Schnaars Blog

Film Journal — 3/14/10

Triangle
A combination of Memento, Time Crimes, and, I don’t know, Ghost Ship, this little ditty was a terrific surprise. Check in on the BGH podcast for our full rousing discussion.
Final score: 4 out of 5

Bright Star
It has been a while since I’ve sat down and taken in something akin to Bright Star, and because of that I enjoyed it as a change of pace if nothing else. But to leave it at that would not do justice to a film, that despite bordering on histrionics at some points, managed to hold my attention for 120 minutes without a single explosion, car chase or fist fight. The credit for that is due largely to a strong script, interesting cinematography and solid performances all around — just a professionally done film, really. It’s hard to not talk about Abbie Cornish as she was clearly the star here, but for me, the more interesting performance, and indeed performer, was Paul Schneider. He is near unwatchable on Parks and Recreation owing largely to writing, but I have loved him in nearly every film role I’ve seen, including The Assassination of Jesse James. There, as well as here, he brings a bombast and believability to period roles that just can’t be pulled off by every actor, which makes me think he may ultimately find the most success by travelling the “under-appreciated” road of a Brad Dourif or Jeffrey Jones. Maybe not the career that every actor dreams of — especially the child-porn charges that Jones eventually pled to — but it’s a much more than many actors achieve.
Final score: 4 out of 5

Town Creek (aka Blood Creek)
A decent amount of buzz had me pretty stoked to check this direct-to-DVD horror feature out. One small detail set me back on my heels, however: director Joel Schumacher. Now, to be fair, Schumacher has a couple of relatively decent horror credits under his belt — The Lost Boys has kitsch value, Flatliners a little less so, and I know some people liked 8MM. But the defining films of Schumacher’s oeuvre will always be the two worst Batman films, which were sandwiched around my favorite, though probably not the best, Grisham adaptation, A Time to Kill. Unfortunately, my fears about directorial vision proved to be well-founded as Town Creek is a high-concept mess. That’s not to say that there’s nothing of value, because for many horror fans the film will have its moments. By and large though it brings very little to the table beyond what can be found in many of the new breed of horror anthology episodes. I’d be remiss if I didn’t give a slight nod to some decent make-up effects, but those were counteracted by some equally mediocre blood/gore effects. I really did want to like the essential plot more — Nazi occult zombies! — but it wasn’t deployed as effectively as I had hoped, and never approaches the level of fun or fright that it could have.
Final score: 2 out of 5

Reading Journal — Pandora in the Congo

Pandora in the Congo first pinged my radar when I caught a capsule review in the New York Times. I had been reading Bolano at the time, and I think the fact that Pandora was also pegged as a playful, postmodern Spanish language novel, made it stick in my mind. It was at least a year later, when I saw Pinol’s book on The Daily Beast’s end-of-decade The Best Books You Missed list that I finally pulled the trigger.

Telling the story of a young British writer who gets himself hopelessly enmeshed in criminal proceedings surrounding Her Majesty’s colonial interests in Africa, Pandora in the Congo layers fictions within fictions in a way rarely ever attempted. The novel itself matched all my preconceptions — Pinol both venerates and critiques the rich generic works of the early 20th century. He does the critical legwork of connecting genre with the dominant ideology without ever making it feel academic or boring.

The trouble I had was in the second half of the novel when it came time to start winding down his novel-within-a-novel and draw it back into the overarching narrative. Pinol loses some steam while drawing his threads together and bringing the whole operation to a conclusion. The day was saved for me, however, by a witty, tongue-in-cheek finale. In retrospect, it’s the kind of maneuver that should have been incredibly obvious based solely on the preceding 400 pages. But it’s too Pinol credit that he takes his literary sleight of hand all the way to its conclusion.
Final score: 3 out of 5

Film Journal - 2/28/2010

Cop Out
Shockingly shallow plotting and characterization make this film near unwatchable. Nearly everyone involved seemed to be mailing it in — none worse than Bruce Willis, except for maybe director Kevin Smith, who almost seemed to be actively spitting in the audience’s face. The film’s only saving grace was Tracy Morgan, who clearly wants to move beyond his success on TV and take his shtick to Hollywood. He, and Sean Williams Scott, provided enough chuckles to keep me awake.
Final score: 1 out of 5

The Crazies
A fun little post-apocalyptic romp (the fourth of 2010?). I was surprised by how well Breck Eisner executed the genre conventions and created a number of effective sequences. Read the full review over at Bloody Good Horror.
Final score: 3 out of 5

Film Journal - 2/21/2010

Dracula A.D. 1972
Having now watched three Hammer films — two featuring Dracula — I feel comfortable saying that I get the allure. As a group they feel very dated, but in the best possible way. It’s almost too easy to call them a perfect blend of the Universal studio era sensibilities and the edgier, tongue-in-cheek genre conventions that would blossom in Hollywood in the 70s and 80s. While I understand the appeal of the Hammer oeuvre in general, “Dracula A.D. 1972” is a far from exemplary offering. The problem is that in trying to give the Hammer-Dracula formula a cheeky modernizing, the production team stripped out what makes the other Hammer films so much fun.
Final score: 2 out of 5

The Wolfman
The shame here is that with the budget and the talent involved, Wolfman could have been so much better. Read my full review at BloodyGoodHorror.com.
Final score: 2 out of 5

Shutter Island
I’m having some trouble reconciling the complaints from the various haters out there. I wouldn’t go so far as to call “Shutter Island” a masterpiece, but it’s certainly not a bad film. You always open yourself up to a critical pounding when you construct a film around a pivotal moment that shifts the entire viewing experience in retrospect. Scorsese walks us to the moment in question with enough finesse, and with enough breadcrumbs sprinkled throughout that I had no problem handling the shift. You can sample more thorough discussion at the BloodyGoodHorror Podcast.
Final score: 3 out of 5

Film Journal — 2/7/10

Monsters, Inc.

My top five Pixar films list goes like this:
1) Toy Story 2 
2) Monsters, Inc.
3) Wall-E
4) Up
5) Ratatouille 
The key factor for me in each of the top two is the level of comedy writing, with Monsters and Toy Story each playing like the best buddy comedies. The blend of Laurel-and-Hardy-esque repartee with more juvenile gags and child-like imagination and wonder (particularly in Monsters) raises these films above the other outstanding Pixar offerings. (Really, they’re all fantastic, but I was surprised how aged the first Toy Story felt on a recent viewing). In particular, the door-room sequence at the climax of Monsters, like the baggage-belts/airport sequence in Toy Story 2, stands out as some of the finest animated action you’ll find.
Final score: 5 out of 5

Jackie Brown

As a huge Tarantino fan, this was an omission that I had been looking to correct for a long time. The overarching critical consensus that I’d seen was that this was his most “mature” work, which is interesting considering it was his third feature in a career that approaching two decades. I don’t necessarily disagree with that assessment, but I feel that the reaction may have more to do with the genre choices and sources that Tarantino drew from here as opposed to something like Kill Bill or Grindhouse. I was unaware — though not surprised to learn— that this was based on a Leonard novel, which indicates that perhaps Tarantino was intentionally limiting himself by tying his own range of choices to the writer’s text. Whatever the case, it’s a brilliant film, and certainly more restrained feeling than other Tarantino efforts. 
Final score: 5 out of 5

District 13: Ultimatum and District B13

It was a real treat to see Ultimatum, the sequel to one of my favorite action films of the last decade, at one of my all-time favorite theaters, Village East Cinemas. Having watched the sequel, re-visiting the original — directed by Pierre Morel, who used the film as a launching point for a real break-out career — provided some perspective. In many ways, the newer film is a near remake, hitting many almost identical plot-points and with a central twist that is remarkably similar. Of course, both sprung from the well-practiced pen of Luc Besson, so that’s not entirely a surprise. That being said, the one thing that lifts Ultimatum, even despite its mimicry, is what felt like a greatly expanded budget and a more post-modern sense of self. Stars Raffaelli and Belle are better as well.

In general, everything feels just a little more polished and a little bigger — the openings providing the most instructive example. In the original, we are informed of B13 through title cards, and then we quickly zip through the district witnessing drug use, violence and degradation. The scene is bleak, but not beyond recognition. In Ultimatum, this exact same mechanism opens the film, but now we fly through a district divided into racial fiefdoms, each a comic-book caricature of stereotyped Parisian citizens. There’s the white supremacists, the Africans, the Muslims, the Asians (Chinese?) and then what appeared to me to be lower-class French, but could have been a spin on traditional Italian mafiosos. These groups trend more toward Doomsday silliness than actual social commentary, and they lack the nuance, or perhaps just the restraint, of the monolithic gang that populates the original. And what of K2 — easily one of the best parts of the first film.

Taken on its own however, the sequel is just as terrific, and even surpasses the original in many areas. Raffaelli’s fight sequences have more “Oh damn!” type moments, and the casino bust in act one (yes, there’s another casino bust) is far wilder — owing more to the Jackie Chan police films than the original. While the addition of the multiple gangs should have in theory led to more complex political plotting, the reverse is more true. The stereotypes really don’t matter much other than for characterization, and the true enemy or threat is never really in doubt.

Like Besson and Morel’s Taken, both of these should be filed in the guilty pleasure category, but there’s far more meat — and wit — on these bones than in Taken. And while Liam Neeson may be unmatched as a snarler, Raffaelli and Belle are stunt men whose feats are not to be missed.
Final score: Both, 4 out of 5

Paul Blart: Mall Cop

There’s not a whole lot to say about this one. We started it while doing some cleaning, and though we made it to the end, it was really more out of indifference than anything else. It was interesting when viewed in the context of Observe and Report, which we also recently watched. There’s a level of self-loathing pulsing through Paul Blart that can’t be completely brushed away with the saccharine conclusion. In that way it’s not completely out of step with Jody Hill’s misanthropic masterpiece, it’s simply refitted for a PG audience.
Final score: 1 out of 5

Film Journal — 1/31/10

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

There are several obvious criticisms to be leveled at Andrew Dominik’s film about the demise of Jesse James. The first is its length, which is excessive at just a hair over 150 minutes. The second would be its pacing, which is deliberate and sometimes stilted — with a coda that could wear on some viewers. The last might be the affectation of the film: dialogue is think and stagey, and characterizations are heavily wrought. But each of these critiques, while not necessarily false, don’t do justice to a film that in my mind stands among the best revisionist Westerns of all time.

Conceived as a History Channel narrative documentary on steroids, “Assassination” paints a picture of the West (in this case, really the Midwest) that we don’t see very often. It’s bleak, it’s isolated, and at times it can feel almost uninhabitable. The two key elements that make this a must for Western fans are Dominik’s use of space — every shot is either a sparse interior or a vast, open exterior — and the formation and recalibration of history and legend. The latter is really the film’s true aim: to undercut the popular conception of James as robber-hero, only to recreate the legend from a new reality centered on his death. In this way the film is really about the history of the West and the role that legend had in its creation and in its continued cultural importance.
Final score:5 out of 5

The Seventh Seal and Hour of the Wolf

In preparing for this week’s BGH podcast — where we discussed Ingmar Bergman’s “Hour of the Wolf” — I took the opportunity to rectify a horrid omission from my personal film library, and thus I sat down to watch “The Seventh Seal.” Perhaps the finest thing I can say for the film is that despite more than 50 years and parodies to the point of near cultural irrelevancy, I still found “Seal” to be among the finest film viewing experiences I’ve ever had. A lot of my personal reaction probably has to do with the subject matter, which resonated a great deal with me and meshed with other texts I’ve been exploring recently. But it’s also important not to downplay the sheer beauty of the film.

“Hour of the Wolf” was a far less engaging experience, but that is not to say that it was not a terrific film in its own right. Check out the BGH podcast (episode 105, I believe) for more complete thoughts, but what struck me more than anything while watching this film was the impact that it must have had on filmmakers like David Lynch, David Cronenberg, and others. It seems to occupy a similar space as Polanski’s “Repulsion,” which was a few years earlier than “Wolf” as well as “Rosemary’s Baby,” which was released the same year. It may not carry the same weight as “Seal,” but it’s a tremendous filmmaking effort nonetheless.
Final score, Seal: 5 out of 5
Final score, Wolf: 4 out of 5

Film Journal — 1/24/10

Legion

“The Bible has quite a healthy section on the apocalypse, replete with descriptions beyond even what many Hollywood screenwriters might imagine. Unlike the limitless films that have found success by mining this information, ‘Legion’ chooses to go its own way with a plot that makes little sense. In doing so it’s steps out into potentially fertile territory, but lacking the required creativity or filmmaking chops ‘Legion’ neither ascends to lofty heights nor sinks to salacious (and enjoyable) lows.” — Read the rest of my review at BloodyGoodHorror.com
Final score: 0 out of 5

Film Journal — 1/17/10

G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra

More absurd, and therefore more tolerable, than Bay’s “Transformers” films, “G.I. Joe” may set the record for most stuff packed into 105 minutes. This is not to say that it’s good, but it does need to be seen to be truly appreciated. “Joe’s” saving grace may actually be its script, which manages to make the action-figure characters palatable and even believable. The production design, similarly, required such a heroic effort to surmount the ridiculous premise and setting that it wins by not falling hopelessly short.
Final score: 2 out of 5

The Book of Eli

A post-apocalyptic western that takes itself a little too seriously, The Hughes Brothers’ film succeeds when it hues most closely to genre conventions. Uneven ideology sinks a crisp script and some fun cinematography. Read my full review at BloodyGoodHorror.com.
Final score: 2 out of 5

Dead & Buried

This film represented a hole in my horror catalog that I finally decided to fill based on a lot of online chatter after the death of screenwriter Dan O’Bannon this past December. Originally released in 1981, “Dead & Buried” stands out for me as a genre-rich exercise with more spirit and wit than some of its contemporaries. Particularly when considered as a contribution to the zombie sub-genre, “Dead & Buried” enters must-watch status for horror enthusiasts or Robert Englund completists.
Final score: 3 out of 5

Smooth Sounds Ending for Music Games

Catching up with some things I missed over the holiday, one in particular stuck in my head. At PaidContent, in a post about Warner Music’s third quarter earnings report, the headline trumpets CEO Edgar Bronfman’s displeasure with income from video game licensing. On its face, the comment doesn’t mean a whole lot — as a CEO focused on his company’s bottom line, Bronfman was unlikely to describe himself as extremely pleased with the compensation from game publishers, no matter how lavish it may have been.

But underlying this otherwise ho-hum statement seems to me to be the kernels of a real problem for game developers and publishers. Earlier this year, the Rock Band franchise surpassed $1 billion in total sales. That’s a great milestone. What’s unclear is how much of that has come from hardware and original software sales, and how much has come in the form of downloadable content (DLC). At this stage, what is clear is that new units of Rock Band in particular, and music games in general, are not exactly flying off the shelves. While the highly-acclaimed Beatles Rock Band was making headlines and generating all kinds of free publicity only months ago, it’s largely been confined to the used-bin in most video game circles.

In fact, the video gaming press has seemed to largely loose the beat when it comes to music games. While the newest Call of Duty may warrant pages of preview pics, and then columns and columns of review copy, the newest versions of Rock Band and its competitors do not rate, at least not on the scale they had in previous years when they were the darling of the game industry’s eye, and a genuine cultural phenomenon to boot. (As a side note, it’s typically safe to say that by the time the NYT Magazine is running a story on a game, whatever cache the game had has run it’s course in the broader cultural dialogue.)

To be clear though, Rock Band and music games in general do not need broad acceptance by the video game community to remain profitable and artistically viable. The beauty of the original Guitar Hero, which has been carried through all later music gaming instantiations, is that once you have the hardware, you’re set to rock. And with the proliferation of DLC, you’re never at a loss for new challenges.

Here’s where Bronfman’s comments come into play: the true cash cow of these music games is in DLC. The marginal cost of creating a new Rock Band track is, I’d guess, quite low. It requires a team of programmers working within a well defined system to create the actual content, and from there, distribution is virtually free. Publishers can just sit back and watch the dollar signs roll in. I’ll reserve comment on the ethics of DLC for a later date, but what’s important here is that Warner Music (and all other rights owners) represent the great unknown in the equation.

Game publishers have made some sort of pitch to rights holders about the use of their music. My guess is that it includes some form of revenue sharing, perhaps coupled with agreements to push out new or preferred content chosen by the music companies. In this way, Warner could agree to give EA the rights to Taylor Swift’s (note: I have no idea if Swift is with Warner, or if this is something that people who play Rock Band would want to download) hot new jam, but only if EA also gives The Ugly Toad’s (band name only theoretical) under-performing single the Rock Band treatment. Here, game publishers get high valued content at a good price, and music publishers get exposure for a struggling asset. They would hope to convert this exposure into other revenues for the poor, struggling Toads.

What Bronfman is saying, in no uncertain terms, is that the deal has not worked out all that well for music publishers, or at least not as well as game publishers made it sound at the pitch. Clearly, popular music — that is, music that is popular, not just pop music — has helped music game makers generate a princely fortune. The Rock Band crew can, and should, pat themselves on the back about their $1 billion plus in sales, but without the cooperation of music publishers, the next billion is going to be much harder won.

Without knowing a lot specifics, it’s hard to say where to from here. Certainly, game publishers could simply cut rights holders a bigger piece of the pie. Based solely on anecdotal evidence, the idea that exposure to an artist in a music game would lead to increased sales of that artist’s content in other venues seems dubious to me. The fact that Warner Music is expressing such displeasure means that they are probably finding it suspect as well. Clearly, just handing over a chunk of the profits from these games could appease the music publishers, but will game companies swallow that pill?

Alternately, game publishers can increasingly move away from unfriendly music partners. There are options for all parties, and the functions of the market are going to act on each — pressuring music publishers to make deals at rates favorable to the game publishers, while game publishers will be pressured to increase their offers to rights holders to attract the highest value musical content. What may determine success in both cases is the ability to find the right match of price point and overall content quality. Sacrificing some per sale percentage to get into a better game could ultimately mean more total downloads for a particular song, while making the right deal to acquire the about-to-pop single could put a marginal music game on the map in a big way.

The wild card in all this is the consumers’ appetite for music gaming in general. From my perspective, the golden days seem to have passed. So now the key may be finding a niche of popularity. But with the potential for bargaining battles, it will be interesting to see if publishers of either variety of content have the will to keep the music gaming sphere humming along, or if the opportunity costs of trying to work out these kinks will be too much to overcome.