Sherlock Holmes

2009 action movie/bastardized lit

Rating: 13/20 (Jen: 11/20)

Plot: Slobbish detective Sherlock Holmes and his sidekick Dr. Watson attempt to solve the mystery of who is trying to terrorize Londoners. Turns out that it's a dead guy! Oh, snap!

The more this went on (and on and on), the more I actually ended up liking it. Unfortunately, it was never enough to completely save the movie. This is one of those movies that seems like it was written by eight different people. They all started out in same conference room around a massive oval table, a picture of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in front of an empty chair to give them inspiration. Maybe they all smoked opium, listened to violin music, and wore deerstalker hats to get in the right mood. In fact, I'm sure they all must have been smoking opium. They had trouble agreeing on much, just as you'd expect from a gaggle of writers, and decided to split up, write portions of the plot on their own, and reassemble later to paste it all together. So Guy #1 ran off with his head full of all these supernatural elements because he digs vampire movies; Guy #2, the traditionalist of the bunch, left with his convoluted explanations to show off Holmes' deductive knack and powers of observation; Guy #3, lover of action movies that he was, decided to storyboard a few ultra-modern fight scenes; Guy #4, lover of romantic comedies that he was, figured a little romance on the side wouldn't hurt anything; Guy #5 figured it was about time to put all that research he'd done on Masonry back in graduate school to use, also remembering the popularity of that Da Vinci Code movie; Guy #6, awakened from yet another terrorism-fueled nightmare, decided to put his irrational fears to use and include biological weapons; Guy #7 had writer's block and failed to contribute anything at all; and Guy #8, a chemist without any friends at all, decided to Bill-Nye-the-Science-Guy is up and add a bunch of stuff that nobody but he and the friends he would have had if he had had any would understand. They reconvened and threw all their ideas on that big oval table. But some dastardly foe, likely from a rival movie studio although that's yet to be proven, set the table on fire! The writers panicked, rapidly assembling the most coherent story they possibly can before their hard work perished in the flames. Sure the final result was a complete mess, but they decided that modern audiences won't mind if there's some nifty special effects to go along with it. I was a little annoyed by the slow-mo modern fisticuffs and Guy Ritchie's flashy direction. It's all stylistically interesting but very distracting. The story was also frustratingly complex, and after a while, I was so confused that I just gave up trying to figure out what was going on. Yes, it does all come together in the end, but it wasn't enough to make up for the previous 110 minutes of frustration. I don't easily forgive when something or somebody makes me feel so stupid for so long. The special effects team did create some cool settings (love moody London here), and as readers of my blog know, I always like Robert Downey Jr. He and Jude Law have fine chemistry. Rachel McAdams also provides some eye candy. I suppose there are enough nods to the original source material to appease some Holmes-aphiles while the purists will likely turn up their noses and pooh-pooh the whole thing. I'm somewhat in the middle. I'm not in a hurry to see this again even though it's the type of thing that repeated viewing could help, but I wouldn't mind renting the sequel when it comes out.

Brother's Keeper

1992 documentary

Rating: 16/20

Plot: The Brothers Ward have lived in the same dinky and rickety shack in the middle of Middle-of-Nowhere, New York. They've got the minds of four-year-olds but work hard. The other occupants of Middle-of-Nowhere, New York, don't pay much attention to them until Delbert is accused of murdering his brother for reasons ranging from euthanasia to, more bizarrely, sexual frustration. The townfolk rally around the brothers after he apparently confesses to the murder, an act that Delbert's feeble mind may not have fully understood.

Watching the Ward Brothers is a lot like watching the Beales in Grey Gardens, an oft-uncomfortable invasion of privacy that, at times, you almost feel bad watching. The brothers are simple minded, yes, but in a way, it's hard not to admire the simple lives they lead. It's just hard to believe that people like this exist in our fast-moving 21st Century culture, and that's even prior to the revelations that their dirty little shack might contain some dirty little incest secrets. So Brother's Keeper works as a cultural document. The dynamics of the whole city mice vs. the country mice thing added another layer, and the courtroom scenes were riveting. The documentarians treat the subject matter both objectively and lovingly. You can tell Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky spent a great deal of time with the brothers, and you get such an intimate portrait of them. We don't get all the answers because they don't really matter all that much. Brother's Keeper sets up more questions than it answers, but that's part of the beauty of it. I also really liked how this showed the media's despicably voyeuristic role in a case like this, the almost gleeful talking heads that flocked to Middle-of-Nowhere, New York, to report on the story. In the end, I felt almost happy that these filmmakers helped me see the humanity in this mystery, made me seem like a much better person than the slimy news reporters and the big city big-wigs. I ended up liking simple-minded Delbert quite a bit, and after the filmmakers contrast scenes with him admiring his chickens that he keeps in a run-down school bus converted into a coop with a brutally and graphically violent scene featuring a random guy slaughtering a pig, you just get the feeling that there's no way Delbert could have done anything cold blooded. Or maybe he could. Who knows? Euthanasia or death by natural causes? Perhaps it's the little liberal in me trying to get out, but I don't think it even matters.

Brewster McCloud

1970 bird documentary

Rating: 16/20

Plot: After stealing from the wardrobe of Waldo (of Where's Waldo infamy), the titular Brewster hides out in a bomb shelter deep within the Astrodome. He spends his time studying birds, developing intricate wings so that he can fly, and exercising his flying muscles to prepare for when the big day arrives. He's helped by his guardian angel, the woman in the shower in that one scene in M.A.S.H. Meanwhile, a mass murderer is apparently on the loose in the greater Houston area, and a

Whether or not you actually like this movie (and I suspect there's only a small percentage who will), you've got to at least appreciate how different it is from anything else, even other Robert Altman movies. I imagine there are a lot of Altman fans who wouldn't necessarily like anything about this movie, and a lot of fans of Brewster McCloud who might not like any other Robert Altman movies. But I don't know who those second group of people might be. Part-fantasy, part-social statement, part-murder mystery, part-nature documentary, the mash-up that is Brewster McCloud succeeds as an oddball in the oeuvre of Robert Altman and cinema in general, like a crazy aunt you forget you have until you read about a news story about how she's living in a studio apartment with more than thirty cats and piles of Popular Mechanics magazines with all the eyes cut out of the pictures. About that comedy--a lot of it's the sort of humor where you're not even sure if there's an intent to be funny. There's an odd combination of the old-timey slapstick you'd expect to see in something from the 20s (chase scene with a portly Astrodome security guard and Brewster before the latter has gotten a line), word play reminiscent of a Laurel and Hardy feature (a hilarious exchange between the detective and a guy about the height of a suspect), and really dry humor that you might miss if you blink (opening music credited to Francis Scott Key). The movie begins with a tongue completely piercing a cheek and popping out the other side and never goes back in, a big ol' middle finger of a movie after Altman's success with M.A.S.H. I really like Bud Cort in this, but Sally Kellerman as that sexy wingless guardian angel and the always-sexy Shelley Duvall are also really good. This is a fun movie that gets better with repeated viewings, and I'd definitely recommend it to three or four people, none who I have actually met yet.

After the Thin Man

1936 sequel

Rating: 16/20 (Jen: 15/20)


Plot: Nick and Nora return from their honeymoon, the retired private dick swearing that he's finished solving cases for good. But not so fast, Nick! Nora's cousin's hubby's been missing for weeks, and her family wants Nick to find him. The couple have no problem doing that, but the case gets a bit more difficult and dangerous when somebody murders him. Oh, snap! Nick has to discover the identity of the real murderer in order to save his cousin-in-law from the electric chair.

As with the first in the series, the banter between the couple is more interesting that any of the Dashiell Hammett mystery. It inspired the wife and I to entertain ourselves by pretending to be Nick and Nora. We glued a bunch of fur to our eleven-month-old and taught her how to bark. Then, we imitated the snappy dialogue of Loy and Powell. I played Nora.

Me/Nora: Let's go solve a mystery, Darling.
Wife/Nick: You drink to much.
Me/Nora: (Weeps uncontrollably and becomes unresponsive)
Baby/Asta: Woof!

It wasn't quite as good. And this one, although entertaining from start to eventual finish, is not quite as good as its predecessor. It tosses in Jimmy Stewart in an interesting role and an assortment of oddballs to populate Nick and Nora's house for a funny surprise party. The murder mystery and its subsequent solving is dopey and convoluted, but I think that's part of the appeal with these things. We'll get to the others in the series soon.

Note: It's hard to get glued fur off baby skin. Find an alternative.

The Wicker Man

1973 pagan musical nightmare

Rating: 19/20 (Anonymous: 20/20; Amy: 16/20)

Plot: A policeman from the Scottish mainland flies to a mysterious island to investigate the disappearance of a young girl. The island's inhabits, a bunch of heathens, aren't cooperative as they prepare for May Day festivities.

What I love most about this movie is its sense of humor. Sure, it's got an assortment of musical selections that can stack up against the soundtrack of any other movie. It's got a great scene with Britt Ekland (Mary Goodnight in the recently-reviewed The Man with the Golden Gun) dancing around naked. It's got another of those Christopher Lee performances where he plays a sophisticatedly evil and tongue-in-cheek baddie. It's got loads of weird-looking beige-teethed Scots wearing an assortment of animal masks. It's got a gradually unfolding and hypnotic mystery that builds to one of the most shocking images in the horror movie history and a jaw-dropping finale. It's got a thematic backbone, delicious irony, and a literate script. It's got a sex scene with stuffed animals. It's got some beautiful shots of this exotic and erotic locale and its people. And it's unique. There just aren't movies like this. But what I love most is that sense of humor. No, it's not as funny as the remake with Nicolas Cage (few movies are), but there's so much hilarity as the islanders dick around with the detective. This is a movie with more great moments than a movie should be allowed to have (love the hare, the dance they're all doing at the end), and it would be difficult to find a movie as unsettling as this one.

And yes, Anonymous, the gravedigger (Aubrey Morris) was the guy in A Clockwork Orange.

The Thin Man

1934 murder mystery comedy

Rating: 17/20 (Jen: 16/20)

Plot: A thin man goes missing. After the murder of a couple of his acquaintances, retired detective Nick Charles, vacationing with his new wife Nora and their dog Asta, finds himself involved in the case. It's unfortunate because all he really wants to do is drink and spend Nora's money.

The first time I watched this, the mystery, even after William Powell's Nick summarizes the whole thing at a dinner party at the end of the movie, was a complete mystery to me. I lost interest in that part of the story, the part you'd think would be pretty important since, and just enjoyed the banter between Powell and Myrna Loy, the zippy dialogue and prickly but playful teasing. It was so entertaining, and I'd never heard early 30s movie banter this good before. Now that I've seen The Thin Man a second time, the mystery part of the plot still doesn't make all that much sense to me, but there's still something so fresh and fun about the rapport between the two leads. I love their little dog, too. This movie will be celebrating its 80th birthday in a few years (probably with a lot of drinking), but it's got ten times the laughs and fifty times the wit of a modern movie with "man" in the title like I Love You, Man. The Thin Man can't hide all its wrinkles. Every scene involving a gun looks dated because the characters hold their weapons in such an old-timey way. It's also very obvious that this was a quickie production. However, it's stuffed with a class and elegance that modern movies painfully lack, and I'm looking forward to watching the thirty-five sequels as I continue my quest to break the world record for watching the most consecutive movies with "man" in the title.