#13 Winter's Bone (2010)

By Debra Granik.

I decided to watch this one after we had made plans to see Silver Linings, since I hadn't ever seen Jennifer Lawrence in anything, and since she appears to be the current talk-of-the-town (or "the most talented young actress in America" according to Rolling Stone), I wanted to do a bit more investigation.

This movie is much better than Silver Linings, and the actress is much better in this one, even though according to some, Silver Linings is a "career-defining performance." This movie (Winter's Bone) kind of does give her all the prerequisites to get a best actress nomination. She plays the teenage poverty-stricken girl with the crazy mom, meth-cooking dad, taking care of her younger brother and sister by hunting squirrels, bringing them up right or at least as best she can, being too proud to beg, but is forced to track her missing dad in the underworld of hillbilly meth-cookers so she can save their house since he put it up for bond. You know what that takes? That takes courage. And she's got it. Oh, and then she unfairly gets her ass kicked so she gets the opportunity to be all bloody and then still look like a bad-ass with a swollen up face while still being beautiful in her grittiness. Honestly, I don't know how she didn't get the oscar. (I guess Portman was just more rawer.) Anyway, I could go on and on, but the movie is good. My ranting is more to complain about the Academy Awards than about this movie. I liked this movie a lot. I give it 4 stars. And Jennifer Lawrence was good. You should watch it.

#12 Silver Linings Playbook (2012)

Directed by David O. Russell.

When some friends suggested we make an effort to see all the oscar-nominated films for this year's oscars, I thought it was an interesting idea and kind of opportune since I'm doing this almost365films thing (although I just realized it means I have to see Life of Pi). Since my parents were in town and we all wanted to go to a movie, we chose one that would be appealing to all the members of the family and went to the theater to see Silver Linings Playbook.

I didn't hate it.

I kind of enjoyed it at times. So I guess its gimmick is that it's not your typical rom-com because it also deals with deeper issues like mental health, recovery, etc. What it's gimmick really seemed to be was everyone yelling at each other a lot. My wife (who is not American) was fairly confused by this movie. The recurring adjective she kept using for it was "bizarre." I guess that we Americans understand and even enjoy people yelling at each other all the time. Especially if it's about football, bets or some competition of some sort. Or as a way of flirting. I guess America is addicted to dance competitions also, so that got worked into it. Charming. When we spoke about it with the friends with whom we are going to do this "see all the oscar-nominated films" project, we brought up that since it was nominated for best picture we were thinking it might have been something other than a typical romantic American, happy-ending, the team wins, our savings didn't get lost in the bet by a tenth of a point, the guy chases after the girl to tell her he loves her climactic-type movie. But as Bob put it, "Man, what the hell were you expecting when you have Robert De Niro acting like an idiot and the guy from the Hangover part 3?"

#11 Holy Motors (2012)

By Leos Carax.

This is a difficult movie to write about. It really needs to be seen. I tried to choose several different photos to try and convey the variety of bizarre sequences in this movie, but the few I've selected only represent a small fraction of the total. It is a french movie that essentially deals with acting. The main character, Monsieur Oscar, played by the versatile Denis Lavant (I think "versatile" is an understatement), is an actor who is ferried around in his limousine/dressing room to the various "jobs" he has to do during a typical work day. From a street-begging old maid to a trained assassin, to a sewer-dwelling elf, to an elderly man on his death bed, to an action-movie star in which his job entails performing fight scenes and love-making scenes all in a motion-capture suit. The movie definitely could be interpreted to delve into the question "what is acting?" or "what does creating cinema really mean?" However, these arguments only barely entered into my perception of this movie, as there doesn't appear to be an opinion or point of view that is being forced on the viewer. The viewing experience, for me, involved a lot more appreciation for the varying scenes and images, the strange interactions between the characters, and the great amount of creativity that went into the making of this movie. The result is a great feeling of "I wonder what is going to happen next!!!" I guess whether or not that makes it enjoyable or "entertaining" is up to each individual viewer.

4 stars.

#10 Grey Gardens (1975)

Four credited directors. The ones who filmed the footage were Albert and David Maysles.

I really want to write something about this movie because it had a big effect on me. I'm not sure what it was. The movie is a documentary about a middle-aged/elederly mother-daughter couple (Edith, and Little Edie) who live in poverty in a mansion called Grey Gardens in East Hampton. The subject matter came to the attention of the film-makers when they heard of a mother and daughter who were being threatened with eviction from their home of 50 years because they were unable to maintain it, and it had become unhealthy to live there. (You can read more about the story here.) 

Filmed in the early 70s, it really has an incredible way of bringing us closer to these strange individuals. The characters are not the lovely, wonderfully resourceful, free-spirits that I've seen written about them in other reviews. In fact, they are the kind of people that you are not so sure you would want to know in real life. There was always this strange equilibrium in my emotions between feeling sorry for them and being repulsed. The repulsion stemmed from the myriad squalor, cat shit, untidiness, disorganization and confusion at their inability to change their situation. Whether what keeps them together in that awful place as it disintegrates around them from lack of care is because of poor health, fear, mental problems or just desperation at having been the same for so many years that there is no inertia to change. The feelings of pity also stem from many of these same roots, but also come about because of a closeness that is generated as they gradually reveal themselves in front of the camera. They sing, dance, eat, fight, and continually proselytize their ideas about the world, men, social class, the problems with each other, "what could have been", etc., all in front of the cameramen. It was a very touching story. When the movie ends, after having spent 2 hours with these strange women, you can't help but feel depressed that your life goes on, while they..... well, they were still stuck where they were. And you knew that that life they led was not going to last much longer. 

 Too often documentaries try to make a point, or have an agenda. It is so nice to just see real people and get to know them through the screen. A very good movie worth seeing.

#9 Ginger & Rosa (2012)

By Sally Potter.

Well, there was bound to be a bad one in this expedition of mine. This was clearly the first bad one, and boy, was it bad. Man, I don't know how movie reviewers do it and find something interesting to write about movies that suck. I'm glad that I don't have the problem of anybody reading what I write. But this movie was a real (I don't know what to call it–something really bad).

Takes place in England in the early sixties. A bunch of American actors playing Brits. The main character, Ginger, played by child star Elle Fanning, is a precocious teenage poet/anti-nuclear bomb activist with a dreamy dad who cries when he listens to Shubert. I won't go any further. The story of Rosa is just as bad, trust me.

Probably meant to invoke strong emotion in the viewer, however the only emotion that it stirred in me was, "Man, what a bummer for having wasted the past hour and a half".

#8 - Dangerous Moonlight (Suicide Squadron) (1941)

Directed by Brian Desmond Hurst. Starring Anton Walbrook and Sally Gray.

There are several things that occurred to me while watching this movie.

First, it isn't quite as good as the Hitchcock films I've seen this month in terms of writing. The storyline and many of the initial dialogues don't seem as witty. And the development of a romantic spark between the characters is too quick for the viewer to feel much empathy. This film did in the end win me over with it's wonderful argument presented in the second half of the film. Should the world-renown pianist possibly sacrifice himself and give up his ability to provide the world with his wonderful music in order to contribute to a greater cause by being only a contributing member of the war effort as an airman fighting against the evils ravaging Europe? It in some way offers a nice counter view to the movie from last night, Hannah Arendt, in that the cause of the greatest evil ever known is from the loss of the individual and thus the formation of totalitarianism (see blog post for more in depth comments). Whereas here, the question is raised, in order to defeat this evil is the abandonment of the individual also necessary? 

Second, I wasn't happy with how it ended. But, without trying to give too much away (at least no more than what is already revealed in the first scene of the movie), I have to believe that the ending comes from the fact that this movie was made in 1941, and the American public even without wanting to admit it knew that their fate was to join the war effort as well. With that in mind, I can't imagine any wartime movie made with a different ending and receive any public appreciation at the time. (This idea has also made me decide at some point to watch The Pianist by Polanski–a movie that I am yet to see, but which must have a great deal in common with this one, I think.) 

Third, the motivation for watching this movie came from the fact that we have been listening to the Warsaw Concerto by Richard Addinsell on our record player, and M has said how it is her favorite track. Upon looking it up, I came to realize it was written especially for this movie. So, we decided to get ahold of the movie and see if we liked it. The song is ubiquitous throughout, to the point where M was already annoyed with the music despite only sticking around (awake) for the first couple scenes. But, all-in-all, the song really is quite marvelous (embedded video below).

#7 - Hannah Arendt (2012)

By Margarethe von Trotta. Tour de force performance by lead actress Barbara Sukowa.

Incredible work!

A must.

We chose to see this one because it will be the opening night film in SIFF's Women in Cinema mini-festival. And indeed, Hannah Arendt is an incredible woman. 

Labeled a "self-hating Jew" by her contemporary "intellectuals", Ms. Arendt apparently initiated the necessary and wonderfully difficult debate over the Holocaust and the roots of the evil that caused it. The meat of the movie starts when Hannah, a well-respected German-Jewish emigrant philosopher, concentration-camp survivor, and author of "The Origins of Totalitarianism", is asked to report for the New Yorker on the trial of recently arrested Nazi chief Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Her highly controversial report correctly identifies the crime as too huge for any individual to be held responsible and Eichmann as simply too miniscule a cog in the totalitarian machine–a participant in the "final solution" without individuality in the least–even to the point of not being able to think. He, in fact, only acted according to the oath he had taken to always obey the fuhrer, and never acted of his own volition or even to think his own individual thoughts. He never killed anyone. All he did was load the victims onto the trains. What happened to them after that wasn't his responsibility, and therefore none of his concern. He was just a correctly functioning lever in a well-oiled machine.

The main contention her Israeli and American colleagues and friends had with her report stemmed from her delving deeper in her attempt at understanding the complexity of the phenomenon and her failing to admit the complete inculpability of the Jewish leaders. They too had fallen into a system in which their individuality had been taken from them. The victims, as the perpetrators, were unable to veer out of the confines of the machine of the totalitarian system. There was no freedom of choice, freedom to act, or freedom of thought. They only did what they were told. This system wasn't only in Germany. It pervaded all of Europe. Her detractors never forgave her for this betrayal. However, to her, these issues had to be brought up and examined. We all know what people who fail to understand history are destined for. Very much the intellectual, she adequately defended herself by explaining her position on Eichmann, "trying to understand him is not the same as forgiving him." If only more historians were like her...

Truly gut-wrenching, both sides of this argument are so terribly painful. As her close friend and strongest admirer admonishes her at the end with tears in his eyes, "you act like one of the superior Germans lecturing us inferior Jews! You forget that if you hadn't escaped the camp, they would have killed you too!"