these films and see what kind of effect they have on you. These are only recommendations. I know there is a ton of low-budget and even larger-budget films that have slipped under the radar and have gone unseen by the majority of people. Wouldn’t it be a shame if they stayed that way?

Last Call: tells the story of the last months of writer F. Scott Fitzgerald’s life as he became gripped more and more by alcoholism and his inability to confront what he deemed a failed writing career.

Factotum: tells the story of a wandering, alcoholic, womanizing writer and his struggles with writing, women, and life in general as he survives day to day through jobs no one would want to work. Based on the novel of the same name by Charles Bukowski.

Love and music and life

La Haine: a French black-and-white film about a single day in the tumultuous lives of three youngsters living in a multi-ethnic housing project.

High Fidelity: a movie about a man trying to get his ex-girlfriend who has left him and upon leaving him whom he has realized he actually truly loves. In the process he learns a good deal about himself, life, and romance.

Half-Nelson: the best movie that no one knows about. A elementary school teacher with an idealistic nature is a depressive basehead having fallen into the reality that he cannot deal with each day without cocaine.

Plenty more where these came from. I’ll try to get more up later!

Gosling as the lovelorn lover in The Notebook

My own take on the matter can be narrowed down to a few reasons: storyline, story cohesion, cowardice on the director’s and actors’ parts. Notice I didn’t say bad acting or bad endings or overindulgence in something or other. Here are a list of movies I feel fell flat as a pancake.

Stinkers:

The Notebook: Yeah, I said it. And, yeah, I saw it. A few times, actually. Romantic? No way. Two 16-year olds date for a summer and one takes off on the other for a more realistic prospect. Somehow their love endures though and they never forget each other, can’t over each other, always want each other, etc. Same ol’, same ol’. Cliche to an intolerable degree. I’m astounded Gosling, a first-rate actor, signed on for such a low-rate role. The thing that ruined the film was the side story. It made it original but took away from the love story. Sparks, the author of the book on which the movie is based, should have taken more time originating and added substance to the main story and cut out the nonsensical back story.

Nothing like the real Venom.

Alexander: This movie had the potential for greatness; that is, before it started. Alexander’s a huge historical figure and

Farrell, you just don't look right on a horse.

there’s a great story behind his life. And a great actor, Colin Farrell, was playing him. He put on a sub-par performance but the story was focused on all the wrong things. Plus Angelina Jolie played his mother.

Every Spiderman movie, X-men movie and every Batman movie between the first and the latest: Why? Because the possibilities are endless and they all miss on all cyclinders. Maybe the problem is they can’t or shouldn’t be made into movies because they don’t translate well. Maybe the villains are weak and the heroes have little resemblance to the cartoons.  Do not take the words cartoons lightly. There was power in all those episodes. Their movies have done them no justice.

Andrew

Raw, disturbing...much like Selby's novel

So this blog will be devoted to films. Remember that these selections could easily be argued. Overrated films are movies I watched with high hopes and got let down or movies a lot of people think were good and I actually think were bad. Underrated films are movies few find very good but I think they were exceptional. These definitions might have been obvious but I wanted to make everything clear.

Most Underrated Films:

Double or nothin'?

Love & Basketball: A fan favorite but the critics inexplicably didn’t pay much attention to it. It’s a love story and one of the best I’ve ever seen. This will resonate with you. Sanaa Lathan gives a magnificent performance.

Antz: Yes, this film was animated but so what? It has a deeper message than what meets the eye. It’s definitely got all the facets of an excellent movie from acting to suspense to action to poignancy and they are weaved together with superb directing.

Requiem for a Dream: This movie will stay with you. Some of it’s difficult to watch but the actors give bone-tingling performances. You can’t be unaffected or unmoved by Requiem for  a Dream. It strikes a chord the majority of films never even come close to.

Most Overrated Films:

Mystic River: I’ve heard the book on which it’s based is very good. The movie didn’t really affect me at all. It had some strong acting but none of it rang true with me. Put another way, I knew its material was strong but on the screen it fell flat and came forth empty.  I can’t believe it won a few Oscars.

Fantasia: This film was horribly boring.  I saw it once and vowed to never see it again. I honestly don’t know how someone can sit through it in its pathetically false entirety. What really happened? This was NOT poetry on the screen. I’ll show you poetry on the screen–check out the movie Blow. Talk about an underrated movie.

What this movie could have proved if only it had...

American Beauty: I did like this movie but I was disappointed by it at the same time. It could have been so much better, so much more fearless. It was an original idea and a brilliant one but the director didn’t go far enough. He could have explored the subjects of this film much more deeply.

There you have it. Expect another two blogs by Friday.

A flawless, heart-rending performance

Who are some underrated actors? Don Cheadle? Alec Baldwin? Patricia Arquette? Bill Pullman? Underrated movies? Jumanji? Garden State? Closer?

What about overrated actors? Nicolas Cage? Keanu Reeves? Melanie Griffith? Overrated movies? Star Wars? Rambo? Finding Nemo?

Here’s my take. Note that when I say overrated or underrated I mean both underrated or overrated by critics or fans–that is, perhaps overrated by critics and/or overrated by fans or vice versa.

Underrated actors:

1. Ryan Gosling: maybe not especially underrated, he was nominated for an Oscar, but this guy is mostly identified with the romantic film The Notebook in which he was good but not nearly as good as he has been in some of his other films. Check out Half-Nelson, Fracture, and Stay.

2. Ryan Reynolds: he isn’t really known as a brilliant or even a good actor. Some probably know him only because he’s married to Scarlett Johannson. But he acts with a rare passion and competency. His roles aren’t limited to action movies or romantic comedies. Look for him to shine in the future, playing dynamically complex characters in a broad range of films.

3. Maria Bello: I wouldn’t be surprised if you don’t know the name. She was the bar manager in Coyote Ugly, if you

Intrepidly captures her character's essence.

remember that movie. She is versatile and has a presence on the screen that few possess. I wouldn’t be surprised if she one day wins an Oscar. For now, she’ll continue putting forth poignantly emotional and sincere performances. Check her out in A History of Violence and The Cooler.

Overrated Actors:

1. Viggo Mortensen: many will vehemently disagree but I haven’t been really impressed with any of his performances. Especially when one considers how much he’s praised by critics. For me, his performances come off flat and lackluster, though the movies he stars in are quite good.

2. Bruce Willis: he may or may not be overrated. I don’t think movie critics think the world of him but some fans do. His movies have always been entertaining but not because of him. He’s an example of an actor who acts in blockbuster movies but does not try any more complex roles. The Sixth Sense was a small, and unimpressive, digression from this pattern.

3.  Nicolas Cage: Name a good Nicolas Cage movie? Maybe you can name a few. But how many movies has this guy played essentially the same character recycled? He follows the same pattern Willis has followed to and while in stardom. Cage has recently been on a tear,

Willis unsuccessfully exploring a new kind of role.

acting in several action thrillers in the past few years–three in 2009 alone. They all aren’t very good. One movie he does actually act in is Adaptation. Cage has ability, I will give him that. More ability than most actors. But he doesn’t seem to test or even use it often. Leaving Los Vegas was Cage at his best.

The man.

Who are you favorite actors? Why? I’m into the newer movies so I don’t have much of an opinion about older actors. I love Brando though. Man had talent but it didn’t come easy. The complicated thing here is are they your favorite actors because you like them or because you think they’re the most talented, or both? Even if we love a certain actor, I think we can put that aside when he or she gives a terrible performance. For example, Al Pacino in the execrable 88. Here is my scoring rubric:

Talent

On-Screen Presence

Difficulty/Depth of Roles

Range

Adroitness

Have any other ideas for what should go on the scoring sheet? Well, based on those, these are some of the best to me:

1. Leonardo Dicaprio–has played many different characters, all of them very difficult. Digs deep with every role and

Becomes his character on the deepest levels.

brings something uncanny to every movie. You’ll never see him do a movie like Men in Black. He acts with passion and brings something ingenious to his characters. Dicaprio never gives a lame performance and one has to admire when an actor puts heart and soul into what he’s doing and the result is brilliance.

2. Denzel Washington–best of the best. Intense, dynamic, conquers every role. Denzel brings fire and genius to the movies he chooses to partake in. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Denzel Washington movie that wasn’t very good. He’s got unparalleled talent. Just try telling me a bad Denzel movie. Tell me one you didn’t like. That’s what I thought. He reaches a level of control, competency, and depth when acting that I don’t think any other actor can equal.

3. Halle Berry–Beautiful, fearless, and singularly brings art to her work. She’s taken on some of the toughest roles I’ve seen. She’s not afraid to challenge herself emotionally and temperamently when doing a movie. If you thought Monster’s Ball was brilliant, wait until you see her in The Things We Lost in the Fire. Berry deserved another Oscar for that heart-renching performance. She’s also got some of best range of any actor or actress out there. Check her out in Introducing Dorothy Dandridge. Some might argue Berry is not one of the best out there. But she is. She sets herself apart from the rest by how she reaches beyond the character to the human being in the her roles.

Brave versatility

A very pleasant place to raise the kids.

I saw Watchmen over the weekend and thought it was a pretty violent movie but not especially violent. If you want to see extreme violence, watch The Departed, Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003), The Silence of the Lambs, Saw, or Pan’s Labyrinth. All great movies but horrible violence. In one scene in The Departed, three straight guys get their heads shot off. In the Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003), after sawing off a guy’s leg, Scarface hoists him onto a hook and lets the dying man hang on it before he stuffs a bunch of salt into the remaining stump of his leg and ties a power towel around it to keep the salt stuck in the wound.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remains the scariest movie I’ve ever seen. That movie bothered me long after I’d watched it. It was really, in the worst sense of the word, sadistic. The silhouette of the dilapidated house against the smoky sky, abandoned to its owners’ devices in the most remote and haunted area one could imagine. I will provide a link so the brave and curious ones can understand what I mean. Warning: do not click this link if you can’t stomach blood and gore. I still don’t get, however, how a 270 pound man, swinging a chainsaw catches a seemingly healthy 25 year old.

Pan's Labyrinth, a violent and spiritual parable.

Is there such thing as too much violence in a movie? Does the rating really mean much? I watched my first R-rated movie when I was 8. I’m going to continue using The Texas Chainsaw Massacre because it was shocking to me. Is that level of violence necessary? The answer I usually get is that if it’s a scary movie, the point is to scare and the movie should be able to be as violent as it wants. Sometimes, in the case of movies that are especially violent but not scary movies per se, the level of violence is meant to depict real life situations and real life can unfortunately be very violent.

I know there’s been discussion over violence in the movies and whether it gets to be too much and how it should be viewed and rated. Think about it. Do you really think that the violence some films contain has the capacity to affect people on a

One psychiatrist you don't want to talk to.

psychological level and make them do violent things? I don’t buy it. I say it can’t be violent enough. If you pay to watch or just sit down and watch a rated-R movie, that means you’d better be willing to watch any degree of violence the film has. If you’re not willing to do that, don’t watch the movie. If we start censoring movies because of angry parents and such then where do you draw the line and how do you objectively censor them without taking away from_ the experience the movies offer for those who are willing to watch them regardless of the violence? I’m not a fan of censoring anything. Movies are a form of art, I believe. Film needs to be as real as possible to affect us as deeply as any other form of art. If you censor it, you’re unfairly limiting the vision of those involved in making the movies. It’s comparable to banning books because of pornographic content.

As Eminem said:

“So who’s bringin the guns in this country? (Hmm?)
I couldn’t sneak a plastic pellet gun through customs over in London
And last week, I seen a Schwarzenegger movie
where he’s shootin all sorts of these motherfuckers with a uzi
I see these three little kids, up in the front row,
screamin “Go,” with their 17-year-old Uncle
I’m like, “Guidance – ain’t they got the same moms and dads
who got mad when I asked if they liked violence?”"

Andrew

Few things are as fun as watching a scary film in theaters.

Scary movies. Scary? Really scary? If so, are they worth the scare? Any of them Oscar-worthy? Does that even matter? Probably not. Everyone goes to see scary movies to get creeped out, see some cool horror scenes, or for the sheer entertainment it provides. It’s hard to be critical of a scary film. The question is do they deserve the same caliber of review, praise or scathe, as films of other genres? I don’t think they do. Most of the horror flix I’ve seen have been overly bloody and violent. That’s speaking in generalities but the point remains: is not the purpose of a scary film to scare or to shock?

I guess the question is whether more can be done with or taken away from horror films. From what I’ve seen and heard, scary movies, at least recently (as far back as seven or eight years and possibly further), have been colossal disappointments.

Here’s a list of some of my favorite scary movies and the ones which were the scariest to me:

1. Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)

2. Amityville Horror (2005)

3. Poltergeist (1982)

4. The Shining (1980)

5. What Lies Beneath (2000)

I’ll blog more about this at another time.

AB

A great novel...a great film? Oh, I'm not sure.

I recently watched Brideshead Revisted, a novel written by Evelyn Waugh. Waugh wrote that the novel “deals with what is theologically termed ‘the operation of Grace’, that is to say, the unmerited and unilateral act of love by which God continually calls souls to Himself”. The book and film focus on the outdated values and beliefs of the aristocratic English Marchmain family.

The novel was good and the movie was, I thought, very good. The problem some might have with the latter was that it didn’t do much or, said another way, it didn’t say enough. It was a long movie but, overall, not much happened. The scenes were fragile glimpses meant to encompass the sacred and profane memories of Charles Ryder–the novel’s protagonist. However, this was the way in which the book was written and it is a literary technique modernists often used. I respect that the director stayed in tune and true to the nature of the novel but I can see people walking away wondering what it all meant and, if there were deeper meaning, was it worth understanding and did the film do enough to evidence it.

Does brilliance on the page translate into brilliance on the screen?

The discussion is do good or even excellent books translate into good or even excellent movies? I think of Mystic River, a novel by Dennis Lehane, and winner of a few awards (among them a few Oscars), The Great Gatsby, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, etc.

I don’t have a definitive answer but I’ll post again tonight and talk a little more about it. For now, mull it over.

"No one's chasing you this time"--Dicaprio with the real Frank Abagnale Jr.

Have you ever seen Catch Me If You Can? Leonardo Dicaprio plays the most successful conman/impostor in the history of the United States, Frank Abagnale Jr.  Do yourself a favor: go out to the rental store and rent it, or go on to NetFlix and get it, or find it on youtube as I did.  Dicaprio is excellent, encompassing not only Abagnale’s smooth tense confidence but also the unfortunate effects his parent’s divorce had on him. Tom Hanks plays Carl Hanratty, the FBI agent who pursues and eventually catches Abagnale. Christopher Walken gives a stellar portrayal of Abagnale’s tired and dejected father.

I was surprised when the movie ended. I’ll ruin the surprise but most people know the backstory before they watch the movie. Abagnale’s singular expertise and knowledge of checks and fraud were noticed by the FBI. They brought him in after he had served fewer than five years of his sentence and he worked for the FBI detecting fraud and scam artists until his parole was up.

Abagnale had  a hard time finding a job:

After his release Abagnale tried several jobs, including cook, grocer and movie projectionist, but he was fired from most of these upon having his criminal career discovered via background checks and not informing his employers that he was a former convict. Finding them unsatisfying, he approached a bank with an offer. He explained to the bank what he had done, and offered to speak to the bank’s staff and show various tricks that “paperhangers” use to defraud banks. His offer included the clause that stated if they did not find his speech helpful, they would owe him nothing; otherwise, they would only owe him $500, with an agreement that they would provide his name to other banks. The banks were impressed by the results, and he began a legitimate life as a security consultant.

Catch him if you can...

He has continued to work with and assist the FBI throughout his life ad even had a small part in Catch Me If You Can as one of the officers who arrested Abagnale. So there you have it. Abagnale tricked the world, impersonated an attorney, doctor, pilot, and a teaching assistant. At about the halfway point in the movie Hanratty tells Abagnale’s mother that he owed the government $1.5 million. And despite all the laws he broke and turmoil he caused, he didn’t even spend five years behind bars. I’m not petitioning for him to be put back in prison. I admire his intelligence and his cleverness. But it’s worthy of discussion. Could this happen today?

Abagnale said he did what he did because at the time he needed a lot of money. In the film, though, his motivation is his father. Abagnale was affected by his father’s plight. Dicaprio portrays a kid, just 16 when he was committing these crimes, desperately hoping he can bring his family back together and”get back” all the money the government had supposedly taken from his father. You can’t help but sympathize with Abagnale as the movie progresses. After all, he’s just a heartbroken kid, right?

When Hanratty asks him how he cheated on the Louisianna bar exam, Abagnale responds:  “I studied for two weeks and passed.”

Familiar Faces...

Who doesn’t like to rent a couple of movies every now and then? I do. The biggest problem is usually what movies to rent. You can always count on a Sean Penn film to bring seriousness and heavy dramatics. Will Smith brings action in some form. Penelope Cruz is an excellent actress, and I mean that. But name a movie she’s been in (Vicky Cristina Barcelona was surprisingly great)? OK, name another. Some are  layered in subtitles or are completely subtitles (because they’re Spanish movies). The movies I’ve seen her in have been good but subtitles can get agitating. We want to watch a movie, not read one. So, what’s the point? Well I’m going to throw out some top-notch movies I think everyone should go out and rent or order or find on the Internet. They are worth the hassle.

Wins your heart no matter what.

1. White Fang–a film based on a novel of the same name written by Jack London. It’s about a young man who goes looking for gold in the Yukon and befriends a wolf. It’s about adventure and companionship and contains some of the deepest pathos you could find in a movie.

2. The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles I–A classic. One of the greatest scenes in cinema history is when we first see Shredder and his long, daunting shadow stretches and descends. I’m sure if you’re from my generation you saw this movie when you were a kid and loved it. Watching it now, some of the scenes might be cheesy but it nevertheless will make you laugh, recall awesome memories, and still utterly impressed at how realistic those turtles look. Guarantee: After you see this movie, you will say: “Jeez, I wish they’d make another one.”

3. Half Nelson–Ryan Gosling gives a stellar emotionally numb performance as a teacher/basehead who forms a special bond with one of his young students. It’s an Independent Film which some people usually equate with boring, abstract, and overwrought. Not this movie. Watch it one night when you’re sitting around with your friends and you’re all in a contemplative mood.  It’s  melancholic in tone but will move you on emotional levels you might not have known you had.

4. Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead–Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke star and both dig deep to deliver emotionally-charged performances. It is a different kind of movie. It doesn’t fall in any one category and it really tests cinematic bounds. There’s not a moment when you won’t be intrigued. Warning: this is a serious film dealing with a subtly serious topic. Two brothers rob a jewelry store but the robbery goes tragically awry. Hell breaks loose for both of them. It’s a ride. Strap yourself in. After it’s over, come back here and tell me or someone what you thought the deeper meaning of the movie was. In my mind if it doesn’t haunt you, you’ve got no soul.

Big Stars=Big Movie

5. The Departed–This seems like too obvious of a choice. But I’m surprised at the number of people who have never seen this movie. It is my all-time favorite. Adjectives to describe it: intense, raw, unflattering, no holds barred, gripping, badass. Every performance from Nicholson’s to DiCaprio’s to Damon’s to Wahlberg’s was on point and flawless. It’s also directed by Martin Scorsese. You can watch this with a girlfriend, boyfriend, friends, or family (no children of course). Perfect for any night, any time, any day, any mood. Guarantee number two: you will be awesomely shocked as you have never been shocked before by a movie; and say “No f****ing way” at least twice. If you thought Fight Club left you dizzy, this film will knock you out. Come back after you’ve seen it and I dare you to try telling me it is not in your top five favorite movies…of all time.

There you have it. This isn’t the ultimate list. I have plenty more and will save those for future posts. For now, these are some good ones and I promise you won’t be disappointed (guarantee number 3).

Andrew