Overall message of this documentary: Joan Rivers is egotistical and mean, and yet sadly fragile inside.
To which I hereby officially respond--meh.
This lackluster doc leaves out what I could consider to be any truly interesting or surprising information, instead mostly just showing us the Joan Rivers we already knew.
The result is a not very bold or unexpected, not very thought provoking, and largely pointless hour and a half about a funny lady and her dirty laundry.
Showing posts with label Movies Based on a True Story. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Movies Based on a True Story. Show all posts
20 March 2011
29 January 2011
The Secret of Kells (2009)
Very mesmerizing visually, slightly less spectacular plot-wise.
I was delighted to find out that the story is based on an actual book-—an illuminated manuscript of the Gospel from ninth century Ireland.
Overall, a lovely film to behold. Certainly worth your time.
I was delighted to find out that the story is based on an actual book-—an illuminated manuscript of the Gospel from ninth century Ireland.
Overall, a lovely film to behold. Certainly worth your time.
02 January 2011
10 August 2010
The Runaways (2010)
This based-on-a-true-story film about the formation of the all girl rock band The Runaways was kind of a letdown, but that wasn’t particularly surprising given the criticism it already received, both when it made the festival circuit and when it was distributed more widely.
I was hoping that critics had been unjustified in rating it so low, but sadly they were right. It was a pretty boring movie overall. Eyebrow raising, considering that the story it tells (of how Joan Jett and company were brought together to form a rather groundbreaking band) is actually pretty interesting in and of itself. It just wasn’t served by the filmmaking and the way the whole thing was put together.
What I did like, however, was Kristen Stewart’s performance. Finally breaking away from the moody teenager romantic angst figure that she’s been associated with so far, Stewart actually convincingly portrays Jett in presumably accurate fashion (Jett herself has been quoted as saying Stewart actually became her for the film)*. Anyone who reads this blog regularly knows that I’m already a fan of Stewart for various reasons, but I think here in The Runaways Stewart’s performance can show that she’s actually a quality actor to those who aren’t on Team Bella.
Maybe rent it if you’re interested in the music history already, or if you’re really keen on seeing Kristen Stewart make out with Dakota Fanning. Overall- meh.
*I don’t remember where. Most likely in an interview in Entertainment Weekly.
I was hoping that critics had been unjustified in rating it so low, but sadly they were right. It was a pretty boring movie overall. Eyebrow raising, considering that the story it tells (of how Joan Jett and company were brought together to form a rather groundbreaking band) is actually pretty interesting in and of itself. It just wasn’t served by the filmmaking and the way the whole thing was put together.
What I did like, however, was Kristen Stewart’s performance. Finally breaking away from the moody teenager romantic angst figure that she’s been associated with so far, Stewart actually convincingly portrays Jett in presumably accurate fashion (Jett herself has been quoted as saying Stewart actually became her for the film)*. Anyone who reads this blog regularly knows that I’m already a fan of Stewart for various reasons, but I think here in The Runaways Stewart’s performance can show that she’s actually a quality actor to those who aren’t on Team Bella.
Maybe rent it if you’re interested in the music history already, or if you’re really keen on seeing Kristen Stewart make out with Dakota Fanning. Overall- meh.
*I don’t remember where. Most likely in an interview in Entertainment Weekly.
20 December 2009
Invictus (2009)
Invictus consisted of Morgan Freeman in his role as Nelson Mandela essentially delivering an endless series of brief yet somehow monumental speeches, the result of which was bringing post-Apartheid South Africa together using rugby. Apparently the quality of his delivery of these speeches designates him as “a great actor.” I do not concur with this assessment, but let’s keep in mind that I’m a cynical and whiney complainer when it comes going along with an assessment of anything as “good,” whether it be acting, plot, or dialogue, unless the criteria used for evaluation happen to miraculously align with my own personal worldview and taste.
The biggest problems with this movie were that it had boring pacing and that it turned a suspiciously blind eye to depicting the hideousness of the South African Apartheid that the real Mandela was striving to overcome. The biggest strengths were that Invictus had an interesting topic, feel-good morals, and OK acting.
Basically: Politics ‘Lite’ with a nice soundtrack.
--
Up next: Avatar!
The biggest problems with this movie were that it had boring pacing and that it turned a suspiciously blind eye to depicting the hideousness of the South African Apartheid that the real Mandela was striving to overcome. The biggest strengths were that Invictus had an interesting topic, feel-good morals, and OK acting.
Basically: Politics ‘Lite’ with a nice soundtrack.
--
Up next: Avatar!
13 December 2009
Into the Wild (2007)
I had the feeling that I really ought to like this movie, but somehow I just couldn’t. The problem is that I know Into the Wild means a lot to a number of people, including people I am close to. I think this appeal stems from the fact that the ideals expressed by the main character, Alexander Supertramp/Chris McCandless, namely giving up connections to money and possessions in favor of relying solely on oneself for strength and knowledge, are ideals that a lot of people (including me) have felt in one form or another over the course of their lives. I don’t think there is anything wrong with becoming frustrated by all the material responsibilities one faces as an adult, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with feeling disillusioned by hypocritical people, especially parents, which is another theme in the movie.
But my complete disappointment with the film lies not with its spoken ideals and themes, but rather with the delivery and presentation of said themes. From the very beginning I felt like the whole thing was very, very pretentious. There were too many long quotes from Thoreau, ponderous and badly done narration from Jena Malone (as the main character’s sister), and landscapes, landscapes, landscapes. It rang very hollow for me and I ended up irritated and bored by the end of it, just wanting it to be over because I got the point already.
It is not as though I thought there was no value to the movie at all. The scene when the old man asks to adopt Alexander was particularly poignant and well done. I liked the soundtrack, and I liked Vince Vaughn’s character even though I wasn’t entirely clear on the details of what he was actually doing. The scene with the dead moose was appropriately gruesome, and the random Swedish couple from the river were hugely amusing.
I guess at the end of the day I just could not buy into the mentality that Alexander Supertramp was actually doing something noble or valuable, and I was confused as to whether the movie was condoning his behavior or condemning it. A big part of the film was about showing how much his absence negatively affected his loved ones, but for me that aspect got overshadowed by the big ideas supposedly justifying the young man’s journey and behavior.
It seems I am left just as unable to articulate my thoughts regarding breaking away from everything and leaving civilization behind as the movie itself seemed to be. Perhaps I should want that kind of independence, but should know that I can’t realistically have it? Or is it that I could have that type of experience, but shouldn’t want it?
Difficult things to think about, and unfortunately delivered by Into the Wild in a rather clunky fashion.
But my complete disappointment with the film lies not with its spoken ideals and themes, but rather with the delivery and presentation of said themes. From the very beginning I felt like the whole thing was very, very pretentious. There were too many long quotes from Thoreau, ponderous and badly done narration from Jena Malone (as the main character’s sister), and landscapes, landscapes, landscapes. It rang very hollow for me and I ended up irritated and bored by the end of it, just wanting it to be over because I got the point already.
It is not as though I thought there was no value to the movie at all. The scene when the old man asks to adopt Alexander was particularly poignant and well done. I liked the soundtrack, and I liked Vince Vaughn’s character even though I wasn’t entirely clear on the details of what he was actually doing. The scene with the dead moose was appropriately gruesome, and the random Swedish couple from the river were hugely amusing.
I guess at the end of the day I just could not buy into the mentality that Alexander Supertramp was actually doing something noble or valuable, and I was confused as to whether the movie was condoning his behavior or condemning it. A big part of the film was about showing how much his absence negatively affected his loved ones, but for me that aspect got overshadowed by the big ideas supposedly justifying the young man’s journey and behavior.
It seems I am left just as unable to articulate my thoughts regarding breaking away from everything and leaving civilization behind as the movie itself seemed to be. Perhaps I should want that kind of independence, but should know that I can’t realistically have it? Or is it that I could have that type of experience, but shouldn’t want it?
Difficult things to think about, and unfortunately delivered by Into the Wild in a rather clunky fashion.
01 December 2009
The Blind Side (2009)
-Link contains spoilers!-
If you have seen the trailer for this movie there is no need to go to the theater and watch it. You have already witnessed the entire story, gotten a good dose of the humor, and caught wind of the overall theme.
Now, if you nevertheless really feel like you want to watch The Blind Side all the way through, despite my warnings, please at least wait until it is available as a rental. Very not necessary to see it on the big screen. Thanks for nothing, whoever makes decisions about trailers.
However, if you have somehow managed to escape seeing the trailer and don't know a lot about the movie, I would recommend it. If you like feel-good, based-on-a-true-story heart-warmers, which a lot of people these days (entirely understandably) do, then go for it! The Blind Side is a crowd pleaser, a mug of hot apple cider on a cold day, a warm blanket to fall asleep with, through and through.
An overwhelmingly nice pick-me-up if you’re feeling down in the dumps and want to be cheered up, so long as you don't already know everything about it going into it.
If you have seen the trailer for this movie there is no need to go to the theater and watch it. You have already witnessed the entire story, gotten a good dose of the humor, and caught wind of the overall theme.
Now, if you nevertheless really feel like you want to watch The Blind Side all the way through, despite my warnings, please at least wait until it is available as a rental. Very not necessary to see it on the big screen. Thanks for nothing, whoever makes decisions about trailers.
However, if you have somehow managed to escape seeing the trailer and don't know a lot about the movie, I would recommend it. If you like feel-good, based-on-a-true-story heart-warmers, which a lot of people these days (entirely understandably) do, then go for it! The Blind Side is a crowd pleaser, a mug of hot apple cider on a cold day, a warm blanket to fall asleep with, through and through.
An overwhelmingly nice pick-me-up if you’re feeling down in the dumps and want to be cheered up, so long as you don't already know everything about it going into it.
20 November 2009
Coco before Chanel (2009)
This quiet biopic about Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel before she got famous is pleasant enough to watch but ultimately forgettable once you walk out of the theater.
It’s not that the acting or the plot is lackluster. On the contrary, it is quite engaging to see how Chanel goes from rags to riches by sheer force of will. Audrey Tautou artfully shows us just what kind of character is needed in order for Chanel to succeed, especially in light of the considerable obstacles with which an orphaned woman in turn of the century France was faced.
I think for me the problem was that the film did have some emotional content, showing Chanel in complicated romantic situations with a variety of men, but that somehow at the end of the day we could still only look on Chanel’s story from the outside. It was as though we had been invited to look through a window at her life, but never quite got invited inside to join in.
Perhaps this keeping the audience at arm’s length was the point; Chanel is repeatedly characterized as independent to the degree of aloofness throughout the film. However, this coldness had the effect of creating a certain degree of indifference in me toward Chanel—at the end of the film I didn’t really feel anything at all.
It’s not that the acting or the plot is lackluster. On the contrary, it is quite engaging to see how Chanel goes from rags to riches by sheer force of will. Audrey Tautou artfully shows us just what kind of character is needed in order for Chanel to succeed, especially in light of the considerable obstacles with which an orphaned woman in turn of the century France was faced.
I think for me the problem was that the film did have some emotional content, showing Chanel in complicated romantic situations with a variety of men, but that somehow at the end of the day we could still only look on Chanel’s story from the outside. It was as though we had been invited to look through a window at her life, but never quite got invited inside to join in.
Perhaps this keeping the audience at arm’s length was the point; Chanel is repeatedly characterized as independent to the degree of aloofness throughout the film. However, this coldness had the effect of creating a certain degree of indifference in me toward Chanel—at the end of the film I didn’t really feel anything at all.
18 November 2009
Pirate Radio (2009)
In the 1960s, BBC radio didn’t play rock music. So a bunch of dudes got on a boat and broadcast what everyone was secretly listening to anyway!
This movie is pretty entertaining, as ‘based on a true story’ movies go. Lots of talent is involved and there are plenty of laughs. The filmmakers keep it lighthearted, even when terrible things are happening. Very tongue in cheek, very fun. Makes the ‘60s look like the most awesome time ever. Excellent soundtrack, of course.
You probably don’t need to shell out to see it in theaters, though. It will make you just as happy as a rental.
This movie is pretty entertaining, as ‘based on a true story’ movies go. Lots of talent is involved and there are plenty of laughs. The filmmakers keep it lighthearted, even when terrible things are happening. Very tongue in cheek, very fun. Makes the ‘60s look like the most awesome time ever. Excellent soundtrack, of course.
You probably don’t need to shell out to see it in theaters, though. It will make you just as happy as a rental.
04 October 2009
Greenfingers (2000)
Sound improbably cheesy? Like something that would never happen in real life? Too full of gardening puns for you taste? Well here’s the real surprise—this movie is based on a true story.
Even though it’s unlikely you’ve heard anything about it outside of this blog, you should be at least mildly interested in seeing this movie. Though it is admittedly a very sunny, perhaps simplistic, view of what criminals in Britain can and do go through during their stay in prison, this pleasant patch of inspirational fluff is just the ticket for helping you believe that even the worst situations in life can be made better. Also, Clive Owen plays the lead role with Helen Mirren for backup. AND! As if that weren’t enough to entice you to click “Add to Queue”, consider that you'll also get the added bonus of dry humor and lovely garden settings!
A cheerful pick-me-up for any moviegoer who wants a break from the horrors of the evening news but without committing to a fully fledged trip into fantasyland.
24 September 2009
The Informant! (2009)
Summary:
The story centers on a guy named Mark Whitaker, an informant employed by the US government in the 1990s to gather information on agricultural giant ADM (it happened in real life!). Though the investigation is initiated by the FBI to look into allegations of price fixing in the industry, Whitaker’s own machinations come out of the woodwork over the course of the story, eventually causing his elaborately and expensively constructed life to fall to pieces.
The story centers on a guy named Mark Whitaker, an informant employed by the US government in the 1990s to gather information on agricultural giant ADM (it happened in real life!). Though the investigation is initiated by the FBI to look into allegations of price fixing in the industry, Whitaker’s own machinations come out of the woodwork over the course of the story, eventually causing his elaborately and expensively constructed life to fall to pieces.
The Good:
First of all, no one can claim that the acting was not up to par in this movie. However, walking into the theater I was skeptical. All I knew about the movie was gleaned from hearsay which excitedly advertised Matt Damon’s thirty pound weight gain, apparently a guarantee of a great performance. While I remain unconvinced that Damon’s extra heft lent any additional credibility to his role as Mark Whitaker, I do have to say that I sat through the movie thinking, “Mark Whitaker was a real asshole” and not “Matt Damon is a real asshole for playing this guy.” So kudos to you, Matt. I totally believed you were him, which is the whole point of your job.
Additionally I loved the quirky voice-overs when Whitaker details his random thoughts and daydreams, because random silly bits of character interiority thrown into movies on serious topics make me feel like maybe other people are starting to understand the value of frivolous silliness.
Performances from Scott Bakula (as the very normal FBI agent Brian Shepard) and Melanie Lynskey (as Whitaker’s dedicated wife Ginger) were excellent as well, both as their own characters and interaction with Damon’s Whitaker. Have you ever watched a movie where one performance so outshone the others that it made it seem like otherwise good actors were hacks? (Think The Dark Knight (2008), where Heath Ledger’s performance made Aaron Eckhart’s look like child’s play). Definitely not the case here. The whole cast pulled their weight in this film through and through.
The Bad:
Despite the excellent acting by all parties involved, something was definitely off. I felt as though I wasn’t really being encouraged to identify with any character. Whitaker is shown to be a confused sociopathic individual who is completely untrustworthy to the extreme. But we are not asked to take the side of the FBI either. Nor ADM. Nor even Whitaker’s wife, a sad figure who may be the one person throughout the piece with clear cut values. I’m the kind of person who has to be able to emotionally invest in a movie on some level. If I can’t even find a character where I can think to myself “I know how you feel”, I unfortunately have to file the movie under kind of pointless. At least for me.
Equally troubling as the just-not-quite-working-ness on the emotional investment side was the blaring and oddly selected musical score. I think there was supposed to be a point to it, but I think it too missed the mark. Marvin Hamlisch, composer/writer of the famous musical A Chorus Line wrote it and it definitely shows in terms of style. I think maybe they were going for satire with the jazzy and at times too loud musical interludes, but to me it was just distracting, and didn’t really work to any specific effect.
On the nitpicky side, I also really did not understand the random 1970s style lettering. This movie was about events that took place during the 1990s. What’s with the bizarre font?
Overall:
My overall impression of this movie was that it had the potential to be really great, but somehow and somewhere missed the mark. Not so severely, however, that I think it was total crap. If you like movies with good acting and aren’t up for something that will make you feel a bunch of feelings while you watch it, go for it. Just be prepared to walk out and say “What’s next?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
