Winter's Bone (2010)

WINTER'S BONE

DIRECTED BY: DEBRA GRANIK

WRITTEN BY: DEBRA GRANIK & ANNE ROSSELLINI

NOVEL BY: DANIEL WOODRELL

OVERALL SCORE: 8.00/10

The sole responsible member of her house, Ree Dolly (Jennifer Lawrence), must find her father prior to his court date or the house, in which she currently raises her two younger siblings, will be claimed by the father's bail bondsman. 

---------------------------------

Reminiscent of 2008's Frozen River, Winter's Bone is an unflinching, slow, character driven look at a town built upon poverty, drugs, and societal retreat. Moody, without ever being pretentious, Winter's Bone is a beautifully crafted cinema experience which calls to mind the work of Jane Campion and John Boorman.

Indie director Debra Granik finds a beautiful balance between visual awe and harsh reality. The second time feature film director excels in challenging both the characters and the viewer. Maintaining a simple narrative, but wrapping it in a perfectly believable ambiguity that forces upon the viewer love and frustration in equal doses. By the end, Winter's Bone proves you don't have to spell every thing out for people to connect the dots, and sometimes it's a far more appreciable experience if you don't.

Handling the screen, Jennifer Lawrence breaks through in leaps and bounds, especially if you consider her main claim to fame prior to this was The Bill Engvall Show. Lawrence presents the character with a stubborn sense of necessity, and overbearing, that makes her relatable without being excessively emotional. Ree Dolly is exactly what the world has made her, and exactly what she needs to be to survive it.

Much of the same could be said for Dolly's uncle Teardrop, played by the always excellent John Hawkes. Teardrop is not a character that's easy to relate to, he's far more distant, borderline cruel, but well layered and there when needed. Winter's Bone gives Hawkes the perfect platform to display the wonderful talent he's always had outside the more generic characters he's often given. If anything, I'm debating if I should start my John Hawkes for Oscar nomination campaign now, or give it a few weeks.

Still, even with the beautiful visuals, characters, and talent, Winter's Bone suffers some minor hiccups. The most obvious one being a scene involving Ree Dolly and an Army recruiter. While I admit the scene offers some perspective on the transformation Dolly must make, the dialogue that carries the scene feels incredibly forced and redundant. The material covered in this scene has already become apparent to the viewer, and unless we believe Dolly must hear it to believe it, it simply slows down the pace of the film.

Luckily enough for the viewer, Winter's Bone is not the kind of film where slowing down is a big change. Winter's Bone is intentionally slow to begin with, building off its own core story into tales of character and lifestyle.  A beautiful, dark, tale that never shies away from what is necessary to tell the story. Granik's tale of family and survival exists not for popcorn theatrics, rather one for the more composed viewer. One who wishes to think, feel, and connect as opposed to be wrapped up in explosions.

Admirable, enjoyable, and beautifully crafted, Winter's Bone is the kind of film acutely aware viewers can get behind. Winter's Bone manages the craft of being subtle, without being incomprehensible. Granik puts you right into the middle of Dolly's story, her world, giving the viewer a brief insight into the life of impoverished America.

The Red Riding Trilogy

In the Year of Our Lord - 1974:

Directed by: Julian Jarrold
Trilogy Written by: David Peace (novel) & Tony Grisoni

Grounded by a solid performance from Andrew Garfield, and a great supporting cast of Sean Bean, Eddie Marsan, and Rebecca Hall, 1974 is a beautifully shot introductory element to the trilogy. Setting the series in tone, and in narrative, it creates the starting point from which the other two films must follow.

The film's shining quality is how it blends plot, action, and character breakdown seamlessly. Capturing deep emotional struggles beneath, as each character tries to present their own uncaring to what's going on around them.

While it will provide some answers to the questions it presents, 1974 leaves you hooked, and begging for more. My one real complaint would lie in the middle in which the plot begins to drag before heading into a powerhouse of a finale. A finale which, quite honestly, saves the film several times over.

In the Year of Our Lord - 1980:
Directed By: James Marsh

In the context of the entire trilogy 1980 suffers from 3 problems. The first being that it is in many respects a stand alone story which provides some context which is later developed in the final installment. Secondly it lacks the beautiful imagery, and style, of the first and final installment. Lastly, there's just not enough depth there to make it gripping.

There's no hiding my enjoyment for watching Paddy Considine act, and here he brings some of his best acting to the forefront. As well you have lesser known British actors such as Sean Harris, Tony Pitts, Maxine Peake, and Warren Clarke stepping up to meet that level, giving 1980 one of the best all around performances of the trilogy.

1980 also benefits from having a rather quick paced plot with plenty going on. Lots of dealing with uncovering corruption, murder, and providing a bit of rounding out to some of the character's we've seen, but not known until now.

In the Year of Our Lord -1983:
Directed By: Anand Tucker

Perhaps the most visually surreal entry, 1983 does a brilliant job of tying together the loose ends left by 1974 and 1980. Linking the three films together in a story of redemption, and uncovering. Headlined by two strong performances by David Morrissey who spends the first two installments as a back ground character, and Mark Addy as a solicitor trying to prove the innocence of those accused of the lead in crimes.

Perhaps the most striking thing about 1983 is how those characters who merely served as background for the first two installments really come to light here. How much impact they really had on the plot development of the previous two films, and the crimes surrounding them. If nothing, I greatly enjoy how it all tied together, even if it isn't a perfect knot.

The only real issue I had with the plot lied in the heavy use of flashbacks. They were in many cases necessary, but not well blended, and towards the end it became hard to keep track of what time frame I was looking at. Luckily the placement of certain characters makes it a bit easier on the viewer.

--------------------------

As a whole you won't find many television movies as provocative, or indeed captivating, as this Red Riding trilogy. The acting is splendid throughout, and, while it never achieves an element of perfection, it certainly makes for a gripping weekend event.

The Ghost Writer (2010)

THE GHOST WRITER

DIRECTED BY: ROMAN POLANSKI
WRITTEN BY: ROBERT HARRIS & ROMAN POLANSKI
NOVEL BY: ROBERT HARRIS
OVERALL SCORE: 6.50/10

Ghost writer (Ewan McGregor) is assigned the task of penning the memoirs of ex-Prime Minister Adam Lang (Pierce Brosnan), but is quickly thrown into the dark world of politics when Lang is charged with releasing terrorists to the CIA for torture.

"This place is Shangri-La in reverse."

The Ghost Writer is an effectively designed thriller that benefits from seasoned hands, careful handling, and swift direction. It struggles with an overbearing score, often used in random places, and a pace that would suggest more brilliance, than it really possesses.

No, if anything, The Ghost Writer is an exciting gem of a film, that has managed to find its way into a year where it can shine far more brightly by sheer association. Using this to its advantage is never a bad thing as it's able to get away with more than I could rightfully expect.

The real strength of Ghost Writer lays in the hands of McGregor, and a series of strong supporting performances from Olivia Williams, Brosnan, and even Kim Catrall. Not to mention all to quickly gone appearances from Eli Wallach and Tom Wilkinson. These cast members deliver performances that require a great deal of emotion (especially in the case of Williams), while having to memorize an uncountable number of throw away names.

Much like most political thrillers, The Ghost Writer deals with a politician who must now come to terms with his darker past. While we learn, in a manner much like State of Play, about the surrounding circumstances that lead to this dark past. All of which culminate in the great reveal for which the film has been building.

The only real downside to The Ghost Writer is that once the great reveal comes, it goes rather quickly. So that, while it is a strong finale, it is not a commanding one. It does not reach into the fabric of your mind and require repeat viewings. It merely ends with a "wow, didn't see that coming" and a passing "what next?" The journey is captivating, thriller, and mysterious, but you must lay the groundwork very well if you're intending to shock and awe.

And like a construction worker experiencing a bad case of nerves, Polanski completes the foundation for his tale with shakey plot points at best. Don't get me wrong, they are marvelous plot points. Only, these points are laid out in the most vague of circumstance, and fail to build the finale Polanski seeks.

It's visually thrilling, and worthy of your eye, just don't get your hopes up that you'll be witnessing the next great thriller. It's far from it, but worth the adventure if not for the performances alone.

With brilliant performances, and an admirable script, The Ghost Writer is one of the better political mystery films in some time. Though it struggles to build to something great, it creates something that entertains and captivates all the same. A few more fine touches, and it could have been brilliant. But, for what it is, it's a fine film all the same.

High Plains Drifter (1973)

HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER

DIRECTED BY: CLINT EASTWOOD
WRITTEN BY: ERNEST TIDYMAN & DEAN RIESNER (uncredited)
REVIEWED FOR: 1001 MOVIE CLUB
OVERALL SCORE: 7.50/10

Mysterious gunman (Clint Eastwood) agrees to help a mining town defend itself from 3 criminals they put in jail some time ago, now being set free. All of which are connected by a dark secret some will kill to protect.

"It's what people know about themselves inside that makes 'em afraid."

To say High Plains Drifter absolutely caught me off guard would be a flagrant understatement. Dark, eerie, mysterious, it's a western unlike any western I've seen before it. Laced in supernatural elements, grounded by dark, far too real, characters, Eastwood, Tidyman, & Riesner sure created something worth a view. Different from the darkness of a Wild Bunch, because High Plains Drifter is a tale of the darkness of men. And the consequences that come when good people do nothing.

To make sure this gets across to the viewer, the filmmakers shock no more than 15 minutes in without "heroic" gunman raping a woman right off. A shocker to the system if I've ever seen one, and a perfect setup for the tone of the film. A near entire cast of anti-heroes. Which makes the film both difficult to watch, and gripping, as one tries to solve the underlying mysteries. What makes these people do what they do, and why. Questions reiterated to the viewer throughout the film, all coming to point in the grand finale.

Though don't think of it as all bad. To offer the viewer some characters to relate to we are given dwarf Mordecai (Billy Curtis), who befriends our stranger and acts as his second-in-command, and Sarah Belding (Verna Bloom), wife of local innkeeper, and last remaining moral conscience. The two provide much of the heart of the film, and serve as mediators between the viewer and the past. Bringing together the harsh reality of the town, with the simple western premise.

Bloom is especially strong in the role, providing the perfect balance to Eastwood's mysterious backstory. The rest of the cast serve their purpose, but during their bigger moments it must be said not all rise to the occasion. Luckily enough, it's never so bad that it takes away from the film, just doesn't offer much to it.

Of course one can afford to be mediocre in acting when Eastwood's direction is so steadfast. Utilizing an eerie score, the dark shots Eastwood has become known for, mixed in with classic Western setup, it's a strong visual film throughout. The sort of film one images wears on the mind of those involved because of all that is put into it.

Brilliantly blending darkness with the classic western, Eastwood and company have crafted something truly unique in High Plains Drifter. Those seeking western chipper, and humor, dare not apply, High Plains Drifter is a dark, analytical, take on humanity, and the cost of our selfishness.

Shutter Island (2010)

SHUTTER ISLAND

DIRECTED BY: MARTIN SCORSESE
WRITTEN BY: LAETA KALOGRIDIS
NOVEL BY: DENNIS LEHANE
OVERALL SCORE: 7.25/10

U.S. Marshall Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his partner Chuck (Mark Ruffalo) investigate the disappearance of a patient at a secluded institute for the criminally insane.

As is the case with all Scorsese films, I often find reviewing them to lean heavy on the hard side. Shutter Island is a capable mystery thriller, with great performances, and some amazing direction, but it always weighed towards the just good side of things. It's the sort of film that plays off of subtle gestures and quick cuts to keep you on your feet. It plays with continuity errors, and mental stability. Basically, Shutter Island from the very get go begs you to doubt it.

Pulling you in with a powerful lead performance from DiCaprio, who is just getting better and better, and a supporting cast to die for. If you were to make a list of underappreciated supporting players, Shutter Island could easily be a starting template with the likes of Ruffalo, Von Sydow, Michelle Williams, Emily Mortimer, Patricia Clarkson, Jackie Earl Haley, Ben Kingsley, and so on and so forth. Really, Scorsese's casting director outdid themselves with this work of casting art.

Still Shutter Island for all it's grand direction, and awesome musical tone, is a movie about the writing. The story to be more frank. If you've seen a trailer for the film you know it's got the twist. And while I appreciate it, I have to admit it's painfully obvious. What good twist films do is give you reason to doubt it, or no reason to believe there is one. And while I see Shutter Island tries that, I just never bought the misdirection. You compound that with direction meant to keep you on your feet, wondering what the twist is, and you have one that adds great character layer, but not much shock.

Still, it's in that character layer that Shutter Island stands out. The attention paid to the development of the Teddy Daniels character, is just superb. Scorsese really knows how to get everything out of a scene, and DiCaprio knows how to breath life into a character. The combination of which brings Shutter Island to life in an inescapably dynamic fashion. It's no wonder audiences have attached themselves too it, and I don't much blame them.

While I wouldn't call it the greatest twist, or film for that matter, in the canon of any of those involved, Shutter Island is a gripping, and intriguing thriller, that hits the right beats, just perhaps not quite hard enough.

Brick (2005)

BRICK

WRITTEN AND DIRECTED BY: RIAN JOHNSON
OVERALL SCORE: 7.25/10

After the death of his ex-girlfriend, Brendan (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) heads into the drug ring underworld of his high school in order to find her killer.

Since it's release I've heard nothing but overbearing praise for this 2005 noir mystery film. And following my love of Johnson's 2009 film The Brothers Bloom, I made a personal note to check this film out. To say the very least: Brick is a highly stylized verbal narrative, with elements of mystery, and some action. The movie's dialogue requires your mind to be at its absolute peak (or have thesaurus and dictionary websites readily available) as its riddled with slang, and quick talk. The world of Johnson is not one in which everything is spelled out in simple, elementary, words, but through a variety of analogies, and interesting word usage.

Overall this is both the film's greatest strength, and its greatest weakness. With little on screen action, the slang heavy dialogue can either attract or repulse the viewer. If they find it catchy, intriguing, and worthy of a deeper look, they'll find the meaning behind what is being said, and it makes for a much easier viewing experience. While on the other hand if they find it annoying, overly stylized, and devoid of real meaning, they'll likely sit through frustrated after many "what the hell does that mean" moments. Luckily for myself I leaned just enough in the attraction to make this a perfectly interesting go around.

Though at the heart of the dialogue is the film's characters. The actors portraying said characters can some with a mix bag. While Levitt, Matt O'Leary, and Nora Zehetner seem to perfectly embrace their characters' odd quirks, others (such as Noah Fleiss and Lukas Haas) feel as if they're trying to force their emotions. This isn't always the case, but for the most part the movie's acting takes a strong backseat to the dialogue, and style of Rian Johnson. And that style is at the heart of what makes Johnson's Brick work so well. It's unmoving in its dedication to that style (derived from classic noir films, spaghetti westerns, and Cowboy Bebop - according to IMDB), and the way these characters move throughout the environment. It helps to create a captivating visual world... even if it does lack the depth to be truly memorable.

Despite its obvious flaws, this heavily stylized 2005 film works because of strong dialogue, dedication to its style, and a strong enough story to carry the time.

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959)

THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES

DIRECTED BY: TERENCE FISHER
WRITTEN BY: PETER BRYAN
NOVEL BY: ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
OVERALL SCORE: 6.50/10

Sherlock Holmes (Peter Cushing) and Dr. Watson (Andre Morell) is called in to investigate the mysterious death of Charles Baskerville, while protecting the last sole heir to the Baskerville family, Sir Henry (Christopher Lee).

Last week me and TheAnswerMVP from Common Sense Movie Reviews agreed to a little film exchange. I would watch two of his Hammer films (of his choosing) and he would watch two of my Kurosawa films (of my choosing). A sort of opportunity for us to bridge the massive gap between our two film tastes. Judging by his review of Yojimbo (a major favorite of mine) we'll still be left a good distance apart by the end of this thing.

My first film for Hammer is the retelling of the classic Doyle story, Hound of the Baskervilles. Odds are you've read the story at some point in school, not real need for me to break it down for you piece by piece. Overall though my opinion of people's fascination for low-budget old monster and mystery movies still doesn't change. To me it feels like being an expert on Wal-Mart brand cheerios, or Sam's Club soda. Cheaply made, cheaply sold, and only really intended to be used by those who either can't afford or oddly enjoy them. So as you may imagine when I first popped this into my player I was expecting something between disaster, and terror.

To be honest the opening 5 minute sequence left the thought: "dear god what did I let MVP get me in to." The acting was somewhere between awful and laughable (I'm not sure if I should even swap it). Then Peter Cushing stepped onto the screen. MVP lucked out in many ways by picking a Peter Cushing movie (an actor I insanely enjoy), as Cushing's Bones-esque take on Sherlock Holmes as the ever intelligent, ever critical, and unwavering logical imperative man was quite fun. The tale is classic, and it offers the same suspense you'd expect. Lee is dreadfully underused (anyone with a voice could have done his role), but I enjoy his presence all the same. Morell even manages to carry the film nicely during the (unnecessary) absences of Holmes.

While watching this movie it's no real surprise to see why Hammer aficionados love and admire it. The acting, while over the top at times, is grounded based on their relative skills by director Terence Fisher. Fisher even manages to create a very theatrical take during some of the more intense scenes, giving it a nice more open flair. As well the movie's brisk 1 hour and 26minutes runtime glides by incredibly quickly (something I assume is important for Hammer fans). Even still the movie failed to make me really care. Sir Henry could have easily been just some obscure tall guy, the mystery is sort of obvious (only 2 possible suspects, we could all use a coin), and it felt more like a TV episode than feature film. Even still the movie is quite entertaining, and something I don't regret having seen.

Entertaining, quick, and with a nice performance from Cushing, this 1959 take on the classic Doyle tale is a solid, all be it uninspired, mystery film.