Three Imaginary Girls - Film Review

In the House (Dans la maison)

Imaginary Amie — Sat, 18 May 2013 23:49:59 +0000

{In the House opened in Seattle on Friday, 5/17, and is screening at the Landmark Seven Gables Theatre}

In the House is the latest thriller from atmospheric maestro François Ozon, and while it’s a bit more subtle than Swimming Pool or Hideaway, manohman does it deliver on the chills.

Bored literature teacher Germain (Fabrice Luchini) finds interest and inspiration in a new Freshman’s fictional story, but when he confronts the boy, Claude, about it, he admits it’s based in reality, and is about his friend Rapha’s family. The startled professor initially gives Claude a hard time about it, but then encourages him to continue for the sake of the story, offering to help the boy develop his literary gift.

As each page rolls in, Germain and his wife, Jeanne, (Kristin Scott Thomas) read them out loud and become more and more engrossed in the story—even as it gets more and more disturbing. Knowing he’s got them hooked, Claude plays along by ending the pages with “to be continued…”

Ozon cloaks the scenes with Claude and Rapha’s family in heavy suspense (complete with tinkly thriller music) so you never know if what the Germains are reading is true or not. You’re never sure what Claude’s intentions are—only that they’re somewhat sinister. And as Germain and Jeanne fall deeper and deeper under his spell, you can only watch—and wait. And wait. And wait … to see what happens.

The whole film has an unsettling, voyeuristic effect. Just what you want in a thriller, and definitely worth your (non-SIFF) dollars this weekend.

{In the House opened in Seattle on Friday, 5/17, and is screening at the Landmark Seven Gables Theatre}

In the House is the latest thriller from atmospheric maestro François Ozon, and while it’s a bit more subtle than Swimming Pool or Hideaway, manohman does it deliver on the chills.

The Great Gatsby

Imaginary Amie — Fri, 10 May 2013 15:32:03 +0000

{The Great Gatsby opens in Seattle on Friday, 5/10, and is playing at the Landmark Guild 45^th, The Big Picture, and Thornton Place IMAX®. In both 2D and 3D! Check listings for 3D screenings.}

Ah, Baz Luhrmann. The Director people love to hate. I’m actually in the “love to love” category (with the exception of Australia. That fucking movie. Unnnnnngggghh.), but this guy’s work certainly divides film fans. So what happens when Baz gets ahold of beloved F. Scott Fitzgerald novel The Great Gatsby? Pretty much what you’d expect: A novel about excess adapted by a guy who specializes in excess. Including the application of another excessive thing—3D.

Set in the roaring ‘20s, the story starts with aspiring Wall Street mogul Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire. Ugh.) recalling how he moved into a quaint Long Island cottage that happened to be right next door to the mysterious GIGANTOR mansion of Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio). In which the reclusive zillionaire stares out the windows broodingly while throwing lavish parties full of beautiful people, confetti, fireworks, and of course, enough illegal hooch to fill six Olympic swimming pools with.

It’s not long before Carraway learns that Gatsby’s extreme host persona and piles of money have been created and amassed to get the attention of a certain girl—the beautiful and emotionally delicate Daisy (Carey Mulligan, who was like, MADE for this role), who happens to be Carraway’s cousin, and who also just happens to live directly across the water in her own gigantor mansion with her terrible, overbearing, cheating husband.

Gatsby enlists the help of supermodel sportswoman Jordan Baker (Elizabeth Debicki, who I am going to start paying a LOT more attention to), to enlist the help of Nick, to get Daisy over to his side of the lake so they can rekindle their long-lost love. And it totally works! Obviously. What girl wouldn’t fall for a smooth-talking Leo in pastel-colored 20s suits with a closet as big as an airplane hanger?

Unfortunately, this is a tragedy, not a comedy, so there are some rather large complications. Like the fact that Daisy’s husband, Tom (Joel Edgerton), is onto this scheme, and he’s not having any of it. And Tom’s jealous mistress, Myrtle, isn’t having any of it either. And Myrtle’s alcoholic husband, George, DEFINITEY isn’t having any of anything (except, uh, booze. and car grease). And—oh hey, maybe Daisy isn’t having any of it either? SPOILER ALERT.

Anyway. As you’d expect, Luhrmann paints massive amounts of gold and glitter from one end of the screen to the other. GLITTERBOMB! SPARKLEMOTION!!!! And the costumes! Ohman the costumes. And the jewelry! Ohman, the jewelry. I bet Tiffany sells a bazillion dollars worth of that shit after the movie opens and people see it draped all over Carey Mulligan’s flawless complexion.

Flawless: that’s a good word for the movie LOOKS. Both Mulligan and Debicki appear so damn near perfect you’ll almost be fooled into thinking they’re life-size dolls; not a hair out of place on their perfectly cut '20s bobs (HAIR COVETING). And the 3D only makes everyone appear more smootheed out and surreal, plus, admittedly, it kicks some serious ass when used to enhance falling snow, sparkling fireworks, and buckets of confetti.

And we already know it’s a good story, right? But even though I was blown away by how gorgeous this film was, there’s something about it that doesn’t quite work. True, a large part of that is the fact that I find Tobey Maguire infinitely irritating, but honestly Leo looked like he was sleepwalking through the movie, so those two basically cancelled out how brilliant both Mulligan and Edgerton were for me.

And it’s not the music—I know people are all freaking out about Beyonce’s “Crazy in Love” being turned into a jazzy speakeasy tune, but I actually LOVED that—so what is it? I can’t pin it down, exactly. It just seemed sort of empty, despite all the obvious work that was put into making this thing spectacular (spectacular).

Look, anytime you can’t get some tears out of ME with a tragic love story, I feel like you’re doing it wrong. I cry at fucking Google commercials. Was I expecting too much by comparing it to my favorite Baz film, Moulin Rouge? Maybe. And it’s entirely possible Gatsby will grow on me if I see it a few more times—or maybe not.

Either way, I look forward to arguing with everyone else about what an idiot I am for not loving it whole-heartedly straight away; or about what an idiot I am for liking anything Luhrmann has ever done. GOOD TIMES.

{The Great Gatsby opens in Seattle on Friday, 5/10, and is playing at the Landmark Guild 45^th, The Big Picture, and Thornton Place IMAX®. In both 2D and 3D! Check listings for 3D screenings.}

Revelatory doc on The Source Family at SIFF Cinema Film Center

Chris Estey — Thu, 02 May 2013 22:22:48 +0000

{The Source Family opens Friday, May 3 at 9 PM at the SIFF Cinema at the Film Center in Seattle Center, 305 Harrison Street, and runs through May 9, 2013. Source Family members Makushla, Omne, and Rain Aquarian will be at the premier in person.}

For underground music fans of the god-jam variety (namely, psyche heads) the names Father Yod and Ya Ho Wa 13 can evoke mystical states of I want I want I want. Most fans of even just some of the hundreds of releases these often free-form musicians put out since the late 60s are aware there is a wild cultural backstory to their creation; and some of those LPs feature pivotal artists such as Sky Saxon of The Seeds, who converted to the unabashed cult which formed the bands which made their sounds.

That's right, FY and YHW 13 are actual cult artists, the former once known as Jim Baker, a Judo master and Marine and miracle-magus who underwent a Yogic conversion in the 60s and charismatically collected together something called The Source Family at the height of the West Coast New Age wampum.

His tribe, a few hundred strong, were a bit-scruffy but glowingly-beautiful clan of white-robed followers immersed in health food promotion (including a popular restaurant for hippies and celebrities and celebrity hippies), total communal living, prayerful alternatives to that whole sexual monogamy drag, and ... oh yeah a little early morning sacramental use of the reefer. Good times!

Ya Ho Wa 13 were kinda the house band for TSF, a core of some adept musicians and inspired floaters who made all kinds of records, some ferocious dark night of the soul stormers, some sappy tambourine jangle, sometimes all together. (A Japanese label put out a huge box set of the releases a few years ago, but even more bootlegs remain.) Father Yod played a mighty big gong and was relentless on a big drum through some of their sides; his deep voice occasionally gracing the celestial sound-scapes. A couple of years ago, Process Books put out a warts-and-all but loving biography of the cult with a free CD featuring samples of tunes from throughout The Source Family's experiments with rock and pop and folk; it's a sweet, trippy sample of a fascinating scene and a must-have in your music book library.

That book, subtitled The Untold Story of Father Yod, Ya Ho Wa 13, And The Source Family, written by Isis Aquarian and Electricity Aquariun, was the basis for the movie The Source Family. I highly recommend both for being excellent documents of extraordinary times in Western religion and civilization. As a guy who confesses absolute spiritual retardation and frantically flees from any glazed-over gazes of the converted spouting propaganda, I can attest they hold up well as straightforward, trustable narratives with a minimum of the heebeegeebees. Both are truly unique, in that they are richly experienced words from deeply inside a radical religious collective that challenged the authorities and offered an unusual way out of the hard drugs, capitalist overkill, political despair, and general bumming vibe of Vietnam-era America.

As you will see in the superbly structured film, which has tons of photos and footage from beginning to dissipation of the The Source Family, the cult had a lot going for it; this movie shows just how attractive the communal movement was, but doesn't flinch from expressing some members' disappointment in Yod's craving for lotsa wives. He brought a ton of peace to many regardless; a peace he sort of missed out on himself, or never fully absorbed or something. His restlessness seems utterly Eclessastical by the end of the film (you know, eat drink and be merry because how long you wanna live anyways?). There's a lot of tension as you witness the triumphs of spirit and challenges to experimental lifestyles; yeah, I was waiting for the poison-laced treats to be busted out at some point.

But The Source Family avoided the whole death trip; it simply wasn't in their character to give anything back but more life and creativity. That makes this movie, as open as it is about such a fiery period of society-spiting spiritual growth, an ontologically-rewarding experience. And when Father Yod stands on a high school stage in his white fedora, with his big old beard, looking like a mad daddy of magic about to take you on to the other side, and says, "I'm looking for about 4000" to come along with him, it's a rock and roll moment that seems like Moses as Elvis. Pretty damned cool.

Imaginary film report: Antiviral and Mental open today in Seattle

Imaginary Amie — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 23:24:02 +0000

Weekend movie time! There are a few Indies screening at The Grand Illusion and SIFF this weekend that I wanted to share with our imaginaries.

First up, Antiviral: screening at Grand Illusion Cinema , 4/19-4/25.

Antiviral is about an evolution in the way people view celebrity. Placed in a future bathed in clean white, the film centers on Syd, a salesman at a popular clinic where the commodity is live infections taken from celebs. A celeb gets infected or sick with something—herpes, the flu, etc.—and sells their virus to the clinic for a price, who in turn sells it back to super fans who want to be as close to that famous person as possible.

Gross, right? Imagine someone paying to get injected with Kim Kardashian's ... whatever. Anyway, things get even more complicated, as it turns out Syd works with a friend who runs a “celebrity meat” butcher shop (cells from celebs are used to grow “steaks” that fans can buy and eat - ewwwwwwww) that's also a black market business for the viruses. And when Syd steals a deadly virus from a beautiful young star, it turns out he’s interfering with a much larger plan.

Director Brandon Cronenberg’s work is clearly influenced by dad (David)’s sick and twisted visions. It’s a beautifully done cautionary tale bathed in horror. Be prepared for lots of poking, prodding, needles, and bizarrely disgusting human tissue creations. And that last shot. Oh man. SO UNCOMFORTABLE!

In the mood for something completely different? Mental is screening at the SIFF Film Center, 4/19-4/21.

Cringe-worthy in a different context, this Australian comedy is about the Moochmore family: Shirley, a mentally stressed mum to five girls who are constantly self-diagnosing themselves on the Internet is an embarrassment to her family and her fancy pants neighbors. Still, belting out tunes The Sound of Music in her backyard seems tame next to her best friend’s insistence that the two life-sized dolls she carts around are her “girls”.

When Dad (Anthony LaPaglia with an Aussie accent – what?!?!?) returns home after a two week break, Shirley takes off on “holiday”—read: mental hospital. Since he has to concentrate on his political campaign instead of his kids, Dad hires a kooky drifter named Shaz (Toni Collette, natch) off the side of the road to be their nanny. Of course, she turns out to be exactly what’s needed to whip the Moochmore girls into Von Trapp-perfection, just the way mum imagined.

Mental is packed full of intentional kookiness—and yeah, maybe it sometimes tries a little too hard (one incident involving a practical joke and an all-white living room was a little rough to get through)—but the cast makes it work somehow. Lily Sullivan as the eldest Moochmore girl, Coral, really stands out. And in addition to LaPaglia, Liev Schrieber dons a scruffy beard and Aussie accent (BE STILL MY HEART) to play a shark hunter who stands in as an unconventional father figure.

It’s not quite as charming as Muriel’s Wedding (also helmed by Director and Writer PJ Hogan), the "mental illness is all about perception" thing gets a little old, and it becomes almost ridiculously unhinged by the end, but I was still pretty entertained. Maybe you'll like it too?

Weekend movie time! There are a few Indies screening at The Grand Illusion and SIFF this weekend that I wanted to share with our imaginaries.

First up, Antiviral: screening at Grand Illusion Cinema , 4/19-4/25.

Gross, right? Imagine someone paying to get injected with Kim Kardashian's ... whatever.

My Amityville Horror

Imaginary Amie — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 14:32:40 +0000

{My Amityville Horror is screening at Grand Illusion Cinema on Friday 4/12 & Saturday 4/13 at 11pm, and again on Monday 4/14 at 9pm}

When I was a preteen, I saw the 1979 version of The Amityville Horror, which kicked off an obsession with spirits and demon possession, and learning everything about the family that had lived in the real house and what they had experienced. So I was pretty psyched when I saw that Daniel Lutz, one of the kids who lived through the actual thing, was the subject of this new documentary, My Amityville Horror.

But whoa. WHOA. This guy, who is now in his mid-40s, is clearly messed up about whatever went down in that house. Whether is was actually poltergeists causing the scares, or the active imaginations of the children (via patriarch George Lutz), is left up to you to decide. Regardless, it’s clear that the scars Danny bears from it will never heal completely.

Documentarian Eric Walter does a fantastic job setting up the story for us; covering the history of how George and Kathy Lutz met, relocated to the famous Dutch Colonial in Amityville. And then moving on to how and why they came forward, and the stories that they spun, which resulted in their respective paranormal fame. He also includes interviews with some of the paranormal experts who were originally brought in to investigate the house, along with news anchors and journalists who covered the story.

The problem for Danny is that The Lutz's fame was also projected onto their children, especially after the novel and the movies were released. At one point, Danny relates to a therapist how hard it is for him to have his own identity with people prescribing a movie character’s actions to him—including being called different names depending on what sequel people are referencing.

All that seems like it would be rough enough, but you can also tell from Danny’s awkward social behavior and erratic story-telling that something else went very wrong in that house, especially after witnessing the almost palatable hate he has for his late stepfather, George.

Whatever the truth is, the story of that house in Amityville and the boy who spent time in it is FASCINATING, even though we might ever know what really happened. And after watching this, I hope Daniel Lutz is able to move beyond whatever is holding him to his past and find peace someday.

{My Amityville Horror is screening at Grand Illusion Cinema on Friday 4/12 & Saturday 4/13 at 11pm, and again on Monday 4/14 at 9pm}

Evil Dead (2013)

Imaginary Amie — Fri, 05 Apr 2013 15:14:22 +0000

{Evil Dead opens in Seattle on Friday, 4/5 and is screening at the Regal Meridian 16, the Landmark Varsity, and Thornton Place}

Holy shit you guys. Holy. Shit. I was really hoping the Evil Dead reboot would be awesome, but I had no expectations that it would be as fantastically amazing as it turned out to be. As a horror fan, I gotta tell you that this is one of the finest examples of the genre that I’ve ever seen. Ever.

Fans of the original don’t need to be worried—it’s not a straight-up remake. It’s more of a reboot that uses the basics of The Evil Dead story as a starting point to create a new legend, combined with some really clever nods to Raimi’s work. Which include a new take on his signature camera moves and some great twists on everything you loved about the 1981 flick.

The opening sequence sets you up for the glorious splatter that follows in a surprisingly original way. And you probably know the rest, more or less: five friends head to a cabin in order to help their heroin-addicted friend Mia (Jane Levy, I will never be able to look at you on Suburgatory the same way again) dry out. The group includes Mia’s somewhat estranged brother, David (Shiloh Fernandez); his blonde girlfriend, Natalie; dark-haired nurse Olivia, and bespectacled hipster-nerd Eric.

Unfortunately, the group soon stumbles onto a creepy basement filled with ominous ritualistic items, like strung-up rotting cats (so many rotting cats), and The Book of the Dead (not yet named as such), and Eric, the genius (!!!) brings it upstairs and starts reading the words contained within. AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS: Eric is a tool. Oops, I mean: the demons have been summoned.

Mia is the first to be possessed by way of a brutally graphic update of the famous “angry molesting tree” scene in the original (seriously cringe-worthy, to the point where I crossed my legs super-tight and said, “nononononononoNOOOOO” as it happened) and from there, it’s a full-on relentless Gorefest that at one point paints almost the entire screen with blood.

A Gorefest, by the way, that’s sure to please even the pickiest horror fans. Name pretty much any uncomfortable way to suffer, and it happens in this movie. There’s one scene in particular where you can hear what’s happening long before you see it, and even though you’re bracing for it—it’s just. So. Terrible (and great!). The practical F/X (with just a tiny bit of CGI enhancement) in this thing are really, really, really boss.

Coupled with some really cool shots by Director Alvarez, great acting from the cast, and a screenplay co-written by Diablo Cody (I can now forgive you for the crap-fest that is Jennifer’s Body, Di), all the splatter adds up to an almost perfect movie. There’s just one tiny bit of MacGyver madness that distracted me from enjoyment, but it was so brief and there is SO MUCH GOODNESS that I can totally let it slide.

Guys. Honestly. Evil Dead is one of the best horror flicks I’ve seen in ages. Scary, uncomfortable, entertaining, gross, bloody, and disgusting—with a pretty decent plot to boot. I can’t wait to see it again.

{Evil Dead opens in Seattle on Friday, 4/5 and is screening at the Regal Meridian 16, the Landmark Varsity, and Thornton Place}

Room 237

Imaginary Amie — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 15:44:50 +0000

{Room 237 opens in Seattle on Friday, 4/5 and is screening at SIFF Uptown Cinemas through 4/11. Director Rodney Ascher will be on Skype for a Q&A after the 6:45pm showings on both Friday and Saturday night—and you can catch a screening of The Shining directly after the documentary on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday}

“This is not “The Making of The Shining.” This is not a biography of Stanley Kubrick. This is: After the film has left the filmmaker’s hands, how does the audience grapple with it and make sense of it?” ~ Director Rodney Ascher from an interview with Vulture

After viewing a film (in particular, viewing a film over and over and … over) some fans latch onto the tiniest details, stringing them into clues that they then weave into a larger meaning that is personally important to them—and then convince themselves that the Director obviously meant that ONE THING.

In Room 237, the film in question in Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining, and those “one” things include The Holocaust, the massacre and betrayal of the Native Americans, something-something about a Minotaur and the maze, an analysis of impossibly constructed rooms and hallways, a look at the interesting imagery created when it’s played backwards and forwards at the same time, and awestruck respect at how the whole thing is inlaid with hidden meanings.

Rather than show you the faces of the people behind the various theories, Ascher shows you scenes from films with the vocals laid over them. And not just scenes from The Shining and other Kubrick movies (although those are prominent, especially when the narrative has a talking point about a specific scene)—the entire “in theater” framework is made up of scenes from Lamberto Bava’s Demons, which I found more distracting than anything.

Also distracting (no surprise) is that a few of the people sharing their theories with you come across as arrogant blowhards. MY FAVORITE. Look, passionate movie fans and critics are always, always, always willing to tell you their theories on a particular film—I’m no exception. But I really try to explain it in a way that says “I am having all the feels about this thing because…” and not “You are an idiot if you don’t see this too.” I mean, I think. (If you’re one of my friends and you disagree, PLEASE tell me!)

A beautiful rush of corn syrup-y blood just for horror's sake? Or representative of the elevator shaft's direct connection to the blood of the Native Americans in the burial ground beneath the hotel? Only Kubrick knows for sure.

What I can’t stand is when those people insist that ONLY THEY noticed this particular detail, and ONLY THEY KNOW FOR SURE that the director meant that painting/rug pattern/room number/can of baking soda to symbolize the thing that they desperately want it to. I’ve watched people have to eat their own words at Q&As when presenting directors with this very thing, and it’s never pretty (but it’s always amusing).

The way I see it, the bottom line is that any film can be interpreted almost any way you please, and The Shining inspires a lot of different interpretations. And I think that’s what Ascher is trying to show you here. People who love movies REALLY love movies, and people who love The Shining REALLY REALLY love The Shining, and people who love Kubrick REALLY REALLY REALLY love Kubrik.

And depending on your personal experiences, you may or may not agree. Things pointed out in this film may make perfect sense, or they may seem to be really far-fetched. And that’s the beauty of art, isn’t it? It can mean something different to everyone.

Room 237 is a fascinating study of what fans of the film believe, and it’s an entertaining look at that world—especially if you’re not immersed it in it everyday.

Like The Shining, it’s worth a watch a few times over. Good thing it’s playing at SIFF Uptown all week!

The 6 Best Children's Movies of 2012 (yup, 2012!)

Roxie Rider — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:57:16 +0000

Since the Magnificent Liz has been making her way through her Best of 2013, I thought, what better time to polish up the Best of 2012 list I started over a month ago (though still a good month after 2012 was actually over)? I figure the target audience for this list is probably, like me, months behind anyway, so what the hell.

So without further ado, here are my top 6 children’s movies of 2012.

6. Brave
I’ll admit up front, I had some quibbles with the plot. And it’s hard to avoid a whiff of affirmative action when talking about it: it is, after all, one of the only animated megahits in memory with a strong, independent female badass at its center. (Tiana? Rapunzel? Mulan? Discuss.) But dammit, she is a badass! And the characters are nuanced and interesting, and the animation is breathtakingly beautiful, and the mischievous little brother triplets are hilarious. Don’t be dissuaded by the tepid reviews (mine possibly included). Let Merida elbow out some of the more vapid princesses in the pantheon.

5. Hugo
Hugo isn’t a movie that you’d immediately associate with Scorsese. There’s no violence, no grittiness, no Eastern seaboard goomba accents. But I could feel Scorsese’s adoration for film history just radiating from it. It’s based on the genre-busting Caldecott-winning book The Invention of Hugo Cabret, which reads a bit like a storyboard itself, and I admit I preferred the movie slightly. My son, whose tolerance for live-action narrative movies wasn’t fully developed at the time, sat rapt through the whole thing. It’s beautiful.

All that said, I’m not sure I’d go out of my way to see it a second time.

4. Hotel Transylvania
My kids would probably put this higher on their list than I—months later and they’re still quoting it regularly—but I did think it had a clever premise: Dracula (Adam Sandler) is a devoted but highly overprotective father, raising his century-old-teenage daughter Mavis (Selena Gomez) in a hotel promising resort-style vacations for monsters, safely hidden from angry pitchfork-wielding mobs. But then Phish-loving backpacker Jonathon (Andy Sandberg) stumbles in to woo Mavis and help Dracula loosen up. It’s funny and unobjectionable.

3. The Secret World of Arrietty
This recent offering from Studio Ghibli (released in 2010, but only coming stateside last year) is a retelling of The Borrowers, which may be enough for some of you right there. A spirit sister of Kiki’s Delivery Service, The Secret World of Arrietty is about a resourceful and independent-minded girl who relies on her own grit and instincts, plus some guidance from her stoic father (Will Arnett) and anxious mother (Amy Poehler), to learn the perilous trade of Borrowing: taking cast-offs from normal-sized people to build a life under the floorboards. It’s a patient, fulfilling, quiet movie, but with enough momentum to keep the kidlets engaged. It’d be perfect for watching on a misty afternoon with some hot chocolate.

2. Wreck-It Ralph
This may have been the mostly tightly scripted movie I saw this year, adult movies included. John C. Reilly plays Ralph, the Bad Guy in a Donkey Kong-like arcade game called Fix-It Felix Jr (voiced by 30 Rock’s Jack McBrayer). Ralph decides he’s tired of being a bad guy and invades a neighboring first-person shooter to acquire a medal, then ends up, through various shenanigans, accidentally landing in a Japanese racing game, where he forms an alliance with a mysteriously outcast racer (Sara Silverman). Jane Lynch and Alan Tudyk each lend an absurdist’s gravitas. Ralph is gloriously geeky, with countless nostalgic references for those of us who lived through the arcade era, but the kids enjoyed it on plot alone. We saw it twice in the theater.

1. The Pirates: Band of Misfits
As much as I loved Ralph, I have to put this one first because we’ve now seen it 5 times (including twice in the theater) and I haven’t yet begun to tire of it. It’s a swoon-worthy who’s who of British hotties: Hugh Grant has, I hereby submit, never been funnier as the Pirate Captain, Martin Freeman, ol’ Bilbo Arthur John Dent Baggins Watson himself, plays the first mate, and David Tennant (!!) voices a lovelorn yet resourceful Charles Darwin. The movie is filled with signature Aardman touches—passing puns, charming anachronisms, and a silent but expressive animal character who’s smarter than all of the humans. This one’s a keeper.

So without further ado, here are my top 6 children’s movies of 2012.

A Good Day to Die Hard

Imaginary Amie — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 00:42:12 +0000

{A Good Day to Die Hard opens in Seattle on 2/14, and is screening at the Regal Meridian, Sundance Cinemas Seattle, Thornton Place, and Pacific Science Center IMAX. Note: A few of these theaters are showing 10pm screenings on 2/13}

I don’t want to be a hater. I promise you, I went into A Good Day to Die Hard with an open mind (yes, even *I* appreciate big, dumb action movies).

I love the original, revel in the cheesiness of the second, think the third works brilliantly, and even though the fourth was poorly constructed, I thought it at least had some charm. This, though? THIS. This is just. Terrible.

After his son Jack (Jai Courtney) gets thrown into a Russian prison for shooting a guy in a night club, John McClane (a lean-looking Willis) heads to Moscow to uh, I guess provide moral support? Even though he mentions that he and his son haven’t spoken for at least a few years. I was hoping it would be to actually break his son out of prison, but that didn’t happen.

But once McClane arrives, he discovers his son is actually a hotshot CIA agent who’s been placed in prison deliberately in order to save the life of Yuri Komarov, the former business partner of Big Bad Chagarin: a corrupt government official who basically runs the city and intends to assassinate Yuri before he can reveal a long-buried secret that will ruin his reputation.

It’s not long before the explosions, car chases, double-crosses, and McClane’isms start; unfortunately, none of them are very good. For instance, the line that gets repeated WAY too many times by McClane, “I’m on vacation!” doesn’t even make any sense. Because, he’s not. He’s there for his son. This isn’t Clerks, for chrissake. And John doesn’t need a new catchphrase.

Which brings us to young McClane, Jack (John Jr.). Courtney is impressively chiseled, and I know people love the guy on Spartacus, but I don’t think he has the makings of an action star. He’s lacking the charisma needed to make me want to root for him. There’s no way this guy—at least as written here—could take the Die Hard movies and run with them on his own.

And while I appreciated the old-school Russian villain plot, and thought that the few nods to the first film were pretty cool, this thing is a big ol’ mess. Fox, I’m sorry—but you picked the wrong people to resurrect your moneymaking franchise.

Director John Moore slams through every action sequence so hard it seems like he’s hell bent on destroying as much stuff as possible, and completely unconcerned with exciting the audience. There’s only one exception, towards the end—but mostly during the car chases and gunfights, I felt like I was watching the same scene over and over. As for the more personal shots, overused slow motion and long pans don’t make for strong emotional connections.

Screenwriter Skip Woods (who penned such classics as Swordfish and X-Men Origins: Wolverine) takes what could have been an interesting scheme and mucks it up with a bunch of trying-too-hard-to-be-tender moments between father and son, nonsensical quips, and bad character choices. He essentially sucks all the magic out of an established action hero.

This is not John McClane. This is a sad old man trying to reconnect with his estranged son, and failing to make me believe it.

My recommendation: tomorrow’s a good day to skip seeing this incarnation of Die Hard. Hell, any day is.

I don’t want to be a hater. I promise you, I went into A Good Day to Die Hard with an open mind (yes, even *I* appreciate big, dumb action movies).

Side Effects

Imaginary Amie — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 15:47:33 +0000

{Side Effects opens in Seattle Friday, 2/8, and is screening at Sundance Cinemas, Oak Tree, AMC Pacific Place, and SIFF Cinema Uptown}

Well, Soderbergh finally made a movie with Channing Tatum that I wanted to see—if only to watch Rooney Mara work her magic.

Side Effects is one of those movie that I think could have been brilliant, if it focused more deeply on the issue of pharmacology and the responsibility of psychiatrists and drug companies. Instead, it uses those things only to provide a frame around a cheap thriller.

Mara plays Emily, a depressed young woman whose husband Martin (Tatum) has been in prison for 2 years for insider trading. Emily and Martin were living the high life when he was arrested with mansions and fancy cars and designer clothes, and now the poor girl actually has to work a 40-hour a week job! And she can’t even afford a decent psychiatrist.

After Martin is released, Emily slips further and further into her depression, ghosting through her days, and eventually slams her car into a concrete wall, which lands her in the hospital and in front of Dr. Jonathan Banks (Jude Law). The concerned doctor strongly suggests that she either be committed or get on antidepressants.

Having been down this road before, Emily agrees she needs meds, and begs him to accept her as a patient, promising to see him as many times a week as needed—as long as he doesn’t force her to stay in the hospital. She refers him to Dr. Victoria Siebert (Catherine Zeta-Jones), a specialist she was seeing before Martin’s money was seized and she couldn’t afford to be in treatment anymore.

Siebert and Banks discuss Emily’s condition and the different medications that might work to help her get better. Victoria mentions a brand new antidepressant called Ablixa, and when the rest of the drugs available hit her with various undesirable side effects, Emily mentions it to, so Banks decides to prescribe it.

Unfortunately, Ablixa has its own mind-boggling side effect: putting Emily into a sleep-walking trance where she does things like cook dinner and set the table for three people … and when she wakes up, she doesn’t remember anything about what did while in that state.

So, when Emily does something REALLY TERRIBLE she doesn’t remember, during the resulting trial, Dr. Banks’ expertise is called into question, as is the question of responsibility –is it Emily’s fault? Or her doctor’s? Or the drug company that created Ablixa and knew about this possibly dangerous side effect?

Unfortunately, that exploration ends rather quickly, and the film descends into a “there’s more to THIS story” thriller that’s just too damn easy to figure out. Zeta-Jones frankly looks like she’d rather be at home than in a film (trying to act), and while Law does a decent job, his character arc starts out interesting but reaches a resolution way too easily. The one bright star in this whole mess is Mara, who really has the skills to pull of Emily’s layers and make us believe we’re in the middle of it with her.

At best, this is an entertaining way to spend an evening, as long as you don't *think* about it too much. There were some good reveals towards the last third, but I prefer a little more thriller in my thrillers, so for me, it didn’t live up to the great piece of filmmaking it should have been.

Word is that this is Soderbergh’s last film ever—and I think Side Effects proves it’s a good time for him to quit.

{Side Effects opens in Seattle Friday, 2/8, and is screening at Sundance Cinemas, Oak Tree, AMC Pacific Place, and SIFF Cinema Uptown}

Well, Soderbergh finally made a movie with Channing Tatum that I wanted to see—if only to watch Rooney Mara work her magic.

Warm Bodies

Imaginary Amie — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 18:00:23 +0000

{Warm Bodies opens in Seattle on Friday, 2/1, and is screening at both AMC Pacific Place and Thornton Place}

I know there are a few others out there, but this is the first “Zombie Romance” film I’ve seen, and it was pretty well done. But! If you’re a hardcore Zombie purist, you’re going to hate it because it seriously messes with the rules of the genre.

Instead of focusing on the outbreak, Warm Bodies deals with the aftermath of a Zombie apocalypse, where the remaining humans (led by a militant John Malkovich) wall themselves up inside the remains of a big city, and the zombies run around outside eating whatever brains they can find. But here’s the catch: the zombies can think pretty much the same way they did before they became the walking dead.

It gets harder for them to retain their humanity the longer they’ve been at it, but “R” (super-dreamy Nicholas Hoult – yes, even as a Zombie) seems to have a little more consciousness than the others, clinging to his human persona by collecting various chotskies, including a boss collection of ‘80s albums—I knew I was going to like this film as soon as they queued up John Waites’ “Missing You”.

Worlds collide when a group of teenage warriors sets out to gather supplies and runs into R and his group of flesh-eating buddies. During the slaughter, R eats the brain of Julie’s boyfriend, ingesting his victim’s memories along with the tasty, tasty grey matter. Already enamored with her appearance (I get it—Teresa Palmer is easy on the eyes), the memories trigger a strong devotion in R, and he fights off a few Zombies to protect her precious noggin, then hauls her off to his hideaway to keep her safe.

Did I lose you? So the Zombies can think, and in some cases, feel. This totally goes against everything we’ve been trained to believe, so I had some trouble wrapping my mind around it—especially when R begins to speak. (And more especially when Rob Corddry’s character starts speaking, because honestly that guy is funny, but he’s not as good an actor as Hoult. Not in this, anyway.) But the story of Julie and R is so damn sweet, and R’s narration is so damn hilarious that I am willing to let it slide.

Still, this romance is WAY more complicated than Romeo & Juliet (there’s a nice nod to that with a balcony scene): 1) He’s dead. 2) Her father will shoot him in the head on sight. 3) He ate her boyfriend.

There are some inconsistencies with the movement of the zombies, particularly the scary “Bonies”—Zombies that have been dead so long they’ve picked off their own flesh and don’t retain any thoughts except hunger, and like I said, you’ve gotta be willing to believe that the Zombies could, uh, “get better.” Which is quite a leap.

But ultimately it doesn’t matter if you can make that leap, as long you don’t dig too deep and learn to appreciate this film as a fun time. Levine nailed it by casting Hoult and Palmer in the main roles and adapting Isaac Marion’s unconventional novel into a romantic comedy with a killer soundtrack and an endearing resolution.

I definitely enjoyed it more than I ever thought I would, and deem it worthy of your time and money.

{Warm Bodies opens in Seattle on Friday, 2/1, and is screening at both AMC Pacific Place and Thornton Place}

Promised Land

Imaginary Rich — Mon, 31 Dec 2012 23:44:09 +0000

{ Promised Land opens in Seattle Friday December 28th at the Regal Meridian 16 and Lincoln Square Cinemas (in Bellevue) }

Promised Land starring Matt Damon is your best choice this weekend if you're seeking a picturesque tale of how America's rural heartland is in danger of being steamrolled by big energy with a bit of romance tacked on. Less of a great choice if you want either some hard data on fracking or an especially compelling film. A lightweight take on environmental devastation that's well constrained within a familiar narrative. Naive (or willfully ignorant) boy with big ambition turns a blind eye on how his corporate masters do business. Until wiser folks and the double crossing sneaky big money interests eventually shake up his world view. Promised Land is the sort of film that feels interesting enough while you're watching, but even given the weighty subject matter isn't especially likely to stick with you longer than the time it takes to get to the parking lot.

Matt Damon is a highly successful salesman. People sometimes say to be good in that job you need to believe in what you're selling. And Damon is a true believer. Specifically that agricultural towns have always been more dependent on big business than they believed (his family's town was devastated by a manufacturing plant closing) and that selling natural gas rights to their land will allow them to keep the dream alive. Over time it becomes clear he maybe harbors internal conflicts bordering on a deep resentment of that rural life. At first it's subtle, for example it's mentioned that his success in sales isn't just in volume but in getting towns to accept far less than his company is willing to pay. But eventually as events push him into harder spots more of his personal anger boils to the surface. His internal view may make him out as each town's savior but the reality is that he's playing as fierce a game of hardball as anyone else.

As the picture's man in need of redemption he has limits, which he increasingly struggles with over the picture's arc. Early on the town begins to get squirrelly over potential environmental concerns with the fracking. Damon is at first resistant, shrugging them off. Clearly unable to believe the horror stories on the Internet about either because he's trusting or because his livelihood depends on it. Stuck in the town pending a vote as to whether the natural gas development will be allowed Damon increasingly gets to know the town and his confidence becomes less rock solid.

There's a bit more going on of course than meets the eye - which I'm purposefully going to avoid mentioning for those who will see the film. Truth be told there's more, but not a lot more. The most appealing parts of the film are Gus van Sant and cinematographer Linus Sandgren's beautiful visual renderings of the region combined with Frances McDormand as Damon's pragmatic, we're just here so I can support my kid, partner. Even beyond these highlights are several individually solid performances and effective moments. Particularly early in the film as residents are excited to see the natural gas buying team who are preaching the good word about money from heaven. Overall though it's just not especially fascinating character wise nor enlightening environmentally speaking. A good think to mark for your Netflix queue - but one can do better with your holiday season in-theater choices.

{ Promised Land opens in Seattle Friday December 28th at the Regal Meridian 16 and Lincoln Square Cinemas (in Bellevue) }

Django Unchained

Imaginary Amie — Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:59:08 +0000

{Django Unchained opens in Seattle on December 25, Christmas Day, and is screening at SIFF Cinemas Uptown, Regal Meridian, Landmark Varsity, and Thornton Place}

I am a Tarantino fangirl through and through. There is not one single thing he’s done that I don’t love with all my heart … but I was still a little worried about Django, since it’s a Western and that genre is not really my favorite.

But I shouldn’t have.

Django Unchained is everything I wanted it to be: a kick-ass tale of revenge with amazing performances from its leads, smart chunks of dialog punctuated by action, blood-spattered (and more blood-spattered) gun fights, and Quentin Tarantino with a ridiculous Australian accent. I LOVED ALL OF IT. Even the twangy Western ballads sprinkled throughout.

Jamie Foxx is Django (“The D is silent”), a slave being dragged across the country in chains, when he runs into Dr. King Schultz (as much as Christoph Waltz rules in Inglorious Basterds as a villain, he rules even more here as one of the good guys). Schultz needs Django to identify his former masters so that he can kill them and collect the bounty on their heads, so he buys Django with the promise of setting him free once he helps track down the three brothers he’s looking for.

Naturally, they find the loathsome brothers on the sprawling cotton plantation of Big Daddy (I can’t think of a better person to ham this part up than Don Johnson. So perfect!), and since Django is pretty pissed at the brothers for past treatment, he lets loose all kinds of hell.

This is all fine with Schultz, since he gets the money whether his bounty is dead or alive, and he’s also pretty disgusted with the idea of slavery. But it’s not so fine with Big Daddy, which leads to a little hitch later involving Jonah Hill and some poorly constructed white hoods. Wait. What.

After Django relays the story of his missing wife, Broomhilda, to Schultz, the two partner up to hunt bounties all winter with a plan to track her down in the spring and buy her back from her current owner—a mustachioed gentlemen named Calvin Candie (Leo!) who runs a plantation called “Candieland” with a fearsome reputation.

Unfortunately, Calvin has a devoted slave named Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson, playing a part well beyond his years with some serious fucking chops) who doesn’t trust the pair right off the bat, and that causes a hitch in the whole plan.

I don’t want to give anything else away, so I’ll stop there. But I think if you love Tarantino, there’s no way you won’t love this.

The only other thing I want to mention is that the dialog is littered with the N-word; which makes sense in the context of the story and within the time its set in, but is still, obviously, disconcerting to hear over and over and over again. Just a heads up for people who might get offended -- although honestly, if you’re going to see a Tarantino movie, you should know what you’re in for.

My recommendation: a fine movie to see on Christmas Day, or any time. I can’t wait until it comes out on blu-Ray and I can add it to my QT collection!

{Django Unchained opens in Seattle on December 25, Christmas Day, and is screening at SIFF Cinemas Uptown, Regal Meridian, Landmark Varsity, and Thornton Place}

But I shouldn’t have.

Hyde Park on Hudson

Imaginary Rich — Tue, 18 Dec 2012 00:15:51 +0000

{Hyde Park on Hudson opened in Seattle on Friday, December 14, and is screening at the Landmark Egyptian Theater as well as the Bellevue Lincoln Square Cinemas}

Hyde Park on Hudson is a fascinating film, but not in a particularly positive way. It's fascinating as a demonstration of how any numerical 1-5 star type rating approach would miss how good the best parts are, and how "meh" the rest of the picture is.

Hyde Park follows a relationship between FDR (Bill Murray) and a somewhat distant cousin Daisy (Laura Linney). Over a critical weekend in the British/U.S. relationship on the eve of World War II, the Roosevelts entertain the King and Queen of England in their home.

The picture is a grab-bag of messages. History lessons, thinly veiled commentary on the nature of media presence in the modern era, dark romance, and aspects of period costume drama crash together. Producing a work that's mostly pretty dull, but decorated with an occasional flash of genius.

The screen comes sparklingly alive whenever FDR interacts with the young King (Samuel West). In those moments with West as a foil, Murray breaks out of the too understated depiction of Roosevelt that he skulks about in the earlier scenes. The two men play off each other in an engaging way that should go on much longer than it does. That sparkle and zest hurtles into a wall of "whatever" though, whenever Daisy appears onscreen. Which if you include the near ever present voice over happens a lot. So unless you've always wondered what a tastefully shot scene of FDR getting a hand-job in a field of flowers would look like I'd suggest not rushing to the theater for this one.

No … not kidding … seriously.

The based-on-a-true story events at first seem intriguing. Daisy is called to FDR's nearby home one fine day. He's bored and mother thinks that inviting over a member of the extended family will help. Things are awkward as first as Roosevelt tries the old "hey, look at my stamp collection" gambit. Before long though, she's a fixture of the Roosevelt home away from the White House. Spending season after season there. Eventually things get a bit naughty and/or creepy between the two. Anyways … after some time the King and Queen come to visit - some cultural clashes which are vaguely amusing ensue, the royal couple are uncomfortable while the press is tame enough to ignore FDR's polio, his multiple mistresses and the chance to photograph the King of England in a bathing suite. Eventually hot dogs are served and democracy is saved.

The picture certainly looks lovely with lush recreations of FDR's private estate. The film isn't really unpleasant to watch, and there's enough mild humor to hold one's interest ... to an extent. Quite a few of the actors work hard attempting to flesh out a less than enthralling concept. It's just hard at the end not to feel things would have been much more interesting with lots less Daisy and more presidential/royals action. Bill Murray may be thinking he picked the wrong year to go for the Academy Award by playing a famous president in makeup. There's some truth to that, as Lincoln and Daniel Day Lewis is going to be tough to beat. But even if Murray manages to sneak in via the supporting actor category he's truly handicapped by a less than interesting script. A shame really, as the best parts shine bright. If you're just seeing it to get out of the rain - remember that and at least stick things through to that middle section where everyone suddenly seems to come to life. After that, it's fine to follow one's instincts even if they take you to an early dinner before the picture is officially over.

Apparently Hyde Park on Hudson is rated R - which makes no sense at all. I'm not sure anyone under 17 is going to want to see it. But still ... It's absolutely mystifying what the MPAA saw as inappropriate for younger viewers. Unless they think they're going to hurt themselves laughing as we watch a car bobbing gently from afar after Murray places Linney's hand on his fully clothed thigh.

{Hyde Park on Hudson opened in Seattle on Friday, December 14, and is screening at the Landmark Egyptian Theater as well as the Bellevue Lincoln Square Cinemas}

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Imaginary Amie — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 16:57:14 +0000

{The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey opens in Seattle on Friday, 12/14 and is screening pretty much everywhere, but I personally recommend the Cinerama}

In order to talk about Peter Jackson’s much-anticipated The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, you have to talk about the craziness of him creating a new 3D film technology and deciding to use it—even at the risk of alienating some hardcore fans, and also, uh, making some of them literally throw up. But, we’ll get to that later. Let’s start with the actual plot first.

I was worried going into this that the dwarves would mean a lot of slapstick-y nonsense, and my fears were proven true as soon as the prologue about the dwarves was over, and they reached Bilbo’s house. It’s absolutely true that the dwarves are so similar that outside of the leader, Thorin, you can’t really tell them apart. It’s also absolutely true that the quickest way to make me facepalm is to have a bunch of characters sing while juggling dishes, but I digress.

The plot (like any of you going to see it DON’T know—humor me here) is thus: the dwarves were once rulers of this incredible mountain kingdom, and had more gold and jewels than they really knew what to do with, which unfortunately attracted a greedy dragon named Smaug who forced them out in order hoard the treasure.

Then the dwarves were scattered across the land without a home something-something, something-something, and the King’s grandson Thorin fought a bad-ass scar-faced thing called Azog (aka: Amie’s new favorite villain) and chopped off his arm, obviously leaving him pissed off and looking for revenge.

Much later, Gandalf gets bored and decides to trick mild-mannered Hobbit Bilbo Baggins (is there anything Martin Freeman can’t do? Because seriously, he’s perfect. Just like he is in everything -- /fangirl Amie) into helping the dwarves “steal” their fortune back. Which for some reason works, even though the dwarves eat all of Bilbo’s food and kind of act like jerks.

So they all set off on an awfully big adventure involving spiders, and some dude who has a bunny sled, and trolls that make a lot of a fart jokes, and a stupid moonlit map, and ~~Rock’em Sock’em Robots~~ giant rock monsters, and a globular Goblin King who lives in a not-very-well constructed kingdom, and giant eagles, and killer wolves and, most importantly: GOLLUM and his shiny precious.

To be honest, since I took motion sickness meds to avoid hurling my mixed chocolate/regular popcorn all over the Cinerama, I was kind of drifting in and out of sleep from about 20 minutes in until the rock monster boxing match—which caught my attention and then held it steady through the non-stop action from then until the end of the film.

So is it good? Well, I’ll say this: it’s quite a ride. And I think it’s a fine follow-up to the LOTR movies, and a solid beginning to this installment of Jackson’s incredibly detailed Tolkien tribute. It’s not perfect, but it is enjoyable, and I think fans of the first three movies will dig on this one … even if it’s just for Gollum and Bilbo’s scenes alone (a more than worthy reason to really like it).

One of the problems I had—and I anticipated this going into it—is that outside of Gandalf, Gollum, and brief appearances by Elrond & Galadriel, everyone you cared about from the original trilogy is gone. You’re basically starting from scratch with all new characters (I KNOW Bilbo’s in the first three, but Ian Holm doesn’t exactly have a meaty part), and this movie doesn’t have time to spend on developing characters on most of them, because it’s too busy focusing on the WOWTHATLOOKSNEAT stuff.

Here’s hoping Jackson straightens that out in the next two, learns to shave some (serious) time off each scene, and continues to improve on what I think is a pretty promising start.

Now, about that whole FPS thing: Honestly, seeing a film shot at 48 FPS (frames per second) as opposed to the usual 24FPS is REALLY jarring. Everything is clear. Like super clear. Like preternaturally clear. So clear, it no longer looks like you’re watching film; it looks like some crazy combination of animation and HD TV. And the contrast between real live characters and CGI-d creatures or backgrounds is super-super obvious.

At times, that clearness creates an effect that looks cheap. As the camera panned down over Hobbiton, the clarity of the colors and costumes made the scene look like a local RenFair—except, not even as gritty as that. Which is a shame. Because what I want from big, fantasy action-adventures like this is some grittiness … some reality to ground me, so I can really get into the characters and believe that this world exists.

Where the faster frame rate does work is in the gigantic, largely CGI-populated long shots, where complete environments are created, and when the focus is on armys of fantastical creatures. Rivendell has never looked so lush and ethereal; the Goblins’ mountain domain is well executed, and the piles of gold hidden away by the dwarves are insanely beautiful. Plus, both Gollum and the BIG BAD Azog look really f’ing cool.

But as a whole, 48FPS seems to be at best an unnecessary enhancement, and too much of a distraction to really praise. I think my friend Matt said it best (when I was discussing the film with him yesterday), in that it’s a technology that definitely still needs a lot of work before it’s perfect.

James Cameron is probably going to strike me down for saying this, but if you choose to see it in the non-3D 24FPS version, you’re not really going to miss anything; and you might even like it more.

So (as if I could stop you), sure! Go see it. It’s a fine way to spend almost three hours.

{The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey opens in Seattle on Friday, 12/14 and is screening pretty much everywhere, but I personally recommend the Cinerama}

Silver Linings Playbook

Imaginary Amie — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:57:06 +0000

{Silver Linings Playbook opens in Seattle on Wednesday, November 21. Check local theater listings for screenings}

While I’m not sure I can agree with that Silver Linings Playbook is worthy of all the Oscar buzz it’s been getting, I do agree that’s a sure crowd-pleaser … and I’m saying this as a girl who can’t stand Bradley Cooper.

Mr. Cooper hasn’t quite won me over like Colin Farrell eventually did (he was too awesome in both Horrible Bosses & Fright Night for me to ignore), but SLP did at least made me think he can do something different than the roles he normally takes.

Pat Solitano (Cooper)’s mom arrives to pick him up from the institution he’s been in for eight months after he flipped out upon coming home to find his wife cheating on him, and beat her lover almost to death. But after being treated for bipolarism due to the court ruling him mentally incompetent, Pat’s ready to face the world with a brand new, positive, “Silver Linings” attitude. He's focused on the positive, working out to please his wife (it's mentioned several times that he was fat when he was committed, which is something that wore on my nerves), and determined to win her back.

When he arrives back to his parent’s Philly home with his mom, he finds dad (Robert De Nero, who’s grown into the perfect grumbling old man) has lost his job and is relying on booking football gambling to get by, his wife has moved on ... with her lover and a restraining order, and his brother is still the same self-centered, tactless jock he always was.

He also finds best friend Ronnie stuck in a controlling marriage, and Ronnie’s wife’s newly widowed sister, Tiffany, (Jennifer Lawrence) exciting in a way he wasn’t quite expecting. As Pat struggles with his mental illness, and Tiffany struggles with hers (depression and sexual addiction), they eventually strike up a deal that will benefit both of them—she gets a dance partner, he gets a way to communicate with his estranged wife.

It’s not hard to imagine the ending of this film; nor are they are any real surprises along the way. And it took awhile for me to get used to the way they played Pat’s BP for laughs. I mean, I know you have to make light of everything sometimes, but there were some points where I felt like maybe the comedy was just a little too much. Throwing a Hemingway book out a window and waking your parents up at 4am to complain about the depressing ending is one thing; having a rage-filled flip out in your pyschiatrist's office when you hear the song played at your wedding is another.

Though this is a romance at the core, these are two people struggling with real mental illnesses. And while there were some dramatic moments, I felt like the movie made being bipolar look less like a serious disease, and more like an endearing quirk.

But I’m probably just being too picky.

Shades of real life do poke through, and even though you know the outcome from the beginning, there are some gut-punch moments. Every time one of Pat's friends or family members says, "I'm sorry I couldn't get up the hospital to see you ... " - and there are several - you flinch, thinking about how this guy has been written off by almost everyone because of the stigma of being in a mental hospital.

Silver Linings Playbook is well cast (yes, even Cooper), and it’s easy to get sucked into the lives of these characters. Lawrence is fantastic, as always. And De Niro and Jackie Weaver are particularly easy to fall for as Cooper’s parents—even with the extreme Philly stereotypes. Which reminds me; I need to look up how to make crabby snacks and home-maise.

More importantly, the audience I viewed this with seemed to love it -- and I can see why. I don't mean to contradictory; I really don't. Despite its flaws, it's got romance AND sports AND funny family drama AND a really hilariously amazing can't stop laughing about it dance scene.

Recommended as an entertaining way to spend your theater hours, and (since you’re not me) it just might become one of your favorite romantic comedies EVER. Who knows?

{Silver Linings Playbook opens in Seattle on Wednesday, November 21. Check local theater listings for screenings}

Miami Connection

Imaginary Rich — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 17:33:25 +0000

{Miami Connection can be seen at the Grand Illusion Cinema Friday and Saturday night at 11pm, and this coming Thursday at 8pm}

I'm not an really big fan of so bad it's good movies. But when I heard tale of Miami Connection the lost 1980s-made action flick featuring drug deals gone bad, motorcycle ninjas, and a musical band of crime fighting tae-kwon-do masters who belt out ridiculously catchy synth-rock ballads -- I was at least a bit intrigued.

It turns out that Miami Connection is less a bad movie than a piece of joyously un-ironic filmmaking that wears it's wonderfully optimistic heart on it's sleeve. While introducing its audience to new levels of unintelligible story plot points, poor acting and stilted dialog. All worked in between insanely catchy yet horrible music that infects one brain with a grip more addictive than the film's "stupid cocaine."

The package works as a super entertaining unintended parody of a decade's genre action movies. As well as a triumph of artistic determination so pure that it overwhelms a myriad of execution flaws to make one want to give the filmmaker a hug for trying so hard. It's bad - but it's actually quite good.

I guess you could cynically mock Miami Connection as a barely literate lovechild produced by a threesome between an episode of Miami Vice, Troll 2 and Gymkata. My mind started watching in that vein, but became sucked in by a film that is so obviously pure of heart. Even while it delivers the goods with a closing blood-soaked melee between sword-wielding ninjas and band members who have been pushed too far.

Miami Connection jumps right into things opening with a stereotype filled drug deal gone bad due to the intervention of black-suited motorcycle ninjas. Wait? What!? Before your brain can register that it just watched a bunch of ninjas take out a series of heavily armed rejects from a Miami Vice, casting call things are moving on. Fast forward to an Orlando nightclub (yes, I know it's called Miami connection, but get used to saying whatever) where the band Dragon Sound is rocking the house. Blasting out their hits "Against the Ninja" and the bubble gum synth piece of musical crack "Friends for Ever" they ooze fun and friendship while Mark (director Y.K. Kim) throws around a bunch of kicks onstage. Sporting red muscle tees with the sort of iron-on transfer letters that went out with Spencer's Gifts, the band owns their own style in a less than ageless way.

Eventually we learn the female band member is dating one of the other musicians. Her brother is a thug mixed up in the cocaine trade, and is a brother of the head ninja - or something like that. Honestly it's pretty confusing at times. Kim's ability to throw in completely random story arcs that point to hours of cut footage don't help in things making sense. But that's sort of part of the WTF fun. Point being - eventually shit goes bad - and the boys in the band need to start taking out the town's trash.

Technically for what I understand as a first film things actually look reasonably good. Special effects are a bit subpar - but it's in more subtle ways that things really go south. For example, almost every scene goes on several paces too long. To the point of becoming delightfully creepy. Action scenes are the type where you can't help but notice the choreography slow down to ensure people are in just the right spot to get hit, or deflect a blow. Sort of like what would happen if you were screwing around with friends in junior high school making such an effort. At least assuming you spent the better part of your parent's life savings on such a production - and you actually knew Tae-Kwon-Do.

Watching the film makes one suspect the director Kim is a nice guy. Before seeing the film I watched him interact a bit with folks at Fantastic Fest where Drafthouse films hyped the heck out of this lost gem - further making me feel there might not be an ironic bone in his ass-kicking body. There's a raw earnest that comes through the filmmaking that makes you like the folks involved matter how groan worthy the material is. From the lyrics of the soundtrack, themes of brotherhood to the final text that "only through the elimination of violence can we achieve world piece" - the crazy violent mayhem seems to come from an good place. And frankly if I'd tried to make a grindhouse film in 1987, it would have looked way worse. While being nowhere as entertaining.

Miami Connection really deserves to be seen in a communal space. Head down to the Grand Illusion and take part. Bring a few friends and perhaps have a beer or two along the way. I doubt you'll be disappointed. If nothing else I can guarantee you'll be humming Against the Ninja on the way home. And omg - wait until master Kim grabs a guy's nose with his toes as part of a Tae Kwon Do takedown. Seriously. Bottom line - don't miss this one. The beach side frolic montage, cheesy mustaches and your confusion as to the source of the missing father who may or may not reappear in the end are all together worth the price of admission even without the rest of the picture.

But you get so much more than just those magical moments...

{Miami Connection can be seen at the Grand Illusion Cinema Friday and Saturday night at 11pm, and this coming Thursday at 8pm}

I'm not an really big fan of so bad it's good movies. But when I heard tale of Miami Connection the lost 1980s-made action flick featuring drug deals gone bad, motorcycle ninjas, and a musical band of crime fighting tae-kwon-do masters who belte out ridiculously catchy synth-rock ballads -- I was at least a bit intrigued.

Pusher

Imaginary Amie — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 14:58:40 +0000

{Pusher opens in Seattle on Friday, 10/26, and is screening at Sundance Cinemas Seattle}

I love Drive, but I haven’t yet delved into Director Nicolas Winding Refn’s much-praised debut feature, Pusher, which spawned two sequels and is supposed to be gritty and dirty and action-packed and fantastic.

So along comes Spanish Director Luis Prieto, who decides to remake Pusher, apparently with Refn's blessing, and I guess it’s pretty close to the original, story wise, but it seemed a lot glossier (based on what I've viewed of the original on the Internets).

Frank (Ricard Coyle) is a drug dealer who takes things a bit too far by making a deal with a buyer, who then screws him out of the money after stealing his stash. Unfortunately the stash belongs to Frank’s friend and supplier, Milo—and while Milo is willing to cut Frank some slack, his money is more important to him than the tenuous friendship they have.

Throw in a sexy striper girlfriend with a habit who may or may not be conspiring with the people who have Frank’s drugs, and a cast of other characters all chasing one thing or another, and oh yeah—frank. is. fucked.

This is one of those movies where the dialog is really controlled and quiet, and the club scenes are so bumping with loud music that you’ll want to rip your eardrums out. AND THERE ARE A LOT OF CLUB SCENES. Annoying, right?

Overall, I think this was just fine. Entertaining? Sure. A sufficient amount of eye candy? I don’t know about you, but I could look at Richard Coyle’s face FOREVER. Some nice, tight action filled with tension? Absolutely.

I just wish I cared more. And I probably should have watched Refn’s version first. A quick glance at the trailer leads me to believe I’d like it a whole lot more.

And if you’re looking for a more excited “drug deal gone wrong” flick, I’d recommend Sleepless Night (Nuit blanche) over this one.

{Pusher opens in Seattle on Friday, 10/26, and is screening at Sundance Cinemas Seattle}

The American Scream

Imaginary Amie — Sat, 06 Oct 2012 16:17:54 +0000

{The American Scream screens at the Grand Illusion Cinema on Saturday, October 6 at 9pm and 11pm as part of their Curse of All Monsters Attack! Program this month}

The American Scream is one of those amazingly awesome documentaries full of people that make you cry because they are so damn passionate about what they’re doing.

And in this case, what they’re doing is setting up “Home Haunts”, which means running full-scale haunted houses every Halloween that they put together themselves, and pay for with their own money. (I swear, if we ever got trick-or-treaters at our house, and our yard was bigger than a walk-in closet, I’d be doing the same thing!)

Directed by Michael Paul Stephenson (who played the kid in Troll 2, and directed Best Worst Movie), this intensely personal doc follows three families in Fairhaven, MA who put on complicated haunted houses every year: Victor Bariteau, Manny Souza, and Matt & Rick Broudeur work all year long to make sure the neighborhood kids have a good time on All Hallows’ Eve.

While all the subjects are interesting, compassionate, and just plain awesome people—The Bariteaus naturally end up front and center because of Victor’s intense passion. It’s clear he’s honed his talents to a level that should earn him a place constructing special F/X for horror films. You are seriously rooting for this guy to succeed, and find a full-time job doing what he loves. Even more endearing: seeing how much his wife and family love and support him. (so many things in my eyes!)

My favorite thing about the Bariteaus was daughter Tina, who shares her dad’s obsession with Halloween and spends her time dismembering dolls and covering them in blood-red paint. At one point when Tina is describing a scene she’d like in the haunted house, Victor turns to her with absolute glee and says, “You are a sick little girl! You know that?”

Also, I learned something from The American Scream that I had no knowledge of before: there are actually home haunting conventions. I mean, of course I knew that there were people who build these elaborate haunted houses in their backyards every year, but I didn’t realize there was an actual convention for them to go to learn how to build stuff and buy props! HOW COOL IS THAT!?!?!

Watching each family put together their haunted constructions, and talk about why they love doing it, and why they love Halloween is beautiful, inspiring, and just plain fun. I highly recommend you head to The Grand Illusion to see this one.

Its Best Documentary Award from Fantastic Fest this year was well earned, and it’s more than worth the $8 ticket price. Go see it!

Side note: I plan to show this to my boyfriend, so he understands that although my Halloween obsession is kind of insane, it could always be worse ...

{The American Scream screens at the Grand Illusion Cinema on Saturday, October 6 at 9pm and 11pm as part of their Curse of All Monsters Attack! Program this month}

The American Scream is one of those amazingly awesome documentaries full of people that make you cry because they are so damn passionate about what they’re doing.

The Oranges

Imaginary Amie — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 15:30:53 +0000

{The Oranges opens in Seattle on Friday, October 5, and is screening at Sundance Cinemas Seattle}

The Oranges is one of those movies that I really WANTED to be good, because it has an incredible cast: there are strong performances from Hugh Laurie, Catherine Keener, Allison Janney, and Alia Shawkat – rounded out by some nice supporting roles from Oliver Platt, Adam Brody, and yes, even Leighton Meester. Unfortunately, there’s just not much for them to “perform”.

The character focus is all over the place, starting with some narration by Vanessa (Shawkat) Walling, who begins the movie by warning us of the evil contained within her former best friend and across-the-street neighbor, Nina Ostroff (Meester), who, since sophomore year of High School, has ignored Vanessa and over-shadowed her by succeeding at doing everything Vanessa wants to, but can't motivate herself to do.

The Wallings (Laurie & Keener) and the Ostroffs (Janney & Platt) have always been best friends, apparently doing everything together, as you know, suburban couples with children the same age do. But when free-spirit/world-explorer Nina returns for Thanksgiving after a 5-year absence, everyone’s suburban paradise is shaken when David and Nina start having an affair.

The affair is played as both cheap comedy and a catalyst for everyone else realizing their lives are unfulfilled and need fixing. Sounds mildly familiar, yes? Yeah, there aren’t really any surprises here. And it’s a shame to waste this amount of acting talent on a script that really doesn’t require much acting.

Everything is played really low-key, like it’s all expected and nothing’s that shocking. There are a few moments where you think it might get meaty (as one would expect when an affair that’s damaging many lives at once starts up), but the film always pulls back before it gets that far. Even the individual moments of rage aren't that rage-y or unexpected. You can see everything that happens in this film coming from a mile away.

As a whole, it’s an okay indie-feeling movie with an okay script—filled with a lot of people who are nice to look at. It just didn’t make me feel anything, which lands it in the category of something I’ll probably forget I even saw after a year passes.

{The Oranges opens in Seattle on Friday, October 5, and is screening at Sundance Cinemas Seattle}