Return to other movies | Dean's Home Page.

WINTER 2000 MOVIE REVIEWS

Out of a possible four stars:

All About My Mother

**

Cider House Rules

***

Cradle Will Rock

***

Galapagos

****

Hurricane

****

Magnolia

***1/2

Snow Falling on Cedars

***

Topsy Turvy

**1/2

About My Mother -- (In Spanish, with subtitles)  It's easy to see director Pedro Almodovar's agenda, though not his point, in the collection of  characters and situations he assembles for his latest film.  AIDS victims, flamboyant transsexuals, drug-addicted actresses, saintly caregivers and conflicted or regretful mothers are the subjects of this film.   Perhaps the closest thing to a reoccurring theme is the question of authenticity in appearances and the cost versus benefit of openness and honesty.   There are touching moments in this film, but Almodovar more often yields to excessive melodrama or to occasional silliness.  Cecilia Roth charmingly plays the lead role as the mother of a son whose death moves her to deliver the tragic news to the father he never met.  In doing so, she revisits her past and through coincidence comes to care for the girlfriend and the daughter of her son's father.  (Kids: No; Young teens: probably not; Older teens: perhaps, but uncomfortably weird for some)  **

Cider House Rules -- For awhile, I thought this Waltonesque film ("Goodnight, John-Boy") might have been more appropriately made for commercial television, but then things begin to get serious, and it becomes apparent that CBS, NBC and ABC wouldn't touch the themes of this movie with a thousand foot pole.   This thoughtful and empathethic film will make my anti-choice (anti-abortion) friends scream about its blatently pro-choice leaning ... which, of course, is partly why I liked it.  When is it appropriate to do nothing and to mind one's own business and when must one feel compelled to get involved -- that is, what are the boundaries of personal privacy and when ought one feel compelled to cross them?  The film draws the line of tolerance very broadly, not only on the issue of abortion, but also on the telling of lies, on extra-marital affairs, on drug abuse, on suicide and even on incest.  I saw the rules on the cider house wall as symbolic of the larger political debate about where power should reside -- with the individual, with some larger but still local group (ie. so-called "States rights") or with some overarching authority (ie. the Federal government, or perhaps in an even larger moral sense, God).   Centered on an orphanage in the early 1940s, the film moves at the pace of rural Maine and often tempts sentimentality, but usually doesn't dwell  long enough for things to get too syrupy.  If you're programmed to absorb 60 images a minute to maintain your attention, I'd stay home and watch television commercials if I were you.   Though the film is only moderately insightful, those who can slow their pulse down a bit and who appreciate a little time to reflect will probably find the time spent worthwhile. (kids: no; young teens: no; older teens: yes) ***

Cradle Will Rock -- A delightfully liberal and in-your-face diatribe -- pretentious, elitist, full of itself, and if the Acadamy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has any balls, they'll choose it as this year's Best Picture.  They won't, and it's not, but I'll bet that they'd like to choose it, and I'd probably shout an enthusiastic "yes!" if they did.  Tim Robbins, who wrote and directed this "mostly true" docu-satire about the 1930s political struggle over Federal theatre and arts funding, ought to recieve the award for Best Screenplay, if not Best Director.  I'd favor it for Best Soundtrack as well.  This seems to be the season for long movies (this one clocking in at nearly three hours) and ensemble casts.   Though there weren't any spectacular performances in this film, I'm in love (or lust) with Emily Watson, in whichever role I've seen her.   Here, she touchingly plays a homeless person who gets hired first as a stage hand and then as the lead actress in a play, Cradle Will Rock,  that gets censored effectively by an act of Congress.   Bill Murray is both touching and amusing as a conflicted ventriloquist, uncertain as to his allegiences in the arts community.  John Cusack plays his Nelson Rockefeller role in a no-nonsense fashion, the way Nelson seemed to the world.   Angus MacFadyan plays a young and bombastic, though remarkably believable Orson Wells.  There are lots of fun performances and cameo appearances.  Despite its liberal bent and haunting similarities to recent political debates, the film caricatures people throughout the broad range of the political spectrum.  Nevertheless, conservatives are bound to feel more slighted, and it wouldn't surprise me if it eventually ended up as Exhibit A in the effort to doom the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities.  The film's dialog of Congress is taken from actual Congressional testimony.  Perhaps a similar story will someday be written of a 1990s Congress.    Cradle Will Rock may bore or go over the heads of people uninterested or put off by snootyness in theater or politics, but for me, the three hours were a delightful diversion ... but then again, perhaps it takes a sometimes snooty liberal such as myself to appreciate one.  (kids: uninterested; young teens: uninterested; older teens: yes) ***

Galapagos -- Coming to an IMAX theater near you is a beautiful and an eye-popping documentary in 3-dimensions.  I don't normally include reviews of IMAX films, but this one  provokes special mention due to my biased fondness for the location and my belief that few other places could put the 3-D technology to better effect.  The 3-D eyeglasses are still required equipment, and though they no longer use one red lense and one blue lense, they are as silly-looking and unfashionable as they were in the days of 1950s sci-fi.  However, the technology seems to have made some spectacular advances.  Leaping lizards would be an understatement!  They are damn near in your lap!  We sat near the back of the theater, but I was nearly certain that iquanas and tortoises were crawling all over the people sitting in front of us.  The film moves at a pace that allows one to ponder the wonderment of it all.  (kids of all ages -- absolutely!) **** 

Hurricane --  This is a must-go movie that I would recommend to virtually anyone, although a few scenes may be a bit too violent or uncomfortable for some.  Ruben "Hurricane" Carter, the would-be welterweight champion boxer, wrongly convicted of murder in the 1960s, made famous in the 1970s through a Bob Dylan song and through the efforts of many to free him, and finally released after 20 years in prison, is only part of the focus of this crowd-pleasing movie.  Parallel to his story is that of a young man who is taken from a ghetto by three do-gooder Canadians, who help prepare him for college, and who become deeply involved in the efforts to free CarterDenzel Washington's exceptional performance as Hurricane Carter makes him a favorite for Best Actor this year, although my favorite is Keven Spacey in American Beauty.  Even at 2 1/2 hours, the movie gives inadaquate attention to a number of questions that would have given more depth to the narrative.  For example, virtually no attention is paid to the man convicted along with Carter.   The movie only lightly touches upon some of the less heroic aspects of Carter's character (such as his womanizing) and paints the bad guys as pretty flat characters.  Director Norman Jewison seems somewhat loathe to complicate the narrative with too much depth of character, though we do learn much about Carter's fully understandable mistrust, anger and hate at the system and society that incarcerated him.   It's unfortunate, also, that the opportunity was missed to point out that the law is no longer capable of freeing someone such as Carter, and if the same thing were to occur today, he would sit in prison until he rots.  A law passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton in the early 1990s, intended to reign in those who might abuse the appeals process in order to draw out their cases indefinitely, has made it nearly impossible for a case heard in a state court to reach the Federal level under circumstances similar to this case.   The movie could have helped galvanize some activism for a reverse of the law toward a more balanced approach.  That, of course, would have been too much of an agenda for the purposes of entertainment.  It's best to go away cheering at the end of a movie, and indeed the audience does and I did.  The movie leaves one inspired in the hope for racial harmony and in the belief that things can be achieved in the face of hopelessness.  To be informed, however, is a little too much to ask.  Nevertheless, don't hesitate, if you haven't seen it -- go!  (kids: probably not; young teens: possibly yes; older teens: definitely yes;  The movie includes violent boxing scenes, the attempted sexual assault of a child, and foul language)  ****

Magnolia -- The three and a half stars that I give this film does not necessarily mean I would encourage you to see it.  I found it excessively dark, cynical and vulgar, while at the same time, entertaining though pointless (perhaps like life in general).   This film is yet another deeply cynical look at Southern California neuroses, as if you hadn't had your fill already.  Hollywood again leads the way into making us a shriller, brasher, less civil society, close on the heals of Congress and talk shows engaged in verbal arm wrestling.  Extraordinarily strong performances by several members of the ensemble cast redeem the collection of nine (count 'em, nine!) interweaved, though loosely-coupled and mostly shallow mini-soap operas.  Robert Altman managed six such mini-dramas in Short Cuts, and now writer-director Paul Thomas Anderson deftly manages to tie together nine shorts while maintaining a moderately intense, though unnecessarily vulgar, crescendo through three plus hours -- no simple task.  Thankfully, he occasionally infuses humor to accomplish this task, though not often enough.  There's no explicit sex and relatively little violence in this film, except the verbal kind -- which is on overdrive -- whew!  Tom Cruise is the film's big name draw, and he puts in one of his better performances as a male supremecist/self-help guru, though I have yet to see him break down and cry effectively in any film -- he flops on that score in Eyes Wide Shut and in Born on the Fourth of July as well.  The most powerful performances are delivered by Julianne Moore, the young wife of a dying cancer patient (Jason Robards) and the cancer patient's nurse, Phillip Seymour HoffmanWere this not an ensemble piece, both would be strong candidates for Best Supporting role honors.  Moore especially deserves it.  Also refreshing are vulnerable performances by newcomers, Melora Walters, as the cocaine-addicted daughter of a television quiz-show host (Phillip Baker Hall) and John C. Reilly, who plays a thoughtful and caring though bumbling policeman.  One expects good things from and is not disappointed by William H. Macy, who plays a man struggling to maintain his menial job at an electronics store, while attempting to come to grips both with his anger for parents who squandered his winnings as a child quiz show star and with his unrequited love for a gay bartender.  Macy asks the question that I asked myself throughout this movie -- (paraphrasing) why is my head filled with (and why am I watching) so much pointless garbage?   Though lacking in substance and meaning, things I normally demand from a movie before I give it a high rating, this movie compensates by mostly succeeding at the demanding challenge of thoroughly engrossing and entertaining me without distraction through such a lengthy time.  (kids: no; young teens: no; older teens and adults: okay, but dark, extremely cynical and with excessively vulgar language) ***1/2

Snow Falling on Cedars -- A Japanese-American is accused of murder in an early 1950s small town where fears and prejudices linger from World War II.   A murder mystery, a trial, and a cross-cultural childhood romance grown to adulthood -- all favorite subjects of Hollywood -- are set in the spectacular surroundings of the fijords and rainforests of Washington State's Puget Sound (actually filmed on the more spectacular Vancouver Island of Canada).   The film well documents the climate of fear and anger surrounding the grossly unjust internment of Japanese Americans during the War and the intractable mistrust that continued in the years that followed.   However, as with many movies that I am seeing these days, it seems that human emotion takes a back seat to narrative and to atmospherics.   It seems that every director these days feels obliged to put at least one surrealistic scene in every movie they make.  Maybe they do this for their elitest peers in Hollywood or for the movie critics who would dismiss their films as insufficiently artful, unstimulating or unhip.  Anyway, the requisite surreal scene is included, but as usual, it adds nothing to the telling of the story and seems rather hokie.  There are no particularly special performances to speak of, although Max Von Sidow, as the accused's attorney, delivers a thoughtful and moving closing argument for his defendent.  Max was portraying old men in movies 30 years ago, and he still looks the same.  Sam Shepard plays the owner and editor of the town newspaper, standing up for what's right inspite of threats to his life.  Ethan Hawke plays the newspaper editor's son and the childhood love of Hatsue (played by Youki Kudo) who later becomes the wife of the alleged murderer (played by Rick Yune).  Those who appreciate stories that involve questions of social injustice will be captivated by this film.  (kids: maybe, but perhaps boring; young teens: yes; older teens: yes)  ***

Topsy Turvy -- Is it possible to be Best Director and still make a rather uninspiring movie?  Mike Leigh certainly has put together an impressive film that, at the same time, has a rather unimpressive story line.  Although the film managed to keep most of my attention through 2 and 1/2 hours, it did little more for me.   While he manages to extract a number of nearly flawless performances from a talented cast of unknowns, he leaves me not really caring much about any of them.   It's the musical performances of Gilbert and Sullivan's operas that carry the film.   It's hard to believe that such a staid, stern and overly proper William Gilbert could write such witty and silly lyrics, while Arthur Sullivan's music is, of course, pure genious.  Still, not much happens between them in the movie other than a bout of writer's block and a brief scene of artistic disagreement.   Indeed, Victorian England is notoriously devoid of emotional expression, but as an American accustomed to a climate of wearing emotions on our sleaves, I can always hope for a glimpse of humanity through the British stuffiness.  This film provided little of that.  Only one moment found its way to being the least bit moving -- when the opera's performers mounted a challenge to Gilbert's decision to remove a song and a soloist from the opera.  As impressive as the artistry of this film is, I can nevertheless hardly recommend it to anyone other than a true Gilbert and Sullivan fan, of which I know none.   Mike Leigh should have received Best Director honors for his 1994 film Secrets and Lies on the strength of what may have been some of the most complicated and longest uninterrupted ensemble scenes ever attempted on film.  This time, he may win it on the strengths of the film's art design, musical performances and the believability of the character depictions.   Unfortunately, I would not also award him Best Picture, because perfection can also be quite unstimulating, if not dull; and for many movie goers, this movie indeed is.  (Okay for all ages, but with brief scenes of nudity).  **1/2

Return to other movies | Dean's Home Page.