The Infectious Indie

A friend of mine recently sent me this video, "Ode to the Indie," from Current TV. Check it out:



When I first watched this I had a good laugh at all the indie film stereotypes the video pokes fun at: people with weird names, bearded intellectuals, sped-up or slow motion, bragging about favorite bands, "melancholy ecstasy," hand-drawn fonts, etc. Then I realized I've seen almost every movie that's featured in the video.

I'll admit it. I'm an indie film junkie. Every time I see a preview for a film with any of the characteristics mentioned in that video, I'm just itching to see it. I can even think of a few films that fit some of the stereotypes the video mentions that were left out of the montage. I realize, as the video so astutely points out, a lot of indie films share many of the same qualities. Yet even if the trailer for an indie seems similar to one I've already seen, I still feel a little ping of curiosity, like I might be missing something if I don't check out this latest indie too. This genre is infectious to me.

So what is it about the indie film that draws me in? For one, in a good indie film, I feel very drawn to the characters. My favorite indies are character-driven pieces that examine, in their own offbeat way, the complexities of human relationships. The stories and characters of indie films are quirky enough to seem a little different and intriguing, but at the same time the emotions those characters experience are very easy to relate to.

I think this is done particularly well in my personal trifecta of indie favorites: "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind," "Garden State" and "Once." There's something a little unconventional about each of the core couples in these films, but the way they open up to each other and grow together is a journey I enjoy watching. "Adventureland" is a recent film that I think captures the nuances of the emotion behind friendships and relationships beautifully.

And while I concede to the video's point that people in indies often feel the need to make non-chalant references to their favorite bands (Natalie Portman's insistance in "Garden State" that The Shins "will change your life, I swear" springs to mind), I think the music in many of these films does add something to their emotional impact.

Zach Braff is someone who I think really understands how good music can capture the mood of a scene for the audience and move the emotion of that scene forward. "Garden State" wouldn't be as great of a film if it weren't for the soundtrack Braff hand-picked to supplement his storytelling. "Once" and "Juno" use this tactic to their advantage as well. And if the early reviews for "500 Days of Summer" are any indication, that film will likely join the ranks of indie soundtrack greatness.

This isn't to say that I'm charmed by all indies. "Margot at the Wedding" is one that I certainly don't have any desire to see again. In that film, the characters are so filled with misery, so narcissistic, so devoid of any redeeming qualities that they are impossible to relate to. One leaves that movie feeling the same misery those characters feel, without one single shred of happiness. A film like "Rachel Getting Married," on the other hand, captures the misery that can emcompass a family affected by addiction yet still shows that no matter how many problems a family has, love is still there whether you want it to be or not. This single difference makes the film infinitely more relatable.

I recently came across a quote from Jessamyne West, "Fiction reveals truths that reality obscures." To me, a good indie film, through its unique brand of storytelling, makes me think about elements of my own life. Certainly not every indie film has the ability to do this. But the ones that do have a certain charm that I can't stay away from, no matter how much they fit the stereotypical indie mold.

Review: Public Enemies

"Public Enemies," the first major film of July, opened last week to mixed reviews, and after seeing the film this past weekend I'd have to say I agree. It certainly wasn't a bad film. It was a good portrait of an interesting true story and it featured some really strong performances, but it was nothing exceptional. It's worth watching, but it wasn't exactly a masterpiece.

For those unfamiliar with the Michael Mann-directed film, "Public Enemies" tells the story of notorious criminal John Dillinger (Johnny Depp), who robbed banks during the crime wave of the 1930s alongside the likes of Baby Face Nelson and Pretty Boy Floyd. Dillinger was admired by the American public, who found him to be charming and charismatic and thought his robberies and jail breaks were exciting in light of their dissatisfaction with the banks.

This image drove J. Edgar Hoover (Billy Crudup) to view Dillinger as public enemy number one. His Bureau of Investigation, led by Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale), was charged with capturing Dillinger at any cost, along with all of his accomplices.

The film also examines Dillinger's relationship with Billie Frechette (Marion Cotillard), who became enamored with Dillinger after meeting him in Chicago and spent two years in federal prison for harboring a criminal when she refused to give up his whereabouts.

Overall, "Public Enemies" is a decent film. It tells an interesting story, but it likely wouldn't have been as strong without the amazing actors Mann was able to recruit. Depp and Bale, who consistently turn in top-notch performances, shine again here, but I wish Bale's character had been developed more. The audience doesn't get to know him as well as I would have liked. So much of the film was robbery after robberty and prison escape after prison escape. It would have been nice to balance that out with some more backstory.

In spite of having powerhouse leads like Depp and Bale, the movie belongs to the supporting players. Crudup plays against type in his small but significant role as J. Edgar Hoover, and Cotillard exercises her Oscar-winning chops and adds depth to the "girlfriend" role that is usually so one-note.

The look of the film is another strong point. The scenic design, costumes, hair and make-up capture the Depression well and create a visually appealing atmosphere for the film.

My biggest compalint is that the film was too long. At two hours and 20 minutes, the film is actually shorter than blockbusters like "X2: X-Men United," "Titanic" and the "Harry Potter" films, but "Public Enemies" suffers because it felt long. The action sequences were great, but if Mann had cut those down and added just a little more backstory, the film would have felt fuller without being unnecessarily long. I'm happy to sit through a long film as long as it's worth my while. Here, I found myself wondering when Dillinger would finally be captured so I could stand up.

Universal Pictures made a smart decision in releasing the film during the summer rather than holding it until awards season. The film is not quite up to par to receive any major Oscar nominations, but during the summer it's an option for moviegoers looking for a film that's still action-packed but more intelligent than "Transformers."

"Public Enemies" is an entertaining look at an intriguing true story with some great action sequences and outstanding performances, but overall Mann's look at the life of one of America's most notorious gangsters falls short of spectacular. B-

2010 Oscars will feature 10 Best Picture nominees

The news broke today in sources like EW and Variety that the Best Picture category at the Oscars will up the number of nominees to 10 starting with the 2010 ceremony. The Best Picture category has had five nominees for years, but back in the 1930s and early 1940s, having up to 12 nominees was common. This decision is already sparking debate among film aficionados, and there are certainly pros and cons to each side.

On one side, some people are arguing that doubling the number of nominees devalues the honor of receiving a Best Picture nomination. I can see where these people are coming from, because I would hate to see a few mediocre films sneak in just because there now have to be 10 nominees. And being one of five select films certainly seems to hold more prestige than being one of 10. I think we'll have to see what films get nominated next year before we can really judge the effectiveness of this new method, but I'm choosing to remain optimistic for now.

The last Oscar ceremony was the one with which people were the most vocal about the Academy ignoring commercially successful films. Granted, many commercially successful films are not up to Academy standards, but giving "The Dark Knight" and "WALL-E" the shaft in favor of "The Reader" and "Frost/Nixon," upset critics and fans alike. "The Reader" and "Frost/Nixon" were still critically acclaimed, but they didn't receive the rave reviews "The Dark Knight" and "WALL-E" did. They just happen to fit the mold of the type of film the Academy likes to recognize.

Many people feel "The Dark Knight" and "WALL-E" were left out of the major awards - even though they were recognized by virtually all of the critics awards - purely because their mass popularity automatically made them not prestigious enough for voters. The outcry over the Academy ignoring these films likely made them rethink their methods, so if having 10 nominees means movies like "The Dark Knight" and "WALL-E" will actually get recognized, I think that's a huge plus. Anyone who knows me knows how much I complained when "The Dark Knight" failed to earn a Best Picture nomination this year.

And it means movies like "Up" and "Star Trek," the best reviewed movies of the year so far, might actually have a shot. This also paves the way for more comedies to have a shot at a nomination, like July's "Funny People," which already has strong early buzz. If this practice had been in place two years ago, a critical and audience favorite but small film like "Once" may have had better odds at getting more than just a Best Original Song nomination.

And as First Showing points out, the Best Picture winner has become so predictable in recent years (really, who didn't see the "Slumdog Millionaire" win coming?) that adding more nominees to the mix might make the telecast more interesting. And since most publications and organizations like AFI typically release a list of the top 10 best films of the year at the start of awards season, honoring 10 nominees at the Oscars doesn't seem like that much of a stretch.

So what do you think? Will doubling the number of Best Picture nominees work in Oscar's favor? Or will it devalue the level of prestige associated with receiving a nomination?

Review: The Hangover

Every summer the most anticipated movies usually feature big-name stars and in-your-face special effects. But every once in awhile something different comes along that unexpectedly garners critical and box office success. “The Hangover,” the latest comedy from “Old School” director Todd Phillips, definitely falls into this category.

A few days before his wedding, Doug (Justin Bartha) heads to Las Vegas for the ultimate bachelor party with his three groomsmen: His best friends Phil (Bradley Cooper), a sarcastic middle school teacher, and Stu (Ed Helms), a mild-mannered dentist with an overbearing girlfriend, and his soon-to-be brother-in-law Alan (Zach Galifianakis), an off-the-wall loner who just wants to be one of the guys.

After checking into an expensive villa at Caesar’s Palace and taking a few shots on the roof, the guys go on a series of drunken misadventures. The next morning, they wake up to find Doug missing and are so hung over that they have no recollection of what happened the night before.

The only clues they have to guide them are Doug’s missing mattress, a hospital bracelet on Phil’s wrist, a chicken perched atop the piano, a baby crying in the closet and an angry tiger in the bathroom. Phil, Stu and Alan must attempt to retrace their steps so they can find Doug and get him home before his wedding.

“The Hangover” is unapologetically vulgar and profane, which is part of its charm. On its surface, the film seems like just another silly take on the blunders of man-children, but it actually has a surprising amount of wit and cleverness. The mystery of where Doug is and what the guys drunkenly did the night before is just as interesting as the film’s comedic situations are hilarious.

Part of what makes “The Hangover” transcend most recent comedies is its sharp script. One might not expect much from the writing team whose past endeavors include “Four Christmases” and “Ghosts of Girlfriends Past.” But whatever faults those films may have had, Jon Lucas and Scott Moore make up for it with this movie. Each line of dialogue brings more and more laughs.

Often the majority of a film’s memorable moments are given away in the trailer. This is certainly not the case with “The Hangover.” Rather than having just a few stand-out moments, this film consistently delivers throughout.

Another one of the film’s strong points is its cast. It may not have the biggest movie stars, but Cooper, Helms and Galifianakis fit into their roles perfectly and really click as an ensemble. They are a riot to watch together, and they carry the film with ease.

While “The Hangover’s” R-rated (and at the end of the film bordering on NC-17-rated) laughs may not be for everyone, fans of witty, raunchy and ridiculous comedy should find this film goes beyond their expectations. B+

Review: Up

Pixar continues its string of critical and commercial successes with "Up," which has the third highest-grossing opening weekend for a Pixar film and an impressive 98% on Rotten Tomatoes. After seeing this film in both 2D and 3D, I have to say it deserves all the praise. I thought it would be hard for Pixar to release something as refreshing and brilliant as last summer's "WALL-E," and while I do still think "WALL-E" is a slightly superior film, "Up's" original premise, flawless execution and plentiful heart definitely make it another Pixar classic.

The film revolves around Carl Frederickson (Edward Asner), a 78-year-old unlikely hero. Carl and his wife Ellie always dreamed of adventure, wishing to somehow move their house to the majestic Paradise Falls in South America. Following Ellie's death, Carl decides to honor her by trying to make their dreams a reality. By attaching thousands of balloons to his house, he flies away with his sights set on Paradise Falls. But the adventure doesn't start out as expected when a young Wilderness Explorer named Russell (Jordan Nagai) stows away on his porch.

When they arrive in South America, Carl and Russell meet a host of memorable characters including Kevin the giant bird, who turns out to be a girl trying to get back to her babies, and Dug the talking dog (Bob Peterson). But rather than being a typical cartoon talking dog, Dug speaks through a collar that translates his thoughts, allowing him to maintain his charming, panting canine demeanor.

Dug's owner turns out to be the explorer Charles Muntz (Christopher Plummer), Carl's childhood idol who has been trying to find Kevin in order to prove he didn't fabricate a giant bird skeleton years before. Carl, Russell and Dug must try to reunite Kevin with her children before Muntz can capture her and take her back to the states.

Based on the trailers for this movie, I expected "Up" to be more of a kids' comedy than "WALL-E." I was wrong. "Up" does have its comedy, but it was a much more emotional film than I anticipated. Its pure and unapologetic heart is really what drives the movie. Its opening montage of Carl and Ellie's life together is one of the most moving and incredibly executed I've ever seen. Without giving too much away, another reflection of Carl and Ellie's relationship that occurs later in the film was so emotionally overwhelming that tears actually streamed down my face in the middle of the theater.

Carl and Ellie's bond is the only one that drives the film. His relationship with Russell, whose parents are divorced and whose father is largely absent from his life, is also very touching. As a huge dog lover, Dug stands out as a favorite for me. The things he says remind me of things I think my own dog would say, and his hatred of squirrels provides some of the film's biggest laughs. But the close relationship he forms with Carl while Muntz and his other dogs find him a joke also supply some very heartwarming moments.

I was hesistant to see "Up" in 3D as I'm a bit skeptical of the medium. I was afraid there would be too many 3D gimmicks that would detract from the film's content. For this reason, I saw "Up" in 2D first so as to fully appreciate the story. While some of the trailers that played before "Up" clearly were made for 3D gags, the 3D actually only enhanced "Up." I would still recommend seeing it in 2D first, but the 3D made it pop visually without being too distracting.

"Up" is definitely worth the money it costs it see it in both 2D and 3D. Its characters are memorable and original, and it will bring both laughter and tears. It is impossible to not be moved by "Up's" story, which still appeals to kids while at the same time being incredibly emotional and multi-layered. Pixar has definitely delivered yet another classic. A-

Reel Talk with the A-Team

The past month has been pretty crazy, between class projects and finals and the beach vacation I just got back from, so unfortunately I haven't had the chance to update since my "Wolverine" review at the beginning of May (minus the summer movie preview I just posted that ran in The Pendulum on May 13 so even that's old). I've seen "Up" and "Star Trek" since my last post so I'll hopefully be posting those reviews by this weekend. I'm seeing "Up" in 3D tomorrow so I want to wait until I see that version to post my review of that, and I'll also probably be seeing "The Hangover" this weekend and should be posting a review of that as well. I should also have my reaction to the MTV Movie Awards up sometime tomorrow night.

In the meantime, while I play catch-up, check out the first few episodes of Reel Talk with the A-Team, a film podcast I do at Elon with Adam Constantine, The Pendulum's senior film critic. There are five episodes so far in which we review one or two of the weekend's movies, analyze Friday's box office numbers and preview the next weekend's releases. New episodes of Reel Talk with the A-Team are posted on The Pendulum Online every Saturday during the school year. There won't be any episodes during the summer but we'll be back in the fall.

April 18
April 26
May 2
May 9
May 14

My top 5 picks for summer movies to watch

1. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (July 15): If the latest trailer is any indication, the penultimate installment in the “Harry Potter” franchise promises to be the most epic yet. As Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) returns for his sixth year at Hogwarts, he learns more about Voldemort’s (Ralph Fiennes) past so he can gain the tools to defeat him. As paranoia about the impending war grows, Harry and his friends also start finding love. This film looks to balance comedy, drama and intense action sequences and has the potential to surpass “Prisoner of Azkaban” and become the best movie in the series so far.

2. Funny People (July 31): Based on the trailer for the latest film from director Judd Apatow, “Funny People” will still have its hilarious moments but will likely lean on the more dramatic side than “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” and “Knocked Up.” The film follows stand-up comedian George Simmons (Adam Sandler), who reevaluates his life and his relationships when he learns he has a terminal illness. Apatow mainstays Seth Rogen and Leslie Mann play George’s protégé and the girl that got away. Early buzz surrounding the film lauds it as potentially Oscar-worthy, so “Funny People” should please audiences and critics alike.

3. Away We Go (June 5): “Revolutionary Road” director Sam Mendes turns to more comedic fare than his typical films with this little movie about a couple expecting their first child who travel the country trying the find the perfect place to live. This should be a charming, feel-good film with a strong cast. “The Office’s” John Krasinski and “Saturday Night Live’s” Maya Rudolph star in the lead roles with strong supporting players in Allison Janney, Jeff Daniels and Maggie Gyllenhaal.

4. Up (May 29): It will be hard for Pixar to live up to the prestige of last summer’s “WALL-E,” but “Up,” the studio’s latest film, appears to be a fun and adventurous family-friendly comedy. The first movie from director Pete Docter since “Monsters, Inc.” tells the story of Carl Fredrickson (Edward Asner) who decides to see the world from the comfort of his own home by attaching thousands of balloons to his house. “Up” will be a very different from “WALL-E,” but with characters like Russell (Jordan Nagai), a boy scout who stows away with Carl, and Dug, a dog with a talking collar that translates his thoughts, this movie should still be a Pixar classic.

5. Taking Woodstock (August 14): This dramedy from “Brokeback Mountain” director Ang Lee should be a refreshing change from the slew of comedy and action blockbusters coming out this summer. “Taking Woodstock” is the true story of Elliot Tiber (Demetri Martin), who offers up his family’s motel and the surrounding land as the location for the Woodstock Festival of 1969. This movie offers viewers an interesting true story and a top-notch cast that includes Liev Schreiber (“Wolverine”), Emile Hirsch (“Into the Wild”) and Jeffrey Dean Morgan (“Watchmen”).