In memory of Ismail Merchant ("A Room with a View")
Ismail Merchant of the famous Merchant/Ivory films (A Room with a View, Howards End, The Remains of the Day) is dead at 68.Read more
J. Robert Parks' 2005 Summer Movie Preview
J. Robert Parks, who frequently contributes to the review archive at Looking Closer's movie page, stops by with a preview of this summer's big screen features...Read more
Contactmusic reports U2 to re-record "Pop" album!
Personally, I like Pop the way it is. But you can bet I'd be in line on release-day to hear what the band intended the album to be.Read more
Today's specials: Bono corrects Chicago reporter. Summertime fiction. And the man playing Orbison.
Today's specials:
- Greg Kot gets a memorable interview with Bono.
- Jonathan Rice gets cast as Roy Orbison in I Walk the Line.
On my radar for summertime fiction:
- Freddy and Fredericka, a new novel by Mark Helprin described as a satire about a future king and queen of England slumming in the States.
- Od Magic, the latest from Patricia McKillip, my favorite living fantasy writer. And she's got another one coming too--Harrowing the Dragon.
- A Feast for Crows, by George R. R. Martin, one of my wife's favorite novelists.
As always, a wide range of responses...
CT Movies has updated its feedback page, and there are some interesting responses to the Kingdom of Heaven coverage.
There are also the typically varied displays of enthusiasm and protest over reviews of Kicking and Screaming, Monster-in-Law, and Crash...
posted 05/23/05
Regarding Kicking and Screaming, I must object to one aspect of your review that, at some level, shows a lack of respect for male sexuality. Your review mentions (with great tolerance) the crude jokes concerning male genitalia. Would you have been equally tolerant if the movie had been infused with crude jokes about female genitalia? Moreover, there are several scenes where boys are hit hard in the groin with soccer balls for the sake of "humor." Similarly, a man is hit hard several times with a tetherball in the groin for the sake of "humor." Are these kinds of "jokes" consistent with Christian values? Would you have similar tolerance for "comic" scenes where women/girls are sexually injured? I think not.
Doug Wellsposted 05/23/05
In your review of Monster-in-Law, your Family Corner section mentions premarital sex, gay relationships, multiple marriages, etc., as things "for parents to consider." But shouldn't this section be a warning to Christians of all ages and not just children? Shouldn't we guard ourselves against these things and not just guard our children? I would prefer that the "For Parents to Consider" section be called "For Christians to Consider, "because what we consider unsuitable for our children is also what God considers unsuitable for his children.
Karen Workmanposted 05/23/05
I'm very impressed with your reviews; they're insightful, informed and well-written. As a Christian college student who enjoys seeing and analyzing films for their artistic and cultural merit, I really appreciate your even-handed treatment, particularly of Crash. So many Christian reviews come from an overly moralistic perspective that often completely misunderstands the film they are addressing. I was struck by your awareness that while some films should be only seen by adults, their use of explicit content is at times appropriate. That is something that is missing from the Christian understanding of art and culture, and many kudos to you guys for breaking the mold.
David Sessions
Of course, Workman's letter begs the question--God communicates that it's unsuitable for Christians to behave in these ways, but does that mean it's unsuitable for Christians to pay attention to stories in which these behaviors take place? If so, we'd better throw out the Bible, which is full of unsuitable behavior.
I doubt we'll ever eradicate from Christian circles the narrow-minded idea that art should reflect only the world they want to see, rather than the world they live in. But at least things have changed, and now Christian film criticism is moving deeper into art interpretation and farther from reactionary alarm-sounding.
Having said that, I'm not sure I'm comfortable saying "Monster-in-Law" and "art" in the same blog post.
PG, PG-13, or R?
How should the MPAA distinguish between PG, PG-13, or R ratings?
I find it's very easy to point out when they've done it wrong, but tough to lay out a plan for how to do it right.Read more
Cannes 2005 Winners! Dardennes, Jarmusch, and Tommy Lee Jones!
The directors of Rosetta and The Son, two films I dearly love, have just won the coveted Palme D'Or at Cannes for their latest film The Child. America may not know it, the Academy is too narrow-minded to appreciate it, but the Dardennes Brothers are two of the finest filmmakers in the world.
Read more
Madison (2005)
This review was originally published at Christianity Today.
•
Jim Caviezel passed up a chance to be a character in one of the best comic book movies ever made. The actor recently told The Seattle Times that he was cast as Cyclops for the original X-Men movie, a box-office and critical hit in 2000. But then another script came along, and Caviezel, who says he was "literally in costume as Cyclops," bolted the X set and took the other acting gig instead.
The Passion of the Christ? Nope. That would come later. Caviezel passed up the chance to be a superhero with "optic fire blasts" to instead play the role of …. a boat racer. That's Caviezel's gig in Madison, a film that, though shot in 2001, had been shelved for more than three years before hitting theaters today.
Back when Caviezel made his decision, no one suspected that Bryan Singer's big gamble would become the best blockbuster franchise of the recent comic-book adaptation surge. At the time, Madison might have seemed like a wise choice. That's a shame. As action movies go, the X-Menflicks are bursting with creativity, passion, and directorial imagination, and they're surprisingly meaningful and relevant. Madison, on the other hand, is flat, formulaic, and forgettable.
It's hard not to wonder if William Brindley's lackluster movie about hydroplane racing was shelved because of its flaws. It may be that it's coming to theatres now only because the name "Caviezel" is popular with a sizeable audience, thanks to Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. Madison is revving with good intentions, but it runs a predictable course with no distinct style to set it apart. And it's a hero story that asks us to accept some rather questionable decisions.
The true story of hydroplane hero Jim McCormick certainly sounds matinee-worthy. In 1971, Madison, Indiana was a coal-mining community in an economic crisis. Woolworths was closing, and Midwest Barge and Coal was losing laborers to better jobs elsewhere, making the town "obsolete." The best local option for recreation and distraction was the Ohio River, perfect for hydroplane races. When the opportunity to host a major hydroplane championship—the Gold Cup—ignited the ambitions of local hydroplane enthusiasts, boating fans witnessed an against-all-odds success story on national television.
John Mellencamp provides nostalgic narration as Mike McCormick, reminiscing about his legendary father Jim (Caviezel), a former hydroplane pilot and a decent, simple soul who takes on the burden of saving the town. Jim's heart bleeds for his frustrated neighbors and their lifestyle and tradition, which are threatened by the shift in the transportation industry from waterways to roads. He decides to lead the fight for Madison's right to host the Gold Cup. First he must raise the $50,000 deposit necessary to host the race, or else the pressure applied by the villainous San Diego and corporate interests will spoil the fun. Second, he must prepare the community-owned hydroplane—Miss Madison—for its chief competition: the slick, cutting-edgeMiss Budweiser. Through his efforts, he also finds an opportunity to face his fears, work through a loss, and show his son what some guts, determination, and mechanical skills can accomplish.
Despite its weaknesses, Madison is made watchable by James Glennon's cinematography, by its period authenticity (complete with clips from ABC's "Wide World of Sports"), and by the earnest efforts of its cast. Caviezel portrays Jim as convincingly solemn and principled. As the narrator's younger self, Jake Lloyd shows about the same range of emotion and talent that he exhibited as young Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars, Episode One: The Phantom Menace. (Make of that what you will.) Performing the thankless task of Jim's shortsighted wife Bonnie, Mary McCormack (yes, a McCormack playing a McCormick) invests her bland dialogue with emotion and personality. Big screen veteran Bruce Dern brings wry humor to his cookie-cutter role of the Wise Old Man, the Yoda of hydroplane racing who shows up with crucial know-how when the going gets tough.
Some moviegoers concerned about the lack of good clean family films will respond with hearty applause. Aside from a scene in which one character reprimands another for swearing, the language is as tame as the action. You can tell the good children of hydroplane racers from the bad children of hydroplane racers—how? The bad children go to R-rated movies!
But just because a film lacks profanity, sex, and violence doesn't mean it's blameless. Unlike John Sayles' Sunshine State, which struck a healthy balance in its portrayal of an American community and its growing pains, highlighting the pros and cons of change, Madison only reinforces stereotypes that "old-fashioned" means "good" while "modern" means "bad." The Home-Cooked Good Guys are earthy, earnest, innocent small-town folk, and the Big City Bad Guys sneer, snarl, mock, behave with merciless arrogance, and—gasp—have long, slick hair.
Perhaps the most troubling thing about Madison is what it says—or doesn't say—about marriage, family, and responsibility. We're supposed to sympathize with McCormick and root for him when his wife questions the sanity of investing so much time and energy into an extremely risky gamble. Bonnie's made to look narrow-minded as she worries for her family and her future, and her baby cries on cue to emphasize just how tough things are for our visionary hero. When Jim faces his community in a town meeting and makes a rash and dishonest declaration, he's celebrated as courageous and clever. And of course, who's going to question his priorities when he takes life-threatening risks in hopes of winning that trophy? What is this film saying about the priorities of a husband and father?
By the logic of the film, the race must happen in Madison and be won at all costs. Even the local church prioritizes the race above all else, investing the offering plate funds in a nationally televised sporting event. When Bruce Dern exclaims, "You know, this is really becoming ridiculous!" late in the film, you might be inclined to agree with him.
That is, if you're thinking at all. The movie seems determined to give our gray matter a rest. When the narration isn't spoon-feeding us with information, the soundtrack cues act as emotional subtitles, and close-ups of facial expressions instruct us as to how we should feel about each new development. When a racing boat stalls on the water, we hear the engine die; we see the smoke; we see a lot of crowd reaction shots of shock, dismay, disappointment; even the music groans. And then, in case we missed it, someone remarks, "He stalled it!"
Formulas can be interesting when the filmmakers invest something original or unusual in them, or when the typical targets are struck with flair and enthusiasm. One of the finest entries in the sports-championship genre was based on another Indiana legacy—a slam-dunk called Hoosiers. Madison falters at almost every opportunity—even the big finale. The climactic race isn't anything remarkable. You'll wish little Anakin Skywalker would put on his helmet and get out there to show the rest of them what podracing is all about.
The experience becomes one of merely waiting for a series of inevitables. In a film where the hero spends the bulk of the film preparing for a national championship, who would guess that it culminates with a championship race? With so much focus on the fears and ghosts holding our hero back from getting behind the wheel himself, what are the chances he'll be back in the saddle when duty calls? Who would expect that those old ghosts will haunt him during the heat of the race? Will the little boy with big hydroplane dreams get his wish in the end? Will the Big City Bad Guys get their comeuppance? And what about that secret button in the Miss Madison that's reportedly very dangerous—is there any chance someone will have the courage to use it when it matters most?
Thus, despite the formidable talents of its cast, Madison is only mediocre entertainment. It's exactly what many moviegoers want—90 challenge-free minutes that are as easy to swallow as the popcorn, and as artificial as the buttery goo on top of it. But if you want the thrill of a race, try ESPN, where the excitement is full of surprises and you can't easily guess the outcome ahead of time. And if you want real drama, there are plenty of superior choices. Including X-Men.
The Chicago Reader's political Star Wars
Surprise, surprise... The Chicago Reader's J.R. Jones, in the tradition of that paper's preoccupation with political readings of film, sees Revenge of the Sith as an attack on the White House.
And so, of course, he really likes it.
Overlooked 2004 treasure: "Goodbye, Dragon Inn"
Sometimes I wish I had the resources to travel around the world to the great film festivals. Heck, sometimes I wish I had the time and money to explore the international film festival that takes place in my own backyard! (I'm only going to one film in this year's Seattle International Film Festival this year, and I'm not happy about it at all.)
Fortunately, I have friends who do travel to festivals, and I hear firsthand from them about the films I'm missing, films I'll later look up on DVD.
Thus, I knew to be watching for Goodbye, Dragon Inn on DVD. And sure enough, it's worth every quiet, haunting moment.
Tsai Ming-liang's 81-minute mood piece is 2004's quietest, most watchful film. And it rewards only the most patient viewers by quietly, secretively revealing a complicated web of stories and some surprises that will make the hair on your arms stand up.
If you're not really watching, if you're not really thinking through the details of what you see, you're likely to think it's just a boring bunch of footage taken in an old movie theatre.
But believe me, there's a lot going on in that almost-empty theatre.
First of all, there's the movie... King Hu's 1966 martial arts film Dragon Inn . You see pieces of that film playing before the cavernous auditorium, but most of the time you just hear it in the background, sometimes just resonating through the walls... walls that sound like they're bending and about to collapse. In fact, the whole building is groaning with vibrations, shudders, and echoes that just might come from ghosts. There's a torrential rainstorm going on outside that never lets up, and you get the feeling it might be the rain that finishes off this old theatre.
Meanwhile, a limping ticket-stamper and custodian makes her labored way through the labyrinth of corridors and stairways, yearning for an encounter with the handsome projectionist who has other things on his mind.
A Japanese tourist is in the theatre for much more than the movie... he's hoping to find a quick and easy homosexual connection, and with some of the suspicious characters lurking in the shadows, he just might.
There's a young boy and his grandfather. There are others who seem half-interested in the show. And there are a dozen amusingly awkward encounters between patrons.
A lot of films have celebrated the power of movies. This one celebrates the whole experience of movie-going... the kind of joy that involves the architecture of the theatre, the sticky floors, the way people glance at each other for eating too noisily. But it's also much more than that. It's about loneliness, about our dreams and our disappointing realities, about being lost and yearning to be found.
So there I go, back to my Best of 2004 list, to revise it all over again.