"Out of Print" is a evocative documentary about the future of libraries, writers, books, and the publishing industry. After the film on Sunday, April 28th, "The New Yorker's" Ken Auletta moderated a panel consisting of "Out of Print's" director Vivienne Roumani, Open Road Integrated Media CEO Jane Friedman, New York Public Library President and CEO Tony Marx, and others discussing the issues brought to light in the film. Both the film and the panel were worth a trip to Tribeca, yet some important questions were left unanswered by the film and Ms. Roumani, such as the views of traditional publishing companies on the future of the industry. "Out of Print" however is still a great documentary worth seeing.
Reviews
11 Reviews
Brothers
(I) (2009)
Better Editing would have Saved this Film
15 January 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The main issue with this movie is editing. Think about how fantastic it would have been if as Natalie Portman's character finds out what McGuire did the audience does too through flashbacks? Having the war part and the home font part going back and forth took away a lot of the mystery because the whole time the audience knows exactly what Sam did and why he's so messed up. If we had been allowed to discover it along with Portman the ending would of had a lot more impact.
I also would of put more focus on the "brothers" aspect. McGuire and Gyllenhaal both act very well in the movie (though McGuire is the real star of Brothers-who knew he could act?) and try to sell their so-called connection as best they could. However, as written the brothers part is so underdeveloped that I walked away from the movie thinking it shouldn't of been called Brothers in the first place.
The characters could of grieved for Sam a bit more. The writers/director etc. relied too much on dialogue to tell the story (ie Portman's character says she was so sad she couldn't get out of bed, Gyllenhaal says he misses Sam) and didn't try to show us more. I know the kids were young and had issues but they could of seemed a tad bit more upset that their father was dead.
But basically my main issue is how the movie was edited. I almost wish they could go back and reorder it and have the audience find out what happened to Sam at the end. If that had been done I think it would of been a great movie with fantastic acting as apposed to a average movie saved by stellar performances.
I also would of put more focus on the "brothers" aspect. McGuire and Gyllenhaal both act very well in the movie (though McGuire is the real star of Brothers-who knew he could act?) and try to sell their so-called connection as best they could. However, as written the brothers part is so underdeveloped that I walked away from the movie thinking it shouldn't of been called Brothers in the first place.
The characters could of grieved for Sam a bit more. The writers/director etc. relied too much on dialogue to tell the story (ie Portman's character says she was so sad she couldn't get out of bed, Gyllenhaal says he misses Sam) and didn't try to show us more. I know the kids were young and had issues but they could of seemed a tad bit more upset that their father was dead.
But basically my main issue is how the movie was edited. I almost wish they could go back and reorder it and have the audience find out what happened to Sam at the end. If that had been done I think it would of been a great movie with fantastic acting as apposed to a average movie saved by stellar performances.
W.
(I) (2008)
Made a Human Out of "W"
24 October 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Oliver Stone made a human out of George W Bush with his movie "W". Through the past eight years, George Bush has become sort of a caricature, like most presidents tend to become. Can any one picture George Washington or Abe Lincoln with real thoughts and feelings? As anything but perfect human beings? Not that GW is anything near perfect and this fact is what Oliver Stone nicely captures in his film. I went in expecting more like the infamous pretzel scene and instead actually felt sorry for the man. W had an uneasy and unpredictable road to the White House and this movie portrays exactly how unbelievable and unlikely it was that George Bush actually got there. And in my opinion, shows exactly why he should of never stepped into office. Like I said, the movie made me feel sorry for him, but wanting to prove that you are better than your more coveted brother and to please "Poppy" is not a good enough reason to run for office. It was fascinating to see all the hands that got "W" in the Oval Office and all the hands that would ultimately leave him in the end. As long as people were telling GW what to say and how to think he was alright- he caught the ball. But as soon as the Iraq war proves to not be a "mission accomplished" and his "yesmen" are left with nothing to say, "W" crumples, which is heartbreaking to watch on screen. This movie may not be the "gospel truth" on the rein of George W. Bush, but it is a humanizing take on the current sitting president worth viewing.
The Invisible
(2007)
May contain spoilers. David S. Goyer, whoever you are, learn how to edit. A teen fights for his life as he is caught in the world between life and death.
27 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Ah, the Invisible. Sorry to say that I waited months for this movie to come out. And it wasn't terrible. I mean it was a lot worse than I expected, but I can't say that I wasted two hours of my life either.
The plot goes like this. Nick Powell (Justin Chatwin) is the seemingly all American perfect guy. Not exactly popular, but liked well enough. He lost his father at thirteen and has some issues with his mom (Marcia Gay Harden) who hides behind a mask of pretension. However, - see this is the crafty part- no one really "sees" him. He wants to write and go to London but his mother won't let him or listen to his arguments and contrary to most teen movies his teacher barely notices his talent. Then there's Annie (Margarita Levieva) who is the school misfit and is spiraling out of control. Their two lives meet and Nick is caught in the middle by Pete (Chris Marquette), who is single handedly the world's worst best friend. He's quick to say that he "loves" Nick but stands by watching and at points in the movie participates in his demise.
Therefore, that's where we find Nick for most of the movie, caught in the middle of life and death. Here's where the movie has its strong points. The characters are believable and wonderfully flawed. Nick thinks he's better than he really is, and Annie is not as bad as she appears to be yet both try to play the part. Also the movie does have some surprises as it reaches its climatic end.
Now the end, is where the director, (David S. Goyer) got it all wrong. The movie should have ended about twenty minutes before it actually does. He tries so hard to create symbolism and irony, but never quite gets there without going across the line into corny. When you see the part with Annie's brother and Nick on the hill, let me know if you too don't want it to just stop. And then the music kicks in ..ugh I won't torture you any longer.
All in all it's not a bad movie. The actors do a good turn especially Margarita Levieva. Justin Chatwin does okay, I couldn't tell if he was suppose to be wooden or if he was just tired since "time was running out" and Chris Marquette does great as a spineless blob. But the director just needs to learn how to edit and when to end- see Annie's painful car chase. I say, go see it, sit back and relax. Its not great but it is enjoyable. 6/10.
The plot goes like this. Nick Powell (Justin Chatwin) is the seemingly all American perfect guy. Not exactly popular, but liked well enough. He lost his father at thirteen and has some issues with his mom (Marcia Gay Harden) who hides behind a mask of pretension. However, - see this is the crafty part- no one really "sees" him. He wants to write and go to London but his mother won't let him or listen to his arguments and contrary to most teen movies his teacher barely notices his talent. Then there's Annie (Margarita Levieva) who is the school misfit and is spiraling out of control. Their two lives meet and Nick is caught in the middle by Pete (Chris Marquette), who is single handedly the world's worst best friend. He's quick to say that he "loves" Nick but stands by watching and at points in the movie participates in his demise.
Therefore, that's where we find Nick for most of the movie, caught in the middle of life and death. Here's where the movie has its strong points. The characters are believable and wonderfully flawed. Nick thinks he's better than he really is, and Annie is not as bad as she appears to be yet both try to play the part. Also the movie does have some surprises as it reaches its climatic end.
Now the end, is where the director, (David S. Goyer) got it all wrong. The movie should have ended about twenty minutes before it actually does. He tries so hard to create symbolism and irony, but never quite gets there without going across the line into corny. When you see the part with Annie's brother and Nick on the hill, let me know if you too don't want it to just stop. And then the music kicks in ..ugh I won't torture you any longer.
All in all it's not a bad movie. The actors do a good turn especially Margarita Levieva. Justin Chatwin does okay, I couldn't tell if he was suppose to be wooden or if he was just tired since "time was running out" and Chris Marquette does great as a spineless blob. But the director just needs to learn how to edit and when to end- see Annie's painful car chase. I say, go see it, sit back and relax. Its not great but it is enjoyable. 6/10.
Stranger Than Fiction
(2006)
Not a great fan of this one
21 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Not a fan of the movie. Spoiler ahead I liked that she saved him in the end but it just completely defeats the point of the movie. Also I'm all about suspending disbelief but I just couldn't completely go there with this one. Why her? Where did she get this power to narrate people's lives? What about the rest of Harold's life? Why this instant? Okay, So I know why. She was too preoccupied with death to live and through his "death" he had to learn to live- blah blah blah_ but still. What about her other stories? She was preoccupied with death then why not those people? Where does this gift come from? Maybe I would be able to believe a little more if an explanation was given.
Also this movie fell prey to breaking its own rules. Harold is not in control of his life right? But when he finds out how he going to die and decides he's in control then that defeats the whole point doesn't it? Also she narrates that he is unaware of his death as he makes last phone calls. But Harold is aware. If one can assume that the movie is book and she says then end it is just okay but doesn't make sense with the rest of the book (which is true) doesn't the movie also suck? (which it does in some ways). Furthermore, is Dustin Hoffman's character honestly telling Harold he should die for the sake of the novel ( granted at this point we don't know how he dies but still)? Saving a boy is great and all but come on.
I thought that maybe there was a point to the movie. That maybe is was some kind of metaphor that the narrator is God or something and showing how sometimes he/she as to take good people even if they don't want to but have to. Then they had the real ending which I'll admit I like that he lived, but totally went against where the rest of the movie was going.
One more nuisance, anyone else notice the mise-en-scene? It was hitting you over the face with it almost. I keep trying to figure out the point of it.
The movie wasn't horrible. If you don't over think it, it was funny the acting was mostly good and only a little too long. However a lot of better movies have shown the whole live life to the fullest song and dance a lot better. See, My Life, Life As a House, It's a Wonderful Life, Pay It Forward, even Angelina Jolie's long forgotten, Life or Something Like It for much better versions.
7.5-8/10
Also this movie fell prey to breaking its own rules. Harold is not in control of his life right? But when he finds out how he going to die and decides he's in control then that defeats the whole point doesn't it? Also she narrates that he is unaware of his death as he makes last phone calls. But Harold is aware. If one can assume that the movie is book and she says then end it is just okay but doesn't make sense with the rest of the book (which is true) doesn't the movie also suck? (which it does in some ways). Furthermore, is Dustin Hoffman's character honestly telling Harold he should die for the sake of the novel ( granted at this point we don't know how he dies but still)? Saving a boy is great and all but come on.
I thought that maybe there was a point to the movie. That maybe is was some kind of metaphor that the narrator is God or something and showing how sometimes he/she as to take good people even if they don't want to but have to. Then they had the real ending which I'll admit I like that he lived, but totally went against where the rest of the movie was going.
One more nuisance, anyone else notice the mise-en-scene? It was hitting you over the face with it almost. I keep trying to figure out the point of it.
The movie wasn't horrible. If you don't over think it, it was funny the acting was mostly good and only a little too long. However a lot of better movies have shown the whole live life to the fullest song and dance a lot better. See, My Life, Life As a House, It's a Wonderful Life, Pay It Forward, even Angelina Jolie's long forgotten, Life or Something Like It for much better versions.
7.5-8/10
X-Men: The Last Stand
(2006)
Horrible
11 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I was incredibly surprised on how horrible this movie was. I'm not even a reader of the comic books and I still hated it. The writing was terrible. Filled with corny lines and every cliché in the book. How did this script get approved? All the main characters are reduced to non-roles namely Cyclops and Rouge. Ben Foster who I was excited to see as Angel has no point in the movie what so ever and is introduced to the audience without an explanation and practically no dialogue from Foster. Hallie Berry won an Oscar? This movie and the laughable "Cat Woman" make me wonder how that happened. The acting on this one was very below par. It was only and hour and forty minutes but it seemed SO much longer. The "story" dragged and only picked up at the end with the action sequence that to me at least did not seem as "action packed" and exciting as other have been saying. Also they moved the Golden Gate Bridge at daytime then like a switch it turns to night? Guess I have to add bad editing to the list as well. What this movie needed was the character driven story of the first two movies and not this crap.
Swimming Upstream
(2002)
Great Film!
11 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I was presently surprised by this film. The acting and writing while a little campy at first grows into a beautiful story. An early Matt Czuchry gives a moving and heart wrenching performance as Morris and seemingly normal teenager who's life is altered dramatically. Ben Savage does well as his best friend- Savage has a talent in comedy. Kelly Rutherford and Moriarty lighten up the screen with moving performances. Especially the last moment between father and son. I liked Elisabeth Harnois from "My Date with the President's Daughter" and she does a good turn here but the storyline between her and Morris has been overdone. Buy the DVD now out and not the edited version on the TV. Personally, I think the alternate ending found on the DVD works better for the film and not the original ending.
One thing that I disliked about this movie was the music by Steven P. Wolf. It was horrible and distracted the viewer from what was occurring on screen. The soccer game which is suppose to be an important part in the film had me wishing it would end just so the sappy, overpowering music in the background would stop.
Great movie though, worth seeing.
One thing that I disliked about this movie was the music by Steven P. Wolf. It was horrible and distracted the viewer from what was occurring on screen. The soccer game which is suppose to be an important part in the film had me wishing it would end just so the sappy, overpowering music in the background would stop.
Great movie though, worth seeing.
Earthsea
(2004–2005)
One good review
24 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I just want to start off and say that I have not read the books. Perhaps if I had I might of felt differently about this movie. I don't think this movie deserves all the harsh reviews however. If the movie did completely change the books than that was wrong of the screenwriter, but when you sign over the rights to your work these things can happen.
As a thing on to itself, Earthsea was a pretty good movie in my opinion. Yes, we have the Frodo/Luke/Harry character that is Ged, the Dumbledore/Gandalf/two Magnas (Danny Glover) and the Archmagnas and the Samwise like sidekick. Oh, and don't forget the Magic school- Hogwarts. But when watching a fantasy film don't you come to expect a certain story? The young wizard-hobbit whatever goes on an epic journey and is taught by a guide who must disappear for a while so the boy can go out on their own and find their own path. In essence, Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings, The Chronicles of Narnia and all the others share the same messages and the same plot in many ways. Earthsea just taps into that.
Yes, the writing and effects could of used a little work. Kristin Kreuk as Tenar does an okay job, but she seemed too much like her Lana Lane from Smallville. -Basically just standing around and looking pretty. She didn't seem to take much effort with her acting. Shawn Ashmore I thought did a good job, give what he had to work with as well as Danny Glover though he was miscast and underused in the film. The rest didn't stand out too much with their cookie cutter roles. This film is not nearly as bad and many would have you to believe. It may not be the best movie on TV but it is nice to turn on and fall into Earthsea for a few hours.
Even if it's not the book.
As a thing on to itself, Earthsea was a pretty good movie in my opinion. Yes, we have the Frodo/Luke/Harry character that is Ged, the Dumbledore/Gandalf/two Magnas (Danny Glover) and the Archmagnas and the Samwise like sidekick. Oh, and don't forget the Magic school- Hogwarts. But when watching a fantasy film don't you come to expect a certain story? The young wizard-hobbit whatever goes on an epic journey and is taught by a guide who must disappear for a while so the boy can go out on their own and find their own path. In essence, Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings, The Chronicles of Narnia and all the others share the same messages and the same plot in many ways. Earthsea just taps into that.
Yes, the writing and effects could of used a little work. Kristin Kreuk as Tenar does an okay job, but she seemed too much like her Lana Lane from Smallville. -Basically just standing around and looking pretty. She didn't seem to take much effort with her acting. Shawn Ashmore I thought did a good job, give what he had to work with as well as Danny Glover though he was miscast and underused in the film. The rest didn't stand out too much with their cookie cutter roles. This film is not nearly as bad and many would have you to believe. It may not be the best movie on TV but it is nice to turn on and fall into Earthsea for a few hours.
Even if it's not the book.
Tristan + Isolde
(2006)
A Much Better Film Then Expected
14 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Don't pay attention to the commercials. One they tell you the whole first half of the movie and two they make the movie look quite bad. It's not. I went to see this movie because my sister dragged me to it and I ended up liking it a lot. Cinematic genius it is not, but it is a nice romantic drama. Simply it is in my opinion what "Troy" wanted to be, but failed so miserably at. The acting is mostly quite good and moves at a nice pace. James and Sophia (who looks strangely like Kate Winslet)are a good match and light up the screen. The critics are lukewarm, but it really is not that bad. I would suggest seeing it...the movie just may surprise you.
The Librarian: Quest for the Spear
(2004 TV Movie)
Quite Good, Actually
5 December 2004
I just saw this movie and it was actually really good. As a fan of Noah Wyle from ER I decided to watch this movie but didn't think it was going to be very good (come on,with a title like "The Librarian:Quest for the Spear how could it be?) However, I enjoyed it a lot. They took a tired and cliché plot that has been used over and over in many movies and made it original and funny. It seemed like it might have even been a satire on that genre ,but I could be wrong or over thinking it. I even found myself not wanting it to end. Noah Wyle and Sonya Walger had great chemistry. Bob Newhart, Jane Curtin and Olympia Dukakais were great as always. Good Job :-)
The Village
(2004)
Amazing
2 August 2004
I walked into the expecting it to be really bad from what I heard from others but I ended up loving it. Yes, they shouldn't of made it seem really scary by the previews, but hey M. Night Shyamalan's movie are all not that scary. At least not the crappy cheap scary that is in so-called horror movies (ie Cabin Fever, Scream) that we're used to today. I enjoyed the plot and thought the performances were amazing. Ron Howard's daughter, Bryce Dallas Howard, was quite good,Joaquin Phoenix and Adrien Brody as well. I think this one might beat Signs in my book or come very close.
Also as a side not it was great seeing Frank Collison, from Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman and Jesse Eisenberg as well.
Also as a side not it was great seeing Frank Collison, from Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman and Jesse Eisenberg as well.
Tell Your Friends