Good Night, and Good Luck.

History lesson? A lot of films are even when they're not biopics or sweeping epics. This one really is straight from the pages of history, being Edward R. Murrow's "attack" on Senator Joseph McCarthy and his House Unamerican Activities Committee. Attack is in quotes because Murrow does not so much attack as try to reveal the whole truth, at the same time providing editorial comment. Every minute of this film is fascinating as a result -- from George Clooney's schlumpy producer to Ray Wise's unstable, fearful co-anchor to, of course, David Strathairn's layered rendition of Murrow. Strathairn is a marvel, no more so than during the few minutes preceding his first editorial. He clearly becomes more and more nervous as the seconds tick by, chain smoking like a fiend, but focused on the task at hand and obviously far more eager for this type of news show than the insipid programs he usually anchors. Clooney has done two brave things: shot his film in black and white, thereby alienating one half of his potential audience immediately, and had McCarthy play himself, which doesn't necessarily alienate the other half, but creates more difficult situations for the screenwriter (i.e., how to integrate film of McCarthy and still have the story flow). Clooney's decision to include the story of the husband and wife (Robert Downey Jr. and Patricia Clarkson) who kept their marriage secret from their co-workers is far less successful even though it does mirror the secrecy and fear inherent in the creation of the Committee itself. It feels added on to the plot. Still, for those of us who are fascinated and impressed by the actor-turned- director Clint Eastwood, I think the protégé has arrived.

year: 2005
length: 93 min.
rating: 3.5
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0433383/combined

The General

I've seen a few of Buster Keaton's films, and while a couple of them are favorites (especially The Navigator), most of them have such extraordinarily boring parts that I've fallen asleep watching them on DVD. And there lies the crux of the problem. Silent movies are not meant to be watched on DVD -- they're meant to have the full force of a live orchestra or organ scoring the plot for you. And what a difference this can make if you have the right silent movie and the right accompanist. I was lucky enough to see this film in our restored 1920s downtown movie house accompanied by one of our most renowned silent film organists. I'd heard this was one of Keaton's best films, but I'd heard that about most of his films. How happy I am to have been proved wrong. Based on a true story from the Civil War, a hapless, unlucky-in-love train engineer has his engine stolen from him by the Northerners and races across the Southland trying to get it back. Of course, he's using borrowed engines, as well as other conveyances, to do this and if you know anything about Keaton's magic, you can guess what kinds of stunts you'll see. Except that you'll be wrong; they'll be better than what you guess. I've never seen a stunt like Keaton pulls off to remove two logs from across the tracks as his train is approaching them. It has to be seen to be believed. This film cost a fortune in its day, using multiple trains, often filmed together on the same track and/or being destroyed. In that respect, it's similar to the best special effects created today, except that these are all real, there are no stuntmen, and they're unbelievably dangerous. I have to admire every actor Keaton hired, especially the woman playing his sweetheart, who of course is abducted by the bad guys (read: Northerners) and ends up "helping" Keaton. Along with gasps of disbelief and cheers when a stunt is enacted beautifully, you'll be laughing till your sides aches at Keaton and his screen love's interactions. I want very much to own this film on DVD, but I know the small screen and (usually) bogus accompaniment won't do my memory justice. I'll just have to hope the theater runs it again soon. I'll be there, right in the first row.

year: 1927
length: 116 min.
rating: 4.0
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0017925/combined

Garden State

What a sweet, quirky little film. I know that if I were 10 years younger, this would be a film to see over and over and over...kind of like how I felt about The Breakfast Club. It focuses on the travails of those in their late 20s to early 30s, in particular a numb film actor (Zach Braff), an epileptic former figure skater (Natalie Portman), a grave-digging slacker (Peter Sarsgaard), and a self-made millionaire with an unfurnished mansion and a golf cart for roaming around all the empty rooms. Plus a guy, his wife and baby who live in a grounded boat on the edge of a deep canyon-quarry. Did I say quirky? I meant kooky. There is a plot that reveals itself at a nice pace, an ending that matches the rest of the film, and some nice camera touches (the trippy spin-the-bottle scenes are a hoot). For a first screenwriting attempt, and a directorial debut, and both these things being done by a new actor on the Hollywood scene (Braff, currently on Scrubs), this is phenomenal work. He should pat himself on the back, write more scripts, get in touch with excellent directors and learn at their feet. Whether he can write anything non-angsty and more universal remains to be seen, but it's an excellent start.

year: 2004
length: 109 min.
rating: 3.0
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0333766/combined

The Grapes of Wrath

But then there's John Ford. Who can turn any film into a social diatribe, and make it entertaining and informational as well. (Say what, you say? See my review of What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?) So, classic film is not all silly and overblown, of course not. I've never read Steinbeck's book, so I don't know how this film compares. (In general, I like reading books after watching films of books. The other way around doesn't work for me; for that reason, I won't watch Seabiscuit or The Cider House Rules.) The film is such a polished production, I'm not sure it would matter much in this case. Henry Fonda is once again perfect, this time as an ex-con traveling back to his Dust bowl-era family in Oklahoma, only to find them kicked off their land and in the process of moving the whole family to California. It is as apt a depiction of the lives of farmers, migrant workers, and the poor today as it was in 1940. Although there may be additional factors at work today, the plight of those who depend on rich landowners is as close to the same as to make no never mind. Ford's characters talk about workers' rights nearly non-stop throughout the picture, which sounds as if it could be too much like your college-level American history class, but this is not at all the case. Mostly because of the excellent acting -- Fonda and Jane Darwell and John Carradine (yes, the father of David Carradine) and, well, everyone really. I rank this film up there with Sullivan's Travels, another must-see Depression-era film. If you ever see these double-billed at your local art film theater, drop everything and go.

year: 1940
length: 128 min.
rating: 4.0
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032551/combined

Good Bye, Lenin!

Right after the closing credits started rolling, the couple in front of me said "What a charming film!" That, and the brilliant concept the film is predicated on, make it one of two films so far this year that are a "must-see" (yes, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is the second one). The film is not without its flaws (that darn boom operator, and the numerous teeny tiny plot holes) but those really, truly don't matter by the time you get to the end. The director has crafted a film based on his experiences living in East Germany before and after the wall fell, and has written a fabricated story around his mother being in a heart attack-induced coma during reunification. In order to keep her stable, he must make her believe that East Germany still exists. This is both funny and touching at near simultaneous moments throughout the film (in no scene more so than when the statue of Lenin is helicoptered past the mother, pointing his finger at her as he flies by). And underneath it all is the radical notion that elements of socialist East Germany weren't so half bad. Or at least that a mix of capitalism and socialism is better than the polar opposites we have now in the world. I heartily endorse the film, and recommend it to anyone interested in different world views. And those who like to laugh hard.

year: 2003
length: 121 min.
rating: 3.5
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0301357/combined

Girl With a Pearl Earring

This so rarely happens -- I like a film better because I originally read the book. Usually, I'm disappointed in a director's vision because I had my own vision while reading. (Lord of the Rings is another exception to the rule.) In this case, I enjoyed the film better because someone (read: art director) cared enough to make every scene look like a Vermeer painting. And since one of the intents of the book is to enhance your appreciation of Vermeer's masterpieces, this is manifested as subtext in the film. I found nearly every image breath-taking, and I don't have qualms with the story -- a young Dutch maid secretly becomes a model for a famous artist -- as some seem to. Since it mirrors Tracy Chevalier's novel, perhaps it's the book people should take issue with. Scarlett Johansson is perfect. When she finally turns her head to the camera with the pearl in her ear and the blue and yellow wraps on her head, you think "how lucky were they, finding an actress who can do subtle and who looks the part?" Colin Firth is better here than in recent films, if only because he gets a chance to use those chaste smoldering glances he became famous for in Pride and Prejudice. And, in one of my more surreal movie-going moments, I watched 28 Days Later... several hours after seeing this film. Yes, that is Cillian Murphy in both films (starring in the former, while only window-dressing in the latter), and I never even noticed until the rolling credits. But, that's a review for another day...

year: 2003
length: 95 min.
rating: 3.5
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0335119/combined

The Great Dictator

Yet another film about Hitler. But so different from any you've seen before. Not quite serious and not quite funny. And in deadly earnest in places you wouldn't expect. I wish I'd seen this on the big screen for the riveting scenes, in particular the dance with the blow-up globe, shaving the man in time to Brahms, and of course, the final speech. At first, I thought I was going to be distracted by the fact that sound was coming out of Charlie Chaplin's mouth, but I quickly forgot that and was wowed by his genius. I didn't think it was possible to make a film that is knee-slappingly funny in parts and so poignant in others that tears well up. I can't think of a recent film that's done that to me. It is ridiculous to me that some critics call this "a film that seems an indictment of the Nazi regime." Seems? Even in hindsight I don't think it's possible not to see this as a blistering attack on right-wing politics and the treatment of Jews, at the very least. It's no wonder he had to escape the US for his left-leaning tendencies not meshing with McCarthy politics. But what a pity that we didn't get 20 more years of good film out of him.

year: 1940
length: 124 min.
rating: 3.5
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032553/combined

Groundhog Day

I'm convinced that this film is based on a short story that I read in high school. (I don't know the name of it, and if this rings a bell, let me know as it has both me and the entire reference staff stumped.) In the story, a man is promised a whole lotta money to be locked up in a house for 5 years. He accepts and you see him go through certain stages -- the enjoy-life-to-the-fullest stage (going on benders, eating tons of food, etc.), depression (having become fed up with his situation), weary acceptance, and ultimately the realization that he has a chance to become a better person. He reads books he's never read before, and learns to play music and compose his own music. When the five years are up, his phone rings and he's shocked. He'd forgotten that he was a prisoner. Bill Murray goes through very similar, albeit much more funny, circumstances trying to get past February 2nd in Punxatawny, Pennsylvania. In the process he becomes a well-rounded, un-selfish, nice guy instead of the boor he was. And then the girl falls for him. This is one of my fave Murray portrayals (Ghostbusters and Lost in Translation are also at the top of the list, with The Royal Tenenbaums ever so close behind). He gets it all right -- the humor and the pathos. On top of it all, we also get some insight into what it must be like to do take after take after take...

year: 1993
length: 101 min.
rating: 4.0
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107048/combined

Go West / The Scarecrow / The Paleface

A lot of the classic silents are now being released by Kino Video on DVD in a nice format: one feature film and two shorts. I watched this one, since I had heard that Go West was one of Buster Keaton's best feature films. It's the story of a down-and- out man who stumbles into work as a cowboy. As you can imagine, there is much fumbling and many prat-falls and even better, in this film one of the stars is a cow. Yup, and she's good, too. However, to be honest, I admit that I preferred the shorts, especially The Scarecrow. The genius of Keaton, besides his comedic physical prowess, was the ingenious contraptions he designed. A Victrola that turns into a stove? Salt and pepper shakers that fly across the room on strings as the diners require them? A bed that turns into a piano? I have a feeling that with his feature film, it's as if he had too much time to perform his magic, and so it ended up diluted for the audience.

years: 1925 / 1920 / 1922
length: 69 min. / 17 min. / 33 min.
rating for all: 3.0
IMDB links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0015863/combined
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011656/combined
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0012543/combined

Good Morning

The appeal of this film for U.S. audiences lies in the incredible contrast between middle-class living here and in Japan. They are packed like sardines in the suburbs of Tokyo, yet seem perfectly content with that. No one ever knocks, they just walk in, slip off their shoes and call out "Anyone home?". Makes me shiver. The film revolves around the veneer of politeness that exists in such situations. Under the surface, everyone suspects everyone else and conversations among neighbors play out like that old game telephone tag. Two of the children in this suburb are desperate to watch TV, a new thing at that time, and beg their parents to own one, which they refuse because of the expense. The children are scolded and take a vow of silence to prove their point. As you can imagine, silence ends up being much more effective than talking. Yasujiro Ozu has a very simple touch; there's really just the story and not much else, but that doesn't deter from the effect of the film. The most amusing thing for me was a portrayal of what was considered a "bad woman" in the suburbs. She wore red and listened to jazz music -- gasp!

original title: Ohayô
year: 1959
length: 94 min.
rating: 3.5
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053134/combined

The Ghost and Mrs. Muir

This is quite a unique film. A love affair between a Victorian woman and the ghost who inhabits the house she owns. The themes all focus on denial (no such things as ghosts, it was all a dream, the man she's going to marry isn't already married) but the reason to watch is the acting. Rex Harrison has never been a favorite of mine, but he transforms into the crotchety old seaman who takes a fancy to his tenant against his will. Gene Tierney, who in close-ups looks a bit ridiculous, shines as the prim, starchy, independent woman who won't give way. Probably a bit daring in the 1940s, what with her striking out on her own and raising her daughter alone after her husband dies. Shocking! The only thing I thought was rather silly was the lengthy shots of frothing, billowing ocean waves as they crash to shore. It's almost like they were added as pauses in the film and weren't connected to any particular scene. In general, though, a sweet, kindly, pleasant film at its core.

year: 1947
length: 104 min.
rating: 3.5
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0039420/combined

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

I will confess right up front that I don't much like Westerns. I think it's something about the role women play (either they're being punished or they're there for the guys to look at, but hey, that's their role in Hitchcock movies and I stomach those pretty well) or maybe it's because the way they make reference to good vs. bad is not how I personally see these weighty issues. Case in point, Clint Eastwood stars as the "good" guy in this classic Western, but how good is someone who shoots 5 guys dead in the space of 2 minutes so he can get a chance at laying his hands on $200,000? And I don't buy the argument that that's just the way things were then. Eli Wallach plays the "ugly" guy (what does that actually mean?), and in some respects you empathize with him more than with Eastwood. OK, so he shoots a guy who's come to kill him while he's soaking in the bathtub, but he gets to deliver a great line afterwards the essence of which we can't not agree with: "When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk." Plus he has this hilarious tic worth watching for, similar to Toshirô Mifune's tic in Akira Kurosawa's samurai films (there are many parallels between samurai and Western flicks). The music is a hoot, constantly making fun of what's happening on screen. And Eastwood is so young! He's nowhere near as scary here as in the Dirty Harry films, but you're aware that he's going to be a force to be reckoned with later.

original title: Il Buono, Il Brutto, Il Cattivo
year: 1966
length: 162 min.
rating: 3.5
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060196/combined

The Green Mile

Even though the performances are strong in this film (hey, there's Sam Rockwell again!), there was something about it that didn't quite work. My guess is because it all hangs together too neatly. Something that happens early on in the film, and that you were scratching your head over to figure out why it was included, is brought back later as explanation. Other that that, it is very reminiscent of The Shawshank Redemption, the first Frank Darabont film, which holds a special place in my heart. He is clearly drawn to stories of wrongly convicted men, and obviously Stephen King, since both films are based on his stories. Where he gets the film right is in the production design -- you really do feel you're in a 1920s prison.

year: 1999
length: 188 min.
rating: 3.0
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120689/combined