A Second Look At "True Grit"

Last night, I began what I thought would be a live-blog of True Grit. I scrapped it without posting as it was basically a series of line quotations; presumably you don't come to the blog to watch me take dictation.

It's a testament to the Coen Bros singular voice and gift with language that they can launch a movie with a particularly evocative scriptural quotation

"The wicked flee when none pursueth."Proverbs 28:1

...and begin topping it straightaway with their own words. Or what one assumes are their own words since this is an adaptation. Confession: I have not read the Charles Portis novel or seen the John Wayne film. I've been allergic to John Wayne for as long as I can remember and the only successful antihistamine I've yet encountered is Montgomery Clift (see Red River. Literally. See it. What a film!)

True Grit is an extremely mannered film. That's not a qualitative judgment, just an observation. As I stated in my 7 word review "even the horses act with meticulous predetermination." Which is to say --  here comes the qualitative judging -- this particular movie could stand to breathe in a little of its cold night air or just to stumble from its saddle, the way Rooster does once he's fallen to drink. True Grit doesn't feel entirely human. No Country For Old Men benefitted enormously from the Coen Bros machine-like control of cinema. It made the whole film feel malevolent and underlined its thematic death march. That level of inhuman control is not as much to your advantage when you're telling a story about a little girl out to avenge her father's death.

The plot setup, in case you haven't yet seen it, is that Cheney (Josh Brolin) has killed Mattie Ross's (Hailee Steinfeld) father and fled. Since the law doesn't seem to care Mattie hires a Marshall Reuben "Rooster" Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) to track down her daddy's killer. A Texas ranger (Matt Damon) accompanies them. Mattie admires men with grit and she's got the stuff herself, but none of the characters (including Mattie) have much in the way of emotional depth. Some, like the villains, are straight up types / cartoons.

 The performances are often amusing but these roles are but tiny sandboxes in which the actors can play. Matt Damon is quite funny in that casual fraternal way of his. Josh Brolin and Hailee Steinfeld don't fare as well, especially on second viewing, adding a stiff "I'm acting now" vibe to the film's already overt mannerisms. These can't be the easiest lines to say -- think for a moment on how hard it is to speak naturally without contractions -- but sometimes, particularly with Steinfeld, the dialogue is spoken as if it were lines rather than verbalized thoughts. Even in two-character scenes, she's monologuing rather than conversing. I continue to be bewildered by the intense praise and awardage Steinfeld is receiving for what is, at best, a solid performance of an endearing lead role, and what is, at worst, an adequate reading of a role that could have elevated the film if there were more complex subtext. There's precious little nuance or backstory teased out which keeps the role in its one dimensional origin space. Arguably Steinfeld also hits those non-verbal notes to convey Mattie thinking or scheming a bit too hard. Is she telling us that Mattie is less clever than she thinks she is or is this merely overplaying?

Best in show, and by an enormous margin with a star turn that deepens on second viewing, is Jeff Bridges as the sozzled Rooster Cogburn. The actor knows that this already iconic role is a rich opportunity for showmanship and understands its imitations otherwise, so he zeroes in on the voice and the physicality, both of which can be readily aped at home to further endear people to the character and actor. (Pop culture statisticians tell us that "I can't do nuthin' for you, son" has already been quoted with amateur approximations of Rooster's voice at least 36,230 times since December 22nd from people of both sexes and of all ages in over 4 different countries. I'm rooting for "performin' his necessaries" to also hit it big.)

Bridges' best decision is that tilted stare, sometimes with his head just slightly yanked backwards; is Rooster trying to refocus his eyes? 'I mean his eye.' He continually holds that stare a shade too long. There's just so much humor in the way Rooster sizes up each character. Even better is that Rooster has the same reaction to surprising lines that are lobbed his way. He treats them like verbal pistol-cocking and he'd best locate a target.

The Coen Bros are beloved of cinephiles and it's not hard to understand why. Filmmakers like the brothers force you to think about the construction of films, because you suddenly notice that every shot, every cut, every moment represents a choice. The dark side of this is that the mannered films perpetually risk devouring themselves like an oroborus or, be they less aggressive or more pretentious, merely sticking their head up their own arse. Excessive stylization is also anathema to viewers who don't like to be confronted by the man (or men) behind the curtain while they're watching films. But on second viewing, the belabored filmmaking proves more boon than bane though and makes the movie quite a lot funnier.

And as everyone has noted, the technical elements are lovely. Roger Deakins' cinematography is beautifully expressive as well as just being plainly beautiful and the editing is top notch. (It's less discussed than their writing skills but aren't the Coens just as gifted in the editing bay?) Nick once called the dissolve a more "soulful" option than a cut and the Coen Bros lean on it a lot here. It works well for the film.  What True Grit lacks in heart and warmth it nearly makes up for in cool soul.

Best line in the movie? It comes during a fade to black near the beginning of the picture as Mattie crashes at the local undertakers before beginning her trip with Rooster.

"If you would like to sleep in a coffin, it would be all right."

It's a comic line in direct context but it's so much more, too. Could there be a slyer preceding line for such a willful march towards vengeance? And could there be a more perfect line to illustrate the often morbid comic sensibility of the Coen brothers?

Speaking of death...

True Grit really sticks its landing which is so important and so hard for movies to do. [VAGUE SPOILER] The climactic nighttime run, which needs to be the most operatically emotional moment in the movie, is just that. Bridges lends the scene natural gravitas and the brave surreal length of that race against the clock is superbly handled. The 25 years later coda, which we also need, is more surprising but ends the movie on just the right note of starch. Mattie (now played by Elizabeth Marvel, the acclaimed stage actress who we're betting is the new Coen regular) has never been a particularly emotional or fun-loving girl and though "time gets away from us" we know it hasn't actually changed her all that much.

B (up from B-)

Unsung Heroes: The Costumes of The Big Lebowski

Michael C from Serious Film back again, this time with a Little Lebowski Urban Achiever whose work is already iconic even if few know her name.

I'd like to dedicate this one to the costume designers that don't do movies about dead monarchs or glittery musicals.

-Sandy Powell collecting her third Oscar

It's a common refrain among film lovers that flashier work may win the awards, but the subtler, more invisible work is the stuff that really deserves the recognition. But what about the crafts where the flashy stuff is also brilliant as well? Take costume design. In 1998 when the Oscar race came down to Shakespeare in Love vs. Elizabeth I don't think many would deny that those were two very deserving choices. Even though they were the Oscar's favored "Look at me!" more-is-more style nominees, that didn't make the costumes any less superb. And while a lot of people would agree with Powell's statement that contemporary costume design is woefully overlooked, it will still be difficult to skip over Elizabeth to mark your ballot for my choice for that year's best costume design: Mary Zophres for the Coen brothers' The Big Lebowski. 

If you contrast the amount of effort that went into making one of Cate Blanchett's royal gowns against, say, picking out just the right grungy beige cardigan for the Dude, it seems like a pretty indefensible choice on the face of it. But costume design, like any other creative profession, is about making choices. And every choice made about the costumes in Lebowski is a bullseye, right down to getting a T-shirt to properly accentuate the Dude's gut.

Zophres makes every character in the movie instantly recognizable from their attire without ever stretching credibility (at least without stretching it any further than the Coens already did) How many robes did she have to try before she found one that hung off Julianne Moore so perfectly? How many vest and tinted glasses did she go through before she found the perfect combo to give John Goodman that militaristic edge? I could have done a whole post just on John Turturro's legendary hairnet and tight purple bowling outfit alone, to say nothing of all the other bowlers, nihilists, avant garde artists, and young trophy wives who populate the film.

And, hey, if you want traditionally attention grabbing, Zophres and the Coens oblige with a wacked-out Busby Berkeley goes bowling musical showstopper with the most outlandish costumes this side of a Terry Gilliam movie. Sandy Powell was a totally worthy Oscar winner for Shakespeare in Love, but I defy anyone to name me a costume from Shakespeare, or from any other film that year, that has brought more joy to people over the years than Julianne Moore's Viking bowler ensemble.

Kristin Scott Thomas Wanted Tilda's Role in "Burn After Reading"

The latest issue of French Premiere has hit the newsstands 'cross the Ocean. It's a big Harry Potter issue with new photos and such but if you look at the top left hand headline you can see the hallowed name of Kristin Scott Thomas, one of the few British acting giants that didn't teach at Hogwarts. Kristin has lately been headlining French films like Leaving (now in theaters) and, of course, I've Loved You So Long a couple years back. 

I had the pleasure of interviewing her a couple of years ago and she struck me as surprisingly unguarded and honest about her career ups and down. Premiere asked her if she ever watches movies and wishes she had played that role. "Of course, all the time" she answered (!) and then some.

Les rôles de garçon, surtout. Il y a aussi Burn After Reading des frères Coen, dans lequel je voulais tourner, mais ils ont préféré prendre Tilda Swinton. Et je suis aussi très fâchée contre Stephen Frears, parce qu’il ne m’a pas proposé le rôle de la femme de l’écrivain dans Tamara Drewe. Tamsin Greig est formidable, mais quand j’ai vu le film, je n’ai pas pu m’empêcher d’aller voir Stephen pour lui demander pourquoi il n’avait pas pensé à moi. Je rêve de tourner avec lui et il le sait très bien !

 Kristin Scott Thomas and two roles she wanted to play.

My french is of the high school variety but basically she's jealous of the men's roles first and foremost. She also alludes to having auditioned for the Tilda Swinton role in Burn After Reading but the Coen Brothers preferred Tilda. I heart Tilda but I could totally see KST barking orders at George Clooney and John Malkovich while chopping carrots or driving through DC, can't you? She also approached Stephen Frears after seeing Tamara Drewe. 'Why hadn't he thought of her for the role played by Tamsin Greig?'

About the Oscar loss (The English Patient) and the snub for I've Loved You So Long, she has this to say.

Un jour, quand j’aurai 95 ans, ils m’amèneront sur scène et me donneront un prix pour l’ensemble de ma carrière. Mais je n’ai pas vraiment besoin de récompenses. De toute façon, je ne gagne jamais rien, ni loto, ni tombola, ni Oscars.

This is something humorous along the lines of  'I never win anything -- lottery, Oscar -- but I don't need awards.' Maybe when she's 95, they'll bring her up on stage for career honors?

 Kristin and Sergí Lopez in Leaving (Partir)

Kristin Scott Thomas is still inarguably vivid onscreen at 50 and what's more she's still erotically viable, too. Leaving is full of randy sex scenes with Sergi Lopez but my favorite moment in the film is one where her husband (played by Yvan Attal, Charlotte Gainsbourg's real-life man), who has learned of her affair verbally assaults her marking her "sluttish grin" and comparing her to a cat in heat. The moment, which is nasty but unfortunately relatable (given the outright flaunting of her affair), wouldn't work half as well if you hadn't already marked how much she's abandoned herself to desire.

One hopes more directors and casting directors start to notice how well she's maintained her particular screen magic. Maybe her role in Nowhere Boy, in which she's typically excellent playing the key role of John Lennon's (Aaron Johnson) disciplinarian aunt can remind them what they're missing when they don't consider her for the meaty parts. If that pre-fame Beatles biopic takes off at all, it's easy to imagine Oscar traction for her role in Best Supporting Actress.

Can you imagine her in Tilda's Burn role? Do you plan to see Nowhere Boy?
*

Yes, No, Maybe So: "True Grit"

The teaser for our Christmas present from The Coen Bros has arrived. It's our first good look at the second film version of the novel True Grit. Now why can't trailers for musicals admit their genre as readily as all westerns do -- despite westerns being a similarly troubled genre with notoriously fickle public interest. 



As a teaser there's not much to go on yet. But I am happy to say...

yes Joel and Ethan Coen reuniting with "The Dude" is cause for rejoicing all by its lonesome self and the cinematography by Coen regular Roger Deakins looks unsurprisingly purty. I also reckon Carter Burwell stuck with his "protestant hymn" scoring idea that I scooped for y'all from Nashville this spring if the music in the teaser is representative of what we'll hear in the full movie.

no Matt Damon shooting things is less thrilling than it once was.

maybe so Apart from those strong directorial hands, all four of them, this entire thing will rest on Hailee Steinfeld and she's unknown to us. Good luck Hailee!

I'm actually just doing the Yes, No, Maybe So™ from habit. I am 100% YES. And you?
* Jeff Bridges Joel Coen

Take Three: Steve Buscemi

Craig here with Take Three. Today, one of cinema's the most recognisable, ubiquitous and hard-working character actors: Steve Buscemi

Steve Buscemi (seen here in Sally Potter's Rage)

Take One: Every dog has his day

Buscemi was the one who gave Quentin Tarantino’s dialogue much of its snap and vigour in Reservoir Dogs (1992). It’s not so much the opening Madonna chatter I recall first, rather Mr Pink’s “I don’t tip” diatribe that springs prominently to mind. His sneering worldview marked him out as the dog with the least reserve when it came to social conduct and the most contempt when it came to straight, work-a-day life. The rest of the colour-coded pack may have appeared harder, and with “manlier” nicknames, but Mr Pink was far craftier, and suspiciously nervy with it.

The dog days are just beginning for Buscemi as Mr Pink

Buscemi - an actor forever accustomed to playing numerous weaselly types - is of course perfect casting as the dryly sly bank robber. He’s the most unusual suspect in Tarantino’s heist line-up, and the one who, ultimately, sneaks off with the greenbacks. Hiding during the film’s bloody central shootout served him well: he's Pink by name, but yellow by nature. It’s in his quiet, underhand moments in Dogs where I best see the comparison people have often made between some of Buscemi’s and Peter Lorre’s characters: both have played people so slippery that the camera has to be quick to catch their cunning. Could Steve bulk up and play him in a biopic, perhaps?

Nothin' but a gundog: Buscemi fires off for Quentin Tarantino

Buscemi digs into his character to show some revealing aspects to the brightly-monikered gangster-lite he plays. From just before he’s made to tip the waitress, and for a long time after, we see the seeds of his shifty surreptitiousness grow. Buscemi’s often on the periphery, but each time Mr Pink re-enters the narrative his callous apprehension notches up a gear. The words, verve and audaciously-skewed slant on the bank heist movie belonged to Tarantino, but the freshest thesping honours went to Buscemi. He was top dog here.

Take Two: Buscemi in the Bay of Plenty... of destruction and carnage

Buscemi as 'that guy' in The Island

We’re going to... The Island (2005).When Buscemi, as James McCord, says, “Just ‘cause people wanna eat the burger doesn't mean they wanna meet the cow,” and other pithy lines in Michael Bay’s slop-fi extravaganza it’s clear that he’s the droll relief the audience will instinctively warm to. The role is far from the best of his career, but it is somewhat typical of it. It’s a genre staple character for high-concept Hollywood fare, too: like fellow character actors Lawrence Fishburne (in Predators) and Peter Stormare (in Minority Report) Buscemi’s McCord is that 'slightly dubious guy who helps the lead(s) escape when they’re on the run’. Nonetheless, Buscemi’s working relationship with Bay meant that another ridiculous role for him gets Steve’s seal of approval (he was also in Armageddon).

Three smile Island: Buscemi stares at Ewan McGregor's clone

Part of his character's strict duty is to spout exposition at just the right point so that we, the audience, can sit pretty knowing that all the daft techno-malarkey will play out accordingly. Another strict duty includes telling Scarlett Johansson apart from her clone. (Hint: the clone gave the better performance.) Characters like McCord are essential for the survival of expensive, bloated-but-fun mishaps like The Island - so I guess [spoilery sentence incoming... although, as if anyone cares about the plot of the movie now] we should be grateful, then, that McCord got killed off. He's clearly a meat-and-potatoes role, a bill-payer, for Buscemi. But it matters not, as he characteristically added some leftfield charm to proceedings, and in the process got to deliver all the film’s best lines. Both of them.

Take Three: The Coen Brothers x 5½

Buscemi adds the snivel and the savoir faire in Miller's Crossing

I could have stuck a pin in Buscemi's filmography and stood a fair chance of hitting a Coen Brothers movie. Buscemi’s comically absurd side flourished with the extended bit parts he banked for his five-and-a-half Coen collaborations. Their 1990 Prohibition-era crime flick Miller’s Crossing was his first time out with the brothers. He was Mink Larouie, a gay bookie involved with John Turturro’s Bernie Bernbaum. Buscemi plays the jittery double-dealer type capably. He has one big scene with Gabriel Byrne, but casts a minor spell over the remainder of the film. Hats off to him. A year later he was Chet, Barton Fink’s (1992) bizarrely chirpy bellhop, on hand to squint at the dubious goings-on at the strange hotel and cease that ever-reverberating desk bell.

Dude, where's my ball? Buscemi goes logjammin' in The Big Lebowski

A cameo as a beatnik barman in The Hudsucker Proxy (1994) followed, then came the nearest thing to a Coen lead with 1996’s Fargo. As talkative and "kinda funny-lookin'" Carl Showalter, one half of a criminal kidnapping duo, Buscemi essayed one of his best roles - a veritable showcase for his best onscreen mannerisms, and a memorable career centrepiece. The much-loved Donny in The Big Lebowski (1998) was next. He was lovably goofy but pitiable this time, and of course exited the film on a breezy note, posthumously providing a few laughs to boot. And in some folks' eyes his part equalled Fargo for Buscemi best. Lastly, he avoided eye contact with an awkward couple across Tuileries station in the 1st arrondissement in Paris, je t'aime's (2006) fourth segment; it topped off (for now?) the above quintet as a quick-paced and frothy footnote. But when are those brothers going to give him a proper lead role? Or is Buscemi best suited to continually add great characterisation to their creations? Either way, it’s a bankable combination.

Posterized: Coen Bros

An Asian remake of the Coen Bros' debut Blood Simple hit theaters this weekend. It's called A Woman a Gun and a Noodle Shop. So let's mark the occasion of their first remake (unless I missed one?) with a look back at the peaks and valleys of the Coen Bros. They're consistently interesting filmmakers and often inspired (see Robert's 'Directors of Decade' column) but have you seen their whole filmography?

Here we go...

Blood Simple (1984) | Raising Arizona (1987) | Miller's Crossing (1990)

Barton Fink (1991) | The Hudsucker Proxy (1994) | Fargo (1996)

The Big Lebowski (1998) | O Brother Where Art Thou? (2000) |
The Man Who Wasn't There (2001)

Intolerable Cruelty (2003) | The Ladykillers (2004) | No Country For Old Men (2007)

Burn After Reading (2008) | A Serious Man (2009) | True Grit (2010)

How many have you seen? How would you rank them? It's a pretty consistently fascinating filmography, percentage wise. Well done, Joel and Ethan. Do you think Oscar was correct to focus mostly on Fargo for the 90s and No Country for the Aughts? And am I the sole person alive who wishes Holly Hunter were nominated for Best Actress for Raising Arizona in 1987 instead of Broadcast News?

I'm getting more curious about True Grit (2010) as we near its release. That Carter Burwell evening I attended helped stoke my interest and then of course there's the cast and general quality of their filmography to recommend it, trailer unseen. Perhaps I should read the novel. Have any of you read it?
*

Iron Baby... and Other Babies

Have you seen this Iron Baby trailer? Kids these days. They got tech skills in diapers.



Confession: I went to see Babies last weekend while I was in Boston. My girl Amy suggested it.

Amy and me in NYC --->

We tried not to weep copiously into our popcorn bucket since we are both barren through circumstance (i.e. single or gay). Babies wasn't exactly a documentary so much as four parallel home movies without commentary other than perhaps what you're projecting on to it. I have nothing to add to the New Yorker's review which is brill. This moment David Denby singles out had us roaring:

I detected only one satirical sally: The San Francisco baby, Hattie, and her mother attend some sort of New Age group-parenting session. The mothers, raising their arms in supplication, sing a ghastly hymn to the earth, at which point Hattie heads for the door.

Boy did Hattie want out of the room! Boston audiences approved.

Our other favorite shared bit in the movie was the Japanese baby Mari's absolute hissy fit whenever she so much as looked at the pieces of a peg and hole game. So so funny... a total drama queen in training. Have any of you seen it yet? It's already one of the most successful docs ever. But maybe you'll avoid it like the plague. The Boyfriend mock screamed when the trailer played in front of a movie some months ago. Dramatically placed title cards "BABIES... ARE... COMING" will sound like a threat to the child averse.

When Amy and I exited the theater we spontaneously began quoting Holly Hunter by way of Raising Arizona.

You go right back up there and get me a toddler.
I need a baby, Hi. They got more than they can handle.
I want that baby, Hi.
[sobbing] ILOVEHIMSOMUCH

Holly Hunter is magic. The End.
*

Carter Burwell on Scoring the Coen Bros True Grit

more from the Nashville Film Festival

As an addendum to the "We Can't Wait: True Grit" post, I thought I'd share a few notes from my favorite special event at the 2010 Nashville Film Festival "Carter Burwell: One on One". Throughout the event last night, acclaimed film composer Carter Burwell spoke frequently about his work with the Coen Bros. He counts Miller's Crossing (1990) as his favorite working experience ever because he was given three months rather than the common three to six week time frame. When asked for a favorite score from his own career he offered up only "I like Fargo but I don't really have favorites."

The audience at the well attended event seemed especially intrigued by any hints as to what the soundscape for the upcoming True Grit (2010) might sound like.

"We don't always see eye to eye." Burwell noted when discussing his 14th collaboration with Joel and Ethan Coen. But when it came to the conception of the True Grit score "We both had the same idea at the same time: Protestant hymns." The composer went on to explain that the lead character, Mattie Ross (to be played by Hailee Steinfeld) was so convinced of her own righteousness that they all thought Protestant hymns would be a fine way to play with her misplaced rectitude.

He is just beginning preliminary work ("research mode") while True Grit films in Santa Fe and warns that sometimes the early concept isn't what they end up going with at all. You might not hear any Protestant hymns in other words. But it's their early shared concept. "I like having a concept". He's currently looking for appropriate hymn recordings but griped that "they all sound too sweet." He has an idea for a sort of call and response feel to the theme, a solo instrument echoing back since Mattie is marching off alone, determined into dangerous territory to find her father's killer and recruiting others to join her.

Did he feel any pressure to conform to the sounds of classic Western film scores? No pressure at all. When asked about the 1969 film he reconfirmed that this is not a remake. "We're trying to go back to the book as much as possible and ignore that film."


In case you missed any of the "We Can't Wait: Summer and Beyond" series, here they are: The "orphan" picks Nathaniel (Burlesque), JA (Love and Other Drugs), Jose (You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger), Craig (What's Wrong With Virginia?), Robert (True Grit) and Dave (Brighton Rock); Team Film Experience Countdown #12 It's Kind of a Funny Story, #11 Sex & the City 2, #10 Scott Pilgrim vs the World, #9 Somewhere, #8 The Kids Are All Right, #7 The Illusionist, #6 Toy Story 3, #5 Inception, #4 Rabbit Hole, #3 Never Let Me Go, #2 Black Swan and #1 The Tree of Life.

We Can't Wait: TRUE GRIT

Robert here to discuss my most anticipated orphan.

True Grit
Directed by: Joel and Ethan Coen
Starring: Jeff Bridges, Josh Brolin, Matt Damon, Barry Pepper, Hailee Steinfeld

Synopsis: A tough guy U.S. Marshal is hired by a 14-year old girl to help hunt down the man who killed her father.
Brought to you by: Paramount
Expected release date: December 25

The Coen's latest movie isn't exactly going to satisfy any great longing we've been feeling. After all, the brothers' have been turning out a movie a year since 07. Jeff Bridges, great though he is, was everywhere this past award season. And we all know the film courtesy the 1969 classic. So what's there to be excited about?

If you, like me, believe the Brothers Coen are possibly our greatest working filmmakers, then no overexposure can temper your excitement. The nihilism of the old west fits in nicely with the Coen's view of the universe and it just be fun to see just how much of the metaphysical they throw into the mix. The last time Jeff Bridges worked with the Coen Brothers he gave us one of the most iconic characters of the past twenty five years. It may be too soon to say "back-to-back wins" but the late December release date suggests Paramount thinks there's Oscar potential somewhere. Even if Joel, Ethan, and Jeff have won recently, there's Matt Damon, there's Josh Brolin and there's way overdue Roger Deakins.

The cowboy look suits him.

How about you? Have the copious amounts of Coen and Bridges we've gotten lately make you more ambivalent toward this one or are you still itching for another helping?

Oscar's Twin Costuming Champs and 2010 Predictions

Press play for a twin-riffic soundtrack to this post


The April Fool Oscar predictions are coming right along. I call them April Fool not because I'm joking but because who the hell knows. It's a foolish practice. Yet foolish can be fun. If you're curious about how well I do before any of the films are seen you can see the past year scores below the predictions. I do pretty well just by imagining what might come to pass. Everyone is good at predicting right before the Oscars (we've seen months of winnowing down and precursors to study) but it's a much tougher game before you even fully know the players.

Robert Redford with actors on the set of The Conspirator.
Costumes by Louise Frogley, still waiting for Oscar nomination #1

In Costume Design, I'm curious whether Colleen Atwood (Alice in Wonderland, Rum Diary) and Sandy Powell (The Tempest, Shutter Island), Oscar's favorite working designers, can keep up their constant friendly battle for another year. They've both been nominated 8 times within the last 16 Oscar years. Which means that 50% of the time they're nominated. But check out this weird siamese twin Oscar statistic: Atwood and Powell have amassed a total of 5 wins between them, always in years when they were both nominated. And they've only competed directly 5 times. Which means that neither of them win unless the other one is nominated. That's so weird. And delightful. It's deweirdful.


Is that siamese twin soundtrack uptop done playing, now? If it is, I highly recommend another siamese twin themed musical... "Evelyn Evelyn" by Amanda Palmer (of the Dresden Dolls) and Jason Webley. I SO want it to be a stop motion movie or short, right now. It's so strange and winning and creepy and I love that Amanda is officially with Neil Gaiman (Coraline, Stardust) because what an obviously sympatico match that is, you know?

But where were we? Yes, costume design.

Beyond the twin golden powerhouses (Atwood & Powell) whom the cinema would obviously be naked without, my main costume design preoccupation each year is this: which longtime fab designer will nab their first nomination? Consider the following fab five worth rooting for (should they prove worthy this year, I mean) who have remarkably never been Oscar nominated...

• Kym Barrett (The Green Hornet)
  She famously put angel wings on Claire Danes in Romeo + Juliet and was a crucial player in the influential iconography of The Matrix. She even does animated costumes. Still no nomination. What will it take?
  
• Louise Frogley (The Conspirator)
  This British designer has an intimate knowledge of George Clooney's measurements and you don't. Her filmography includes 5 Clooney movies (including black and white beauties Good Night, and Good Luck. and The Good German and those aren't easy to costume) And who doesn't love the costuming choices in Bull Durham? Someone had to choose that striped underwear for Tim Robbins "Nuke LaLoosh".
  
• Michael Kaplan (Burlesque)
  He recently gave the Federation uniforms a reboot for Star Trek. And he often does brilliant, clever and stylish work on contemporary films like Fight Club, Mr & Mrs Smith or Big Business to name a few. But yeah, Oscar doesn't like contemporary work. But here's the real failure of Oscar discernment. He costumed freaking Blade Runner (1982) and didn't win. Adding insult to injury, he wasn't even nominated!!! I hope this costuming assignment (Christina Aguilera and Cher!) really inspires him this time around.

• Mary Zophres (True Grit, Iron Man 2)
  A lot of the technical crew from the Coen Bro's enviable filmography have been recognized for their efforts. Not so with Zophres who put that bowling ball bra on Julianne Moore in The Big Lebowski among other visual triumphs from their ouevre. She's costumed 10 of their 15 features including costume heavy assignments like The Man Who Wasn't There and O Brother Where Art Thou?
  
• Penny Rose (Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time)
  She's done British period pieces (Carrington, Another Country), big budget musicals (Evita) and one behemoth franchise in which she definitely aided in shaping one of the screen's most indelible and beloved characters (Pirates of the Caribbean). So there's versatility, bait and plentiful inspiration in her filmography. What gives with the Oscar shunning?
  

Which costume heavy movies are you looking forward to this year. Do you pay attention to the invisible creative powers behind the movies you love?

the costume design page

In Space No One Can Hear You Link

Godxillary Alien vs. Pooh. Ohhh, that's just so wrong.
People celebrates Why We Love Julia Roberts. They have 20 reasons but forget to mention numero uno "she boosts our sales / pageviews when we display her thusly"
First Showing Michael Bay sounds intelligent (gasp) when he expresses concerns about 3D. But, frankly, I don't understand why he's having the meetings at all about 3D conversion. Transformers 3 hasn't started filming yet, so why not do it for real rather than worry about that post-production shortcut that Clash of The Titans went with?


"Stroobs" a collage of Meryl Streep cleavage (via jazzt). haha. The internet is a delightful place
Monkey See terrific piece on film criticism and the eternal confusion about what it's supposed to be
Screen Rant Angela Bassett joins the Green Lantern cast in potentially lucrative role for her. I'm all about Bassett getting more work, however that can happen. So, tentative "yay!" even though I still think Green Lantern woulda worked better as a television series with a complex sci-fi allegory bent (a la Battlestar Galactica)

Fun video from Film in Focus: Karina Longworth of LA Weekly on the Coen Bros classic, The Big Lebowski



The Dude abides.

Netflix Patterns: Everyone Loves Button

Have you ever wondered what other people in your neighborhood might be renting on DVD? I know when I see someone holding a red Netflix envelope I always wish I had x-ray vision to see which disc was inside. The NYT have a fascinating map about rentals by region in 2009. Apparently The Curious Case of Benjamin Button was the #1 most rented overall. But it's fun to flip through various cities to see how a movies popularity shifts from region to region and even zip codes. For example, in my neighborhood (Harlem) Doubt, ...Button and The Soloist (???) were the top dvds. Weirdness.


The Coen Bros Burn After Reading is popular in NYC but even more popular just across the East River in Brooklyn. Deep deep red in one spot so I clicked over to confirm: hipster Williamsburg. Of course!


Zeéeeee's latest "movie" New in Town was a funny example. It was pretty unpopular in any urban areas but totally unpopular in San Francisco and Oakland... Much more rental friendly in Minnesota which happens to be the very place found in the movie that teaches city girl Renée how to let her flat-ironed big city hair loose.

Mostly these maps just confirmed what we already know. Mainstream hits are popular in suburbs and divisive artier films are much more popular in densely populated areas. Take the world's most improbable double feature: Paul Blart: Mall Cop and Rachel Getting Married. They're almost polar opposites.


Practically no one on the island of Manhattan cared to rent the comedy. Is that because we don't have malls? (No, the "Mall of Manhattan" doesn't count). But parts of New Jersey were totally into it. Those same parts were not about to put up with Kym's emotionally complex shenanigans in Rachel Getting Married. They weren't having it!


Neurotic city-dwellers, however, embraced the awkward toasting and raised their glasses to Anne Hathaway's killer performance.

What do you suspect people are watching where you live? And are you as nosey as I am to know what influences your neighbor's movie choices?
*

Year in Review Pt 1: Baffling Comedy and Over Cooked Drama

Part 1 of ??? (Possibly Many)

Receive with simplicity everything that happens to you.
~"Rashi" according to A Serious Man.

I rarely make time to rewatch movies (so many new and old films to see for the first time) which is a shame since a second look can be valuable. Some critics and civilians are loathe to admit that their minds are changeable or that their opinions aren't the be all/end all, but why? There's always new points of view to consider and life experiences that should shift your paradigms.

Huh?

Before I get to the movies I feel strongly about (i.e. worst and best), I thought I'd share the three which I'm not sure I "got": The Coen Bros A Serious Man, Lars von Trier's Antichrist (my gut reaction) and Jody Hill's Observe and Report.

All three verge on the deeply misanthropic which can be something of a turn-off even if you're otherwise amused by the nifty formal control, shock aesthetics, or pitch black comedy. I'd love to hear opinions from readers on where these movies succeed or fail because honestly, I didn't know what to make of them. Or, rather, I am unsure if what I made of them will last. I currently think the first two in particular are wildly over acclaimed but I'm open to being talked out of that. At the very least all three feel like exactly the picture the filmmaker(s) set out to make. There's something to be said for movies that don't feel at all about confused about themselves... even when they prompt confusion in the viewer.

Hyperbole Gone Wild
Since this happens to be one of my intermittent "consensus" years, I actually like most of the films and performances that have been racking up the Oscar-buzz. That makes kicking the movies while they're up more difficult. Maximum flexibility required. So approach the following list of 'ridiculously overpraised' with the understanding that none of them are bad. So, let's also note the silver linings.

Over Appreciated Movies

[This section of the year-end review is dedicated to you-know-who. I've had to declare him ineligible for this annual tradition lest his movies clog up the list each and every year, including this one]

04 Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Yeah, yeah, I enjoyed it okay. But why isn't everyone sick of this franchise yet? Two more to go still? I'm not sure if I have the stamina. Silver Lining: Jim Broadbentwas a welcome cast addition.

03 The Cove
See previous post. I haven't seen much of its competition but it's tough to imagine that there isn't a better documentary getting shafted with its trophy haul (10+ prizes already). From the limited docs I've seen this year I much preferred Prodigal Sons (genius) Anvil! The Story of Anvil! (multi-layered) and Valentino the Last Emperor (entertaining!) for starters. Silver Lining: Dolphins are awesome.

02 The Hangover
I avoided this film for a long time. Frat boy comedy has never been my thing and I'd heard about the "Dr. Faggot" jokes and the inappropriate justifications of the same ('that's the way people talk!' for a film that otherwise doesn't worry a lick about representing reality). Watching it proved to be quite a rollercoaster. For the first 15 minutes I was bored solid and annoyed by the sexism/homophobia, generic setup and pedestrian filmmaking. Then, suddenly, the movie became consistently hilarious for a full half hour (which is more than most comedies can claim) as the inexplicable absurdities piled up: the chicken, the tiger in the bathroom, the missing tooth, the police car. The absurdly ballooning 'what the hell happened' scenario provided lots of funny which then slowly deflated, punctured by increasingly less funny 'here's what happened' details. Then in the final half hour the film returned to its generic misogyny. The takeaway: Boys will be boys, warts and all. Ya gotta love 'em! [back slap!] Women on the other hand... If you have to put up with them (and you do, unfortunately) only blissfully ignorant wives and sexual bimbos are acceptable options. Silver Lining: And yet... lots of laughs.

01 A Single Man
I'm sure some of you may feel that this drama about a gay man named George grieving his dead lover belongs in the grouping above. 'You'll change your mind about it! It's great!!!' But I can't shake the film school feeling that Tom Ford's debut gave me. Some people see enormously moving beauty. I see enormously self-conscious imitative beauty. Not that that can't blossom into something better. I look forward to Ford's next film. I just wish people hadn't been as quick to shower him with praise. George practically drowned in all of it in the dream sequence! What will there be left to say if Ford makes a truly great film next? Silver Lining: the original European trailer is so flawless and hypnotic that if we were grading trailers rather than the movies they're advertising this one would be an "A". The same grade applies to Colin Firth's heartbreaking performance, especially in the first half.

Inexplicably Praised Performances

It would be a gross exaggeration to say "worst" when it comes to these two performances but both are misjudged. That they should be in contention for acting prizes over more complex, careful and rewarding work would be maddening but for the Career Reward aspects of year-end hoopla. Both of these actors can claim fine "nomination worthy" turns in the past. And by "past" I do not mean earlier in December when these performances emerged.

Maggie Gyllenhaal as "Jean Craddock" in Crazy Heart
One of my friends recently told me I had taken "bad mood pills" the day I saw Crazy Heart. If reviews could speak they would undoubtedly say the same. It's just that I felt that I'd seen the movie a hundred times before and that it meandered dully whenever it drifted away from the musical performances (quite good) and into the romance and addiction drama. Jeff Bridges is terrific as "Bad Blake" but his excellence didn't feel revelatory to me in the way that seems to be elevating the film for others. Since when is Jeff Bridges not terrific when he's front and center? How can this be a revelation to people after The Big Lebowski, Star Man, The Door in the Floor, The Fabulous Baker Boys and Insert More Movies Here? I bought Bad Blake's instant lost puppy insinuation into Jean's life but I didn't buy her ready acceptance of the same. The conflict that arises in their relationship you expect but Jean's reaction to it was puzzling. It didn't feel at all organic to the character as Maggie had been playing her up till then. What about this woman would have made her cast her lot so quickly with such an obviously "Bad" man? She doesn't play the backstory. You have to get it from the screenplay instead. Did Maggie misplace her script or did they edit out a crucial character detail scene?

I still love My Maggie G and it's not like I don't root for her to walk Oscar's red carpet quite frequently (If there's a big surprise in Oscar's Supporting Actress list maybe it'll be her?) but it's hard not to expect more from her after the electricity and depth of her star turn in Sherrybaby (among others).

Stanley Tucci as "George Harvey" in The Lovely Bones
Momentum has been building to give this fine actor/writer/director his first Oscar nomination for Supporting Actor. I can totally support that (see previous Tucci enthusiasm). But if we're going to do that can't it be for Julie & Julia wherein he effortlessly supported the movie and the star (Meryl Streep) and did so with great charm and well judged simplicity. In The Lovely Bones he adds so many affectations to the killer that one wonders why the neighbors haven't come at him with pitchforks years ago. And all of it is unnecessary since Peter Jackson and his production team are already telegraphing what a terrible pervert he is through camera angles, lighting, makeup and wardrobe. George Harvey is a killer but this performance is O-V-E-R-K-I-L-L.

Ways to Be Wicked

That's only one man's opinion, mine. And yours? Which 2009 films and performances did you struggle to appreciate when everyone around you was swooning for them? And are you glad I declared a certain film ineligible so you didn't have to hear me bitch about it?

Tomorrow: Hell's Multiplex: The Worst of the Year.

*

Directors of the Decade: Joel and Ethan Coen

Robert here, continuing my series of the directors that shaped the past 10 years. This week’s directors have achieved new heights critically and commercially in the past ten years. They may be (collectively) the greatest director(s) of the decade. I speak of: Joel and Ethan. The Coen Brothers.

Number of Films: Seven
Modern Masterpieces: Two. No Country for Old Men and A Serious Man.
Total Disasters: The Ladykillers has maybe a few good things going for it.
Better than you remember: Burn After Reading was very much a love-it-or-hate-it film. If you hated it, it’s far better than you remember.
Awards: Director and Picture Oscars for No Country for Old Men
Box Office: That film is also their best performer w/ over 75 mil.
Critical Consensus: ...and received their most consistent raves.
Favorite Actor: If you said George Clooney, you’d be right! Also Stephen Root and Richard Jenkins. Three films each.

Let’s talk about:
Meaninglessness. It’s the major thematic thread through the Coen Brothers’ filmography, and best describes their view on life; a sequence of meaningless events full of sound and fury signifying nothing. But there’s a stylistic thread in the brothers’ films as well. It’s their favorite way to tell their tales of meaningless... By mixing and mis-matching various genres. The Coen brother’s films can reasonably be separated into two kinds. Those that are heavier on the genre fun (like The Big Lebowski where although it’s clear that The Dude’s misadventures add up to nothing the enjoyment comes from watching the stoner comedy meet Raymond Chandler). Or those that are heavier on the meaningless motif (like Fargo where the combined comedy and crime genre’s are essential, but the heart of the film lies within Marge’s “and what for?” monologue.)

Ethan, Joel, Roger

The Coen Brothers started off the decade with three films heavy on genre play and ended by digging deeper into the futility of their universe than ever before. O Brother Where Art Thou? is titled after a fictional film from Preston Sturges’ Sullivan’s Travels. And the film is their definitive love-letter to the 1930’s comedies that have inspired them from Raising Arizona onward. Sprinke in a little religious allegory and a lot of Greek myth (not to forget the contributions of T. Bone Burnett, one of their finest collaborators) and you’ve got classic Coen genre goofiness. Of course even after our fugitive protagonists save the day and get pardoned, they still find themselves senselessly at the whim of the film’s villain, followed by a Deus ex Machina ending that, from any other director, would be frustratingly unnatural. But not in the world of the Coens. After this came The Man Who Wasn’t There, the brothers’ definitive love-letter to film noir. Just as its predecessor the delights of the film come from watching noir elements congeal with staples of old time sci-fi and allusions to Nabakov’s Lolita (with a lot of aesthetic help from Roger Deankins, another invaluable contributor). And just as before not much that happens has any real meaning. It’s life. Man against a world out to punish him via ambivalence.

The Coen Brothers’ winning streak would tank a bit with their next film, Intolerable Cruelty. As long as they were making genre-based love letters, they might have as well thrown in screwball comedy. But they barely loaded the genre blender and as a result the film seems too safe (though it’s saved by Clooney’s inspired performance and an aside with a character named Wheezy Joe). Forget homage, The Ladykillers, their next film was an all-out remake, and like most remakes, came off as rather unnecessary. But the prospect of character after character getting bumped off in meaningless ways must have appealed to the Coens. And once again the film’s most worthwhile asset is its leading performance (nice to see Tom Hanks chew up the scenery comedically again).

Then, a high-water mark. Somehow The Academy Awards went for No Country for Old Men, the Coen Brother’s most nihilistic picture of the decade and a good example of the second kind of Coen film (light on genre, heavy on theme). As with Fargo the Coen Brothers create a crime film where each new futile development adds up to little more than additional death, while using the film’s protagonist to view the lunacy and ponder what it all means. As with Fargo, the true protagonist doesn’t show up for 30 minutes and is left with no real answer. Though Sheriff Ed Tom learns what Sheriff Marge may already know: the world is no place for reasonable people. But “after a while you just have to try to get a tourniquet on it.” And that’s it. As for the exciting plot, the chases, the shootouts, the intrigue… there could never be a satisfying ending to it. And plenty of viewers were upset. Feel that ambivalent universe yet?

MacGuffin

In Burn After Reading, the Coen’s again use a character who wonders out loud about it all. “What did we learn?” asks the CIA man. But “I don’t know” is really the only possible response. This isn’t a deep thematic contemplation. This is another fun-with-genre outing. What genre you ask? Only the most vogue of the decade, the (god I hate this term) hyperlink film, where the lives of random strangers intertwine to create some kind of poignant statement on the world. But the Coens mock it. They know that these films are so overly dependent on ridiculous coincidence and stupid characters that what was supposed to be meaningful can only be meaningless… perfect for the Brothers’ Coen.

Finally the Coens returned to thematic territory. Not that they don’t have fun combining the Book of Job with comedy elements. But essentially they’re again asking more questions about the meaning of meaninglessness, of the ambivalence of the world. Larry Gopnik has to know if the universe is out to get him, yes or no. But the answer is either unknowable like the Goy’s teeth, or no good can come from finding out, like the tale of the dybbuk. Better to let the answer be yes and no (like Schrodinger’s cat). Don’t look in the box. Embrace the mystery. Enjoy the parking lot (as Jerry Lundegaard never got to).

And the Coens continue to explore the universe, utilizing more techniques and exploring even far more territory than I’ve been able to describe here. Their films are filled with layers, yet crammed with delights. Over the past decade, no directors have managed to combine the cerebral and the comical with such success. And in the last ten years their status has grown from quirky and clever cult directors to two of the best minds working in American cinema.