The Cinematic Katzenjammer has moved. We're now on WordPress with a new sexy layout and so much more. The domain hasn't changed, but if you could re-subscribe over at the new site, you will be looked at in favor from the gods of the internet. 

http://cinekatz.com/

Dec 1: The Sting

"In 1930s Chicago, a young con man seeking revenge for his murdered partner teams up with a master of the big con to win a fortune from a criminal banker."

Directed by: George Roy Hill, Rated: PG, 129 minutes

While The Sting is far from as flashy as the Oceans' 11 series or as action packed as The Italian Job, it's still one of the first heist/con movies of its time. With a memorable soundtrack (thank you ice cream trucks) and acting that leaves you smiling, it's a bonafide classic that must be seen. It's entertaining, full of humor, a bit of violence, and has a lot of twists you can barely see coming (a lot of the twists in the film were first seen with The Sting). Ladies and gentlemen, there are dozens of reasons why this movie won Best Picture in 1974 and it's no surprise it was able to beat out The Exorcist and American Graffiti.

Even the devil can't out-movie The Sting. 

Johnny Hooker (Robert Redford) is a suave con man who makes his living scamming any hapless stranger walking down the street. He's a scamp, never really making it big and losing whatever he makes gambling. His partner, Luther (Robert Earl Jones) is an older man, well past his prime in the conning game. He's ready to retire and settle down and get straight (or legal). After Hooker and Luther steal from the wrong man, Luther finds himself face down in an alleyway, dead. Hooker, angry and scared, heads to Chicago to find Luther's old friend, Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman), to not only have a place to hide but also a place to come up with a plan of revenge against the greedy and evil Lonnegan (Robert Shaw). The two hatch an idea of staging a horse betting ring and figure out a way to draw Lonnegan into betting millions, only to take it away from him for revenge.

Before he hunted a great white shark, he was the swarmy and evil Lonnegan. 

The Sting is a very smart movie that's well ahead of its time. It's a movie from the 70s, set in the 30s, with the humor and charisma you can find in any decade. With each additional viewing, it proves more and more timeless and you can't help but be amazed at what's happening on screen. Robert Redford and Paul Newman have a blast in their roles, and the reunion of them four years after Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid reminds us why they're so perfect together. They both exude masculinity and cool and seeing them work off of each other adds an entirely new level to the film. George Clooney and Brad Pitt were able to emulate this chemistry thirty years later, with Oceans 11, but even then, it's far from as awesome as Newman and Redford. Besides the two leads, The Sting also has plenty of recognizable faces (most of which you're used to seeing much older) and has great supporting performances from Ray Walston, Eileen Brennan, and Harold Gould. Of course, Robert Shaw is also great, as always, and his Irish and angry Lonnegan proves to be a villain you can most certainly stand against.

No matter how hard you try, you will never be as cool as these two men. 

The Sting is a must watch for any fan of film. So many themes and ideas we see in the heist movies of today borrow from The Sting and once you recognize that fact, it looks even greater. The movie also uses the ever-annoying The Entertainer (again, thank you ice cream trucks) but to a much greater effect. It becomes the movie's theme and is more memorable than annoying and helps build the setting of 1930s Chicago. With great acting, witty and smart dialogue, and terrific set design, The Sting is a ride through multiple pasts and reminds us that movies are the perfect escape from reality. 

The Good:

a great capture of the 1930s with an optimistic feeling to it that leaves you more excited than depressed

The Better:

the performances from the entire cast with Robert Redford and Paul Newman more perfect than ever

The Best:

knowing that the film has such an importance in cinema history and being reminded of how influential it is

Overall: 8.7/10

Discussion Question:

Where does The Sting rank in the greatest movies of all time? Has it been a bit forgotten over time?

Trailer:

November Ratings Roundup

Month 11 of this journey has come to an end. I have now watched and review 335 movies in 335 days and am one step closer to the end of the year. Below is a graph showing all of the movies I watched in November with my rating being compared to IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes.

The Cinematic Katzenjammer:

Highest Rated: Skyfall, 9.4/10

Lowest Rated: Krull, 2.0/10

IMDB: 

Highest Rated: Life of Pi, 8.4/10

Lowest Rated: Rec 3: Genesis, 5.2/10

Rotten Tomatoes:

Highest Rated: Heathers and Time Bandits, 95%

Lowest Rated: The Raven, 22%

Nov 30: Men in Black 3

"Agent J travels in time to MIB's early years in the 1960s, to stop an alien from assassinating his friend Agent K and changing history."

Directed by: Barry Sonnenfeld, Rated: PG-13, 106 minutes

It's hard to believe it's been ten years since we last saw Agent J and Agent K. In 1997, we were first introduced to the rather unusual duo of Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones. Since then, Smith has become a megastar and Jones has begun to find the humor in his old age. Repairing them at this point in time seemed damn near impossible, with both of them going off in their own directions, but of course, in Hollywood, anything can happen (and of course it does). With Men in Black 3, we see a return to a world filled with intergalactic aliens, secret organizations, and even a little bit of time travel. However, we aren't treated to 90 minutes of Tommy Lee Jones but instead are gifted with the incredible talent of Josh Brolin emulating the man to absolute perfection.

Seriously, it's terrifying how exact he is in emulating Jones. 

Boris the Animal (Jemaine Clement) is an alien terrorist that's on a path of revenge. He's an alien that has smaller aliens living inside his arms and after Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones) severs one of them, Boris is sent to a prison on the moon. There, he's locked away for 40 years until he manages to escape and more motivated than ever to get back at K. So he steals a time traveling device and takes a first class ticket to 1969, where he lost his arm and where he plans to kill K before it can happen. Agent J (Will Smith) figures out Boris' plan and time jumps into the past as well, and vows to save his partner from a most certain death. In 1969, J runs into a much younger K (Josh Brolin) and comes to realize that the man was always a bit uptight, but had a thing for a woman and eased back when it came to pie. Together the partners must stop Boris from changing history and of course, protect each other from you know, dying. 

While he's not as gruesome or sinister as Edgar, Boris does prove to be memorable, even if he's not the most developed of villains. 

Men in Black 3 is far above it's predecessor and gives the first film a run for its money. While the first two movies focused heavily on the effects and wide variety of aliens, MIB3 focuses on the two characters we have grown to love. Even through their adventures already, J was never able to understand or even learn a lot about K and MIB3 not only answers a lot of questions, but makes you appreciate the two's relationship even more. It's complex but very much a father-son relationship and while Tommy Lee Jones isn't on screen as much as you'd hope, Brolin still manages to deliver on those complexities. Yes, the film has a hell of a lot of humor throughout with Will Smith reminding us why he's the megastar we all love on countless occasions  but MIB3 actually has some moments of real drama that are genuinely sad. It's really interesting that a film so many of us have waited for really turns out to be vastly different than the first two installments, but still gives us what we want in its own little way. After this many years since seeing the two fight aliens, I guess it's about time we get to know them a little better.

We are also given the chance to see the continually amazing Michael Stuhlbarg as the all-knowing-every-possibility alien, Griffin. 

While the film is far from perfect, Men in Black 3 still manages to be much better than a majority of the blockbusters that roll in and out of theaters. The movies does not have as many aliens or creatures or even explosions and guns as the first two, and instead takes a more mature approach to a story that all of us can feel for. It's a character study disguised as an action comedy and it surprisingly works. It's not a game-changer by any means but it's smart in that the filmmakers knew how invested we were in these characters and that at this point in time, we really just want to see more of them, even if its not shooting giant alien bugs with even larger guns. Director Barry Sonnefeld returns us to a world we're glad to be in, and even better, reminds us it's a place we'd love to stay. For me, I'm excited to see more of J and K, even if it's just them sitting at a diner and talking for 90 minutes. At least there is pie.

The Good:

seeing what J and K are up to after ten years of doing God knows what

The Better:

and along with that reunion, being reminded that the world that MIB exists in is not only fun and entertaining, but has thousands of stories that can be told over and over

The Best:

being surprised by a more character-driven drama than anything else- something quite unexpected

Overall: 7.5/10

Discussion Question:

Should the Men in Black franchise carry onward or is this installment a nice end to a rather successful trilogy?

Trailer:

Follow Friday: Meet the Staff- Ries

So the end of the year is much sooner than you'd expect and will mark the end of the first part of my journey.  However, The Cinematic Katzenjammer is going to change into a much larger site and hopefully the place you come to for all of your movie reviews, trailers, news, and needs. I will be joined by a group of other writers that will help me along the way and in the weeks building up to the end of the year, I will focus on a new writer each week, letting you get to know each of them with a series of questions. 

Ries has become an almost-regular of the site and he's written a handful of reviews, a couple of Pick Six features, and has a lot more in the works. Here are his answers to my questions:

1. What are your Top 3 movies of all time? 

My top three movies. That’s like asking me what my favorite sense is. I suppose if pressed I’d have to land on Casablanca, The Motorcycle Diaries and Raiders of the Lost Ark. (Nearly made the cut – Once. It got edged by Indy. Sorry, Glen and Marketa.)

2. What's one movie you hate that a lot of people love? 

This is an honest-to-God tie between The Princess Bride and Slumdog Millionaire. One I find unbearably cheesy, and the other I find...absurd. On multiple levels.

3. What's your history with writing? 

I've been involved in actively pursuing creative writing since I was about eight. Technically speaking, I published my first piece when I was twelve. My junior high school had a paper we put out called The Wildcat Roar, and in an effort to expand the readership of the paper the teacher in charge of the publication called on me to write a narrative to increase student enthusiasm. The deal worked out, and I wrote the then-longest thing I’d ever written (forty two pages), a horror story called My Name is Justice.

Fortunately for everyone involved, the plan went swimmingly – My Name is Justice was well received by the students, the Wildcat Roar expanded from a single page paper to a pretty hefty manuscript on newsprint, and I felt the rush that comes with finishing a store and putting it out there for people to read. After my senior year at Carmel High School, I won the 2007 Carmel Art Council Award for fiction and went on to study Creative Writing at Knox College and then at DePauw University. I graduated from DePauw with a B.A. in English Writing in the spring of 2011, and am now putting that degree to work...in the Marine Corps. Right.

4. Where do you see yourself in 11 years? 

Oh, I have no idea. If you had asked me at the beginning of my junior year of college where I saw myself after college ended, I quite literally wouldn't have picked the military if I could give nineteen possibilities. The only thing I can say with any conviction is – I will not be in the military. I’d like to be back home in New York. Hopefully in either Manhattan or Brooklyn. And employed.

5. Do you have any movie-watching rituals or habits? 

I’m really picky about sound. I drive theaters crazy when I go, because if their speakers aren't at 100% I’m that asshole who will leave the theater to complain to the management. I don’t eat anything at movie theaters (unless I’m in New York, in which case I guess some part of my brain figures sixteen dollars isn't enough to spend at the theater) but I like to sit as close to the center as possible. When at home, on the other hand, I must have snacks nearby and my Turtle Beach headphones securely on my head and the lights off. Phone tends to go off too. I’m quite serious about film watching.

6. What's THE movie that turned you into a true film fan?

I have no idea. I've loved film passionately for literally as long as I can remember. I used to hope for rainy days because when it was raining outside I was allowed to stay inside and watch movies. The first movie I ever saw was Born on the Fourth of July, but the first movie I ever saw and actually watched was 101 Dalmatians.

7. Who's your favorite actor? 

Humphrey Bogart and Daniel Day-Lewis. (My favorite actresses are Emma Thompson and Cate Blanchett.)

8. Who's your favorite director?

Christopher Nolan. The man is a genius.

9. Would you rather make a movie or star in one?

I’d love to be involved in the writing of a film. And I ever wrote a book that was later made into a film, I’d demand a cameo. Where does that land me?

10. What's one thing you want future readers to know about you? 

Not much. I’m rather private. OH! Oh! Pick me. That I love Walt Disney. As in I love the man, and his identity as an American visionary. I can’t comment on the company as much, unfortunately, but I do love Walt Disney World.

11. Borrowed from Inside the Actor's Studio, If heaven exists, what would you like to hear God say when you arrive at the pearly gates? 

That’ll do, Ries. That’ll do.

Follow Ries on Twitter @Minuteman2589

Nov 29: A Cat in Paris

"In Paris, a cat who lives a secret life as a cat burglar's aide must come to the rescue of Zoe, the little girl he lives with, after she falls into a gangster's clutches."

Directed by: Jean-Loup Felicioli and Alain Gagnol, Rated: PG, 70 minutes

Last year, A Cat in Paris was nominated for an Oscar for Best Animated Feature of the Year. While it's competition wasn't the greatest of films, the movie definitely was able to stand on its own amid the mix as a little French flick with stellar hand-drawn animation and a jazzy score that makes you move. It's visually engaging and really makes you appreciate its style, but the film does get a bit boring after a bit. Luckily, the visuals keep things interesting and leave you more overwhelmed with nostalgia than anything else.

It's pretty... pretty. 

Zoe, a little girl in Paris, hasn't said a word since her father died at the hands of the gangster Victor Costa. Her mother, Jeanne (Marcia Gay Harden) is a cop who's obsessed with getting her vengeance for her husband's death but also has to deal with a cat burglar, Nico, who's stealing precious jewels and artifacts all around the city. Zoe's cat, Dino, seems to be the only joy in the little girl's life at the time and he continually brings her home little treats (dead lizards, diamond bracelets). Little does Zoe know, Dino is actually an accomplice to the burglar, helping him get through alarms and warning him when someone is near. After Zoe is kidnapped by Costa, Dino finds a way to get Nico to help save her, and must figure out a way to get the aid of Jeanne as well, even though he's one of her prime targets.

It plays out a lot like a children's book you'd find in the corner of the kids section at the library. 

A Cat in Paris' animation style is beautiful. Hand drawn with paint and ink, you're left in awe thinking you're watching something from the days of the past. The movement and color is both vibrant and full of energy and the music that accompanies it gives the movie a feeling of being cool. The jazz music that dances with the visuals only adds to the mood and you're left with a laid back, easy-listening vibe. It's certainly the biggest strength for the film and you really could watch it all day. The movie is certainly for kids (with only a couple of moments for adults) and the style reminds of you something you'd watch on PBS growing up. It's sophisticated on its own level and is a valuable piece of cinema that calls back to the past.

Nico moves like a dancer in the dark, stretching and swimming through the rooftops at night. 

Even though A Cat in Paris has moments that leave you a bit bored, the visuals are a masterpiece of its own kind. I would definitely recommend watching the movie for the animation alone and if you're a fan of anything of the past or the classic in the genre, you're in for a treat. Beautiful on levels you haven't seen for years, A Cat in Paris is the perfect remedy to the countless 3D CGI animated movies that litter the theaters these days. It's a work of art that needs to be watched, and even if you get bored, it is only 71 minutes. But I think then, even after it's over, you'll know that you've watched something special. 

The Good:

incredible animation, hand-drawn and painted that leaves you all sorts of amazed

The Bad:

moments of the story drag on a bit and leave you a little bored

The Ugly:

wondering why there are not more movies like this made these days and if old style animation is really dead

Overall: 7.5/10

Discussion Question: 

What recent movies remind of you animation styles of the past? Is the art dead or just buried in the ground, sleeping for awhile?

Trailer:

As You Watch Episode XIV: Killer Klowns from Outer Space

Here's another installment of the As You Watch Podcast, a podcast I host with Joe, and Vern. This week, we are joined by Shane of Film Rehab. After a quick introduction, Shane discusses his Top 3 Movies of All Time. We then go on and talk about our "Top 3 Clowns in Movies". This leads into our movie of the week discussion, where we talk about the 80s cult classic, Killer Klowns from Outer Space (my review here) and wrap it up with The Battle of the Wits. 

Listen Here

Like us on Facebook 

Follow us on Twitter

Nov 28: The Company Men

"The story centers on a year in the life of three men trying to survive a round of corporate downsizing at a major company - and how that affects them, their families, and their communities."

Directed by: John Wells, Rated: R, 104 minutes

2007 saw Ben Affleck become relevant again with his directorial debut in Gone Baby Gone. Seemingly re-energized  Affleck jumped back into the acting game after a few years on "leave" and found that his talent in that department started to catch up with his directing ability. To be honest, I never really gave up on the man but I can understand why a lot of people did. He's an acquired taste and you tend to either love him or hate him. Well, throughout all of his emergence as one of the best American directors, a little film called The Company Men he stars in flew under the radar. It's even more surprising given its subject matter- the US economy collapse and the results of the recession, in the corporate world and at home.

He even gets to keep his Bawston accent. 

The Company Men follows the stories of three men. Bobby Walker (Affleck) is a senior salesman at the GTX Corporation. He's damn good at his job and makes $200K a year. He has a beautiful home, a gorgeous wife (Rosemarie DeWitt), and a really nice car. He has settled in his life and is more than sitting large and comfortable. Unfortunately  GTX runs into financial problems because of the recession and Walker is let go, completely out of nowhere. Bobby flails and loses any comforts he had, never thinking something like that could ever happen to him. Gene McClary (Tommy Lee Jones) is another bigshot at GTX and his close friends with the CEO, James (Craig T. Nelson). He's a fighter for all the workers let go and we see him working to contain the downsizing, knowing the employees are more than just people who show up to work every day. Phil Woodward (Chris Cooper) started off on the factory floor of GTX and worked his way up over thirty years. His job is his life and he has set up an even nicer home for his wife and daughter. He never complains and works his ass off, so hearing the news that he too has been let go pushes him to the brink, unraveling the man faster than you could imagine.

The film also stars Maria "I Always Get Naked" Bello. And yes, she does. 

The Company Men is a movie all about the performances. All three men in the lead roles are amazing, each fitting their respective part perfectly. It's easy to believe Affleck is the over-confident businessman who has it all and it's even easier to picture Tommy Lee Jones as the man at the top, rugged, worn, and wiser than you think. Chris Cooper is exceptional as Phil and you feel so bad for him as the man who's worked so hard to get royally f**ked in the end. However, at first glance, you would think that these characters shouldn't be cared about, as they really are high and tight, near millionaires who have made money off of the losses and pains of other people. But, I guess that's the strength of the film because it never villainizes these characters. Even if they're "better than us", they're still human and the movie really focuses on the real struggles they face. Losing your job and even your home effects everyone and is equally embarrassing across every economic class.

This sucks, no matter who you are. 

I would definitely recommend The Company Men. It's a movie that's relevant to what's been going on in the country the last few years and gives us at look at how those on the top (who we're supposed to hate) are struggling to get by as well. It's extremely well acted and gives the film an unexpected level of talent and credibility. Written and directed by TV vet John Wells (The West Wing and ER), it's a smart very serious drama showered with bits of humor that make it all that much easier to swallow. While the lives of those focused on in the film are far from what any of us are used to, their struggles are still relatable and their pain is still hard to watch. Even then though, it's worth your time. 

The Good:

terrific performances from the entire cast, from the three main leads to each supporting character

The Bad:

being reminded that getting fired has absolutely no positive aspects to it and that family may be important, but money really, really helps

The Ugly:

seeing that everyone was hit hard by the recession, except the very, very, very, very top of big companies that keep spending all of the money, taking bonuses, raising new buildings, and going on vacations 

Overall: 7.7/10

Discussion Question:

If someone makes millions of dollars a year, lives large, but then loses his/her job, should we feel sorry for them? 

Trailer:

Nov 27: Brave

"Determined to make her own path in life, Princess Merida defies a custom that brings chaos to her kingdom. Granted one wish, Merida must rely on her bravery and her archery skills to undo a beastly curse."

Directed by: Mark Andrews and Brenda Chapman, Rated: PG, 93 minutes

Pixar is falling to pieces. It's a sad fact and I hate admitting it but it's true. Ending with one of its greatest films (Toy Story 3), Pixar has seemingly came full circle and now everything afterwards is just not really worth it. Cars 2 is a disgrace and is a sequel no one but kids and merchandisers asked for. If Pixar ever showed signs of slowing down it was with Cars 2, and all hope for the animation studio regaining its composure was put into this year's Brave. Unfortunately, the film is a complete mess and doesn't feel like a Pixar classic at all. It's unimaginative, horribly paced, and probably one of the more childish movies I've seen from the studio. Brave is a generic waste of time and I am so disappointed with Pixar.

She must have so much hair in her food...

Merida (Kelly McDonald) is a young princess (because we don't have enough of those already) who's rebellious and lives her life against the grain, never wanting to do the training her mother (Emma Thompson) wants her to do and never wanting to become the queen she's destined to be. Luckily, her rather rambunctious father (Billy Connolley) allows Merida her moments of freedom and time with archery, something she's very good at. After a fight with mommy, Merida runs off into the woods and encounters a witch. She tells the hag that she wants her mother to change and the witch conjures up a little tart to present to mom that will most certainly make things a bit different around the dinner table. Unfortunately for Merida, the changes are a bit too drastic for her own good, and a curse is placed upon her mother, leaving Merida with only 48 hours to stop it before it becomes permanent.

Believe it or not, there's very little of this that actually happens in the film. 

Brave never feels like something that sprung from the minds and imaginations of the once-genius animators at Pixar. The story is the same story we've seen hundreds of times before, disguised as something just a little bit different. With lush, very realistic scenery and terrific visuals, Brave at first glance is something special. However, as the film drags on, even that luster begins to fade and you can tell what parts were given more attention than the rest. Merida's hair is rendered really well and the bright orange color contrasts well with the green of Scotland, but at times, you can tell it's the only thing that was paid attention to. A large part of the story features a bear and after the animal is introduced, it sticks out as something poorly made, and the fur on it's back looks neglected compared to Merida's fiery mane. It's a shame more attention wasn't paid to the details because once you notice one, it slowly drives you insane.

Oh my God! There's a poorly rendered bear right behind you!

If the hit and miss visuals weren't enough to scare you away, Brave lacks any imagination in the story it tries so hard to tell. The pacing is awful and jumps from family melodrama to stupid kid humor in the blink of an eye. In it's more fun moments, Brave tries to pack in as much jokes as possible, all of which are far from being THAT funny. Sure, there are a couple of chuckles in the mess, but they are far from enough to save the film. As for the actual story, there's very little originality in it and from the very beginning you can predict where it's headed. By the movie's conclusion, you feel no satisfaction as you've seen it all before and are more happy that the whole thing's over than anything else. Pixar may be owned by Disney (who's still putting itself back together), but there are few excuses to allow such mediocrity from the studio. With a streak has strong as the one it has, a film like Brave coming out of nowhere and really disappointing is almost unforgivable.

Luxor Jr. is a little dimmer these days...

Brave is a hard film to really breakdown and review. As a stand alone movie, it's above average and has technical moments worthy of praise. As a Pixar film, it's terrible and one of the worst they have made (it gives Cars a run for its money if that tells you anything). It's a movie that's completely lacking any imagination or thought and the magic we're promised in this fairy tale is almost non-existent. Our heroine is hard to root for and her actions are more careless than anything else. Very little depth is put into her and the rest of the characters and any emotion we're supposed to feel is shallow, if anything. However, I won't recommend staying away from Brave, as I know many people will see it regardless  but I will warn you that it's far from anything else we've seen from Pixar. Here's hoping that next year's Monsters University will restore some of the faith I have lost. Mike and Sully can't let me down. Right?... 

The Good:

visuals that create a vibrant world set in a very green wilderness (but has moments of blah)

The Bad:

a predictable story that does nothing new with the princess/fairy-tale story

The Ugly:

Pixar completely losing itself in the past couple of years and very little hope or signs that it's repairing itself

Overall: 6.1/10

Discussion Question:

Where does Brave rank in Pixar's filmography?

Trailer:

Guest Review- The Constant Gardener

"As some of you may know, I have a handful of writers jumping on board with me as phase 2 of The Cinematic Katzenjammer rolls out this week. In slowly introducing all of the writers, I always wanted to infuse some of their own reviews in the site, to give you a taste of what is to come. Here's Michael's review of The Constant Gardener."

Greetings movie lovers. On the solemn word of writer Ries Murphy - who is a good friend of mine - Nick Powell has generously agreed to let me graffiti his beautiful website with my review. He may not know this constitutes my first blog post ever, and as such, the dawning of a new age. Somewhere a giant block of obsidian has appeared and neanderthals are tossing bones in a rapture of evolution. Let’s hope there’s less strife this time.

Welcome to the digital age.

You know you’re watching a John le Carre mystery whenever you can hear the clock ticking on the mantelpiece. For those of you who aren't familiar with John le Carre, he wrote some of the most iconic British espionage literature of the past fifty years, which has, in turn, inspired some of the longest winded film titles of the past few decades. He wrote the novels that later became the movies Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and The Spy Who Came in From the Cold. Both movies are excellent. However, as much as I admire John le Carre and Fernando Meirelles, who also directed City of God, I had little interest in seeing this movie when I first saw the previews. It sounds awful to say it, but I will. I thought, “Oh great, another Oscar winning film about Africa.” I think a lot of people had a similar reaction, or at the very least, tossed this movie aside into the giant box of Oscar winning and foreign movies that people told them they should see. One day. After Hot Tub Time Machine.
I don’t think this reaction is a mistake and so I’ll meekly climb my soap box now. Most movies that take place in Africa run into either Scylla or Charybdis. Either they’re too timid to approach the reality of the country, and instead paint a fantasy (remember Tip of the Spear?). Or, even more obnoxiously, they lean on the problems of the country in hopes of squeezing out another Oscar before our concern packs its bags for some other third world. I was a little hesitant at first to watch The Constant Gardener because I feared that underwhelming feeling you sometimes get when an Oscar winning movie passes you by. Just as you can expect someone to tell you that you should watch it, you can count on someone to tell you why you didn't get it. The bottom line is that I wasn't willing to sacrifice my respect for either Meirelles or John le Carre.
Let me tell you now, if you ever shunted this movie aside on the suspicion that the Oscars were won before the filming, and that the reviews afterwards wore false smiles, I understand your indifference. Regardless, give this movie a second chance, despite how too-good it looks. Meirelles made a serious movie. The Constant Gardener takes a long, unblinking look at the dangerous political marriages between Africa, state aid, and humanitarianism and the resulting atrocities. It makes no shoddy claims or definitive answers and except about people.

I’ll warn you. If you take a good look at this film, it might cut you

Little did Justin know that the begonias were watching him.

Now, that being said, take my recommendation with a grain of salt. John le Carre is not for everyone and what I like about him others might detest. I remember once watching Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy with someone who hadn't ever seen a le Carre movie. At the end I was completely transported, biting my nails; if someone on screen had dropped a tea cup I would have probably passed out. Only after the movie finished did I realize that the person I’d watched it with was dead asleep. If you’re looking for an action thriller, this probably isn't your movie. Unlike his contemporary, Ian Fleming, le Carre’s characters take their mysteries and thrills one step at a time, usually only after playing a rousing game of chess, or perhaps re-potting the begonias and sipping on a cup of earl gray. Compared to Fleming’s sheer sided, diamond compression of manhood, le Carre’s protagonists tend to look as wilted as boiled spinach. Ironically, I watched this film just after the momentous Skyfall and there were times when I caught myself expecting the main character, Justin, to break some one’s shin, or start a bike chase and instead, he got his ass kicked.

The Constant Gardener is my kind of mystery though. I find myself biting my nails when a character mutters, and holding my breath while Justin re-pots his goddamn begonias before taking tea. The tension of the movie revolves around the relationship between Justin and Tessa. Most of the time, in fact, the scenes between them are charged with more tension than when Justin is in dire peril.

This is the heart of the movie.

This formula only worked because I cared about the characters so much. I empathized with Justin - modestly able, mostly distracted, and completely thunderstruck that he had such an awesome wife. While I felt like Justin, I fell in love with Tessa, who was written so we fall in love with her. Ralph Fiennes (again in Skyfall) does a brilliant job of playing Justin by what he fails to say, and his subdued, somewhat timid reactions. Rachel Weisz, passionate, altruistic, manages to be both ambiguous and highly charming, inspiring our loyalty and trust even as we doubt her, which isn't that surprising after seeing her performance in The Fountain. I felt like Justin. I wanted to believe in the goodness of my wife. The movie by contrasting this love story with the horrors of the scheming pharmaceutical companies, had the arguably realistic effect of making worthwhile love seem an anomaly. As much as we want to believe her, how can we trust Tessa?

The Constant Gardener trades in subtleties. No questions have a single answer. The violence sinks in more deeply when its off screen and has a quality to it as final and helpless as the landscape itself. Africa is wide and desolate and red, full of persisting life, but when the violence passes you’re only left wondering as to why it happened in the first place. It unsettled me when I noticed the absence of “why” in the film, especially when there is so much death to explain. One scene will haunt me for a long time. Raiders swoop down on an isolated village. The whole thing unfolds as if rehearsed. People run and the raiders pursue, women die, children are rounded up. A man stands staring at his grass hut, now a ball of flame. The logic of the film had entered me at some point and I knew what would happen next, off screen, when the credits rolled and I left to go eat lunch. The villagers will rebuild. The grass huts will go up again and be burned away. Victories and losses in that land are written in sand. But just as the violence cannot not be explained or remedied, neither can the love. Both come from a place as wide and inexplicable as Africa.

A bleak and beautiful land.

“Some very nasty things live under rocks. Especially in foreign gardens.”

Indeed they do. Bravo.

The Good: Terrific performances by Rachel Weisz and Ralph Fiennes in a subtle, thinking man’s thriller with deep questions.
The Bad: 
Some of the answers to those questions. Anyone planning to join the Peace Corps should not watch this movie.
The Beautiful: 
The movie pays attention to Africa as a pressing dilemma rather than a backdrop for a thriller. It’s a heavy punching movie with a lot to say about the dilemma’s of a torn country.

My score: 9.2/10

DVD Court: Nov. 27

This week, we put just one film on trial. As The Jury, we recommend what should happen to a particular DVD released today. Voting Burn It, Skip It, Rent It, or Buy It, we come together to deliver a verdict and hope to help you decide what to watch or avoid. Unfortunately, there is no Court of Appeals this week. However, I'd like to introduce everyone to Fernando of Committed to Celluloid, the newest member of the Jury, bringing our total count to 12. While I will close any new applications for new members right now, come January, there will be more spots opening so contact me if you are interested. 

The Jury:
Nick of The Cinematic Katzenjammer
Ries of The Cinematic Katzenjammer
Joe of Two Dude Review
Vern of The Vern's Videovangaurd
Andrew and Sarah of Two Tickets For...
Dave of Dave Examines Movies
Andy of Andy Watches Movies
Sati of Cinematic Corner
Daniel of Daniel's Film Reviews
Mavi of FilmScope
Brian of The Soap Box Office
Fernando of Committed to Celluloid

ParaNorman

"A misunderstood boy takes on ghosts, zombies and grown-ups to save his town from a centuries-old curse."

Directed by: Chris Butler and Sam Fell, Rated: PG, 92 minutes

Nick: Buy It
Ries: Rent It
Joe: Buy It
Vern: Rent It
Andrew and Sarah: Rent It
Dave: Buy It
Andy: Rent It
Sati: Rent It
Daniel: Rent It
Mavi: Rent It
Brian: Skip It
Fernando: Rent It

VERDICT: RENT IT

Lawless

"Set in Depression-era Virginia, a bootlegging gang is threatened by a new deputy and other authorities"

Directed by: John Hillcoat, Rated: R, 116 minutes

Nick: Rent It
Ries: Buy It
Joe: Rent It
Vern: Rent It
Andrew and Sarah: Buy It
Dave: Burn It
Andy: Rent It
Sati: Rent It
Daniel: Rent It
Mavi: Rent It
Brian: Rent It

Fernando: Rent It

VERDICT: RENT IT

Step Up Revolution

"Emily arrives in FL with aspirations to become a professional dancer. She sparks with Sean, whose neighborhood is threatened by Emily's father's development plans."

Directed by: Scott Speer, Rated: PG-13, 99 minutes

Nick: Burn It

Ries: Skip It
Joe: Burn It
Vern: Rent It
Andrew and Sarah: Burn It
Dave: Skip It
Andy: Burn It
Sati: Burn It
Daniel: Burn It
Mavi: Burn It
Brian: Skip It

Fernando: Skip It

VERDICT: BURN IT

Men in Black III 

"Agent J travels in time to MIB's early years in the 1960s, to stop an alien from killing his friend and changing history."

Directed by: Barry Sonnenfeld, Rated: PG-13, 106 minutes

Nick: Rent It
Ries: Buy It
Joe: Buy It
Vern: Skip It
Andrew and Sarah: Rent It
Dave: Rent It
Andy: Rent It
Sati: Skip It
Daniel: Rent It
Mavi: Skip It
Brian: Rent It

Fernando: Skip It

VERDICT: RENT IT

Sparkle

"Three sisters form girl group and soon become local sensations, but fame becomes a challenge as the family begins to fall apart."

Directed by: Salim Akil, Rated: PG-13, 116 minutes

Nick: Burn It
Ries: Skip It
Joe: Skip It
Vern: Skip It
Andrew and Sarah: Skip It
Dave: Skip It
Andy: Burn It
Sati: Skip It
Daniel: Rent It
Mavi: Burn It
Brian: Skip It

Fernando: Skip It

VERDICT: SKIP IT