Ten Years Ago, Jerry Seinfeld Advocated Slavery And Stereotypes In Bee Movie!

The Good: Decent animation
The Bad: Ridiculous stereotypes, Unlikable characters, Terrible overall theme, Predictable and hyperbolic plot
The Basics: Bee Movie is another terrible animated film that has an ultimately horrible message and reinforces stereotypes more than doing anything remotely entertaining.


Years ago, I discovered that some animated films get away with the most horiffic racism, sexism and stereotype-reinforcement when I sat down and watched A Shark Tale (reviewed here!) and it was painfully obvious to deconstruct what was in the film, as opposed to what the writers and producers hoped viewers would see. So, when my wife sat down to watch Bee Movie and she prefaced it with "this is one of the worst movies ever; it is so horrible!" I was ready to believe her, but I still went into it with an open mind. Anti-Semitic and essentially arguing in favor of a slave class, Bee Movie is one of the worst, most subversive films I've seen in a long time . . . even if on the surface it advocates for worker's rights and environmental balance.

Bee Movie was co-written by Jerry Seinfeld, Spike Feresten (who had a delightful late-night talk show for a while that I quite enjoyed!), Barry Marder, and Andy Robin and it is somewhat amazing that it took at least four people to write a film that was so lacking in humor and managed to create something that on the surface was progressive, but has a truly horrible subtext. While the film is built on an obvious series of jokes based on stereotypes about Jews, lawyers and women, Bee Movie has a resolution that is unfortunately ambiguous and leads to a conclusion that appears to advocate in favor of race slavery!

In a bee hive, Barry B. Benson and Adam Flayman graduate from school and are assigned to the hive workforce. Barry wants to join the bees who leave the hive because he has a sense of adventure to him, while Adam wants to work in the hive. Barry goes on a flight out into the city where he learns about pollination and is nearly killed by getting stuck on a tennis ball. When it begins to rain, Barry ends up in the apartment of Vanessa Bloome, who saves him from her neanderthal boyfriend. Barry feels obligated to thank Vanessa, revealing to her that bees have the ability to speak and are fairly reasonable. Barry also discovers that humans are manufacturing their own honey, to the detriment of bees.

Barry and Adam sue the humans, charging that the companies that enslave bees to harvest their honey (while keeping the bees at bay using smoke) are illegally appropriating the by-products the bees create. When the lawyer for the humans, Layton T. Montgomery, goads Adam into attacking him, Barry must complete the case on his own. But winning the case and freeing the bees from human exploitation leads to an environmental disaster that menaces humanity! As bee society falls apart, the relationship between Barry and florist Vanessa Bloome is strained to the point of breaking. The bee and human must work together to save the world!

On the surface, Bee Movie seems to have a great message of the importance of environmental interdependence. The humans and bees in Bee Movie eventually learn that they must work together to protect the delicate balance of the Earth's ecosystem. That is an honorable message. However, the film begins in the hive and illustrates a rigid society that is ordered, well-controlled, and is somewhat oppressive, but ends in Vanessa's lower shop without any closure for the hive. The consequence of this is that it leads to a strongly implied horrible message for the overall film.

After winning the lawsuit in the human world, the humans stop using honey in their products, which frees the bees and menaces their orderly society. But the final scene of Bee Movie has Vanessa featuring "bee approved" honey in her flower shop. The problem with this climax is that there is no visible price on the bee approved honey and it is not clear that she is actually selling the honey, as opposed to giving it away. The problem with failing to close the loop on the hive story is that Bee Movie fails to illustrate that the bees actually profit from their work. The bees successfully stop humans from explicitly enslaving them and stop the humans from manufacturing and selling honey from fake hives created for the purpose of making honey. But, the bees go back to work to protect the environment, keep order in their society and produce honey that the humans then distribute and enjoy. The bees in Bee Movie do not evolve; they merely liberate some of their brethren from explicit slavery. Because there is no scene that illustrates that the bee approved honey financially or materially benefits the bee hive, Bee Movie implicitly advocates in favor of a slave society. The bees do all of the work and are kept under control and the fruits of their labor are used by a vastly more powerful group . . . without any explicit moment that shows them benefiting, this is a slave class that has been bamboozled into putting their seal of approval on their own exploitation.

This troubling ending comes at the climax of a film where the characters are unlikable, based on stereotypes and relationships that make no actual sense. The unlikable aspect of the characters is epitomized in the way Barry uses other people for his own gain. Barry is thrilled when a bear is willing to appear at the trial and act violent in order to benefit his case . . . but then, after the case, Barry disparages bears again. Barry is a user and a racist one at that! Ironically, the writers miss their chance to make a truly relevant social commentary on the way language has been misappropriated by having a lawyer accuse Barry of "playing the species card" when it was the perfect place to use the term "race card" accurately (as bees and humans are actual different races, as opposed to humans of different ethnicities!).

The relationship between Barry and Vanessa is just troubling. Vanessa is a human who seems to fall in love with Barry, the way he fell for her. When my wife shockingly asked, "How would that even work?!" and I came up with some creative ideas to answer that question, I got her to blush and tell me - well before I came to the end of my list - to please stop! Bee Movie is just ridiculous when one looks at the relationships in the film.

While the animation in Bee Movie is fairly impressive, the voice acting is merely adequate. Renee Zellweger goes in and out of dialects as Vanessa and Jerry Seinfeld descends into shtick as Barry.

The result is that Bee Movie is a truly terrible animated film that is not worth watching . . . even for its ten year anniversary!

For other animated films, please visit my reviews of:
Zootopia
Despicable Me
Shrek

1/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my Film Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2017 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

I Can't Believe I Missed Lost For This! I Justifiably Pan Revolutionary Road!

The Good: A few moments of performance/character, Soundtrack
The Bad: Melodramatic, Nothing happens, Poor writing, Unlikable characters, Soundtrack telegraphs everything.
The Basics: Boring, jaded and not filled with performances nearly as great as many claim, Revolutionary Road is a flop for director Sam Mendes!


[Note: This review was originally written off a preview screening of the film, but I liked the title and opening, so I am leaving it unaltered. Enjoy!]

It's a tough thing to stand before your fellow critics and ask "What movie did you just watch?!" for a film that is receiving universal praise. However, having just endured the latest Sam Mendez film, Revolutionary Road, I stand up in the community, shake my head, and firmly and loudly shout "Don't go to see this movie!" To add insult to injury, tonight while I was at the screening of this film, I was forced to miss the season premiere of my favorite television show, Lost. That just hurts.

Before the pile-on begins, it is worth establishing that: 1. I like dark films, 2. I like films with great performances, and 3. I was utterly unbiased going into Revolutionary Road; I had not seen a single trailer or read even one review of the film. And because it is worth mentioning, I have been a fan of some of the works of director Sam Mendez, most notably American Beauty (reviewed here!). As we say in the biz; this is no American Beauty!

April and Frank spot one another across a smoky room in 1948 America. They connect and seven years later, they have two children, an unhappy marriage and April's dreams of being an actress have died a very public death. As their marriage falls apart, Frank and April remember the better days, how they found their little house in suburban Connecticut on Revolutionary Road and the time they spent there happy. As Frank begins an affair with a new secretary at his machine firm - where he works in advertising - April contemplates the lack of direction in her life and mourns her missed opportunities.

But April comes across a photograph of Frank in Paris and recalls how it was the one place he wanted to return to. April pitches to Frank that they do just that. So, they begin preparations to sell the house and car and move to France where April will work and Frank will find himself. Yet nothing goes quite according to plan as April gets pregnant and Frank is offered a whopping promotion and raise and their dreams begin to die yet again.

A few years ago, there came a film that did not fare so well called The Story Of Us (reviewed here!) which basically had Bruce Willis and Michelle Pfeiffer yelling at one another. Their characters were at the end of a disintegrating marriage and the film was largely unpleasant. The thing is, the critics and viewers seemed to realize that. With Revolutionary Road, most seem to be giving the characters a free pass on substance because they are played by Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio. The thing is, Revolutionary Road, like The Story Of Us is basically a lot of yelling and one tires of it quickly. Sure, it has some great realism, but it also is not at all entertaining. Does it capture the reality of life women were forced to endure at the time? Undeniably? Is it worth watching? Not really, no.

The reason for my antipathy is quite simple; the film goes nowhere. There is no physical or emotional journey in Revolutionary Road. After the establishment of the relationship between Frank and April, there is a scene that illustrates the two of them married and fighting bitterly over April's flop of a play. We, the viewer get it. What next? Unfortunately, the answer to that is simply "more of the same." Revolutionary Road continues and revisits the same fighting, performances and character issues over the course of the interminable two hours this film runs. There is no catharsis, but worse than that, there is never any real hope, no growth, not even much in the way of events. When looking at the plot of Revolutionary Road it is remarkably simple: Frank and April, in an unhappy marriage, decide to leave the U.S., they have the mentally worn-down John over for dinner, have affairs, are offered promotions and the end comes (far, far too late for most viewers to care). Instead, the movie plods along with little to recommend it as the characters spend the bulk of the time yelling at one another.

Add to that, none of the characters are particularly likable. One of the first things Frank does is have an affair on April. He's not a good husband or a particularly good man and when things have the chance to turn around, he continues to make poor decisions that make it utterly impossible to respect the man. Similarly, April likely suffers from bipolar and she truly suffers. Divorce, as this is set in the 1950s is not mentioned, but she is not exactly blameless for the condition of the marriage, either. She baits Frank and lets him treat her terribly instead of leaving him.

Equally problematic are the supporting characters. The neighbor, Shep, is clearly interested in April, director Sam Mendes makes that so obvious only an idiot or someone who, I suppose, is literally blind, will not see that. Actor David Harbour leers through all of the scenes they share and the film plods along with a sort of "get on with it feel" because the viewer pretty much knows that at some point April will have and affair or Shep is going to rape her. One of those two things will happen, because that is how the guy is looking at her constantly. That Shep's wife, Milly, never seems to catch on is just insulting to all concerned.

The only character with anything going for him is the crazy guy, John and even that is somewhat problematic. It has become cliche that only the crazies truly see things as they are (though I'll abide by that in being a crazy that calls this film flat-out boring). John is just the embodiment of that archetype.

Only slightly better than the dismal characters and utter lack of character development is the acting in the film. Kathryn Hahn, who plays Milly, is so over-the-top in Revolutionary Road that it took me a while to figure out why her performance seemed so familiar. I challenge anyone who has seen Scott Thompson in drag on The Kids In The Hall to watch Hahn in Revolutionary Road and not find her performance derivative of that. Moreover, in his second appearance on screen, Michael Shannon appears to be channeling Heath Ledger's version of the Joker for his portrayal of John.

As for the leads, Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio are quite safely within their established ranges in their roles of April and Frank. DiCaprio, for example, is giving his fans nothing that is not within his abilities that we didn't see in the way he played his character in Blood Diamond. He can yell, he can play puppy dog eyes, we get it. What's new? Nothing here. In a similar fashion, Kate Winslet gives us nothing we haven't seen before in other films of hers. She showed more range in her single episode of Extras than she did in this entire film.

Movies that are dark are not to be shunned. There are plenty of films with oppressive moods that are still great. This is not one of them. You can have a movie without much plot, if it still has great characters or amazing acting. This has neither. You can have a film with lousy characters and it can work if they do something interesting, in Revolutionary Road, they do not. And you can have poor acting in a film where there is a story or decent writing or even intriguing character developments. Revolutionary Road has none of those things. If you bother to sit through the film up to the title plaque, know this: you've seen all the film has in the way of acting and a journey.

It's truly not worthy.

For other works with Dylan Baker, check out my reviews of:
Across The Universe
Spider-Man 3
Let’s Go To Prison
Hide And Seek
Spider-Man 2
Changing Lanes
Thirteen Days
The Cell
Requiem For A Dream

4/10

For other film reviews, please visit my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2012, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

The Rare Distracted Movie Review: Failure To Launch Fails To Impress

The Good: Decent acting, Interesting story, Moments of humor
The Bad: Frenetic moments, Predictability, Final moments, Main characters
The Basics: When Tripp meets Paula, it might be love, save that she is working for his parents to get this thirty year-old out of their house.


It's rare that I wait more than four days to review a movie (a trip out of town saw to that in this case) and it's even more uncommon that I review a movie that I saw under such strange circumstances as Failure To Launch. My mother was watching Failure To Launch one afternoon when I stopped by to pick her up to take her to lunch. She insisted on finishing it before leaving, so I watched the last twenty minutes of the movie. She then insisted I take it with me to watch and - finding my queue otherwise empty - so I did. I cannot think of a movie I've basically ruined the end of only to sit down and watch it days later.

Failure To Launch follows a laid-back boat dealer named Tripp who is in his thirties and living at home with his parents. Tripp soon meets Paula, an attractive woman who is seemingly not repulsed by Tripp's life without land and property and the two begin to date. The problem, as the viewers are instantly brought into, is that Paula is actually a specialist working for Tripp's parents to get him out of their house. As Paula develops real feelings for Tripp, her life - and his - become complicated.

Ultimately, I am recommending Failure To Launch because, though it is an average movie, it smartly deals with some aspects in a complicated manner. Sue, Tripp's mother, is largely motivated by fear which she expresses to Tripp late in the movie. Tripp is motivated by a strong sense of loss and on a grander scale, Failure To Launch is the first movie in my experience to deal with the growing phenomenon of adult children in the U.S. living with their parents, usually as a result of economics.

It's rare that one watches a movie that is clever enough to make things complicated. Tripp is not a loser and one of his friends who initially appears to be one is even less of one, having bought his parents' house to avoid the estate tax. Tripp's father, Al, even develops in the course of the movie, so it feels less like a monolithic romantic comedy.

The problem is when the movie stops being clever and defying the conventions of romantic comedies by focusing entire scenes on characters who are not the leads and instead descends into the inane and ridiculous. In Failure To Launch, this takes the form of slapstick comedy with Tripp being attacked by a dolphin, a chipmunk and something else. I say "something else" because I know there were at least three frenetic, spasmodic scenes with animals flying around, but the movie left such a lack of an impression on such scenes that it was largely forgettable. At only 97 minutes, I want to think that the ridiculous slapstick intervals are simply a way to kill time to get the film up to conventional standards. Though I suspect director Tom Dey and writers Tom J. Astle and Matt Ember could have extended the movie more organically, I'll try not to blame their choice.

Sarah Jessica Parker plays Paula and it's hard to judge her acting in Failure To Launch, as the role is fairly indistinct; she is generic professional and female romantic lead. She had more of a screen presence in The Family Stone (reviewed here!) and this did not seem much different from any of the episodes of Sex And The City I've seen in terms of acting. This is not the role to define Parker.

Similarly, Matthew McConaughey as Tripp is a bland, generic, Hollywood-good-looking, "Aww shucks"-charming, well-off thirtysomething lead. He's indistinct and bland and his screen presence - or lack thereof, makes one wonder how he was voted "sexy" at anything; he's far too generic for that, with all of the important information about his place and character being relayed by others.

And that's why Failure To Launch comes close to failing. The lead actors are not distinctive in their roles. All of the bit actors steal the show. Kathy Bates has a supporting role as Sue and Terry Bradshaw, as Al, steals ever scene they share from her. Who would have guessed that Terry Bradshaw could hold his own in a supporting movie role and legitimately earn praise for it? Bradley Cooper, who I always enjoyed on Alias, (reviewed here!) gives a strong supporting performance as Demo, a character too infrequently used in Failure To Launch.

It is actress Zooey Deschanel who throws the movie over the top. Deschanel plays Kit, a bitter, borderline alcoholic who is Paula's best friend and is plagued by a mockingbird. She plays the role with enthusiasm and sarcastic stoicism that make her the easiest character and actor in the movie to watch. She's able to turn her moods on a dime, almost violently in a way that few actors can.

In short, Failure To Launch is a pretty straightforward romantic comedy save that it is diluted with slapstick and strong supporting characters that have little in competition for airtime with the a-story. It's not going to light the world on fire, but it's also not the worst movie one could watch when the queue is otherwise empty.

For other works with Zooey Deschanel, be sure to visit my reviews of:
New Girl - Season 1
Yes Man
Weeds - Season 2
The Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy
Elf
Almost Famous

5.5/10

Check out how this film stacks up against others I have reviewed by visiting my Movie Review Index Page where the films are organized best to worst.

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Graduating Into Something Mediocre: Rumor Has It . . .

The Good: A few lines near the very end
The Bad: Unextraordinary acting, Flat characters, Formulaic plot
The Basics: In a disappointing romantic comedy, Jennifer Aniston's character Sarah learns she may be the lovechild of the guy from The Graduate. Sigh.


When Harry Met Sally and Love Actually (reviewed here!) are two romantic comedies that are traditionally well-reviewed that I love. They are in my permanent collection, I watch them periodically, I enjoy them quite a bit. I mention them because lately I've seen a lot of romantic comedies or dramadies that border on romantic comedy that have been disappointing, vacuous or unsurprising and unfulfilling. I give every film, c.d. and book I encounter a fair, open-minded chance, but lately, I've been running into a lot of duds. The latest in that series is Rumor Has It . . .

Thirty years after the affair that inspired The Graduate, Sarah Huttinger is going through something of an existential crisis. While at her sister's wedding, while covering up her own engagement, Sarah learns that her grandmother, Katharine, is the woman who Mrs. Robinson was based upon and that the man who she seduced also seduced Sarah's mother. This causes Sarah to believe it is possible that Beau Burroughs might be her biological father, so she hunts him down.

Romantic comedies often hinge on chemistry. Chemistry is key to convincing an audience within ninety to 180 minutes that two people who are just coming together could be romantically involved. Hollywood creates for the audience and society the myth that relationships are not complex and can be condensed into an experience that is encapsulated within a ridiculously short period of time. Even given that common conceit, too many movies fail to engage the viewer simply based on lack of chemistry.

Rumor Has It . . . is plagued by a lack of chemistry all around. There is no palatable chemistry between Sarah and her fiancé Jeff. When we meet Beau, he is not terrible charismatic. Beau and Sarah have no discernible chemistry. And, though it was probably intended, Annie (Sarah's sister) and Scott have no chemistry either. It's pretty much impossible to sell a romantic comedy when none of the characters/actors have chemistry with one another.

I'm going to start the blame here with the actors. Mark Ruffalo plays Jeff and from his first appearance on-screen, my thought returned to the age-old problem of directors casting the Hollywood Beautiful d'jour actor of middling talent. Ruffalo fits this mold and it's unclear what his appeal is. This is the first movie I've seen Ruffalo in and he did not spark any desire to see him in any other roles. His delivery is bland, his affect is dull and he has no on-screen chemistry with Jennifer Aniston.

Conversely, Ruffalo is given the best line of the entire movie, though it comes far too late (almost at the very end) for the viewer to care and be impressed by his character for it. Moreover, there is nothing spectacular about Ruffalo's delivery, so the credit for the line has to go squarely to writer Ted Griffin.

Kevin Costner plays Beau and his performance calls to mind a gag from Family Guy. Chris, the dim son on the show, states, "I haven't been so confused since the ending of No Way Out!" and the shot immediately changes to him walking out of the movie wondering, "How does Kevin Costner keep getting work?" Yes, Rumor Has It . . . brings that question to mind as Costner is neither charismatic or even interesting as a character that pretty much demands being both. His performance feels surprisingly woody and Costner does not add anything to the role to sell the character.

Jennifer Aniston plays Sarah and it does not work for her. She proved to me her acting talents in Friends With Money, which might have been mood-terrible, but she was great. Aniston plays a character too much like her strong but occasionally befuddled Friends character Rachel. She exhibits no chemistry with either Costner or Ruffalo, which pretty much sinks the story.

Director Rob Reiner gets a lot of credit from me. He directed both When Harry Met Sally and the fabulous The American President. He is a man with some real talent and he has proven it time and time again. Rumor Has It . . . is not his best work. He doesn't bring out anything in the cast, does not make the story pop in a visually interesting way nor does he manage to sell us on any of the leads as being talented individuals.

Ultimately, Rumor Has It . . . just does not pop from the writing to the acting to the directing. It is not engaging and the events that are supposed to lead to a cathartic end fail to because the supposed catharsis is based on the concept that two of the characters are good together. Alas, we will hold out for better.

For other works with Mark Ruffalo, be sure to visit my reviews of:
The Avengers
Date Night
Shutter Island
The Kids Are All Right
Where The Wild Things Are
Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind

3.5/10

For other film reviews, please check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing of all the movies I have reviewed!

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Sigh, Eh . . . About Schmidt

The Good: Not much, moments of acting
The Bad: Utterly unlikable characters, Boring - if not, absent - plot, Obvious epiphanies
The Basics: When Harold Schmidt loses his wife, he latches onto his daughter in a boring cross-country odyssey to get to her boring wedding. Man, this film drags!


It's hard to muster a lot of enthusiasm for About Schmidt; and I am someone who enjoys a good depressing movie (Brazil) or a mid-life crisis movie (American Beauty). The overriding problem is that the movie is about dull people, doing dull things, while looking, feeling and acting utterly dull. I'm surprised I could muster up a sigh even after watching this.

Harold Schmidt has been forced into retirement and shortly thereafter, his wife dies leaving him very much alone. He adopts a foster child (like you see on the commercials for Christian Charities abroad) and sends the youth letters about what is going on in his life. The letters become his opportunity to vent and he describes meeting his daughter's fiance and going to her wedding cross country in his Winnebago.

The problem with About Schmidt is that it spends a great deal of time with Harold complaining, but he never has anything beyond that. That is to say that he complains because he doesn't like things, but he never offers any sort of ambition or idea about how things could be better. So, the film ends up being 125 long minutes of Harold Schmidt quietly whining about everything without ever progressing beyond that.

The unrelenting complaining, dejected staring and lack of wit to Schmidt makes Harold one of the lousiest protagonists in recent memory. The pedophile from Boogie Nights had more charisma than Schmidt and he was just plain wrong! Schmidt is like a one-man geriatric Waiting for Godot.

A big part of the problem is in the acting. Jack Nicholson has become typecast as a curmudgeon and in About Schmidt he plays the same role he has played, but without any of the flair he had in other roles. Nicholson plays Schmidt like his character in As Good As It Gets (reviewed here!), but without the anger. What do you have of that character without the anger? Just a boring old guy complaining. Or, like I said, Schmidt. The role adds nothing even remotely impressive to the repertoire; in fact, it detracts from it, given how disappointing the performance is.

Likewise, Kathy Bates is playing a loud, excitable, somewhat flamboyant woman. We've seen that before from her in Titanic (did I just admit to seeing that movie?!). Here she does it with a little more hickdom to it, but it wears thin long before her nude scene. In fact, quite possibly the only redeeming thing about About Schmidt is Kathy Bates' nude scene. Why? She looks like a real person. It's refreshing to see people other than the Hollywood ideal on our screens and Kathy Bates is a nice distance away from that standard.

Still, it's nowhere near enough to save this movie. It's long, pointless and the morals of it (live each day to its fullest, especially while you're young) have been done elsewhere with much better results. Even a Nicholson fan will have difficulty swallowing this one.

For other works with Kathy Bates, be sure to check out my reviews of:
Valentine’s Day
The Blind Side
Six Feet Under
Primary Colors

2.5/10

For other film reviews, please be sure to visit my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing of all my movie reviews.

© 2012, 2004 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |

Oscar Pandering Season (2009) Opened With Sandra Bullock's Successful Grab For Best Actress In The Blind Side!

The Good: Good characters, Good acting, Good heartwarming/inspiring story
The Bad: Entirely predictable and in some ways passe.
The Basics: Clever and heartwarming, The Blind Side is a character-driven story that shows just how powerful it can be for people to help those less fortunate.


For those who do not follow my many reviews, each year, there is a time I less-than-lovingly call Oscar Pandering Season. That is the time of year when the studios release the films to the short-attention spanned voters of the Academy in the attempt to get movies nominated for the big awards for Oscar season. Don't believe me? Look at recent nominees; all five of them were released in December. It's a lazy practice from a bloated system (for my money, three of 2009’s should have been: Watchmen, Defiance, and The Soloist - though my wife was honestly gunning for Star Trek to get a nomination) and in 2009 and this year, the Thanksgiving and beyond fare does appear to be continuing the trend, rather than bucking it. Hoping, apparently, to get her first serious look for Best Actress - she appeared as part of the massive ensemble for the Best Picture, Crash (reviewed here!) - Sandra Bullock delivered a powerhouse performance in The Blind Side. And it worked.

The Blind Side is an inspirational dramatic story with a theatrical preview trailer which was far too revealing, but that adequately prepared the viewer for exactly what type of movie it was going to be. Based upon real events and a book, it is worth issuing my usual disclaimer; this is a review solely of the film, not the book or reality.

Driving home with her children, Leigh Anne Touhy notices a giant young man walking in the rain. Appalled that he does not have so much as a coat, she pulls over and offers him a ride. Having nowhere to go, the young man, Michael, is taken in by Leigh Anne and her husband, Sean. Michael, it seems, is woefully neglected by the public education system and is homeless. Leigh Anne insists on taking him in - despite the stares from her neighborhood society friends - and bettering his life.

As Michael learns to read and develop other skills, Leigh Anne encourages him to take up other interests, including sports. Playing off his love and loyalty for his new family Leigh Anne finds the key to unlocking Michael's potential as an offensive tackle and soon he is excelling both in school and on the playing field. But even as he moves up there, Leigh Ann and Sean come to realize what a blessing improving Michael's life has been to their entire family.

The Blind Side is an appropriately inspiring story with a decent reinforcement of American social mobility and the benefits of family values. In some ways, it is exactly That Kind Of Movie. I'm not one for sports movies and The Blind Side minimizes the sports aspect in favor of the human drama of the struggle of Michael learning both in terms of education and how to love his new family. But the drama of The Blind Side is balanced between Michael's story and that of Leigh Anne and her growth from a sheltered, privileged housewife to a woman who sees the value of helping others more directly than just through charities and the like.

The reason The Blind Side works as well as it does is that it is less of the "ethnic mismatch" drama that the trailers originally made it out to be and it almost never treads into the realm of melodrama. Instead, the film develops at a smart pace with the character focus being retained above plot contrivances. So, even though Leigh Anne ends up in the ghetto confronting less-savory people from Michael's past, the conflict is retained as a family one, not as a fight between rich and poor or white and black. The emphasis on taking the personal risk for the benefit to - for lack of a better term - the soul of those who do random acts of kindness makes for a compelling drama.

And this truly is Sandra Bullock's dramatic opus. While there is ample evidence that she can do comedic and she can pull off cute, but John Lee Hancock - who adapted the book and directed The Blind Side - and the studio know exactly what they are doing with releasing this film now. Sandra Bullock illustrates serious dramatic chops with her delivery of lines that could be campy or melodramatic in a less professional actor's hands. Instead, Bullock plays Leigh Anne as smart, internally powerful and with a dignity that comes from more than just her economic station in life. And having seen a lot of films these days that are supposedly great, but fall flatter in my reckoning, Sandra Bullock deserves some serious credit for maintaining her accent throughout the film. As simple as it seems to be, few actors these days actually manage to hold their character's accent consistently throughout a production, but Bullock does it wonderfully.

The real surprise on the acting front is not how well Tim McGraw supports Bullock's performance as Sean, but rather how well Quinton Aaron develops the role of Michael. Aaron is clearly a gifted actor in that one assumes he began filming at (or above) the level of articulation Michael reaches by the climax of the film. As a result, Aaron makes plausible the transformation of the mumbling, numb teenager into the young man who stands proud and plays hard. Of course, Aaron is well-cast as a young person who would be an offensive tackle, but the real strength of Aaron as Michael is in the way he presents himself in the dramatic moments of the film and slowly develops the character into a more confident and articulate young man. The fact that he holds his own opposite Sandra Bullock with her dramatic stare and intense deliveries of lines is a credit to the young actor.

And while much of The Blind Side is truly a rags to richest story that is very typical, what makes it work so well is that it is both well-written (it has some memorable one-liners and Bullock is able to take some cliche moments and play them almost tongue-in-cheek to sell the audience on them) and it actually focuses a decent amount on the idea of social responsibility. As such, Leigh Anne's role is more than just a nurturing position that helps transform Michael from rags to riches, but one that develops the broader concept of those who have do a greater social benefit by making ripples by helping when it is so easily within their means. Leigh Anne's arc illustrates how it benefits the spirit to benefit the less fortunate and the strength of her family is multiplied by the acts of kindness to Michael as opposed to diminished by it.

In short, anyone who likes inspirational dramatic stories will find something to enjoy about The Blind Side, especially those who are not predisposed toward sports movies. Incorrectly billed more for the football aspect of it, this film is truly about the way we enrich ourselves and our society by helping others.

For other films with Sandra Bullock, please check out my reviews of:
The Proposal
28 Days

8.5/10

For other film reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| | |

Man-made Disaster Movie: Titanic Is A Passionless Love Story That Sinks!

The Good: Good peripheral performances, A few moments of character
The Bad: Mediocre special effects, Predictable plots (not just the boat sinking), Contrived love story, Chemistry
The Basics: After several years, I gave Titanic a second chance, only to discover it was as bad as I remembered it being!


I'll admit it, I'm in the minority. I am not a fan of Titanic. I saw it years ago and was utterly unimpressed with virtually every aspect of it. So, when I sat down to rewatch the film as part of my desire to see every movie that won the Best Picture Oscar, I knew I would have to see Titanic again. I went into my latest viewing with my partner, who is a big fan of the film. Despite being initially biased against the movie based upon my prior experience, I figured if there was anything that could change my perception of the movie, it would be seeing it with my favorite person in the world and sharing her appreciation of the film.

It, alas, did not.

Titanic remains one of the most overrated films I've ever seen with two leads who have no genuine sexual chemistry. And while almost anyone who has ever heard the word "titanic" knows about the ship and what happened to it, the film by James Cameron is remarkably predictable in both plot and character aspects. For all the supposed greatness of the movie, this remains a long, tiresome drama that is a mild twist on a "man from the wrong side of the tracks gets the society girl" story. The disaster story is fleshed out with a romance that is more cliche than extraordinary. Ironically, for all those who hailed Revolutionary Road as a great reunion of stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet, truth-be-told, their on-screen chemistry was often lacking.

When a team exploring the ruins of the R.M.S. Titanic recovers a safe with a drawing of a woman wearing a famed lost jewel, the Heart Of The Ocean, a woman comes forward to try to help the salvage team that is bent upon recovering such things. Rose, then, begins to tell crew the story of her time on the Titanic. Feeling trapped by her engagement to Cal, Rose boards the Titanic as part of society's elite. Moments before the ship is launched, Jack Dawson wins a ticket in a poker game to get him on the Titanic. But soon Rose feels utterly smothered by the expectations of Cal and society. She prepares to end her life by throwing herself off the front of the ship, but she is saved by Jack.

After several awkward incidents where Jack is reminded of his place in the social scheme, Rose becomes certain she does not want to associate with the social elite any longer. She abandons Cal (as best she can on the boat) and runs off with Jack. Jack, an artist, makes the portrait of Rose, which Cal finds in their room's safe. Cal's assistant plants the Heart Of The Ocean on Jack and arrests the young man. Shortly thereafter, the Titanic collides with its fateful iceberg and begins to sink. The young love Rose and Jack share becomes a nightmarish attempt to evacuate the sinking ship.

Titanic is superlative for its supporting cast. Kathy Bates portrays Molly, a society woman who does not care for conventions, brilliantly. She brings a vibrancy to scenes that are filled with stuffy characters acting boringly. Similarly, Victor Garber (Mr. Andrews, the designer of the ship) and Bernard Hill (Titanic's captain) play their roles with dignity that is enjoyable to watch and becomes the definition of professionalism and sacrifice.

But so many of the other roles are monolithic and cliche even. Cal and his henchman are villains of the most predictable and mundane order. Cal is clinging to Rose, not out of love, but a chauvinistic sense of possession. Outside being an artist, Jack is just a boy from the wrong side of the tracks with little else to distinguish him from similar characters. And Rose is very much a spoiled society girl who is unhappy with her lot in life. Her character is only fleshed out by her mother's insistence that she do whatever is necessary to snag Cal because Rose's wealthy father died carrying an inordinate amount of debt.

So, with characters who are more "types" than genuine characters, Titanic is a movie with a predictable plot that is trading almost exclusively on style instead of substance. As for the style, the film is an awkward mix of phenomenal and droll. The sets inside the Titanic are absolutely stunning, recreated in immaculate detail. The costumes, as well, are beautiful and appear period-correct. There is much to admire about the style of Titanic for much of the film.

Unfortunately, most of the shots of the ocean liner Titanic are sloppy, obvious CG efforts which have a poor physical relationship to the ocean setting and the sky. When the boat is moving and when the camera is posed at improbable angles - especially as the Titanic is going down - the effects are anything but special. The reality of footage of the actual Titanic on the ocean floor stands out compared to the computer-generated replica and when the reality and the CG are put side by side, it is just horrible. The epitome of bad special effects comes in the frozen bodies, several of which are obvious mannequins.

After a ridiculous amount of time, the movie ends and the viewer feels cheated, not so much because they knew the end from before the movie began, but because of the narrative structure. From the outset, viewers know that Rose survives, so the process of how she gets rescued is mildly interesting at best. But some of the other characters could have had surprising resolutions to their stories, but for them being mentioned early in the movie.

As well, while director James Cameron has an obvious appreciation for some physical details, he fails to capture certain essential realities. The darkness of the boat after the lights go out and sound as it would have traveled after the boar went down are less-realistically presented in Titanic.

On DVD, Titanic comes with the theatrical trailer and the ability to see the movie seamlessly in one take (the old VHS had two cassettes). There is a new two-disc version which offers Titanic fans more goodies, but I only had the one-disc version for review.

Ultimately, Titanic is another big budget special effects film of a tragedy which fleshes out the known tragedy with a lackluster character story that is more of a fairy tale than it is an original or inspired story.

[As a winner of the Best Picture Oscar, this is part of my Best Picture Project available by clicking here! Please check it out!]

For other works featuring David Warner, please check out my reviews of:
The Adventures Of Brisco County Jr.
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Secret Of The Ooze
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
Tron

4/10

For other film reviews, please check out my index page by clicking here!

© 2010, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |