Frenchy’s Fracas

General Info
Title: Into The Wild
Year: 2008

In Short
When a young man finishes college with top honors, his parents expect him to follow the path to a successful career. Instead, he follows his own path of adventure and anger; aching to get into the wild: Alaska.

The Movie
Visuals
Wow.. Wow..
Did I say ‘Wow’ already?
Wow..

Opening shot tells you all you can expect: widescreen shots of the cold and harsh lands of Alaska with one lonely pickup truck driving onto the scene.. Wow!
The whole movie is a traveling adventure piece, so we get to see incredibly simple and beautiful landscape shots of the US and it’s done with care and admiration.
Other visual stuff: the simple and almost muted use of colors, nothing is emphasized, you just get this sense of color without getting heaps of it in your face, loved that.

Plot
Based on a true story of a young man who decides to leave everything behind to discover himself by way of an adventurous journey across the US to the great and wild Alaskan countryside.
We see a man full of anger and spite turning his back on his parents, his sister and society in general, looking for a life filled with true values and not the materialistic limitations that surround him daily. This need to do away with wealth, gadgets, stuff, etc. means he will undertake his journey without any outside assistance or money: hitchhiking across the country to get to his destination and meeting all sorts of different people along the way. His parents don’t know where he is, or where he’s gone to and slowly suffer the agony of Not Knowing for a long and torturous time.
When our main character arrives at his destination he decides to camp in the wild, using an abandoned old bus as his Winter home. The harsh cold doesn’t break his will to survive and when Spring comes he is ready to leave his shelter. And that’s when all of his real lessons about life, love and the True Values begin.

Cast
One guy has to carry most of this movie and that guy, Emile Hirsch, pulled it off excellently. Hirsch depicts this boyish yet harsh and unforgiving character with flair and determination. The supporting cast has some beautiful royal performances from William Hurt, veteran Hal Holbrook and Catherine Keener. Even the almost always irritating Vince Vaughn performed in a way that had me slightly adjust my arrogant dislikes of his work, just a little bit though..

Conclusion
* * * S P O I L E R - A L E R T * * *

Ready?
Here we go..
Like in the real story our hero dies in the end and while I knew this before I went to see the film, I still was emotionally drained and disappointed by his death.

* * * S P O I L E R - A L E R T - E N D S * * *

That in itself was an incredible experience: I chose to really forget what I knew about the story and I really wanted the guy to survive his self-made ordeal.
That makes this an example of some very strong and compelling storytelling. Part of that strength does lie with the fact that the tragedy is a true story, but also the great script and skills of director Sean Penn play a role in my way of experiencing this movie.
Special big ass credit for Forever A Real Musician, Eddie Vedder’s contribution to the score and soundtrack, go buy the soundtrack.

I’m not done with this movie yet, it left me drained afterwards, simply rehashing the story and its characters until my mind just had to have a rest from it all. It’s a coming-of-age movie, but a lot of thirty-somethings (or almost-forty-somethings, like yours truly) will be mentally prodded into contemplation: so if you finally do take The Big Step and Leave Everything Behind To Discover Yourself, is this what you get in return? Kinda reminded me of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: to win this crazy game, you need to become a bit crazy and the rewards are a bit crazy too..

Another thing that bothered me about this story, no not bothered, annoyed is a better word: this guy is almost as selfish as a suicide victim. (Maybe an unjust comparison, and no, I don’t have any close experiences with said subject matter to make the comparison, thank you).
His actions are always about what he wants, disregarding other people’s feelings out of some fierce anger, fear and disappointment. The people he meets along the way all bond to him and he enriches their lives by simply being himself.
But his mind is on his plan and nothing or nobody can get in the way, so he leaves these people who really care for him. The fact that he discovers this shortcoming in the end, doesn’t take away my annoyance, but hey, that’s what you get for getting (too?) involved into a great and tragic story

Wonder what I’ll think of this movie in a coupla years time..

Rating:

Share This

General Info
Title: There Will Be Blood
Year: 2007

In Short
From rags to riches: we see a very determined and ambitious man climb his way to the top, the hard and emotionally costly way.

The Movie
Visuals
Hmm.. No super special visual tricks, just very smart use of the tools of the trade: great landscapes, a lot of good versus bad, light versus dark setups. A very strong sense of looking through the main character’s eyes, can’t put my finger on it.

Plot
No real surprises or complex intellectual stuff: it’s very similar to movies like Giant.
You get to experience the main character’s struggle to succeed in his dream: become as rich and powerful as possible in order to be totally independent of other people. To achieve this he still has to endure the personal and business relationships, something that really doesn’t come easy to him, except with his son. And he has to succeed in the oil business during the harsh and pioneering times in the beginning of the last century.

The development of this man into something of a sad and horrible monster is riveting stuff to behold; you keep supporting him in his fight to survive and be successful. Even though he sees every single person in his surroundings as enemies, his real nemesis in the story seems to be the young evangelist in the little village where he’s trying to drill for oil. The battle between these two really blurs the line between Good and Bad, love it!

The story ends with Final Confrontations: with his son and with the evangelist. Both scenes are very well handled.

Cast
Excellent, friggin’ excellent cast. Daniel Day-Lewis is his usual intense self, deservedly winning an Oscar for this role. The young Paul Dano was even more impressive, though.
Special props to that baby in the train scene, I don’t know how they got the kid to interact with Daniel Day-Lewis, but that baby is a natural.

Conclusion
160 minutes.. The 1st half was exciting and interesting the whole time, but after the intermission, the story started to wander, kinda lost in the desert for a while. That part of the movie felt rushed, as if there was more to tell while on the other hand a lot movie minutes was spent almost wasted on seemingly less important parts of the plot. It’s the closing part that compensated the bad parts in the second half.
Magnolia director Paul Thomas Anderson wrote the screenplay and directed the movie and it was an impressive job. Still have problems with the second part of the film, but I know that this movie will be crossing my mind for a long time, in a positive way.

Rating:

Share This

General Info
Title: No Country For Old Men
Year: 2007

In Short
In the Texas Back Country, a man finds a bag of drug money at a very bloody murder scene. He decides to take the money and from that moment on, Trouble follows him wherever he goes.

The Movie
Visuals
Well, it’s an incredibly sober visual setup: everything, from landscape shots to close ups are effective, nothing fancy.

Plot
It’s a reasonable straight plot: one guy on the run, being hunted by a very bad character and an old police man observing the situation from afar, trying to help the prey.

*SPOILER ALERT*
The fact that the main character gets killed 20% from the ending is a real surprise, but what really stuck in my head was how his killing was portrayed: it wasn’t, we just arrive at the scene with the police investigating the scene. A very nice Touch.
*SPOILER ALERT*

Even though it’s been done before many a time, I really enjoyed the older sherrif character combining old age, desperation and bewilderment in one look or sentence, it’s incredibly well done.

Cast
Had to look up Josh Brolin, his face isn’t familiar, but his performance was solid and impressive. Oscar winner Javiar Bardem shows us one of the scariest movie characters of this decade, wow..
Tommy Lee Jones is in full auto pilot, but he gets the job done with style. Nice cameo from Woody Harrelson.

Conclusion
Excellent movie from the always interesting Coen Brothers!

Rating: (Coen Bros deliver the goods..)

Share This

General Info
Title: 12 Angry Men ||
Year: 1957

In Short
A court hearing in New York during the 50s is in its most important phase: closing arguments from both parties have been heard and now the jury has to decide over the fate of the accused.
The crime: murder in the first degree; the punishment: the death penalty; the accused: a teenage boy from the bad part of town.
It’s an open and shut case: the boy is as guilty as hell, but is he? That’s for the jury to decide in a small closed off room in the middle of a heatwave, twelve men decide.

The Movie
Visuals
It’s a Classic Black and White movie; these movies have their own visual aesthetic. That combined with tight shots, great lighting and almost fishbowl close-ups give the movie a great sense of atmosphere.
I must mention another important part of movie: the sound and the movie score are minimalist in setup. Love it!
Originally written as a television play, you almost get this sense of claustrophobia, because almost 98 per cent of the movie happens in that one room.

Plot
The genre of courtroom drama is worked out to the max: what will the jury decide?
The difference is that in this movie we actually see twelve jury members debate to reach a verdict with very dire consequences. We see twelve people talk about another person’s actions and wether or not this will lead to a death sentence.
The plot isn’t about the accused, it’s about those twelve men, that’s what’s interesting. We get to see the interaction between these men and how they reach their decision.
Not wanting to give away a lot about the story: just one man believes that the accused, ehrm.. the boy could be innocent.
Just one man believes that there is reasonable doubt, just that. He’s not like a great hero and defender of the downtrodden, he just doesn’t accept that anybody can be 100 per cent sure of the boy’s guilt. Eleven men disagree and that’s where the Drama starts..

Cast
Please, Henry Fonda dominated the whole movie: the lone and highly principled guy with those piercing eyes that made him such a compelling presence in most of his movies.
If you could give an honorary Oscar for All Time Best Supporting Cast then this would be the right occasion. A very young Jack Klugman as the guy who escaped the slums, the brilliant Joseph Sweeney as the elder and bewildered statesman, and the unforgettable and excellent Lee J. Cobb as the frustrated and annoying father who misses his son.

Conclusion
I was lucky to get the chance to see this movie on a large screen in a cinema this week; this movie is in my Top Three Favorite Movies of All Friggin’ Time.
Seriously, I just love the art that’s put into the film: visuals, sound, plot and cast are all incredibly effective in bringing across the pressure cooker atmosphere in which people are put in and how these people have to confront each other over the choice they have to make.
I have seen quite a lot of movies, but there aren’t many that can deliver so much tension, drama and pause for thought. Me like, me love!

Share This

General Info
Title: Infamous
Year: 2006

In Short
Literary giant Truman Capote has almost everything that he wants; he’s the cream of the crop of the New York social elite, his books are well-read and enjoy great reviews, and he can live his life with his lover in a relaxed manner in the still homophobic 1950’s. Then he reads an article about a rich farming family that were brutally murdered and he is immediately fascinated. He decides to go the scene of the murder in rural America to explore the story..

The Movie
Visuals
Hmm.. The New York scenes are okay, nothing very special about the socialites and their lifestyle. The opening scene was quite well displayed, liked that. The rural scenes were much better, especially during the scenes where Capote’s interviewing the locals. I particulary enjoyed the train station scenes, reminding me a bit of Bad Day At Black Rock.

Plot
A story revolving the Capote character delivers what you’d expect: sharp dialogues, very nice! The story has a nice pacing, never feeling too rushed or too slow; nice and well portrayed character development. For a pseudo biopic it never tries to explain waaay too much, you have to wonder if people who don’t know anything about the writer and his works can keep up with the story, I’m guessing it works fine for them too.
That’s also where the plot is very, very strong for me: I remember reading In Cold Blood and the chills that went down my spine while reading. The story kept triggering those shivers without any actual triggering it seemed, I liked that.
The handling of the new love angle was very unexpected, no hold on, the whole new love angle was very unexpected, but it was handled okay. Another male-on-male liplock without the whole Brokeback Mountain brouhaha.

Cast
Main lead Toby Jones was excellent, the annoying voice even seemed less irratable after twenty-odd minutes; but the actor did just more than that, he went out of his way to depict a larger than life character with a fine attention for detail.
The Hollywood Cameo set with the likes of Sigourney Weaver, Gwyneth Paltrow and Isabella Rossellini weren’t really impressive as the New York elite, but were quite entertaining. Sandra Bullock as the quiet and intelligent author Harper Lee kinda worked for me; I think Bullock is working very hard to get more serious and interesting roles for herself. I wonder if she’ll succeed..
Extra credit for Daniel Craig, the new 007 shows a great bit of thought-provoking talent. The way this guys performing his roles could make the James Bond franchise very exciting again.

Conclusion
Tricky stuff.. I know that the book and its impact on my psyche weigh very heavily on how I experienced the film. It sure as hell didn’t disappoint, that’s for sure. I was having flashbacks from the book and the movie version from 1967, and like I said earlier: I enjoyed being triggered by the movie. But take away those positives, does the movie itself have any good points? Definitely, although it did take me some time to realize that: nicely
written, well performed, okay visuals.
I didn’t expect the love interest in the story and I was very much curious about the real facts behind that story, but Capote and his biographer could be playing around with the truth.

Rating: (sharp and witty, sometimes thought-prevoking)

Share This