Critic's Corner

Sunday, November 20, 2005

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

It seems that far too often lately, there have been too many "necessary evil" movies... that is, movies that are made that are okay to watch, but you have to see them to truly appreciate the movie that follows in the series. These movies include the last Terminator movie that was made just a few years ago and Star Wars Episode 2: Attack of the Clones.

Fortunately, Goblet of Fire is not one of these movies. How the producers of the Harry Potter movies do this is beyond my realm of understanding. I can only imagine that it has something to do with JK Rowling and the way her books continue to get better and better.

One thing that I really enjoyed about Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is probably something that not everyone will notice. In these so-called "necessary evil" sequels, it seems that there is too much emphasis placed on characters that we've seen enough of already. Goblet of Fire, however, gives a chance for some once overlooked cast members to have a larger piece in the film. For example, the Weasley twins have always been bit actors in the series. In this film, they had much meatier roles. (Because I know what happens to them in Book 5, I can see why.) Another great part was the way they showed that even kids with magic powers have awkward teenage moments like acquiring the courage to ask someone to a dance.

However, having read all of the books does pose a bit of a downfall. Ever the pessimist, I'm always looking for ways that the films don't hold justice to the books. With the Potter series, I keep getting things mixed up with what storyline was in which book. I think it was in book 5 where we found out who Rita Skeeter really is and how she gets her stories, but I can't be certain, so I don't know if this was "left out" of the film, or if it was intentionally left for the upcoming Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.

Also, most people are probably saying "Enough with the Harry Potter thing already- everything is about HIM!" I think it was great the way the producers kept with JK Rowling's feeling of sympathy for the characters who are saying the same thing. You can feel it in Ron's every gesture throughout this film- he's as sick of the attention Harry gets as everyone else is. But then Ron realizes what the audience sees: Harry did not ask for all of this, and given the choice, neither he nor the ones who envy him would want to be faced with such demons.

One thing I wasn't crazy about was the mannequins that they used for the underwater scene. They could have been done better.

Pessimism aside, I would see this film over and over. I really loved the way that it was shown and each actor performed above par. Ralph Feinnes was fantastic as Lord Voldemort, and it was nice to see people that we don't get to see a lot of, like Neville Longbottom, Ginny Weasley, and the twins, as well as new characters like Cedric Diggory and Cho Chang. And even though we did not see a lot of Maggie Smith's Professor McGonagall and Alan Rickmam's Professor Snape, they served their purpose and did what they needed to do to move the story along without hogging up all of the spotlight.

Overall, it was a great coming of age film with drama, suspense, and humor.

Sunday, November 13, 2005

Jarhead

Welcome to the suck. Hoo-rah.

Yesterday we went to see this movie and I have to say that Sam Mendes has yet to really disappoint me.

I was moved by how accurate a lot of the scenes in this film were. Having spent time in the Army and not the Marine Corps, I cannot honestly say that I went through everything that they went through- after all, the Marines are a lot tougher than the Army. But I can say that historically, it seemed to be very accurate. The same way the the war seemed to end so abruptly in the film was the way I remember it ending while I was in. I was supposed to go to Desert Storm, and I guess you can say this is a main reason why this movie meant so much to me.

A lot of the things that happened in the movie you truly need to have experienced a portion of the military in the early 90's to appreciate. Desert Shield, Desert Storm, Christmas overseas... all of these things mean a lot more when there was a true threat that they could happen to you.

One thing that I did see that probably could be considered inaccurate (although not having been actually sent to Desert Storm I can't say for certain) is this: I cannot see the whole bottled water thing. I can completely see the whole "hydrate hydrate hydrate" thing, but what we did was empty our canteens and then held them upside down over our heads to show that they were empty. I can't see the armed forces sending over bottles of water and actually taking the time to find somewhere to put the trash. But I guess if it isn't accurate, we can overlook it because of everything that was so good about the film. There were all sorts of little things that a soldier could see. One in particular was the NBC drills and the fact that half of the guys had broken equipment. Nobody gave a shit whether your equipment was broken when they issued it to you, but if it was damaged when you turned it back in- God help you... they would charge you for that shit so fast your head would spin.

Overall, I really enjoyed this film and though that Peter Sarsgaard and Jake Gyllenhall were both fantastic, and it was pretty cool to see other people like Jamie Foxx, Chris Cooper (in a much smaller role that I expected), Dennis Haysbert (from TV's 24 and Allstate commercials), and surprisingly, Lucas Black (aka the kid Frank from Sling Blade)!!!

Great movie.

Predictions: Oscar win for Best Adapted Screenplay
Oscar nomination for Peter Sarsgaard
Oscar nomination for Jake Gyllenhall (and he'll lose to Joaquin Phoenix or Phillip Seymore Hoffman)