Marcus: Invasion (2006)

How many of you have ever had an epiphany before? Have you ever had a revelation that what you were experiencing at that very moment was glorious, beautiful, magnificent, and that forever after you would remember that snapshot in time with relish? Have you ever been a part of something so immaculate that you reacted with an almost religious awe and a sense of appreciation for even being allowed to exist in the same moment and place as that which transfixed you? Well what do you suppose the opposite of that feeling is? Imagine that with a nice drizzling of week old placenta, and you get a sense of what it’s like to watch “Invasion.”

I almost feel like by talking about this B-movie will make myself physically sick, and I’m not just talking nausea, I mean a full blown malignant brain tumor type of sickness. It’s almost like acknowledging this film’s existence causes its death stench to cling to you and haunt you into the grave. Even as I recall it now my heart is beginning to shudder and slow down like a chubby kid 15 steps into a footrace.

The plot is as follows. A meteor with an alien parasite crashes into a rural California valley. A farmer calls it in to the cops, and when an officer is dispatched to the scene, the now infected farmer infects the cop, then the cop keeps driving and finds a prom couple making out and infects the dude, then the girl escapes in the cop car. She contacts the police station over the radio, then for the next hour she’s driving around deserted dirt roads trying to find an exit from the park that isn’t blocked by infected boyfriends, which is hard because apparently there’s only one, which doesn’t stop her from trying twice. And I’m not exaggerating about driving around for an hour straight. Mercifully, the film’s only about an hour and twenty minutes, so it ends pretty soon after that, but it’s still too long by the mere fact that it exists.

Now some of you might say, “But Marcus, surely it can’t be that bad, ‘My Dinner with Andre’ was almost two hours and featured nothing but two guys in a conversation while eating.” And to that I say, first of all kudos for knowing about “My Dinner With Andre,” and secondly, there’s a difference between a single scene movie that’s made up of interesting dialogue and one that’s a girl screaming “Please help me” into a radio for an hour. Oh, and did I mention the entire duration of “Invasion” is seen from the dashboard camera of the cop car? Did I mention that? Because it fucking is! So not only is it an hour of a girl driving around in a car, coming into contact with other people for a total of about 30 seconds, but you never even fucking see the girl! It’s just empty dirt road! I don’t think there was ever a better visual representation of the parallel between the script and the final product, sheer vapid emptiness. I think this review so far is longer than the script. It’s probably also better. That’s the one thing I’ll say about this movie that is in any way positive. Its existence proves that any of you aspiring directors out there can make a viable film. It doesn’t matter how blurry or shaky the camera is, or if the acting’s any good, because this movie proves not only that, but apparently it doesn’t even matter if you fucking point the camera at anything. And I know that none of you would be stupid enough to do that, so automatically you’d have something better than this filmmaking equivalent of a colonic cyst.

I don’t know if the film was trying to be uniquely realistic or just stingy. The whole thing is one continuous shot there are minimal lighting effects, save the car headlights, there’s no acting since the “actors” are barely ever in front of the camera, and I’ve seen better special effects in the recording Thomas Edison made of Fred Ott’s sneeze. Fred Ott’s sneeze was recorded January 7, 1894, literally one of the first motion pictures ever recorded. That’s right, the special effects in “Invasion” actually predate the invention of films, they are that bad.

Anyways, the end result is a movie that’s just as unique as any hipster (here’s a hint, if you’re part of a group that can be identified by what you wear and take interest in, you’re not a unique individual, you’re part of a club). But even that’s unfair to hipsters; sorry, hipsters (but not really, you plaid shirt, tight jeans, and thick-framed glasses wearing vintage trinket lovers). “Invasion” really doesn’t know what it’s trying to accomplish, and doesn’t even make an effort.

I’ll bring up one more terrible thing about the movie and end it there because, as I guessed, typing this has given me diarrhea. The film is bookended by two scenes featuring a woman who is about to hike into the valley, which has now been quarantined for 3 days. The movie informs us that the army nuked the whole valley the same night the invasion was reported, which we see in the last seconds that the cop car camera is running (how’d they recover the footage anyways?). So this woman, who’s been paying careful enough attention to know the army’s restricted entrance to this rural, Podunk little town, but not enough attention to know it was nuked 2 days ago, is about to begin her hike when an infected army official grabs her and kills her off camera, graciously saving her from the horrible slow decay of death by nuclear fallout. Oh yeah, and these two scenes were shot with a “night vision” filter and yet the lady’s wearing sunglasses and casting a shadow… so I retract my previous hipster comparison. This movie is more like a retired boxer (with, let’s say 40 concussions or so) who’s taken up writing novels than a teenager who’s struggling to define herself, but really needs to take her floral print sundress, bulky camera, and ukulele, and just get the fuck out of the photography section of the bookstore.

Marcus: Shutter (2004)

         I’ll start by asking a question that, despite how common it seems to be brought up, is never given a satisfying enough answer for me to leave it alone. What the hell is it exactly that makes Asian horror movie ghosts so terrifying? In the past decade, we’ve been treated to a plethora of frightful ghosts and ghouls from the now well-established Japanese horror (or “J-horror”) film industry. They always seem to follow the same strict guidelines, too. Asian horror movie ghosts are almost always women or children who were severely wronged in some way during their life and their death was one final nail in the coffin (I won’t ask you to pardon the pun because that pun was fucking awful). They always appear decrepit, with a pale blue complexion usually blocked by cascades of unkempt hair. And they’re usually associated with water. It’s a weird visual, I know, to have the appearance of a ghost foreshadowed with things starting to drip or when the sight of an overflowing sink fills you with pant-shitting levels of terror, but you can’t deny it’s effectiveness (for an example of any of these, see “Dark Water,” “The Eye,” “Ringu,” or any of the, like, 12 “Ju-On” films).
          Keep in mind that I’m referring strictly to the original Japanese versions of these movies. All of these films have been remade into an American adaptation that are partially an attempt to integrate the two cultures and partially laziness on Hollywood’s part, and to be completely honest with you, I bullshitted the former point. In recent years the Asian film industry seems to have tapped into a vein that all people share, a vein that contains our fears and what it is that causes them. Any attempt on Hollywood’s behalf to Americanize these films is left with a bitter aftertaste because the end result is unoriginal and usually really fucking stupid by comparison.
            Which brings me to my thoughts on another great example of Asian filmmaking, “Shutter,” which was remade in 2008 as that movie that none of you saw because, again, American unoriginality. Shutter is a Thai film that, to put it simply, is a great horror film. You just watch it and say, “Wow, why can’t every scary movie hold itself to those expectations?”

            The basic premise is that a photographer, Tun, and his girlfriend, Jane hit a girl with their car on the way home from a celebration with friends. Rather than check to see if she’s all right, Tun urges Jane to drive away. From that point on Tun begins to notice that either his photography skills have gotten drastically shittier, or his pictures are beginning to be haunted by smudged images of the dead girl.

            Tormented by nightmares and a mysterious sore neck, Tun enlists Jane’s help in figuring out just what the hell is going on once he learns that all his friends from that party at the beginning of the film have committed suicide. We find out that Tun and his friends had a much more sinister role to play in the dead girl’s past than what was originally thought. We also find out what was causing Tun’s neck pain; surprisingly, that’s the freakiest part.

            Where “Shutter” works so effectively is in the pacing. It’s an element of filmmaking that is so crucial and yet all too often overlooked, which is a shame because it leads to a lot of crap movies, but also serves the purpose of weeding out the bad directors as a sort of Darwinian code of cinema. “Shutter” balances the scares with great emotional scenes and good dialogue that is important for moving along the story. But don’t worry, it’s not all boring dialogue, for you fans of cheap thrills, it has plenty of scares. Holy shit does it have some scares. This is where the pacing really stands out. Some of the scares are what you’d expect, the building tension, the crescendo of music, the false climax, the labored silence, then BOO! There are plenty of those, and they’re great. But then there are moments that are barely even fair to the watcher, where you don’t even realize what you were seeing was scary until it’s already over. Those types of spooks are the ones that really get me. They throw me out of my comfort zone, and usually quite effectively. An example: Tun is developing photos in the dark room in his apartment when who we expect to be Jane walks in and stands next to him. We can only assume it’s her because the camera is angled so we can only see her torso and Tun begins talking to her while still focusing on his work. Then the phone rings and he steps outside to answer it. “Hello, Tun, it’s Jane.” WHAT THE FUCK!? I literally had to pause the movie to let my fit of goose bumps pass. I know it’s not that remarkable a trick, but the way the previous scene led into this one, and considering how quickly it happened, there was no sense that something ominous was about to take place. It was masterfully executed.

            That’s all the examples I’m going to give for this movie to demonstrate its greatness. Normally I’d have no qualms about ruining the plot, but I feel I should give you a chance to see it for yourself and truly appreciate it. That way you’ll learn first hand how it came to pass that your humble movie reviewer crapped his pants in the name of Asian cinema.

Marcus: There Will Be Blood (2007)

Is this review really necessary? If you’ve ever heard of the movie you know that no, this review is in fact not necessary and if you haven’t heard of the movie then you need to stop reading this right now and go fucking watch that shit immediately. In fact, if you haven’t seen the film yet I’m not even sure how you would be reading this because I DON’T LET IGNORANT FOOLS READ MY BLOG!!! (This happens to be the mantra of every blogger of all time)

“There Will Be Blood” is, to put it simply, epic. It represents that definition in every sense of the word (that word still being epic). The setting, the cinematography, but most importantly, and I can not stress this enough, the acting by Daniel Day Lewis, which is not so much powerful as it is a hydrogen bomb that would incinerate you were you next to it, but from far enough away the explosion sounds like a really authoritative voice that doesn’t put up with any bullshit. He plays Daniel Plainview, a self-proclaimed oilman who travels the western frontier establishing wells to add to his ever-expanding wealth, often resorting to very shrewd and even devious business tactics. Yet, as he gets richer, it becomes apparent that he doesn’t have any true source of happiness in his life. He gets rich only because he can’t stand to see others succeed, and he generally hates everyone, including himself.

It gets to the point where Daniel must abandon his own son, H.W. (as he later loudly confesses to a church multiple times) after an explosion causes H.W. to lose his hearing and frankly Daniel just doesn’t want to put up with his son’s shit anymore. This display, and many others like it show just how much of a sociopath Daniel truly is. The one thing about this film that makes me absolutely giddy is the number of monumental lines that are spoken by Plainview. Almost all of them are instantly quotable as they carry with them the power and assertiveness of someone with a God complex, but are still as completely bat-shit insane as the man speaking them. Of course, everyone knows about the milkshake line, but here are a couple of my favorites:

“Did you just tell me how to run my family? One night I’m going to come to you, inside of your house, wherever you’re sleeping, and I’m going to cut your throat.”

“I’m going to bury you underground, Eli.”

(And, one of my favorite lines from any movie) “I told you I was going to eat you! I told you I was going to eat you up!”

Like the character of Daniel Plainview, the movie itself seems to have a lot of confidence. You can tell that every shot, every line of dialogue, every element was captured so precisely by director Paul Thomas Anderson because he wants them all to serve a strong purpose. Of course, any movie would have to be confident to not have a line of dialogue appear until 15 minutes in. But even the first quarter hour is captivating, as we see the humble beginnings of Plainview and his emergence into the oil business.

And of course, far be it from me to not give credit where credit is due. There is another powerhouse performance given in “There Will Be Blood” by Paul Dano, who plays both Sunday brothers. He definitely holds his own against Daniel Day Lewis, especially when you consider he was originally only supposed to play Paul Sunday, whose time in the film constitutes but one short scene near the beginning. Dano was only given four days to prepare for the role of Eli, after the original actor left the production. Rumor has it that he left because Daniel Day Lewis’ tendency to stay in character even when not shooting was a little too intense for him. Kudos to Paul Dano, if that’s the case (or even if it’s not), for filling in the important role and turning in one hell of a performance as a crazed priest.

Now that I think about it, everyone in this film is crazy. Well, whatever, “There Will Be Blood” is a fantastic film, a powerful character study, and an instant classic. And to quote Daniel Plainview one more time, “I’m finished.”

Alex: Moon (2009)

Most people associate science fiction with “Star Wars” “Star Trek” and other big budget studio tent poles that feature alien races and large space ships that blow the shit out of smaller, but still large space ships. They associate them with special effects, weak plots, and generally deride them as being everything that’s wrong with the modern movie going experience.

Fuck those people.

Science fiction (in movies I should clarify) is more then just big budget, effects driven summer blockbusters. They are capable of being plot and character driven films with strong dialogue and morals and other angles of appreciation that film school kids cream their pants over. They just happen to be set in the future, or in an alternate past, or in a society that in someway or another is different then ours. The best science fiction directors of sci-fi today will take our world and guess what technological innovations or apocalyptic events will happen and place their story in that scenario. When people state that science fiction can’t be taken seriously, they are criticizing the use of imagination (which might be why we get a Transformers trilogy but that’s neither here nor there).

People don’t like science fiction, and it’s a shame because it gave us three of the 00’s best movies. Alfonso Cuarón’s “Children of Men” Neill Blomkamp’s “District 9” and Duncan Jones’ “Moon”.

Moon tells the story of Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell), an astronaut serving out a three year contract on the moon for Lunar inc. an energy company harvesting Helium 3 on the dark side of the moon, and shipping it to Earth. Sam is the only employ on the base; save his trusty robot companion Gerty (voiced by Kevin Spacey). The first act of the film describes Sam’s days as he tries to retain some semblance of sanity. The communications satellite is down so he can’t receive live messages from his bosses and his wife Tess (Dominique McElligott) only recorded messages. Sam exercises, carves his hometown out of wood, and grows his hair long. Occasionally he will have to go out on a rover to a giant reaper that is harvesting the surface of the moon for energy. Sam collects it, brings it back to the base, and launches it back down to Earth. On one of these excursions Sam hallucinates and crashes into the energy collecting behemoth, losing consciousness.

He awakens back in the infirmary, where Gerty tells him he has lost consciousness, but that everything is all right. Weak and disoriented, Sam can barely walk, so Gerty forbids him from leaving the base. This frustrates him and he sabotages a gas line, which gives him an excuse to get back on the surface. He hops in a rover and goes to the site of the reaper. He finds the first rover in the crash, and Sam Bell still unconscious in it.

Two Sam Bells, more importantly TWO SAM ROCKWELLS! Be still my fluttering heart. This was only released in 2009 and didn’t really get a lot of attention in theaters so I will stop my discussion of the plot here, for those of you still interested in checking it out. (Its on Netflix on demand right now, so go demand it.) Rest assured though that the movie is very, very good with strong performances by Rockwell, who plays the two main characters. The pacing can be a little slow, but it helps the audience feel the stress that Sam feels as he goes about his everyday life on the moon and tries to unravel the secrets of the Lunar Inc. base. Every plot twist in the movie is delivered like a sucker punch to the audience as we start to sympathize with Sam (er both of him). The film breaks stereotypes of science fiction movies, by giving us a plot driven movie with depth. “Moon” is a great science fiction movie, and like I said before, one of my favorites from the 00’s.

Marcus: Quiz Show (1994)

           I love Robert Redford for his apparent hatred of American mainstream society. I have no evidence to support that he harbors such feelings, and yet, after watching “Quiz Show” I have a sense that he must feel that way. In the film he states clearly and succinctly what it is about Americans that keep them tuning in to the empty, mindless shows on television, that being that they are inherently greedy and have short attention spans. This makes them prone to watching shows in which likeable, relatable people win lots of money. The film explores how networks exploit this to appeal to the masses and in the process end up corrupting themselves and lying to the public. It’s so great because it’s a message the public needs to hear, yet it’s wrapped up in a film they will never watch because it doesn’t appeal to those very weaknesses it addresses. Also, you get to see Martin Scorsese act a little, so it’s a shame that most people are missing out on that.

            “Quiz Show” is a specific reference to the popular game show of the fifties, “Twenty One” which came under fire for being rigged when several contestants came forward, testifying that they had been given the answers and coached on how to act on air. The scandal focused particularly on Herbert Stempel, who admitted to being fed answers and told to take a dive after many weeks of being a returning champion, to make room for a more likeable contestant, Charles Van Doren.

            In the movie, Herb Stempel is played John Turturro in a brilliantly uncharismatic, borderline crazy manner that comes together to make him an all together likeable guy. His main opponent is Charles Van Doren, played by Ralph Fiennes in a similarly uncharismatic fashion, yet one that seems to draw people to him. Fiennes’ role in particular drew my attention because of how conflicted the character is. On one hand, he willingly accepts the answers to the quiz show before the fact, all the while taking in thousands of undeserved dollars despite his guilt eating away at him because he is sworn to secrecy, and when he does finally come clean and testify, he is publically shunned and ruined, fired from both the job he was offered at NBC and the professor position he had at Columbia University. Ultimately the lesson we can get from watching his character is crime doesn’t pay, except when it does a whole lot but then leaves you as a traitor to the public’s trust and without a job.

            David Paymer, who wasn’t so much born as he was cast from a Greedy, Corrupt Jew Mold­^TM played Dan Enright, the man who eventually took the fall for the game show fixing seeing as he was the producer, although it’s implied the scandal went even higher, reaching the President of NBC and the owner of the main sponsor, Geritol (played extra weasel-y by Martin Scorsese, a welcome addition to the already outstanding cast).

            Rob Morrow plays Dick Goodwin, the Congressional lawyer hired to investigate the possible corruption of “Twenty One.” In his quest to uncover the truth, Goodwin aims too high, hoping to bring down the television network itself and realizing too late that that would never happen, with the above mentioned Enright taking the bullet to protect NBC. Morrow’s performance of an ambitious young lawyer is captivating, and there is a huge emotional payoff at the end when we see the disappointment and shame he feels at inadvertently destroying the life of Van Doren and realizing his dreams of unmasking the corruption of television would never come true. Also, he sounds exactly like a sad Adam Sandler the whole movie through (you know that voice Sandler does when he’s not being silly or pissed off? I promise you it’s exactly like that).

            I think the most moving parts of this film, though, come from the scenes between Charles Van Doren and his father, Mark. Mark Van Doren is played perfectly by Paul Scofield as a loving, proud father who is dealing with his son’s newfound fame. He is a man who is astounded at the prospect that his son can achieve so much wealth and fame from so little effort. Uneasy about it at first, he soon comes to terms with it, and supports Charles as only a devoted father can. It’s so heartbreaking then, to see Charles fight and struggle to tell his dad that he’s been cheating. And when it finally happens it’s a sad but loving moment that continues as they attend the hearing together. The real heartbreaker comes after the testimony, when the press reveals to both father and son that the University they teach at together is going to ask for Charles’ resignation. They are both crushed and as a viewer I was too. Paul Scofield puts on the best face of hurt feelings and crushed spirit, you just feel all hope wither with him as he stumbles out of the court in disappointment.

            “Quiz Show” is a powerful testament to the power of television and the effect it holds on the public. My case in point, how many of you had ever heard of this huge scandal before? As the movie itself proves, the public forgets so easily. The film itself was one half interesting, arbitrary facts presented in and about the quiz show its contestants, the scandal, and the other half is big business vs. legislative politics. Even reading that last sentence, I realize how boring that will sound to the majority of the movie watching public. And yet I also know now from personally watching the film how powerfully and effectively it presents its case that so many people need desperately to hear.

Marcus: The Faculty (1998)

I feel I must admit right off the bat that the only reason I watched this was because I had heard Jon Stewart played a villain in it and was intrigued. I really had no idea what else to expect from the film, although I figured, heck, it’s a Robert Rodriguez movie, it ought to have plenty of action/horror with some dark tongue-in-cheek humor. A note to any who are interested, if you find yourself desperately trying to rationalize watching a movie by listing all the minutiae that could be good about it, but deep down you think it’ll be disappointing, it’s probably best to just let it go. Ultimately, the three minutes with Jon Stewart were delightful because I expected them to be, and the rest of the movie was cardboard. And not even cheese encrusted, bottom-of-the-pizza-box cardboard, just boring old dusty cardboard.

            How best to describe the plot of “The Faculty?” Well, think “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” meets “Dawson’s Creek” with a lot more drug abuse. Or better yet, why not let the movie explain itself for you? The screenplay was written by Kevin Williamson, the same guy who wrote the aforementioned “Dawson’s Creek” as well as “Scream.” And “The Faculty” doesn’t mind taking a page or ten out of the “Scream” book of tricks, because it ends up being just as painfully self aware. Most of the film, we’re treated to the socially awkward, outcast Goth girl (portrayed as glaringly archetypal as only the nineties can) regaling the rest of the survivors of the rules they must abide now that their teachers and the student body have been taken over by mysterious alien parasites. In doing this, the characters make way too many assumptions about the nature of these aliens. It’s all very well and good to draw the parallel to Body Snatchers, but after that it’s just guesswork. The Goth, Stokely, played by Clea DuVall’s massive, overhanging forehead, guesses that if they kill the leader, or queen of the parasites, then all of them will die. Well wouldn’t that be fucking convenient? First of all, who’s to say there is a queen at all? Secondly, why assume that with her death, all the offspring would die too? They were all surviving fine on their own buried deep in the brains of the staff and sudents. When Ripley killed the queen in “Aliens” that didn’t automatically make all her babies die, this isn’t a Borg-like hive mind we’re talking about here.

            The next big assumption comes right after my favorite scene in which the kids fight and kill the science teacher, Mr. Furlong, played by the infallible Jon Stewart. Up until this point, he had been trying to discover what the parasite was, and during his analysis of it, proved to know quite a lot for a high school biology teacher (When hypothesizing what the creature could be, he says, “A certain mesozoan only occurs in the kidney of certain octopuses or squids.” Really? Whatever you say, man). Anyways, after some time, he gets infected, and has a showdown with the students, who promptly stab a pen into his eye, killing him. Turns out the pen was filled with a homemade drug created by one of the survivors (Josh Hartnett plays the hyper-intelligent, lazy, drug-dealing layabout, and that’s terrible). That drug is a diuretic and thusly must have killed the water-loving parasite via dehydration. Good gravy! It’s the only explanation! Oh wait, no, here’s one, maybe he died because you SHOVED A FUCKING PEN IN HIS EYE! We later learn that these creatures can even survive after being decapitated, but these kids didn’t know that yet, therefore their conclusion was still a stupid one to jump to.

            My main quarrel with this movie is too much of its plot is automatically resolved just by the students mentioning a farfetched solution, which happens to be the right answer. I can understand that trick working at the climax of an action movie, where the hero daringly escapes from imminent doom, but to have six annoying kids do it constantly throughout the movie and have it work every time just doesn’t seem fair.

            Another thing that really bugged me was the scene in Josh Hartnett’s shed that directly rips off “The Thing.” In the scene, the kids all decide to take the diuretic to see which of them is infected, à la the blood testing scene from the aforementioned 80’s horror classic. What bothered me was the notion that the human’s had to do hard drugs in order to survive. I know most stories have their protagonist end up sacrificing something, whether that be subjecting themselves to physical harm, but the way this scene is portrayed just seems cheap, and it made me uncomfortable as such. Then again, this is coming from a guy who drinks less than a Mormon teetotaler, and the scene was shot by Robert Rodriguez, so I’m sure my reaction was exactly what he was going for.

            Besides that scene, I notice a lot of the movie is devoted to the kids trying to determine who the queen is, while I was glaring at them going, “Really? Is it really that mysterious to you?” Honestly, this is one of those twists where, once it’s revealed, there’s so little tension released you might as well be sitting on a deflated whoopee cushion. You can tell who the queen is a good 45 minutes before it’s revealed, which is sad because the film does absolutely nothing to hint at who it is, and yet the fact that you can figure it out and the characters can’t makes them seem all the more stupid.

            Overall, a big disappointment of a film, considering the star-studded cast. I mean where else can you find a movie where Jon Stewart gets stabbed in the face by Josh Hartnett, who then decapitates Famke Janssen in a car crash and… oh right, Selma Hayek plays the school nurse in it too. Oh, and Bebe Neuwirth is the principal, not to mention Elijah Wood being, like, the main protagonist and… holy fuck is that Usher?!

Marcus: The Machinist (2004)

            One of the greatest things about cinema is its inherent tendency towards evolution or trendsetting. Old ideas are constantly being toyed with and recreated as something with an original twist, and occasionally we’re given something that is completely original. Whatever the case, the world of cinema has never found itself going stale, providing you know where to look for ingenuity.

            “The Machinist” is, and I guess it always will be, my absolute favorite movie, hands down. I’m sure there are plenty of other movies out there with buckets more originality and inventiveness going for it, but they don’t matter to me because in my eyes, “The Machinist” has all that I’m looking for in the right dose. Not only does the film feature action, mystery, great characters, amazing cinematography and a fantastic surprise revelation at the climax, but everything is told in one of the most well written scripts I’ve ever encountered. Every line of dialogue, every detail revealed is so relevant and important to the story that it borders on poetic execution. What I’m trying to say is, I like the movie. I like it a whole lot.

        First and foremost, neither I, nor anyone who sees this film can ignore the elephant in the room that is Christian Bale’s absolute commitment to his role. For those of you who don’t know the extent of Christian Bale’s work, it extends far past what many of you would consider a “silly” rasp in his voice when playing the new Batman. The man may be the single greatest method actor of our time. For “American Psycho” he dropped his British accent for the entire duration of filming and adopted a foreign American timbre. Not only that but he crafted his body into literally perfect physical condition. Here again for “The Machinist” he speaks with a perfect American accent, but not only did he get in shape for the role, he achieved a figure that would make Vogue magazine cover models get jealous. Christian Bale lost 62 pounds for this role, ending at a weight of 120 lbs. He was aiming for 99 but the producers stopped him because he was already losing control of his body. Seriously. For 4 months he lived off of a cup of coffee and either an apple or a can of tuna. You wish you had as much dedication as this guy. Then again, maybe not, considering the guy looks like a holocaust victim, and that’s without any special effects. I’m not exaggerating the loss of bodily control either. After a take, Christian would be so exhausted that he was prone to violent trembling and even passing out.

            So before we’ve even gotten to the actual movie, we see something worth praise. But why did Bale see it necessary to put his body through this rigorous regimen? Well, as I mentioned before, he is a method actor, meaning he strives to inhabit the role and its emotions by essentially “becoming” the character. And in this case, that character is Trevor Reznik, a malnourished, hallucinating insomniac who has been awake for over a year. Yeah, I’d say Christian Bale did pretty much all he could to “become” the role.

            The success of this movie is also do in no small part to the superb direction by Brad Anderson, who I think is an unsung genius of directing, having made some delightful, but underappreciated gems like “Transsiberian” and “Happy Accidents.” He spans many genres and his creativity seemingly knows no bounds. His cause is only bolstered by cinematographer Xavi Giménez, who had a hand in creating some of the creepiest, most surreal, and yet effective camera shots ever in film history. Their work together in this produces something that is utterly chilling and truly brilliant.

            The plot of the movie is more streamlined than a Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber, and if you think that was a long walk for an analogy, just Google a picture of it and you’ll agree I chose wisely. It’s quite a streamlined piece of aerospace engineering. Now that you’ve seen that my needlessly long simile and resultant defense thereof, let me elaborate. Every single line of dialogue feels needed and, in fact, is. The characters take part in conversations rife with hints or foreshadowing relating to the huge reveal that comes at the end of the film. I will not spoil it for you, but needless to say, when you learn it, it will hit you as hard as Trevor hit that boy in the accident he keeps denying ever happens (I may have gone a touch too literal on the analogy this time; like Trevor Reznik, please forget this ever happened… DAMMIT!).

            The story is great because the characters are all so believable despite the Gothically dark and horrible circumstances thrust upon them. It allows the viewer to accept what is happening to the characters without ever growing cynical towards the situation. The story builds and builds, until the tension becomes palpable and in the final minutes of the film, the twist is unveiled and all that we’ve experienced up until that point comes washing down on us in a cascade of realization. Never have I felt such justification (or perhaps even vindication) in my choice to watch a movie. And I feel that every time I watch this.

            My verdict is: watch “The Machinist,” if not for the outstanding performances, the creepy settings and music, the flawless writing, or the transcendental cinematography, then for all of them together, because by combining these elements you are left with something one rarely sees in cinema, a film that surpasses itself every time it’s watched.

            Oh, and by the way, after filming this, Christian Bale immediately began regaining his weight, plus an extra 40 pounds (of mostly muscle) to play the role most of us know him for, Bruce Wayne. Christian Bale laughs at you mortals and your Jenny Craig.

Marcus: Let The Right One In (2008)

            Just when I think I’ve become jaded to the point where no new movie can impress me, one comes along that does exactly that. It’s a natural cycle that I always seem to run through from year to year. On a similar note, I’m always blown away by the outstanding quality of most foreign films I come across, the amount of which being ashamedly much less than I’d like to admit. And as you may have guessed by now, I’m a sucker for a good horror film. And yet to call “Let The Right One In” merely a horror film is like calling Al Capone merely a troublemaker. This beautiful Swedish movie has so much going for it I’m surprised it doesn’t have it’s own entourage.

            The story focuses on Oskar, a lonely boy who doesn’t feel a true connection to anyone as his parents have had a divorce, and are emotionally distant, and he is regularly bullied at school. He eventually finds friendship, in Eli, a new girl in his apartment complex, who tries to keep her distance from him as she harbors a dark secret, that being she is a vampire.

            I’m going to now disarm a thought that I know has come to your mind by now. This movie is not like “Twilight.” True, the stories both focus around the growing romance between two kids who are tempting fate by being together because one of them is a vampire, they’re both based off of a book and both of these movies made me cringe but this is not like “Twilight,” ok? First of all, only one of these films actually tells the story of a vampire in love while still using the mythology that qualifies it as a vampire. Here is a list of basic vampire mythos that appears in “Let The Right One In”:

1. Vampires must drink the blood of humans to survive.

2. If a human survives a vampire bite, they too become a vampire.

3. Vampires are immortal.

4. Sunlight kills vampires.

5. Vampires must be invited into a building where they do not live or else they can not physically enter.

6. Vampires demonstrate superhuman abilities (e.g. flying, scaling walls, monstrous strength and agility).

7. Cats can sense when someone’s a vampire.

8. Vampires are fucking scary!

            The infamous Edward Cullen barely satisfies half of this list, especially when you consider that, while the sun affects him, it only does so to the same degree that the flattering figure of a shiny sequined blouse on a young, confused boy “affects” his sexuality. It certainly doesn’t pose any threat to him as it so badassly does in “Let The Right One In.”

            Some of you might think that “Let the Right One In” is just trying to copy “Twilight,” but this is also not true. Both movies came out in the same year and as for the original books, “Twilight” came out a year later. And finally, while both movies did make me cringe, one did so with its shitty dialogue and acting, while the other did so by depicting a child’s head being ripped off, a girl bleeding from her eyes and a half-mangled face effect better than the one on Two-Face in “The Dark Knight.”

            Some elements that stuck out to me in this film were the setting, and the performances. This film takes place outside of Stockholm in the early 80’s, and as such, I can confidently put “Outside Stockholm in the early 80’s” as #1 on my list of the bleakest places in the world. It accentuates the theme of loneliness perfectly, which is good, because there is a LOT of loneliness in this film. You see it in Oskar when he is driven from human contact by his distant parents and the bullies who beat him up at school. You see it in Eli, who, other than her guardian, must avoid all human contact as a necessity, except when she must feed. You even see it appear in the side plot that develops, wherein a woman who survived an attack by Eli becomes "sick" and no longer knows how to interact with those she knew, eventually deciding on suicide via HOLY SHIT SHE JUST BLEW UP! All of these lonely, lonely Swedes just seem all the more isolated when seen trudging through the thick, crunchy snow, with no noise but the howling wind and sad piano music. Tonally, the movie is perfect.

            The acting in this film is far stronger than it has any right to be, considering all the main characters are children and this is the film debut of the two leads. There’s no question that they are able to drive the plot and they make it more interesting to watch than most of the child stars you see in Hollywood could. One particular detail I loved was the casting of the bullies, because they aren’t your stereotypically, tough and obviously menacing bully. They look like regular kids, in fact, were this any other movie, they look like they’d all be Oskar’s friends, playing second banana to his antics. But they are ruthless and relentless and ultimately, cowardly.

It’s wonderful to see a movie that is written so elegantly that it can cover a wide range of material without becoming muddied and convoluted. I highly recommend this film to any and all who would see it. And if after seeing this movie you say to yourself, “that was like ‘Twilight,’” I want you to order yourself a piece of electronic equipment and swallow the silica gel packet that comes in the box with it.