FreeLook BookStore

Home

Our Picks

Classics Club

E•Zine

About Us

COVER  • Contents  • < PREV Page  • NEXT Page >

The Flick Chick Film Titles Beginning with "A" & "B" Movies are fun. They take us away. Need a good cry? Film provides it. Lonesome and blue? They make us feel all warm and mushy. Bored? They scare us, make our hearts beat faster. The right film has something for everyone — the right film, if you can find it. Thats the catch. Anxious now? Never fear. You've got a safari guide now. Ready? Excellent! Get your fills of chills, thrills, spills, forget your ills, and come with the Chick to the movies!

About a Boy

     Yeah, stupid title. Yeah, hackneyed scenario: shiftless wastrel is redeemed by the love of a good woman and (oh, give it a break) an adorable child. "Oh well," the Chick said, "I'll sit through almost anything for the pleasure of looking at Hugh Grant."
     And right off, she breathed a little sigh of relief, because the visuals had style. And though HG's character was a worthless loser, and HG himself had a disfiguring haircut, the other characters had an oddball charm. There were some mildly good jokes. The Kid was not agonizingly sentimental. And then . . . was the Chick imagining it, or was Grant actually, uh, acting? Nah, surely not. Why would one of the master Sex Symbols of our age want to mess up his act with acting? And yet . . .
      Well, it's not right. There are rules, you know. Cary Grant (the master) never ventured beyond classic CaryGrantness. Sean Connery made a dozen early flicks based on his gorgousness alone. Paul Newman waited until he was old before he learned to act. So who does Hugh Grant think he is, distracting us from his yumminess by learning his craft? Fie!
      Yet it must be admitted — despite the bad haircut, HG did real good. Real good. (5/22/02)

Adaptation - ****

     It's been said that inside every writer there is a madman struggling to get out. Others have described the creative process as a bowl of jello that is occasionally struck by lightning. It's doubtful that either one of these definitions applies to any specific writer, but neither is far off the mark in describing Charles Kaufman, the main character of this fascinating, formless film — that was created, interestingly enough, by a writer named Charles Kaufman.
     In very general, it is about the creation of a film adaptation of a book. And as we watch the adaptation itself unfold before our eyes, viewers do indeed feel that they are inside the desperate mind of the writer, and that they are watching a creative process as the narrative moves forward.
      Nicolas Cage and Meryl Streep, two stars great enough to have put vanity behind them, show the dissolution of one character and the re-creation of another. Watching, we experience passion, anguish, desolation, pathos, and a hand-in-hand wedding of violence and slapstick comedy. When the lights come up, you may be asking yourself what it was about. Here's the answer — the making of a classic!
      To the best of anyone's knowledge, however, Charles Kaufman never had a twin brother. (1/17/03)

A-I

     Haley Joel Osment, who singlehandedly carried this film, did so with his best performance to date. He was believably robotic at the outset and at the moment when he bonds with his surrogate mother, his expression changes so subtly, yet so radically, that it was thrilling to watch! The robots were brilliantly conceived, the scene in the "robot graveyard" had the same rich impact as the bar scenes in the first STAR WARS episode, and Jude Law's makeup and performance as Gigolo Joe were absolutely faultless. All that having been said . . . although I was glad I saw it, and although I recommend it, the film as a whole never supplied me with that indispensable click-through of emotion. No matter how good the elements, they must add up to a whole we can care for. Even the standardized Spielberg elongated, featureless glitterdusted humanoids could not save the day for me. (7/01)

Amelie
(In French, with subtitles)

     Yes, I admit to a weakness for foreign film. And that I'm partial to films directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet (even, dare I say it, the little-known but ghoulishly hilarious Delicatessen). And I do love to laugh. Despite all these admissions, you may trust the Chick's word that this is a thoroughly delightful film. Audrey Tatou, as the title character, is just as winsome as one hopes, never descending into kitsch, yet enlisting our full sympathy with her do-gooding and her mischief-making alike.
      One the strengths of Jeunet's film-making is that, although there are many small parts in this film, there are no minor characters. Each persona is fully rounded out, brilliantly cast and brilliantly played. (One such part is acted by the clown-faced protagonist of the above-mentioned Delicatessen. Surely the other two living U.S. members of that film's cult-fan-club will be glad to see him again.)
      Although Amelie won beaucoup prizes at last year's Cannes festival, it is still hitting theaters here in the heartland. Lucky us anyway. We need not travel to Metropolis or wait for a long-delayed tape. Now's your chance. Ignore the words "warm," "heart-warming," and "charming" — See it anyway. You'll be glad. (2/6/02)

Angels and Insects - ****

     I was lucky enough to enjoy once more the eerie charm of this wonderful and strange film. At once an intellectual experience and a stroll through the mind of a great visual artist, this has also a very kinky & voluptuous story line. By the last reel, we are in a fever of anxiety, fearing that the hero will not escape. Does he? And if so . . . wht sort of bondage will he assume in exchange? Go out of your way to experience this!

Bad Company

     What's not to like about Tony Hopkins as a smooth, world-weary superspy training wildman Chris Rock to play a smooth, world-weary superspy in a storyline that features double dealing, doubletakes, and a wealth of snappy comebacks. See this one for a fun evening. (6/10/02)

Bad Santa

           Why Billy Bob Thornton! How you do go on! If you wasn't so doggone cute in your Santa beard . . . I swan — but I would knock that bottle of apple juice right outta your hand and wash out your mouth with brown soap — the way you talk! For shame!
          But as my tender ears have never heard such language before, and as I am so pure as to not recognize that you are a wicked, and obscene, and thieving scoundrel, I guess as I have took no hurt from those goings on. But if I was you, I would clean up my mouth before I talked to innocent young ladies and small children. You be warned!

The Banger Sisters

       Who can resist Goldie Hawn? Ans. No sane human.
        Is there anybody in the world who doesn't believe Susan Sarandon is a first-rate actress? A no-show of hands indicates you all agree, so you see, you're way ahead before you start.
       Although this is billed as a feckless chick flick, that promo does it a huge injusice. It is also about compassion. And choices. And the results of those choices. And growing wiser as we grow older. Every character in this film shows real emotional growth — and that's no small accomplishment. Although there are some wildly improbable moments, we are willing to go along with the fantasy as well as the versimillitudes of reality. And perhaps best of all, to quote someone who is speaking of Goldie Hawn's character: "You look like a flower." Fairly true of the character. Entirely true of the no-longer-quite-young actress. We believe in her completely; she's a real, true star. (9/02)

Barber Shop

     Even though this has been a big box-office winner, you may still be surprised at how much you like it. Although most are stock characters, they are well played in three dimensions. The interactions are warm, the jokes and dialogue made my audience laugh, and Ice Cube has real presence. We sympathized with him, were willing to be patient with him while he worked out his problems in his own mind, and enjoyed his far-fetched success. One big criticism: take ear plugs. The sound track is WAY too loud.(9/02)

A Beautiful Mind

      What constitutes genius? We hardly know, because we can't see the lightning as it strikes. All we have is a whiff of ozone when it's come near. So if we can't even recognize it when we're looking at it, it's understandable that portraying genius would present a few problems. But it's fascinating to see them try: Amadeus (Tom Hulce as Mozart); Infinity (Matthew Broderick as Richard Feynman); the very powerful Thirty-Two Short Films About Glenn Gould (in 1993), which actually included substantive examples of his work; Pollock (with Ed Harris in the title role, reviewed earlier in this column); and now Russell Crowe portrays the tormented mathematician John Forbes Nash.
      Lots of good stuff here. Ed Harris is craggy and dangerous, Jennifer Connelly is appetizing and enduring. As a film buff, I relished the many examples of first-rate throwaway business: e.g. when Nash's friend and sometime tormentor acknowledges his success, Nash silently offers him a glass; the friend hesitates before taking it. And Nash wordlessly reaches out to him just as the camera leaves the scene.
      Okay. You've already guessed that I really liked this film. It engaged my emotions and my mind. It raised, very powerfully, the eternal questions about reality and our perceptions of it. Russell Crowe turns his potent charisma inside-out, so that it merely glints beneath the surface of Nash's driving, driven character. It was an exceptional performance, in which I frequently lost track of the actor within the man he portrayed. We went inside him. Struggled with him. But did we see Nash's genius? . . . well, lightening is notoriously hard to see.
      A suggestion: although troubled lives generally make better copy, how's about a salute to a relatively untroubled genius or two. Starting with, say, director Ron Howard? (Jan.'02)

Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure

     Whoa, Dudes, just when you think there's nothing on, just as you're doing a last, desperate flip through the channels before falling exhausted and sleepless to the deck, what should you find but a 1989 antique gem — brilliant as ever in the flickering darkness! A lanky teenaged Keanu Reeves (Ted) in a strange Dutch-boy haircut and with an orange Tee knotted around his loins is sent back in time (together with pal, Bill, played by Alex Winter) by a charming, deadpan George Carlin (Rufus, the future Dude) via a Doctor-Who-style phone booth, powered by a rusty TV antenna and some chewing gum. Yum. Once there, they rocket around collecting the cream of historical characters: Napolean, Soo-Krates, Dr. Frood, Beethoven, and a few of that ilk to win, ultimately, fame, fortune, world peace, and a passing grade in history. Excellent dudes! Its only equal in that arena was Yahoo Serious playing Albert Einstein. Who said Cable never gave us nothing! (VH1 4/17/01)

Blow

     Blow it off! Even Johnny Dep can't save this loser-flick that tries to make you feel sorry for a heartless, worthless, pusher. (4/15/01)

Bound for Glory

     Where was I when this film was new? I never knew it existed! Caught only the last 3/4 of this superb biopic of the great Woody Guthrie. (He was far more than Arlo's dad, believe me.) I was traveling and it was a long mostly sleepless night, so I don't even know the release date, although the fact that David Carradine stars gives us a clue.
     Guthrie was more than a brilliant performer and songwriter; his involvment in the labor struggles of impoverished itinerant workers during the dark days of the Great Depression was genuinely heroic. The film is valuable as a social document as well as commemorating the life of a great and troubled artist. And the sound track brims with Guthrie's great songs. If you love folk music, if you think Grandpa always had it easy, and even if you can't stand David Carradine, see Bound for Glory if you can find it. My video store never heard of it. (Note to self: try the Net.)
      Note from the net: Film was directed by Hal Ashley, and it won two Academy Awards in 1976. Can I pick 'em!

The Brothers Grimm

          Any Terry Gilliam film will be quirky, visually moving, and will offer odd and unexpected perspectives. This one does all that . . . although to a somewhat lesser extent than Time Bandits and Baron Munchausen. And it is certainly not Brazil, which is in a class by itself. Instead, the stars, Matt Damon and Heath Ledger, as the Brothers, and Lena Headley as Angelika, play relatively straightforward characters in a fairly straightforward Gothic narrative which even includes some rare moments of humor. ("Don't rely on that armor. It doesn't do anything but look pretty. I made it myself.")
           But the horror elements — trees that stalk the travelers, the menacing birds, the witches, and the Black Blob that comes out of the well — are sufficiently effective to cause nightmares in the faint of heart. As in most Python-originated films, the mud and squalor of past centuries are more-than-realistically shown. But there is something else that sets this film apart. It serves to remind us of a very dark aspect of humanity's very dark past . . . the genuine and omnipresent fear of the night, a dread of the unknown, and the threat of horrid happenings that are beyond our control and outside our understanding.
           Do you like this sort of film? See this one, by all means. (9/05)