The Ballad of Buster Scruggs

November 20, 2018 at 4:32 pm | Posted in 2018 | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ½

In their on-going attempt to expand their media empire, Netflix has scored it’s best coup to date in getting The Coen Brothers’ newest movie released on their site the same day as in theaters. And what a delightful film, too. This anthology is one of their best films in years, full of Coen wit (sometimes dry, sometimes absurd), and with a dark vein running through it. The story is made up of 6 “chapters” that are not quite evenly divided in it’s 132 minute run time. All the stories are humorous, but the tone of the film definitely shifts throughout. The first story, “The Ballad of Buster Scruggs,” is delightfully silly. If that’s not your thing, don’t worry; none will be as light-hearted as that one. From there, it inches darker until the somber, meditative final scene, “The Mortal Remains,” leaves the audience with a feeling that there was a lot more going on in this film than meets the eye. In fact, that final story, with it’s dark blue hues and cut-out buildings felt more like an allegory; it was saying something about certainty and uncertainty that seemed to be the through line for all of these stories. The film begins with Buster, who speaks directly to the audience. It ends with a stagecoach ride, in which the riders all seem to be speaking bigger truths. In between all the entertainment, these characters are telling us something about life, cruelty, and justice. And, along the way from silly to somber, the Coens take us through scenes that are funny, heartbreaking, and deeply deeply creepy (I think “Meal Ticket” may be the darkest story they have ever made). As is typically true of them, every scene is beautifully constructed and full of rich details. They create mood so beautifully. From start to finish, this was a lush, gorgeous, disturbing work. And it was one of the best films I have seen this year.

Spider-Man: Homecoming

July 9, 2017 at 10:53 am | Posted in 2017 | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

◊ ◊ ◊ ½

The Spider-Man franchise, in its various incarnations, has been the gold standard for superhero franchises, having brought in just over $4 billion in its 15 year run. Not bad for a kid in tights. So, expectations have been high for this reboot, especially after the Andrew Garfield one failed to take off. Right from the start, they were off to a good start because Marvel was back in control of the franchise and they have shown a deft hand at translating even the goofiest of characters to the screen (think “The Guardians of the Galaxy), where others have failed, even with hugely popular characters (think “The Fantastic Four”). Marvel chose to bring Spider-Man right back to his roots. What made him unique when he debuted in 1963 was that he was an awkward teenager, so unlike the cool and supremely talented heroes we had seen in comics to date. I think this is part of why Garfield’s Spidey never worked; he was too cocksure and smirky. Nothing about him read awkward teen. This time, Marvel hired the youngest actor yet to play Peter Parker, 21 year old British actor Tom Holland (“The Impossible,” “In the Heart of the Sea”). Unlike previous actors, Holland is able to believably play a 15 year old. In fact, the real contribution of this film to the genre is in just how different its hero is. This Spider-Man is every bit the nerdy, self-conscious, angst-ridden teen. He is impulsive, eager to please, clumsy and incredibly endearing. Holland’s charm as the character is what makes the film work. The storyline is not particularly better or worse than any of the other films. Again, the writers have dragged out a couple of classic Spider-Man villains. This time it is The Shocker and The Vulture. Robert Downey Jr’s cameo as Iron Man adds some humor and deeper context, but only if you are a fan who has watched all the other Marvel movies. Otherwise, he looks like a confusing add-on. Far funnier were Chris Evans’s cameos as Captain America. They were brilliantly clever (make sure you wait until after the final credits to see the last one). But the real star to watch was Michael Keaton as The Vulture. Keaton is having a well deserved revival after “Birdman” reminded everyone of how brilliant he is. He imbues this villain with just the right balance of menace, cynicism and blasé attitude. He is the perfect foil for Spider-Man’s goofy energy, wide-eyed wonder and perkiness. I found their in-costume battle scenes to be a bit dull, but when they were face-to-face, sparring verbally, that was just a joy. Keaton commanded every one of those scenes, but that’s okay because he should have. This geeky boy, despite his super powers, was no intellectual match for his enemy. I love that Marvel was willing to give us such an incomplete hero here. Usually, super heroes are all so automatically super and heroic. Even previous Spider-Men (Men? Mans? What’s the right grammar here?), had a “learning my powers montage” or two and then were remarkably proficient. I loved that this film chose to tackle the character so differently. As an action movie, this was about par with the most of them and not nearly as good as the likes of last month’s “Wonder Woman.” But, as a character study, this is really one of the best superhero films we have had to date.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.