Halloween (1978): Bump. Bub-ump. Bump. Bub-ump. This is the reason why the original Halloween is so scary. All it takes is those two dreadful notes. The music is absolutely terrifying. One of the filmmakers said if you watch the film on mute, it’s quite tame. It’s when the music comes on, that you feel those worst fears coming true. This film is awfully effective, simply because there’s no shame or winks. Michael Myers moves like Jaws; completely amoral, without need for words or reasoning or conscience. He is a horrendous force of nature. One of the best sequences is when Laurie Strode yells for Tommy Doyle (that name is so suburban, its funny) to come unlock the front door. Across the street, we see the house that Michael Myers is somewhere inside of. Cut back to Laurie. Cut back to the house, and we see Michael slowly (slowly is the key) emerge from the shadows. He’s still coming. Laurie starts to panic and yells once again for Tommy. Cut back to Michael, who’s now approaching the street. So incredibly simple, and yet so bold and terrifying in its directness. I attached the trailer, for an example of the music’s effectiveness.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Halloween (1978)
Halloween (1978): Bump. Bub-ump. Bump. Bub-ump. This is the reason why the original Halloween is so scary. All it takes is those two dreadful notes. The music is absolutely terrifying. One of the filmmakers said if you watch the film on mute, it’s quite tame. It’s when the music comes on, that you feel those worst fears coming true. This film is awfully effective, simply because there’s no shame or winks. Michael Myers moves like Jaws; completely amoral, without need for words or reasoning or conscience. He is a horrendous force of nature. One of the best sequences is when Laurie Strode yells for Tommy Doyle (that name is so suburban, its funny) to come unlock the front door. Across the street, we see the house that Michael Myers is somewhere inside of. Cut back to Laurie. Cut back to the house, and we see Michael slowly (slowly is the key) emerge from the shadows. He’s still coming. Laurie starts to panic and yells once again for Tommy. Cut back to Michael, who’s now approaching the street. So incredibly simple, and yet so bold and terrifying in its directness. I attached the trailer, for an example of the music’s effectiveness.
Funny People (2009)
I have to say that this was a disappointment, and that it, too, deserves another viewing. For a few reasons, but the main one is because I saw the movie in an empty theater. It’s hard to laugh out loud like you want to at the cinema when it’s a quiet (and cold!!!) empty room. The echo of your own laughs makes you feel lonely.
But Judd Apatow’s third feature leaves its most serious subject to go on an hour long subplot that is frustrating in its intentions and quite worthless. The first hour, however, is quite good, and on par with Apatow’s best. Who else can talk about death and penises? But what’s frustrating is that George Simmon’s near-death experience is only that. A spoiled asshole of a man comes close to death, and that’s about it. There’s no catharsis in that situation, no feelings of redemption or hope. Only a man who almost dies, remains an asshole, and never thanks anyone for his luck or resolution. He is a dick to Ira (Shmyra) and then tries to steal his old flame back from a much nicer man. Everyone in the Apatow universe has a problem, but George won’t admit of his problems. He’s just not very likeable. But I don’t think that this movie is bad. It has grand aspirations, and it’s smart, well-written, and (this is key), funny. But compared to Knocked up (2007), which I still think is a masterpiece, this movie doesn’t hold up.
I resort back, quite often, to the rule of thumb from Matt Stone and Trey Parker. They believe, and I do too, that their best episodes of South Park came when they focused specifically on one idea. When they started combining storylines into a twenty minute episode, the plots felt too sparse and rushed. Apatow should consider this, because I think he has two movies piled into this one. The stand-up idea is quite good, and possesses much more material that didn’t make it into this movie. I could tell that Apatow cut a lot out so that he could fit in the other stories into this mess of a movie. There seems to be about three plots going on, and this one ain’t Pulp Fiction.
But But But. THe first sequence of this movie is stunning. Putting this in the movie was quite brilliant of Apatow, but the movie never again seems to reach the high notes of four guys just making jokes in an apartment room.
G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra (2009)
Can’t say too much about this one, except that I only watched forty minutes. I won’t say that I left because of disgust, but just because I felt that I didn’t have the time to sit and risk not enjoying the movie. The only thing that I noticed was that Channing Tatum did not seem like a very good actor, and that I had to pee really bad. I hope one day I can sit down and try and figure out if the movie was worth the awesome weekend that it had. For the record, I love director Stephen Sommers; The Mummy and Van Helsing will always be at the very top of my geek chart.
By the way, this movie and Transformers have really sparked some debates about where the movies are going, and more importantly, where audience expectations are going. I am stuck in the middle of the debate. While I value movies with actual stories and action scenes with some motivation and inspiration, I think that most people still go to the movies to escape the burdens of real life. And if people want to see stuff blowed up, or see Sienna Miller in brown hair, let them go. Detach yourself from the machine, and move on past it. I did find myself somewhat depressed listen to everyone laugh at the jokes within G.I. Joe. Their laughs felt contrived, as if they understood the formula of the blockbuster. Put in lots of action scenes, but in between these scenes, give them comic relief so they can feel part of the awesomeness. But the laughs I head in that theater were weirdly timed. A joke would arrive, and it wouldn’t be that funny. But seconds later, the audience picked up on the cue, and laughed. Hard. I don’t know how to respond to that, except that it turned me off.
Also, Channing Tatum (who still can’t act) reminds me of a beefed up Ben Foster. They should have put him in the fucking movie.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)
Quite astonishing in its design and attention to detail. David Yates, like Christopher Columbus, really makes an effort to put in as many references from the original books as he can, and open up J.K. Rowling’s universe. Obviously, the film must progress differently than the book, but Yates still makes an effort to place secondary characters in the background as much as possible. Seeing Professor Flitwick, Crabbe, Fenrir Greyback (although his purpose barely ascended past growling and looking like a pro wrestler) and Luna Lovegood sprinkle the overall feel of the story is wonderful; you can tell that the people working on this project approach it with a certain sense of respect and love.
It’s frustrating then, that this movie has been met with disdain by followers of the books simply because a fight scene was excluded. The books were never about the fights; there’s only so much you can do with two people waving wands at each other. This problem was somewhat noticeable in the climax of The Order of the Phoenix. While Voldemort and Dumbledore proved rather climactic, the fight scene before theirs came off a bit awkward. Many people have been upset with the amount of teen-romance taking place. This is also a bit frustrating, because these are the characters we love and care about. We shouldn’t have to insist on them being in fight scenes and Quidditch matches every half hour. The drama between Harry, Ron, and Herminone occasionally has some very poignant moments, like when Harry slips a placebo into Ron’s drink, or when Harry lets Hermione’s head rest on his shoulder. Or how about Harry mackin’ on a Muggle at the very beginning of the film? It’s easy to forget that these wizards and werewolves technically coexist with our boring universe. It’s these moments when I realize that I grew up with these characters, and that I deeply care about them. The first movies are so incredible because we’re so jealous of their incredible luck to be a part of this astounding world. These quiet and human moments in the later films prove that the problems of the Wizard world often have a peculiar relation to our own problems.
And their problems motivate the excitement of the action sequences, and this film has one of the best of the series. The moment in the cavernous lake is dazzling and epic in scope. We see Dumbledore, for the first time, reduced to an (gasp!) old, whimpering man. What a inversion of roles, as Harry now must literally nurse Dumbie back to safety. But it is the arrival of the Inferi out of the black depths that stir the macabre beauty of Dumbledore’s trap. This scene deliciously reminded me of Gandalf’s battle with the Balrog in his freefall within the mines of Moria. There is a breathtaking shot of Harry being pulled down into the dark waters by the Inferi, where the camera observes the awesomeness of Dumbledore’s power. I’m very excited and glad that Yates is with the last two films to the end. To that lonely march towards Hogwarts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)