Lincoln

Steven Spielberg and Daniel Day-Lewis working together on a film about one of the greatest Americans that ever lived?  Yeah, that sounds like a prestige picture.  Lincoln boasts not only (arguably) the best director and (unarguably) the best actor working in Hollywood right now, but one of the greatest supporting casts ever assembled for a simple (read: not epic) film.  Of the ten top-billed actors on Lincoln's IMDb page, there are a total of 16 Oscar nominations (with 6 wins) and 28 Golden Globe nominations (with 5 wins); only Bruce McGill has not been nominated for an Oscar or Globe.  If you wanted acting credibility, you got it in spades with Lincoln.  But does the movie live up to its pedigree?

Lincoln is a tad deceiving as a title; this isn't so much a biopic as it is a chronicle of President Abraham Lincoln's (Daniel Day-Lewis) struggle to get the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution passed while simultaneously ending the Civil War, the bloodiest war Earth had seen up to that point.  For those of you who are not history buffs (America, I'm looking at you), the 13th Amendment made slavery illegal in the United States.  Sure, Lincoln had freed all the slaves with his Emancipation Proclamation, but the legal grounds by which he did so were shaky, at best.  Lincoln wanted to ensure that his actions had some sort of long-lasting effect that would not be overturned in a court of appeals.  It's a pretty cool thing to be the guy who freed the slaves, but nobody wants to be the guy who freed the slaves only long enough for them to bleed in battle for him. 

Even a great hat can't distract from that, Mr. President

Unfortunately, his window of opportunity was closing fast.  The Confederacy was weakening.  It was only a matter of time before they were completely defeated.  But once the Confederate states rejoined the Union, the chances of passing an anti-slavery amendment would be nil.  Not only would there be pro-slavery Southerners voting, but much of the support for anti-slavery legislation was garnered from the belief that repealing slavery would end the war faster; with the war over, racism would win the day.  That left Lincoln with one chance.  Assuming everyone in his political party would vote for him (which was a stretch), the 13th Amendment was still a few votes shy of passing --- but there were several men in the opposing party that had lost their elections and were just waiting to be replaced.  If Lincoln's men could convince enough of these lame ducks --- and his own party --- to vote for the amendment, history could be made.  And, as luck would have it, there was one more date available for a Congressional vote before all the peace hits the fan!

"What will it take to get your vote?  A threesome is not off the table."

The acting in Lincoln is, not surprisingly, excellent.  Daniel Day-Lewis is THE thespian stud of our times, and he brought his A-game here.  Day-Lewis went against the traditional interpretation of the character by making him slouch, feel old, and speak with a soft tone, but he also managed to demand all of the attention in every scene he was in.  As luck would have it, that is practically every single scene in the film.  I think some of my favorite moments were the scenes where he relied on nonverbals.  This is a fairly talky character, so having the quiet moments as highlights is just a testament to Day-Lewis' acting prowess.

Example: right here, Lincoln was this close to killing everyone in a 30 foot radius

Leading the exemplary supporting cast was Tommy Lee Jones, who played a perennially cranky character.  Shock!  I love it when Jones gets a role that lends itself to his acerbic delivery, and this is easily one of his best.

Sally Field played Mrs. Mary Todd Lincoln, who is known historically for being a bit crazy.  Field managed that well enough, but I didn't think her role was anything special.

Buck up, Sally.  Sulking is not attractive in any time period.

Despite that, Field did a lot with the part and was surprisingly magnetic onscreen.  David Strathairn was good as the eternally exasperated William "I Heart Alaska" Seward.  He didn't really have much room to grow as a character, but served well as a mouthpiece to the logistics Lincoln was facing.  James Spader, John Hawkes, and Tim Blake Nelson played the three men tasked with drumming up support among the opposition; all three are fine actors, but I would have preferred it if Spader wasn't the one doing most of the work here.

Spader, realizing that this role has nothing to do with deviant sex acts

Hal Holbrook was fine as an obstacle for Lincoln to overcome, although I think this role was a little underdeveloped.  Speaking of which, Joseph Gordon-Levitt was a waste of space as Lincoln's eldest son.  One of these days, JGL will play a big role in a big movie --- it's inevitable, given his talent and the people he works with --- but the whiny, over-privileged son of the president is not that role.

"What if I tried pouting more?"

Rounding out the cast, Lee Pace was solid in the strawman role of "that really racist guy."  This is the first time I have seen Pace play an unlikable character, and he did so reasonably well.

Lincoln was the result of director Steven Spielberg teaming up with Tony Kushner, king of the difficult-subject-screenplay.  With regards to the direction, Spielberg nailed all the technical aspects.  Design, costumes, filling the cast with nary a bad actor, etc. --- Spielberg is too big of a director to accept anything but the best in these regards.  While he has never been the strongest director in terms of cinematography, Spielberg still managed to snag several memorable shots of an American icon.

He also handled the actors quite well.  Having a great cast obviously helps with that, but Day-Lewis, Jones, and Field were all deserving of their award nominations, and Spielberg was ultimately responsible for that. 

I think Kushner did a solid job with the plot and the dialogue.  Both Lincoln and Thaddeus Stevens (Tommy Lee Jones) had some fantastic lines, and transforming this political issue into an interesting story was an impressive feat.  Lincoln is missing something, though.  I want to say that it is something immaterial, like "heart," but I can do better than that.  This is a smart script, no doubt.  It is just not an emotional one.  American culture has reached a point where racism is justly vilified.  It definitely still exists, but racists are generally acknowledged as assholes, as they should be. 

"Amend that.  It should read 'total fucking assholes'"

This might have been a brave film as late as 1975, but in 2012, the subject matter isn't compelling enough on its own.  This needed an emotional anchor to twist the audience's stomach in knots while we waited for the inevitable, and that was lacking.  There were some attempts.  Thaddeus Stevens' change of policy was intriguing, but underdeveloped.  Abraham and Mary Todd shared a scene where they got to bare their souls, but it wasn't nearly enough to warm an otherwise cold story.

"You act like a little culture will kill you!"

The fault is not Kushner's alone, of course.  Lincoln has been Spielberg's baby for years, and he managed to put out a smart, well-acted and -directed film without that crucial element that makes you cry at the end.

I was expecting a lot from Lincoln, and only got most of what I hoped for.  This is technically a better film that Spielberg's last effort, War Horse, but that movie drew me in, despite my objections.  Lincoln is more cerebral, but leaves emotions at the door, and that turned out to ultimately be a mistake.  Even without something tugging at my heartstrings, it is hard to dismiss Daniel Day-Lewis reinventing an American icon.  With all the good and the not-quite-bad, Lincoln gets

Contagion

Films about infectious diseases typically try to make it easy for the audience to relate.  Maybe a madman is trying to infect the others (12 Monkeys), or the quarantining of an area puts your loved ones at risk (The Crazies), or people stop acting nice when survival is on the line (28 Days Later).  Contagion takes the relatively novel approach of not giving the audience a straw man to hate.  Instead, this is a thoughtful, realistic story that is not sensationalized.  But does that make for a movie you want to see?

Two days after returning home from Hong Kong on a business trip, Beth Emhoff's (Gwyneth Paltrow) nasty cold escalates from coughing and looking ugly to seizing and death.

Death: When you're too ugly to live

She's not alone.  Her son died less than two days after being exposed to whatever the hell his mother had, and cases pop up in Hong Kong and London, as well.  This mysterious disease appears to be highly contagious and kills in a matter of days, but there is worse news: with airline travel, the disease quickly becomes a pandemic, reaching most major metropolitan areas before anything can be organized to stop its spread.  Some people, like Beth's husband, Mitch (Matt Damon), are immune to the disease, thanks to a lucky genetic twist.

"I get it.  She's dead.  I've got an owwie on my soul.  Do I get a lollipop?"

Most others are not.  For instance, the mortality rate of Academy Award winners appears to be 50%.  It is up to the Center For Disease Control's main man, Dr. Ellis Cheever (Laurence Fishburne), and his team to figure out what the disease is, how it is spread, and ultimately how to stop it. 

"Relax...you won't die.  You're just part of the Matrix"

That means that there are researchers working around the clock in horribly unflattering hazmat suits, trying to decode this virus.  The military are worried that this might be biological warfare.  Obnoxious conspiracy bloggers like Alan Krumwiede (Jude Law) see this as an elaborate get-rich-quick scheme by a government and pharmaceutical industry that are supposedly working hand-in-glove.  CDC workers try to pinpoint where the disease began by tracking who encountered who once Beth Emhoff returned to the US, as well as when she was in Hong Kong.  People keep getting sick and people keep dying, leading to riots, supply shortages, and a general breakdown of civilization in some areas.  The world just plain sucks, but there are silver linings around every cloud.  Hopefully, the silver isn't poisonous mercury.

I'd wear a raincoat, just the same

Contagion was directed by Steven Soderbergh, and it is obvious from the very first that this one of his "Issue" movies.  The storytelling style and camerawork are often reminiscent of Traffic, but without the complex moral dilemmas.  Of course, that film had the benefit of moral decisions in the plot, while Contagion is more about survival.  Not having a humanoid enemy makes a big difference, doesn't it?  It's not that I disliked Soderbergh's direction here; it is simply pretty standard fare for a movie with so many interlinking plots.  The one bit of artistic flair that you will see from the director comes when he focuses on what sick people have touched --- I thought that was a clever bit of work that showed how vulnerable everyone is to a disease that is spread through the germs we leave via physical contact.  Soderbergh also deserves some credit for getting such a noteworthy cast into so many small roles, even if some of the actors were underutilized.

Speaking of the actors,even with such a large cast, the heart of the story was dependent on just one.  Matt Damon was very good as the surviving husband of patient zero; normally, a role like this would be painful to watch, since the character is essentially grieving for the whole film, but Damon handled it beautifully with a believable and sympathetic performance.  Jude Law probably leaves the second biggest impression as the closest thing to a villain that the movie has.  He was slimy, despicable and annoying.  I thought it was interesting that the film portrayed a blogger with such power and reach, and yet made sure to make him a complete douche bag.

Complete with his matching suit

Most of the rest of the cast was solid, but their parts weren't spectacular.  Kate Winslet and Laurence Fishburne were good.  Elliot Gould, Bryan Cranston, Demetri Martin, John Hawkes, and just about everybody else's parts basically amounted to cameos.  Even Gwyneth Paltrow and Marion Cotillard, who are featured on all the posters and commercials are barely in the movie.

Unless Cotillard was actually kidnapped during filming, in which case I'm a jerk

Looking back, I kind of want to criticize Contagion for focusing so much on the plot and not enough on the characters, given the excellent cast and Soderbergh's ability to make ensemble casts work.  But that's not really fair.  Soderbergh set out to make a frighteningly plausible film about a pandemic in the modern world, and he succeeded.  The film is disturbing at the very least and horrifying if you're anything close to a hypochondriac.  The straightforward tone of the narrative makes sure the effect of the plot on your intellect isn't diluted by a sappy love story or anything like that.  While something more character-based certainly would have made for a more entertaining film, that's not the point of Contagion.  This film was meant to be as realistic as it could be, and it succeeds. 

The message of Contagion is clear: we are not ready, and probably never will be prepared for a true pandemic.  We are damned lucky that the worst thing we have had to deal with is the bird flu.  That message is clear.  In terms of delivering a message, this film definitely succeeds.  However, it's surprisingly dry and emotionally remote for a subject that can hit so close to home.  I like the basic idea of Contagion.  I like the acting.  I like most of the direction.  Unfortunately, something doesn't add up; this is a well-made film with purpose that somehow finds a way to underwhelm.  Of course, that's compared to what you might expect from so many big names in one movie.  It's not perfect, but it's still worth a watch.  Those of you who are nervous about germs and sickness...you might want to take a pass.

From Dusk Till Dawn

After a month of horror movies, I have come to the realization that there are not a lot of great vampire movies out there.  The premise is sound, but many vamp flicks just fall short of the mark, whether from budgetary reasons, stylistic choices, or simply bad writing.  I have seen From Dusk Till Dawn before, but it has been a few years since I watched it last.  This movie obviously had a budget, since legendary special effects master Tom Savini wouldn't be seen acting in a film without cool effects.  The writing is handled by Quentin Tarantino, back when his dialogue was ridiculous and overly entertaining.  As for the style, it is directed by Robert Rodriguez, features monstrous vampires, over-the-top action, and has a good part of the story take place at a strip club.  Right off the bat, you know that this isn't going to have the subtle moodiness of Interview With the Vampire.

Not the first, but certainly not the last clue

From Dusk Till Dawn opens with the notorious Gecko brothers, Seth (George Clooney) and Richie (Quentin Tarantino), on the run from Texas Marshals on their way to the border.  Richard broke Seth out of police custody, and the pair had left a trail of corpses in their wake ever since.  This is partly because they are a couple of no-nonsense villains, but also because Richie is a bit of a psychopath and manufactures reasons to kill. 

They look like brothers, right?

Thanks to Richie's habit of murdering people, it has become harder and harder for the pair to maintain a low profile.  They need to sneak across the border, but how can they do it without being caught?  As luck would have it, a disillusioned preacher, Jacob (Harvey Keitel), is taking his kids on a road trip in the aftermath of their mother's death.  Their motor home catches the attention of Seth as it pulls into his motel parking lot, and suddenly, the Geckos are forcing Jacob to drive them into Mexico.

So...where are all the vampires?  Hold on, they're coming.  Once in Mexico, the crew arrives at the place where Seth is supposed to meet his contact; by morning, Seth and Richie will be on their way to their safety zone and Jacob will be free to take his two kids back home.  The meeting place happens to be a strip club named the Titty Twister, which caters to bikers and truckers.  The place is open from dusk until dawn, so it's the perfect spot for a fugitive to spend a few hours unwinding.  Except everyone in the Titty Twister happens to be a vampire.  Oops.  The best laid plans...

This scene makes me laugh every time

For being a ridiculous vampire movie, the acting is surprisingly solid in From Dusk Till Dawn.  This was George Clooney's first starring film role since he became famous in ER, so it's kind of interesting seeing this as his first step toward super-stardom.  And he is very good here; he delivers Tarantino's dialogue naturally and fits the sleaziness of his character quite well.  His role isn't perfect --- he's on the run and wears a leather vest, of all things, to blend in? --- but he is able to be a bad guy and a fairly charismatic character at the same time.

Even if he has douchebag tattoos

Quentin Tarantino isn't anywhere near as likable, but his character isn't supposed to be.  While I dislike QT as an actor, I will admit that his style fits the abrasive nature of his character perfectly.

Side note: I hate Tarantino's face

Harvey Keitel is pretty good as Jacob, but I think he is awfully stiff given the shitty day he is having; at first, I thought the awkwardness was pretty natural for a hostage, but he never unclenches.  Juliette Lewis plays his teenage daughter, and I guess she was fine.  She's a little awkward, and her screams are kind of annoying, but it was a tough role to be likable in.  Ernest Liu plays her brother and manages to be less charismatic than Lewis.  Seriously, what a dull character.  There are a lot of noteworthy actors in the rest of the cast, but most of them have far less screen time as supporting actors.  Cheech Marin played three different characters for no real reason; he was kind of funny as a vampire and later, as a crook, but his first appearance as a border patrol cop was surprisingly bland.  Salma Hayek writhed around as a stripper --- named Satanico Pandemonium --- who doesn't take her top off, dances with a snake, and lets Richie suck on her toes as she pours booze down her leg.  There isn't any substance to her character, and the toe and snake things kind of gross me out, but it's hard to criticize Hayek's portrayal of a lusty babe.

Nope.  No problems here.

Frequent Rodriguez collaborator Danny Trejo makes a brief appearance as a tough guy vampire, which adds a whole new layer of depth to his acting oeuvre.  Fred Williamson also gets to play a bad-ass, which is about the only thing he has ever done in his life.  Tom Savini didn't get much dialogue, which speaks to how little Tarantino trusted him to act, but he kicked a lot of vampire ass, which is plenty good enough for me.  There are also some noteworthy bit parts in the film; Kelly Preston is a news reporter, John Saxon is an interviewed FBI agent, Michael Parks introduces his Texas Marshal character for the first time (he pops up again in Kill Bill and the Grindhouse double feature), and John Hawkes delivers the most vintage Tarantino dialogue in the whole film as a liquor store clerk.  And to think, I was impressed by the cast of Interview With the Vampire!

Since this is a vampire movie, it is important to take a quick look at the creatures.  This time around, they are normal-looking people who transform into hideous monsters.

Danny Trejo, before transforming

Post-transformation, the creatures sometimes resemble their human selves, but not always.  The are super-strong, but their bodies are mushy, so blunt force attacks are effective against them.  They are vulnerable to sunlight, crosses, holy water, and wooden stakes, although you can just opt to punch holes in them, too.  Pretty standard stuff, but you never know what the rules are going to be in a vampire movie.

I really enjoyed the special effects in From Dusk Till Dawn.  They don't really come up much in the first half of the film, but once people start vamping out, there is a ton of very cool makeup and practical effects in every scene.

That also means that there is a good amount of gore in this movie.  Hearts get pulled out, heads get melted, and there is an absolute ton of blood.  Honestly, there isn't much more you can ask for in an action/horror vampire story.

Unfortunately, this isn't just an action/horror vampire story.  In fact, the first half has very little action or horror at all.  It's a crime yarn that makes a left turn and winds up in the unfamiliar territory of the supernatural action/horror sub-genre.  I'm not complaining, mind you; both halves are very entertaining.  However, the shift in tone, pacing, and style makes this feel like two separate films.  I knew that going into this viewing, but the effect was still jarring.  The first half feels like it could have been taken from leftover Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction scraps (I mean that in a good way), except for the fact that the most likable character (Seth) is obviously a complete bastard, instead of the usual cool-guy-that-does-bad-things type Tarantino usually creates.  The second half doesn't play to Tarantino's strengths, as there is very little dialogue, and even less of it is clever.  The action scenes are staged well, though, and Robert Rodriguez is able to keep the film entertaining, even as is shifts its focus.

He kicks ass for the lord

I'm not saying that From Dusk Till Dawn is a bad movie, but it is far from the best work of either Rodriguez or Tarantino.   Objectively, this movie lacks solid pacing and focus.  The writing is uneven, and the acting takes a back seat to the effects in the second half.  It's fun, but a little empty.  Of course, this film was never meant to be a critical darling.  It feels less like a cool story that the filmmakers really wanted to tell and more like a couple of friends having a blast, making the type of movie that would have blown their minds as teenagers.  In that, they are successful.  This is silly, cheeky, gory, and absolutely ridiculous, which makes it very entertaining, warts and all.

Winter's Bone

It doesn't happen often, but on rare occasions, a film forces me to look at my life with fresh eyes and consider just how lucky I truly am and how insignificant my problems are.  Sure, I may have been exposed to an experimental chemical that is slowly dissolving my eyeballs from the inside out, and I may have bookies hounding me night and day, thanks to the debts I've accrued from betting poorly on the LPGA.  Or, maybe not.  The point is, I am beyond thankful that I was not born poor white trash.

Ree Dolly (Jennifer Lawrence) is not so lucky.  At seventeen, she is the sole responsible "adult" in her household, getting food when and where she can (hunt, scavenge, but never begging) and raising her young brother and sister; her mother has an undisclosed mental problem that leaves her in a catatonic stupor most of the time and her father is a known methamphetamine cook, a profession that rarely leads him (or any money) home.  Bad news, Ree.  The sheriff (Garret Dillahunt) suspects that your daddy, Jessup, is going to skip out on his bail.  Big deal, right?  Actually, it is.  Jessup didn't have any money to post bail, so he put up the family house and land, which means that if he skips bail, you lose your home.  With a no-you-didn't resolve that would make RuPaul proud, Ree decides that there is no way in hell that is going to happen.  The rest of the film has her hunting Jessup down, asking all the wrong people all the wrong questions.  Ree knows that she's asking for trouble; if she didn't know, then she would have learned quickly, because before she speaks to the meth-addicted backwoods scumbags she knows have information on her father, she is warned by their wife/girlfriend/lady-friends.  No one helps her.  No one encourages her.  She should fail, and her family should scatter into the wind.  But the only thing that will stop Ree from protecting her family is death.

I don't often finish watching a movie impressed by the female lead.  Part of this is my tendency to shy away from period piece dramas (where Oscar seems to think the best female acting comes from) and part of it is because Hollywood doesn't have much material for strong women characters.  I was extremely impressed by Jennifer Lawrence's performance; she deserves a nomination for a Golden Globe, if not an Oscar.  Her performance is quiet and nuanced, and her character could easily seem unrealistically optimistic.  Instead, she just seems to draw from an inner well of strength, which is a lot harder to portray on the screen than being cheerful or a bad-ass.  Or a cheerful bad-ass.  But she's not a bad-ass, she's just a kid playing another kid, one who refuses to give up hope.  This film absolutely depends on Lawrence's performance, with little help from the supporting cast, but John Hawkes, who played her uncle Teardrop (a family name, I assume), made a nice turn here.  He plays the kind of ragged, stringy piece of trash that will stab you in the throat because it's Tuesday, and his living-for-nothing attitude and actions provide a sharp and sometimes frightening contrast to Ree.  And yet, the film provides moments for even Teardrop's craziness to pause long enough to see him as an innocent again.  The direction of co-writer Debra Granik is nothing special, in terms of cinematography.  If Ree has to walk somewhere, the camera will show her walking away.  Nineteen year-old Lawrence's performance, though, implies that Granik has some talent for handling actors --- I'm interested in what she can do with a script that has more developed characters in it.

Despite the stellar lead performance, the depth of this cast is not very impressive.  Almost all of the characters are one-dimensional and Lawrence's performance makes me wish she had more to compete against.  I wish this movie had more of a Coen Brothers feel to it; they usually have a very well-defined main character, but their supporting roles are consistently fantastic.  The direction, while utilitarian, could have added a lot more to the picture, if only they had tried even a couple of shots to provide some subtle symbolism to the film.

In a lot of ways, this is a frighteningly realistic film.  I knew that meth was thinning our nation's poor white trash population, but the movie depicts this crippling drug trade without prejudice.  It's just how things are, and things are depressing as all hell.  I found the gender dynamics interesting; the women of the meth men always act tough, initially, to Ree, but it soon becomes apparent that they are trying to scare her off because they know enough to be frightened of their own lovers.  I'm a huge fan of noir, and this is one of the better modern entries in the genre I have seen in a while; it's tough, gritty, unemotional (except in very small, unexpected ways) and surprisingly uplifting for a film that gives you little to smile about.  This movie is not for everyone.  The pace is deliberate and its depression can lie on you like a heavy quilt.  But this is worth seeing, if only as a reminder that your life isn't so bad, after all.