BROWSE
ARCHIVES

Steven Soderbergh is a very interesting man.  His last film, Che was a four and a half hour masterpiece.  Never boring, never dull, I not once found myself looking at my watch.  The Girlfriend Experience, however is a painfully long 78 minutes.  The movie doesn’t flow like Che; it just sits there, stagnantly awaiting some sort of justification for its own existence that never quite comes.

Famed adult movie star Sasha Grey proves to us once again that porn stars can’t act.  She is virtually emotionless.  No, this does not add to her character.  Some could be inclined towards arguing that she is living such a depraved existence that she no longer experiences pleasure, therefore that should be self-evident in her acting (or lack thereof).  To people who thought her “minimalistic” performance works with this theme, I say that they are missing the point of watching movies in the first place.  Things happen.  Yes, things do indeed happen in this movie (albeit few).  Still, we see no reaction brew inside of this woman.  Even in the film’s (relative) emotional climax we see her react like a crappy community theater actor to the dashing of the little joys remaining in her life.  I can’t pity a woman who doesn’t react to things happening around her.  If she doesn’t seem hurt, than why should I feel bad for her?

Interestingly Soderbergh chooses to take a simple story, and convolutes it by presenting the linear story out of sequence, but without any way of knowing where in time any given scene takes place.  Yes, this blatant confusion of the sequence of events can work (i.e. Pulp Fiction), but it just doesn’t here.  Certain parts are even shot on a video camera like a reality TV show, and are similarly painful to watch.  There is not much going on in terms of story, and no fancy or confusing devices are going to hide that fact.

In conclusion, this movie feels long even though it is exceedingly short.  It is not in any way enjoyable to watch, which is the fault of the directer, editor, and certainly the actors.  This movie is quite simply bad.  I recommend saving your money or just watching Che again.

-Paul Brinnel

It’s a beautiful day. Flowers are blooming, birds are singing, and houses are flying. Summer has arrived, and with it comes an array of loud films filled with explosions and your favorite comic book characters. ’Tis the season when studios make their money by unleashing sequels and prequels of their cherished franchises to an all-consuming, fanboy public. Adults are busy hibernating until the fall. While continued franchises like Star Trek, Transformers, and Terminator compete with each other on a level of pure cacophony, Pixar Animation Studios presents yet another film that is more quiet and emotionally authentic than just about anything we’re liable to see this year.

The tenth Pixar film Up is the second by director Pete Doctor, whose prior effort was the charming buddy comedy Monsters, Inc. Like last year’s Wall-e, which brought us into the lonely world of the last robot on earth, Up brings us into the lonely world of septuagenarian Carl Fredericksen (Edward Asner). In his youth Carl was a balloon salesman and married to his childhood sweetheart, Ellie. The two were attracted together through their love of adventure and living life to the fullest. Their life together is presented in a silent, elegiac montage, set to Michael Giacchino’s beautiful score. In this sequence, Doctor manages to capture both the tragic unpredictable moments of life, and the human comedy of a relationship as portrayed in the couples buoyant perseverance and eternal love for each other. Now that Ellie has died Carl has receded from life into a grumpy old man. Then, to stave off going to the nursing home, and in obligation of an unfulfilled promise he made with Ellie, Carl straps thousands of balloons to his home, which lifts the multicolored house from it’s foundation into the air. The sight of the house soaring through the air, once again accompanied by Giacchino’s fine score is a fresh, breathtaking image. The flying house is headed toward Paradise Falls in South America, where Carl and Ellie’s childhood hero, adventurer Charles Muntz (Christopher Plummer), used to travel to in his zeppelin, in search of exotic creatures. Accidental stowaway and young wilderness explorer Russell accompanies Carl to South America. The relationship between the two is the centerpiece of the film. Russell (Jordan Nagai) at first seems annoying. He’s an average kid who whines when he’s tired and has no reservations of saying what’s on his mind. Russell unintentionally forces Carl to come to terms with his own fears and helps him to rediscover the meaning in his life after Ellie.

While being deeply emotional and visually beautiful, Up is extremely funny. The age gap of the main characters fulfills its expected potential for comedy. Meanwhile there is absurdist humor with a giant colorful bird, whose neck movements alone provide a wonderful array of endless sight gags, along with dozens of anthropomorphic dogs, which somehow feels naturally integrated into this fantastical story. And while I praise the film for it’s moments of quiet, there is plenty of action. However the action is filmed fluently, without a lot of fast cuts or quick movements. Doctor has respect for the aerial action, not to mention the human eye. The only aspect of Up that doesn’t quite hit the mark is when Russell goes into exposition explaining his unfortunate family situation. These conversations are not only abrupt and manipulative, but also unnecessary. This is Carl’s story, and it’s a good one.

-Jason Bardin