2005 Film List

See, Jason? I'm not the only one who didn't like this movie!

~Edwin

Yes it is Adam. I didn't care for it either but I could point you to a number of carefully thought out, positive reviews, J. Hoberman's Village Voice review being one of the best of these. Tsai made the film he wanted to make with specific aesthetic and thematic purposes for doing so. You or Edwin or I may not like this particular work, but he is no different from any other director with a clearly definable stylistic bent. He has the right to make whatever film he wants to make and we have the right to watch or not to watch.

I would also point out that Tsai probably made nothing beyond whatever his director's fee was for the film. The distributor/investors get the proceeds paid for foreign rights. Tsai has enough of a following that any film he made would be picked up in a similar manner. He didn't need to make a specific kind of film just so it would get released in other countries. I'm sure he could have made a martial arts or gangster film and had a far better shot at dough if such was his intention.

According to IMDB it grossed $33,000 in the US and only had 2 prints in circulation. Wellspring probably lost money on releasing this here. It won "The Golden Horse" for best Taiwanese film at the Taiwan film awards so I think it is safe to say that it had a far greater degree of acceptance in Taiwan than it ever did here.

Film can be anything within the imagination of human expression. Your attitude strikes me as terribly close-minded for a film fan passionate enough about the form to spend considerable amounts of money in studying it.

Not that it really matters, but for housekeeping purposes/thread rules, Goodbye Dragon Inn is a 2004 film.

well, yes you're right, it is a film I suppose, but I also know when I'm being exploited, and I know that there are asian filmmakers out there who guarantee making another film by producing crap right now but know that there feces will win enough praise in the west to get them more films made.

Although this is not true of him, it's sort of like Kim Ki-Duk, there are a lot of Koreans who don't consider his films to be representative of Korean cinema (Deepa Mehta of India is another example) rather, he's making films specifically for a western audience and what they expect to see from asian cinema. It's not orientalism per-se but its an extension of it, a self-orientalizing, if you will.

Hou Hsiao Hsien makes similar boring films but he usually has a point. I don't find anything worthwhile in this film at all, and I find it disingenous and ridiculous as an example of art-house filmmaking.

And I remember seeing this in LA art house theatres this last summer, so I thought it was 2005.

Adam

Certainly, but you could find people who will say David Lynch or Woody Allen or Wes Anderson or whoever, isn't representative of American cinema and are making films for an insulated art house crowd.

I know what you are getting at as I've heard similar arguments about Ki-Duk and other filmmakers, and the Iranian Cinema is probably the worst offender of this, yet Goodbye Dragon Inn is not one of these films. Just as with Hou's films, GDI has specific Taiwanese contexts that may fly past the Western viewer. The film revolves around a screening of King Hu's Dragon Inn, the first film Hu made in Taiwan after leaving the Shaw Bros. Studio in HK. Hoberman's review goes into the historical reasons and theme that Tsai makes in specifically choosing this film to be the "film within a film" in his movie.

I've never seen Dragon Inn, these things were meaningless to me as I unsucessfully fought falling asleep during this movie, and yet, they wouldn't necessarily fly by a knowledgeable Taiwanese viewer. There are other cultural aspects, such as the real location of the film in an oldstyle dilapidated cinema that might resonate with Taiwanese viewers just as a film like Darabonts The Majestic or Grease or some other nostalgia-trip US movie might resonate with Americans.

I understand what you're saying, GDI just isn't one of "those" kinds of movies. I would put it more of a piece with Hou's Good Men, Good Women and Goodbye South, Goodbye where some understanding of the Taiwanese historical and cultural contexts existing within the film are almost essential to appreciating it. It's probably at the opposite end of the spectrum you are describing.

Flightplan - Producer Brian Grazer is up to his old tricks again. After passing off the revisionist and whitewashing that A Beautiful Mind was, he serves up another film, this time with a bullet-ridden plot.

(out of four)

~Edwin

That's the first thing I thought of and was going to add. One of the things the middle stages of film theory study has opened up to me is that "production film" as a business or for a pop audience target or whatever is still a section of art. It is simply hyper-reflexive of the culture it appeals to.

We call this stuff hack work usually, such as a Fantastic Four or Dukes of Hazzard. Silly to speak of them in the same breath as Eiseinstein, and yet not. It is a style and genre, the Hollywood pop-spectacle and it has it's own identifiable traits, both in the production side of it (application of the budget, choice of stars vs actors, advertising, etc) and in the film content itself.

I'm not calling such films "good", but clearly we also can see that what makes those films "bad", the slavish manner in which they toe the genre line, also makes for bad arthouse, asian, queer, blaxploitation, or whatever type of cinema under discussion.

The fault isn't that these films are what they are, and in that regard this means that its not wrong for a filmmaker to appeal to an audience more than his own aethetics any more than it is wrong for Clint to win out in the final gun battle of a Leone film.

I haven't seen GDI to address the specifics here, just that I don't think it's intrinsically wrong to "give em what they want" vs "being true to yourself/culture." It's just a different genre.

It's fine that you don't like that genre, the Americanized Asian film by an Asian filmmaker. I'll leave it to you and Brook to decide if it fits that genre or not since you definitely aren't generating my interest in seeing it.

Now 3 adds to my list

The aforementioned
Fantastic Four
4.5 of 10
There are elements here, especially in the general plotline, that are very strong. And Chiklis is strong as Ben Grimm.

Where the film lacks most of all is in the detailed writing of scenes, usually filled with weak dialog, and then bad acting from some of the primary characters. I think Alba was pretty bad most of the time, only getting it right occassionally, as was Gruffudd as Reed. Chris Evans was a pretty good casting choice however.

I also think that another big weakness was Tim Story's direction. It has no life, no artfullness to it. Very plain presentation which fits with the very plain writing of scenes.

A film is only as good as the people who make it. This appears to be a film that is great only in treatment form and deserved to have better or more approriate talent applied to it in order to make a great film from it.


Capote
10 of 10
So much has been said of Hoffman that it has overshadowed how good this film is overall. The supporting cast is outstanding as well and meets the challenge of Hoffman's effort.

But the film is also so beautifully shot, so thoughtfully arranged to tell the story of this incident and what it tells us about who Capote was, that it has to be a major player for Best Pix.

It's also one of the best scripts I've seen this year. The few times it jumps forward and seems to leave gaps of important info behind, it then goes on to fill in those holes in the section it jumped too. Capote stays behind and is obsessed with the criminals seemingly out of nowhere, but it is the scenes with them after that which flesh out what it was that drew him to these characters and what his full motivation is.

The film takes a clear stand that this event made and broke Capote at the same time, and every aspect of the production focuses perfectly on making that point.

My favorite of the year so far.


Munich
9.5 of 10
The film is incredible most of the time. Where it lacks is a slow start (despite the compelling opening content) and then a stumbling, dragging finish as SS decides where he wants to end it up. At times in the middle he falls back into very Spielbergian things like a tracking shot at the wrong time or a plot point made a bit too obviously, but this is rare.

Mostly the 90% in the middle is finely honed and unflinching power in the hands of a master filmmaker paired with a great cast. Actions scenes retain the dynamic power of Raiders or SPRyan, and yet are more disturbing and than anything in SPR.

He is more willing to shock than ever before and does so many times over. Gore, nudity, and character behavior that becomes rather questionable. He condems violence by Jews as strongly as he condemned violence on Jews in Schindler's List.

He comes close to matching his best work (SL, Jaws, Raiders, CE3K, SPR, ET) but not quite.

I've not seen enough Lynch to comment, but I'd say Anderson's last film played more to the cult of Anderson than it stood on it's own merits.

Seth, this is what Goodbye Dragon Inn is, (bear in mind it's 80 minutes long)

About 20-25 minutes of a crippled girl walking around the depths of the theatre in long static takes. She finds out there is no projectionist to zero reaction (oooooooohhhhhhhhhh symbolic). This contains the one 'cool' shot of the movie when her face is illuminated by the light coming through the holes in the screen.

About fifty minutes of a kid moving from seat to seat and trying to pick up a guy, any guy in the theatre (or being annoyed by patrons). This is not as interesting as it sounds because mainly he stares at a person for a long time. Long static shot. This contains pretty much the only dialogue in the film

four minutes of three guys standing at urinals and apparently either masturbating or standing there for the fun of it (a four minute piss would have to be a record). Or they're so repressed they can't communicate their gayness to each other and so just stand next to each other in the john. This actually generates a few laughs at the ridiculousness of it.

Five minute static shot of the theatre at the end. Nothing happens in this shot.

About two minutes of the film Dragon Inn--this is the only interesting part of the movie.

----
On the Other hand, although Hou's Good Men Good Women was of a similar style it actually had substance, story, character and quality. I'd like to eventually see it again, though I was not crazy about the film it was richly textured and finely made and I felt I missed a great deal on the first viewing.

with Goodbye Dragon Inn I just felt abused.

Saraband - A worthy film, if not populated with very familiar themes about deep rooted hatred and lost love. Ingmar Bergman’s self-proclaimed last film, which looks more like a stage play, may not be his most memorable film but its strength comes from the complexity of emotions brought on by a very talented cast.

(out of four)

As a side note, Jonathan Rosenbaum needs some lucidity in his ratings system. While his 2 stars for Saraband was not that generous, it still made and placed higher in his Top 15 list (after ties) than the better reviewed 3-star Broken Flowers.

~Edwin

Hustle & Flow – An infectious and absorbing tale with a breakthrough performance from Terrence Howard.

On Deck: Junebug

~Edwin

The New World (2005) - Malick's epic weaves personal journey's of discovery into the greater history of the English colonization of Virginia. Like his previous film, The Thin Red Line, the first half of the film works much better than the 2nd half, benefiting from a narrower focus and unburdened by Christian Bale's too-mannered performance. But it is the first half, and in particular the way that Malick captures the early conflicts between the English and Native Americans, that rises to the artistic heights of his earlier films. One battle scene in particular, the operatic camerawork and score raise to the level of grand tragedy, as if in the space of 5 minutes, Malick is visually describing the entire history of the United States. This scene embodies the power of cinema. - A-

Thumbsucker (2005) - Indie teen-angst/coming-of-age drama about a boy who alternates between sarcastic slacker and conniving approval-seeker. The film's "hook" is that he still sucks his thumb as a security blanket, and the cast, which features Vincent D'Onofrio and Tilda Swinton as the kid's parents, Vince Vaughn as his debate teacher, and Keanu Reeves in his usual dazed & confused mode as a philosophizin' orthodontist. The problem is the stars (besides Reeves) are much more interesting than the teen actor who is not up to the lead role in a film. It also doesn't help that nothing terribly interesting ever happens and the ending rings false. The only thing I found to really appreciate was Vaughn, who turns in a solid dramatic performance without falling back on his comedy schtick. - C+

Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room (2005) - A powerful human story of arrogance, lies, betrayal's, and tragedy. However, I don't think the filmmaker's bring that much to the table. In most cases this is a tabloid style presentation that lacks the finer details of what really happened. For such a well-known story, there isn't a lot of new revelations brought to the table other than some audio tapes of Enron employees waxing on about all the money they're making. It isn't all that different than the stuff 60 Minutes, 20/20, etc were doing at the time. And I'm all for gratuitous nudity, but there was absolutely no reason to feature it in what is supposedly a serious, educational film. - B-

Lila Says (2005) - Romantic drama about an Arab teen living in a French slum who falls in love with a beautiful French-Polish girl. He is shocked and intrigued by her sexual openness as she both taunts and flaunts for him as their relationship develops. While the film at times goes over the top in its racial conflicts as one of the young man's friends becomes brutally violent in his lust for the girl, the relationship at the film's center, and the way it drives the young man into changing his life, makes for an affecting film as well as an erotic one. It also is quite good at portraying the "ripped from the headlines" struggle of immigrants to economically fit in French society. - B+

40 Year old Virgin -

Note this is the unrated DVD edition since theatrical edition isn't available in Widescreen.

A very charming and sweet comedy that sometimes goes over the top into the too vulgar (Kevin Smith) so it treads an interesting place between 'safe' rom-com and college/SNL schtick. It feels almost like a very confused film, but it seems to know exactly what it is. I think some things were extraneous and that it could have been tightened down in several places, but that could just be from the unrated edition.

Steve Carrell is excellent and performs an interesting transformation throughout the film, but his naivete seems somehow or somewhat inconsistent with the flashback experiences we get of his past.

The friends are all very well done, stepping nimbly through the very very stereotypical roles they're handed. "You know how I know you're Gay?" is possibly the best thing about the film. Coldplay. Ouch. reminded me of me and my friends constant videogame ragging on each other. Though I have no idea how he was supposed to successfully be playing Mortal Kombat or even pulling off a fatality holding the controller in the manner he was.

ADam

Well, I don't think Rosenbaum likes assigning star ratings; I distinctly recall him writing about it on a couple of occasions and admitting they're pretty much arbitrary and that he only assigns them because the Reader requires him to do so. In light of that it's not surprising his ratings would be inconsistent. There's also the fact that Rosenbaum has reevaluated films after his initial viewing (I believe his opinion of Mystic River changed for the better after subsequent viewings).

Enron - the Smartest Guys in the Room -

This is so lucid and well put together it could very well take the oscar away from March of the Penguins since it is a subsection and not the academy at large that votes for it.

It also illustrates perfectly--especially in explaining the California situation (and now we're really royally screwed in so many ways with all the debt from the money they sucked out and the governer they appointed for us)--all my personal issues with the stock-market vampire economics.

The film gets better and better as it goes on, starts off a bit blah but it's relentless, compelling and amazing to watch.

Bravo, one of the best films of the year.

Adam

Good Night and Good Luck – By the time the film was over, I wanted more. George Clooney’s film definitely had a lot to say about broadcast journalism and when a disingenuous person shrouds himself under a cloak of patriotism. Both subjects are ripe for discussion for comparison and contrast to certain present day events in the U.S.

At times, the film has the feel of a documentary. Some of the real life footage included actually seemed inappropriately lengthy and, at times, it felt I was watching a C-Span broadcast of a congressional hearing. In another, it looked more like a re-enactment and a compilation of some of the best lines that Edward Murrow had ever given during the years profiled. Further, certain parts dragged like the opening sequence and an extraneous subplot involving Robert Downey Jr. and Patricia Clarkson.

So while the film could have been more powerful, leaner, meatier and expansive in other areas, it is nonetheless incisive and compelling. David Stratheim had total command of his character as Murrow.

Good Night And Good Luck, among other things, shows what investigative broadcast journalism can be when a network’s News Department is not under the control of its Entertainment Division.

¼ (out of four)

~Edwin

Well then go back and append the review. This is (film critique), after all, his career choice profession.

~Edwin

I don't think the Chicago Reader is going to run a revised review of a film that came out months ago and was already reviewed in the same paper. And I suspect if film critics went back and rewrote their old reviews every time they changed their minds about a film, they would have no time to review new films. It's not uncommon.

Incidentally, during my theatrical viewing of Good Night and Good Luck, there was this older couple sitting behind me who took it upon themselves at certain parts of the film that it was the appropriate time for the husband to give his wife historical lessons and talk out loud about the McCarthy years. The incident did very little to alleviate my growing discontent about inconsiderate and rude patron behavior at theaters these days.

~Edwin

The New World -

Malick's latest film is mesmerizing and enrapturing, though I have a few quibbles with the 'whoop whoop' antics of the Naturals and their acting like birds/apes when they first see the ships for the most part it is a fascinating portrayal. Q'Orianka Kilcher delivers a tremendous performance and is incredibly beautiful, John Rolfe may be may single favorite character from 2005, Christian Bale was excellent. This is also probably my favorite Colin Farrell performance. And I love the way Lubeski shot this, making the forest every bit as beautiful and stunning as it truly is without overdoing it in the tiniest bit.


Out of curiosity, if Smith says, "now we are thirty-seven" after the one guy in the chair is found dead, how exactly did they survive the battle where fifteen-twenty were killed, and yet still have another thirty extras milling in the background of the town?

Wonderful film, but it would fit in my top ten right at number 11, primarily because Horner was relentless in keying up 'Gift of a Thistle' from Braveheart throughout the score. Never failed to slam me out of the film, again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again.

Tim Burton’s Corpse Bride excels in animation. And that’s what people mostly will be talking about. Its story, on the other hand, is just ho-hum. At a very economical 77 minutes, it shows the very lean material that an otherwise very talented filmmaker and cast had to work with. Still, it is leaps and bounds better than what other animated studios have put out in the past year.

(out of four)

~Edwin

Wow Adam, now I've just got to see Dragon Inn.

House of Wax
5.5 of 10
This wasn't too bad actually. Not great, definitely some formula, but it also avoids some of the worst habits of modern horror flicks. The body count stays low and the film takes a good 40 minutes getting to the first one. If it weren't for the yucky, glossy photography and direction and a lame final act, it would have been a very strong flick.


Cinderella Man
10 of 10
Perhaps Ron Howard's best film yet, or very close to Apollo 13. Both share one outstanding trait, they make you doubt an outcome that you know is certain. As I doubted the survival of astronauts that I knew survived, I often wondered if somehow I'd misunderstood my Braddock history too.

Ron takes some of the most aggressive directorial steps of his career that give this film an extra bit of electricity, such as the flashes of white pain that shoot through Braddock.

The story itself is incredible and inspirational and a lot of the film's power also comes from that. But Howard somehow avoids playing that too sappy, where it clearly could have been. Instead he lingers more on the darker side of things which helps remind the viewer of just how close to real failure Braddock and his family came.

I'm no fan of much of Goldsman's work, but he and Hollingsworth have written many great scenes worth of powerful and evocative dialog. The scene of Braddock being shown the Max Baer footage and his response to it is extremely good writing.

The boxing action for me was 2nd only to Raging Bull. There is punishment, but not Rocky cartoonish levels. Strategy is made clear in every fight as well. Even better perhaps is that Howard avoids excessive levels of training scenes. There is a bit of montage at one point, but it's a minimal presence.

Finally, the cast is perfect. Crowe may be unlikeable as a star, but as an actor he's remarkable. I think the main reason he and Renee got less notice than Giamatti is simply because people have come to expect it from them.

It might be the 2nd best boxing film ever, and at least rivals Seabiscuit in the ranks of elite sports films.

Oh, its also an outstandingly powerful look at Depression era America, one of the best I can think of.

Now don't say you weren't warned, Seth.

~Edwin

In Her Shoes from director Curtis Hanson (8 Mile, Wonder Boys, L.A. Confidential) is surprisingly a good film anchored by solid performances from Toni Collette and Cameron Diaz.

It tells the story of the roller coaster relationship between two sisters – Rose (Collette), a successful lawyer and Maggie (Diaz), a party girl who refuses to grow up. The dynamics between the two are so good that they bring depth to the characters they play. As a film whose story is centered primary on women, it does have strong male supporting performances especially from Mark Feuerstein who plays another lawyer who takes an interest in Rose.

In Her Shoes is mostly a film about relationships. While its focus is between the two main characters, its grasp goes far beyond that – from a complex family relationship that affects certain romantic involvements to a casual friendship that develops into something more. The screenplay by Susannah Grant is rich in these small treasures and characters that Curtis Hanson is able to manage and put them all together rather beautifully.

In Her Shoes rates ¼ (out of four).

~Edwin

Grizzly Man -

A truly fascinating film with mesmerizing narration by Herzog. Treadwell is an astonishing character and the rhythm and manner in which we discover him through Herzog's editing and his own camera's eye. I think my favorite bit may be when the fox steals the hat, though the lengthy profanity rant against the injustice of everyone and everything was also very interesting.

I'm glad we didn't hear any of the death footage, the way this was handled was perfect.

Not sure where exactly I'll end up putting this, I'd like to let it digest and stew for a while first, but its definitely up with Mad Hot Ballroom as best documentary of the year.

Adam

Brokeback Mountain (2005) - Another film about emotions seething beneath the surface, the story is well known to just about everyone by now. Director Ang Lee does a very good job of taking us inside the lives of the characters and letting us know who they are. The love stories feel authentic, allowing the tragic qualities of the film to resonate. Technically, the film exhibits a high degree of skill, showing off the ruggedly beautiful environment and allowing the actors space to shine.

I did feel it was a stronger film early, when the actors were on equal footing, rather than later when Jake Gyllenhaal's story is given less screentime despite a story and struggle at least as interesting as that of Heath Ledger's character, particularly the relationship with his wife. Still, this is my favorite of the 5 Best Picture Oscar nominees. - B+

The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill (2005) - This is the touching story of a 40something San Francisco man who cares for the wild parrots who live in a nature area near his home. He feeds them by hand, cares for the sick and injured birds, observes their personalities, and keeps diaries of their behavior. His warm and engaging manner quickly overcomes the eccentricities one might associate with this behavior, as, through his eyes and words, we see what he sees and become an intimate observer of this little world.

The film slips a bit in trying to generate a dramatic finale that proves to be a lot less critical than it initially builds the situation as, though it does payoff with a winning final moment. 2005 proved to be a great year for documentaries, and Wild Parrots is one of the best. My 2nd favorite of the year next to Grizzly Man. - B+

Cronicas (2005) - John Leguizamo stars as an ambitious TV journalist trying to ferret out a serial killer in this Equadorian film. The film offers some acting dramatics but the story feels like TV crime show material. Leguizamo attempting to goad a man offering him clues to the serial killer's identity into confessing that he is the killer while his cameraman and assistant tour the countryside conducting interviews and looking for clues. The climax, where Leguizamo's actions have serious, unintended consequences and lead to a crucial moral decision is the highlight of the film but the rest of the film is never as impressive. - B-

The Corpse Bride (C): Unfortunately, this movie just seemed very dull to me, but with nice animation. I kept waiting for it to be over. Was not having a good time. I have felt that way for awhile over the latest animation films. They seem to be bringing out ADD symptoms in me. Basically, I would have rather spent the time doing something else.

The Fog 2005 (D--): Wow! Was this a stinker or was this a stinker? A terrible movie. A terrible horror movie. A terrible rainy day movie. Just terrible all around. I demanded a refund the next day at the video store. Unfortunately, they no longer have a customer satisfaction guarantee.

Junebug is a film about an eccentric family that treads that fine line of films that are made just for eccentricity’s sake. There is so much to like about it including the performances of its cast, especially, a well-deserved supporting Oscar nomination for Amy Adams. On the other hand, there is also so much not to like about it because many of the issues presented remains a big ambiguity and mystery towards the end.

The story pretty much focuses on a young, newlywed couple, Madeleine and George, who finally goes down to North Carolina for business and to meet George’s family for the first time.

One has to wonder, why there is so much animosity from Johnny towards his brother George? Why is Johnny so hostile and detached towards his pregnant wife, Ashley? There are conversations that take place in which the audience are not privileged to.

And if conversations are not taking place between the characters then one has to wonder why? Why, for a bright woman as Madeleine is, she doesn’t ask her husband about Johnny’s attitude towards him? Or why is he so cruel to his pregnant wife? Wouldn’t she want to find out? Why doesn’t George talk to his brother Johnny and patch things up whatever issue they have between them? The film purposely leaves things out for ambiguity and eccentricity’s sake.

In the final analysis, the good performances do not make up for the characters that are only half drawn. Junebug wants to be something more. But in the end, it leaves out so many elements about many its characters that any investment in them generates very little payoff, with the exception of Ashley.

It also doesn’t give us comfort when the last line uttered in the film and viewed within the entire context of the storyline is somewhere along the lines of, "I’m glad that’s over with". For some, that just might be the way they feel about Junebug after seeing it.

Junebug rates (out of four).

~Edwin

It's fun going back to see the reviews I had to skip until I saw the film. Amazing how much we tend to agree on the aspects of the films, even if we vary in how much it bothers us or thrills us.


Hustle and Flow
9 of 10
It only loses the 1 point because it has moments where its a bit too amateurish, Qualls and Anderson are both in a bit over their heads, and the story just can't quite avoid being a happy H'wood narrative for a little bit. But for the most part this is a story with a ton of truth in it, and in the characters. If you come from the streets and try to make it big, this is much more like what you went through than the glamor versions usually sold to us.

Let me borrow from Edwin and repeat that is was "an infectious and absorbing tale with a breakthrough performance from Terrence Howard." Definitely, Howard is just so amazingly powerful here. Glad to see him earn the Oscar nom for this as it would be a shame to have the effort overlooked. I also loved the songs and will be pulling for "Hustle and Flow" to win I think.


Murderball
9 of 10
Yet another great documentary. It was a very good year for creative docs and they spanned a wide range of topics too. What makes this powerful besides the filmmaking itself (which is solid) is the fact that instead of being about the sport it becomes about the people and how the paralysis fails to alter who they are as people at the core. Yet it also shows that at first it does affect people in just that way and puts them in a real identity crisis.

Those are 2 views on the subject that often get overlooked. It brings a humanity to the film that goes beyond the cliched version of "humanity" that these docs often focus on, becoming no better than manipulative H'wood scripts cloaked in the aura of "documentary".


Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room
8.5 of 10
I do agree with Brook on the stripper club stuff, it just seemed manipulative. In fact as FILMMAKING goes, this isn't a great doc. It is much more like the type I just complained about in my Murderball review above, with painfully obvious metaphors and a tendancy to go begging with the audience.

However, I also agree with Adam about the presentation of the facts. Perhaps for Brook the Enron situation was always clear, but I didn't follow it closely enough myself, and so I found the narrative of facts to be extemely powerful. It's the story that holds all the weight here, and it is a story that smacks you in the face and scares you a bit. Many things in the world today feel like "1984" come to life, but this is one of the worst.

It would have been better in the hands of a better filmmaker, but its still a vital tale that will grab your attention, at least if you aren't already overly familiar with the details of every facet.


Into the Blue
3 of 10
Well, after seeing this and F4 within a few weeks I realize quite clearly that Alba is a dreadful actress and her work should be avoided at all costs. I mean really terrible. Of course Paul Walker ain't much to write home about himself. Both are awful

I have no problem with a remake of The Deep (even though its not ), but it ends up being a great example of everything that's wrong with dumb, poorly written cinema today. It's an F'n thriller, and yet the surprise find of drugs has to be given away with the very first, totally unnecessary scene of the drug plane crashing.

Better to just start with the characters, remove the excess plot devices and manipulation, and leave the audience in the dark most of the time. This is exactly what people mean by check your brain filmmaking because the writer assumes you won't get it...ever. So they toss aside the edgy, confused grit of the original film and turn it into a cotton ball soft script that refuses to ever challenge, and therefore interest, the viewer.

It probably gets all its points from just the general overall story, as nothing else in the film warrants any rating points. It does make me want to watch The Deep again though, just to clear the palette.

I was just reviewing some of the last few pages, looking at comments on films I hadn't seen, and it struck me that Inside Deep Throat probably has less nudity in it than Enron: TSGITR. Go figure.

While I don't remember the nudity as being gratuitous, the inclusion of the strip club sequence was nonetheless relevant, in my view, and highlights some of the frivolous spending that some Corporate executives are guilty of these days.

Just recently, the CEO of Savvis Communications Corp. quit over controversies that he ran up to $241,000 in, among other things, lap dances in one night while entertaining other guests for six hours at a strip club.

Here's a little tidbit:


That particular scene in the film in contrast to the millions of dollars that employees lost in their 401k accounts and analyzed in its proper context, is appropriate in its circumstance.

~Edwin