptation it is. On its own merits, it is a fairly mediocre film that reeks of low-budget filmmaking. I would guess that the novel has more depth because this one embraces shallowness and rushes through characterisation. I like the teen angst/vampire story idea but it's been done in so many different (and better) ways in recent years. The fact is that I've seen episodes of 'Buffy The Vampire Slayer' that kept me more interested than this one. Maybe the source material itself is lacking and the low budget didn't make anything easy. However, director Catherine Hardwicke and Robert Pattinson as Edward Cullen don't do themselves any favours. I could see what they were attempting to do with some mixed character motivations and stilted dialogue but the storytelling felt a little weak. Hardwicke may have been passionate about the material but she cannot direct action at all (the weakest element of the film) and maybe some more scenes and backgrounding for the rest of the Cullen household would have helped. Kristen Stewart and the second-tier cast actually give a pretty good account of themselves, so it's not a total loss. The film, on the whole, is difficult to recommend. I usually love a good vampire movie but Twilight just didn't deliver the goods - it winds up as a pseudo-hip teen romp that cashes in on the flavour of the season.

What dreams may come.... (what 2009 is all about)

And the list continues, here are more must-sees for 2009.

May 1

X-Men Origins: Wolverine: Do you remember a time when comic book movies were new and exciting? That first feeling of excitement on seeing 'Spider-man' in 2002 - yea, well times have changed and we need more from comic book films today. The Dark Knight and Watchmen have changed the comic genre and our perspective on the way these movies should be made. Every film needs to be seen in context and the Spider-man, X-Men and the Blade trilogy have all had an impact on the evolution of comic book cinema. However, what makes films like the 'The Dark Knight' enduring is the rewatchability factor - something the X-Men films lack severely. I loved them the first few times I saw them - they just don't work as well any more. And now we have X-Men Origins: Wolverine coming in May telling the comic origin of fan favourite Wolverine. But the trailer makes it seem very similar to the original trilogy (hopefully closer to 1 and 2 than 3). That old excitement has waned and one can only hope that it offers something different that is as exhilarating as a film like Iron Man. Unfortunately, 20th Century Fox is in charge and their comic book track record is abysmal at best - the most we can hope for is that a small measure of justice is done to one of the best comic characters ever created - Wolverine. 
   The good news is that two other eagerly awaited characters - Deadpool and Gambit - will also be seen on screen for the first time. Again keep expectations low because Fox does not seem to have aimed very high either story or character wise. Oh how I wish I could see Marvel Studios reboot this franchise themselves... but that continues to be my wish. Until then, check out X-Men Origins: Wolverine. At least Hugh Jackman should rock our minds as Logan a.k.a. James Howlett.

If there is a story, there is a way to tell it.... (what 2009 is about!)

As promised, here's the list that will continue to go on and on and yet never be truly exhaustive - the must-sees of 2009 (I reserve the right to include movies for reasons that range from the obvious to the kinky). Without further ado, here they are:

March 6

Watchmen: The perfect way to begin the list is with what is arguably the most anticipated film of the year! Created by writer Alan Moore, artist Dave Gibbons, and colorist John Higgins, Watchmen was published as a series by DC Comics during 1986 and 1987 and has been subsequently reprinted in collected form. It was the only graphic novel to be on TIME Magazine's list of the 100 greatest English-language novels from 1923 to 2005. The legendary Moore changed the comic book genre forever with his deconstruction of the superhero mythos and the material is still revered to this day. Moore has also since disassociated himself from film adaptations of his works and termed Watchmen in particular as 'unfilmable'. Watchmen has been in development for more than 20 years with talent and studios coming and going. Finally, it has got made and with Zach Snyder, who has claimed he fought to maintain a slavish adherence to the source material. It is a dirty, gritty and shocking tale of alternate reality where costumed vigilantes co-exist with the normal folk. If you're a fan of the novel, this is a must-watch. If you have a sensitive disposition, best to stay away. All of the footage seen so far has been brilliant and the early reviews have been overwhelmingly positive. What is the least that is expected from this movie? That it redefines the superhero genre forever!

May 21

Terminator Salvation: I'm not usually prone to extreme reactions to movies, ideas for films or cinema buzz. However, this film was an exception - I hated the idea for this movie. For me, Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines does not exist because T2 ended the franchise so superbly - T3 just felt like an insult to everything that was right about the first two. James Cameron gave us two great movies that have since become classics; the first was iconic and scary; the second was an action fan's dream come true. Then for some reason (dollar signs), they made a third that was an unintentional parody of all that came before. You know it's bad when a film ends with a nuclear holocaust and that's the best part of the whole flick. 
       After doing all they could ruin this series, I wondered why they were going back again. Gluttons for punishment, huh? Sure seemed like it when McG (yes, that's his name - director of Charlie's Angels, Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle) was confirmed as director. I then decided to switch to a more measured approach. I saw McG's 'We Are Marshall' - showed some talent but still Terminator Salvation seemed like too much and I wrote this one off.
        Since then, three things have happened that changed my mind completely; 1. Jonathan Nolan (Memento, The Dark Knight) rewrote the script. 2. Christian Bale was cast. 3. The trailer is already better than the whole of T3. I always wondered what the man-machine war would look like on film and now we will see it. I am prepared to forgive timeline alterations if the film can keep me riveted for two hours. If nothing else, this film means that the bad taste of T3 can be washed away from our mouths. Looking forward to it!

March 13

Race to Witch Mountain: Now to shake things up a bit! Why should must-sees always be so predictable? For a change of pace, let's talk about a must-see family movie in 2009. If you're old enough, you probably remember the 1975 family film 'Escape to Witch Mountain' starring Kim Richards and Ike Eisenmann. If you don't, you can experience the story for the first time with Race to Witch Mountain. The original had a lot going for it and the 2009 version has just as much, if not more. Dwayne Johnson is on a family movie hot streak after 'The Game Plan' and (though I may be a little biased) any film that has Carla Gugino in it can only be the better for it. The trailer alone is probably one of the best Disney has come up with in a while. And if you talk about young talent, AnnaSophia Robb can give both Abigail Breslin and Dakota Fanning a run for their money. Alexander Ludwig (The Seeker: The Dark Is Rising) plays the second lead in this tale of two alien kids with extraordinary powers who join forces with a cabbie and a UFO expert in a race against time to prevent global catastrophe. Sound like fun at the cinema? You betcha!

Lots of extra butter on my jumbo popcorn please!

How do you describe the popcorn film? Many call it a waste of time, others call it perfect entertainment.... I like to call it one of the most popular genres of cinema. Plotlines are usually disposable, any stand-out acting is a bonus and the action on screen is usually worth the price of your popcorn. An example of one of the best popcorn films ever made is 'Con Air' - it has everything - an outrageous storyline, an awesome cast and even some above-average acting. And the action is enough to get your blood pumping every time. It is an eternally watchable popcorn flick and very few make it to that top tier! This year there are some fun popcorn films on offer and no matter what people say, if you can learn to enjoy it, there is joy to be had from a fun popcorn movie. These four stand out from the pack for various reasons for me - sometimes negative buzz can be a very good thing!

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen: Before I saw Michael Bay's Transformers in 2007, I didn't know what to expect from seeing one of my favourite cartoons as a kid brought to life on the big screen. I was surprised but understood that the material lends itself quite easily to popcorn entertainment. And nobody does it better than Bay! This year's ultimate popcorn extravaganza is undoubtedly the sequel. Releasing on June 24, 2009, this second film in the franchise will feature even bigger Bay elements  - that means huge robots and huger explosions. Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox are back - always a good thing (that's Fox to the left). Throw in Josh Duhamel, Tyrese Gibson and about 40 transforming cars into the mix - what have you got? To use the word of the moment - yea, that's right - 'Bayhem'!

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra: When this film was first announced, my childhood memories came flooding back - this was actually happening! I had owned so many of the toys, I had religiously watched the cartoon and I had always wondered what a live action G.I.Joe would be like. It became my most anticipated film for a long time.... but with a heavy heart I am forced to include it in this year's popcorn roster. It has a 7 August 2009 release, but I came across the script for this one and I couldn't resist - boy, was it a letdown! In recent years, G.I.Joe has been such a popular comic with a serious and violent tone that I, like other fans, thought that the characters would be best served if taken seriously. Unfortunately, the filmmakers seem to have decided there's too much realism going around, so it's time for a freaky military fantasy. Imagine taking the themes of the (frankly awful) cartoon, mixing in some random comic history plus dollops of lopsided humour and you'll get a fair idea of what this film is about. But it's not all bad news - you at least get to finally see Duke (Channing Tatum), General Hawk (Dennis Quaid), The Baroness (Sienna Miller), Snake Eyes (Ray Park) and Scarlett (Rachel Nichols) on screen. The cons include Marlon Wayans as Ripcord and a horrendous plot I won't get into. Of the lot, Park is brilliant casting and in a different movie could have been special (especially since they have Christopher Eccleston as Destro, Arnold Vosloo as Zartan and Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Cobra Commander)....G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra feels like such a missed chance - it's simply pure 80s nostalgia that will get me to the cinema. That and I generally love popcorn cinema, so if for right now this is the best they can do, let's see it.

Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li: After the abomination that was the 90s attempt to adapt the same video game, anything this film does will be infinitely better. Now, this film has had fanboys wringing their hands in fury since it was announced as they believe movies like this are a waste of time. And video game fans want the feeling they got while twiddling the controls without realising there wasn't much to begin with. The 1994 movie to be honest, does not deserve to be called a legitimate effort in filmmaking. For those who don't remember that atrocity starring Jean-Claude Van Damme, Kylie Minogue and a host of forgettable people, it had choice quotes like - "For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me, it was Tuesday." Ohhhh (***shivers at the memory***). What they've managed so far is to restart the franchise following the chronology of the characters and yes, taking it a tad more seriously this go-around. You've also got Smallville's Kristin Kreuk (pic), Chris Klein, Neal McDonough, Michael Clarke Duncan, Robin Shou and Moon Bloodgood to name a few. And if this does even moderately well, you might get to see other franchise characters get their own films. Unfortunately, popcorn flicks like this are very hit or miss and this one might well be coming at the wrong time (27 February) in the middle of the economic crisis. It's pretty likely it will get a cold shoulder and the Street Fighter franchise will be back in cold storage for some more years. Only time will tell!

Dragonball Evolution: If there was another film (apart from Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li) that was cursed by negative hype long before it completed filming, it's this one. These two films were declared the worst of the year before 2009 began. It's these extreme reactions that are silly - sure, we may not like how some films turn out but watch them before condemning them. And popcorn films, I generally believe, are critic-proof or they should be because they are not made for critical acclaim - it's mindless entertainment, nothing more. That being said, I can understand some of the anger - I never watched the anime series or read the manga on which this film is based, so I cannot judge how different this film looks. Obviously, if the source material meant a lot to me, seeing a mediocre adaptation would be insulting. But a little common sense goes a long way - stick with the source that you love and don't let the adaptation take away from your enjoyment of it. Sometimes the popcorn route works, sometimes it doesn't - these films need to cater to the masses, you can't recoup $100 million from fans alone. The trailer seems okay enough (some Mortal Kombat vibes - not a good thing) and it seems to be a get-what-you-expect kind of a deal. 8 April 2009 is the date for this one.

While on the subject of unusual popcorn films this year, I think I need to get started on an exhaustive list of Hollywood must-sees for 2009. Should be interesting - there are a wide variety of interesting films on offer. I'm still catching up on my must-sees of 2008, so the sooner the better with this list I think. Watch for that next!

What could have been....

As promised these are two films that should have been something else, but wound up being missed opportunities. Why are these two in this list and not in the turkey parade? Read on to find out...

The Spirit: Anyone who loves comics will tell you Frank Miller is a visionary. Yes, he is but is he a filmmaker? A co-directing credit on Sin City is not enough to convince me - not when Robert Rodriguez is your backup. Sin City may be one of the greatest comic adaptations but not all comics can make the transition. The Spirit is a beloved comic by another visionary, Will Eisner, Miller's mentor in many ways. By virtue of having its origins in the 1940s, a lot about the character is outdated. Miller figured that by keeping what he loved about Eisner's stuff and adding some Sin City aesthetics, he could make a watchable film. Unfortunately, this movie will be a hit only with those who love the 1960s Batman and The Green Hornet - it wears over-the-top like a morning jacket and campiness like a badge of honour. Was it a wasted effort? Not if it taught Miller that he has a lot to learn about filmmaking. Is it something that would make Eisner roll over in his grave? Not really but it is a hollow attempt and the great man deserves so much better.

Punisher: War Zone: The good news is that it is the best of the three attempts at bringing The Punisher comic book to life. The bad news is that a comic come to life can sometimes lose something in the translation and some cheesiness and crazy action can creep in as well as shock factors that do not work. The violence is for the first time Punisher worthy and Ray Stevenson is Frank Castle - no two ways about it. Unfortunately, director Lexi Alexander clearly chose to not portray the material in a serious vein and she plays everything straight only in a comic fantasy sense. It just felt lacking in the writing and those finishing touches that bring disparate elements together in a eclectic mix of comic book entertainment. Feels like a missed chance!

Why aren't these two called turkeys? Because they aren't - they are weird, outrageous almost-okay below-par films that might be cult classics in the making. They show that comics on film can be approached in so many different ways. And without so many different ways of looking at films, where's the fun?