Category: movies

A traditional “joke” about Jews is that we go out to see a movie and have Chinese food on Christmas Day.

So guess what we did today.

Right. We saw a movie and had chinese food. This post (of course) is about the movie. The Chinese food was pretty good as well.

Today, we went out to see Persepolis, which opened today in limited distribution, just in Los Angeles and New York. We actually hit the first show, so we were at the “premiere” screening. It is at very few theatres, being an “art flick”, in French, with English subtitles. It is also animated, primarily in black and white.

That said: Go See It! Make the effort and find a showing. It is worth it.

Persepolis tells the life story of the author, Marjane Satrapi, who was born into a middle-class family in Tehran, Iran. We see her life in Iran as an approximately 9 year old as the regime of the Shah falls, and the people are happy that they might be getting democracy. However, they get something far different than they expect, and we learn how their world has changed. By the time she is 13, Marjane is sent to a French School in Vienna, where she learns that being Iranian isn’t popular, and that she doesn’t quite fit in. We learn of her life and loves as she becomes a young woman, and we see how she misses the Iran of her youth. When she returns, however, Iran is not what it was. Eventually, she moves back to France, leaving her family behind.

My synopsis does not do the story justice. You can find a better synopsis here.

This is not a kids animated movie. This is a heavy story, with death, torture, drug use, and religious fanaticism. The use of animation allows imagery instead of the graphic (unlike, for example, Sweeney Todd, which was heavy on the graphic), and actually serves to enhance the movie and the story telling. However, the PG-13 rating is well deserved.

I found the movie to be very moving (yes, I’ll admit it made me teary-eyed). It shows how one’s home can be so much a part of one’s makeup, and then when circumstances come about that force one to leave in order to be free and be alive… it’s heavy. You also get the view of Iran from the inside, realizing that the bulk of the populace are not religous fanatics: they are people just trying to live their lives, be with their families, just like you and me. We often forget that with what the media tells us. It also makes one realize that “the west” isn’t all sunshine and butterflies either: for foreigners trying to find home, the west often isn’t welcoming… and we certainly don’t help the downtrodden. I think the movie makes you realize that behind all the geopolitical aspects are real people.

This is not a movie for everyone. You need to be ready to sit through 90 minutes of deep material, even though it is animated. But it is well worth it. Persepolis has been nominated for 4 Annie awards (Best Feature, Best Directing, Best Music and Best Writing) and a Broadcast Fim Critics Assn award (Best Animated Feature)… as well as being France’s entry for foreign film at the 2008 Oscars. It has won the Sutherland Trophy at the British Film Institute, and loads and loads of other awards.

In terms of interesting previews: the most interesting one was a film executive produced by Rikki Lake called “The Business of Being Born”. This is a documentary about the birth business in the United States, and she does mean business. It addresses how doctors and nurses often deal with birth as something to be scheduled and treated with drugs, vs. the use of midwives and natural births. It looked fascinating. It opens on January 9, 2008, and I think it will be well worth seeing.

Our next movie, however, also likely deals with babies. nsshere wants to see the Fox Searchlight production Juno, a quasi-art movie about a teen with an unplanned pregnancy, who decides not to have an abortion nor to keep the baby, but to find the right adoptive parents for the baby.

Normally, we see a movie on Christmas Day (don’t all good Jews?). This year, we decided to be different and see one the day before as well. As the color of the holiday is red, we opted for Sweeney Todd. Actually, we opted to see the movie because of our love of movie musicals.

Now, I had seen the original Sweeney Todd when it played the Ahmanson Theatre during its original touring company with George Hearn and Angela Lansbury, so I’ve always loved this musical. I’ve also been reading up on the production, including an excellent article in the New York Times that provided a discussion with Stephen Sondheim, the composer, on the changes made. So I was expecting a lot of changes from the original stage production.

So what did I think of the show? Very well done, and an excellent transformation from stage to film. This is not a film of the stage production: that’s been done. This is a transformation. It is 95% sung through, but significant songs have been removed or trimmed from the original. I can’t think of one song that is 100% intact. The Ballad of Sweeney Todd is gone — it remains only as underscoring. The purpose of the chorus has been replaced with visuals. But with all the cutting, the story remains.

The motif of the musical is blood. From the opening credits to the end, there is blood. It gushes, it spurts, it drips, it drizzles. But it is clearly stagecraft. This isn’t the horror movie where you see the guts spewing out and the muscles and viscera. The blood is lubrication for the mood of the piece. And that mood is evil and madness.

ETA: I forgot to mention when I originally posted this about the cinematography. Tim Burton, as usual, does his wonderful job of color and framing. The motif is dark and grey in most scenes, except when there is the blood, stark in its redness. There are a few light scenes, such as the “By The Sea” number, where the surroundings are bright, but Todd and Lovett stand out in their darkness. There is also camera movement and angles, especially in the opening transition from the dock to Fleet Street, which make one dizzy. This is something the original musical could not pull off; the original musical (not the recent revival) had a very Victorian Ironworks motif surrounding the stage. With these changes, Burton moved the focus from the hierarchy of society to the descent of the individual.

Sweeney Todd reminds me of a classic horror movie. Forget the drek they pass off as horror today. Go back to the 1930s and 1940s. The story in its madness and descent is pure horror, and I do predict that one day this will be a classic horror movie.

So, what about the singing. The leads do OK, although I found Helena Bonham Carter’s voice a bit thin. The others do sufficient: the movie focuses much more on the deft wordmanship of Sondheim, and not the vocal quality. As noted above, they made the proper decision to retain the primary sung through aspects of the show. Contrast this with something like Rent, where they abandoned the sung through aspect, and it actually hurt the movie.

Some other observations:

• They drastically reduced Toby’s role from the play. I haven’t yet decided if this is a good thing.
• Alan Rickman is such a wonderfully evil villian. However, they had the same actor that played Wormtail as the Beadle, and that just was distracting for me. I can see a whole vein of Snape/Wormtail slash. Ohh, Ick.
• This certainly won’t win an Oscar for original score or original song… because there was nothing new from the stage production. I applaud the producers for not feeling they had to add something to a perfect piece.
• However, they should have retained the Ballad of Sweeney Todd, but used it only over the closing credits. It would have been great there.
• Watching the closing credits, I noticed the titles were done by “The Thing”. I always wondered where he had gone after the Addams Family ended.

Did Sweeney Todd deserve an “R” rating? Perhaps. There’s blood and gore, but is it any worse than the action flicks we see today? I think not, and a PG-13 would have sufficed.

We do still plan on seeing a movie tomorrow. The leading candidate is Persepolis, a black-and-white animated coming-of-age story of a precocious and outspoken young Iranian girl that begins during the Islamic Revolution. ETA: However, Persepolis is only at one theatre in the area, so we might have to go with a second choice. nsshere is pushing for Juno a movie about a teen faced with an unplanned pregnancy who an unusual decision regarding her unborn child. That’s at more theatres. Another possibility is Enchanted, but that’s been out a while, and we might wait for DVD. So hopefully we can make the noon showing of Persepolis.

P.S.: With this review, I must note the death of Michael Kidd, award-winning choreographer of shows such as “Finian’s Rainbow,” “Guys and Dolls”‘ and “Can-Can” and Hollywood musicals like “The Band Wagon” and “Seven Brides for Seven Brothers”. Mr. Kidd won five Tony Awards: for “Finian’s Rainbow” in 1947, “Guys and Dolls” in 1951, “Can-Can” in 1954, “Li’l Abner” in 1957 and “Destry Rides Again” in 1960. In 1996 he received a special Academy Award “in recognition of his services to the art of dance in the art of the screen.”

Last night, we took our daughter out for her birthday to see “Lars and the Real Girl.” I’m sure that some were unsure about this, having read the synopsis on Yahoo:

Lars Lindstrom is a loveable introvert whose emotional baggage has kept him from fully embracing life. After years of what is almost solitude, he invites Bianca, a friend he met on the internet to visit him. He introduces Bianca to his brother Gus and his wife Karen and they are stunned. They don’t know what to say to Lars or Bianca–because she is a life-size doll, not a real person and he is treating her as though she is alive. They consult the family doctor Dagmar who explains this is a delusion he’s created–for what reason she doesn’t yet know but they should all go along with it. What follows is an emotional journey for Lars and the people around him.

In reality, the movie film (correction courtesy of nsshere) is an unexpected gem.

Lars (Ryan Gosling) is an extremely introverted IT office worker for whom touch is painful, with a co-worker into porn and action figures. Lars is functioning in the real world, but isolating himself. Trying to draw Lars out of the isolation are those who care about him: Karin (Emily Mortimer) and Gus (Paul Schnieder), his pregnant sister-in-law and brother; Margo (Kelli Garner), a single female co-worker, and the rest of the town. Lars reacts to this by ordering a full-size anatomically-correct sex doll, dressing it up and treating it like a real woman, Bianca (note: you always see the doll dressed). The town’s doctor, Dagmar, believes this is a delusion and is Lars’ way of coping with the world. She indicates the town should humor him, while seeing Bianca weekly for her low blood pressure (and talking to Lars at the same time). The town does this, getting Bianca involved in all sorts of activities. Over time, Lars grows in learning how to relate and react to other people, eventually moving from Bianca to the world of real people.

As I said, this was a quiet surprise movie film. No special effects: the strength of the movie film was its acting and its story. The actors were all very strong (well, Bianca’s performance was a bit wooden and stiff), and one really believed this slightly off-beat Minnesota town could exist, with people that care about their own.

I’ll also note that the movie film was believable in a sense. I know people like Lars in real life: folks that isolate themselves from personal relationships and touch for whatever reason, whose families and friends wish for them the joy they have from personal relationships (no, the person who came to mind on this is not on LJ). Lars learns to relate to others through Bianca, who draws him out, and through Dagmar, who teaches him that touch isn’t painful. You have the feeling at the end of the movie that a relationship will blossom between Lars and Margo, all thanks to the groundwork laid by Bianca.

I’ll also note that the theatre we were in was packed. Every seat appeared to be full… and this for an independent movie film that has been out for a month. I’m guessing that word of mouth on this movie film is growing, so I’ll add my recommendation to the pack. Eschew the popular — you don’t need to see “Beowolf”, “Dan in Real Life”, or “Mr. Magorium”. Go see the quiet wonder and the joy that is “Lars and the Real Girl.”

So what’s next on the calendar? Movie-wise, we normally see a movie on Christmas Day, and currently we’re expecting that movie to be the new Tim Burton version of “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street”, although I fear Tim Burton may have excised too much of the music, and over-emphasized the drama and the gore (of course, this means it will be successful as a movie). We also saw a preview for the movie “Persopolis”, an animated movie about the fall of the Shah of Iran and its effect on an Iranian family. This looked quite interesting, and is another possibility. It appears that Lars turned our daughter into someone liking art movies.

As for non-movies, that resumes next week with “The Unexpected Guest” at REP East (Myspace) on 11/24 @ 8pm. This is followed by “Ray Charles Live” at the Pasadena Playhouse on 12/1 @ 8pm; Tom Paxton at McCabes on 12/2 @ 7:30pm; and the highly anticipated “The Stinky Cheese Man And Other Fairly Stupid Tales” at Nobel Middle School on 12/6 @ 7pm, 12/7 @ 7pm, and maybe 12/8 @ 5pm.

This afternoon, we decided to beat the heat and head over to the mall and see a movie. Today was the last of the three summer movies of interest: The Simpsons Movie. Now, unless you’ve been living under a rock for the last 20 years (although I hear the housing prices are good there), you know who the Simpsons are and what the general plotline of most Simpsons episodes are: Homer/Bart does something stupid, people get mad at him, Homer/Bart makes it right, everyone is happy at the end. So I’m not going to give you the detailed plot (plus you’ve likely already seen it, and since when has plot mattered to The Simpsons).

I will, however, tell you what I thought of it. I thought that it was reasonably good for what it was: a ninety-minute episode on the big screen. After all, there is no cinematography in a movie such like this, and any depth is an illusion. There were jokes and scenes that were laugh out loud funny. The story wasn’t afraid to make fun of itself or its audiences. It made use of many stock Simpsons’ bits (although not all), and I’m sure that if I was a more regular viewer of the series, I would have caught more. They attempted to do a little-bit more than usual with some of the animation (going for that deeper feel), and it was certainly better than Sponge-Bob. The music, as always with this series, was excellent (although I was surprised to not see Alf Clausen in the credits). It was certainly worth what we paid for it, but then again, we had two free passes and only had to buy a kids ticket.

I’ll also note that the theatre was relatively crowded, almost full. Given this far into the release cycle for this movie, that is remarkable. It certainly has had more staying power than Hairspray or Harry Potter 5 in terms of audience. People were actually singing along with various parts (“Spiderpig, Spiderpig”), so this may be on its way to becoming a cult favorite.

The Simpsons is a perfect summer movie, for those looking for non-action-adventure summer movies. It was brainless escapism (d’oh, just like Homer). It was a wonderful way to beat the heat on Labor Day afternoon… plus Nancy Cartwright rocks (I have to say that as she is the honorary mayor of Northridge).

As for the promo reels, there were mercifully few:

• Horton Hears a Who. Eh. Now, if they were making a musical of Seussical, which tells the same plot, using animation, that would be awesome.
• Run Fat Boy Run. Double Eh. Run from this movie–at least the trailer doesn’t sell it well.
• Good Luck Chuck. This seemed like a cute movie at the Showtime level (i.e., worth watching on Showtime, but not the big screen), until the showed the scene with the fat lady. Sorry, they lost my business. Fat people seem to be the one stereotype Hollywood can still insult, but I don’t like it.
• Alvin and the Chipmunks. They are trying to appeal to the baby-boomer audience with CGI, but there are those of us that still remember the original Alvin Show, and I don’t think this will cut it. It is on the level of The Garfield Movie.

So what will our next movie be? Usually, we see a movie on Christmas, and it will most likely be Sweeney Todd (with Johnny Depp). I saw the original back when it was first at the Ahmanson in the 1980s; we’ll be seeing it again in the revision early next year. I love the music and love the show. Also sticking in the mind is the preview for Mr. Magorium’s Wonder Emporium which comes out in November, however I don’t know the buzz on that.

Today, while at Universal Citywalk, we ducked out of the heat and went to the AMC Universal 19 to see Hairspray: The Movie. Now, this is a show we’re familiar with: we’ve seen the original 1988 John Water’s version many times, and love the musical, which we saw back in August 2004.

This production was equally wonderful.. different in its own way, but wonderful. Wonderful show, wonderful music, wonderful message. I can’t help but make a few observations.

First, the cinematography impressed me. I’m of the firm belief that one of the reasons that The Producers and Rent tanked on screen was that they were faithful adaptations of the stage versions. On the other hand, Chicago and Dreamgirls were successful because they used the screen to the advantage: the cinematography enhanced the story.

This was certainly true of Hairspray: they eliminated some songs, added some new ones, and changed the plot a bit, but all in the name of making a better movie. They didn’t detract: they enhanced the story. I think this was good, and it serves the movie well.

The performances were excellent. The talented newcomer Nicki Blonsky, in her first screen role ever, was remarkable. She followed in the tradition of Rikki Lake and Marissa Jaret Winokur in bringing the character’s youthful enthusiasm and spirit alive. I was also quite impressed with Amanda Bynes performance as Penny Pingleton: I’ve seen this young lady grow up from her All That days, and she has turned into a talented actress. Of course, the press has all been about John Travolta, and it is well deserved. He gives a remarkable interpretation of Edna, quite different than that of Divine or Harvey Fierstein (or Bruce Vilanch, who was in LA). He brings out the sexiness of Edna, and is remarkably feminine. He should return to the world of musicals, for his talent is strong. Good words also for Christopher Walken as Wilbur Turnblad, Queen Latifah as Motormouth Mabel, James Marsden as Corny Collins, Zach Efron as Linc, Michelle Pfeiffer as Velma Von Tussle, and Elijah Kelley as Seaweed. Hell, the entire cast was excellent.

But what makes this movie are the little things. The cameo of John Waters as a flasher. Casting Rikki Lake as a talent agent. Casting Jerry Stiller (who was in the original) as Mr. Pinky. Casting Adam Shankman (the executive producer) and Mark Shaiman (the composer) as talent scouts. Playing the songs deleted from the stage production over the credits, newly sung. Having the song “Mama I’m a Big Girl Now” (which played over the credits) be sung by Ricki Lake, Marissa Jaret Winokur, Nikki Blonsky, and Harvey Fierstein. These are the little gems that make this special.

I highly recommend this movie. It is an excellent movie musical.

[The theatre is another matter. It was almost deserted when were were there, a bad sign for a Friday matinee during the summer. The film had a few sound skips, and at the end the projectionist turned off the lamp too early, then turned it back on. He also let the film run out. The theatre was clean, however, and the seating and sight lines were quite good. Sound wasn’t too loud. AMC doesn’t seem to be devoting much attention to this theatre: perhaps they consider it aged, given it is 20 years old. We’ll see if other movies fare as bad.]

This afternoon, my daughter and I went to see Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. What did I think of it? Well, it wasn’t the best of the series. I found it slow at points, and quite dark. If you hadn’t seen the first four movies in a while, matching up the characters with the actors was a lot harder. So, not stellar, but a workable installment in the series.

Updated to Add:

A few additional points I didn’t think of originally:

• Part of the problem was that this didn’t provide any backstory. Thus, for those unfamiliar with Potter-lore, they would be totally lost coming into this movie.
• I did like the actress who played Luna Lovegood. Great casting.
• Some of the actors are starting to look a little old for the role. I wonder how they will look when the series is finished.
• We’re what… 4 weeks after release… and the theatre wasn’t even 1/3rd full. This one doesn’t have legs.

Back on Sunday, April 3, 1983 I sat in the darkness of the Shubert Theatre in Century City and was blown away by a 23 year old newcomer, Jennifer Holliday, as she sung what became her signature song “And I’m Telling You I’m Not Going” (click here for the Tony awards performance; here’s a concert performance).

Today, Monday, December 25, 2006 — 25 years after the original Dreamgirls was on Broadway, I sat in a darkened theatre and was blown away another newcomer, Jennifer Hudson, who we last saw as a runner-up on American Idol, echoing the talent of Jennifer Holliday in her performance as Effie White.

As you likely figured out by now, our annual Christmas movie was Dreamgirls (The Movie), the long-awaited movie version of the 1981 Tony-award winning musical, Dreamgirls (Book and Lyrics by Ton Eyen, Music by Henry Krieger). For those not familiar with the story, Dreamgirls roughly tells the story of The Supremes (I say roughly because although there are some real life basis for the characters, some characters are amalgams and some have different outcomes). Dreamgirls tells the story of a girl singing group, The Dreamettes, consisting of Deena Jones (Beyonce Knowles [Diana Ross]); Lorrell Robinson (Anika Noni Rose [Mary Wilson]), and Effie White (Jennifer Hudson [Florence Ballard]). Although Effie was the original lead of the group, they started to hit it big when their manager, Curtis Taylor Jr. (Jamie Foxx [a Barry Gordy Jr. amalgam]arranged for them to sing backup to James “Thunder” Early (Eddie Murphy [a mix of a number of Motown artists, including Marvin Gaye, Smokey Robinson and James Brown]. Throughout all of this, writing the songs, is C.C. White (Keith Robinson [likely representing Holland-Dozier-Holland]). As the “Dreamettes” stars start to rise, Early’s star starts to fall, and Curtis sends the now renamed “Dreams” out on their own. In doing this, he moves Deena to the lead singer, and shuts aside Effie, eventually casting her away and replacing her with Michelle Morris (Sharon Leal [Cindy Birdsong]). The success of Deena Jones and the Dreams [Diana Ross and the Supremes] continues, while Effie’s life continues to sink. Finally, as with all ebbs and flows, the Dreams reach their zenith while Effie reaches her nadir. CC leaves the “Rainbow Records” [Motown] fold, and returns to Effie with the song that only she can sing. But Curtis steals the song; Deena finds out and leaves him and the Dreams. The movie ends with the final performance of the four Dreams, including Effie. [Alas, this isn’t real life, for things weren’t that lucky for Florence Ballard, who started the Supremes.]

So what did I think of the movie. Wow.

First, I thought the casting and the performances were excellent. I was particularly taken by Jennifer Hudson and Eddie Murphy in their roles, although Jamie Foxx turned in a remarkable performance as well, especially in the last scene where he realizes that Magic, Effie’s daughter, is his daughter. I think there are some strong Oscar contending performances in this. But none of the cast were bad or miscast. They were all exceptionally strong actors, singers, and dancers. I’ll note that the casting even gave a nod to the original musical in the casting of Loretta Devine as a jazz singer, as well as Hinton Battle as an aide to Curtis.

As for the music. Much of it came from the stage version (although some songs were cut), and there were new songs added for the stage. I thought the music was strong, and I couldn’t tell what was old and what was new, except for a few portions where dialogue was sung. Sung dialogue was a characteristic of the stage musical, and most of it was removed for the film, making the few places where it did occur stand out. But I’m probably the only one who noticed. The musical styling was very cinematic — this works well for a show that mostly takes place on the stage, so situational songs (which are fine on the stage but seem off in movies) were few.

As for the cinematography: I found it stunning. One problem that reviewers have with movie musicals is when they are, essentially, filmed versions of the stage show. This is what doomed the excellent movie musicals Rent and The Producers, whereas Chicago was a success. In this film, the cinematography was used to best advantage, with framing shots, rotating steadicams, and the general approach adding to the story (except for the long rotating steadicam sequence during “We Are Family”, which left me dizzy). I should also note the construction of the end credits, which actually showed the contributions of each person credited. Well done, very well done.

Credit should also go to the director, Bill Condon, for his choices. The location shots, the design, the layout, the angles… the entire approach to the production is remarkable.

I agree with the hype that this movie is an Oscar contender: there were powerful performances, and one could really see the power of the acting.

I should note that the success of the movie, however, is bittersweet. First, and formost, in almost an echoing of what happened in the movie, the original Effie White, Jennifer Holliday, has been shunted aside by the movie publicity machine. After her success at age 21 in Dreamgirls, she faced a suicide attempt at 30. Bankruptcy. Two failed marriages. Bouts with depression. She has dropped 200 lbs, but hasn’t seen her career come back. Now, with the publicity machine of the movie, she’s been shunted aside again. Her voice is used in the film’s trailers… but she isn’t credited. She was never approached about the movie or publicity. She was “uninvited” to the film’s premiere at the Ziegfeld Theatre. Some speculate that the filmmakers fear that comparisons to Holliday may dull the glow surrounding the performance of Jennifer Hudson, the former “American Idol” contestant who plays Effie in the film. Some note that Holliday just is a hard person to work with. Whatever the case, the echoing in reality of what has happened before remains sad, but far too often the movie eclipses the stage version. I do hope that Holliday’s voice remains strong, and she reemerges as the talent she is.

The second sad point is the fact that, on the day the movie opened in wide release, the world lost the legendary R&B singer James Brown, who created the foundation for funk and rap music, and in real life was an instrumental part of the events that formed the basis for this story.

May movies such as this teach us to treasure the performers amongst us, to not dismiss the talent that God blesses people with. As we enjoy the music, let us focus on the talent, and not the package. We do it far too often.

Happy holidays. I hope you have enjoyed reading my reviews this year as much as I have enjoyed researching and writing them.