The Brothers Bloom (2008)

5/5

Rian Johnson's The Brothers Bloom is the best con movie to come out in years--maybe ever. It exceeds standards set by its predecessors on what a con movie needs to be, and sets brand new ones for how entertaining and enjoyable it can and should be. It keeps you hooked and in control for the first 2/3, then spins wildly and wonderfully beyond your grasp for the last 1/3. You are wholly lost in a grand mosaic of deceit, lies, and cons on top of cons. You never quite know for sure who's playing whom and who will emerge at the top of the pile. You have suspicions, but you're never 100%. And because the foundation of the story itself is built on shifting sand, nagging doubts incessantly pepper your predictions. It's absolute bliss for anyone enamored of the genre.

From start to finish, Rian Johnson's creativity and inventiveness plastered a grin on my face and kept it there. We are introduced to the brothers with a poem, one that subtly foreshadows the puckish yet poignant mood of the piece. And one that is referenced again at the end, as the entire piece is brought back full circle. The movie playfully prides itself on anachronisms with a self-referential, tongue-in-cheek attitude. It joyously combines 1940's costuming with 1970's music and modern technology to create an altogether novel and singular experience. The cinematography is subtle but powerful and the editing clean and brisk. The acting is spot-on, the characters rich and unique. The plot and dialogue are smart, sharp, and simply sublime. It all combines in perfect harmony to create a movie that is fresh, fun, and stimulating on numerous levels. Watching it was pure ecstasy for me. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0844286/

Topkapi (1964)

3/5

Jules Dassin's comedy caper Topkapi has as many problems as it does successes. It was enjoyable enough half the time, but frustratingly inadequate the other half. There is an impressive symmetry to the film; it seems that for every positive there is an equal and opposite negative to counterbalance it. If the concept weren't so illogical, I'd say the director had planned it.

The best part of this movie, as with any Dassin film, is its ending. There is not a single misstep in the 20-minute heist sequence; the audience feels the anxiety and tension the characters are experiencing and cannot look away. Coincidentally, the worst part of this movie is its beginning. The film starts with a 10-minute hallucinatory "explanation" of the protagonist's motivation in an unintelligible foreign accent. It must have turned away untold multitudes of previously interested filmgoers. While the dialogue and characters were amusing, the accents and music were annoying. The promising build-up to the climax was disrupted by a bizarre and wholly unnecessary homoerotic oiled wrestling orgy. (It is so difficult to grab onto a shirtless oiled wrestler, it seems, that most end up shoving their hands down the other contestants' pants just to be able to grip onto something.) Still, most of the negatives are unintentionally humorous in their own way and can be used as excuses to further enjoy the movie; so if you're interested in heist movies, check this one out.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0058672/

Judgment at Nuremberg (1961)

4/5

First off, the acting in this movie by Marlene Dietrich, Maximilian Schell, and Burt Lancaster is unforgettable. The dialogue in the script is spot-on; sensational when need be, understated at other times. The ending is phenomenal, and utterly uncompromising in its verdict. The power is amplified by the uncertainty and moral ambiguity present up until the finale. It could get surprisingly emotional and devastatingly powerful at times. It grips you from the start and never lets you go, even after the screen blackens.

Stanley Kramer doesn't know how to direct worth crap. The camera movements and shot composition were so ludicrous, unnatural, and just plain ugly, it distracted tremendously from the most impressive components (story and acting). Although, by setting practically the entire movie in a courtroom, he set himself up for disaster. He had two options: either create artificial camera movements or use extremely stale, stationary shots. He unfortunately chose the former, but even if he had chosen the latter, it wouldn't have been much better because the editing was terrible. On that note, it's unnecessarily long; nothing is gained by the extraneous scenes that neither flesh out characters nor progress the plot. Also, repetition to ensure understanding of the theme is, as I've always stated, insulting to the viewers. Luckily, it doesn't occur very often. But when it does happen, it's especially heinous and cringe-inducing. For example, some minor characters were introduced for the sole purpose of bluntly reiterating a point that had already been made subtly. Speaking of characters, some were dealt with extremely poorly (forgotten or introduced at the very end), especially in comparison to the main ones. Others were extremely stereotyped and not really fleshed out at all (Richard Widmark's characters, for example). But really, imagine how amazing the rest of this movie must be for me to be able to look past all those negatives and still give it a four; I highly recommend this movie.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0055031/