Cinephile At Large

Director: Zack Snyder
Writer: Dave Hayter & Alex Tse (screenplay); Dave Gibbons (graphic novel illustrator) & Alan Moore (graphic novel)
2009

Wow. And I use that word in the worst context possible for a film. Because of all the hype for the film, because this is one of the the greatest graphic novels, and because of Zack Snyder I was excited to see this film. If you’re like me, you should stop being excited right now. I’m saving you some grief. Some graphic novels do not transfer well into films and this is definitely one of them – I would say it’s the poster child for such things. Watchmen is nothing to get excited about, it is weaker than weak and I shall tell you why. From the opening titles and the superb way Snyder intercuts the history of the watchmen to Bob Dylan’s great song “The Times they are a Changing” until maybe an hour into the film I really liked it. Then something happened. There was a shift that caused the story to take a wrong turn and even the music declined in quality. From this point until the end you will have to deal with superheroes who are rendered really lame mostly because of the actors, and for a film that relies heavily on characters that is a terrible thing.

First, there’s the whole Silk Spectre thing, yeah she does know how to fight but the innate coolness, strength and toughness just wasn’t there. And for the most part she is portrayed as a misguided woman torn between two lovers. One of them, Nite Owl, has potential to be cool but is nerded up by Patrick Wilson’s performance. It’s not entirely his fault though, since it takes more than the actor to give a bad performance or to make a character really weak – it’s the writer, director and anyone else who had anything to do with the characters who are also at fault. I know he is supposed to be a bit nerdy but come on, this is just awful. Then of course, the most annoying of all is Dr. Manhattan. Seriously, he is the most annoying character ever (right alongside Jar Jar Binks).

What Watchmen needed was more Jeffrey Dean Morgan as the Comedian – that’s why the first hour is great. His character is awesomely ironic, and with a name like the Comedian he is anything but – he is more like a sociopath, and a very entertaining one at that. I would have rather seen more of his character than Silk Spectre getting it on with Nite Owl. Rorschach is pretty cool too but the film doesn’t do as much with him as it could have and don’t even get me started on the end of the film and his final scene! Ugh. It is one of those perplexing, disappointing moments where you think “gee, that was so lame”. For the most part, Rorschach is used as the narrator and when the film allows him to do something it is entirely awesome and stunning, so more screen time and character development for him and the Comedian would have made this film better, not a lot better given the rest of it, but probably more watchable with less eye rolling.

So, for a character heavy film there needs to be actors who can bring something special to their characters, not just be empty shells dressed up as costumed heroes. And because the acting is weak, the entire film falters. Not all the blame rests with these actors, it is also the fault of the director to whom I would ask “what happened?” The film started out so promising then quickly turned around into a film showcase of bad acting and a boring story. By the end of it, I was like “who cares?” I am very disappointed in this film and I would never watch it again even if it was on tv, for free. If I wanted to see awesome Zack Snyderesque action sequences, vivid cinematography and cool editing techniques I would have watched 300 and I suggest you do the same. Don’t waste your time watching Watchmen.

Director: Steven Soderbergh
Writer: Scott Z. Burns (screenplay); Kurt Eichenwald (book)
2009

When this film was over, I really didn’t know what to make of it. It’s one of those films that leave you a little confused, even though the story was fairly straightforward. But that doesn’t mean I didn’t like it. The Informant! is a quirky Soderbergh film with his unique brand of humour and nonlinear editing style. Matt Damon (thank you Mr. Soderbergh for not casting your good friend George Clooney in this film) is superb in the title role of Mark Whitacre, a corporate employee who exposes his company’s price-fixing operation to the FBI, leading to larger problems in the company and Whitacre’s life as he is exposed as a possible embezzler. As a viewer you are constantly conflicted as to whether or not to believe this Mark Whitacre because his story is constantly changing whenever he retells what happened. One time it’s 5 million he reportedly embezzled and the next time it’s 7, that sort of thing. Whitacre creates so many lies of omissions and fabrications that even the FBI begin to question his level of ‘truthiness’. Nevertheless, as a whole the film is pretty good and even more enjoyable if you are partial to Soderbergh and his brand of storytelling. My favourite aspect of the film is Mark Whitacre’s strangely funny and out of place random thoughts, portrayed in voice overs. They are hilarious and relatable because they are the kind of random thoughts everyone has all the time. So, keep an open mind and go see The Informant! for yourself and let your opinions run rampant!

Director: Ruben Fleisher
Writer: Rhett Reese & Paul Wernick
2009

If you like zombie films then you’ll love Zombieland. If you don’t like zombie films than you’ll love Zombieland. This film appeals to a wide range of viewers aka smart viewers with great taste in films, and if you don’t like this film there is clearly something wrong with you. Zombieland is ridiculously funny, entertaining, action packed and chockful of crazy zombies. Woody Harrelson and Jesse Eisenberg are the perfect pair of polar opposites, with Harrelson being the cool, tough guy and Eisenberg the neurotic antisocial guy with helpful hints on how to survive a zombie outbreak. There isn’t much you need to know about the plot, just that the zombie virus spread quickly and started with a hamburger (take that meat eaters!). Unlike most zombie films, this one does not take itself or the genre seriously – it has fun with the genre and that makes watching it very enjoyable. Get your hands on Zombieland, you won’t be disappointed. Just be sure to bring along a pen and paper to write down the survival tips cleverly edited into the film, because you can never be over-prepared.

P.s Keep an eye out for the coolest cameo ever!

Friday 13 November

This week, the featured director is Steven Spielberg. Yes, I do have a problem with him now, but that will never change the fact that he made some great films a long time ago. Schindler’s List has to be one of the most heartfelt projects he’s done and even though it’s not one of those films that you can watch whenever (because it is so depressing in a good way) you feel like watching a movie, it is one of his best and one of the best about the Holocaust, exploring the realm of human nature and the atrocities that occurred.

The Thin Red Line (1998)

Terrence Malick is an extremely visual director and I really enjoy how he leaves the camera on certain things in the scene (be it grass, or rain drops) to linger where another director would cut. Malick, along with his stellar cast breathe new life into this story about the Guadalcanal conflict during WWII.

Das Boot (1981)

Wolfgang Petersen took on a lot when he made this epic film about life on a German U-boat during WWII. It is the best film about submarine warfare and his look at the German point of view on the war is very thought provoking.

Schindler’s List (1993)

I shouldn’t have to tell you what this film is about. It is one of those films that everyone and I mean every single person who’s ever seen a film needs to see. Enough said. Go see it.

Paths of Glory (1957)

Alright, I’ll forgive you if you don’t know what this one is about so long as you go see it right away. Stanley Kubrick’s film takes place during WWII and centers around the story of a group of soldiers who refused to take part in a suicide mission (as did everyone else) and they are made examples of. Scapegoats so to speak. It’s a really different take on the war as it focuses more on the bureaucratic nature of those in charge and how they are only concerned with saving face. Go see this one. If not for this explanation, then at least see it for Ralph Meeker.