objxs

This movie is excellent. This movie is also excruciating. This raw and edgy filmmaking that makes you laugh and wince at the same time. While watching this movie, you have this desire to escape the situation but can't help but to see what happens next.

This is the story of Roger (Campbell Scott), an advertising writer with an incomparable wit and abundant ego. Roger is that type of guy that we all know (and secretly think we want to be). He can talk his way into (and out of) any situation and into any woman's bedroom. At least, we men think he can. However, after being dumped by his boss/lover Joyce (Isabella Rossellini) and a visit from his lovelorn nephew Nick (Jesse Eisenberg), Roger's bachelor lifestyle turns into a nightmare.

This is above all else, a conversation film. With little in the way of external plot devices, this movie relies on the dialog of the script and the performances of its actors to succeed. In this aspect, this movie soars above any movie I've seen this year. The script, written by the debut director Dylan Kidd, flows along and breakneck speed delivering line after line of witty, hard-hitting and cynical dialog and the performances of these lines keep you enthralled with the film.

Campbell Scott (Long Time Companion, Singles, Big Night) escapes from his usual charming characters and takes on the role of Roger with relish. This is truly great acting. There is no pretense or use of cheap theatrical tricks in this performance. He can bridge the contradictions of a charming smile and a soul of hate with out missing a beat. This is without a doubt his best performance to date.

Young actor Jesse Eisenburg plays the 16-year-old nephew Nick superbly. The terror in his eyes during his long night of sexual discovery is perfect. His fumbling words and nervous body language is well executed and very believable. There is a scene in a bedroom with a very drunk and available woman where he particularly distinguishes himself. He, like Campbell Scott is able to show the characters inner conflicts, fighting between sexual desire and moral rectitude.

The female side of the cast is equally good. Isabella Rossellini (Immortal Beloved, Big Night) continues to prove her acting might as the tough and sexually free employer. Surprisingly, Elizabeth Berkley (Showgirls) shows that she actually can act leaving me to believe she just has bad judgment in her choice of parts. Finally, Jennifer Beals (Flashdance) is wonderfully desirable and human.

The film making style is definitely hard-core art school. Shot almost entirely on hand held cameras, this film has a definite documentary feel. The lighting is natural and the attention to detail is astounding. Keep a close eye of the short tight shots of hands and feet. They draw you into the characters internal workings. Occasionally, the shots can seem a bit contrived, but none of them takes away from the story.

There is very little to criticize about this film, but this is not a perfect film and for only one reason. The ending to this film seems tacked on to give some unneeded resolution to the long night in which this film primarily takes place. It feels like it was added after some unfavorable initial screenings and if so proves why committee based filmmaking is a horrible idea.

However, despite the film's sole flaw, this film is driven by the classic Roger. The character of Roger may be one of the hardest to classify. Simply put, this man is an jerk (changed for publication) of the first order. I would be hard pressed to find any redeeming qualities about this man at all. However, despite the fact that everything he says and does is despicable, you still like him. The reason you like him is that the only reason he is an a**hole is that everything he says is a little too close to the mark. He sees the hypocrisy of the world of love and relishes in it. He says everything that you know to be true but would never admit. He knows not only the rules of the game but also that it is a game and accepts all of the consequences of it. I can say with great confidence, that this is truly one of the best characters in modern film.

This is hard film to watch, but a great work of art.

I have to admit that I haven't read any of the amazingly popular novel's from which this movie came. However, after viewing this film, I am certainly tempted to do so. While this film is certainly designed for the preadolescent market, it has those necessary hooks to keep even the most hardened realist of an adult interested.

Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) is a young wizard, who after his parents were killed, was left with his mean and un-magical, aunt, uncle and bratty cousin who force him to live under the stairs. However, on his 11th birthday he is accepted into the Hogwart's School for young witches and wizards and enters a world of magic and mystery. While at school, he and his classmates Ronald Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson) set out on a quest to find the Sorcerer's Stone (which will bring immortality to those who possess it) and to prevent an evil wizard from acquiring it.

Outside of the main cast of children (who are excellent); this film is chocked full with an astounding cast of British actors. Robbie Coltrane (Henry V, GoldenEye) is perfect as the lumbering and loveable giant, Rubeus Hagrid. Alan Rickman (Bob Roberts, Dogma) once again proves that he can do sinister better than any living actor. English heavyweights Richard Harris (The Guns of Navarone, Unforgiven) and Maggie Smith (Tea with Mussolini, Gosford Park) give good performances. The short appearances by John Cleese (Life of Brian, A Fish Called Wanda) and John Hurt (I Claudius) round out this superb cast.

The cinematography is fun and inventive with a superb use of computer special effects. The setting is a combination of gothic horror and Dickensian melodrama, which works to good effect. The story combines fairy tales of every shape and kind. From Cinderella to Greek and Roman mythologies, this movie weaves a storyline that is fun to follow. The appearance of Cerberus, the three-headed dog, now renamed as Fluffy is especially amusing.

Now, despite all of these good things, the fact of the matter is that this is a fluff adventure. The characters are fairly cookie-cutter with very little time given to character development. The storyline is convoluted by its attempt to juggle too many plot lines. However, it is fun to watch and I'm glad I checked it out. I may have to borrow a child so I can go watch the next one in the theatres.

Made in 1946 and released in 1948, The Lady and Shanghai was one of the big films made by Welles after returning from relative exile for making Citizen Kane. Dark, brooding and expressing some early Cold War paranoia, this film stands tall as a Film-Noir crime film. The cinematography of this film is filled with Welles' characteristic quirks of odd angles, quick cuts, long pans and sinister lighting. The use of ambient street music is a precursor to the incredible long opening shot in Touch of Evil, and the mysterious Chinese characters and the sequences in Chinatown can only be considered as the inspiration, in many ways, to Roman Polanski's Chinatown. Unfortunately, it is Welles' obsession with technical filmmaking that hurts this film in its entirety. The plot of this story is often lost behind a sometimes incomprehensible clutter of film techniques.

However, despite this criticism, the story combined with wonderful performances by Welles, Hayworth and especially Glenn Anders (Laughter) make this film a joy to watch. Orson Welles pulls off not only the Irish brogue, but the torn identities as the honest but dangerous sailor. Rita Hayworth, who was married to Welles at the time, breaks with her usual roles as a sex goddess and takes on a role of real depth and contradictions. Finally, Glenn Anders strange and bizarre portrayal or Elsa's husbands' law partner is nothing short of classic!