ReelThoughts

---

Choose the month you would like to access:

Return to Current

June 20, 2004 (Sunday):

Terminal Credibility

Since I posted my review of The Terminal, I have received numerous e-mails taking exception to the following comment: "The premise - that a man could live months of his life in an airport terminal - holds a certain fascination (especially for those with a large number of frequent flier miles, who will feel a peculiar kinship with The Terminal's protagonist), but, in the post-9/11 era, it's not credible." Ah, they say, what about Merhan Karimi Nasseri, the Iranian who has been living inside Charles De Gaulle airport since 1988?

Although the kernel of the idea behind The Terminal was drawn from Nasseri's life story (which was made into a French film in 1994), that does not invalidate my claim that the movie's premise is "not credible." Let's review that premise: a man becomes trapped in modern-day JFK when a bureaucratic snafu disallows him to enter New York City or be deported. Charles De Gaulle is in France, and JFK is in New York City, only a few miles away from where the World Trade Center once stood. Security, which borders on paranoia, is considerably higher in JFK. Post-9/11, Nasseri was allowed to remain in Charles De Gaulle because he had been there for 13 years. It is doubtful that French officials would let a repeat incident occur today. Meanwhile, it is inconceivable that anyone would be allowed to spend an extended period in JFK. The Terminal is a fable, tenuous connection to actual events notwithstanding.

Summer Preview

In the Northern Hemisphere, today marks the beginning of summer (at least astronomically speaking). Of course, if you use the Memorial Day-to-Labor Day means of calculating the season, it's already three weeks old. And, as far as Hollywood is concerned, it's half-over. Many of the big guns (Troy, Shrek 2, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) have already gone off. In fact, after July 4, there will be few blockbusters left in the pipeline. However, since next weekend is the first official weekend of summer, now's as good a time as any to look at what promises to show up in multiplexes during the next three months.

Only a couple of notable features arrive on June 25. The first is The Notebook, and it probably won't generate much business in a marketplace that's dominated by teenagers (particularly boys). As a love story, the movie's okay, but it has its share of problems, and doesn't really deserve to be singled out for particular notice. Meanwhile, Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 comes with as much baggage as publicity. I'll have plenty to say about the movie after I see it (tomorrow). But the big question about this one will be: is it a documentary or propeganda? (Or is there a difference? A recent column by Roger Ebert indicates that there may be a blurring of the line between the two.)

The biggest battle to be waged at the box office this year will be between Shrek 2 and Spider Man 2. The green ogre has a big headstart, but the webslinger will get his send-off on June 30. Expect a minimum of $120 million (maybe as high as $150 million) over its 5-day opening weekend. I'm not going to predict a winner in the Shrek vs. Spider Man match, because it's too close to call, and the willingness of teenage boys to see a movie repeatedly is notoriously inconsistent. In a strange move, The Clearing (a kidnapping thriller with Willem Dafoe and Robert Redford) is opening opposite Spider Man 2. I guess the expectation is that the movies are targeting different audiences. However, I wonder how many middle-aged couples wanting to see the Redford movie are going to brave multiplex crowds waiting in line to see Spider Man 2. Also opening July 2 is Before Sunset, Richard Linklater's almost-as-good-as-the-first-one sequel to Before Sunrise. The talky romance is #1 on my "want to see" list for the summer, and it does not disappoint. Those who liked the first one will appreciate the sequel. Those who didn't like the first one will hate the second installment. And, if you haven't seen Before Sunrise, rent it.

July 7 is King Arthur's weekend. I'm not sure why there's a feeling that we need another re-telling of the legend. As far as I'm concerned, Monty Python and the Holy Grail is definitive. Hopefully, the new version will be rousing and won't feature too much anachronistic material (such as a kick-ass Guinevere). The movie doesn't have a strong "buzz," so it's probably headed for obscurity about as quickly as Troy.

The following week (July 14-16) sees a few more releases. The headliner is I, Robot, which stars Will Smith in an action-oriented adaptation of Isaac Asmiov's classic story. I have to admit to being interested in this one. Also that weekend is The Door in the Floor, about an extremely dysfunctional marriage, an adult who sleeps with an underage boy, and a psychologically abusive drunk. (It also features nude scenes from a couple of older-than-starlet actresses, Mimi Rogers and Kim Basinger.) Fun stuff for the middle of the summer. Then there are Sleepover and A Cinderella Story, neither of which I plan to see. I have endured my share of tween girl-oriented material for the year; it's doubtful I'll subject myself to another sample any time soon. (Plus, I actively avoid Hilary Duff, although the same cannot be said about her "rival," Lindsey Lohan.)

June 23 sees the release of one sequel and one spin-off. I'm looking forward to The Bourne Supremacy, hoping that the return of virtually the entire cast will ensure a taut second episode. Then there's Catwoman, a movie that, at least based on advance word, should never have been made. Considering what I have heard, the only draw may be seeing Halle Berry in a leather S&M outfit. Since she showed a lot more in Swordfish, that makes Catwoman redundant. And without Batman to rub suits with, where's the fun?

July 30 is a big day for releases. The most anticipated movie to come out that day is M. Night Shyamalan's The Village, which will get a nice publicity boost due to an apparently "unfavorable" documentary scheduled to air on the Sci-Fi Channel. That weekend also opens the Manchurian Candidate remake - a film that, in order to work, is in need of some serious updating. The original was great in the '60s, but appears dated. Certainly, the cast (Denzel Washington, Meryl Streep, John Voight) is top-notch and the director (Jonathan Demme) has a proven track record, but the real key may be how well the screenplay is re-worked. Then there's Jonathan Frakes' PG movie version of the '60s British TV Series "Thunderbirds," and a limited roll-out of the disappointing Garden State, which does not live up to its post-Sundance buzz.

Open Water is probably my second-most anticipated summer release (after Before Sunset). The low-budget thriller, about people trapped in shark infested waters after the sinking of their boat, has been compared to The Blair Witch Project. I eagerly await its August 6 opening. Also seeing the projector's light during the first weekend of August is Collateral, the Michael Mann/Tom Cruise collaboration. It will be interesting to see how effective Cruise can be as a bad guy.

Then the dog days hit... The two big releases of the August 11-13 weekend are both ugly-looking sequels: a second installment of The Princess Diaries (which I won't see: two Garry Marshall films in one year is one too many) and the comic book-inspired Alien Versus Predator, which sounds like a fanboy's wet dream, but will probably be a nightmare for anyone who cares about things like plot and character development. Yet I hope it makes money, because the rumor is that if it's profitable, Ridley Scott and Sigourney Weaver may be back on board for an Alien 5. Personally, I'll be rooting for the aliens, since I have never been impressed by the predators.

August 20 sees the long-delayed release of Zhang Yimou's Hero, starring Jet Li, in what has been described as the most inventive and visually impressive martial arts film since Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. This one has languished on Miramax's shelves for about two years. Open Water will also go wider on this day.

After that, it's a month of dining on cinematic dirt. Nothing looks promising until the September 17 release of the science fiction adventure Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. Its debut was postponed from its original mid-summer slating to place it in a less competitive marketplace. It's just as well that late August and early September are so barren - it will allow me to go on my honeymoon and attend the Toronto Film Festival without worrying about missing something good at my local multiplex.

When all is said and done, the summer of 2004 will probably result in shattered box office records, but also a high level of disappointment. Blockbusters are ripe to discourage, but we have a right to expect more hits than misses, and that hasn't been the case with this year's crop. Or at least, that hasn't been the case so far. Who knows? Maybe the quality of the real summer movies will eclipse all of the missed opportunities of the late spring.

June 22, 2004 (Tuesday):

The Phantom Defense

It has become fashionable over the last five years to bash all things related to George Lucas in general, and The Phantom Menace in particular. Let me be the first to say that Lucas deserves a fair amount of criticism. He's not what one might call a fan-friendly man, and, over the years, he has been guilty of money grubbing of the worst kind (think of all those people who bought about eight different versions of the original Star Wars movie on VHS and laserdisc, just so they could have the new bells & whistles). But casting down a perfectly entertaining space opera on the grounds that it's not the second coming of Star Wars is ludicrous and unfair. So the time has come for someone to step up and defend The Phantom Menace. And, since I gave the movie ***1/2 at its release, and have not changed my opinion since then, I'll accept the task.

Think back to May of 1999, a week before the release of Episode 1. No film in the history of cinema had been more anticipated. The level of expectation was through the roof. Hardly anyone was talking about anything else. You couldn't go anywhere or read anything without running into a Phantom Menace reference. I was asked dozens of times each day whether I had seen the movie (I had, but was sworn to secrecy until the day before it opened). Not since the opening of Star Trek: The Motion Picture had I witnessed such a fan-inspired frenzy. However, this time, the spillover washed over all aspects of pop culture, spreading far and wide from the hardcore fan base. It was insane... glorious, but insane. And it necessitated a major letdown.

It isn't possible to have that kind of humongous buildup without a similarly large letdown. You drink too much and get high, then crash and wake up with a hangover. The two go hand-in-hand. Those who went into The Phantom Menace expecting it to be the best movie of the year, or the decade, or the century, or ever, were misguided from the start. Why saddle any movie with such unreachable expectations? I approached the film modestly, remembering that Return of the Jedi had been a disappointment, and there was no reason to expect The Phantom Menace to be better. What I saw on that evening when I attended a pre-release screening was a movie that was more engaging than the Ewok-infested, poorly-paced Episode 6, but something that was not quite up to the level of storytelling provided by Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. In short, the biggest foe faced by The Phantom Menance was the level of anticipation. Fair? No. But realistic.

Frankly, a lot of people went into this movie expecting to have a similar experience to what they underwent on a balmy summer evening in 1977. No matter how good The Phantom Menace was, that wasn't going to happen. The genie was out of the bottle. In 1977, Star Wars was new and fresh (although not original). It crashed unexpectly into pop culture and dug out a niche. By the time The Phantom Menace arrived, the niche had become a well-fortified trench. And everyone around it had grown up.

Most die-hard Star Wars fans are around my age - between 30 and 40. They saw the first film when they were a child, and it left a lasting impression. The passage of time, which always amplifies a cherished memory, made the experience of seeing Star Wars something more than just sitting in a darkened theater watching images on a screen. There's magic in the memory, and to ask The Phantom Menace to re-create the magic isn't fair, because the circumstances are so different. Ask a 9-year old kid who saw The Phantom Menace in 1999 what he/she thought of the film, and you're likely to get a postive response. (I know, because I have asked quite a few.) 9-year olds liked The Phantom Menace. With them, it wasn't competing with any ghosts. 35-year olds didn't. The question is, is that because it wasn't a very good movie or because their perceptions were colored by shades of past Star Wars images? I believe it to be the latter, and I'll continue this defense by looking at some of the most common charges leveled at Episode 1.

The Plot: Considering the corner he backed himself into by deciding to make prequels (rather than sequels), Lucas did a respectable job crafting the story. It's got all the important bits - a beginning, a middle, and an end; segments on various planets; comedy, action, and tragedy; and it introduces all of the major characters and themes. Like the original three movies, it's a simple tale of good vs. evil. And, in the climax, it uses the same kind of intercutting that was a hallmark of Return of the Jedi. This generates a surprising amount of tension and energy. The main complaint about the plot seems to be that it lacks originality. You won't get an argument about that from me, but I don't see it as a drawback. The same criticism can be leveled at Star Wars, which was just as straightforward and occasionally hokey. Yet what was viewed as charming in 1977 is suddenly crass and creatively bankrupt in 1999? Huh? Lucas isn't cannabilizing himself any more in The Phantom Menace than he was stealing from Kurosawa, earlier serials, and space operas in Star Wars. Plus, I think a lot of the die-hard fans are simply pissed off that the movie didn't go in exactly the direction they had wanted. Expectations again.

The Screenplay: I hear all the time about how painful the dialogue is. Granted, it's not Shakespeare, but it gets the job done. Lest a reminder be needed, the original Star Wars had its share of clunkers and howlers, and even the line that everyone remembers ("May the Force be with you") is silly - it's just that it caught on and was repeated everywhere. If you're attending a Star Wars movie in search of meaningful dialogue and deep character interaction, you have wandered into the wrong theater.

The Actors: The actors appearing in The Phantom Menace take a lot of abuse, but I would argue that this ensemble is an improvement over the group that headlined Star Wars. Okay, so Jake Lloyd is a little raw, but he's also a kid. Natalie Portman is a better actress than she shows here, but she's okay. Ditto for Ewan McGregor. Liam Neeson and Ian McDiarmid are good. Look back to 1977, when it's hard not to cringe every time Mark Hamill utters a line of dialogue. Harrison Ford's woodenness is striking. And Carrie Fisher's performance doesn't scream "Oscar." All we're left with is Peter Cushing and Alec Guiness, both of whom are admittedly superb. (I don't count Darth Vader, since he's wearing a mask and is voiced by someone other than the actor playing him.)

The Villains: Here's where The Phantom Menace falls short of Star Wars. There's no Darth Vader. And, although Darth Maul is a perfectly acceptable short-term bad guy, there is a little bit of a vacuum, because Vader is only ten years old and is still on the good side. In limited screen time, Maul radiates enough malice to capture the attention of kids, proving that Lucas understands what's needed to fashion a villain. And Sidious, although more malevolent, is too much in the background to be a factor.

The Pod Race: A lot of people don't like this sequence, but I think it's one of the most exciting and visually interesting portions of the movie. And, in addition to being fun, it reveals a few things about Anakin's character.

The Special Effects: It's hard to imagine anyone complaining about the effects in Episode 1, but some people did. I guess they thought there were too many or that the movie looked overly computer-generated. Personally, I thought what Lucas accomplished added a rich texture to the story. For the most part, the effects were integrated seamlessly. Lucas has always been about pushing the edge when it comes to visuals, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that the effects eclipse the characters. To an extent, they did that in 1977 as well. (It doesn't look that way in retrospect because, by today's standards, those effects are modest. But that wasn't the case when the movie came out.) The light-saber battle between Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon, and Darth Maul showed us a battle the likes of which we had never seen in a Star Wars movie.

Jar-Jar Binks: Sorry, but I don't have a defense for this one. It was a colossal mistake, although kids seem to like the CGI embarassment. Fortunately, Lucas dramatically downsized his role in Attack of the Clones.

I have a feeling that, once all six movies are available, The Phantom Menace will be looked upon more kindly. Stripped of expectations and set in its proper place as the first chapter of a six-part story, it is a more appealing experience. It's hard to imagine anyone expressing dislike of The Phantom Menace without using the word "disappointing." That's a subjective evaluation that can't be argued against. Ultimately, this is Lucas' vision, and not anyone else's, and, as far as I'm concerned, what he has done with The Phantom Menace (and also Attack of the Clones) is consistent with the way in which he developed and concluded the original trilogy.

Feel free to argue, but I'm holding my ground...

©2004 James Berardinelli