W. (2008)

2/5

Oliver Stone's W. claims to be an honest representation of the former President in the hopes of dismantling years of misconceptions, both positive and negative, but is instead a ludicrous farce filled with exaggerations and caricatures. The movie goes back and forth between history and the present, starting with his time in office and intercutting with past events that led him there (including random, unrelated ones). I can imagine this was done for no other reason than to make up for lacking transitions and storyline inconsistencies. There is no progression or escalation, merely event after event after event, which makes the 2 hour runtime laboriously slow. (I thought it was nearing the end before 90 minutes in.) And each vignette is only hinted at, nothing is fleshed out, so we are left with a frustratingly inadequate and incomplete picture of a man nobody really cares about anymore. Not only that, but the rest of the screen is filled with people who are more focused on their horrific accents than their characters, which turn out to be flatter than their real counterparts (and those I've only seen in stilted TV announcements).

The one redeeming factor is the humor that is infused in this film, although I'm not sure it was all intentional. Because everything is so extreme, it is also preposterous to the point of comedy. The movie cannot be taken seriously anymore. Dick Cheney is a raving, power-hungry, egomaniacal lunatic--weren't we trying to dispel myths and prejudices? Condoleezza Rice is, for some bizarre reason, an uglier, female version of Neil Goldman from Family Guy. Below I have included a clip with Neil Goldman; as you watch it, just imagine Thandie Newton in disfiguring makeup prosthetics talking to Bush, and you have the movie W. Don't watch this movie; it's a waste of time.



IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1175491/

RocknRolla (2008)

4/5

Guy Ritchie's RocknRolla is pretty much the same movie as all of Guy Ritchie's other gangster movies. The complicated and confusing plot is made more imperceptible by thick, obfuscatory British accents. And while it started out with a story that seemed uninteresting and unengrossing, there was just enough innovation and cleverness to make it fresh and new. The cinematography, style, and editing all feel the same as his earlier movies (which is a compliment). The decidedly quick-witted humor is also back, and in full force. Guy Ritchie knows British movies, British actors, and British sensbilities, but not American ones. Jeremy Piven and Ludacris felt a little out of place here. Still, RocknRolla is an altogether enjoyable film that is on par with Snatch. I recommend it to anyone who knows and enjoys Guy Ritchie.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1032755/

Interview with the Vampire (1994)

2/5

I was pretty disappointed by Neil Jordan's Interview with the Vampire. It might be that I just don't like vampire movies, but I think the bigger reason is that I just don't like bad movies. Apparently the movie's sympathetic vision of vampires was revolutionary ... or something. It didn't seem that novel or interesting to me. It follows the story of Louis (Brad Pitt) over the past 200+ years after being turned by Lestat (Tom Cruise). Kirsten Dunst plays an angsty and needy teenage vampire and Antonio Banderas plays a suave yet flamboyant vampire. All of them are orgiastically homoerotic towards each other.

I'm sure there's a lot about vampire culture I don't understand, but the stuff I did understand wasn't very good. The story plodded along, the wooden dialogue stumbled forward, the actors didn't complement each other. The camera focused on meaningless gestures, the editing lacked purpose, and the movie felt like it took three hours. I had to stand up and walk around to stay awake, which annoyed every one else I saw it with. But as soon as I stopped walking around and sat down, I fell right back asleep. The positives: some interesting ideas and cool special effects. I'm sorry to say it, but don't bother with this movie unless your a vampirophile.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110148/

The Pursuit of Happyness (2006)

4/5

The Pursuit of Happyness follows the real-life story of Chris Gardner, a father who loves his son above all else and will do anything to stay with him. And wow, Will Smith gives a tour-de-force performance. His acting gives so much depth and complexity to his character because he's not a perfect guy who just got caught in a bad situation; sometimes he makes mistakes, he gets angry, he loses control. All of this makes the character real and sympathetic (unlike Russell Crowe in Cinderella Man). There are three scenes of extraordinary power in this film, two by Will Smith and one by Thandie Newton, and they are worth the price of admission alone.

The cinematography is nothing to write home about except for one shot, the first time Will Smith walks into the brokerage firm. The editing and directing were also relatively mediocre at best. The music was a bit over the top for me, but effective nonetheless. While never comedic, most of the movie had a sort of tongue-in-cheek feel, the kind of humor Will Smith specializes in. While it was really enjoyable to watch, it sort of took away from the painful situation of homelessness by making it seem not so bad. Also, the voice-over narration was absolutely terrible. They should've completely stripped the entire movie of narration. Or at the very least taken out the "This part of my life is called..."

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0454921/