Sunshine Cleaning (2008, U.S.)

I went into this movie thinking it would be more comedy than drama, but let me be the first to tell you that isn't the case.

The best thing about this movie is that the characters were so real. A lot of times, characters are so obviously "characters" rather than "people," but not here. This family consists of a single mom who works as a maid, her young (and very strange) son, her (even stranger) father, and her screw-up sister. Their mother died when they were a child. Other characters include a married cop who the older sister is having an affair with, a group of shallow women she knew in high school, and a one-armed vacuum salesman. Every single one is so believable.

Also, what an usual story. This family is struggling to survive, and the main character hears that cleaning up crime scenes is a lucrative business. She drags her sister, who has just been fired from another job, into the work, and Sunshine Cleaning is born. The older sister sees herself as someone who helps others in a small way when they're going through a tough time. How they both react to the business tells a lot about their personalities—and how their mother's death changed them both and their relationship with each other.

This one is definitely an original, and quite well done.

Rating: 3.5

X-Men (2000, U.S.)

I can't lie, I was confused for most of this movie. Partially because I was talking to Jeff through most of it, and partially because I never read or watched X-Men as a kid. Mostly I wanted to watch the trilogy so that I could watch and understand Wolverine because a) I have become a Hugh Jackman fan (especially since he hosted the Oscars) and b) Aaron Jeffrey is in it!

Still, I thought it was pretty sweet. For starters, the aforementioned Mr. Jackman was awesome, and the rest of the cast was great too. The special effects were really believable, which is sometimes all one can ask of a movie like this. One thing that did really bother me was when the script obviously dropped the ball. For instance, Storm is letting herself (and everyone else) get beat up, and I assumed she just couldn't use her powers inside. Then five minutes later, she uses her powers to save the day. Why couldn't she do this earlier? I don't know.

So yeah. Good casting, good special effects. That pretty much sums it up.

Rating: 3.5

Streets of Fire (1984, U.S.)

This film was part two of a B-movie night with my friends. It was shockingly bad, and yet somewhat enjoyable.

First, the plot is poorly conceived. It seems to be set in the 1950s, and a weird creepy guy (who wears leather overalls and works out of a biker bar / strip club with a strangely androgynous stripper) kidnaps an 80s rock star with the purpose of physically using her. However, her ex-boyfriend comes back to town and goes to find her (at his sister's request) with the help of her current paramour and an unlikely (and very butch) woman he meets in a bar.

It is strange and nonsensical but strangely riveting. I especially loved the sidekick, McCoy, who was played by Amy Madigan. Absolutely hilarious. Then there was young Diane Lane pretending to be a hardcore 80s rock goddess and Willem Defoe with his evil face and leather overalls... It was terrible, but also almost enjoyable. Yeah.

Rating: 2.0

Torque (2004, U.S.)

Would you like to see a terrible action movie often hailed as The Fast and the Furious on Motorcycles? If so, look no further! Before I have to say anything else, I have to defend myself by saying that I watched this movie with a bunch of friends on a B-movie night. So I knew it would be bad.

There are a lot of motorcycles. I guess they're cool. There are rival bike gangs, who are beyond lame. Also, one of the gangs is primarily black, and it is incredibly racist. I mean really, Ice Cube? (Not "Why did they cast him?" but "Why would he do it?") Also, the few Asians in the film were beyond stereotypical. We called the main Asian character Red Dragon, because he wore a red dragon biker jacket. Painful.

The plot was insubstantial: good guy framed for murder must prove his innocence, which involves a lot of motorcycle stunts and explosives, of course. He has a "sexy" love interest, but several of us were in agreement that this woman (although in her late 20s) looked old and worn out. Yuck.

Basically, it sucked. But the lead actor was kind of cool in the delivery of his lines... "Why yes, this is a terrible movie and my lines are even worse, but look at my over-the-top bad boy smirk!" Oh yeah.

Rating: 1.5

Duplicity (2009, U.S.)

This film was all anyone could ask for. It's funny. It's smart. There's romance. There's espionage. There's Clive Owen and Julia Roberts. This totally redeems Owen for the travesty also known as The International.

First of all, the plot is completely over the top. Two companies trying to beat each other out in the market for hair care products or lotion or some such silliness. They are so extreme about corporate secrecy that they have whole security teams protecting the chemical formulas and laying false trails for the competitor. Enter Ray and Claire, who may or may not have known each other before and who may or may not be on friendly terms. Each is the head of security for one of the companies, and they may or may not be working together to fleece both of their employers.

It is truly remarkable the way the filmmakers integrated this complex plot with a touch of romance and a lot of humor. The writing was superb, and I was very impressed. Of course Owen and Roberts were great, although it was very strange to see them together for the first time since Closer without attributing some of their earlier characters' characteristics to the current set. But eventually that wore away, and their chemistry and acting skill was very apparent.

One other thing I have to say about this film is this—what a score. Of course, I'm biased because I love James Newton Howard, but I actually didn't realize it was his until the credits. Two of my favorite scores are his—Peter Pan and Defiance. Peter Pan is whimsical but beautiful, very fairy-ish. Defiance (which is my opinion was robbed, robbed, robbed of the Oscar by an infinitely inferior score) is heartbreakingly beautiful, tragically lovely, whichever set of seemingly contradictory terms you want to use. Anyway, I could gush about him all day. The point is, this score was very different, but just as perfectly appropriate to its film as the other two I mentioned. It was lighthearted and upbeat. (This part reminded me a bit of the Catch Me If You Can score). It had a hint of sneakiness that fit with the espionage, but also a hint of something else more appropriate to the romantic aspect. It was masterfully done.

I don't think I can offer any higher recommendation for a film like this than these two words: Fun. Smart.

Rating: 4.5

Taken (2008, U.S.)

Taken is one of the best suspense movies I've seen in a long, long time. I saw it because Meghan had been wanting to see it, and I rarely turn down a movie invite. In this case, I'm glad I didn't.

On the one hand, the plot of this film was ridiculously unbelievable. But at the same time, it was chillingly believable. A teenager and her friend go to Paris together, only to immediately fall for a cute French guy who is the tip of a human trafficking iceberg. Her ex-military father is determined to hunt them down and save his daughter before it's too late.

The action is great. Even the violence falls perfectly between gory and stylized, which is the only kind of violence I really like in a film. Unlike the last suspense film I saw (The International), how Neeson's character figures out the clues to get from point A to point B makes sense. The acting is phenomenal. The filmmakers also did an exceptional job with making the characters truly realistic, even down to a very convincing father-daughter relationship between Neeson and Grace. Really, this relationship was the backbone of the entire film.

I'm not one to watch action movies over and over again, but I could definitely see giving this one a second viewing. It was incredible.

Rating: 4.0

He's Just Not That Into You (2009, U.S.)

It was the weekend, I was bored, I wanted to see a movie, and there was very little playing. That is how I ended up seeing this travesty of a movie.

I liked it so little that I don't think I can even bother scrounging up any constructive comments. The ensemble cast was pretty great, but the characters they played were terrible—shallow, irritating, self-centered, and stupidly causing themselves trouble that would be easily avoided.

In fact, I'm not really sure why I stayed to the end of this one. Perhaps I hoped it would redeem itself. It didn't.

Rating: 1.5

The International (2009, U.S.)

I have rarely been so disappointed with a film starring one of my favorite actors. Or by such a prestigious director. But The International just... wasn't good. I can't say that it was bad, necessarily, but nor was it worth the two hours spent watching it.

It started out really promising, with a shockingly long closeup of Clive Owen's face, looking pensive. That one shot built up more tension than the rest of the movie combined, probably. Why is he just standing there? What's going on? And then a man he's working with dies in front of him, and you think he's about to be killed the same way. But really it was just his overactive imagination. And the suspense end there.

The rest of the film is just a confusing mess. Naomi Watts plays a New York ADA and Clive Owen plays an Interpol agent trying to expose a corrupt international bank. How an NY ADA is going to help with this is very unclear. I guess it was unclear to the screenwriters as well, because Watts' screen time was incredibly short, considering she was given top billing with Owen.

I just don't even have that much to say about this film. The acting was great, of course. Some of the cinematography was unbelievable, including a drawn-out gun fight that takes place in a museum with fascinating architecture. (It could be said, however, that the whole film depended too much on this scene, which was drawn out entirely too long.) I didn't even pay that much attention to the score, which was done by the same guys who did Run Lola Run. It should have been more memorable.

All in all, a huge disappointment.

Rating: 2.0

Slumdog Millionaire (2008, UK)

I didn't know anything about this movie other than the fact that everyone was talking about it, it was nominated for tons of Oscars, and Stefanie insisted that I see it. As usual, I did what Stefanie said. Unlike her last disastrous suggestion (Montenegro), I loved it.

Everything about it was great. The cinematography was beautiful. The acting, especially that of the very young children, was convincing. The story was always moving and sometimes funny. The score was okay, but I really don't think it was Academy Award-worthy. (It was just average music by an Indian composer, and I can only assume that it won because it was "different.")

I love character-driven films, and this definitely falls in that category; it follows the same three children from the time the main character is about 5 until he's 18. The use of flashback (another technique I love) is employed in a fascinating manner. The "present" shows Jamal in a jail being interrogated about how he could know all the answers to the questions in the Indian Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, which he is one question away from winning; he is suspected of cheating. Flashbacks show Jamal answering questions on the show. Flashbacks from there show events from Jamal's childhood where he learned the answers to these questions.

I also love the complexity of the "aboutness." On one level, it's a coming of age story. It's also a rags-to-riches story. It's also about the relationship between brothers. It's about the reality of life in Mumbai and its slums. And it's also a love story.

Words to describe this one: complex, beautiful, heart-wrenching, stunning, unique.

Rating: 5.0

Revolutionary Road (2008, U.S.)

I have been dying to see this film, which took way too long to come into wide release (considering the number of times I've seen the preview at other movies). My friend Stefanie and I have tried to see it twice already, but complications arose both times. Needless to say, when we saw it today the anticipation was intense. It was a lot different than I imagined it would be; not disappointing, exactly, just different.

I loved that it was a character-driven film, and that very little about those two characters was explicitly defined. Instead, they relied on their actions (and reactions) to allow the viewer to interpret their characters. Sometimes one was the protagonist and the other the antagonist, and it would change again in an instant. I guess I don't need to say that Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio were both phenomenal. They both have such expressive faces (and especially expressive eyes), that I feel like I can read their thoughts like words written across the face.

The plot was intense. a married couple with two children suddenly realizes that the life they're living isn't the life they wanted, and they take out all of their anger on each other and themselves. They try to start a new life, making plans to move to Paris, where the husband thinks people are "more alive." Things start to look better until their plan starts unraveling, and they both go a little bit crazy. One of the taglines, which I love, is "How do you break free without breaking apart?" Even though this film takes place in the '50s, you can easily see it taking place today. There is some definite social commentary about how we live the lives society tells us we should instead of the lives we want. It's beautiful. Interestingly, the character who seems to really see the world as it is and who has the best grip on reality is the neighbor's insane son.

And as we watch Winslet and DiCaprio brilliantly tear each other apart and put each other back together, Thomas Newman's haunting (and somewhat repetitive—but in a good way) score echos them in the background. The score is simply executed, like the rest of the film.

This film is a good one, and I would recommend it. Just be prepared to feel some gut-wrenching despair and to reevaluate your life.

Rating: 4.0