The Cynical Blog

The blog for the site for the review show for the modern movie watcher.

Skip to: Content | Sidebar | Footer

Revolutionary Road

20 November, 2008 (15:15) | Coming Soon | By: Steve

Who has demonstrated a better grasp of cracking the veneer of American life than Sam Mendes you ask? Nobody? Well, I think I might have to go ahead and agree with you on that. American Beauty captured my imagination and had me looking at the mundane world around me and searching for the purity that the movie’s character were all searching for.

With Revolutionary Road, Sam Mendes explores questions of urban stereotypes again as we watch an idealistic couple trying to fight against the banality and routine that surrounds them. Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet pair up again for the first time since Titanic… why hasn’t anyone caught on to that bit of hype yet?

Revolutionary Road comes to theatres on December 26th.

The New Gangster Paradigm

20 November, 2008 (11:57) | Random Thoughts | By: Steve

There appears to be some kind of paradigm shift in the world of the gangster film.

In what could be an effort to psych out astute fans of the the crime-movie, or perhaps it’s simply the next logical step in the evolution of the gangster film, there appears to be a paradigm shift in the mob movie: The boss is the rat. Whether it’s to get to the top or merely to stay there, mob bosses have been opting to keep their enemies way closer than their friends. In recent films such as The Departed, Layer Cake and (my apologies for the spoiler) RocknRolla this new hole in the mob’s wall of silence has been leaking.

To be clear , this isn’t the same thing as having a cop in their pocket. In The Godfather, Sollozzo made a powerful ally of the Police Chief in order to make his move on the Corleone family. But that’s more of an instance of a cop being dirty, rather than a boss being “clean”. What we are talking about here is the top dog in a criminal organization doing what all of his underlings are terrified that anyone might even think they might be up to.

Is this even a new twist? Besides just looking at The Godfather, I scanned through some other gangster staples and couldn’t find any prominent examples of this phenomenon. This appears to be more of a modern occurrence. So where is this coming from and what can be gained from this emerging twist in the gangster narrative? Is it meant to signal a shift in the morality of filmmakers vis a vis their perception of the underworld?

“Ever since I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster.”

And ever since I can remember watching gangster movies there has been a “no rat” philosophy deeply ingrained in that culture. Is this shift away from tradition merely meant to up the stakes, or is it a new common twist that is supposed to throw the know-it-all audience off? The “thriller” element of the “crime-thriller” depends on the main character dealing with the constant menace of being caught or killed and it’s where most of the story’s narrative tension is generated. As these kinds of films become more prevalent and the way they unfold becomes more predictable, it is incumbent upon writers and directors to create films that can switch up the usual storyline to continue to engage the hardcore audience. As for upping the stakes, this new element only serves to emphasize the crime film adage of “trust no one”, making the gangster world even more treacherous. If you can’t even trust the foundation upon which the criminal enterprise is founded, where are you supposed to find level footing?

I’d actually be willing to take that a step further and say that there are elements of the “abject” and the “uncanny” in the instant our hero realizes that his boss is actually crooked about his crookedness, even if they’re terms you usually only when speaking academically about horror movies. Abject is often used to describe concepts like the Zombie - dead yet alive, a mortifying contradiction in terms meant to generate an instant feeling of revulsion. That is certainly clear in The Departed when Matt Damon finds out that Jack may have sold him out and decides hes got no choice but to shoot him. Uncanny is used to describe creatures like the Wolfman who are familiar, yet strange. The Wolfman is a wolf, but walks and moves like a man, this is supposed to create a kind of disgusted fascination. In RocknRolla a number of threads suddenly coalesce when they figure out that Lenny has been ratting out his own crew. The flow of the movie is suddenly thrown off as loyalties suddenly evaporate. What we have in these films is the crime boss who is a bad guy who is doing the “right thing” by talking to the cops, which is actually the “wrong thing” in the world he comes from. So he’s evil, yet noble, which makes him even more evil.

Joining the rat squad is the ultimate weapon in the dirty Capo’s arsenal, which is odd because it seems so often in other corners of pop-culture that the law is a toothless entity that is always one step behind organised crime. When you look at the portrayal of “the Law” in these new-spin tellings the law is not ineffectual, nor is it incompetent. Organised crime is able to exist merely because the law just isn’t paying attention. When the attention of the law comes to bear, there’s a distinct sense of powerlessness as the wheels of the system begin to turn. Being at the mercy of the courts, rather than the way it is portrayed in Law & Order when the legal system generally comes off as more of a protracted negotiation. So while one side of pop-culture portrays the justice system as toothless (in order to create dramatic tension) another side portrays it as an unstoppable, unforgiving juggernaut. Whatever happened to rubbing out witnesses and bribing judges? What happened to Gotham City style corruption?

There is a certain nobility in trying to take the road less travelled, walking the path of the renegade. But this new twist shows that there is no nobility at the end of that road. Or that it is just as virtuous to walk the path of the righteous man as it is to walk the path of the villain. There is no salvation either way and the only solution offered is to simply rub out your boss and take his place.

Quantum of Solace Review

19 November, 2008 (21:28) | Reviews | By: Steve

You know what the best thing about Quantum of Solace was? The new Star Trek trailer - and even that didn’t seem to get the right kind of reception from the gathered theatrical audience.

I had managed to keep my expectations for this Bond sequel in check, but I should have realized from the start that my expectations were already way out of whack when I acknowledged it as a sequel. There has never been a bonafide sequel to a Bond film, each and every one is completely compartmentalized. Quantum of Solace on the other hand takes place about 5 to 10 minutes after the critically acclaimed Casino Royale leaves off. I would imagine it would be nearly impossible to track down a Bond fan who hadn’t seen Casino Royale at a screening of QoS, so I suppose they can get away with this, but it would be nearly impossible to follow the story without having the lead-in under your belt.

The chases are satisfying, and it’s about time they had a proper car chase in this new Craig-generation Bond. Last time all we had was a car crash. I even liked the foot-chase that followed it, despite the chaotic inter-cutting with the neighbouring horse race. What I did not like was the unbalanced writing that came from having three different writers on the team - even if one of them was Due South creator Paul Haggis. One scene in particular stands out in my mind - where Bond and his partner of the hour, Fields confront Greene at a party in Bolivia. Suddenly the writing takes on a hackneyed Dukes of Hazzard quality that leaves me wondering what happened to the high-brow (and high-handed) fashion in which the story’s been told thus far.

What else didn’t I like? I didn’t like that I couldn’t fathom the convoluted plot. Was it about oil or was it about water? Was Quantum really an uber-powerful Illuminati? If they were, how did that girl keep getting so close to them only to act all crazy again and again? I didn’t like the second stupid foot-chase that was also inter-cut with the neighbouring action, in that case it was an opera. Totally pulled me out of the action.

I kind of dig that this new generation Bond is big into the Parkour thing, but I don’t dig that they haven’t made him about the gadgets at all. Where the hell is Q? The gadgets have always been an integral part of any Bond story and to ignore it is to ignore what the stories are really about.

What else didn’t I like? That when it was over and time to say goodbye that nobody, myself included, knew that the end had come. The credits started rolling and that was it. Hopefully that means we have some ends tied up and we can see the last of these sequel-style Bond films.

I remember watching the trailers for QoS and seeing there was a definite Bourne quality to them. I couldn’t fault them for that, it was a format that proved very effective. As I watched QoS, I was on the lookout for those elements and could see some of them clearly (like the hand to hand fight in the hotel room). What I finally came to accept was that Bond has simply turned into the rich man’s Bourne, taking place in all kinds of fancy-schmancy places while Bourne operated on the edges of society in the cold. I guess opulence has been an important part of the Bond legacy for a ling time, it’s just never seemed to shallow until now.

The Verdict: I give this movie three simple letters - M E H. Meh. I could take or leave this movie a hundred percent.

New Star Trek Trailer!

19 November, 2008 (16:33) | Random Thoughts | By: Steve

The new Star Trek trailer is up on our site for your viewing pleasure. This was arguably the best thing about going to see Quantum of Solace in the theatre - the rest of my experience was pretty much downhill from there.

This trailer manages to do a good job of introducing just about everyone - apparently Uhura’s way of introducing herself is to take off her shirt… I couldn’t be more psyched for this if I tried.

The Film Cynics talk Tropic Thunder

19 November, 2008 (12:44) | Morning Show | By: Steve

Despite the fact that the sync is way out, we’re still proud to present the fifth installment of our Morning Show appearances. This time around we’re happy to chat about the greatness of Tropic Thunder.

Blue Harvest Review is up!

18 November, 2008 (18:24) | Reviews | By: Steve

It’s taken them a little while to get around to it, but Brian and Steve have finally posted their review of Family Guy’s Star Wars tribute: Blue Harvest.  The love is defintiely there, but are the laughs there too?

The Oscar Meme Challenge Part 1

15 November, 2008 (21:50) | Random Thoughts | By: Steve

Legend tells of a movie blog called Filmicability who deigned to challenge the cinematic judgment of Sarahnomics. Sarahnomics was asked to rewrite history in her own image and create her own results for every Oscar winning Best Picture dating back to time immemorial… deciding that immemorial was just a fancy way of saying “the mid-seventies”, Sarah instead generated a list of movies that should have won the Best Picture Oscar to suit the last quarter of the last century… and a little bit of this one.

As joiners in the true sense of the word - The Film Cynics have been more than happy to take the torch from Sarahnomics and come up with their own alternate Oscar Winners lists, and before long will be ready to challenge the next blog to cross our path.

Steve’s List: (Actual winners in parentheses)

1974 - The Godfather Part II (The Godfather Part II)
1975 - One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest)
1976 - Taxi Driver (Rocky)
1977 - Star Wars (Annie Hall)
1978 - Superman: The Movie (The Deer Hunter)
1979 - Apocalypse Now (Kramer vs. Kramer)
1980 - Empire Strikes Back (Ordinary People)
1981 - Time Bandits (Chariots of Fire)
1982 - The Wall (Gandhi)
1983 - The Meaning of Life (Terms of Endearment)
1984 - Dune (Amadeus)
1985 - Brazil (Out of Africa)
1986 - The Mission (Platoon)
1987 - Full Metal Jacket (The Last Emperor)
1988 - Dangerous Liaisons (Rain Man)
1989 - Do the Right Thing (Driving Miss Daisy)
1990 - Goodfellas (Dances With Wolves)
1991 - Silence of the Lambs (Silence of the Lambs)
1992 - Last of the Mohicans (Unforgiven)
1993 - True Romance (Schindlers List)
1994 - Pulp Fiction (Forrest Gump)
1995 - Seven (Braveheart)
1996 - Jerry Maguire (The English Patient)
1997 - L.A. Confidential (Titanic)
1998 - Saving Private Ryan (Shakespeare in Love)
1999 - American Beauty (American Beauty)
2000 - Traffic (O Brother Where Art Thou)
2001 - Road to Perdition (A Beautiful Mind)
2002 - The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (Chicago)
2003 - The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (Lord of the Rings)
2004 - Hellboy (Million Dollar Baby)
2005 - Hustle & Flow/Match Point (Crash)
2006 - Pan’s Labyrinth/Children of Men (The Departed)
2007 - Ratatouille/Hot Fuzz (No Country for Old Men)

A Hero has to Die!!!

10 November, 2008 (23:34) | Random Thoughts | By: Brian

I know Steve is so over this show that he will probably not even read this post. But I just tried to sit through another mind blowingly boring episode of Heroes on NBC. It was another “flashback” episode. You know the ones where they go back in time to tell you how we got to where we are, even though we don’t know where we are going. And they can conveniently change the past to make the future makes sense. I guess Tim Kring should have written more then 1 season of a synopsis down. It would be a great device if I cared about the present.

My biggest complaint is that no one ever dies. Hell, they are bringing back characters that were never even around in the first season. As much as I like Robert Forrester as an actor, I don’t need him in this show. So lets take a vote. I have a poll on the side of the main page, asking for your opinion on which of the original “Heroes” should bite the bullet and move on to direct to DVD movies. If they are lucky.

Rachel Getting Married

10 November, 2008 (16:35) | Reviews | By: Brian

Movies about addiction and rehabilitation are not generally a pleasant experience. Usually the characters are quite depressing and sad, making you glad that your own life does not in anyway mimic what you see on the screen. That is why I was quite pleased in the outcome of Jonathan Demme’s latest film, “Rachel Getting Married”, starring Anne Hathaway in a very un-Anne role. She plays Kym, the drug addicted black sheep of her family, who in her youth was responsible for an event that tore the family apart, and one that they are not quite over yet. She returns from rehab to attend her sisters wedding. That is pretty much it. But you can guess that when you take a self centered drug addict and put them in a situation that is not about them, the conflicts and past problems will arise. And boy do they ever.

What I really liked about this movie, is the way that Demme used the music. It was never as a second thought, all the music in the film is either being played by musicians at the house or from a car stereo or some other naturally occurring device. If there is no music being played, then there is no music music in the film. It was a very nice touch, especially nowadays when most films try to make their mark with what songs they can cram into the movie. It was very cool, and also adding to the cool factor was the fact that Tunde Adebimpe played the groom, but aside from one a cappella song, he wasn’t forced into bringing his day job to the role.

Anne Hathaway is getting rave reviews for her role in this movie and rightfully so. She delivers a solid performance and deserves every bit of attention that she is getting. Is it strong enough to garner an Oscar nom? possibly. But what it does do, it shows that this young woman has the ability to play roles other than the young New Yorker who goes shopping/gets new job/falls in love/acts adorable in every movie. The one thing that struck me as odd though is in the previews for this movie, they were promoting Annes new movie “Bride Wars” which looks like a huge pile of shit and so cliched that it makes me wonder how she picks her roles. Out of a hat? on a dare? probably by paycheck, but then I can’t blame her. The good roles generally don’t pay well and the bad ones do. Hopefully she can keep on doing the good and the bad can become a thing of her past.

Layer Cake Review Now Online

10 November, 2008 (11:59) | Reviews | By: Steve

Our review of Matthew Vaughn’s modern gangster classic Layer Cake is now online for your viewing pleasure.