Fracture (2007)

3/5

Fracture is a movie I thought was a waste of time for many reasons. There are a lot, and I mean a lot, of characters and subplots that I thought were 100% worthless. The main twist at the end hinges on something that was extremely obvious to me the entire movie (although apparently not to everyone). The plot was ludicrous and outrageous. It's less than two hours long and it felt like it was over three hours. It was quite the ordeal.

Yet I enjoyed my time spent watching the movie, for the most part. The acting by Hopkins and Gosling was phenomenal. It didn't take itself seriously and there were tons of jabs at itself that made for exceedingly funny moments. I laughed a lot in this movie. And while I did see the main plot twist, I didn't see the full extent of the twist and was still surprised and impressed at its ending. Overall, not recommended if you're not interested; but if you are, I see no reason not to check it out, but maybe on video.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0488120/

Les Glaneurs et la glaneuse (2000)

3/5

Agnès Varda, the biggest female director of the French New Wave, continues to make movies that still have the feel of French New Wave in them. It was clearly low-budget and exceedingly self-referential, and lacked a traditional story arc. The movie is a free-form documentary about gleaners. Yes, the topic is a bit unconventional and is perhaps one of the film's biggest detractors. After all, what do I care about gleaners? But it has some extremely insightful relationships to lots of different things. The movie has no central objective or goal; it is exploratory in nature. That makes it extremely interesting and surprising, but also hinders it. I felt there was a lot of repetition, and despite its 80-minute running time, the movie feels like it takes forever because of the lack of organization. However, there are some very nice compositions and provocative ideas sprinkled randomly throughout the movie. Bottom line: interesting, but why am I watching this? For an excellent free-form documentary that is much more inventive, creative, and fun, I wholeheartedly recommend Orson Welles's F for Fake.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0247380/

The Dinner Game (1998)

4/5

The Dinner Game is hysterical. I saw this movie at Clemons Library with my friends working around me and my joy distracted all of them. It consistently made me laugh until the final freeze frame. The movie is based on a play, and it shows: it takes place in one location with a limited cast and incredibly precise dialogue. The acting was pitch-perfect for comedic timing, but some of the editing hindered the comedy and was pretty amateurish overall. There was no real music to speak of, and the cinematography/directing overall was extremely bland. But this movie is SO funny!! Highly highly recommended for pure entertainment value.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0119038/

On connaît la chanson (1997)

4/5

This film is a bit of a different turn from director Alain Resnais, who did Night and Fog, Hiroshima Mon Amour, and Last Year at Marienbad. It's a delightful romance/musical comedy about interlocking relationships and human connections. Classic French songs are lip-synched by characters to express their feelings, which can at times get a bit overbearing, but is usually a very welcome bit of excitement in what would be an otherwise talk-heavy movie. There is no action to speak of, as is typical of many French movies; there is just a bunch of people talking about love and life and human frailty. The music adds spice and humor. The writing and acting was well-done. The cinematography felt a bit video-esque (was it not shot on film?) but the editing was excellent. Odile was by far my favorite character; nearly every thing she said and the way she reacted to different situations made me laugh out loud. All in all, recommended if you like French movies, but not recommended if you're looking for a summer blockbuster or a more typical American movie.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0119828/

Serenity (2005)

4.9/5

Note: I watched this movie as a lover of the space western series Firefly, of which this film is an extension. I therefore will not separate myself from the series in writing this review by considering it a stand-alone film. If the movie interests you, then I recommend seeing the series first and then this movie.

Serenity is an amazing addition to an amazing series. It is different in mood and scope, but these changes, while perhaps not necessary, were better-suited for the feature film, I think. It is less witty and more action-oriented, more epic and less personal (for many characters, though not all). It's darker and fiercer; there is less room for jokes and smiles because the stakes are so high.

The movie fleshes out the already complex captain Mal and sympathizes River more, while most other characters are relegated to the background and expanded on very slightly. The themes presented, on choice and sin and on love's power, sometimes seem heavy-handed because of direct dialogue about it, but are thankfully never shoved down the audience's throat through repetition. Because of the series, the characters have a lot of depth going into the movie, so when they are fighting, I am on the edge of my seat hoping they will not die. And the movie goes so far in how thrilling it is; at one point I almost slumped, having lost all hope, thinking everyone would die and the only way out was for this to all be a dream (which it thankfully was not).

The acting matched the acting in the series (excellent). The cinematography was very similar, although it seemed like it tried harder. There were some shots that were much better than anything I saw in the series though. The music, sad to say, didn't live up to my expectations because I love the theme song and was quite miffed at its exclusion. Watch the series. And then watch this movie. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0379786/

The Lookout (2007)

3/5

The aptest word to describe this movie is, for me, unfulfilling. It starts out strong with an absolutely beautiful opening scene that explains the tragedy that results in Chris Pratt's head injury and debilitation that is his central characteristic throughout the rest of the movie. But from there, it never quite lives up to expectations. Coming in, I thought it was going to be a crime movie/character study à la The Beat That My Heart Skipped, but it doesn't even approach the depth, quality, or intensity that that movie contains. As is very often the case, in trying to be both kinds of movies, it succeeds at neither. Much of the story seems sloppy and unnecessary and characters come and go without being fully fleshed out. The writing relied excessively on voice-over and flash-back. The heist/crime aspect was simple and uninteresting and it took away from the emotional aspect of a character living with pain and guilt. The character study had potential, but not much else, as the movie spent more time on the plotting and execution of the bank robbery than on developing his mental anguish.

The acting by Jeff Daniels was awesome; his unique character is very memorable and well-envisioned. I didn't find Joseph Gordon-Levitt's acting spectacular, but I don't think he had much to work with. He was excellent in the very few opportunities he had to be excellent. There were some very pretty shots (in the beginning and during the actual bank heist). And while it never quite satisfied, the morsels of tenderness and emotion sprinkled throughout the movie felt real and true. I wouldn't recommend it unless you're interested in the actors, because they are really the only above average qualities this movie has.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0427470/

Eyes Without a Face (1960)

4/5

Eyes Without a Face is unique in the horror genre in that it is surreal and expressionist. It frightens through its environment and the subtly real characterizations of the "villains," not through surprise or the grotesque (although it would have been easy to, given its subject matter). The movie is about a doctor who wants to graft a face onto his daughter, who has been scarred because of a car accident that he is responsible for. That is one of its strongest points--that we understand his motivations and empathize with him. There was one part where I literally jumped back in my chair because of the frank, unexpected nature of someone's actions. The complexity of character that arose from that single action enriched the analytical groundwork of the film. Also, from a directing standpoint, the use of music and of sound overall (especially of footsteps) was brilliant.

That being said, the sound was very often low-quality; you could tell when they overlaid audio tracks because of background static. The production quality overall (such as sets, lighting, camera, etc.), editing, and much of the acting seemed amateurish. However, the idea is what carried this movie through, and it was not hindered by the poor quality of these elements.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0053459/