Change Your Image
tas22
Reviews
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)
Surprisingly good
I know this movie flopped, and frankly I don't see how the studio thought that this was ever going to be a mass market hit: the target audience is really quite narrow. However, I thought it was warm, heartfelt, and funny, with a nice dose of kick-ass. It helps to know something about the source material and about the video-game references, mostly from the 80s to early 90s. A common criticism leveled at the movie was that the characters were underdeveloped; I think that this was intentional, given the scope of the movie. The characters mostly functioned as archetypes, avatars in a video game. No one expects emotional depth from a video game.
Michael Cera - yes, yes his range is nonexistent - does a nice job with Scott Pilgrim, and displays some more pronounced emotions than he did in the past. His costars outshone him on most occasions, especially Kieran Culkin as Wallace, Scott's roommate. Snarky wit with more heartfelt undertones - Wallace is undoubtedly my favorite character in the film. Ellen Wong (Knives Chau) invested a very limited character with some depth and real emotion, especially at the close of the film. Mary Elizabeth Winstead (Ramona Flowers) functions as the epitome of an object of hipster male desire and adequately fulfills that role, but she wasn't tremendously appealing to me.
The fight scenes were perhaps a little too long, but always very interesting visually. The effects were very well done. The soundtrack was amazing, both the songs and the score and enhanced the action greatly. All in all, the movie was tremendously fun and held my interest throughout. I was very pleased.
The Social Network (2010)
Incredibly over-hyped
The Social Network is contrived, artificial and overlong, but it didn't have to be. There were the makings of a really absorbing movie, using the very timeless themes of betrayal and greed; however, those opportunities were repeatedly squandered. The dialogue was characteristic of Sorkin, with the actors continually speaking over each other, spouting bon mots that rang hollow because they had no time to register. When a simple statement with a few words would suffice and be much more powerful, Sorkin stuffed in multiple sentences that rendered the scene lifeless. Sometimes silence is the most powerful indicator of feeling.
The most glaring problem is the absolute implausibility of one of the central motifs of the story, which is Zuckerberg's obsession with final clubs. The references are hilariously outdated and irrelevant, coming from right out of the 60s. Does anyone really believe that Zuckerberg would screw his co-founder out of his share of the company because of resentment over the fact that Eduardo was chosen for one of the clubs? Whatever happened to plain and simple greed? Surely there was a more interesting and more credible way to explain why the partnership went sour. The filmmakers should have found it.
It has been well publicized that the film is largely fictional; most of the machinations described in the film never happened or didn't happen as portrayed. Both the director and screenwriter have admitted that they don't know much about Facebook or see the point of it. Sorkin himself also said that he was willing to sacrifice the truth for a good story. That isn't necessarily a problem; if the storytelling is solid, the stretching of facts can be overlooked. In this case, the plot is overwrought and not believable, making the glaring plot holes and lack of veracity prominent.
A few more quibbles: the soundtrack was incredibly intrusive, the portrayal of all the women in the film was shameful and sexist, and the vision of life at Harvard was inauthentic. I thought the main actors did a fair job with the material they were given, especially Jesse Eisenberg, who managed to give Zuckerberg more than one dimension. But the movie could have been so much more, which makes the final result really depressing.
(500) Days of Summer (2009)
Moving despite the flaws
(500)Days of Summer is admittedly a slight film. But in contrast to the heavy handed, conventional, and leaden quality of most romantic comedies that inhabit the multiplex, it almost feels like a miracle. Amidst all the pop-culture glitter that surrounds the film, the protagonists ask some fairly profound questions about the nature of love and fate. It's so refreshing to see a filmmaker acknowledge that these aren't concepts that are set in stone; that most relationships don't automatically begin with a contrived meet-cute and end with a wedding. The process of love is detailed here, and the tragedy of building your love and hopes on a totally misguided foundation is rendered movingly. Tom is a person whose passions are directed at the wrong targets; clearly Summer is not in the same place he is and never will be. He is a greeting card writer, a profession trafficking in the most trite and simple emotions, instead of following his passion for architecture. Meanwhile Summer is also floating; her character is never developed and remains sketchy, but I think that this is intentional by the writers. Summer's feet never really touch the ground until she does what she thought was impossible - fall in love. From the perspective of Tom, which is really the character that we are supposed to sympathize with, Summer remains a cloudy object of desire, forever eluding definition. He never REALLY gets her, which is why they could never be together. Both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel do a terrific job of interpreting the characters as they were written. They truly make you care about these people and wonder what they are doing when the movie ends. Some of the inserts and segments may be a little gimmicky, but the picture overall is really memorable. The music and cinematography are gorgeous and deserve recognition.
Up (2009)
I'm a little confused and disappointed
After watching the movie, after hearing all the critical hosannas it received, I was quite a bit disappointed by the movie itself. The animation was gorgeous as usual and the images of the floating house were really memorable. What struck me was that none of the beauty of the film had gone into the creation of the story. It was frankly lazy and uninspired. WALL-E was an example of a film in which the plot and the characters were every bit as absorbing as the animation. The best part of this movie was the small, dialogue-free montage of Carl and Ellie's marriage. Very touching. But those few minutes could not compensate for an entire film that chose the easiest story options at every single opportunity. You could see every plot development coming from a mile away. Previous Pixar films did a great job in making even the most sappy, sentimental moments feel special. This movie failed to do that for me.
ABCD (1999)
Horribly flawed look at South Asian Americans
This film tries and fails to be a compelling account of the experiences of Indians growing up in the U.S. The perspective espoused here matches up nicely with the the view that many Indians hold of ABCDs: that all of them have forgotten their heritage and culture, that all the women are promiscuous, the men are conflicted yet also promiscuous, that all ABCDs hate their parents with a passion and seek to flout their moral standards at every opportunity, and that the women can be redeemed (temporarily at least)by having sex with a ridiculous, platitude-spouting FOB. The characterization of the main players is reduced to empty stereotype. Events that might have been moving are rendered flat and absent of feeling. Motives for actions are at best unclear. Anyone who has even a passing familiarity with the subject matter or has lived the experience will most likely be repulsed by this film. I haven't even mentioned the terrible acting or the incredibly bad dialogue. Watch "The Namesake" for a true-to-life version of the conflicts that are explored so unconvincingly here.
Before Sunset (2004)
One of the best movies of 2004
Along with Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, this has to be one of my favorites from 2004. The movie is very talky and sometimes wanders dangerously into pretension, but nevertheless reaches beauty and profundity frequently against a stunning Parisian backdrop. What could be better? Before Sunrise was a bit too wide eyed and romantic for me, but Before Sunset hits melancholy notes that ring true with every bittersweet insight. The screenplay, written by the director and the two leads, is a gem and is realized with conviction and sensitivity by Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy, who have never been better in my opinion. Love is all too evident between Jesse and Celine, and we are privileged to share the experience.
Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? (1991)
I was on this show!
Yes, my fifteen minutes of fame . . . or rather twenty eight minutes! This was a great show, filled with educational and clever content. It is incredible to me to think that this show was once so popular. Considering the ignorance of most American children concerning geography, I think Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? provided a much-needed service. The late Chief Lynn Thigpen was my favorite person on the show . . . I guess Rockapella was OK (even though that had to be the dumbest name for a singing group ever).
The likes of this game show will probably be never seen again. Even PBS has become a corporate-sponsored wasteland. Nostalgia, nostalgia.