The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)

2/5

When I first heard about David Fincher's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button a year ago, I must admit I was very excited. But the more I saw trailers for it, the less and less thrilled I became. And when I finally saw the movie, my feelings had turned completely dead to what I originally thought was an innovative concept. I don't know why it happened, but I'm sad that it did, because I was unable to truly enjoy this movie. After thinking about what it meant to age backwards, to see everyone you "grew up" with die, to love someone and lose them, I let those thoughts all percolate in my mind. And by the time I saw the movie, there was nothing new for me to take away from it.

If you strip out the gimmick, you'll see that the story itself is fairly plain and uninteresting. It's as if they wanted to make a new Forrest Gump but ran out of interesting stories and just went with second-rate ones. And it's long. You can try convincing yourself that it's a sweeping epic, but you'd just be lying to yourself. It was like watching Ben Stein read War and Peace. The acting was all right, although I never really felt it to be a powerful or emotionally gripping piece. The romance was unconvincing and quite frightening actually. The pacing was lethargic, and many worthless scenes were kept when they should have been cut. The best thing that can be said about this movie is its visual style. Fincher knows good cinematography. And with that, seamlessly integrating CGI into it. Even in that regard, however, it resembled a Jeunet picture (Amelie, A Very Long Engagement) more than a Fincher picture (Seven, Zodiac) because the tones were much warmer than I'm used to seeing from Fincher. Fincher directing The Curious Case of Benjamin Button felt like Lynch directing The Elephant Man.

Overall, I have to say I'm very disappointed with this film. I don't know how "bad" it is, but I do know I got nothing out of it. I can see others enjoying it, but I don't know how deep their appreciation for it really goes. To me, it felt like the filmmakers took a great concept and wrote 3 hours of filler around it. And much like Memento, we're left with a movie that a lot of people like for its initial idea, but is ultimately a subpar, immature, unfinished picture. At its heart, there's really nothing this film has to offer me except negative three hours and negative eight bucks.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/

Valkyrie (2008)

4/5

Bryan Singer's Valkyrie is a superbly-made thriller based on the true story of Operation Valkyrie, an attempt by German officers to assassinate Hitler and stage a coup against the SS/Gestapo. As we all know, the operation failed, but I had no idea how close it was to succeeding. If only this one small thing had been different, if only that one person had done something else, and the entire course of human history could have been so dramatically altered. Watching this movie, I felt that tension, that what-if, that hope that the past could be rewritten. Singer has not only crafted an exhilarating thriller, but has also managed to make us forget what actually happened, if only for a moment.

I have no idea how historically accurate this movie is, and can only assume it is more inaccurate than accurate. That doesn't bother me. Some people may have come into the movie expecting a historical drama, and it may bother those people, but the movie is no such thing. It is a first-rate thriller, and knowing that will help you appreciate the elements that add to the suspense and forgive any poetic license or lack of characterization. The movie did what it set out to do expertly. Of all Singer's direction, what stands out most is the pacing and mood. We are drawn in so intimately to the plot, to every minuscule victory and defeat, that we fail to realize our knuckles getting whiter from clenching our fists so tightly in anticipation of the events to come. Every other facet of the film is either above average or at the very least adequate. Despite being much-maligned in a number of scathingly negative reviews, I found Cruise's performance to be "perfectly satisfactory," to quote Ebert's review. I was a bit perplexed by the inclusion of certain unnecessary scenes, but they were few and far between and easily forgivable. All in all, this delivered on every expectation I had going in. Any World War II buffs looking to learn more about Operation Valkyrie might want to stick to the History Channel and pass on this movie. But if you're a fan of suspense and were intrigued by the trailer, I highly recommend you check this out.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0985699/

Burn After Reading (2008)

4/5

Burn After Reading starts with Malkovich being fired from his job as a CIA analyst. His righteous irateness is immediately hilarious, but also becomes a part of his character as the film progresses. His job loss sends his wife Swinton to a divorce lawyer, and she copies his private files to a disc for her financial security. The disc is lost in a health club, where trainers Pitt and McDormand find it and try to use it to blackmail Malkovich. Swinton is also cheating on Malkovich with Clooney, who meets McDormand through online dating and cheats on both his wife and Swinton with her too. Oh, and Simmons is in there as the CIA head and voice of reason who verbalizes just how confusing and meaningless the entire movie was. If that simplification of the plot was too complicated to follow, then you might not enjoy this movie. But if you can wade through that morass, or if you just don't care about plot, then this could be the comedy for you. Why?

Because the Coens are amazing. Amazing writers, producers, editors, directors. They are amazing at everything they do. Burn After Reading is another comedic hit that further confirms my faith in their constant and consistent ability to impress. No matter the genre, be it a western cat-and-mouse chase or a doofus spy thriller, they manage to transform it into a dark comedy. And because of this, the film becomes its own unique creation, the world is completely new to us, and we have no idea what we'll witness on the journey the Coens take us through. The acting is spot-on, the writing memorable, and the mood flawlessly evoked. The shots are beautiful, the compositions precise, the movements natural. Everything the Coens put in this movie--from bizarre phrases to peculiar mannerisms--is put in with such conviction and certainty that you watch the movie with the feeling that this is so right. I can't even get into specifics, because I would just gush worthless hyperbole. If you love the Coens, this will not disappoint. If you don't "get" them, then this is not the movie to change your mind. But I'm so glad to be in the former group.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0887883/

Doubt (2008)

3/5

Doubt, a movie by John Patrick Shanley based on his play of the same name, is about a nun (Meryl Streep) in a Catholic school who suspects the priest (Philip Seymour Hoffman) of molesting a young child. As far as the acting goes, this movie is the one to see. Shanley is able to bring out amazing performances from his entire cast--I had no idea Amy Adams could pull out the tour de force she did. The others are perhaps superior acting jobs, and theirs are definitely more extensive and sustained, but Adams's portrayal of a recently-hired and innocent nun was the revelation for me. She exuded such emotion--such tenderness and honesty--that I was completely beside myself with empathy.

In addition to the acting, I was impressed by Deakins's cinematography, which you could tell Shanley was trying to use to separate the movie from the play. When adapting a play to the silver screen, you're losing the vivacity and involvement of a live performance, so the film needs to bring something else to the table, which has historically been in the form of cinematography. But while the cinematography was excellent, it wasn't enough to make it a memorable adaptation. The rest of the movie was not as great as I had anticipated. The script was underwhelming. Being a Tony- and Pulitzer-winning play, I was expecting phenomenal. And phenomenal is not what I got. I loved the dialogue, but the story could have used a lot of work. Everything is hinted at, bushes are beaten around, and nothing is revealed. Even if you pay strict attention the entire time, it's easy to miss out on huge plot points if you're not thinking the same thing they are. Still, the movie was pretty much what I expected, but just a bit weaker in quality than I hoped for. Definitely watch it if the trailer appealed to you.

Oh, and apparently Streep's glasses were anachronistic, but I did not find that to be distracting.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0918927/