Recommendation: House of Sand and Fog (2003)

Tragedy certainly leaves its mark on you, especially in this film. As depressing as a film this is, I found the performances in this movie so very, very appealing.  Mainly Ben Kingsley's tour de force performance as a middle eastern father supporting his family. Although the story kinda slips in the third half, this film should mainly be admired for its character development and acting along with a very interestingly visualized use of cinematography.

First and foremost, the acting in this movie is absolutely top notch with Ben Kingsely leading the pack. I didn't know of what to expect when I started to watch this film, only to find as the movie progressed I would get more engaged in the characters. Every character has their own shade of emotion that they express and it gives extreme depth to a very well rounded cast. You can really feel for the characters as things progressively get worse for everyone. Not just a physical struggle is depicted in the film but an emotional struggle within each character.

While the movie's story line swells into a very overtly depressing and dramatic ending, its really the ride of getting there that is the most interesting. Based on a book by Andre Dubus III, the script feels very lively. Every character is explained and fleshed out with realistic thoughts and feelings. The lines of good and bad blur, causing you to have to pick sides and choose what character you deem to be in the right. A very fresh thing for a film script.

And visually this film is very well shot. The cinematography progressively gets moodier and moodier as the film continues. Depicting fog and dark streets lit only by ghostly streetlamps. It gives a physical and illustrated picture of the struggle of two worlds clashing over a house.

At the end, the movie's tempo does kinda weigh you down with a very dramatic turn for the worst, but all in all the film is very much worth a watch. But I may warn you, you may need a box of tissues to accompany you with a copy of this film.

Films That Changed Cinema: Bonnie and Clyde (1967)

Bonnie and Clyde

During the mid 60's Hollywood had gone into an identity crisis. With the new wave films of Europe exploding onto the screen and introducing a new film style of on-location shooting and realism; the Golden Age Hollywood of yesteryear had come to an end. What emerged from the ashes of the Golden Age Hollywood was a mixture of new wave art movements and the studio system called: New Hollywood. This gave new, hip young talent a shot at artistic freedom that was earlier controlled by business men who thought they "knew what the public wanted". The first film to completely capitalize on the changes swooping through Hollywood was Bonnie and Clyde.

The script was written by two young and inexperienced men who just wanted to see if they could adapt two notoriously well known American crime figures to the silver screen.  At first the script was very raw and not very fleshed out, but would later find itself in the hands of two very important figures: Francois Truffaut and Jean-Luc Godard, french cinema gods who championed the new wave movement. These two men help the inexperienced script writers and doctored the script into a ravishing masterpiece.

With the script coming into its own the studio still had very little faith in the film. They gave it a "B-movie" status and very small budget, stating that it was an "experimental film" that would gather no audience because of its glorification of violent crime and an unsatisfying ending. The studio would soon be proven wrong.

The film was released to a very mixed audience. Older viewers found the movie appalling and anarchic. Most film critics shunned the film as being very amateurish and much too violent. The true audience demographic lay with the younger adult crowd. It was a reflection of what the youth of America was feeling at the time of Vietnam War and protest. Violence was at the center of the American psyche and only the youth was willing to connect those dots and understand the implications that New Hollywood directors were trying to get across.   

The true impact of the film was through the overtly anticlimactic, gory ending. The blend of Oscar winning cinematography and newly developed "jump cut" editing would throw the ending death scene so shockingly in the audiences face that some viewers we reported to have left the theater. It was the ending that had Bonnie and Clyde etched in the minds of American film-goers as a clear warning sign that Hollywood was changing. 

Films That Changed Cinema: Psycho (1960)

Psycho

Psycho was a first for many different things in Hollywood. It was the first American "slasher flick" most notably, depicting on screen stabbings coupled with the use of blood in a gory manner. Completely shocking the entire audience base during that time.

Only a veteran director could pull off such a brash awakening of newly found creative liberties that a post-Hayes Code Hollywood was willing to move slowly towards. That veteran director was Alfred Hitchcock, one of the most influential directors to dictate the silver screen.  His past films had grown increasingly psychological only to meet an abrupt sense of exclamation with Psycho. Vertigo, Rear Window, and Spellbound  had all touched on deep psychological themes but none as shocking and unorthodox as Psycho.

The subject matter alone met the studio with controversy, without a single frame being shot. The book Psycho, from which the movie was based, was already well known for its controversial depictions of cannibalism and necrophilia. The studio was completely astounded when Alfred approached them about directing the film option. The only way he secured a release was if he financed it himself, which he did.

Shot on a shoe-string budget (so minimal they couldn't afford color film stock) with a television crew, the studio felt the film would be a box office disaster after viewing dailys. The only person who had faith in the project was Hitchcock himself, always reassuring the film studio that this film will shock and awe the entire film industry.

He was 100% right.

Not only was Psycho the most unconventional film up to its time, it has the greatest twist ending of ANY MOVIE. The films deceptive third act and a clever media campaign about the ending of the movie lead it to shatter box office records and establish a new standard for film violence. To this day the infamous "shower scene" has gone down in history as one of the greatest film scenes of all time. Marrying together Godlike film direction of pacing and timing, flawless sharp editing, impeccable cinematographic use of shadows through lighting, frighteningly real acting, and a film score that would change the horror genre all the way to its core. All from one scene.

Its was that one scene that would later serve as a benchmark for the drastic changes that the industry was going to experience within the next decade. The 60's would soon become a radical time for movies and how a previously conservative art medium would transform into the most openly expressive profession known to society.

If Psycho hadn't been a studio success, the growth of Hollywood would have been stunted. Only a skilled director could have ushered in a new cinema era to the public. This one bold and fresh move made by a director gave new life to a mundane film cycle and created a new film genre that would only be explored years into the future.

Recommendation: Punch-Drunk Love (2002)

Punch-Drunk Love

I hate Adam Sandler. His brand of in your face, crooked-mouth-loud-yelling physical comedy was a bit too over done for my taste. It always seemed like he was trying too hard. So, when I came across this movie I was, at first, very quick to dismiss it as a "run of the mill" Adam Sandler rom-com. But after further investigation I found that the director of this little gem was none other then Paul Thomas Anderson, director of such cinema greats as Magnolia, Boogie Nights, and There Will Be Blood. I was 100% baffled as to why Paul Thomas Anderson, the Orson Welles of our time, would pick such a low-brow actor to be in his film...?

Then I watched the movie.

It all became completely clear. Not only is this movie Adam Sandler's crowning achievement of acting, but it is, in my opinion, one of the best films of the 2000's.
There are a lot of things that stand out in this film; Adam Sandler's performance, the odd script structure, the cinematography, the third act (which I guess ties in with the script structure, but I have to address it alone).

First, and probably the most prominent thing about this fantastic film is Sandler's acting. He plays a very complex, socially awkward character that seems so easy and second nature for him to portray. I was blown away at the development of his character, and the acting maturity that was being expressed by an actor who's past resume include a hockey player turned pro golfer and a rich annoying high school drop out. Sandler convinces the audience that he actually is an actor worth seeing in this movie with an electrifying presence that will glue your eyes to the screen.

Secondly, the script is probably the best original work Paul Thomas Anderson has done, arguably second only to Magnolia. As far as writer/directors go, I think only Tarantino and the Coen Brothers rival him. This film stands as a true testament to how creative and original he really is. The mixture of moods are so well concocted and conveyed. It first starts out as a character study and then slides over to being an acute thriller and then (in its third act) gently sets in as a romantic comedy, just as it is advertised. The ride this film takes you on is STELLAR.

Lastly, the cinematography is very well executed. The use of a very dirty, gritty film stock is left very obvious to the viewer. With the grainy, "cinema romance" feel to the rough screen texture. The color blue is left as a highlight on screen, almost as a metaphor to how blue emotionally Adam Sander's character feels for the better half of the movie. Jazzy, quasi-hippy montages of color erupt in one scene  almost as an outward portrayal of what tone the movie is feeling. As if the celluloid itself was trying to express an emotion to connect with the viewer.

This film, at face value, may seem like another Hollywood romantic comedy where the guy gets the girl at the end. This is just simply not the case.
This piece of pure cinema is both a delight and a labor to watch. Labor in the sense that it will get the brain juices flowing as you try to understand how on earth Adam Sandler got to be THAT good at acting. See it. You'll love it.

Multiple Viewings: American Beauty (1999)

American Beauty

During the 90's there were some very good performances that just completely dominated the silver screen. From Martin Landau as Bela Lugosi in Ed Wood to William H. Macy as Jerry Lundegaard in Fargo, there has been some very well accomplished characters portrayed fantastically. But there is one performance at the tail end of the 90's that closes out that decade with an exclamation mark; Kevin Spacey in American Beauty.

American Beauty is a very rare dark comedy in that it invites us to laugh at horrible situations that occur to a dull, suburban family as they struggle with their odd lives eventually leading up to tragedy. At the nucleus of this movie is Kevin Spacey's character of Lester Burnham, who ushers in eccentric scenarios as he goes through a mid life crisis. His character is then polarized and amplified by other characters in the film; his wife (Annette Bening) and his next door neighbor (Chris Cooper) who both are fake, insecure people trying to appear "beautiful" only to be found hiding their ugly inner nature.

This movie begs the question of "Just what exactly is beauty? And can it be taken at face value, or must it be investigated?" This very question is hinted at with the films tagline of "Look Closer...". Every single character in this movie has either insecurities or "act" a certain way to either get people to like them or be portrayed as normal.

After seeing this movie three times, all at different stages in my life, I have found this to be one of my favorite Best Picture Oscar winners of all time. What really changes with this movie during different viewings is the mood. The first time I saw American Beauty it came off a lot more as a dark comedy, with the dramatic irony and "dead air comedy" scenarios coming to the forefront of the picture. Upon my second viewing I was more engaged to recognize the tragic flaws exposed by each character. And by my third viewing I was more compelled to treat this film as a Shakespearean comedy of sorts, with its heavy use of literary devices.

Each character is very well fleshed out. Their flaws are brought to the forefront of the audiences minds. Which really amplifies the reality of the film. They're complex characters with real issues. We don't have to look too close to see that the "beautiful people" portrayed here are very flawed.

The script, direction, and acting are all brilliantly executed in this film and can only be appreciated  through multiple viewings. So if you were to see it, make room for seeing it a couple more times because one helping is not enough.

Recommendation: Run Lola Run (1998)

Run Lola Run 

I really love world cinema. And as any film buff should know, America is not the only place that knows how to make genuinely good movies. This selection is a German piece of cinema right out of post-pop-art-MTV-era 1998. Its the kind of film that gets completely forgotten about unfairly because it is an amazing work of art.

The narrative style of this movie is very original, there is a main story line that is repeated with three different variations. You're essentially watching three short films of the same subject, with the same characters and the same plot but with different endings. I wont touch on the plot because I don't think it needs to be addressed, there are deeper, more technical things that get brought to light through this movie.

For one thing the editing is absolutely phenomenal from two perspectives. First, the pacing at which everything flows, rather fast, successfully portrays the speediness of the film. With fast simple cuts that carry the viewer from one scene to the next to drive the plot line along. And second, keeping the story together with every turn was very impressive, most movies get lost in their action, Run Lola Run fed off of its action as it was an integral part of the film. 

Run Lola Run stylistically stands out as a visual delight. The cinematography pops off the screen with highlights of arresting colors (such as Lola's rose red hair). The use of animation is even a very bold, artistic move that director Tom Tykwer pulls off with such astounding ease.

I cannot suggest this film enough to people. When people say "I wanna watch world cinema films. What foreign film should I start with?" I immediately  think of this movie. 

See it.

Recommendation: Tiny Furniture (2010)

Tiny Furniture

Lena Dunham has become somewhat of an indie household name, and for a good reason. Her writing style has been compared to film god Woody Allen in multiple ways by many film critics. She's a one man band (or should I say one woman band) directing, writing, and starring in her first feature film. While the film does have its moments of amateurism, it is immediately offset by the level of mumblecore realism that really drives the atmosphere  of the picture.

The main themes of this movie connect on a more personal level then a studio film could even attempt to get across. The plot, although very simple and yet successful, centers around Aura (Lena Dunham) who has recently graduated college and is trying to find her place in the world among old friendships, love interests, and a complicated family.

This movie uses realism to its advantage in that it does not follow a Hollywood "happy ending" plot line. The characters are depicted as true real life people, not embellished celluloid popcorn film fantasies. And that is what really sets this film apart from other independent character studies that I've seen.

The movie was shot completely on prosumer Digital Video giving it a "film student" look. The cinematography was achieved with  ample amounts of natural lighting to give the film a documentary feel coupled with specifically framed shots to compliment the narrative flow. This filming style just ads to the realistic nature of this movie.

Not only do I think this is a personal film for the audience, I also see this a personal film for Lena Dunham who plays here character of Aura almost too convincingly. Exploring the realm of what to do now that one chapter of her life has come to an end and another has just begun. It as if she had written a script about her life and just wanted to shoot it as a movie using friends and real situations.

Its very obvious that this film played as a springboard for what is now the hit HBO television show Girls, in which Lena Dunham plays a similar main character facing similar problems. So needless to say I highly recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys the TV show or films that explore realism with an indie flare.

Recommendation: The King of Comedy (1983)

The King of Comedy

Rarely has there been a film that successfully blurs the lines between what a character depicts in their head and what is actual reality. In Martin Scorsese's 1983 film, The King of Comedy, this is achieved flawlessly.

The plot follows a lonely and detached aspiring comedian named Rupert Pupkin (played perfectly by Robert DeNiro) and his obsession with a desperate-for-privacy super star talk show host Jerry Langford (played by the equally impressive Jerry Lewis). The film has a very quirky, black comedy feel that touches on psychological themes such as obsession and child neglect.

The movie is broken up into two portions that seem to bleed together during the end; what Rupert Pupkin daydreams and fantasies over, and then what is actually taking place in the reality of the film. Some of his fantasies are aided by cardboard cutouts of famous movie stars, talking to them, as he sits in his room depicted as a talk show set. And other fantasies are completely fabricated conversations that take place between Jerry Langford and Rupert Pupkin that later spills out into reality.

This standalone feature is crafted perfectly by Martin Scorsese. He makes a powerfully engaging "comedy" that doesn't force laughter on its audience. Its a black comedy that doesn't tell the audience when to laugh, but rather shows us scenarios that could be depicted as comedic and gives us the option of laughing or taking it as a serious scene. The driest of any black comedy as I've ever seen.

Arguably, the most underrated piece in Scorsese's filmography. Overshadowed by bigger, more complicated films like Goodfellas or Raging Bull it was tainted after being deemed a box office failure due to it only grossing $2.5 Million of its $20 Million budget. But this movie has aged well with time and hails as containing one of the greatest performances in Jerry Lewis's career.

I urge anyone who is a fan of deep psychological comedies, as a minority as that may sound, to see this film. I guarantee it'll  leave you satisfied.

Cinema as Art

Cinema is the greatest art form, of all time.

Not since the creation of cinema has there been the most astounding union of all the major artistic expressions to come out of the human mind. It successfully marries visual storytelling with the most eloquent orchestral arrangements conveyed through the most colorful lenses. Blending together carefully conceived dialogue with meticulous optical illusions. Cinema is filled with all kinds of raw art.

The purpose of this blog is not to give reviews of movies, but to recommend films, discuss film concepts, and talk about cinema in different eras as it has continually evolved. Films are not just looked at as entertainment, but also as expression, like any other art form.

So, join me, as I look at cinema through the art lens. Whether it be the art house scene, the independent circuit, the studio films, or the "wave" movements.  All will be discussed and admired.

"Cinema is truth, 24 frames a second" - Jean-Luc Godard