Cowboys & Aliens (2011, U.S.)

This is not my kind of movie at all. Yes, I like science fiction, and yes, I've recently discovered that I like some westerns, but I would never see this movie in a million years. But. Daniel Craig! Harrison Ford! I would have been missing out if I'd missed it, so thank goodness for that.

I had no idea what it was even about (aside from the obvious cowboys and aliens) before I went to see it, so I will fill in a bare bones plot here. Basically a man (who turns out to be Jake Lonegan, played by Craig) wakes up with no memory of who he is and with a weird mechanical cuff attached to his wrist. It is revealed quickly that he is, for want of a better word, quite a badass. He can fight. He's witty. And let's face it, nobody looks sexier in chaps and a cowboy hat. Nobody. (That alone makes the entire movie worth watching. Seriously. He's that sexy.) When he finds his way to town, alien aircraft start snatching the townsfolk out of the sky, including the son of the rich cattle baron Dolarhyde (played by Ford). The remaining townsfolk (woman played by Wilde, a young boy, a dog, a preacher, the doctor/store owner, Dolarhyde, and Lonegan) head out to find the aliens and get their kin back. In the process, they have some very scary encounters and discover what exactly the aliens are after.

Visually, the movie was pretty awesome. The western scenery was sometimes stark, sometimes beautiful. (On that note, the score felt the same way. It had a western feel and not a sci-fi feel. Even when the music said "the aliens are coming!" it could have just as easily been "the Indians are coming!" or "a stampede is coming!") The costumes seemed very accurate (except perhaps the tightness of Craig's chaps, and I am definitely not complaining about that). The spaceships were cool. The alien's home base was dank and creepy. The one thing I didn't like (which is probably why I don't like alien movies in general) is how disgusting the aliens were. Don't get me wrong, they were really well done, and I know they're the bad guys, but do they really have to be so slimy and nasty? I mean, their chest cavities open and they have extra three-fingered hands in there next to their pulsing heart/lungs/whatever it is. Disgusting. Effective I guess, but yech! Also they like to use their teeth on people, which is vile. That excessive violence and gore and yuckiness just isn't my thing, so that took away from the experience.

Still, the more I thought about this movie after the fact, the more I liked it. Yes, the ending felt a little too easy, but the journey was more important. It had the feel of an old western, but without the racist portrayal of Indian enemies. Instead, the enemies were really nasty, greedy extraterrestrials. And when that concept feels so plausible, you have to admit that the movie was well done. Some aspects, like Lonegan's mind-activated weapon cuff thing, seem a bit ridiculous when you think about them, but somehow it still doesn't require the suspension of disbelief that you'd expect. It's hard to explain.

The acting was, of course, phenomenal. The supporting cast was made up of actors with a lot of talent and familiar faces. Ford was on the ball, and it was nice to see him in a role that accepted his age, didn't treat him as a romantic hero, and let his talent shine in another form. And Daniel Craig. Wow. I already mentioned the sex appeal, of course, but his acting talent is practically unparalleled. He has the most expressive face I have ever seen. Just his eyes convey so much. (I always say he has the best crazed man expression, with darting eyes and heavy breathing.) Even when he's perfectly still, all the way down to his face muscles, you can see countless emotions flickering through his eyes. It's fascinating to watch. In this role, like his role as Bond, he is manly, in charge, and yet emotionally weak (though he tries to hide it). He also plays his humorous lines and physical comedy (mostly involving Dolarhyde's idiot son) with this understated feel and a straight face. Brilliant. (Another positive aspect of the film was the writing, which was sometimes funny in very straight-shooting, serious, dry, manly sort of way, if you get my meaning.) Basically, my reasons for seeing this movie, Ford and Craig, were what made it stand out so much. It would have been okay, and even good, without them, but they made it as great as it is.

I'd recommend this to the right sort of viewer, and even to those who think this might be a bit out of their comfort zone. You just have to see it to appreciate it!

Rating: 3.5

True Grit (2010, U.S.)

I was absolutely stunned by this one. Finally, a western I could enjoy! After watching such modern and acclaimed westerns (featuring some of my favorite actors) as Appaloosa and 3:10 to Yuma, I was beginning to think that they just would never be my thing. So I was thrilled with my small victory here, because True Grit just blew me away.

I've never read the book or seen the original movie, but I have read that this version was a much closer adaptation of the book. If so, the book must be something else too. This film had the absolute best dialogue I have ever heard. It was oddly formal but it flowed so well and was often witty and amusing. Just fantastic. I think it definitely deserved the nomination for best adapted screenplay, and having seen the winner (Social Network), I do understand the tight competition.

The acting was phenomenal. Brolin, Damon, and Bridges all delivered the funniest lines with the most dry, deadpan expressions. Bridges was especially talented in that regard. Damon spent half of the movie with his tongue bitten through and his mouth swollen, and portraying that without looking ridiculous took some serious skill. With just those three men, this film already had an incredibly strong cast, but the real show-stealer was young Hailee Steinfeld. Although Bridges' character was the one who supposedly had the titular "true grit," I think Steinfeld (and her character, Maddie), was really the one with true grit. She was a real firecracker and a strong young actress, and watching her was truly a joy. I thought that Melissa Leo's supporting actress Oscar was ridiculous, and now I know who the hands-down winner should have been. Heck, she should have been nominated for best actress; her character was the central one. Absolutely stellar. Truly, the writing and acting in this film just defy description. You have to see it to understand how good it really is.

I also love the score. Carter Burwell is (sometimes) one of my favorite composers. At times, he writes perfect scores that bring the story alive, and at times he writes unmemorable, unfitting scores. This one was definitely the former. It's hard to describe (this seems to be a theme here), but it sounded very American, slightly western, and somehow peaceful. It fit beautifully with the film.

This brings me to my two small complaints. First, the transition from Burwell's score to the vocalized credits music was just too abrupt, jarring me out of the mood of the film. It really fit okay, but the transition could have been better. Of course, it was less noticeable than it could have been, following the worst bucket-of-cold-water-type moment in the film. I was completely immersed in the world of the film, enjoying the dialogue, the music, the western landscapes, when suddenly appears a mistreated (and then essentially murdered) horse. It's just one of my pet peeves, but I absolutely hate it when horses die in the movies. In a war movie, thousands of men can die without me blinking, but when the first horse falls I just start cringing. So in this otherwise enthralling film, I was suddenly thrown out of my enraptured viewing and back into reality with the death of this poor horse. Don't get me wrong, it works for the plot and Maddie's reaction is heart wrenching, but personally it was hard for me to get back into things and enjoy the rest of the film.

But overall, this was truly incredible. I find the Coen brothers to be very hit or miss when it comes to their films and my taste, and this was pure hit, hit, hit. A very pleasant surprise.

Rating: 4.5

Appaloosa (2008, U.S.)

I really have next to nothing to say about this one. I can't really even remember what the plot was about. I do remember that Renée Zellweger was underwhelming (unusual), Ed Harris was Ed Harris (underwhelming), and Viggo Mortensen was Viggo Mortensen (understated but wonderful performance).

I think westerns just aren't my thing. Maybe this movie wasn't bad, but it bored me to tears. Disappointing.

Rating: 2.0

Legends of the Fall (1994, U.S.)

There just aren't enough movies made about World War I. It's a good thing that the ones that are made are quite good. Legends of the Fall is a bit melodramatic, but it is still a wonderful story. It mixes pieces of war movies, classic westerns, family sagas, and romances. If it comes off a bit melodramatic and times, that's okay. After all, it is a very ambitious film.

They used several very interesting narrative devices. To begin with, I liked that the narrator was a character who was only on the margins of the plot, rather than one of the primary players. To supplement this narration, they also used letters written to and from various characters, which was quite effective. They also used something I would call a flashback, for lack of a better term. To give an example, Tristan gets noticeably upset and frustrated when he tries to free a cow trapped in barb wire. Even though they never show the scene again, it is clearly meant to remind the viewer of the scene where his brother is trapped in barbed wire during the war. These scenes are very well done.

I've always found Aidan Quinn to be a competent but unremarkable actor, and most of the other actors fell into this same category as well. Then there's Anthony Hopkins and Brad Pitt. They steal the scene from anyone they ever work with. Hopkins is an imposing patriarch, and Pitt completely embodies the magnetic, troubled middle brother. Even if the film was awful (as it could have been if the rest was the same as the cheesy final scene), they'd redeem it. Wow.

Rating: 3.5

Dances with Wolves (1990, U.S.)

I have fallen quite behind in posting, so my impressions on this (and the next few) film(s) isn't that fresh.

I watched this film because, as I always say, "the moms love it." "The" moms being women of my mother's generation in general. I'm not much of Kevin Costner fan, which is why it took me so long to see it.

I liked it. It was long, meandering, and often "boring," which are qualities I often value in a film when other people wouldn't. The biggest problem was the amount of psychological development going on in the main character which was probably more evident in the novel, but it was translated to the screen fairly well, for the most part.

I really just don't have much to say about this one. It's one of those movies you just have to see and experience yourself. You can't help but get invested in John Dunbar's life—hours pass by, and you forget there's a world outside the film. Sometimes, that's exactly what I want from a movie.

I think I would have rated this one higher if a) there was more—more everything, not that there was time for it, or b) if the ending was more satisfying somehow.

Rating: 3.5

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948, U.S.)

For liking old movies so much, it's strange that I haven't seen more Bogart films. I thought I would correct that by watching this classic adventure. It was pretty good, for the type of movie it was. My dad would have liked it a lot more -- it's his kind of movie. I liked that it was more about what wealth can do to men, psychologically speaking, than a string of dramatic action sequences. It did get a bit long towards the end, but between Bogart's genius acting (as a man driven crazy by greed) and a refreshingly surprising ending, it was worth it.

Rating: 3.0

No Country for Old Men (2007, U.S.)

I tried to like it, I really did. I'd heard great things, it won several Oscars... but I just didn't like it at all. Too much violence. Nothing but violence, really.

So here are my few notes on it: Minimalist score by Burwell was great, especially in the last scene/closing credits. Good acting, especially by Javier Bardem -- creepy! I didn't know this was based on a Cormac McCarthy book, but it reminded me of him. So when I found out it was based on one of his books, I can only assume they must have done a good job adapting it.

It's easy to forget over the course of a movie that seems predominantly about greed, but the main character never would have run into all the problems he did if he hadn't gone back to the scene where he'd found the money in order to give a dying man some water. No good deed goes unpunished, they say.

So overall, there was some good stuff in this movie. But it was entirely overshadowed by excessive violence. Which I guess was kind of the point, but that doesn't mean I had to like it.

Rating: 1.5