Gladiator: 2000

Technically, I'm still watching Gladiator...at least it's on my television screen right now as I write this post, but I'm at the point where I've watched enough to know that this film is not for me. Most of the time watching it I felt like I was watching the Roman version of Braveheart, but that comparison seems like an insult to Braveheart.

My biggest issue with Gladiator is the lack of character development. Maximus (played by Russell Crowe) wants revenge for the death of his wife and son and the emperor. It doesn't get any more complicated than that for his character. The love story between him and the emperor's daughter Lucilla is present but doesn't seem to be developed much either. We know they have a past and Maximus isn't that interested in revisiting the past. His loyalty to his family is above everything in his life. Certainly an admirable quality but doesn't allow for much development.

The film aspect I found interesting throughout was the color of certain scenes. When Commodus (played by Joaquin Phoenix who is impressively evil, I'll give the film that) is on screen, the color is cool and blue, projecting his evil intentions.

But in scenes with Maximus, in particular after Commodus murders his father to obtain the throne and orders the murder of Maximus's family, the color is warmer.

The color difference doesn't carry throughout the film, but when used, the contrast effectively presents Maximus as the hero and Commodus as the villain.

At least this is another film that Ryan and Nate talked about in their podcast; that's probably the only highlight of watching Gladiator.

The English Patient: 1996

So The English Patient is another Miramax film, meaning Harvey Weinstein worked on it as a producer. I tried not to let that color my experience watching the film, and I think it's fairly safe to say it didn't. What did affect my viewing was the Seinfeld episode where Elaine expresses her hatred of the movie (how it was just soooo boring). After watching the rather long film, I can see why Elaine hated it--it's a true romance with a sad ending. If you're interested in reading more about Elaine, Seinfeld, and The English Patient, check out this Vanity Fair article published in 2016.

I found the film fine. It was one of those films where I was impressed with the cinematography but found the characters dull. The story comes down to a woman who seems bored in her marriage (she married her childhood best friend) finds a man who seems so distant and different from her husband as crazy attractive (enter Ralph Fiennes). Adultery is committed, she dies, he's gravely injured, and oh, he colludes with the Germans during WWII in an attempt to save her (which is quite hopeless by the point he does it). Their story didn't really interest me all that much, but thankfully the film had multiple storylines, with this love story functioning as a flashback. I was more interested in following Juliette Binoche's character, the Canadian nurse who cares for the English Patient (the injured and nearly unrecognizable Ralph Fiennes), because her story follows the end of the war. Her desire to save people because of all those she's lost made her a more interesting character, but since she wasn't the focus of the film, her character didn't develop as fully as I would have liked.

The most impressive part of the film was the make-up. Here's Ralph Fiennes before the plane crash:

And after:

The most impressive part is as the present day storyline progresses, his wounds slowly change as he's healing. It was subtle but effective. The change in his appearance wasn't the only indication of time changing, but it was a detail that wasn't overlooked, which made the film seem more authentic.

I'm not Elaine--I didn't hate The English Patient--but I'm not J. Peterman, either--it's not the best film I've ever seen. This one falls in the middle for me. 

Moonlight: 2016

Moonlight was able at my library in the Hot Picks area, and knowing it was on my list, I went ahead and picked it up. Considering I had just finished Shakespeare in Love, I was looking forward to a different movie that might actually make me think and that had critical acclaim. Just to refresh your memory, Moonlight was the film that Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway called La La Land at last year's Oscars. Oops.

Even though it's only been a year since the film was released, I could already tell that Moonlight was something special half an hour into the film. The story is set up as three acts, covering three different time periods in Chiron's life. As a kid, Chiron is taunted for being different than the other kids, and one scene in particular left me aching for him. Chiron asks Juan about being called a f*****, and Juan has to explain what that word means. Juan has become a father figure for Chiron, and it's Juan's grace in this challenging conversation that amazed me. I actually held my breath as Juan worked through an answer to Chiron's question. The love and compassion that Juan has for this kid, who isn't his own, is so touching.

The contrasts in the film really interested me. Chiron as an adult is so different than what I expected based on his childhood and teen years. But the film teaches a lesson in judging others: while Chiron may seem different as an adult, as the film plays out, he's still the same person. His encounters with his mother in all the stages are heartbreaking; as an addict, she goes from being nurturing to despondent to negligent to regretful. Her last scene with the adult Chiron reveals just how much regrets what happened, and we completely understand her regrets because we saw what she did.

People need to see this film. Sure, it's not a feel good film in the truest sense of that label, but its honesty and love are so compelling that you feel good by the end because of what those can overcome.

Shakespeare in Love: 1998

So I knew I wasn't going to love Shakespeare in Love (the whole Harvey Weinstein connection soured me), but I had no idea how much I would actively dislike the film. My dislike isn't due to the acting; they were fine, even quite good at times. And my dislike isn't due to the genre; I find historical fiction enjoyable when done well. That's where the issue lies...when done well.

First, the historical aspect of the film. The way plays were rehearsed (not three weeks) is wrong. And Shakespeare writing the play and giving the actors the full script? Wrong. Christopher Marlowe dying because of something Shakespeare did? Wrong again. Marlowe was accused of being an atheist. That was far more likely to cause his death than Shakespeare lying and saying he was Marlowe when courting a noble woman. Typically I don't mind if screenwriters alter history to fit a narrative, but in this case I've learned too much about the time period to let these changes slide. Plus, a lot of the film just seemed stupid. The whole star-crossed lovers in real life plotline didn't work for me. Of all of Shakespeare's plays, the one I like the least is Romeo and Juliet. Teaching the play is great because the text is easier to understand than his other works and high schoolers like the concept of forbidden love. But I didn't like the play when I was a freshman in high school, and even after seeing two live productions and watching film versions (the Zeffirelli one and the Lurhmann one), I still don't like Romeo and Juliet. Shakespeare in Love uses that play as its foundation for the love story. Really, the film had no hope of me liking it.

In thinking about the film as an Academy Award winner, I know it didn't receive those awards based on merit. It all came down to a campaign that knocked out the movie that has had far more lasting impact: Saving Private Ryan. At least in this case history shows us which film really influenced our culture and society. Maybe we can send Steven Spielberg a late Oscar?

Braveheart: 1995

As I mentioned in an earlier post, Braveheart is one movie on this list that I already owned. Or at least, I used to own it. After rewatching the film with me, my husband said that we didn't need to keep it anymore. It wasn't because he disliked the film; it's just that he doesn't need to see it again. That sums up how I feel about the film. I didn't dislike Braveheart; then again, I can't say I liked it either. Parts were interesting, parts seemed long. Overall, it was fine.

The most interesting parts of the film were the music, the landscape (although some of the shots were too long...Scotland, though beautiful, didn't change much in the film--it's vibrant green with a misty quality), and the message of not giving up even when all hope is lost. Watching the first twenty seconds of the trailer shows the beauty of the country. That first twenty seconds also shows something I disliked about the film: the love story between William Wallace (played by Mel Gibson) and Murron (played by Catherine McCormack). Her character was underdeveloped for me. I couldn't really understand what they saw in each other besides physical attraction and him being the guy her parents said she couldn't date. I know there's the history of them knowing each other as children and her giving him the thistle, which is a sweet scene, but it's just not enough for me to see them as in love. The longing stares that litter the first hour of the film as just obnoxious; those don't build character for me or suggest that their relationship has any depth.

Once the romance section was over, the fight for freedom began. These scenes were fine, but the battles and debates began to feel repetitive, win or lose. I liked what Ryan and Nate had to say in their podcast about Robert the Bruce's character, but I won't repeat them here. You'll need to listen to them to hear those thoughts.

Braveheart was one of those movies that my husband repeatedly said I should watch. Well, I've seen it now. And like I said, it was fine. I have to wonder, though, if I would have felt differently if I had seen it before Mel Gibson demonstrated who he really is with all those hateful comments. I couldn't help but think about those comments as I watched this film, and I know it influenced my viewing of him as a performer. But even so, I like to think that my opinion would have been the same.

Forrest Gump: 1994

I remember seeing Forrest Gump in the theater. I cried, a lot, and so did my mom. When I finished the film last night, I teared up a few times. It used to be that the scene at Jenny's grave at the end would be what hit me the most, but this time it was Forrest talking to his mom when she tells him that she's dying of cancer. Sally Field plays Mrs. Gump as so brave as she explains to her only son that it's her time to die. Maybe it struck me differently on this rewatch than all the previous ones because I think it's the first time I've watched this after becoming a parent almost six years ago. I've already had to explain some tough topics to my own children, but death is something I fortunately have not had to explain yet. I can imagine, though, what this was like for Forrest's mom, and Field's performance is so calm and almost soothing even though the topic is devastating for Forrest.

I wonder if I should have skipped this rewatching of Forrest Gump because other than tearing up at different moments I'm not sure that I took  much different away on this rewatch than I did on any of the previous ones. The film was so familiar to me (I watched it a lot in middle school and high school and I even have the soundtrack) that it felt like a comfortable blanket. I knew when the happy and sad moments were coming, and as the story unravels, I knew what to expect in the end. Just like the previous viewings, Tom Hanks is outstanding as he embraces the role and makes us all believe that he is actually Forrest Gump. The one small surprise I had was that the shrimp scene, when Bubba lists all the types of shrimp, isn't as long as I remember, but that didn't take away from my viewing. Nor was I surprised since that scene has been parodied and referenced so many times it's become bigger than it was.

Coming up next is Braveheart, a movie we own but I've never seen. I'm not excited about watching yet another three hour epic for this blog, but with a long weekend, I think it will be a bit easier.

Golden Globes: 2018

In the spirit of a film blog (and one that focuses on award winning films), it only seems logical to discuss the Golden Globes, often cited as one indicator of the Oscars (coming March 4, 2018, put it on your calendar now). While I could spend this post discussing how much I love Oprah and her speech (here's the transcript in case you missed it), I'm going to focus instead on what I left the Globes with: a list of films to see.

1) Dunkirk: Nominated for Best Motion Picture-Drama, Dunkirk is based on the true story of small fishing boats rescuing British soldiers in World War II. The film came out in the summer, and honestly, I didn't even think about seeing it in the theater. I've watched a lot of war movies for this blog, so I don't feel like I'm lacking in this area. Watching the clips for Dunkirk during the Globes, though, made me think it might be inspiring to watch (I do love true stories where regular people are heroes because they remind me that good people exist in our world), and luckily for me, as a summer release, it's already available on DVD at my local library. I placed my hold for the film and now just have to wait for it to come in.

2) Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri: When I went to see Lady Bird, I thought about seeing his film instead, but I decided not to because I really needed a comedy, not a drama, that day. Now I really want to find a time to go see Three Billboards, and I think that needs to happen before March 4.

3) All the foreign language film nominees: Every year I see this category on the Globes and Oscars and want to watch them. Maybe that's the next list I should work my way through whenever I finish the Best Pictures list I'm currently working on.

4) Battle of the Sexes: So I know nothing about this movie other than Steve Carell is in it and it's a comedy. Did I mention Steve Carell is in it? Do I need any other reason to see it? I think not. And good news...this one is also available at my local library.

Schindler's List: 1993

I've had to watch a lot of long films for this blog; apparently being long helps a film win Best Picture. And some of those films felt long, dragging on and on with not clear reason for the length. Schindler's List may be over three hours long, but it doesn't feel long. My original viewing schedule was for three days, as I figured I wouldn't want to stay up late watching the film, but I was wrong. The film pulled me in, and even through I knew the ending, I had to keep watching.

I'll admit: I wasn't excited to watch this film. I knew how dark and devastating it would be. I've read a lot of literature set during the Holocaust and reading more about the horrific event doesn't make it easier to digest. Knowing that the film would be difficult made me wait to watch it when I would have more time to process it and wouldn't have to worry about going into work for a few days, which is why I waited until winter break to watch it.

The scenes that the film is known for, notably involving the girl in the red coat (who is responsible for changing Schindler for the better), were incredibly moving, but Amon Goeth's evilness, the commander of the work camp played by Ralph Fiennes in what must have been an incredibly difficult role, is something that struck me continually. He is the epitome of heartless, seeing Jewish people as objects and killing at random for sheer pleasure. In one scene, he shoots Jews from the balcony of his house for no reason other than fun. The only thing the Jewish people in the work camp could do was run faster and hope he wouldn't pick them. It's so horrible, and it's only the beginning because in later scenes he toys with people before killing them. His character showed just how heartless, how evil, the Nazis were. Spielberg's directing of Fiennes and decisions for shots and angles emphasize how helpless the Jewish people are and how diabolical Hitler and his Nazis were.

While his character troubled me, the transformation of Schindler from businessman to savior is remarkable to watch, in large part due to Liam Neeson's abilities to convey his feelings. I could see Schindler's transformation occur throughout his interactions with Stern, Helen, and other Jewish people in his factory. I'd say for the first hour and a half of the film I couldn't stand Schindler; he was profiting because of war and violence against Jewish people. But after he sees the clearing of the ghetto in Krakow and his realization of what the Nazis are doing, he becomes a good man, one that seems alone is this corrupt world. *Spoiler Alert* When he breaks down near the end of the film, saying how he could have and should have saved more people, I teared up. It's heart wrenching to watch because along the way I was thinking the same thing. Sure, I wasn't alive to do something, but why didn't my country do more? And what's happening today in our world that could be prevented?

So yeah, Schindler's List maybe tough to watch due to the violence and cruelty, but it reminds us that there are good people in the world. We just need to choose to be one of them.

It's Been Awhile...

Honestly, I've been watching movies...I just haven't been working on this list. For this post, I thought I'd cover some of the highlights of my year end viewings until I manage to watch Schindler's List (yes, I have a copy now, picked up today from my library).

Mudbound: Thank you, Netflix, for posting your film online as well as releasing it in theaters. With two young kids, it's hard for me to get out to see new releases, so I was excited to hear about Mudbound being on Netflix. As difficult as the film is to watch at times due to the content, it's a must see. Mary J. Blige is simply amazing. I cannot begin to tell you how convincing her performance is. And Rob Morgan as her husband Hap is astonishing. The pain he experiences, both physical and emotional, gripped me. I found myself hurting along with him. I'm hoping to see more of Blige and Morgan in upcoming films. Side note: Morgan is one of the police officers in Stranger Things. As much as I love that series, it doesn't show how powerful Morgan is as an actor.

Lady Bird: I did get to the theater for this one, and I have to say, Lady Bird, I get you. My high school experiences may have differed from yours, but the feelings were there. I also get her mom's feelings, sometimes. This is a film I need to watch again in 10 years when I have two teenagers. Lady Bird is funny, but I didn't find myself laughing out loud. Instead, it was more of that "hmpf" chuckle. My favorite funny moment was when Lady Bird and her friend Julie were caught eating communion wafers at their Catholic school.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi: I LOVE Star Wars, so I'm always a little nervous when new films come out. I have to wonder, can they ever compare to the original trilogy (and by that I mean episodes 4, 5, and 6 obviously). This new series is living up, and what I particularly loved about The Last Jedi is the creation and development of new characters and relationships. As much as I love watching Leia, Luke, and Han fight the Empire, it really is time for new heroes and new stories. The Last Jedi delivers while still making connections to the older generation. The only problem is having to wait a year and a half for the next installment.