Annapolis Film Festival March 21-24, 2013

Confession time: I have never attended a film festival. I've always wanted to, but thought festivals like SXSW would be a little overwhelming, especially for my first one. Ideally I wanted something fairly local and pretty small. The Annapolis Film Festival may be right up my alley. 

This is the first year for the festival, so I'm sure there will be some bumps along the way, but it's also exciting to see people passionate about something getting a project started. At best, I will only be able to attend Saturday, March 23 and part of Sunday, March 24. Here's a listing of the festival schedule.   

I have absolutely no idea what to expect, even from a newly organized festival. Please feel free to leave comments dealing with what to look for, what to avoid, anything you can offer about attending a film festival. And if you're in the area and are interested in attending, let me know. 

The Browning Version (1951) Anthony Asquith

The Browning Version (1951) Anthony Asquith [1:30]

You could say that The Browning Version is the best film ever made about teaching, which may be true, but that’s too narrow a field for consideration. You could also say that the role of Andrew Crocker-Harris is Michael Redgrave’s finest performance. That also would be too narrow a field. Despite its inclusion in the Criterion Collection, both the performance and the film - now over 50 years old - are in danger of being forgotten. Sort of like that teacher you had many, many years ago....

Based on a 1948 play by Terence Rattigan, The Browning Version centers on Andrew Crocker-Harris (or, as his students refer to him behind his back, “The Crock”), an aging classics teacher at an English boys’ school. Early on, we see that Crocker-Harris is stern, strict, demanding in his subject, and largely despised by everyone, including his cheating wife (Jean Kent). Others, including the headmaster (played exquisitely by Wilfrid Hyde-White) simply tolerate him. 

Yet all of that seems beside the point now. Crocker-Harris, in poor health, plans to retire and move away soon, hoping a change will help. What he doesn’t know is that in following him, his wife will have to abandon her lover (NIgel Patrick). If she leaves with him.    

During his last day on the job, Crocker-Harris has an encounter with one of his students that causes him to reexamine his life and career. In the midst of this encounter, we meet Gilbert (Ronald Howard), Crocker-Harris’s successor, observing to get a feel for the students. After class, Crocker-Harris, in a soul-bearing monologue, tells Gilbert, 

“Of course I failed, as you will fail 999 times out of a thousand. But passing your success can atone and more than atone for all the failures in the world. And sometimes... sometimes I had that success.”

I’m well aware that one of the reasons I connected with this film is the fact that I was a teacher for 15 years. I understand much of what Crocker-Harris is going through, knowing that the balance often seems to tip in favor of failure (on the teacher’s part) rather than success. But it goes beyond that. The Browning Version transcends what could’ve been an exercise in melodramatic drudgery into an exploration of the human condition that contains depth and beauty. And Redgrave's performance is superb. It’s a fine film you shouldn’t miss. 

The title refers to a translation by Robert Browning of Agamemnon, an important element in the film.  

(The Browning Version was remade in 1994 with Albert Finney in the starring role, directed by Mike Figgis.) 

5/5

House of Cards Season One

I’m not quite sure how it happened, but somebody at Netflix has successfully delivered an incredible new TV show and, by the way they’ve done it, sent lightning bolts of fear into the hearts of network and cable executives. In a brilliant move, Netflix has made the 13 episodes of the first season of House of Cards available all at once with no waiting, streaming into your TV or device of choice. Of course it doesn’t hurt that the show stars Kevin Spacey and boasts David Fincher as an executive producer (and director of the first two episodes). 

The series begins with an accident on a Washington DC street at night. I won’t go into detail, but this is where we encounter Congressman Frank Underwood (Spacey) for the first time, handling an emergency situation. Underwood does something in this opening that tends to cause either resigned admiration or utter disgust, yet he does it unflinchingly. This scene quickly gives us a picture - although not a complete picture - of who Frank Underwood is.

A new president has just been elected and Underwood, the House Majority Whip, has had a leading role in making the victory happen, so much so that the President elect has promised Underwood a nomination for Secretary of State. If you want to go into House of Cards completely spoiler-free, read no further, although what I’m about to tell you happens in the first 10 minutes, and you’ve probably heard it anyway: Underwood discovers that the President elect has broken his promise, wanting Underwood to remain in Congress where he can do the most good. From that moment on, Underwood is on an all-consuming mission to bring down the entire new administration. 

The web of characters and their manner of manipulations is fascinating to watch. I’ve said it before, but many of my Christian friends see movies and shows like House of Cards and ask, “How can you watch that?” I watch it because there is often honesty in fictional works. That sounds contradictory, but it’s not. Here we see fallen men and women, making decisions and taking actions that are largely selfish and manipulative. But sometimes they’ll do the right thing. Although we may not have any role in Washington politics, we have a role somewhere, and we, too, are fallen. House of Cards also is a fascinating study of how we look at the concepts of truth and falsehood. If there is no absolute truth, then why are these people in such conflict? Why are there secrets? Why are there cover-ups?  

House of Cards is features a mostly smart script and a superb cast including Robin Wright as Frank’s wife Claire, who runs a non-profit organization called the Clean Water Initiative, Kate Mara as a young reporter on the way up, Corey Stoll as a bad-boy Pennsylvania Congessman, and many more, all of whom are part of this complex, yet fascinating inner world of DC politics. The script is not air-tight all the time; many of the Clean Water Initiative scenes are unconvincing and tend to drag the show down. The suspension of disbelief often gets a bit strained and some of the political events and plot advancements happen too easily. But this is, after all, both television and fiction. I’m certainly willing to give in to a few quibbles for a show this good.  

Many people have compared House of Cards to A Game of Thrones, which is not an unreasonable comparison. Both shows are about complex political structures, lying and manipulation, ruthless and reckless behavior, secret and open relationships and moral bankruptcy. Both contain great storytelling. Both contain great acting. What separates the two shows (and this will be an important consideration for some) is that House of Cards has been completely written is projected to be a two-season series for a total of 26 episodes. (Filming on the second season is scheduled for later this month.) When will Season Two air? I don’t know, but I’d imagine you’ll have once again have all the episodes ready for viewing at one time. Besides, when you’ve finished Season One, you’ll want a little time to reflect and speculate on what just happened. Maybe the networks and cable channels will use that time to figure out how to combat a powerhouse series like House of Cards.  

The Man Who Saw a Ghost: The Life and Work of Henry Fonda (2012) - Devin McKinney

The Man Who Saw a Ghost: The Life and Work of Henry Fonda (2012) - 

Devin McKinney

St. Martin’s Press

Hardcover, 428 pages

ISBN 9781250008411

Retail $29.99

Amazon $20.24

Devin McKinney’s The Man Who Saw a Ghost: The Life and Work of Henry Fonda is neither a straight-up biography of the actor nor a critical examination of his body of work. Yet in some ways it is both. Readers seeking to find meaning will do best to keep the title in mind at all times.  

Fonda had many ghosts to deal with throughout his life, one of which - an event he witnessed as a youth in Nebraska - haunted and quite possibly shaped the man he would become. Others ghosts emerged as he grew older. McKinney masterfully weaves this theme of haunting throughout the actor’s life and career. Understand that I’m not speaking here of actual ghosts or hauntings or anything having to do with what we would normally classify as "the supernatural." But the effect on Fonda - which is not fully realized by the reader until the stunningly potent epilogue of the book - is all-pervasive. 

All of Fonda’s major (and much of his minor) work - stage, screen, TV, ads, etc. - is touched on here, as well as much of the work of his children Jane and Peter. Does McKinney spend too much time on Jane and Peter? I don’t think so. It’s clear that they belong to a different generation, but much of that may be due to the fact that the ghosts in their own lives are steering them towards (or possibly away from?) different directions from those of their father. 

We may think we know Fonda from his roles in films like The Grapes of Wrath, Young Mr. Lincoln, The Ox-Bow Incident, My Darling Clementine, 12 Angry Men and many others, and maybe we do. But regardless of what you think you know about Fonda from watching his performances in these films, reading McKinney’s book will give you a greater understanding, if not a greater appreciation, of the man.

The Man Who Saw a Ghost is marred only by McKinney’s often too-opinionated look at the works and many of the other players involved. This is unfortunate and not easily overlooked, but the benefits of the book taken as a whole far outweigh this problem. McKinney’s book is a must-read for fans of film, film history and American cinema. 

4/5

February's Movies

The Killers (1946) Robert Siodmak [1:43]

The Criterion Collection edition of Ernest Hemingway’s The Killers includes the 1946 version, directed by Robert Siodmak, and the 1964 Don Siegel remake. I watched only the Siodmak version, which is memorable both as Burt Lancaster’s debut and as one of the most effective examples of film noir. The film follows the Hemingway story only for the first several minutes, but from then on, Siodmak delivers pure noir, filled with the darkness of disenchantment, double-crosses, and beautiful cinematography. 

4.5/5

The Spy in Black (1939) Michael Powell [1:22] 

Although this film (originally released in the U.S. as U-Boat 29) contains noir elements (darkness, use of shadow, fear and foreboding, etc.), it stands out as an impressive pre-noir tale released just as WWII was beginning. The film is uneven in tone, but Conrad Veidt is excellent as a German submarine captain on a secret mission to gather British intelligence secrets. The Spy in Black also marks the first collaboration between Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger.  

3.5/5

Sisters (1973) Brian De Palma [1:33]

I had intended to discuss this one at length, but never quite found the time for this early De Palma homage to Hitchcock. Overall an impressive film, although De Palma throws a few too many Hitchcock tropes into the mix. The final third of the film explores some really odd stuff; I’m not convinced it all works, but the attempt is impressive. 

4/5

The Game (1997) David Fincher [2:08]

Previously discussed here.

3/5

Led Zeppelin: Celebration Day (2012) Dick Carruthers [2:04]

Another film I had hoped to discuss at length, but that didn’t happen, either (perhaps on a second viewing in the near future). Like them or not, Led Zeppelin is one of the most influential and important rock acts of all time. Of course they know that, and understand that they don’t need a reunion concert every other year. The group has performed together a handful of times since disbanding in 1980, but this 2007 London concert marks the first extended (and probably final) concert we’re likely to see.

And it is amazing. In 2007, Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones were already in their 60s and Robert Plant was pushing 60 (Jason Bonham, John Bonham’s son, was a mere 40 at the time.), but these guys haven’t lost a step. Page sounds as good as he’s ever sounded and while Plant doesn’t do all that much as far as vocal pyrotechnics go, he’s still impressive. Regardless of which Bonham is on the drums, Jones stays in close proximity to the drummer, keeping that tightness that was so essential to the band, proving that the bass player/drummer combination was the true backbone to Led Zep.

Since this was a "one-time only" show, the band spurned the super-extended live versions of some of their more famous songs, hoping to pack more tunes into the set. We get 16, which is quite generous:

Good Times Bad Times

Ramble On

Black Dog

In My Time of Dying

For Your Life

Trampled Under Foot

Nobody's Fault But Mine

No Quarter

Since I've Been Loving You

Dazed and Confused

Stairway to Heaven

The Song Remains the Same

Misty Mountain Hop

Kashmir

Whole Lotta Love

Rock and Roll     

4/5

Lake Mungo (2008) Joel Anderson [1:27]

Previously discussed here. 

4.5/5 

Videotape (2013) Andrew Yorke, Kevin Michael [1:36]

I was fortunate to be invited to view this film by one of its directors, Andrew Yorke, who is also one of my former students. (Many thanks, Andrew!) Videotape begins with the discovery of a pregnant woman found dead in a warehouse. All signs point to suicide, but a freelance journalist gets a tip that an eyewitness with a different story is ready to talk. 

Yorke and Michael have immersed viewers into a world beyond normal youthful indiscretion, one that’s dark and safely self-contained until pressures from mainstream society shatter everything. Videotape is a raw, powerful exploration of the darker side of human nature, with crucial questions screaming to be answered. 

Currently the directors do not have a distributor, but plan to enter it in several film festivals. If it comes to your city, see it.        

4/5

House of Cards: Season One (TV 2013) Netflix Original 

(13 episodes of approx. 50 min. each)

If you’ve avoided a Netflix subscription up until now, you should correct that oversight ASAP, even if the only thing you watch is the first season (13 episodes) of their original show House of Cards. The show (for adults) is only available streaming and only through Netflix. I plan to go into more detail in another post later this week, but after the first episode, I was hooked. Even if you don’t care about Washington politics, watch the show for Kevin Spacey’s masterful portrayal of U.S. Representative Frank Underwood, a man with the power and cunning to literally bring the house down. 

4.5/5

To Be or Not To Be (1942) Ernst Lubitsch [1:39]

A Polish theater company is scheduled to put on a play making fun of Hitler and the Nazis just prior to the Nazi occupation of Warsaw. When forced to put on Hamlet instead, the actors realize they might just have more important roles to play during the coming weeks and months. 

Lubitsch’s To Be or Not to Be is a wonderful mixture of satire, romantic comedy, and even suspense, superbly acted by Jack Benny and Carole Lombard (in her final film before dying in a plane crash). The script by Melchior Lengyel and Edwin Justus Mayer (and Lubitsch, uncredited) is a thing of comic beauty. Although not well received when released, To Be or Not to Be has rightfully earned a place in the canon of classic American films. I feel like watching it again right now. Maybe I will. 

The film also features a very young Robert Stack, recognized by millions of comedy fans many years later as Rex Kramer  in Airplane!    

4.5/5

Feel free to tell me what you saw last month.

The Best Performance in a Bad Film?

Critic Richard Roeper compares the acting of Ed Harris in the new film Phantom to the pitching of Steve Carlton with the 1972 Philadelphia Phillies. That team went 59-97, but Carlton won 27 of those games. Like Carlton on a losing team, Harris (according to Roeper) delivers a top-notch performance in a bad film.

I'll probably see Phantom when it comes out on DVD or arrives streaming through my Roku. I'm a sucker for submarine movies and honestly don't see how I can turn this one down.

But more importantly, Roeper's got me thinking.... What's the best performance I've ever seen in a bad film? I'm going to mull this one over for awhile.... Let me know what you come up with.

Leonard Maltin's 151 Best Movies You've Never Seen (2010)

I absolutely love books and discussions that revolve around great (or even good) films you've never seen or films that few people seem to know about. Film critic and historian Leonard Maltin's book of 151 titles covers many mainstream films that bombed, as well as indie, foreign and just plain odd films. I don't see that many films a year, so I wasn't surprised that I had only seen 9 of the ones presented here.  But with a book like this, it's all about discovery, right?

Maltin's reviews (or synopses) are quite short, usually only slightly over a page. Some of that space is devoted to why the film got slighted or didn't get much exposure, so in some cases, there's not much to go on to recommend it other than Maltin's frequent "Trust me on this one" pleas.

Films are listed alphabetically, with Maltin supplying the title, release date, director, screenwriter(s), original source material, and main actors. I wish he had also supplied each film's running time. A thumbnail of the poster or DVD art would've been nice as well, but I understand that probably wasn't feasible. 

For reasons I can't quite explain, Maltin has never been one of my favorite reviewers. I think he often has some good things to say and I appreciate the fact that he champions films that haven't received enough attention, but even in this collection, you can see Maltin's personal tastes and admiration come through for certain directors and screenwriters. (He even mentions this at times, so there's really no foul. And what do critics get paid for, anyway? Their opinions.) Maltin avoids spoilers, which I appreciate it. In this case, I'm glad he's told me less instead of more. 

I found myself at least mildly interested in many of these films, at least half of them. I plan to actively seek out at least 25 of them. Most of these films were released in the period of 1997 to 2008, but you'll find a smattering of older films as well. Definitely worth a look. 4/5

Lake Mungo (2008) - Joel Anderson

The first several minutes of Lake Mungo make you feel as if you're watching just another horror mockumentary, a subgenre made famous by The Blair Witch Project back in the 90s. Director Joel Anderson starts out with some creepy old black and white photographs that set the tone for what's about to transpire. Nothing new here, but still, it's effective. 

As the story begins, 16-year-old Alice Palmer mysteriously drowns during a family outing. The story consists largely of on-camera interviews with members of Alice's surviving family: her parents and teenage brother Matthew, who live in Ararat, Australia. But there's much more to come. In the midst of the family's mourning, Matthew discovers photographic evidence that Alice's ghost may be inhabiting their home.  

I won't tell you much more than this, only that information about Alice - including some of her secrets - comes to light, leading her family to question what might really have happened to her. What makes Lake Mungo so effective and so eerie is the realization that some of our friends and loved ones who have passed away may have carried secrets we never knew about and probably shouldn't know about. Sometimes too much information is more than just uncomfortable; it's disturbing and horrific. 

Although it contains some genuinely creepy scenes, Lake Mungo will be too slow for some viewers. At just under an hour and a half, it may seem glacial, but Anderson paces the film expertly and gives us actors whom we swear are the real thing. It's rare to find a filmmaker who understands that the slow, progressive accumulation of terror and dread is much more disturbing than slash and gore. 

As much as I liked Lake Mungo, on a personal level, I can't watch it again. I often talk with people about the right movie at the right time and for me, Lake Mungo was the right movie at exactly the wrong time. I recently experienced a death in my immediate family and for whatever reason, I decided to watch this film last night; maybe because it had been sitting in my Netflix queue for a long time, maybe because it's about to be removed from the Instant Queue. It was a mistake.  

Maybe a future post will cover more on "The Right Movie at the Right Time," what to watch, when to watch it, and maybe more importantly, when not to watch it. I think what I need next is something funny and classic, like Bringing Up Baby or A Night at the Opera. So, while I can highly recommend Lake Mungo, I won't be watching it with you.    4.5/5  

Revisiting The Game 15 Years Later

When I saw that Criterion was releasing David Fincher’s The Game (1997) on Blu-ray, I decided it was time to revisit Fincher's third film. To be perfectly honest, I couldn't remember much about The Game. It had been 15 years, but I can still remember other films from much farther back, so there had to be a reason I couldn't recall any specifics about this one. After a second viewing, I understand why.

Michael Douglas stars as Nicholas Van Orton, a filthy-rich San Francisco investment banker who has little time for the people he knows and even less for those he doesn't. His younger brother Conrad (played  by Sean Penn) falls somewhere in between. Nicholas, on his 48th birthday, reluctantly agrees to have lunch with his black-sheep brother, who gives Nicholas a voucher for a game that is guaranteed to change his life. 

Soon the game is on and all hell breaks loose. So do the plot holes. The best way to enjoy The Game is to pay as little attention to details as possible. For instance (MILD SPOILERS), consider that (1) Nicholas is given access to this game by his brother, who has seemingly recovered from a prodigal-son type of existence, (2) the game is given to Nicholas on his 48th birthday, the same age Nicholas' father was when he committed suicide (You'll remember this from the belabored home-movie-footage Nicholas replays in his mind early in the film.), and (3) Nicholas is a jerk whom we really don't care about unless the film can show that there's an opportunity for him to change. The third point is a given; the first two points, if you dwell on them at all, give the whole thing away.   

Yet the first third - heck, maybe the first half - of the film is extremely effective. Fincher knows how to tell a tension-filled story and how it should be paced. Yet with each twist, the audience's suspension of disbelief crumbles until you're left with nothing but pebbles held together by cobwebs. By the time the ending arrives, you realize not only that it's unsatisfying, but also would've been impossible to pull off even in the most fanciful reality. At one point, Nicholas says he wants to see who's standing behind the curtain, pulling the strings. I can tell you, it's not The Great and Powerful Oz.  

Yet Douglas - who is onscreen for just about the entire 128-minute running time, is excellent. Could there have been a better casting choice for Nicholas? I don't think so. 

As many reviewers have stated, The Game is a film you can really only watch once. (Or twice, if your memory is as bad as mine.) I certainly won't watch it again (unless my memory gets really bad). I'm actually surprised that Criterion decided to release and upgrade this title. If they wanted to do a David Fincher film, my vote would be for Zodiac.  If they wanted to do a movie about a game, one film that's screaming for a Blu-ray release is the 1972 version of Sleuth with Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine, a film that does bear repeat viewings, especially to marvel at the incredible performances of the two leads. 

To call The Game a cheat would be unfair. If you're paying attention, it tells you what it's going to do. It's not unfair and it's not dishonest. But it is disappointing when you pull back the curtain and realize that, yes, it's a very pretty curtain, but one filled with many, many holes.  3/5

January's Movies

I can never find enough time to write about everything I’d like to, including the films I see. Of the 11 films I saw in January, I discussed only three of them on the blog. I’d love to revisit one or two others and write more on them later. Maybe I will.

Anyway, I’ve linked to previous posts on three of these films. The others I’ve only written a few sentences about, but I hope it’s enough for you to gauge whether or not you’d like to see them. (I only list TV shows after I’ve watched an entire season.) Each film listed includes title, release date, director and running time. (Since TV seasons often contain multiple directors, I do not list their names, even if the same person directed each episode.) 

Road House (1948) Jean Negulesco [1:35]

Lightweight noir with Richard Widmark going a bit over the top. Some good moments; hardly a noir classic, but worth a look. 3/5

Oslo, August 31 (2011) Joachim Trier [1:36]

One of this year’s Oscar nominees for Best Foreign Film. The pace of this film - about an addict’s first day of freedom from being institutionalized - might be too slow for some, but there’s some real treasure to be discovered here. Excellent performances. 5/5

Brick (2005) Rian Johnson [1:50]

Discussed previously here. 4.5/5

All Night Long (1962) Basil Dearden [1:31]

Discussed previously as part of the Criterion Collection's Eclipse Series 25 Basil Dearden’s London Underground set here. 3.5/5

Desert Bloom (1986) Eugene Corr [1:45]

A disappointing film, despite a nice performance by Annabeth Gish as a young girl coming of age during the post-WWII atomic testing in Nevada. The story is too obvious, too predictable, almost making you think you’re watching a Lifetime movie. 2/5

The Invisible War (NF 2012) Kirby Dick [1:37]

Another Oscar nominee, this time for Best Documentary - the story of rape in the military, a problem that does not seem to be getting better. 4/5

Being John Malkovich (1999) Spike Jonze [1:58]

Previous thoughts here. 4/5

Sherlock: Season Two (TV 2012) [4:26]

If you haven’t seen this modern-day BBC incarnation of Sherlock Holmes, find Season One and get caught up. (Each season is only three episodes long, but they’re all about 90-minutes each.) Finally, a TV show that’s clever, smart, engaging and addictive. 4.5/5

Night Train to Munich (1940) Carol Reed [1:33]

Rex Harrison playing a singing spy trying to pass as a Nazi? How can you say no to that? Despite a goofy shootout and a pretty misleading title (Very little of the film actually takes place on a train.), Night Train to Munich is a fun tale. 3.5/5

Cold Weather (2010) Aaron Katz [1:30]

Calling this a sleeper would be inaccurate. Maybe comatose would be better... “Slacker noir” actually may be the best way to describe Cold Weather, which features a former forensics science major named Doug (Cris Lankenau) who fancies himself as Sherlock Holmes. Doug investigates the disappearance of his ex-girlfriend in a dreary Portland, Oregon. Probably the most laid-back detective film of all-time, Cold Weather slowly accumulates  into something quietly memorable and endearing. 4/5 

Black Moon (1975) Louis Malle [1:40]

Black Moon is very much a film of it’s time, dealing with the battle of the sexes with a twisted Alice in Wonderland backdrop. Many will find it offensive. Unless you’re either a student of 70s films or a Criterion Collection completist, skip this one. 2/5

Now tell me what you saw last month....