(via bbg)

(via I Watch Stuff)

Although, really, it’s not a contest.  Collaboration, maybe.  Curious, definitely:

The thesis pursued in this article is that this strong thematic aspect of The Dark Knight finds its roots in a short story by the labyrinthine Argentinian writer Jorge Luis Borges.

(via monochrom)

In lieu of a numbered list, here you’ll find a bulleted list — well, several of them — covering my favorite books and movies of 2008.  And, because I’m slow, a goodly number of them will be of items released before 2008.  But that’s when I saw them.  So there.  Enjoy!

In Theaters:

• Let The Right One In – Easily the best vampire movie of 2008, and likely the best of the past few years (if not longer).  ’Let The Right One In’ was bizarre, brooding, bloody, and just right — if frequently in an uncomfortable, awkard sort of way. [imdb]
• The Quantum of Solace – ‘Casino Royale’ set a high standard, of which Quantum fell short; but it was still worlds above the most recent Bond movies prior to ‘Casino Royale’.  Also, I tend to have a soft spot for supervillains with credible plans (which is to say, impossible plans, but at least plans that don’t aim for total world domination… right away).
• There Will Be Blood – I was sold from the opening dissonance.  Not an easy movie by most standards, but well worth the challenge.  Dry, solid, menacing.  Powerful.
• The Dark Knight - What’s to say?  It’s mostly been said.  Superb.  Almost pitch-perfect, although I could have done with a slightly more subtle Two-Face.
• Tropic Thunder – I was completely startled by ‘Tropic Thunder’, which I did not expect to like at all.  Not only was the movie hilarious, but — well, mostly it was just hilarious.  Disconcertingly so.  Also, disconcerting.
• Tell No One – Not necessarily what you’d expect from an American mystery re-written for France… but surprisingly excellent.  The premise — a widower, years after his wife’s death, receives an email (sort of) indicating that his wife might still be alive — starts off weak, but is worked into the otherwise tightly spun plot.  Tension-filled, confusing, and humane. [imdb]
• Iron Man – This was just spectacular, big screen superhero sci-fi fun.  Well put-together, well told.  And shiny.

On DVD:

• The Man from Earth – I watched this based on a recommendation, but without knowing what it was about.  You should too. [imdb]
• Triplets of Belleville – An off-kilter cartoon, at turns sad and brilliant, that takes you on a brilliant romp.  Worth it for the dog alone.  The dog!  The animation is gorgeous to watch, and the scenery (and plot) is wild. [imdb]
• The Orphanage – Standard-issue horror movies tend to be crap — sometimes by design (which can work quite well), but just as often not; it’s the rare horror movie that’s earnest and atmospheric and really compelling.  The Orphanage is one such movie.
• Redbelt - I will say right away that I’m a fan of David Mamet.  I enjoy the unique… cadence of his dialogue, and his films.  Some people do not warm to the style, and ‘Redbelt’ is likely not for them.  I enjoyed ‘Redbelt’ quite a lot.  By comparison, I’d say ‘Redbelt’ is better than ‘Spartan’ or ‘Heist’, but not as complete as ‘The Spanish Prisoner’ or ‘House of Games’. [imdb]

Books

There are few stand-outs from among the books I read in 2008.  Unusually, I have few fiction recommendations to pass along — and none that were published this year.  I look forward to reading through some outstanding fiction this year.  We’ll see how that goes.

• Gang Leader for a Day, by Sudhir Venkatesh [nonfiction] – Despite not having read Freakonomics (which, apparently, uses anecdotes from Venkatesh in its telling), I was intrigued by the premise of this book — a sociologist drawn into a gang.  I was surprised by how humanizing and “impartial” (though that’s not the right word) Venkatesh manages to be while still remaining true to the basic facts of the places he hangs out.  You’d think “visits” would be a more appropriate verb, but you’d be wrong.  A surprising book, if not totally worldview-shattering.
• A Night in the Cemetery, by Anton Chekhov [fiction] – (Mostly) early short stories by Chekhov, stories of foreboding and murder and mystery.  A collection of crime stories that manages to be much more.  A really solid group of stories.
• Traffic, by Tom Vanderbilt [nonfiction] – Maybe you spend enough time in traffic during the day, and couldn’t care less about why it exists — and maybe you wonder.  Maybe you’re curious why people drive like they do; sure, you know why you drive the way you do, but–well, maybe you don’t.  A fascinating look at traffic, built on anecdotes and research, stories and experiments.  A (startlingly) fun read, quick, entertaining, and quite possibly useful.
• The Year Million, edited by Damien Broderick  [nonfiction] - An anthology of speculative nonfiction examining what the far future will look like.  Not 100 or 200 years into the future but, as the title suggests, orders of magnitude more.  The writing is uneven — not surprising, given the wide assortment of authors — but the unabashed creativity and imagining is not: regardless of what ends up being true, the writers here have created a magnificent (and daring) work of speculation.
• Out of Eden, by Alan Burdick  [nonfiction] – You may hear people speak disparagingly of alien mussels and invasive shrubs and non-native weeds.  It’s doubtful you’ve traveled as many places as Alan Burdick has specifically to talk about those things, however.  And you probably haven’t uncovered the nuances between the terms, or the tensions among different groups of people and how they conceive of such species.  If you’re concerned about invasives, you’ll learn a lot from this book — although you may walk away from it with a more sophisticated appreciation for the different ways species mix in our world.
• The True History of the Kelly Gang, by Peter Carey [fiction] – True history is misleading, though the book is based on a historical figure — 19th Century Australian outlaw/folk hero/bandit Ned Kelly and, you guessed it, his gang.  Told in many different ways, in wildly creative “dialogue” (and dialect), ‘True History’ is a compelling, fast read.  (Although you ought to look at the first few pages, and see if the style is something you can tolerate — because if it’s not, the book will be truly unbearable and, worse, unfinishable for you!) 
• Wild Trees, by Richard Preston [nonfiction] – A look at the eclectic communities of climbers and researchers structured around the mysterious, giant trees of coastal California.  You wouldn’t expect the world’s largest things to be as secret as some of them are — it turns out to be much more difficult to figure out the height of these giants than you’d imagine.  A curious turn for the writer of The Hot Zone, but one to which he’s clearly committed — the time and effort spent on this book are clearly impressive.

…so much Ninja Terminator!

(via BeaucoupKevin(dot)com)

via io9, a graphic showing the steady-ish uptick in the frequency of zombie movies, and “mapping” it (very roughty) to incidences of war (click below for a larger image):

Correlation not being correlation, blah blah blah, everything else aside, it’s still a fun chart.

(via io9)

(2008) dir Guillermo del Toro – w/ Ron Perlman, Selma Blair, Doug Jones, Doug Jones & Doug Jones, James Dodd, Jeffrey Tambor, Anna Walton, Briane Steele, and John Hurt.  Why did Mr. Wink have to be Evil!

Synopsis: Evil elvy-type wants to take back earth from greedy, selfish humans.  Wants to do so through battle.  Using magical invincible robot sorts of things (the Golden Army).  Selling point: it’s an invincible army.  Cons: wake of utter destruction.  Secret illegal task-force to the rescue!  (Hopefully.)  Hellboy & Co. spring into action.

Review: What’s surprising is that Hellboy II did not in fact have ten times the production budget of the first Hellboy — because that’s what it feels like.  The creatures are astonishing, as is the detail of all the characters.  You could cut out the audio and dub in pretty much any movie’s dialogue, and Hellboy II would still be worth watching.

Which is good, because the story actually isn’t all that great.  Story-wise, I’m actually more fond of the first Hellboy.  Hellboy II has some interesting, intricate points, but is generally quite derivative, predictable, and bland, even.  The dialogue is occasionally phenomenal, and some scenes are ridiculously awesome–but then the movie gets dragged down by other scenes, and by awful, stilted dialogue.  Then there’s a fight, or a new monster, or a new world, and the story doesn’t actually matter that much.  Because the creatures are spectacular.

Hellboy II is actually okay, and I enjoyed watching it a great deal.  But given the performance of the first movie, and given some of del Toro’s other recent excursions, I’d expected much more.  Still, I’d sit through a Hellboy III.  And IV.  We’ll see about a V.

Rating: [•••½] out of [•••••]

(2005) dir Paul Tarantino – w/ Benjamin John Carillo as would-be upwardly mobile insurance agent, Mark Aiken as Dougie, Kristi Clainos as Sarah, and Ralph Lister as, apparently, “The Man”.  I don’t really remember who that might be.

Synopsis: A happy office drone wants a little more out of his workplace environment, and feels he might get a better job elsewhere.  No troubles so far.  He gets recommended a headhunter by a client/friend, and figures–why not!  It can’t hurt to look.  Naturally, he gets a new job right away.  The new headhunter really did the trick!  The hours are a little bit… strange.  And the co-workers are… well…  They’re strange, too.  But the money’s good, am I right?  What’s a little curse, when you’re laughing all the way to the bank?  Or grave…  Puns, horror, and camp follow.

Review: As you might guess from the DVD cover, this is not a high-production-value film.  It’s not, say, Rosemary’s Baby. So what I’m about to say may come as a surprise.

This is an excellent film!

Not exactly good.  But simultaneously earnest and campy, in all the right places.  “Headhunter” knows when to downplay the supernatural, and traffic in innuendo and good old-fashioned story-telling instead.  (Don’t worry–there are some special effects.  And they are very special.)

You have your standard murder curse haunting story, more or less.  The people involved do stupid things, but not unreasonably stupid things. (If it were a true story, and you believed in curses, their actions would be 100% believable.)  Most of the movie takes place in office buildings and parking lots and very ordinary places, and without any special effects whatsoever.  Which is one of the movie’s saving graces; it’s campy when it should be, and silly, and ridiculous (the baby? the lightning?!) — but restrained at other times.  There are a number of scenes that are surprisingly effective despite the lack of any special effects; one scene involves a cursed key-chain.

I have to say, this is a kind of hidden treat.  (I was actually expecting it to be unrelentingly awful, and found myself drawn in, and completely entertained.)

Rating: [•••½] out of [•••••]

Extra: It’s also a little bit adorable that the quote from the movie that someone saw fit to add to imdb’s “memorable quotes” section is:

Ben Caruso: I need you to do a little poking around.
Scott: That’s my speciality.

Because, really?

(2003) dir Jean-Paul Rappeneau – w/ Isabelle Adjani, Virginie Ledoyen, Gerard Depardieu, Yvan Attal, Peter Coyote, and Gregori Derangere as the hapless writer.  Starring some jugs of water as Heavy Water.

Synopsis: A scientist and his assistants, an actress, a writer framed for murder and his fellow escapee, a minister… and of course a Nazi spy.  In France, on the eve of World War II.

Review: I watched the preview for this movie, and knew I had to see it.  Then, months later, the movie in front of me, I read the description and was completely baffled.  I wanted to see this movie?

As it turns out, I did.

The movie has a richly textured plot — as it opens, a famous actress calls on a childhood neighbor and sweetheart to help cover up a murder (or was it?), which, in the middle of a rainstorm in the middle of a night, ends with him being stopped by the police, and arrested as a dead man falls out of his trunk.  Simple enough.  Throw in chance encounters, friendships formed over adversity, a looming war, political machinations of the rich and powerful, science, and you’re on a roll.  But the best thing about “Bon Voyage” is undoubtedly its characters.  They’re compelling, absurd, and full.  They’re awkward and uncertain and, even in the least likely scenarios, believable.  The brisk pace of the movie and the cartwheeling plot only helps things along.

Rating: [••••] out of [•••••]

I always knew there was a secret reason for my liking James Bond.

Secret reason: James Bond was an ornithologist.  And Ian Fleming enjoyed birding.

Perfect!

(Although I realize this may already be semi-common knowledge that I’ve merely evaded up to this point.)

(via a silly list in The Atlantic)

(2008) dir. Jon Avnet – w/ Robert De Niro and Al Pacino; also Brian Dennehy, Donnie Wahlberg, John Leguizamo, Carla Gugino, & 50 Cent.

Synopsis: Two seasoned detectives stumble across the case of a “mysterious” vigilante… who only kills bad guys!

Review: “Righteous Kill” has exactly one good idea.  And unfortunately, that idea is: put Al Pacino and Robert De Niro in the same movie.  Admittedly, it’s a very good idea — but things go downhill quickly.  For starters: the movie is introduced (literally opened with) a statement that necessarily limits your viewing of the movie to one of the two following possibilities: (A) you know the ending from the opening credits, or (B) you know the entire movie is based on a cheap (and obvious) trick (and probably can figure out what that trick is, because it’s not even that clever).  Another problem: it’s nice to see De Niro and Pacino side by side, but this movie could have been made with anybody.  Realistically, “Righteous Kill” and “Heat” are completely, totally incommensurable.  And for Righteous Kill, this is not a good thing.

(Another note: “Who ever heard of a cop serial killer?!” is not the movie’s second good idea.)

It’s a fair movie.  Everyone tries.  Performances are commendable all around.  The music’s fine.  But I could have walked out half-way through and not actually felt like I was missing much.

Rating: [•••] out of [•••••]

This could be good, I think.

Partly because it would be interesting to see Catherine Zeta-Jones in a different sort of role (time-travel is different, right?), but mostly because a movie with David Tennant would likely be excellent.

But who knows.

(WalesOnline: “Talk of Doctor Who Film Role for Zeta-Jones” [10 Sept 2008])

(2000) dir. Ryuhei Kitamura – w/ Tak Sakaguchi as Prisoner KSC2-303, and a bunch of other folks as random, ominous-sounding figures (e.g., “Motorcycle-riding yakuza with revolver,” and “Yakuza zombie in alligator-skin coat”). But you didn’t watch this for the characters. Yet.

Synopsis: Really?  Synopsis?

Review: Open with a bunch of– Oh, come off it.  The plot doesn’t really matter that much.  I mean, there is a plot.  Kind of.  The kind of plot you’d get by taking a “choose your own adventure” book and putting it in a blender and adding glue.  I’m not saying it’s total chance when parts of the movie actually make sense.  But seriously.  Think Kill Bill plus Highlander plus The Evil Dead plus The Matrix, minus the high production values (compared to this movie, Eraserhead has high production values).  The backstory: a couple “escaped prisoners” meet some Yakuza in the Resurrection Forest for some unspecified plot, which really doesn’t matter.  The Yakuza thugs don’t actually want to do what they’re told, some folks are shot/decapitated/etc.–and then, surprise!, come back to life.  A real shocker, what with it being the Resurrection Forest or what-have-you.  People run around, shoot at one another, fight zombies, and so on.  You can tell things get serious when the filters go wonky.  Everything goes red, or pink.  It’s like they’re in an alternate past dimension, maybe.  I don’t actually know.  What’s most astonishing is that, when there are flashbacks, they kind of help the story.  Sorry, the “story.”  Oh, and the plot twists!  Well, you’d be surprised, if you could actually follow the plot.  Which–you can follow the plot, it just doesn’t make all that much sense.  But it’s all in good fun.  And it is good fun.  You’ve never seen a collapsible samurai sword?  Or one with a laser sight?

Rating: [•••] out of [•••••] (Rating a movie like this is difficult.  Mileage per star may vary, based on your personal preferences, i.e., how much entertainment value you can actually derive from this kind of thing.)

I’ve seen better film editing… But I can’t say I’ve actually seen birds whistling the imperial march from Star Wars (or for that matter, any movie themes).  I mean, now I can, sort of.

(Although after a quick search, I am more impressed by birds performing the 1812 Overture and the Andy Griffith Show theme.)

(via io9: “The greatest thing you will see on the internet all day”)

(2007) dir Jonathan King – w/ lots of actors you’ve probably never heard of — fresh faces — and, of course, the sheep.  Really, it’s all about the sheep.

Synopsis: A man, and his irrational fear of sheep.  Animal rights activists, and their disgust of genetically modified sheep.  A man, and his boundless greed.  Then, genetically modified sheep gone bloodthirsty crazy… and all of a sudden, the first man doesn’t seem so irrational, eh?

Review: I’ll happily go on record as saying that there are better zombie movies out there, and better monster movies, and possibly even better sheep movies (though I’m not sure what); but no way are there better zombie sheep monster movies out there. (Note to any budding directors out there: currently, Black Sheep is the only movie on imdb with the keyword “weresheep”.  We can only hope that this will eventually be remedied.)  “Black Sheep” is really a special kind of treat.

If you think that a movie about were-sheep (or even killer sheep, or mad scientists, is something you might be interested in, I can’t recommend this movie enough.  “Black Sheep” is by no means consistent throughout–there are some misses, here and there, where the tone isn’t quite right.  But when the movie gets it right, the effect is absolutely brilliant.  I’m not even using hyperbole when I say the very best parts of “Black Sheep” could easily go head-on-head with Citizen Kane in a death cage match.  No; that’s something else entirely.  On topic, though: I’ve never, ever, ever contemplated the possibility that mint might be outrageously funny.  Rest assured, it can be.  Or any number of other things this movie improvises, invents, appropriates and re-creates.  It’s bloody, campy, ingenious, and completely worth every minute.

If you have an unnatural fear of sheep, I don’t know what to say.  Maybe this movie will help you confront your demons.  I doubt it.

Rating: [••••] out of [•••••]

(2005) dir Cristi Puiu – w/ Ion Fiscuteanu as the eponymous Lazarescu, and a few other people, hospitals.

Synopsis: Mr. Lazarescu feels unwell, and calls an ambulance.  His neighbors harangue him for drinking, his family doesn’t want much to do with him, and various doctors, nurses, and EMTs (their Romanian equivalents, anyway) poke fun and insult him.  The plot is both incredibly straightforward, and not.

Review: Given the title and synopsis, you’d expect this to be a depressing move–and you’d be right.  You’d also expect it to be slow, and you might be wrong.  “The Death of Mr. Lazarescu” is meandering but methodical: not plodding, exactly, but certainly not speedy.  It is difficult to watch at parts, and bleak, and wrenching, but somehow also wry, and knowing, and rarely long.

I can’t entirely explain what makes this movie compelling.  There are brief glimmers of humanity, but they’re very often quashed by selfishness and indifference.  People are in a hurry.  They’re tired of being told things by others.  They don’t want other people to tell them what their jobs are, and they’re tired; it’s late.  And the old man probably just wants attention, they reason.  Stop drinking.  Don’t be so sick.  Get rid of that cat, why don’t you?  There is no good or evil in this story.  If there is any kind of hope, it surfaces in the most unlikely, unfulfillable ways.

Rating: [••••] out of [•••••]

(2007) dir Kenneth Branagh, screenplay by Harold Pinter – w/ Michael Caine and Jude Law.  And a fancy necklace.

Synopsis: Andrew’s (Caine’s) wife has left him for Milo (Law).  Though of course the paperwork’s not entirely cleaned up yet.  Like a good fellow, Milo wants to have a sit-down with Andrew, a man-to-man.  A nice talk.  It’s kinda like “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf”, minus the women, with a little more sleight of hand thrown in for good measure.

Review: It’s hard to do much in the way of reviewing without giving away the movie.  Yet Sleuth wasn’t surprising as it might have been–you don’t necessarily anticipate all the twists, but they also don’t come as that much of a surprise.  The antagonism and banter between Caine and Law is quite good (which is fortunate, because otherwise the movie would not be worth watching at all).  The dialogue itself has a peculiar cadence which you’ll either become accustomed to, or hate.  If you have a problem with the kind of rhythmic, unnatural dialogue of David Mamet, this might not be the movie for you.  The dialogue works, though, and gets you where you’re going.  The main problem I had was the characters: they’re fine folks, and charismatic, but not actually likeable.  Meaning, you don’t really care what happens to either of them.  Meaning… well, what was the point, again?  Human nature?

Rating: [•••½] out of [•••••]

Sort of.

The (terribly informal) verdict:

Believable: Iron Man, Batman

Unbelievable: The Incredible Hulk

Quote:

Now, many people are aware that the most incredible thing about the Hulk is the way his pants always stay on when he expands to ten times his original volume.

But did you also know:

The good superhero stories require only one miracle exemption from the laws of nature.

Oh.  You did?  Well then.

(via SciFi Scanner)

I’d always assumed the criteria were loose (at best), but I didn’t realize that the only necessary condition of stating that a movie is “Based On” the book is a cursory glance at the book’s cover and a $150 million budget.

No, really; that’s it.

And I know “the book” is traditionally supposed to be better than the movie — but Darwin’s On The Origin of the Species has more in common with AVPR than Will Smith’s (and Francis Lawrence’s, or whoever’s responsible) “I Am Legend” does with Matheson’s.

The result is so unrecognizable, and so irredeemably awful, that–well, there’s nothing to say. The only tension in the movie was the hope, the slightest glimmer of possibility, that the filmmakers were bright enough to use the book’s best elements in a good way, or even a bad way.

Instead, they didn’t use them at all. They used a name, and a title, and a scary thing in the darkness.

Of the boatload of movies I watched in 2007 (see the complete list here), the following are my favorites. You get the 30-second version of why each movie makes the list, and nothing more.

Movies Released In (Or Near) 2007:

Stardust – [****] – 2007 / Matthew Vaughn: A fairy tale, but jazzy, expansive, and cock-eyed. Warm and cheery, dark and sinister, truthful. Like all good stories.

Mr. Brooks – [****] – 2007 / Bruce Evans: Maybe the appeal of this lies in how convincingly Kevin Costner plays a serial killer. Maybe not. A part or two silly, but otherwise solidly presented, and with an interesting score.

No Country for Old Men – [****1/2] – 2007 / Coen Brothers: Bleak, dusty, and bloody. (Though not as bleak and dusty as “There Will Be Blood”.) Tommy Lee Jones pitch-perfect, though performances really outstanding across the board. Everything unexpected, even when it isn’t.

Eastern Promises – [****] – 2007 / David Cronenberg: Another solid foray into organized crime by Cronenberg. More straightforward, maybe, than “A History of Violence”, but no less bloody. A conscience you don’t expect. A grimness you do.

Bourne Ultimatum – [****] – 2007 / Paul Greengrass: I’ve enjoyed the Bourne movies, and this installment is a solid addition. For non-fans of the series, this movie will not be a mind-changer, though it is better than The Bourne Supremacy, and arguably better than The Bourne Identity (despite the sad fact of “Ultimatum” not having Franka Potente).

Grindhouse – [****1/2] – 2007 / Robert Rodriguez & Quentin Tarantino: A blast of a double-feature, ridiculous, over-the-top, and phenomenal. Gory and dark, some, but largely hilarious.

Hot Fuzz – [****] – 2007 / Edgar Wright: A genius bit of action comedy unlike a most all American action-comedies, which are rarely much of either. A spoof that’s honest to itself, and solid in its own right. And what other movie have Bill Nighy, Timothy Dalton, and a masked Cate Blanchett appeared together?

Leben der Anderen, Das – [****1/2] – 2006 / Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck

Gwoemul [Host] – [***1/2] – 2006 / Joon-ho Bong: Horror done right, which is to say knuckle-gripping and startling, but with glimpses of real emotion, dashes of uncertain comedy. And evil scientists, sure.

Movies Released Before 2007:

Werckmeister harmóniák [Werckmeister Harmonies] – [****1/2]: It’s only a slight exaggeration to say this film secured a place in my favorites in its first fifteen minutes. There’s a whale, though it doesn’t do much. There’s a main character who, mysteriously, never makes a single appearance. The director isn’t even sure why, so there’s no reason you should have any idea. And that’s fine.

Porco Rosso – [****] – 1992 / Hayao Miyazaki: I’ve been meaning to see this, and wish I had, sooner. It’s strange how non-surreal this movie is, considering it’s a kind of anime noir about a pilot turned into a pig in a world ravaged by sky-pirates.

Primal Fear – [****1/2] – 1996 / Gregory Hoblit: A solid, straightforward criminal procedural that is, but isn’t straightforward. Twisting and smart.

Notorious – [****] – 1946 / Alfred Hitchcock: A wholeheartedly solid Hitchcock movie. Noir, if not at its best, then extremely close. A movie that has aged surprisingly well, considering. Begins and ends with near-perfection.

Fido – [****] – 2006 / Andrew Currie: Everyone else has adorable zombie slaves, why shouldn’t we? That’s the message I got from this movie. Or was it, bullies deserve to be attacked by malfunctioning zombie-slaves? I’m really not sure any more. Anyway, a fine comedy horror period piece, if the parallel-universe 1950s can count as a period. Billy Connolly has never so convincingly played a zombie.