Author Archives: Keith Garlington

Versatile Blogger Award – Take 2

by

47

BLOGGER

A way way back I was nominated for the Versatile Blogger Award and I took part in it. Recently my pal Justine at Justine’s Movie Blog nominated me again. It has been a while so I thought it would be fun to do it again. Thanks Justine! If you don’t frequent her site you’re missing out. Loads of great content worth checking out. I know you’ll enjoy it.

The rules state that I nominate 15 other bloggers. No need for the nominees to feel obligated to join in. This is just my opportunity to offer up recognition to some very deserving bloggers who put out quality content. Check these folks out:

Now the rules state that I list 10 unique facts about myself that you might not know. Here ya go:

  1. I have been a die-hard video gamer since first getting an Atari 2600 back in the 1980’s. I was a gamer then, still am today. Love me some video games.
  2. I absolutely adore Paris, France. The city has cast a spell on me. I could live there in a heartbeat.
  3. I absolutely detest feet. Yours, mine, it doesn’t matter. They sicken me to my core. Baby’s and young children’s feet don’t bother me, but once they hit a certain age…Ewwwwwww.
  4. I’m a church deacon. Yep, betcha didn’t know that one, right?
  5. My wife and I are about to celebrate 20 years of marriage. That may not sound like something to put on here, but it’s something I’m extremely proud of.
  6. I was once told I look like George Clooney……by a long-haired hippie guy who I am fairly certain was ‘under the influence’. Sigh.
  7. Baseball Hall of Famer Bob Feller once bought me a chocolate milkshake at McDonald’s.
  8. I’m thoroughly and unshakably convinced that the 1980s were the best decade for music EVER (and I do mean EVER).
  9. I have a massive comic book collection and a collection of close to 1,000 sports autographs.
  10. I am one of the world’s biggest Humphrey Bogart fans. In addition to having nearly every film of his, I have a Bogart tie, Bogart stamps, a life-sized Bogart cutout standing next to my bed (my wife is awesome for allowing that), and even a certified copy of Bogart’s death certificate.

THE END

 

REVIEW: “St. Vincent”

by

21

VINCENT POSTER

Bill Murray is an interesting actor who has had an interesting career. It has been a long career marked by numerous successes in lead, supporting, or even cameo roles. Perhaps the most intriguing thing about Bill Murray is that most of the time he plays a variation of the same type of character. Sometimes he amps it up as high as it will go, other times he dials it down to subtle levels. Either way we often get some of the same characteristics in a Bill Murray character and it has served him well since his peculiar feature film debut all the way back in 1975.

His latest effort teams him up with writer and director Theodore Melfi. The movie is “St. Vincent”, a comedy/drama that plays with that familiar Murray onscreen personality yet offers the actor an opportunity to flex his dramatic muscles. Murray doesn’t disappoint. As you can probably guess, he plays a man named Vincent. He’s a Vietnam War veteran living in Brooklyn who seeks refuge from his misery in all the wrong places – alcohol, cigarettes, and gambling just to name a few. Vincent is right in Murray’s comfort zone. He is sarcastic and snarky and the humor we get from him is dry and subtly self-deprecating.

VINCENT1

Melfi’s film starts by clearly defining Vincent’s miserable circumstances. It also exposes us to Vincent’s numerous unpleasantries. It doesn’t take long for us to originate our opinions of this man. He’s rude, cranky, frequently drunk, dishonest, and shameless. His finances are a mess, he is in deep with racehorse bookies, and his self-destructive habits are wearing on his health. These problems are accentuated but also confronted when a recently divorced mother (Melissa McCarthy) and her young son Oliver (Jaeden Lieberher) move in next door. But at the same time we eventually see that there is more to Vincent than the gruff, jagged exterior.

“St. Vincent” is all about the characters and each has their own distinct personal problems to navigate. The central relationship is between Vincent and Oliver. From the very first moment they meet the direction of the film becomes obvious. As I watched I kept thinking of a darker, edgier, subtler “Uncle Buck” minus the family dynamic. But while things are pretty predictable that doesn’t mean the movie isn’t without value. The relationships evolve at a deliberate pace which actually works in the story’s favor. But perhaps the biggest surprise came in the movie’s final act. The melodrama is ratcheted up and I knew my emotions were being set up. Yet despite that I found myself responding to it even though it felt a bit manipulative.

VINCENT2

Bill Murray is such a natural performer at this stage in his career and he delivers a strong performance filled with more layers than you might initially think. Young Liberher is fine although it is a pretty standard performance for that type of child’s role. One of the big surprises was McCarthy. It’s not that she was great or groundbreaking. Instead I was just pleased to see a performance from her that I didn’t mind sitting through. We also get Naomi Watts as a Russian dancer and “woman of the night”. She is solid as always although I think her character is easily the most flimsy and uneven.

Again, if you know this is a Bill Murray comedy you have an idea of what you’re going to get. But “St. Vincent” allows for enough nuances to let Murray extend himself beyond what we often see him do. This isn’t a film that breaks any new ground but it does tell a good story although a fairly predictable one. You won’t find a single surprise and there are moments where the movie could have dove into some unfamiliar waters. But at the same time it does offer a handful of intriguing characters whose lives draw us in for better or for worse. That’s something many movies never accomplish.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

2015 Blind Spot Series: “Goldfinger”

by

46

GOLDFINGER poster

I could probably fill half of my Blind Spot series lineup with James Bond films. I’ve just never been what you would call a big 007 fan. That said I do love the Craig films and a couple of Brosnan’s, but I’ve never felt compelled to give the older Bond films much of a chance. In an effort to do that I thought “Goldfinger” would be a good place to start. In fairness I have seen much of the film but never all of it and (obviously) never in one sitting. Yet I have heard so many good things about it especially from Bond aficionados who know and love the franchise a lot more than I do.

“Goldfinger” is the third film in the Bond series and the third of Sean Connery’s six Bond films. Watching Connery work it is easy to understand why many consider him to be the best Bond. “Goldfinger” is also recognized for its many firsts. It was the first 007 film categorized as a blockbuster. It’s budget equaled the previous two films combined and the movie’s promotion heralded it as a big box office draw. “Goldfinger” was also the film that made the extensive use of gadgets a fixture. It was also the first James Bond film to win an Academy Award and it was well received by both critics and audiences. The film would also influence the series in many other areas such as the title credits sequence and overall production quality. In many ways “Goldfinger” changed the standard of what a Bond film was to be.

GOLFINGER11

The story finds Bond lounging it up at a fancy Miami Beach resort, but soon he finds the true reason he was sent there and it wasn’t for vacation. At the same resort is Auric Goldfinger (Gert Fröbe), an obsessed gold smuggler. 007 is tasked with observing Goldfinger and finding out how his smuggling operation works. Bond’s mission takes him London, Switzerland, and bluegrass Kentucky. At each stop he finds himself getting a little too close to his objective and Goldfinger always seems one step ahead of him. But as 007 begins to piece together the inner workings of Goldfinger’s operation, he discovers a much bigger and more sinister plot.

Half of the fun in watching “Goldfinger” involves the characters Bond meets along the way. First there is Goldfinger himself. At first I wasn’t totally convinced in Fröbe’s portrayal but director Guy Hamilton never uses Fröbe beyond the actor’s capabilities. The big surprise was learning that the voice of Fröbe, who spoke practically no English, was dubbed. It’s a clever trick that is brilliantly pulled off. There is also Oddjob (Harold Sakata), Goldfinger’s enforcer and right-hand man. He’s a stout strong arm known for is lethal bowler hat. Silly and preposterous for sure, but he is also entertaining and a lot of fun.

Then of course there are the Bond girls. The stunningly beautiful Shirley Eaton meets Bond in Miami and gives us one of cinema’s most iconic images. Tania Mallett comes along next and aside from her shaky acting, she is a mysterious character that did little to serve the plot. But then you have Honor Blackman as the cool, confident, beautiful, and provocatively named Pussy Galore. Easily one of the most famous Bond girls, Galore had a tougher side which made her a lot more than the typical eye candy. For the rest of her career Blackman would always find herself connected to this classic character.

GOLDFINGER1

“Goldfinger” is absurd and it times in sanely over-the-top. But at the same time it never falls into the cheesy category that some of the later Bond films would. I never had a problem just going along with the craziness of the plot or the way things unfold. There’s a fine line there and “Goldfinger” navigates it beautifully. That’s not to say there weren’t moments where the story pushes believability too far, but that’s forgivable when you’re being so entertained. The film doesn’t allow you to concentrate on its absurdity. The pacing is so crisp and the direction so calculated. It’s also a beautiful film to look at. Some of the locales are breathtaking and the film utilizes them well. But I was even more impressed with some of the clever camera techniques that truly made the film feel spectacular.

In a nutshell “Goldfinger” is a really good movie and I can understand why Bond fans hold it in such high regard. For those who are not fans of the suave secret agent, well this is unquestionably a Bond film so take that as you will. But consider this, as a lukewarm fan of the franchise, I had a blast. Connery is superb, the action is well done, and the story is good crazy fun. The film was surrounded by lawsuits both prior to and during development so it’s a surprise it got off the ground. Thankfully it did and in doing so it gave audiences a classic 007 movie. Without a doubt this is Bond done right.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Bande à part” (“Band of Outsiders”)

by

10

OUTSIDERSposter

“Band of Outsiders” was Jean-Luc Godard’s seventh film and a unique entry into the French New Wave movement. Viewed by some as Godard’s most accessible movie, “Band of Outsiders” is a playful, saucy romp which has influenced a variety of filmmakers through the decades that have followed. While the film may be considered a bit lighter than some of Godard’s other work, many of the director’s signature touches can be clearly seen.

Friends Franz (Sami Frey) and Arthur (Claude Brasseur) recruit the reluctant Odile (Anna Karina) to help them pull off a heist. Odile lives in a villa with her Aunt Victoria and a mysterious wealthy man named Stoltz. One day she tells Franz of a large stash of money kept inside the villa. Franz and Arthur devise a plan to steal the money and Odile serves as their insider. But it grows more and more obvious that she doesn’t want to go through with it. She’s not a criminal. She’s actually sad, lonely, and looking for some validation to her life. That’s the only reason she connects with Franz and Arthur.

OUTSIDERS

Things are made more interesting by the fact that both men are smitten with Odile (at least to some degree). Franz is low-key and clearly in love with her. Arthur is a rude, rebellious, hellion so naturally Odile falls for him. Godard doesn’t give us the standard tensions or follow the same path as most movies featuring this kind of love triangle. It doesn’t become the focal point of the story. It’s simply a component of their relationships that slightly persuades how things turn out.

While the heist is the ultimate goal, the film is about these three characters. Godard treats them as…well…a band of outsiders. They each seem to be living in their own make-believe worlds. They seem to treat life as if it were a movie. We even get moments where Franz and Arthur act out scenes from gangster films. On one hand the trio shows a fresh and energetic approach to living that’s seen best in their frolicking around Paris. On the other hand there is the naive indifference they have to reality and consequences. Only Odile seems to struggle with this.

While the characters and their relationships are the central focus, there is the heist angle which is also unique and unconventional. At times the film feels like a prototypical American crime drama that has been infused with French New Wave irreverence and style. The story sets its aim on a pretty familiar target, but Godard’s auteur’s approach gives us more than the normal heist movie tropes. Our trio are the most inadequate and unprepared people to be trying such a score. We see it in their lackluster planning and in the disastrous end results.

OUTSIDERS2

As with most of Jean-Luc Godard’s movies, there are certain moments that make the film unquestionably his. There is a great cafe sequence featuring a fun and crafty ‘moment of silence’ and the famous “Madison Dance” which inspired Quentin Tarantino’s dance sequence in “Pulp Fiction”. There is the equally famous ‘record-breaking’ race through the Louvre museum – a chipper and playful moment just before things take a darker and more realistic turn. And of course there are numerous artistic references to poetry, music, and film.

I could mention several other things that make “Band of Outsiders” a good film. I could mention the wonderful performances led by the magnetic Anna Karina (she was Godard’s wife at the time and his camera loves her). I could mention the film’s smart and effective blend of excitement and pathos. But ultimately it comes down to a fine filmmaker, good material, talented performers, and that spirited French New Wave perspective. For me that’s a perfect recipe for a great movie.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Mood Indigo”

by

13

MOOD POSTER

Filmmaker Michel Gondry has had his hands in all sorts of projects. He’s made music videos, short films, documentaries, and even television commercials. He has also made a handful of feature films of which I have seen two – the visually striking and potent “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” and the painfully unwatchable “The Green Hornet”. His most recent film “Mood Indigo” falls somewhere in between the two.

I was really excited for “Mood Indigo” not so much because of Gondry but because of its cast which features some of France’s most recognized performers. Romain Duris, Audrey Tautou, and Omar Sy bring a huge spark to this strange romance fantasy, but they can only do so much. Gondry goes all-in creating his surreal Dali-esque dreamworld. He bombards us with it and within the narrow bounds of a two hour movie it’s just too much.

MOOD1

The film is based on “Froth on the Daydream”, a 1947 novel by Boris Vian. It tells the story of a wealthy and happy man named Colin (Duris). He loves his life. He loves the food and company of his cook Nicolas (Sy). He has a wonderful and trustworthy best friend Chick (Gad Elmaleh). Gondry shows us Colin’s life through a wild assortment of off-the-wall but playful imagery and gadgetry. This is important because it is truly intended to be a visual representation of Colin’s state of mind. The visuals grow more whimsical and colorful when he meets and falls in love with Chloé (Tautou). The two hit it off and in no time are married.

Colin and Chloé’s relationship drive the remainder of the film both visually and narratively. The two are madly in love and Gondry visualizes it in a number of vibrantly wacky and bizarre ways. But that changes when Chloé is diagnosed with a terminal illness. Not only does the story take on a more depressing tone, by the visuals go from bright and playful to dreary and bleak. It’s a direct reflection of Colin’s mood and state of mind as his life literally decays right before our eyes. It’s a fascinating stylistic approach that shows Gondry’s insanely cool creative side.

MOOD2

At the same time it is Gondry’s wild surreal world that is the movie’s biggest flaw. While the craziness does a great job of interpreting feelings it also goes overboard and becomes an annoyance. Gondry never pulls back and he sometimes smothers his story with his relentless imagery. Quite frankly some of it made no sense and came across as indulgent. I appreciate the film telling a good story in a very unorthodox way, but I often found myself distracted from the main story and at times uninterested in what Gondry was doing. Too much is too much.

Gondry’s stylistic excesses hurt the film but they don’t hurt the performances. Duris and Tautou have always been able to act with charisma and charm and it’s no different here. Both gracefully move from jaunty and merry to downcast and broken. But I had the most fun watching Omar Sy. He may be the most unique character in the film and Sy gives one of the best supporting performances of 2014. These three are joys to watch and they are the film’s most appealing components. As with the moving and poignant story, their performances sometimes get overshadowed by Gondry’s relentless visual wackiness. That’s unfortunate because ultimately that is what keeps “Mood Indigo” from being as good as it could have been.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

5 Phenomenal Movie Betrayals

by

37

movie_theatre - Phenom 5

Movies have the amazing ability to capture all sorts of human actions and the emotions and motivations that drive them. Not all of those actions are good which leads to this particular Phenomenal 5. Today I’m looking at movie betrayals and there certainly have been a ton of them. The sheer number of characters who have stabbed another in the back was hard to narrow down. I decided to skip some of the obvious choices and go for more variety. So considering how many there were to choose from I wouldn’t call this the definitive list, but there’s no denying that these five movie betrayals are phenomenal (ummm, but not in a good way).

Obviously spoilers will follow!

#5 – “Total Recall” (1990)

BENNY

 

Call this the “I would betray anybody for a dollar” betrayal. In “Total Recall” (the fun original sci-fi actioner, not the unwatchable 2012 mess) . Schwarzenegger finds himself fighting with an underground mutant rebellion against a wicked and oppressive governor on Mars. Along the way he meets Benny, a good-natured taxicab driver who inadvertently joins Arnie in the fight. The problem is Benny is actually working for the tyrannical governor and he turns his back on the rebellion at the worst possible time. And not only has he lied about one thing after another, but it’s revealed that he’s a mutant and has turned on his own kind. It’s a pretty rotten betrayal.

#4 – “Goodfellas”

GOODFELLAS

Call this the “betraying isn’t always a bad thing” betrayal. Martin Scorsese’s quintessential gangster movie features a betrayal that is distinctly memorable.  And while it is most certainly a betrayal, it can easily be argued that it was a good one. Henry Hill made a good life for himself along with his wise-guy pals. But once the law comes down on their illegal activities Henry is offered an opportunity to leave his criminal life. But to do so would require him to turn on his buddies. That’s a pretty unsavory thing to do and living straight may be his biggest challenge. But turning from crime is a good thing even if turning on your friends is a bit shady.

#3 – “Dial M for Murder”

DIAL M

Call this one the “cheating never pays” betrayal. In Alfred Hitchcock’s wonderful 1954 thriller we see a pretty ugly deviation from holy matrimony. In fact it features two different betrayals. First you have a socialite wife (played by the stunning Grave Kelly) who cheats on her husband. That’s bad. But then the husband, who has secretly found out about his wife’s infidelity, devises a brutal betrayal of his own. He devises a plan to have his wife murdered. That’s bad too. Both husband and wife are flawed people and they both seem content to betray the other, just in wildly different but equally vile ways.

#2 – “Social Network”

The Social Network

Call this the “business over friendship” betrayal. I was surprised by how enthralling and effective a story about social media could be. David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin teamed up to tell the story of friendship, Facebook, and ultimately a shameful betrayal. It shows the creation of Facebook by two close college friends Mark Zuckerberg and Eduardo Saverin. But Zuckerberg is lured by his lust for greed and success which leads to him deceiving and ultimately cutting the financial throat of his one time close friend. Conniving, self-centered, and shameful. Just a few of the many words that could describe this pathetic betrayal.

#1 – “The Empire Strikes Back”

EMPIRE

This could be called the “saving your own butt” betrayal. I mean Lando, how could you do it? Now to be fair the powerful and evil Darth Vader had Lando by the throat (quite literally). And as the head honcho of Cloud City, Lando had to worry about Vader blowing Bespin out of the sky. But I still remember the first time I saw Lando lure Han, Leia, and Chewie into Vader’s trap. As a kid I was absolutely furious. It really does set up one of the original trilogy’s best story angles and it should be said Lando was between a rock and a hard place. But it’s still a betrayal of epic proportions and it stands out as my easy #1.

So what do you think of my picks? See something I missed? What would’ve made your list? Please take time to share your thoughts in the comment section below.