Black Swan

Release Date: December 3, 2010

Directed by: Darren Aronofsky

Synopsis: A tightly wound ballerina named Nina is chosen to play the iconic role of the Swan Queen in “Swan Lake.” This task proves to be more daunting than she first imagined, for she must also play the role of the Black Swan, the white swan’s sinister sister who convinces her prince not to love her innocent sister. Nina is constantly under the care of her controlling, wannabe ballerina mother and an egotistical ballet director who exploits her innocence for his gain. The role soon consumes Nina’s entire existence; allowing her to explore her newfound sexuality and ultimately descends into madness.

Review: I want to first put out there that I respect what Aronofsky was trying to do here. He took a darker screenplay loosely based off an iconic ballet, assembled an all-star cast, and provided a thought-provoking thriller. It’s just too bad that all of my thoughts provoked from this film were what time dinner was and when I could get the hell out of the theater. I don’t know why critics are raving about this film. Maybe they saw a different version than I did, or maybe I’m just a simple Colorado girl not sophisticated enough to understand the powerful message that Black Swan conveyed, but I really, REALLY, did not like this film.   

            I knew it was a psycho-sexual-thriller going into it, but I guess I wasn’t ready for just how psycho it was. I felt that if Aronofsky would have stuck to just one or two elements of Nina’s psycho mania rather than throwing 20 different things in my face, I would have enjoyed it. The first 45 minutes of the film were weird, but I did enjoy it. After that, it was all downhill. As a fellow, albeit inexperienced dancer, I understand at least some of the rigor that goes into dance training. I was never a ballet dancer, so I don’t even know a quarter of how hard serious ballerinas work. Showing the scars all over Nina’s feet or hearing her bones crack were chilling, but extremely realistic. Ballet is a cut throat world, and Aronofsky also portrayed that aspect well.

            Although I loathed this film, it was well made and the acting was superb. Natalie Portman never disappoints, and her physical transformation is astounding. She’s probably about as tall as I am and I would guess weighs about 120 soaking wet. She lost 20 pounds for this role, and you could see every bone in her body (which added to the realism this film provided). I did sympathize with her character while at the same time not understanding her at all. Mila Kunis also did a great job, but I don’t really understand why she was necessary to the film. The only real reason I saw her to be in Black Swan was to go down on Natalie Portman, which I also found ridiculously unnecessary. My cousin made the point that it was a little self-indulgent on Aronofsky’s part, and I can’t help but agree with her. I mean, I get she’s discovering her sexuality and sensuality, possibly even lesbianism, but it didn’t add to the film. It served as a draw to get men to come to the movie.

            There were a ridiculous amount of creepy parts to this film, and it was just a mental overload. In one scene, Nina is obsessively pulling at her bleeding cuticles, and she starts to pull of the skin so it can heal. But no, it gets taken to a whole new level in which she literally rips a strip of skin from her cuticle to the middle of her hand. WHY?!?!? We come to find out it didn’t actually happen, which is all the more reason why it should have been left out. It added nothing but disgust for the film, in my opinion. The same disdain grew out of another scene in which Nina visits her aging and injured protégé Beth in the hospital (played by Winona Ryder who bothers me to no end). Nina gives back a nail file she had stolen from Beth, so Beth proceeds to start flipping out and stabbing herself in the face with the nail file. I was expecting some wrist cutting or even stabbing herself in the chest. But her face?!?! Turns out that was a hallucination too. So I ask you Aronofsky, WHAT THE HELL?

            The cool/creepy part was a recurring theme throughout the film, and honestly could have stood well on its own. Nina keeps scratching her back to the point of bleeding, and no one can figure out why . . . only the scratching is in the place where a wing could be (the creativity blows my mind . . . so much so that I figured it out the first time it was showed on screen. Bravo). Right before her big debut on stage, Nina is having a mental breakdown in her room and starts to scratch. Only something is there this time . . . and she pulls out a black feather. She starts pulling out more, and is obviously traumatized. It should have stopped there, but then it proceeds to show Portman’s legs turn into swan legs. Then the scene cuts and she’s sans swan legs. Even though the feather theme was a bit obvious, I felt that enhanced the story and exemplified her mania. Those silly swan legs took it way too far.

            When it came to the dancing, Natalie Portman did an excellent job. She trained for a year before principal filming began, and truly transformed herself into a ballet dancer. The principal male partner was also great (he’s a principal dancer for the NYC Ballet Company, and Portman’s husband/baby daddy), but aside from that the dancing sucked. Like I said before, I’m no expert, but it shouldn’t look like these dancers are working when they dance. It should look effortless. Well, it seemed as though they were exerting every ounce of energy they had into their dancing, and not in a good way.           

I would not recommend this film, but at the same time I’m glad I saw it. It’s safe to say I feel MUCH  better about my neuroses after seeing it.

Most Anticipated Movies of 2011

1. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2
2. Water For Elephants
3. Limitless
4. The Adjustment Bureau
5. Red Riding Hood
6. The Hangover 2
7. Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1

Inception

Release Date: July 16, 2010

Directed by: Christopher Nolan

Synopsis: In a world where dreams are equally, if not more important than reality, a thief has a chance at redemption when he is offered the task of completing Inception: the process of planting an idea into one’s mind in order to create a desired outcome. Cobb (played by Leonardo DiCaprio) and his band of highly intelligent and skilled thieves (Ellen Page, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and Tom Hardy) attempt Inception upon a young billionare (Cillian Murphy) in order for the head of a rival company to rise to power (Ken Watanabe). Will Cobb and his crew achieve Inception, or will the memories of Cobb’s wife (Marion Cotillard) threaten to derail the ultimate heist?

Review: Let me start off by saying that for the most part, I will see just about everything Christopher Nolan directs or writes and anything that Leonardo DiCaprio stars in. Nolan has this insane ability to somehow make deeply psychologically twisted marketable to the masses. From what I’ve read, this particular script took him nearly ten years to complete, and he only had DiCaprio in mind for the role of Cobb. That being said, I am a huge fan of this film.

            The first time I saw Inception a friend and I went to the midnight showing, so I was absolutely exhausted. Seeing it again really made me appreciate the artistry in crafting this story. Nolan has said he is fascinated by the dreaming process, and how our minds create the bizarre scenarios, some of which are vivid and frighteningly realistic. He pays an incredibly close attention to detail, some of which goes way over my head (such as certain things characters say in passing that turn out to be of the utmost importance, different colored clothing, etc).

            Each person was cast perfectly, and most from Nolan’s “stock” of actors (Cillian Murphy, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe). I was a bit hesitant to see Ellen Page take on a more serious role, after the likes of Juno and Whip It, but I thought she handled herself well. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is an actor I really enjoy watching, so I’m glad that this film has helped him land a few more roles. He plays the suave sidekick with the necessary sophistication and intensity. I wish Tom Hardy’s character would have had a bit more screen time, but since he has been cast as the new villain in “The Dark Knight Rises”, I’m sure we’ll get to see a lot more of him.

            The visual effects in this film were stunning. Creepy and a bit bizarre, but stunning. They perfectly exemplified the vivid imagery of our dreams without being hokey or stupid; it greatly enhanced the story. I also loved how there were times where you didn’t know what was a dream and what was reality (hint according to imdb.com: In all the dream sequences, Cobb is wearing his wedding ring. In reality sequences, he is not). I didn’t find myself getting too confused, which was refreshing for a film with this subject matter and interweaving story lines.

            The ending of the story was relatively light hearted compared to the rest fo the film, but I thought it fit well. You felt relief right along with Cobb when his children turned around to see him, and it was nice to see everyone happily go their separate ways, unsure of when they would meet again.

            If you haven’t seen this movie, go rent it right now. It’s a must have for any movie collection!

Details Magazine Interview: Christian Bale

This is a branching out a bit of movie reviews, but this has at least something to do with a movie on my Holiday List, “The Fighter.” Christian Bale plays Dickie Ward, Mikcey Ward’s (played by Mark Wahlberg) younger crack head brother. I was reading an interview with Bale in Details Magazine, and I just had to voice my opinion on the content of the interview, and Bale’s demeanor throughout. .

            First of all, Bale INSISTS upon the interview being in the Q&A format. Secondly, he doesn’t let the reporter even ask questions. He had to perform a second interview just to get useable material. Bale then goes on and on about how he has such a sissy job, and basically complains about his good fortune. Poor you, one of the most sought after actors of this decade. Poor you with all of your money and fame.

            He then goes on to say he wishes he could never do another interview in his life because he thinks they are a waste of time and take away from the character. Uh, in order for your movie to be successful (you know, so you keep being famous and rich and actually cast in more projects) you have to do press junkets. Sure, reporters could come up with more creative questions sometimes, but this is your JOB. You get paid more than the President of the United States, and you are bitching about having to talk to someone who is showing an interest in your life or projects? Please.

            This is the part that bothers me the most. The reporter asks him about his role in The Machinist, in which Bale lost 65 pounds so he would be believable as a junkie on screen. He famously gained 85 pounds back immediately after this role for Batman Begins. The reporter asked how he has the stamina and will to put himself through that kind of thing, and Bale gives the most ridiculous answer. So ridiculous that it’s not even worth repeating. Bale reportedly will leave sets for hours at a time, with no one knowing where he is. He says he’s “preparing for his role.” Also known as method acting.

            Method acting is a crock of psychobabble bullshit. I think Bale is a terrific actor, but I have a feeling this “method acting” is another way of saying, “I’m a psycho who happens to be attractive.” IT reminds me of that Saturday Night Live sketch from the early 90s with John Lovtiz and Phil Hartmen. Lovitz is this snooty actor who quite obviously cannot act, but does very ridiculous things much to the delight of Hartmen. To each of these ridiculous things (such as bending your finger in half to make it as though it has disappeared), Lovitz would reveal his secret and exclaim, “ACTING!!!”

            Here’s the thing: viewers (aka people who pay for the movies you are in, Bale) want to see people they like. They want to see people who are good actors, but don’t take themselves so seriously. If you don’t stop being such a pompous windbag jerk, people will stop seeing your movies all together. So that means no yelling at people for getting a boom mic in the shot, no yelling at your mom in public places, and loosen up in your interviews. Get a life.

The Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader

Release Date: December 10, 2010
Directed by: Michael Apted
Based upon the novel "The Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader" by C.S. Lewis

Synopsis: Edmond and Lucy Pevensie return to Narnia with their emotionally immature cousin Eustace to help King Caspian find the Seven Lords and their enchanted swords in order to bring peace to all of Narnia. Old characters reemerge to help tell C.S. Lewis' classic tale of redemption and above all else love.

Review: I personally enjoyed it. Other reviews have not been as kind, and I can see where they are coming from. As a longtime fan of this beloved book series, I think this particular series is hard to capture on film. The first film (The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe) was filled will spells, magical creatures, and an all around magical feel to it. Prince Caspian and Now Dawn Treader  were both books that were not as immersed in the magical aspects of Narnia as the first and also the last book were. That being said, I thought the filmmakers did a great job with what they had.

Number one: I thought the film did justice to the book. Along with that, the character development was really on point. Each major character had something that they were wrestling with (Lucy coming into terms of her own beauty, Edmond with becoming a man, Eustace with trying not to be so insufferable, and Caspian coming to terms with being the King he knows he must be).  You could really feel with each of the characters' plight, and it doesn't come across being whiny or preachy. 

What I really love about these stories is that Love is the most prominent theme. I don't mean falling in love, but learning to love one another despite your differences, and to love your family no matter what kind of mistakes they make. No relationship is perfect, but they love each other despite their upsets.

My favorite part was Reepicheep, the noble mouse. He is SO cute, but also very open to forging new relationships, mainly with Eustace. He was the only one to see Eustace's potential, and stuck by him when he was having a hard time. The end was my favorite part of Reepicheep's journey (but I'm not going to say what it is here!!!).

I don't know what is it about this series, but every time I see Aslan or hear his voice I cry (Liam Neeson does it. If his badass status wasn't solidified before, it definitely is now). Maybe it's something about these books that realy bring be back to my inner child, or I'm just a sally. Either way, these films are so touching. Dawn Treader was no exception to this! I looked like a psycho sitting in the theatre by myself, crying. But what else is new?

One thing I was not a fan of was how Apted opted to change Caspian's accent. In the previous film, Caspian had a Mediterranean accent, but in this it was Ben Barnes' normal English accent.  The director said he wanted it to sound a bit more natural for Barnes, but that's a pretty big thing to just change up in following films. Viewers need the contintuity, not to mention kids will actually notice that change.

All in all, I really enjoyed this film. However, I think this will be the last adaptation of the books that we see. The next installment, "The Silver Chair," has only Eustace and his friend Jill return to Narnia. The Pevensie children don't make another appearance until "The Horse and his Boy," and it's a pretty brief reappearance. Prince Caspian didn't perform too well at the box office (so much so that Disney dropped the following film production), and when I went there were only about 20 people in the theater. Guess those of us who love these movies will just have to read the books instead!

Wall Street

Release Date: December 11, 1987
Director: Oliver Stone

Synopsis: A young stockbroker lands the chance to work exclusively with Gordon Gekko, the stock market's crowned prince of theives. Gekko takes the young man under his wings and teaches him the ropes of illegal trading and the high life it brings, only to see them both plummet to the bottom.
Review: SO boring. And I honestly don't understand why Michael Douglas won an Oscar for this role, all he did was say the F-word and slick his hair back. Not to mention Charlie Sheen's version of the eager stockbroker was overacted the WHOLE time. Now I know this movie was made in the 80s so cheeseball clothing and music was to be expected, but I felt like I was in a retro acid trip. Why people felt this film deserved sequel is beyond me. This will probably be my shortest review EVER, but it was so awful I couldn't even watch the second half of it. Not recommended.