Guess Who's Coming To Dinner?

In a day and age when the movie theatres are filled with dramas and romantic comedies centered on unusual couplings it sometimes seems easy to forget one of the original odd couple movie, #99 on the 1997 version of AFI's list, Stanley Kramer's Guess Who's Coming to Dinner? Although maybe not that hard to forget since it's a film that relies on its ideas, interracial marriage and the acceptance thereof, rather than an abundance or artistic expression, ideas that were controversial and still can be now. I'm not, however, implying that the movie is forgettable in any way, far from it in fact. It's one of those movies that reminds of you of how great it is each time you see it, especially in the wonderful performances of it's extremely talented and pedigreed cast.

This drawing-room comedy-style film revolves around the arrival home of Joey Drayton (Katharine Houghton) with her new fiance, Dr. John Wade Prentice (Sidney Poitier). Prentice is a celebrated doctor who works on United Nations commitees, in Asia and Africa and is on his way that very night to Switzerland to do research work there...and just happens to be black. In 1967, when the movie was released, interracial marriage had only just be legalised in all 50 states and this supposed to be the main sticking point for Joey's liberal parents, Matt and Christina Drayton (Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn). In all honesty the excess perfection of Prentice's character, coupled with his manners, charms and good looks, seems (sadly) to be an effort by director Kramer (or the studios) to make the only problem with him his race. Although, let's not forget that they've only known each other 10 days and he's 14 years older than her! Nonetheless the latter issues are glossed over, leaving only, which is unfortunate of course, but it's also what has given this movie it's place in history. 

Anyway, I said earlier that race was the supposed sticking point. Christina quickly accepts Joey's decision, but after being approached by an apprehensive Dr. Prentice, who says he won't marry Joey if the Drayton's don't give their approval, Matt becomes fraught with indecision. I really think that this forcing a decision in a few short hours (remember, Prentice is flying to Switzerland that evening) is the real problem. No man likes to be given an ultimatum, yet alone in his own house by a relative stranger! While he spends most of the movie fretting, Matt is lectured by practically everyone he meets, his wife, their good friend Monsignor Ryan and even Prentice's mother, who has flown up for dinner. Needless to say every thing gets resolved in the end, tied up with a nice Hollywood bow.

Like I said, before getting sidetracked by the politics and plot of the movie, the real standout in this film are the performances of its leads. In their ninth and final pairing together Tracy and Hepburn just shine. When watching the always fantastic Hepburn's performance I couldn't help but wonder if the tears that seemed ever-present in her eyes, especially in her scenes with Tracy, were because she believed so strongly in the subject matter (it's said that she took the role without first reading the script) or because she knew this would be Tracy's last film. Hepburn and Tracy had long been domestic partners and starred in eight movies together before this one and always had an undeniable chemistry. It was no secret that Spencer Tracy was dying, in fact since the insurance companies wouldn't cover him, Hepburn and Kramer put their salaries in escrow in case he died during filming so another actor could take over. While he does look ill in the film, Tracy clearly didn't let his illness prevent him from putting his heart into this role. The final speech he gives at the end of the film about love is full of emotion, it's kind of heartbreaking to watch actually, especially with the knowledge that they were the final lines he ever spoke on film, dying only seventeen days after filming ended.

Not to worry I haven't forgotten about the "Guess who" from the title. Sidney Poitier is wonderful in this movie. In the movies he was in previous to this he often came off as a symbol, a black man who wouldn't let society put him in the place it thought he should be in. However I don't think I ever noticed in any of those other movies how natural an actor he was before, but in this movie every movement seems completely organic. It's easy to believe that he's the extremely accomplished Dr. his character is as he carries himself with a huge amount of grace and poise. 

In mentioning the cast there are three other characters who are not to be forgotten: Joey Drayton, Monsignor Ryan and Tillie, the Drayton's black housekeeper. Katharine Houghton (Katharine Hepburn's neice) was a newcomer in this film and was a firecracker as Joey Drayton. Joey is a liberal to the full extent and Houghton plays the headstrong young woman with a lot of energy. 

Monsignor Ryan is an old family friend of the Draytons who accepts the new couple with open arms. Cecil Kellaway is absolutely charming and almost steals the scene for me every time with the sparkle in his eye. His performance makes the Monsignor into one of those people you wish were real just so you could know them; kind, funny and most of all know when to give you good advice.

Finally there's Tillie, played by another newcomer, Isabel Sanford. She brings the black on black bias to demonstrate that interracial unions were not welcomed by both sides of the fence. Her character's dour demeanor and quick mouth make her a fun addition to an already stellar cast.

'Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?' is one of those movies I think everyone should see, whether it was on this list or not. While it's subject matter is outdated, it's a nice reminder of how far we've come as a culture; when parents should be more concerned with their daughters falling for vampires, I doubt any would object to a handsome black doctor! ;D Anyway, I know it was a day late but I hope you enjoyed this installment of my AFI reviews, until next time, keep it reel!

Yankee Doodle Dandy

Oh Yankee Doodle Dandy, what a great way to start the year. In 1997 the #100 spot of AFI's top 100 list was occupied by this ridiculously patriotic and wonderfully entertaining film. (It rose to #98 in 07) This musical biopic directed by Michael Curtiz (yes, 'Casablanca' Michael Curtiz) is about "the Man who owned Broadway," George M. Cohan and James Cagney (I LOVE him) just lights up the screen as the title character. 

While I probably wouldn't put 'Yankee Doodle Dandy' anywhere near my personal top 100; especially since any amount of US flag waving on the silver screen annoys me (that extra 3 seconds of Old Glory in 'Spider-Man 2' irks the hell out of me), I can absolutely understand why it's on this list. The movie tells the story, in flashback, of the life of George M. Cohan, as told by the man himself to the president of the United States, Franklin D. Roosevelt. Nowadays you might be hard-pressed to find a lot of people who know who Cohan was, but you might find some who know a few of his well known songs "Give My Regards to Broadway," "She's a Grand Old Flag," and the war-time anthem "Over There." The movie itself could not have come at a better time for Warner Bros., when it was released in May of 1942, five months after Pearl Harbour, isolationism was over and support for the war was in full force; it wouldn't have hard at all to fill theatres for every showing.

Despite all of this, I believe the main (and possibly only) reason for 'Yankee Doodle Dandy's spot on the AFI list is James Cagney's amazing and Oscar-winning performance as Cohan. It turns out that Fred Astaire had turned down the role and people were surprised to hear that crime-star Cagney would play the titular character. However, they were not to be disappointed, while Cagney may not be a dancer on Astaire's level, but boy, can he move! and he's definitely not much of a singer at all, he's such a great actor you don't care, he sells every step and every bar. He entertains you in every scene he's in, whether he's performing on Broadway, wooing his future wife, or even mourning his father, he's always giving everything he has. Sadly, I'm fairly certain this is the only Cagney movie on AFI's top 100, which is too bad because I love watching him light up the screen. When they talk about not making actors like they used to, Cagney's definitely one of those guys for me. If you really want to see what I'm talking about don't only pick up this flick but also see if you can get your hands on 'Angels with Dirty Faces' (he was nominated for an Oscar in this one too), 'White Heat' (Cagney at his worst, and by that I mean best!), and 'G Men' (one of my favourite early gangster movies).

Well, I know it's a little late in the day, (but it's still up on Monday and that's pretty good for me!) but I hope you've enjoyed my first of the AFI reviews. I intend (I know, "the best intentions of mice and men...") to have the next one out for Wednesday, until then, keep it reel.

A Fine Idea...

...if I do say myself. I know my big Christmas themed blog posts fell through, but somehow the season snuck up on me and then was gone in a flash! Weird. Anyway, for 2009 (and maybe into 2010) I'm going to try to review all of the movies on AFI's top 100 list. In 1997 and in 2007 the American Film Institute put out a list of the top 100 American movies. They've put out various other lists as well, my personal favourite being the top 100 movie quotes, it's awesome. Anyway, I've been meaning to watch all the movies on these lists for quite some time and I figure what better way than to watch them and share them with you!?!
With both lists combined there are 123 movies, so I'm going to try and review about 10 a month...I know, daunting, considering my spotty history, but I'm hoping with a project I'll have more incentive to get it done (despite being the Queen of Procrastination). The only other problem might come from trying to find some of the older movies here in PG, but I shall persevere! I own #100 (well, technically #121), so no worries there.
So look out for that #100 on Monday! Until then...keep it reel.

A Couple of Things

I know it seems like I've dropped off the face of the planet, but the fact of the matter is that I've been seduced by the Dark Side, and by the Dark Side I mean TV on DVD. It's this weird phenomena, I'm sitting at home, wondering what movie to watch and I can't decide. So what do I do? I decide I'll watch an episode of one of my TV shows on DVD, HUGE mistake. Why? Because the next thing I know, I get sucked in and I end up dedicating myself to a couple of days of watching a show! Ridiculous, I know. But, in my defense the shows I watch are pretty awesome: Doctor Who, Samurai Jack, Firefly, Undeclared, etc, etc. (or at least I think they're awesome, maybe I should review some of those...)
Anyway, that being said, I'm on my way back into the blogging world! I have a couple reviews on the way to help get you into the Christmas spirit, seeing that we're only 12 days away now; just a couple of my personal favourite 'holiday' flicks.
Also, and more excitingly (for me, and therefore you!) the Golden Globe nominations were just announced! I don't know about you, but I usually spend the months leading up to the Golden Globes and consequently the Oscars watching as many of the nominated films as I can. Sometimes that can be hard living in the movie black hole known as Prince George, where popular movies come and then proceed to use up a theatre for 2 months. Nonetheless! It's an exciting time for the Film major in me! And I'm proud to announce that I'm only one movie ('Happy-Go-Lucky') away from watching all the movies in the Best Motion Picture - Comedy or Musical! That rarely happens to me so early in the proceedings, except for the Best Animated Feature category; I never have problem seeing all of them. (P.S. this year's nominees are all pretty great.)
That's all for now, but I'll have a review out shortly! Until then, keep it reel.

Quantum of Solace

I can be kind of weird when it comes to movie reviews. I know this must shock you (or not ;D) Sometimes I can't wait to see what's going to be said by other reviewers about movies I intend (or not) to see and in the same way sometimes I'll avoid all reviews until I've seen the movie myself.  When it came to the new Bond flick it was a case of the latter. I love James Bond, and after 'Casino Royale' I was fairly certain there was no way I could be disappointed, and I wasn't I loved 'Quantum of Solace' (even the verbose title is growing on me). However, when I decided to hit up Rotten Tomatoes (for the uninitiated, it's a review aggregator and it's pretty awesome) I was shocked to discover that the reviews are all over the place, especially from critics that I usually agree with and respect. So if you'll allow me, (and you will if you keep reading) I'll tell you why I think this new Bond was pretty awesome.

First and foremost I will admit that the critics are right in that the plot in 'Quantum of Solace' is a slightly convoluted. It's a little bit all over the place: moles in MI6, Bond gone rogue(or has he?), Bolivian coup d'etat...etc. However, keeping in mind that there's another on deck to complete this 'trilogy' that's breathing new life into the franchise I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. If things don't get tied up in the next film, well then I might have some things to say. 

Despite the slight non-cohesion of the plot, 'Quantum of Solace' has lots going for it. I must say the introduction of the titular super secret QUANTUM was fantastic. They come off much creepier and far more powerful that SPECTRE ever did in the older Bonds. The meeting done at an avant garde opera was amazingly beautiful and served to demonstrate exactly the kind of power and influence this new orginisation wields. Also the action in this movie is ridiculous, and by ridiculous I mean awesome. The stereotypical chase at the beginning is fantastic. A cool and collected Bond weaves through traffic on a mountain road in his Aston Martin, wonderful and exactly what I've come to expect from James Bond. 

However, it's apparently this action that the critics (Roger Ebert, I'm talking to you!!!) have taken real offence to. Stating that Bond is not an action hero, which is something that I find baffling. How can you be a spy and NOT be an action hero. Go back watch the older Bond films, there are car chases, boat chases, gun fights, hand to hand combat on a train...does this sound like someone who isn't an action hero, yeah I didn't think so. They all seem to say that James Bond should stop trying to be Jason Bourne. There would be no Jason Bourne without James Bond, for heavens sake! Sorry, I must calm myself...The real complaint from these critics I suppose is that this Bond is nowhere near the suave and debonair spy we were introduced to in the sixties. And to that I say THANK GOD! While the smooth lines and endless flirting suited my favourite Bond, Sean Connery, and the era they were made in to a T, they became sillier and sillier as the franchise continued, turning the suave spy into a line-slinging fool. (Roger Moore nearly killed Bond for me...)  Why do you think they called this a reboot or reworking of the franchise?! Because Bond needed to be updated for the times. 

With his second turn in the role, Daniel Craig has truly cemented himself as my second favourite Bond. (no one can supplant Connery) He plays this Bond as cool and ruthless, but is also as suave as they come. He looks just as comfortable in a tuxedo as he does in his chinos and can kick ass in both. Having a killer physique and piercing blue eyes don't hurt either, especially while wooing your supposed MI6 handler (whose Bond girl name is Strawberry Fields! Love it!). While is certainly not the most verbose Bond there is, I'm finding him to be the most resourceful. This may be due in large part to the fact he doesn't rely on the gadgets of Q (who is absent from the new series so far) like so many of his predecessors did. 

There is a wonderful 'Goldfinger' homage in 'Quantum of Solace.' To those of us who are familiar with the older Bond it causes a little thrill of joy and just looks plain cool to any who aren't. And replacing the gold with oil is especially relevant to the current Bond era. 

My favourite little tidbit in this movie comes right near the end and is only really relevant to us Canadian viewers. When Bond finally tracks down the supposedly kidnapped boyfriend of his doomed lover, Vesper Lynd, from 'Casino Royale' he's already moved on to a new girl, a Canadian. Now I don't know about you, but seeing as how rarely anyone is Canadian in a movie, any time the country is even mentioned causes me pure joy. There are a few wonderful things in this scene. Bond has a great line "Go tell your people to check their seals, 'cause you've got a leak." Then there's the assumption that there is some kind of information that CSIS must have gathered that is actually worth something to QUANTUM(!). The final, and possibly best part, is when Bond lets the girl go before starting his 'interrogation' of the boyfriend, as she walks out the door, she turns back and says "Thank you." I kid you not, even in the dire circumstance when being released by a spy we're polite!  Fantastic.

On the whole, I find any deficiency in plot is wholly made up for by the action and the promise of more to come. Also, sorry that this turned into a little bit of a rant in some places, but I get a little upset when people refuse to accept that movies, ESPECIALLY, franchises need to move with times. Until next time keep it reel!

Nochnoi Dozor

Next up, as promised, is 'Nochnoi Dozor,' or for you non-Russian speakers, 'Night Watch.' This is one of the coolest movies I've ever seen. And I wouldn't have seen it if it weren't for my friend Chris. He's a huge horror fan and I have, as previously mentioned, a strong aversion to horror. When he told me he was going to watch a Russian horror movie all I could see in my brain was Eisenstein's 'Battleship Potemkin' with more blood and gore. NO THANK YOU. We were both working at a video store at the time and when it came out on DVD, after much cojoling he convinced me to give it a go. Thankfully Chris is fairly convincing or else I would've missed out on Timur Bekmambetov's lovely distopian creation.

Timur Bekmambetov has brought a dark and grimy Moscow to the screen and I must admit, it's fairly beautiful in its grittiness. Unlike so many other movies of this kind ('Underworld' and the like ) where the world in which the supernatural beings exist is dark but slick and glamourous, 'Night Watch' is decidedly the opposite. Bekmambetov makes no attempt to gloss up his city for the movie, all the dirt and grime are left on the surface and add to the overall atmosphere of the movie. 

Within these grimy circumstances the movie revolves around Anton Gorodetsky, a member of the titular Night Watch. Anton is an Other, someone with a supernatural gift of some kind. The Night Watch keeps tabs on any rogue Dark others and they have counterparts in the Day Watch who look out for any bad moves on the Light side. Anton (Konstantin Khabensky) has chosen to use his talents as a Seer for the Light Others. He can tell who is an Other just by looking at them, and drinking blood enhances this talent, despite the fact that he clearly despises drinking it. Khabensky is wonderful as the scruffy hero. Through him it becomes painfully apparent that while Anton believes in what he's doing with the Night Watch, the job really takes a lot out of him. 

While the archetype of the plot, good vs evil, is one of the simplest that exist in film, there's a lot going on in the movie. So much so that I feel that even trying to go any more into the plot would extend this post exponentially and who wants that? Not me, that's for sure. Also, while mentioning plot I should mention that this movie is based on a Russian trilogy of sci-fi books, which I haven't read. I know, a movie based on a book and I haven't read it, I'm shocked too...but in my defense, it is a Russian book. (although I'm pretty sure it's been translated)

One last indulgence from me I have to mention are the visuals in this movie. The action is amazing, Bekmambetov mentions that the Wachowskis (maybe you've heard of them) are inspirations of his and it shows, especially in the cuts and in the innovations that Bekmambetov has made is this movie. However, there are no crazy wire stunts in this movie, but the fights that are in it retain the realism that Bekmambetov established in the setting of the movie. Another great touch are the subtitles, they are wonderful. Unlike boring old subtitles that sit on the bottom of the screen these ones scroll across and then fade away, lurk in the corner and turn red. Foreign filmmakers take note! All subtitles should be like this! 

Alrighty, that's enough I think, enough to hopefully tease you into going to try some awesome Russian cinema! Here's the trailer and until next time keep it reel! 

(a little post script here, if you want to watch the whole movie in two minutes, it's been condensed on the official website here...it's awesome both ways.)

Stardust

Here it is at last, the long delayed (and for no good reason - seriously I can't think of one at all) review for 'Stardust.' I honestly don't know what's taken me so long to get this out, 'Stardust' was one of my favourite movies of 2007, and I really only have good things to say about it! It had everything that I enjoy in a flick all in one convenient place! Action, adventure, romance, humour, plus a dash of magic just for fun, and a great cast to round it all out. It was one of those movies that I went to and when the credits started to run, I thought to myself "It's over already?!" (Although by the third time I saw it theatres that had worn off...a little.)

Before the movie came out, 'Stardust' was already one of my favourite books. Neil Gaiman is a wonderful author, who writes fantastic, magical stories that have always captivated me, like 'American Gods' and 'Neverwhere'. He has a great descriptive writing style that is very visual, the kind of thing where you can easily see in your mind's eye exactly what he means. Along with writing great novels, he also has written quite a few graphic novels, my personal favourite being 'Marvel 1602,' it's so good! Marvel characters set in Elizabethan England...aw man they should make that into a movie...but I digress (I know huge nerd right here). Anyway, 'Stardust' is one of those graphic novels, after it was published (to much acclaim) as a "story with pictures," as the author puts it, it was then published without illustrations. Now taking another step and being made to into a film just goes to show that the story itself is very fluid, taking on the various styles with ease.

Now enough about books! This blog is about movies! This movie uses the combination of magic and realism from the source material to great avail. So much so that you almost believe that you could go to England, find Wall and cross over into Stormhold. The wonderful thing about fantasy movies is that the special effects always feel more natural. Which may sound odd, but think, since witches are supposed to be able to do magic, it only seems natural that they do! One of the other great things about 'Stardust' is that it's deceptively funny. I've recommended it to more than one person who's been convinced that it's a romcom, but have been happily surprised to find that it's actually a comedic fantasy adventure.

The movie is also filled with wonderful characters and great acting that brings them to life. First of all I think the people behind the making of 'Stardust' made an excellent choice in choosing a relative unknown for the role of our hero, Tristan. The beauty of choosing an unknown is that we, the audience, have no expectations from the actor and as such Charlie Cox is free to be as charming and bumbling as need be to bring the hopeless dreamer, Tristan, to life. The transformation from shop boy to hero seems completely credible in his capable hands.

Next up is Robert DeNiro. For those of us who are more accustomed to his 'Raging Bull' or 'Taxi Driver' personas, his take on Captain Shakespeare is an wonderful surprise. He is absolutely hilarious as the secretly flambouyant Shakespeare. Nothing like a captain who's so loved by his crew that they pretend they don't know that he's about as hard as pudding and also I never thought I'd see the day where I'd see DeNiro in a dress!

I hadn't seen Claire Danes in anything for a quite a while when 'Stardust' came out, as a matter of fact, it looks like she had taken a couple of years off. I think she was a great choice for Yvaine, while it's true that they added a lot of the literal glowing with special effects, she certainly has the right kind of aura about her to pull off playing a fallen star. I am also very happy to report that her English accent was quite well done.

Last, but most certainly not least is Michelle Pfeiffer. I don't know what's come over her in 2007 with taking villainous roles, Lamia in 'Stardust' and Velma Von Tussel in 'Hairspray,' but the result was pure gold. I can only imagine that most actors must enjoy playing a villain every once and a while and it certainly showed in Pfeiffer's case. While Lamia certainly is evil, there is a good deal of humour in her character, especially as her body deteriorates as she uses her magic.

There are a couple other lovely little things about this movie I wanted to mention. Number one: the ghostly brothers. I LOVE them. HI-LA-RI-OUS. When I heard they were making the movie this was the one thing I wondered about. It's an interesting part of the book and I'd hoped they'd manage to make it work. Did they ever!! Especially having the characters in the shape they were in when they died, a great little comedic touch. And tying in with the brothers a bit is, number 2: the costuming. On the whole is was beautifully done, but one especially great thing comes from the outfits of the seven brothers. If you look closely at their clothes you discover they are covered in embroidery of the roman numeral that corresponds with their name. Wonderful!

And then for the one little nitpicky thing. Really the only thing that annoys me every time is in regards to the black glass knife that Lamia intends to use to cut out Yvaines' heart. She plans to cut through someone's body with this, but it shatters when it hits a wall? I mean, I get that it's glass, but if she wants to get all the way to someone's heart, shouldn't be a wee bit sturdier? Or am I just overly picky?

There you have it! 'Stardust' a great movie for everybody! And while I'm two and half months getting this sucker out, I hope you've enjoyed my thoughts! Now moving on to something completely different: 'Nochnoy Dozor"! Until then, keep it reel!