Films 169-171 (Open Water)
Film 169
"The Others"
starring: Nicole Kidman
"The Others" has the kind of twist that M. Night Shyamalan used to be good at (re: The Sixth Sense and Signs, okay those are really his only two good movies). It's a film about ghosts. And, it stars Nicole Kidman in one of her better performances, even with some of the lines she is forced to say. It's a haunted house movie. It's dark and atmospheric. The camera work is well done as the events unfold for us and the "action" scenes create enough terror in the viewer to gasp out loud. But, it's the opposite of an M. Night film, because instead of subtle, small things happening in order to provide enough tension throughout the film, "The Others" goes for big scares all the time, and it just doesn't work for me, because each scary event sort of becomes predictable. It's also a film with quietness of brooding. Here, the brooding comes from Kidman.
The premise is: Nicole Kidman's character, Grace lives, alone, in a large, isolated house on the British coast with her two weirdo children (Nicholas and Anne). Three eerily spooky servants come to the house one day after supposedly responding to an ad in the newspaper. Things don't really start getting weird when they show up, because the children claim to be in contact with another, unseen child, but the servants kind of help the weird become more known.
I can't talk so much about the events of the film without revealing too much, and since it came out in 2001 I'm sure a lot of you have already seen it so I might not be spoiling it, per se, but I will hold back. Instead, I will comment that as the events unfold, getting bigger and louder each time, it's hard not to think about a magician's creed to show and not tell so much. You can only handle so much talking, before you just want to peek behind the curtain and figure it out for yourself. It's cleat that there is something in the house. What it is, truly, is the mystery. It's definitely a suspenseful movie, but it's also sort of frustrating, even though I thought it was a great film the first time I saw it (in the theatre, I was glued to the edge of my seat), now that I've watched hundreds of films beyond this one, I can say that I've seen a suspenseful film done a bit better. I enjoyed the cinematography, because it's definitely a film that relies heavily on the atmosphere of the house (since it's supposed to be haunted, it should look and feel haunted, which it certainly does). Style and presentation is not a sufficient substitute for substance and the film is lacking substance on a certain level.
Nicole Kidman's performance as a widow who has clearly lost her mind, but presents herself as a normal person in a bad situation is well done. I've always enjoyed Nicole Kidman as an actress and she does an amazing job with the material she was given in this script. "The Others" is a decent suspense/horror film that will entertain you, but maybe see if you can tell what's coming.
.....................................................................
Film 170
"The Other Boleyn Girl"
starring: Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johansson, Eric Bana
I enjoy history and love reading books (even fictionalized history books) about history. Henry VIII is a perfect historical subject for a movie. The dude was slightly off his rocker! But, this film treats history like a terrible shrunken history lesson told through a soap opera lens. It's got beautiful people in its cast: Portman plays Anne Boleyn, the tragic female figure who meets a tragic end), Johansson plays Mary Boleyn (who bears King Henry VIII two bastard, illegitimate children), and Bana plays King Henry VIII (really? don't thin, the actual king looked as handsome and it's actually a wonder he bedded so many ladies, especially with simple lines like, "Tonight." Damn, I wish that worked for me!) The film plays with some Hollywood liberties as it creates its own revisionist history to a familiar storyline.
It's typical soap opera fodder. There's two beautiful sisters, power, corruption, manipulation, maneuvering and chess playing, sexual exploitation, and a king who needs to continue his familial line by having a son (which is apparently hard to do and is the only thing he cannot control).
Anyway, I won't bore you with the plot to the story, instead I implore you to go read a book (this is actually based on a book of the same title) about history in order to learn more. Instead, I'll tell you more about the performances. It was nice to see both ladies playing out of their typical castings. They actually play opposites. Scarlett's Mary Boleyn plays the doe-eyed, I-don't-know-any-better girl who tries to mind her own business and has a naivete that tells her to just do what is asked of her, especially when the king is ordering her to his bedchambers for rendezvous. Natalie plays the scheming, much smarter sister, Anne. But, unfortunately, being smart won't win in this game of sex and manipulation. Anne ends up being the one who gets her head chopped off (Spoiler Alert!!) Natalie's performance as Anne Boleyn deserves accolades, that she won't get because of the general feel of the film. She is great as the only person to go through a personal journey and discovers things about herself. She carries with her a youthful confidence (from marrying Henry VII) to a jaded spitefulness (after becoming knowledgeable of the king's affair with her sister), and then sheer and utter panic (when she gives birth to a baby girl, instead of a boy, because she realizes she is useless to Henry now). Birth scenes in movies are usually treated poorly, but this was one of the few birthing scenes that conveyed so much more than just "birth." It's ultimately when Anne gives everything that she is all at once and also discovers herself and that she got in way over her head, by marrying such a man as Henry VIII.
It's a time period that is interesting to me, and should have been treated better, instead of with a soap opera fashion, because they certainly had decent actors at the helm to convey the story in a darker light, for such a dark period in world history.
Skip it. Read a book instead.
...........................................................................
Film 171
"Open Water"
starring: Blanchard Ryan, Daniel Travis
There are only a few movies that make me nervous to be "out in nature." 1) The Blair Witch Project- I refused to go overnight camping in the woods for a very long time after seeing that movie and 2) Open Water (this film). I already hate swimming in open water and this film helped solidify those feelings.
It is based on a true story of a married couple that come from a privileged yet busy life of expensive cars, electronic devices galore, and busy schedules who decide to go on vacation together (when their schedules actually meshed). They spend time on the beach, but the central point of the film is them exploring and doing things they wouldn't normally do. In this case, it is scuba diving. That's adventurous. That's exciting. They go with a group of other scuba divers, along with expert scuba divers.
This is the kind of movie that feeds on anyone's basic fears. It's not just a movie about being stuck in the middle of nowhere, on the ocean. It's so much more than that. It follows more of a psychological effect of finding yourself in such a situation as this. It's a quiet film that depends on its two stars and their chemistry together, because ultimately they only have each other once they are left behind by their scuba diving crew. And, in that sense, we depend on them, since we are watching them as they slowly face the inevitably of their situation: floating, alone, on the ocean. The ending seems inevitable, but it is treated so well and comes up rather low key that if you blink you almost miss it, perhaps because the entire film is rather quiet for the entire 80 minutes. The movie was written, directed and edited by one guy and his dialogue is great, believable, since the film is quiet and dependent on these two people getting along, never losing faith in each other, sticking by each other, even when times get tough, which they do. It's the ultimate test for a marriage. Can you imagine?
It's not that I'm terrified of open water, I just don't like the idea of being out there, in a situation where I cannot see or touch the bottom or see what lurks below me. I don't think about sharks, so much as all the other things in the ocean. I know that the likelihood of getting attacked by sharks is minor compared to other things I should be afraid of, but this film takes those miniature fears and amps them up and makes them present and real because of the simple premise of the film. It's also more about the psychological effect of these fears and how it can break anyone's spirit. It's a film about being lost, being forgotten about (which, by the way, I'm still not quite sure how they could have been left behind because their bags were still on the boat), and awakening emotions you may have had as a child (shown greatly through the dialogue the couple share since they are alone together and all they really have to do is talk to each other).
This is a film after my own heart, solely based on the now, the present moment and it flows nicely. There's really no need for breaks from what's happening, since the story is all there, on the ocean.
Night follows day. Thirst and hunger comes on. Jellyfish sting them. Sharks make their presence known to the point where it cannot be ignored. It becomes clear that no one is coming back for them or to rescue them (until it is probably too late). It's a terrible take on the universe's joke and you wonder, "what did they do to deserve this?" And laying blame or fault on anyone in such an unfortunate turn of events is irrelevant, but of course brought up, an inevitable stage they must go through. She blames him at one point.
"Fault" is as meaningless as any other concept. Nothing they think or believe has any relevance to the reality they are in. Their opinions are not solicited. Their past is irrelevant. Their success, dreams, fears, loves, plans and friends are all separated from them now by this new thing that has become their lives. To be still alive, but removed from everything they know about how and why to live, is peculiar: Their senses continue to record their existence, but nothing they can do has the slightest utility.
"The Others"
starring: Nicole Kidman
"The Others" has the kind of twist that M. Night Shyamalan used to be good at (re: The Sixth Sense and Signs, okay those are really his only two good movies). It's a film about ghosts. And, it stars Nicole Kidman in one of her better performances, even with some of the lines she is forced to say. It's a haunted house movie. It's dark and atmospheric. The camera work is well done as the events unfold for us and the "action" scenes create enough terror in the viewer to gasp out loud. But, it's the opposite of an M. Night film, because instead of subtle, small things happening in order to provide enough tension throughout the film, "The Others" goes for big scares all the time, and it just doesn't work for me, because each scary event sort of becomes predictable. It's also a film with quietness of brooding. Here, the brooding comes from Kidman.
The premise is: Nicole Kidman's character, Grace lives, alone, in a large, isolated house on the British coast with her two weirdo children (Nicholas and Anne). Three eerily spooky servants come to the house one day after supposedly responding to an ad in the newspaper. Things don't really start getting weird when they show up, because the children claim to be in contact with another, unseen child, but the servants kind of help the weird become more known.
I can't talk so much about the events of the film without revealing too much, and since it came out in 2001 I'm sure a lot of you have already seen it so I might not be spoiling it, per se, but I will hold back. Instead, I will comment that as the events unfold, getting bigger and louder each time, it's hard not to think about a magician's creed to show and not tell so much. You can only handle so much talking, before you just want to peek behind the curtain and figure it out for yourself. It's cleat that there is something in the house. What it is, truly, is the mystery. It's definitely a suspenseful movie, but it's also sort of frustrating, even though I thought it was a great film the first time I saw it (in the theatre, I was glued to the edge of my seat), now that I've watched hundreds of films beyond this one, I can say that I've seen a suspenseful film done a bit better. I enjoyed the cinematography, because it's definitely a film that relies heavily on the atmosphere of the house (since it's supposed to be haunted, it should look and feel haunted, which it certainly does). Style and presentation is not a sufficient substitute for substance and the film is lacking substance on a certain level.
Nicole Kidman's performance as a widow who has clearly lost her mind, but presents herself as a normal person in a bad situation is well done. I've always enjoyed Nicole Kidman as an actress and she does an amazing job with the material she was given in this script. "The Others" is a decent suspense/horror film that will entertain you, but maybe see if you can tell what's coming.
.....................................................................
Film 170
"The Other Boleyn Girl"
starring: Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johansson, Eric Bana
I enjoy history and love reading books (even fictionalized history books) about history. Henry VIII is a perfect historical subject for a movie. The dude was slightly off his rocker! But, this film treats history like a terrible shrunken history lesson told through a soap opera lens. It's got beautiful people in its cast: Portman plays Anne Boleyn, the tragic female figure who meets a tragic end), Johansson plays Mary Boleyn (who bears King Henry VIII two bastard, illegitimate children), and Bana plays King Henry VIII (really? don't thin, the actual king looked as handsome and it's actually a wonder he bedded so many ladies, especially with simple lines like, "Tonight." Damn, I wish that worked for me!) The film plays with some Hollywood liberties as it creates its own revisionist history to a familiar storyline.
It's typical soap opera fodder. There's two beautiful sisters, power, corruption, manipulation, maneuvering and chess playing, sexual exploitation, and a king who needs to continue his familial line by having a son (which is apparently hard to do and is the only thing he cannot control).
Anyway, I won't bore you with the plot to the story, instead I implore you to go read a book (this is actually based on a book of the same title) about history in order to learn more. Instead, I'll tell you more about the performances. It was nice to see both ladies playing out of their typical castings. They actually play opposites. Scarlett's Mary Boleyn plays the doe-eyed, I-don't-know-any-better girl who tries to mind her own business and has a naivete that tells her to just do what is asked of her, especially when the king is ordering her to his bedchambers for rendezvous. Natalie plays the scheming, much smarter sister, Anne. But, unfortunately, being smart won't win in this game of sex and manipulation. Anne ends up being the one who gets her head chopped off (Spoiler Alert!!) Natalie's performance as Anne Boleyn deserves accolades, that she won't get because of the general feel of the film. She is great as the only person to go through a personal journey and discovers things about herself. She carries with her a youthful confidence (from marrying Henry VII) to a jaded spitefulness (after becoming knowledgeable of the king's affair with her sister), and then sheer and utter panic (when she gives birth to a baby girl, instead of a boy, because she realizes she is useless to Henry now). Birth scenes in movies are usually treated poorly, but this was one of the few birthing scenes that conveyed so much more than just "birth." It's ultimately when Anne gives everything that she is all at once and also discovers herself and that she got in way over her head, by marrying such a man as Henry VIII.
It's a time period that is interesting to me, and should have been treated better, instead of with a soap opera fashion, because they certainly had decent actors at the helm to convey the story in a darker light, for such a dark period in world history.
Skip it. Read a book instead.
...........................................................................
Film 171
"Open Water"
starring: Blanchard Ryan, Daniel Travis
There are only a few movies that make me nervous to be "out in nature." 1) The Blair Witch Project- I refused to go overnight camping in the woods for a very long time after seeing that movie and 2) Open Water (this film). I already hate swimming in open water and this film helped solidify those feelings.
It is based on a true story of a married couple that come from a privileged yet busy life of expensive cars, electronic devices galore, and busy schedules who decide to go on vacation together (when their schedules actually meshed). They spend time on the beach, but the central point of the film is them exploring and doing things they wouldn't normally do. In this case, it is scuba diving. That's adventurous. That's exciting. They go with a group of other scuba divers, along with expert scuba divers.
This is the kind of movie that feeds on anyone's basic fears. It's not just a movie about being stuck in the middle of nowhere, on the ocean. It's so much more than that. It follows more of a psychological effect of finding yourself in such a situation as this. It's a quiet film that depends on its two stars and their chemistry together, because ultimately they only have each other once they are left behind by their scuba diving crew. And, in that sense, we depend on them, since we are watching them as they slowly face the inevitably of their situation: floating, alone, on the ocean. The ending seems inevitable, but it is treated so well and comes up rather low key that if you blink you almost miss it, perhaps because the entire film is rather quiet for the entire 80 minutes. The movie was written, directed and edited by one guy and his dialogue is great, believable, since the film is quiet and dependent on these two people getting along, never losing faith in each other, sticking by each other, even when times get tough, which they do. It's the ultimate test for a marriage. Can you imagine?
It's not that I'm terrified of open water, I just don't like the idea of being out there, in a situation where I cannot see or touch the bottom or see what lurks below me. I don't think about sharks, so much as all the other things in the ocean. I know that the likelihood of getting attacked by sharks is minor compared to other things I should be afraid of, but this film takes those miniature fears and amps them up and makes them present and real because of the simple premise of the film. It's also more about the psychological effect of these fears and how it can break anyone's spirit. It's a film about being lost, being forgotten about (which, by the way, I'm still not quite sure how they could have been left behind because their bags were still on the boat), and awakening emotions you may have had as a child (shown greatly through the dialogue the couple share since they are alone together and all they really have to do is talk to each other).
This is a film after my own heart, solely based on the now, the present moment and it flows nicely. There's really no need for breaks from what's happening, since the story is all there, on the ocean.
Night follows day. Thirst and hunger comes on. Jellyfish sting them. Sharks make their presence known to the point where it cannot be ignored. It becomes clear that no one is coming back for them or to rescue them (until it is probably too late). It's a terrible take on the universe's joke and you wonder, "what did they do to deserve this?" And laying blame or fault on anyone in such an unfortunate turn of events is irrelevant, but of course brought up, an inevitable stage they must go through. She blames him at one point.
"Fault" is as meaningless as any other concept. Nothing they think or believe has any relevance to the reality they are in. Their opinions are not solicited. Their past is irrelevant. Their success, dreams, fears, loves, plans and friends are all separated from them now by this new thing that has become their lives. To be still alive, but removed from everything they know about how and why to live, is peculiar: Their senses continue to record their existence, but nothing they can do has the slightest utility.
Comments
Post a Comment