The Ice Harvest.

Review #1616: The Ice Harvest.

Cast: 

John Cusack (Charlie Arglist), Billy Bob Thornton (Vic Cavanaugh), Connie Nielsen (Renata Crest), Randy Quaid (Bill Guerrard), Oliver Platt (Pete Van Heuten), Mike Starr (Roy Gelles), Ned Bellamy (Sidney), T.J. Jagodowski (Officer Tyler), and David Pasquesi (Councilman Williams) Directed by Harold Ramis (#138 - Bedazzled (2000), #208 - Caddyshack, #342 - Groundhog Day, and #804 - National Lampoon's Vacation)

Review: 

"This movie is about people who've lost any sense of meaning in their lives."

One wonders where the time goes when it comes to films that can be defined by one word: "should". But why don't we do a few pleasantries first, since this does fall somewhat into the yuletide spirit (a sort of alternative to the alternative of films set on Christmas Eve), and it can be said that there are some promising names involved. This was the tenth of eleven films directed by Harold Ramis, although it is one of four that he did not also write the script for, with writers Richard Russo (a fellow novelist in his own right) and Robert Benton responsible for the script (they had worked together previously on Twilight seven years prior, since Benton directed that film alongside adapting one of Russo's books into a film). They wrote the film as an adaptation of the novel of the same name by Scott Philips, which was written in 2000 as his first work (incidentally, the Wichita native had done a brief spell as a screenwriter), which he thought was unfilmable (he ended up liking the adaptation, so that is one relief). A book review from the New York Times had attracted Benton and Russo to doing a script, and Ramis eventually was brought in to do a film made with cheaper budgeting than usual for director and stars for Focus Features (who greenlighted it after six weeks for $14 million). There were a few differences made from novel to screen, such as the time (originally 1979) and the dynamic between Cusack and Platt's character (which went from brother-in-laws to friends who each were married to the same person).

So yes, there is that magic word that goes for this film. It should be better, honestly. Namely, it should be funnier, but if that option seems a bit locked out, then one should hope for a darker movie instead. This was the only film Ramis did that resembled a film noir, and it sure is a shame to see those results play out here. Simply put, it is a shaggy dog noir that seems to parade itself for 89 minutes with pacing equivalent to a fish in a tiny glass bowl. Dissapointment has never tasted so cold, particularly because one should know better when it comes to making an interesting experience with a cast like this. The performances are here and there, fleeting in those moments of actual, meaningful, useful, time to highlight. Cusack does fine in digging through the molasses, one who mixes smarm with dogged hope in the face of seedier folks around him. In other words, he comes off fine being the most likable one of the group. Thornton comes and goes with a lead heart towards scuzziness that seems to merit more interest, as if somehow he seems more interesting to see in the seen/unseen aspects of below-the-belt demeanor. Nielsen is okay, but one doesn't really seem grabbed by her as any sort of fatale presence, where one feels that they are instead waiting for the train to come in instead, as if vacancy is the one thing needed in a quasi-noir. Platt turns out to have the most presence in the film (obvious when playing a drunk), but while he is amusing in parts, one tunes him out gradually in the same way they might do if having to see an intoxicated fellow around them for nearly an hour. Of course there is Quaid, who in theory could have an interesting performance in booming presence....he doesn't show up until the last twenty minutes, and one wishes for something more from seeing him in one room and just that. Starr and Bellamy do fine in those small parts of amusement (with the former relegated to mostly voice duty, such as a bit when trapped in a box), so there is that for a positive, in the sense that mediocrity doesn't strike in every aspect of the movie. As a whole, it is an okay movie that should know better, one that seems vacant in either comic or dark aspirations, a movie that will come and go for 89 minutes with the bare minimum in shaggy dog ambition that is more bland than bleak to really be interesting to talk about beyond just the simple word of "should" to describe it. In other words, it should be more interesting, it should have a better pace, it should be anything else than it ultimately turns out to be, and it should be recommended for those who have an average streak with talented folks that should do better.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Bulworth.

Review #1518: Bulworth.

Cast: 
Warren Beatty (Senator Jay Bulworth), Halle Berry (Nina), Oliver Platt (Dennis Murphy), Don Cheadle (L.D.), Paul Sorvino (Graham Crockett), Jack Warden (Eddie Davers), Isaiah Washington (Darnell), Christine Baranski (Constance Bulworth), and Amiri Baraka (Rastaman) Directed by Warren Beatty (#205 - Dick Tracy)

Review: 
"I think it’s crazy to take what aspires to be a work of art and loquaciously expand on what you think about it. Ideally you’d like a movie to speak for itself. It’s like giving subtitles to one, two or three years of work. But nowadays it’s such a mass medium you have to. Especially if you make very few films."

It is hard to state how much responsibility one can really have on a film if they have enough self-confidence and control in oneself to back themselves up. Warren Beatty certainly belongs in that category. By the time the New Hollywood era rolled around in the late 1960s, he had already worked with numerous respected directors while eventually growing an interest in becoming more than just a star in a production, such as producing the hit Bonnie and Clyde (1967). In a film career that started in 1961, he has starred in 23 films (with considerable time spent in other interests such as family), while also serving as producer on ten of them, directing six of them (starting with Heaven Can Wait in 1978) and writing for five (he does all three for this film). He has made his films his own way to his own interests like a good director does that has received quite a deal of attention, such as an Academy Award for Best Director with Reds (1981) and an Irving G. Thalberg Award (meant to honor creative producers such as him) in 1999.

One can only imagine what kind of film can be made on the pitch Beatty had for the film: "A man is depressed, makes a deal for life insurance, takes a hit out on his life, then falls in love with a girl, changes his mind and tries to call the whole thing off.” It only was after he was given the green light to go with it that led to what he wanted beyond that pitch (in other words, a lost idealist finding the words to what he really wants to say to everybody that involve race relations and class disparity). Beatty sought others who helped him in the past with ideas, such as James Toback (writer on Bugsy) and Jeremy Pikser (previously a historical consultant on Reds and credited co-writer on this film with Beatty) while Aaron Sorkin reportedly did a re-write on the script, and the approach of hip-hop came about because of Beatty favoring it as a "great comic contrast." In a way, I had to resist my first instincts when it came to approaching the film. It definitely is a strange film in terms of tone that will either seem really dated or somehow fairly prescient in what it means to society as a message film that verges away from others of its type by going off the rails at certain points with humor. It is an acrid film, one that argues for one to find the spirit in them to rise above market research and go against the grain to speak the straight truth - no matter how it may come out to some in its clash of ideal and compromise. Is it a prescient film about the nature of straight-talking politicians? I don't know if I would go that far (because just saying "It's the film for [current year] politics" is complete hokum), but it definitely has a bit of meaningful sting as a wakeup call of sorts for what matters most: Stick to the issues and just money compromises (whether Democrat or not). It certainly isn't perfect by any means, but I did find myself soon enjoying its attempts at satire that hit more often in striking lines with a beat towards the present without becoming too dated in outlandish histrionics.

One might come to see Beatty have his share of dialogue in rap, but they will generally also stay to see him engage in some straight charisma that will rally some insight alongside some decent timing that never seems too buffoonish, although the romance is debatable. His little jabs at everyone along the way in talking facts (or at least straight-edge ones for 1998, like supporting single-payer healthcare), for better or worse. Berry provides some intrigue, although really they seem more suited as a counteract than anything involving romance mostly because it also just happens to be interlocked with this assassin stuff very disjointedly - she has a good sense of careful charm while playing against a beleaguered (or perhaps strange) Beatty. Platt plays the sniveling type that surely was meant to be an amusing supporting counterpart to management, which he does fine despite not really being that funny (one almost would rather see a criminally underused Warden in that role instead). Cheadle makes fragmented appearances that likely deserves more to really do, which can be reflected with a just as quiet Sorvino in their deep presences within certain interests. On the whole, its first half seems more suited to more interesting moments of farce and perhaps some insight moreso than the stranger (if not still curious) second half that trades in a suit for contemporary clothing and becomes perhaps a bit more hollower than it really believes it should be. I can't say it really kicks in for all of its 108 minutes to be anything more than a passing curiosity of its time, because it really does dwell a bit all over the place, but the rails can go off and still click fine. The ending yearns to inspire a lasting thought about being a ghost with a song to sing for when it comes to saying (and being) what you believe in, and whether the film succeeds in actually generating a push for curiosity about certain aspects of society (race, and I mean more than just asking if you can solve racism by having everybody mix in as one race) is up to how much of it really resonates in the final margin call.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Beethoven.

Review #577: Beethoven.

Cast
Charles Grodin (George Newton), Bonnie Hunt (Alice Newton), Dean Jones (Dr. Varnick), Nicholle Tom (Ryce), Christopher Castile (Ted), Sarah Karr (Emily), Oliver Platt (Harvey), Stanley Tucci (Vernon), David Duchovny (Brad), and Patricia Heaton (Brie) Directed by Brian Levant (#491 - Jingle All the Way)

Review
Beethoven is a strange idea to begin with because no only was this produced by Ivan Reitman, this wasn't released in the 1980's. Of all the decades that had story ideas, the 80's had the weirdest, and Beethoven is right up that alley. The 90's? Maybe not as much, but let's get to the question of this review: How is this movie? The movie is probably more cute then good, all because of one big St. Bernard. Charles Grodin is a fun actor to watch because his facial expressions to this weird plot of a movie and his timing is just right. The dog is just a dog, growing from small ball of cuteness to a hug tub of stuff, and he is certainly charming...for a dog. The rest of the cast (insert your David Duchovny X-Files joke here) isn't bad, they certainly work well with each other. The movie has some quirky moments, and while it isn't really that funny, it's a decent family flick, harmless to say the least.

And yes, I will review the sequel soon.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.