Marvin's Room

B+

Marvin's Room, in essense, is a tearjerker. I usually don't like such movies as they are usually coy and so sapped in false sentimentality that tears come from pain rather than pain. Of course, crying during movies isn't something that I do very often (if you're interested, Finding Nemo almost did the job; In America actually took the pot), but I do appreciate a movie that touches the heart not because it wants to, but because it just is touching. Marvin's Room is one of those movies.

Marvin is an old bedridden man, and this movie isn't about him. It is however, about his two daughters. Bessie (Diane Keaton) is a middle-aged maid, who had spent her predominant adult life caring for her father and her aunt Ruth (Gwen Verdon). Bessie's younger sister, Lee (Meryl Streep) ran away to Florida 20 years ago, not wanting to be burdened down by her family, got married and had kids, the eldest, Hank (Leonardo DiCaprio) happened to be a delinquent, violent and cold. When Bessie is diagnosed with leukimia, Lee and her children were called back to see if they could be suitable bone marrow donors that could just save Bessie's life.

The movie is predominantly how the family comes together once more and helped one another pick up the broken pieces of their lives. We have seen this time and time again, of course, but Marvin's Room had a way of growing in the audience, through superb performances, finely balanced script, tender score and warm cinematography. There were times when I couldn't help myself but to smile, or laugh, or feel sympathy and love for the characters.

Diane Keaton takes centre stage portraying Bessie to her soul. She is the spirit that glues all the characters and plotlines together. Hence, it is imperrative that we feel for/towards Bessie as strongly as the characters on screen. We do. Leonardo DiCaprio shows abundant screen presence here, very impressively, relishing the scenes he shares with Keaton. Meryl Streep, unfortunately, is far too gallant to play Lee; it was clear in the beginning that Streep was over-the-top in the first half of the show; it wasn't until the very end when Streep showed Lee's depth, but she pulled through. Gwen Verdon and Robert De Niro provide good turns in supporting roles.

Director Jerry Zaks took the helm in his, thus far, only screen directorial effort. He is efficient. He neither gives more nor less than what we expect out of the material. Although the subject matter is bleak, Zaks veer us clear from unpleasantness that might have been unbearable. So we have a movie that is neither very original nor impactful, but in that we also have a beautiful gem which you could not help but view with appreciation.
~

A History of Violence

B

I don't get what the big fuss about this movie was all about. 5 stars from Straits Times? All those As on Yahoo Movies? It's an okay movie, sure. But it's not really that great. That's not just me speaking. It's really just not that great a movie.

Tom Stall (Viggo Mortensen) lived a quiet, happy life in the small town in Indiana. The tranquility of the sleepy town was broken, however, when a pair of criminals tried to pull a robbery on the diner where Tom lived. He ended up killing both of them; and the next thing he knew, he was a country hero. His reknowned fame subsequently brought unwanted visitors, in the form of Fogarty (Ed Harris), who insists that Tom is indeed Joey Cusack, a gangster from Philadelphia who still has old debts to settle. Tom's unheaved life now becomes even more so as Fogarty's methods involved terrorising Tom's wife, Edie, (Maria Bello) and children.

What I can say about the plot of A History of Violence is that it wasn't exactly like what I (or anyone else, for that matter) expected. That said, the story still didn't veer too far off the beaten road. Cutting in at just about 90 minutes, I'm rather impressed at how director David Cronenberg managed to pump so much storyline. That's why, I suppose, the movie didn't leave as deep an impression as it should.

A theme that is prevalent throughout A History of Violence is: must one really fight violence with violence. This, however, is only touched briefly, if not reluctantly. A subplot that is aimed to bring out this question, concerning Tom's son being bullied in high-school, would be forgotten when the end credits role. What would be remembered most are 1) Maria Bello's full frontal; 2) gore. The former needs no further comments; but A History of Violence's violence matches that of Saving Private Ryan, if comparisons may be made.

Maria Bello received an oscar nomination for her role as the loving Edie who becomes tormented by her husbands secrets. Viggo Mortensen is quite an enigma. I don't know if it was intentional that he was intended to be so bland and brooding. But it became rather boring sometimes. We are supposed to see, I think, changes in Tom Stalling; but either Mortensen or Cronenberg failed to bring that up to the screen.
~

Miami Vice

B-

It's not that this movie is particularly bad. Michael Mann shows again, as a testament of his constant career, that he has an edge over other directors out there. His films are gritty and edgy, not just in the way they are shot, but also thematically and plotwise. Miami Vice is no different. At best it is what Bad Boys should be; at worse its plot risks drowning in its own emptiness.

Sonny Crockett (Colin Farrell) and Ricardo Tubbs (Jamie Fox) are partners working for Miami P.D. drug squad. They are being recruited by the FBI in order to find a mole that has infiltrated either the FBI/DEA as their latest joint undercover was exposed. Crockett and Tubbs are ideal because they are outsiders and hence out of the grid, and they are allowed to remain that way. They work their way to smuggle for a Colombian drug kingpin, as Crockett becomes romantically entangled with his employer, Isabella (Gong Li), risking the operation's success and the duo's lives.

The most interesting part of Miami Vice was how it shows drugs being smuggled into the U.S. The process that Crockett and Tubbs had to go through to be deemed genuine and reliable by the cartell to transport their products, and how they intended to bring them into the country are presented in a fresh manner. The least interesting part of the movie was the romance that blossomed between Crockett and Isabella. While one can say that this makes such a movie - mainly about sturdy testosterone - unique by adding a little sentimental complication, it also risks losing the audience as they are forced to watch something unwelcome. To be fair, however, Gong Li's presence added intrigue because of her performance which is superbly genuine. But we have seen this romance story before, in movies where it actually belongs.

The movie's 2-hour running length could have been cut much shorter, presenting a lean movie which does not beg the revelation that plot exposition goes nowhere. In fact, one could argue that the events in Miami Vice kind of changed the entire course of the movie. What stays constant was the presence of the real Bad Boys, Colin Farrell and Jamie Foxx. They have the attitude, but their essences are somewhat hidden by the plot-heavy story and Mann's heavy-handed use of shaky cameras and shady photography. Also, Mann focuses most of the story on Crockett, and during those times, we cry for Tubbs to come back to the screen.

On top of it all, the movie has surprisingly little action. As story develops, we get lush aerial photography of South American landscapes, and slick shots of high speed cars and boats and planes, but adrenaline didn't get to start pumping until the last 30 minutes. And after all that, we know we've watched something a little different, but it's movie's attitude that strikes you most, not the plot which no one likely will remember for long.
~