You are here: Home / Archives for Movies

The Book of Eli

January 16, 2010 by

Denzel Washington strays from his recent Tony Scott thrillers (Deja Vu, Pelham 123) to participate in an odd post-apocalyptic tale (yes, another one of those).  While I think much of the audience interested in this film already knows what Denzel’s “Eli” character is protecting as he wanders through what’s left of Earth’s wasteland following a nuclear fallout, I will refrain from revealing the big mystery.

With “The Road,” “Terminator Salvation,” “2012,” “I am Legend” and even “Wall-E,” audiences have seen the end of the world quite a bit lately.  “The Book of Eli” fits right in.  While this film deserves to be stronger than it is, the Hughes Bros. (absent for a decade) deliver a gutsy, expensive mainstream movie.  The set design is amazing–you can definitely tell lots of studio money went into this one.  The action sequences are sharp, bloody, and stinging.  Some of the flick feels a little generic, but I expected as much.  While it won’t be the post-apocalyptic film to remember, it is a challenging and consistently entertaining film with the likes of Denzel Washington (in a refreshing out-there movie for him, even if he often settles back into “Man in Fire” mode) and Gary Oldman (back to his smarmy evil best).  The action delivers, and while the message of it is certainly obtuse, “The Book of Eli” is a daring offering considering its subject matter.

[Rating:3/5]

Filed Under: Action, Drama Tagged With: , , ,

Gran Torino

January 13, 2010 by

Having recently viewed Avatar in 3-D, twice, it’s kind of strange to watch a movie like Gran Torino.  While the former was a glorious cacophony of sight and sound, the latter is brilliantly simple and yet in many ways, far more powerful.  Avatar represents the pinnacle of modern special effects and sensory experience (notice I did not say sensory overload.  That distinction would belong to Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen).  Gran Torino, meanwhile, represents what might be considered the pinnacle of sheer characterization–the most basic elements of storytelling stripped bare of all fanciful special effects, visual trickeries, or even music.  It is a brilliantly simple story with wonderfully complex characters at its center, and its message carries a weight that goes far beyond the feel-good save-the-day tales that are so popular in Hollywood and literature.

Gran Torino, directed by Clint Eastwood, tells the story of a man named Walt Kowalsky who has lost much:  his wife is dead, he hardly knows his children, he hates his neighbors, and his lone companion is a faithful canine named Daisy.  Meanwhile, the neighborhood he has lived in for decades is changing:  Hmong families are moving in to the surrounding houses, and the threat of gang violence begins to rear its ugly head too.  Kowalsky, played by Eastwood, is a grizzled veteran of the Korean War who is one of the grumpiest old men to ever be portrayed on the silver screen.  And while he clings bitterly to the defining moments of his life from the War that have haunted him for decades, he slowly realizes that the world around him is changing and indeed has already changed.  And there’s not much he can do about it.

Gran Torino Kowalsky Tao

Kowalsky showing the neighbor boy how to be a man--by getting a job as a construction worker.

Kowalsky is no hero–he does not pretend to be one now, nor does he claim to have been one during the War.  But he ends up doing what might be considered a heroic deed when he saves one of the youths who live next door from being roughed up by a local gang.  Mind you, his motivation isn’t to save the youth, but to brandish his sense of military power as if it were a sword–to prove to the gang and to himself that he isn’t afraid of anybody, least of all the weak-minded foolish gang members who thrive on the sort of cowardly violence that is so prevalent in their circles.  But his act is interpreted as heroism by the locals, who befriend him against his own will:  they bring him food and he is invited to a gathering at the house next door where he even learns to appreciate a bit of their cooking and possibly even their culture.

At this point, Gran Torino might seem like a dressed-up after school special on racism.  But it’s the gritty realism showcased in the film that gives it a weight far beyond any NEA-endorsed treatise on being nice to others.  Kowalsky is mean, with a vocabulary dripping with some of the filthiest epithets I have heard onscreen in a long time.  Eastwood cuts no corners in depicting the violence of the local gangs, and the bitter mindset of Kowalsky and his friends.  And it’s this sense of reality that draws the viewer in and makes Kowalsky’s story all the more believable.  When he eventually befriends a boy next door and takes him under his wing, despite the fact that the boy tried to steal his precious Ford Gran Torino, their relationship is entirely believable simply because it doesn’t really work.  Not at first, anyway, and not for a long time.  But when it does, it eventually leads up to one of the most powerful and emotional climaxes I have seen in recent memory.  Yes the film does have a message about racism, but I can’t think of a more powerful way to preach it.

Gran Torino Porch

By far the most convincing "Get off my porch" ever spoken by an old man.

Eastwood has had a long and storied career–he has made dozens of films as an actor, and during the past fifteen years he has left his mark on cinema as a director to be reckoned with.  And though some of his films have been too overtly political for my taste (the ending of Million Dollar Baby reeked of typical Hollywood-style proselytizing), it’s clear that he wants to leave his mark on the world in a way that matters.  He has said that Gran Torino was his final acting role, after which he will presumably continue to direct until someone pries the camera from his cold, dead hands.  It’s ironic that a man in his seventies would be so prolific, with films of such quality, but I hope he is able to continue his work for a long time yet.

As a side note, I also appreciate the film’s treatment of Christians.  Kowalsky is not a churchgoing man, but the persistent priest at the church his wife went to eventually does break through to his heart–if only just a little bit.  But the priest and the Church are not mocked or disrespected as so often happens in movies.  The priest is young, energetic, and woefully inexperienced at dealing with men like Kowalsky.  But he and his profession are not treated as a joke, and the priest comes out as almost as much of a hero as Kowalsky.  That’s a rare thing for Hollywood, and one aspect of this movie I highly respect.

Rating:[Rating:4.5/5]

Filed Under: Drama Tagged With: , ,

El Mariachi

January 8, 2010 by

I haven’t seen many films directed by Robert Rodriguez, which may come as a bit of a surprise to some who know my penchant for action and adventure films.  Nevertheless, for whatever reason, I’m just not very familiar with Rodriguez, despite his prominence as a filmmaker.  I know he directed Desperado, a prominent action movie that launched the American career of Antonio Banderas.  I also know he and erstwhile pal Quentin Tarantino have collaborated on a few projects.  And I saw From Dusk till Dawn about 15 years ago, if that counts for anything.  And so it was from this framework that I figured I’d give some of his movies a shot and see what happens.

To start things off I watched El Mariachi, the first full-length movie Robert Rodriguez directed.  In fact, he wrote, directed, edited, and did much of the crew work himself because the meager budget of $7,000 (financed chiefly through Rodriguez’ participation in a medical study) just didn’t allow for much else.  And while El Mariachi is far from great, it’s a good example of professio ex adversum:  art from adversity.  What Rodriguez lacked in anything resembling production value, he made up for with a captivating central character, an interesting story, and a fast-paced directing style that keeps things interesting and engaging for much of the picture.

The film tells the story of a young Mexican guitar player (Carlos Gallardo) who has set out on his own to find fame and fortune as a mariachi.  He ends up in a sleepy town where the locals mistake him for a killer who dresses in black and carries a guitar case full of weapons.  Realizing that people are after him, the Mariachi decides that hiding out isn’t much of an option, so he finds ways to fight back, sometimes with bloody results.  He also befriends a local woman named Domino who works as a bartender and also has some interesting ties to a drug lord who is connected to the real killer.  It’s an interesting story with a few twists along the way and a surprising ending to boot, and all in all a pretty solid canvas for Rodriguez to paint some compelling action scenes and build a few interesting characters along the way.

The damsel in distress: He's going to scare her with what is clearly a 25-cent cap gun.

While it might be easy to dismiss El Mariachi as a bit too cheesy, a bit too low-budget, and certainly lacking in grandiose Hollywood-style explosions and slow-motion gunslinging scenes, I admire Rodriguez for putting together a fast-paced action film despite the odds against him.  The efficiency with which he tells the story is striking:  we know very little about the Mariachi (who, incidentally, has no name in the movie) but his story is compelling nonetheless.  He and Domino have a relationship that is believable, if far from actually being romantic.  And the action scenes with shootouts in bars and the city streets are surprisingly effective thanks to Rodriguez’ solid cutting and editing even though the weapons and blood squibs are so obviously fake.

And so on its own the film is just average, while at times borderline cheesy.  But as a film that was crafted with passion and dedication despite all odds against the director, it’s practically astounding.  I’m anxious to see Desperado now, the follow-up film that made Rodriguez a force to be reckoned with in Hollywood.

Rating:[Rating:3.5/5]

Filed Under: Action Tagged With: , , ,

Hitch

January 4, 2010 by

I’m not sure why “Romantic” movies are also coupled with “Comedy,” but for some reason, the two seem inextricably linked like “Peanut Butter” and “(something else).”  But for whatever reason, Romantic Comedies seem to have found their audience, and they’re generally a pretty safe bet for Hollywood producers as well as the viewing public.  Rom-coms don’t usually have massive budgets like sci-fi epics or action movies, and aside from some anomalies like My Big Fat Greek Wedding, they typically don’t dominate the box office but usually have no trouble making their money back.  Most mainstream Rom-Coms rely on the star power of one or two notable actors, a rather formulaic plot, and a feel-good ending that implies the same “happily ever after” resolution as most childhood fairy tales.

That’s not to say Romantic Comedies aren’t enjoyable, just predictable.  Hitch, while still being romantic, comedic, and predictable, does have enough variations from the norm to make it interesting and fun to watch, even though its serious flaws are tough to overlook.  Will Smith plays Alex Hitchens, a guy who “creates opportunities” for people to hook up.  He doesn’t directly pair up guys with the girls of their dreams, but instead he shows guys how to adjust their attitude and self-image so as to appear more attractive and desirable to the women they are trying to go out with.  In the obligatory (for this kind of setup) montage near the beginning of the movie, Hitch shows a socially akward fireman how to be more calm and collected around a particular girl, another guy how to lose some of the bad habits he has picked up, and so on.  Hitch guarantees that he can get any girl to go out with any guy for at least three dates.  This presents a rather interesting problem when a very akward accountant named Albert Brennaman, played by the affable Kevin James, enlists Hitch’s help in getting a date with his client Allegra Cole–essentially this movie’s version of a more intelligent Paris Hilton.  The setup is perfect for showcasing what makes Hitch unique not only within the movie, but within the canon of Romantic Comedies and Hollywood in general:  he refuses to create opportunities for simple one-night stands.  Instead, his goal is to help people find fulfilling, long-lasting relationships that have far more depth than what is usually portrayed on the silver screen.

Hitch and Albert, both searching for love. In other words, too much story for only one movie.

This premise in itself might make for an interesting enough movie on its own, but fortunately the movie is a bit smarter than that and also delves into the backstory of Hitch himself–ironically, though he is known as the “Date Doctor,” he has his own fears of commitment and has never had a long-lasting relationship.  But this divergence in the movie is also one of the film’s weak points, as it is handled a little too clumsily and gives the storyline a distinct lack of focus.  While Hitch is busy helping Albert with proper dance moves at the club, how to speak with confidence, and the “90%” rule of kissing a woman, he is also busy chasing local gossip columnist Sara Meles (Eva Mendes).  And this is where things get a little confusing:  just when we are getting to know Albert and feel empathy for him and his situation, we are taken on a side quest with Hitch as he tries to hook himself up with Sara.  The two of them go on dates with hilarious pratfalls such as Hitch accidentally kicking Sara off her jetski and into the polluted waters of the Hudson River, and Hitch himself getting a horrible outbreak of facial swelling due to a food allergy.  Har!

As if these two plots weren’t enough, there is another subplot involving Sara’s friend Casey and a guy Hitch refuses to work with, because all he wants to do is sleep with her.  This of course leads to misunderstandings, confusion, and the sorts of conflicts that are omnipresent in Romantic Comedies.  In the end, everything plays out about as you would expect, and though I won’t spoil anything here, I will say that pretty much every Romantic Comedy cliche right down the climax and denouement is present here.

Let me be clear:  predictability is not a bad thing, and I don’t mean to cast aspersions on Romantic Comedies in general.  But what keeps Hitch from being more than average is its poor handling of the multiple storylines, and a general lack of character development for everyone but Hitch himself (the relationship between Albert and Allegra is never explored very much, despite ostensibly being the main focus of the movie).  Is it a passable Romantic Comedy?  Sure.  It’s just not much more.

Rating:[Rating:3.5/5]

Filed Under: Comedy, Romance Tagged With: , ,

Avatar (Take-Two)

December 23, 2009 by

Avatar is not a movie.  It is an experience.  It is a thoroughly engrossing cinematic wonder, mighty and powerful to behold as it grips you with images and sights too incredible to believe, while simultaneously touching you with a tender story that is, at its most basic level, a simple tale of star-crossed love–the kind of tale which has been told for generations upon generations and is as old as time itself.  Avatar is a technological marvel, while thoroughly obliterating the barrier between technology and reality.  Avatar is a film unlike any I have ever seen.

Perhaps it’s the adrenaline talking here, as I left the theatre not more than a half hour ago, and am still trying to process just what it was that I saw.  Perhaps it’s my admiration for James Cameron.  Perhaps it’s my inner sci-fi fanboy being set loose once again–the same force that caused me to go see The Phantom Menace more than ten times in the theatre, just because it was Star Wars.  Or perhaps, perhaps, Avatar really is that good.

Before discussing the storyline, I have to first deal with the planet itself.  All the action of Avatar takes place on Pandora, a world far from here that is a mixture of ecologies unlike anything seen in film or art.  To call it a jungle would be like saying the Mona Lisa is just some painting.  Pandora is as rich and full of life as any locale here on earth, and is inhabited by animals, trees, and human-like beings so realistic there is literally nothing to distinguish them from any of the visual elements of the movie that actually are real.  This is computer-generated imagery the likes of which has not been seen.  Ever. If Weta Digital’s creation of a thoroughly realistic Gollum was a foot in the door, showing us what was possible with computer graphics, the world and creatures of Pandora take that door and blow it to kingdom come.

Jake Sully and Col. Miles Quatrich examine the village the Na'Vi call home.

After this, anything is possible.

To be clear:  every frame, every single frame, of what I saw onscreen last night displayed more life, depth, and richness than what I thought was possible in any given movie as a whole.  I don’t know how James Cameron thought of this world, but he serves up vistas so grand and stunning, supported by creatures so fair and delicate (the floating “seeds” that come down from one special tree are exquisite wisps of life that look so real you will try to reach out and touch them), that it feels as if you aren’t watching a movie, but living right alongside the Na’Vi as they explore the planet of Pandora.

If one could level any criticisms at Avatar, it would be for the fairly lightweight story:  humans = bad, native peoples = good.  Humans want a precious mineral that resides underneath the Na’Vi’s main village, they must either convince them to leave or force them to leave.  Since the humans are mostly a military bunch, headed by a greedy corporate honcho and a trigger-happy Marine commander, and since this is also a James Cameron movie, it’s a foregone conclusion from the get-go that the two forces will end up battling each other rather than just talking their way out of the mess.  But rather than say the story is simplistic, I would describe it as simply uncomplicated.  No labyrinthine plotlines or story mechanisms are required here:  Cameron simply asks us to watch as he lets his world unfold before our eyes, to see marine Jake Sully fall in love with Neytiri, the Na’Vi who helps Sully’s avatar learn the ways of her people.

Sully's avatar experiences the floating seeds of Pandora.

Some movies are fun to see in a theatre because of the loud volume, big screen, and excitement of the crowd.  Avatar is a film that must be experienced in a theatre, especially one that has a 3D projector.  Cameron uses the third dimension to eliminate any last vestige of reserve that might exist in the viewer’s mind that this world is imaginary.  There are no cheap gimmicks here, or things flying at the viewer just for the sake of doing it in 3D.  No, the 3D element renders the movie completely, utterly immersive.  A believable depth of field surrounds the viewer, and everything from smoke and dust particles to missiles exploding and trees collapsing takes place in all three dimensions.  The best special effects, like the best seasoning on a meal, are the ones that are so good the viewer doesn’t even notice them or single them out as effects.  Cameron’s use of 3D is so elemental to Avatar that you forget it’s there, and become completely enveloped in the experience of it all.

Children enjoy fairy tales partly because they like to entertain the possibility that such fantastical worlds of dragons, fairy godmothers, and magical wizards could really exist.  Avatar is a fairy tale come to life, and James Cameron invites his viewers to return to their childhood imaginations and believe, for two and a half hours, that the world of Pandora really exists.  And when I stepped out of the theatre, I was almost convinced it was actually real.

Rating:[Rating:5/5]

Filed Under: Action Tagged With: , ,

Avatar

December 20, 2009 by

‘King of the World’ James Cameron rises back from the depths of the sea after his “Titanic” success twelve years ago to deliver one of the most epic films of all time with “Avatar.”

Let’s get the main two questions out of the way: Is it a good movie?  Heck yes.  Is it a game-changing film that will transform movies forever? Well, possibly.  But can any film really do that?  On a technical level, movies can always advance special effects and what can be accomplished as far as the limits of imagination and reality go.  And to its credit, Cameron’s imagination graces every expensive frame of this movie to an unbelievably believable effect.

I’ve heard much complaining about the simplicity and cliche of his storyline.  I’m at a loss to understanding the reasoning of such complaints.  ‘Avatar’ presents a classic Pocahontas narrative.  In 2154, the American government dispatches a high-tech military unit to ransack the planet of Pandora in an effort to obtain a valuable mineral deposit.  The problem?  An indigenous race of humanoid Na’vi warriors (standing over twice the size of a human) refuse to relocate and give up the forests of their planet for human greed.  The plan?  American scientists are utilized to understand the Na’vi and negotiate a compromise.  After one of the scientists is killed in action, his twin marine brother, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington, Terminator Salvation) arrives to replace him and operate a genetically-engineered and remote-controlled avatar of a Na’vi that will infiltrate their race.  The expected happens when Jake soon loses his militaristic ideals, becomes one with their race, and falls for his Na’vi counterpart, Neytiri (Zoe Saldana, Star Trek).

Call the plot cliche or predictable, but I found it to be the perfect setup for Cameron’s world.  Never once does the audience not know where the story is headed, but never once do they know what this incredible director will show us next.  The very world he creates rivals any other cinematic achievement in history to date.  Witnessing the incredible design of the creatures inhabiting Pandora generated serious awe for me, as they felt authentic and extremely realistic.  Even on the human side of things–all of the military equipment: the helicopters, weaponry, and human-operated tank-bots stand as incredible accomplishments in design.  Cameron has pronounced every detail of his endless visionary world.  And I haven’t even mention the 3D factor.

This is, above all things considered, the most profound and immersing use of 3D to date.  It really opens up Pandora and allows you to enter its universe.  I can’t stress enough the level of detail utilized in the film, and the 3D really eliminates all the barriers from receiving a truly monumental movie experience.  Whether or not the movie will play as well at home remains to be seen.  Even without the third-dimension factor, the visual effects still top anything Michael Bay threw at the screen this year.  The motion-capture used to create the Na’vi characters works tremendously well in capturing authentic expression and emotion.  You can actually see the faces of Sigourney Weaver, Sam Worthington, and Zoe Saldana under the layers of computer-animation.  How this was all accomplished is way beyond me, but Cameron fails to let us down after all the hype surrounding the technology he furthered to create his vision.

James Cameron may not be a storytelling genius, but the man knows what works, and he consistently tackles all of his projects with huge success and accomplishment.  ‘The Terminator,’ ‘Aliens’, ‘The Abyss,’ ‘Terminator 2: Judgment Day,’ ‘True Lies’ and ‘Titanic’ (all among my favorite films) pushed the limits of filmmaking and what could be done with their budgets.  Luckily, Cameron doesn’t puke throwaway spectacle all over the screen.  He delivers something special and memorable with characters you care about and themes that are universal.  “Avatar” continues his streak as a filmmaking pioneer pushing the boundaries of technology to show audiences the limitless potential of the imagination.  This is certainly one of the best films of 2009, and one of the great movie-going experiences of all time.  Get up out of your chair, head to the multiplex, purchase a big tub of popcorn, and witness this incredible film in all its 3D glory.

[Rating:4.5/5]

-MJV & the Movies

Filed Under: Action, Romance, Science Fiction, War Tagged With: , , ,

Wild Wild World of Batwoman

December 19, 2009 by

What could be better than kicking back with a good movie? Well, every so often, you don’t have the appetite for the meat and potatoes of a well-crafted film, and you just want a light cinema snack. Hence of the profitability of mediocre (and worse) films like Transformers, Twilight, and 300. Our culture has a fascination with bad movies (unlike with other mediums), and much has been written about which films are the worst of all time. In 1980, critic Michael Medved and his brother Harry published The Golden Turkey Awards, in which they listed their picks for the worst movies of all time. They ultimately selected Plan 9 from Outer Space (Dir. Ed Wood) as the Worst Movie Ever Made. People tell me I’m competitive, which might be why I felt compelled to find a worse one. Recently, I did.

For an unending source of putridly bad movies, it’s hard to beat Mystery Science Theatre 3000, a serial in which host Mike Nelson (usually) and two robots are silhouetted in front of one of the worst low-to-no-budget flops the producer can find. Mike and the ‘bots make the movie bearable by inserting lines, yelling out jokes and generally lampooning the movie. It turns what would be a traumatic experience into a load of laughs. Usually.

Even Mike’s sense of humor was no match for the horrendous work of Jerry Warren, however, as shown by the colossally bad movie The Wild, Wild World of Batwoman (1966).

WWWB is about … well, that’s the problem, you really can’t tell. The character who seems to be the lead (Katherine Victor) wears a costume, vaguely reminiscent of a superhero costume, complete with a bat logo painted on her breasts. She doesn’t do much to fight crime, however, throwing one punch in the entire movie. Her response to “crisis” situations is usually to call bureaucratic meetings with her underlings, a cult-like troupe of teenage girls who carry guns but spend more time dancing the Jerk than anything else.

All this dancing makes them vulnerable because the “super villain” in this movie, whose costume basically amounts to a bowler hat and a ski mask, and who has an equally ridiculous name (Rat Fink), attacks them by serving them drugged drinks that make them begin dancing uncontrollably. There’s one particularly painful scene in which Batwoman confronts Rat Fink (Richard Banks) while one of her sidekicks is slowly doing an involuntary jig in the background – for about 10 minutes. These “Batgirls” are always doing odd things in the background, e.g. fighting over a horseshoe, and are sometimes more interesting to watch than the characters in the foreground.

Warren offered the role of Batwoman to Victor, but, having worked on Warren’s  Teenage Zombies and The Curse of the Stone Hand, Victor was not eager to work with Warren again. To convince her, Warren promised Victor large production values, color photography and her own bat boat in the film. None of these promises were kept.

Our herione.

Our herione.

Our Mystery Science heros are clearly overmatched by this one, as evidenced by Mike’s sudden plea (whether to the director or God, I’m not sure) in one of the most pointless scenes “Please, God, cut away to anything, please!” I felt pretty much the same way. Even Mike and the ‘bots’ lampooning wasn’t enough to ease the pain of this one.

As bad as this film is, you still might ask why I say it’s worse than Plan 9. With Plan 9, if you have the stamina to sit through it, you can sort-of figure out what it’s supposed to be about. It starts with an alien invasion, then we see the dead rising from the grave; eventually the movie sort-of  ties the two together, leading to a climactic scene inside a spaceship that looks oddly like a wood shop.

The villain.

The villain.

The production of WWWB was downright schizophrenic, largely due to the director’s egocentricism. Victor told Wikkipedia that, on set, if an actor rubbed Warren the wrong way, their lines would be cut out or given to other actors. Victor claimed “the pretty brunette who was kidnapped in the beginning of the picture was supposed to be the lead girl, but for some reason Jerry thought she was getting to big for her britches and gave all her lines to the girl in the leopard tights”. All of this sudden mind-changing by Warren left its mark on the movie. WWWB features, among other things, a man who wears a Hitler mustache for no reason, and another who shambles around the set like a dog, being treated like a pet by a guy who is apparently supposed to be some kind of mad scientist (George Andre). This mad scientist never really does anything, however. He does venture into a cave under his lab once, where he witnesses monsters that are just recycled footage from The Mole People. We see these creatures for two seconds and no explanation for their presence is ever given. At the end, Dog Boy comes off of … whatever he was on, and tells some kind of story about an atomic bomb made out of a hearing aide.

Warren first released the film under the title Batwoman. Then, after being sued, he re-released it as She was a Hippy Vampire (there is no vampirism in the movie). As you can imagine, the film suffered a quick and painful death at the box office. Decades later it was released on video under its current name.

If you’re someone who combs through vaults of old movies, looking for unsung classics, this is one to avoid. It’s astonishing production wrapped before too many cast/crewmembers simply stormed off the set. Even the MST3K version is unbearable. Ed Wood must be spinning in his grave.

[Rating:0/5]

Filed Under: Action Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Christmas Story

December 18, 2009 by

A Christmas StoryFirst, a confession:  Until last week I had never seen A Christmas Story.  I had heard all the references that tend to crop up around this time of year, with people around me tossing jokes around like “You’ll shoot your eye out!” and something about a leg lamp, as well as sticking tongues to flagpoles.  And until last week I would laugh mildly, vaguely knowing what they were talking about but secretly, shamefully, knowing that I run a movie review web site but had not seen Bob Clark’s timeless Christmas masterpiece.

But no more!  Having finally laid witness to the tale of young Ralphie and his quest for a Red Ryder BB Gun, I not only finally understand all the jokes and references, I also understand why this movie really deserves its status as a tried-and-true classic.  It’s not just about a boy who wants a present, it’s a tale that captures the essence of childhood in a simpler time when computers, internet, and even things like thermostat-controlled furnaces in homes were the stuff of far-flung science fiction.  Young Ralphie has a Norman Rockwell existence:  two married parents, one younger brother, an elementary school close enough to walk to, and a big radio in the living room that fills his head with stories of Annie Oakley adventures.  Sure his parents argue, there’s bullies at school who torment him and his friends, the family car is less than reliable, and he gets into trouble for swearing, but the idyllic Americana on display here is indellibly vintage, and I would wager that anyone, whether kid or adult, could find something with which to identify in this (dare I say it?  Yes, I do!) charming little movie.  And its the way in which this exaggerated tale of childhood perfectly captures its subject matter that raises it above so many similar movies and into the realm of American film canon.

When filming, the pole was warm and Flicks tongue was stuck on an air compressor. :-)

When filming, the pole was warm and Flick's tongue was stuck on an air compressor. :-)

The story is delightfully simple: Grinning, wide-eyed Ralphie wants nothing more than a Red Ryder BB Gun for Christmas, and will do anything to make it happen.  He tries to drop hints to his parents, writes a theme paper about it for his teacher, and waits for hours in line at a department store to meet Santa and tell him personally.  But Ralphie’s quest is a backdrop for which the idea of childhood longing and imagination, as well as a loss of innocence, are beautifully played out.  From the moment he lays eyes on the BB Gun in a store window, the thought of owning it consumes Ralphie–he dreams of saving his family from a band of marauders, and wistfully listens to radio programs extolling the virtues of the heroes of the Old West, knowing that he could join their ranks if only he was presented with the small-gauge Excalibur he so desperately wants.  But like many things we all long for, it lies just painfully out of reach, though that leaves him perpetually undaunted, and like Quixote, he will continue to chase after his Red Ryder windmill despite the futility of such a gesture–what with every adult in his life telling him that such a prize would doubtless render his biological ocular instrument duly incapacitated.

Because the story is narrated by a grown-up Ralphie, recounting those events of his childhood, the entire movie is populated with exaggerated caricatures:  an out-of-touch father who screams profanities when things don’t go his way, a mother who almost literally smothers her offspring with overbearing gestures of caretaking, a teacher who obviously had no childhood herself and exists only to soullessly pound requisite educational materials into her pupils’ skulls full of mush, a yellow-eyed schoolyard bully…and so on.  In fact, much of the movie reminded me of a live-action Calvin and Hobbes comic.  Ralphie’s overactive imagination magnifies people to ridiculous proportions (his teacher, he imagines, nearly swoons over his A-grade writing assignment.  His parents and brother hail him as a conquering hero as he defends the house against would-be robbers with his new BB Gun), but isn’t that how we all remember life when we were kids?

A Christmas Story isn’t perfect, but rarely does a movie so perfectly capture the essence of what it’s like to be a kid.

Rating:[Rating:4.5/5]

Filed Under: Family Tagged With: , ,
« Previous Page
Next Page »