"What Just Happened" / "The Mosquito Coast" / "Watchmen" (second viewing) / "Milk" DVD

What Just Happened - Directed by Barry Levinson, starring Robert De Niro, Bruce Willis, and John Turturro - Rated R

What Just Happened is a behind the scenes look at what it's like to be a producer in Hollywood. It's based on a book by real-life producer Art Linson (who also wrote the screenplay). With De Niro as the producer and Bruce Willis playing himself, I expected this movie to be hilarious, but it is mediocre on nearly every level. First of all, the book used true stories and included the names of actual actors involved in them. Even though the stories are still the same, I wanted to know who these stories were based on. Especially the British director (Michael Wincott, who steals every scene he's in) subplot about changes that are forced on him. The changes involve a scene in which a dog is shot in the head onscreen, which I found hilarious because I've comented a hundred times about the fact that a villain can kill countless humans and no one bats an eye, but hurt a dog and you are evil incarnate. So I enjoyed that aspect and Bruce Willis appeared to be having fun in his freak out scenes (he plays himself and he refuses to shave his beard for a role).

But that's where the fun ends for me. The sped up car scenes were annoying. I didn't care about De Niro's most recent divorced wife, much less the older one. I had no feelings toward his character whatsoever, really. I didn't want his film to fall apart, but I didn't want it to succeed, either. If this movie's goal was to show that no one cares about anything in Hollywood, then it succeeded. And that may very well have been the goal, but when it creates an indifference in me, the viewer, then I'd rather not watch it. That's really it. I expected to laugh a lot, but I was completely indifferent to the whole thing. I assume actual Hollywood people like it, though, so about 0.005% of the audience was pleased.

The Mosquito Coast - Directed by Peter Weir, starring Harrison Ford, Helen Mirren, and River Phoenix - Rated PG

I know this came out in 1986, but I want to throw in an older movie now and then if impresses me. The Mosquito Coast is about a troubled genius (Ford) who decides to uproot his family and move to a Central American jungle devoid of civilization and build an ice factory. When I read the synopsis I was instantly interested. Something about people going deep into the jungle where only a boat can reach always seem to appeal to me (my favorite films include Apocalypse Now, Aguirre, and Fitzcarraldo). I guess I've skipped this for so long because the poster for it is ridiculously boring. Sure, Ford has a troubled look on his face, but that's all it is, and doesn't he look a lot like Kurt Russell there?

Early on this movie had my interest. Hearing Ford rant about the problems with the world and how a war is about to happen is pretty entertaining. He goes off with such ease so I instantly bought into his character. Hell, a lot of the stuff he says makes sense, now more than ever. When he takes his family to the jungle and starts to build his own mini-civilization I was still with him. I even found it believable that his family would go along with no complaints because it is established early on that he is eccentric and moving to the jungle might not seem like that crazy of an idea to all of them. But it's not all good times and eccentricities. Eventually, you start to see that Ford might be losing it. He treats his children with extreme harshness at times (mentally, not physically). And while his wife (Mirren) is adamantly by his side, his two sons start to see the problems. Especially River Phoenix, who also provides narration. Phoenix stands up well against Ford and the two truly seem to have a familial connection onscreen.

Weir doesn't do anything special in this film, but he does have a few nice shots of nature and river travel, which leads me to believe that he was heavily influenced by Werner Herzog (Aguirre and Fitzcarraldo). I half expected Ford's family to come across Klaus Kinski hauling a steamboat up the side of a mountain at one point. The world of Fitzcarraldo and The Mosquito Coast is not too far apart. And if you haven't seen either of the Herzog films mentioned, please check them out, you won't be sorry.

There are tons of thought provoking questions to this film. Is civilization becoming too material? Where does God fit into all this? (That question is handled with a kind of bookended plot involving a missionary priest.) What do humans really need to survive? There are more, but the point is that this film makes you ask yourself how you would handle life in Ford's new civilization. I wouldn't last nearly as long as the characters in this film.

Watchmen - Second viewing

Just a few things here. I wanted to check out Watchmen on a regular screen the second time to compare, but I ended up in IMAX again, so I've got nothing on that. I will say that I enjoyed this film just as much the second time as I did the first. And that was the main thing I wanted to find out: does this film stand up to a second viewing? For me, it absolutely did and I want to watch it at least one more time before the theatrical run is done especially since the screenwriter (David Hayter) has now put out a call to all Watchmen fans to watch it again to boost the box office take because he thinks, and I agree, that if this movie doesn't make more money then no studio will allow another one like it to be made again.

Milk - DVD

I also watched Milk again and while I disagree with the Academy on giving Penn the Oscar over Rourke, I still think this is one of Penn's best performances. And I mentioned something about the weird shots of Milk and Dan White talking (where they are in the bottom half of the screen and a large amount of the screen is taken up by the ceiling and walls) and I realized what was going on this time. When they first talk, they are small on the screen, the next time they are medium, and when it's getting close to the assassination their heads fill the screen. This visual clue to the conflict brewing between them was really cool, I thought. Also, the DVD has a few deleted scenes and some featurettes, but just watch the old documentary if you want a good story about the real people from the movie.

Next - Synedoche, New York, and Happy-Go-Lucky.

"Milk" / "Friday the 13th" / Oscar rant

My name is Eric Harris and I'm here to recruit you to the idea that the Academy went political (California recently voted against gay marriage) and gave Sean Penn a slightly undeserved Oscar. More on that later, first the actual movie: Milk.



Milk is the story of Harvey Milk, the first openly gay elected official in San Francisco who was killed by Dan White (also an elected official). Milk is a nice guy and that makes him easy to like. People around him are happy and want him to do good and the audience gets right in step with them. That is the main factor of this film because Sean Penn plays Milk and Sean Penn is not known for being likable, or happy. Sean Penn is known for playing miserable people that do bad things and have bad things done to them. The man's face is a permanent scowl, for god's sake. So it is surprising, entertaining, and impressive to see Penn embodying Harvey Milk as he does. He won the Academy Award for this and I can see why (though I don't agree with it).


But this film has more going for it than performances. It has some ideas about hope and acceptance and who doesn't like that? The acceptance concerns gay rights and that is something that people to this day have a problem with. I didn't really need convincing from this film. If gay people want to get married or work in the same place I work, then they should be able to as far as I'm concerned. I was just hoping that this movie didn't turn out to be a two hour long gay pride parade with flamboyant gay people in risque costumes making out and rubbing each other. If that sounds anti-gay, so be it, but being heterosexual doesn't involve putting on displays of it, so why is sexuality and showmanship always part of gay pride stuff? Can't people be gay and wear suits and still get their point across? Yes, they can and this movie shows that. Though there is a bit of the flamboyance and whatnot, but it's not over the top or even unnecessary. This film walks a fine line and it keeps itself from being comical or too serious, also. It is entertaining and hopeful and that is thanks to Gus Van Sant.


Van Sant not only kept the movie balanced, but he also threw in some style here and there with some split screen work and some interesting angles. Is there some kind of film school message to be found with the scenes between Milk and White (in which they are shown from the shoulders up, but only take up half the screen)? I'm sure there is but I don't want to dissect it. I just noticed that it looked different and frankly, different is almost always better these days. So check out Milk for a great performance from Penn, two impressive performances from Hirsch and Franco, a balancing act from Van Sant, and ignore the annoying Diego Luna (you'll understand when you see it).



Now just a paragraph on the reboot of "Friday the 13th." No need to look deeply into this one. It has Jason, he kills people in semi-interesting ways. He runs now, which I thought was a mistake. The whole menacing thing about Jason is that he always walked but still caught up to everybody. Anyway, Jason kills potheads and oversexed college kids, so this is business as usual. The jokes are cheesy, but high school kids on down might enjoy them. There are a few odd references that I personally enjoyed (if the whole Heineken/Pabst Blue Ribbon thing wasn't a nod to "Blue Velvet" then that is just one of the biggest coincidences in film history). There are some unintentionally funny lines ("Where are you, gun?") and a guy screams just like a little girl at one point. So there is fun to be had here, but I think this is a misstep in the series. "Freddy Vs Jason" was much more enjoyable. I wish they would have stuck with that route. Oh, and Jason uses a bow and arrow in this, which I thought was odd.


Now for my Oscar rant. Sean Penn won Best Actor tonight in the bloated, overlong Academy Awards. I knew that he was neck and neck with Rourke, but I still thought Rourke would win because it's the better performance. I'm going back to my old mainstay argument when it comes to accting awards here. Milk was a real person and Sean Penn did a great impression of the guy. Mickey Rourke did not get to watch footage of Randy the Ram! He had to create something from the page. That is much more impressive to me. Not to mention that his performance is much more entertaining, if that matters anymore. But "The Wrestler" was about wrestling and giving an award for playing a wrestler doesn't give the Academy members the chance to pat themselves on the back as much as giving an award to the protrayer of a slain gay rights activist does. So I'm saying it was all political, especially since it was Penn who won, and that is the only way I can justify it. But here's to Mickey Rourke anyway, there's just going to be an empty spot next to the dozens of other awards you (rightfully) won before tonight.



Next week: I honestly don't know, nothing big comes out, I might just do a few DVD reviews - Frozen River, Changeling, Body of Lies...