Giant (1956)

Netflix Synopsis: In Oscar-winning director George Stevens’s sprawling epic, Texas cattleman Bick Benedict (Rock Hudson) journeys to Virginia in the early 1920s, falls in love with aristocratic, independent-minded Leslie Lynnton (Elizabeth Taylor) and takes her back to his ranch — setting the stage for an intergenerational saga that spans decades. James Dean (in his last film appearance) co-stars as sulking, nouveau riche Jett Rink — the root of Bick’s worries.

Review: I had not heard of this classic before Audrey reviewed it so I figured it was time to check it out. I started watching this movie a few weeks back and just could NOT get into it, Elizabeth Taylor was annoying as hell with her condescending attitude. I got as far as when she arrived to the ranch in TX. Fast forward to today when I gritted my teeth and forced myself to endure the remaining hours of this flick. I started where I left off, what a completely different movie than what I was subjected to previously. I LOVE this movie, the characters are rich in depth and beautifully flawed. We follow the Benedicts over their many years of marriage, from the trial and tribulations of raising cattle, a death in the family, differences in their backgrounds and so much more. I am flabbergasted at the terms used in this movie, they didn’t hold back even with derogatory remarks.

So the movie starts with Bick Benedict visiting Leslie’s family to purchase a horse, within a couple of days they are both headed back to TX. We get to meet his sister, who is NOT impressed with this eastern independent woman who isn’t afraid to speak her mind. The other character is Jett, he is a ranch hand that is enamored with Leslie from the moment he sets eyes on her. He is also quite envious of the Benedict’s wealth and becomes the bane of his existence. Leslie sets out to change things, which sets off her sister-in-law, events take place that change the structure of the family and ultimately their lives forever. We get to grow with the Benedicts, you see them have children, the children grow up with their own minds and eventually marry too. Bick has to face the reality of Leslie not being a ‘Texan’, she rocks the boat with changing the ranch and her family.

There is so much to this movie that I couldn’t even begin to cover it, plus I don’t want to give away anything. My only issue was Texas, it was very brown just the way I remember it. I love the supporting cast too and it is a shame we lost James Dean at such a young age. Once I got into this movie the time flew by, though it would have been a bit smoother if I didn’t have to flip the disc over. If you want a well-rounded movie with a fantastic story, check this one out, it will be worth your time.

Rating:

Submitted by: Bear 2/26/07

Turtles Can Fly (2005)

Netflix Synopsis: Residents of an Iraqi Kurdistan village await the violent arrival of the invading U.S Army. A young boy named Satellite (Soran Ebrahim) helps clear minefields and installs equipment that brings in news from the outside world. Meanwhile, three orphans wander aimlessly, the victims of tragic happenstance. As Saddam is removed from power, these innocent children must confront the harsh reality that awaits them. Bahman Ghobadi directs.

Review: This movie is mesmerizing, the kids are just amazing. Satellite is the leader of the children, though there are adults in this refugee camp, even they go to Satellite for information. The story revolves around these children who survive by digging up mines in their area with a sub-plot of 3 orphans that come upon this camp. They are all interwoven and need each other to survive such terrible conditions, which Satellite believes will be made better when America ‘rescues’ them from Saddam. It is NOT a political movie, though the director does show footage of certain images from the war. The story is about Satellite, who has issues with a boy that lost his arms, almost like a turf war. Satellite falls for the sister (Agrin) who has her own demons to face, you see a bit of a flashback and come to understand her plight. The movie is heartbreaking really but you feel there is hope for these children at the same time, they are survivors. Heather (my oldest) watched it with me but I am not sure if she will be reviewing this movie. I have to give this director a lot of credit for taking on this subject without being preachy.

Rating:

Submitted by: Bear 2/25/07

The Prestige (2006)

Netflix Synopsis: At the dawn of the 20th century, rival magicians Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) are desperate to reveal each other’s secrets. Obsessed by the escalating competition, the two illusionists begin to perform increasingly risky tricks — which soon turn deadly. Michael Caine, Scarlett Johansson and David Bowie also star in this taut psychological thriller from director Christopher Nolan.

Review: The Prestige is very dark, complicated, convoluted. It’s powerful and disturbingly emotional, I was overwhelmed with a feeling of intense despair throughout the film. Not that this is a bad thing…such an acute reaction in me usually means that the acting was phenomenal and the story was entertaining. As a matter of fact, I was completely glued to my seat the entire movie, I couldn’t help myself. The story plunges the viewer deep into tragic obsession through a myriad of brutal twists and turns. I felt nauseous at the deviousness of the main characters, their cutthroat and maniacal attempts to top each other transcended beyond a story about the magic of illusion. In fact, The Prestige isn’t really about magic or illusion at all, fundamentally. It’s about life-consuming obsession and the lengths one is willing to go to satisfy it when in truth, obsession is unquenchable and cannot be satisfied at all. Hugh Jackman is decent as Angier but the two performances that made the most impact on me were Bale as Borden and Bowie as Tesla. Bale’s delivery of Borden is calculated, ruthlessly delivered and truly remarkable. Bowie is intriguing, he adeptly portrays a man of both science and mystery - Tesla as I have always imagined him to be. Michael Caine is typically cast, he does a great job but there is nothing exciting about the role or his portrayal of the role. I felt Scarlett Johansson’s performance was “phoned in”, maybe because she truly has been overexposed in recent years. She appears bored to me throughout the film. I stated that Johansson and Jackman had zero chemistry with each other in my review of Scoop and they have proved that yet again in The Prestige. The chemistry between Johansson and Bale is much more palpable but I think Bale could create chemistry with just about any female! The only criticism I have of The Prestige is the transition back and forth, from past to present. It’s a confusing story line technique showing up in movies much too frequently lately and I am not fond of it, I feel it detracts from my ability to really enjoy a film. I enjoy movies that encourage me to use my brain but if I have to think too hard, I prefer a linear story line to keep me on track. My final comment: I have seen many comparisons of The Prestige with The Illusionist and I think this is a tragic mistake. They are both excellent movies about magicians, both movies about humanity but that’s where the similarity ends. The Illusionist is a love story of hope and survival. The Prestige is a tale of vengeance and enslavement to a desperate compulsion. Both should be judged on their own individual merits.

Rating:

Submitted by: Brandy 2/24/07

Roar: The Complete Series (1997)

Netflix Synopsis: Heath Ledger stars in this short-lived dramatic series (created by former teen idol Shaun Cassidy) chronicling the epic adventures of a Celtic prince (Ledger) who rallies his kinsmen to fend off the Romans. Eventually, the land will become known as Ireland, but in A.D. 400, it’s merely a place where tribes fight for their survival — and heroes are more important than ever. The cast also includes John Saint Ryan, Vera Farmiga and Lisa Zane.

Review: Sweet Brigit, how did I ever miss this series? It is so “me”, I LOVE all things medieval. Right up my alley and I never heard of it until 2007, 10 years later? I am amazed this series didn’t last longer but I feel like this might have been because the target audience was much too specific. I can see how people who aren’t into medieval times, Celtic lore or ancient tales might think there isn’t much in this series for them but Xena and Hercules fans should have been all over this TV show. Roar does get cheesy at times, especially with the special effects aspects. However, Roar has much better acting than both Hercules and Xena. I love Kevin Sorbo but it’s obvious why Heath went on to become the blockbuster movie star and many of the other cast member shave gone on to do much bigger projects. Heath did a fantastic job for such a young actor. The best actor in the cast though? Without a doubt, Sebastian Roche. I look forward to seeing him in the upcoming film “Beowulf” and I will be looking for more projects done by him. He was brilliant as Longinus, he brought to life a character that you want to hate but you just can’t. The main plot and subplots of Roar are outstanding, the character development from episode to episode was very well done and the story kept me enthralled from the second episode of Disc One (episode one wasn’t that great in comparison to the rest of the series) to the last episode on Disc Three. It’s definitely not historically accurate (did I REALLY see an underwire bra on one of the female characters, under her leather top?) but with a story this entertaining it’s not about historical accuracy anyway. It’s really a shame this show ended so soon, I want MORE of Conor’s story! I do think that the series should have ended with the second to last episode “The Cage” as it provided more conclusion to the story and it was one of the best episodes of the entire series. The final episode “Sweet Brigit” just couldn’t compete and left the viewer hanging, wanting more closure.

Rating:

Submitted by: Brandy 2/23/07

Beer League (2006)

Netflix Synopsis: This laugh-out-loud sports comedy follows a motley squad of underdogs who’d rather perfect their beer-drinking skills than concentrate on improving their softball game. But when the league threatens to banish them because of their slacker attitude, underachiever Artie DeVanzo (Artie Lange) rallies his teammates and inspires them to new heights. The supporting cast includes Ralph Macchio, Anthony DeSando, Seymour Cassel and Laurie Metcalf.

Review: I should have known. I didn’t know exactly who Artie Lang (the leading actor) was but I’d heard he was a regular on Howard Stern’s radio show. I’m not a big fan of Howard Stern but I can stomach the jokes of a dumb sports movie once in a while so I gave this one a shot.

That assumes of course that the movie isn’t a foul flaming fountain of feces.

The movie was awful. The acting was sub par but not terrible. The jokes however fell flat over and over again. Usually the jokes were sexual in nature but boorish behavior and drug use littered this turd with a large helping of unfunny also. Fortunately, the plot was exceptionally thin, the characters all two-dimensional and the ending completely predictable.

This wasn’t the worst movie I’ve seen in the last six months. That honor probably goes to See No Evil.

Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

The Good -
There was a story.

The Bad -
The story wasn’t a good one,
The acting was sub par,
The jokes were flat and lame.

The Ugly -
After this movie I felt like I’d licked a used ashtray at last call.

Rating:

Submitted by: Brian 2/20/07

Street Fight (2005)

Netflix Synopsis: Raising hard questions about American politics, democracy and race, Marshall Curry’s incisive Oscar-nominated documentary takes viewers behind the scenes of the Newark, N.J., cutthroat mayoral race in 2002. The candidates: young Ivy League upstart Cory Booker vs. incumbent Sharpe James, an old-timer who’s not above employing questionable tactics to achieve victory. The gloves come off as the contenders lock horns in their battle to win voters.

Review: For anyone with more than a passing interest in politics, this should be really interesting. Basically the film maker attempted to document the behind-the-scenes mechanics of a local race for mayor in Newark New Jersey (a fairly good sized city).

The incumbent in office is a powerful yet grizzled old scandal wrought political veteran who had occupied the office for 16 years. His competition is an upstart Ivy league black man with a sincere interest in helping the community. The combination results in some really under-handed attacks and abuse of power that makes you wonder just how typical this sort of behavior is in American politics.

To make matters worse, from nearly the beginning, the incumbent refuses to let the film maker film him. This leads to increased focus on the young upstart and the obstacles involved in taking down a popular and long term (albeit likely corrupt) political incumbent.

This Oscar nominated film has a lot of heart and a story that will keep you guessing. And best of all: the film maker is completely neutral (although more focus is on one candidate) which means there is no agenda.

The Good -
Always interesting,
Well explained.

The Bad -
The ending was both good and bad.

The Ugly -
Although this election is probably one of the more radical examples, it really sheds some light on a process that could work a lot better.

Rating:

Submitted by: Brian 2/20/07

This Film Is Not Yet Rated (2006)

Netflix Synopsis: Kirby Dick’s provocative documentary investigates the secretive and inconsistent process by which the Motion Picture Association of America rates films. Dick questions whether certain studios get preferential treatment, exposes the discrepancies in how the MPAA views sex and violence, and reveals the association’s efforts to control culture. Interviewees include John Waters, Darren Aronofsky, Maria Bello, Atom Egoyan, Kevin Smith and more.

Review: Thirty minutes into this movie, I felt this movie should have been more appropriately named, “This Country Is Sexually Repressed And Overwhelmed By Guilt”. Why? Well, to me, that seemed to be the focus of the documentary. It seemed, from the opening credits to a full 30+ minutes later, that the viewer was preached upon for allowing, as a society, nudity to be censored.

Fortunately, the film gradually (and I do mean gradually) moved beyond that into more relevant (and interesting) concepts. The result was asserted that the judgment of what is appropriate for everyone is actually based on a perceived majority (sexually straight Republican men apparently). Examples are given to support this thinking and I will admit that it’s a persuasive argument.

Lastly the documentary did a pretty good job at pulling back the curtain on what is supposed to be a secret society of raters. The public is told that the raters are all of a certain age range, financial background and with a certain number of kids. Unfortunately no names are given so it’s supposed to be impossible to prove these numbers. Once exposed, it’s obvious that the stated “standards” aren’t being followed too closely. And in fact, the rating process is dominated by big studio interests.

I came to the conclusion that the film maker wasn’t in favor of abandoning a rating system. Rather, he felt we should either shed some light on the current system (and therefore all have an equal say in what should be “censored”) or come up with a new system that won’t favor big studio interests quite so much.

Anyway, it was an interesting watch even if I didn’t agree with everything said. I didn’t get the feeling there was some largely one-sided agenda being pushed. But it was clear that the film maker didn’t think the current system was fair in any way.

It was pretty interesting.

The Good -
Very informative.

The Bad -
Preoccupation with sex was a bit much.

The Ugly -
The MPAA system sucks for Indie makers.

Rating:

Submitted by: Brian 2/20/07

This Film Is Not Yet Rated (2006)

Netflix Synopsis: Kirby Dick’s provocative documentary investigates the secretive and inconsistent process by which the Motion Picture Association of America rates films. Dick questions whether certain studios get preferential treatment, exposes the discrepancies in how the MPAA views sex and violence, and reveals the association’s efforts to control culture. Interviewees include John Waters, Darren Aronofsky, Maria Bello, Atom Egoyan, Kevin Smith and more.

Review: I was honestly surprised by the revelations in This Film Is Not Yet Rated, mostly because I did not know the process behind rating movies. The ratings have just always been there, a part of life that I just blindly accepted as accurate without question. The documentary is slanted as most are these days. The facts that fit the documentarian’s point are prominently trumpeted, underscored multiple times and there is definite evangelism for a cause - namely to allow sex in movies to be funneled into theaters and homes without reservation or warning labels. The first half of the movie comes across as whining and sour grapes against larger corporations with more influence and control in the movie making market. These corporations are large and wealthy for a reason, they appeal to the mass consumer. It’s a fairly simple strategy that has worked for many large corporations in general for many years. Give the people what they want and they will come back for more. As the documentary progresses forward into the second half, I started to feel my opinion being swayed. Somewhat. I absolutely agree that the same rating application and theory isn’t being applied to violent movies in the same way as movies with sex. I absolutely agree that movies with violence toward women are much too prevalent and usually receive a lighter rating than a movie with consensual sex. I absolutely agree that the “secret society” of the MPAA is ridiculous and their entire system of ratings applications is faulty, defective and shockingly corrupt. It’s ludicrous that most of the MPAA Raters don’t even have children under the age of 18, when deciding these ratings based on the marketability towards children. Where the documentary loses me is the implication that the ratings system should be abandoned and that movies with sex (no matter how explicit) should not be monitored since sex is “natural”. The focus of this movie is so centered on sex (some of the sex scenes shown are certainly objectionable to most when it comes to children especially) that it loses some of it’s credibility for me. There is no doubt the system is inequitable and should be revamped entirely. But as a parent, I rely on movie ratings to help me determine what is appropriate viewing for my children. I also use the rating system to determine what is appropriate viewing for myself. If the movie scenes they showed in the documentary as examples are indicative of what they feel should be allowed without reservation, I would rather have a flawed ratings system than none at all. This Film Is Not Yet Rated has a very valid point that gets lost and loses steam amid the blatant pushing of sex and what is socially acceptable. The ratings system is not a legal one, a rating is not required for movie distribution. If a movie producer wants to push the envelope that far and the movie is explicit enough to potentially earn an NC-17 rating then they are not trying to appeal to the masses anyway. Like most in the industry, these producers and movie makers have their eye on the almighty dollar and want a bigger share of the market….apparently, children are the untapped audience for these movies. I feel everyone should see this documentary for the educational experience…I just wish it hadn’t been so focused on pushing the sex in movies agenda and more on the blanket corruption of the MPAA.

Rating:

Submitted by: Brandy 2/19/07

Flags of Our Fathers (2006)

Netflix Synopsis: From director Clint Eastwood comes this riveting World War II drama that recounts the story of six soldiers instantly immortalized when they were photographed raising the American flag atop Iwo Jima’s Mount Suribachi. Based on the book of the same name, the film reconstructs the events that preceded and followed the snapshot that came to symbolize the U.S. troops’ triumph and America’s indestructible spirit. Ryan Phillippe and Barry Pepper star.

Review: I’ve heard mixed opinions on this movie. I know the critics seemed to really like it and I do think Clint Eastwood is a good director so I gave it a gander and discovered… it’s a mixed bag.

The actual war/battle scenes are amazing. From panoramic ocean vistas with hundreds of war ships, to beaches filled with mechanized armor and soldiers, to first person views through dirty windshields of warplanes, FoOF (”foof” LOL!) has probably the best war scenes I’ve ever seen in a movie - including Saving Private Ryan.

But the actual battle for Iwo Jima is mostly a backstory for events rather than the event itself. Rather, the plot focuses around a famous photo and the US governments attempt to drum up financial support with the photo regardless of truth or accuracy. This results in an abundance of politics that frankly, really wasn’t all that interesting. The effects of the politics did have some curious effects on several of the branded “heroes” but even that was a little flat as none of the characters had real depth and it took some time to figure out who was who.

I did like this movie if mostly for the battle scenes. And although I’ve yet to see Letters From Iwo Jima (the follow up movie but from a Japanese perspective), I have a feeling this will be a good, if not critical, piece of the bigger picture (i.e. both movies together).

The Good -
Awesome FX,
Wicked action/battle scenes,
Most realistic depiction of war I’ve seen.

The Bad -
The movie is too long (2H 12M),
The politics of the movie aren’t that interesting,
The characters are a little bland.

The Ugly -
Nothing.

Rating:

Submitted by: Brian 2/19/07

Fight Club (2006)

Netflix Synopsis: When corporate drone Edward Norton can’t sleep, his insomnia leads him to take desperate measures and introduces him to roguish rebel Brad Pitt. Together they stage impromptu (and brutal) parking lot boxing matches. But when other men join in the “fun,” Pitt transforms the club from a group of men rebelling against conformity into a nihilistic cult of pranksters with greater malice in store.

Review: Holy Christ this was a good movie.

I had no idea what to expect. Since this movie came out, I’ve been dismissing it as a movie where a bunch of men get together to beat the crap out of each other. Sounds like WWE to me. No thanks.

But it is so, so much more than that. How I’ve managed to avoid being exposed to the twists in this movie after all this time has got to be a minor miracle. Let’s leave it at that… sorry, no spoilers here.

The acting in Fight Club was outstanding. No surprise when you see Edward Norton in the leading role. My first real, “Wow, he’s good” moment was in The Illusionist. He’s at least that good in this movie. And with a certain nod to Legends of the Fall, I’d have to say this is the best role I’ve seen Brad Pitt in. Together, the two are amazing.

The plot of the movie is dark, sickly and twisted. And most of the characters, including the main two, are just as demented. This is not a rosy view of the world. But something here resonates in reality. There is a message here, right beneath the surface, that is real but ugly and best not looked at too long. If you’ve seen the movie, you likely know what I’m talking about. For those that haven’t, you’re in for an eye-opener.

There is one iffy part in this movie. It’s near the end but not the end itself which is excellent and reminds me of V For Vendetta.

Great cult movie. Great movie period.

The Good -
Deep meaning,
Great twists,
Fantastic acting.

The Bad -
Almost 2 1/2 hours long.

The Ugly -
The whole thing is ugly but that’s the point.

Rating:

Submitted by: Brian 2/19/07