Tag Archives: Drama

#34: Whisper of the Heart (1995)

23 Tuesday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Shizuku Tsukishima is a schoolgirl in Japan,
Forgetful and neglectful and without a long-term plan.
She whiles away the hours reading books and fairy tales
And writes her own song lyrics, which she timidly unveils.
She notices that all of her library books were read
By Seiji Amasawa, and she muses in her head
What kind of person he might be, this other rival reader
Who seems to share her tastes and always chances to precede her.
 
While junior high school drama causes aches of heart and head,
She meets a jerkish boy and is upset by what is said.
One day, a feline leads her to an antique shop nearby,
Where kindly old man Nishi and a statue catch her eye.
When Nishi’s grandson Seiji, whom she earlier had met,
Allows her in to see it, she forgets she was upset.
He plans to fashion violins and plays at her request,
A song that shows the talents with which both of them are blessed.
 
Though romance now is budding, Seiji leaves to show his stuff,
Which makes Shizuku wonder if, for him, she’s good enough.
She tries to prove herself and write a novel within weeks,
Inspired by the Baron statue found among antiques.
Her parents start to worry as her grades begin to fall,
And all her time is taken by the book she cannot stall.
At last, when she is finished and her gem has been revealed,
Her future’s seeming clearer, and their love at last is sealed.
_____________________
 

Does anyone out there have a movie with which they fondly relate on a deep, personal level? Whisper of the Heart is that film for me. I first saw this anime movie after being reintroduced to Studio Ghibli and holding a marathon of their films. I enjoyed almost all of them, but this one stayed in my mind and heart and is the only anime I own.

Shizuku is possibly the film character with whom I most identify: procrastinating, occasionally scatter-brained, devoted to her reading and writing sometimes at the expense of school and relationships, and deriving immense fear and pleasure from the appreciation of her work. I relate to her on multiple levels, whether it’s the adolescent uncertainty about the future, the apprehension of showing her creations to others, the way in which her inspirations seem to come to life, or the desire to prove herself as a writer. She even writes alternate lyrics to her favorite song, John Denver’s “Country Roads” (one of my favorites as well).

My VC joined me for this latest viewing at my insistence, and she found the film nice but “juvenile,” in her words, citing the soap opera-like crushes in the first half. I disagree; even if the characters are in junior high, they deal with life and familial issues that remain relatable. Indeed, the film’s greatest charm lies in its ordinariness, in everyday commutes to school, conversations among friends, the beautifully hand-drawn details of train rides and antique shops and sunrises. The film’s overall peaceful, mundane tone may be boring to many people, especially those who prefer the more exciting or fantastical anime, but I love this quiet, quotidian quality, which I’ve found in other favorite anime like The Girl Who Leapt through Time and Wolf Children. Yet, unlike these films which didn’t leave me wholly satisfied by the end, Whisper of the Heart offers hope for the future, at once corny and joyful, exactly the kind of hoped-for conclusion I enjoy.

That quiet mood isn’t everything, though; there are similar films that are just missing something and didn’t make my list, such as Ghibli’s own From Up on Poppy Hill. Perhaps it’s the use of “Country Roads,” which culminates in a stirringly quaint musical number midway through. Perhaps it’s the conversation with Shizuku’s parents (played by Jean Smart and James B. Sikking in the English version), in which they agree she should follow her heart but brilliantly buck that cliché with an important add-on so often omitted from other films. Most likely, it’s the role of writing in the plot; the second half, concerning Shizuku’s novel, features several conversations with wise Mr. Nishi, and I find his advice to her just as encouraging for myself. I’m also nursing a novel idea, and after watching this film, I always feel excited to write and to seek the “gems” within myself. What other movie has that effect?

The English dub is excellent throughout, particularly Harold Gould as Mr. Nishi and Brittany Snow as Shizuku. David Gallagher, Ashley Tisdale, and Cary Elwes are also featured as Seiji, Shizuku’s friend Yuko, and the Baron, respectively. Elwes later reprised his role in the lesser Ghibli film The Cat Returns, which really was juvenile at times but still only narrowly missed out on inclusion on my list. That film was essentially like a fantasy Shizuku would write, and I would have loved for perhaps an after-credits scene showing her finishing it as a successful writer married to Seiji; that would have been utterly satisfying and would have earned it a place on my list.

Hayao Miyazaki and Isao Takahata get all the credit as the masterminds of Studio Ghibli (and Miyazaki did produce and write Whisper of the Heart), but this my favorite film was directed by Yoshifumi Kondō, and it truly is a shame that he died just a few years after its release. Though I must admit that other films are better and deserve a higher place on the list, Whisper of the Heart will always be one of my fondest inspirations.

Best line: (Shizuku’s father, who’s concerned about her) “All right, Shizuku, go ahead and do what your heart tells you. But it’s never easy when you do things differently from everyone else. If things don’t go well, you’ll only have yourself to blame.”

 
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

271 Followers and Counting

#35: Spider-Man Trilogy (2002, 2004, 2007)

22 Monday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

(Spoilers ahead)
 
Poor Peter Parker, a nerdy outsider,
Is bitten by one super-modified spider,
Which grants him the power of webbing defense,
As well as a precognitive “spider sense.”
His crush Mary Jane Watson lives just next door,
And yet he has not tried to make friendship more.
 
Although Peter’s uncle attempts to explain,
His nephew tries using his powers for gain.
His bitterness costs him his dear Uncle Ben,
So Peter does hero work time and again.
Meanwhile, his friend Harry Osborn’s own dad
Attempts an experiment, which then goes bad.
 
As Peter fights criminal thugs and prevails,
The newspaper calls him a menace for sales,
But when the Green Goblin arrives on his glider,
He proves a formidable foe for the spider.
It’s Norman Osborn, with whom Pete has connections
And who likes to argue with his own reflections.
 
When Osborn learns Spider-Man’s identity,
He goes for the heart with his villainous glee.
Brave Peter saves MJ and others in danger
And learns that the Green Goblin isn’t a stranger.
When Osborn is killed, Spider-Man gets the blame,
And Harry wants vengeance on Spider-Man’s name.
________________
 
Although New York’s safe under Spider-Man’s guard,
Pete’s personal life is continually hard.
His best friend still wishes his hero self dead,
And Mary Jane soon has a spaceman to wed.
Although money’s tight, Peter’s thrilled he can meet
Doc Otto Octavius, a genius to Pete.
 
Another experiment Oscorp is backing
Goes horribly wrong when stability’s lacking,
And Otto is fused with mechanical arms,
Which turn him to crime and don’t care whom he harms.
He plans to remake the experiment new,
Bigger and better, more dangerous too.
 
Meanwhile, ol’ Peter, affected by stress,
Is losing his powers, though not from bad press.
Deciding that all of his cares can be solved,
He lives as a man, with no spider involved.
His job and his schoolwork improve every day,
But he doubles back when Doc Ock takes MJ.
 
He fights his old mentor on tower and train
And ends up abducted with no Mary Jane.
Pete’s taken to Harry, who made Doc a deal
And is taken aback by the shocking reveal.
Pete learns from his friend of the doctor’s new crime
And swings to the harbor to stop him in time.
 
Octavius puts up a fight once again,
But Peter convinces him, like Uncle Ben,
To give up his dreams and to stop all the strife,
And Doctor Octavius pays with his life.
His secret revealed to both MJ and Harry,
Pete now has his love and a new villain scary.
_________________
 
All seems to be going well for Peter Parker,
But now his persona’s about to get darker.
He has Mary Jane and romantic contentment,
But Harry attacks him in growing resentment.
The newest Green Goblin, he battles his friend
But suffers amnesia they did not intend.
 
Meanwhile, Flint Marko, a crook close at hand,
Falls into a hole and is turned into sand.
Meanwhile again, Peter’s peer Eddie Brock
Upstages him till he is shown as a crock.
Meanwhile once more, a black symbiote slime
Attaches to Spider-Man’s suit in no time.
 
The black stuff from space changes him for the worst;
Since Flint killed his uncle, he bears a blood thirst.
His attitude’s changed, Mary Jane notices,
And Peter despises what everyone says.
When Harry remembers, Pete causes more pain
And even is jerkish to poor Mary Jane.
 
At last, he decides that enough is enough
And goes to a church to peel off the black stuff.
Once Venom’s created when Eddie’s infected,
He teams up with Flint that revenge be perfected.
They take Mary Jane (she is captured a lot)
And call Spider-Man that their fight may be fought.
 
Appealing to Harry to help him save her,
Pete gains back his friend and a super partner.
The battle is rough, full of Venom and sand,
But Peter and Harry prevail and withstand.
It comes at a price, but once evil’s subdued,
Pete’s reconciled romance is slowly renewed.
________________
 

Before Iron Man and Captain America began setting box-office records, Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man films set new highs for the superhero genre. Typically, the first two are lauded and the third decried, but I find all three enormously entertaining and pitch-perfect in spirit and tone for their source material.

The first Spider-Man is among the best and most faithful comic book adaptations around, nailing who Peter Parker is and how he becomes everyone’s favorite webslinger. The casting is exceptional; while not everyone’s a Toby Maguire fan, he captures Peter’s innate lovable geekiness to a tee and effortlessly shows a much wider range of emotion than Andrew Garfield in The Amazing Spider-Man reboot. While the first movie skips Gwen Stacy in favor of Pete’s inevitable love Mary Jane Watson, Kirsten Dunst is a beautiful girl-next-door love interest who shares that iconic upside-down kiss with Spidey. Their romance is sweet and heart-felt, pure and innocent, though not immune to the typical bumps along the road of love. On top of them, there’s Cliff Robertson as wise Uncle Ben, Rosemary Harris as equally wise Aunt May, and J. K. Simmons as antagonistic J. Jonah Jameson, all superbly owning their roles, especially Simmons who couldn’t be replaced for the reboot. While the Green Goblin’s mask is rather hokey, Willem Dafoe is an effectively creepy villain with his intentionally devilish voice. So many scenes are simply untouchable that the reboot was forced to avoid some of the best and most essential aspects of the story, such as the whole “With great power…” conversation, and changed much of what it could for the worse. Not to say The Amazing Spider-Man is a bad film, but it simply cannot compare with the original, particularly Toby Maguire as my ideal Peter Parker.

As good as the first is, though, the second surpassed it to become one of the best superhero films ever. With all returning actors, including James Franco as Harry Osborn, the relationships are deepened, secrets revealed, and cliffhangers formed; in short, it does everything a successful sequel ought to do. It also introduced Alfred Molina as another favorite villain Doctor Octopus, turning the consistently villainous comic book character into a tragic role both dangerous and sympathetic. The train battle is one of the most exciting and awesome superhero fights I’ve seen, and Peter’s temporary departure from being Spider-Man further develops his struggle with his hero identity. One thing I’ve noticed about these films is that there are different perspectives from the people he defends. Superman is universally lauded by everyone, while the X-Men are mostly feared and hated for their mutations. Even with the Avengers, most opinions are debated among high-profile leaders, except for a few brief scenes. Spider-Man is applauded by most of the everyday New Yorkers, but certain non-fans (police and mainly Jameson) inexplicably see him as a menace and have the power to sway others’ views against him. It’s a balanced approach that makes hero work into a tricky public image nightmare, though even Jameson misses Spidey when he disappears.

The third film has its detractors, who often dislike it for its over-packed plot and those scenes with the “dark” Peter dancing stupidly. Yet, in many ways, it delivers a purely enjoyable comic book mish-mash of villains and subplots. The action scenes are amazing, from Peter’s mid-air battle with Harry to his face-off with Sandman among subway trains to the big climax which is as close to an epic villain team-up as we may get outside of the comics. As stuffed as the plot is with concurrent storylines and coincidences, nothing is overly random and the various subplots do tie together smoothly; Flint Marko’s reappearance and the vindictive wiles of Harry Osborn spark Peter’s desire for revenge, which is aggravated by the symbiote-soon-to-be-known-as-Venom. I can even defend the silly dance scenes since the symbiote increases Peter’s aggression and confidence but doesn’t necessarily diminish his inherent geekiness; such is the result. I do wish that the Venom symbiote had had a better introduction than a convenient meteorite landing near Peter and MJ, and that the film had ended on a happier note, considering it would be the last of the original series. It would have been nice for Raimi and company to collaborate on one more film, though it was not to be. They seemed to be setting up the Lizard storyline that was ultimately used in the reboot; notice that Peter’s college professor Curt Connors only had one arm, and in one scene in the third film, there were lizards he was studying in the background. Oh, well.

While the animated TV shows (especially The Spectacular Spider-Man) often do the characters justice and the reboot has at least expanded on Gwen Stacy, all three Raimi films are such excellent comic book adaptations that no other Spider-Man movie could add anything to their chosen storylines but additional special effects and more villains (I’m sure they’ll get to the rest of the rogues gallery, like Vulture, Kraven, Black Cat, Scorpion, and maybe Hydro-man or Carnage one of these days). Tobey Maguire will always be Peter Parker for me, and these films will remain comic book classics.

Best line from Spider-Man: (Peter, at the end) “Whatever life holds in store for me, I will never forget these words: “With great power comes great responsibility.” This is my gift, my curse. Who am I? I’m Spider-Man.”

Best line from Spider-Man 2: (a witness, after pizza-delivery boy Peter changes into Spider-Man) “He just stole that guy’s pizza!”

Best line from Spider-Man 3: (Peter, at the end) “Whatever comes our way, whatever battle we have raging inside us, we always have a choice. My friend Harry taught me that. He chose to be the best of himself. It’s the choices that make us who we are, and we can always choose to do what’s right.”

 
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

270 Followers and Counting

#36: The Five People You Meet in Heaven (2004)

20 Saturday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

Eddie worked at Ruby Pier,
Fixing rides year after year,
But Eddie is no longer here;
It seems he died today.
‘Twas on his birthday that he died
From some malfunction in a ride.
A final sacrifice he tried
Has left him with dismay.
 
In that big theme park in the sky,
He learns that, when all humans die,
Five people from their lives supply
The answers that they sought.
He learns the histories of those
Who shine a light upon his woes,
Mistakes, heartaches that they expose,
And lessons they’ve been taught.
 
He feels his life did not transcend,
A failure to the very end,
Till they help Eddie comprehend
The truth of good and ill.
In heaven, Eddie is aghast,
But makes amends for what is past,
And sees that, to the very last,
His life had purpose still.
________________
 

Here we go from Doctor Zhivago, one of the highest-grossing films ever made, to a Hallmark film that doesn’t even have a Wikipedia page. When I first saw this television movie, I had little idea how much it would touch me, and I soon read the same-titled novel for a school book report. Written by Mitch Albom (whose adapted work appeared previously on the list with Have a Little Faith), The Five People You Meet in Heaven is a “meet-‘em-and-move-on” film but in reverse, beginning with Eddie’s death and revealing his life story through flashbacks. The transitions are a bit sudden but deftly handled, often passing between timelines as if through doors. The three main periods differ primarily in their color palette: Eddie’s youthful past tends to have warm, full colors, while the present day before and after his passing is marked by gray bleakness.

The acting is of consistently higher quality than most television productions, particularly the Golden Globe-worthy lead performance by John Voight as Eddie. Playing different ages, he successfully navigates the full spectrum of emotions—despair, anger, confusion, grief, contentment—as his eyes are opened to how lives interconnect and sorrows become clear from a different perspective. Also excellent are Ellen Burstyn as the namesake of Ruby Pier, Michael Imperioli as his WWII army captain, and Jeff Daniels as a blue-skinned freak at the amusement park.

As that last credit would imply, there are some strange moments that border on surreal, and the scenes where Eddie moves on to his next person are somewhat confusing until they are explained. Still, the film doesn’t go overboard with bizarreness in its stabs at transcendence, like The Tree of Life or The Fountain. The Five People You Meet in Heaven remains grounded in human emotion and shouldn’t leave viewers scratching their heads by the end. On the contrary, the final scene exemplifies the power of the “meet ‘em and move on” genre, bringing every character to peace and fulfillment in a manner that, to my surprise, brought me and my VC both to tears upon this latest viewing, proving it can still happen.

As moving as it is, it’s a fantastical glimpse of what heaven could be like, such as What Dreams May Come, with little Christian or otherwise religious overtones. There’s some very brief talk of God but nothing on which to base one’s eschatological beliefs. In fact, I disagree with some points made, such as how those in heaven supposedly cannot view what happens on Earth, but there’s nothing anti-religious or morally objectionable.

For a television film, it’s a convoluted storyline but one that reveals the secrets of Eddie and his five people gradually with astutely depicted growth. Ruby Pier itself progresses from a prison to a heaven, at times a deathtrap, at others a place of ultimate fulfillment. Despite its religious liberties, I believe Mitch Albom was inspired when he wrote the book, as well as the screenplay. Full of wisdom and solace, The Five People You Meet in Heaven is my favorite television film, Hallmark or otherwise, one of the best and closest book adaptations, and a beautiful addition to the “meet-‘em-and-move-on” genre.

Best lines: (the Blue Man, to Eddie) “Strangers are family you have yet to come to know.”

(Marguerite, Eddie’s wife) “Life has to end, Eddie. Love doesn’t.”

 
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

270 Followers and Counting

#37: Doctor Zhivago (1965)

19 Friday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

When Yuri Zhivago was orphaned still young,
The friendly Gromekos arrived and agreed
To take him in, care for, and raise him among
The wealthy of Moscow, a life guaranteed.
 
Becoming a poet and doctor, he grew
To love his stepsister, dear Tonya by name.
Meanwhile, a young woman out of his view
Is drawn from her innocence into deep shame.
 
Victor Komarovsky takes Lara to bed,
Which causes the girl to attempt execution.
Escaping from Moscow, she chooses to wed
Her loyal friend Pasha, who craves revolution.
 
The first great World War comes to ravage the land,
And doctoring Yuri meets Lara by fate.
The Bolsheviks see their best chances, as planned,
And war soon gives way to a Communist State.
 
His life back in Moscow has changed for the worse,
And scarcity reigns as starvation takes hold.
His half-brother Yevgraf suggests they traverse
The far western Urals, which are less controlled.
 
He meets Lara’s husband while on his way there,
A violent guerrilla now called Strelnikov.
His family soon settles, until an affair
With Lara splits Yuri’s attention and love.
 
He’s captured to serve with the army for years,
Before he returns home, his wife and son gone.
He hides out with Lara till Victor appears,
To take Lara for her own safety at dawn.
 
He wanders henceforth, without lover or wife,
And leaves this pained world in a pitiful way,
And yet his poems live on beyond his short life,
As does daughter Tonya and her gift to play.
_______________
 

I’m not much of a fan of David Lean’s epics; as critically lauded as they are, Lawrence of Arabia and The Bridge on the River Kwai simply don’t appeal to me. I find both overblown and often boring but for a few impressive action sequences.  Though both of them won Best Picture, I prefer his adaptation that was only nominated, Doctor Zhivago. Based on Boris Pasternak’s long novel set before, during, and after the Russian Revolution, Lean’s film bridges the gap between sweeping storytelling and intimate romance, allowing for credible human drama amid the epic coursing of history.

Omar Sharif is at his very best playing the title character, and my VC has mentioned (many times) how she finds him utterly attractive with his trademark mustache. Though he is a flawed protagonist and some of his sorrows are due to his own moral decline, his naïve desire to live and love without the weight of politics and war is entirely sympathetic. By the heartbreaking end, his life has become a definitive tragedy of how lives are swallowed by mankind’s most degrading ideologies. The same goes for his secret lover Lara, played with resilient beauty by Julie Christie; her desire for a simple life is undermined by her husband’s dedication to supposedly justified violence, and she is ultimately lost to everyone who loved or knew her. Supporting players are consistently masterful: the slimy allure of Rod Steiger’s Komarovsky, the stoic interest of Alec Guinness’s Yevgraf, the gentle faithfulness of Geraldine Chaplin’s Tonya (that’s Charlie Chaplin’s daughter), the wide-eyed apprehension of Rita Tushingham’s Tonya, the allegiance-turned-zealotry of Tom Courtenay’s Pasha/Strelnikov.

I haven’t read Pasternak’s novel, but my VC has and considers the film an improvement, better plotted and more restrained in objectionable content. The film doesn’t carry quite as many plot points as the book, such as Komarovsky’s involvement in Yuri’s father’s death, but it’s complex and extensive enough and manages to still focus on smaller details, such as a skeletal branch tapping on Yuri’s window after his mother’s funeral.

The lilting violins of Maurice Jarre’s effervescent score make Doctor Zhivago memorable to the ear, just as the scopious mountain cinematography does to the eye. (The 2002 miniseries has its good points as well, including closer adherence to the book in certain instances, but, as good as he and Keira Knightley are, Hans Matheson can’t compare with Sharif.) Though some critics accused it of glossing over history, the story is meant to be from the perspectives of Yuri and Lara. Their firsthand experiences of war, destitution, and desperation are vividly portrayed, even if the ambitions and nuances creating them are not spelled out in documentary fashion, though there’s some of that too. Despite (or due to) its length, Dr. Zhivago is a pillar of Russian literature, and its film version a tribute to what is personal and an exemplar of tragic, epic filmmaking.

Best line: (Yuri) “It seems you’ve burnt the wrong village.”  (Strelnikov) “They always say that, and what does it matter? A village betrays us, a village is burned. The point’s made.”  (Yuri) “Your point—their village.”

  
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

270 Followers and Counting

#38: Chariots of Fire (1981)

17 Wednesday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

‘Twere many fine names
In the Olympic games,
The runners and sprinters who dashed for their fames.
With wings on their feet
That few others could beat,
They strove in 1924 to compete.
 
At Cambridge, a Jew
Who did not run but flew,
One Abrahams trained to be best in each queue.
He ran to resist
Those who were prejudiced,
And friends thought no faster young man could exist.
 
In Scotland, however,
One man would endeavor
To run to please God, but on Sundays, he’d never.
This brave Eric Liddell,
Whom none could belittle,
Held faith and resolve which a king could not whittle.
 
They all took their place
In the glorious race,
The high point of lives, formed by training and grace.
Each swift Englishman
Did their utmost and ran,
For medals, for country, for God, or for clan.
______________________
 

The Best Picture of 1981, Chariots of Fire captures not only two moving stories of talent and trial but also the thrill at the core of a race. The true accounts of Harold Abrahams and Eric Liddell reveal their similar skills as athletes and disparate purposes in employing them.

Ian Charleson is eminently devout Eric Liddell, who balances his desire to run by dedicating his victories to God’s service. I love his assertion that he feels God’s pleasure as he utilizes his talents; I sometimes feel the same when writing. Whereas his sister in the film insists he focus solely on God, anything can be used to give our Creator glory, whether it be peeling a potato or running a foot race. As Liddell runs, flailing his arms about in a wholly unorthodox manner, at times it is as if the Lord takes hold of him, pushing him faster than any contender would expect. Even so, he remained solid in his convictions concerning his Sunday heat. Beyond running for God, his refusal to compromise was disseminated to the world as a faithful stand that was ultimately rewarded. Abrahams, on the other hand, played by Ben Cross, runs with all the determination of a man who dares never lose. His desire is not to please God, fans, or even himself, but to prove his merit in the face of discrete anti-Semitism. When he sees Liddell run firsthand, he strives even harder, unable to cope with not being the best. Yet even when he wins his victorious Olympic medal, he’s just as overwhelmed by the weight of victory as by the weight of defeat. Ian Holm is likewise outstanding as his trainer Sam Mussabini, looking considerably older than in Alien just two years prior. By depicting both of these runners, as well as their comrades who run more or less for the fun of it, the film serves as a well-rounded view of this promising generation of young athletes.

Chariots of Fire is exceptional in its Oscar-winning electronic score by Vangelis and its painterly cinematography. The film abounds with scenes worthy of being hung on the wall, not least of which is the opening jog along the beach with the man and boy watching from a distance. Though the film is rather slow overall, its artistry is wondrous to behold. Speaking of slow, it also is notable for the frequent use of slow motion, which realizes the suspension of time during a race and how a contest lasting mere seconds can become a deep-seated memory of joy or grief. In the case of Liddell, the protracted running seems to portray a miracle in progress, especially with the transcendent accompanying music.

A film that well-deserved its four Academy Awards, Chariots of Fire is the greatest film about track and one of the finest sports films ever made, choosing the contemplative furor of a race over the energetic action of a ball game. Also, for Star Trek fans, Ben Cross’s appearance with Alice Krige (as his fiancée Sybil) affords the unlikely sight of Sarek dating the Borg Queen. Implacable values like those of Eric Liddell are sadly harder to come by now than they were in 1924, but his stand for his beliefs continues to serve as an example to all who are called to compromise too far.

Best line: (Liddell, when accused of arrogance) “My arrogance, sir, extends just as far as my conscience demands.”

VC’s best lines: (Eric, to his sister) “I believe God made me for a purpose, but he also made me fast. And when I run I feel His pleasure.”

(Lord Cadogan, fed up with his decision not to run) “Don’t be impertinent, Liddell!”  (Eric) “The impertinence lies, sir, with those who seek to influence a man to deny his beliefs!”

 
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

269 Followers and Counting

#39: The Blind Side (2009)

16 Tuesday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

, ,

The young behemoth Michael Oher
Has led a life of silent woe.
For years he has been dumb and poor
With nowhere comforting to go.
 
But then one night, to his surprise,
A kind white woman lets him in,
Despite his color and his size,
And treats him like a next of kin.
 
He doesn’t know how to react
But still enjoys the change begun,
While Leigh Anne Tuohy can’t retract
The ever-growing kindness done.
 
Adopting Michael gradually,
She urges him to be a shield,
Protecting threatened family
And players on the football field.
 
Encouraged to perform defense,
Oher proves his talent with a block,
And soon the college heads commence
The offers that he join their flock.
 
He’s pushed by Leigh Anne toward Ole Miss,
Which raises questions of intentions.
Though Mike’s troubled by all this,
His trust in her subdues contentions.
 
Charity gave Michael Oher
A chance to play, prove, and protect.
When one looked harder than before,
There came a grace none would expect.
__________________
 

The Blind Side is the account of one “random act of kindness” that changed a life and a family forever. It’s also a film that seems to be loved or hated for different reasons.

I personally very much enjoy the uplifting true rags-to-riches tale, but others see what they want to see. Some view the narrative as a white savior story, an indictment on black communities which supposedly cannot rise from poverty without the intercession of benevolent white people. They see strong but mute Michael (played by Quentin Aaron) as an example of the pitiable street kid who can do nothing for himself until some altruistic white benefactor comes to his rescue. Others like me don’t interpret the film’s message as such. In addition to the main crux of the film, some can’t agree on the details too. Sandra Bullock’s performance as Leigh Anne Tuohy was lauded by most critics and earned her a Best Actress Academy Award, but my VC, who likes the rest of the movie, is irritated by her pushiness, audacity, and occasionally provocative attire, a personality type she finds abrasive.

As far as the first assertion, my opinion is as follows: Yes, Michael Oher’s story is conceivably a white savior tale, but those who see it as such are ignoring his contributions to the Tuohy family. As Leigh Anne says in the film, she’s not just changing his life; he’s changing hers, reminding her of what’s important and how blessings are meant to be shared. The film depicts the dangerous, gang-infused neighborhoods that claim so many youths, and as unfortunate as it is, such places do exist, hard-to-escape places that might have consumed Oher as well but for the kindness of strangers. While the Tuohys are shown as overall noble sponsors, their well-to-do world of Christian schools and over-priced restaurants does not escape some criticism for hypocrisy and discrimination. Rather, Leigh Anne’s contributions to Michael’s life open up her own views; she visits areas of town she’d never gone and feels unforeseen guilt at taking for granted the simple things that Michael has never possessed. The film even calls into question her potentially selfish reasoning for committing such a selfless act; like Dr. Treves in The Elephant Man, she wonders how good she truly is when she is clearly benefiting from her own charity. Though she is vindicated, it’s a fair point that other films might have glossed over.

For a film that endorses Christian charity, the acting and production values are top-notch, including cameos from multiple real-life university football coaches like Nick Saban and Lou Holtz. I admire Bullock’s brash, bold, and bossy performance as Mrs. Tuohy, even if it rubs my VC the wrong way. Tim McGraw impresses as a likable Mr. Tuohy, proving that not all singers are doomed to be poor actors, and Kathy Bates is excellent as always, playing Michael’s tutor Miss Sue. Quentin Aaron is perfect as Michael, though his one-note glumness makes me doubt his versatility in future roles. Also (Lost alert!), Kim Dickens, who played Sawyer’s girlfriend Cassidy on my favorite show, portrays Michael’s sympathetic teacher, who is nearly as admirable as Mrs. Tuohy in looking beyond her student’s apparent apathy to help him learn in his own way.

It may err on the controversial side, but The Blind Side is an inspirational family film that doesn’t skimp on the humor and sports action as well. (It wasn’t entirely clear to me, though, why Bullock’s narration connected Michael’s story to Lawrence Taylor; did anyone else understand that?) It’s also one of the few films with a heartwarming familial Thanksgiving scene that makes it ideal viewing for the last Thursday in November. Viewers often see what they want to see in certain films, and what I see in The Blind Side is a motivating challenge to assist and not give up on the underprivileged.

Best line: (Michael, in his end-of-school paper about “The Charge of the Light Brigade”) “But honor, that’s the real reason you either do something or you don’t. It’s who you are and maybe who you want to be. If you die trying for something important, then you have both honor and courage, and that’s pretty good. I think that’s what the writer was saying, that you should hope for courage and try for honor. And maybe even pray that the people telling you what to do have some, too.”

 
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

268 Followers and Counting

#40: Babe (1995)

15 Monday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

(Can be sung to “If I Had Words”)
 
A pig is chosen as a contest prize
And won by a farmer to his surprise.
On Hoggett’s farm, Babe’s taught so far
To stick to her place and the way things are.
 
Adopted by the boss’s sheepdog Fly,
Babe helps out a duck who dares not comply.
Befriending sheep with her heart of gold,
Babe learns how the dogs keep the sheep controlled.
 
When Hoggett gives the friendly runt a chance
To aid with the sheep, Babe bids them advance.
She finds asking is always preferred,
And Hoggett is floored by his ordered herd.
 
He enters Babe in a dog competition
To lead sheep with her cordial disposition.
Though Babe is shocked at what pigs are for,
She chooses to serve the boss, as before.
 
As Hoggett leads his entry on the field,
The crowds laugh and jeer at what he’s revealed,
But when his pig leads each willing ewe,
Babe’s satisfied that what she did will do.
_________________
 

Exuding simple charm, Babe is one of the few modern family films to earn and be worthy of an Oscar nomination for Best Picture (E.T., Beauty and the Beast, The Blind Side, Up, and Toy Story 3 are the only others I can think of). As straightforward and appealing a fable as any Hollywood has produced, the film has a unique ability to appeal to children and adults on the same level, rather than including kiddie stuff solely for the kids and mature jokes only their parents would get.

Babe is pleasingly whimsical with its sneezing ducks and bucolic Hobbiton-like location, but also surprisingly blunt in how it depicts the true “purpose” of pigs and the reality of death. Babe may not understand the meaning of a meat truck or a shotgun, but the audience does, even impressionable young viewers. In creating lovable characters out of edible farm animals, the film succeeded in guilting many into a vegetarian lifestyle, including star James Cromwell, and though I myself still enjoy a good steak, it’s a decision I can certainly understand and respect, having seen this film.

Even with the truth of “the way things are,” the film is replete with unabashedly sweet moments: Fly’s comforting of Babe when she misses her mother, Babe’s comforting of Fly when she misses her pups, Hoggett’s musical comforting of Babe when she falls ill. Roscoe Lee Browne’s sapient narration highlights the film’s storybook quality, along with the intermittent chapter headings provided by a trio of mice who are high on Alvin and the Chipmunks.

James Cromwell earned a Best Actor nomination for his understated portrayal of laconic Farmer Hoggett, and it’s amazing that he can play the father of robotics or warp travel with the same skill as an outdated farmer who can barely operate a fax machine. Magda Szubanski milks some laughs as his overbearing wife, while the rest of the cast is mostly the talking animals. In addition to Christine Cavanaugh (the original Dexter from Dexter’s Laboratory) as naïve and innocent Babe, the standout voice actors are Miriam Margolyes as Fly and Hugo Weaving as Rex, the two dogs who assist Babe in her rise to stardom.

Though Babe failed to win most of its nominations (‘twas the year of Braveheart and Sense and Sensibility), it beat out Apollo 13 for the Best Visual Effects Oscar. Unlike the usual spectacle that earns that award nowadays, it won for the seemingly simple feat of granting the animals speech, at times using puppets, other times replacing their lower jaws and partial faces with CGI to create mouth movement. The result is subtle but impressive, and the animals are significantly more realistic than the more recent all-CGI attempts, like Marmaduke or Scooby Doo. In addition, the film’s orchestral score is lovely, dominated by a piece of Saint-Saëns’ Symphony No. 3 in C Minor. Scott Fitzgerald recorded the tune as the 1977 pop song “If I Had Words,” which is also prominent in the film; in fact, the mice’s rendition at the end deserves a place in my End Credits Song Hall of Fame.

Babe is the most notable proof that a G-rated family film can still be Oscar-worthy without the objectionable material so many awards contenders feel is necessary. While it and another famous pig story Charlotte’s Web probably turned off half a generation from pork, Babe is a shining example of a family film done right.

Best line: (the narrator, as Fly is trying to figure out if Babe was guilty of a crime) “Fly decided to speak very slowly, for it was a cold fact of nature that sheep were stupid, and there was nothing that could convince her otherwise.”  (Fly) “Please, someone tell me… what happened this morning.”  (the narrator again) “The sheep decided to speak very slowly, for it was a cold fact of nature that wolves were ignorant, and there was nothing that could convince them otherwise.”

VC’s best line:  (Farmer Hoggett) “That’ll do, pig. That’ll do.”

  
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

268 Followers and Counting

#43: 84 Charing Cross Road (1987)

13 Saturday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Dear Marks and Co,
It’s Helene Hanff still here,
Still waiting for books from the next hemisphere.
You know, Frank, I really can’t thank you enough
For putting up with my American guff
And sending me titles, antique and obscure,
Fulfilling my craving for literature.
The books I have gotten have brightened my soul,
And I’ve you to thank for it, Mr. Frank Doel.
One day, I’ll arrive in your English abode
And fawn over 84 Charing Cross Road.
Till then, I suppose British books must suffice,
The secondhand copies at such a low price,
The authors and poets that somehow contain
The joys of my innermost heart.
Love, Helene
 
Helene, we all love letters sent ‘cross the pond
From our favorite buyer, of whom we’re so fond.
Your package of food was, as always, a treat;
No grocer in London could hope to compete.
Your latest request, I am happy to say,
Was found at an auction and mailed yesterday.
I’m awed by the nearly two decades since you
First sent off a letter to our humble crew.
We’re all looking forward and feel much is owed
Whenever you reach us on Charing Cross Road.
Although no one here has as yet seen your face,
We count you a dear friend we could not replace.
The store’s none too dull, and we have you to thank;
No doubt that more books will be coming.
Love, Frank.
______________________
 

I have my VC to thank for introducing me to this beloved sleeper, based off the play and book detailing the real-life correspondence of writer Helene Hanff and Frank Doel, the manager of the antiquarian London bookshop Marks and Co at the titular address. Rife with literary love and charming incident, 84 Charing Cross Road is among my VC’s favorite films, placing somewhere in her top 20.

Anne Bancroft (whose husband Mel Brooks produced the film) excels as the down-to-earth Helene, who possesses an unusual taste for rare English literature. Due to her tight finances and lack of a Barnes and Noble in 1948 New York, she turns to a distant retailer, which would become a mainstay in her life. Helene is a witty, chain-smoking grandmother type, as endearing as she is sarcastic. Her admiration for British prose is evident from the start as the film name-drops authors and titles only ever heard in literary circles or English lit classes, such as Leigh Hunt, John Henry Newman, Pepys’ Diary, and Robert Louis Stevenson’s Virginibus Puerisque. For the most part, these out-of-print titles are taken for granted as mere names to most viewers but cherished treasures to a poor New York writer. Yet certain snatches of prose and poetry are quoted as well, allowing glimpses of the cerebral profundity that Helene finds so alluring. Likewise, across the Atlantic, Anthony Hopkins is ideally ordinary as Frank Doel, embodying British stoicism while retaining a subtle good humor. Two scenes with his wife Nora, played by Dame Judi Dench, imply an entire life of daily pattern and repetition, intermittently enlivened by a pithy letter from Helene. Though some characterize 84 Charing Cross Road as a romance, the letters they exchange are based entirely on their mutual love of books, even while they progress from “Yours faithfully” to “Love”; Helene has her career, and Frank has Nora, a seemingly cold marriage that nonetheless suggests a deep fondness. Still, the Oscar-worthy acting of Bancroft and Hopkins fosters a unique connection, despite their lack of shared scenes.

It’s likely that many people will find the epistolary plotline slow or tedious, but for those who enjoy literature, 84 Charing Cross Road is a treat. (I myself love shopping and owning books even more than actually reading them.) It’s a tribute to the old-fashioned book stores that have sadly gone out of style, like Marks and Co, which closed and is now a restaurant. The film also exemplifies the former power of written correspondence. Cell phones and email and social media are quite convenient, but no amount of texts or tweets could contain the power of nineteen years’ worth of affectionate mail. In addition, like Up, the film taps into how life’s greatest aspirations can be stalled by life itself. 84 Charing Cross Road is a quiet, unobtrusive story about the quiet, unobtrusive passion of two quiet, unobtrusive people, and I love it dearly.

Best line: (Helene) “I love inscriptions on flyleafs and notes in margins. I like the comradely sense of turning pages someone else turned and reading passages someone long-gone has called my attention to.”
 
VC’s best line: (Frank, quoting W. B. Yeats’ poem)
“Had I the heavens’ embroidered cloths,
Enwrought with golden and silver light,
The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half light,
I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.”
 
 
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

268 Followers and Counting

#44: National Treasure (2004)

11 Thursday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , ,

The young Ben Gates was spellbound by
The Templar treasure legendary,
Which the Founders had to bury
Somewhere secret clues imply.
He teams with whiny Riley Poole
As well as Ian, a mercenary;
Though his father is contrary,
Ben keeps searching somewhere cool.
 
When Ben unearths the latest clue,
It hints a certain Declaration
Hides a map. This implication
Shows Ian’s lawless point of view.
Since Ian’s leaning toward the worst
And plans to “borrow” our foundation,
Ben decides its best salvation
Is for him to steal it first.
 
Though he and Riley do succeed
In borrowing the document,
They gain a girl without consent,
And Dr. Chase helps them proceed.
The parchment leads to other clues,
And though Ben’s dad knows where they went,
Still Ian guesses their intent.
The FBI as well pursues.
 
When Ben and Ian team again,
They find a crypt and secret stairs,
Which seem to sorely need repairs,
But Ian then abandons Ben.
Ben and his friends continue through,
Despite initial dead-end scares,
And soon the treasure room is theirs,
The end of every hidden clue.
_________________
 

National Treasure is probably the film I have seen, in whole or in part, more than any other movie. Every time it comes on television, it’s the perfect standby to turn to. It’s clean, amusing, exciting, and complex enough to deserve repeated viewings, an all-around satisfying helping of Indiana Jones-lite.

As the walking encyclopedia Benjamin Franklin Gates, Nicholas Cage spouts history, conspiracy, and American values, the kind of treasure-hunting idealist worth rooting for. His dutiful theft of the Declaration of Independence allows the audience to enjoy the gadgetry and cleverness of a heist film, while retaining the confidence that he’s still the good guy. This draws parallels with Jerry Bruckheimer’s other franchise Pirates of the Caribbean, as well as the “treason” of the Founding Fathers, as Ben feels called to attempt what is technically illegal to accomplish what is right. Justin Bartha is lovably nerdy as Riley, and Diane Kruger is intelligent and lovely as Dr. Abigail Chase. Sean Bean plays the cunning villain Ian and is actually a clever mental match for Ben, unlike Ed Harris in the sequel who let Ben do all the work. Other pleasing roles are filled by Jon Voight as Ben’s nay-saying father and Harvey Keitel as a Sam Gerard wannabe from the FBI. Also, (yet another Lost alert!) one of Keitel’s team is played by Mark Pellegrino, a.k.a. the mysterious island-dwelling Jacob.

The Mason conspiracy at the core of the treasure’s origins is hardly believable, but the film manages to still be a stimulating history lesson in its details, ranging from the cryptic clue from the Charlotte to the author of the Silence Dogood letters. These lesser-known facts lend credence to the film as a whole, though the chase for the treasure is such an entertaining thrill ride that any inaccurate or unrealistic elements can and should be ignored for fun’s sake. With plenty of twists and turns, both action-packed and perceptive, National Treasure is still a film I can see over and over.

Best line: (butcher lady in a market) “If you’re not a steak, you don’t belong here.”
(Abigail, hiding from Ian’s goon) “I’m just trying to hide from my ex-husband.”
(butcher lady) “Who, Baldie?”
(Abigail) “Yes.”
(butcher lady) “Honey, stay as long as you like.”
 
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

268 Followers and Counting

#45: Ratatouille (2007)

10 Wednesday Dec 2014

Posted by in Movies, Poetry, Reviews, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Remy’s a rat with a keen sense of smell,
Who loves not just eating but cooking as well.
His wish to create, though, attracts a backlash
From Django, his dad, who just wants to steal trash.
 
Their colony’s forced to abruptly take leave,
And Remy is lost in the sewers to grieve.
The voice of his hero, the late chef Gusteau,
Encourages Remy to rise from below.
 
He climbs to find Paris, the City of Lights,
And finds Gusteau’s restaurant, which thrills and excites.
When Remy tries fixing a soup in the kitchen,
He’s captured and threatened for trying to pitch in.
 
However, he’s freed by the awkward Linguini,
A garbage boy who couldn’t boil fettuccine.
He teams with the rat, who can pull on his hair
And cook from beneath the tall hat that chefs wear.
 
Though Skinner, the head chef, is sure there’s a rat
When some garbage boy begins cooking like that,
He can’t stop Linguini from gaining acclaim
And lifting Gusteau’s from its relative shame.
 
Linguini must face expectations concerned
And deal with celebrity he hasn’t earned,
While Remy must choose between kitchen and kin
And unearths a secret, to Skinner’s chagrin.
 
At last, when a critic named Ego arrives
To taste if Gusteau’s reputation survives,
The dish ratatouille reminds of his youth,
An odd revelation of taste and the truth.
 
Though Ego’s review is a tip of the hat,
Some people just can’t handle food from a rat,
But those who will open their mouths and their minds
Are thrilled by the flavors their tolerance finds.
_________________
 

Yet another Pixar masterpiece, Ratatouille is a film that could have so easily been a ridiculous failure with its absurd concept and rambling narrative, yet Brad Bird did it again, lending outstanding character development to Pixar’s ever-phenomenal animation.

Patton Oswalt will forever be Remy to me. (I know his real voice sounds exactly the same, having seen him on “Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.”) As foolhardy as Remy’s dream seems, his vehement arguments with his dad and genuine talent for the culinary arts manifest a passion worth pursuing. Lou Romano is lovably incompetent as Alfredo Linguini (not the other way around), whom Remy uses as a living marionette. True, this is unrealistic, even for a film about talking rat chefs, but it leads to some of the funniest moments, as Remy perfects his follicular puppetry. The rest of the voice actors contribute exuberant performances, obviously enjoying their French accents, including Ian Holm as Chef Skinner, Janeane Garofalo as Colette, and Brad Garrett as Remy’s hero and imagined conscience Chef Gusteau. Plus, Peter O’Toole’s scathing articulations make Anton Ego a truly forbidding presence, albeit with an unforeseen soft side.

The animation is exceptional, one of Pixar’s most detailed depictions of the real world from the perspective of rat and human alike. My VC enjoys pointing out Remy’s adorable feet and sniffing nose, which make him considerably cuter than any rat I’ve seen. Textures and lighting are meticulously rendered, from the rushing water of the sewers to the distant, warm lights of the Eiffel Tower to the food itself, which is as delectable to the eye as to the characters’ taste buds. The atmosphere of Paris is further brought to life by the romantic score from Michael Giacchino. (Lost alert; in addition to scoring Pixar films like this, The Incredibles, and Up, Giacchino has also worked with J.J. Abrams on the Star Trek reboots and Lost.)

In addition to being laugh-out-loud with lethal thumbs and an abundance of slapstick humor, Ratatouille tackles some heavy material as well, including the morality of benign thievery, the expectations of parent and child, and the purpose and responsibility of criticism. Ego’s review, in particular, flew over my head upon my first viewing, but its profound message is a credit to the entire creative and analytical industry. Ratatouille also dares into less kiddy subject matter, such as legal scams, drunken interrogations, a character’s illegitimate child, and the realistic ramifications of a rat in the kitchen (which the film then ignores for the final gratifying scene).

Attempting much more than most animated films and succeeding in every area, Ratatouille is a film that can entertain both children and their parents on different levels. Heart-warming, funny, and appetizing, it was yet another feather in Pixar’s cap.

Best line: (Gusteau) “You must be imaginative, strong-hearted. You must try things that may not work, and you must not let anyone define your limits because of where you come from. Your only limit is your soul. What I say is true—anyone can cook… but only the fearless can be great.”

 
Rank: 58 out of 60
 

© 2014 S. G. Liput

267 Followers and Counting