Dark Shadows

Remember when Tim Burton had some indie cred, and his emo movies were something new that brought credibility and something different to the movies.  Remember seeing his remake of Planet of the Apes, how he had them wear those stupid hats, just how upset you got seeing it, and wishing things could go back to the way they were.  It hasn't.  You would think a movie based on a sixties vampire soap opera would be right up his alley.  And maybe it was.  And Burton just had so many ideas for his new movie; he couldn't bear cutting any of them out.  That is probably what happened to Tim Burton's most recent passion project. Dark Shadows suffers under the weight of having too many ideas with no idea how to bring them together.

This is the eighth time Johnny Depp and Tim Burton have teamed up and by now there really is nothing left the duo can do to surprise their audience.  Burton goes for a Gothic look while trying to provide a balance of horror and comedy; while Depp rocks a ridiculous wardrobe and a funny accent.  Nothing we haven't seen these two try before.  And just as predictable is Burton shifting his tone as often as he changes his scenes.

No doubt feeling the need to pay homage to the series, Burton tries to include too much with his story and doesn't give enough attention to any of his many subplots.  He does fine with the first act of the movie, and setting up the story.  Even once we get to 1972 the movie has some solid jokes delivered by Depp who always does so well as the fish out of water.  To no surprise Depp was the one of the few bright spots of the movie, and did very well in the roll, but nothing we hadn't seen countless times before.  The movie gets lost in itself once we meet the rest of the family.

While it looks like a large cast really there are only two players in this production.  Johnny Depp as Barnabas Collins and his immortal rival the witch, Angelique Bouchard, played by Eva Green.  Their lust/hate relationship is the main plot line throughout the movie and the only one given any real attention.  Both characters are fully realized and play well off each other.  The only other character that possesses any semblance of depth is Michelle Pfeiffer's matriarchal, Elizabeth Stollard Collins.  All the other characters seem thrown into the mix just to honor the source material of the sixties soap opera.  It wouldn't surprise me if Alice Cooper in a brief cameo had more lines than the rest of the family including a completely underused Chloe Moretz and Jonny Lee Miller who probably should have just been written out of the story entirely to better develop the young son played by Gulliver McGrath.  Even Burton's muse Helena Bonham Carter couldn't gather any real screen time as she would appear briefly as the live-in psychologist and then be completely forgotten about for chunks as a time.

Not only that, but the movie flip flops from comedy to horror at the drop of a hat.  Becoming lighthearted and cheery underscored by some classic hits from the early seventies and then almost immediately shifting gears to murder and death.  While the Burton look to the movie helps reflect whatever mood the audience should feel he shifts too many times, and doesn't do great with either the comedy or the horror.

The movie really loses its momentum by introducing too many characters with too many story lines.  Burton seemed to have a very distinct idea of how he wanted the movie to begin and end but no real road map on how to get there.  By the end of the movie you could almost see Burton throwing his hands in the air and just tossing in ideas that he meant to build towards but never actually mentioned.  And just as I'm sure the production crew was getting frustrated with their ending, the audience did as well, with people in the screening walking out at the end already knowing how the movie was going to end but not caring to see it themselves.  D

2011 Oscars: Actress

One would think that the lead actress role would be locked up by now, but some people in the industry are seeing a late surge that could change some voters’ minds late in the game. Before that let’s look at the supporting actress category.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Amy Adams, "The Fighter"
Helena Bonham Carter, "The King's Speech"
Melissa Leo, "The Fighter"
Hailee Steinfeld, "True Grit"
Jacki Weaver, "Animal Kingdom"

First let’s get a couple of these out of the way. The King's Speech is as patriarchal as you can get. This movie is all about the men, and while The Queen Mum has an important place in history, she had little or nothing to do in this film, so she's out. Not everyone takes their role of Academy voter as seriously as Sir Elton John so if there is a movie people are going to sit out it will probably be the Australian import Animal Kingdom. If you haven't had a chance this movie is definitely worth a spot on your Netflix queue. Then it comes down to two movies The Fighter and True Grit. Melissa Leo did fantastic in the movie and I thought her performance would go unnoticed behind that of Christian Bale but boy was I proven wrong with that. Melissa Leo has already won Screen Actors Guild and Golden Globe gold for her performance as the selfish mother. She has been acting since the eighties and has paid her dues. But then comes along this little 14-year old girl to muck the whole thing up. Hailee Steinfeld not only held her own in True Grit but at times outshines two past Academy winners. One could argue that she isn't really a supporting actress but rather the lead with Jeff Bridges. I doubt she had much say in the whole thing as this is only her FIRST MOVIE (I think at 14 I was growing a mullet). Compound the fact that Melissa Leo took out ads for herself just as people were starting to talk about the kid. Put the performances next to each other and I think Hailee Steinfeld did more to help Jeff Bridges grow as a character than Melissa Leo did for Wahlberg. All the big blogs out there go with an upset pick. So I'm going with Hailee Steinfeld to upset the veteran actress.

BEST ACTRESS
Annette Bening, "The Kids Are All Right"
Nicole Kidman, "Rabbit Hole"
Jennifer Lawrence, "Winter's Bone"
Natalie Portman, "Black Swan"
Michelle Williams, "Blue Valentine"

This was supposed to be a lock, no one has been hotter than Natalie Portman and frankly that helps. Usually the Academy will deal out Oscar to the next big PYT (read: Hallie Berry, Reese Witherspoon, Charlize Theron). Natalie Portman has been steaming up the scene ever since The Professional (that's a joke people). She has gone from child actress, to blockbuster starlet, to indie queen and this Sunday she seems poised to grab the statuette. And rightfully so, the performance is frightening and the movie will stay with you long after you have left the theater. But recently there has been an upswing in support for Annette Bening in The Kids Are All Right. Now I personally thought that Julianne Moore had the better performance in this movie, but this time Bening won't be competing against her co star because Moore was not nominated. While the Academy tends to not support comedy movies they do love gay movies, as one Hollywood observer noted "If you play gay or retarded you get an Oscar. I'd take in the ass for an Oscar." The now four-time nominated actress will eventually win the award, but this is not her night. Portman's performance is too captivating to go unrewarded plus Oscar also loves to break up marriages (read Hallie Berry, Reese Witherspoon, Sandra Bullock). The recently engaged and knocked up Portman may walk away a winner Sunday, but the tabloids will make sure to bring her back down within a couple of years.

Tomorrow we'll look at the men. Who do you think will win for Best Actor (hint: it rhymes with Colin Mirth). What about this category, do you smell upset? Let me know what you think.

The King's Speech

Well if this isn't Oscar bait I don't know what is. A movie about the British monarchs that comes out in December. The only thing that is holding it back from pure gold is that it is actually doing well in the box office, people are going to see it.

It seems that come award season a couple movies always make it across the pond and infiltrate the system. This movie follows the same formula as the ones before it. It humanizes the monarch while still telling a story of perseverance. Already nabbing a couple awards it is sure to win a couple of Oscars as well. Had it not been for the suburb acting in this movie I'm sure this would just be another British film nabbing awards that no one would see.

The title of the film references two things. Both the slammer that Albert Fredrick Arthur George (His Majesty to you) possessed since an early age. It is this stammer he must overcome to deliver his most important address to the nation at the dawn of World War II with Hitler knocking on the doorstep.

But Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush make it worth it. Firth plays the stammering king who lives in the shadow of his father and brother, hauntingly played by Michael Gambon and Guy Pearce respectively. He once again dives into the role that calls for quiet restraint. He has become known for this type of role and continues to flourish with it. But his best moments are when he steps out of his quiet demeanor and stands up for himself. He is a shoo-in for best actor this year.

Firth's strong performance of the damaged son lacking confidence allows for his supporting cast to step out and excel as they try to raise him up. Helena Bonham Carter does well as the Queen Mum, her strong personality fits well as she interacts with some of the commoners. Her role is more limited in this story so most of the accolades not given to Firth will likely be given to his other costar. Geoffrey Rush steals every scene as the eccentric speech therapist who believes in his king. He delivers most of, if not all the laughs in the movie (Timothy Spall has some as Winston Churchill but I'm not sure if that's the writing or the fact that Timothy Spall is playing Winston Churchill). There is little to no nuance to the performance and while it may be the big named actors that get you in the theater it will be Rush who keeps you in your seat.

That seems to be what the problem with so many other English movies, they are often so serious that they keep fun loving American movie goers away from the theater. The performances and writing in the movie will keep the viewer engaged. All the characters are believable and it isn't until the final sequence that all the king talk really hits home, it is less about the monarch and more about the man looking to fulfill his duty.

Writer David Seidler had been looking to make this film for some time. And although he didn't need to, he asked for permission from the Queen Mum to make the movie. She in turn asked him to wait till after her death as the memories were still to fresh for her. After she passed away at the age of 150 he was finally able to tell the story of a man who fell by the wayside with so many larger personalities during this time period.

The story is an interesting one, but the execution is what brings the movie down a peg, it is formulaic. Fortunately the formula is how to win a lot of awards so it is a good path to follow. Even more fortunate are the male leads in the movie as they take the this story over the top which will have one of these men (though both deserve it) walking away with gold in February. A-