Tag Archives: Danny Huston

Birth-2004

Birth-2004

Director Jonathan Glazer

Starring Nicole Kidman, Cameron Bright

Scott’s Review #1,124

Reviewed March 18, 2021

Grade: B+

Due to the difficult nature of the film’s storyline, Birth (2004) is a tough sell to most cinema lovers.

A grown woman embarking on any sort of romance with a ten-year-old boy will turn off viewers, though can you even imagine if the genders were reversed? I was fascinated by the premise and the endless possibilities of a conclusion.

I’m not quite sure what I expected to ultimately happen but I felt slightly underwhelmed by the ending.

All in all, it is a daring effort that I wish had more payoff.

The first hour or so is extremely provocative.

Nicole Kidman excels at making the unbelievable material as believable as she can and the film is directed very well by Jonathan Glazer who gives it a haunting and mysterious Stanley Kubrick vibe.

The director would come into name recognition following his 2013 masterpiece Under the Skin.

The film opens with a voiceover of an unknown man, a professor, lecturing about his disbelief in reincarnation. The audience then sees the man jogging through New York City’s Central Park where he collapses and dies.

It takes Anna (Kidman) ten years to recover from the death of her husband, Sean, (the professor) but now she’s on the verge of marrying her boyfriend, Joseph (Danny Huston), and finally moving on. We suspect she may not be completely keen on marrying Joseph but most of their relationship is unclear. We know that she aches for Sean.

On the night of their lavish engagement party, a young boy named Sean (Cameron Bright) turns up, saying he is her dead husband reincarnated. At first, she ignores the child, thinking it’s a joke, but his knowledge of her former husband’s life is uncanny, leading her to slowly realize that he could be telling the truth.

Anna is conflicted to say the very least and Kidman effortlessly makes the audience believe that what is considered ridiculous might be true.

Is there a supernatural element here?

Her family members, led by her mother Eleanor (Lauren Bacall) are disbelieving and antagonistic towards the boy for disrupting Anna’s life.

An issue is that other than one supporting character, Clara (Anne Heche), who has a great opening sequence burying mysterious letters, the others have next to nothing to contribute to the story except to brood and get angry.

Bacall, in particular, is completely wasted in a role that could have been played by any other older actress.

Parallels to Rosemary’s Baby (1968) are hard not to make. Anna dons a similar pixie hair as Rosemary. They both reside in swanky old-style New York City high-rises that have a ghostly, haunting feeling. The ambiance is positive.

My favorite camera shot that Glazer includes is a lengthy one of Kidman’s Anna. In a close-up, the character’s reactions are on full display for what feels like several minutes. Kidman gets to show her tremendous range- tears, shock, realization.

I’ve noticed a similar shot in a handful of modern films and it’s an actor’s delight- a viewer’s too!

The finale, without giving much away, is interesting to a point. The big reveal involving Clara is intriguing until the viewer backtracks and tries to add up all the events. The fact is they don’t add up and I longed for something more concrete or believable.

There is not a good payoff.

Birth (2004) doesn’t always add up to satisfaction but it’s edgy, gloomy, and unpredictable and I enjoyed those facets enough to recommend it. This is not a mainstream film like Ghost (1990) with a similar theme- it’s much more cerebral and thought-provoking.

Kidman’s performance is the main draw here but it’s tough to find a film the actress is not great in.

30 Days of Night-2007

30 Days of Night-2007

Director David Slade

Starring Josh Hartnett, Melissa George

Scott’s Review #993

Reviewed February 25, 2020

Grade: B-

During the decade when 30 Days of Night (2007) was released, the trend leaned towards the vampire-horror genre, where bloodthirsty tyrants would do battle with the good folks of the land.

The film has outstanding elements: a tiny town, total darkness, and chaos.

The gritty conclusion is a predictable letdown as the film spins out of control into the silly and the formulaic.

Hartnett, at the time, was an A-list actor, whose film career was dwindling, reduced to the horror circuit.

In Barrow, Alaska said to be the northernmost town in the United States, the winter sunsets and does not rise for 30 days and nights providing a full month of complete blackness. An evil force emerges from the black atmosphere and strikes terror on the town, and all hope rests on a husband-and-wife cop team, Sheriff Eben (Oleson (Hartnett) and Stella Oleson (Melissa George).

The duo must protect a handful of survivors from a pack of vampires and battle the lack of communication and blizzard conditions in the frigid arctic.

The film is based on a comic book miniseries of the same name, but 30 Days of Night is mostly influenced by two better films; 28 Days Later (2002) and 28 Weeks Later (2007), the former a groundbreaking film within the sub-genre- even the title is a copycat!

The result is nothing groundbreaking and rather run-of-the-mill story-wise. It seems patterned too closely after other films rather than having an identity all its own.

The best part of the film is the fantastic elements and trimmings created to provide an atmosphere. Highly effective, it carries the film and intrigues the compelled audience when the story lacks.

What is more frightening than a blinding whiteout, hungry vampires, or a town fraught with perilous fear? The spooky atmospheric trimmings make the lack of payoff even more jarring and make the film adequate, but little more.

The casting is mediocre and unrealistic.

I doubt any sheriff in a tiny, forgotten town would be as good-looking as Hartnett, nor is he believable as a powerful sheriff- he does not fit the part.

George, as estranged wife Stella, is neither good nor bad, but rather inconsistent. Little chemistry exists between the couple and both were cast for their looks as they seem to be staged puppets more than fleshing out their characters.

Regardless, any romantic entanglements between the characters are dull and insignificant.

The character development is not there.

Ben Foster, as “The Stranger”, is a great actor, but not in this film. Subsequently appearing in grand roles in Hell or High Water (2016) and Leave No Trace (2018), this film is not his best work. The character is limited whereas he could have added much more to a better-written script.

We know little about any of the townspeople and is unclear what the motivations of the vampires are other than to wreak havoc and create terror.

30 Days of Night (2007) is a marginally good film mostly because of the way it looks, and the horror-flavored ingredients sprinkled throughout. Despite some cool ways of killing off the evil vampires, the film never hits high gear, only remaining neutral for most of the way and puttering out with a disappointing climax.

Advisable is to see the much superior and similarly produced and filmed, 28 Days Later (2002).

21 Grams-2003

21 Grams-2003

Director Alejandro G. Iñárritu

Starring Sean Penn, Naomi Watts, Benicio Del Toro

Scott’s Review #990

Reviewed February 14, 2020

Grade: A

21 Grams (2003) is an independent drama containing crisp writing, top-notch acting, and a unique directing style by Alejandro G. Iñárritu.

An early work by the acclaimed director, he delivers a powerful exposure to the human condition using intersecting storylines.

The result is a powerful emotional response that resonates among viewers taking the time to let the story evolve and marinate.

Outstanding filmmaking and a sign of things to come for the director.

The film is the second part of screenwriter Guillermo Arriaga’s and Iñárritu’s Trilogy of Death, preceded by Amores Perros (2000) and followed by Babel (2006), 21 Grams interweaves several plot lines in a nonlinear arrangement.

Viewing the films in the sequence is not required to appreciate and revel in the gorgeous storytelling and mood.

The story is told in a non-linear fashion and focuses on three main characters, each with a “past”, a “present”, and a “future” story thread. Events culminate in a horrific automobile accident, which is the overall story. The sub-story fragments delve into the lives of the principals as the audience learns more about them.

Ultimately, all three lives intersect in dramatic fashion leaving the viewer mesmerized and energized by the deep connections.

Paul Rivers (Sean Penn) is a successful, married college mathematics professor who desperately needs a heart transplant. He and his wife are considering having a baby in case he should die.

Cristina Peck (Naomi Watts) is a recovering drug addict now living a happy suburban life with a loving husband and two young children.

Jack Jordan (Benicio Del Toro) is a former convict who is using his newfound religious faith to recover from drug addiction and alcoholism and live a happy existence with his wife and kids. After the car accident, each life takes a shocking turn forever changing things.

The multiple timelines and back-and-forth storytelling are an excellent part of 21 Grams, adding layers upon layers of potential entanglements among the characters. This could be a confusing quality, but instead, it provides mystique and endless possibilities.

What worked so well in the outstanding Traffic (2000) is used by Inarritu and delivers. The recipe of clever plotting characters the audience cares about and top-notch acting is created, mixed, and served on a silver platter.

Penn, Watts, and Del Toro are stellar actors who give their characters strength, sympathy, and glory. Each has suffered greatly and faced (or faces) tremendous obstacles in life, soliciting feelings from viewers.

All three are good characters, trying to do the right thing, and grasp hold of any sliver of happiness they can find. They have moral sensibilities without being judgmental, delicious is how each character interacts with the others, but in differing ways.

The film is not happy and not for young kids, but the brilliant elements will leave the film lover agape at the qualities featured. The dark, muted lighting of the film is perfect for the morbid stories told throughout and the common themes of anguish, courage, and desperation.

The clever title refers to an experiment in 1907 that attempted to show scientific proof of the existence of the soul by recording a loss of body weight (said to represent the departure of the soul) immediately following death.

Only the second full-length film in Inarritu’s young career, 21 Grams is brilliant in human emotion and connections. The powerful director would go on to create Babel (2006) and The Revenant (2015), two vastly different films but with similar hearts.

21 Grams (2003) is a wonderful introduction to good things to come while utilizing crafty acting and layered writing to create a gem well worth repeated viewings.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Naomi Watts, Best Supporting Actor-Benicio del Toro

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Special Distinction Award (won)

Wonder Woman-2017

Wonder Woman-2017

Director Patty Jenkins

Starring Gal Gadot, Chris Pine

Scott’s Review #696

Reviewed November 20, 2017

Grade: B

Wonder Woman is a 2017 summer offering (and a mega success) firmly nestled in the comfort of the superhero adventure genre. It is unique because it is directed by a woman in a male-dominated field.

This must be championed, and the film has a palpable, female-empowering quality that I adore since it is still lacking in most mainstream movies.

However, at times, the film teeters too much around predictability and possesses many traditional superhero elements, such as good versus evil, climactic fight scenes, and stock villains.

But liberties must be taken, and overall, I saw the film as a female-driven work.

The fact that the masses celebrated Wonder Woman is terrific news.

Director Patty Jenkins, notable for having previously tackled weighty subject matter in films such as 2003’s Monster, is at the helm of this project and embodies her lead character with a good blend of earnestness, pizzazz, and heart.

“Wonder Woman” is a likable character, and newcomer Gal Gadot, who is unknown to me, is interesting casting. There are a myriad of young Hollywood “names” who could have championed the part—Scarlett Johansson or Jennifer Lawrence may have been palpable in the role.

Seemingly brave, Gadot takes command of the character and fills her with substance.

We meet “Princess Diana” as a young girl living on the protected Amazon island of Themyscira, inhabited only by females. It is around 1918, amid the harsh reality of World War I, though the members of the tribe know nothing about the war or any other current events—nor do any males live on the island.

Most women are trained warriors, presumably to protect the island from potential dangers. It is soon revealed that Diana has special powers, and after meeting a lost American soldier, Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), she embarks on a mission to save the world from the ravages of war.

Mixed in with the main story is a briefly mentioned ancient legend of Zeus’s son Ares plotting to return and destroy the Amazons, whom Zeus created.

My only issue with Wonder Woman as a whole is with the story.  The plot is not weak, but simply put- it is nestled in Hollywood predictability rather than containing surprises.

Despite deserved kudos for the characterization of Diana, the story ultimately turns ho-hum like many superhero films—peppered with the inevitable battle scenes.

The genre-specific “save the world” is played to the hilt as Diana takes it upon herself to stop the war, believing that people are not entirely bad. With this thought, Diana finally learns a valuable lesson about the complexities of human beings.

Wonder Woman contains a moralistic tale, but then there are more battle scenes.

The villains are mainly cartoon-like, which is what one might expect for a film of this kind.  Chemist Isabel Maru/Doctor Poison (Elena Anaya) dons a mask to hide a disfigured face (intentionally to test the poison gas), and General Erich Ludendorff (Danny Huston) plans to destroy all of humanity.

These characters are straight out of comic books and contain no redeeming qualities.

Contrary to where the main story may be a tad lacking, the romantic element is nicely done. The scenes involving Diana and Steve are sweet and romantic, making them fun to watch and a good balance against the action sequences.

Gadot and Pine have great chemistry, adding humor, so the scenes are not forced. As Diana sees Steve naked for the first time, a clever sexual flirtation develops, and a sly lesbian backstory is briefly hinted at.

Diana remarks with a smirk that men are only needed for procreation and that the women on the island “can satisfy themselves.” The duo also has a play of words about his “manhood.”

Due to Wonder Woman’s success, a sequel, again directed by Jenkins, is in the works. My hope is that because of the box office performance, the talented director can take many more liberties and push the envelope further, as she did with Monster.

Wonder Woman (2017) is a good film, so we hope the next installment will be great.

Clash of the Titans-2010

Clash of the Titans-2010

Director Louis Leterrier

Starring Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson

Scott’s Review #566

Reviewed December 27, 2016

Grade: B

Though I went to the theater begrudgingly to see Clash of the Titans-2010, (fantasy blockbusters are not typically my cup of tea), I have to confess to being moderately impressed by this film.

I had no real expectations other than it is a tale loosely based on the Greek myth of Perseus.

I have heard some people compare it to the original in an unfavorable way, but I have not seen the original- released in 1981 so any comparisons are a moot point.

At one hour and fifty minutes, the film is a perfect length and does not drag.

The plot is basic and focused. Perseus (Sam Worthington)  must save the life of the beautiful Princess Andromeda, as he leads a team of warriors into battle against vicious enemies.

Some of the creatures they meet along the way are fascinating.

Clash of the Titans (2010) is not fine cinema, and the acting is not spectacular, but the effects are worth mentioning and the look of the film is impressive.

My only real criticisms are the way Medusa is portrayed (said to be ugly, she really is a beautiful woman with snakes on her head) and the 3-D, which was pretty much unnecessary- this is probably an attempt by the studios to capitalize for profit.

Big Eyes-2014

Big Eyes-2014

Director Tim Burton

Starring Amy Adams, Christoph Waltz

Scott’s Review #216

70095129

Reviewed January 18, 2015

Grade: B

Big Eyes (2014) tells the true story of Margaret Keane, a talented artist, famous for the “big eyes” waif collection, whose husband manipulated her and took credit for her works during the 1950s and 1960s.

A con artist, he passed himself off as a talented artist, but in truth, he scammed other artists and had no artistic talent of his own.

He was also mentally unstable.

Due to his charisma and ability to wine and dine, with influential people, combined with his marketing talents, he made millions in profits from his wife’s art.

Amy Adams and Christoph Waltz portray Margaret and Walter Keane.

Tim Burton directs the film.

Adams and Waltz are the main appeals in this film. They share tremendous chemistry, when they are courting one another and subsequently when they despise each other and fight a bitter divorce battle in court over the rights to Margaret’s paintings.

I love Christoph Waltz in whatever he appears in as his charisma and acting ability astound me.

Adams is quite effective and believable as the passive, loyal, and talented Margaret Keane.

As compelling performance as Adams gives, one issue with the film is that I did not feel as sympathetic towards Margaret Keane as the film probably intended.

I like the character very much and was rooting for her in the courthouse scenes to be awarded rights to her paintings and cheered when she escaped to Hawaii with her daughter to begin a new life.

But, she willingly went along with her husband’s plot, as they both decided a female artist would not sell like a man could (it was the 1950s), and they made millions from her art. They lived in a gorgeous house, had wonderful dinners, and were able to maintain an extravagant lifestyle- not so bad.

It was not as if Walter stole all of her money and left her homeless. She enjoyed a nice lifestyle.

So, my sympathy for her was affected.

A positive of Big Eyes is how Margaret continues to uncover Walter’s deceptions. She first learns he has taken credit for her work then finds out that he is not even an artist and has conned another painter into giving Walter credit for their work.

The buildup to these reveals is excellent.

The film is a change of pace for Tim Burton. Big Eyes is not a dark film and is quite bright and colorful. Some interesting sets and art direction are similar to his other works- Edward Scissorhands and Beetlejuice.

Big Eyes (2014) is an enjoyable film largely made successful by the talents and appeal of its two stars.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Screenplay