Recent films

A few short reviews of films I've watched in the past month.

Observe and Report. While it has a few nice moments, by the end, this mall set dark comedy becomes a little too "one-note" and loses steam. I'm such a fan of Jody Hill's The Foot Fist Way and East Bound & Down that it's kind of a disappointment. Not bad, just expected more. Hill's style is not for everyone though. He likes to push the boundaries some with comedy.

Dead Snow. All I need to say about this new film from Norway is: Nazi zombies! What else do you want to know? Lots of horror in jokes and references as a group of friends go to a remote cabin (not in the woods, this being Norway, it's on a snow covered mountain range) and have to fight off the Nazi undead. Fun as you can see by the poster (I heart the poster!) and will be coming to the Circle Cinema in August for a couple of midnight movie screenings.

Nollywood Babylon. Evidently Nigeria has a booming film industry. Granted, it won't challenge Hollywood since most films are shot on the cheap for under 10K and released DIY on DVD in markets and shops. The movies look terrible but the locals seem to enjoy them despite the low budget and amateurish quality they have. I was fascinated by the city of Lagos. What a crazy, frantic, packed with people, economically strapped, non-stop place.

Fulltime Killer. This is a typical Johnny To Hong Kong action film from 2001. That means a few things--it is good, bullets will fly, it is stylish, it is tense, it is tautly edited, it will have lots of slow motion. I love a good Johnny To action film and this is another that didn't disappoint me at all.

Adventureland. What a pleasant surprise this was! I basically saw it to see Martin Starr in a fairly large role for him and was completely captivated by this story set in a Pittsburgh amusement park in 1987. It's smart, appropriately nostalgic, has a great score, lots of likeable characters and just a well done youth comedy. Wish more people would have gone to see it but it should still be in theatres so you can still catch it.

I Heart Wes Studi

I'm not a fan of Wes Studi just because he is from Oklahoma (although that surely doesn't hurt!). No, I like Studi because he's an interesting character actor who has been criminally underemployed in quality films for far too long. What a shame. Studi is one of those distinct, unique actors that always makes an impression.

Studi, a full blood Cherokee born in Nofire Hollow, Oklahoma (is that a great town name or what?), has carved a career out of playing Native Americans. Ethnic actors often get pigeonholed for a particular kind of role and that is all they seem to get despite the fact they can do more but the prison of typecasting is a hard confinement to escape from. Actors have to make a living so they take what they can. For some, it's straight to DVD genre pictures, for someone like Studi, it's playing Indians from every tribe under the sun.

Some of Studi's more well known roles (some of these are TV) are in Last of the Mohicans, Geronimo, Into the West, The New World, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee and Comanche Moon. He had a nice role in Heat that I wish would have led to more cop roles--he makes a great detective!--but that didn't happen. It looks like Studi has some sort of role in James Cameron's highly anticipated science fiction 3D epic Avatar later in 2009 so that's something to be excited about.

Check out Studi this Monday on PBS as he has a significant role in American Experience's Native American five part series We Shall Remain. It's the first time Studi has gotten to speak Cherokee in a project after his dozens of roles as other Indian tribes.

The Paris

In the age of the multiplex, there is something comforting about going to see a movie at a single screen theatre. They are becoming more rare with auditoriums being chopped into sections or having their balconies walled off for that precious extra screen. That's if the theatre is lucky--the unfortunate theatres are just razed or turned into a restaurant. Survival is a never ending struggle for the single screen theatre in the 21st century.

My favorite theatre in New York, the Paris, is just the sort of old school, single screen throwback that makes me think of long-gone eras whenever I step into its lobby and head down into the spacious room built into the ground. Other theatres in NY have more interesting programming but the act of watching a film doesn't get any better than this jewel located on a picturesque square underneath the Plaza Hotel and near a corner of Central Park. Go in the spring or the fall and your heart will skip a beat.

Everything about the Paris charms me. The lobby is tiny so you have to queue up on the street despite whatever the weather might be in New York. If it is raining or snowing--too bad, line up on the street and wait until the movie starts. This is how it should be for every theatre in a city. The theatre is draped in velvet, the 586 seats are soft and comfy and the view from the front/middle of the balcony is absolutely perfect. If I could, I'd watch every single movie in this theatre, such is my love for the place. There's something magical about walking off a busy Manhattan street and then becoming lost in the story on screen.

The Art Moderne styled Paris opened for business on September 13, 1948. Specializing in foreign and independent films--the Paris is known for French cinema. With a name like "Paris" that shouldn't be a surprise. The theatre was run by France's Pathe for 42 years before Loew's took over in 1990.

A few of my favorite experiences at the Paris: watching Amelie with a packed house during its American premiere weekend in 2001 has to be at the top of the list. French TV was on the street and interviewing people as they stood in line. Two weeks later I went and saw Amelie a second time at the Paris. That same year I saw The Widow of Saint-Pierre and then went and ate at a creperie on a cold, autumn night. How French is that?

Two Lovers

The sad thing about Two Lovers is that the film has been overshadowed by the recent antics of Joaquin Phoenix. I don't know if he is putting us on or is serious about this whole rap career change. It's a shame if it's true because he's such a soulful, interesting actor. For selfish reasons, I'd prefer he stick to acting. Hip hop for Joaquin? No thanks.

Two Lovers. Director James Gray sets all his films in the boroughs of New York City (this is #4) and he loves to ratchet up the tone and nuance in full 1970s mode. That's good. If a film hints of the '70s, I'm all for it. Gray's films are so washed in that era he might want to try and break away from that in the future just to do something different. Then again, why should he? Making films that feel as if they dropped out of that decade is a compliment and more directors should do the same so I hope he just keeps on making these sorts of films.

Phoenix plays Leonard, a mumbling, slightly damaged young man living with his parents, working in the family dry cleaning store and pining for a lost love. He goes from no romance to two women in the span of a couple of days--the safe choice (Vinessa Shaw) or the unhinged choice (Gwyneth Paltrow). What is good for Leonard might not be the direction he chooses to go as he's torn between the two women--it's hard to resist the dangerous path of the heart sometimes.

The two women represent a life change too. One wil make him a predictable wife and life connected to his family; one offers the complete unknown and escape from the world around him. Leonard is torn. Gray let's us see both sides of the romantic coin and we see and feel what Leonard has to dicipher between--the security or the passion.

Phoenix delivers a riveting, warm, tender, raw and oddly comical performance. It's hard to not watch him on screen. If this is his last role--and as I said, I'm hoping it's not--then he's ending it on a high note. I wish Paltrow was not in this though. Granted, I'm not a fan but I found her distracting in such a small, intimate story. I loved watching Isabella Rossellini and Moni Moshona as Leonard's parents as they solidify a great ensemble cast.

James Gray's Two Lovers is another trip for him into "1970s" storytelling. It's honest, deceptively simple in its construction and very direct. I admire Gray for his stubborn adherence to this style--he will not give up! It makes for bleak downers but for films this well crafted and acted, those are not negative traits at all. Gray's next film is The Lost City of Z, an adventure drama set around the search for lost explorers so we'll get to see if he can step out of the NYC box.

Movie tickets #6

Street cred

Recently Vern Snackwell and I spent an afternoon upping our street cred points for how nerdy we can be for film watching. Vern, who is on a 2009 quest for five hundred movies (!), came over to my house about 5.30 with a pizza and Dr. Pepper. The weather outside was sunny, springlike and high 70s. It was a gorgeous day, one of the first days like that of spring. We didn't really get to enjoy that though as we promptly turned on the TV and watched three episodes of Eastbound and Down and then the Japanese film Tokyo! for the next three and a half hours.

If it's one thing film geeks worry about it is their rep among other dedicated film geeks. What is more embarrassing in life than to get attitude from a video store clerk at a good video store (if you have a good video store in your town--and I'm not talking about the awful Blockbuster and Hollywood chains--then you know how these people can get up on the cinema high horse)? This afternoon should give us a few points on that front. Forget good weather, Vern and I will take pizza, a raunchy TV show and a so-so Japanese film any day over walking outside, doing yard work, sitting on a park bench, taking the dog down by the water for exorcise, riding a bike or any of that active stuff.

A letter to america, part two

Dear America,

Let me go curmudgeon for a bit: something is seriously wrong with the youth of America. I haven't read a poll that lambastes their intelligence--although it's impossible to ignore the stories about how ignorant they are at history, science, literature. I have a feeling if these subjects were properly dispelled via social network site, mp3 player, download or cell phone--our American youth would do us all proud. But they aren't. Yet.

No, my worry stems from a recent conversation that left me slack jawed with worry and disbelief. Maybe I just ran into an anomaly but I kind of doubt it. I've read enough about the interests of the today's youth (for the sake of this essay we'll classify youth as being from the ages of 13-19) and have had, or overheard, enough conversations to realize they might just be a clueless mob. There, more curmudgeonly opinions!

I've been having trouble with my computer the past couple of weeks and was at a local Geek Squad getting it looked at. The computer is an iMac from 2002 and as I was describing its issues I made a couple of comments about "2001"--obviously a reference to the film 2001: A Space Odyssey from the legendary Stanley Kubrick. Come on, that's about as much of a no-brainer as humanly possible when snuck into a few sentences about a quasi retro-futuristic piece of technology that is the iMac.

Maybe not. The guy helping me seemed about nineteen years old and got all glassy eyed when I said the phrase "2001" a second time.

"What do you mean, 2001?"
"You know, 2001. The movie. By Kubrick, this computer reminds me of that."
"Never heard of him. What else did he do?"

I was immediately struck by just how empty this poor kid's soul was. Maybe he was just messing with me? I began to list some films to jog his memory: Lolita, Full Metal Jacket, The Shining, Dr. Strangelove...I kept listing them, hoping something would slap him out of his stupor. Nothing. The unlucky sap! To be in your late teens or early twenties and to not know Kubrick is the worst sort of self-abuse and self-loathing.

You'd think in this day of instant accessibility via DVD or other technology that a kid who works ON computers would know about one of the greatest science fiction films ever. There is a strong relation in the two worlds. This example is a symptom of a larger ignorance I'm afraid. We are living in a world where youth only know of pathetic remakes and overblown CGI epics forged from computer screens and comic books. Idiosyncratic auteur directors whose heyday was the 1960s and 1970s are lost and off the radar--unless that much needed remake of A Clockwork Orange comes soon.

I'm concerned, very concerned.

Sincerely,

Replicant

Aliens, Tulsa, 1986

{every so often i want to write about memories of particular films--these posts might be more about who i was with, where i saw the film and my memories rather than the movie itself. this is the first of the film memory series of posts.}

In 1986 my best friend Scott lived with my family for the summer before he moved to Memphis. There were conversations between his family and mine about him staying with us in Pryor Creek throughout our senior year of high school. That did not happen so near the tail end of summer, before Scott left Oklahoma, a small group of us went on a movie binge at the Eton Square Theatre in Tulsa.

Theatre hopping, as we called going to watch two or three films in a row after only paying for one, was a frequent weekend treat for me and a few friends. We'd drive the forty-five minutes from Pryor Creek to Tulsa and see multiple films for the price of one--thank you multiplexes! This Saturday night we saw more than one film but the only one I remember seeing was the last, and best, of the night--Aliens.

Aliens is the high octane, science fiction/action film from director James Cameron (the original Alien by director Ridley Scott in 1979 relied less on bullets and more on terror and suspense. For the record, I love both films.) that has Sigourney Weaver reprising her role as Ripley. She escorts a motley crew of Marines to a planet that might have a killer alien species on it. Well, let's be honest, there will be carnage and mayhem thanks to the aliens that exist on this planet, that should be no surprise to anyone.

We talked about going to see Aliens for weeks before it came out so we were watching it opening weekend. Despite being a late night screening, we sat in the middle, closer to the front, surrounded by others in a packed house--the perfect environment for a film like this. Aliens is an adrenaline rush of a film and all the way home we were buzzing about it and our favorite scenes ("We're history man!") and whether or not it was better than the original.

By the time we got back to Pryor Creek and home, around 2am, the night was full of bittersweet emotions. I'm still good friends with Scott, yet in 1986, when he packed to leave a few days later, our future friendship was more uncertain. Teenage friendships don't often survive cross country moves. We were happy that we got to have that last going away theatre hopping event where we saw one of our favorites from the 1980s--Aliens.

Wendy and Lucy

Kelly Reichardt is quickly emerging as a young filmmaker to watch and admire. Her films are low budget, filled with natural light, simple, honest and direct--qualities that I love to see an American reveling in (most want the flash and dash of Hollywood unfortunately). Based on Wendy and Lucy and 2006's Old Joy, Reichardt has tapped into a portion of the usually unseen American population, and has unleashed a couple of heart wrenching tales of the lost and found.

Wendy (Michelle Williams) is a young woman travelling to Alaska with her dog Lucy. With dwindling funds, Wendy's car breaks down in Oregon and this begins a rough span of hours for Wendy. When Lucy disappears sometime after the car trouble, Wendy becomes desperate to find her and to restore some sense of normalcy and friendship in her solitary existence. Wendy may have other people in her life but we don't get to see them. We only get to see her with the dog and engage in awkward conversations with strangers. So, Lucy is important, she may be the only real relationship in Wendy's life.

Wendy and Lucy seems simple on the surface but has a lot going on in it if you look. It's a powerful meditation on a variety of themes--the desperation and frustration of being poor, the isolation of travel and not fitting in with the world around you, the optimistic wanderlust of youth, forming unexpected connections with strangers and the universal love between dog and owner. The story unfolds with little dialogue, utilizes long takes and is raw without the doses of sentimentality a lesser director may have injected. A film with a major plot point of a missing pet could go syrupy very fast but it's to Reichardt's credit that Wendy and Lucy never comes close to veering in that direction.

Williams, who I'm more impressed with each time I see her act, gives a stellar performance as Wendy. She absolutely nails it. She's equally numb and emotionally fragile with the way she has to live and with what happens to her in Oregon. Will Patton plays a mechanic and while I like him, it was a distraction to see someone recognizable in the context of such a small story and setting.The rest of the film is full of non-pros or obscure character actors and this adds to the film's texture of reality.

Wendy and Lucy stays with you long after it ends. The slowness lulls you into its sadness and when it is over, the story and performances are haunting as they stick to you. We need more American filmmakers like Reichardt crafting real stories and real films but unfortunately her style doesn't translate to the masses. It's too slow, it's too sad, it's too low budget but it's really too bad because the void that has become American filmmaking is only growing larger and we could use more people as interesting and talented as Kelly Reichardt.

March movies

My favorite film of the month was one I've seen five or six times--The Big Lebowski. Every time I see this movie it seems funnier, quirkier and just better. I'm eager to rewatch it in a few years! We showed it for the midnight movie series at the Circle (poster by Fritschie to the left) and had a short, impromptu trivia contest before the film where we gave away a rug and a balling ball. Earlier in the night a small group of us went bowling and I opened with two strikes before it went downhill from there. It was a fun night of bowling and The Dude. Lots of mediocre films in March.





Frenzy---1972---england ***
Waltz With Bashir---2008---israel ***
The President's Analyst---1967---usa ***
Che, part one---2008---usa ***1/2
Love Songs---2008---france ***1/2
Tokyo!---2008---japan ***
The Class---2008---france ***1/2
The War Bride---2001---uk or canada ***
Happy Hour---2003---usa **1/2
The Big Lebowski---1998---usa *****!
Tulsa---1949---usa **
Wendy and Lucy---2008---usa ****
The Boss of It All---2006---denmark ***1/2
I Love You, Man---2009---usa ***1/2

I Heart Amanda Seyfried

I usually write about actors who have more of a resume or who are character actors but I'm going to change it up a bit with this one. I only know Amanda Seyfried from two shows on television: Big Love and Veronica Mars. Even though the roles have been small and not leads, Seyfried is a young actress poised to do big things and is someone to keep an eye on.

It's her performance in Big Love (one of my favorite shows) that has really grabbed me. She might have been great in Mamma Mia! but I didn't see that one. As Big Love has evolved in season three, Seyfried is at the epicenter of this Salt Lake City, Utah family of polygamists. Seyfried completely nails the confused, awkward teenager who finds herself pregnant. She never loses her vulnerability, her likability and warmth no matter how inward she turns. Seyfried is one of the highlights on a very good ensemble cast in an underrated show.

Seyfried has a lot of films coming out in the next year or two, so, her profile is about to rise. Judging by her performance in Big Love--she's got promise and might make it out of her large, surrogate family in Utah.

Amores Perres

This film from Mexico and director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu will make you feel soiled and in need of a long hot shower with lots of scrubbing. Amores Perros (Love's A Bitch) is the first film I've ever seen with a disclaimer before the credits informing us that no animal was hurt during filming. You see, dogs figure mightily in Amores Perros, and mostly it is cringe inducing, eye averting stuff. I'm no sissy with film violence but seeing bloody, limp dogs over and over was almost a bit much for me.

The film is a non-linear triptych of stories that sort of interweave into one another and converge at a violent, horrific car wreck. The first story is about Octavio, who has feelings for his brother's wife and fights his giant dog to get money. I don't care what the disclaimer says, I've been around dogs my entire life and watched big dogs fight one another. I've jumped into the fray with teeth lashing and know what a dog fight looks like, and the dog fights in this sure looked real. Anyway, everything in this story is pushed to a jittery, frenetic pace, aided by lots of handheld camera and the emotional powder kegs of betrayal and violence between the dogs and the two brothers. Betrayal is an interlocking theme used in all three stories as someone is getting betrayed and in two of them it is brothers doing the back stabbing.

Story two is based around a man and his model girlfriend he leaves his wife and kids for. They move into a beautiful apartment with a hole in the floor that spells trouble for their dog Richie (I told you, dogs walk a dangerous line in this movie and for a dog lover like me, that's hard to watch). These people don't seem to care for one another but there are stressful events in their lives. Story 3 is centered around a homeless man who is also a contract killer and has some kind of damaged relationship with an unknown daughter who haunts him. As I said, all the stories merge.

Amores Perros is one of the bleakest films I've seen in a while. It's also one of the most intense, gritty depictions of living on the fringe of society (or like the second story, in the upper class where all is beautiful yet horror lurks very near). At times the film veers too closely to melodrama but it's so no holds barred in its negativity that I'll forgive it that. This is one hopeless film but it has a feral, unhinged rawness that I really enjoyed. It may sound like I didn't like the movie--but I did. A lot.

Amores Perros was up for best foreign film at the 2000 Oscars and I can see why it didn't win (probably too dark for the voters) but there is often beauty and power in the squalid and Amores Perros delivers a few screaming howls from some dark recess of our existence. You can't really say this is a lot of fun, with all the dogs in various strata of disrepair, betrayals and in your face intensity, but good (great) movies are often filled with ugliness and we are better people for having watched them. Not for the overly sensitive but highly recommended.

CineRobot propaganda poster

Talented local graphic designer/artist Dan Fritschie has been designing one of a kind posters for the monthly midnight movie series at Circle Cinema. These posters have been very popular with people around town since each one is unique to the particular film--it's like having a piece of art + a one of kind poster for a film that is unlike anything used for the regular promotion of the movie.

With that in mind, Dan has created a piece of propaganda for CineRobot to help spread the message: cinema + robot = CineRobot!

Dan also writes the blog Random Thought Patterns (link is on my links section to the left), curates the local Personality of Cult art project, is a burgeoning stand up comic and is an all around swell guy.

When do you press stop?

Everyone has a stopping point. You know, you are watching a film that you don't like and a decision must be reached. Pick a reason--it's boring, the acting is terrible, it's annoying, it's just not any good. You pick up the remote and press stop. You then move onto something else in your life. My question for you is this: what was the final moment or the last film you were watching when you had enough and went over the edge to the stopping point?

I had such a moment recently. I was watching the 1975 cult French film The Beast (La Bete) and right off the bat there is a very graphic scene of horse on horse copulation. I'm talking erection, quivering and ejaculation graphic. Horses. For a minute or two. I think to myself--"Okay, it is French, it's a controversial film in some circles, an extended horse sex scene in the first three minutes, while not my thing, it's understandable." I keep watching.

About ten minutes later there is a second scene of two horses getting it on! That was my moment of remembering of the other things I could be doing--I pressed stop. I don't feel guilty at all. I just won't watch The Beast and who knows how many more sex scenes the kinky, equine obsessed director might have put in the movie.

Evidently I have a stopping point: multiple + detailed lovemaking scenes between horses. But that's just me--what is your stopping point or what was the last film you stopped watching and never returned to?

Che (part one)

Che, Steven Soderbergh's history on the revolutionary Che Guevara runs nearly five hours long. It's actually divided into two separate parts with part one is dubbed The Argentine. Not wanting to sit on a not so comfortable seat at the Circle for five hours on a work night--opted to watch part one only.

I enjoyed Che--part one. I'm not sure why there is even the need for part two although I haven't the foggiest what material it covers in Che's life. Part one exists on two fronts--Guevara's involvement in the Cuban revolution in the late 1950s and his visit to New York a few years later to address the United Nations on behalf of Cuba. The film flips back and forth between the two times in Che's life. One's in color, the other black and white.

I absolutely loved the Cuban revolution storyline. It's the strength of the film as it perfectly captures the gritty struggle by this small band of fighters, farmers and radicals as they make their way towards Havana encountering Bautista's military along the way. Lush, tropical greenery surrounds them and it's a stunning, beautiful backdrop. If you are going to engage in armed rebellion--you might as well do it in a place this gorgeous. Has to help with the morale.

I was less interested in the jump forward portion of Che in New York. To switch up the color palette, Soderbergh shoots these scenes in super grainy black and white (literally--he's also the DP under an alias). Soderbergh has put these two sections of Che's life side by side for a reason--he wants to show us the revolutionary with a gun in his hand juxtaposed with the statesman with words as his weapon. I found the Cuban revolution stuff more interesting, thought out and effective. Benecio Del Toro gets to deliver more layers as Che with the dual story lines and he does deliver a fine performance--I would have happily traded these scenes for more Cuban revolution.

Aside from the ubiquitous t-shirt, I knew very little about Che Guevara. Che--part one (and maybe part two)--changes that somewhat for me. Had this only been about the Cuban revolution Che--part one might have made my top ten for last year, that's how strong that portion of Che is. Too bad it had a dual storyline to drag down the superior story.

Movie tickets #5

This week's remakes

Well, Hollywood has decided to release not one but two remakes this week. Pretty soon that is all we'll get--new versions of films we've already seen. You can go the horror route (and gee, how long will it be until another horror film from the '70s or '80s is out?) and choose The Last House On the Left. Or, you can go the more kid friendly path of Race to Witch Mountain. Either way--you lose. Boycott!!!

The Delman

The Delman is a movie theatre in Tulsa I love but I sadly never got to see a film in this Art Deco gem. Heartache. I vaguely even remember the place as it sat empty and ignored into the mid 1980s before it was noticed (and deemed too troublesome to fix up) and was met full on by the wrecking ball. More heartache.

Built in 1938, the Streamline Art Deco 1,138 seat, single screen with balcony Delman Theatre saw its glory days in the 1940s and 1950s. Like many single screens, it went the way of porn in the 1970s, was bought by the Loew's chain and used for movies and events, and gradually went downhill until it was closed for good in the 1980s. A generic Walgreen's sits on its lot now. That's progress of the sickening kind.

I fell in love with the Delman when I caught a glimpse of the photo in this post. 1948. Claudette Colbert on the marquee. Noir-like. Wet streets. Neon. The sensual streamline curves in the black and white night. This photo tugs at my heart with a full fledged assault of romantic nostalgia (something I'm always susceptible of). I can only imagine what joy it must have been to by a ticket out on Cherry Street and see a film at the Delman.

***Photo courtesy of the Tulsa Historical Society***

I Heart James Gammon

I love character actors. They are the supporting structure of virtually every good movie with a cast of more than a couple of actors (which is pretty much every movie of worth ever made). You can't name a great film without these smaller, character roles that give a film depth, tension, laughter, heartache etc etc. These are my acting heroes. James Gammon is a character actor of the finest kind. James Gammon is one of my favorite actors of all time.

The first thing you notice about Gammon is his voice. It's a wonderful blend of gravel and drawl. Gammon is not a handsome guy but his everyman looks have allowed him to play every sort of character in a career that dates back to the mid-1960s. Gammon, like all great character actors, makes a film better even though you might not realize just who he is. He can help make good films great and the dreck he has to do sometimes to pay the bills is always more watchable because of his presence.

Gammon is perfectly suited for westerns. If I was making a western, since Warren Oates is dead, the first person I'd call would be James Gammon and I'd ask him to grow a powerful mustache. No one tops Oates! I wouldn't make the film if Gammon wasn't in the cast. Gammon has been in westerns such as Silverado, Wyatt Earp and Cold Mountain. He can also do comedy as his gruff exterior offers great straight man possibilities--he's hilarious in the ribald baseball comedy Major League. Cast him in crime genres and he'll go to town in those as well.

James Gammon is just a great actor in anything, period. Every time I see his name in the credits or see his face pop up on screen I get a little thrill something good is about to come my way. He's the glue, an honest, hardworking character actor. And that's a compliment.

Gran Torino

Gran Torino had me worried at the start. As the opening minutes rolled by, I kept thinking, "This is the last time I see Clint on screen" and it was hard to think otherwise since Eastwood has said it will be his last role as an actor. I wanted Gran Torino to be nothing short of great--of which I was quickly realizing it wasn't up to that level. But, it was Clint Eastwood up there and he was giving one more dose of the quintessential "Eastwood" that has made him a cinematic icon and one of my all-time favorites. Even with Gran Torino's flaws, Clint being Clint is more than enough to make me happy.

Eastwood plays Walt, a newly widowed Detroit autoworker for forty years. He still lives in the same neighborhood despite many changes for the worse in his opinion--run down houses, unkempt yards and lots of Asians and other ethnic groups Walt dislikes. With no relationship with his own family--Walt lives by himself (and his dog), wants to be left alone by neighbors/priest and he likes it that way.

Walt begins to thaw some when he gets entangled in the troubles of the Hmong family next door. This involves taking on some wannabe gangstas who drive around the neighborhood acting and speaking tough. I don't care how old Eastwood is--to see him taking on gangstas with a sneer and the threat of violence feels my heart with pure cinematic joy. It's Clint Eastwood people!

The early portion of Gran Torino is plagued by a clunky start. The story is a little forced , heavy handed and is bogged down by some woeful acting by some of the younger actors (maybe Clint scared the acting right out of them?). Some of this might have been my fault--see the intro. The racial stuff in the film is played for laughs--always dangerous--but was mostly effective in drawing in to Walt's world and to see how he's softened for these people he barely knows.

The film gets better when Walt softens up some and begins to befriend and protect an awkward Hmong kid next door. While predictable, this gives us a connection with the character rather than just seeing him as a simplified, one-note, cranky, bitter, bigoted old man stuck in a buried rage of what he did in his past. Well, he kind of is those things but he has a few gifts left to give that make him redeemable.

If this is Eastwood's last film as an actor--it's not his best but it's still good. Gran Torino is another piece of his cinematic mythology he's been creating for decades. If this is it, Clint has gone out squinty-eyed, bad ass, taking on gang bangers, gun in his hand, knuckles bloody from pummeling some punk kid's face and standing up alone against bad odds because someone has to. Would we have it any other way?

***I saw Gran Torino a second time after I wrote this review and liked it more. I just got to enjoy it instead of worrying how good Eastwood's last role would be. I think I laughed more, was rooting for more vengeance and even moved more than the first viewing.***