So it’s been awhile since i’ve reviewed a film, and I intend to be much more informal (and possibly and possibly not more brief) so let’s see how we do.

The King’s Speech is a perfectly serviceable movie that will assuredly win lots of awards but probably fade out of immediate memory as soon as next year’s releases come out. Not to say that it is bad or overly sentimental (a la crash), and not that I would expect a british film of this nature to be, but it does border it quite a few times. The movie is just good, and that’s it. The acting is quite fine, the story interesting, and direction without disagreement. It’s funny at times and moving at times but it just seems to be right in that position of movies made to win awards and acclaim, not striving beyond a general acceptance of being fine, and that’s is something that i really dislike. A movie can be good, a movie can try to be good, but movies that strive just to be good enough always seem to be a bit hollow.

An example: the film stock (this was more noticeable at the beginning of the movie though perhaps that is just me adjusting to it) seemed more reminiscent of that from the late 50’s and 60’s as opposed to the feel of movies from the time period (which would have been black and white generally or an altogether different time of color gamma). In that degree it tried to give the appearance of being “old” or historic but settled on being more obviously so than correctly so. I have a few ideas on that myself, but i don’t want to just put that forth like it’s the best idea (because i’m not sure of it myself) or seem to be shitting on something just for the sake of puffing myself up. It’s possible i just projected the filmstock coloration based on last seeing Colin Firth in A Single Man.

Another issue is that the movie really just didn’t want to push the boundaries of discomfort. Perhaps this is a deep-seated issue of British decorum ingrained in the filmmaker in a way that is simply subconscious and unavoidable, but I highly doubt it. The first speech, and really any speech but the final one and the training montage, was so horribly uncomfortable to watch, and I just wanted it to be over, and then as soon as became inevitable that it wasn’t going to get any more tolerable, the scene ended. Never did they allow the speech scenes of intense discomfort to play out in their entirety. I think that we all knew the end of the film was going to be a successful speech, but it meant less having not been forced to sit through an miserable one. There was no escape for Bertie, why should there have been for the audience? It lessens the impact of the finale and misses a way for the audience to be immediately sympathetic with the character in such a visceral way. This “miss” more than anything I think shows that the filmmakers weren’t going for anything more than what was necessary rather than anything special.

The direction did not detract from the movie but was fairly cold. I don’t want to start going on that the distant nature of the films protagonists and historical period lends itself to that style because i think that’s giving too much credit where I didn’t see it in any other aspect. The director also directed the John Adams mini-series on HBO and I thought that so bizarrely directed with such extreme dutch tilts and obvious and uninteresting set ups that it became almost a joke (someone should make up a drinking game for it).

The acting was quite fine. Of course Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush (and bit parts by other fine “british actors*” like Michael Gambon and Guy Pearce were excellent as well) and Helena Bonham Cater in a, let’s just say it, “normal” role (she is quite nice in it). Timothy Spall, Wormtail (god i’m sorry if you ever read this for some bizarre reason) could possibly been good as Churchill, but i was just weirded out and kept thinking about all the type of make-up pieces you have to wear in all these films you’re in and it distracted me.

You should definitely see The King’s Speech. It was good, one of the best i’ve seen this year even though this review seems mostly negative. Perhaps i’m brow beating about this trend that i see, which is unfair, but it still bothers me.

So British actor Pete Postlethwaite died yesterday (technically 2 days ago), and for some reason it has really hit home with me. He’s a fantastic actor. Someone who was always turning up in movies and absolutely slaying it no matter how good the movie was. Take a movie like Dragonheart (for you Peedge) where he was absolutely in a class above the movie, and he was still really good in it, or something like The Town where he’s in the movie for probably less than six minutes. He’s just sort of a background prop for the entire movie until he has once scene and absolutely kills it. I mean just turns the whole thing on its head (and if you’ve seen the movie then you know what I’m talking about). I was just sitting there in the theater and it was like the movie paused and this guy did his thing and you could feel everyone in the audience feeling and thinking the same thing.

Very fine actor. Just a guy going in there and doing his job and a tremendous job every time. That’s the sort of thing I guess I like in actors. Maybe that’s an outsider looking in, desperately wanting to be in, or maybe if I ever do find myself on the other side of the glass, I’ll feel the same way.

I think the other reason is that he’s the same age as my father.

Goodnight M. Postlethwaite and thank you.

a less thought out list (done much more quickly)

1) The Social Network
2) Winter’s Bone
3) How To Train Your Dragon
4) Toy Story 3
5) The Secrets in Their Eyes
6) The Town
7) Inception
8) Tron Legacy
9) The Fighter
10) Scott Pilgrim

Movies That I never Ended up seeing and would probably be on this list:

Never Let me Go
The King’s Speech (Saw it and while the acting was great, the whole thing felt a little sentimental to me. stay tuned for this).
True Grit
Black Swan
Somewhere
Greenberg

Looking at this makes me realize (in the 5 minutes i put this together) that i did not do a very good job of seeing independent/foreign films this year. I reserve the right to add any of that second list into the first as i do see them.

A List of Favorites (as opposed to “Best”)

1) Le Fabuleux Destin d’Amélie Poulain (2001) — The crane shot of Amélie skipping stones in Canal St. Martin is possibly the most gorgeous thing caught on film in my lifetime. If you do not like this movie then you are dead inside.

2) The Royal Tenenbaums (2001) — Wes Anderson’s best movie so far. Alec Baldwin as a narrator–genius. It is also a little bit before M. Anderson lost himself in himself.

3) Le Scaphandre et le Papillon (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly) — This movie really impressed me through it’s visual tone and storytelling. the fact that it was made by an non-French (american) director really makes me smile to know that kindred spirits are out there. The conversation through his wife at the end is heartbreaking (and so french).

4) Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind — Charlie Kaufman, Michel Gondry, and Ellen Kuras. Yeah, one of the best of the decade.

5) Gosford Park — Altman, exceptional, british cast, and a lush roving camera in constant motion.

6) Memento (released in Jan 2001 in the USA) — To date, Christopher Nolans’ best film (if you’re thinking “What about the Dark Knight?” then you don’t deserve to read any further).
Paper on Memento for Noir Class

7) The Darjeeling Limited — My Cav Daily Review

8) Serenity — Film finalizing (maybe) the prematurely ended show Firefly. Watch Firefly first (PJ you douche)! One of a few movies of pure delight allowing no external distraction when in a period when i desperately needed them.

9) In the Mood for Love — So I forgot about Kar Wai Wong’s In The Mood for Love. Honestly, he could quite possibly be making the best looking, most interesting films out there right now. The Criterion release is stunning, and i just hope they get the rights to do a BD one. Thanks to PMD for reminding me of it, and giving me a more satisfying pick than Lost in Translation (still kept my burb below). It feels right.

10) Avatar — I make no apologies for this. Other than star wars, Avatar was one of the most pure cinematic experiences i’ve ever had. You can look back afterwards and critique all you want (and i am certainly not ignorant of its flaws), but i was so engrossed in the spectacle and visuals, so captivated while watching it that none of it registered at the time. If you were not, then i just feel bad for you that you missed out.

Other Movies I considered:

Lost in Translation — It’s lyric, funny, and just resonated with me at the time i first saw it. I guess it still does but perhaps not to the same degree.

Spider-Man 2 — the greatest comic book movie since Donner’s Superman: The movie, but with a decent third act.

Kingdom of Heaven, Director’s Cut- Ridley Scott’s best looking movie since he stopped making sci-fi (and I’ve been alive). Sure Orlando’s “rousing” speech is weak and the “duel” at the end is unnecessary and weird. But it still looks amazing. That probably is accounting for most of this, but a film with an enigmatic aesthetic can do wonders. Don’t bother with the theatrical cut. While Director’s cut usually means “a version to get more money from you” here it actually means “movie the studio would have released if alexander didn’t blow so hard and scare us.”

Batman Begins – poor editing and a third act so full of holes it makes inception look like it holds up does not stop the fact that i found this movie so entertaining in that summer of 2005 (see Serenity).

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

Ratatouille

Enchanted

Eastern Promises

Hustle and Flow

Children of Men

The Squid and the Whale

District 9

junebug

Adaptation

City of God

Tropic Thunder

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl

Never Saw:
An Education
There Will Be Blood