Hey, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab.
Ghostboy is one of our regular chatters and occasional contributors. He normally speaks up on behalf of smaller films that he’s afraid are going to be overlooked because of bigger studio releases. Today is no exception:
Howdy,
Two movie reviews will follow: one is a normal review for a movie that most people will be able to see - the second is for one that will require a bit more seeking out. Read on...
It's been a great summer for movies so far, one of the best in recent memory (possibly even better than '99). Everyone knows about all the big releases that have turned out to actually be good, but there are plenty of small movies that don't have the hype but deserve the attention - such as 'Lovely And Amazing,' which is opening in most markets this Friday.
After seeing 'Lovely and Amazing,' I realized that it could technically be construed as a chick flick, since it is after all about women and their problems. But it also reveals the basic flaw of such classifications, which is that if the movie is good, it will appeal to everyone. Here's a film that is funny and wonderful - indeed, it is both lovely and amazing - and I hope that it won't vanish from this summer slate in which it is a welcome respite from special effects and Ya Ya sisters.
The movie, written and directed by Nicole Holofcener ('Walking and Talking'), is about three sisters and their mother, all of whom have the same low level of satisfaction with their lives. The matriarch, Jane Marks (Brenda Blethyn), is about to undergo liposuction. The oldest daughter, Michelle (Katherine Keener), is a restless stay-at-home mom in a loveless marriage. Elizabeth (Emily Mortimer), the second oldest, is an aspiring actress who is convinced that she's hopelessly insecure. And then there is eight year old Annie, Jane's adopted African American daugher who is spoiled and overweight.
These quick sketches of the characters may sound a bit typical, as far as dysfunctional families go, but Holofcener's script expertly cuts straight through the facetious qualities of the women and leaves them exposed, where their problems are funny because - well, because they are, but sad because they're also quite real. They all have trouble with men; Jane has a crush on her plastic surgeon, Michelle is quite aware that her husband is sleeping with her best friend, and Elizabeth is stuck in a non-relationship with a logic obsessed nature writer played by James LeGros. She invites him to the premiere of her first big movie; "You should take someone you'll have fun with," he tells her.
Elizabeth loves to spend time with Annie and is obsessed with adopting stray dogs, and it becomes clear that she and Michelle would be happier in each other's shoes. Michelle, who is thirty six going on nineteen, is woefully uninterested in her family, and longs to somehow express herself artistically. When making little arts and craft items fails, she settles for a job at a 1-hour photo developers, where she finds herself caugh up in an affair with her sixteen year old boss (Jake Gyllenhall, who is going to be in my next film, even though he doesn't realize it yet).
Annie's storyline is a bit more troubling, because she is so young. She's smart and a bit conniving, and knows how to play the sympathy card (she often notes that her real mother was a crack head), but she also adores Jane. Janes clearly loves her and lavishes attention on her, but she also frequently leaves her in the care of a Big Sister program, where her assigned caretaker (Aunjenue Ellis, who proves her talented turn in 'Undercover Brother' was no fluke) wonders why this well-off kid with three real sisters needs her help.
I appreciated the way the movie doesn't deal with these girls' problems; it observes them as the realize that they have problems, and then respectfully fades out to let them deal with them on their own. This spares us any of the weepy confessionals and confrontations that would surely have plagued a Hollywood version of this film, although had the film gone on, I'm convinced Holofcener would have managed to keep the quality up. I was a little disappointed when the credits rolled - I wanted more of these characters - but then a quiet satisfaction crept in as I realized it could not have ended any more perfectly.
Now...the other movie I have to review is not in active release in America. In fact, it is to my understanding that there is only one 35mm print with English subtitles in existance. Anton Sirius reviewed this same print during last year's Toronto Film Festival, and since then word on it has been nil. The fantastic Asian Film Festival Of Dallas managed to secure that print and screen it tonight. And all I have to say is, DAMN.
Oops, I forgot to mention the title. The movie is 'Bang Rajan,' an historical epic from Thailand, and one of the most successful films from that country. It tells the true story of a band of villagers from the titular outpost who manage to hold of an army of 10,000 invading Burmese soldiers for nearly six months - basically, an Asian version of The Alamo or the Battle for Thermopylae.
For the first hour and a half, the movie was good, but not great. The story begins with a battle that puts the opening of 'Gladiator' to shame. The villagers, armed only with machetes and a few rifles, fade out of the jungle and lay bloody waste to the Burmese attackers. It's similar to the raids from 'The Last Of The Mohicans,' only a bit more visceral. The movie then takes several breathers to introduce the characters, explain the history of the situation, etcetera. It gets a bit melodramatic pretty frequently, actually, although there are several scenes between a warrior and his pregnant wife that are quite beautiful. But it doesn't take long for the next battle scene to occur, this one a horrible siege on the village the that is even more brutal than the first. It's important to note that the carnage is never shown too graphically in these scenes - it's all cut rather brilliantly with hard hitting sound effects that suggest much bloodletting without actually showing it.
The situations grow more dire, matters of love and death are discussed and then...the final battle begins. But this one is different. The defiant warriors gather line up outside their village, knowing they are facing death. The women stand beside the men, all stone faced and bearing arms. And then...the enemy rises over the crest of the hill...bearing hundreds of human heads on stakes. A feeling of dread immediately hits you like a fist to the stomach with this image, and when the battle begins...it is like nothing ever seen before. Bloody, horrifying, intense. Everything that was only suggested before is now seen in full. We see all the characters who we suddenly realize we've grown attached to die brutal, yet heroic deaths. The husbands and wives see each other cut down, and it is as emotional as it is horrific. The heroism of the characters is quite stunning; the sight of them charging, riding atop great horned buffalo is awe inspiring. I don't think there's ever been a battle like this put on film.
I'm sure the film is available on video and DVD, although maybe not here in the states. If you can track down a copy, get it immediately. It may seem like a standard historical epic at first...but just wait for that last thirty minutes. Just wait.
That's it this time. Back to screenwriting and editing and all the other projects that somehow don't keep me from seeing every movie that comes out -- as usual, you can find more of my reviews at my website, along with other cool indie film stuff.
I'm outta here,
Ghostboy
Thanks, man. I’ll keep my eye out for both.
"Moriarty" out.
