Best & Worst Movies I’ve Seen This Half-Year

Here’s the deal: I don’t work from a list of movies which have been released during a calendar year, because I don’t often manage to see them when they’re new. Instead, I rank those I’ve viewed for the first time during said year, regardless of when they were initially revealed to the world. And I’m doing this at the end of June because I don’t want to wait another six months. I’ll do another half-year list then.

This is also in alphabetical order because it’s pointless to rank them further when they’re this good or bad. I may have stronger feelings toward some, but instead of numerical placement I’ll let the words chosen to describe them convey this on their own.

And so we begin!

Good Thrills

The Babadook

All the familiar aspects of a horror movie are here, but are used so well - with such confidence and precision - it feels like a new experience. Sometimes it shows restraint, other times it's an onslaught of visual and aural stimuli. Regarding said sound design; it’s insanely good. Just the right quality of what you hear or what you don’t, what is scary and what is normal. Sometimes it’s scary because it’s normal. And through all this, there is a truly terrifying psychological undercurrent running beneath the supernatural veneer. An astonishing example of what the medium of film can create.

The Battery

One of the best examples ever of how no-budget limitations can be a blessing, and used to produce a much more thoughtful and intelligent movie than additional money might have allowed or encouraged. While there are occasional issues with the storytelling and direction, most of the time the lack of funds serves these elements well, as the camera tends to stay away from big action sequences which would cost a lot and take a long time to shoot. So it’s a zombie movie with very few zombies or human cast members, but they each interact with the others in a realistic manner grounded in simple, clear motivations. They don’t get involved in major set pieces just so there can be an action scene every ten minutes; their actions are based on individual goals, which sometimes conflict. A solid buddy movie and horror concept which derives many of its scares from what you don’t know and can’t see. Excellent filmmaking at its most fundamental.

Blue Ruin

Another low-budget success! At least in terms of quality drama; I have no idea how well it did in regard to profit, etc. But here is a story about people in direct conflict, who don’t necessarily want to be doing what they’re doing but are compelled to see it through. It’s a revenge plot in which the revenge is not presented as admirable (finally!) but as an unfortunate choice which has extremely destructive consequences. The hero - if one can call him that - is both a bumbling amateur and extraordinarily clever, exhibiting each attribute depending on what he’s gotten himself into at one point or another. He knows what he’s doing is wrong, and doesn’t actually want to carry it out - which is more than anyone can say about those with whom he’s feuding - but he does so anyway because he can’t live with himself if he doesn’t. Complex characters, with clear motives. The way drama should always be done.

The Double

If I’d watched this not knowing anything about those behind it, I’d think Terry Gilliam made a film based on something by Kafka...but no, it’s a Dostoevsky novel adapted by a guy best known for playing a tech support geek on a British sitcom. But talent is talent, and Richard Ayoade knows exactly what he’s doing. This movie is dark, surreal, odd, funny, nervous, and beautiful. Jesse Eisenberg plays a dual role, and since both characters are usually dressed the same the only way to tell them apart is by his distinctly spectacular performances. Add to that this film’s wonderful lighting, tone, sound, music, and overall weirdness: you end up with an insanely brilliant work which doesn’t always make sense but doesn’t have to, because it’s just so enjoyable to view such artistry.

Predestination

A few years ago, the Spierig brothers from Australia quietly made Daybreakers - an excellent vampire movie full of intelligent and assured filmmaking. With Predestination, they’ve quietly done the same for a unique time travel concept. Some of its secrets may be easy to guess before they’re revealed, but the story being told is so beautiful and compelling that it doesn’t entirely matter what you know or think you know. The journey, from beginning to end and back around, is so exquisitely crafted that any piece of information you determine or discover ahead of time can only enhance your experience. The amazing actress Sarah Snook, another Australian, is extraordinary in her role and would stand out in any film, whether taking a lead role or supporting...and Ethan Hawke is good the way he is when he’s good, which is more often than he’s generally given credit for. And while the mind-bending elements of time travel do play a large part, what the movie’s really about is one’s sense of identity and purpose. At least that’s what I got out of it; everyone should see it for themselves and take away what they will.

Honorable Mention

22 Jump Street

Funny as fuck. I especially love the references and jokes about sequels and moviemaking in general. Not exactly brilliant cinema; how could it be? But pure entertainment always has value.

Exodus: Gods And Kings

It tells what people know as a biblical story without making it religious. Director Ridley Scott, as he often does, combines wondrous visuals with emotional depth. Imperfect but solidly enjoyable.

Frances Ha

One of those great introspective indies with terrific characters and tremendous performances. Always good to see female-centered films which aren’t silly clichéd romantic comedies.

Bad Spills

Afflicted

I’ll be mentioning this again when I write about found footage films, but will try to refrain at that time from ranting about how endlessly fucking stupid it is. One thing which bothered me, a lot, aside from the dumbness of the story: there are two main characters; a filmmaker and his subject. The filmmaker guy has all sorts of cameras and lenses and other equipment for recording their trip around the world, or whatever the fuck this was supposed to be about, but, SPOILER: he gets killed halfway through. Maybe even earlier. Up to that point, we already had to deal with his handheld found-footage-style bullshit, but now that he's dead, we're viewing footage supposedly captured by the guy who DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO USE THE FUCKING CAMERA. So it’s deliberately shot as if the guy shooting doesn’t know how to shoot. Yeah, that’s fucking brilliant. It's fucking terrible to look at, guys...and you tell me you WANTED it to look like this? Fuck off. The story itself is just a brainless retread of monster movies and other tired-ass found footage crap. Worthless beyond measure.

Big Hero 6

I already slammed this one earlier, so I won’t go into detail again, but holy shit did it make me fucking mad to watch this. In a way I’m glad I saw it after the Oscars, already knowing it’d won (ha) Best Animated Feature - because if I’d seen this shitbomb before the Oscars and then had to learn it won, I might have snapped some connective fibers in my brain while exploding with uncomprehending rage. As it is, I just watched it thinking “This garbage won the top award in its field? Fucking insane.”

The Giver

Briefly mentioned in a multi-review, so here’s a bit more left unsaid: it’s one of those adaptations of classic books which spends so much thought and energy on the design of the film, and making the world of the book appear on screen; I find no fault with it regarding how it looks and feels...but the story and the characters are so fucking stupid and ridiculous I don’t even know how anyone involved read or watched this from beginning to end and thought “Yeah, that makes sense.” Not a single plot element or character motivation works in proper conjunction with any other. They’re just people doing what the story says is supposed to happen. Plus it contains magical/mystical/supernatural elements which are NOT established as being a part of this world. I’ll buy anything through suspension of disbelief IF it’s properly established as existing, the rules governing such fantastic elements are presented, and everything stays within those guidelines. Seriously, anything, if it’s done right. This does everything wrong. A lot of the acting stinks too.

Hell Baby

I thought this was going to be a funny, silly, goofy, horror comedy. Nothing in it is funny. Not one thing. It tries, but weird and aimless ain’t funny. It’s boring. The fucking title character doesn’t even show up until nearly the end, then has one scene and it’s over! What the fuck? I even tried to find a screen shot of the actual hell baby from the movie and couldn’t find one! That’s how unimportant the hell baby is to a movie called Hell Baby. There’s a haunted house, and possessed people, and odd neighbors, and corrupt authority figures, but none of it has anything to do with anything! I kept waiting for something pertinent to occur, but it doesn’t. It’s like an exercise in wasting a talented cast on stupid bullshit to see how much they put up with before they quit, then using whatever footage the crew managed to get and cutting a movie out of it. Hopeless crapola.

Need For Speed

The caveat on the inclusion of this hateful mess is that I did not watch the entire movie...I know, I know, it isn’t fair to judge it not having seen it all, but I guarantee you: it could only have gotten worse. I gave up after 40 minutes - twice as long as I’ll usually tolerate something which obviously sucks and I already loathe. It’s unrepentingly stupid, and misogynist, and the kind of movie in which the characters do the stupidest possible thing and are then surprised when stuff goes bad for them. Duh. Even the one thing this movie might have done well, which is race cars, looks terrible. Just a lot of expensive-looking vehicles zooming past the camera. Ooh, thrilling. I’d get more excitement out of a Hot Wheels set with a plastic track.

Dishonorable Mention

Jessabelle

Another clunker written by half the writer/director team of Hell Baby. I’m not trying to rip on them, they’ve done plenty of decent work in the past; maybe this is just a slump. Anyway, this supposed horror movie does a lot of things The Babadook does, but does them all wrong. Every common cliché, every obvious foreshadowing, every stupid jump scare and dumbass character decision one can think of - all here. The writing is so transparent, I constantly found myself seeing right through all the hints at “what really happened” and wondering why the characters didn’t look into such things...at all.

There’s even a point when the title character finds a videotape in the wall - because the ghost broke a mirror hiding it - and she just throws it off to the side and screams. So obviously, there is information on this tape she will need at some point, but the filmmakers don’t want her to know it just yet, so she doesn’t watch it. And I’m just waiting for the point near the end when she realizes oh yeah, that video, I’ll watch it and learn the secret…which does occur, but she doesn’t even have to deal with trying to remember what she did with the tape, or bother searching for it, because the fucking ghost TURNS ON THE TV and the tape has been placed on a nearby table. Gee, ghost, if you can do that shit, why not just tell the bitch up front what your fucking problem is?

I know that’s a stupid thing to say about a horror movie, because if every angry spirit in every movie could communicate so plainly, there wouldn’t be a movie. I get that. But if there are limitations on the ghost’s abilities, fucking abide by those limitations! And don’t get me started on what terrible, expository writing it is to have information revealed to the protagonist through a series of videotapes...and then try to find reasons to prevent her from watching all of them at once like any normal person would. Just lame all around.

If you’re wondering why I’m writing at such length about a movie I didn’t even include in the worst five, it’s because the thing isn’t horrible in every way. Sarah Snook, the star of Predestination, is just as good here, even if the story is shit and her character’s an idiot. There’s nothing wrong with the lighting or sound or other aspects of filmmaking; they’re all well executed...they’re simply done in the hackiest of ways. Yeah, that’s how awful it is to watch this mess; I have to make up words to describe its badness.

Just Go With It

Oddly enough, Adam Sandler is not the issue here. He doesn’t play that annoying obnoxious asshole he usually does, just a decent charming guy who causes a major problem for himself. He even has good chemistry with Jennifer Aniston, who is the main reason I even tried watching this: she’s often good, thus sometimes makes movies she is in turn out better than they otherwise might. But not this time: the story is just too dumb, the characters’ choices too pointless and obvious; too contrived. A bad decision has to be the result of a character flaw, not merely the screenwriter’s need for conflict. The farce doesn’t play here because the conflict is so unnecessary. And the movie skips over important scenes which would be pivotal if this plot actually merited significant attention. But it doesn’t, so what would be pertinent in a good movie happens offscreen in this one. Also: of the two kids, the little girl is a good actress and has been good in other movies; the boy is terrible. He cannot act. I don’t know how he got the job. Some producer’s kid, maybe.

Locke

No clue why this had so many positive reviews raving about its brilliance. One reviewer wasn’t sure how an entire movie about one guy in a car managed to not be boring…easy; it did not manage this. I won’t say nothing happens, because events do occur and lives do change - offscreen. Over the phone. The whole movie is this guy driving and talking to various people on the phone, telling them things they don’t pay attention to, and then it’s over. Seriously; no one listens to him. He tells them what they should do and they don’t do it, then call him back and ask him what to do. Or they just flat out refuse his advice. It’s fucking ridiculous.

If there were actually some tension generated by the fact this guy is in the car on the way somewhere and can’t help the idiots more directly, I might go along with it, but there's no sense of anything truly at stake. And how many times does one man need to talk to the same four people on the phone in ninety minutes? Nobody does that! And nothing is fully resolved: he’s still driving when it’s over, having said what he intends to do, but why listen to himself when no one else does? So anything could change. Just a dumb gimmick that didn’t work, despite Tom Hardy actually being very good. Too bad the material gave him no chance of success.

The Mortal Instruments: City Of Bones

Just another dumb adaptation of a dumb book series written for teens to make them feel like they’re not special and they can’t do anything important. Yes, that’s exactly what I think these stories do, even though they claim to be empowering, and the kids only like them because they like the fantasy that they aren’t in fact just like everyone else but special and powerful and magic and all other kinds of bullshit. Every person - adult, teen, or child - is indeed unique, while still sharing the same fears and doubts as everyone else, even though they think they don’t. These movies don’t promote that. They promote the idea that even though you think you are just the same dull human being as everyone else, maybe you have magical powers you don’t know about yet, you’ll meet a nice vampire, you’ll find the courage to save your oppressed kingdom...fucking stupid escapist fantasy bullshit.

Even if it weren’t, the movie’s just bad. It creates numerous story threads it then leaves hanging, the characters are turkey-slice thin and poorly motivated, plus the direction prefers hectic what-the-fuck-is-happening-ness to properly showing the action. Nothing but dull rubbish trying to capitalize on an already popular product. From what I understand, it failed; a box office bomb. Good. Fuck that noise.

The Other Woman

Again, a story intending to present itself as empowering to a particular demographic - in this case women over 35 instead of under 17 - but instead is stupidity piled on top of itself. Nobody in this movie thinks like a rational, sane, adult human being. They do the dumbest possible thing at every turn...or if not something pea-brained, then just plain old petty and puerile, not to mention simplistically selfish.

And for a supposedly "adult" comedy, it sure goes for the lowbrow laughs. Bad sex jokes in every breath, except for when the cheated-on ladies secretly slip the bad guy some laxatives for the purpose of a bathroom scene with nasty splashy farty sounds which goes on for a LONG, LONG time. Ha. So hilarious. Don’t they realize Dumb & Dumber is the pinnacle of this gag (no pun intended) and can never be improved upon? Leave it out of the script and try to be intelligent instead. Even without that stinky scene, the whole movie smelled the same. I knew it would be bad but watched it anyway just to see where and how it went wrong. The answer: everywhere, in every way.

-----

And now, a first: on BOTH lists, we have…

Troll 2!!

SUCH a bad movie - but so amusing to watch, and make fun of, and watch again for how awful and funny and stupid and delightful it somehow ends up being.

So yes I loved it, but it’s terrible. Downright horrific! Best worst movie indeed.

Big Hero 6

Whenever I become aware of an overwhelmingly positive response to a movie I hadn't intended to see - from critics, the public in general, friends I care for and respect - I’m not dumb enough to begin watching it thinking “This is gonna be so great I won’t even believe it!” It may have been something I just wasn't interested in, hadn’t gotten around to, or concluded was not worth seeing, but whatever the delay, the good vibes from those who’ve enjoyed it convince me there’s worthwhile viewing to be had. My initial assessment may have been that it was most likely awful, or perhaps simply okay but not impressive - though when sitting down to watch it, I’m thinking that with all the happy folks full of praise, it certainly won’t be terrible...may even be pretty good! And I think this because of the excitement people have shown about it.

Too bad so many people can somehow be so wrong.

Big Hero 6 is nothing more than beautifully animated garbage...not even good enough to call junk, but actual refuse. Because - to extend the metaphor - junk is useless, and takes up space, but is essentially harmless. If it’s junk food, then it’s tasty but not healthy, and still harmless in moderation. Garbage, however, is a nasty, smelly, rotting, health hazard requiring immediate disposal and/or destruction. You certainly wouldn’t want to consume it. You want it gone, you want it disappeared, you don’t even want to know what happens to it as long as it remains elsewhere.

So, the movie: when the story here isn’t clichéd, it’s stupid. When it isn’t stupid, it’s predictable. When it isn’t predictable, it’s over (finally). Often it’s all three at once. There is no motivation for many things each of the active characters does, or just a weak/simple motivation...sometimes there’s no reason for what they don’t do; for failing to act. There is no sense and no explanation for basic aspects of the setting and various situations. Here are some randomly-recalled examples (with a few spoilers, if that actually matters) of various stupidities:

Why is this city the bastard child of San Francisco and Tokyo? After viewing, I read the filmmakers had a history all figured out as to how this came to be - so why wouldn’t they incorporate any of their ideas into the movie? Why do they just show it as if it makes any sense by itself? It couldn’t be because they don’t manage to specify anything else without dull spoken exposition, could it? Like they realized they wouldn’t be able to think up an interesting way to reveal this information other than having one of their characters awkwardly talk about it so they left it out? I don’t think they’re that aware...if they were, they wouldn’t have included so much poor storytelling in exactly that manner.

Why did the filmmakers start the movie with the protagonist kid’s parents being dead only to kill off his brother in act one? Couldn’t live parents have served just as much of a non-purpose as his aunt, who doesn’t do anything or affect the plot in even the tiniest way? Do we need to double up on the so-aloneness of the kid? Not that I’m sympathizing with the obnoxious little punk, just that it’s a repeated state of being for the character, and unnecessary. Superfluous backstory/set-up. Set the stage and get the ball rolling!

How does a fourteen (?) year-old kid with no money or resources manage to manufacture billions of tiny robots in a matter of days (or even weeks)? I’m all for suspension of disbelief, but a movie - any movie - needs to establish the rules of the world presented then abide by said rules. This movie is about scientific genius kids, so I’m wholly willing to buy his theoretical wherewithal to dream up this idea in the first place, as well as his possessing the technical and scientific knowledge to carry it out...but in general, the movie takes place in a world very similar to our own. So how did he actually DO all this? How did he acquire the materials and a production site? Uh, he didn’t. He just has his billion bitty-bots, because this is an animated film and anything is possible, even if it’s horribly unrealistic. But hey, the entire school here is only made up of about six students and one professor, apparently, so maybe the rest of the building is a you-can-make-anything-you-wish factory, and a bottom line-less lending institution.

Where in the holy hell did the cloud-covered limbo land generate from? With both teleporters (let’s face it, stargates) active, the hat enters one and exits the other, because that’s the whole point of teleportation - instant traversal of any physical separation - so when there’s only one switched on it leads to a parallel dimension? And some broad in a ship bubble can simply exist there indefinitely in hypersleep? And in operation it serves to counter the effects of gravity and suck up everything in its vicinity, even though nothing inside it is moving at all? What in the freewheeling fuck is happening here?

Why did no one question or investigate how the fire started, how it created such a sudden and encompassing explosion? Why did Hiro assume his microbots had been destroyed, while the guy who stole them assumed they would protect him? Hiro built the damn things and doesn’t know their full capability, but this guy who just saw a basic demonstration five minutes earlier bets his life on their resiliency?

Speaking of microbots and the bad guy: how stupid are the characters to assume who the guy was who stole them and has nefarious motives for doing so? And how stupid is that guy, and the other guy, to assume without further analysis the results of their failed teleporter test thus creating the center of their shared hostility? And how dumb do the filmmakers think their audience is for going ahead with these assumptions and not expecting anyone to realize how dumb (and wrong) these assumptions are?

Why does Hiro think he has to hide Baymax from his aunt? Why do the filmmakers think it’s funny for Baymax to act drunk when his battery’s low? Why does everyone in the movie keep saying “gone” instead of “dead” over and over and over and over and over? Do they not want to say the word in what they intend to be a kids movie? Or is it because some of these people are not actually dead in some sense and they don’t want to make a false statement?

Why can’t they just make a good movie that isn’t full of stupid shit like this?!?!?

I’m not a fan of The Lego Movie - in fact, I rather hate it - but that animated film only has two major problems; the action moves so fast it’s impossible to follow and the overall tone is too silly to carry any real dramatic weight. It’s still miles better than this reekingly offensive turd bomb.

This is why I no longer watch or care about the Oscars. Because I just don’t get how or why such head-smackingly awful filmmaking can be awarded best animated feature, above four other nominations and plenty more not even nominated, including Lego...which I heard some people were upset about. Now that I’ve seen Big Hero 6, I support those zealots in their fervor, despite not even respecting their choice. Unless the animation itself - not the story, characters, sound, music, or any aspect of the movie except the execution of the images alone - is what’s being awarded, I don’t see how this could even compete. It’s that bad. But kids and parents seem to like it, so, hooray for Disney!

Apologies to any friends and family members who are kids/parents/people and also somehow fans of this movie. I still like and respect you, and am oddly pleased - envious, even - you are able to possess such standards of viewership as to not be bothered by the horrible sludgestorm presented here as if it were an acceptably accomplished animated film. You have a gift, dear ones, to see the good and block out the bad. I’m all for silver linings, but if Big Hero 6 is the dark cloud inside, I myself would rather get out of the way of that storm and wait for it to pass, thank you very much.

In the meantime, maybe I’ll just watch WALL-E for the 27th time.

Slumdog Millionaire

Slumdog Millionaire won 8 Oscars. It was a struggle to fund, produce, & distribute. It is admired, beloved, and a tremendous emotional experience to millions of viewers around the world. It's also one of the most horribly contrived and predictable piles of crap I've seen in a long time.

Don't boo me, fans; I am actually an easy mark when it comes to epic tales of oft-delayed romance which turn out wonderful and beautiful in the end - I am indeed a sap, tears always at the ready - but when the plot points along the way are as forced as these, I'm gonna call foul. (The Notebook has the exact same qualities; I also hate that movie while wanting to like it.) And even putting aside the message of the film that money solves all problems - a message I find incredibly demeaning and insulting, even if probably true - most of the trouble these characters get into, or don't get out of, is their own fault.

Why is it so difficult for Jamal and Latika to stick together? Because they don't try to, until it suits the story. Even as adults, she has the chance to leave with him, and she doesn't, because "it's too late." Give me a break; if you want to go just go! And don't anyone claim she's afraid to leave because she's abused; that would be your assumption - the movie doesn't create that situation or that character. The filmmakers have the characters do what they want them to do to retain their story structure, whether it makes sense or not.

When they're still kids, Jamal listens to his brother Salim and doesn't go back for Latika, even though Salim left her behind for no reason. Years later, Salim kicks Jamal out because he wants Latika for his own purposes...but why? Because they're teenagers now and he's got the hots for her? Why her and not any other girl? What about looking after his little brother, and why doesn't Jamal do anything to keep track of them? It was so stupid...I thought Salim was forcing him out for one night, to have his way with the girl while he had a chance - because that's how the filmmakers sold it - but the story just skips ahead a few years like that was the end of it. This is poor story structure, and lousy character motivation.

And these are just the things they're doing to themselves - the situations that are forced upon them are so ridiculous and predictable that I absolutely did not care about anything that happened. Why is the host of the show telling a contestant he's going to lose, then secretly giving him wrong answers? What's the point of that? It's movie bullshit, and I hate fake drama. A character's actions have to be believable for that character...so a despicable person can certainly do despicable things, but that character has to have a reason he or she believes in...when it's just for the sake of giving your hero a moment of antagonism, it's movie bullshit.

So let's talk about predictability...yes, the movie will end with the hero and heroine safely reunited, all is well, blah blah blah that's a given and I'm very accepting of that. Right near the beginning, they're talking about The Three Musketeers, and how they didn't learn the name of the third one...gee, think that'll be the final question? What a shocker. The kids are saved from living in the dump by a nice man who gives them cold soda in glass bottles; think he'll turn out to be an evil scumbag with ulterior motives? Whuh-oh! And if that weren't already clear enough, we are treated to a scene in which the kids, happily eating lots and lots of food, talk about the nice man and discuss his eligibility for sainthood...golly, he really had them fooled! Such garbage in this movie, and a lot more than they showed at the landfill.

Near the end, when Salim lets Latika go (like we never saw his moment of redemption coming, though why he's such as ass in the first place is never established or motivated) he gives her his phone and makes a point to tell her to always keep it with her...and we know Jamal hasn't used his phone-a-friend lifeline yet, so when she gets out of a car in stalled traffic then goes to watch the live (ha!) broadcast of the show and Jamal uses the lifeline to call his brother, oh no she's left the phone in the car and has to run to get it before it stops ringing and Jamal won't be able to ask for help with the question and the whole thing is SO incredibly fucking awful I can't even continue to describe it without wanting to punch myself in the head. Do people really like this dreck?

Don't get me wrong - the film is beautifully made, and would be absolutely exhilarating to watch if it weren't so friggin' stupid. Just because I'm a reformed cynic doesn't mean I can't spot bullshit when I see it, and doesn't mean I'm now easily impressed. The things these filmmakers put the main character through, in order to show the trials he must endure to emerge victorious...complete nonsense. Is it really necessary, for the purposes of the story, to have Jamal beaten and tortured under suspicion of fraud in order to make him an underdog? No...but the filmmakers want him to be tread upon, so they have him beaten and tortured. They could just as easily have framed their story any other way, with Jamal telling his story of how he knew the answers. Because anyone within the story who already doesn't believe he didn't cheat isn't going to buy his explanation, either. If he were telling someone who would see it as he does - that it's destiny - the audience would then identify with the listener and find it fascinating. Even a reformed cynic would be fascinated...if the details weren't so incredibly pointless.

He knew Samuel Colt invented the revolver because his brother pointed a gun at him...he knew Benjamin Franklin is on the U.S. $100 bill because a tourist gave him one and his blind friend told him who it was...this is supposed to be a big deal? He knew things because information was presented to him at some point and he remembered it? Is that somehow unique? Don't we all do that? And if you want to analyze it, the difficulty of the show and others like it isn't simply knowing the information, it's being able to recall it under the circumstances, and the pressure...that's the hard part. Besides, I didn't actually notice his brother saying anything about who invented the revolver he was pointing at him...he did call it a Colt, but he didn't go into a brief lecture on the inventor.

What we have here is a mix of meaningful events in his life that don't actually present the necessary information, and relatively meaningless events that do present the precise information eventually needed on the show. He even answered a question with information that doesn't seem to have been presented to him in any way connected with the story being told in relation to that question...in fact it's so irrelevant we're even shown a repeat flashback of particular images, to make sure we know where the reference was...and this ain't the only flashback for that purpose. This is not a tightly-written screenplay, this is forcing the plot to go a certain way in order to manipulate the desired results. Bad bad bad bad bad.

Frankly it just sickens me when people allow themselves to be manipulated by such drivel. Apologies to those who love this movie, but I honestly had a stronger emotional reaction to Rocky Balboa...because the story itself is well-crafted. It isn't forced. And I'm not even a Rocky fan. That's just an example, because I saw it recently - and not a great movie by any stretch though perfectly decent - but if pressed I could probably name other movies I found more moving that haven't had nearly the impact on others which Slumdog has.

Being a writer, I mainly judge a movie on how well the story works in and of itself. This has good acting, interesting camerawork, solid editing, swell music (if occasionally incongruous with the scene it plays over), and an interesting concept - but they try so hard to make all the little pieces work together, that none of it works at all. And I wish more people were not taken in by this, or fooled by it. That continues to be my wish.

Michael Clayton

Last year, I only managed to get my sorry ass into a movie theater a few times. Less than a dozen, I think; can’t even remember why anymore. One of those times was for Michael Clayton. I enjoyed it, I recognized its successful qualities, especially several of the performances, but it didn’t quite resonate with me as a filmgoer. It didn’t sink in. I didn’t even review it. But the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to be a very strong and moving story, well told and admirable. I even put it in my top five of the year, despite my lack of intensity regarding its impact on me at the time. Now that it’s received seven Oscar nominations and been re-released into theaters, I had an opportunity to see it once more (thanks, Jen!) with a new perspective...and the true strength of this film has finally sunk in.

I mentioned the performances; I knew they were good the first time, but now I’m simply amazed at what these actors did with their roles. Tilda Swinton completely disappears inside Karen Crowder...her insecurity, her sense of responsibility, and guilt, and inability to feel comfortable with anything she’s doing, good or bad. I hardly know what to say about Tom Wilkinson; he’s always good, and a british actor playing an american (which he does often), as well as portraying a serious chemical imbalance, is certainly going to acquire a lot of critical praise...but he’s doing so much more than that. There is such depth to his character; his performance is a great deal more than the mechanics of mental instability. Even the supporting actors without Oscar nominations - Michael O’Keefe, Merritt Wever, the young Austin Williams as Michael’s son Henry, the always wonderful Sydney Pollack...they make a strong impression, and without them the movie wouldn’t carry the weight it needs to.

And of course, there’s the man himself, George Clooney...he gets away with playing a lot of characters using his natural (and naturally overflowing) charm and charisma, like the Ocean’s Eleven series...none of that is in evidence here. I’m pretty sure he doesn’t smile once throughout the entire movie. Everything Michael Clayton is dealing with, all the trouble resting on his shoulders, is clearly evident in every expression, every movement Clooney makes. The film ends with an extraordinarily long take as he sits in the back of a moving taxi, his very soul on display; he seems to be reliving every heart-crushing moment of the story we’ve just seen play out. It’s the kind of thing you never see an actor do; merely sit there and be, in character. This is not George Clooney the heartthrob, the gotta-love-him movie star; this is Clooney the actor...and I’m truly enthralled by what he does in the role.

So what is there to say about the screenwriting, the direction? There’s a plethora of plot events and story points, but I wouldn’t call it intricate. It’s the kind of story that could easily end up convoluted and useless, but Tony Gilroy is better than that. He brings you into it, tells you everything you need to know...there are no secrets, no twists, no sudden surprises that bring everything to new light. It’s all right there, and you’re with him every step of the way. There is tension even when you’ve already seen what happens next, and I’m still trying to figure out how he did that. It’s simply a great way to tell a story, and I admire this experienced screenwriter for taking on his own script as a first-time director. That shows a lot of passion for the film, a true understanding of what he wants to get across and how to do so. It’s definitely something any filmmaker would aspire to.

I’m glad I was able to see this a second time, and in the theater, and with someone who was certain to take notice of the great performances. When seeing a good film a second time, it’s nice to share it with someone who’ll have a strong and unique perspective. That way, you know you’re not saying to yourself, "Gee, this really is good; why didn’t it sink in before?" Instead, you learn to appreciate what you knew was there but didn’t quite feel, and you have someone who can impart a more comprehensive first-time experience. It’s never as simple as just seeing a movie; not for me, anyway. If it were, I couldn’t possibly be writing this.

Go see Michael Clayton, before the Oscars! And tell me what you think!