The Wrestler: 4 Stars **slight scene spoilers**

I'm going to go in another direction with this movie review blog. I'm going to try to have my posts be more of a reaction to the filmmaking rather than a formal review. The plot, the actors names etc. can all be found on IMD and Rotten tomatoes and I feel like I am avoiding the point by covering all of that information. In the end, the reaction and discussion of the result is all the matters. So hopefully this new format is more helpful. 

I absolutely loved The Wrestler. However, it is definitely not a universally appealing film. That's the thing about art; great art is never appreciated and understood by all, and it shouldn't be. Some artists or scholars will disagree with me on the why of that statement. Some think art shouldn't be personal, as this may blind the artist to a work's true meaning and make it difficult to complete. By being objective and specific it is harder to confuse the intent. With such a specific intent, that will of course turn off people who have no interest in that subject matter. However, I believe that all art, from the extremely personal to the lavishly theatrical, has the same percentage of  natural alienation. So why not invest yourself into your creation? I believe it is the impersonal art that makes it difficult to connect to. It might be more widely understood, but that doesn't mean anyone should care. While it can be just as easily misunderstood or glossed over, I feel personal art results in a more honest and truthful representation of the subject matter and thus a more universal appeal. Why should I invest any emotion or time into something if the creator hasn't invested the same? The artist may have taken the creative time to produce something, but when an artist becomes part of his/her creation a mutual understanding of care is developed between artist and viewer. While the interpretation may be different from that of the artist, the goal of consciousness and introspection is reached and that is all that matters. This personal investment is why Mickey Rourke's performance, and the overall affect of the film, is so outstanding. 

While everyone in the film is great, Rourke as Randy "The Ram" Robinson does truly stand out and is deserved of any accolades stowed upon him. However, lets not forget the director and writer who do have a large part in assisting Rourke to get to this point. First, there is Aronofsky's raw approach. In terms of his previous work think of PI rather than The Fountain. Aronofsky's choice of film instead of digital is excellent. I'm not sure what kind of film he used, or the exact process, but the result has the look of a slightly aged, expired roll of color film. The color is bright, but something seems off, much like The Ram himself. Second, there are some fantastic scenes written for Rourke to excel in. You might think that one of the emotionally revealing scenes shown in the trailers is what I would choose, however I think the smaller everyday scenes are what add more to The Ram's character. Working his day job in a deli, having a beer and reminiscing about the eighties, and one in particular where Randy has nothing better to do than play NES wrestling (as himself) with one of the neighborhood kids. The interaction between the two of them is priceless. 

The Wrestler provides us with a brief vignette from Randy "The Ram" Robinson's troubled life, and probably one of the more important ones. While you will receive no additional information regarding his ex-wife, his estranged daughter, or what he has done in the past to end up where he is now, it really isn't necessary. Think of it as a documentary with no filmmaker intervention. Normal people don't walk around blurting out all the details of their past with people they already know and don't have convenient flashbacks filling in all of the holes. During scenes with his daughter I suppose Randy could have delved deeper into his emotions and his thoughts on their relationship and his relationship with her mother, but then again, I don't think Randy is the kind of person who would do that.  

The Spirit: 2.5 stars

**update: I originally gave this film 3 stars, but have changed it to 2.5. This isn't to say I didn't like the film or that I wouldn't watch it again, but rather conceding that it isn't the most well crafted film, and giving it 3 stars would be unfair to other films which are technically superior. 3 stars would be saying this film is close to 4, and it isn't anywhere near that. It is just an enjoyable 2.5 star film.

This is going to be a quick review because there really isn’t much thought needed for The Spirit, but that’s part of why I’m giving the film three stars. You’ll go on Rotten Tomatoes and see that it received a paltry 14%, read reviews implying that it is vacant of all emotion (which is correct) and state that it is all “style over substance,” and most likely dismiss the movie if you’re not the biggest graphic novel enthusiast. My question is are we really supposed to care?

Perhaps we are spoiled moviegoers now since we’ve had the pleasure of witnessing the rebirth of Batman, the beauty of Sin City and the depths of Watchmen, but I’ve always thought graphic novels and comic books read exactly like The Spirit is presented. I was never an aficionado, but I’ve read a few comic books and even when at their deepest they aren’t the greatest pieces of literature out there. They are bold, beautiful and fast just like The Spirit. I still have yet to come across a review from someone who has actually read The Spirit, and I’d be interested to see if director Frank Miller stayed true to the source.

Maybe it was because I went in expecting nothing, as most of the reviews prepared me for, but I enjoyed The Spirit and would watch it again. It is gorgeous to look at and it is all over the top fun. It’s really best not to bring any logic into this one, just sit back and enjoy the ridiculous show. What is the story you ask? No matter, that’s just the bit of glue holding together all of the cleavage, sexual innuendos, violence and flimsy hard talk dialogue, but I mean that in a good way. While film has evolved over time into a fine art form, movies were created to be an escape and that is exactly what The Spirit delivers.

Lars and the Real Girl: 4 stars

There are films that, for me, serve as a litmus test for one’s personality. You can tell a lot about someone by the films they love. It doesn’t work on everybody. If someone just isn’t that into movies then it won’t work. Some films work better than others, there are different litmus tests for different people, some preferences just don’t matter, but others are windows into ones true self. I know that sounds corny, but it’s true and Lars and the Real Girl is one of those films for me. If you dislike this movie, then we may have a problem (I’m looking in your direction Michael Phillips).

Lars and the Real Girl is the story of a man named Lars, played by the more and more impressive Ryan Gosling, from a small town who leads a life of isolation in this family’s coach house. His older brother and his expectant wife, played wonderfully by Emily Mortimer, now inhabit the main house. As the story unfolds we gather more bits of information from the family’s past to help explain why Lars may act the way he does. The basic plot is that in order to deal with difficulties with social interaction, a painful past, and longing for love Lars orders a life size realistic doll to be his companion. He pretends she is real, names her, gives her a past and introduces her to his family as his girlfriend whom he met on the Internet. His family, as well as the town, on advice from their physician goes along with Lars’ delusion that this doll is real in order to help Lars deal with his true issues.

Some reviews I have read make the mistake of penning Lars, along with the movie as a whole, as quirky. I feel this couldn’t be further from the truth, and would probably offend a large group of people who have the same type of disorder portrayed in this film. I believe Lars along with the film is very true to life. I think a better word would be distinct. It would be irresponsible to assume emotionally damaged or delusional people don’t exist as represented in this film just because one hasn’t had the experience in their own life. Furthermore, the film is very restrained. No character is so over the top that it is unbelievable. Some may argue that the fact that the whole town bands together to help Lars is unbelievable. I’m a pretty cynical person, but had no problem believing that this could occur, especially in a small town.

I was even waiting for the inevitable bully scene, where an immature secondary character confronts the main character about being different, calls him names, beats him up and makes him cry. It is a cheap and cliché cinema tool to evoke compassion from the audience. That scene never came in Lars and that’s because it doesn’t need it. The filmmaking, writing and acting is superb, and it wasn’t hard for me to become attached. The film is also not afraid to allow you to laugh. Life is funny, even when it’s painful. If you can’t learn to laugh at yourself, then the difficult times are going to be even worse. I belly laughed and cried and was very impressed with this one. I can’t wait to watch it again.

If you watch this film and find it hard to believe anything that occurs, feel that it’s ridiculous that everyone is going along with Lars’ delusion and he just needs to be told the doll isn’t real, or feel that the characters are over the top, you can consider yourself the point of the film. If left in your hands Lars would probably be in a mental institution getting worse.

Adventureland: 3.5 stars

We’ve all had horrible summer jobs. I’ve actually worked as a telemarketer with a group of my high school friends. The question is always, “ How can you stand it there?” The answer isn’t usually a positive one, but in reality it is the camaraderie, the crushes and aimless fun created in the meantime that allow our minds to show up every day. Summer jobs are a sort of limbo between the end of one part of life and the start of a new chapter. Adventureland creates this atmosphere with perfection and throws in a very touching coming of age love story as well.

In the summer of 1987, James Brennan (Jesse Eisenberg) is sideswiped by reality following his graduation from college when he is told that his parents can’t afford to pay for a trip to Europe as previously planned. Needing money to help his transition into graduate school, but having no real life experience to speak off, James take a summer job at the local amusement park working the game booths. There, he meets and falls for Em (Kristen Stewart) who is dealing with some issues of her own. Along for the ride is an excellent supporting cast anchored by Martin Starr as the super geek, and Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig as the hilarious park managers. Hell, even Ryan Reynolds fits perfectly and does a great job of underplaying and not making his character stick out like a sore thumb (which as written, could have easily happened).

I really liked this film. For me, Adventureland will be another movie that, just as Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist did, fits perfectly into a specific place and time both on film and in viewer’s lives. Armed with a great soundtrack (I’m not cool enough to know all the bands from this soundtrack, but I know the music I heard was great) the film brings back a rush of personal memories and that ability to relate to it's audience is big part of it's success. The music links together memories from crappy summer jobs, high school or college loves and our own hilarious misadventures and allows us to relive them in between opening and closing credits along with a fictional group of friends.

This was a particularly difficult review to write not because the film was difficult, but because there really isn’t that much to analyze. It’s one of those really solid films that is a breeze to sit through, is crafted well behind the camera and in front and is a film that you just need to go see and experience rather than read about.

Overlooked Gems

I've been tied up with other projects lately, so I haven't seen any movies I wanted to review. A review of MST3K would just be weird. So I bring you seven films from my personal collection (one I have yet to purchase) that you may have overlooked. These are all little gems that I was very surprised by. That's usually the case. You pick see a film that didn't interest you in the first place, or didn't have expectations for, and then it knocks you on your butt. Keep in mind these films are not universally adored or anything, so I'm not saying that you'll absolutely love them, but you should at least give them a chance. You might be pleasantly surprised. So here they are in no particular order. 

1. Shotgun Stories: This is a modern day western set in Southeast Arkansas. This tense and engaging story of a family feud confidently ranks up there with the best films I saw in 2008. The actors are phenomenal, anchored by Academy Award nominee Michael Shannon, and the soundtrack is outstanding as well. It is slow moving, but what it lacks in action it makes up for in story and acting. 

2. Oleanna:  Oleanna is a 3 act 2 person play by David Mamet, and Mamet brings his work to the big screen with William H. Macy in the lead role. The subject matter is sexual harassment and the film is very tense and very minimal. The power of the acting and script is all that is needed. Its one of those movies that just slowly turns up the tension and makes you boil inside. If you like any of  David Mamet's work or any other dialogue driven films, then definitely check this out. 

3. Diggers: Written by Ken Marino, starring Paul Rudd and Maura Tierney...need I say more? Ok, I probably do. This film is just a joy to watch. It's one of those movies that just fits in this really nice niche; it doesn't do too much and doesn't ask for too much from viewers. It's funny, touching, and very well done. It really doesn't matter what the story is, just go watch it!

4. A Guide To Recognizing Your Saints: Written and directed by first timer Dito Montiel, Saints tells the story of a group of friends from the mid-80's growing up in Astoria, Queens. This film was very outstanding for a first time Director, let alone a seasoned one. This one is as gritty as it gets, and the fact that is based on Montiel's personal memoir makes it all the more intense.  RDJ's performance alone is enough to give this one a shot. 

5.  Tape:  This is another film based on a play. Richard Linklater brings Stephen Belber's stage play to the big screen. Ethan Hawke, Robert Sean Leonard and Uma Thurman star in what is a very low budget film. Even more minimal than Oleanna, Tape is shot entirely on what seems like a $250  mini-dv camera (don't worry it's on a tripod), and in a one room location. This film also boasts the feel of a documentary. It is the story of three high-school friends reuniting to reminisce but soon find out one of them has an ulterior motive of revealing one of their painful pasts. Again, if all you need is a good story and good dialogue then check this one out. 

6. Brick: You'll either love or hate this one. I haven't really found much of an in between. I personally think it's a breath of fresh air. The story is a throwback to the fast talking hard-boiled detective stories of the 20's, except this one is set in suburbia and the characters are in High School. Turn it up loud and really pay attention because they words come at you very fast. Even if it's not you're thing you can't deny the talent of first time director Rian Johnson. Watch out for his next film which hits the theatre this year; The Brothers Bloom with Adrian Brody and Mark Ruffalo.

7. Waitress: I have to admit I thought this was going to be a very lame chick flick when I first saw it advertised. I caught it at a friends on DVD and I was amazed. It's just very funny, charming, smart and will make you want some pie.